Islam is a crime syndicate controlled by Arabic imperialists

[simple_...@yahoo.com]

How many moderate Muslims gave money to victims of Islamic terrorism?
Exactly the same number of moderate Nazis gave money to victims of
Holocaust. When American Muslim named Kamal Nawash tried to organize
anti-terrorism rally in Washington, DC., Islamic organizations
condemned the rally. About 50 people showed up, mostly Jews and
Christians. Arabic proverb says "first comes Saturday, then Sunday."
It means that Arabs are going to exterminate Jews before they
exterminate Christians. It also means that Israel is the first line of
defense against Islam. "Islamic Civilization" is a contradiction in
terms. You can either be Islamic or civilized. Our media, our
politicians, and our universities are terrorized by Muslim immigrants
and corrupted by Saudi petrodollars. Muslim terrorists have not
corrupted Islam, Islam has corrupted them. Muslim immigrants could not
care less about their host countries because they have pledged
exclusive allegiance to an Arab-dominated, Muslim nation called
Ummah. Can you imagine Churchill or Roosevelt praising "moderate
Nazis"? Alas, we do not have statesmen who understand the heinous
nature of Islam. Muslims use this fact to prove that the West is
decadent and powerless.

There are several hundred sharia mini-states in Europe. Muslims living
in those sharia mini-states hate outsiders, especially the police. If
an outsider ventures there, his life is in danger. In southern France
there are more mosques than churches. If the present trends continue,
Muslims will become the majority of European population in about 35
years!

If you still do not understand the psyche of a Muslim, imagine a
fusion of Mara Salvatrucha and Italian Fascism. Islam is not a
religion of peace. Islam is not a religion. Islam is a crime syndicate
controlled by Arabic imperialists. It must be eradicated to prevent
another world war.

"Fascism was the first and prime instance of a modern political
religion... This religion sacralized the state and assigned it the
primary educational task of transforming the mentality, the character,
and the customs of Italians. The aim was to create a 'new man,' a
believer in and an observing member of the cult of Fascism." - Emilio
Gentile
____________________________

23-year old French Jew, Ilan Halimi was abducted by Muslim immigrants
and tortured for three weeks in a basement of an apartment building in
a southeastern suburb of Paris. Some Muslim neighbors came to the
basement to watch the torture and to participate in the torture. About
30 Muslim immigrants living in the building heard the screams of the
tortured Jew for three weeks, but none of them called the police. The
Jew was later found tied to a tree near a railway track. Cigarettes
were burned into his skin. He had multiple stab wounds. One ear and
one toe was severed. 80% of his skin was burned. He died on his way to
a hospital. While the Jew was held hostage, his torturers called his
family on the phone many times. They made ransom demands and quoted
Koran while tortured Jew's screaming was heard in the background. The
French police refused to trace the phone calls claiming that they had
technical problems. The police also claimed that there was "no anti-
Semitism involved." The Jew's mother, Ruth Halimi was not happy with
the way the police handled the case. She said: "We told the police
that there had been at least three other attempted abductions of young
Jews, but they persisted in considering the motives purely criminal
because they are afraid of reviving a clash with the Muslims." The
French interior minister, Nicolas Sarkozy, described the abduction,
torture and killing of the Jew as an anti-Semitic crime.

Two years earlier another Jew named Sebastien Sellam was savagely
killed in the eastern part of Paris by a Muslim. The Muslim cut off
the Jew's head and took out his eyeballs with a fork. He came home a
few minutes later saying to his family: "Now, I can go to paradise. I
killed my Jew." The Muslim was sent to jail, then to an insane asylum,
and declared cured two years later.

“Jihad is holy fighting in Allah’s Cause with full force of numbers
and weaponry. It is given the utmost importance in Islam and is one of
its pillars. By Jihad Islam is established, Allah’s Word is made
superior (which means only Allah has the right to be worshiped), and
Islam is propagated. By abandoning Jihad Islam is destroyed and
Muslims fall into an inferior position; their honor is lost, their
lands are stolen, their rule and authority vanish. Jihad is an
obligatory duty in Islam on every Muslim. He who tries to escape from
this duty, or does not fulfill this duty, dies as a hypocrite.”
sources:
1. http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/59458,
2. Koran 2:190 Footnote, King Fahd Complex translation
3. page 580 of the Islamic University of Medina’s translation of Sahih
al-Bukhari’s Hadith; it opens Bukhari’s Book of Jihad

To say that moderate Islam is the solution to radical Islam implies
several things: that moderate Islam exists; that it represents the
true (though perhaps currently disregarded) norm of Islam; and that
radical Islam is a departure from that norm. source:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.aspx?GUID={5F4D7BB5-CA89-4C09-986B-67CF241C2098}

Latest offerings from the religion of peace: http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/
____________________________

THE ORIGIN OF ISLAM (sources: http://www.historyofjihad.org/
http://www.islam-watch.org/AnwarSheikh/JihadandCivilization1.htm
http://www.islam-watch.org/Others/Allah-and-Eurabia.htm with minor
edits)

The birthplace of Islam, Arabia was afflicted with a harsh environment
unsuitable for agriculture. Bedouins inhabited this harsh environment.
They were wandering in search of pastures and supplemented their
meager livelihood with brigandage, which meant raiding other tribes
and commercial caravans. Though it was sheer looting, it assured them
solace, security and survival, and, therefore, it was not looked down
upon as sinful but a source of power, pleasure and prestige. This
institution of brigandage known as ghazwa (razzia) had existed long
before the advent of prophet Muhammad, the greatest Arab national
hero. The Umayyad poet al-Qutami has alluded to this custom in his two
verses: "Our business is to make raids on the enemy, on our neighbor
and on our own brother, in case we find none to raid but a brother."
Brigandage was a compulsive trait of the Arab national character and
this is the reason that it was not considered an act of impiety but a
mark of honor and manliness.

The chief deity of pre-Islamic Mecca was the moon-god called Hubal or
al-ilah (god), which was shortened to Allah in pre-Islamic times.
Mohammed dropped the name Hubal but retained the generic Allah. Pre-
Islamic Arabs worshipped the moon-god by bowing in prayer toward Mecca
several times a day. They also made pilgrimages to Mecca, walked
around the Kaaba seven times and threw stones at the devil. And they
fasted for one month, which began with the appearance of the crescent
moon and ended when the crescent moon reappeared. These same rites
form the core of Islam today: Muslims bow in prayer toward Mecca, make
pilgrimages to Mecca, walk around the Kaaba seven times, and they
still throw stones at the devil. They also observe the fast of
Ramadan, which begins and ends with the crescent moon.

The word Islam is not derived from the word "Salam" which means peace,
but from the word "al-silm" which means submission or surrender. The
Kaaba is actually a meteorite which fascinated the ancient tribal
Arabs who were awe-struck by its flaming rush from the skies before it
landed in Mecca.

Mohammed (yimach shmo ve-zichro - may his name and memory be
obliterated) was a murderer, a pedophile and a scoundrel of the worst
kind. Epileptic fits created hallucinations that a god was talking to
him. His first converts were his wife Khadija, his slave Zaid, and
hardened criminals who wanted to loot a harried and defeated enemy.
Having lost his father, the posthumous orphan Mohammed wanted to
perpetuate his father's memory. His father's name Abdallah was derived
from Abd-Allah which translates as "Slave of Allah." This is the
reason why Mohammed chose Allah among the many pre-Islamic Arab
deities to be the only deity to be worshipped by the Muslims.

After normal marriage with Khadija, he started his spree of marriages
with his marriage of Aisha who was the daughter of his follower Abu
Bakr. Aisha was just seven years old when Mohammed married her and she
was only nine years old when he consumed this marriage! This is the
inspiration for the Arabs of today to pick up child brides.

Realizing the significance of brigandage, Mohammed converted this
institution into a religious doctrine called jihad i.e., the holy War
against the infidels. At his core, Mohammed was nothing more than a
power grabber, who slyly used religion to promote himself. And the
people of Mecca as well as those of Medina saw through that. Some
inhabitants of Medina supported him because he advocated war against
their competitors: the Jews and the Quraish tribe of Mecca. Mohammed
drilled into his followers the fantasy that if they died in a jihad,
they would reach heaven (Jann'at) where they would be served by 72
virgins (Houris) and by pearly eyed boys for the perverts among his
followers.

Two communities lived in Medina (Yathrib): the pagan, polytheistic
Arabs and the Jews. They were often on the warpath. The Arabs were
more numerous, but the Jews by virtue of being traders were more
prosperous and better organized, they also had built fortresses within
and around Medina to defend themselves during their internecine fights
with the pre-Islamic Arab tribes around Yathrib (Medina). The Jews
were usually victorious in the battles against the Arabs. The Arabs of
Medina decided to outwit the Jews by becoming Mohammed's followers and
seek his help in defeating the Jews. This is why the Arabs of Medina
(Yathrib) welcomed Mohammed, in whom they saw an opportunity to break
the trade monopoly of the Jews and also to defeat their other rivals,
the Meccans.

Islam was conceived as a political ploy of Arabs living in Medina
against Jews and Mecca, and it was marketed by Mohammed to his first
converts in Medina as a political alliance rather than as a lofty
religion. Mohammed organized them to take his first revenge on the
Meccans, and he started regularly raiding the caravans of the Meccans
that passed by Medina. He organized 64 such raids from 622 to 630, of
which he personally led 27 raids. These raids were called Ghazawats or
Razzias. The Meccans finally got fed up with Mohammed's antics and
attacked him in Medina. This led to the first major battle in
Mohammed's life - the battle of Badr. The Meccan army was led by Abu
Jahal. In this battle, he realized that the far stronger Meccan army
could only be defeated by guile. He ordered all the water springs
outside Medina to be sanded-up, so that the attacking Meccans would be
without any water. This was a legitimate tactic in a war, but a true
messenger of god would not destroy water supply of his own clan. The
Meccans decided to outwit Mohammed and attack Medina during a
cloudburst, to obviate the need for water. But the heavily armored
Meccan army got trapped in the slushy sands outside Medina and they
were in disarray with camels falling over each other in total
disorder. They were defeated by the infantry charges of the Mohammed
's rag-tag, but highly motivated gang.

Many of Mohammed's followers pretended to leave Islam before they
settled in Mecca, thus becoming the fifth column during the eventual
invasion of Mecca that took place in 8 A.H. (630 C.E.). The Hudna
(temporary peace treaty) with the Meccans demonstrates the evil genius
of Mohammed. This evil genius is shared by all Muslims who trick non-
Muslims in day-to-day life in a practice popularly known among the
Muslims as Taquiyya (also spelt as Taqiyya or Taqiya) which means
deception. Pervez Musharraf (the President of Pakistan) referred to
the Hudna when he announced after 9/11 that he was making a pact with
America to fight the Taliban.

With every Muslim military victory, there was not just a change of
ruler, but a wholesale slaughter of those who refused to convert or
pay Jaziya. There was also a total destruction of the pre-Islamic
culture, its educational institutions, libraries, etc.

One of the cardinal principles of Islam is that when a Muslim commits
heinous deeds in order to bring victory to Muslims waging a Jihad
against the Non-Muslims (Kafirs), Islamic law forgives those deeds.
Mohammed preached contempt for all the non-Muslims and told his
gangsters that the non-Muslims were living in ignorance (Jahiliyaa)
and that he would lead his followers to enlightenment (Ailm or ilm).
This enlightenment forgave all acts of rape, murder, torture, as long
as they were committed against the non-Muslims (Kafirs).

Muslims respect only strength and cruelty. They treat magnanimity,
charity and noblesse with contempt. The ritual of emulating Mohammed
in everything is called the Sunnat (or Sunnah). Muslim males emulate
him in doing everything he did like drinking camel urine, dyeing hair
red by using henna, in addition to emulating Mohammed's traits of
being murderous, lecherous, and deceptive.

Arabs brainwashed, Arabized and Islamized all the conquered people at
the pain of death. Knowing all this is relevant today for those who
attempt to eradicate Islam. To do so we have to first understand the
depth of depravity in Islam. Islam has brutalized them and transformed
them into robotic followers, killers, and sadists. If the Muslims are
to be saved from Islam, then it is not sufficient to conquer the
Muslim countries and to encourage democratic forms of government. If
we want Muslims to become emancipated, civilized beings, we have to de-
Islamize them as thoroughly as we have de-Nazified Germans.

Muslims have devised ingenious methods to reach those best suited for
Islam, so they evangelize in prisons, where they appeal to the dregs
of society, or those who come from broken families, or those who have
had some heart-breaking personal experience. Muslim missionaries prey
on them like vultures and hyenas. Richard Reid (the shoe bomber), and
Jose Padilla are typical Westerners who became Muslims. During the
fourteen centuries of Islam's existence, death threats forced people
to become Muslims and kept them Muslim. The same death threats are
used today to intimate Ayan Hirsi Ali, Salman Rushdie and many others
who tell us the truth about Islam. According to the Shariah, a Murtad
(Muslim apostate) has to be killed, and it is the duty of all Muslims
to kill any Muslim who leaves Islam.

While all forms of religious fanaticism are deplorable, only Islam
sanctifies the slaughter of all Kafirs (non-Muslims). It teaches
Muslims to gloat over the killing of non-Muslims, including women and
children. Islam is a psychology of perpetual war. A psychology that
had existed among the pre-Islamic Bedouin Arabs. But then, before
Islam, this psychology was not a global problem, since the Arabs
fought amongst themselves.

The full understanding of the heinous nature of Islam is the first,
and most important step in our efforts to eradicate Islam. Islam lives
by the sword and shall die by the sword. Death threats forced people
into becoming Muslims and kept them as Muslims. Death threats are the
only way these scum can be shaken out of their adherence to the
savagery called Islam. Those opposed to Islam will have to be like the
hunter who aims his rifle between the eyes of the man-eating tiger and
shoots till the tiger is dead meat. The hunter bears no enmity toward
the tiger, but he has to kill the tiger if he does not intend to
become tiger's dinner.
____________________________

THE BRUTAL TRUTH ABOUT ISLAM

Name any area of achievement, any field of human endeavour — patents
filed, literacy, quality of life, degree of civil or political
freedoms, transparency, world-class universities, and so on. In every
case, the nations of Islam are at or near the bottom in every
category, and only barely beat sub-Saharan Africa in overall
performance. source: http://www.islam-watch.org/Others/Why-Muslims-doomed-to-fail.htm

Muslims constitute 22 percent of world population with a 1 percent
share of Nobel Prizes. Jews constitute 0.23 percent of world
population with a 22 percent share of Nobel Prizes. source:
http://www.faithfreedom.org/oped/sina51126.htm

Islam has the world’s record of genocide. Its victims, over more than
1,350 years, number in the hundreds of millions, many more than the
victims of the Holocaust and World Communism combined. Muslim genocide
is still ongoing in the Sudan, Ivory Cost. Mauritania, Somalia, the
Philippines, Indonesia, and, to a lesser extent in other Muslim
countries. source: http://allaboutmuhammad.com/page15.html

Turkish holocaust of Christian Armenians inspired Adolf Hitler:
http://tinyurl.com/3yjvae
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_Genocide#Influence_of_the_Armenian_Genocide_on_Adolf_Hitler

Beheading video of American civil engineer Eugene Armstrong:
http://www.abrahamic-faith.com/audio/eugene-armstrong-beheading-video.wmv

Beheading video of American engineer Jack Hensley:
http://www.notobs.com/english/audioandvideo/crimes/jack_hensle.htm

Beheading video of Japanese tourist Shosei Koda:
http://www.notobs.com/english/audioandvideo/crimes/shosei_koda.htm

Beheading video of American businessman Nicholas Berg:
http://www.notobs.com/english/audioandvideo/crimes/nick_burg.htm

Beheading video of British civil engineer Kenneth John Bigley:
http://www.notobs.com/english/audioandvideo/crimes/kenneth_bigley.htm

Beheading video of South Korean translator Kim Sun-il:
http://www.notobs.com/english/audioandvideo/crimes/kim_sun_execution.htm

Muslim Albanians exterminate Christian Serbs in Kosovo:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UaqThra0kCI

Muslim families are baby-production factories. No consideration is
given about the child's future... and whether the parents can feed,
shelter and educate him/her. What is important is the mullah's call to
grow in numbers, so that the Ummah may overcome the kaffirs. source:
http://www.news.faithfreedom.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1259

The Muslim world does not accept non-Muslim immigrants. In fact, it is
becoming more homogenous as Islamic regimes drive out religious
minorities or whittle them down through other means of attrition. Even
Muslims who feel entitled to life in the West often decry the presence
of foreigners in Muslim lands. source: http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/homeland.php?id=1072859

"What I dislike about it is this element of parasitism. These (Muslim)
people who want to come to other countries from their own benighted
places. They twist the laws, they hire lawyers, they do bad things to
get residence. And then, having got that, they wish to destroy (the
society) which has welcomed them." - Nobel Prizewinning author Sir
Vidia Naipaul

Everything a Muslim does is done to promote Islam. Everything they see
and touch which is not Islamic, or accepted by Islam, becomes a target
for “jihad”. So no matter how many concessions we make, Westerners can
never concede enough. Yet Muslims are moving us, step by step, towards
conceding the unthinkable: that there is only one God and his name is
Allah and that politics, religion, education and every other form of
human life must bow down to and accept the “guidance” of Islam. There
can be no shared ground with Islam. Muslims, by their very nature, are
committed to transforming every area they live and work in into an
Islam-dominated world. And freedom for Islam is doom for anything and
anyone else. Saying “I will live in peace, equality and tolerance with
Islam” is... the medical equivalent to saying you will live in
equality and harmony with a body-wasting disease.... Anyone with a
mind knows that “jihad” means the Islamization of everyday life. And
any Muslim who accepts secularism, freedom, equality or any of our
other cherished “Western” values can no longer be considered a Muslim
in anything but name - for the Qur’an forbids it. The dominance and
authority of the Qur’an is why Muslim communities, no matter where
they are have never integrated. They are either dominant or growing...
Building a mosque in a European city is Islamization. Changing school
meals to halal is Islamization. A teacher telling my child that Allah
and God are the same thing is Islamization. Destroying traditional
European culture because it may offend the people who would like to
destroy it is Islamization. Allowing irresponsibly fecund families
into Europe to breed, take our jobs and bleed our welfare system dry
is Islamization... “Islamization” is the mass immigration of people
who hold “Western” values in contempt. “Islamization” is the
invitation of people who detest our freedoms, religions, equalities
and ways of life into our neighbourhoods, cities and schools. And
“Islamization” is the reprehensible enforcement of multiculturalism
even though the result is inevitable social tension, alienation and
hatred. Westerners and Islamic culture are bipolar opposites which
never have – and never will – share common values. source:
http://www.news.faithfreedom.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1355

I headed for Gracanica, a small enclave of Christian Serbs who's
ancestors have been living in Kosovo for thousands of years. Gracanica
Monastery has been the site of Christian churches since the 6th
century, yet when I arrived I was struck by the towering concrete
walls adorned with coiled barbed wire and machine gun nests, all
required now for the protection of the nuns and bishops who live
there. The outside was also spotted with vehicle blockers reminiscent
of Normandy Beach, with KFOR guards and vehicles patrolling to protect
the Christians from Islamist attacks. I visited with the nuns in the
monastery, who told me their stories, how much they lived in fear of
being murdered by radical Muslims. My heart sank as I saw that even
though their families had been there for countless years, they knew
that their situation would never get better, and that sometime in
their lives they would either be murdered or forced to leave. My mind
shot back to Dearborn, Michigan, and I found myself wondering if
Christians there would one day be forced to live like this. source:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.aspx?GUID=9A68C6F6-8A08-453E-B2E8-6E247D2736CD

The mythical Moderate Islam is nowhere to be found... After each
terror attack, moderate Islam seems more of a dream while the reality
of Jihad expands around the globe... While Muslims have been moderate
under European colonial rule, the Islamic Revival has brought a return
of the original Islam. Given its origin, Islam has severe problems
that preclude it from being a suitable candidate for modernization and
as a basis for a sustained liberal order. Consequently, Islam will
continue to be a threat to civilization as long as it exists... The
key to understanding Islam is to realize that it is a supremacist
ideology. This explains why, for jihadist Muslims, the atrocity of
9/11 was a religious experience that reaffirmed Allah’s will that
Islam is destined to rule this world... source:
http://libertyandculture.blogspot.com/2005_12_01_libertyandculture_archive.html

There is no such thing as “radical Islam”, since by its true
definition Islam is nothing but radical. Those who espouse a “liberal”
view of Islam should be forced to back up their nouveau interpretation
with unabrogated scriptural facts. Unless such would-be “reformists”
can categorically denounce Islamofascisim based on sound evidence from
the Qur’an, they prove to be the true radicals... The terrorists are
faithful and true to what is written in the holy Qur’an. A Muslim is
forbidden to think critically about the Qur'an. He must blindly obey
it and accept it passively and should memorize all of it. source:
http://www.amilimani.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=71&Itemid=2

Progressive radicalization is a persistent theme in Islam, not just in
the West, but in other parts of the world as well, where
fundamentalism usually has a way of winning out over pragmatism.
source: http://www.topix.net/forum/religion/hindu/TVJL7MSEGIK5D2GM9

"Islam makes it incumbent on all adult males, provided they are not
disabled and incapacitated, to prepare themselves for the conquest of
(other) countries so that the writ of Islam is obeyed in every country
in the world." - Ayatollah Khomeini

"Allah did not create man so that he could have fun. The aim of
creation was for mankind to be put to the test through hardship and
prayer. An Islamic regime must be serious in every field. There are no
jokes in Islam. There is no humor in Islam. There is no fun in Islam.
There can be no fun and joy in whatever is serious." - Ayatollah
Khomeini

"Those who oppose the mullahs oppose Islam itself; eliminate the
mullahs and Islam shall disappear in fifty years. It is only the
mullahs who can bring the people into the streets and make them die
for Islam - begging to have their blood shed for Islam." - Ayatollah
Khomeini

"I have nothing against Islam because it educates the men in this
division for me and promises them heaven if they fight and are killed
in action. A very practical and attractive religion for soldiers." -
Heinrich Himmler (head of Nazi SS troops)

Sun Tzu teaches that to win a war one must know who the enemy is. And
if there is a single reason while we’ve failed, it is the
administration’s’ staggering inability after six years to figure out
who our enemy is, let alone how to go about defeating it. Officially,
we’re fighting a war against terror, but terrorism is a tactic not an
enemy and one does not win wars by fighting tactics. Yet, the enemy is
very real and formidable. Armed with a murderous ideology, it has a
worldwide support and recruitment infrastructure, virtually unlimited
financing and single-minded commitment to the destruction of our
civilization... Saudi Arabia, a reactionary medieval fiefdom
subsisting on our oil rents, has spent, by its own admission, anywhere
between $80 and $100 billion dollars over the past 30 years exporting
its hateful Wahhabi creed worldwide and building a gigantic
infrastructure of Islamism. There is not a city of any size anywhere
in the West today that does not have a Saudi-controlled mosque,
Islamic center or a madrassa, all preaching hatred and violence
against the infidels. In the United States, at least half of the
mosques are owned by the radical Wahhabi organization North American
Islamic Trust (NAIT) and most of what claims to be the Muslim
establishment is in the hands of radical Islamists.
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/terrorism.php?id=1315637

What on earth has American foreign policy got to do with the stoning
to death of a woman for adultery in Nigeria? It has every thing to do
with Islam, and Islamic Law... We must take seriously what the
Islamists say to understand their motivations, to understand September
11, 2001. The four greatest influences on the modern rise of Militant
Islam have been the Egyptians Hasan al Banna, the founder of Muslim
Brethren, and Sayyid Qutb, the Indo-Pakistani, Maududi, and the
Iranian Ayatollah Khomeini. They all repeat the same message, derived
from classical writers like Ibn Taymiyyah, and ultimately from the
Koran and Hadith, namely, it is the divinely ordained duty of all
Muslims to fight non-Muslims in the literal, military sense until man-
made law has been replaced by God’s Law, the Sharia, and Islam has
conquered the entire world... In August, 2002, the Rand Corporation
published a report that described Saudi Arabia as "the kernel of evil,
the prime mover, the most dangerous opponent." The report went on
explain that "Saudi Arabia supports our enemies and attacks our
allies. The Saudis are active at every level of the terror chain, from
planners to financiers, from cadre to foot-soldier, from ideologist to
cheerleader." And yet little seems to have changed in the West's
behaviour towards a regime that has financed terrorism, funneled
millions into madrassas that preach more anti-Western hatred, has
corrupted institutions of higher education like Harvard and Georgetown
University, has bought the favours of Western politicians and seeks to
destroy Western civilisation at every turn. We know the reason: oil.
But until we address the question of Saudi Arabia and its influence on
life in the West we shall have no progress, no rest... Demand the re-
writing of Saudi, Egyptian, and Syrian textbooks preaching hatred of
the West, of Jews, of Non-Muslims... French teachers, in recent years,
have been intimidated by Muslim pupils into not teaching the
Holocaust... There is, among many well-meaning Western intellectuals,
academics, and Islamologists, the belief that somehow Islam will
reform itself without anyone anywhere ruffling any feathers,
disturbing Muslim sensibilities, or saying anything at all about the
Koran. This is wishful thinking. If one desires to bring about an
Enlightenment in the Islamic world or among Muslims living in the
West, at some stage, someone somewhere will have to apply to the Koran
the same techniques of textual analysis as were applied to the Bible
by Spinoza and others, especially in Germany during the 19th Century.
In recent years, Saudi Arabia, and other Islamic countries (for
example, Brunei) have established Chairs of Islamic Studies in
prestigious Western Universities, which are encouraged to present a
favourable image of Islam. Scientific research, leading to objective
truth, no longer seems to be the goal. Critical examination of the
sources or the Koran is discouraged. Scholars, such as Daniel
Easterman, have even lost their posts for not teaching about Islam in
the way approved by Saudi Arabia. In December, 2005, Georgetown and
Harvard Universities accepted $20 million each from Saudi Prince
Alwaleed bin Talal for programmes in Islamic Studies. Such money can
only corrupt the original intent of all higher institutions of
education, that is, the search for truth. Now, we shall only have
"Islamic truth" that is acceptable to the Royal Saudi family, a family
that has financed terrorism, anti-Westernism and anti-Semitism for
over thirty years. Previous donations from various Saudi sources have
included gifts of $20 million, $5 million, and $2 million dollars to
the University of Arkansas, the University of California, Berkeley;
and Harvard respectively. source: http://www.islam-watch.org/IbnWarraq/Islamic-Enlightenment.htm

“Among religions, Bolshevism is to be reckoned with Mohammedanism
rather than with Christianity and Buddhism. Christianity and Buddhism
are primarily personal religions, with mystical doctrines and a love
of contemplation. Mohammedanism and Bolshevism are practical, social,
unspiritual, concerned to win the empire of this world. - Bertrand
Russell (source: Theory and Practice of Bolshevism, London, 1921 pp .
5, 29, 114)

“The conversion of the entire population to Islam and the extinction
of every form of dissent is the ideal of the Muslim State. If any
infidel is suffered to exist in the community, it is as a necessary
evil, and for a transitional period only. Political and social
disabilities must be imposed on him, and bribes offered to him from
the public funds, to hasten the day of his spiritual enlightenment and
the addition of his name to the roll of true believers. A non-Muslim
therefore cannot be a citizen of the State; he is a member of a
depressed class; his status is a modified form of slavery. He lives
under a contract (zimma, or ‘dhimma’) with the State: for the life and
property grudgingly spared to him by the commander of the faithful he
must undergo political and social disabilities, and pay a commutation
money. In short, his continued existence in the State after the
conquest of his country by the Muslims is conditional upon his person
and property made subservient to the cause of Islam.” Author: Bat
Ye’or source: http://globalpolitician.com/articleshow.asp?ID=2878&cid=3&sid=7

For the most part, Christianity has been purged from the Middle East.
While some countries have a small minority of Christians, they are
persecuted and tormented and in many cases, they are not even allowed
to be citizens of the country of their birth because they are not
Muslim. In most Islamic countries, non-Muslims cannot own land and
their children are not allowed to attend the better schools. source:
http://www.news.faithfreedom.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=254

For hundreds of years the Middle East was the embodiment of real
multicultural ideal, the thesaurus of spiritual and philosophical
knowledge. Antique mystery religions and Zoroastrism; the Ebonites and
the first Christian sects; Gnosticism and Kabbalistic teachings; the
Neoplatonics and the Manichees, the Arians and the Nestorians -- all
of them had co-existed in harmony... It was from this fathomless
source, that European philosophy, theology and learning got strength
which paved the way to freedom and liberal values... What has remained
from the multicultural world of the Middle East? Do the Zoroastrians
and Bahai's stay in Iran, their homeland? It will be easer to find
them in a cemetery in that country, than living. Those who could
escape flew to India and the West. Had the Sufis remained in Saudi
Arabia? No, they were annihilated by the regime as the enemies of
"true Islam". Can you find a branch of Ahmadiyya movement at least in
one of the countries of the Middle East?... The Christians of Iraq and
the West Bank escaped to the USA and Canada. Copts left Egypt... In
20-30 years the Middle East will turn into a multicultural cemetery
with an oasis in the form of Israel... One more step, and instead of
the cradle of humanity only a scorched desert of hatred will be left
here. And this desert will spread to the North and South, to the East
and West. It will enter the open doors of your house; devour you and
your family, your clubs, cafes, libraries, theaters, and galleries.
You have got used to freedom; you don't know what the world without
freedom is. I know it because I have grown up in communist Moscow. But
I also know the Middle East. And believe me, in comparison to the new
Caliphate the Soviet empire of the 60ies and 70ies would seem a
paradise. The new rulers of the world will not only shut your mouth,
but turn your soul inside out. source:
http://www.islam-watch.org/Others/Islam-Multicultural-Cemetery-Open-Letter-Educated-Liberal.htm

There is an asymmetry between the good that many moderate Muslims can
do for Britain and the harm that a few fanatics can do to it. The 1-
in-1,000 chance that a man is a murderous fanatic is more important to
me than the 999-in-1,000 chance that he is not a murderous fanatic...
British society could get by perfectly well without the contribution
even of moderate Muslims. The only thing we really want from Muslims
is their oil money for bank deposits, to prop up London property
prices and to sustain the luxury market; their cheap labor that we
imported in the 1960s in a vain effort to bolster the dying textile
industry, which could not find local labor, is now redundant. source:
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-op-dalrymple8jul08,0,6923090.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions

Alqaeda members live in the West and get total protection and
financial support from the infidels. They do not even have to worry
about going to work. This is taken care of, thanks to the infidel’s
welfare system, which gives the jihadists the vital time to focus on
their jihad activities. Almost all of the terrorists arrested in the
UK benefited from the state’s welfare system while they were planning
for the destruction of that very system and the state altogether... As
a result of the military jihad, America now spends millions of dollars
to protect its airlines from being hijacked, bombed or shot down,
while the Arab airlines are busy reaping profits from the confident
passengers who know well that by flying in an Arab airliner they are
unlikely targets for Islamic terrorism. A terrorists’ attack on an
American city would result in raised alert level for weeks with severe
disruption of normal life throughout the country and the loss of
billions of dollars. On the other hand, life in the cities of the Arab
world continues just as normal, after the initial dancing in the
streets, with no fear at all that an American reprisal in kind will
ever take place... Soon after 9/11, the sale of many American products
in the Middle East came to a near standstill and many American
businesses had to shut down their operations. MacDonald’s restaurants
in the Middle East, which are partly owned by local Arab companies,
had a hard time explaining to the public they were joint ventures and
had nothing to do with the American policies. The pressure of the
market forced the American fast food chain to donate a proportion of
its profits to the Palestinians in a desperate attempt to retain
customers... In the Middle East, no Arab will doubt that
Marks&Spencers donates its Saturday’s revenues to finance Israel’s war
efforts. In the Middle East, anti Western rumours spread fast among
the Arabs and are readily believed even by the professionals and
intellectuals! In the West, mosques and Islamic centres usually take
the lead in steering the war; they regularly update their communities
on which stores or businesses to avoid. source:
http://www.islam-watch.org/MuminSalih/Trade-Jihad.htm

A Shiite Muslim can't build a mosque in Cairo; his Sunni brother can't
have a mosque of his own in Tehran. Editions of the Koran printed in
Egypt or Saudi Arabia are seized as contraband in Iran; Egypt and most
other Muslim nations in turn ban the import of Korans printed in Iran.
The works of a majority of Muslim writers and philosophers are banned
in most Muslim countries. source: http://tinyurl.com/2ggld6

Laughing is an unacceptable behavior in Islam and it’s against
Mohammad’ teachings. source: http://www.news.faithfreedom.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=742

To become a Muslim, you must take an Arab name, dress like an Arab,
speak Arabic, eat only what Arabs eat, treat your wife as Arabs treat
their wives, etc... Such things as blue jeans are not really condemned
because they are immoral but because they are not Arab. source:
http://www.chick.com/information/religions/islam/quran.asp

All sports like football, cricket, volleyball, basketball etc. will be
prohibited. Islam does not condone any types of sports for recreation
purposes. Sport of any type is considered the game of Satan. Praying
five times a day is their main sports. All forms of drama, theaters
and cinema are deadly illegal in Islam; hence will be strictly
prohibited by Islamic shariah. Islamic morality/virtue police
(Muttawalli) will roam the country to stop these Satanic vices and
will severely punish with beatings and lashing, if anybody violates
the code of Islamic virtues. In the Islamic Shariah laws, music is
considered weapons of Satan (Devil); hence music of all kinds are
strictly prohibited. Only vocal music of religious nature (commonly
known as Gazzal), which exalts the greatness of Allah and his prophet,
is allowed. All instrumental music, i.e. all musical instruments is
strictly prohibited. Violators are punished or imprisoned. Islam does
not allow drawings or sculpturing of any living beings (such as
humans, animals and birds). The drawings of plants and vines will be
allowed, because the Islamic God thought plants and vines were
lifeless objects! Punishments for the crimes (like stealing, adultery,
killings etc.) will be cutting/chopping hands, feet and even chopping
heads, or stoning death and lashings one hundred and one times.
Present Islamic paradises like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Nigeria, Pakistan,
Sudan and many other Arab nations randomly practice these above
mentioned punishments according to Islamic Sharia or hudud laws.
Islamic shariah laws will also control people’s sexual life and
marriage life. Shariah will dictate when, what and how to do sexual
acts. Usage of condom etc. will be prohibited. Love acts of all types
will be strictly prohibited at the outside of the private home. Even
the family lives in the Islamic country are controlled by the Sharia
laws. Family planning such as birth-control will be strictly
prohibited. source: http://www.islam-watch.org/Shabana/real_islam.pdf

Even though you are not ethnically an Arab, you must keep an Arabic
name, follow Arabic culture; adopt their food, clothing, hygiene and
toilet habits; memorise their Holy Scriptures without comprehending a
single word of it and prostrate endlessly to their Allah. When you go
on pilgrimage or when they hire you as slaves to work for them they
ridicule you as a 'miskin' (indigent). But they treat the white
infidel workers with respect and offer them higher pay and more fringe
benefits than the black and brown immigrant workers (like you) .Though
you are better qualified than many of them (white infidels) your Arab
brothers discriminate you against the white infidel workers. As a
general rule, you are paid half compared to a white unbeliever. Yet,
you consider the Arabs superior to you and you imitate their dress and
Bedouin habits. Some Islamic Paradises (like Pakistan) even broadcast
news in Arabic when not even 0.1% of their population understand the
Arabic language. You wonder why a desperately poor country should
spend money to Arabise its population? source:
http://www.islam-watch.org/AbulKasem/AK_apostacy.htm)

Recently I had the experience of travelling by train from Karachi to
Islamabad. More often than not, there was no water in the (train)
compartments, for no sooner was the overhead tank filled with water
than it was consumed in a frenzy of ablution (wazu) by the pious
preparing themselves for prayer... Government offices practically
don’t become functional until 9:30 or 10:00 and close for business
about 2:30 or so. This five-hour working day is further reduced by an
extended ‘prayer break’ or waqfa barae namaz. During this break, the
pious pray, others socialise or just loaf around... I am told of
instances when groups of holies have commenced congregational prayer
(ba-jama’at namaz) in the aisles of planes as they prepare for
landing. In some cases, even cabin crew have made themselves
incommunicado from passengers by drawing curtains with the notice
‘prayer break’... Morality has become synonymous with, and reduced to,
a dress code for women, preferably the veil. Human rights, good
customer service, politeness in public, adherence to contractual
obligations, facilities for the handicapped, public toilets, voluntary
work, donations to secular charities and equality before the law are
not considered worthy objectives, and are conspicuous by their absence
in Muslim countries. source: http://www.muslim-refusenik.com/news/dailytimes-01-18-07.htm

A poll of more than 1,000 British Muslims, conducted by the Policy
Exchange think-tank this year (2007), found that 36 per cent of
Muslims aged between 16 and 24 believe those who convert to another
faith should be punished by death. source:
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2170160,00.html

The apostate should not be put to death until he has been asked to
repent three times. This is the view of the majority of scholars,
including ‘Umar, ‘Ali, ‘Ata’, al-Nakhaii, Maalik, al-Thawri, al-
Awzaa’i, Ishaaq and others. Because apostasy comes about because of
doubt, and cannot be dispelled in an instant. Time should be allowed
for the person to rethink the matter, and the best length of time is
three days. The saheeh Sunnah indicates that it is essential to put
the apostate to death. Al-Bukhaari (6922) narrated that Ibn ‘Abbaas
said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon
him) said: “Whoever changes his religion, put him to death.” Al-
Bukhaari (6484) and Muslim (1676) narrated that ‘Abd-Allaah ibn
Mas’ood said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah
be upon him) said: “It is not permissible to shed the blood of a
Muslim who bears witness that there is no god except Allaah and that I
am the Messenger of Allaah, except in one of three cases: a soul for a
soul (i.e., in the case of murder); a previously-married person who
commits zina; and one who leaves his religion and separates from the
main body of the Muslims.” source: http://www.islam-qa.com/index.php?ref=14231&ln=eng&txt=apostasy

As a child, I was asked to memorize the verses of Koran. I used to ask
the Hujur (Mullah) what meanings were conveyed by those verses? The
reply I used to get from the Hujur was a few strokes of the cane and
rebukes. He used to say that one should never ask any question on the
matter of Islam especially on Koran. The penalty for asking questions
is whipping. source: http://www.islam-watch.org/AbulKasem/breaking_the_manacles.htm

Koran is full of internal contradictions, scientific errors and
historical blunders. 54:19 mentions Aad was destroyed in a day but
69:6,7 mentions Aad was destroyed in seven nights and eight days;
19:17 shows an angel appeared to Mary but 3:42 shows several angels
appeared; 28:40 mentions pharaoh drowned and died but 10:92 states
that the same pharaoh was saved; 18:86 states that sun sets in a muddy
spring of water; 15:19 mentions earth is flat; 86:6,7 states that
semen emits from between back-bone and the ribs; 19:27,28 states that
Mary was the sister of Aaron, whereas history shows they were born
about 1300 years apart; 28:8 tells that pharaoh and Haman were living
at the same time and place whereas history clearly shows they were
born about 1000 years apart and pharaoh lived in Egypt and Haman lived
in Shushan city in Persia; and 4:157 says that Jesus was not crucified
whereas it is crystal clear in historical records that Jesus was
crucified and not another man who looked like Jesus. By the way, the
transliterated name of Jesus in arabic Quran is Isa but even this is
wrong because the name of Esau, brother of Jacob (Yaqub in arabic) is
Isa in arabic. The correct transliterated name of Jesus in arabic is
Yasu. Isa (Esau) means ‘hairy’ and Yasu (Jesus) means ‘God saves.’
source: http://islam-watch.org/LeavingIslam/Why-I-Quit-Islam.htm

Any religion that requires total obedience without thought is not
likely to produce people capable of critical thought, people capable
of free and independent thought. Such a situation is favorable to the
development of a powerful "clergy" and is clearly responsible for the
intellectual, cultural, and economic stagnation of several centuries.
Illiteracy remains high in Muslim countries. Historically, as there
never was any separation of state and religion, any criticism of one
was seen as a criticism of the other... No Muslim country has
developed a stable democracy; Muslims are being subjected to every
kind of repression possible. Under these conditions healthy criticism
of society is not possible, because critical thought and liberty go
together... All innovations are discouraged in Islam - every problem
is seen as a religious problem rather than a social or economic one...
If a man were to break into a woman's dormitory and rape half a dozen
women, he would risk nothing since there would be no male witnesses.
Indeed a female victim of rape is unlikely to file a lawsuit because
she would risk being condemned herself and have little chance of
obtaining justice... According to Muslim jurists, the husband is not
obliged under Islamic law to pay for her (wife) medical expenses in
case of illness... According to Women's Action Forum, a woman's rights
organization, 72% of all women in police custody in Pakistan are
physically and sexually abused... Under Islamic law a woman cannot be
the head of state. source: http://islam-watch.org/IbnWarraq/Islam's-Shame-Veil-Tears.htm

The United Nations, in its 2002 Arab Human Development Report, found
that the total number of books translated into Arabic each year is no
more than 330, or one-fifth of those annually translated in a small
country like Greece. Indeed, the total number of books translated into
Arabic during the last 1,000 years, since the age of Caliph Al-
Ma’moun, (a ninth-century Arab ruler who was a patron of cultural
interaction between Arab, Persian, and Greek scholars) to this day is
less than those translated in Spain in one year... Muslims claim to
have contributed the numeral “Zero” to the sum total of human
knowledge, and alas, have continued to contribute zero ever since.
source: http://www.islam-watch.org/Warner/Gutenberg-and-the-Date-Palm.htm

German author Henryk M. Broder recently told the Dutch newspaper De
Volkskrant that young Europeans who love freedom, better emigrate.
Europe as we know it will no longer exist 20 years from now. Whilst
sitting on a terrace in Berlin, Broder pointed to the other customers
and the passers-by and said melancholically: "We are watching the
world of yesterday." Europe is turning Muslim. As Broder is sixty
years old he is not going to emigrate himself. "I am too old," he
said. However, he urged young people to get out and "move to Australia
or New Zealand. That is the only option they have if they want to
avoid the plagues that will turn the old continent uninhabitable."
Many Germans and Dutch, apparently, did not wait for Broder's advice.
The number of emigrants leaving the Netherlands and Germany has
already surpassed the number of immigrants moving in. One does not
have to be prophetic to predict, like Henryk Broder, that Europe is
becoming Islamic. Just consider the demographics. The number of
Muslims in contemporary Europe is estimated to be 50 million. It is
expected to double in twenty years. By 2025, one third of all European
children will be born to Muslim families. Today Mohammed is already
the most popular name for new-born boys in Brussels, Amsterdam,
Rotterdam, and other major European cities. Broder is convinced that
the Europeans are not willing to oppose islamization. "The dominant
ethos," he told De Volkskrant, "is perfectly voiced by the stupid
blonde woman author with whom I recently debated. She said that it is
sometimes better to let yourself be raped than to risk serious
injuries while resisting. source: http://www.islamreview.com/articles/awakenedsecularists.shtml

Prime Minister Gordon Brown told the nation that "we have got to
separate those great moderate members of our community from a few
extremists who wish to practice violence and inflict maximum loss of
life in the interests of a perversion of their religion." By contrast,
a former jihadist from Manchester wrote that the "real engine of our
violence" is "Islamic theology." Months ago, this young man informed
me that as a militant he raised most of his war chest not from
obscenely rich Saudis, but from middle-class Muslim dentists living in
the United Kingdom. There's sobering lesson here for the new prime
minister. So far, those arrested in connection to the car bombs are,
by and large, medical professionals. The seeming paradox of the
privileged seeking to avenge grievance has many champions of
compassion scratching their heads. Aren't Muslim martyrs supposed to
be poor, disenfranchised, and resentful about both? source:
ttp://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/print.php?url=http://www.nypost.com/seven/07082007/postopinion/opedcolumnists/islams_problem_opedcolumnists_irshad_manji.htm

Jihad is a duty of every Muslim... Jihad... does not recognise any...
permanent peace because such a permanent peace does not match the
necessary expansion of “Dar-al-Islam”. source:
http://www.mideastyouth.com/2007/09/05/jihad-is-a-justification-of-aggression/

Terror groups have tried to use the guise of injury to pass security.
Being in a wheelchair, wearing a cast, posing as gravely ill to “get
treatment” in the States, and claiming asylum are all techniques
employed by various groups... There have even been cases of Middle
Eastern individuals posing as Mexicans to cross the Southern U.S.
border, knowing that the U.S. government is sympathetic toward illegal
immigrants... Islamic terrorists have been using many disguises to
hide themselves. They hide in South America and work to convert
indigenous people to Islam... There are innumerable vulnerabilities in
the U.S. As a criminal profiler who has consulted with police and
members of U.S. Military Intelligence, I see many similarities between
serial murder and terrorism. Serial killers become whatever they need
to be in order to get close to their victims. They have had jobs as
doctors, police officers, military officers, pharmacists, and
teachers. One can be sure, that if the lone serial killer is smart
enough to get into these positions, a well financed terror
organization can do the same. Remember, people are not always what
they appear to be. source: http://www.aim.org/guest_column/5760_0_6_0_C/

Once a sleeper has succeeded in entering a country he is intent on
attacking, his goal is to establish himself (herself) in a community
and take on a pedestrian appearance. Such sleepers seek employment
that provides them with camouflage and mobility. We have seen
terrorists such as Mahmoud Abouhalima who entered our country as a
tourist and then overstayed his authorized period of admission. He
subsequently applied for amnesty under the agricultural worker
provisions of the disastrous Amnesty of 1986, falsely claiming to have
been a farmer. His application for amnesty was approved and he drove
a taxicab in New York City. The only thing he ever planted was a bomb
in the basement of the World Trade Center complex that was detonated
on September 26, 1993, killing 6, injuring hundreds of innocent
victims and inflicting an estimated 500 million dollars in damages to
that iconic complex, nearly toppling one of the towers! source:
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/homeland.php?id=1384797

Even the Westerners who perceive a danger rarely grasp its full scope.
Religious war simply does not fit with their understanding of the
world. While they may be able to grasp the notion of Islamic terrorism
or “Islamofascism,” it is inconceivable that Islam itself could be
hostile. They assume, without questioning, that all religions are
basically the same, and that all religions teach about peace and love.
source: http://www.news.faithfreedom.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=756

The elite newspapers, with the exception of The Wall Street Journal,
systematically censor the news in order to downplay the threat, or at
worst, literally distort the facts to falsely portray radical Islamic
groups in the United States as victims, which is exactly in line with
the victimology propagated by these groups. If misreporting were a
crime, a lot of reporters would be in jail. source:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1189411449079&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter

The West has been hampered by a festering and self-inflicted wound: a
reluctance to identify its foe as the totalitarian, Islamic-based
ideology that it is. Instead, our elites call forth a politically
correct haze to shroud the jihadist elephant in the room. Media
outlets invoke euphemisms about rocket-launching "militants" and car-
torching "youths..." The conflict between Islamic expansionists and
the West does not stem from political disagreements that can be
assuaged by dialogue or compromise. Radical Islam seeks to wear down
and ultimately destroy its opponent -- in Iraq, Israel, Europe, and
everywhere else. We must focus on doing the same to radical Islam.
source: http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/08/the_art_of_the_long_war.html

65.2% Muslims favor Caliphate, 65.5% Muslims favor strict Sharia law
in every Islamic country: http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=28064

Terror Free Tomorrow of Vienna, Virginia and the Pakistan Institute
for Public Opinion conducted a poll in Pakistan on August 18-29, 2007
to determine approval ratings of some organizations and politicians.
Poll results (approval ratings): al Qaeda = 43%, Taliban = 38%, local
Muslim extremist groups = from 37% to 49%, Osama bin Laden = 46%,
Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf = 38%. source:
http://edition.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/09/11/poll.pakistanis/index.html

Peru is said to be one of Osama Bin Laden’s favorite training
locales... In South America, Islamists have met inside Catholic
churches to avoid raising a red flag. They have worn crucifixes, taken
on Christian names, attended Christian services, stolen dead
Christians’ birth certificates, stolen the identity of a dead Catholic
priest, and sought asylum under the pretext of being a persecuted
Christian. By attempting to blend in using the cover of a different
religion, the terrorists believe that scrutiny will be minimized...
Puerto Ricans can come to the mainland any time they want. Fraudulent
documents are a huge industry there as illegals and terror operatives
look to enter the island illegally, obtain fake paperwork, and then
simply come to the mainland. source: http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/terrorism.php?id=1325399

A recent study by the London-based Transparency International found
that Middle Eastern and North African nations form the world’s most
corrupt region. source: http://www.canadafreepress.com/2003/inter102003.htm

Repressive laws, supplemented and reinforced by terrorists, vigilantes
and mob violence, are a fundamental barrier to open discussion and
dissent, and so to democracy and free societies, within the Muslim
world. source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/28/AR2007092801358.html

72 terrorist organizations with thousands of operatives exist and
operate within the borders of the United States. These organizations
include: Hezbollah, Hamas, Abu Sayyaf, Islamic Jihad, al Fuqra, the
Muslim Brotherhood and al Qaeda. source: http://www.basicsproject.org/terrorism/terrorism.htm

France will pay Muslim immigrants to return home. Under the scheme,
Paris will provide each family with a nest egg of €6,000 ($8,000) for
when they go back to their country of origin. A similar scheme, which
was introduced in 2005 and 2006, was taken up by around 3,000
families. source: http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,484716,00.html

Obsession (very good film about Islam):
(part 1, 39 minutes) http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8662467646661149069
(part 2, 9 minutes) http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2379593167878434106
(part 3, 9 minutes) http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=923759196750871367
(part 4, 9 minutes) http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3347862095172919551
(part 5, 9 minutes) http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7134286674402163481

Must-see (or hear) Brigitte Gabriel's speech about Muslims (58
minutes):
http://www.heritage.org/Press/Events/ev092706a.cfm

The best book about Islam "Why I Am Not A Muslim" by Ibn Warraq:
http://tinyurl.com/2jgb89

The best book about the Islamization of Europe: "While Europe Slept"
by Bruce Bawer:
http://tinyurl.com/342nhg

Dan Dennett explains how Islam infects our minds:
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/116

Interview with Brigitte Gabriel:
first half: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?print=yes&id=20232
second half: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?print=yes&id=20438

Islam in Europe:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nI5WoXpmPiM

A few words about the world's fastest growing religion:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/016621.php
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=fa8_1182431311

Wafa Sultan speaks about Islam:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wPglHZQf-0

Islam? No thanks!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QM9SYfqKNuA

Four Stages of Islamic Treachery:
http://www.islam-watch.org/Others/Stages-of-Islamization.htm

Robert Spencer, Truth About Muhammad (piss be upon him, 64 min.):
http://www.heritage.org/Press/Events/ev111406a.cfm

Short interviews with Ayaan Hirsi Ali:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3tgY_eI_P0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b04pjSiTWUQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6Wrhivp7eQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vg8AYs56RAY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08EYqwyns-k

Interview with Nonie Darwish about Islam:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=26094

Nonie Darwish, Now They Call Me Infidel:
http://www.heritage.org/Press/Events/ev111506a.cfm

Criticism of Islam:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Islam

Historical persecution by Muslims:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_persecution_by_Muslims

Ali Sina's articles about Islam:
source: http://www.islam-watch.org/AliSina/How-to-Beat-Jihad.htm
http://www.news.faithfreedom.org/index.php?name=Sections&req=viewarticle&artid=1&page=1
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/2005/04/005810print.html
http://www.islam-watch.org/AliSina/index.html
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Author/Sina.htm

Islamic websites:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRc9UByJJsk

Khallid Abdul Muhammad speaks about non-Muslims:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CADSzKUEpM0

Undercover video reveals Muslim plans for the West:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peFQWuk4nuo

Statistical data about Islamization of Europe: Timothy M. Savage,
Europe and Islam: Crescent Waxing, Cultures Clashing, The Washington
Quarterly, Summer 2004. http://www.twq.com/04summer/docs/04summer_savage.pdf

When Britain, Israel, the United States or any other country gets
attacked by Muslims, this is always blamed by the media on past
colonial history, occupation, aggressive foreign policy etc. Well,
Sweden doesn't have a colonial history, its political establishment is
among the most anti-Israeli in Europe and Swedish media have always
been critical of US policies. Muslim immigration to the country has
created the worst rape wave in Scandinavian history (which was
indirectly blamed on global warming by the nation's largest newspaper
some weeks ago), and the authorities have more or less abandoned their
third largest city, Malmö, to Muslim gangs. source:
http://www.islam-watch.org/Fjordman/Sweden-Learns-Appeasement-Does-not-Pay.htm

Roughly two-thirds (65%) of adult Muslims living in the United States
were born elsewhere, and 39% have come to the U.S. since 1990. A
relatively large proportion of Muslim immigrants are from Arab
countries, but many also come from Pakistan and other South Asian
countries. Among native-born Muslims, slightly more than half are
African American... A careful study in San Diego, California, found
that the Muslim population there was capable of doubling every six
years. But a more rigorous study in Illinois found the Muslim
population in that state doubled every 17 years, or only about a third
of the increase estimated in San Diego. source:
http://pewresearch.org/assets/pdf/muslim-americans.pdf

According to various reports, at least 80% of U.S. Mosques follow or
are influenced by the Wahhabi sect of Saudi Arabia. Among other
things, this sect believes it is a “religious obligation” to hate
Christians and Jews and to think of the United States as “enemy
territory.” In 2006, Bernard Lewis, one of the world’s leading
scholars on Islam, called Wahhabism, “The most radical, the most
violent, the most extreme and fanatical version of Islam.” source:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/ (September 25, 2007)

Radical Islamist groups, most tied to Saudi-sponsored Wahhabi
organizations suspected by the U.S. government of being closely linked
to terror financing activities, dominate Muslim prison recruitment in
the U.S. and seek to create a radicalized cadre of felons who will
support their anti-American efforts. Due to their efforts, the
population of Muslim inmates has reached approximately 350,000 (in
2003) with 30,000-40,000 added each year. These converted inmates are
mostly African American with a small but growing Hispanic minority.
source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prison_Islam_in_the_United_States

Moderate Muslims: http://www.aina.org/news/20070930022150.htm

Islamization of Europe:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29i_y0dQg0Q
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7801911443405277650&q

The real Islam revealed:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SzQFyhFNUtE

Lynching in Islam:
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Gallery/7.htm

Islam around the world:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hz-bTNxpApU

Cleric Abu Abdullah on CNN:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1817039565075741443

Ex-Islamic terrorists speak out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZFYLAxfQ_I

Islam's war against Buddhism:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=27700

Palestinians celebrate 9/11 attack:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xyaixXr6PvI

Reasons for decline of the Muslim world:
http://archive.gulfnews.com/articles/07/05/02/10122223.html

The myth of Islamic tolerance:
http://kenlydell.typepad.com/islamic_evil/muslim_intolerance/index.html

Islam, Middle East and Fascism (long but excellent article by
Ibn Warraq): http://www.islam-watch.org/IbnWarraq/Fascism.htm

Islamic humor:
http://www.faithfreedom.org/comics/comics.htm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHZUaW8iuzE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWT-C2VygBw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhjnAVnY5ns
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vW9oYzMhiF4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6SRGRshiSM
http://kenlydell.typepad.com/photos/cartoons/who_are_you_kidding.jpg
http://kenlydell.typepad.com/photos/cartoons/purity1.jpg
http://kenlydell.typepad.com/photos/cartoons/eurabia.jpg
http://kenlydell.typepad.com/photos/cartoons/safest.jpg
http://www.islamcomicbook.com

Frank Sinatra's song (Strangers On My Flight):
http://www.laughingatislam.com/imagessite/sinatra.mp3
Lyrics: http://www.laughingatislam.com/strangers.html

MEMRI Compilation of Muslim opinions:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JplfzQ9PkTg

Since 1945, the number of Muslims killed by other Muslims outnumbers
those killed by Israelis by a factor that far exceeds 100-1. source:
http://www.nysun.com/pf.php?id=55137&v=9335610811

What really happened in the Middle East:
http://www.terrorismawareness.org/what-really-happened/

Who authored the Koran:
http://www.islam-watch.org/AbulKasem/WhoAuthoredQuran/who_authored_the_quran.htm

Contradictions in the Koran:
http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/contra/by_name.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_Qur%27an

Errors in the Koran:
Scribal Errors: http://members.aol.com/AlHaqq4u/scribal.html
Grammatical Errors: http://members.aol.com/AlHaqq4u/grammar.html
The Gate: http://members.aol.com/AlHaqq4u/gate.html
Zul-Qarnain: http://members.aol.com/AlHaqq4u/alex.html
Zul-Qarnain and the Sun: http://members.aol.com/AlHaqq4u/spring.html
Inventions to protect the miracle: http://members.aol.com/AlHaqq4u/inventions.html

The most famous recent convert from Islam to Christianity is Dr.
Muhammed Rahoumy. He was the Dean of Al Azhar Islamic University in
Egypt - the oldest and most prestigious Islamic school of theology in
the world. Rahoumy (now Samuel Paul) left Islam in 2000, and now lives
in the USA.

The major branches (of Islam) are Sunni, Shi’a and Sufi. We have four
schools of thought under the Sunni school of thought, Hanafi, Hanbali,
Maliki, and Shafi’i. Shi’a sects are Jafari, Ismailiyah, Zaiddiyah,
Alawi, Alevi, and Bohras. The Sufi orders are Bektashi, Qadiri,
Naqshbandi, Suhrawardiyya, and the Chi****i order. In addition to the
major branches within Islam, we have the sects of Kharijite (Ibadi,
Sufri), Kalam schools of thought (Ash’ari, Maturidi, Murjite, and
Mu’tazili). The movements within these sects are namely the Barelwi,
Deobandi, Salafis, Wahhabis, Liberals, and the Tablighi Jama’at. And
the famous, Zikri, Ahmadiya, Qaidyani and the Nation of Islam in
America. If you are a member of one sect, you view generally that your
sect is the “true” Islam and that all other sects are wrong (could
this be a conspiracy to keep us poor and stupid?). The biggest dilemma
that the entire Muslim nation faces is that every sect within Islam
believes that only if all Muslims would follow their view, Islam would
win back Allah’s favor and the glory of Islam would be restored. The
Salafist and Wahhabis are a perfect example; they have resorted to
violence, bloodshed, and killings. They believe that every other sect
within Islam is on the wrong path, therefore; all other sects within
Islam must follow their ideology; with the exception of Shi’a,
otherwise they will be humiliated, tortured or killed. Salafis and
Wahhabis have made a permanent takfir on the Shi’a and declared them
as Kuffar (Infidels); they would not even give Shi’a Da’wah
(invitation to Sunni Islam). source: http://ronbosoldier.blogspot.com/2006_12_01_archive.html

Salafism is derived from the word salaf, which means “companion of the
prophet” and is a positive term for any Muslim... Salafist groups and
movements include the Wahhabis, the Deobandis and the missionary group
Jamaat al Tabligh. Wahhabis hold the prophet Muhammad’s life in Medina
as the gold standard for practicing Islam, particularly in terms of
ethics and morality. Wahhabism rejects all other influences on Islam
and attempts to “purify” the religion; it is generally seen as more
conservative than salafism. It rejects culture, history, philosophy,
Sufism, and all other Muslims that do not follow its path... Muslims
who are not Salafists perceive a “good Muslim” as one who follows a
doctrine of Wahhabism... Even though there are not a lot of salafists
in Europe, most of the religious texts in mosques are salafist.
Salafists have imposed upon the Muslim mind that this is the way...
For example, in traditional Islam the people of the Quran considered
Jews and Christians believers, while infidels were people who did not
believe in one god. Yet, today, if you ask even a tolerant Muslim who
is considered “an infidel”, he will answer “Jews and Christians.”
source: http://www.nationalinterest.org/Article.aspx?id=15598

Muslims wash their hands and face, rinse their mouths and, to finish,
wash their feet, starting with the right. Each body part is washed
three times before prayers begin. source:
http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070922/LOCAL/709220487/-1/LOCAL17

Ex-Muslims' Survey:
http://www.geocities.com/exmuslims_survey/index.html

Young males are eager to gain dominant position in their society by
all means including violence. When human population explosion produces
too many young males, they restore natural balance by killing one
another. The side effects of the killings are wars and failed states.
Hungry males are less violent than well fed males.
http://www.sappho.dk/Nr.%206%20maj%202007/kontinent-english.html

The cheapest method of preventing the human population explosion is
quinacrine sterilization: http://www.quinacrine.com/

No leader of a democratic nation was ever more popular than British
Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain - wildly cheered in the House of
Commons by opposition parties as well as his own - when he returned
from negotiations in Munich in 1938, waving an agreement and declaring
that it meant "peace in our time." Less than a year later, World War
II began in Europe and spread across the planet, killing tens of
millions of people and reducing many cities to rubble in Europe and
Asia. Looking back after that war, Winston Churchill said, "There was
never a war in all history easier to prevent by timely action."
source: http://www.nypost.com/seven/07272007/postopinion/opedcolumnists/americas_moral_paralysis_opedcolumnists_thomas_sowell.htm

Charlie Chaplin knew the great power of ridicule. A strong opponent of
racism, in 1937 Chaplin decided to make a film on the dangers of
fascism. As Chaplin pointed out in his autobiography, attempts were
made to stop the film being made: “Half-way through making The Great
Dictator I began receiving alarming messages from United Artists. They
had been advised by the Hays Office that I would run into censorship
trouble. Also the English office was very concerned about an anti-
Hitler picture and doubted whether it could be shown in Britain . But
I was determined to go ahead, for Hitler must be laughed at.” (Charles
Chaplin, My Autobiography- 1964)... Today Muslims become angry if you
ridicule their faith, but once they are free from this bondage of the
mind they will thank you for it. Ridicule Islam and ridicule those who
defend it. Put to shame the appeasers and the useful idiots even if
their name is Charles Windsor or Bill Clinton. Expose the stupidity of
Islam and laugh at its ignorant supporters. source:
http://www.faithfreedom.org/comics/introduction.htm

The Eastern faiths (Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, Shintoism) make no
claims of exclusivity, i.e. that salvation can only be found in their
dogmas. The Western faiths (Judaism, Christianity, Islam), however,
do. Each proclaims itself the utter and infallible word of God and
seeks to subjugate the world to its will. source:
http://www.islam-watch.org/Tariq/Why-I-Am-Not-Muslim-Bold-Brilliant-Blasphemous.htm

[Topaz]

By Ahmad Rami
"The Zionist control of the media imposes a kind of media terrorism
and hypocrisy, in such a way that many Swedes have a public opinion
which they express on radio and TV. If [a Swede] wants to live a
normal life and have work, he must claim to be Israel's friend and the
enemy of Israel's enemies. But when you talk to regular Swedes, and
even authors, privately, they are all against Israel and against the
Zionist occupation. Nevertheless, if Israel finds itself in danger and
if we become stronger than it, no Westerner will come to its defense.
"The Jews in the West, and this has become a tradition, have 100%
complete control of the media, of the political parties, of the trade
unions, and of the publishing houses. They politically control all the
parties, from Right to Left.
"We can say today... I gave a lecture in Berlin recently, and a young
man said to me: 'If we, the free people, get to rule [this country],
we will help the Palestinian people.' I said to him: 'Brother, if you
liberate Germany from Israeli control and occupation, we will talk
about Palestine. The problem is that Israel and the Jews are using
you, your strength, and your technology to fight us.'
"Ninety percent of the Israeli infrastructure was built with West
German money. Therefore, Israel is a criminal beggar who receives
money and aid and imposes his terms on those who support him.
Generally, the one giving aid is the one who dictates the terms
whereas Israel receives aid, yet humiliates Germany, for example, and
imposes its terms upon it.
"If the Jews were satisfied with the occupation of Palestine, the
Westerners might not have had a problem. The problem is that they are
occupying America, they are occupying France and the West in general.
in terms of media, and culture and politics. This is real occupation.
"The difference between the occupation of Palestine and that of the
West is that in Palestine, the occupation is mechanical and military,
whereas the occupation of the West is an occupation of values, of
mind, of ideology, and of culture. The Palestinian and South Lebanese
bodies still have antibodies, whereas the Jewish occupation of the
West resembles a cancer, a cancerous tumor, which the body cannot
feel, and thus it can spread. They are trying to do the same thing in
the Arab world. They use the normalization of relations to make this
tumor spread throughout the Arab and Islamic world, and to paralyze
us, to turn into cancer."
"The Jew is proud of being a Jew. He has called his country 'the
Jewish State.' Why don't we call things by their real names? I have
interviewed Jews who said that 99% of the Jews support Israel and act
to help it."
"When I lived in Morocco, I could have criticized anything except the
ruler, who is the king. When I reached Sweden, I found that I could
criticize anything and anyone..." But I have no right to criticize the
true rulers, the Jews. Moreover, the Jews are trying to implement a
policy of stages, like Kissinger's policy. First they fought to
prohibit the criticizing of Jews and of Judaism. They succeeded in
bringing about laws forbidding the criticism of Jews. The second
stage, in which they have now succeeded, is the prohibition on
criticizing Zionism.
"In the trial against me, which lasted six months, I was accused of
lack of respect for the Jewish people. My lawyer told the general
prosecutor that Ahmad Rami is criticizing only the Jews, not the
Zionists...
I was sentenced to six months in jail. The general prosecutor said:
'When Ahmad Rami says Zionist, he means Jew.' They read what's on my
mind. [...]
"The Jewish organizations are very smart, and they control the
situation in the West. They studied the political map and infiltrated
all parties, from Right to Left. They have completely occupied the
political parties."
"There is a battle between dead nations and living nations. The Jews
are now active. They have occupied the entire world, and they are
using their power worldwide to annihilate us and humiliate us, from
inside and out. Their control stems entirely from the weakness of the
Westerners.
"As far as I'm concerned, Judaism is not a religion. Judaism is a
criminal and dangerous mafia."

http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com

http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.nsm88.com/

http://wsi.matriots.com/jews.html

[Doug]

Duh, I'm so scared of the jews. They commit so many acts
of terrorism. They commit countless atrocities in the name of
God. If you love islam, move to a 7th century islamic theocracy,
you won't have to worry about the joos there.

"Topaz" <mars...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:7fi7g354u5hdj4h5q...@4ax.com...

[*us*]

Bush and Cheney are the problem.

[beavis]

Allah butt-fukked a pig and mohammed was born 9 months later.

[B1ackwater]

Gee ... and here I thought Catholicism was a crime syndicate
controlled by Vatican imperialists .......... :-)

[Carl]

Doug wrote:
> Duh, I'm so scared of the jews. They commit so many acts
> of terrorism. They commit countless atrocities in the name of
> God. If you love islam, move to a 7th century islamic theocracy,
> you won't have to worry about the joos there.
>

I shouldn't tell you this Doug, but at tonight's weekly Jew Meeting, in
which all 16M of us meet once a week to plot the taking over of the world,
we took you off of the To Be Exterminated list. Topaz, on the other hand, is
a different story. Now let's see, I have to go now because it was assigned
to me to figure out how to get Al Jazeera and Mel Gibson in line with the
Jewish controlled media agenda.

[Defendario]

Carl wrote:
> Doug wrote:
>> Duh, I'm so scared of the jews. They commit so many acts
>> of terrorism. They commit countless atrocities in the name of
>> God. If you love islam, move to a 7th century islamic theocracy,
>> you won't have to worry about the joos there.
>>
> I shouldn't tell you this Doug, but at tonight's weekly Jew Meeting,

Shut your filthy pie-hole, jooboi.

;D

[Tani Jantsang ©]

Kevin MacDonald "The Culture of Critique" - A MUST READ. This information
below is TRUE.

"Topaz" <mars...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:7fi7g354u5hdj4h5q...@4ax.com...
>

[Tani Jantsang ©]

"Doug" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:yeRMi.3350$4V6...@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net...

> Duh, I'm so scared of the jews. They commit so many acts
> of terrorism. They commit countless atrocities in the name of
> God. If you love islam, move to a 7th century islamic theocracy,
> you won't have to worry about the joos there.

Forget Islam. What the Jews DID (not all of them, of course) in THIS
country - is a fact, documented fact. Pat Buchannan knows it. Kevin
MacDonald knows it - MANY people know it. What they did was a pernicious
act of total war against European Christian values and society. THEY WON -
and that is why - WHY - we are all on here right now BITCHING about the
insane immigration policies.

Please - GET A CLUE. Even Jewish Prof. Steinlight BEGS Jews to turn around
what they DID. So far, they won't. Eventually, they will.

[Doug]

"Tani Jantsang ©" <tjs...@spampost.com> wrote in message
news:13g8pst...@corp.supernews.com...

>
> "Doug" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:yeRMi.3350$4V6...@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net...
>> Duh, I'm so scared of the jews. They commit so many acts
>> of terrorism. They commit countless atrocities in the name of
>> God. If you love islam, move to a 7th century islamic theocracy,
>> you won't have to worry about the joos there.
>
> Forget Islam. What the Jews DID (not all of them, of course) in THIS
> country - is a fact, documented fact. Pat Buchannan knows it. Kevin
> MacDonald knows it - MANY people know it. What they did was a pernicious
> act of total war against European Christian values and society. THEY
> WON - and that is why - WHY - we are all on here right now BITCHING about
> the insane immigration policies.
>
> Please - GET A CLUE. Even Jewish Prof. Steinlight BEGS Jews to turn
> around what they DID. So far, they won't. Eventually, they will.
>
>

The jewish gangsters who control most of Southern California
*really* scare me. So do the jewish imams. I'm scared of the
jews...all three of 'em.

[Carl]

I don't think you're the one who would be able to make me do that,
defendopo, whether on usenet or in person. You're a coward and you know it.
So does everyone else.

[Carl]

Doug wrote:
> "Tani Jantsang Š" <tjs...@spampost.com> wrote in message

Wait. You're forgetting about Steven Seagal. That makes FOUR scary Jews.

[Topaz]

http://www.nationalvanguard.org/story.php?id=11576
Jewish Terrorism in France
In its issue of June 1991, the French monthly Le Choc du mois ("The
Shock of the Month") published a rather lengthy report entitled
"Jewish Militants: Fifteen Years of Terrorism" ("Milices juives.
Quinze ans de terrorisme," pp. 7-13). Under the main headline, a
subtitle summed up:
'"Jewish Action Group," "Jewish Combat Organization," "Jewish Defense
Organization"... Under these various names, Jewish activists for 15
years have unceasingly sown terror [in France] with total impunity…

The report reviews 50 cases of physical aggression committed by
organized Jewish groups during the period from June 19, 1976, to April
20, 1991. Not mentioned, therefore, are physical attacks committed by
individual Jews (which are, in any case, rare).
The victims of the 50 cases listed by Le Choc du mois, who number in
the hundreds, suffered: loss of life, an eye put out, acid throwing,
numerous hospitalizations, injuries followed by deep coma, lifetime
disabilities, and serious post-traumatic conditions, "the commission
of barbaric acts," severe beatings in the presence of policemen who
refused to intervene, and numerous ambush attacks (in one case with
the complicity of the daily newspaper Lib'ration).
Most of these acts of aggression were passed over in silence by the
media or only briefly reported. Some were applauded by Jewish
publications or organizations which, in general, after a few pro forma
words of censure, suggested that the victims deserved their fate, that
such attacks are "only natural and normal," and that no one need
expect any leniency in future if he should ever again arouse Jewish
"anger."
It is worthy of note that not one Jew has been the victim of a single
attack in revenge by any "revisionist" or so-called "extreme right"
group. (Although the press routinely lumps "revisionism" and the
"extreme right" together, in reality historical revisionism receives
support from thinking persons of all possible political views, from
the ultra-left to the extreme right, and of all parties, except the
Communists. Paul Rassinier, regarded as the founder of Holocaust
revisionism in France, was a Socialist.)…

Francois Duprat
Francois Duprat, a member of the leadership of the National Front
party, and an author and distributor of revisionist writings, was
killed in his car on March 18, 1978, when it was blown up with a
sophisticated bomb. His wife was severely injured. A "Remembrance
Commando" claimed responsibility for the crime. In keeping with the
practice of "Nazi hunters" Serge and Beate Klarsfeld, Patrice Chairoff
had published in Dossier n'onazisme ("The Neo-Nazi File," 1977), the
name and address of Duprat, and of several other persons who were
suspected of fascism, neo-Nazism, or revisionism (Le Monde, March 23,
1978, p. 7; April 26, 1978, p. 9)…
On December 9, 1979, about a hundred individuals wearing helmets
attacked the 14th national conference of GRECE (Groupe d"tudes et de
recherches sur la civilisation europ'enne, "Group for the Study and
Research of European Civilization"). Wrecking the book stands, they
displayed banners bearing the name "Organisation juive de d'fense"
(OJD, "Jewish Defense Organization"). Fifteen or so of the conference
attendees were injured. One of them lost an eye. Several of the
assailants were arrested by the police, and then released that same
afternoon on the intervention of Jean-Pierre Pierre-Bloch, the son of
Jean Pierre-Bloch and a friend of Jacques Chirac [currently President
of France]. Jean-Pierre Pierre-Bloch had been involved, and would also
later be involved, in other attacks and intercessions on behalf of
these same attackers.
On September 19, 1980, a commando group of the "Jewish Defense
Organization" (OJD) attacked sympathizers of Marc Fredriksen, an
executive of FANE ("F'd'ration d'action nationale et europ'enne," or
"National and European Action Federation"), at the Paris Palace of
Justice (court house). Six persons were injured, two of them
seriously. The Palace of Justice guards, although charged with
maintaining order, permitted the Jewish militants in this case, as in
all other similar circumstances, to act without or almost without
hindrance…
If a French "right wing" group had harmed a Jew, the media of the
world would have played up the attack, with shocking photographs of
the victim, gruesome details about the injury, follow-up interviews,
and outraged commentary…
A few days later, on October 7, Charles Bousquet, 84 years old, was
attacked in his home in Neuilly with sulfuric acid by a group of
unknown men who had apparently mistaken him for the militant
nationalist, Pierre Bousquet (no relation to Ren' Bousquet). He was
hospitalized for a month at Foch Hospital in the major burns ward, and
suffered after-effects from his injuries. He refused to press charges
because his son Pierre, a professor of history at the University of
Paris IV, has asked him not to "on account of the Israelites." He
said: "They'll be in Jerusalem or Tel Aviv, the ones who did it. It
would all be useless. I want to forget it" (during a conversation with
R. Faurisson, May 2, 1984).
On October 12, 1980, Mark Fredriksen was beaten up and admitted to the
Rambouillet hospital in serious condition. His apartment was torn
apart in his absence. While under treatment at Berck-sur-Mer for
multiple fractures, he came close to suffering another attack: three
young men showed up and asked to see him; their description matched
that of the Aziza team that subsequently attacked Michel Caignat with
acid (see below).
On October 20, 1980, the writer Andr' Figu'ras was attacked at his
residence.
On the morning of January 29, 1981, Michel (Miguel) Caignet, a
26-year-old Sorbonne student who was preparing for a doctorate in
Anglo-German linguistics, had just left his residence in Courbevoie to
go to the university when he was accosted by four individuals. They
knocked him down and prevented him from moving. One of the four
attackers sprayed his face and his right hand with sulfuric acid.
Caignet had belonged to FANE, and he was a revisionist. He had been
denounced by the weekly VSD (Vendredi/Samedi/ Dimanche). Following the
attack with acid, his face looked so hideous that only two newspapers
ventured to publish his photograph. The principal perpetrator of the
attack, Yves Aziza, a medical student and the son of Charles Aziza (an
assistant pharmacist at Montreuil), was identified by the police
within an hour of the crime. But in this case, as in others, the
French police and courts scandalously permitted Yves Aziza to flee to
Germany and to Israel. At the Justice Ministry, an official named Main
at the criminal affairs bureau (headed by Raoul B'teille)
sarcastically evaded every question put to him with regard to the
14-day delay in opening a judicial inquiry. Among Yves Aziza's
correspondents was Daniel Ziskind, the son of MichŠle Ziskind, sister
of Jean-Pierre Pierre-Bloch, who is himself the son of Jean
Pierre-Bloch.
On September 18, 1981, 200 members of the Organisation juive de combat
(OJC) or "Jewish Combat Organization" laid down the law at the Palace
of Justice in Paris, where the defamation trial brought by Pierre
Sidos, president of l'Oeuvre francaise, against Jean-Pierre Bloch was
taking place. As usual, Jewish thugs beat up several of the
spectators.
On November 25, 1981, the premises of the tudes et documentation
bookstore were set on fire by a commando group.
On May 8, 1988, at Saint-Augustin Square in Paris, OJC commandos used
iron bars to attack l'Oeuvre francaise supporters who were taking part
in the traditional parade in honor of Joan of Arc. Some 15 supporters
were injured, two of them very seriously. Four of the victims were
hospitalized. A septuagenarian remained in a coma for several weeks.
Ten OJC members were questioned by the police. That same afternoon
Jean-Pierre Pierre-Bloch interceded with the criminal police
investigation unit (police judiciaire) on their behalf. Legal
proceedings were instituted against some of the attackers. Some
attackers were released with the following notation by the examining
magistrate: "preliminary examination inopportune." Other attackers
were tried, though not without pressure "from the highest political
level" being brought to bear on the public prosecutor's office. In
total, only three of the attackers were tried. Each received a
two-year suspended (!) prison sentence.
On February 6, 1990, millions of viewers witnessed the brutal attack
against Olivier Mathieu during a television broadcast emceed by
Christophe Dechavanne. Jean-Pierre Pierre-Bloch came on to the stage
with a group of OJC militants. Mathieu had just time enough to
exclaim: "Faurisson is right." Then ten or so of the thugs severely
beat him, his fiancee, and Marc Botrel. Among those present was an
important figure among Jewish militants: Moshe Cohen, a former second
lieutenant of the Israeli army and an officer at the time of the Tagar
organization, the student branch of the Betar (59 boulevard de
Strasbourg, Paris Xe). The attacks continued off stage and out into
the street. One attacker was questioned by the police, but released a
few hours later on the intercession of Jean-Pierre Pierre-Bloch.
Pierre Guillaume, a leftist, is in charge of the Vieille Taupe ("Old
Mole") publishers, which has issued a number of revisionist works,
including those of Professor Faurisson. He has been the victim of a
number of serious attacks, both against his person-at the Sorbonne, in
his Paris bookstore, and at the Palace of Justice in Paris (where the
guards did not intervene) -- as well as against his property (book
warehouse, video equipment, bookstore). In 1991, groups of
demonstrators, most of them Jews, laid siege to his bookstore in the
rue d'Ulm on a regular basis. As a result of various acts of violence
(breaking shop windows, spraying chemical products, physical
intimidation, etc.), they finally succeeded in closing it.
On April 20, 1991, at the "Maison des Mines" building in Paris, about
50 individuals claiming to be members of the Groupe d'action juive
(GAJ), or "Jewish Action Group," and armed with iron bars and baseball
bats, attacked the attendees of a meeting of the "Friends of
Saint-Loup" ("Les Amis de Saint-Loup"), named after a deceased writer
whose real name was Marc Augier. Thirteen persons, most of them
elderly, were injured, two of them very seriously. Juliette Cavali',
67 years of age, was taken to Beaujon Hospital where she lapsed into a
coma that lasted three months. After regaining consciousness, she was
condemned to spend the rest of her days unable to walk or even to feed
herself. Alain L'authier, a journalist for Lib'ration and a relative
of the socialist deputy and Jewish zealot Julien Dray, witnessed the
attack from beginning to end, and provided a smug and ironical report
of it ("Zionist commando unit invites itself to the neo-Nazi meeting,"
Liberation, April 22, 1991, p. 28).
Europe's most prominent Holocaust revisionist scholar, Professor
Robert Faurisson, was the victim of ten physical assaults between
November 20, 1978, and May 31, 1993 (two in Lyon, two in Vichy, two in
Stockholm and four in Paris). Seven of these attacks were at the hands
of French Jewish organizations or militants-two in Lyon, one in Vichy,
one in Stockholm (by Swedish Jews together with French Jews who had
come from Paris by plane), one at the Sorbonne, and one at the Palace
of Justice in Paris.
The first of these seven attacks took place on November 20, 1978. It
was lauded in Lib'ration-Lyon by the Jewish journalist Bernard
Schalscha, who reported the day, the place, and the hour of the
professor's courses. Members of the Jewish Students Union who had come
by first-class train from Paris attacked the professor at the
University, while Dr. Marc Aron, a cardiologist and president of the
liaison committee of the Jewish institutions and organizations of
Lyon, was present.
The second attack occurred a few weeks later when Faurisson attempted
to resume his courses. On that day as well, Marc Aron was again at the
university.
At the Sorbonne, on September 12, 1987, members of a Jewish group of
militants attacked Henry Chauveau, Michel Sergent, Pierre Guillaume,
Freddy Storer (a Belgian), and Professor Faurisson, all of whom were
injured. (Chauveau was seriously injured.) The Sorbonne guards
apprehended one of the attackers. A plainclothes policeman ordered the
attacker released and used the violence as an excuse to expel the
professor from the university. (Prof. Faurisson had once taught at the
Sorbonne.)
On September 16, 1989, three men set a trap for Faurisson in a park
near his residence in Vichy as he was out walking his poodle. After
spraying a stinging gas into his face, temporarily blinding him, the
assailants punched him to the ground and then repeatedly kicked him in
the face and chest. If a passerby had not intervened, the attackers'
kicks to the head would have been finished off the 60-year-old
scholar. Badly injured, Faurisson had to undergo a lengthy surgical
operation. The crime investigation unit inquiry confirmed that the
attack could be attributed to "young Jewish activists from Paris."
On the eve of the attack, Faurisson had noted with surprise the
presence near the park of a certain Nicolas Ullmann (born in 1963). On
July 12, 1987, Ullmann had violently struck the professor at the Vichy
Sporting-Club. When he was questioned at the criminal investigation
department about his presence in that area, he denied having been
there. Moreover, Ullmann claimed that on the very day of the attack he
had taken part in a masked ball ("bal masqu'") in Paris, so that it
would be impossible for anyone other than his host and friend to vouch
for his presence in Paris that day. It should be noted that the
examining magistrate of Cusset, near Vichy, never summoned Faurisson
to hear his testimony. Instead, judge Jocelyne Rubantel merely
received him in her office in Cusset to inform him that she would ask
for a dismissal of the charges-which she obtained. No search was made
of the Paris headquarters of Betar/Tagar. Such a search would have
incited too much "anger" in the Jewish community.
On October 16, 1989, precisely one month after the attack in Vichy, a
bomb exploded at the door of the offices in Paris of Choc du mois,
which were then ransacked. Credit for the attack was claimed by the
"Jewish Combat Organization" (OJC) and some far left groups. Eric
Letty, who had devoted an article in Choc du mois to Professor
Faurisson, would have been killed had he not, by a miracle, detected
the imminence of the explosion.
We do not have space here to cite the other attacks against Professor
Faurisson.
Many other cases could be cited of attacks by Jewish groups: in
addition to the incidents during the years 1976-1991 listed in the
Choc du mois article, there are other, unlisted, cases, as well as
attacks that have occurred since 1992. To repeat: the total number of
victims of Jewish terror amounts to several hundreds, even though, in
contrast, not a single Jew has been the victim of a concerted or
organized attack in France.
On January 14, 1988, in Lyon, Professor Jean-Claude Allard was
hospitalized following a group attack against him for which the OJC
claimed responsibility. The attackers ambushed him in the parking lot
of the University of Lyon III. In June 1985, he had presided over the
examining board of the thesis of revisionist scholar Henri Roques on
"The 'Confessions' of Kurt Gerstein," which have been widely regarded
as key evidence for Holocaust gassings. (In an action without
precedent in French academic history, the thesis' defense was annulled
under pressure by "angry" Jews. [The English-language edition of The
'Confessions' of Kurt Gerstein is published by the IHR.])
Armed Jewish militants carried out new acts of violence on April 13,
1994, during a break in the trial of the "hooligans of the Parc des
Princes," a Paris soccer stadium. (At least one of the hooligans was a
Jew.) In this case the victims were policemen. The militants entered
the Palace of Justice with weapons and iron bars, and one of the court
house guards was attacked. "An interesting detail," one Paris paper
noted. "No investigation was made to clear up the affair, and the only
arrest made was that of one of the 'nationalist militants' who had
been attacked and ventured to defend himself." ("Jewish militants make
the law," Le Libre Journal, April 27, 1994, p. 9. See also: "The Betar
makes the law in the Palace of Justice," Rivarol, April 22, 1994, p.
5).
On April 28, 1994, the German citizen Ludwig Watzal, an official guest
of the University of Nanterre (near Paris), was struck by members of
Jewish or leftist organizations.
Many bookstores have been wrecked. In addition to the
Bleu-Blanc-Rouge, Ogmios, Librairie Francaise, and Librairie de la
Vieille Taupe stores, we may mention the Librairie de la Joyeuse
Garde. (In the last-named case, shop windows were broken, steel safety
shutters were glued shut, and excrement was strewn around.) Further
targets of attacks, for which Jewish organizations claimed
responsibility, have been offices, buildings, exhibitions, a book
warehouse and a church (Saint-Nicolas-du-Chardonnet in Paris, on
December 21, 1978).
For those who have been targeted for attack by the Jewish militants,
the most dangerous city in France is Paris. Within Paris, one of the
most dangerous districts is the first district, and within that
district the most dangerous place is the Palace of Justice-the central
courthouse-and the surrounding area. Paradoxically, this area is under
particularly good police surveillance because the Palace has its own
"military command" consisting of hundreds of armed guards, and because
next to the Palace building is the "Quai des OrfŠvres," headquarters
of the police crime investigations department. As it happens, though,
in recent years the guards and police have permitted many acts of
violence to be carried out, especially against revisionists who have
been summoned to court or who come to attend the trials.
When a group of Jewish militants decide to burst into the court
building, the scenario is invariably as follows: the thugs, whose
demeanor betrays their bellicose intentions, are in no way restrained
by the guards from their intended victims. No officer attempts to
inform these shock troopers that violence will not be tolerated. The
assailants are permitted to insult, to provoke, and then to strike
their victims. Sometimes guards will make an effort to protect
victims. If a militant calls special attention to himself by extreme
violence, three guards quickly take him away, but then let him go.
Once the militants have completed their brutal work and have
disappeared, the guards hasten to the bloody or swollen victims,
fussing over them like concerned nannies. The victims are never able
to get the police to interrogate the attackers, or even to learn their
identities…
In 1986, when Laurent Fabius was Prime Minister of France, his wife,
Mme. Fran‡oise Castro, revealed that the Jewish militants and the
Interior Minister were working hand in hand. She stated: "An
extraordinary novelty in political behavior: the Left has allowed
Jewish militants to establish themselves in some quarters of Paris and
also in Toulouse, Marseille, and Strasbourg [and to have] regular
contacts with the Interior Minister." (Le Monde, March 7, 1986, p. 8).
Castro and Fabius are both Jewish.
By a sort of consensus it seems to be generally agreed that the Jews
must be treated in France as a privileged minority whose "anger"
(colŠre) must be excused. (This word crops up in the press with
nagging persistence.) By law, private militia groups are not legal in
France. But the authorities allow one exception to this law. Jewish
militants are the only ones permitted to bear arms in France. (See the
photograph of a Jew armed with an automatic pistol on the roof of a
building in the rue de Nazareth. Lib'ration, Oct. 14, 1986, p. 56.)
France's criminal police investigators are thus paralyzed in their
investigations of crimes committed by these militants, who are
euphemistically called "young Jewish activists of Paris." These
militant groups enjoy at least a partial guarantee of impunity in
France. The worst thing their members have to fear is having to go
into exile in Germany or Israel for a spell…
A list of incendiary statements by French Jews in positions of
responsibility calling for physical violence would be a long one. Jews
do not shrink from political assassination. On this subject, one may
read the recent work of Nachman Ben-Yehuda, Political Assassination by
Jews: A Rhetorical Device for Justice (New York: State Univ. of New
York Press, 1993). We know the considerable role played by Jews in the
Bolshevik revolution. [See: M. Weber, "The Jewish Role in the
Bolshevik Revolution and Russia's Early Soviet Regime," Jan.-Feb. 1994
Journal.] In France, the song of the partisans was written by two
Jews, Joseph Kessel (1898-1979) and Maurice Druon, both of whom were
later members of the French Academy. The song's refrain is well known:
"Hey there! Killers by gun or blade. Kill swiftly!" ("Oh'! Les tueurs
… la balle et au couteau. Tuez vite!")…
During a 1986 interview with the Chicago Tribune (June 29, 1986),
Beate Klarsfeld told "how she haunted at least three former Nazis
until they committed suicide or died; how she organized attempts to
kidnap others; how she used headline-making gimmicks to bring to trial
or to ruin the careers of many who were convinced the world had
forgotten them." She related how she slapped the face of German
Chancellor Kurt-Georg Kiesinger in public in 1968. "Once, she and
several friends tried to kidnap Kurt Lischka" but the operation failed
because the car they were using had only two doors. As for Ernst
Ehlers, "harassed by Klarsfeld-organized demonstrations outside his
home, he first resigned his position [as judge] and then committed
suicide."
After picking up the trail of Walter Rauff in Chile, the Klarsfelds
organized demonstrations in front of his house and broke his windows.
"He died a couple of months later," Beate Klarsfeld told the American
daily. "I was glad, because as long as these people are alive, they
are an offense to their victims." "My husband and I are not fanatics
... Once my husband held a pistol to the temple of Rauff, just to show
that we could kill him, but he didn't pull the trigger."
In 1988, Serge Klarsfeld stated: "No one has really gone after Le Pen
in dead earnest. We ought to have provoked confrontations with him so
that ... he'd take the most extreme position possible." (Le Soir
[Brussels], quoted in Rivarol, July 1, 1988, p. 5).
In 1991, Beate Klarsfeld entered Syria with fraudulent papers to go
after Alois Brunner (who was already disfigured and missing most of
his fingers as the result of letter bombs). In front of his presumed
residence, she wanted to repeat the kind of demonstration that had
been staged in front of the home of Paul Touvier in 1972 (which was
broken into, looted, and laid waste). [See: "Alois Brunner Talks About
His Past," in the Spring 1990 Journal, pp. 123ff.]
In 1992, the Klarsfelds organized what Le Monde (Oct. 21, 1992, p. 4)
called "the savage escapade of the Betar at Rostock ... spreading
terror in the central square of the Rostock town hall, with French and
Israeli flags displayed, calling passersby 'dirty Germans, dirty
Nazis!'." A short time later Beate Klarsfeld expressed approval of the
Betar attack against the Goethe Institute (German cultural center) in
Paris, calling it an act of "legitimate violence" because the Rostock
police had briefly held and questioned a few of the Jewish attackers.
(Der Standard [Vienna], Oct. 23, 1992). Nine of the policemen had been
injured, among them several who required hospitalization after being
beaten with baseball bats and iron bars, and sprayed with "defensive"
gas.
On June 8, 1993, Ren' Bousquet, former secretary general of the police
in the wartime Vichy government (and who was later deported by the
Germans), was struck down in his Paris residence by a fanatic. The
attacker, who spewed out verbiage … la Klarsfeld, explained his action
as that of a lover of justice who had already tried to kill Paul
Touvier. Writing in the French daily Le Monde (June 10, 1993, p. 28),
Annick Cojean referred to Serge Klarsfeld: "Was he not the slayer of
Bousquet? The one who had tracked him down, pursued him, attacked him,
forced him to resign from his every position from 1978 to 1989? And
was he not [by this killing] robbed of a long awaited trial? The
lawyer [Klarsfeld] quietly smiles: 'Why deny it? What I feel today is
relief above all. And if that runs counter to the interests of the
trial, so be it! I can't be worrying about what those people want.
That's too much for me'."

Full article
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v16/v16n2p-2_Faurisson.html

2006 NationalVanguard.org.

[Topaz]

Here is a typical example of what Jews do:

JEWISH PRESSURE FROM PRO-ISRAELI LOBBY LEADS TO
CANCELLATION OF RICHMOND MEETING

Richmond, Virginia, February 19, 2003 E.U.R.O. National President
David Duke was scheduled to speak this Saturday, February 22nd
on the dangers of our pro-Israeli foreign policy and the coming war
against Iraq. Due to threats from Jewish terrorist promising
violence, and from what the hotel representative Sabrina Young
described as pressure from almost every Rabbi in town, the
Sheraton Richmond West Hotel (6624 West Broad Street)
canceled Saturday's event.

One of the groups applying pressure is the Jewish Defense
Organization, an organization with ties to domestic terrorism.

This is un-American and shows how the Israeli lobby and their
fanatical supporters will use any means to silence critics, said
Virginia EURO President Ron Doggett. America's foreign policy
is controlled by the powerful and ruthless Israeli lobby. They
want this war and are not going to let anyone stand in their
way.

One reason for the choice of Saturday's meeting was that the
location is in the Seventh Congressional District. Jewish
Congressman Eric Cantor, described by major publications
as a leading pro-Israeli advocate, represents this district.

EURO is working hard to find an alternative location for this
important event. The Virginia branch of the European-American
Unity and Rights Organization denounces any attempts by
Jewish supremacists to silence debate on this most important
issue.

For more information contact Virginia EURO President Ron
Doggett at (804) 357-5453 or at (804) 285-3917.

The European-American Unity and Rights Organization (EURO)
is the leading organization fighting against discrimination and
for the rights and heritage of European-Americans. Learn more
at www.whitecivilrights.com <http://www.whitecivilrights.com>.

[Topaz]

There was a book in ordinary bookstores called "An Empire of
Their Own". It was a pro-Jewish book but it showed that the Jews ran
Hollywood.

Here are some quotes from a magazine for Jews called "Moment".
It is subtitled "The Jewish magazine for the 90's" These quotes are
from the Aug 1996 edition after the Headline "Jews Run Hollywood - So
What?":

"It makes no sense at all to try to deny the reality of Jewish
power and prominence in popular culture. Any list of the most
influential production executives at each of the major movie studios
will produce a heavy majority of recognizably Jewish names."

"the famous Disney organization, which was founded by Walt
Disney, a gentile Midwesterner who allegedly harbored anti-Semetic
attitudes, now features Jewish personnel in nearly all its most
powerful positions."

The head of Walt Disney studios is now the Jew Michael Eisner.
On studios that were bought out by the Japanese the magazine says:

"When Mitsushita took over MCA-Universal, they did nothing to
undermine the unquestioned authority of Universal's legendary - and
all Jewish - management triad of Lew Wasserman, Sid Scheinberg, and
Tom Pollack."

Here are some quotes from the paper "Jews Control the Media
and Rule America"
It may be rather out of date but it still explains why things are the
way they are.

"American Broadcasting Companies (ABC), Columbia Broadcasting
System (CBS), and National Broadcasting Company (NBC). Each of these
three has been under the absolute control of a single man over a long
enough period of time--ranging from 32 to 55 years--for him to staff
the corporation at every level with officers of his choosing and then
to place his imprint indelibly upon it. In each case that man has been
a Jew.
"Until 1985, when ABC merged with Capital Cities
Communications, Inc...the chairman of the board of directors and chief
executive officer (CEO) of the network was Leonard Harry Goldenson, a
Jew...In an interview in the April 1, 1985 issue of Newsweek,
Goldenson boasted 'I built this company (ABC) from scratch.'"

"CBS was under the domination of William S. Paley for more than
half a century. The son of immigrant Jews from Russia..."

"There has been no move by top G-E management to change the
Jewish "profile" of NBC or to replace key Jewish personnel. To the
contrary, new Jewish executives have been added: an example is Steve
Friedman..."

"The man in charge of the television entertainment division at
CBS is Jeff Sagansky. At ABC the entertainment division is run by two
men....nearly all of the men who shape young Amercians' concept of
reality, of good and evil, of permissible and impermissible behavior
are Jews. In particular, Sagansky and Bloomberg are Jews. So is
Tartikoff. Littlefield is the only Gentile who has had a significant
role in TV entertainment programming in recent years."

"American Film magazine listed the top 10...entertainment
companies and their CEOs...Time Warner Communications (Steven J Ross,
Jew) Walt Disney Co. (Michael D. Eisner, Jew)...Of the 10 top
entertainment CEOs listed above, eight are Jews."

"The Newhouse media empire provides an example of more than a
lack of real competition among America's daily newspapers; it also
illustrates the insatiable appetite Jews have shown for all organs of
opinion... The Newhouse's own 31 daily newspapers, including several
large and important ones, such as the Cleveland Plain Dealer, the
Newark Star-Ledger, and the New Orleans Times-Picayune; the nation's
largest trade book publishing conglomerate, Random House, with all
its subsidiaries; Newhouse Broadcasting, consisting of 12 television
broadcasting stations and 87 cable-TV systems, including some of the
countries largest cable networks- the Sunday supplement Parade, with a
circulation of more than 22 million copies per week; some two dozen
major magazines, including the New Yorker, Vogue, Mademoiselle,
Glamour, Vanity Fair, HQ, Bride's, Gentlemen's Quarterly, Self,
Home&Garden...."

"Furthermore, even those newspapers still under Gentile ownership
and management are so thoroughly dependent upon Jewish advertising..."

"the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and the Washington
Post. These three...are the newspapers which set trends and guidelines
for nearly all others. They are the ones which decide what is news and
what isn't, at national and international levels. They originate the
news; the others merely copy it. And all three newspapers are in
Jewish hands...The Sulzberger family also owns, through the New York
Times Co. 36 other newspapers; twelve magazines, including McCall's
and Family Circle..."

"New York's other newspapers are in no better hands than the
Daily News. The New York Post is owned by billionaire Jewish
real-estate developer Peter Kalikow. The Village Voice is the personal
property of Leonard Stern, the billionaire Jewish owner of..."

"There are only three newsmagazines of any note published in the
United States: Time, Newsweek, and U.S. News & World Report....The CEO
of Time Warner Communications is Steven J. Ross, and he is a Jew.
"Newsweek, as mentioned above, is published by the Washington
Post Co., under the Jewess Katherine Meyer Graham..."
"U.S. News & World Report... owned and published by Jewish real
estate developer Mortimer B. Zuckerman..."

" The three largest book publishers...Random House... Simon &
Schuster , and Time Inc. Book Co....All three are owned or controlled
by Jews...The CEO of Simon & Schuster if Richard Snyder, and the
president is Jeremy Kaplan; both are Jews too."

"Western Publishing...ranks first among publishers of children's
books, with more than 50 per cent of the market. Its chairman and CEO
is Richard Bernstein, a Jew."

"Jewish spokesmen customarily will use evasive tactics. "Ted
Turner isn't a Jew!" they will announce..."

"We are doing more than merely giving them a decisive influence
on our political system and virtual control of our government; we also
are giving them control of the minds and souls of our children..."

[Topaz]

"Without the solution of the Jewish Question, there is no salvation
for
the peoples of the world.

Despite the fierce and fiery reaction of its blind or bought allies,
the disastrous role of the Jew, this parasite upon the body of every
people is being drawn more and more into the light of day. Everywhere
where morality, law, and order succumb to disintegration, where
racketeering and corruption devour the economy, where materialistic
dialectics undermine the foundations of faith, where Marxist
propaganda transforms politics into a criminal reality, where the
healthy race of the people is made sick and desecrated -- there one
meets everywhere the tracks of the Jew.

The Jew is fundamentally and basically criminal. Crime is, for him,
the form of existence inherent in him. Thus, just as the spirochetes
which are the bearers of syphilis, so the Jews are the carriers of
criminality in its political and non-political form.

The frequent criminality of the Jew is as well known a fact as its
peculiar inclination and aptitude for fraud, dirty enterprises,
cheating in gambling, usury, sexual offenses of all kinds,
pickpocketing, high treason, etc.

With the toxin of crime and the weapon of Bolshevism, the Jew conducts
his war of extermination against all that is wholesome, true, good and
noble in the world. He is the embodiment of evil, which rebels against
God and Nature."

[Topaz]

Crusading 1990s paper was mercilessly attacked -- and destroyed --
when it led one crusade into forbidden territory; a personal story.by
Jack Killey

QUESTION: Do you really believe the Jews own the media?

Answer: Most of it, yes. But they don't have to own it to control it.

An object lesson in this distinction was the downfall of northeastern
Ohio's The Gateway Press, a general interest newsweekly to which I
devoted seven years of part-time work. A fierce smear campaign and
unremitting advertising boycott by Cleveland-area Jews -- many not
even in our circulation region -- caused the forced sale of a
newspaper that many readers trusted to deliver at least an
approximation of the truth about events in their communities...

But only 850 words on Clinton's appointments reduced our county, after
twelve years of an alternative, to its former bland diet of
one-newspaper pabulum. A barely measurable percentage of our
readership, none of whom ever refuted the commentary on its
particulars, managed to deprive some 48,000 readers of a reliable news
source in their communities. The Jews' "persecuted minority" mantle
is, I suppose, apropos for a race that showed a gift for the
theatrical long before they created Broadway and Hollywood...

The commentary in question was published, as all my many commentaries
were, as my personal opinion, not as the editorial position of the
newspaper. The piece can be easily synopsized. I pointed out the high
percentage of Jews among Clinton's appointees, hardly representative
of his stated goal to have an administration that "looks like
America." I wondered how this might affect American foreign policy
towards Israel, and (this was the part that brought in the big guns
against us) ventured the opinion that this facet of the Clinton
administration was being deliberately obscured by a Jewish-dominated
American media establishment.

You'd think I'd written a glowing reconsideration of Mein Kampf. My
editor's phone started jumping off her desk. Sales reps were screamed
at and thrown from premises by red-faced merchants who had previously
described us as an asset to the community. One of the more prominent
Jewish businessmen in the area wrote the editor a venomous letter
(specifying, of course, that it was not for publication) telling her,
"You can't say whether or not you're an anti-Semite. Only we can
decide that."

Do you think the surrounding media establishment came to the defense
of one of their own embattled members as the pot began to boil beyond
the boundaries of Portage County, Ohio? Do you suppose that perhaps
they'd defend the First Amendment right of a 12-year-old mainstream
newspaper to publish controversial opinion articles? Think again.

It took the Newhouse-owned Cleveland Plain Dealer about ten working
days to run a lead editorial titled "One For the Fish," written by
Plain Dealer staffer Carolyn Davis, a Jewess who in a personal whine
piece once stated her wish that every gun be wiped off the face of the
Earth (no liberal bias here). Carolyn was mad, and maybe a little
jealous that I could write circles around her. She at least quoted the
commentary's best sentence, which was that Clinton "seated enough
white European males to ensure that America will be ruined in a
competent, intelligent, and well-organized fashion." Otherwise it was
the stock denunciation of "anti-Semitic . . . crap," seething with
horrified disbelief that anyone could suggest that Jews control
America's media. Let's see, a Jewess writer for Ohio's largest - and
Jew-owned --newspaper attacks a rural Gentile-owned weekly in a lead
editorial . . . doesn't sound like control to me.

The Cleveland Jewish News was even more generous, allotting a full
page to editor Cynthia Dettelbach herself rather than an underling. An
equally unexceptional attack it was, bristling with weasel words and
broad smears, but contradicting none of the commentary's content with
opposing facts regarding Clinton's appointees. I imagine the Jewish
News, like most of the other Jewish organs in the country, ran
bannered praise of Clinton's favoritism towards Jews in his
administration. I guess it's only impolitic for Gentile publications
to notice it, another point I made in the commentary.

This sort of notice by large media organs goes beyond "coverage" of a
hot topic. Neither publication took any interest in the community
served by The Gateway and probably cared even less who we, the paper
covering it, were.

The Newhouse-owned Akron Beacon Journal ran no editorial hate pieces,
but they stayed on top of the unfolding events around that
"anti-Semitic" newspaper in Streetsboro. The Plain Dealer nominally
covered our county, but we beat them regularly in an area they usually
assigned to worn-out hacks in their Summit County bureau. The point
is, the sudden interest and overbearing coverage of a heretofore
unnoticed region of their circulation area was looking mighty
selective. We had touched on a topic that was . . . unpermitted. A
Jewish topic. And they were going to make sure that the publication
impertinent enough to raise the thorny issue of Jewish power in the
American oval office and the American media wouldn't publish for long.

The point man in the effort -- the visible one, anyway -- was Jerry
Brodsky, a Jewish principal in the largest and most affluent public
school district in our county. His most recent claim to fame had been
his opposition to the display of a Christmas tree at the predominantly
Gentile school he governed.

Also an attorney and a resident of Beachwood, a heavily-Jewish and
affluent Cleveland bedroom suburb, "Jerry the Jew," as he became
less-than-affectionately known in the Gateway office, mounted a
secondary advertising boycott against us, sending high-minded letters
to many of our advertisers warning them of the business to be lost if
they continued to advertise with us. He wrote the letters under his
legal letterhead, though he took care to remind recipients this wasn't
official business (although he did remind them of his important
position in the school district).

I don't think Jerry the Jew really scared anyone off, but he kept up
the momentum; the big advertisers who dropped us did so on their own
hoof. Jewish Rite Aid CEO Alex Grass suddenly took a personal interest
in the ad account of his rundown shop fifteen miles from us and pulled
their ads, declaring his offense at the article in a letter to us; Jew
Albert Klaben of Klaben Auto Stores, one of the region's
biggest-volume auto-supply chains, was equally miffed and yanked his
ads. Both were important accounts. Several smaller but regular
advertisers pulled one by one, and a large Cleveland-area grocery
chain, Gentile-owned but with stores in heavily Jewish Cleveland
suburbs, began shuffling their feet and "reconsidering" their account
in phone calls and letters to my editor. Nervous local Gentile bankers
and realtors called with weak offers of continuing support, but whined
about all the "bad publicity" we were getting...

I thought back to a mysterious anonymous caller, a not-unfriendly
and apparently Gentile woman with a patrician accent who contacted me
early in the fray. She calmly told me the history of "the boycott,"
meaning not the current one against us but the
historical prototype of it, and said, "Your paper will be out of
business in eighteen months." It took, I think, fourteen.

What I found significant throughout this process was the outsized
influence wielded by a small clique, and a clique who would normally
have had no special interest in our paper or in our region, which is
largely rural and probably 99 percent Gentile. Even had a genuine
boycott been carried out its effect would have been negligible. Bad
publicity seems to have been the boycott's purpose; since the largest
advertisers who pulled were Jews, a phone call to them from Brodsky or
the Jewish News or the Cleveland ADL probably would have sufficed.

Another feature of the boycott that struck me was the powerlessness of
our Gentile readers, many of whom were outraged by the attack on us.
We weren't lacking in support from our readership, some of whom were
courageous enough to register their agreement with the commentary in
our letters column. I found encouraging the number of readers who told
me privately their feelings on Jewish power in U.S. politics.
Unfortunately, they didn't wield the power the Jews do among U.S.
merchandisers, bankers, car dealers, and realtors, the people whose ad
dollars support small (and large) newspapers. It shouldn't have
surprised me.

I had to laugh at Carloyn Davis's description of "Jewish media power"
in the Plain Dealer editorial as a "bigoted buzz phrase that goes back
decades." One doesn't have to sample overtly "racist" writings to
encounter references to Jewish media control, and they date back much
farther than decades. When I see past allusions to Jewish press power
from the pens of such august and "establishment" figures as historian
W.E.H. Lecky, Winston Churchill, Hillaire Belloc, or Sir Richard
Burton (among many others), two things cross my mind.

One is the casual manner of its mention, as though these writers are
noting that the sky is blue. Lecky, for example, in his late
nineteenth-century masterpiece "Democracy and Liberty," devotes a
paragraph or two to Jewish domination of the Russian press under the
Czars (he attributes at least some of the resentment the average
Russian felt for the Jews during the pogroms to this influence). No
earnest attempt is made to convince the reader of a doubtful precept,
no long lists of proofs are proffered: not because they couldn't be
produced, one senses, but because it simply isn't necessary to
document what appears to have been a commonly-known fact among the
less-numerous, but better-informed, literate members of earlier
generations.

A more troubling thought that strikes me about this situation is that
contemporary authors of comparative standing could not publish similar
observations, or at least not without sudden relegation to vanity
presses and maybe community college jobs. Probably only the eminence
and the solid corpus of work produced by earlier authors, and perhaps
less fear among Gentile publishers, allowed them to make such
references without destroying their careers.

At any rate, Jewish press control is hardly a malicious myth that's
been propagated for decades (centuries?) by anti-Semites; it is rather
a truth that has been relentlessly obscured by increasingly powerful
Jewish interests within and outside the press. No one who has closely
studied the pertinent history at any length can convincingly argue
otherwise, even if the student limits himself to "permitted" books and
authors rather than documents some find inherently questionable (i.e.,
the Protocols. ) The extent to which an offending author is pushed to
the margins or isolated from the public by a self-interested Jewish
minority probably depends on a variety of factors, but one thing is
certain: he won't emerge from the process quite intact.

So what has this to do with the experiences of a small-time writer for
a little newspaper in Streetsboro, Ohio? Only that I saw firsthand
what happens and has happened to many writers who dare to write and
publish on the fact of Jewish media and political influence. It was in
one sense a privilege to be in courageous company living and dead: to
be allocated the ire bestowed on people like Hillaire Belloc, G. K.
Chesterton, William Pierce, Douglas Reed, and Wilmot Robertson was a
badge of honor of sorts.

In other senses, not least the sacrifice of a good newspaper on the
altar of Jewish sensibilities, it was a tragedy. But not for me.
Although it's virtually certain that despite fifteen years of some
pretty good journalism on my part, I'll never work again for a
"respectable" journal, given the litmus tests and the rules imposed by
such publications, who would want to? If anything my experience in
fifteen years in the field has been one of progressive distaste for
the media, and in that sentiment at least I join a growing number of
Americans.

Unfortunately, most readers and television viewers will probably
continue to be guided by a thirst for entertainment and stimulation
despite their stated disgust for the mainstream media. But there's no
doubt that awareness of the true nature and agenda of America's
"mainstream," i.e., Jewish, media is growing, and perhaps we can take
a page from the Chosen Ones themselves when it comes to the
retribution a committed and aligned minority can impose.

2005 NationalVanguard.org.

[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."

[Doug]

Have you noticed the islamic terrorists have been blowing shit
up since Clinton's regime? And you're still worried about the
joos? Are you a muslim? THAT would explain a lot.

"Topaz" <mars...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:nk1bg3d7op53odiku...@4ax.com...

[Tani Jantsang ©]

"Topaz" <mars...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:km1bg3ha2de03imil...@4ax.com...
>

YES

Most authoritative of all and a MUST read for anyone that really wants to
know HOW we got ourselves in the MESS we are in, in the USA and in Europe:

http://www.amazon.com/Culture-Critique-Evolutionary-Twentieth-Century-Intellectual/dp/0759672229/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/102-0291449-8923379?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1191564107&sr=1-1

Look up Kevin MacDonald if that link doesn't work - it's for amazon.com The
Culture of Critique.

Also this:

http://www.amazon.com/Israel-Lobby-U-S-Foreign-Policy/dp/0374177724/ref=pd_sim_b_shvl_title_3/102-0291449-8923379

The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy

[Tani Jantsang ©]

"Doug" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote in message

news:kEgNi.4198$oA2....@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com...

> Have you noticed the islamic terrorists have been blowing shit
> up since Clinton's regime? And you're still worried about the
> joos? Are you a muslim? THAT would explain a lot.

You aren't grasping one crucial thing - and I've posted about it on here and
told you what you might read to find out about it. That this anti American
Islamic Jihadism is POST 60s. The non-violent and subtle "revolution" that
put this country where it is right now, happened in the 60s.

Culture of Critique - Kevin MacDonald

[Tani Jantsang ©]

"Doug" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote in message

news:uQ8Ni.3418$4V6...@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net...

It has nothing to do with Hollywood. It goes back, WAY back to Boas, then to
the Frankfurt School. You should be scared of them - because they have PUT
us in the position we are in today. They did this primarily out of FEAR,
too.

Steinlight is NOT writing his letter (and he used to be one of them) to
anyone in Hollywood. I posted it. I'll post it AGAIN, right now. Perhaps
YOU are a Jewish person in denial about some of this stuff.

High Noon to Midnight
Does Current Immigration Policy
Doom American Jewry?

Dr. Stephen M. Steinlight

(extended version)

Among the articles of faith in the slowly waning culture of secular
liberalism that have passed for and often served as a substitute, ersatz
religion for many mainstream American Jews, the most vulnerable tenet at
present is belief in "generous legal immigration," the euphemism for
open-borders immigration in the policy lexicon of the national
American-Jewish public affairs agencies. This is not to accuse them of
out-and-out double-talk and hypocrisy so much as engaging in intellectual
and moral trimming, followed by self-deception and denial. Having repeatedly
failed to persuade the National Immigration Forum, to which virtually all
belong, to distinguish between legal and illegal immigration, they took the
path of least resistance and chose to remain in any case, made their peace,
lowered their eyes, and convinced themselves they could get away with
blurring the distinction between illusion and reality.

That they continue to pay lip-service to a bogus totem and equivocate about
an issue of enormous importance is not only deplorable as a matter of
principle, it is also increasingly untenable as a matter of policy: it puts
them fundamentally at odds with their own long-term institutional values and
interests, undermines the position of the American-Jewish community, and,
what's more, greater and greater numbers of American Jews from the
leadership on down see the sophistry for the transparent charade it is.
Survey research, plus a weight of anecdotal evidence, reveals a significant
change in attitudes among American Jews at the grassroots level, with a
plurality in public opinion polls taken in the two years following 9/11
favoring lowered immigration and some 70 percent the introduction of a
secure national identity card.

While the same survey conducted in the last year by Market Facts Inc. - the
findings were released many months ago - indicate some slippage backwards
towards traditional opinion (old habits die hard and the impact of 9/11 may
already have started to lessen), with 15 percent favoring increased
immigration, 43 percent believing it should remain the same, and 41 percent
wanting it lowered, the same survey revealed that some 55 percent believe
that Muslims are the most anti-Semitic group in the United States.

Given a barrage of media attention to Islamic anti-Semitism over the past
two years this is an extraordinarily low statistic, and a finding is worth
pausing over. It is only explicable in light of the Jewish obsession with
appearing tolerant towards groups perceived as "Other" by the dominant
culture, especially non-whites and non-Christians. Many are loath to see
Muslims as antagonists, despite evidence of pervasive virulent Islamic
anti-Semitism. Had the same question been asked of virtually any other group
in America regarding which population most hates Jews, far higher
percentages surely would have identified Muslims. One hopes it will not
require another act of major domestic terrorism to cause the same
respondents to draw the appropriate cause-and-effect connections; bolder,
more concerted efforts of the ground, including advertising in the Jewish
and secular press, can accomplish this end, as would the founding of an
entity specifically devoted to awaking America's Jews to the danger.

My experience on the ground in congregations across America shows that very
few Jews possess anything remotely resembling knowledge and understanding of
the history of Jewish immigration itself, immigration policy, including the
scale of current immigration or the engines that drive it, and frequently
all that is required to effect enormous changes in attitude is to apprise
them of data that is indisputable. Simple facts can prove transformative.

When I began my efforts at the grassroots level, the Jewish media spoke of
attitudes within the American-Jewish community as "monolithic" in support of
open-borders immigration. Now it is commonplace to describe the situation as
one in which "a raging debate is going on" (I quote the Forward). If so much
could have been accomplished principally by one individual with occasional
support by others, it is clear what an ambitious, concerted effort might
achieve. Opinion regarding this issue is volatile, based on little other
than nostalgia, and up for grabs. One can not undo the sentimental
attachments of decades or belief in powerful mythologies at one stroke; but
they can be shaken and unhinged by concerted, continuing effort, and
significant enough numbers can be detached from this loyalty to make a
political difference. Perhaps most important, among the community's
organizational leadership enthusiasm for this dangerous anachronism is a
mile wide and an inch deep.

It should be noted for the historical record that my doubts about open
borders had their origins in the powerful misgivings about it expressed by
my beloved mentor at the American Jewish Committee (AJC), Sam Rabinove of
blessed memory, AJC's Legal Director of many years and one of the giants in
the court struggles of the Civil Rights era (his amicus in Bakke was one of
the most widely-cited in the Justices' decisions), as well as the conscience
of that agency, not to mention one of the most respected figures working in
Jewish organizational life in the 20th century. In those days a
dyed-in-the-wool left/liberal, I was taken by surprise by Sam's repeated
expressions of anguish and disgust over the intellectual dishonesty of
Jewish organizations' remaining in the National Immigration Forum, knowing
what they all know about that organization's naked identity politics, its
contempt for the rule of law, and its visceral anti-Americanism. On one
memorable occasion as we left a meeting of the National Immigration Forum,
Sam turned to me with and said, "What on earth are we doing here?"

Among Jewish leadership, the inevitable collision between allegiance to
received opinion and the recognition of hard urgent new realities had begun,
if sotto voce, before 9/11, but that tremendum greatly accelerated the
process by revealing in the most terrible way the nexus between the anarchy
that has passed for immigration policy and immigration law enforcement and
the savage assault on the innocent lives and national security of the
American people. Much has occurred in its wake to drive the point home about
the dangers Jews and all Americans face. In the wake of 9/11 came the war
against Islamist terror that began in earnest in Afghanistan and continued
with the toppling of the regime of Saddam Hussein and the ongoing struggle
in that fractious "country" at nation-building. All the while, major news
story after news story has covered the radical upsurge of anti-Semitism in
the Muslim world (President Mahathir Muhammad's speech at the Islamic
summit, one that might have been ghost-written by Joseph Goebbels or even,
as Omer Bartov has pointed out, Adolph Hitler himself, left a searing
impression (as did the standing ovation it received from 57 leaders of
Muslim states, in addition to President Putin), as have the crazed
maunderings of Osama bin Laden and countless fanatical mullahs about Jews
and Crusaders. Significant attention in both the secular and Jewish press
has highlighted the extraordinary hostility to Jews and Israel within the
leadership and citizenry of the European Union, and there has been almost
continuous treatment of the emergence of the "New Anti-Semitism." Given all
this - plus the hatred of Jews manifested in such individual cases as the
brutal and richly symbolic murders of Daniel Peal and Nick Berg; or in the
terrorists attacks aimed at the residual Jewish presence in the Islamic
patrimony such as the bombings of synagogues in Morocco, Tunisia, and
Turkey; the multiple ongoing investigations into the connections of American
Islamic "charities," national organizations and leaders (including some that
Jews obsessed with dialogue briefly helped legitimate) to Jihadist
anti-Semitic and anti-Israel terrorist groups - it has become very difficult
to remain simultaneously credible and in a state of total denial.

"Facts are such horrid things," says Lady Susan at the close of the
epistolary novel that bears her name, Jane Austen's first published fiction.
Or, to borrow Milton Himmelfarb's famous formulation about the origins of
neo-conservatism, the American-Jewish community has been "mugged by
reality." In the contest between adhesion to a sentimental archaism and
existential horror, only those willing to be perceived as purblind or
suicidal do not eventually adjust to facts.

Thus, behind closed doors, Jewish leaders speak a very different language
than in public. This is not entirely new with regard to immigration policy,
but the disconnection between appearance and reality is much sharper now; it
constitutes a veritable chasm. In private, they express grave concern that
current immigration policy will prove politically and existentially ruinous
to the American-Jewish community, as it has for the Jews of France and will
inevitably for the Jews of Britain, indeed, throughout Western Europe. There
is particular fear about the impact on Jewish life and security, as well as
American support for Israel, of the rapid growth of the Muslim community in
the United States, fueled almost entirely by current immigration policy
(conversion to Islam plays a role as well, but as a cause of concern it is a
distant second - except where shifting terrorist tactics are concerned.)

At the conclusion of many meetings with Jewish national leaders most have
told me, several using the identical formulation, "You are 1000 percent
right, but I can't go out and say it yet." While they have not yet found the
civic courage to break with the traditional consensus - an act they know
will jeopardize what remains of the unity of the old liberal coalition,
create tensions with the Latino groups they are assiduously courting, as
well as set them at odds with much of their rank and file, including some of
their strongest supporters and biggest donors - they can see the Rubicon
glinting in the distance, and many recognize that eventually they will have
to cross it.

My personal experience of more than two years' speaking on behalf of
immigration reform as a Fellow of the Center for Immigration Studies, to
overwhelmingly sympathetic, often packed audiences at dozens of
congregations across the country - yes, with occasional, strong, even
vitriolic dissent, including some from big shots and fat cats (I have,
albeit infrequently, been called a racist and likened to David Duke) - as
well in closed-door, off-the-record meetings with Jewish leadership at the
highest levels in New York and in Washington confirms these are the
ascending trends. Though my experience falls into that category we
denominate "anecdotal evidence," the fact is that I have spoken with more
grassroots Jews about immigration policy than any other person in the United
States. That there will be - as survey research consistently reflects - a
lag time between people's intellectual shifts and their emotional capacity
to register it, speak it aloud and act on it - sooner or later, the two will
become congruent.

The typical congregant at any one of the dozens of synagogues I have visited
across America, frequently being invited as a "scholar-in-residence,"
staying for a full weekend and thus having the opportunity to gain a firmer
handle on what's going on, is thrilled to hear a voice speaking from the
podium in the sanctuary that is not mumbling political correctness, and that
is prepared to say aloud what the great majority already think - but has yet
to find the full confidence to speak.

This is not to say change will come quickly or painlessly. While virtually
all the rabbis in the dozens of congregations where I've spoken have
generously - and often courageously - made a point of agreeing with me in
public and affirming their support of my views - and thus breaking with the
policy line of their denomination as well as what one might have assumed was
communal orthodoxy among their flocks - I have been bitterly attacked by a
handful of die-hard leftists in the pulpit. Some see themselves not as my
hosts but as my debating partners. There is and will be also strong
resistance from many quarters in the organized community, not least of all
from the professional domestic affairs staff of national Jewish
organizations, a group that can be reliably counted upon to be far to the
political left of the executive and lay leadership, whom they are adept at
misleading and sabotaging.

There is special cause for concern about staff manipulation in those
organizations that nominally grant lay leadership wide discretion in
decision-making on policy while, in fact, professional staff effectively
retains it, controlling debate by subtlety limiting options within internal
discussion, card-stacking the evidence in the preparation of background
materials, and having more "expertise" and thus intellectual authority than
the membership. This tendency for staff to overstep its position, monitor,
and even play the role of control officers for the executive and lay
leadership will become stronger as the Jewish community increasingly
questions its automatic support for the Democratic Party and its candidates,
a process that may well reach a watershed with the upcoming Presidential
race. It is not beyond possibility that the President, who received a scant
17 percent of the Jewish vote in 2000, may conceivably garner 30-40 percent
of it this time around. While it is by no means clear this will come to
pass - Jewish support for Democratic candidates is tenacious and opinion
polls suspect - a shift of this magnitude is not impossible and it might
even influence the outcome in such crucial swing states such as Florida,
Ohio, and Missouri.

The most telling piece of evidence of the stubbornness of Jewish
organizational adhesion to the open borders camp, perhaps the staff/lay
dynamic described above, as well as tenacious organizational maintenance of
the status quo in the face of accumulating evidence of dissent in the ranks,
is the letter sent by eleven Jewish national organizations to members of the
Senate as recently as May 28, 2004. The letter seeks "immigration reform"
(read amnesty) that would make conditions easier for illegal aliens by the
passage of legislation to "address immigration issues, including bills to
aid farm workers immigration needs and ease education burdens for
undocumented immigrant students." Thus, at the top of the communal pyramid
all would appear unchanged, but the base is increasingly restive. For the
time being - indeed for as long as it is tenable - the propensity among
leadership will be to circle the wagons and reaffirm the traditional
position, hoping the mere organizational line-up will overawe the
opposition; the reasoning is as understandable institutionally as it is
shortsighted as a matter of policy.

The issue of immigration remains bitterly divisive among Jews, and which
organization welcomes costly internal strife? At a luncheon several months
ago following an address at one of New York City's wealthiest and most
prominent synagogues, board members clashed head-on and savagely over my
presentation, with the president of the congregation, one of those who
accused me of being a racist, being attacked by a senior board member as
being "the kind of Jew that sold out others to the Nazis." The atmosphere
was electric, and the dense toxicity that enveloped that room during the
supremely uncivil "discussion" about my remarks might have been cut with an
axe. Important segments of the leadership remain true believers in the dying
faith, and will not give it up without a fight. But that change is
inevitable is clear enough. The question, ultimately, is whether it will
come too late to make a difference to the future of America and its Jewish
community.

Though it will prove wrenching - philosophically and spiritually - to break
with the old consensus, so wrenching many are effectively paralyzed by the
very prospect right now, it must surely concentrate their minds wonderfully
to know that continuing to uphold it endangers the values, power, interests,
and perhaps even long-term viability of the community whose protection is
their raison d'être, a criticism they are beginning to hear from a rising
chorus within it. In their heart of hearts they recognize they risk a harsh
judgment by history as those responsible for "losing America," just as their
predecessors have been rightly pilloried for their failure to do more to
save European Jewry in the years leading up to and during the Holocaust.
American-Jewish leadership is understandably at sea and agonized,
experiencing profound vertigo as it seeks to chart a course within a reality
that would appear to make sense only to a schizophrenic.

Fading Anti-Semitism
On one hand, the Jewish organizational leadership cadre holds influential
positions within a community that feels a sense of belonging and inclusion
unknown in the 2000-year history of Diaspora Jewry, as well as justifiable
pride and not inconsiderable complacency stemming from the position it has
achieved within American society. The American-Jewish community has attained
success and acceptance beyond their forebear's fondest dreams. Though only a
small minority within the United States, American Jews are influential far
beyond their miniscule percentage of the population. Not only are they, per
capita, among the wealthiest and best educated of Americans, but they also
hold significant political power as well as cultural influence. Nearly half
the money spent in the presidential primaries in the Democratic Party comes
from Jewish contributors, and in recent years Jewish presence at the highest
levels of government has become routine. A majority of the cabinet members
in the Clinton administration were Jews, and while there are none in the
Bush cabinet, Jewish political advisors play key roles in national security,
foreign, and military affairs. Had Al Gore become President, an Orthodox Jew
would have been a heart-beat away from the nation's highest office. In the
upcoming Presidential election, if Senator Kerry wins, he will be the first
chief executive with Jewish roots. Jews are concentrated in states with the
highest votes in the Electoral College, and they vote at a higher rate than
any other group of Americans, amortizing their otherwise limited demographic
presence.

To repeat some of the well-known indicators of the Jewish community's
success, ten per-cent of the Unites States Senate is Jewish. Currently, the
majority of the presidents at Ivy League universities are Jews, and
faculties and student bodies at elite colleges and universities are
typically 30-40 percent Jewish, often constituting a plurality at these
institutions. Jews continue to form a high percentage of the membership in
the learned professions (law, medicine, academia, scientific research) and
among the chattering classes, i.e., among writers, journalists, and
publishers of some of the nation's leading national newspapers and
periodicals, and as creators and disseminators of both high and popular
culture. Though not necessarily representing Jewish interests or values,
American Jews play the predominant role in Hollywood (nearly 70 percent of
movie and TV producers and directors are Jewish), and thus shape much of the
popular imagery central to the national life. Jews also hold key positions
within many leading financial institutions in the country, especially within
investment banking and the brokerage industry.

The principal cause, as well as a symptom of these successes, anti-Semitism
has fallen to historic lows among the white Christians that still form
America's dominant cultural group; indeed what was once a significant factor
in mainstream American life is now, at most, a peripheral phenomenon. A
recent ADL study found that only some 12 percent of white Christian
Americans hold anti-Semitic attitudes; this represents a 50-percent drop
over just the past 30 years. Indeed, one of the leading factors contributing
to the crisis in Jewish continuity is the fact that our neighbors like us,
are prepared and often eager to marry us and have children with us. It's
important to emphasize this as Jews often find it hard to hear good news,
even as their leadership is often capable of suppressing bad news, at least
when it comes from politically correct quarters. Among the more significant
examples of the "bad news" is that survey research has consistently shown
high levels of anti-Semitism among Latinos, with percentages in the
neighborhood of 47 percent holding hostile attitudes towards Jews. Moreover,
this finding has remained stubbornly constant. It is cited in the major
survey of inter-group attitudes Taking America's Pulse conducted by the
National Conference of Christians and Jews in 1992 and again in a recent
study sponsored by the ADL.

A risible but interesting indicator of how marginal anti-Semitism has become
within the dominant culture is how candidate after candidate for the
Democratic Party's presidential nomination is "discovering" his Jewish
roots, or, if he is not so lucky to have any, emphasizes the fact that his
wife or wife and children are Jewish. In an earlier America, these candidate's
forebears thought it prudent to conceal their Judaism by changing their
names or converting to Christianity; their descendants now see a distinct
advantage in flaunting what their antecedents sought to hide.

Having cited these examples of the success of the American-Jewish community,
one feels compelled to add a caveat to anticipate the responses such
observations invariably elicit from anti-Semites and other neo-Nazis,
fascists, paranoiac Jew-haters, fanatic Latino nationalists, and Islamist
crazies, as well as from such protean political curiosities as Michael Lind,
an often interesting political analyst who unfortunately appears to have an
unhealthy fixation with Jews. The last thing one wishes to do is provide
this ilk further "evidence" to justify their hatred of or distaste for the
American-Jewish community. When I discussed the admirable situation of the
America's Jews in my first CIS Backgrounder in 2001, this crowd chose to
view my open avowals of the self-evident either as a rare glimpse into the
arcane secret workings of the vast Jewish conspiracy, or saw their nutty,
hair-brained analyses as having "outed" one of the key conspirators. In what
constitutes a classic case of unconscious humor, they acted as if they were
sleuths who had uncovered what I freely offered. (David Duke described me as
"one of the most powerful Jews in America," an assessment I wish had been
shared by my former employers at the American Jewish Committee, and one I
would gladly have shared with my mother had the source not been so
scabrous.)

Perhaps most bizarre, Michael Lind feigned shock and dismay that the Jewish
community uses its economic position and resources to advance its political
agenda, sounding like nothing so much as the outraged, newly arrived virgin
in the whorehouse, a stock character in Western comedy since Roman times.
One would have thought the connection between money and political power had
never been previously explored; but one doesn't need to know the work of Sir
Lewis Namier: all that's needed is what one famous tabloid calls an
inquiring mind. No, Virginia, there is no conspiracy, and I am not, sad to
say, "One of the most powerful Jews in America." Rather, valuing hard work
and education, with an accumulated store of inventiveness and intellectual
energy maintained, indeed hoarded, within the stifling and oppressive
confines of the largely ghettoized European societies which they abandoned
or fled, with a facility for languages and cultural adaptability that their
historical condition had forced upon them, free to advance within a society
which became increasingly meritocratic as well as one in which anti-Semitism
yielded quickly to tolerance and then full inclusion, Jews have achieved the
American Dream by fair means. That the American Jewish community should be
concerned, perhaps more than most others, with gaining and maintaining
political influence and access should come as a surprise to no one that
understands that powerlessness was key to the annihilation of a third of
world Jewry in living memory.

Romanticized Image of Immigration
Yet for all its accumulated historical consciousness and above-average
political acuity, the American-Jewish community, like any other, believes in
myths, and these die slowly because they represent enduring values and
ideals, not realities. The meaning and power of any myth does not derive
from its demonstrability as fact, and the mythopoeiac power of the immigrant
experience among American Jews will lose force only slowly. Of all the
pieces of Americana that most middle-aged American Jews, at least, know by
heart, one of the best known and most-cherished is that verse from the
well-known poem inscribed on the base of the Statue of Liberty: "Give me
your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free ."

That poem was written, of course, by a Jewish schoolgirl poet in New York in
response to the persecution of Jews in Czarist Russia. For more than a
century it has given expression to a highly romanticized image of the
immigrant experience in America, one that has become iconic and
all-encompassing despite its decided irrelevance to much it purports to
represent. This quote has a great deal to do with refugees and asylum
seekers, and they and the policy universe to which they belong are separate
and distinct from that of immigrants and immigration policy per se. If
American Jews are going to get this issue right, they need to disaggregate
the two, something many Jews have failed to do intellectually or
emotionally. For the truth is that Jewish immigrant experience far more
closely parallels the experience of refugees and asylum seekers than typical
immigrants - then or now. Jews have reason to get misty-eyed about what the
Statue of Liberty stands for, but the same is not quite the case for the
vast majority of immigrants who passed beneath it on their way to Ellis
Island.

No group has ever exemplified, revered, and clung to this romanticized
notion of immigration to the United States as much as the Jews who landed
here in the late 19th and early 20th centuries and their descendants. My own
forebears did not come on the Mayflower, nor were they among the small group
of Jews who arrived in New Amsterdam aboard the St. Katerina from Recife,
Brazil, 350 years ago and remained, the New World's first permanent Jewish
pilgrims. I'm a first-generation American. My father fled the pogroms that
swept the Russian Empire during the Civil War that followed the Bolshevik
Revolution. He was born in a small village in Ukraine outside Kiev, a city
that was Judenrein by law; my maternal grandmother and her family had
arrived some years earlier from Riga, Latvia.

Given the horror that engulfed those Jews that remained in Europe -
including the many who might have been saved had the United States not
substantially closed its doors to immigration in 1924 and slammed them shut
entirely on Jews fleeing Nazism and the Holocaust in the 1930s and 1940s -
the utter abandonment of the Jews by the Western democracies will resonate
forever deeply within the consciousness of every self-identifying Jew, and
particularly America's grudging acceptance of a mere 1,500 refugees who were
interned in Camp Oswego in Upstate New York - it is fair to say that no
immigrant group has appreciated the blessings of being immigrants to America
more than Jews. Against this backdrop, American Jews must now contend with
one of the most intellectually and emotionally anguishing questions that has
arisen in the entirety of their history in the United States: whether to
support the continuation of the current great wave of immigration, though a
more accurate metaphor for what is taking place now would be that of a
continuous, pounding surf than a wave, that has now reached an historically
unprecedented level, or exercise their still considerable political and
economic clout to seek to curtail the current record influx.

With approximately 1.5 million legal and illegal immigrants entering and
settling annually - by far the greatest number illegal - roughly equivalent
to the population of Philadelphia - the United States now has the highest
number of foreign-born residents in its history. As a percentage of the
total population, the 32 million foreign-born, being strengthened
continuously, are fast approaching and will soon surpass a level not seen
since the first decade of the 20th century, and will in only a few years
constitute the largest percentage of foreign-born residents in the nation's
history.

For American Jewry, the debate over immigration is a classic confrontation
between the heart and head, nostalgia and foresight, illusion and reality.
In their gut, many American Jews feel that substantially reducing the level
of immigration betrays the legacy of their parents and grandparents. There
is a strong communal aversion to the notion of kicking the hands on the rung
of the social ladder beneath your own. But a growing number have reached the
conclusion that to continue along these lines betrays their children and
grandchildren. The danger arises because mass immigration is conterminous
with the importation of mass anti-Semitism. It's no accident that the rise
of widespread and increasingly violent anti-Semitism in Western Europe and,
to this point at a far lower level in America, tracks perfectly with mass
immigration, especially that of Muslims. Mass immigration also tracks with,
indeed, is the ultimate generator of, Balkanizing notions of extreme
multiculturalism.

Multiculturalism was not invented on some particularly benighted college
campus; nor did it fall from the sky: it is the direct outgrowth of the kind
of mass, uncontrolled immigration the United States has been experiencing
for decades. Having worked for more nearly a century through its communal
organizations and in the context of inter-faith encounters to achieve an
America largely free of anti-Semitism, it is difficult for American Jews to
sit back and watch mass immigration, most of it the consequence of the
wholesale violation of the rule of law, reverse that outcome.

However uncomfortable it is to grapple with the issue of immigration policy,
both as Jews and as Americans, it is a political question American Jews
cannot avoid. More than any other group of Americans, Jews have most at
stake in how this policy plays out in the coming years. Perhaps
counter-intuitively but right on the target, the immigration reform movement
sees American Jews with their significant political power, wealth,
substantial presence in the media and among opinion-makers to be the group
that may have the capacity to break this conspiracy of silence in a society
where issues of nationhood, sovereignty, race, ethnicity, and culture are
infinitely more indelicate to speak of than sex.

That conspiracy is maintained by a curious alliance among the leadership of
the major political parties, the ethnic lobbies, and Big Business. This
conspiracy sees to it that despite that fact that every survey shows HUGE
majorities of Americans favoring an outright moratorium on immigration -
differing only whether the moratorium should be for five years or for 10 -
their opinion does not register. Why not? The answer lies in who controls
public policy debates in America. These "debates," or, in this case, the
lack of any genuine debate, is the result of a distorted, skewed,
manipulated process dominated by those with the most to gain immediately and
palpably, financially and personally, with respect to any given issue.
Clearly, any alien, especially one from the Third World, experiences an
incalculable gain upon entering the United States. The worker from Mexico
that made five dollars a day will now make five dollars an hour. The ethnic
lobbies that purport to speak on his behalf also gain by the appearance and
often reality of a growing constituency. As do the employers of "cheap"
immigrant labor - cheap for them, of course, though not for the American
taxpayer, for whom this scenario represents the obverse of a "win/win"
situation.

It's been estimated that over the course of a lifetime, a typical illegal
alien in California will use more than $75,000 in public services than he
will ever pay in taxes. The education of the children of illegal aliens, the
cost of the emergency medical services and healthcare they most typically
use (the most expensive in a costly market), as well as the cost of a host
of other direct and indirect services from which they benefit are paid for
by the taxes of the American people. Similarly, the wages of American
workers earning at the bottom third of the workforce have fallen by some 7
percent in a decade as a direct result of competition from illegal aliens.
Still, the immediate tangible losses suffered by the average American
citizens are not felt to be nearly commensurate with the very tangible and
enormous material benefits gained by illegal aliens, their employers, and
their self-appointed parasitic "representatives."

Not a Right/Left Contest
Perhaps there's a politically useful silk purse in this sow's ear for those
of us seeking immigration reform and converts to the cause among
ever-over-anxious, too-eager to-be-loved and not-to-offend, politically
progressive and socially liberal American Jews. The news that the battle
over immigration is not a rightwing vs. leftwing battle tends to salve their
consciences as they pursue their rational self-interests and those of
America as a whole. It's always a help to remind audiences at a synagogue
event that the strongest proponents of open-borders immigration are the Wall
Street Journal and the Chambers of Commerce. And why, pray, is this so, I
regularly ask? Is it because the employers of sweated labor are in love with
the gorgeous mosaic of ethnic diversity? It doesn't take much to convince a
largely liberal constituency the cause is greed, the desire for an unending
supply of cheap labor to exploit in order to engorge their profits in the
service sector and agro-business and depress wages across the board, all the
while caring not a whit for any other consideration, whether political,
cultural, or environmental. Among the considerations to be thrown overboard
include American political democracy, including fundamental Constitutional
principles, such as the bedrock concept of the nation state as comprised of
a cohesive citizenry expressing its political will through democratic
processes.

President Bush's proposal for "immigration reform," a disgraceful fraud
that, if passed, will effectively amnesty some 10-15 million illegal aliens
by transforming them into wage slaves, members of a new legal permanent
underclass of Guest Workers in America - a policy idea that is an affront to
the deepest ideals and values of American political and social culture from
the Founders on, as well as constituting the death-knell of the American
Dream of immigrant inclusion, upward mobility, and naturalization - will
make it far easier to persuade Jewish progressives that open-borders
immigration is not a cause that should continue to enlist their support. The
transparency of the attempt to label this cynical, socially reactionary,
money-grubbing ploy as an instance of "Compassionate Conservatism" is not
selling well. Coming as it did, on the heels of Bush's memo circulated by
his Labor Department telling employers how they can avoid paying workers
overtime, it is clear this represents nothing less than a massive assault on
the American middle class in the interest of the wealthiest of the wealthy,
as well as smarmy, lame-brained, ineffectual election-year pandering to the
Latino lobby. It is also not lost on many American Jews - and we will keep
it in the forefront of their consciousness of those that need reminding -
that this amnesty will legalize the presence in the United States of what is
estimated to be some 300,000 individuals from countries on the terrorist
watch list! Given the President's current low ratings in the polls, as well
as greatly heightened concerns around domestic security - concern likely to
be significantly amplified by the report of the 9/11 Commission, it is
unlikely he will wage a full-court press on behalf of this unpopular plan.

According to a recent ABC news poll, more than half of Americans aren't
buying this attempted legislative murder of the American Dream, and
recognize the cynical sham it for what it is: by a 2-1 majority they see it
as an assault on the dignity and interests of American labor, as nothing
more than a strategy to drive down wages. This survey also shows that
support for real immigration reform is the ascendant trend; a similar survey
conducted in 2000 showed Americans split on this issue; now a solid majority
stands in opposition. Opposition is also broad and cuts across the spectrum,
uniting political opponents. The Bush proposal - that guarantees the
indentured servants legal status for only three years - has already been
opposed by the National Council of La Raza for failing to provide illegal
aliens everything as part of its strategy goal of political and demographic
Reconquista; it is opposed by the AFL-CIO; it was even attacked by Governor
Howard Dean during his failed race for the Democratic nomination (at only
one press conference, however: at least his opportunistic populist political
instincts saw opposition to this scheme as a winner); and by moderates and
conservatives that are appalled by this surrender to and complicity in the
wholesale violation of American law - one that will prove a powerful
stimulus to further massive violation of law as such law-breaking is seen to
carry rewards rather than consequence. And, of course, despite the
assurances that these recipients of "compassionate conservatism" will go
home after three years of being exploited, the example of Western Europe
over the past thirty years tells us something quite different: guest workers
never go home; they disappear into a society that seemingly has no means of
keeping track of any one.

It is also being denounced by principled Americans of all political stripes
that see this proposal for the enormous danger it constitutes to fundamental
American principles: if enacted, Bush's scheme would, at a stroke, transform
the United States of America to the best approximation the modern world has
ever known of the democratic ideal represented by the Athens of Pericles
into Sparta, a hierarchical state with rigid social distinctions carried on
the backs of a class of helots. Should this proposal be enacted into law,
writers and poets should begin composing epitaphs for the American Dream.

The great majority at any gathering are also horrified to learn that in many
states illegal aliens are voting, in direct contravention of the
Constitution of the United States. These are citizens of foreign countries,
in most case of Mexico, who obtain drivers' licenses and have thus passed
what now constitutes the ultimate test of inclusion: a driver's license.
That they have no loyalty to the United States, sense of belonging to the
American nation, or evince no desire to naturalize are seen as mere
formalities by those in positions of power willing to wink at this outrage.
If you have a driver's license you can vote; it's just that simple. And as a
direct result the American people are losing control over the destiny of
their own country, at the same time that the ideal of membership and
inclusion have been cheapened, sold to the lowest bidder.

The Demographic Handwriting is on the Wall
Of the manifold concerns about current immigration policy felt by all
Americans and American Jews in particular, none is more disturbing than the
manner in which it fuels Muslim immigration, making Islam the fastest
growing religion in the country, forming an expanding anti-Israel and
anti-Semitic constituency, and providing an ever-expanding sea in which
terrorist fish swim undetected. The lead article in the May 14, 2003 edition
of the Toronto Globe & Mail announced that Muslims now outnumber Jews in
Canada. It noted that this dramatic demographic shift "could ultimately
affect [Canada's] position toward the protracted Middle East conflict." The
good news is that Canada is hardly a major player on the geopolitical stage.
But what happened there in just the past decade should concern the 5.3
million Jews who live south of the 54th Parallel, as well as those who chart
Israel's course in the halls of the Knesset.

Muslim ascendancy in Canada is a harbinger of things to come in the United
States, with potentially enormous impact for both American Jewry and
American foreign policy. According to the 1991 Canadian Census, there were
25 percent more Jews in Canada than Muslims. Within a single decade that
demographic advantage was obliterated. According to the 2001 census, the
Muslim population of Canada exceeded the Jewish population by 75 percent.

Only recently news stories on CNN and ABC News reported a doubling of the
Arab population in the U.S. in just two decades. Both news outlets suggest
the number of Arabs alone (we are not now talking of Muslims in general) is
already nearly 1.3 million, with the largest population in New York,
followed by the Detroit suburbs. For virtually its entire history, Arab
immigration to the United States was primarily Christian and lopsidedly
Lebanese; now it is virtually all Muslim, with the immigrants' lands of
origin mainly Egypt, the West Bank, and Yemen.

That dramatic demographic turnaround in Canada, the U.S., and Europe can be
accounted for by a single factor: immigration. Muslim immigration has or is
dramatically altering demography in all these places, and with it,
inevitably, the political landscape. This phenomenon has already had
enormous - and frightful - impact on Jewish life in Europe, and has turned
European foreign policy on the Middle East from one of even-handedness to
one that is overtly anti-Israel, if not outright anti-Semitic or tolerant of
it.

Symbolizing the transition was the EU's failure to condemn the recent vile
speech by the Malaysian Prime Minister. Or, perhaps even more shocking,
witness the current moral and intellectual scandal of the EU's rejection of
the report it recently commissioned from the German Technical University on
the dramatic upsurge of anti-Semitism in Europe. The report was rejected and
labeled as "racist" because it identified by far the greatest numbers of
perpetrators of anti-Semitic outrages as Muslim. The propensity of the
willfully blind to shoot the messenger never seems to go out of style. The
highly suspect follow-up study predictably came up with the
politically-correct conclusion: the plague of violence was in fact the work
of skinheads and Neo-Nazis. One is reminded of Claude Reines' sardonic
remark in Casablanca when he orders the Vichy police to "round up the usual
suspects."

The demographic change has caused European Jews to live under profoundly
insecure and threatening conditions, something virtually unknown since the
rise of fascism. Lest anyone imagine that hostility to Israel is only a
factor among leaders of European governments or hostile elites, a recent
survey conducted by the European Commission called "Iraq and Peace in the
World" revealed that more ordinary Europeans consider Israel a threat to
world peace than any other country. Asked whether certain countries posed a
risk to world peace, Israel topped all other nations with 59 percent of
Europeans answering in the affirmative, placing Israel ahead of Afghanistan,
Iraq, Syria, Iran, Pakistan, and even North Korea. Among the 15-member
union, only in Italy did fewer than 50 percent identify Israel as a threat,
and leading the anti-Israel pack were Holland at 74 percent and Luxembourg
at 66 percent. (The U.S. was identified by some 53 percent, the same number
as North Korea.)

Because of sustained large-scale immigration, we're on the threshold of a
similar demographic shift in the U.S. Currently, some 5.3 million Jews live
in the U.S., compared to approximately 4 million Muslims. Islamist groups
often cite the grossly inflated and entirely spurious figure of 7 million.
Such wild exaggerations have been their stock in trade; they have no
research capacity and simply make up figures. None of which would represent
a problem if such Big Lies weren't ultimately accepted as truths, even among
supposedly "reliable sources." Thus when the Washington Post last year
congratulated the "7 million strong American Muslim community" on the
celebration of the Eid at the close of Ramadan, myth became reality.

This shift is a certainty because the exponential growth of the Muslim
population is paralleled by a precipitous decline in the number of American
Jews, in absolute terms and as a percentage of the overall population over
the past 30 years; further, there is no reason to believe the factors that
have caused this will be reversed. Only a decade ago we spoke of 5.8 million
Jews; now we speak of 5.3. Jewish fertility is flat, well below replacement
level; its population is aging; nearly half of all Jews intermarry, and all
efforts to promote "Jewish Continuity" have thus far yielded zero results.
The recent findings of the UJC Population Study confirm the worst fears of
those anguished about this specter.

Unless the religious leadership of the American Jewish community takes a
radical step and returns to ancient traditional Jewish practice - the
seeking of converts from among non-Jews - a scripturally sanctioned practice
made a capital offense by the Byzantine Emperor Constantine when he adopted
Christianity as the official religion of the Eastern Roman Empire (a
position embraced by the forward-thinking Allen Dershowitz as well as Dennis
Prager) - as well as use the philanthropic resources made available to the
failed and philosophically flawed effort at "Jewish Continuity" by also
encouraging Jews to have larger families by establishing college accounts so
more families will have 3 or 4 children - projecting 20 or 30 years ahead,
Muslims will no longer need to exaggerate their numbers to have a major
influence on both domestic and foreign policies.

Unlike Canada, or even Western Europe, the foreign policy of the United
States matters enormously. The United States is not only the world's sole
superpower; it is also Israel's only reliable ally in an increasingly
hostile world. Without discounting the sincerity of many American Christians
in their support for Israel, it would be naïve to believe that American
politicians will not respond to an ever-growing Islamic voting bloc, one
that will eventually far outnumber Jewish voters.

Whatever their manifold shortcomings, no one should ever underestimate the
ability of American politicians to count - count votes and campaign
contributions. As Muslim Americans become politically organized - and they
are well on their way - politicians will certainly not ignore the votes and
campaign dollars of a rapidly growing segment of the electorate. Unlike
Latinos, Muslims naturalize and vote at higher than average percentages - 65
percent in the last Presidential race. And, like Jews, they are concentrated
in states with large voting blocs in the Electoral College; they are
everywhere Jews are.

Importing Anti-Semitism
It is not only Israel that will face increasing hostility and radically
diminished American military, economic, and political support as Muslim
immigration swells. The outbreak of violent anti-Semitism that has swept
Europe in recent years has far less to do with that continent's latent
hatred of Jews by Christians than it does with the hatred for Jews among its
young, poor, and alienated Muslim population.

As we've noted, more often than not, attacks on synagogues and desecration
of Jewish cemeteries in Europe are perpetrated not by skinheads, but by
young Muslims indoctrinated in the hatred of Jews by Islamist imams and
preachers in the radical mosques that dominate Islamic life in Europe.
Virtually every major city in Western Europe already has a central mosque,
funded by the Saudis, that preaches Wahabbi doctrine, one of the most
extreme, violent, atavistic, anti-Western forms of Islam. These mosques,
that have spawned the likes of Zacharias Moussaoui and Richard Reid, double
as recruiting centers and financial support networks for Muslim terrorist
cells.

In the banlieues - the lawless ramshackle "suburban" slums that surround
Paris and other major French cities - Jews and Jewish institutions are
subject to repeated attacks by marauding gangs of Muslim hoodlums. (CNN
recently reported that violent attacks on Jews in Paris come at the average
rate of 12 a day.) Reminiscent of Germany circa 1930, when Hitler's Brown
Shirts ruled the streets while a timid government and press kept silent,
governments and the media in Western Europe today turn a blind eye to
Islamic anti-Semitism and violence out of fear of their growing political
power and an adherence to political correctness. Chirac's recent decision
opposing religious freedom in the classroom - the banning of headscarves for
Muslim girls, kepahs, and crosses, is not only woefully misguided and
insufficient; it's absurdly incommensurate with the scale of the problem -
though it is clear from the recent pronouncements of France's erstwhile
friends among Islamic theocracies and within anti-Israel terrorist
movements, such as Hezbollah, that it may well pay a price for this "assault
on Islam."

One would like to think these threats - some of which may be carried out in
the form of terrorist acts committed in France - will lead to a reassessment
by French authorities of the cynical policies they have pursued, but given
its history of twisted if cleverly self-serving diplomacy, the French are
likely to paper things over with their friends in the Arab world, including
among its radicals and terrorists, rather than recognize that they are
subjecting France, and especially the ideals of the French Republic, to a
slow, painful, and shameful death. While the Muslim underclass is detested
and discriminated against by increasingly xenophobic ordinary Europeans as
well as the European elite, they and their unwelcome guests share a common
hatred of American preeminence in the world, as well as the belief that
Israel is a tool of an imperialist United States.

A chilling article in the June 2003 issue of Vanity Fair by Marie Brenner
about the anti-Jewish violence in France describes the new reality facing
Europe's largest Jewish population. This was recently followed by a front
page story along the same lines in the Washington Post.

Living amidst a Muslim population that now outnumbers it ten to one, and a
political establishment that up till very recently could be described
charitably as utterly indifferent to the wave of anti-Semitism sweeping the
country, beleaguered French Jews are enduring conditions not witnessed in
Europe for more than half a century. Although overt violence is less common
in Great Britain - rioting second generation South Asian youth shouting
"death to the Jews" in the Midlands a year ago may be a harbinger - Britain
has become home to the most radical elements in the Islamic world; those who
track the worldwide Islamist movement refer to the British capital as
"Londonistan." The recent arrest of the Mullah of the Finsbury mosque, who
has been openly calling for the murder of Jews and Christians, because of
his alleged link to Al Qaeda is welcome news, but this is merely the tip of
the iceberg.

While it is admittedly risky to draw conclusions based on what's happening
in one country and applying it, wholesale, to another - the United States is
not France, or Germany, or even Canada - it would be equally foolhardy to
ignore what is happening abroad. Jews are not entitled to the luxury of
assuming that what has already happened in Western Europe and is beginning
to take place in Canada has no relevance to them. A people that lost
one-third of its total world population in living memory due to
powerlessness has no choice but to adopt a posture of high vigilance. Unless
fundamental changes are made in U.S. immigration policy and enforced sooner
rather than later, the same transformation will occur in this county, at
incalculable cost to American Jews and their interests. Moreover, it will
happen much more quickly than most might imagine.

As we've noted, the price of averting - or at least postponing - this
outcome will be enormous cultural discomfort among American Jews and
potentially a major political realignment as Jewish leaders will be forced
to take positions that will further strain an already attenuated
relationship with the liberal coalition that was forged under Franklin
Roosevelt and reached its zenith in the civil rights struggles of the 1960s.
It is not impossible that the frayed bond will tear apart and prove
irreparable. This will constitute a full-blown identity crisis for the many
Jews who have regarded political liberalism as a constituent element of
their Judaism. But faced with the choice between loyalty to a largely broken
alliance and their own long-term survival, the great majority of America's
Jews will make a rational choice.

Because of the way U.S. immigration laws work, an exponential growth in the
Islamic population in the coming years is a statutory certainty. Having
established a foothold in the U.S. over the past 30 years and attained
citizenship, these relatively new Americans have the right to petition to
bring large numbers of extended family members to this country. Current U.S.
immigration policy entitles U.S. citizens to bring not only their nuclear
families, i.e., spouse and unmarried minor children, but parents, adult
children and their spouses and children, and adult siblings and their
spouses and children. Moreover, over time, all of these extended family
members can eventually bring a similar range of extended relatives here as
well, in an unbreakable chain. What begins as a single immigrant can result
in the immigration of an entire village. In fact, in some West Bank towns,
as is the case with many villages in rural Mexico, as much as half the
population either now lives in the U.S. or has U.S. citizenship.

Readers unfamiliar with the political bedfellows of AILA (American
Immigration Lawyer's Association) need to learn that its connections provide
stunning evidence that it is far from a non-partisan, non-ideological
professional association. It is a driving force behind these policies. It is
both disturbing and revealing to know that Jane Butterfield, the President
of AILA, was, for the greatest part of her career, the head of the American
Solidarity Committee for Palestine, and has been a long-time supporter of
the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, a group identified on the
State Department list of terrorist organizations.

Demographic and economic realities within the Islamic world suggest we will
face a tidal wave of Islamic immigration for the foreseeable future - unless
some cut-off mechanism is put in place. Those ineluctable realities include
a worldwide Islamic population of 1.3 billion people, most living in
poverty-stricken and politically oppressive countries. A rare moment of
political candor was the important recent speech by President Bush
discussing the danger posed by the lack of democracy anywhere in the Arab
world, one that even acknowledged the historical complicity of American
policy in enabling Islamic tyranny.

Indeed, two-thirds of the poorest people on earth live in socially,
economically, technologically, and intellectually fossilized Muslim
societies. Given the chance to immigrate to a country like the United
States, countless millions would jump at the opportunity - at the same time
that they not only harbor hatred and contempt for American political
institutions and American culture, but are also members of a religious and
political culture much of which is currently under the dangerous delusion
that it will, can, and must achieve global domination. Many of these
immigrants - a decent percentage of whom might better be identified as
infiltrators than immigrants - are part of a well-organized and extremely
well-funded movement to subvert and destroy American institutions and the
American infra-structure.

By contrast, the global Jewish population is estimated to be between 13-15
million - a mere one one-hundredth of that of Islam. One-third of all the
Jews in the world already live in the United States, a third more live in
Israel, while the remainder are spread mainly among First World nations
where the political and economic forces that generally drive immigration do
not exist. Thus, Jews have very little to gain directly from an open door
U.S. immigration policy. And even in a worst-case scenario for the remaining
Jews in the former Soviet Union, Latin America, and perhaps even parts of
Western Europe, the existence of Israel, in spite of its security and
economic troubles, guarantees a safe haven for any Jew who needs one.

Also, one byproduct of powerful Jewish political influence has been that
persecuted Jews have been able to go to the head of the refugee line for
resettlement in the United States. Under the Lautenberg Amendment, hundreds
of thousands of Jews from the former-U.S.S.R. were able to enter the
country, ahead of millions of other refugees who, arguably, faced greater
persecution and danger in places like Central America and Africa. One of the
potential casualties of the loss of political power could be the special
consideration now afforded Jewish refugees.

Jews stand to lose a great deal more than any other group currently living
in the United States from an immigration policy that brings millions of
people from cultures that range from antipathetic to antithetic to Jews and
the State of Israel. Muslim immigrants are certainly the most likely to feel
savage hostility toward Jews at the moment and are intent on destroying
Jewish political power in the United States as a pre-requisite for weakening
Israel. Thus, this is most emphatically not the time for Jews to be reticent
or "polite" for fear of antagonizing or offending Muslims: American-Muslim
organizations have shown no such compunctions when it comes to Jews or to
Israel - or the sensibilities or predilections of dyed-in-the-wood extreme
multiculturalists who view the Balkanization of American society either with
neutrality or favor. Jewish leadership must step up to the plate and speak
frankly and courageously on behalf of the community they are supposed to
lead and protect.

Common sense demands that the source of the danger be identified. Within the
vast Islamic universe is a fast-spreading totalitarian political ideology
whose name is Islamism, though some know it by other names - Jihadism,
Salafi Islamism, Wâhhabism, and the more generic term Fundamentalism.
Nomenclature counts for nothing; the names make no difference; the
phenomenon is broadly identical in philosophy and tactics, though there are
minor doctrinal differences among its adherents from country to country as
well as ethnic and personal rivalries. Its goal is world domination by Islam
and the imposition of the harshest and most inhumane incarnation of rigid,
unchanging, and unchangeable hide-bound Islamic law on all nations and
peoples. It pursues its agenda through brainwashing, pie-in-the-sky theology
for desperate people, intimidation, selective assassination, terrorism,
political repression, and, on occasion - such as in Bangladesh when it
declared its independence from Pakistan in 1971 - genocide; the murder of
some two million Bengali men, women, and children, and the rape of hundreds
of thousands of women by members of the Pakistani army, the local Islamists
know as razakars, and thousands of madrassah students must not be permitted
to disappear into the black hole of historical forgetfulness. The people of
Bangladesh were, for the greatest part, pious Muslims; their crime was to
wish to the separation of religion and government.

Islamism, like the European fascism it resembles in so many ways and from
which it borrowed heavily in terms of attitudes to many questions, its
paranoid vision of Jews among them, embodies the politics of the culture of
despair - reflecting the catastrophic inability of every other movement in
the Arab and Muslim world to bring power, a decent living standards, and
prestige to the Islamic patrimony -especially the failures of secular
nationalism and Pan-Arabism to take root in the 1950s and 1960s.

The modern Islamist movement began in Egypt in 1928 with the Muslim
Brotherhood whose heyday spans the years 1930-1950 (its philosophical
luminary being Sayyid Qutb); the two other seminal figures of 20th century
Islamism are Mawlana Mawduddi (first of India and then Pakistan), founder of
the fundamentalist Deobandi Movement with its political party and vast
network of propagandistic madrassahs, and the Ayatolla Ruholla Khomeini in
Iran. One could argue, however, that in essence, Islamism has always been a
potent force within Islam; indeed, it has been its dark twin from the very
birth of the faith, and not an aberration born in the 18th century as a
product of the alliance from the 1760s on of the House of Saud under its
then leader Muhammad ibn Saud and the fundamentalist Ibn Abd al Wahhab,
founder of the Wahabbi movement. Nor does its origins lie in the work of
Taqi al-Din ibn Taymiyya of the 13th century - though he heavily influenced
it - who responded to the disaster of the destruction of the Abbassid empire
by the Mongols by accentuating the earliest teachings of the Koran, the
concept of Jihad, emphasizing piety over the literature of textual
commentary that had formed a considerable body of Islamic thought for
centuries and, perhaps most of all, the demand that temporal Muslim rulers
subordinate themselves to a strict interpretation of the Koran. It was
surely this "dark twin" that also stirred the Mogul conquerors of India to
commit one of the greatest genocides in history: the Hindu Kush, or Hindu
slaughter, which some historians have suggested produced a body count
totaling near 8 million human beings. But one needs to go no further than
the Koran itself, with its multiple suras, especially in the Medinan
revelations, calling for the murder of infidels and the necessity of Islamic
military and political global dominance.

In the 20th century, Islamism was repressed violently for decades by the
secular nationalist regimes, mostly brutal corrupt dictatorships that
flirted with the Soviet Union in Damascus, Baghdad, and Cairo (Sayyid Qutb
was hanged in Egypt in 1966), but with the rise to power of the Ayatollah
Ruhollah Khomeini in Iran it secured its temporal power base, followed by
the coup that made General Zia ul Haq military dictator of Pakiststan, a
great admirer of Mulana Mawdudi, whose party, the Jamat-e-Islami had been
repressed under Zia's predecessor Zulfikar Ali Butto. With Zia's seizure of
power, the Jamat-e- Islami found that its Islamist philosophy had achieved
the position of the official ideology of the state, which Zia began to
thoroughly Islamize in a series of measures begun in 1979. Once in the
wilderness, the Islamist movement now ruled the key political power and
religious powr centers of Iran, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia. Some otherwise
excellent scholars of the movement (Gilles Keppel, author of the superb
study Jihad: The Trail of Political Islam, being one) have made one signal
error: arguing it has already crested. Nothing could be further from the
truth.

This movement is gathering strength almost everywhere. Witness the recent
resurgence of Shiite religious fanaticism in Iraq, epitomized in the
rebellion of Muqtada Al Sadr's Shiite militia in Karbala, Kufa, and Najaf
(which may represent less of a renegade phenomenon than official opinion
would have us believe) that may reignite what appeared to many to be the
waning of the movement's virulence in Iran; the New York Times only recently
head-lined the story that the most secular Arab nation, Syria, now has a
growing and vibrant Islamist movement. It is alive and well in Afghanistan
in the "tribal areas" that hug the border with Pakistan, and it is a bomb or
bullet away from re-taking control of Pakistan (how many assassination
attempts can the apparently sincere Kemalist General Musharraf survive?
Something of an enigma, his latest moves toward peace with India, lowering
the temperature in Kashmir, and attacks on extremism in the Pakistani
Parliament that led to an Islamist party walkout suggests his modernist
gestures may be for real: so was Sadat.) It dominates the richest of all
Arab states, Saudi Arabia, the most important banker for this movement,
which is increasingly facing an internal violent opposition even more
extreme in its Islamism than the Saudi monarchy itself, which it views as a
sellout to the West; it governs in the Sudan, in Yemen, in Somalia, and
rules the street in much of East Africa. It threatens to turn the largely
moderate Islam of India into an increasingly militant one; it may well
overthrow what had been a comparatively moderate Muslim society and regime
in Bangladesh, one that is trying to avert the outcome by providing
increasing quiet support to the Jihadists.

The Bangladeshi newspaper The Daily Star ran a story as recently as January
13 regarding an American Congressman's visit with representatives of
minority religions at the Dhakeswari National Temple, where he was informed
that the country's "minority religions are persecuted, oppressed and
marginalized in society." It has produced a body count of slaughtered
innocents in Algeria that runs into the tens of thousands and threatens
other regimes in the supposedly Europeanized Maghreb. Many were stunned to
learn of the rise of an Al Qaeda-like terrorist network based in "moderate"
Morocco that was responsible for the bloody Madrid bombing. Perhaps of
greatest interest to those of us who track the correlation between lax
immigration policy and the spread of Islamism, the Moroccan terrorists
practice a doctrine known as Takfir wal Hijara, which is the advocacy of
using immigration as part of a stealth strategy of establishing a Jihadist
presence in the heart of the enemy: in Western Europe. Islamism is also
gaining ground in the Caucasus; and there are Islamist insurgencies
throughout South East Asia, from the Southern Thailand to the Philippines. A
militant Albania and break-away Kosovo endanger not just little Macedonia,
but pose an Islamist threat across the Balkans.

The fact is that if free and open elections were held tomorrow across the
Muslim world, the pan-Islamists would likely take power in the great
majority of states. And then, of course, there would be no more elections.
This movement hates pluralism, individual rights, freedom of conscience,
freedom of expression, secular civil society, the separation of religion and
government, the rule of law as we understand it in the West, human rights,
women's rights, gay rights, the rights of religious minorities,
Christianity, the West in general and the United States in particular, and
most of all it has identified Jews and Israel as its foremost enemies -
enemies to be exterminated. Many scholars of contemporary movements in the
Islamic world who are not Islamist or apologists for Islamism put the number
of active adherents of this dangerous movement at between 100-300 million,
with a majority of the non-activists cheering from the sidelines. It is a
movement that has kept most of Islam in a pre-Enlightenment stage of
development. The mentality within wide sections of the Islamic world is some
500 years behind the rest of humanity.

Do we need further evidence of Muslim hatred of Jews than the keynote
address by the former "moderate" prime minister of Malaysia, who has
compounded the original offense in a series of bizarre interviews since,
including with the Israeli press? His speech at the World Organization of
Islamic Nations repeated all the familiar canards of crazed, paranoid
anti-Semitism: that the diabolically clever and all-powerful Jews run the
world, control its banks, the IMF, world media, and even "invented" such
ideologies as democracy, human rights, socialism, and communism as means of
protecting their own interests. Worst of all, however, was the reaction of
the other heads of State that filled the hall to overflowing. It wasn't
stony, embarrassed silence; they didn't lower their heads and look away.
They gave him a standing ovation, and those wildly applauding leaders
included our friends and "allies" General Musharraf of Pakistan, King
Abdullah of Jordan, the Egyptian President, the King of Saudi Arabia, our
own newly-installed President of Afghanistan, Mohammad Karzai, and yes, Mr.
Putin, "representing" Russia's Muslims.

Will this movement achieve world domination? Of course it will not, at least
by military means. But the patent absurdity and unreality of the goal does
not lessen the danger is represents, nor should any one feel the least bit
secure, let alone complacent. Nazism and Communism harbored similar
delusions. Our final victory over them could not bring back to life the
millions upon millions annihilated in their names, including 1/3 of all the
Jews in the world nor the millions of Allied soldiers, including some
400,000 Americans as well as partisans throughout occupied Europe who gave
their lives to defeat them. And how many of us really believe that 9/11 will
be the last enormity to be committed on American soil? Our national leaders
tell us again and again there is something like a 100 percent certainty that
they will strike again, and powerfully. Some months ago another huge
terrorist assault on the United States utilizing aircraft was reportedly
uncovered and prevented, one that included attacks on nuclear facilities,
major population centers, infrastructure, and national symbols.

The recent bombing in Madrid with its huge death toll (in excess of 200)
underscores the continuing threat as well as its special character: the
technical sophistication of its perpetrators and their wish to inflict
maximum casualties on an innocent civilian population who are demonized by
virtue of being infidels. Indeed, it is far more likely that the Moroccan
bombers responsible for the slaughter in Spain were motivated by the belief
that Spain is Islamic land - Al Andalus - and must revert to Muslim control
rather than were reacting to the meager contribution of troops the Spanish
government then in power had made to the occupation of Iraq.

While the Islamists are incapable of conquering the lands of the infidels
through military means they have another extremely potent weapon in their
arsenal, and we are not speaking of the terrorism that will almost certainly
continue to plague the world for decades to come. The most potent weapon in
their possession is demography: their capacity to slowly and quietly
overwhelm and come to dominate non-Muslim societies through sheer strength
of numbers. This is where the critical nexus between the Islamic dream of
global conquest, beginning with their third historical assault on Western
Europe, and irrational, self-destructive Western immigration policy reveals
itself most dramatically.

Almost two months ago, London's Daily Telegraph reported the predictions of
a group of renowned demographers that France - the great capital of European
secularism in Paris and an atrophying but still predominant traditional
Catholicism in the countryside - will become a majority Muslim country
within 20-30 years! Their reasoning was neither arcane nor their predictions
hysterical: to the contrary, it was all terribly prosaic. All they did was
plug the demographic facts into the standard formulae to come up with their
results. Though the precise percentage of Muslims is hard to know for a
certainty given the fact that the French government does not share the data
it denies collecting on the race and ethnicity of its population, most
demographers place the current figure somewhere between 18-25 percent. The
fertility of the average French family is 1.2, while that of the average
Muslim family is 4.6, with even higher birthrates among the black African
Muslim population (almost 5). Among the most fertile sections of the
population, young men and women ranging in age from 17-30, Muslims already
constitute 35 percent. Intermarriage is also frequent, with the most
prevalent pattern that of a French Catholic young woman marrying a Muslim
man, converting to Islam, and then rearing a large family. A similar pattern
is evident in Belgium, where in the schools of Brussels Muslim children far
outnumber Belgian Christian youth.

Then there is the story of Pym Fortun and Dutch immigration. Pym Fortun was
a gay Dutch professor of literature who became a vocal spokesperson in the
immigration reform movement in the Netherlands because he did not wish to
see the massive influx of a population who regard the killing of homosexuals
as religiously sanctioned and who have shown little or no interest in
assimilating into liberal Dutch society. He was, in short, vigorously
opposed to tolerating intolerance. An opponent of his views assassinated him
a little more than a year ago. But a backlash was brewing all along. Some
six weeks ago the Dutch parliament passed a resolution barring all
immigration to Holland for five years, including that of refugees and asylum
seekers. Something similar is happening in Denmark, where the government has
made it clear that Muslim immigrants are welcome in Denmark only if they are
prepared to teach their children Danish, assimilate to the norms of Danish
society, and balance their Islam with a strong sense of loyalty to their new
homeland. Should they not follow this course, they will be strongly
pressured to leave Denmark.

With these hopeful exceptions, however, the Europeans in the main continue
to make a Devil's bargain with the Islamic world for short-term financial
gain and in order to buy a brief respite from trouble that makes the present
moment resemble the Phony War more than anything else. While the Sitzkrieg
continues, conditions on the ground are undergoing a vast transformation.
Their own societies are undergoing a profound metamorphosis that is making
them unrecognizable, and in ways they will come to bemoan, perhaps when it
is too late to undo it.

They also risk engendering violent nationalist reactions on their own soil
as their own dominant culture groups begin to strike back as they perceive
their familiar world, interests, and most basic values threatened as the
demographic balance reaches the tipping point. Whether or not they are fully
aware of what they are doing, they are conjuring the ghost of Oswald
Moseley, or at the very least that of Enoch Powell. One imagines that sooner
rather than later there will be dozens of rightist demagogues in Western
Europe giving their own versions of Powell's "Rivers of Blood" speech. But
unlike Powell, who was gazing at the distant future, they will be responding
to what large numbers will perceive as an immediate threat to their way of
life. Needless to say, it would be infinitely wiser for European countries
to adopt sensible immigration policies now that will prevent the thorough
Islamization of their societies and the rise of the Urabia journalists
rather than risk civil war on their streets in the coming decades.

Muslim hatred of Jews is the greatest danger we face, but they're not the
only group now entering the United States en mass with troublesome views
about Jews. Attitudes toward Jews in the Latin American societies that are
the largest source of immigration today - some 60 percent of all immigrants
come from Mexico and Central America - are steeped in a culture of
theological anti-Semitism that has defied the post-Vatican II enlightenment
of European and North American Catholicism. Nor have they any mitigating
history of residential closeness to Jews, little knowledge and no direct or
familial experience of the Holocaust, and they regard Jews simply as among
the most privileged of white people in the United States; privileged white
people who killed God. Speaking in support of a July 2002 congressional
resolution deploring anti-Semitism in Europe, Rep. Christopher Smith (R-NJ)
noted dark clouds on the American horizon. According to Smith, "17 percent
of Americans are showing real anti-Semitic beliefs and the ugliness of it.
Sadly, among Latinos and African Americans, it is about 35 percent." The ADL's
studies indicate that some 47 percent of Latinos hold strongly anti-Semitic
attitudes.

It's true that current Mexican disinterest in naturalization will protect
America's Jews to some extent for perhaps another decade or two; of the
massive demographic bulge that entered the U.S. in the early 80s, fewer than
20 percent has become citizens, and of that number fewer still bother to
vote. In the last presidential election, Jews outpolled Latinos in LA
County! Will this sleeping giant awaken is one of the huge political
questions everyone ponders. The Democrats will say nothing about immigration
reform because they expect this demographic will join their ranks, and they
don't wish to run the risk of alienating it; and the Republicans will mostly
say nothing because they get tons of campaign monies from the Fast Food
Industry, the whole service sector, and Agro-Business and don't want to
alienate them. The timetable for the demographic transformation will be
greatly accelerated if President Bush's "immigration reform" proposal,
announced in January, is enacted.

Even if the powerful assimilative forces of American culture eventually
prevail, as they did among previous waves of immigrants, it will take
several generations, and it is certainly arguable that they will never fully
succeed with Muslims unless an Islamic "Enlightenment" comes about, an
extremely unlikely scenario given the benighted condition of much of the
Muslim world and the fact that its proponents will be branded as infidels by
traditional religious authorities - as they have always been - and targeted
for murder.

Among the myriad mythologies that surround American immigration experience
is the belief that the process of assimilation magically transformed
immigrants into English-speaking patriotic devotees of Jeffersonian
democracy and tolerance virtually as soon as they set foot on these shores.
This proposition is about as accurate as the notion that America's streets
were paved with gold. Assimilating millions of Irish, Eastern, and Southern
European immigrants into mainstream Americans (people, who were not long ago
called "ethnics" and today are loosely and ironically defined as "Anglos")
was a long and often painful process, and depended on a set a of historical
conditions and cultural circumstances that have vanished.

The Jewish Immigrant Experience Was Atypical
Popular perceptions of immigrant experience in America have been oddly
skewed because the story has been largely told by Jews about Jews. The
Jewish narrative has come to be understood as prototypical when, in fact, it
was unique. This has led to profound misapprehension of the more common
pattern - an error that carries large consequences for immigration policy
and attitudes towards immigrants -on the part of great numbers of people,
Jews included, who ought to know better. Jews have always been the exception
to the rule. Almost each critical aspect of their immigration experience -
the reasons they emigrated to the U.S., their communal history in their
countries of origin, and how they acculturated into America - is vastly
different from the circumstances of almost every other immigrant group,
Armenians excepted.

First and foremost, as we've noted, the Jews who arrived in the great wave
of immigration at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries
more closely resembled refugees and asylum seekers than immigrants. Though
the quest for economic opportunity motivated many Jews to come to America,
they came chiefly to escape religious persecution and political oppression.
Unlike the substantial percentage of Italians, Poles, and the other Slavs
who eventually returned to Europe, Jews migrated in only one direction.
Given where they had come from and what they had left behind, often fleeing
for their very lives, Jewish immigrants enthusiastically embraced the ideals
of patriotic assimilation into American society (indeed too enthusiastically
for those concerned with a loss of Jewish identity). Within a few years of
arrival in the United States, Jewish immigrants mastered English. Within a
generation, Yiddish was rarely, if ever, spoken by their American-born
children.

Distinct, de facto and de jure, from the majority culture in every society
in which they had previously lived, Jewish immigrants did not bring to
America any lingering allegiance to their countries of origin or to the
dominant political or religious culture or ideologies that flourished there
(with the exceptions of socialism and Marxism, sympathies that evaporated
within a few years following their arrival), as did almost every other group
of immigrants. Having lived for centuries as minority cultural outsiders in
often hostile societies gave Jews a distinct advantage over millions of
people who were experiencing minority status for the first time. In places
like Poland and Czarist Russia Jews had developed survival mechanisms that
made the adjustment to America relatively easy.

In those countries, segments of the host Christian population, often
semi-governmental bodies like the Black Hundreds in Russia, often sought to
kill them; in America the host population was satisfied with keeping them
out of their neighborhoods, professional associations, country clubs, and
elite universities. Distinct as the Jewish immigrant experience was from
that of other immigrants who came at the same time, it is even more
different from that of today's immigrants.

While the non-Jewish immigrants of a century ago also maintained strong
emotional ties to their countries of origin, their societies and cultures
were neither hostile to America nor obsessed with it, and they certainly did
not blame America for their every problem. Much of the non-European world
and virtually all the Muslim world was then part of the British, French, or
Russian colonial empires; before the First World War America was not a great
global power. And, of course, at the end of that conflict it was Woodrow
Wilson in his uplifting if delusional Fourteen Points who preached against
empire and advocated home-rule for many colonized peoples. Political
circumstances and attitudes could not be more different now. Anti-American
hostility is a hallmark of the societies from which most Muslim immigrants
and many Latinos hail, and the values inculcated in people from a host of
corrupt and brutal dictatorial regimes and quasi-fascist theocracies are
very much at odds with those most Americans hold dear.

Between the worldview of the United States, indeed between the worldview of
most non-Muslim nations and the Islamic one, is a much deeper, perhaps
unbridgeable cultural divide that bears directly on the question of Muslim
acculturation - this falls into the "Clash of Civilizations" thesis that has
gained great strength in recent years. The very concept of the nation state
commanding the loyalty of its citizens is a highly problematic one in much
of the Muslim world, and not only because many of the countries that
comprise it were drawn haphazardly on maps by European colonial diplomats
and statesmen who were shockingly ignorant of the religion and the culture
of the peoples under their sway, and whose "nation-building" in the Muslim
world was largely secondary to and a mere offshoot of the rivalry for global
power among them.

For much of the world's Muslim population, the central organizing communal
principle is not the polity of the state but the Umma, the world that is
ruled by the laws of the Koran, not by any temporal ruler, set of secular
constitutional principles, or territories denominated as countries flying
different flags. It is no accident that when Osama bin Laden expresses his
ideal of the right global order, he recalls the Caliphates and the Ottoman
Empire - pan-national Islamic domains in which the unifying idea was Islamic
religion and law, and in which the idea of the nation state had no place. It
is arguable that it is impossible for a devout Muslim ever to be a patriot
in a non-Muslim society.

Even among the Mexicans who comprise the dominant immigrant group in America
today there is a strong tradition of anti-U.S. resentment and historical
grievance. A widely-shared belief among many Mexicans is that the gringos
are responsible for their chronic economic woes. Nor have they forgotten
that a sizable chunk of the American Southwest was conquered by the United
States in the Mexican War of 1846-1848. For some, the act of flooding
America with their Mexican countrymen, legally or illegally, is part of an
undeclared, low-intensity war of Reconquista. Because the two nations are
joined by a long porous border - the longest on earth between a First World
and a Third World country - continuous two-way migration inhibits any strong
identification with the United States. When I worked as National Affairs
Director at AJC I was, ipso facto, a board member of the National
Immigration Forum, the main lobbying group for open borders, and the extent
of the anti-Americanism and language of Reconquista was shocking even to one
who saw himself in those days as a card-carrying liberal multiculturalist.

Perhaps the most important distinction between today's immigrants and those
of yesteryear is the absence of the tacit and overt pressures that
eventually forced assimilation upon even the most reluctant immigrant
groups. These forces have been weakened by the prevailing multiculturalist
ideology that legitimizes and reinforces identity politics, the demise of
Americanization programs that inculcated patriotic assimilation
(multiculturalism denies the very existence or even desirability of a
legitimate, cohesive American culture), the death of civic education, the
rise of bilingualism, and the elimination of any obligation to do national
service. As noted, it is massive immigration itself that creates Balkanizing
multiculturalism; it did not fall from the sky.

Then there are the simple practical differences that carry gigantic
consequences: the revolution in modern transportation and communications
technology allows immigrants to maintain strong bonds with native lands,
cultures, and languages - something not true a hundred years ago. As a
result, many "immigrants" are in fact permanent resident aliens who live
simultaneously in two societies but who naturally maintain primary loyalty
to the cultural and political heritage of their countries of origin - the
places where they were reared, had their early formative experiences, were
educated, and socialized.

Thus, to assume automatically today's immigrants will be as rapidly absorbed
into the mainstream as were our parents and grandparents constitutes a
one-legged leap of faith and very risky proposition. There is no reason to
believe that the unique Jewish experience, unrepresentative even of an age
when Americanization was upheld as the ideal, will be replicated in one in
which that ideal is ridiculed and rejected by the practitioners of ethnic
identity politics who work for an array of ethnic lobby groups and human
relations organizations largely created and financed by a group of
left-leaning, multiculturalist, major national foundations, the
politically-correct professorate, and many influential mainstream media
opinion-makers.

So much is different today: the immigrants are different; the country and
its social institutions are different; the economy is different; the
technology is different; and what is deemed normative is different. To
believe the outcome will be the same under an entirely distinct set of
conditions on the ground as well as in social and political constructs is
not merely willful thinking: it is simply preposterous.

Trouble on the Home Front
While American Jews have an emotional stake in the survival and success of
Israel, they have personal stake in anti-Semitism in the United States.
Anti-Semitism is an immensely complex phenomenon attributable to a myriad of
social, cultural, economic, political, psychological, religious, even
metaphysical factors. But on a purely practical level, some very important
distinctions are simple enough, as well as crucial; there is a great
difference between harboring anti-Semitic sentiments, and feeling the
license to act on them. In the Western democracies where the vast majority
of Jews outside Israel reside, the degree to which anti-Semitism is felt and
expressed is closely linked to immigration. As noted by the Anti-Defamation
League - which dogmatically supports open immigration and routinely savages
anyone who is critical of current U.S. immigration policies - Western Europe
holds the dubious distinction of leading the world in anti-Semitic violence.
Recent waves of anti-Jewish violence, ADL observes, "have tended to
originate chiefly among Muslim immigrant circles in Europe, with extreme
right groups jumping on the bandwagon."

While overt acts of anti-Semitic violence are much rarer in the United
States, they are not unheard of, and are increasingly perpetrated by Muslim
youth. Nowhere in America has the resurgence of anti-Semitism more
manifested itself, sometimes thinly disguised as anti-Zionism, than on
college campuses. Anti-Jewish hate speech masquerading as anti-Zionism is
commonplace on campuses all across the United State today, and has on a
number of occasions crossed the thin line that separates free speech from
incitement. Indeed, at the present time, the campus is the most inhospitable
place for Jews and supporters of Israel in the U.S., something the national
Jewish organizations have come to recognize. Hillel, the most typical
institutional Jewish presence on America's campuses, is belatedly addressing
this by developing talking-points and backgrounders for Jewish students so
they can defend themselves against assaults on Israel and Judaism by the
growing numbers of politically active Arab and Islamist students. There is
an active movement advocating the divesting of any university assets
invested in Israel, and while it has not gained much momentum, with college
president after president bravely rejecting the idea out of hand -Israel is
not the moral equivalent of apartheid South Africa - it adds to the air of
toxicity surrounding attitudes towards the Jewish state.

In May 2002, a small group of Jewish students and faculty, demonstrating on
the campus of San Francisco State University in favor of a peaceful solution
to violence in the Middle East, were surrounded by a much larger mob of
mostly Islamic students who threatened them physically and taunted them with
chants like, "Death to the Jews" and "Hitler didn't finish the job."
Eventually, the trapped Jewish students and faculty had to be escorted to
safety by the San Francisco Police. Far from mobilizing the university's
leadership to confront overt anti-Semitism, the incident was hushed up so as
not to create tension with the campus' large and militant Arab student
population.

Similar incidents, in which Jewish students and supporters of Israel have
been subjected to overt intimidation, have occurred all across the U.S. and
Canada. On the campus of Concordia University in Canada, Muslim students
forced the cancellation of a speech by former Israeli Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu by threatening organized violence.

Only a few months ago, Nathan Scharansky was hit in the face with a pie on
the campus at Rutgers, by a convenient Jewish idiot. Faculty committees
across the country have worked to ban from their campuses scholars on the
Middle East that are not deemed politically correct, Daniel Pipes being a
key example. It also appears that Senators Kennedy and Harkin, as well as
some eight other Senators, on the Committee that oversees appointments to
the U.S. Institute for Peace, regard the poor, brilliant scholar Daniel
Pipes as an unfit bigot because of his temerity to tell the truth about
Islamism. Luckily President Bush has made a recess appointment.

To date, assaults on Jews and Jewish institutions have been far fewer than
in Europe, but American Jews already live under a state of heightened
threat. A visit to New York, home to America's largest Jewish population,
provides startling and irrefutable visual evidence that Jews no longer live
in safety and security. Virtually every high-profile Jewish institution in
New York is surrounded by concrete barriers to prevent car bombs from
exploding too close to the building, while being checked by security guards
and passing through metal detectors are now as routine a part of attending
synagogue services as putting on a kepah, or skullcap. The sense of Jewish
insecurity is by no means confined to New York. Throughout the country, in
communities with a substantial Muslim presence, security is now a critical
part of planning any sort of Jewish political or communal event - especially
those intended to demonstrate support for Israel. A speech by an outside
speaker known as a supporter of Israel or a critic of Islamism is sufficient
to ensure an armed police presence.

Reality is beginning to dawn on many American Jews that something is amiss,
although it still seems to be lost on some of the country's most venerable
Jewish organizations. There is a sad if also somewhat comic irony to the
fact that legions of employees at organizations like ADL, the American
Jewish Committee, and the Presidents' Conference must pass through a
gauntlet of concrete barriers, armed guards, metal detectors, and double
bulletproof anterooms as they come to work each morning to protect them from
radical Islamic terrorists, in order to spend their days studying and then
disseminating reports on the "threat" posed by Evangelical Christians or the
non-issue of Mormon conversion of dead Jews or the imaginary anti-Semitism
that "The Passion of the Christ" did not produce. Meanwhile, the legislative
affairs staffs of these same organizations are directed to lobby against the
very immigration reforms that could minimize the danger.

In recent years - particularly since Sept. 11, 2001 - Jewish organizations
have devoted increased resources and attention to the activities of radical
Islamic groups in the United States. The web sites of most major Jewish
groups are filled with alarming information about the activities of these
groups, many with documented ties to those that blow Israeli schoolchildren
to bits on buses and in pizzerias. Amazingly, however, these Jewish watchdog
organizations fail to employ the most basic logic and ask the most obvious
question: How did they get here? When will they stop kidding themselves and
simply connect the dots? Not one of these groups has even been willing to
examine the potential impact of mass immigration, including mass Muslim and
Islamist immigration, on American Jewry, much less take a position calling
for changes in U.S. immigration policy.

One of the most troubling phenomena that has been widely reported by people
such as Steven Emerson, Daniel Pipes, and many others - including courageous
dissidents within the Muslim community - though largely ignored by the
mainstream media and the political establishment: many of the key "American"
Islamic civic and charitable institutions that have sprung up in the United
States over the past 30 years are little more than domestic incarnations of
foreign Islamist political parties. Among the primary objectives the
U.S.-based Arab and Muslim organizations are the undermining of Jewish
political influence in the United States, the propagation of anti-Semitism
and Holocaust denial, and the destruction of Israel.

Frequently masquerading as ethnic anti-discrimination organizations, such
entities as the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), the American
Muslim Council (AMC), the Muslim Student Association (MSA), and the Islamic
Circle of North America (ICNA) are either offshoots of or maintain close
ties to some of the most radical terrorist groups round the globe. Many
"mainstream" Islamic organizations have their roots firmly planted in the
same bloody soil that spawned groups such as Hamas, Islamic Jihad,
Hezbollah, and even al-Qaeda. In addition, many American mosques, often
built, maintained and controlled with money from the fundamentalist
Saudi-based Wahabbi sect - serve as hosts to radical preachers from across
the Islamic world who manage to slip through the notoriously lax U.S. visa
issuance process. In one recent and particularly flagrant case, a mullah was
arrested in Europe after boasting of having raised $20 million for Osama bin
Laden at the El Farooq Mosque in Brooklyn.

As recently as January 12, 2004, it was reported in the New York Times that
a prominent Muslim cleric, Fawaz Mohammed Damrah, who runs the largest
mosque in Ohio, was arrested for concealing his ties to terrorist
organizations when he entered the United States 10 years ago. In the
language of the indictment, Damrah lied to immigration officials about his
active involvement in religious persecution "when in fact he had previously
incited and/or assisted others, including terrorist organizations, that
advocated the persecution of Jews and others by means of violent terrorist
attacks." It is sadly true of many mosques in the United States that the
Friday sermon is regularly used to preach the hatred of Jews. Dr. Martin
Luther King once noted that Sunday morning was the "most segregated time in
the week" in an America that has largely, thankfully, passed into history.
It might be noted that in today's America, in mosques all across the land,
Friday afternoon is the "most hateful" time of the week.

The true nature of virtually all Islamic organizations in America is
reflected by the fact that more than half of all Islamic "charities"
operating in the United States have been closed down as a result of
investigations launched after 9/11. These so-called charities, which had
operated openly with tax-exempt status, were front groups that served as
recruiting agencies and financial support mechanisms for Islamic terrorist
organizations from all over the world. In some cases, these "charities" were
found to be directly funding terrorism against Israel and compensating the
families of terrorist bombers who murdered school children, diners,
shoppers, and bus riders in Israel.

Concern over the nature and real agendas of Islamic organizations in America
is hardly a parochial Jewish matter. The Muslim terrorists on 9/11 did not
distinguish among Americans based on religion, or indeed any other factor;
they slaughtered Americans of every background, and their hatred of America
comes right behind their hatred of Jews - wherever they are found. Thus, a
seamless confluence of interests (among them simple survival) unites all
Americans - Jewish or otherwise - with regard to the danger represented by
the Muslim-Islamist presence in the United States. That this is a national
concern is made clear in a news story in the Washington Post of January 14,
which concerns a request by the Senate Finance Committee to the Internal
Revenue Service to provide it "confidential tax and financial records,
including donors lists, of dozens of Muslim charities and foundations as
part of a widening Congressional investigation into alleged ties between
tax-exempt organizations and terrorist groups." The request by the Finance
Committee comes on the heels of two-years of investigations by the Treasury
Department, the FBI, and other agencies of the federal government into
Muslim "charities" with suspected ties to Al Qaeda.

Needless to say, such Islamist organizations as CAIR (Council of American
Islamic Relations) are charging the investigators with bias and bigotry, of
conducting a "fishing expedition" into the Muslim community rather than
acknowledging that any problem exists. Among the "charities" and foundations
of principal interest to the Senate Finance Committee are: the SAAR
Foundation and associated entities; Global Relief, an organization whose
founder has been deported; as well as the largest of all Muslim "charities"
in the United States, the Texas-based Holy Land Foundation for Relief and
Development, an organization that investigators believe is tied to the
terrorist group Hamas. And it does not stop there; also under investigation
for links to Islamist terrorism are the World Assembly of Muslim Youth, the
Muslim World League, and the Islamic Society of North America.

This is not the appropriate context in which to engage in a full discussion
about attitudes towards Jews in so-called classical Islam - we are focusing
on what is referred to as political Islam. But it must be pointed out, as
many of my friends and colleagues who grew up as orthodox Muslims across the
Islamic patrimony have said to me in agonizing personal confessions, friends
that went through madrassah education and then advanced learning in Islam in
countries ranging from Morocco, to Egypt, to Bosnia, Pakistan, and
Bangladesh, that it is virtually impossible to be reared in classical Islam
and not be educated to hate Jews - based on a literalist reading of the
Koran, where many of the Suras concerning Jews are monstrously hateful,
murderous, terrifying, as well as the literature of the Sunnah. These texts
also regard Jews as a spiritually fraudulent entity - all the prophets and
great figures of the Hebrew Bible, according to Islamic teaching, were
Muslims, not Jews. No wonder Yassir Arafat, and old graduate of the Egyptian
Brotherhood and far more a pan-Islamist than a Palestinian nationalist,
denies any connection between Jews and the Temple Mount in Jerusalem.

It is hard to hear, and extremely painful to say it, but at his historical
moment, barring an Islamic Enlightenment, arguably the only way to be a
Muslim and not a Jew-hater is to be a lapsed Muslim or - if one continues to
call oneself a Muslim and practice the faith - to conduct what is, in
essence, a private and personal "reformation" and do what no devout Muslim
would ever publicly confess: pick and choose among the content of Muslim
holy scripture, then treat the Koran as the divinely-inspired work of human
beings but not the literal word of God. This is happening everywhere, of
course, whether among more moderate Muslims in such places as Morocco,
especially among its Berbers, or among Turkish Muslims. But the act
constitutes heresy according to all leading Islamic authorities. Such
picking and choosing, leaving behind the rude and barbarous aspect of sacred
text that reflects the barbarous historical conditions of its authors, is
routine for the overwhelming majority of Christians and Jews in the world
that view the New Testament or the Hebrew Bible as the divinely-inspired
work of human beings, and thus as historically conditioned, and amenable to
interpretation, emphasis, and de-emphasis.

But the status of the Koran among devout Muslims is different than that
accorded Holy Scripture by virtually all Christians and Jews: the Koran more
closely approximates what the Eucharist represents for religious Christians:
it is the body of God, the direct word of God, and thus any interpretive
enterprise, any effort to build a community of scholarly discourse regarding
the continuing validity of outworn usages, is regarded as heretical, and
heretics are still sentenced to death in Islamic societies.

Still, many are accomplishing this hopeful version of the Greater Jihad, the
internal struggle for spiritual growth, but until religious and even secular
authorities with the Islamic patrimony publicly embrace this shift, there
will be no political counterweight to Islamism. One can only pray that in
time, what I believe to be millions of silent reformations will find their
public voice, and then there might be safety, as well as solidarity, in
numbers. As my Muslim friends that are scholars of Islam remind me, the
intellectual work of this reform was accomplished long ago - one sees it as
early as in the 8th century "heresy" committed under the early Abbasid
Caliphate that chose to view sacred text as Jews and Christians regard
theirs: not as a living incarnation of the Divine nor as a fetish, but as
the divinely inspired works of human beings, children of their time, and
subject to limited historical understanding.

The intellectual work has been accomplished long ago; Muslims know precisely
what to do. The impediment is the political power and ruthlessness of their
enemies, the capacity and willingness of their enemies to forever stunt the
growth of a great living breathing humane Islam through intimidation and
murder, an Islam that that might yet have so much to offer to the world.
Whatever the risks, these secret Muslims of the enlightenment must step
forward, ignore the charge that will be leveled against them that they are
engaging in takfir (impiety), an accusation that leads to excommunication
from Islam in the eyes of "the faithful," and save Islam from itself.

There are, of course, non-devout Muslim Americans that hail from Islamic
societies that don't support the radical agendas of those that purport to
represent their interests in the United States. Some independent Muslim
thinkers believe that such moderates form a silent majority within Islamic
America. But if such a majority exists, their silence would appear to
indicate assent rather than opposition - though it may also indicate
self-censorship out of fear of retribution. With the exception of a tiny
group of courageous American Muslims - mostly academics, journalists, and
freelance writers - who have spoken out and condemned extremism,
anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism, the "Muslim Street" in the U.S. has yet
to show its disapproval of this philosophical and political agenda.

As we've intimated, one reason so few American Muslims have publicly broken
with the Islamist orthodoxy that increasingly dominates American-Muslim
communal life is because these organizations, their members and
fellow-travelers, employ physical intimidation, threats of violence,
economic pressure, and foster shunning, enforcing conformity and isolating
and destroying independent-minded Muslims. They have orchestrated fatwas by
foreign mullahs against dissident Muslim secular intellectuals who have been
forced to take refuge in safe houses; instigated death threats against such
prominent religious moderates as the Sufi leader Sheik Hisham Muhammad
Kabbani (whose movement, the Islamic Supreme Council of America, has 200
mosques); have organized boycotts against and then threatened the life of
the wife of the Muslim publisher of a critically-acclaimed newspaper dealing
with events in Pakistan; and routinely issue hysterical attacks against
books and articles (which of course go unread) or speech that deals
objectively with any aspect of Islamic history, politics, belief, or
practice.

Of course it is incomparably worse throughout the Islamic world, where
courageous independent Muslim thinkers are routinely murdered by Islamists;
their body count in only the last few decades runs into the hundreds of
thousands. This has not silenced luminaries like Mehmet Aydin in Turkey, Ali
Asghar Engineer in India; Abdel Rahman Lakassi in Morrocco, Bassam Tibi in
Germany, Rashid Ahmad Jullundri in Pakistan, or Muslim believers in
pluralism and freedom of conscience associated with the Ibn Khaldún Society
founded and led by the fearless Khalid Durán. One hopes the day will dawn
when their work and that of American-Muslim scholars like Radwan Masmoudi,
Sohail Hasmi and others will find a larger and larger audience and end the
intellectual fossilization of Islam and the war between Islam, democracy,
and pluralism. But that day lies in the distant future; our first
responsibility now is protecting America from the Islamism that produced
9/11 and targets "Jews and Crusaders."

I should note, in anticipation of the inevitable charge that I am a racist
or a xenophobe, that my dear moderate Muslim friends, many who go by the
name "Freethinkers," are equally adamant about opposing large-scale
Muslim/Islamist immigration at time when extremism is so rife among the
populations seeking entry to the United States. The adherents of those
movements pose not only a danger to the Constitutional values and democratic
pluralism they came to American to find, but they also poses a direct
physical danger to these courageous dissident Muslims. Those of us seeking
to curtail the anarchy that passes for current immigration have, and will
find, many allies among intellectuals from the Arab and larger Islamic
patrimony that wish to create a new Islam under American circumstances, and
do not wish to be stopped dead in their tracks - or shot dead - by members
of the benighted masses that enter this country, socialized only to hate
pluralism and free thought.

The Potential Loss of Political Influence
It would be an understatement to say that American Jews have achieved
unprecedented political power and influence in the United States. We have
already cited a good deal of the evidence. This power and influence stands
as testament to how successfully Jews, who represent just above 2 percent of
the U.S. population, have assimilated (in the most positive sense of that
word) into the American political, cultural, and economic mainstream. It
also stands as a tribute to the openness and the tolerance of the vast
majority of the American people who have come to accept Jews as full-fledged
Americans who happen to practice a different religion.

Living at the high noon of Jewish political power, it will strike some as
alarmist and counter-intuitive to suggest that the sky may be about to fall.
Yet that is precisely what may happen within the next 20 years. The Jewish
population of the United States is about to be eclipsed by an ethnic group
whose interests are in direct conflict with those of American Jews and many
of whose leaders and members are openly hostile to Jews. The American
constitution, the basic integrity of the vast majority of the American
population, and the professionalism of American law enforcement may militate
against the kind of anti-Semitic violence taking place in France and
elsewhere in Europe; they will at least slow down its progress. What those
two intangible attributes will not be able to prevent, however, is the loss
of political support for Israel that would doom the Jewish state to complete
political isolation.

Without minimizing the effectiveness of lobby organizations like AIPAC and
other American Jewish organization in steering U.S. foreign policy in a
pro-Israel direction, it must be noted that for many years they have been
pushing on an open door. Once the old Arabist crowd at the State Department
and the several notably anti-Semitic Secretaries of State and members of the
diplomatic corps departed the scene, except for politicians on the extreme
left or right who have an ideological antipathy for Israel and are generally
unsympathetic to the Jewish community, support for Israel and high levels of
deference towards the concerns of the American-Jewish community has been a
political no-brainer. It has brought substantial benefits and no downside.

The fact is that the celebrated "Jewish lobby" won battle after battle by
simple default. A politician who supported Israel could count on the backing
of Jewish voters in his home state or district. Even if there were no Jewish
voters back home to speak of, there would always be Jewish money available
to support the campaigns of Israel's friends in Congress. The political
benefits of supporting Israel, combined with what was often a genuine
empathy for a reliable American ally and the region's only democracy, has
resulted in a U.S. foreign policy - though it has had its ups and downs -
that has generally tilted in Israel's direction for 40 years.

What's been missing from the political equation was a strong counter-veiling
force. There has never been a significant constituency that has felt as
strongly opposed to Israel as American Jews have felt in favor of Israel.
There has certainly never been an anti-Israel constituency that was
motivated enough to organize politically, form political PACs, and vote for
or against a candidate based on his or her stance on Middle East policy. Now
there is, and it is growing very rapidly and as a direct result of current
immigration policy.

According to an October, 2002, Zogby poll, half of Arab-American voters
state that Mideast policy is a "very important" consideration in determining
their vote. The feeling is most intense among the growing pool of Arab
voters who were born outside the United States, with nearly 60 percent of
that cohort assessing the Mideast conflict as "very important." The more
established, U.S.-born Arab population is heavily Christian, while Arab
immigration over the past 30 years has been predominantly Muslim. Thus, the
fastest growing segment of the Arab American electorate is the segment that
feels most intensely about and opposes U.S. policy in the Middle East. In a
report on Arab-American polling results commissioned by Abu Dhabi Television
after the 2000 elections, the Zogby Polling organization noted, "While
recent immigrant Arab-Americans, in fact, show greater intensity of concern
[about U.S. policy in the Middle East], the depth of concern of the first,
second and third generation Arab Americans is still impressive." In other
words, the Arab-American electorate is growing rapidly; the largest growth
is taking place among people who feel a deep, emotional stake in the
Arab-Israeli conflict; and the depth of that feeling remains intense even
after several generations in the United States. Additionally, Arab-American
voter participation - 62 percent in 1996, 65 percent in 2000 - is
substantially higher than that of the general population, adding even more
weight to their growing numbers.

Even after Muslims outnumber Jews in the United States, Jews are likely to
maintain a political advantage for a time by virtue of the fact that they
are well entrenched in the "old boys" network in Washington and other
centers of power. Israel will also continue to enjoy strong support from
millions of Evangelical Christians who see the Jews' return to the Holy
Land - and their continuance there - as part of the biblical prophecy that
presages the Second Coming. And not only that; the tens of thousands of
Evangelical Christians that travel regularly to Israel have also developed
warm personal relations with individual Israelis and a love for the country.
Certainly their theology is what primarily motivates them, but they also
form natural, prosaic human attachments.

The clock will eventually run out on such advantages. The fastest growing
religious group in America, Muslims are organizing politically to promote
their interests. Ironically, they often cite Jewish political organizations
as their model for wielding influence in the United States. Demography plus
money equals political power. American Jews, in a good economic year,
typically contributes about $600 million to Israel. By contrast, the Saudi
regime spends about $5 billion annually to promote "Islamization" around the
world. To further underscore the imbalance in resources, the $600 million
American Jews sent to Israel was equaled by what the Saudis spent last year
alone in Bosnia, a country of 1.5 million people. Though foreign regimes
cannot, by law, pump money into domestic U.S. political races, Saudi and
other Arab oil money can mount huge indirect campaigns aimed at influencing
U.S. public opinion and policy. Combined with a growing and highly motivated
Islamic voting bloc in the U.S., the demography + money equation will
inevitably work against strong political support for Israel.

In addition, social liberals who tend to be most supportive of open
immigration will also find that a growing, influential, and socially
conservative Muslim population is at odds with their most cherished
allegiances. Church-state separation, sacred to secular liberals, is
anathema to the Islamic clerics who run the vast majority of mosques and
religious schools in the United States. Social liberals, and no cohort in
America is more socially liberal than Jews, will also find fierce Islamist
opposition to freedom of expression, women's rights, abortion rights, and
gay rights. There is also little if any tolerance from these quarters for
speech and writings that are deemed offensive to Islam, or the Prophet. Even
if they cannot impose official censorship against blasphemers, the
experience of Salman Rushdie in Europe stands as an object lesson of the
sort of self-censorship that can occur when an offended minority group vents
its righteous indignation over words and ideas that they find highly
objectionable. The informal censorship imposed by fear of reprisal by
fanatics can be just as effective a mechanism to control free expression as
state power.

Muslim and Arab political PACs are springing up all across the country
preparing for the day when their numbers make them a force to be reckoned
with. The defeat of two strongly pro-Palestinian House members in bitterly
contested Democratic primary races in 2002 is being used as a clarion call
by Arab and Muslim American groups to redouble their political organizing
efforts. In analyzing the defeats of two black Southern Democrats, Earl
Hilliard (Alabama) and Cynthia McKinney (Georgia), James Zogby, president of
the Arab-American Institute noted that "Arab-Americans have substantial
political resources and allies and we can work to overcome the impact of
these setbacks." Prominent Arab and Muslim Americans must avoid the kind of
political "foolishness" that led a leader of the self-described "mainstream"
American Muslim Council to stand in front of the White House and declare his
support for Hamas and Hezbollah while the video cameras were rolling,
cautions Zogby. That leader, by the way, Mr. Allamoudy, is now under
indictment for laundering money for terrorist organizations.

In addition to political strength derived from their own increasing numbers,
the Arab and Palestinian cause has the backing of a coalition of aggrieved
minority groups who see themselves and Muslim Americans as victims of an
oppressive power structure. They also enjoy strong backing among foreign
policy multilateralists plus anti-globalists, like those who took to the
streets to oppose U.S. action in Iraq, who want to see international
matters - like the resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict - left to bodies
like the United Nations.

Upsetting the Status Quo
There is something analogous to religious faith among American Jews in the
Constitution as the ultimate protector of our rights and security in the
United States. Certainly the Constitution is the most enlightened governing
treatise ever devised by human beings. But in the final analysis it is still
just words on a piece of paper. Many nations have had enlightened
constitutions, expressing lofty ideals and, nevertheless, turned on the Jews
and other minorities. France is the perfect example.

What sets the United States apart from other societies in which Jews live
and have lived over the centuries is the nexus between the principles
asserted in the Constitution and the American people themselves. The
protections of the Constitution would mean nothing were it not for a
population that has believed in it, bled for it, and struggled with itself
to see to it that its principles are applied to all who live in the United
States. The Constitution has made the American people what they are, but the
American people make the Constitution a living, breathing document.

American Jews have also been blessed to live in a society where the
contagion of anti-Semitism has never been as deeply rooted or as widespread
as it is in much of the rest of the world. This is attributable to many
factors, but it is primarily a tribute to the social and cultural forces
that have shaped the nation. No country has ever been completely free of
anti-Semitism, but since the middle of the 20th century, the United States
has come as close as any society ever has.

Nevertheless, change is well underway. Unceasing large-scale immigration,
unprecedented in its magnitude and duration, is in the process of reshaping
the nation. By the middle of this century, the United States will become a
nation without a majority ethnic population, a situation that is not
necessarily problematic by itself, though it will undoubtedly represent a
challenge to social cohesion. Infinitely more worrying, strong multicultural
forces are simultaneously deconstructing in theory and in fact the ideal and
reality of a dominant, common culture, one that links Americans of all
racial, ethnic, cultural, and religious backgrounds. During this volatile
transformation period, the balance between group identity and a larger sense
of national belonging has swung decidedly in the direction of tribal
identity among many new immigrants. Many of these new cultures being
introduced to the multicultural "salad bowl" harbor long traditions of
anti-Semitism, and in the case of Muslims, are in direct conflict with Jews
over issues that command the deepest emotional allegiances of both
communities.

Perhaps this prognosis is too gloomy and it will all work itself out for the
best in the end. Perhaps the assimilative forces that liberated last century's
European immigrants from their deeply rooted anti-Semitic prejudices will
succeed in tempering the animosity of Muslim and Latin-Catholic immigrants.
But if American Jewish leaders are going to continue to support this sort of
mass immigration, or at least tacitly accept it, they must understand and
honestly acknowledge the risks. And they must stop acting like ghetto Jews
and confront the dangers of Islamism in this country openly and with
confidence. They will find their concerns, as well as their well-being, are
supported by the great majority of Americans. They can and should have
greater confidence in their Christian neighbors.

Should the day come when Jews find themselves disempowered, vulnerable, and
threatened 20 or 30 years from now in a very different America, the one
thing Jewish leaders as well as ordinary American Jews must never be allowed
to say is, "We didn't see it coming." The historical record of America's
major Jewish organizations in confronting the rise of Hitler and the
Holocaust is cause for shame; at the very least it is cause for a
considerable measure of humility and a far greater willingness to
re-evaluate long-held positions in the face of new realities.

Two stories from those terrible years suffice: in the summer of 1939, when
the St. Louis stood offshore with its desperate cargo of German-Jewish
refugees, symbolizing for all the world the plight of Jews seeking to escape
the devouring maw of Nazism, the American Jewish Committee was unable to
assemble its Executive Board to meet because the members could not be
troubled to interrupt their summer vacations. Then there was the celebrated
meeting of Jan Karski, the heroic Polish Christian officer and courier of
the Home Army (Armija Krajowka) who had been twice smuggled into the Warsaw
Ghetto, as well as the Majdanek Concentration Camp so he could see with his
own eyes and record with precision for posterity the annihilation of the
Jews of Poland, risking only his own life in doing this, but also that of
his entire family.

Those who have seen Claude Lanzmann's magisterial documentary film Shoah
will recall the elderly Karski in the film's opening sequences, a man so
overwhelmed with pain and recalled agony he can barely speak. He relates his
meeting with F.D.R. who could not be made to show the least interest in the
terrible, earth-shattering message he was bringing back from hell to the
"normal" world. What is less well-known is his equally ill-fated attempt to
deliver his message to the most prominent court Jew of the day, Supreme
Court Justice Felix Frankfurter. When Karski completed his long narrative of
what he had seen, one filled with carefully observed details in which he
concentrated on fact after fact in order not to be accused of seeking to
overwhelm with emotion, Justice Frankfurter turned to him and said, "Sir, I
do not believe a single word you are telling me."

Today's leaders of those same organizations should humbly recall this vast
historic catastrophe - as well as the total and utter failure of their
predecessors as guardians of the Jewish people - as they look at this issue,
consider the future, and ponder the choices they can evade no longer.

Dr. Stephen M. Steinlight is a Fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies.
He is also currently a Fellow at Timothy Dwight College, Yale University.
For more than six years he was the Director of National Affairs at the
American Jewish Committee and for two years served as a Senior Fellow at the
AJC. Mr. Steinlight is co-editor of Fractious Nation: Race, Class and
Culture in America at the End of the Twentieth Century,(UC Berkeley Press).

[Tani Jantsang ©]

Both Pat Buchannan and Ron Paul have said sort of the same thing about
American involvement over there being the CAUSE of all this hatred toward
the USA.

When I think of the hubris, the enormity of it - it boggles the mind.
Jewish elites, basically Frankfurt School bastards and their followers -
DID what they did to the Europeans in the USA and in Europe - a kind of
INSIDIOUS poisoning of the people that made western civilization. Our lands
get overrun, INVADED, by 3rd world garbage.

NEXT up - they want our boys to fight for ISRAEL. OH brother. I can see
why they see gentiles as goyim (cattle). The problem is, our BOYS can no
longer fight because they are too PC, too brainwashed, not in any kind of
emotional shape to do what it takes to DESTROY an enemy - thoroughly destroy
them. Meanwhile, we are DE FACTO at war with Mexico and being invaded - and
too few people have a god damned CLUE about it. Amazing.

Babe, when I say we need to get LEAVE IT TO BEAVER back - I am saying a lot
more than just something about family values. I'm saying that the ENTIRETY
of the Frankfurt School PC thought cop influence on this country has to be -
ERADICATED - this time by the roots, not just a few branches. It has to be
done in Europe too. I'm also wondering if any European people, enough of
them, still have the BALLS it would take to DO IT.

Here is a source that has nothing whatsoever to do with any "right wing"
organizations out there.

The Culture of Critique: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in
Twentieth-Century Intellectual and Political Movements, Prager, 1998,
$65.00, 379 pp. -Kevin MacDonald, Professor of Psychology at California
State University-Long Beach, CA, USA

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, and 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 of 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 Silverman:
"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 Silverman 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. Silverman 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 Brandies 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 Meade 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, changing the
environment could eliminate every inequality in achievement. 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 "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 esthetically repressive
(especially with regard to sexuality). Central to this program was creating
ethnographies do 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.
Max Horkheimer headed the organization, 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 drawning 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 psychoanalysis, 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 counter cultural 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

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 Agnail, 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 contraction, the poem welcomes to America "huddled masses
yearning to breath free/The wretched refuse of your teeming shore."

Prof. MacDonald has discovered that Jews have made implausible arguments
about diversity being a quintessentially American strength 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 multicultural 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 universalistic social
solutions would be yet another way to dissolve gentile loyalties that might
exclude Jews. The appeal of universalistic 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 Jewish ness 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 people hood 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, "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 Jewish ness 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 people hood. 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
Orthodox Jews had promoted multiculturalism or mass immigration or The
Authoritarian Personality 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 interest." 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 Hein rich 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 out compete 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 believe 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.(r)

Stanley Hornbeck is the pen name of a Washington, DC, - area businessman.

"Topaz" <mars...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9u1bg3pdrndq61ut9...@4ax.com...

[Tani Jantsang ©]

"Doug" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:yeRMi.3350$4V6...@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net...

> Duh, I'm so scared of the jews. They commit so many acts
> of terrorism. They commit countless atrocities in the name of
> God. If you love islam, move to a 7th century islamic theocracy,
> you won't have to worry about the joos there.
>

Perhaps you should be scared - and clearly get a grasp of WHY the USA is in
the insane position it's in today with regard to - EVERYTHING that's wrong.
And this has NOTHING to do with Hollywood. It is to THIS (below) that Prof.
Steinlight (a Jew) is writing to all those powerful Jewish agencies about -
and he, having been part of it, knows exactly what they did - and what kind
of clout they have. Read:

[Carl]

Topaz wrote:
> There was a book in ordinary bookstores called "An Empire of
> Their Own". It was a pro-Jewish book but it showed that the Jews ran
> Hollywood.
>
>

Actually, the title of the book is "An Empire of Their Own: How the Jews
INVENTED Hollywood". You conveniently left that out.

So, if the Jews are credited with having INVENTED Hollywood, why would you
expect them to not be the ones to RUN the business they CREATED? So what
then would be the huge revelation here?

So you think it's revealing that if you dig down into the details of a part
of past American culture that you find some racism, bigotry, class
distinction, nepotism, favoritism, what??? Was it not non-Jews that created
the slavery system in America? Did not George Washington and Thomas
Jefferson own slaves? Was it not non-Jews who killed off the native
Americans and then placed the remainder in reservations? Is it not non-Jews
running the White House even today and who are causing even conservatives
embarrassment? Is it not a guy named Trump, a non-Jew, who is the biggest
name in land development, often at the expense of the local residents? Is it
not true that there are only 3 Jews who made it this year to the Forbe's 400
List of America's Wealthiest, far less than their representative percentage
in the U.S. (2%)? Let's delve into the lives of the other 397 and see what
dirt we can dig up.

Choose any other industry and let me see you spend as much time nitpicking
that one for its dirty laundry.

[Doug]

"Tani Jantsang ©" <tjs...@spampost.com> wrote in message

news:13gbl7b...@corp.supernews.com...

>
> "Doug" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:kEgNi.4198$oA2....@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com...
>> Have you noticed the islamic terrorists have been blowing shit
>> up since Clinton's regime? And you're still worried about the
>> joos? Are you a muslim? THAT would explain a lot.
>
> You aren't grasping one crucial thing - and I've posted about it on here
> and told you what you might read to find out about it. That this anti
> American Islamic Jihadism is POST 60s. The non-violent and subtle
> "revolution" that put this country where it is right now, happened in the
> 60s.
>

So it's the joo's fault that Osama had the WTC blown up along w/US
embassies in Africa? It's the joo's fault that heads were being cut
off in Iraq? When muslims chant death to america it's because of
the joos? It's not islam, it's the joos?

[Doug]

South Park had a great episode on anti-semitic tourette's syndrome just
last night.

Here's a clue for you, the greatest problem in Europe today isn't the
joos, it's islam. That's why the organization SIOE (Stop the Islamization
of Europe) was formed. Your puerile attempt to deflect criticism of islam
by attempting to blame the joos is just so much BS.

If you love islam, move back to your third world, 7th century islamic
theocracy and don't forget to pack your burkha.

"Tani Jantsang ©" <tjs...@spampost.com> wrote in message

news:13gbnr2...@corp.supernews.com...

[Doug]

"Tani Jantsang ©" <tjs...@spampost.com> wrote in message

news:13gbmhg...@corp.supernews.com...

>
> NEXT up - they want our boys to fight for ISRAEL. OH brother. I can see
> why they see gentiles as goyim (cattle). The problem is, our BOYS can no
> longer fight because they are too PC, too brainwashed, not in any kind of
> emotional shape to do what it takes to DESTROY an enemy - thoroughly
> destroy them. Meanwhile, we are DE FACTO at war with Mexico and being
> invaded - and too few people have a god damned CLUE about it. Amazing.
>
> Babe, when I say we need to get LEAVE IT TO BEAVER back - I am saying a
> lot more than just something about family values. I'm saying that the
> ENTIRETY of the Frankfurt School PC thought cop influence on this country
> has to be - ERADICATED - this time by the roots, not just a few branches.
> It has to be done in Europe too. I'm also wondering if any European
> people, enough of them, still have the BALLS it would take to DO IT.
>

Maybe you should read up on current events in Europe. Europe isn't worried
about the joos anymore, they're worried about the muslim bastards who are
blowing up trains and not only threatening people in the name of islam
(ever heard of a fatwah?) but killing people in the name of islam (look up
Theodore Van Gogh).

Are you a muslim? I'm betting you are. All your "Leave it to Beaver" crap
is just an attempt to hide the fact you're a mudslum.

[Tani Jantsang©]

"Doug" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote in message

news:0YuNi.734$y21...@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net...

I suggest you ask Pat Buchannan to answer that for you. I already posted a
summary of MacDonald's book - and I posted Jewish Prof. Steinlight's letter
to these organizations that were crucial to the change in our immigration
policy - and in our foreign policy. Ask Pat Buchannan and he might tell
you. You might also glean that from simply reading Pat's books.

[Tani Jantsang©]

"Doug" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote in message

news:i7vNi.736$y21...@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net...

Lord have mercy - I know all about the CURRENT problems. But these CURRENT
problems had a start - a cause. What I gave you from MacDonald, which you
snipped out - is THE CAUSE. Obviously, Mark Levin is NOT one of the people
in these orgs MacDonald is referring to. Obviously, Professor Steinlight,
who used to be when them, is not either - he's now begging them to REVERSE
themselves on: IMMIGRATION. Why can't you simply see this? I'm not trying
to derail any points - and this is simply a usenet newsgroup, nothing more.
I'm simply showing the CAUSE of the troubles that the USA AND Europe are in
RIGHT NOW. The CAUSE. And sure, it's backfiring on Jews that supported it
for so many decades against the well-being of European culture. SURE it's
backfiring - that's what Steinlight is SAYING - duh!

>
> Are you a muslim? I'm betting you are. All your "Leave it to Beaver" crap
> is just an attempt to hide the fact you're a mudslum.

I'm not a Muslim. Are you a Jew? You probably are. I agree with Pat
Buchannan - ENTIRELY - on this issue. Is HE a Muslim? Now you are stooping
to the kinds of tactics illegals use when they accuse anti illegals of being
racist. Bad boy.

I sincerely HOPE that Hitler-type people, as STRONG as that I mean - ready
to DO whatever it takes, rise up in European countries and FIX the problems
in 1 year. I want to live to see this. And then, after the Islamic and
illegal problems get FIXED there - heh heh - they have to ENSURE that this
kind of shit can never happen again. Same here. Oh yes, Pat Buchannan
knows ALL about the CAUSE of all European troubles right now. So does Kevin
MacDonald - but you SNIPPED IT OUT. Why did you snip the MacDonald
information out?

I shall REPOST it.

I will add that some cultures can assimilate and blend in very well. My
husband is German and Italian - that's a blend. I'm Slavic (Catholics) and
Tatar (Lamaists) - and that's a blend. We are married. Some cultures and
some ethnic groups will not blend and can not blend - and they SHOULD be
kept out. And SO WHAT if it's "racist." Who cares. Ban the god damned
word. I would.

I'll repost what you conveniently SNIPPED OUT because this man is ALSO not a
Muslim. And neither is Pat who knows everything MacDonald knows. Pat knows
the CAUSE of our current troubles, the CAUSE of Europe's current troubles.
Sure, deal with the immediate infection - but definitely, when that's dealt
with, eradicate the CAUSE of the infection too. Then innoculate everyone
against it forever more.

[Tani Jantsang©]

"Doug" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote in message

news:n3vNi.735$y21...@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net...

> South Park had a great episode on anti-semitic tourette's syndrome just
> last night.

Nice cop out.

>
> Here's a clue for you, the greatest problem in Europe today isn't the
> joos, it's islam. That's why the organization SIOE (Stop the Islamization
> of Europe) was formed. Your puerile attempt to deflect criticism of islam
> by attempting to blame the joos is just so much BS.

And how did Islamization GET TO BE a problem there - or illegals get to be a
problem here? That's what you are digging your head in the sand about. Pat
Buchannan knows the same things I know.

>
> If you love islam, move back to your third world, 7th century islamic
> theocracy and don't forget to pack your burkha.

Your purile attempt to link me with Islamics when I said the SAME THINGS Pat
Buchannan has said - is pathetic. That's like doing exactly what the
illegals do - by trying to pull a switcheroo. It won't work.

Yes, our problem right now is illegals and Islamics and Europe's problem
right
now IS ISLAM - and illegals. But HOW did that GET TO BE a problem? I just
told you. If you insist on remaining ignorant about it - fine. Pat
Buchannan is highly informed about the exact things I tried to tell you.

Yes indeed, Europe MUST deal with the Islamic invasion - by any means
necessary. They might need a Hitler to fix what's wrong there. So be it.
But when that's all ironed out, Europeans must ensure that this kind of
subverting of their PEOPLE - NEVER HAPPENS AGAIN.

[Tani Jantsang©]

If these Jews, not just those in Hollywood, but them too - did as Prof.
Steinlight is begging them to do - we would END our illegal problem in one
year. That fast. They'd be GONE - and Moslems, whether or not they were
born here or not - would be KICKED OUT.

But what does Hollywood give us? Jericho - a really good sci fi type show -
except that the bad buys that nuked the USA are - HOMELAND SECURITY, for
shit's sakes. What the fuck is that? Heh, it's HOLLYWOOD where everything
white and male and Christian is EVIL. Get it?

If the same organizations that managed to sabotage our immigration policy in
the 60s were to REVERSE
themselves tomorrow - we wouldn't have to bombard anyone with faxes or
letters. It would get fixed.

MORE should go in with Mark Levin and Steinlight. But so far, they are
STILL afraid of the "potential nazis" in the European-Christian
organizations.

"Carl" <crot...@NOSPAMoptonline.net> wrote in message
news:sYsNi.408$zs2...@newsfe12.lga...

[Carl]

Topaz wrote:
> Here is a typical example of what Jews do:
>
> JEWISH PRESSURE FROM PRO-ISRAELI LOBBY LEADS TO
> CANCELLATION OF RICHMOND MEETING
>
> Richmond, Virginia, February 19, 2003 E.U.R.O. National President
> David Duke was scheduled to speak this Saturday, February 22nd
> on the dangers of our pro-Israeli foreign policy and the coming war
> against Iraq. Due to threats from Jewish terrorist promising
> violence, and from what the hotel representative Sabrina Young
> described as pressure from almost every Rabbi in town, the
> Sheraton Richmond West Hotel (6624 West Broad Street)
> canceled Saturday's event.
>
> One of the groups applying pressure is the Jewish Defense
> Organization, an organization with ties to domestic terrorism.
>
> This is un-American and shows how the Israeli lobby and their
> fanatical supporters will use any means to silence critics, said
>

Are you talking about the David Duke whose ideology is white supremacy and
anti-semitism and whose affiliations are with the KKK and the National
Association for the Advancement of White People?

And you think it's "un-American" to be able to protest against such an
individual, to exert whatever influence you have to prevent him from
appearing? That's patently ridiculous.

David Duke is not a "critic" but a virulent self-pronounced anti-semite and
white supremacist. It is as American as can be for people of any type to
lobby against those who advocate violence and bigotry against others, just
as people in NYC rallied recently to try to get Columbia U. from hosting
Amadinejad.

As another point of fact, I don't believe the Jewish Defense Organization
has ever been implicated in any acts of "domestic terrorism" as you are
attempting to imply. Contrary to your assertion, the "JDO has had actual
patrols of synagogues, and Jewish cemetaries,marches against assorted
anti-semites...", and that's all they do.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Defense_Organization

[Carl]

Doug wrote:
> "Tani Jantsang Š" <tjs...@spampost.com> wrote in message

Doug, I don't want to hurt your feelings, but Tani is correct about this.
The facts are as such: At the General Jew Meeting of April, 2001, it was
decided by the Joint Jews of Staff that the US embassies in Africa had to be
blown up. So we instructed our Muslim brethren to go into action. They
complied reluctantly, but under the threat of force they succumbed. In
addition, I have to confess that we also instructed the 25,000 Jews living
in Iraq to coerce Iraqis to cut each others' heads off. This was
accomplished through the pressure of sheer overwhelming numbers. We also
instructed Muslims to chant Death to America. It's all part of the overall
plot which is moving along so well. The part that gets a belly laugh out of
me is how we orchestrated the deaths of 6M of our own people in order to
capture world sympathy for awhile! What a bunch of softies, eh? We were
going to do it again, but then we realized there'd be none of us left! Ha!
How silly of us.

He's right about the '60's too. We invented rock n roll music and the hippy
sub-culture, along with all those pesky anti-viet-nam protests just to screw
up the country. Jimi Hendrix, CSNY, Bob Dylan were all hired by the Jews to
help us create this atmosphere (by golly, Dylan WAS a Jew, wasn't he? Damn,
I forgot. We didn't have to pay him at all.). The pot smoking wasn't our
idea though, but some gentile threw that in as an extra added touch. And
Timothy Leary with his LSD! Man, who could have asked for more help than
that!

So don't be too hard on Tani. His thinking is clear and objective and he
doesn't yet have all his facts together but he's on the right track, seeing
through the whole plot and all.

[Topaz]

Jews say that being "anti-Semitic" is a terrible crime. Do they say
being "anti-Arab" is a terrible crime? What about "anti-Christian", or
"anti-German"? Of course the Jews think
they are special. Any other group could be our enemy, but not the
Jews, they say. The Jews tell us the Arabs are our enemies. The
Jewish controlled media tells us that the Jews are America's only
friend in the Middle East. The truth is that before the Jews America
didn't have any enemies in the Middle East.

Americans had a revolution when they were ruled by the British. If
the British accused
them of being "anti-British" would the Americans throw down their guns
and apologize?
Now that America is ruled by the Jews it is no insult to be called
"anti-Semite". The insult is that they think we care about their self
serving verbiage.

The Jewish controlled media said the French were "cheese eating
surrender monkeys". Why can't the French howl "anti-French" like the
Jews howl "anti-Semite"? Because the French don't control the media,
Jews do.

This is what President Nixon said:

http://www.hnn.us/comments/15664.html

"There may be some truth in that if the Arabs have some complaints
about my policy towards Israel, they have to realize that the Jews in
the U.S. control the entire information and propaganda machine, the
large newspapers, the motion pictures, radio and television, and the
big companies. And there is a force that we have to take into
consideration."

[Imam Contemptus Mundi]

In article <13gdgcq...@corp.supernews.com>,
"Tani Jantsang©" <tjs...@spampost.com> wrote:

Poor Doug, while I feel certain that he is well-intentioned, there are
none so blind as those who refuse to see.

Doug, have you ever wondered why Jews have been rejected from just about
every European country over the last millennium? Doesn't that interest
you?

Imam

Imam
--
If you're not pissed off, you're not paying attention.

[Tani Jantsang©]

"Carl" <crot...@NOSPAMoptonline.net> wrote in message

news:O5BNi.3$31...@newsfe12.lga...

> Doug wrote:
>> "Tani Jantsang Š" <tjs...@spampost.com> wrote in message
>> news:13gbl7b...@corp.supernews.com...
>>>

Hey Carl, EAT this - pray tell, WHO is Steinlight writing to? Clue: NOT
Hollywood.

Dr. Stephen M. Steinlight

(extended version)

their raison d'ętre, a criticism they are beginning to hear from a rising

in their support for Israel, it would be naďve to believe that American

[Tani Jantsang©]

"Imam Contemptus Mundi" <im...@divinepraxeology.org> wrote in message
news:imam-DF1407.2...@news.motzarella.org...

He doesn't want to know the cause of the problems Europeans have today.
Steinlight's letter is precious. I HOPE TO GOD these same Jews, so
terrified of "Euro potential nazis" listen to him and see the danger - the
REAL danger to them from the Latinos and Islamics that Steinlight mentions -
and switch around what they promoted. IF THEY DID this, we'd be done with
illegals in 1 year. Guaranteed. These orgs are very powerful. The problem
is, as MacDonald explains, their FEAR of Europeans is justified and imo,
it's almost innate with them after so long. They need to look in the mirror
and realize that THEY TOO - are WHITE - and that's how everyone non-white
sees Jews - as WHITES. Steinlight addresses all this.

When I mention the enormity of it all, I MEAN that Europe might be finished,
the people there might be finished. Buchannan clearly sees this too and
addresses it. HOW DID THIS HAPPEN? That's what Doug maybe doesn't want to
know.

Sure, it's irrelevent on the surface to the illegal problems we have here
today - and in Europe - but so long as these Jewish organizations are
AGAINST the Europeans - these problems are NEVER going to go away - and
that's just the plain fact of it. It's not going to go away. IMAGINE the
ACLU taking on Big Bad Homeland Security. Imagine it. I can't. I'm
amazed.

I'd like to know why MILLIONS of citizens are not out there at these
rallies - in the streets. The brainwashing is SO damned subtle with them -
yet SO obvious to me. They are SO afraid to be called racist or nazi.

It's almost like what I'd call SPIRITUAL war that was waged here and in
Europe.

[Imam Contemptus Mundi]

In article <13ge1j9...@corp.supernews.com>,
"Tani Jantsang©" <tjs...@spampost.com> wrote:

While Steinlight does ask whether it's time for Jews to reevaluate
immigration, he only acts out of Jewish interest. Is it good for the
Jews to lower immigration now? In my book, that makes him a p.o.s.
anyways, and it's probably too little too late.

Jews will be lumped in as whites when TSHTF. When all of these jealous
minorities use their collective political clout to work against whites,
Jews will be treated like any other whites.

As far as Arab/Muslim immigration is concerned, I don't think they
counted on very much immigration from them, or at least them gaining any
substantial political clout, else they wouldn't have championed liberal
immigration as they did. This will surely come back to bite them in
their collective asses.

>
> When I mention the enormity of it all, I MEAN that Europe might be finished,
> the people there might be finished. Buchannan clearly sees this too and
> addresses it. HOW DID THIS HAPPEN? That's what Doug maybe doesn't want to
> know.
>
> Sure, it's irrelevent on the surface to the illegal problems we have here
> today - and in Europe - but so long as these Jewish organizations are
> AGAINST the Europeans - these problems are NEVER going to go away - and
> that's just the plain fact of it. It's not going to go away. IMAGINE the
> ACLU taking on Big Bad Homeland Security. Imagine it. I can't. I'm
> amazed.
>
> I'd like to know why MILLIONS of citizens are not out there at these
> rallies - in the streets. The brainwashing is SO damned subtle with them -
> yet SO obvious to me. They are SO afraid to be called racist or nazi.

It doesn't help that even to this day, over 60 years after WW2 has
ended, there is STILL a constant barrage WW2 movies, documentaries,
books, etc. harping on the evils of nationalism and racial identity and
the suffering of the Jews. It is never out of the public's conscience,
and so who would dare to be accused of continuing such politics today?

Americans, and whites in particular, are so cowed by the "racist" and
"nazi" labels that they are paralyzed against even acting in their own
self-interest. Never mind that Americans, and whites in particular, died
by the hundreds of thousands to help the Jews, and that Americans to
this day are the main supporters and financiers of the little ethnic
nation of Israel. Jewish interest groups, once again, are biting the
hand that feeds them when they attack whites who also have an ethnic
self-interest. Not ALL Jews, mind you, but "organized" Jewry. There are
some very enlightened Jews, like Michael Levin and Norman Finklestein,
but there are too few of them.

>
> It's almost like what I'd call SPIRITUAL war that was waged here and in
> Europe.

Indeed.

[Tani Jantsang©]

"Imam Contemptus Mundi" <im...@divinepraxeology.org> wrote in message

news:imam-69AF77.0...@news.motzarella.org...

What is a p.o.s.? OH, I know what he's saying, and why and he's pretty open
about all that - he ADMITS it. I read it all very very carefully (printed
it out, did not read it online). The curious thing is that ALL of what
MacDonald exposed (at this stage of the game, it's almost funny) I knew back
in the late 60s and early 70s - and I knew it FROM JEWS that hated what was
going on. I knew even a whole lot more from one that was in the ADL for
years. He said it in the late 80s: it's all going to backfire. He cut off
relations with them. What's good about MacDonald is that there are no Jews
denying any of it, or arguing with him. He got HIS info from them, too.
His first two books would make you love Jews, by the way. But after
researching the 3rd book, he got PISSED - and hoo boy, with some of what he
wrote after that, it definitely shows that he's pissed. He wrote "Stalin's
Willing Executioners" which I posted on here, the entire text. As far as I
know, it's not copyrighted. It was on a website or something - or maybe in
pdf. YEAH, it was in pdf.

What amazed me, heh, was how naive MacDonald was. Didn't he know that if
the KKK and neo Nazis see this book that they'd love it? No, he had no
clue. That deserves a LMAO. Of course, as soon as THOSE groups start to
praise his book, the powers that control the media use that to smear
MacDonald. He's holding pretty damned firm, so far. Imo, the neo Nazis and
KKK go way too far. They might not like ME - and therefore, I can not like
THEM. Self preservation. They need to get a grasp that just like some
Europeans are anti European - some Jews are PRO European. It's not an all
100% thing at all.

>
> Jews will be lumped in as whites when TSHTF. When all of these jealous
> minorities use their collective political clout to work against whites,
> Jews will be treated like any other whites.

I know that. Jews that hated what was going on hated it for that very
reason - they suffered! They were truly caught between a rock and a hard
place. And always worried that - surely, non-Jews are going to eventually
figure this out and get - PISSED. Well, imo, not ENOUGH have found out -
YET. Buchannan knows :) His career was ruined by these people with their
clout.

>
> As far as Arab/Muslim immigration is concerned, I don't think they
> counted on very much immigration from them, or at least them gaining any
> substantial political clout, else they wouldn't have championed liberal
> immigration as they did. This will surely come back to bite them in
> their collective asses.

Oh, you bet it will. Arabs are coming here and DOING the same thing these
Jews did - they know the tactics. Here it is tho. Doug and others on here
moaning about the Mudslums in Europe. Just what would happen IF Europeans
converted to Islam? It's not hard to do, btw. It's super easy. Their
civilization wouldn't vanish at all, they'd still DO what they do. There
are heaps of Islamic countries that are very secular. Is America secular?
How about the evangelicals - are they secular? This rise in religious
extremism is on both sides - and it's ALL political. The ADL watched the
rise in evangelism - and there is a direct equasion with evangie rising
along with the PC-ization of standard religions. One is the result of the
other - a reaction to it. The ADL KNOWS this. So they monitor
evangelicals. They already ruined Buchannan - smeared him as a nazi and
anti semite. He didn't say ANYTHING like that in the book that provoked
this. But everyone heard their smear. Very few have read his books. You
see? Yes, you DO see. They are NOT monitoring these non-white
organizations that are extremely racist - and talking genocide.

>
>>
>> When I mention the enormity of it all, I MEAN that Europe might be
>> finished,
>> the people there might be finished. Buchannan clearly sees this too and
>> addresses it. HOW DID THIS HAPPEN? That's what Doug maybe doesn't want
>> to
>> know.
>>
>> Sure, it's irrelevent on the surface to the illegal problems we have here
>> today - and in Europe - but so long as these Jewish organizations are
>> AGAINST the Europeans - these problems are NEVER going to go away - and
>> that's just the plain fact of it. It's not going to go away. IMAGINE
>> the
>> ACLU taking on Big Bad Homeland Security. Imagine it. I can't. I'm
>> amazed.
>>
>> I'd like to know why MILLIONS of citizens are not out there at these
>> rallies - in the streets. The brainwashing is SO damned subtle with
>> them -
>> yet SO obvious to me. They are SO afraid to be called racist or nazi.
>
> It doesn't help that even to this day, over 60 years after WW2 has
> ended, there is STILL a constant barrage WW2 movies, documentaries,
> books, etc. harping on the evils of nationalism and racial identity and
> the suffering of the Jews. It is never out of the public's conscience,
> and so who would dare to be accused of continuing such politics today?

Well, I have nothing against those politics. I don't care WHO calls me a
name. :) I have more balls than all of these people put together - and I
don't even literally HAVE balls, lol. Look how they pounce on that guy that
posts something from David Duke. Duke was a Senator here - fairly elected.
"Birth of a Nation" was a standard American film of the time, praised by
the news at the time. Everyone could relate to it at the time. Nothing has
changed. People relate to it with their FEET, instead of with their mouths.
The Left promotes and praises nationalism and racism in non-white people all
the time. Once upon a time, everyone from Churchill on, KNEW what the
Bolshevik revolution was - and WHO did it. That's been forgotten because
the MEDIA doesn't play it up. These people are slaves to the MEDIA and
those that control the media know it. The people that condemn David Duke
would probably also condemn Andrew Jackson.

>
> Americans, and whites in particular, are so cowed by the "racist" and
> "nazi" labels that they are paralyzed against even acting in their own
> self-interest.

I know that. I just can't quite figure out WHY names would cow them. I
really don't get it. Maybe I can't understand it.

Never mind that Americans, and whites in particular, died
> by the hundreds of thousands to help the Jews, and that Americans to
> this day are the main supporters and financiers of the little ethnic
> nation of Israel. Jewish interest groups, once again, are biting the
> hand that feeds them when they attack whites who also have an ethnic
> self-interest. Not ALL Jews, mind you, but "organized" Jewry. There are
> some very enlightened Jews, like Michael Levin and Norman Finklestein,
> but there are too few of them.

I know. You know. Watch out, lol - someone might flame you for saying
that. I just sit back here and watch those that tried to flame me for
saying it - I watch them PLAY the same fucking game that the illegals and
their allies play. I see how infected they are. They are LOST. "Am I a
Muslim," they ask. LMAO. I'm marginally Lamaist, I guess. Marginally.
I'm a big SCI FI fan and science fan. I can take or leave religion of any
kind, tho I think Catholic songs are incredibly beautiful, the most
beautiful. Do they really think that saying that to me is going to cow me
(like THEY are cowed) or intimidate me? LMAO. I'm not quite made of the
same stuff they are made of. I know what I know - nothing can dissuade me
from it, no intimidation can work on me. I am not a person that lives in
fear. I think what I think, and I have no problem saying it. Let someone
call me anti Jewish and HA - I found out all of what I know about this FROM
JEWS, from one of them in the ADL for shit's sakes. I could care less.

I agree with Buchanan, who was called a nazi and anti semite for saying that
America should never have permanent alliances with anyone - and that FDR
plotting with Churchill to manoever the US into ww2 was a BIG mistake. It
was. Hitler had NO plans to attack the west at all. Churchill might be
said to have been the BIGGEST traitor against all things European and
Western that ever lived. He went and made war with Germany over the
bullshit with Poland. I agree with the old "America First" people,
Linbergh's group. They also got slandered thru the roof, their lives
ruined. They got smeared as fascist supporters and 5th columists - only
later we found out that FDR had Soviet agents in his own government, LOL.
What a fiasco. We need to get back to the Monroe Doctrine.

ALL of this preceeds the current problems in Europe with Moslems and the
current problems with illgals and a lot of other stuff right here. It's the
cause of ALL of it. The ROOT. These people on here mostly are griping
about the mere branches.

>
>>
>> It's almost like what I'd call SPIRITUAL war that was waged here and in
>> Europe.
>
> Indeed.

My new favorite statement, I made it:

--
When dealing bacteria, you deal with the immediate infection.
When that's dealt with, you eradicate the CAUSE of the infection.
Then you innoculate everyone against it forever more.
Nations are like bodies.
They can be infected, too.
Using the same methods is a good idea.

[Topaz]

On Fri, 5 Oct 2007 11:43:20 -0400, "Carl"
<crot...@NOSPAMoptonline.net> wrote:

>Actually, the title of the book is "An Empire of Their Own: How the Jews
>INVENTED Hollywood". You conveniently left that out.
>
>So, if the Jews are credited with having INVENTED Hollywood, why would you
>expect them to not be the ones to RUN the business they CREATED? So what
>then would be the huge revelation here?

It's bad to have Jews making the movies because they were the ones
behind Communism:

Article Winston Churchill wrote in 1920:
"This movement amongst the Jews (the Russian Revolution) is not new.
From the days of Spartacus Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down
to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kuhn (Hungary), Rosa Luxembourg (Germany)
and Emma Goldman (United States), this world wide conspiracy for the
overthrow of civilization and the reconstruction of society on the
basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible
equality, has been steadily growing. It played, as a modern writer,
Mrs. Nesta Webster, has so ably shown, a definitely recognizable part
in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of
every subversive movement during the Nineteenth Century; and now at
last this band of extraordinary personalities has gripped the Russian
people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the
undisputed masters of that enormous empire. There is no need to
exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the
actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution by these international
and for the most part atheistic Jews. Moreover, the principal
inspiration and driving power comes from Jewish leaders." (ibid)

Lev Trotzky wrote a book called "Stalin: An Appraisal of the Man and
His Influence", Harper Bros., New York and London, 1941, translated by
Charles Malamuth.
In this book he told who the principle members of the October Central
Committee were. This group was the leadership of the Bolshevik Party
during the October Revolution. This is what he wrote:
"In view of the Party's semi-legality the names of persons elected by
secret ballot were not announced at the Congress, with the exception
of the four who had received the largest number of votes. Lenin--133
out of a possible 134, Zinoviev--132, Kamenev--131, Trotzky--131."
Of these four top leaders of the Bolshevik Party the last three were
known Jews. Lenin was thought to be a gentile married to a Jewess. It
was later proven that he was one quarter Jewish, London Jewish
Chronicle April 21, 1995, Lenin: Life and Legacy.
David Francis, the American Ambassador to Russia at the time of the
Revolution, wrote:
"The Bolshevic leaders here, most of whom are Jews and 90 percent of
whom are returned exiles, care little for Russia or any other country
but are internationalists and they are trying to start a world-wide
revolution."
The Director of British Intelligence to the U.S. Secretary of State
wrote this:
"There is now definite evidence that Bolshevism is an international
movement controlled by Jews."
In 1945 the FBI arrested six individuals for stealing 1700 highly
confidential documents from State Department files. This was the
Amerasia case they were:
Philip Jaffe, a Russian Jew who came to the U.S. in 1905. He was at
one time the editor of the communist paper "Labor Defense" and the
ringleader of the group arrested.
Andrew Roth, a Jew.
Mark Gayn, a Jew, changed his name from Julius Ginsberg.
John Service, a gentile.
Emmanuel Larsen, nationality unknown
Kate Mitchel, nationality unknown.
In 1949 the Jewess Judith Coplin was caught passing classified
documents from Justice Department files to a Russian agent.
The highest ranking communist brought to trial in the U.S. was Gerhart
Eisler. He was a Jew. He was the secret boss of the Communist Party
in the U.S. and commuted regularly between the U.S. and Russia.
In 1950 there was the "Hollywood Ten" case. Ten leading film writers
of the Hollywood Film Colony were convicted for contempt of Congress
and sentenced to prison. Nine of the ten were Jews. Six of the ten
were communist party members and the other four were flagrantly
pro-communist.
One of the top new stories of 1949 was the trial of Eugene Dennis and
the Convicted Eleven. This group comprised the National Secretariat of
the American Communist Party. Six were Jews, two gentiles, three
nationality unknown.
Also in 1949 the German-born atomic scientist Klaus Fuchs was
convicted for passing atomic secrets to the Russians. Acting on
information obtained from Fuchs the FBI arrested nine other members of
the ring. All of them were convicted. Eight of the nine were Jews.
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 book "Soviet Russia and the Jews" by Gregor Aronson and published
by the American Jewish League Against Communism, quotes Stalin in an
interview in 1931 with the Jewish Telegraph Agency. Stalin said:
"...Communists cannot be anything but outspoken enemies of
Anti-Semitism. We fight anti-Semites by the strongest methods in the
Soviet Union. Active anti-Semites are punished by death under the
law."
The following quotes are taken directly from documents available from
the
U.S. Archives:
State Department document 861.00/1757 sent May 2, 1918 by U.S. consul
general in Moscow, Summers: "Jews prominent in local Soviet
government, anti-Jewish feeling growing among population...."
State Department document 861.00/2205 was sent from Vladivostok on
July 5, 1918 by U.S. consul Caldwell: "Fifty percent of Soviet
government in each town consists of Jews of the worst type."
From the Headquarters of the American Expeditionary Forces, Siberia on
March 1, 1919, comes this telegram from Omsk by Chief of Staff, Capt.
Montgomey Shuyler: "It is probably unwise to say this loudly in the
United States but the Bolshevik movement is and has been since it's
beginning, guided and controlled by Russian Jews of the greasiest
type" type."
A second Schuyler telegram, dated June 9, 1919 from Vladivostok,
reports on the make-up of the presiding Soviet government: "...(T)here
were 384 'commissars' including 2 negroes, 13 Russians, 15 Chinamen,
22 Armenians, AND MORE THAN 300 JEWS. Of the latter number, 264 had
come to Russia from the United States since the downfall of the
Imperial Government.
The Netherlands' ambassador in Russia, Oudendyke, confirmed this:
"Unless Bolshevism is nipped in the bud immediately, it is bound to
spread in one form or another over Europe and the whole world as it is
organized and worked by Jews who have no nationality, and whose one
object is to destroy for their own ends the existing order of things."
"The Bolshevik revolution in Russia was the work of Jewish brains, of
Jewish dissatisfaction, of Jewish planning, whose goal is to create a
new order in the world. What was performed in so excellent a way in
Russia, thanks to Jewish brains, and because of Jewish dissatisfaction
and by Jewish planning, shall also, through the same Jewish mental an
physical forces, become a reality all over the world." (The American
Hebrew, September 10, 1920
"In the Bolshevik era, 52 percent of the membership of the Soviet
communist party was Jewish, though Jews comprised only 1.8 percent of
the total population." (Stuart Kahan, The Wolf of the Kremlin, p. 81)
Interestingly, one of the first acts by the Bolsheviks was to make
so-called "anti-Semitism" a capital crime. This is confirmed by Stalin
himself:
"National and racial chauvinism is a vestige of the misanthropic
customs characteristic of the period of cannibalism. Anti-semitism, as
an extreme form of racial chauvinism, is the most dangerous vestige of
cannibalism...under USSR law active anti-Semites are liable to the
death penalty." (Stalin, Collected Works, vol. 13, p. 30).

Here is a quote from Mein Kampf:
"Making an effort to overcome my natural reluctance, I tried to read
articles of this nature published in the Marxist Press; but in doing
so my aversion increased all the more. And then I set about learning
something of the people who wrote and published this mischievous
stuff. From the publisher downwards, all of them were Jews. I
recalled to mind the names of the public leaders of Marxism, and then
I realized that most of them belonged to the Chosen Race- the Social
Democratic representatives in the Imperial Cabinet as well as the
secretaries if the Trades Unions and the street agitators. Everywhere
the same sinister picture presented itself. I shall never forget the
row of names- Austerlitz, David, Adler, Ellonbogen, and others. One
fact became quite evident to me. It was that this alien race held in
its hands the leadership of that Social Democratic Party with whose
minor representatives I had been disputing for months past."
Solzhenitsyn named in his book the six top administrators of the
Soviet death camps. All six of them were Jews.
Here is something the National Socialists wrote:
"The Soviet Union was in fact a paradise for one group: the Jews. Even
at times when for foreign policy reasons Jews were less evident in the
government, or when they ruled through straw men, the Jews were always
visible in the middle and lower levels of the administration."

>
>So you think it's revealing that if you dig down into the details of a part
>of past American culture that you find some racism, bigotry, class
>distinction, nepotism, favoritism, what??? Was it not non-Jews that created
>the slavery system in America?

Blacks and Jews Newspage
http://www.blacksandjews.com/

The following Jews were known dealers, owners, shippers or supporters
of
the slave trade and of the enslavement of Black African citizens in
early New York history.

Issack Asher
Jacob Barsimson
Joseph Bueno
Solomon Myers Cohen
Jacob Fonseca
Aberham Franckfort
Jacob Franks
Daniel Gomez
David Gomez
Isaac Gomez
Lewis Gomez
Mordecai Gomez
Rebekah Gomez
Ephraim Hart
Judah Hays
Harmon Hendricks
Uriah Hendricks
Uriah Hyam
Abraham Isaacs
Joshua Isaacs
Samuel Jacobs
Benjamin S. Judah
Cary Judah
Elizabeth Judah
Arthur Levy
Eleazar Levy
Hayman Levy
Isaac H. Levy
Jacob Levy
Joseph Israel Levy
Joshua Levy
Moses Levy
Uriah Phillips Levy
Isaac R. Marques
Moses Michaels
(E)Manuel Myers
Seixas Nathan
Simon Nathan
Rodrigo Pacheco
David Pardo
Isaac Pinheiro
Rachel Pinto
Morris Jacob Raphall
Abraham Sarzedas
Moses Seixas
Solomon Simpson
Nathan Simson
Simja De Torres
Benjamin Wolf
Alexander Zuntz

Jewish Role in Slavery: Quotes from Jewish historians
Moshe Kahan stated bluntly that in 1653-1658, "Jewish-Marrano
merchants were in control of the Spanish and Portuguese [slave] trade,
were almost in control of the Levantine trade...were interested in the
Dutch East and West Indian companies, were heavily involved in
shipping; and, most important, had at their disposal large amounts of
capital."
Lee M. Friedman, a one-time president of the American Jewish
Historical Society, wrote that in Brazil, where most of the Africans
actually went, "the bulk of the slave trade was in the hands of Jewish
settlers."
Herbert I. Bloom wrote that "the slave trade was one of the most
important Jewish activities here (in Surinam) as elsewhere in the
colonies." He even published a 1707 list of Jewish buyers by name with
the number of Black humans they purchased.
Cecil Roth, writer of 30 books and hundreds of articles on Jewish
history, wrote that the slave revolts in parts of South America "were
largely directed against [Jews] as being the greatest slave-holders of
the region."
Seymour B. Liebman in his New World Jewry, made it clear that "[t]he
ships were not only owned by Jews, but were manned by Jewish crews and
sailed under the command of Jewish captains."
In Brazil, where most black slaves were sent, Jewish scholar Arnold
Wiznitzer is most explicit about Jewish involvement:
"Besides their important position in the sugar industry and in tax
farming, [Jews] dominated the slave trade. From 1636 to 1645 a total
of 23,163 Negro slaves arrived from Africa and were sold for 6,714,423
florins. The West India Company, which monopolized imports of slaves
from Africa, sold slaves at public auctions against cash payment. It
happened that cash was mostly in the hands of Jews. The buyers who
appeared at the auctions were almost always Jews, and because of this
lack of competitors they could buy slaves at low prices. On the other
hand, there also was no competition in the selling of the slaves to
the plantation owners and other buyers, and most of them purchased on
credit payable at the next harvest in sugar. Profits up to 300 percent
of the purchase value were often realized with high interest
rates....If it happened that the date of such an auction fell on a
Jewish holiday the auction had to be postponed. This occurred on
Friday, October 21, 1644."

> Did not George Washington and Thomas
>Jefferson own slaves? Was it not non-Jews who killed off the native
>Americans and then placed the remainder in reservations?

Question: did Neanderthal man deserve to be eliminated by cro magnon
man? Probably not [I believe most literature attributes their
extinction at least in part to the encroachment of cro magnon into
their territories]. But we don't judge what apparently was the
natural sequence of events that lead us to...well... what we are
today. My point is that I keep hearing this argument about the native
American over and over and over ad infintum until my brain seems about
to burst. Whatever judgments we cast upon the situation today, much
of which has been a profound orchestration in the last few decades to
usher in multiculturism [by diminishing euro influence and settlement
of the world]...one simple fact screams out that we should all
consider. What else would a sane person imagine would happen when a
stone age culture comes into contact with a culture on the verge of
industrialization and exploding technology?
Let's get rid of this guilt trip baggage that we seem so obsessed with
today [what...over a hundred or more years after the fact] and realize
'IT WAS IN THE CARDS' that any stone age culture was going to vanish.
Perhaps we should consider what it might have been like if Ghingas
Kahn had showed up on American shores before Europeans. Oh, and let's
keep proper perspective on this 'ennobling' thingy, and realize how
'political it really is' when you study the true harshness of the way
of life such Native American culture engendered.
Who got a hold of our education institutions...wow have they done a
number on us. They took all the white hats away from us and handed
them our competitors.

tooly

> Is it not non-Jews
>running the White House even today

Bush is "remarkable," Rabbi Fund tells The Jewish Week, "the ultimate
Shabbos Goy."'3
There you have it: the "ultimate Shabbos Goy" has presided over a
holocaust of some 100,000 Iraqis, plus over 1,000 of his own troops.

>and who are causing even conservatives
>embarrassment? Is it not a guy named Trump, a non-Jew, who is the biggest
>name in land development, often at the expense of the local residents? Is it
>not true that there are only 3 Jews who made it this year to the Forbe's 400
>List of America's Wealthiest,

The list lies.

> far less than their representative percentage
>in the U.S. (2%)? Let's delve into the lives of the other 397 and see what
>dirt we can dig up.
>
>Choose any other industry and let me see you spend as much time nitpicking
>that one for its dirty laundry.
>

http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com

[Topaz]

On Thu, 4 Oct 2007 18:42:31 -0700, "Doug" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:

>Have you noticed the islamic terrorists have been blowing shit
>up since Clinton's regime? And you're still worried about the
>joos? Are you a muslim? THAT would explain a lot.

Advice for Patriots
By Dr. William Pierce

Today let's talk about some of the things that have changed in America
since September 11. I'm not thinking about all of the new rigamarole
at airports or about how Mr. Bush's campaign of cruise-missile
diplomacy in the Middle East is going or even about how opening the
mail each morning in media offices around the country and in
politicians' offices in Washington has become a much more exciting
operation than it used to be
when Ted Kaczynski was the only person putting dangerous things into
letters.
I'm more interested in the changes in the Politically Correct party
line laid down for the lemmings by the media. I'm interested in
changes in the way Americans view the world. And I'm interested in the
changed prospects for the future of America.
The most interesting thing about the new party line is its stupidity.
The Jews were caught by surprise last month, and they had to whip up
something in a hurry in order to deflect blame from Israel and from
the U.S. government's support for Israel. Apparently the best they
could do on a moment's notice is the explanation that Osama bin Laden
attacked us
simply because he hates our freedom and democracy. Since they first
cooked up that explanation they've refined it quite a bit. Both the
Foreign Ministry in Israel and the American Israel Public Affairs
Committee, Israel's enormously powerful lobby in Washington, have been
circulating "talking papers" to their own people, to politicians, and
to everyone else who is likely to be making a public statement about
America's new war or about Washington's past policy in the Middle
East.
These "talking papers" tell people how to counter what the Jews call
Osama bin Laden's "lies" and also how to respond to anyone who
suggests that our government's support of Israel might have had
something to do with the September 11 attack. The papers warn people
never to raise this subject, but if someone else insists on talking
about it, it is to be
countered with the explanation that support for Israel had nothing at
all to do with the attack, that we would have been attacked even if we
weren't supporting Israel, and that the only reason for the attack is
Osama bin Laden's irrational hatred of America's freedom and
democracy.
I believe that it's clear that many people actually believe this
nonsense, judging by the number of cars with red, white, and blue
ribbons tied to their antennas. But these are the people who believe
everything Tom Brokaw or their beloved Big Brother in the White House
tells them. If George Bush came on TV and told them with that
mock-solemn expression of his that a Martian invasion force had just
landed, that the Martians were demanding one million sacrificial
virgins as their price for not destroying Hollywood and Washington,
and that U.S. Army troops would be going door to door to collect
virgins, the folks with the ribbons on their antennas would believe
it, and they would prepare to hand over any virgins in their
households. They would consider it their patriotic duty. The party
line may change from time to time, but lemmings never change.
Well, the lemmings may believe that U.S. support for Israel had
nothing to do with the September 11 attack or with the anthrax-laden
letters now going around, but no one else believes it. Last week the
media bosses were kicking themselves because they had let the text of
a statement Osama bin Laden had made be published in the United
States. They said that they had made a mistake in putting this
statement before the American public. They wouldn't publish any
further Osama bin Laden statements, they said, because the statements
might contain secret instructions for his operatives.
Everyone I've spoken with laughed at that excuse. In his last
statement Osama bin Laden said that Americans would not be secure and
would have no peace of mind as long as Palestinians were not secure in
their own land. That's the sort of powerful and simple message that
even Sally Soccer Mom and Joe Sixpack might understand, and that's
what the Jewish media bosses don't want the public to hear. They're
not worried about secret instructions; they're worried about the
lemmings figuring out what's going on.
Actually, I think there's very little danger of that. And really, the
changes I'm more interested in are in the outlook of the minority of
the population able to think for itself: the minority that doesn't
believe whatever Tom Brokaw says. You know, I've been talking to this
minority for years-decades, actually-warning them about the
consequences of letting their government get out of control, warning
them of the consequences of permitting the Jews of Hollywood and New
York to run our country through their control of our mass media,
warning them of the consequences of continuing to sit on their hands
and keep their mouths shut from fear of being denounced by the media
as "anti-Semites" or "racists."
And I wasn't having as much success as I wanted at getting them to pay
attention and change their ways. Many of those who listened wouldn't
do anything because what I was warning them about didn't seem quite
real. Despite all the changes they could see around them-the
deterioration of our cities and our schools, the darkening of the
racial complexion of America, the trashing of our culture by the mass
media, the increasingly
obvious efforts of the Jewish media bosses to persuade our young women
that they should bed down with non-Whites-despite everything, they
themselves managed to remain comfortable and economically secure, so
the things I was warning them about didn't seem quite real. They had
convinced themselves that they were above it all, that they could
continue to watch the destruction of their country and their people
all around them, and it would never affect them personally: that they
could remain secure and comfortable while everything around them went
to hell. Osama bin Laden jolted some of them awake on September 11:
some of those whose attention I hadn't been able to catch with my own
warnings. He convinced some of them that what they had been observing
going on around them for years was in fact real: that continuing to
ignore the degenerative processes promoted by the media and the
government and hoping for the best really wasn't a good strategy for
personal survival. In particular, he convinced many members of the
thinking minority that losing control of our government really is a
serious matter, that
permitting our government to be used by the Jews against their
neighbors in the Middle East-and also against the genuine interests of
the American people-could have real consequences at home.
I have the feeling that many of these thinking people are paying at
least a little more attention now to the things we've been talking
about here every week. The fact that the number of people who download
these broadcasts from my Web site each Saturday has nearly doubled
since September 11 is a pretty good indication of this, I believe.
Just as I'm getting more hate mail from the red-white-and-blue-ribbon
types, I'm also getting more thoughtful responses from the people who
understand and care. Which is to say, I think I have an audience now
that not only is bigger but also is more attentive and responsive.
That is really important.
I'm not discouraged by the fact that the attentive and responsive
people still constitute only a minority of a minority. I'm encouraged
by the fact that the attentive people now make up a larger minority of
the thinking portion of the population than they did before September
11. Important things always are done by minorities. Majorities don't
make
decisions; individuals do; small minorities do. History is made by
active minorities. Sometimes an active minority may use the passive
majority as a tool or a weapon, but the minority always acts in accord
with its own will.
What's important is which minority is making the decisions, which
minority is active at any particular moment. For at least the past 60
years it's been the wrong minority, an alien minority that is
implacably hostile to our people. If we are to survive, that must
change. Our minority must become active instead. Our minority must
grow to include more of the thinking portion of our population. And
that is happening now. That's been happening since September 11.
The people who understand and care have been forced to begin paying
attention. I have a very strong premonition that there will be other
things in the reasonably near future that will make them pay even
closer attention. The Bush government, just like the Clinton
government before it, thinks that it can stop terrorism with cruise
missiles and smart bombs. But just think for a moment: whether Osama
bin Laden survives the Bush government's current war against Israel's
enemies in the Middle East or not, he already has become immortal. In
the eyes of Muslims he has been elevated to a status in heaven
alongside Mohammed. His name will be praised, and stories will be told
about him around campfires throughout the Muslim world for countless
generations to come, long
after the Bush government has gone and been forgotten. Cruise missiles
can't take Osama bin Laden's immortality away from him. There's
nothing the Bush government can do to diminish his glory in the Muslim
world. In fact, the more cruise missiles and smart bombs the United
States unleashes on the Muslim world, the higher will Osama bin
Laden's esteem rise; the more will his strike against the United
States seem justified to his fellow Muslims.
Don't be fooled by the tame "house Muslims" the media bosses have been
trotting out to explain to the lemmings that violence is abhorrent to
"real Muslims." The real Muslims are the ones rioting against the
government in Pakistan now. The real Muslims are the ones singing
Osama bin Laden's praises now. And there will be no shortage of other
young Muslims lusting for a share in his glory, lusting to have their
praises sung around campfires too. Cruise missiles don't frighten
them. There are enough of them already in this country to keep things
jumping, thanks to the government's insane immigration policy of
recent decades. The anthrax-laced letters that have been going around
all were mailed from inside this country. And anthrax is by no means
the nastiest thing that can be mailed in an envelope. The media won't
even mention the biological warfare agents the government is really
afraid of, because they don't want to give anyone ideas.
The fact is, terrorism has been made much more fashionable since
September 11, and the stakes have been raised. Simple truck bombs
won't get much respect in the future, but I have a suspicion that
we'll see a few more of them anyway. And I suspect that we'll also see
people trying to outdo Osama bin Laden's September 11 televised
extravaganza. The
government and the media suspect the same thing, and they're
frightened. That's why they're trying so desperately to stifle dissent
and keep everyone pledging allegiance to the flag.
At the University of California in Los Angeles a library worker,
53-year-old Jonnie Hargis, has been suspended without pay because he
sent out an e-mail letter criticizing U.S. support for Israel's
aggression. The university administration explained that it has a
policy against using university computers for political messages, but
Hargis, who has worked at the UCLA library for 22 years, pointed out
that no one who has been sending out pro-Israel and pro-war messages
has been punished.
There are similar situations at other universities around the country.
Jews and neo-conservatives post belligerent, bloodthirsty messages
calling for the annihilation of all of the Jews' enemies in the Middle
East, including Iraq and Iran as well as Afghanistan. Anyone who calls
instead for eliminating the cause of the September 11 attack-that is,
for stopping the blind support by the U.S. government of Israel's
aggression-is censured and threatened with expulsion or with being
fired.
There are still people around who can remember how it was at our
universities during the Vietnam war. That was when treason ruled on
campuses. Students burned their draft cards and put up Viet Cong flags
and posters of Ho Chi Minh in their dormitories. Jewish activists in
groups such as Students for a Democratic Society organized pro-Viet
Cong
rallies on campuses. Professors encouraged this activity, and
administrators didn't interfere, citing free speech.
The switch to red, white, and blue ribbons and saluting the flag came
rather suddenly last month, and a lot of thinking people understand
why it came. They understand that it is when America is involved in a
war to promote Jewish interests that pledging allegiance to the flag
suddenly is declared fashionable. When Israel's welfare is threatened,
Jews, ordinarily noted for their cynicism and irreverence, suddenly
put their hands over their hearts and begin singing The Star-Spangled
Banner, and they glare at anyone who isn't singing loudly enough. And
people who make the mistake of asking why get fired or suspended. But
you know, firing people or suspending people who have dissenting
opinions doesn't go down well with the independent thinkers. And I'll
guarantee you:
there will be a lot more dissent before this war is over. And the
Jewish media won't be able to hide it all.
What we are beginning to see now is a sharpening division between the
Jews, their bought politicians, and the "I pledge allegiance,"
authoritarian types on one side, and everyone else on the other side.
We also saw a division, along different lines, during the Vietnam war,
with the authoritarians and the Jews on opposite sides instead of the
same
side. I believe that the division this time will develop faster and
become sharper.
I don't know how the war itself will develop. It was clear before it
began that the U.S. military machine is quite capable of flattening
Afghanistan or any other Third World country without suffering any
significant losses to its own personnel, simply because we can hit
them from a distance with a great deal of destructive power, and they
don't have the means to hit back-except through what we call
"terrorism." It is certain that there will be more terrorism,
although, of course, I cannot predict the form it will take or its
magnitude.
I can predict, however, that the media and the politicians will
denounce it as "cowardly" and will act as if America has been wronged:
that whatever form the next blow against America takes and wherever it
comes from, it will be declared "unprovoked." And I can predict that
the polls published by the media will continue to show nearly every
American
wildly enthusiastic about the war, even as the opposition to the war
grows.
One interesting thing about the opposition this time is that it is
growing both among the Gentile Left and among genuine patriots. During
the Vietnam war the members of the Gentile Left all were on the Jewish
side. Despite the current agreement between leftists and patriots on
the single issue of ending support for Israel and limiting the war in
the
Middle East, I don't see much chance of real collaboration between
these two elements. The Gentile Left is still hopelessly confused on
such essential issues as race and feminism and homosexuality and
permissiveness. But the war is indeed driving a wedge between Jews and
Gentile leftists-a deeper wedge than that driven by the development of
Jewish neo-conservatism after the Vietnam war, and for that we should
be thankful.
There may be other hopeful developments as well. The assassination in
Jerusalem this week of one of Israel's most bloodthirsty Jewish
militants by the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine
certainly was a welcome move. Until now all of the assassins have been
Jews, and all of the victims have been Palestinians. It's too soon to
know whether
or not this one act of retribution against the Israeli leadership will
be followed by other successful blows, but it may be that the events
of recent weeks have emboldened the Palestinians to act with more
imagination and enterprise than before.
Looking ahead a bit, there are several signs of hope here on our own
home front. The heightened sense of reality among non-lemmings, the
lessening of their sense of detachment, the stronger realization that
they cannot survive by continuing to sit on their hands and watch the
Jews destroy the world around them- -- this is the single most
important consequence of recent events. This, together with the
growing alienation between Gentile leftists and Jews, leaves the Jews
in a weaker position than they have been in a long time. They will
crack their whips more frantically than before, trying to keep
everyone in line, but the principal effect of that will be to generate
even more resentment against them.
Things are a bit brittle now. A few dozen more anthrax cases, another
truck bomb in a well chosen location, and substantial changes could
take place in a hurry: a stock market panic, martial law measures by
the Bush government, and a sharpening of the debate as to how we got
ourselves get into this mess in the first place. As the debate
sharpens, the Jews and their collaborators will pull out all of the
stops in an effort to stifle it, but I don't think that even a
declaration of martial law can stifle it now. Too many people already
smell the stink in Washington. Too many people already understand on
whose hands is the blood of 6,000 innocent Americans who died last
month. Too many people understand the true motivation behind the
current war against Israel's enemies in the
Middle East. The genie is out of the bottle now, and not even Mr.
Bush's new anti-terrorism agency-what does he call it? -- the Office
of Homeland Security? -- not even this new Federal agency can put it
back in the bottle.
It's a strange thing: in a novel I wrote more than 12 years ago - the
title is Hunter-I talked about the formation of a new anti-terrorism
agency, separate from the FBI. And I pointed out that the principal
aim of the new agency would not be to protect the public from
terrorism, but to protect the government from an increasingly restless
and disillusioned public: a sort of modern Praetorian Guard. I think
that we'll be seeing more developments in that direction in the next
few months, with the timing depending upon when the next surprise
comes and its magnitude.
Of course, I don't know what will happen next to shatter already
jangled nerves, but it is likely that something will happen. My advice
to responsible patriots now is this: Expect a surprise, and remain
calm when it comes. But don't wait for it to come to raise your voice.
Speak out now. Don't be intimidated by the mindless yahoos waving
their flags
or by the government or by the media. If you point out calmly and in a
reasoned way who is responsible for what happened to America last
month you will have more people agreeing with you than you might
imagine. If you call for your fellow Americans to join you in
regaining control of their government, the response will be greater
than at any time in recent years.
Thanks for being with me again today.

[Topaz]

On Fri, 5 Oct 2007 10:59:15 -0700, "Doug" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:

>
>So it's the joo's fault that Osama had the WTC blown up along w/US
>embassies in Africa?

Exactly.

"The ultimate cause of this terrorism stems from our involvement in
and
support of the criminal behavior of Israel.

TERROR IN RESPONSE TO TERROR

The Palestinians and many of their Arab allies have been the target of
a half century of unrelenting Israeli terrorism.

In the late 1940s the Zionists took over Palestine and drove out over
600,000 people from their homes through widespread acts of terrorism.
Among those events was the sadistic massacre of 254 Palestinian mostly
old men, women and children at Deir Yassin. After the bloodletting,
the Jews then purposely publicized the event so as to make the people
flee in panic from their homes and businesses from which they still
haven't been allowed to return.

Former Israel Prime Minister, Menachem Begin, boasted of the
importance of the massacre of Deir Yassin in his book The Revolt: The
Story of the Irgun. He wrote that there would not have been a State of
Israel without the "victory" of Deir Yassin. "The Haganah carried out
victorious attacks on other fronts... In a state of terror, the Arabs
fled, crying, 'Deir Yassin."
(1)

Nor did the massacres cease after the establishment of the Jewish
State; they continued in times of both peace and war. Following are
the names of some of them: Sharafat Massacre, Kibya Massacre, Kafr
Qasem Massacre, Al-Sammou' Massacre, the Sabra And Shatila Massacre,
Oyon Qara Massacre, Al-Aqsa Mosque Massacre, the Ibrahimi Mosque
Massacre, the Jabalia Massacre.
(2)

In a policy of ethnic cleansing, Israel continues to keep residents of
Palestine who were born there and whose families lived there for
countless generations, from returning home. At the same time, it gives
generous incentives for genetic Jews who never lived in Palestine to
immigrate from the far corners of the world.

The British also suffered greatly from Israeli terror, such as the
horrendous bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem.

Israeli terror has not stopped since. Israel has more prisoners per
capita than any other nation of the world, more than Stalinist Russia
or Red China during its worst periods. It routinely tortures its
Palestinian prisoners, and is in fact the only nation in the modern
world that legally sanctions torture. In fact, a Jewish human rights
group in Israel confirmed in a 60-page report that 85% of Palestinian
detainees undergo torture while in
custody.(3) Even a major New York Times article by the Jewish Joel
Greenburg, stated matter-of-factly that Israel tortures 500 to 600
Palestinians every month
.(4)

Israel has targeted and assassinated thousands of Palestinian leaders,
and this includes scholars, clerics, businessmen, philosophers and
poets, anyone who inspires the Palestinian people to patriotism. These
assassinations have occurred all over the world, even in the United
States. In the process they have killed many thousands of women and
children. They have even repeatedly bombed Palestinian refugee camps
packed with women and children.

Not only did they establish their Israeli state over Palestinian land,
(in 1948 Palestinians personally owned over 90 percent of it) the Jews
took almost all of the Palestinian personal property: the land, farms,
homes and businesses. After they drove out the Palestinian refugees
and refused their return, they then passed an "abandoned property" law
that confiscated Palestinian property and gave to the Jews. The law
even has the chutzpah to forbid ever selling any of their stolen land
to Palestinians. (5)

In 1982 Israel invaded Lebanon. During their invasion and 18 year
occupation an estimated 40,000 civilians died. Israel relentlessly
bombed and attacked cities and villages and also many hospitals and
orphanages (as documented by the Norwegian Red Cross) and devastated
the ancient and once beautiful city of Beirut.

The current Prime Minister of Israel, Ariel Sharon, doesn't dare even
step foot in Belgium or the Netherlands, fearing an indictment of the
World Court for war crimes. Sharon is responsible for the murder of
two thousand of refugees in the Sabra and Shatila camps in Lebanon.

Israel shot down a Libyan passenger airliner over the Sinai Peninsula
killing 111 people.

And it is has not just been the Palestinians who have suffered from
Israeli terror.

ZIONIST TERROR AGAINST THE UNITED STATES

Americans have also suffered from Zionist terror. In fact, Israel has
committed a number of acts of war against the United States.

Israel has a long record of terrorism against the United States going
all the way back to 1954. In that year, the Israel government plotted
to blow up American installations in Cairo and Alexandria and blame it
on Egyptian nationals. By chance the plot failed and was uncovered. It
was named the Lavon Affair after the man who supposedly set up the
terrorism, Pinhas Lavon, the Israeli Defense Chief. He resigned in
1955 over the incident. (6)

In 1967, Israel purposefully attacked with unmarked jet fighters and
torpedo boats, the U.S.S. Liberty, an American Navy vessel of the
Sinai Peninsula, even machine gunning the deployed life rafts of the
ship. The attack killed 31 American servicemen and wounded over
170.(7) They sought to sink the ship, kill all the Americans and
blame it on the Egyptians so they could have American support to
conquer larger areas of the Arab world.

The attack on the Liberty was nothing short of a vicious act of war
against the United States by Israel. In spite of the fact that U.S.
Secretary of State Dean Rusk and navy chief Admiral Moorer said that
the attack on the USS Liberty by Israel was deliberate. The
all-powerful Zionist Lobby prevented a formal Congressional
investigation. If the Lobby can even cover up horrendous Israeli
crimes against America, it's no wonder they can cover
up Israel's endless crimes against the Palestinians. Yet, after the
Liberty attack America didn't even reduce our billions of dollars of
aid, in fact the story quickly vanished from the news after a few
short days.

In 1986 Israel actually caused us to wrongly go to war and militarily
attack another nation. The Mossad planted a transmitter in Tripoli,
Libya and then broadcast terrorist messages in Libyan code indicating
Libyan responsibility for killing two Americans in the bombing of the
La Belle discothèque in Germany.(8) (It was later proven that Libya
had nothing to do with the bombing) By use of this fraud, Israel
induced the American bombing of Libya. American bombs wrecked havoc
there. One of those killed was the infant daughter of the Libyan
President. It is certainly a dastardly act of war against a nation to
induce it into wrongly attacking another nation. Only a truly evil
enemy of America would do such a thing.

Every Palestinian and Arab is aware that Israel's half century of
terror could never have occurred without the active financial,
military, and diplomatic support of the United States. They know that
the Jewish Lobby has control of American Mideast Policy and the
Zionists can get whatever they want from Congress on issues important
to them.

It was American support of Israel's brutal invasion and occupation of
Lebanon in the 1980s that led directly to the bombing of the U.S.
Marine contingent, killing 300 American young men.

THE INVOLVEMENT OF AMERICAN IN ISRAELI CRIMES

Arabs know that almost every bomb that kills their people comes from
America, Every bullet, every tank, and every fighter plane, is
manufactured or paid for by American dollars. It is America's billions
of dollars of support that have enabled the Jewish state to terrorize
the Arab people for half a century.

Even though Israel invaded Lebanon and killed thousands of civilians,
America never threatened to bomb Tel Aviv (as it did Iraq) if Israel
refused to obey UN resolutions to withdraw. A comparison of America's
reaction to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait to that of Israel's invasion of
Lebanon is instructive.

America's one-sided policy foreign policy can be illustrated by the
different treatment afforded Israel and Iraq:

1. Iraq invaded Kuwait. Israel invaded Lebanon.
2. Perhaps 3000 Kuwait civilians died in the initial war with Iraq.
40,000
Lebanese died from the time of the invasion through the occupation.
3. Iraq disobeyed UN resolutions to leave Kuwait. Israel disobeyed UN
resolutions to leave Lebanon. (for 18 years)
4. Iraq broke international conventions on chemical, biological and
nuclear
weapons. Yet Israel is a far greater offender, having one of the
greatest stores
of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons in the world
5. Iraq refused UN inspections. Israel has always refused UN
inspection.
6. For these violations we bombed Iraq. In response to Israel's
crimes, America just
continued to send more billions of dollars.

American foreign policy was and continues to be Israeli policy. Israel
was not threatened with even a cutoff of U.S. aid as thousands of
Lebanese civilians died from the Israeli actions. Iraq was once a
friend of America with whom we bought oil and did much business.
America actually supported Saddam Hussein and Iraq's war with Iran.
Iraq did nothing against the United States, but it made the mistake of
becoming a strong enemy of Israel. So the Jewish and the
Jewish-controlled gentile bureaucrats, and Jewish-dominated
media quickly made our former friend, Saddam Hussein, into our
archenemy.

We dropped more explosives on Iraq country in a few weeks than we had
in the whole of the Second World War. We killed hundreds of thousands
of Iraqis including tens of thousands of civilians. Then we engaged in
a blockade and embargo of Iraq that even the anti-Iraq United Nations
says led to the deaths of at least 1,200,000 children and hundreds of
thousands of elderly. Let those Americans who don't understand the why
of this terrorism concentrate on this shocking fact. One million, two
hundred thousand
children have died as a direct result of our policy toward Iraq.

The Jewish Lobby and the Jewish-dominated media are very careful not
to let the American people fully understand the real reason for the
Iraqi war or the true issues in the Palestinian question. They really
don't want Americans to know why so many millions in the Arab world
hate us and why the number grows larger every day.

They don't want us to know the real reasons why Americans are so hated
- because it is the Jewish bosses of American foreign policy who are
the one's responsible for this growing hatred of America. Imagine the
anger and feelings of despair that would drive men to sacrifice their
own lives to get at us.

The Zionist bosses know that by America's supporting the criminal
policies of Israel spawns hatred against America. They are certainly
aware that bombing and going to war against nations solely for
Israel's benefit creates dedicated and fanatical enemies against
America, enemies who will seek revenge in American blood.

Of course, they never put America's interests first; their own Jewish
interests are always paramount. In actuality, they are fully aware
that the brutal and stupid acts of terror that recently happened in
New York and Washington only help the Zionist cause by engendering
enormous American anger at Israeli enemies, and make Americans more
easily manipulated to do the bidding of Israel.

Think about who really gained from this terror. Have the Palestinians
benefited? This terrorist act destroyed all the progress the
Palestinians have recently made with world opinion. It has blinded the
world to Israeli terrorism. Israel is the only winner in this tragedy.
They will now have a green light to do anything they want against the
Palestinians. They can kill any of their foes whether they are violent
or non-violent. They will get all the money they want from the
American people, and no one will be thinking
about their on-going suppression, murder and human rights violations
against the Palestinian people.

No, the Zionists are the only benefactors of the horrendous day of
terror on September 11, 2001. Ironic isn't it, that although Zionist
criminal actions led to this terror, only the Zionists will benefit
from it. Of course, they reason they benefit because the American mass
media is completely in their hands and it will never ask the proper
questions of why these horrendous events are happening. Unfortunately,
too few people will ever hear voices such as mine who dare to
challenge the Zionist lies.

That's why we are in this mess, because a foreign power has become the
most powerful lobby in the American government and controls the
direction of the mass communication media in America.

Let me repeat that one more time. The primary reason we are suffering
from terrorism in the United States today is because our government
policy is completely subordinated to a foreign power: Israel and the
efforts of world-wide Jewish Supremacism.

American Flags are flying everywhere in America in the aftermath of
the attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. That is good,
for we need to be more patriotic. If we were more patriotic for the
real interests of America rather than for Israel, we would not now
suffer from terrorism.

And truly, what could be more patriotic than wanting our own country
to be led by our own people in the service of America; not a foreign
power or a powerful minority.

Yes, we must fight tooth and nail against any terrorists who attack
our country. But, we must understand why this terror is occurring, and
how it has been spawned. It has occurred because of long-standing
treason against the United States and her people.

WHAT HAS ZIONISM COST THE AMERICAN PEOPLE?

The Jewish Lobby and media power has cost the United States about 6
billion dollars a year in foreign aid and weapons, almost one third of
America's entire foreign aid budget during the last half century and
as much money spent in America's drug war.

It has poisoned our relations with the oil-rich Mideast nations. In
response to our policies, the Arabs came together and developed their
"oil weapon" which has cost Americans at least ten at least ten
trillion dollars in higher oil costs.

It has alienated the entire Arab world, leading to destruction or
confiscation of billions of dollars of American property in those
countries, kidnapping of American citizens, and generated enormous
hatred for the American people.

How has Israel has paid us back for our support? They have
continually spied on us on us (the Jonathan Pollard Case), sold our
highest secrets (such as to the biggest nucleur threat to us currently
in the world: the Communist Chinese) and stolen our enriched uranium
for their illegal nucleur weapons.

They have launched terrorist attacks against the United States such as
the Lavon Affair and the Attack on the USS Liberty. Both these acts
were nothing short of vicious acts of war against the United States.
Providing false information for America to wrongly go to war against
another country is also nothing less than an Israeli act of war
against the United States. Yet, in response to these despicable
actions against America, our Zionist controlled leaders did not even
reduce our billions of dollars of financial and military aid to
Israel. We give Israel about 6 billion dollars in aid each year, that
is more than all the nations of Sub-Saharan Africa, the Caribbean and
South America.

What is the latest cost of our subservience to the criminal actions of
Zionism? The latest price we have paid is the horrendous acts of
terrorism on September 11, 2001.

The powerful agents of Israel in American media and government are
ultimately responsible for this terror against the United States just
as surely as if they themselves had piloted those planes into the
World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

And now they cynically plan to use the terror that they themselves
created to increase the cycle of violence against Israel's enemies.
You can be sure that the Zionist powers plan to do far more than
simply punish the perpetrators of these events. America will once
again be used to strike against whomever Israel wants.

An indiscriminate or intemperate response from America would
ultimately produce even more hatred against America, and bring more
terroristic acts upon the heads of American people. The increasing
cycle of hatred is exactly want the Zionists want, for their aim that
we will fight Israel's enemies for them, spilling our blood instead of
theirs. They are only ones who truly benefit from America's pain.
Rather than Israel, we will pay the
ultimate price.

Unless we heal the wounds and give America a better course, every new
missile and bomb we send will come back to us again. Every life we
take in foreign lands will result in more American lives lost here and
abroad. America will sink more and more into uncertainty and fear.

We must have cool heads now and break this cycle of violence.

Many traitors in our government have supported Zionism's criminal
activities rather than the true interests of the American people. They
have spawned the hatred that drove these terrible acts. Unless their
power is broken Americans will be haunted by an increasing specter of
terrorism.

Let us pray for the American victims of these events and for their
suffering families. Let us swiftly and harshly punish the perpetrators
of these dastardly acts.

But, even more importantly, let us understand why these events
occurred and how we can heal the hatred against our nation.

Once we understand the reason why, then we will all agree on the sure
way to prevent such terroristic acts in the future.

The solution to this huge problem is extremely obvious and it is very
simple.

America must heed the farewell address of the Father of our Country
and "avoid foreign entanglements."

And we must always put America and the American People first."
David Duke
September 15, 2001
www.Davidduke.com

FOOTNOTES

1. Begin, M. (1964). The Revolt: The Story Of The Irgun. Tel-Aviv:
Hadar
Pub. p.162.
2. Erlich, G. (1992). Not Only Deir Yassin. Hebrew Daily Ha'ir. May
6.
3. Sami Sockol, Moshe Reinfeld (1998) May 20. the Israeli daily,
Ha'aretz
4. Joel Greenberg (1993) Israel Rethinks Interrogation of Arabs
Aug. 14
New York Times
5. Badi, J. (1960). Fundamental Laws Of The State Of Israel. New
York.
p.156.
6. Bar-Joseph, Uri (1995)Intelligence Intervention in the Politics
of
Democratic States: The United States, Israel, and Britain. University
Park,
PA: Penn State Press,
7. Ennes, J. (1979). Assault On The Liberty. New York: Random
House.
8. Ostrovsky, Victor. (1995) The Other Side of Deception: A Rogue
Agent
Exposes the Mossad's
Secret Agenda. New York: Harper
9. See the chapter on media control in my book, My Awakening. Also
available at Davidduke.com
10. Bill Gertz (1993) Washington Times and Michael R. Gordon, New
York
Times Oct.13
11. A & L Cockburn (1991) Dangerous Liaison

> It's the joo's fault that heads were being cut
>off in Iraq? When muslims chant death to america it's because of
>the joos? It's not islam, it's the joos?
>

Yes. The Jewish controlled media tells us the Jews are America's only
friend in the Middle East. The truth is that before these Jews,
America didn't have any enemies in the Middle East.

[Topaz]

On Fri, 5 Oct 2007 11:06:58 -0700, "Doug" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:

>South Park had a great episode on anti-semitic tourette's syndrome just
>last night.

Jews control the TV.

Jews say that being "anti-Semitic" is a terrible crime. Do they say
being "anti-Arab" is a terrible crime? What about "anti-Christian", or
"anti-German"? Of course the Jews think
they are special. Any other group could be our enemy, but not the

Jews, they say. The Jews tell us the Arabs are our enemies. The
Jewish controlled media tells us that the Jews are America's only
friend in the Middle East. The truth is that before the Jews America

didn't have any enemies in the Middle East.

Americans had a revolution when they were ruled by the British. If

the British accused
them of being "anti-British" would the Americans throw down their guns
and apologize?
Now that America is ruled by the Jews it is no insult to be called
"anti-Semite". The insult is that they think we care about their self
serving verbiage.

The Jewish controlled media said the French were "cheese eating
surrender monkeys". Why can't the French howl "anti-French" like the
Jews howl "anti-Semite"? Because the French don't control the media,
Jews do.

This is what President Nixon said:

http://www.hnn.us/comments/15664.html

"There may be some truth in that if the Arabs have some complaints
about my policy towards Israel, they have to realize that the Jews in
the U.S. control the entire information and propaganda machine, the
large newspapers, the motion pictures, radio and television, and the
big companies. And there is a force that we have to take into
consideration."

>

>Here's a clue for you, the greatest problem in Europe today isn't the
>joos, it's islam. That's why the organization SIOE (Stop the Islamization
>of Europe) was formed. Your puerile attempt to deflect criticism of islam
>by attempting to blame the joos is just so much BS.

>

>If you love islam, move back to your third world, 7th century islamic
>theocracy and don't forget to pack your burkha.
>

Here's why Jews hate theocracies:

Jewish Leaders in the Homosexual Movement

Larry Kramer -- co-founder of "Act Up," a homosexual/AIDS activist
organization; co-founder of the Gay Men's Health Crisis

Alan Klein -- co-founder of group ACT UP, co-founder of group Queer
Nation, National Communications Director and chief spokesperson for
the Gay & LesbianAlliance Against Defamation [GLAAD]. Klein also co-
founded the successful multimedia campaign STOPDRLAURA.COM

Arnie Kantrowitz -- co-founder of the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against
Defamation [GLAAD].

Jonathan D. Katz -- founded and chairs the Harvey Milk Institute, the
largest queer studies institute in the world. A long time queer
political activist, was a co-founder of Queer Nation, [the key San
Francisco branch].

Harvey Fierstein -- film actor [Mrs. Doubtfire]; well-known gay
activist.

Moises Kaufman -- playwright and film director [The Laramie Project].

Israel Fishman -- founder of the Gay Liberation Caucus in 1970 [now
known as the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgendered Round Table of
the American Library Association], the world's first gay professional
organization.

Bella Abzug and Edward Koch -- both Jewish -- the first members of the
US. House of Representatives to introduce legislation banning
discrimination based on sexual orientation [1974].

Winnie Stachelberg -- political director, Human Rights Campaign [HRC]

Michael S. Aronowitz, The New York Log Cabin Republicans.

Tony Kushner -- gay activist; Tony and 1993 Pulitzer Prize-winning
playwright [for Angels in America, 1992].

Len Hirsch -- president of the GLBT federal government employees
group, GLOBE.

Meg Moritz, Ph.D. -- a Director and member of the Executive Committee
of GLAAD.

Barbara Raab -- an NBC-TV producer; a "Jewish lesbian feminist
journalist, writer."

Charles Kaiser [?] -- author & founding member of National Lesbian and
Gay Journalists Association [NLGJA].

David Goodstein -- owner/publisher of the gay magazine The Advocate
[1975-1985]; co-founder of the National Gay Rights Lobby.

Judy Wieder -- Editor-in-chief, The Advocate gay magazine.

Alison Bechdel [?] -- cartoonist creator and author of the bi-weekly
comic strip "Dykes to Watch Out For."

Kevin Koffler -- Editor-in-chief, Genre gay magazine.

Garrett Glaser -- National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association
[NLGJA] national board member.

Ronald Gold -- reporter for Variety; a leader in the fight to overturn
the American Psychiatric Association's policy that homosexuality is an
illness.

Magnus Hirschfeld [d. 1935], early gay rights activist in Germany;
founded one of the first gay rights organizations, the Scientific
Humanitarian Committee; coined the term "transvestism"; fled Nazi
Germany.

Fred Hochberg -- deputy administrator, U.S. Small Business
Administration; co-chair of the Human Rights Campaign [HRC].

Michael Berman -- member, Human Rights Campaign Board of Directors.
Mitchell Gold -- HRC Board
Marty Lieberman -- HRC Board
Andy Linsky -- HRC Board
Dana Perlman -- HRC Board
Abby Rubenfeld -- HRC Board
Andrew Tobias -- HRC Board
Lara Schwartz -- Senior Counsel, HRC
Heather Wellman -- HRC Field Coordinator
Dan Furmansky -- HRC Senior Field Organizer, West
Sally Green -- HRC Associate Field Director

Rick Rosendall [?] -- President, Gay & Lesbian Activists Alliance of
Washington, DC.

Barney Frank -- member of U.S. Congress; helped create non-
discriminatory employment policies in all U.S. federal agencies

Kerry Lobel -- executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task
Force.

Robin Margolis, American coordinator of the Bi Women's Cultural
Alliance and author [Bisexuality: A Practical Guide].

Evan Wolfson, Senior Staff Attorney, Lambda Legal Defense and
Education Fund -- and -- the executive director of Freedom to Marry.

Jennifer Einhorn -- Communications Director, Gay & Lesbian Alliance
Against Defamation [GLAAD]
Nancy Alpert [?] -- Treasurer, GLAAD
Judy Gluckstern -- Board of Directors, GLAAD.
Stephen M. Jacoby -- Board of Directors, GLAAD.
Matt Riklin -- Board, GLAAD
Carol Rosenfeld -- Board, GLAAD.
William Weinberger -- Board, GLAAD
Tanya Wexler -- Board, GLAAD.
David Huebner -- GLAAD Counsel.

Richard Goldstein -- Village Voice writer on gay culture and politics

Ron Schlittler -- Director of Field & Policy, Parents and Friends of
Lesbians and Gays [PFLAG].

Craig Ziskin -- Deputy Director of Development, PFLAG.

Debra Weill -- Senior Field & Policy Coordinator, PFLAG.

Dody Goldstein -- Board of Directors, PFLAG.

David Horowitz -- Board of Directors, PFLAG.

Shawn Frank -- Board of Directors, PFLAG.

Leon Weinstein -- Chair, Nominating Committee, PFLAG.

Kate Kendell [?], National Center for Lesbian Rights.

Gayle Rubin -- lesbian author/activist.

Hilary Rosen -- a founding member of the Gay and Lesbian Victory Fund;
former board co-chair of the Human Rights Campaign.

Roz Richter, American attorney and activist.

Bob Kunst -- long-time activist in gay and Jewish causes.

"Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network" [GLSEN]. Board co-chairs:
Marty Seldman, president

"National Gay & Lesbian Task Force" [NGLTF].
Board co-chairs: ..... Rachel Rosen in Santa Fe, N.M
Dave Fleischer -- Director of Training [political training], NGLTF.
Craig Hoffman -- Board of Directors, NGLTF.
Beth Zemsky -- Board, NGLTF.
Marsha C. Botzer -- Treasurer, NGLTF.
Jeff Levi -- first, Levi was NGTF's lobbyist, early 1980s [NGTF became
NGLTF in 1985]. Later, he was NGLTF executive director.

Bill Rubenstein, J.D. '86, developed the ACLU Lesbian and Gay Rights
Project

Martin Duberman -- author/historian; founded the Center for Lesbian
and Gay Studies at the City University of New York.

Ben Schatz '81, J.D. '85, is executive director of the Gay and Lesbian
Medical Foundation.

Kevin Schaub, American; Executive Director and Dean of the Harvey Milk
Institute in San Francisco, the world's largest center for queer
studies.

Sarah Schulman [1958- ], American playwright, novelist, and activist
[one of the founders of the Lesbian Avengers, a direct-action lesbian
rights organization].

Susan Spielman -- principal/head of Common Ground, an education/
consulting firm specializing in workplace sexual orientation
education; her company has worked with hundreds of U.S. organizations,
helping them to implement domestic partner benefits plans; co-author
of the book Straight Talk About Gays in the Workplace.

Gertrude Stein -- wrote the first openly lesbian novel, "Q.E.D.," in
1903, but it was only published posthumously in 1950.

Rikki Streicher (1925-1994), American activist and businesswoman.

Michael Goff -- founded Out magazine in 1992.

Paulette Goodman -- founder of local chapter [Washington D.C.] of
PFLAG and served as President of the National PFLAG organization from
1988-1992.

Jeffrey Newman, American, president and COO of the Gay Financial
Network; president and CEO of out.com.

Jim Levin -- New York gay historian.

Barrett Brick -- GLAA [Gay and Lesbian Activists Alliance] Treasurer.

Robin Tyler -- American comedian [born Arlene Chernick] who was the
first openly gay comic in North America; Tyler is also an activist who
was the stage producer for the first three gay marches on Washington
and the national protest coordinator for the "Stop Dr. Laura"
campaign; she produces women's comedy and music festivals, and
operates a lesbian travel-tour company.

Dr. Bruce Voeller [1935?-1994] [?] American gay rights activist,
molecular biologist, physiologist, and AIDS researcher (pioneer in the
use of nonoxynol-9 as a spermicide); cofounder and first executive
director of the National Gay Task Force; creator of the Mariposa
Foundation [an AIDS prevention research organization].

Mark Elderkin [?] -- co-founded Gay.com.

Leroy Aarons -- American professor, journalist, and founder of the
National Gay and Lesbian Journalists Association (1990).

Dr. Donald I. Abrams -- American physician, HIV expert, medical
marijuana researcher, and past president of the Gay and Lesbian
Medical Association.

Johnny Abush (1952-2000) -- [Canadian]; archivist of the International
Jewish GBLT Archives.

Roberta Achtenberg [1950- ]; civil rights lawyer and federal official;
appointed as Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal
Opportunity by President Bill Clinton in 1993.

Miriam Ben-Shalom [1948- ], American Army Reserves drill sergeant and
gay activist; in 1986 she won a ten-year legal battle with the
Reserves
when a court ordered her reinstatement; founder of the Gay, Lesbian,
and Bisexual Veterans Association [GLBVA] in 1990, serving as its
first president.

Larry Brinkin, American gay activist who brought the first domestic
partnership lawsuit [against Southern Pacific Railroad, 1982].

Rob Eichberg, American psychologist, co-creator of National Coming Out
Day [October 11th].

Scott Evertz, American; in April 2001, President Bush appointed him to
serve as the Director of the White House Office of National AIDS
Policy [ONAP].

Gene Falk [?, Jewish name], American business executive; Senior Vice
President of the Showtime Digital Media Group; part of the team that
launched and marketed the U.S. TV series Queer as Folk; Chair of the
Board of Directors of the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation
[GLAAD].

Surina Kahn -- American lesbian activist.

Larry Kessler -- founding director in 1983 of the AIDS Action
Committee of Massachusetts, the largest AIDS support organization in
New England.

Kathy Levinson -- American investor and philanthropist; serves on the
board of PlanetOut; also on NGLTF Board of Directors.

Judith Light -- actress, activist for gay causes.

David Mixner -- gay activist, political consultant; co-founder of the
Municipal Elections Committee of Los Angeles [MECLA], a group of
wealthy gays and lesbians who became influential in local politics;
president Bill Clinton's Special Liaison to the Gay-Lesbian Community.

Dan Savage -- American author of gay-themed books [The Kid: What
Happened
After My Boyfriend and I Decided to Go Get Pregnant; Skipping Towards
Gomorrah: The Seven Deadly Sins and the Pursuit of Happiness in
America] and gay-themed- sex-advice columnist [Savage Love].

Susan Schuman, American executive vice-president and general manager
of the Planet Out gay and lesbian online service.

Scott Seomin, American entertainment media coordinator for the Gay &
Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation [GLAAD].

Jason Serinus [Jay Guy Nassberg] -- founder and coordinator of the
Lavender Healing Network; a former gay activist with the New York
chapter of the Gay Liberation Front.

David Sine [?] -- American CEO of C1TV, the first U.S. gay and lesbian
cable TV network.

Rex Wockner -- longtime gay, American journalist who has reported news
for the gay press since 1985.

Jack Fritscher -- became Editor in Chief of Drummer gay magazine
[1977].

Leslie Feinberg [1949- ], American trade unionist, transgender
activist and author [Transgender Warriors: Making History from Joan of
Arc to RuPaul].

Allan Ginsburg - late Jewish poet and leading member of North American
Man Boy Love Association

[Topaz]

The Value of Truth and Righteousness
By Dr. William Pierce

Last Saturday George Bush addressed the United Nations General
Assembly, urging all of the member nations to join the United States
in bringing pressure to bear against all countries that sponsor
terrorism or harbor terrorists. He did it in his standard mock-serious
way, barely suppressing a smirk. Everyone applauded, including the
representative of a country that from its founding until the present
day has sponsored
terrorism. That country, of course, is Israel.

The prime minister of Israel, Ariel Sharon, is a war criminal, a mass
murderer, with the blood of thousands of women and children on his
hands. He is being sought now for trial by the same Hague Tribunal
that succeeded in extraditing former Yugoslav President Slobodan
Milosevic for trial on charges of crimes against humanity in Kosovo,
the same
Hague Tribunal that already has tried and sentenced soldiers who raped
and murdered in Bosnia and in Rwanda.

In 1982, during Israel's invasion of Lebanon, Ariel Sharon was
Israel's defense minister. After the bloody terror-bombing of civilian
neighborhoods in Beirut that killed thousands of Lebanese and
Palestinian civilians -- terror bombing carried out by Jews flying
military aircraft supplied to Israel by the United States - Sharon
arranged for the evacuation of Palestinian fighters from Lebanon.
Palestinian women, children, and old people were left behind in
refugee camps, with their safety guaranteed by the United States. On
the night of September 16, 1982, Sharon sent murder squads into two
Palestinian refugee camps, Sabra and Chatila, in West Beirut to kill
the unarmed
Palestinian civilians in the camps. With Israeli tanks and troops
surrounding the camps to prevent any of the Palestinians from
escaping, Sharon's murder squads shot, knifed, and bludgeoned
Palestinian civilians all that night and the next day and the
following night, while the Israelis around the camps listened
gleefully to the shots and screams coming from inside. Then Sharon
sent in bulldozers to scoop out mass burial pits and cover up the
corpses of more than 2,000 Palestinian women and children.

Many Palestinians remained unburied, however, and Red Cross workers
found whole families in their homes with their throats cut and other
families who had been lined up and machine-gunned, from small children
to elderly grandparents. One infant had been stomped to death by a man
wearing spiked boots.

This was Ariel Sharon's work, but only a part of his work. He is a man
who believes the teaching of the Talmud that only Jews are human
beings, and that all who are not Jews were put on this earth only to
serve the Jews, and that anyone who opposes the Jews deserves to be
killed, and he has acted in accord with this belief all his life.
There are a dozen major atrocities for which he could be tried by the
Hague Tribunal, but the one with which he is charged now is the mass
murder he implemented, as Israel's defense minister, in West Beirut in
September 1982. And the U.S. government, which clamored for Slobodan
Milosevic to be turned over to the Hague Tribunal for trial, pretends
that it knows nothing about Sharon's genocidal crimes against
humanity.

In the 1950s Israel's Mossad, the equivalent of the CIA in the United
States, sent hundreds of letter bombs to German scientists working in
Egypt and Syria, killing a number of them.

In 1967, during Israel's war against Egypt, the Israeli army carried
out a number of mass executions of Egyptian prisoners of war in the
Sinai, forcing them to dig ditches, then lining them up and shooting
them. Dozens of eyewitnesses to these mass executions have reported
what they saw, but the world's politicians and media bosses pretend
not to know.
Also in 1967 Israel attacked the U.S. Navy ship, the U.S.S. Liberty,
attempting to sink it and kill its crew and then blame the sinking on
the Egyptians.

Israeli agents have carried out assassinations and other terrorist
operations around the world. One of the most colorful of these
operations -- and one of the few that received major media coverage -
was the attempt to murder a prominent Muslim cleric in Jordan in 1997.
Two Israeli agents sprayed poison in the ear of Khaled Meshal as they
walked past him on a sidewalk in Amman. Fortunately, Meshal's
bodyguards were able to catch the two Jews as they ran away, and so
the assassination attempt was publicized.

Israel has stolen nuclear materials and nuclear weapons technology
from the United States to build an illegal nuclear arsenal. Israel
also is known to have developed an arsenal of biological and chemical
weapons of mass destruction.

None of these Israeli activities is secret. Those I've mentioned are
just a few of the ones that were found out and publicized. Not
publicized very much, of course. In fact, they all were dropped from
the news pretty quickly. Still, everyone attending Mr. Bush's speech
at the United Nations last Saturday knew about them. And yet, no one
stood up and booed. No one walked out in protest. Bush's speech was
covered by all of the major newspapers and television networks in the
world, but no reporter for any news medium operating in the West
commented on his hypocrisy. No one mentioned Israel's terrorism.
Everyone knew, but everyone played along.

These people weren't lemmings. Lemmings really don't know any better.
Lemmings are essentially moral creatures; in fact they are
compulsively moral. To lemmings it is essential to feel and think and
act the way they believe they are expected to feel and think and act.
That's morality. Most groups of lemmings believe that it is bad to
lie, to deceive, to be hypocritical. If during George Bush's speech at
the United Nations a substantial part of the audience had walked out
in disgust, and at the end the remaining delegates had stood up and
booed him loudly, and if the media commentators then had remarked with
scorn to their television audiences that Bush is a hypocrite who talks
about stopping state-sponsored terrorism while continuing to finance
Israeli terrorism, the lemmings would have booed him too.

But Bush's lies and hypocrisy were ignored by the media and by the
other delegates. Instead of booing, they applauded him. And so the
lemmings applauded him too. It was all an act for the benefit of the
lemmings. Nearly all politics these days, nearly every speech or
public appearance by a politician or a government official, is an act
of showmanship. What is said has relatively little relationship to
what the politician
actually is thinking.

ertainly, last Saturday George Bush wasn't really thinking about
waging war on countries that sponsor terrorism or harbor terrorists.
He was thinking first and foremost about the importance of pleasing
the Jewish media with his speech. He may have been keeping his fingers
crossed and hoping that no Arab delegate would jump up during his
speech and shout at him, "What about Israel? You say that we should
wage war on states that sponsor terrorism. Israel engages in
state-sponsored terrorism more than Afghanistan and all the other
countries in the Middle East combined. When will you send your B-52s
to carpet-bomb Tel Aviv and Jerusalem?" And at the end he must have
marveled to himself how smoothly the act went and how easy it is to
deceive the public.

Crookedness of this sort has been going on for a long time. There are
only two things that make this latest crookedness noteworthy. First,
it is being used to justify yet another war that is not in the
interests of the American people. It is being used to justify dropping
cluster bombs on villagers whom we have no good reason to kill. And
second, it is a lot more obviously crooked than usual. Osama bin Laden
caught the Bush government and the media by surprise, and they didn't
have time to refine and polish their lies. All they could do was
pretend that they had no idea why he would attack the United States
and then claim that it must be because he hates our freedom. They
didn't have time to put up
their usual smokescreen of obfuscation. They simply launched their
denunciations of terrorism and terrorists and of governments that
tolerate terrorism and hoped that no one would say anything about
Israel or Ariel Sharon or Israel's policies of assassination and
torture.

Because the crookedness is more obvious now than usual, more
perceptive people than usual are noticing it and saying something
about it, and that's good. But these perceptive few who are unhappy
enough about the crookedness to speak out have little or no voice in
the mass media, and so the lemmings remain oblivious to the realities
of the situation.
That's the wonderful thing about democracy: you don't have to try to
fool all of the people; all you have to do is fool most of the people
all of the time, and that's pretty easy to do when you control the
mass media. You can just ignore the few who refuse to go along with
the act, and the great majority of the voters will never notice.

So why do I care that the system is crooked? Why should you care? Why
not just pretend not to notice the crookedness and go along with it,
like everyone else? Pretend to be a lemming, but stay alert to
possibilities for profiting from the fact that, unlike the lemmings,
you really are secretly aware of who's who and what's what. That's
what the
big shots do. That's what the people do who care only about themselves
and don't give a damn what happens to their country or their race or
the civilization built by their race, as long as they personally are
able to turn a profit from events. That's what George Bush does. He
pretends to care about all sorts of things. He pretends to be outraged
by terrorism, but he shakes Ariel Sharon's hand and gives him a big
hug whenever Sharon shows up in Washington. He pretends not to be
aware of Sharon's record as a mass murderer, a war criminal, a
terrorist, a man who sends out teams of assassins and orders the
Israeli police to torture prisoners.

A lot of people think and behave the way George Bush does. A lot of
people believe that's the only smart way to be. We're living in a
society in which a great many people are completely alienated,
completely disconnected from any sense of responsibility to race or
nation or to anyone but themselves: amoral people, people willing to
do anything they believe is personally advantageous, people for whom
every public expression is simply an act. And because there are so
many people like that, including virtually everyone in the government
and in the media, America is very, very sick.

I'll go further: individuals who think and behave that way are sick.
George Bush is a very sick man. Anyone who consciously and
deliberately betrays his own race or his own nation, anyone who
commits treason, is a defective person, a sick person. And George
Bush, by consciously following a policy he knows is not in the
interests of America but only serves Israel's interests, a policy he
knows is responsible for the September 11 attack against America, a
policy he continues to follow despite that knowledge, is a traitor.
That's George Bush I'm talking about, the President of the United
States. He may look stupid, but he knows what he's doing. George Bush
believes he's a smart guy, a guy who
knows which side his bread is buttered on, a guy who can get away with
anything as long as the Jewish media will back him up. And so far he
has been getting away with it. In a democracy, hypocrisy works; lying
works. As long as you have the mass media on your side you can get
away with anything, because the majority of the voters never will
figure it out.

What has been happening in Mazar-i-Sharif and Kabul and other northern
cities in Afghanistan this week is a good example. The big act put on
by George Bush and his British counterpart Tony Blair and all of their
media supporters since the campaign to destabilize Afghanistan began
last month -- the big act was that the Taliban is a bunch of
tyrannical fanatics who brutalize women, sponsor terrorism, and do
lots of other bad things, and the Northern Alliance, which was
supplied with weapons and money by the U.S. government while we bombed
the Taliban to smithereens, is a bunch of Sunday school teachers and
Boy Scouts. The United States will deliver Afghanistan into the hands
of the Northern Alliance, and then everything will be rosy and
peaceful and democratic. The people who had been tyrannized by the
Taliban will be free and happy
under the Northern Alliance. The Americans will be the good guys, who
have made this wonderful improvement possible.

Well, of course, it hasn't worked out that way. As soon as the
Northern Alliance took over each city it began rounding up people it
didn't like, people who belonged to the wrong tribe, for example, and
raping and killing them. There have been dozens of mass executions and
mass rapes by the Northern Alliance troops this week. There are a lot
of people they don't like. And the ones who just get raped or shot are
the lucky ones. Eyes are being gouged out, breasts are being cut off,
prisoners are being castrated and impaled and skinned alive or burned
to death. That's the way things are done in the Middle East. When the
British tried to pacify the country in the 19th century, the rule was
never to
let yourself be taken alive. If you were wounded and left behind, you
always saved your last cartridge for yourself. Rudyard Kipling wrote
about that:

"When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains,

"And the women come out to cut up what remains,

"Jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains

"An' go to your Gawd like a soldier."

The Russians learned the same lesson, to their sorrow, just a little
over a decade ago. And the military people around George Bush
certainly were aware of the experiences of the British and the
Russians. The Taliban indeed may be a rough and brutal bunch, but no
more rough and brutal than the people paid and armed by the U.S.
government. When the
Taliban was in charge at least there was peace and stability. There
were no massacres or gang rapes. The U.S. government, with its bombing
campaign and its mercenary troops in the Northern Alliance, has
succeeded in destabilizing large portions of Afghanistan, and the
rapes and mutilations and mass executions have started.

But the lemmings won't hear enough about that for it to sink in.
George Bush will continue lying and smirking and pretending that the
Northern Alliance are the good guys, and America is bringing freedom
and democracy and happiness to Afghanistan. What the United States
actually is trying to do is set up a government a little more corrupt
than that
of the Taliban: a government that we can control with bribes and
threats and that will not be a danger to Israel. That's the whole
purpose of our war against Afghanistan.

It's the same sort of crookedness that we saw in connection with the
Second World War. The pretext that the British government used for
declaring war against Germany in 1939 was the safeguarding of Poland's
freedom. When the Roosevelt government in the United States finally
was able to use the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor as an excuse for
jumping into the war against Germany, the act by the media and the
politicians here was that Americans were being the good guys and would
bomb the Germans to smithereens in order to protect American freedom
and the freedom of Europe. And the people to whom we shipped military
supplies so they could help us were the Soviets under good old Uncle
Joe Stalin, that kind and fatherly fellow who also was being
threatened by the wicked Germans.

Of course, what we did, after carpet-bombing German cities and killing
enough Germans to make them surrender, was turn Poland and the Baltic
states and half the rest of Europe over to communist rule for half a
century. It had never been the intention of either the British
government or the U.S. government to free anybody. We knew what sort
of people the communists were. We knew that they had butchered the
cream of the Polish nation in the Katyn forest and elsewhere - 25,000
Polish military officers and professors and physicians and engineers
and writers - but our government and media people pretended that it
was the Germans who had done it and that we were "liberating" Europe
from the
Germans and protecting American freedom, which never was threatened by
the Germans.

It was all an act. The aim was not to safeguard anybody's freedom; it
was to destroy Germany because the Germans had gotten the Jews off
their backs and out of their country. We made war against Germany in
order to make Europe safe for the Jews and for no other reason. We are
making war against Afghanistan now in order to make the Middle East
safe for the Jews, and for no other reason. Everything else is an act
to keep the public fooled. And the public will be fooled: just as they
never figured out what World War Two was all about, they won't figure
out what the war against Afghanistan is all about. They may hear
rumors about the massacres being carried out now by the Northern
Alliance, but the television people won't spell it out for them, won't
show them gory pictures of the piles of corpses, and so the public
won't get it.

So again, why should you care? Why not just go along with the act, the
way the big shots do?

That's a hard question to answer, in this sense: If you're like George
Bush or any of the other big shots who think they're being smart by
going along with the act and collaborating with the Jews against their
own people - if you think that's the smart way to behave - then you
won't understand my answer, no matter how carefully I explain it. If
you're a person who already is totally alienated - if you're an amoral
person who already is completely disconnected from your race and its
traditions and values and you think of yourself solely as an
individual scrambling to get an advantage over other individuals by
any means that will work - you won't understand my answer.

But if you still have some sense of being a part of something larger
and more permanent than yourself -- if you still have a sense of
racial identity, a sense of kinship with a larger family of fellow
Europeans, of fellow White men and women with whom you share
traditions and values and a way of looking at the world - if you value
the civilization your ancestors built over the last 5,000 years, if
you think of it as your civilization - then my answer is superfluous.
You already know the answer. You already understand why you must not
collaborate with creatures who secretly sneer at your values, who are
contemptuous of the traditions and history of your people, who have
been working for
thousands of years to corrupt your civilization, and who are
determined to annihilate your race. You already understand why men who
do collaborate with these creatures must not be permitted to make laws
and set policies governing your people. You understand that instead of
being applauded and looked at with respect, they should be hanged as
traitors
and as a warning to others who might be tempted also to betray our
people. You already understand that truthfulness and righteousness are
their own reward.

Thanks for being with me again today.

http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com

[Carl]

Topaz wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Oct 2007 11:43:20 -0400, "Carl"
> <crot...@NOSPAMoptonline.net> wrote:
>
>
>> Actually, the title of the book is "An Empire of Their Own: How the
>> Jews INVENTED Hollywood". You conveniently left that out.
>>
>> So, if the Jews are credited with having INVENTED Hollywood, why
>> would you expect them to not be the ones to RUN the business they
>> CREATED? So what then would be the huge revelation here?
>
> It's bad to have Jews making the movies because they were the ones
> behind Communism:
>
> Article Winston Churchill wrote in 1920:
> "This movement amongst the Jews (the Russian Revolution) is not new.
>

I see Topaz. So all those Russian pogroms, where entire villages of men,
women, and children were wiped out, were imaginary? Or were the Jews the
driving force behind the pogroms in order to gain support for their cause to
make Russia communist? How does that work?

And, please tell me, why it matters if the people making the movies were
behind communism? What does political affiliation have to do with movie
making? Are you single-handedly trying to re-ignite the McCarthy era?

Besides, I think the movies made back then were damn good, don't you?

[Doug]

"Tani Jantsang©" <tjs...@spampost.com> wrote in message

news:13ge8tm...@corp.supernews.com...

>
>>
>> As far as Arab/Muslim immigration is concerned, I don't think they
>> counted on very much immigration from them, or at least them gaining any
>> substantial political clout, else they wouldn't have championed liberal
>> immigration as they did. This will surely come back to bite them in
>> their collective asses.
>
> Oh, you bet it will. Arabs are coming here and DOING the same thing these
> Jews did - they know the tactics. Here it is tho. Doug and others on
> here moaning about the Mudslums in Europe. Just what would happen IF
> Europeans converted to Islam? It's not hard to do, btw. It's super easy.
> Their civilization wouldn't vanish at all, they'd still DO what they do.
> There are heaps of Islamic countries that are very secular. Is America
> secular? How about the evangelicals - are they secular?

You're delusional. ALL MUSLIM countries have laws that proscribe
punishment for CRIMES AGAINST ISLAM. ALL OF THEM. Try publicly
burning a Koran in any muslim country and see if you survive long
enough to be tried for crimes against islam.

> ALL of this preceeds the current problems in Europe with Moslems and the
> current problems with illgals and a lot of other stuff right here. It's
> the cause of ALL of it. The ROOT. These people on here mostly are
> griping about the mere branches.
>

It's not the mudslums committing terrorist acts, it's the joos. That makes
about as much sense as the namesake for your satanist 'nym ever did.

[Doug]

"Imam Contemptus Mundi" <im...@divinepraxeology.org> wrote in message
news:imam-DF1407.2...@news.motzarella.org...
>

> Poor Doug, while I feel certain that he is well-intentioned, there are
> none so blind as those who refuse to see.
>
> Doug, have you ever wondered why Jews have been rejected from just about
> every European country over the last millennium? Doesn't that interest
> you?
>
> Imam
>

Europe isn't worried about the couple of million joos still there. They
are worried about the tens of millions of towelheads preaching jihad.

I'm shaking in my boots I'm so worried about the joos.

[Doug]

You really need to read up on the concept of infidel in the
religion of islam. You might also want to look up the concept
of: "first Saturday, then Sunday". BTW, you're still an infidel
even if you're:

i. a satanist
ii. an atheist
iii. an agnostic
iv. anything other than muslim.

The islamic invasion of Europe didn't differentiate between
Christians and joos.

Keep livin' in your fantasy world though.

"Topaz" <mars...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:pokeg3l4dui1n8fit...@4ax.com...

[Doug]

Osama has directly threatened the US APART from
Israel. If you think islam is your ally then move to a 7th
century, third world, islamic theocracy and have fun. I
guarantee you your life will be joo free.

"Topaz" <mars...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:ulkeg3hq9g2rjcdgr...@4ax.com...

[Doug]

"Tani Jantsang©" <tjs...@spampost.com> wrote in message

news:13gdhks...@corp.supernews.com...

>
> "Doug" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:n3vNi.735$y21...@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net...
>> South Park had a great episode on anti-semitic tourette's syndrome just
>> last night.
>
> Nice cop out.
>>
>> Here's a clue for you, the greatest problem in Europe today isn't the
>> joos, it's islam. That's why the organization SIOE (Stop the Islamization
>> of Europe) was formed. Your puerile attempt to deflect criticism of islam
>> by attempting to blame the joos is just so much BS.
>
> And how did Islamization GET TO BE a problem there - or illegals get to be
> a
> problem here? That's what you are digging your head in the sand about.
> Pat
> Buchannan knows the same things I know.

So the joos are responsible for the rise of islamic
fundamentalism/terrorism?

>>
>> If you love islam, move back to your third world, 7th century islamic
>> theocracy and don't forget to pack your burkha.
>
> Your purile attempt to link me with Islamics when I said the SAME THINGS
> Pat
> Buchannan has said - is pathetic. That's like doing exactly what the
> illegals do - by trying to pull a switcheroo. It won't work.
>

SOmetimes it seems like you're spouting nothing but islamic propaganda.
Islamic propaganda wants me to believe that the joos are who I should
be afraid of.

>
> Yes, our problem right now is illegals and Islamics and Europe's problem
> right
> now IS ISLAM - and illegals. But HOW did that GET TO BE a problem? I
> just
> told you. If you insist on remaining ignorant about it - fine. Pat
> Buchannan is highly informed about the exact things I tried to tell you.
>

I agree w/you on the above.

>
> Yes indeed, Europe MUST deal with the Islamic invasion - by any means
> necessary. They might need a Hitler to fix what's wrong there. So be it.
> But when that's all ironed out, Europeans must ensure that this kind of
> subverting of their PEOPLE - NEVER HAPPENS AGAIN.
>

I agree w/you on this last point too.

[Doug]

"Topaz" <mars...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:oaleg3dr7gvg8kb9j...@4ax.com...

> On Fri, 5 Oct 2007 11:06:58 -0700, "Doug" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>>South Park had a great episode on anti-semitic tourette's syndrome just
>>last night.
>
> Jews control the TV.
>

Even the Spanish speaking stations? Even the Christian channels?

>
> Jews say that being "anti-Semitic" is a terrible crime. Do they say
> being "anti-Arab" is a terrible crime? What about "anti-Christian", or
> "anti-German"? Of course the Jews think
> they are special. Any other group could be our enemy, but not the
> Jews, they say. The Jews tell us the Arabs are our enemies. The
> Jewish controlled media tells us that the Jews are America's only
> friend in the Middle East. The truth is that before the Jews America
> didn't have any enemies in the Middle East.
>

You are delusional. Osama Bin Laden's threats against the western
nations have never been tied to Israel. The founding father of
the Muslim brotherhood also condemned western civilization irrespective
of the Israel connection.

>
> Americans had a revolution when they were ruled by the British. If
> the British accused
> them of being "anti-British" would the Americans throw down their guns
> and apologize?
> Now that America is ruled by the Jews it is no insult to be called
> "anti-Semite". The insult is that they think we care about their self
> serving verbiage.
>

I'm ruled by Joos? Gee, the LA city council and LA county board
of supervisors are dominated by hispanics/latinos NOT joos.
Joos don't get affirmative action/preferential hiring programs or
bilingual educational programs. I guess the joos aren't that efficient
at ruling the US are they?

>
> "There may be some truth in that if the Arabs have some complaints
> about my policy towards Israel, they have to realize that the Jews in
> the U.S. control the entire information and propaganda machine, the
> large newspapers, the motion pictures, radio and television, and the
> big companies. And there is a force that we have to take into
> consideration."
>

That was what? 30 years ago?

> Here's why Jews hate theocracies:
>
> Jewish Leaders in the Homosexual Movement
>

> Allan Ginsburg - late Jewish poet and leading member of North American
> Man Boy Love Association
>

A dead joo? Wasn't Goebbels gay?

Are you muslim?

[Imam Contemptus Mundi]

In article <0qZNi.6918$6p6....@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net>,
"Doug" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:

You've got a valid point, the Jews are not violent like Muslims- at
least in Europe they're not. In the Middle East, however ...

Muslims in Europe are a problem, no doubt about it. Most Europeans would
probably agree with that since they have to live with them.
Before the Muslims, it was Jews with whom Europeans had major issues.

[Doug]

"Tani Jantsang©" <tjs...@spampost.com> wrote in message

news:13gdhkr...@corp.supernews.com...

Nope, not jewish, but who knows, maybe one of my great-great-great
grandfathers was jewish?

>
> I sincerely HOPE that Hitler-type people, as STRONG as that I mean - ready
> to DO whatever it takes, rise up in European countries and FIX the
> problems
> in 1 year. I want to live to see this. And then, after the Islamic and
> illegal problems get FIXED there - heh heh - they have to ENSURE that this
> kind of shit can never happen again. Same here. Oh yes, Pat Buchannan
> knows ALL about the CAUSE of all European troubles right now. So does
> Kevin
> MacDonald - but you SNIPPED IT OUT. Why did you snip the MacDonald
> information out?
>

Sounds good to me, but trying to blame the joos for the problems is
ridiculous
at this point -- especially considering there's so few of them left in
Europe after
the holocaust.

I've had friends shot & robbed by latino gangsters, beatdown by latino
gangsters
and I myself have been threatened to be "domed" by black gangsters and
"jumped"
by latino gangsters. I haven't really seen, read or heard of anyone being
jumped, killed
or robbed by jewish gangsters so it's hard for you or topaz or imam to
instill in me
any great fear of the jewish people. All I can say, is that all three of you
must lead
a charmed life to live in such fear of the joos. If I were to drop any one
of you off in
E. Los Angeles, CA; Santa Ana, CA; Boyle Heights, CA; Compton, CA;
Inglewood,
CA; late on a Friday or Saturday night I think you might know what it's like
to live in
a ghetto neigborhood and how the joos are the least of my concerns.

One other intersting tidbit, 40 years ago Boyle Heights was a nice, jewish
neighborhood.
Now it's a run-down, graffitti covered, crime-ridden, gang controlled latino
ghetto. WHy
don't YOU tell me it's a BETTER community NOW than it was 40 years ago. If
you think
it's better let me drop you off there on a late Friday or Saturday night and
let's see how
long you survive.

[Doug]

"Topaz" <mars...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:8kleg3ph2jv2kt68f...@4ax.com...

> The Value of Truth and Righteousness
> By Dr. William Pierce
>
> Last Saturday George Bush addressed the United Nations General
> Assembly, urging all of the member nations to join the United States
> in bringing pressure to bear against all countries that sponsor
> terrorism or harbor terrorists. He did it in his standard mock-serious
> way, barely suppressing a smirk. Everyone applauded, including the
> representative of a country that from its founding until the present
> day has sponsored
> terrorism. That country, of course, is Israel.
>

Of course, it's Israel that's responsible for world-wide islamic
terrorism!

>
> The prime minister of Israel, Ariel Sharon, is a war criminal, a mass
> murderer, with the blood of thousands of women and children on his
> hands. He is being sought now for trial by the same Hague Tribunal
> that succeeded in extraditing former Yugoslav President Slobodan
> Milosevic for trial on charges of crimes against humanity in Kosovo,
> the same
> Hague Tribunal that already has tried and sentenced soldiers who raped
> and murdered in Bosnia and in Rwanda.
>

Proof please.

> In 1982, during Israel's invasion of Lebanon, Ariel Sharon was
> Israel's defense minister. After the bloody terror-bombing of civilian
> neighborhoods in Beirut that killed thousands of Lebanese and
> Palestinian civilians -- terror bombing carried out by Jews flying
> military aircraft supplied to Israel by the United States - Sharon
> arranged for the evacuation of Palestinian fighters from Lebanon.
> Palestinian women, children, and old people were left behind in
> refugee camps, with their safety guaranteed by the United States. On
> the night of September 16, 1982, Sharon sent murder squads into two
> Palestinian refugee camps, Sabra and Chatila, in West Beirut to kill
> the unarmed
> Palestinian civilians in the camps. With Israeli tanks and troops
> surrounding the camps to prevent any of the Palestinians from
> escaping, Sharon's murder squads shot, knifed, and bludgeoned
> Palestinian civilians all that night and the next day and the
> following night, while the Israelis around the camps listened
> gleefully to the shots and screams coming from inside. Then Sharon
> sent in bulldozers to scoop out mass burial pits and cover up the
> corpses of more than 2,000 Palestinian women and children.
>

Proof please. Not that I don't trust your islamic propaganda sources...

>
> This was Ariel Sharon's work, but only a part of his work. He is a man
> who believes the teaching of the Talmud that only Jews are human
> beings, and that all who are not Jews were put on this earth only to
> serve the Jews, and that anyone who opposes the Jews deserves to be
> killed, and he has acted in accord with this belief all his life.

Do you have any citations to back this up? I've read the bible and
I don't remember reading anything along these lines.

> There are a dozen major atrocities for which he could be tried by the
> Hague Tribunal, but the one with which he is charged now is the mass
> murder he implemented, as Israel's defense minister, in West Beirut in
> September 1982. And the U.S. government, which clamored for Slobodan
> Milosevic to be turned over to the Hague Tribunal for trial, pretends
> that it knows nothing about Sharon's genocidal crimes against
> humanity.
>

I'd like to see some proof.

> In the 1950s Israel's Mossad, the equivalent of the CIA in the United
> States, sent hundreds of letter bombs to German scientists working in
> Egypt and Syria, killing a number of them.
>

Proof?

>
> In 1967, during Israel's war against Egypt, the Israeli army carried
> out a number of mass executions of Egyptian prisoners of war in the
> Sinai, forcing them to dig ditches, then lining them up and shooting
> them. Dozens of eyewitnesses to these mass executions have reported
> what they saw, but the world's politicians and media bosses pretend
> not to know.
>

Proof?

> Also in 1967 Israel attacked the U.S. Navy ship, the U.S.S. Liberty,
> attempting to sink it and kill its crew and then blame the sinking on
> the Egyptians.
>

I know this is true, but Israel did reimburse the families of those
killed -- unlike your islamic buddies who NEVER do.

> Israeli agents have carried out assassinations and other terrorist
> operations around the world. One of the most colorful of these
> operations -- and one of the few that received major media coverage -
> was the attempt to murder a prominent Muslim cleric in Jordan in 1997.
> Two Israeli agents sprayed poison in the ear of Khaled Meshal as they
> walked past him on a sidewalk in Amman. Fortunately, Meshal's
> bodyguards were able to catch the two Jews as they ran away, and so
> the assassination attempt was publicized.
>

I don't think I'm going to be crying for any mudslums anytime soon.
Proof?

> Israel has stolen nuclear materials and nuclear weapons technology
> from the United States to build an illegal nuclear arsenal. Israel
> also is known to have developed an arsenal of biological and chemical
> weapons of mass destruction.
>

Proof?

>
> ertainly, last Saturday George Bush wasn't really thinking about
> waging war on countries that sponsor terrorism or harbor terrorists.
> He was thinking first and foremost about the importance of pleasing
> the Jewish media with his speech. He may have been keeping his fingers
> crossed and hoping that no Arab delegate would jump up during his
> speech and shout at him, "What about Israel? You say that we should
> wage war on states that sponsor terrorism. Israel engages in
> state-sponsored terrorism more than Afghanistan and all the other
> countries in the Middle East combined. When will you send your B-52s
> to carpet-bomb Tel Aviv and Jerusalem?" And at the end he must have
> marveled to himself how smoothly the act went and how easy it is to
> deceive the public.
>

God what a load of unsubstantiated BS. If you can't dazzle them w/
data, baffle them w/BS eh? Pile it higher and deeper, say it often
and everyone will beleive it?

>
> I'll go further: individuals who think and behave that way are sick.
> George Bush is a very sick man. Anyone who consciously and
> deliberately betrays his own race or his own nation, anyone who
> commits treason, is a defective person, a sick person. And George
> Bush, by consciously following a policy he knows is not in the
> interests of America but only serves Israel's interests, a policy he
> knows is responsible for the September 11 attack against America, a
> policy he continues to follow despite that knowledge, is a traitor.

Proof please.

> government. When the
> Taliban was in charge at least there was peace and stability. There
> were no massacres or gang rapes. The U.S. government, with its bombing
> campaign and its mercenary troops in the Northern Alliance, has
> succeeded in destabilizing large portions of Afghanistan, and the
> rapes and mutilations and mass executions have started.
>

"Peace and stability"? LOL. Islamic peace and stability.

> But the lemmings won't hear enough about that for it to sink in.
> George Bush will continue lying and smirking and pretending that the
> Northern Alliance are the good guys, and America is bringing freedom
> and democracy and happiness to Afghanistan. What the United States
> actually is trying to do is set up a government a little more corrupt
> than that
> of the Taliban: a government that we can control with bribes and
> threats and that will not be a danger to Israel. That's the whole
> purpose of our war against Afghanistan.
>

Duh, Al Quaida was using Afghanistan as its base of operations, I
wonder if that had anything to do w/our invasion?

>
> It was all an act. The aim was not to safeguard anybody's freedom; it
> was to destroy Germany because the Germans had gotten the Jews off
> their backs and out of their country. We made war against Germany in
> order to make Europe safe for the Jews and for no other reason. We are
> making war against Afghanistan now in order to make the Middle East
> safe for the Jews, and for no other reason.

Are you on drugs?

>
> But if you still have some sense of being a part of something larger
> and more permanent than yourself -- if you still have a sense of
> racial identity, a sense of kinship with a larger family of fellow
> Europeans, of fellow White men and women with whom you share
> traditions and values and a way of looking at the world - if you value
> the civilization your ancestors built over the last 5,000 years, if
> you think of it as your civilization - then my answer is superfluous.
> You already know the answer. You already understand why you must not
> collaborate with creatures who secretly sneer at your values, who are
> contemptuous of the traditions and history of your people, who have
> been working for
> thousands of years to corrupt your civilization, and who are
> determined to annihilate your race. You already understand why men who
> do collaborate with these creatures must not be permitted to make laws
> and set policies governing your people. You understand that instead of
> being applauded and looked at with respect, they should be hanged as
> traitors
> and as a warning to others who might be tempted also to betray our
> people. You already understand that truthfulness and righteousness are
> their own reward.
>
> Thanks for being with me again today.
>

I always wondered if neo-nazi organizations were being funded/financed
by islamic interests, I guess I have my answer now.

[Doug]

Go to San Quentin and ask the Aryan Brotherhood if they have
any fear of the jewish conspiracy. Go to San Quentin and ask
ANYONE If they fear the joos.

"Topaz" <mars...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:nk1bg3d7op53odiku...@4ax.com...

[Imam Contemptus Mundi]

In article <XVZNi.6924$6p6....@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net>,
"Doug" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:

LOL, no one said fear, Doug. Apparently you don't grasp what is being
discussed. Sources cited earlier in this thread are Jewish sources who
are now pleading with their Jewish brothers and organizations to change
their stance on immigration policy into the U.S. They have been big
movers and shakers in influencing immigration policy. Your experiences
with latino and black gangsters are a direct result of Jewish lobbying
for open immigration policies and multiculturalism. It's all well
documented by Jews themselves. That's what Jani is talking about when
she makes reference to "the ROOT(s)" of the problem. What is so hard to
understand about that?

> If I were to drop any one
> of you off in
> E. Los Angeles, CA; Santa Ana, CA; Boyle Heights, CA; Compton, CA;
> Inglewood,
> CA; late on a Friday or Saturday night I think you might know what it's like
> to live in
> a ghetto neigborhood and how the joos are the least of my concerns.
>
> One other intersting tidbit, 40 years ago Boyle Heights was a nice, jewish
> neighborhood.
> Now it's a run-down, graffitti covered, crime-ridden, gang controlled latino
> ghetto. WHy
> don't YOU tell me it's a BETTER community NOW than it was 40 years ago. If
> you think
> it's better let me drop you off there on a late Friday or Saturday night and
> let's see how
> long you survive.

Hmmm... why did the Jews abandon their neighborhood when the gangstas
started moving in? They advocated for it. You get to deal with it.

[Defendario]

Doug wrote:
> "Tani Jantsang©" <tjs...@spampost.com> wrote in message
> news:13gdhks...@corp.supernews.com...
>> "Doug" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>> news:n3vNi.735$y21...@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net...
>>> South Park had a great episode on anti-semitic tourette's syndrome just
>>> last night.
>> Nice cop out.
>>> Here's a clue for you, the greatest problem in Europe today isn't the
>>> joos, it's islam. That's why the organization SIOE (Stop the Islamization
>>> of Europe) was formed. Your puerile attempt to deflect criticism of islam
>>> by attempting to blame the joos is just so much BS.
>> And how did Islamization GET TO BE a problem there - or illegals get to be
>> a
>> problem here? That's what you are digging your head in the sand about.
>> Pat
>> Buchannan knows the same things I know.
>
> So the joos are responsible for the rise of islamic
> fundamentalism/terrorism?
>

Yes, absolutely. When the zioNist thugs ran the Palestinian Muslims out
of Palestine, they brought the wrath of 1.5 billion Muslims down on
them. Because we make it possible for the zioNazi thugs to continue
oppressing Muslims, they hate us as well.

Not hard to understand at all. Pull your head out, Douggyboi.

>>> If you love islam, move back to your third world, 7th century islamic
>>> theocracy and don't forget to pack your burkha.
>> Your purile attempt to link me with Islamics when I said the SAME THINGS
>> Pat
>> Buchannan has said - is pathetic. That's like doing exactly what the
>> illegals do - by trying to pull a switcheroo. It won't work.
>>
>
> SOmetimes it seems like you're spouting nothing but islamic propaganda.
> Islamic propaganda wants me to believe that the joos are who I should
> be afraid of.
>

The jooz threaten the world with nuclear annihilation if their ghetto is
overrun. You should be afraid -- they're blackmailing you.

http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/israel/destroycaps.html

>> Yes, our problem right now is illegals and Islamics and Europe's problem
>> right
>> now IS ISLAM - and illegals. But HOW did that GET TO BE a problem? I
>> just
>> told you. If you insist on remaining ignorant about it - fine. Pat
>> Buchannan is highly informed about the exact things I tried to tell you.
>>
>
> I agree w/you on the above.
>

Of course. You're a xenophobe, so you hate immigrants no matter where
they hail from. But you're blind to the fact that jooz are every bit as
alien, and treasonous, as any other auslander. Maybe worse, in fact.

>> Yes indeed, Europe MUST deal with the Islamic invasion - by any means
>> necessary. They might need a Hitler to fix what's wrong there. So be it.
>> But when that's all ironed out, Europeans must ensure that this kind of
>> subverting of their PEOPLE - NEVER HAPPENS AGAIN.
>>
>
> I agree w/you on this last point too.
>

Again, you agree with the Satanist Tenni because you are morally weak,
and a plain bigot.

>

[Defendario]

Doug wrote:
> Go to San Quentin and ask the Aryan Brotherhood if they have
> any fear of the jewish conspiracy. Go to San Quentin and ask
> ANYONE If they fear the joos.
>

The brighter ones do. You should.

http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/israel/destroycaps.html

[Topaz]

On Sat, 6 Oct 2007 17:16:08 -0400, "Carl"
<crot...@NOSPAMoptonline.net> wrote:

>I see Topaz. So all those Russian pogroms, where entire villages of men,
>women, and children were wiped out, were imaginary?

In researching Jewish history, the investigator discovers a wide
variance of written material. Work by authors expressly critical of
Jews (and they include a surprising number of Jewish commentators,
mostly "apostates" of one kind or another) is invariably labeled by
today's political conventions to be "anti-Semitic" in nature. There is
a large body of such material extending throughout history, written by
critics wherever Jews were to be found. Observations about Jewish
life by non-Jews is startlingly consistent over two thousand years.
Consistently credible Gentile themes in attacks against Jews include
Jewish elitism, their insularity and clannishness, their disdain for
non-Jews, their exploitive and deceptive behavior towards those not
their own, the suspicion of Jewish national loyalties and allegiance
to the lands they lived in, excessive Jewish proclivity for money and
economic domination, and an economic "parasitism" (the concentration
of Jews in lucrative non-productive fields of finance-usury, money
lending, etc.-at the expense of non-Jewish communities).

"Hatred for the Jews," Abram Leon writes, "does not date solely from
the birth of Christianity. Seneca treated the Jews as a criminal race.
Juvenal believed that the Jews only existed to cause evil for other
peoples. Quintilian said that Jews were a curse for other people"
(Leon, 71).
In 59 BC the Roman statesman Cicero criticized Jewish "clannishness"
and "influence in the assemblies." In the second century AD Celsus,
one of Rome's great medical writers, wrote that Jews "pride themselves
in possessing superior wisdom and disdain for the company of other
men." Philostratus, an ancient Greek author, believed that Jews "have
long since risen against humanity itself. They are men who have
devised a misanthropic life, who share neither food nor drink with
others." (Cf. Shakespeare's Merchant of Venice, I, iii, 29-32.) The
great Roman historian Tacitus (A.D. 56-120) declared that "the Jews
are extremely loyal toward one another, and are always ready to show
compassion [for their fellow Jews], but toward other people they feel
only hate and enmity" (Morais, 46).

Centuries later Voltaire's criticism of Jews, in his Essai sur le
Moeurs, repeated many of the same charges: "The Jewish nation dares to
display an irreconcilable hatred toward all nations, and revolts
against all masters; always superstitious, always greedy for the
well-being enjoyed by others, always barbarous-cringing in misfortune
and insolent in prosperity."
"However uncomfortable it is to recognize," says Albert Lindemann,
"not all those whom historians have classified as anti-Semites were
narrow bigots, irrational, or otherwise incapable of acts of altruism
and moral courage. They represented a bewildering range of opinion and
personality types" (Lindemann, 13). And why is this "uncomfortable
[for Jews] to recognize?" Because, by even a child's exercise of logic
and common sense, the common denominator of all such disparate people
can only be the enduring truths about Jews as each observer
experienced them in varying historical and cultural circumstances.
The French Jewish intellectual (and eventual Zionist), Bernard Lazare,
among many others in history, noted this obvious fact in 1894, long
before the Nazi persecutions of Jews and resultant institutionalized
Jewish efforts to deny, or obfuscate, crucial-and central- aspects of
their history:
Wherever the Jews settled one observes the development of
anti-Semitism, or rather anti-Judaism ... If this hostility, this
repugnance had been shown towards the Jews at one time or in one
country only, it would be easy to account for the local cause of this
sentiment. But this race has been the object of hatred with all
nations amidst whom it settled.
Inasmuch as the enemies of Jews belonged to diverse races, as
they dwelled far apart from one another, were ruled by
different laws and governed by opposite principles; as they had
not the same customs and differed in spirit from one another,
so that they could not possibly judge alike of any subject, it
must needs be that the general causes of anti-Semitism have always
resided in [the people of] Israel itself, and not in those who
antagonized it (Lazare, 8).
Excerpts from from When Victims Rule, online at Jewish Tribal Review.
http://www.jewishtribalreview.org/wvr.htm

> Or were the Jews the
>driving force behind the pogroms in order to gain support for their cause to
>make Russia communist? How does that work?

Article Winston Churchill wrote in 1920:
"This movement amongst the Jews (the Russian Revolution) is not new.

>

>And, please tell me, why it matters if the people making the movies were
>behind communism? What does political affiliation have to do with movie
>making? Are you single-handedly trying to re-ignite the McCarthy era?

THERE IS NO GREATER POWER in the world today than that wielded by the
manipulators of public opinion in America. No king or pope of old, no
conquering general or high priest ever disposed of a power even
remotely approaching that of the few dozen men who control America's
mass media of news and entertainment.
Their power is not distant and impersonal; it reaches into every home
in America, and it works its will during nearly every waking hour. It
is the power that shapes and molds the mind of virtually every
citizen, young or old, rich or poor, simple or sophisticated.
The mass media form for us our image of the world and then tell us
what to think about that image. Essentially everything we know-or
think we know-about events outside our own neighborhood or circle of
acquaintances comes to us via our daily newspaper, our weekly news
magazine, our radio, or our television.
It is not just the heavy-handed suppression of certain news stories
from our newspapers or the blatant propagandizing of
history-distorting TV "docudramas" that characterizes the
opinion-manipulating techniques of the media masters. They exercise
both subtlety and thoroughness in their management of the news and the
entertainment that they present to us.
For example, the way in which the news is covered: which items are
emphasized and which are played down; the reporter's choice of words,
tone of voice, and facial expressions; the wording of headlines; the
choice of illustrations-all of these things subliminally and yet
profoundly affect the way in which we interpret what we see or hear.
On top of this, of course, the columnists and editors remove any
remaining doubt from our minds as to just what we are to think about
it all. Employing carefully developed psychological techniques, they
guide our thought and opinion so that we can be in tune with the "in"
crowd, the "beautiful people," the "smart money." They let us know
exactly what our attitudes should be toward various types of people
and behavior by placing those people or that behavior in the context
of a TV drama or situation comedy and having the other TV characters
react in the Politically Correct way.
Molding American Minds
For example, a racially mixed couple will be respected, liked, and
socially sought after by other characters, as will a "take charge"
Black scholar or businessman, or a sensitive and talented homosexual,
or a poor but honest and hardworking illegal alien from Mexico. On the
other hand, a White racist-that is, any racially conscious White
person who looks askance at miscegenation or at the rapidly darkening
racial situation in America-is portrayed, at best, as a despicable
bigot who is reviled by the other characters, or, at worst, as a
dangerous psychopath who is fascinated by firearms and is a menace to
all law-abiding citizens. The White racist "gun nut," in fact, has
become a familiar stereotype on TV shows.
The average American, of whose daily life TV-watching takes such an
unhealthy portion, distinguishes between these fictional situations
and reality only with difficulty, if at all. He responds to the
televised actions, statements, and attitudes of TV actors much as he
does to his own peers in real life. For all too many Americans the
real world has been replaced by the false reality of the TV
environment, and it is to this false reality that his urge to conform
responds. Thus, when a TV scriptwriter expresses approval of some
ideas and actions through the TV characters for whom he is writing,
and disapproval of others, he exerts a powerful pressure on millions
of viewers toward conformity with his own views.
And as it is with TV entertainment, so it is also with the news,
whether televised or printed. The insidious thing about this form of
thought control is that even when we realize that entertainment or
news is biased, the media masters still are able to manipulate most of
us. This is because they not only slant what they present, but also
they establish tacit boundaries and ground rules for the permissible
spectrum of opinion.
As an example, consider the media treatment of Middle East news. Some
editors or commentators are slavishly pro-Israel in their every
utterance, while others seem nearly neutral. No one, however, dares
suggest that the U.S. government is backing the wrong side in the
Arab-Jewish conflict, or that 9-11 was a result of that support. Nor
does anyone dare suggest that it served Jewish interests, rather than
American interests, to send U.S. forces to cripple Iraq, Israel's
principal rival in the Middle East. Thus, a spectrum of permissible
opinion, from pro-Israel to nearly neutral, is established.
Another example is the media treatment of racial issues in the United
States. Some commentators seem almost dispassionate in reporting news
of racial strife, while others are emotionally partisan-with the
partisanship always on the non-White side. All of the media spokesmen
without exception, however, take the position that "multiculturalism"
and racial mixing are here to stay and that they are good things.
Because there are differences in degree, however, most Americans fail
to realize that they are being manipulated. Even the citizen who
complains about "managed news" falls into the trap of thinking that
because he is presented with an apparent spectrum of opinion he can
escape the thought controllers' influence by believing the editor or
commentator of his choice. It's a "heads I win, tails you lose"
situation. Every point on the permissible spectrum of public opinion
is acceptable to the media masters-and no impermissible fact or
viewpoint is allowed any exposure at all, if they can prevent it.
The control of the opinion-molding media is nearly monolithic. All of
the controlled media-television, radio, newspapers, magazines, books,
motion pictures-speak with a single voice, each reinforcing the other.
Despite the appearance of variety, there is no real dissent, no
alternative source of facts or ideas accessible to the great mass of
people that might allow them to form opinions at odds with those of
the media masters. They are presented with a single view of the
world-a world in which every voice proclaims the equality of the
races, the inerrant nature of the Jewish "Holocaust" tale, the
wickedness of attempting to halt the flood of non-White aliens pouring
across our borders, the danger of permitting citizens to keep and bear
arms, the moral equivalence of all sexual orientations, and the
desirability of a "pluralistic," cosmopolitan society rather than a
homogeneous, White one. It is a view of the world designed by the
media masters to suit their own ends-and the pressure to conform to
that view is overwhelming. People adapt their opinions to it, vote in
accord with it, and shape their lives to fit it.
And who are these all-powerful masters of the media? As we shall see,
to a very large extent they are Jews. It isn't simply a matter of the
media being controlled by profit-hungry capitalists, some of whom
happen to be Jews. If that were the case, the ethnicity of the media
masters would reflect, at least approximately, the ratio of rich
Gentiles to rich Jews. Despite a few prominent exceptions, the
preponderance of Jews in the media is so overwhelming that we are
obliged to assume that it is due to more than mere happenstance.

Electronic News & Entertainment Media
Continuing government deregulation of the telecommunications industry
has resulted, not in the touted increase of competition, but rather in
an accelerating wave of corporate mergers and acquisitions that have
produced a handful of multi-billion-dollar media conglomerates. The
largest of these conglomerates are rapidly growing even bigger by
consuming their competition, almost tripling in size during the 1990s.
Whenever you watch television, whether from a local broadcasting
station or via cable or a satellite dish; whenever you see a feature
film in a theater or at home; whenever you listen to the radio or to
recorded music; whenever you read a newspaper, book, or magazine-it is
very likely that the information or entertainment you receive was
produced and/or distributed by one of these megamedia companies:
Time Warner. The largest media conglomerate today is Time Warner
(briefly called AOL-Time Warner; the AOL was dropped from the name
when accounting practices at the AOL division were questioned by
government investigators), which reached its current form when America
Online bought Time Warner for $160 billion in 2000. The combined
company had revenue of $39.5 billion in 2003. The merger brought
together Steve Case, a Gentile, as chairman of AOL-Time Warner, and
Gerald Levin, a Jew, as the CEO. Warner, founded by the Jewish Warner
brothers in the early part of the last century, rapidly became part of
the Jewish power base in Hollywood, a fact so well-known that it is
openly admitted by Jewish authors, as is the fact that each new media
acquisition becomes dominated by Jews in turn: Speaking of the initial
merger of Time, Inc. with Warner, Jewish writer Michael Wolff said in
New York magazine in 2001 "since Time Inc.'s merger with Warner ten
years ago, one of the interesting transitions is that it has become a
Jewish company." ("From AOL to W," New York magazine, January 29,
2001)
The third most powerful man at AOL-Time Warner, at least on paper, was
Vice Chairman Ted Turner, a White Gentile. Turner had traded his
Turner Broadcasting System, which included CNN, to Time Warner in 1996
for a large block of Time Warner shares. By April 2001 Levin had
effectively fired Ted Turner, eliminating him from any real power.
However, Turner remained a very large and outspoken shareholder and
member of the board of directors.
Levin overplayed his hand, and in a May 2002 showdown, he was fired by
the company's board. For Ted Turner, who had lost $7 billion of his $9
billion due to Levin's mismanagement, it was small solace. Turner
remains an outsider with no control over the inner workings of the
company. Also under pressure, Steve Case resigned effective in May
2003. The board replaced both Levin and Case with a Black, Richard
Parsons. Behind Parsons the Jewish influence and power remains
dominant.
AOL is the largest Internet service provider in the world, with 34
million U.S. subscribers. It is now being used as an online platform
for the Jewish content from Time Warner. Jodi Kahn and Meg Siesfeld,
both Jews, lead the Time Inc. Interactive team under executive editor
Ned Desmond, a White Gentile. All three report to Time Inc.
editor-in-chief Norman Pearlstine, a Jew. Their job is to transfer
Time Warner's content to target specific segments of America Online's
audience, especially women, children, and teens.
Time Warner was already the second largest of the international media
leviathans when it merged with AOL. Time Warner's subsidiary HBO (26
million subscribers) is the nation's largest pay-TV cable network.
HBO's "competitor" Cinemax is another of Time Warner's many cable
ventures.
Until the purchase in May 1998 of PolyGram by Jewish billionaire Edgar
Bronfman, Jr., Warner Music was America's largest record company, with
50 labels. Warner Music was an early promoter of "gangsta rap."
Through its involvement with Interscope Records (prior to Interscope's
acquisition by another Jewish-owned media firm), it helped to
popularize a genre whose graphic lyrics explicitly urge Blacks to
commit acts of violence against Whites. Bronfman purchased Warner
Music in 2004, keeping it solidly in Jewish hands.
In addition to cable and music, Time Warner is heavily involved in the
production of feature films (Warner Brothers Studio, Castle Rock
Entertainment, and New Line Cinema). Time Warner's publishing division
is managed by its editor-in-chief, Norman Pearlstine, a Jew. He
controls 50 magazines including Time, Life, Sports Illustrated, and
People. Book publishing ventures include Time-Life Books,
Book-of-the-Month Club, Little Brown, and many others. Time Warner
also owns Shoutcast and Winamp, the very tools that most independent
Internet radio broadcasters rely on, and, as a dominant player in the
Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), was essentially
"negotiating" with itself when Internet radio music royalty rules were
set that strongly favored large content providers and forced many
small broadcasters into silence. (The Register, "AOL Time Warner takes
grip of net radio," 8th April 2003)
Ted Turner's Lesson: "Be very careful with whom you merge."
When Ted Turner, the Gentile media maverick, made a bid to buy CBS in
1985, there was panic in the media boardrooms across the country.
Turner had made a fortune in advertising and then built a successful
cable-TV news network, CNN, with over 70 million subscribers.
Although Turner had never taken a stand contrary to Jewish interests,
he was regarded by William Paley and the other Jews at CBS as
uncontrollable: a loose cannon who might at some time in the future
turn against them. Furthermore, Jewish newsman Daniel Schorr, who had
worked for Turner, publicly charged that his former boss held a
personal dislike for Jews.
To block Turner's bid, CBS executives invited billionaire Jewish
theater, hotel, insurance, and cigarette magnate Laurence Tisch to
launch a "friendly" takeover of CBS. From 1986 to 1995 Tisch was the
chairman and CEO of CBS, removing any threat of non-Jewish influence
there. Subsequent efforts by Ted Turner to acquire CBS were obstructed
by Gerald Levin's Time Warner, which owned nearly 20 percent of CBS
stock and had veto power over major deals. But when his fellow Jew
Sumner Redstone offered to buy CBS for $34.8 billion in 1999, Levin
had no objections.
Thus, despite being an innovator and garnering headlines, Turner never
commanded the "connections" necessary for being a media master. He
finally decided if you can't lick 'em, join 'em, and he sold out to
Levin's Time Warner. Ted Turner summed it up:

"I've had an incredible life for the most part. I made a lot of smart
moves, and I made a lot of money. Then something happened, and I
merged with Time Warner, which looked like the right thing to do at
the time. And it was good for shareholders.
"But then I lost control. I thought I would have enough moral
authority to have all the influence in the new company. If you go into
business, be very careful with whom you merge.
"I thought I was buying Time Warner, but they were buying me. We had
kind of a difference in viewpoint. Then they merged with AOL, and that
was a complete disaster, at least so far. I have lost 85 percent of my
wealth."

Disney. The second-largest media conglomerate today, with 2003
revenues of $27.1 billion, is the Walt Disney Company. Its leading
personality and CEO, Michael Eisner, is a Jew.
The Disney empire, headed by a man described by one media analyst as a
"control freak," includes several television production companies
(Walt Disney Television, Touchstone Television, Buena Vista
Television) and cable networks with more than 100 million subscribers
altogether. As for feature films, the Walt Disney Motion Pictures
Group includes Walt Disney Pictures, Touchstone Pictures, Hollywood
Pictures, and Caravan Pictures. Disney also owns Miramax Films, run by
the Jewish Weinstein brothers, Bob and Harvey, who have produced such
ultra-raunchy movies as The Crying Game, Priest, and Kids.
When the Disney Company was run by the Gentile Disney family prior to
its takeover by Eisner in 1984, it epitomized wholesome family
entertainment. While it still holds the rights to Snow White, the
company under Eisner has expanded into the production of a great deal
of so-called "adult" material.
In August 1995, Eisner acquired Capital Cities/ABC, Inc., which owns
the ABC television network, which in turn owns ten TV stations
outright in such big markets as New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, Los
Angeles, San Francisco, and Houston. In addition, in the United States
ABC has 225 affiliated TV stations, over 2,900 affiliated radio
stations and produces over 7,200 radio programs. ABC owns 54 radio
stations and operates 57 radio stations, many in major cities such as
New York, Washington, and Los Angeles. Radio Disney, part of ABC Radio
Networks, provides programming targeting children.
Sports network ESPN, an ABC cable subsidiary, is headed by President
and CEO George W. Bodenheimer, who is a Jew. The corporation also
controls the Disney Channel, Toon Disney, A&E, Lifetime Television,
SOAPnet and the History Channel, with between 86 and 88 million
subscribers each. The ABC Family television network has 84 million
subscribers and, in addition to broadcasting entertainment (some of it
quite raunchy for a "family" channel), is also the network outlet for
Christian Zionist TV evangelist Pat Robertson.
Although primarily a telecommunications company, ABC/Disney earns over
$1 billion in publishing, owning Walt Disney Company Book Publishing,
Hyperion Books, and Miramax Books. It also owns six daily newspapers
and publishes over 20 magazines. Disney Publishing Worldwide publishes
books and magazines in 55 languages in 74 countries, reaching more
than 100 million readers each month
On the Internet, Disney runs Buena Vista Internet Group, ABC Internet
Group, ABC.com, ABCNEWS.com, Oscar.com, Mr. Showbiz, Disney Online,
Disney's Daily Blast, Disney.com, Family.com, ESPN Internet Group,
ESPN.sportzone.com, Soccernet.com, NFL.com, NBA.com, Infoseek (partial
ownership), and Disney Interactive.
Viacom. Number three on the list, with 2003 revenues of just over
$26.5 billion, is Viacom, Inc., headed by Sumner Redstone (born Murray
Rothstein), a Jew. Melvin A. Karmazin, another Jew, was number two at
Viacom until June 2004, holding the positions of president and chief
operating officer. Karmazin remains a large Viacom shareholder.
Replacing Karmazin as co-presidents and co-COOs are a Jew, Leslie
Moonves, and Tom Freston, a possible Jew. (We have been unable to
confirm Freston's Jewish ancestry; he has done work for Jewish
organizations and was involved in the garment trade, a heavily Jewish
industry, importing clothing from the Third World to the U.S. in the
1970s.)
Viacom produces and distributes TV programs for the three largest
networks, owns 39 television stations outright with another 200
affiliates in its wholly-owned CBS Television Network, owns 185 radio
stations in its Infinity radio group, and has over 1,500 affiliated
stations through its CBS Radio Network. It produces feature films
through Paramount Pictures, headed by Jewess Sherry Lansing (born
Sherry Lee Heimann), who is planning to retire at the end of 2005.
Viacom was formed in 1971 as a way to dodge an anti-monopoly FCC
ruling that required CBS to spin off a part of its cable TV operations
and syndicated programming business. This move by the government
unfortunately did nothing to reduce the mostly Jewish collaborative
monopoly that remains the major problem with the industry. In 1999,
after CBS had again augmented itself by buying King World Productions
(a leading TV program syndicator), Viacom acquired its progenitor
company, CBS, in a double mockery of the spirit of the 1971 ruling.
Redstone acquired CBS following the December 1999 stockholders' votes
at CBS and Viacom. CBS Television has long been headed by the
previously mentioned Leslie Moonves; the other Viacom co-president,
Tom Freston, headed wholly-owned MTV.
Viacom also owns the Country Music Television and The Nashville
Network cable channels and is the largest outdoor advertising
(billboards, etc.) entity in the U.S. Viacom's publishing division
includes Simon & Schuster, Scribner, The Free Press, Fireside, and
Archway Paperbacks. It distributes videos through its over 8,000
Blockbuster stores. It is also involved in satellite broadcasting,
theme parks, and video games.
Viacom's chief claim to fame, however, is as the world's largest
provider of cable programming through its Showtime, MTV, Nickelodeon,
Black Entertainment Television, and other networks. Since 1989 MTV and
Nickelodeon have acquired larger and larger shares of the juvenile
television audience. MTV dominates the television market for viewers
between the ages of 12 and 24.
Sumner Redstone owns 76 per cent of the shares of Viacom. He offers
Jackass as a teen role model and pumps MTV's racially mixed rock and
rap videos into 342 million homes in 140 countries and is a dominant
cultural influence on White teenagers around the world. MTV also makes
race-mixing movies like Save the Last Dance.
Nickelodeon, with over 87 million subscribers, has by far the largest
share of the four-to-11-year-old TV audience in America and is
expanding rapidly into Europe. Most of its shows do not yet display
the blatant degeneracy that is MTV's trademark, but Redstone is
gradually nudging the fare presented to his kiddie viewers toward the
same poison purveyed by MTV. Nickelodeon continues a 12-year streak as
the top cable network for children and younger teenagers.
NBC Universal. Another Jewish media mogul is Edgar Bronfman, Jr. He
headed Seagram Company, Ltd., the liquor giant, until its recent
merger with Vivendi. His father, Edgar Bronfman, Sr., is president of
the World Jewish Congress.
Seagram owned Universal Studios and later purchased Interscope
Records, the foremost promoter of "gangsta rap," from Warner.
Universal and Interscope now belong to Vivendi Universal, which merged
with NBC in May 2004, with the parent company now called NBC
Universal.
Bronfman became the biggest man in the record business in May 1998
when he also acquired control of PolyGram, the European record giant,
by paying $10.6 billion to the Dutch electronics manufacturer Philips.
In June 2000, the Bronfman family traded Seagram to Vivendi for stock
in Vivendi, and Edgar, Jr. became vice chairman of Vivendi. Vivendi
was originally a French utilities company, and was then led by Gentile
Jean-Marie Messier. A board of directors faction led by Bronfman
forced Messier to resign in July 2002.
Vivendi also acquired bisexual Jew Barry Diller's USA Networks in
2002. (Diller is the owner of InterActive Corporation, which owns
Expedia, Ticketmaster, The Home Shopping Network, Lending Tree,
Hotels.com, CitySearch, Evite, Match.com, and other Internet
businesses.) Vivendi combined the USA Network, Universal Studios,
Universal Television, and theme parks into Vivendi Universal
Entertainment (VUE).
After the Vivendi-NBC merger, Bronfman used his considerable personal
profits to strike out on his own, and recently purchased Warner Music
from Jewish-dominated Time Warner. The current chairman of NBC
Universal is a Gentile often associated with Jewish causes, long-time
NBC employee Bob Wright. Ron Meyer, a Jew, is president and chief
operating officer of Universal Studios. Stacey Snider, also Jewish, is
the chairman of Universal Pictures. The president of NBC Universal
Television Group is Jeff Zucker, another Jew.
With two of the top four media conglomerates in the hands of Jews
(Disney and Viacom), with Jewish executives running the media
operations of NBC Universal, and with Jews filling a large proportion
of the executive jobs at Time Warner, it is unlikely that such an
overwhelming degree of control came about without a deliberate,
concerted effort on the Jews' part.
Other media companies: Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation owns Fox
Television Network, Fox News, the FX Channel, 20th Century Fox Films,
Fox 2000, and publisher Harper Collins. News Corp. is the fifth
largest megamedia corporation in the nation, with 2003 revenues of
approximately $19.2 billion. It is the only other media company which
comes close to the top four.
Its Fox News Channel has been a key outlet pushing the Jewish
neoconservative agenda that lies behind the Iraq War and which
animates both the administration of George W. Bush and the "new
conservatism" that embraces aggressive Zionism and multiracialism.
Murdoch is nominally a Gentile, but there is some uncertainty about
his ancestry and he has vigorously supported Zionism and other Jewish
causes throughout his life. (Historian David Irving has published
information from a claimed high-level media source who says that
Murdoch's mother, Elisabeth Joy Greene, was Jewish, but we have not
been able to confirm this.) Murdoch's number two executive is Peter
Chernin, who is president and chief operating officer-and a Jew.
Under Chernin, Jews hold key positions in the company: Gail Berman
runs Fox Entertainment Group; Mitchell Stern heads satellite
television division DirecTV; Jane Friedman is chairman and CEO of
Harper Collins; and Thomas Rothman is chairman of Fox Filmed
Entertainment. News Corporation also owns the New York Post and TV
Guide, and both are published under Chernin's supervision. The primary
printed neoconservative journal, The Weekly Standard, is also
published by News Corporation and edited by William Kristol, a leading
Jewish neocon spokesman and "intellectual."
Most of the television and movie production companies that are not
owned by the large media corporations are also controlled by Jews.
For example, Spyglass, an "independent" film producer which has made
such films as The Sixth Sense, The Insider, and Shanghai Noon, is
controlled by its Jewish founders Gary Barber and Roger Birnbaum, who
are co-chairmen. Jonathan Glickman serves as president and Paul
Neinstein is executive vice president. Both men are Jews. Spyglass
makes movies exclusively for DreamWorks SKG.
The best known of the smaller media companies, DreamWorks SKG, is a
strictly kosher affair. DreamWorks was formed in 1994 amid great media
hype by recording industry mogul David Geffen, former Disney Pictures
chairman Jeffrey Katzenberg, and film director Steven Spielberg, all
three of whom are Jews. The company produces movies, animated films,
television programs, and recorded music. Considering the cash and
connections that Geffen, Katzenberg, and Spielberg have, DreamWorks
may soon be in the same league as the big four.
One major studio, Columbia Pictures, is owned by the Japanese
multinational firm Sony. Nevertheless, the studio's chairman is Jewess
Amy Pascal, and its output fully reflects the Jewish social agenda.
Sony's music division recently merged with European music giant BMG to
form Sony BMG Music Entertainment, now one of the world's largest
music distributors. It is headed by CEO Andrew Lack, formerly
president and CEO of NBC-and a Jew. Sony's overall American operations
are headed by a Jew named Howard Stringer, formerly of CBS, who hired
Lack.
It is well known that Jews have controlled most of the production and
distribution of films since shortly after the inception of the movie
industry in the early decades of the 20th century. When Walt Disney
died in 1966, the last barrier to the total Jewish domination of
Hollywood was gone, and Jews were able to grab ownership of the
company that Walt built. Since then they have had everything their way
in the movie industry.
Films produced by seven of the firms mentioned above-Disney, Warner
Brothers, Paramount (Viacom), Universal (NBC Universal), 20th Century
Fox (News Corp.), DreamWorks, and Columbia (Sony)-accounted for 94% of
total box-office receipts for the year 2003.
The big three in television network broadcasting used to be ABC, CBS,
and NBC. With the consolidation of the media empires, these three are
no longer independent entities. While they were independent, however,
each was controlled by a Jew since its inception: ABC by Leonard
Goldenson; NBC first by David Sarnoff and then by his son Robert; and
CBS first by William Paley and then by Laurence Tisch. Over several
decades these networks were staffed from top to bottom with Jews, and
the essential Jewishness of network television did not change when the
networks were absorbed by other Jewish-dominated media corporations.
The Jewish presence in television news remains particularly strong.
NBC provides a good example of this. The president of NBC News is Neal
Shapiro. Jeff Zucker is NBC Universal Television Group president.
Reporting directly to Zucker is his close friend Jonathan Wald,
formerly an NBC program producer, now a senior consultant for CNBC.
David M. Zaslav is president of NBC Cable (and also a director of
digital video firm TiVo Inc.). The president of MSNBC is Rick Kaplan.
All of these men are Jews.
A similar preponderance of Jews exists in the news divisions of the
other networks. Sumner Redstone, Tom Freston, and Les Moonves control
Viacom's CBS. Moonves demonstrated his power in 2002 by replacing the
entire staff of the new CBS Early Show. He is also a great-nephew of
Zionist leader David Ben-Gurion, Israel's first prime minister. Al
Ortiz (also a Jew) is executive producer and director of special
events coverage for CBS News. Senior executive producer Michael Bass
and Victor Neufeld (formerly producer of ABC's 20/20) produce the CBS
Early Show; both are Jews.
At ABC, David Westin, who is a Jew according to Jeffrey Blankfort of
the Middle East Labor Bulletin, is the president of ABC News. The
senior vice president for news at ABC is Paul Slavin, also a Jew.
Bernard Gershon, a Jew, is senior vice president/general manager of
the ABC News Digital Media Group, in charge of ABCNEWS.com, ABC News
Productions, and ABC News Video Source.
The Print Media
After television news, daily newspapers are the most influential
information medium in America. About 58 million of them are sold (and
presumably read) each day. These millions are divided among some 1,456
different publications. One might conclude that the sheer number of
different newspapers across America would provide a safeguard against
minority control and distortion. Alas, such is not the case. There is
less independence, less competition, and much less representation of
majority interests than a casual observer would think.
In 1945, four out of five American newspapers were independently owned
and published by local people with close ties to their communities.
Those days, however, are gone. Most of the independent newspapers were
bought out or driven out of business by the mid-1970s. Today most
"local" newspapers are owned by a rather small number of large
companies controlled by executives who live and work hundreds or even
thousands of miles away. Today less than 20 percent of the country's
1,456 papers are independently owned; the rest belong to
multi-newspaper chains. Only 103 of the total number have circulations
of more than 100,000. Only a handful are large enough to maintain
independent reporting staffs outside their own communities; the rest
must depend on these few for all of their national and international
news.
The Associated Press (AP), which sells content to newspapers, is
currently under the control of its Jewish vice president and managing
editor, Michael Silverman, who directs the day-to-day news reporting
and supervises the editorial departments. Silverman had directed the
AP's national news as assistant managing editor, beginning in 1989.
Jewess Ann Levin is AP's national news editor. Silverman and Levin are
under Jonathan Wolman, also a Jew, who was promoted to senior vice
president of AP in November 2002.
In only two per cent of the cities in America is there more than one
daily newspaper, and competition is frequently nominal even among
them, as between morning and afternoon editions under the same
ownership or under joint operating agreements.
Much of the competition has disappeared through the monopolistic
tactics of the Jewish Newhouse family's holding company, Advance
Publications. Advance publications buys one of two competing
newspapers, and then starts an advertising war by slashing advertising
rates, which drives both papers to the edge of bankruptcy. Advance
Publications then steps in and buys the competing newspaper. Often
both papers continue: one as a morning paper and the other as an
evening paper. Eventually, though, one of the papers is closed-giving
the Newhouse brothers the only daily newspaper in that city. For
example, in 2001 the Newhouses closed the Syracuse Herald-Journal
leaving their other Syracuse newspaper, the Post-Journal, with a
monopoly.
The Newhouse media empire provides an example of more than the lack of
real competition among America's daily newspapers: it also illustrates
the insatiable appetite Jews have shown for all the organs of opinion
control on which they could fasten their grip. The Newhouses own 31
daily newspapers, including several large and important ones, such as
the Cleveland Plain Dealer, the Newark Star-Ledger, and the New
Orleans Times-Picayune; Newhouse Broadcasting, consisting of
television stations and cable operations; the Sunday supplement
Parade, with a circulation of more than 35 million copies per week;
some two dozen major magazines, including The New Yorker, Vogue,
Wired, Glamour, Vanity Fair, Bride's, Gentlemen's Quarterly, Self,
House & Garden, and all the other magazines of the wholly-owned Conde
Nast group. The staffing of the magazines is, as you might expect,
quite Kosher. Parade can serve as an example: Its publisher is Randy
Siegel, its editor and senior vice president is Lee Kravitz, its
creative director is Ira Yoffe, its science editor is David H. Levy,
and its health editor is Dr. Isadore Rosenfeld.
This Jewish media empire was founded by the late Samuel Newhouse, an
immigrant from Russia. When he died in 1979 at the age of 84, he
bequeathed media holdings worth an estimated $1.3 billion to his two
sons, Samuel and Donald. With a number of further acquisitions, the
net worth of Advance Publications has grown to more than $9 billion
today. The gobbling up of so many newspapers by the Newhouse family
was facilitated by newspapers' revenue structure. Newspapers, to a
large degree, are not supported by their subscribers but by their
advertisers. It is advertising revenue-not the small change collected
from a newspaper's readers-that largely pays the editor's salary and
yields the owner's profit. Whenever the large advertisers in a city
choose to favor one newspaper over another with their business, the
favored newspaper will flourish while its competitor dies. Since the
beginning of the last century, when Jewish mercantile power in America
became a dominant economic force, there has been a steady rise in the
number of American newspapers in Jewish hands, accompanied by a steady
decline in the number of competing Gentile newspapers-to some extent a
result of selective advertising policies by Jewish merchants.
Furthermore, even those newspapers still under Gentile ownership and
management are so thoroughly dependent upon Jewish advertising revenue
that their editorial and news reporting policies are largely
constrained by Jewish likes and dislikes. It holds true in the
newspaper business as elsewhere that he who pays the piper calls the
tune.

Three Jewish Newspapers
The suppression of competition and the establishment of local
monopolies on the dissemination of news and opinion have characterized
the rise of Jewish control over America's newspapers. The resulting
ability of the Jews to use the press as an unopposed instrument of
Jewish policy could hardly be better illustrated than by the examples
of the nation's three most prestigious and influential newspapers: the
New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and the Washington Post.
These three, dominating America's financial and political capitals,
are the newspapers that set the trends and the guidelines for nearly
all the others. They are the ones that decide what is news and what
isn't at the national and international levels. They originate the
news; the others merely copy it. And all three newspapers are in
Jewish hands.
The New York Times, with a 2003 circulation of 1,119,000, is the
unofficial social, fashion, entertainment, political, and cultural
guide of the nation. It tells America's "smart set" which books to buy
and which films to see; which opinions are in style at the moment;
which politicians, educators, spiritual leaders, artists, and
businessmen are the real comers. And for a few decades in the 19th
century it was a genuinely American newspaper.
The New York Times was founded in 1851 by two Gentiles, Henry J.
Raymond and George Jones. After their deaths, it was purchased in 1896
from Jones's estate by a wealthy Jewish publisher, Adolph Ochs. His
great-great-grandson, Arthur Sulzberger, Jr., is the paper's current
publisher and the chairman of the New York Times Co. Russell T. Lewis,
also a Jew, is president and chief executive officer of The New York
Times Company. Michael Golden, another Jew, is vice chairman. Martin
Nisenholtz, a Jew, runs their massive Internet operations.
The Sulzberger family also owns, through the New York Times Co., 33
other newspapers, including the Boston Globe, purchased in June 1993
for $1.1 billion; eight TV and two radio broadcasting stations; and
more than 40 news-oriented Web operations. It also publishes the
International Herald Tribune, the most widely distributed
English-language daily in the world. The New York Times News Service
transmits news stories, features, and photographs from the New York
Times by wire to 506 other newspapers, news agencies, and magazines.
Of similar national importance is the Washington Post, which, by
establishing its "leaks" throughout government agencies in Washington,
has an inside track on news involving the Federal government.
The Washington Post, like the New York Times, had a non-Jewish origin.
It was established in 1877 by Stilson Hutchins, purchased from him in
1905 by John R. McLean, and later inherited by Edward B. McLean. In
June 1933, however, at the height of the Great Depression, the
newspaper was forced into bankruptcy. It was purchased at a bankruptcy
auction by Eugene Meyer, a Jewish financier and former partner of the
infamous Bernard Baruch, a Jew who was industry czar in America during
the First World War. The Washington Post was run by Katherine Meyer
Graham, Eugene Meyer's daughter, until her death in 2001. She was the
principal stockholder and board chairman of the Washington Post
Company; and she appointed her son, Donald Graham, publisher of the
paper in 1979. Donald became Washington Post Company CEO in 1991 and
its board chairman in 1993, and the chain of Jewish control at the
Post remains unbroken. The newspaper has a daily circulation of
732,000, and its Sunday edition sells over one million copies.
The Washington Post Company has a number of other media holdings in
newspapers (the Gazette Newspapers, including 11 military
publications); in television (WDIV in Detroit, KPRC in Houston, WPLG
in Miami, WKMG in Orlando, KSAT in San Antonio, WJXT in Jacksonville);
and in magazines, most notably the nation's number-two weekly
newsmagazine, Newsweek.
The Washington Post Company's various television ventures reach a
total of about 12 million homes, and its cable TV service, Cable One,
has 750,000 subscribers.
The Wall Street Journal sells 1,820,000 copies each weekday and is
owned by Dow Jones & Company, Inc., a New York corporation that also
publishes 33 other newspapers and the weekly financial tabloid
Barron's. The chairman and CEO of Dow Jones is Peter R. Kann, who is a
Jew. Kann also holds the posts of chairman and publisher of the Wall
Street Journal.
Most of New York's other major newspapers are in no better hands than
the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal. In January 1993 the
New York Daily News (circulation 729,000) was bought from the estate
of the late Jewish media mogul Robert Maxwell (born Ludvik Hoch) by
Jewish real-estate developer Mortimer B. Zuckerman. Another Jew, Les
Goodstein, is the president and chief operating officer of the New
York Daily News. And, as mentioned above, the neocon-slanted New York
Post (circulation 652,000) is owned by News Corporation under the
supervision of Jew Peter Chernin.

News Magazines
The story is much the same for other media as it is for television,
radio, films, music, and newspapers. Consider, for example,
newsmagazines. There are only three of any importance published in the
United States: Time, Newsweek, and U.S. News & World Report.
Time, with a weekly circulation of 4.1 million, is published by a
subsidiary of Time Warner Communications, the news media conglomerate
formed by the 1989 merger of Time, Inc., with Warner Communications.
The editor-in-chief of Time Warner Communication is Norman Pearlstine,
a Jew.
Newsweek, as mentioned above, is published by the Washington Post
Company, under the Jew Donald Graham. Its weekly circulation is 3.2
million.
U=2ES. News & World Report, with a weekly circulation of 2.0 million,
is owned and published by the aforementioned Mortimer B. Zuckerman,
who also has taken the position of editor-in-chief of the magazine for
himself. Zuckerman also owns New York's tabloid newspaper, the Daily
News, which is the sixth-largest paper in the nation.

Our Responsibility
Those are the facts of media control in America. Anyone willing to
spend a few hours in a large library looking into current editions of
yearbooks on the radio and television industries and into directories
of newspapers and magazines; into registers of corporations and their
officers, such as those published by Standard and Poors and by Dun and
Bradstreet; and into standard biographical reference works can verify
their accuracy. They are undeniable. When confronted with these facts,
Jewish spokesmen customarily will use evasive tactics. "Ted Turner
isn't a Jew!" they will announce triumphantly, as if that settled the
issue. If pressed further they will accuse the confronter of
"anti-Semitism" for even raising the subject. It is fear of this
accusation that keeps many persons who know the facts silent.
But we must not remain silent on this most important of issues. The
Jewish control of the American mass media is the single most important
fact of life, not just in America, but in the whole world today. There
is nothing-plague, famine, economic collapse, even nuclear war-more
dangerous to the future of our people.
Jewish media control determines the foreign policy of the United
States and permits Jewish interests rather than American interests to
decide questions of war and peace. Without Jewish media control, there
would have been no Persian Gulf war, for example. There would have
been no NATO massacre of Serb civilians. There would have been no Iraq
War, and thousands of lives would have been saved. There would have
been little, if any, American support for the Zionist state of Israel,
and the hatreds, feuds, and terror of the Middle East would never have
been brought to our shores.
By permitting the Jews to control our news and entertainment media we
are doing more than merely giving them a decisive influence on our
political system and virtual control of our government; we also are
giving them control of the minds and souls of our children, whose
attitudes and ideas are shaped more by Jewish television and Jewish
films than by parents, schools, or any other influence.
The Jew-controlled entertainment media have taken the lead in
persuading a whole generation that homosexuality is a normal and
acceptable way of life; that there is nothing at all wrong with White
women dating or marrying Black men, or with White men marrying Asian
women; that all races are inherently equal in ability and
character-except that the character of the White race is suspect
because of a history of oppressing other races; and that any effort by
Whites at racial self-preservation is reprehensible.
We must oppose the further spreading of this poison among our people,
and we must break the power of those who are spreading it. It would be
intolerable for such power to be in the hands of any alien minority
with values and interests different from our own. But to permit the
Jews, with their 3,000-year history of nation-wrecking, from ancient
Egypt to Russia, to hold such power over us is tantamount to race
suicide. Indeed, the fact that so many White Americans today are so
filled with a sense of racial guilt and self-hatred that they actively
seek the death of their own race is a deliberate consequence of Jewish
media control.
Once we have absorbed and understood the fact of Jewish media control,
it is our inescapable responsibility to do whatever is necessary to
break that control. We must shrink from nothing in combating this evil
power that has fastened its deadly grip on our people and is injecting
its lethal poison into our people's minds and souls. If our race fails
to destroy it, it certainly will destroy our race.

>
>Besides, I think the movies made back then were damn good, don't you?
>

As Neal Gabler points out in his book An Empire of Their Own, ". . .
the Jewish immigrants who founded the film business wanted more than
wealth and power: they felt a powerful craving for acceptance as
mainstream Americans . . . With this goal in mind, the films of
Hollywood's Golden Era invariably portrayed clergymen in a sympathetic
light . . . " In more recent years however, ". . . Hollywood has swung
to the opposite extreme-presenting a view of the clergy that is every
bit as one-sided in its cynicism and hostility as the old treatment
may have been idealized . . . "

[Topaz]

"Knowing who did the terrorism of September 11 is important, but why
they did
it is even more important to us.

Yet, strangely, there has been little discussion in the mass media on
why the attack occurred. Politicians and media personalities have
given us completely inadequate explanations why a couple of dozen
young men would blow themselves up to get at us. In fact, they have
told us absurd lies to keep Americans from understanding the real
reason for the attacks.

We have been told that the attackers were simply crazy, cowardly men
who committed a quote "unprovoked attack." Media and government
spokesmen repeatedly assured us that these attacks had "nothing to do
with America's support of Israel." The official view, as expressed by
the President to the U.S. Congress, was that the terrorists attacked
us because they hate our freedom! Here is an excerpt of his remarks
before Congress

"Americans are asking, "Why do they hate us?"

"They hate what they see right here in this chamber: a democratically
elected government. Their leaders are self-appointed. They hate our
freedoms."

I am not trying to be disrespectful, but what he said is so ridiculous
that even this intellectually challenged President cannot really
believe it. Does Bush really think that a bunch of young men would
give up their families, their homes, and immolate themselves in a huge
ball of fire simply because they hate our democracy! Right on Mr.
President! Next week, will we will hear about Islamic kamikazes
crashing planes into Iceland, the oldest enduring democracy on earth.

Mr. Bush is asking America to support a massive war over the next ten
years. We are being asked to support a massive conflict whose huge
costs could well bankrupt America and cause the loss of great numbers
of American lives. Before we can make such a crucial decision, we
deserve to have the whole truth concerning this cataclysmic event.

Of course, Mr. Bush did not tell us the truth; he simply repeated the
Big Lie put out by the American mass media.

Saying that these acts were born out of hatred for freedom is a
calculated lie to divert us from associating this disaster with our
support for Israel.

You see, associating the attack with our Israeli policy would be bad
public relations for Israel and the Jewish Lobby. The last thing they
want is for the American people to realize that our unconditional
support of Israel has directly led to this disaster.

If the American people clearly understand that fact, people might
begin to ask a similar question to the one asked by Leslie Stahl, "Is
our support of Israel really worth it?"

To keep people from asking that obvious question, the media made up
the Big Lie that the men of October 11 were simply crazy, cowardly
people who hated freedom and democracy!

The real reason for the attack

Even the date the terrorists chose for this attack shows their true
motivation.

The attack occurred on September 11. That is the anniversary of the
League of Nations proclaiming in Palestine the British Mandate in
1922. The date represents the first physical step toward the
implementation of the Balfour Declaration and the establishment of
Israel.

Why has the mass media kept this important fact from the American
people?

Frankly, this fact has been suppressed because the American media are
thoroughly dominated by Jews. Many Americans suspect that Jews have
disproportionate influence in the press, but their actual power is
more than most people imagine. If you want documented proof of their
enormous media power, just go to my web page, www.davidduke.com and
read the "Who Runs the Media?" chapter from my book, My Awakening.
(Located at http://www.davidduke.com/awakening/chapter19_01.html)

Just as Jewish Israel-Firsters dominate the mass media, so the Israeli
Lobby afflicts Congress and the President. It should anger every
American to think that the most powerful lobby in Congress is in the
service of a foreign nation. Yet, the immense power of the Jewish
Lobby is a proven fact, and nobody on Capitol Hill will dare defy this
all-powerful lobby. Even one of the most powerful U.S. Senators in
American history, William Fulbright, bluntly said on CBS's Face the
Nation, that, "Israel controls the U.S.
Senate."

Recently, a Hebrew Israeli radio station, Kol Yisrael, on October 3rd
reported that during an argument in an Israeli cabinet meeting, Shimon
Peres warned Prime Minister Ariel Sharon that unless he would heed
American requests for a cease fire with the Palestinians, he could
cause America to turn against Israel. In a fit of anger, Sharon
responded to Peres:

"Every time we do something, you tell me America will do this and will
do that . . . I want to tell you something very clear: Don't worry
about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people, control
America, and the Americans know it." (2)

The media bosses and the Israel-bought politicians know the real
reasons behind this terrorism. They have read the interviews of Osama
Bin Laden. He and almost every other Islamic opponent of America has
put support for Israel at the top of their top ten reasons for hating
America. Bin Laden and countless millions in the Muslim world regard
the attacks on Lebanon, on Iraq, on Libya, on Iran, on Afghanistan and
on Sudan as a direct result of Israel's control over America.

They point out that the many Israeli massacres of Palestinians, the
ongoing torture of thousands of prisoners, the use of assassination of
political enemies, the bombing of refugee camps, and the expansive
wars launched by Israeli's against their Arab neighbors; that all
these Israeli crimes are completely dependent on unconditional
American aid. They also see the deaths of the 500,000 Iraqi children,
as admitted by our former Jewish Secretary of State, as a direct
result of Jewish control of America.

The American people, who are under the bombardment of a biased
multimedia, might not realize the Jewish control of American foreign
policy, but the Palestinians and their allies such as Bin Laden, all
understand it; and they hate us for it.

In fact, the same mass media that are giving out the Big Lie that the
terrorist motivation is "hate for freedom," are clearly aware of Bin
Laden's real motivations.

I can easily prove the true motivation of bin Laden and I can prove
the media has known the truth all along. In May of 1998 reporter John
Miller of ABC interviewed Bin Laden. Bin Laden talks about why he
seeks to attack America. You can find it on the ABC and the PBS web
sites. Here are excerpts of bin Laden's own words.

"For over half a century, Muslims in Palestine have been slaughtered
and assaulted and robbed of their honor and of their property. Their
houses have been blasted, their crops destroyed.

"This is my message to the American people: to look for a serious
government that looks out for their interests and does not attack
other people's lands, or other people's honor. And my word to American
journalists is not to ask why we did that but ask what their
government has done that forced us to defend ourselves."

"So we tell the Americans as people, and we tell the mothers of
soldiers and American mothers in general that if they value their
lives and the lives of their children, to find a patriotic government
that will look after their interests and not the interests of the
Jews."

I say to them that they have put themselves at the mercy of a disloyal
government, and this is most evident in Clinton's administration. We
believe that this administration represents Israel inside America.
Take the sensitive ministries such as the Secretary of State and the
Secretary of Defense and the CIA, you will find that the Jews have the
upper hand in them. They make use of America to further their plans
for the world.

In the interview, bin Laden never said one word about opposing
democratic principles, nor has he ever done so in his lifetime. So,
now we know Laden's true motivation. He attacked us not because he
"hates democracy", but because he thinks Israel controls and uses
America to attack his people."

David Duke

(1) THE SUNDAY MAIL (2001) Sept. 16
(2) Israeli Hebrew radio, Col Yisrael Wednesday

---------------------------------------------------------------

Your support makes our work possible. We need your help now more than
ever.
Please help our efforts with an online donation today.

Make a donation today by clicking here:
http://www.whitecivilrights.com/donate.shtml

IMPORTANT ONLINE LINKS

Learn more about EURO at: http://www.whitecivilrights.com/faq.shtml
How to join EURO online: http://www.whitecivilrights.com/join.shtml
How to download an application and mail it in:
http://www.whitecivilrights.com/join.shtml
Where to find local EURO Chapters:
http://www.whitecivilrights.com/ero_contacts.shtml
Where to read our press releases:
http://www.whitecivilrights.com/news/
Watch news clips and interviews:
http://www.davidduke.com/video/index.html
Where to buy books, tapes or stickers: www.davidduke.net
Read sample chapters online from David Duke's book "My Awakening":
http://www.davidduke.com/awakening/toc.html

[Topaz]

Thanks for being with me again today.

[Topaz]

"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

[Topaz]

On Sun, 07 Oct 2007 04:46:09 GMT, "Doug" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:

>You really need to read up on the concept of infidel in the
>religion of islam. You might also want to look up the concept
>of: "first Saturday, then Sunday". BTW, you're still an infidel
>even if you're:
>
>i. a satanist
>ii. an atheist
>iii. an agnostic
>iv. anything other than muslim.
>
>The islamic invasion of Europe didn't differentiate between
>Christians and joos.
>
>Keep livin' in your fantasy world though.
>

"Christians and Moslems manage to get along in the Mid-East. This
writer observed them in Gaza. Baptists go to church next to the
Mosque, and when they are not in church, members seem to work together
as best they can. Churches are not a historic enemy to Islam in Iraq.
Coptic, Catholic, and Orthodox churches often date back to Roman
times, still standing with Christian cemeteries around them, undefiled
through the ages of Islamic domination. Christians in Iraq say they
do not hate Muslims, but many Evangelicals in America practice hatred
of Islam that is now manifested in destruction and death. Jesus words
object.

The Southern Baptist Convention has had no explanation for this
peaceful co-existence with Islam; its publications play it down or
ignore it. The evangelicals? views of the Mideast demand both racial
and religious hatred. The Baptist Mission Board even ignores its own
church in Gaza, housed in a dome roofed ancient mosque. This writer
documented the story of its members in a previous article.
Evangelicals tell us Islam detests Baptists and would kill them on
sight. Christians in the land of Islam live their lives out
otherwise, and any serious observation supports their version.

In Gaza the wall in front of the Baptist church has the same
anti-Israeli graffiti as does the wall in front of the Mosque nearby.
Their members suffer Israeli occupation side by side. If they do not
love each other, they certainly coexist in peace. We Hold These
Truths receives reports from Christians and Muslims from Damascus to
Ammon. There is an uneasy peace made worse by anti-Islamic statements
spewed forth from evangelical Enabler churches and celebrities in
America.

How would Islam benefit from bombing churches? If Christians stay
home from church or emigrate out of fear, how does this make Iraq more
independent? It does not.

It is sad that Iraqis would bomb other Iraqis who are hungry and
desperate for work and who hate the occupation, but who take
Army-funded jobs at a police station. But this can be understood in
war, the Iraqis do not want a compromised, 56-year occupation as the
Palestinians have.

Who benefits?
We don't know who planted the bombs but we do know that American
evangelical celebrities facilitated and enabled the act. Without the
Enablers constant condemnation of Islam, there would have been no
reason for the propaganda bombing of five churches, because there
would be no market for the propaganda that is being distributed
through the evangelicals in the USA.

We have read all the accounts of the bombings. As expected, they are
being blamed on an unknown Islamic group. Consider what is likely:

* If an Islamic militant group bombed the churches and wanted to
terrorize Christians, they would have taken credit for it the first
hour, as they have with kidnappings, and they would have promised more
bombings, or asked for something. No one did.

* The "group" that belatedly did claim the blame for the bombings
was
anonymous and unknown and did not have a formal name or spokesman. It
offered no plausible reason for this significant act. It could have
been created on a cell phone after the bombing or in an office in
London, and it probably was. The US-appointed Iraqi government did
not point this out, nor did our press.

* Most Muslims who we know fear God, they do not hate Him, and would
be correctly afraid to bomb a church--afraid of God, not of men. And
Muslims, unlike the Israelis, believe Jesus was on very good terms
with the one God, whom they call Allah. They do not challenge Allah;
they fear Him as righteous.

* If secularists did the bombing, there would be Muslims who would
know about It, and would tell. It was too big a scheme to keep it
quiet this long.

* The churches in Iraq are traditional, not evangelical; they do
not hold to the neo-evangelical interpretations that hold Israel to be
a God image that must be worshiped. They do not share the chosen
people theology that enables the war on Islam.

* Islam is not anti-Christian, as we Christians are told. The
Qur'an says much about Jesus and Mary, and is more than respectful.
One passage, (S.5.78-84) seems to be all about trust and coexistence
with followers of Christ. Verse 82 reads:

Strongest among men in enmity to the Believer wilt thou find the Jews
and Pagans; Nearest among them in love to the Believers wilt thou find
those who say "We are Christians" because amongst there are men
devoted to learning. And men who have renounced the world and they are
not arrogant.

Clearly this was not written about evangelical-Zionist (Enablers) who,
to the contrary, openly call for genocide against Islam, even its
total liquidation, and some are boldly arrogant about it.

Many untrue yarns are spun on the Internet depicting a hate filled
Qur'an. We Hold These Truths has investigated several and found that
most are not there, or seem to be intentionally distorted. Our paper
called Internet Tales about Islam details some of these. We find some
statements we have been given by evangelical Enablers to be outright
untrue on their face. Even the most popular story among evangelicals
about the prize of "72 virgins" for martyrs in Paradise (like the car
bomber) may be a hoax. As best this writer can tell, it is not in the
Qur'an; we are still waiting for someone to show us otherwise.

One of the worst we have heard, Dr. Robert Morey, who calls himself a
"Christian" and who has written several books about Islam, openly
preaches for the incineration of Mecca, Medina and The Dome of the
Rock.

Leading Muslim clerics have condemned the bombing as cowardly and
unbecoming of Islam, but christian-Zionists take denial as a sign of
guilt. And prominent Christian leaders in Iraq have not suggested
Muslims were responsible, and have spoken out in solidarity with them.

Who Could Have Done It?
The State of Israel and what is currently being called the US
"Neo-Con" establishment, which really controls Israel and holds
absolute control over the present Bush administration and past Clinton
administration as well, are the beneficiaries of wars.

Israelis would not think twice of bombing churches because they have
already done it. They have also attacked mosques and killed Muslim
leaders in front of at least one mosque. Israelis have even been
known to damage their own synagogues to get sympathy. The State of
Israel shelled two or more Christian churches in Palestine. Israel's
agents are known to be operating in Iraq and are probably more likely
to have bombed the churches than the CIA or Halliburton's paid
mercenaries. They are used to this kind of assassination, and they
know how to keep quiet. If this is true, you can bet the incident will
just die down and disappear from the press.

The tale of the church bombings will never disappear from the
preaching of the evangelical-Zionist, who will blame the Arabs
everywhere, with or without proof.

Who Is Responsible?
Though we will probably never know for certain who bombed the five
churches, we can be sure the blood is on the hands of the Enabler
reverends, evangelical celebrities, and on their willing followers.
The deaths of every one of the eleven church-going Christians is their
responsibility because without them there would be no reason for the
bombing. Whoever did it simply obliged these evangelical Enablers by
creating more grist for Israeli promoted Christian-Zionist hate mills.
Hate enabled the war and the occupation; hate keeps the occupation
going. Only love will end it.

An Israeli "BUS19", in which 11 Israeli civilians died, was imported
to the US from Israel in May. "Eleven" happens to be the same number
of civilian Iraqis killed in the five Church bombings. A team or
speakers associated with The Unity Coalition for Israel is touring
evangelical Enabler churches with the bus, giving the misleading
message that Palestinians are murderers, and Islam is a religion of
violence. Our account of this is called Israeli Hate-Bus Tours
America.

The five damaged churches are the Iraqi equivalent of BUS19, another
trophy to be displayed at churches in America. Without the insatiable
desire of christian-Zionist celebrities for more "proof of Arab
violence" there would have been no church bombings in Iraq because no
other purpose was served. This writer is no longer alone among
Followers of Christ in blaming evangelical Enablers for war.

As reported in the "New York Times," in a speech on March 9, 2003,
former President James Earl Carter criticized his own Southern Baptist
Convention for supporting the "unilateral attack on Iraq." Carter did
not dignify the attack by calling it a war. He went on to implicate
Israel in the occupation of Iraq, saying,

"a few Southern Baptist leaders (favor war) who were greatly
influenced by their commitment to Israel based on eschatological, or
final days theology."

Mr. Carter also stated some of the most profound and truthful words
ever heard at a Democratic convention in an interview after his speech
where he stated:

"The State of Israel is at the center of the problems in the Middle
East."

Christian pastor and writer Tony Campolo, speaking to United Methodist
leaders in Birmingham, Alabama, on June 3, 2004, warned that too many
Christians have become "evangelical Zionists" who favor ethnic
cleansing of Palestinians in the Middle East. This surprisingly candid
statement was covered in the Birmingham News quoting Campolo:

"Some evangelicals have gotten caught up in the theology that before
Christ can return, the Holy Land must belong to the Jews," and,

"They're really advocating ethnic cleansing. There's no justification
for that in Scripture."

We note: Ethnic cleansing means systematic murder! The Birmingham
News further quoted Campolo:

"Christian leaders such as Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, as well as
Tim Lahaye and Jerry Jenkins, authors of the best-selling "Left
Behind" end-times prophecy novels, have spread the "evangelical
Zionist" theme. "They're a very powerful group," The evangelical
community has gotten so pro-Israel that they've forgotten how to love
Palestinians."

The Presbyterian Church in America's leaders recently condemned The
Wall being built around the Palestinians, and voted by a wide margin
to divest itself of all Israeli assets from its multi-billion dollar
retirement fund. This is the first major church denomination to do
so.

Evangelical leaders must be challenged publicly by their own members.
To accomplish this Project Strait Gate was started 18 months ago, and
over 35 major evangelical churches, as well as conventions, have been
picketed for peace during their worship hours.

Five ladies and two men led a Strait Gate Project demonstration at two
churches last weekend in Southern California, with signs reading NO
MORE WARS FOR ISRAEL and BLESSED ARE THE PEACEMAKERS. One event was a
2004 Israel and Bible Prophesy Conference at the giant Calvary Chapel
in Chino, California. Several participants reported they were
pleasantly surprised with the response, not so much from the churches
as from the passersby. Many responded positively to the message of
the demonstration.

Strait Gate Ministries urges Followers of Christ to have their names
removed from membership rolls at any churches that fail to oppose the
continued war and occupation in the Mideast. We suggest you tell the
Reverend you might return once the Church regains Christ's admonition
to love one's brothers as yourselves. Until then, you might better
serve the Lord by supporting an Armenian or Coptic Church in Iraq.

We Hold These Truths/Strait Gate Ministries plans to distribute this
letter to about 100,000 Presbyterian Pastors and laymen leaders as an
encouragement to them. We wish to expand this number by tenfold to
other reverends in other denominations.

The challenge is overwhelming, the time short and the burden is
heavy."

WE HOLD THESE TRUTHS/STRAIT GATE MINISTRIES
http://www.whtt.org
P.O. Box 14491
Scottsdale, AZ 85267
480 947 3329 (cec...@whtt.org)

To be receive future mailings go to our site

[Topaz]

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."

[Topaz]

On Sat, 6 Oct 2007 22:34:18 -0700, "Doug" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:

>Go to San Quentin and ask the Aryan Brotherhood if they have
>any fear of the jewish conspiracy. Go to San Quentin and ask
>ANYONE If they fear the joos.
>

The Jews control your media and your mind. I've written to prisoners
many times.

Here are some quotes from "The Shadow of Zog" by Israel Shamir:
Jeff Blankfort writes, "Ardently pro-Israel American Jews are in
positions of unprecedented influence within the United States and have
assumed or been given decision making positions over virtually every
segment of our culture and body politic". And he quotes Benjamin
Ginsberg's "The Fatal Embrace: Jews and the State":
"Jews played a central role in American finance during the 1980s, and
they were among the chief beneficiaries of that decade's corporate
mergers and reorganizations. Today, though barely 2 % of the nation's
population is Jewish, close to half its billionaires are Jews. The
chief executive officers of the three major television networks and
the four largest film studios are Jews, as are the owners of the
nation's largest newspaper chain and the most influential single
newspaper, the New York Times".
Is it a conspiracy of Jews to steal the Republic? No, no conspiracy is
necessary. In Jules Verne's juvenile novel, Children of Captain Grant,
a villain leads the captain's ship astray by placing a magnet brick
beneath the compass. The magnet does not conspire: it constrains the
compass. The sheer mass of self-involved Jews in the media acts in a
similar way and draws the superpower off its normal course. For the
media is the nerve system of a modern state. Modern democracy in
practice in a very complicated society can be compared to a
sophisticated computer. Its machinery can function successfully on one
condition: there is a free flow of information across the system.
While every input is instinctively checked and sieved on one
criterion, whether it is good for Jews..
Thus, concentration of Jews in the media created the distortion. A
takeover of every other part of industry or trade would be noticed and
reported in the media; but there is no remedy for media takeover...
Gandhi could be condemned as 'racist', for he 'noticed' the privileged
position of the British in India. By PC logic, a good American should
reply to Mahatma: yes, there are some rich and powerful Brits in
India, but there are also poor Tommy Atkinses, governesses, honest
administrators, writers like Kipling and Orwell. On the other hand,
there are powerful and rich Rajas, important Brahmins. How do you
dare, sir, to demand 'de-colonisation'! This is sheer anti-English
racism!
An old Indian Air Force officer Joe Thomas actually reminded that,
"while the population of the US today is approximately the same as the
population of India a century ago, the British in India never numbered
more than 50,000 and still ruled India. They did not rule India by
force but by dominating Indian discourse. Indians fought for the
British and put down rebellions. During the two world wars, millions
of Indians fought as volunteers for Britain. If such a tiny group
could control India, then it is not strange that 100 times that number
can influence the United States"...

[Topaz]

On Sun, 07 Oct 2007 04:53:32 GMT, "Doug" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:

>So the joos are responsible for the rise of islamic
>fundamentalism/terrorism?
>

Exactly.

FOOTNOTES

[Topaz]

On Sun, 07 Oct 2007 05:01:56 GMT, "Doug" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:

>
>Even the Spanish speaking stations? Even the Christian channels?

Unholy Alliance - Zionism and Christianity: Ted Pike, interviewed by
Texe Marrs, provides eye-opening insight into the great harm being
done by supposed Christian leaders who have bought into the
unscriptural Zionist scheme. Many of them, he reports, are richly
rewarded for their allegiance to earthly Israel. For example, Baptist
pastor Jerry Falwell was given a spanking new, multimillion dollar
executive jet by Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin. Pat
Robertson's CBN Network was "blessed" by Israel with a television
station in Lebanon. But - surprise! - in fact, U.S. taxpayers
actually footed the bill for these toys which Israel so generously
showered on its Judaizer pals of the powerful U.S. evangelical lobby.

www.powerofprophecy.com

>
>You are delusional. Osama Bin Laden's threats against the western
>nations have never been tied to Israel. The founding father of
>the Muslim brotherhood also condemned western civilization irrespective
>of the Israel connection.

There is no such thing as mentioning the USA government irrespective
of the Jews. These groups are one in the same.

The West is the White race.

>

>I'm ruled by Joos?

Yes

> Gee, the LA city council and LA county board
>of supervisors are dominated by hispanics/latinos NOT joos.

That is because of the Jews.

http://www.csulb.edu/~kmacd/review-AR.html

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.

>Joos don't get affirmative action/preferential hiring programs or
>bilingual educational programs. I guess the joos aren't that efficient
>at ruling the US are they?

Who's to Blame for the Affirmative Action Fiasco?
By Hugh Murray

Searching for employment in the late 19th century, many Irish
immigrants in America encountered the sign, "NINA" (No Irish Need
Apply). Today, their descendants face much the same discrimination. Of
course, now, it is not limited to the Irish - for in America men are
routinely denied jobs, promotions, contracts and scholarships because
they are of Irish, Italian, English, German or general European
heritage. Worse, not only is this discrimination government sponsored,
it is performed in the name of "Equal Opportunity." How did this come
about? Why do the media prefer to ignore it? Who fostered this
discrimination against white men?

In high school a white boy may be denied entrance into special
programs because he is not a preferred minority; or, in some cases, he
may be denied because he is not a girl. There are scholarships
available, but many cannot be awarded to a white male (for example,
Bill Gates of Microsoft was recently lauded by the media for
establishing a billion-dollar scholarship program - one in which
recipients are restricted to blacks only.) When the teen applies to
university, the administration will admit "basically qualified"
minorities, but reject better-qualified whites. When applying for
jobs, the same discrimination occurs. If the teen finds employment,
special, on-the-job training for promotion may be denied him as it is
reserved for minorities, even if they are lesser qualified and have
been on the job a shorter period of time. Once hired, he may be
required to attend "diversity training" sessions, in which he is
supposed to confess his alleged guilt of racism and sexism.

How did this systematic discrimination arise?

What did it mean to forbid discrimination? From the early days of the
20th century through 1964, most liberals were clear as to what this
meant-show no bias against or preference for a person because of his
race, sex, religion etc. This was the dominant view. But in the debate
over the civil rights bill in 1964 some opponents declared that if
passed, it would lead to, among other things: racial quotas and racial
balance in the workplace, preferences for blacks over whites in
employment, promotion, bank loans etc.

But, in Congress, the debate went otherwise. No senator who favored
the civil rights bill spoke up for quotas, "positive integration,"
racial balance or preferences for minorities above whites. Quite the
contrary.

How then did a law which promised to end discrimination by outlawing
discrimination against any individual, a law that promised preferences
for no group, which agreed to retain testing to reject unqualified
applicants-how was this law subverted into its opposite? Here the role
of Alfred Blumrosen is crucial. Blumrosen was among the zealots
working for the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission who did not
want the agency to function as created.

Alfred Blumrosen was instrumental in this and other shifts. He was a
professor at Rutgers University who became the EEOC's liaison chief
for federal, state and local agencies, and he admitted that his
"creative" reading of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was "contrary to
the plain meaning." But why worry? By 1965 when the Bank of America
instituted quota hiring under a euphemism, "the standard refrain of
the EEO bureaucracies, [was that] affirmative action [AA] had nothing
to do with racial quotas. That was illegal." Unfortunately, that
deceptive refrain is still heard today.

The goal of Sonia Pressman, another ideologue in the EEOC, was "to
document large disparities in employment patterns, [so] that
discriminatory intent might legally be inferred." ...the EEOC sought
to impose quotas while not calling them such because quotas were
clearly illegal. The agency sought to break the law.

Blumrosen and Pressman pushed the EEOC to defy the Civil Rights Act of
1964 by imposing quotas, demanding racial balance in the workplace and
giving preferences to blacks over whites. Essential to the Blumrosen-
Pressman campaign was the collection of statistics to show "disparate
impact," how minorities were underutilized, employed in a smaller
proportion in various occupations to their numbers in the general
population.

Blumrosen was set upon "selectively enforcing" the civil rights act by
using disparate impact theory and proportional representation only
when it affected others. (More accurately, Blumrosen was "selectively
malenforcing" the civil rights law, imposing quotas for
underrepresented blacks, using quotas to curb whites; for women,
against men; but never for gentiles and against Jews.)

Of course, had the EEOC sought to restrict Jews as it has white men,
the storm of protest would have cast "disparate impact" theory into
the dustbin of history. Thus, the role of Blumrosen and his allies in
the media, academia etc., was to create a false target - the
"overrepresented," "privileged" and "oppressive" white male. According
to the EEOC, the statistics proved just that. However, the statistics
proved otherwise. The partial statistics used by Blumrosen were simply
the effort to deflect criticism to another group instead of the one
most overrepresented, privileged and oppressive - his own.

By not asking the religious question on the EEOC questionnaires, the
EEOC created a scapegoat of the white male. Once smeared as
"privileged" and "oppressive," the non-privileged, working-class and
poor whites began to pay the price for the "moral" system of
affirmative action by being legally discriminated against and denied
equal opportunity.

The proportional test, the liberals' test of all tests, when applied
to the religious clause of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, shows Jews to
be the most privileged and oppressive of people in America. The fav-
orite test of liberals reveals white men to be less privileged than
the Jews. Why does not The New York Times, the EEOC, NBC, CBS or ABC
report that statistic? The media remain silent on the issue of Jewish
privilege while simultaneously exposing every time white men are
somewhat overrepresented. Why the silence regarding Jews? A glance at
the ownership of the media just might have something to do with this
disparity in exposing "privilege." And if any individual in the media
dared to expose some Jewish privilege, there would be a thunderous
assault upon that individual's "bigotry." However, daily, reporters
write of white male privilege, but almost no one denounces this anti-
white bigotry.

Once smeared as privileged, the non-privileged middle-class, working-
class, and poor whites pay for the "moral" system of AA by being
legally discriminated against and denied equal opportunity. But then
the history of America since the 1960s is often the record of wealthy
liberals using the law to curb and oppress blue-collar whites, because
the blue-collar folk are deemed privileged, prejudiced and provincial.
Therefore, such blue-collar whites deserve to be passed over in
scholarships, jobs and promotions; the blue-collar crowd should be
shunted aside, and instead the "pets" of the elite should be elevated:
the children of illegal immigrants, of wealthy minorities and the
daughters of rich liberals. And this is done in the name of morality,
fairness, and justice.

In summary, the great hoax concocted by Blumrosen and his
collaborators in the media, academy, and government is "white male
privilege." Most white men are not privileged. Those who are, often
support AA because it is no loss to them - their children will not
require a scholarship, an entry-level job, a position as policeman or
fireman, or a promotion. It is the poor and middle-class whites who,
denied equal opportunity, must pay with thinning wallets and shrunken
dreams for the "morality of diversity" imposed by the wealthy, liberal
elite.

Even if every CEO in America were a white male, that would be no
reason to discriminate against a poor, white teenage boy seeking a
scholarship and give it to a lesser qualified girl or minority. "White
male privilege" is a social construct created by liberals. They have
used their power in government, media, and academia to deny equal
opportunity to white men, to undermine and stigmatize America's
working class, and to immobilize with guilt the white middle class.
America does not suffer from white male privilege and oppression; it
staggers beneath Jewish privilege and oppression.

Excerpted from article found at:
http://www.barnesreview.org/Nov__Dec_2001/Who_s_to_Blame_for_the_Affirma/wh
o_s_to_blame_for_the_affirma.html

>
>>
>> "There may be some truth in that if the Arabs have some complaints
>> about my policy towards Israel, they have to realize that the Jews in
>> the U.S. control the entire information and propaganda machine, the
>> large newspapers, the motion pictures, radio and television, and the
>> big companies. And there is a force that we have to take into
>> consideration."
>>
>
>That was what? 30 years ago?
>
>

>A dead joo? Wasn't Goebbels gay?

No.

Here is part of a speech by Dr. Joseph Goebbels, delivered in
Nuernberg on September 13th, 1935 at the Seventh National-Socialist
Party Congress:

"Almost without exception, the intellectual leaders of Marxist atheism
in Germany were Jews, among them being Erich Weinert, Felix Abraham,
Dr. Levy-Lenz and others. At regular meetings, held in the presence of
a notary public, members were requested to register their declaration
of withdrawal from their church for a fee of 2 Marks. And this the
fight for atheism was carried on. Between 1918 and 1933 the
withdrawals from the German Evangelical Churches alone amounted to
two-and-a-half million persons in Germany. The programme which these
atheistic societies laid down in regard to sexual matters is amply
charcterized in the following demands publicly expressed at meetings
and distributed in leaflet form:

1) The complete abrogation of the paragraphs of the law dealing with
the crime of abortion, and the right to have abortion procured free of
charge in State Hospitals.

2) Non-interference with prostitution.

3) The abrogation of all bourgeois-capitalistic regulations in regard
to marriage and divorce.

4) Official registration to be optional and the children to be
educated by the community.

5) Abrogation of all penalties for sexual perversities and amnesty to
be granted to all persons condemned as 'sexual criminals'.

"Truly a case of methodical insanity, which has for its aim the
wilful destruction of the nations and their civilization and the
substitute of barbarism as a fundamental principle of public life.

"Where are the men behind the scenes of this virulent world
movement? Who are the inventors of all this madness? Who transplanted
this ensemble into Russia and is today making the attempt to have it
prevail in other countries? The answer to these question discloses the
actual secret of our anti-Jewish policy and our uncomromising fight
against Jewry; for the Bolshevic International is in reality nothing
less than a Jewish International."

>
>Are you muslim?
>
No

[Topaz]

During World War Two the Germans put Jews and Communists in
concentration camps. The USA locked also up the Japanese and their
political opponents and for less reason. At the end of the war there
was a lot of deaths in the German camps from disease and starvation
because Germany was being bombed to rubble. There is no evidence that
the Germans had gas chambers or an extermination plan.

Newsweek magazine May 15, 1989 says on page 64:
"the way the Nazis did things: the secrecy, the unwritten orders, the
destruction of records and the innocent-sounding code names for the
extermination of the Jews. Perhaps it was inevitable that historians
would quarrel over just what happened"
The real reason there are no records of an extermination plan is
because there was no extermination plan. The Germans planned to deport
the Jews out of Germany. The records show that they planned to move
them to Madagascar.

Here is part of the Leuchter Report:
"Thirty-one samples were selectively removed from the alleged gas
chambers at Kremas I, II, III, IV and V. A control sample was taken
from delousing facility #1 at Birkenau. The control sample was removed
from a delousing chamber in a location where cyanide was known to have
been used and was apparently present as blue staining. Chemical
testing of the control sample #32 showed a cyanide content of 1050
mg/kg, a very heavy concentration. The conditions at areas from which
these samples were taken are identical with those of the control
sample, cold, dark, and wet. Only Kremas IV and V differed, in the
respect that these locations had sunlight (the buildings have been
torn down) and sunlight may hasten the destruction of uncomplexed
cyanide. The cyanide combines with the iron in the mortar and brick
and becomes ferric-ferro-cyanide or prussian blue pigmentation, a very
stable iron-cyanide complex.
"The locations from which the analyzed samples were removed are set
out in Table III.
"It is notable that almost all the samples were negative and that the
few that were positive were very close to the detection level
(1mg/kg); 6.7 mg/kg at Krema III; 7.9 mg/kg at Krerma I. The absence
of any consequential readings at any of the tested locations as
compared to the control sample reading 1050 mg/kg supports the
evidence that these facilities were not execution gas chambers. The
small quantities detected would indicate that at some point these
buildings were deloused with Zyklon B - as were all the buildings at
all these facilities"

Professional holocaust believers have admitted that the "gas chamber"
which is shown to the tourists at Auschwitz was actually built by the
allies after the war was over. This is what they wrote:
Brian Harmon <har...@msg.ucsf.edu> wrote in article
<080620000051136373%har...@msg.ucsf.edu>...
"You're confusing Krema I with Kremas II-V. Krema I is a
reconstruction, this has never been a secret. Kremas II-V are in
their demolished state as they were left."
Charles Don Hall <cdhall...@erols.com> wrote in article
<8F4CB71B...@news.erols.com>...
"Certainly not! The word "fake" implies a deliberate attempt to
deceive.
"The staff of the Auschwitz museum will readily explain that the Nazis
tried to destroy the gas chambers in a futile attempt to conceal their
crimes. And they'll tell you that reconstruction was done later on. So
it would be dishonest for me to call it a "fake". I'll cheerfully
admit that it's a "reconstruction" if that makes you happy."
They admit that the "gas chamber" shown to the tourists at Auschwitz
was built by the allies after the war was over. There is no physical
evidence that the Germans had gas chambers. No bodies of people who
died from gas have been found. The Communists were the first to enter
the camps. How do the other allies know the Communists didn't blow up
the buildings? Then they could claim that these demolished buildings
used to be gas chambers.

But then the believers will say the Germans confessed. Their main
confession is from Hoess. Here are the details:
"In the introduction to Death Dealer [Buffalo: Prometheus, 1992], the
historian Steven Paskuly wrote: "Just after his capture in 1946, the
British Security Police were able to extract a statement from Hoess by
beating him and filling him with liquor." Paskuly was reiterating what
Rupert Butler and Bernard Clarke had already described.
In 1983, Rupert Butler published an unabashed memoir (Legions of
Death, Hamlyn: London) describing in graphic detail how, over three
days, he and Clarke and other British policemen managed to torture
Hoess into making a "coherent statement." According to Butler [Legions
of Death, p. 237], he and the other interrogators put the boots to
Hoess the moment he was captured. For starters, Clarke struck his face
four times to get Höess to reveal his true identity.
<quote>
The admission suddenly unleashed the loathing of Jewish sergeants in
the arresting party whose parents had died in Auschwitz following an
order signed by Höss.
The prisoner was torn from the top bunk, the pajamas ripped from his
body. He was then dragged naked to one of the slaughter tables, where
it seemed to Clarke the blows and screams were endless.
Eventually, the Medical Officer urged the Captain: "Call them off,
unless you want to take back a corpse."
A blanket was thrown over Höss and he was dragged to Clarke's car,
where the sergeant poured a substantial slug of whisky down his
throat. Höss tried to sleep.
Clarke thrust his service stick under the man's eyelids and ordered in
Geffnan: "Keep your pig eyes open, you swine."
For the first time Höss trotted out his oft-repeated justification: "I
took my orders from Himmler. I was a soldier in the same way as you
are a soldier and we had to obey orders."
The party arrived back at Heide around three in the morning. The snow
was swirling
still, but the blanket was torn from Höss and he was made to walk
completely nude
through the prison yard to his cell.
</quote>

An article in the British newspaper Wrexham Leader [Mike Mason, "In a
cell with a Nazi war criminal-We kept him awake until he confessed,"
October 17, 1986] following the airing of a TV documentary on the case
of Rudolf Hoess included eyewitness recollections by Ken Jones:
<quote>
Mr. Ken Jones was then a private with the Fifth Royal Horse Artillery
stationed at
Heid[e] in Schleswig-Holstein. "They brought him to us when he
refused to
cooperate over questioning about his activities during the war. He
came in the winter
of 1945/6 and was put in a small jail cell in the barracks," recalls
Mr. Jones. Two
other soldiers were detailed with Mr. Jones to join Höss in his cell
to help break
him down for interrogation. "We sat in the cell with him, night and
day, armed with
axe handles. Our job was to prod him every time he fell asleep to
help break down
his resistance," said Mr. Jones. When Höss was taken out for exercise
he was made
to wear only jeans and a cotton shirt in the bitter cold. After three
days and
nights without sleep, Höss finally broke down and made a full
confession to
the authorities.
</quote>

The confession Hoess signed was numbered document NO-1210; later
revamped, as document PS-3868, which became the basis for an oral
deposition Hoess made for the IMT on April 15, 1946, a month after it
had been extracted from him by torture...
Since what people confess to after they have been captured by the
Communists and their liberal comrades is not proof of anything, this
leaves only the stories of survivors. These contradict each other and
not believable. One professional survivor said that he could tell if
the Germans were gassing German Jews or Polish Jews by the color of
the smoke.
The fact that there are so many "survivors" is not proof of an
extermination plan. There may be six million survivors. Just about
every Jew that is old says he is a survivor.

The real "holocaust" was when the Communist Jews murdered millions of
Christians. Communism was Jewish. Here is proof:

Montgomery Shuyler: "It is probably unwise to say this loudly in the

United States but the Bolshevik movement is and has been since it's
beginning, guided and controlled by Russian Jews of the greasiest
type" type."

A second Schuyler telegram, dated June 9, 1919 from Vladivostok,
reports on the make-up of the presiding Soviet government: "...(T)here
were 384 'commissars' including 2 negroes, 13 Russians, 15 Chinamen,
22 Armenians, AND MORE THAN 300 JEWS. Of the latter number, 264 had
come to Russia from the United States since the downfall of the
Imperial Government.

The Netherlands' ambassador in Russia, Oudendyke, confirmed this:
"Unless Bolshevism is nipped in the bud immediately, it is bound to
spread in one form or another over Europe and the whole world as it is
organized and worked by Jews who have no nationality, and whose one
object is to destroy for their own ends the existing order of things."

"The Bolshevik revolution in Russia was the work of Jewish brains, of
Jewish dissatisfaction, of Jewish planning, whose goal is to create a
new order in the world. What was performed in so excellent a way in
Russia, thanks to Jewish brains, and because of Jewish dissatisfaction
and by Jewish planning, shall also, through the same Jewish mental an
physical forces, become a reality all over the world." (The American

Hebrew, September 10, 1920 "In the Bolshevik era, 52 percent of the

http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com

[Topaz]

by Kevin MacDonald

The current situation in the United States is really an awesome
display of Jewish power and influence. People who are very strongly
identified as Jews maintain close ties to Israeli politicians and
military figures and to Jewish activist organizations and pro-Israeli
lobbying groups while occupying influential policy-making positions in
the defense and foreign policy establishment. These same people, as
well as a chorus of other prominent Jews, have routine access to the
most prestigious media outlets in the United States. People who
criticize Israel are routinely vilified and subjected to professional
abuse.
Perhaps the most telling feature of this entire state of affairs is
the surreal fact that in this entire discourse Jewish identity is not
mentioned. When Charles Krauthammer, Bill Kristol, Michael Rubin,
William Safire, Robert Satloff, or the legions of other prominent
media figures write their reflexively pro-Israel pieces in the New
York Times, the Wall Street Journal, or the Los Angeles Times, or
opine on the Fox News Network, there is never any mention that they
are Jewish Americans who have an intense ethnic interest in Israel.
When Richard Perle authors a report for an Israeli think tank; is on
the board of directors of an Israeli newspaper; maintains close
personal ties with prominent Israelis, especially those associated
with the Likud Party; has worked for an Israeli defense company; and,
according to credible reports, was discovered by the FBI passing
classified information to Israel - when, despite all of this, he is a
central figure in the network of those pushing for wars to rearrange
the entire politics of the Middle East in Israel's favor, and with
nary a soul having the courage to mention the obvious overriding
Jewish loyalty apparent in Perle's actions, that is indeed a
breathtaking display of power.
One must contemplate the fact that American Jews have managed to
maintain unquestioned support for Israel over the last thirty-seven
years, despite Israel's seizing land and engaging in a brutal
suppression of the Palestinians in the occupied territories - an
occupation that will most likely end with expulsion or complete
subjugation, degradation, and apartheid. During the same period Jewish
organizations in America have been a principal force - in my view the
main force - for transforming America into a state dedicated to
suppressing ethnic identification among Europeans, for encouraging
massive multiethnic immigration into the U.S., and for erecting a
legal system and cultural ideology that is obsessively sensitive to
the complaints and interests of non-European ethnic minorities - the
culture of the Holocaust. All this is done without a whisper of
double standards in the aboveground media...

[Doug]

"Imam Contemptus Mundi" <im...@divinepraxeology.org> wrote in message

news:imam-108C3E.0...@news.motzarella.org...

But there aren't many joos left in Europe now. I can't think of a single
jooish
terrorist act committed outside of Israel can you?

[Doug]

I ran out of tears for the muslims after 9-11, after 7-7, after the bombing
of Spanish trains.

If you love islam so much move back to the 7th century, third world, islamic
theocracy you came from -- before it's too late.

The days of reckoning for the mudslums are coming in Europe. It'll make
the jewish holocaust look like a holiday. I can hardly wait. I want to get a
piece of that action. I just hope you're over there when it all comes down
you muslim camel fucker.

"Defendario" <Defen...@netscape.com> wrote in message
news:5ms6trF...@mid.individual.net...

[Imam Contemptus Mundi]

In article <uB9Oi.2172$sm6...@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com>,
"Doug" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:

Are you kidding? Starting with Irgun and the Stern Gang in the 1940s to
their targeted assassinations in Europe?
How do you feel about Israeli spying on the USA? How about their selling
U.S. weapons technology to China?

[johnny@.]

How about attacking the U.S.S Liberty?

--
Tom Tancredo for President in 2008
For a Secure America
http://www.teamtancredo.org/
http://tancredo.house.gov/

[Imam Contemptus Mundi]

In article <o1aOi.1842$s8....@bignews3.bellsouth.net>,
"johnny@." <johnny@.> wrote:

Yeah, that one too. Thanks.

[Doug]

<johnny@.> wrote in message
news:o1aOi.1842$s8....@bignews3.bellsouth.net...

>
> How about attacking the U.S.S Liberty?
>
> --
> Tom Tancredo for President in 2008
> For a Secure America
> http://www.teamtancredo.org/
> http://tancredo.house.gov/

Israel paid off the families of those victimized
by this incident, unlike Iraq who didn't
reimburse anything anyone for their attack
on a US warship that wasn't in a hot warzone.

http://eightiesclub.tripod.com/id344.htm

[Doug]

"Imam Contemptus Mundi" <im...@divinepraxeology.org> wrote in message

news:imam-2803C7.1...@news.motzarella.org...

>
> Are you kidding? Starting with Irgun and the Stern Gang in the 1940s to
> their targeted assassinations in Europe?
> How do you feel about Israeli spying on the USA? How about their selling
> U.S. weapons technology to China?
>
> Imam
> --

The Irgun was active in Israel, nowhere else.

The targeted assasinations in Europe were of islamic MF's, who
I couldn't care less about.

Yes I do remember the Israeli spying incident, but that's hardly
terrorism.

I'd like to see incontrovertible proof of "selling US weapons tech to
China."

[Doug]

"Topaz" <mars...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:a47ig3ds1u665usfl...@4ax.com...

> On Sun, 07 Oct 2007 04:46:09 GMT, "Doug" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>>You really need to read up on the concept of infidel in the
>>religion of islam. You might also want to look up the concept
>>of: "first Saturday, then Sunday". BTW, you're still an infidel
>>even if you're:
>>
>>i. a satanist
>>ii. an atheist
>>iii. an agnostic
>>iv. anything other than muslim.
>>
>>The islamic invasion of Europe didn't differentiate between
>>Christians and joos.
>>
>>Keep livin' in your fantasy world though.
>>
> "Christians and Moslems manage to get along in the Mid-East. This
> writer observed them in Gaza. Baptists go to church next to the
> Mosque, and when they are not in church, members seem to work together
> as best they can. Churches are not a historic enemy to Islam in Iraq.
> Coptic, Catholic, and Orthodox churches often date back to Roman
> times, still standing with Christian cemeteries around them, undefiled
> through the ages of Islamic domination. Christians in Iraq say they
> do not hate Muslims, but many Evangelicals in America practice hatred
> of Islam that is now manifested in destruction and death. Jesus words
> object.
>

You're an able liar for Islam. Muslims have been slaughtering Christians
in Lebanon for DECADES, islamboi. Ditto for Turkey artard. Ditto for
Northern
Africa artard (as a matter of fact I know a Christian from Eritrea who
has DIRECT knowledge of the genocide of Christians in his country).
Let's not forget the Armenian genocide either.

>
> In Gaza the wall in front of the Baptist church has the same
> anti-Israeli graffiti as does the wall in front of the Mosque nearby.
> Their members suffer Israeli occupation side by side. If they do not
> love each other, they certainly coexist in peace. We Hold These
> Truths receives reports from Christians and Muslims from Damascus to
> Ammon. There is an uneasy peace made worse by anti-Islamic statements
> spewed forth from evangelical Enabler churches and celebrities in
> America.
>

Muslims in Iran persecuted Christians to such a degree that there are
now few left. Talk to Christian Amanpour about this sometime.

>
> * Most Muslims who we know fear God, they do not hate Him, and would
> be correctly afraid to bomb a church--afraid of God, not of men. And
> Muslims, unlike the Israelis, believe Jesus was on very good terms
> with the one God, whom they call Allah. They do not challenge Allah;
> they fear Him as righteous.
>

But they blow up Synagogues in Turkey. The few churches left are
armed fortresses.

>
> * Islam is not anti-Christian, as we Christians are told. The
> Qur'an says much about Jesus and Mary, and is more than respectful.
> One passage, (S.5.78-84) seems to be all about trust and coexistence
> with followers of Christ. Verse 82 reads:
>
> Strongest among men in enmity to the Believer wilt thou find the Jews
> and Pagans; Nearest among them in love to the Believers wilt thou find
> those who say "We are Christians" because amongst there are men
> devoted to learning. And men who have renounced the world and they are
> not arrogant.
>

If you love Islam get the fuck out of Europe or the US and move back
to your 7th century, third world islamic theocracy. Stop pretending you're
a neo-nazi and come out of the closet.

It's nice how you've ignored the numerous fatwahs issued by islamic
imam's against the enemies of islam, incl. such people as Rushdie,
cartoonists, and women who have spoken out against islam.

You're repeated lies about islam being the religion of peace have
destroyed any credibilty you had w/me. You're not worth my time
anymore.

[Doug]

"Topaz" <mars...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:h77ig3lr8322mse98...@4ax.com...

>
>
> 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.
>

So you admit you're a race traitor, if you're really white that is.

[johnny@.]

That's not good enough. They deliberately attacked an American ship,
trying to blame it on Egypt, so the United States would attack Egypt.

[Doug]

Your proposal to ally w/the muslims and permit the
islamic takeover of Europe defines you as a race
traitor.

"Topaz" <mars...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:7b8ig3ht305glua7q...@4ax.com...

[Doug]

<johnny@.> wrote in message news:3rbOi.1883$s8....@bignews3.bellsouth.net...

> Doug wrote:
>> <johnny@.> wrote in message
>> news:o1aOi.1842$s8....@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
>>> How about attacking the U.S.S Liberty?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Tom Tancredo for President in 2008
>>> For a Secure America
>>> http://www.teamtancredo.org/
>>> http://tancredo.house.gov/
>>
>> Israel paid off the families of those victimized
>> by this incident, unlike Iraq who didn't
>> reimburse anything anyone for their attack
>> on a US warship that wasn't in a hot warzone.
>>
>> http://eightiesclub.tripod.com/id344.htm
> That's not good enough. They deliberately attacked an American ship,
> trying to blame it on Egypt, so the United States would attack Egypt.
>
>

Do you have any proof of that last part? I've heard enough that they
can't say it wasn't a deliberate attack, and I think they owned up to
that.

[Defendario]

Doug wrote:
> I ran out of tears for the muslims after 9-11, after 7-7, after the bombing
> of Spanish trains.
>

No real evidence that Muslims were involved with those events,
especially not London or Spain. 9/11 was an inside job, as the sentient
are already aware.

> If you love islam so much <smak>

I just hate xenophobes and bigots. I have no use for either, really.

If you hate Muslims so much, volunteer to serve in the IDF, punk.

Go to IsReeL and catch yourself a Qassam.

Don't let the door hit you on the (_!_) as you leave.

[Defendario]

Doug wrote:
> <johnny@.> wrote in message news:3rbOi.1883$s8....@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
>> Doug wrote:
>>> <johnny@.> wrote in message
>>> news:o1aOi.1842$s8....@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
>>>> How about attacking the U.S.S Liberty?
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Tom Tancredo for President in 2008
>>>> For a Secure America
>>>> http://www.teamtancredo.org/
>>>> http://tancredo.house.gov/
>>> Israel paid off the families of those victimized
>>> by this incident, unlike Iraq who didn't
>>> reimburse anything anyone for their attack
>>> on a US warship that wasn't in a hot warzone.
>>>
>>> http://eightiesclub.tripod.com/id344.htm
>> That's not good enough. They deliberately attacked an American ship,
>> trying to blame it on Egypt, so the United States would attack Egypt.
>>
>>
>
> Do you have any proof of that last part?

Google Operation Cyanide, and connect the dots, doofus.

> I've heard enough that they
> can't say it wasn't a deliberate attack, and I think they owned up to
> that.
>

The attack was clearly deliberate, and there was complicity at the
highest levels (Pres Johnson, SecD McNamara)

Do your own research, and you won't look like such a simpleton.

>

[johnny@.]

Defendario wrote:
> Doug wrote:
>> I ran out of tears for the muslims after 9-11, after 7-7, after the
>> bombing
>> of Spanish trains.
>>
>
> No real evidence that Muslims were involved with those events,
> especially not London or Spain. 9/11 was an inside job, as the sentient
> are already aware.

All the hijackers were Muslim, and most were from Saudi Arabia. It was
an inside job.

>
>> If you love islam so much <smak>
>
> I just hate xenophobes and bigots. I have no use for either, really.

The only bigot here is you. There are no xenophobes in this group, we
have a reason to fear foreigners.

>
> If you hate Muslims so much, volunteer to serve in the IDF, punk.
>
> Go to IsReeL and catch yourself a Qassam.
>
> Don't let the door hit you on the (_!_) as you leave.

[Defendario]

johnny@. wrote:
> Defendario wrote:
>> Doug wrote:
>>> I ran out of tears for the muslims after 9-11, after 7-7, after the
>>> bombing
>>> of Spanish trains.
>>>
>>
>> No real evidence that Muslims were involved with those events,
>> especially not London or Spain. 9/11 was an inside job, as the
>> sentient are already aware.
>
> All the hijackers were Muslim, and most were from Saudi Arabia.

No evidence that the planes striking the buildings were what made them fall.

> It was
> an inside job.
>

Yes. So glad you agree. :-)

>
>>
>>> If you love islam so much <smak>
>>
>> I just hate xenophobes and bigots. I have no use for either, really.
>
> The only bigot here is you. There are no xenophobes in this group, we
> have a reason to fear foreigners.
>

You're a xenophobe and a delusional fuckwit. Your denials fall flat.

>>
>> If you hate Muslims so much, volunteer to serve in the IDF, punk.
>>
>> Go to IsReeL and catch yourself a Qassam.
>>
>> Don't let the door hit you on the (_!_) as you leave.
>

Same admonition goes for you, too, "Johnny"

>

[Tani Jantsang©]

"Doug" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:0oZNi.6917$6p6....@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net...
> "Tani Jantsang©" <tjs...@spampost.com> wrote in message
> news:13ge8tm...@corp.supernews.com...
>>
>>>
>>> As far as Arab/Muslim immigration is concerned, I don't think they
>>> counted on very much immigration from them, or at least them gaining any
>>> substantial political clout, else they wouldn't have championed liberal
>>> immigration as they did. This will surely come back to bite them in
>>> their collective asses.
>>
>> Oh, you bet it will. Arabs are coming here and DOING the same thing
>> these Jews did - they know the tactics. Here it is tho. Doug and others
>> on here moaning about the Mudslums in Europe. Just what would happen IF
>> Europeans converted to Islam? It's not hard to do, btw. It's super
>> easy. Their civilization wouldn't vanish at all, they'd still DO what
>> they do. There are heaps of Islamic countries that are very secular. Is
>> America secular? How about the evangelicals - are they secular?
>
> You're delusional. ALL MUSLIM countries have laws that proscribe
> punishment for CRIMES AGAINST ISLAM. ALL OF THEM. Try publicly
> burning a Koran in any muslim country and see if you survive long
> enough to be tried for crimes against islam.

Apparently you know very little about Moslem countries that were also SSR
countries. They burned plenty of Korans. I'll say this much - you are
ignoring the REASON WHY Europe is presently beplagued with Muslims. Go
ahead, ignore it. It's the PC that's the cause - and some on here know
exactly where all that came from. One thing - if th ey DID all "convert" to
Islam (they could always unconvert after) they'd be able to tell Israel to
go fuck itself, stop paying reparations and heh - they'd be PROTECTED due to
the stupid PC laws. LMAO. Talk about backfiring. Imo, it's a funny idea.
Nothing more. I also said (you conveniently ignored that.....) that I LIKE
what the new Pope is saying - and that he's gaining popularity. Religious
revival via the Pope would promote NATIONALISM - and that's what Europeans
need. NATIONALISM.
>
>> ALL of this preceeds the current problems in Europe with Moslems and the
>> current problems with illgals and a lot of other stuff right here. It's
>> the cause of ALL of it. The ROOT. These people on here mostly are
>> griping about the mere branches.
>>
>
> It's not the mudslums committing terrorist acts, it's the joos. That makes
> about as much sense as the namesake for your satanist 'nym ever did.

You failed to read what othes on here said. Lemme tell you something.
Everything I said about the war over there was also said by PAT BUCHANAN -
and I'm sorry, babe, but Pat makes 100% good sense. Trying to libel me
doesn't phase me one fucking bit, buster. What nym. This IS my god damned
name, moron. I take no god damned responsibility for what others have done
IN my name, or USING my name. Fuck them too, they are trivial
nothingnesses. You are NO better than the PC bastards that defend La Raza.
You proved it more than once on here. WHO do you think jumped on Pat
Buchanan and ruined his career for writing that book he wrote, HEY? The
FUCKING JEWS did, you dope.

Yes, deal with the immediate problems: illegals and Islamic - here and
Europe. NEXT UP: deal with the one thing that CAUSED the mess long prior
to it being a mess. LAST UP: innoculate the people - INDOCTRINATE THEM.
Let them never forget it, either. The USA is a western culture country.
PERIOD. Europe for Europeans - NOBODY ELSE. AND - furthermore, if they
are Christian countries - then let them ONLY LET Christians in - European
Christians. They just need to throw off the YOKE that stops them from
taking action to DO these things. And just what is that YOKE? Do you know?
Imam knows. PAT KNOWS TOO, but he doesn't DARE say it in public. Kevin
MacDonald DID say it in public - and he's not backing down.
--
When dealing bacteria, you deal with the immediate infection.
When that's dealt with, you eradicate the CAUSE of the infection.
Then you innoculate everyone against it forever more.
Nations are like bodies.
They can be infected, too.
Using the same methods is a good idea.

>
>
>

[Tani Jantsang©]

"Doug" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote in message

news:Hd_Ni.4525$oA2....@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com...

> Go to San Quentin and ask the Aryan Brotherhood if they have
> any fear of the jewish conspiracy. Go to San Quentin and ask
> ANYONE If they fear the joos.

LMAO - the Aryan Brotherhood knows ALL about the Jews - some even far
fetched stuff. At least Kevin MacDonald stuck to the facts. MANY Aryan
Brotherhood are Identity Christians.

>
> "Topaz" <mars...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

> news:nk1bg3d7op53odiku...@4ax.com...
>> Here is a typical example of what Jews do:
>>
>> JEWISH PRESSURE FROM PRO-ISRAELI LOBBY LEADS TO
>> CANCELLATION OF RICHMOND MEETING
>>
>
>

[Tani Jantsang©]

You libelous fucktard.

"Defendario" <Defen...@netscape.com> wrote in message
news:5ms6trF...@mid.individual.net...

Doug wrote:
> "Tani JantsangŠ" <tjs...@spampost.com> wrote in message
> news:13gdhks...@corp.supernews.com...

>> "Doug" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote in message

>> news:n3vNi.735$y21...@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net...
>>> South Park had a great episode on anti-semitic tourette's syndrome just
>>> last night.
>> Nice cop out.
>>> Here's a clue for you, the greatest problem in Europe today isn't the
>>> joos, it's islam. That's why the organization SIOE (Stop the
>>> Islamization
>>> of Europe) was formed. Your puerile attempt to deflect criticism of
>>> islam
>>> by attempting to blame the joos is just so much BS.
>> And how did Islamization GET TO BE a problem there - or illegals get to
>> be a
>> problem here? That's what you are digging your head in the sand about.
>> Pat
>> Buchannan knows the same things I know.

>
> So the joos are responsible for the rise of islamic
> fundamentalism/terrorism?
>

Yes, absolutely. When the zioNist thugs ran the Palestinian Muslims out
of Palestine, they brought the wrath of 1.5 billion Muslims down on
them. Because we make it possible for the zioNazi thugs to continue
oppressing Muslims, they hate us as well.

Not hard to understand at all. Pull your head out, Douggyboi.

>>> If you love islam, move back to your third world, 7th century islamic
>>> theocracy and don't forget to pack your burkha.
>> Your purile attempt to link me with Islamics when I said the SAME THINGS
>> Pat
>> Buchannan has said - is pathetic. That's like doing exactly what the
>> illegals do - by trying to pull a switcheroo. It won't work.
>>
>
> SOmetimes it seems like you're spouting nothing but islamic propaganda.
> Islamic propaganda wants me to believe that the joos are who I should
> be afraid of.
>

The jooz threaten the world with nuclear annihilation if their ghetto is
overrun. You should be afraid -- they're blackmailing you.

http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/israel/destroycaps.html

>> Yes, our problem right now is illegals and Islamics and Europe's problem
>> right
>> now IS ISLAM - and illegals. But HOW did that GET TO BE a problem? I
>> just
>> told you. If you insist on remaining ignorant about it - fine. Pat
>> Buchannan is highly informed about the exact things I tried to tell you.
>>
>
> I agree w/you on the above.
>

Of course. You're a xenophobe, so you hate immigrants no matter where
they hail from. But you're blind to the fact that jooz are every bit as
alien, and treasonous, as any other auslander. Maybe worse, in fact.

>> Yes indeed, Europe MUST deal with the Islamic invasion - by any means
>> necessary. They might need a Hitler to fix what's wrong there. So be
>> it.
>> But when that's all ironed out, Europeans must ensure that this kind of
>> subverting of their PEOPLE - NEVER HAPPENS AGAIN.
>>
>
> I agree w/you on this last point too.
>

Again, you agree with the Satanist Tenni because you are morally weak,
and a plain bigot.

>

[Tani Jantsang©]

"Imam Contemptus Mundi" <im...@divinepraxeology.org> wrote in message

news:imam-051CE5.1...@news.motzarella.org...

How about the Boas school attacking Darwinian facts and the Frankfurt
School - doctrinaire Marxists that methodically took over 1. the media 2.
the psychiatric industry and 3. the educational industry with the SOLE
purpose of destroying the one thing that STOPPED Europeans from embrasing
Marxism: their Christian culture and family values. They attacked it - OH
BOY did they. That's WHY we are in the mess we are in today.

Their form of terror is the PC Thought Police. THAT IS terror of a much
more insidious kind. I'm obviously not subject to it. The media NEVER
fools me when they show their impossible nightmares (dreams, pipedreams).

I fault Ahmedinajid for being all talk and no action. I WISH he'd go and do
what he said he'd do. THEN Europeans all over would be FREE to nationalize,
be proud of THEIR OWN culture, speak THEIR OWN language and be as tribal
(racialist) as they wish - because that DOES come naturally. We'd clean
house if not fot the PC thought cops and their clout agencies. IMAGINE the
ACLU taking down Homeland Security . Imagine it.

More and more people ARE asking the question. Scheuer on the Bill Maher
show asked it - wrote a book too. Pat Buchanan said it (and THEY ruined his
career). MacDonald said it. MANY are saying it these days.

[Tani Jantsang©]

Notice how Doug NEVER answers you? NOtice how he fails to note that I
said the SAME THING that Pat Buchanan said? In fact, Pat said it 100 times
stronger - about WHY the Muslims are attacking us. Pat said it stronger.

At this point, I'd say Pat is wrong. Things have changed. We ARE at war
with Islam NOW - and that is unfortunate. There are a lot more of them -
and Russia might ally with them as a superpower. China might do that too.
So it's very unfortunate.

But notice how Doug ignores what you said - what Johnny said. He libels
me - but doesn't say a word about Pat, who said the same things I just said.

I think he's an emotional coward, at this point.

"Imam Contemptus Mundi" <im...@divinepraxeology.org> wrote in message

news:imam-28DA82.0...@news.motzarella.org...
> In article <XVZNi.6924$6p6....@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net>,

> "Doug" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>> "Tani JantsangŠ" <tjs...@spampost.com> wrote in message

>> news:13gdhkr...@corp.supernews.com...
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Maybe you should read up on current events in Europe. Europe isn't
>> >> worried
>> >> about the joos anymore, they're worried about the muslim bastards who
>> >> are
>> >> blowing up trains and not only threatening people in the name of islam
>> >> (ever heard of a fatwah?) but killing people in the name of islam
>> >> (look
>> >> up
>> >> Theodore Van Gogh).
>> >
>> > Lord have mercy - I know all about the CURRENT problems. But these
>> > CURRENT
>> > problems had a start - a cause. What I gave you from MacDonald, which
>> > you
>> > snipped out - is THE CAUSE. Obviously, Mark Levin is NOT one of the
>> > people in these orgs MacDonald is referring to. Obviously, Professor
>> > Steinlight, who used to be when them, is not either - he's now begging
>> > them to REVERSE themselves on: IMMIGRATION. Why can't you simply see
>> > this? I'm not trying to derail any points - and this is simply a
>> > usenet
>> > newsgroup, nothing more. I'm simply showing the CAUSE of the troubles
>> > that
>> > the USA AND Europe are in RIGHT NOW. The CAUSE. And sure, it's
>> > backfiring on Jews that supported it for so many decades against the
>> > well-being of European culture. SURE it's backfiring - that's what
>> > Steinlight is SAYING - duh!
>> >>
>> >> Are you a muslim? I'm betting you are. All your "Leave it to Beaver"
>> >> crap
>> >> is just an attempt to hide the fact you're a mudslum.
>> >
>> > I'm not a Muslim. Are you a Jew? You probably are. I agree with Pat
>> > Buchannan - ENTIRELY - on this issue. Is HE a Muslim? Now you are
>> > stooping
>> > to the kinds of tactics illegals use when they accuse anti illegals of
>> > being
>> > racist. Bad boy.
>> >
>>
>> Nope, not jewish, but who knows, maybe one of my great-great-great
>> grandfathers was jewish?
>>
>> >
>> > I sincerely HOPE that Hitler-type people, as STRONG as that I mean -
>> > ready
>> > to DO whatever it takes, rise up in European countries and FIX the
>> > problems
>> > in 1 year. I want to live to see this. And then, after the Islamic
>> > and
>> > illegal problems get FIXED there - heh heh - they have to ENSURE that
>> > this
>> > kind of shit can never happen again. Same here. Oh yes, Pat Buchannan
>> > knows ALL about the CAUSE of all European troubles right now. So does
>> > Kevin
>> > MacDonald - but you SNIPPED IT OUT. Why did you snip the MacDonald
>> > information out?
>> >
>>
>> Sounds good to me, but trying to blame the joos for the problems is
>> ridiculous
>> at this point -- especially considering there's so few of them left in
>> Europe after
>> the holocaust.
>>
>> I've had friends shot & robbed by latino gangsters, beatdown by latino
>> gangsters
>> and I myself have been threatened to be "domed" by black gangsters and
>> "jumped"
>> by latino gangsters. I haven't really seen, read or heard of anyone being
>> jumped, killed
>> or robbed by jewish gangsters so it's hard for you or topaz or imam to
>> instill in me
>> any great fear of the jewish people. All I can say, is that all three of
>> you
>> must lead
>> a charmed life to live in such fear of the joos.
>
> LOL, no one said fear, Doug. Apparently you don't grasp what is being
> discussed. Sources cited earlier in this thread are Jewish sources who
> are now pleading with their Jewish brothers and organizations to change
> their stance on immigration policy into the U.S. They have been big
> movers and shakers in influencing immigration policy. Your experiences
> with latino and black gangsters are a direct result of Jewish lobbying
> for open immigration policies and multiculturalism. It's all well
> documented by Jews themselves. That's what Jani is talking about when
> she makes reference to "the ROOT(s)" of the problem. What is so hard to
> understand about that?
>
>> If I were to drop any one
>> of you off in
>> E. Los Angeles, CA; Santa Ana, CA; Boyle Heights, CA; Compton, CA;
>> Inglewood,
>> CA; late on a Friday or Saturday night I think you might know what it's
>> like
>> to live in
>> a ghetto neigborhood and how the joos are the least of my concerns.
>>
>> One other intersting tidbit, 40 years ago Boyle Heights was a nice,
>> jewish
>> neighborhood.
>> Now it's a run-down, graffitti covered, crime-ridden, gang controlled
>> latino
>> ghetto. WHy
>> don't YOU tell me it's a BETTER community NOW than it was 40 years ago.
>> If
>> you think
>> it's better let me drop you off there on a late Friday or Saturday night
>> and
>> let's see how
>> long you survive.
>
> Hmmm... why did the Jews abandon their neighborhood when the gangstas
> started moving in? They advocated for it. You get to deal with it.

[Tani Jantsang©]

"Doug" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote in message

news:rF9Oi.2173$sm6...@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...

>I ran out of tears for the muslims after 9-11, after 7-7, after the bombing
> of Spanish trains.
>
> If you love islam so much move back to the 7th century, third world,
> islamic
> theocracy you came from -- before it's too late.

He (Defendario) is a fucking TOTALLY stupid moron - real IQ 80 idiot. He
really HATES it that I'm PRO Western civ and FUCK EVERYONE ELSE. And yes,
Doug, I WOULD do genocide. It's LONG past due.

>
> The days of reckoning for the mudslums are coming in Europe. It'll make
> the jewish holocaust look like a holiday. I can hardly wait. I want to get
> a
> piece of that action. I just hope you're over there when it all comes down
> you muslim camel fucker.

YES YES YES. I'd do a genocide in a minute - but Imam and me and others are
just trying to get you to SEE - SEE SEE SEE --- WHY the Europeans just don't
DO this themselves. WHAT the cause of the PC yoke is, was, has been. You
aren't seeing that.

Yeah, Israel DOES have nukes. Why doesn't ISRAEL do it once and for all.
They talk about (and I've heard this more than once) nuking EUROPE in
vengeance. Always Europeans, always Christians, ALWAYS.

At this point, I hope Iran and Israel nuke each other. Their INFLUENCE
needs to be ended here - and GOD DAMMIT man, Pat knows about it. Even if he
was SO careful not to name it as such . Kevin MacDonald DID name it. Why
can't you see this? Why aren't the US troops REALLY using WMDs against
those people over there? WHY? Are they fighting a war to lose?

SHEESH - all this BULLSHIT. Fighting bullshit wars to lose, dragging it on,
and we are BORROWING MONEY FROM CHINA to fight this war. HOW the fuck are
we going to pay China back? They selling off big chunks of the USA maybe?
HOW are we going to pay this?

You are a man that seems to see the SMALL picture, and nothing but that.
Imam and Johnn and I are trying to explain the BIG picture - the picture
that explains, step by step, HOW Europe and the USA have come to the place
they are right now. You don't want to know. YOu do nothing but make fun of
anyone saying it - and DO NOT libel me, boy. I'm not a fucking satanist. I
am marginally Lamamist - IF I have to name some religion. I'm not
religious - PERIOD. I freaking HATE those people, the satanpoos, I hate
them enough to --- well, my ways of vengeance are VERY sneaky. But never
mind.

[Tani Jantsang©]

I thought a few posts I made were LONG - where I posted what Steinlight
said, or the summary of Kevin MacDonald's book. But BOY, Topaz, you always
make LONG posts.

If I was the head of education for America, I'd make Kevin MacDonald's book
"Culture of Critique" standard reading material.

"Topaz" <mars...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:1n8ig3hv7b47feai2...@4ax.com...

[Michael Ejercito]

On Oct 7, 10:49 am, Topaz <mars1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Advice for Patriots
> By Dr. William Pierce
>
Getting advice on patriotism from William Pierce is like getting
advice on honesty from Jeffrey Skilling.

Michael

[Topaz]

On Sun, 7 Oct 2007 11:30:39 -0700, "Doug" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:

>But there aren't many joos left in Europe now. I can't think of a single
>jooish
>terrorist act committed outside of Israel can you?
>

http://www.nationalvanguard.org/story.php?id=11576
Jewish Terrorism in France
In its issue of June 1991, the French monthly Le Choc du mois ("The
Shock of the Month") published a rather lengthy report entitled
"Jewish Militants: Fifteen Years of Terrorism" ("Milices juives.
Quinze ans de terrorisme," pp. 7-13). Under the main headline, a
subtitle summed up:
'"Jewish Action Group," "Jewish Combat Organization," "Jewish Defense
Organization"... Under these various names, Jewish activists for 15
years have unceasingly sown terror [in France] with total impunity…

The report reviews 50 cases of physical aggression committed by
organized Jewish groups during the period from June 19, 1976, to April
20, 1991. Not mentioned, therefore, are physical attacks committed by
individual Jews (which are, in any case, rare).
The victims of the 50 cases listed by Le Choc du mois, who number in
the hundreds, suffered: loss of life, an eye put out, acid throwing,
numerous hospitalizations, injuries followed by deep coma, lifetime
disabilities, and serious post-traumatic conditions, "the commission
of barbaric acts," severe beatings in the presence of policemen who
refused to intervene, and numerous ambush attacks (in one case with
the complicity of the daily newspaper Lib'ration).
Most of these acts of aggression were passed over in silence by the
media or only briefly reported. Some were applauded by Jewish
publications or organizations which, in general, after a few pro forma
words of censure, suggested that the victims deserved their fate, that
such attacks are "only natural and normal," and that no one need
expect any leniency in future if he should ever again arouse Jewish
"anger."
It is worthy of note that not one Jew has been the victim of a single
attack in revenge by any "revisionist" or so-called "extreme right"
group. (Although the press routinely lumps "revisionism" and the
"extreme right" together, in reality historical revisionism receives
support from thinking persons of all possible political views, from
the ultra-left to the extreme right, and of all parties, except the
Communists. Paul Rassinier, regarded as the founder of Holocaust
revisionism in France, was a Socialist.)…

Francois Duprat
Francois Duprat, a member of the leadership of the National Front
party, and an author and distributor of revisionist writings, was
killed in his car on March 18, 1978, when it was blown up with a
sophisticated bomb. His wife was severely injured. A "Remembrance
Commando" claimed responsibility for the crime. In keeping with the
practice of "Nazi hunters" Serge and Beate Klarsfeld, Patrice Chairoff
had published in Dossier n'onazisme ("The Neo-Nazi File," 1977), the
name and address of Duprat, and of several other persons who were
suspected of fascism, neo-Nazism, or revisionism (Le Monde, March 23,
1978, p. 7; April 26, 1978, p. 9)…
On December 9, 1979, about a hundred individuals wearing helmets
attacked the 14th national conference of GRECE (Groupe d"tudes et de
recherches sur la civilisation europ'enne, "Group for the Study and
Research of European Civilization"). Wrecking the book stands, they
displayed banners bearing the name "Organisation juive de d'fense"
(OJD, "Jewish Defense Organization"). Fifteen or so of the conference
attendees were injured. One of them lost an eye. Several of the
assailants were arrested by the police, and then released that same
afternoon on the intervention of Jean-Pierre Pierre-Bloch, the son of
Jean Pierre-Bloch and a friend of Jacques Chirac [currently President
of France]. Jean-Pierre Pierre-Bloch had been involved, and would also
later be involved, in other attacks and intercessions on behalf of
these same attackers.
On September 19, 1980, a commando group of the "Jewish Defense
Organization" (OJD) attacked sympathizers of Marc Fredriksen, an
executive of FANE ("F'd'ration d'action nationale et europ'enne," or
"National and European Action Federation"), at the Paris Palace of
Justice (court house). Six persons were injured, two of them
seriously. The Palace of Justice guards, although charged with
maintaining order, permitted the Jewish militants in this case, as in
all other similar circumstances, to act without or almost without
hindrance…
If a French "right wing" group had harmed a Jew, the media of the
world would have played up the attack, with shocking photographs of
the victim, gruesome details about the injury, follow-up interviews,
and outraged commentary…
A few days later, on October 7, Charles Bousquet, 84 years old, was
attacked in his home in Neuilly with sulfuric acid by a group of
unknown men who had apparently mistaken him for the militant
nationalist, Pierre Bousquet (no relation to Ren' Bousquet). He was
hospitalized for a month at Foch Hospital in the major burns ward, and
suffered after-effects from his injuries. He refused to press charges
because his son Pierre, a professor of history at the University of
Paris IV, has asked him not to "on account of the Israelites." He
said: "They'll be in Jerusalem or Tel Aviv, the ones who did it. It
would all be useless. I want to forget it" (during a conversation with
R. Faurisson, May 2, 1984).
On October 12, 1980, Mark Fredriksen was beaten up and admitted to the
Rambouillet hospital in serious condition. His apartment was torn
apart in his absence. While under treatment at Berck-sur-Mer for
multiple fractures, he came close to suffering another attack: three
young men showed up and asked to see him; their description matched
that of the Aziza team that subsequently attacked Michel Caignat with
acid (see below).
On October 20, 1980, the writer Andr' Figu'ras was attacked at his
residence.
On the morning of January 29, 1981, Michel (Miguel) Caignet, a
26-year-old Sorbonne student who was preparing for a doctorate in
Anglo-German linguistics, had just left his residence in Courbevoie to
go to the university when he was accosted by four individuals. They
knocked him down and prevented him from moving. One of the four
attackers sprayed his face and his right hand with sulfuric acid.
Caignet had belonged to FANE, and he was a revisionist. He had been
denounced by the weekly VSD (Vendredi/Samedi/ Dimanche). Following the
attack with acid, his face looked so hideous that only two newspapers
ventured to publish his photograph. The principal perpetrator of the
attack, Yves Aziza, a medical student and the son of Charles Aziza (an
assistant pharmacist at Montreuil), was identified by the police
within an hour of the crime. But in this case, as in others, the
French police and courts scandalously permitted Yves Aziza to flee to
Germany and to Israel. At the Justice Ministry, an official named Main
at the criminal affairs bureau (headed by Raoul B'teille)
sarcastically evaded every question put to him with regard to the
14-day delay in opening a judicial inquiry. Among Yves Aziza's
correspondents was Daniel Ziskind, the son of MichŠle Ziskind, sister
of Jean-Pierre Pierre-Bloch, who is himself the son of Jean
Pierre-Bloch.
On September 18, 1981, 200 members of the Organisation juive de combat
(OJC) or "Jewish Combat Organization" laid down the law at the Palace
of Justice in Paris, where the defamation trial brought by Pierre
Sidos, president of l'Oeuvre francaise, against Jean-Pierre Bloch was
taking place. As usual, Jewish thugs beat up several of the
spectators.
On November 25, 1981, the premises of the tudes et documentation
bookstore were set on fire by a commando group.
On May 8, 1988, at Saint-Augustin Square in Paris, OJC commandos used
iron bars to attack l'Oeuvre francaise supporters who were taking part
in the traditional parade in honor of Joan of Arc. Some 15 supporters
were injured, two of them very seriously. Four of the victims were
hospitalized. A septuagenarian remained in a coma for several weeks.
Ten OJC members were questioned by the police. That same afternoon
Jean-Pierre Pierre-Bloch interceded with the criminal police
investigation unit (police judiciaire) on their behalf. Legal
proceedings were instituted against some of the attackers. Some
attackers were released with the following notation by the examining
magistrate: "preliminary examination inopportune." Other attackers
were tried, though not without pressure "from the highest political
level" being brought to bear on the public prosecutor's office. In
total, only three of the attackers were tried. Each received a
two-year suspended (!) prison sentence.
On February 6, 1990, millions of viewers witnessed the brutal attack
against Olivier Mathieu during a television broadcast emceed by
Christophe Dechavanne. Jean-Pierre Pierre-Bloch came on to the stage
with a group of OJC militants. Mathieu had just time enough to
exclaim: "Faurisson is right." Then ten or so of the thugs severely
beat him, his fiancee, and Marc Botrel. Among those present was an
important figure among Jewish militants: Moshe Cohen, a former second
lieutenant of the Israeli army and an officer at the time of the Tagar
organization, the student branch of the Betar (59 boulevard de
Strasbourg, Paris Xe). The attacks continued off stage and out into
the street. One attacker was questioned by the police, but released a
few hours later on the intercession of Jean-Pierre Pierre-Bloch.
Pierre Guillaume, a leftist, is in charge of the Vieille Taupe ("Old
Mole") publishers, which has issued a number of revisionist works,
including those of Professor Faurisson. He has been the victim of a
number of serious attacks, both against his person-at the Sorbonne, in
his Paris bookstore, and at the Palace of Justice in Paris (where the
guards did not intervene) -- as well as against his property (book
warehouse, video equipment, bookstore). In 1991, groups of
demonstrators, most of them Jews, laid siege to his bookstore in the
rue d'Ulm on a regular basis. As a result of various acts of violence
(breaking shop windows, spraying chemical products, physical
intimidation, etc.), they finally succeeded in closing it.
On April 20, 1991, at the "Maison des Mines" building in Paris, about
50 individuals claiming to be members of the Groupe d'action juive
(GAJ), or "Jewish Action Group," and armed with iron bars and baseball
bats, attacked the attendees of a meeting of the "Friends of
Saint-Loup" ("Les Amis de Saint-Loup"), named after a deceased writer
whose real name was Marc Augier. Thirteen persons, most of them
elderly, were injured, two of them very seriously. Juliette Cavali',
67 years of age, was taken to Beaujon Hospital where she lapsed into a
coma that lasted three months. After regaining consciousness, she was
condemned to spend the rest of her days unable to walk or even to feed
herself. Alain L'authier, a journalist for Lib'ration and a relative
of the socialist deputy and Jewish zealot Julien Dray, witnessed the
attack from beginning to end, and provided a smug and ironical report
of it ("Zionist commando unit invites itself to the neo-Nazi meeting,"
Liberation, April 22, 1991, p. 28).
Europe's most prominent Holocaust revisionist scholar, Professor
Robert Faurisson, was the victim of ten physical assaults between
November 20, 1978, and May 31, 1993 (two in Lyon, two in Vichy, two in
Stockholm and four in Paris). Seven of these attacks were at the hands
of French Jewish organizations or militants-two in Lyon, one in Vichy,
one in Stockholm (by Swedish Jews together with French Jews who had
come from Paris by plane), one at the Sorbonne, and one at the Palace
of Justice in Paris.
The first of these seven attacks took place on November 20, 1978. It
was lauded in Lib'ration-Lyon by the Jewish journalist Bernard
Schalscha, who reported the day, the place, and the hour of the
professor's courses. Members of the Jewish Students Union who had come
by first-class train from Paris attacked the professor at the
University, while Dr. Marc Aron, a cardiologist and president of the
liaison committee of the Jewish institutions and organizations of
Lyon, was present.
The second attack occurred a few weeks later when Faurisson attempted
to resume his courses. On that day as well, Marc Aron was again at the
university.
At the Sorbonne, on September 12, 1987, members of a Jewish group of
militants attacked Henry Chauveau, Michel Sergent, Pierre Guillaume,
Freddy Storer (a Belgian), and Professor Faurisson, all of whom were
injured. (Chauveau was seriously injured.) The Sorbonne guards
apprehended one of the attackers. A plainclothes policeman ordered the
attacker released and used the violence as an excuse to expel the
professor from the university. (Prof. Faurisson had once taught at the
Sorbonne.)
On September 16, 1989, three men set a trap for Faurisson in a park
near his residence in Vichy as he was out walking his poodle. After
spraying a stinging gas into his face, temporarily blinding him, the
assailants punched him to the ground and then repeatedly kicked him in
the face and chest. If a passerby had not intervened, the attackers'
kicks to the head would have been finished off the 60-year-old
scholar. Badly injured, Faurisson had to undergo a lengthy surgical
operation. The crime investigation unit inquiry confirmed that the
attack could be attributed to "young Jewish activists from Paris."
On the eve of the attack, Faurisson had noted with surprise the
presence near the park of a certain Nicolas Ullmann (born in 1963). On
July 12, 1987, Ullmann had violently struck the professor at the Vichy
Sporting-Club. When he was questioned at the criminal investigation
department about his presence in that area, he denied having been
there. Moreover, Ullmann claimed that on the very day of the attack he
had taken part in a masked ball ("bal masqu'") in Paris, so that it
would be impossible for anyone other than his host and friend to vouch
for his presence in Paris that day. It should be noted that the
examining magistrate of Cusset, near Vichy, never summoned Faurisson
to hear his testimony. Instead, judge Jocelyne Rubantel merely
received him in her office in Cusset to inform him that she would ask
for a dismissal of the charges-which she obtained. No search was made
of the Paris headquarters of Betar/Tagar. Such a search would have
incited too much "anger" in the Jewish community.
On October 16, 1989, precisely one month after the attack in Vichy, a
bomb exploded at the door of the offices in Paris of Choc du mois,
which were then ransacked. Credit for the attack was claimed by the
"Jewish Combat Organization" (OJC) and some far left groups. Eric
Letty, who had devoted an article in Choc du mois to Professor
Faurisson, would have been killed had he not, by a miracle, detected
the imminence of the explosion.
We do not have space here to cite the other attacks against Professor
Faurisson.
Many other cases could be cited of attacks by Jewish groups: in
addition to the incidents during the years 1976-1991 listed in the
Choc du mois article, there are other, unlisted, cases, as well as
attacks that have occurred since 1992. To repeat: the total number of
victims of Jewish terror amounts to several hundreds, even though, in
contrast, not a single Jew has been the victim of a concerted or
organized attack in France.
On January 14, 1988, in Lyon, Professor Jean-Claude Allard was
hospitalized following a group attack against him for which the OJC
claimed responsibility. The attackers ambushed him in the parking lot
of the University of Lyon III. In June 1985, he had presided over the
examining board of the thesis of revisionist scholar Henri Roques on
"The 'Confessions' of Kurt Gerstein," which have been widely regarded
as key evidence for Holocaust gassings. (In an action without
precedent in French academic history, the thesis' defense was annulled
under pressure by "angry" Jews. [The English-language edition of The
'Confessions' of Kurt Gerstein is published by the IHR.])
Armed Jewish militants carried out new acts of violence on April 13,
1994, during a break in the trial of the "hooligans of the Parc des
Princes," a Paris soccer stadium. (At least one of the hooligans was a
Jew.) In this case the victims were policemen. The militants entered
the Palace of Justice with weapons and iron bars, and one of the court
house guards was attacked. "An interesting detail," one Paris paper
noted. "No investigation was made to clear up the affair, and the only
arrest made was that of one of the 'nationalist militants' who had
been attacked and ventured to defend himself." ("Jewish militants make
the law," Le Libre Journal, April 27, 1994, p. 9. See also: "The Betar
makes the law in the Palace of Justice," Rivarol, April 22, 1994, p.
5).
On April 28, 1994, the German citizen Ludwig Watzal, an official guest
of the University of Nanterre (near Paris), was struck by members of
Jewish or leftist organizations.
Many bookstores have been wrecked. In addition to the
Bleu-Blanc-Rouge, Ogmios, Librairie Francaise, and Librairie de la
Vieille Taupe stores, we may mention the Librairie de la Joyeuse
Garde. (In the last-named case, shop windows were broken, steel safety
shutters were glued shut, and excrement was strewn around.) Further
targets of attacks, for which Jewish organizations claimed
responsibility, have been offices, buildings, exhibitions, a book
warehouse and a church (Saint-Nicolas-du-Chardonnet in Paris, on
December 21, 1978).
For those who have been targeted for attack by the Jewish militants,
the most dangerous city in France is Paris. Within Paris, one of the
most dangerous districts is the first district, and within that
district the most dangerous place is the Palace of Justice-the central
courthouse-and the surrounding area. Paradoxically, this area is under
particularly good police surveillance because the Palace has its own
"military command" consisting of hundreds of armed guards, and because
next to the Palace building is the "Quai des OrfŠvres," headquarters
of the police crime investigations department. As it happens, though,
in recent years the guards and police have permitted many acts of
violence to be carried out, especially against revisionists who have
been summoned to court or who come to attend the trials.
When a group of Jewish militants decide to burst into the court
building, the scenario is invariably as follows: the thugs, whose
demeanor betrays their bellicose intentions, are in no way restrained
by the guards from their intended victims. No officer attempts to
inform these shock troopers that violence will not be tolerated. The
assailants are permitted to insult, to provoke, and then to strike
their victims. Sometimes guards will make an effort to protect
victims. If a militant calls special attention to himself by extreme
violence, three guards quickly take him away, but then let him go.
Once the militants have completed their brutal work and have
disappeared, the guards hasten to the bloody or swollen victims,
fussing over them like concerned nannies. The victims are never able
to get the police to interrogate the attackers, or even to learn their
identities…
In 1986, when Laurent Fabius was Prime Minister of France, his wife,
Mme. Fran‡oise Castro, revealed that the Jewish militants and the
Interior Minister were working hand in hand. She stated: "An
extraordinary novelty in political behavior: the Left has allowed
Jewish militants to establish themselves in some quarters of Paris and
also in Toulouse, Marseille, and Strasbourg [and to have] regular
contacts with the Interior Minister." (Le Monde, March 7, 1986, p. 8).
Castro and Fabius are both Jewish.
By a sort of consensus it seems to be generally agreed that the Jews
must be treated in France as a privileged minority whose "anger"
(colŠre) must be excused. (This word crops up in the press with
nagging persistence.) By law, private militia groups are not legal in
France. But the authorities allow one exception to this law. Jewish
militants are the only ones permitted to bear arms in France. (See the
photograph of a Jew armed with an automatic pistol on the roof of a
building in the rue de Nazareth. Lib'ration, Oct. 14, 1986, p. 56.)
France's criminal police investigators are thus paralyzed in their
investigations of crimes committed by these militants, who are
euphemistically called "young Jewish activists of Paris." These
militant groups enjoy at least a partial guarantee of impunity in
France. The worst thing their members have to fear is having to go
into exile in Germany or Israel for a spell…
A list of incendiary statements by French Jews in positions of
responsibility calling for physical violence would be a long one. Jews
do not shrink from political assassination. On this subject, one may
read the recent work of Nachman Ben-Yehuda, Political Assassination by
Jews: A Rhetorical Device for Justice (New York: State Univ. of New
York Press, 1993). We know the considerable role played by Jews in the
Bolshevik revolution. [See: M. Weber, "The Jewish Role in the
Bolshevik Revolution and Russia's Early Soviet Regime," Jan.-Feb. 1994
Journal.] In France, the song of the partisans was written by two
Jews, Joseph Kessel (1898-1979) and Maurice Druon, both of whom were
later members of the French Academy. The song's refrain is well known:
"Hey there! Killers by gun or blade. Kill swiftly!" ("Oh'! Les tueurs
… la balle et au couteau. Tuez vite!")…
During a 1986 interview with the Chicago Tribune (June 29, 1986),
Beate Klarsfeld told "how she haunted at least three former Nazis
until they committed suicide or died; how she organized attempts to
kidnap others; how she used headline-making gimmicks to bring to trial
or to ruin the careers of many who were convinced the world had
forgotten them." She related how she slapped the face of German
Chancellor Kurt-Georg Kiesinger in public in 1968. "Once, she and
several friends tried to kidnap Kurt Lischka" but the operation failed
because the car they were using had only two doors. As for Ernst
Ehlers, "harassed by Klarsfeld-organized demonstrations outside his
home, he first resigned his position [as judge] and then committed
suicide."
After picking up the trail of Walter Rauff in Chile, the Klarsfelds
organized demonstrations in front of his house and broke his windows.
"He died a couple of months later," Beate Klarsfeld told the American
daily. "I was glad, because as long as these people are alive, they
are an offense to their victims." "My husband and I are not fanatics
... Once my husband held a pistol to the temple of Rauff, just to show
that we could kill him, but he didn't pull the trigger."
In 1988, Serge Klarsfeld stated: "No one has really gone after Le Pen
in dead earnest. We ought to have provoked confrontations with him so
that ... he'd take the most extreme position possible." (Le Soir
[Brussels], quoted in Rivarol, July 1, 1988, p. 5).
In 1991, Beate Klarsfeld entered Syria with fraudulent papers to go
after Alois Brunner (who was already disfigured and missing most of
his fingers as the result of letter bombs). In front of his presumed
residence, she wanted to repeat the kind of demonstration that had
been staged in front of the home of Paul Touvier in 1972 (which was
broken into, looted, and laid waste). [See: "Alois Brunner Talks About
His Past," in the Spring 1990 Journal, pp. 123ff.]
In 1992, the Klarsfelds organized what Le Monde (Oct. 21, 1992, p. 4)
called "the savage escapade of the Betar at Rostock ... spreading
terror in the central square of the Rostock town hall, with French and
Israeli flags displayed, calling passersby 'dirty Germans, dirty
Nazis!'." A short time later Beate Klarsfeld expressed approval of the
Betar attack against the Goethe Institute (German cultural center) in
Paris, calling it an act of "legitimate violence" because the Rostock
police had briefly held and questioned a few of the Jewish attackers.
(Der Standard [Vienna], Oct. 23, 1992). Nine of the policemen had been
injured, among them several who required hospitalization after being
beaten with baseball bats and iron bars, and sprayed with "defensive"
gas.
On June 8, 1993, Ren' Bousquet, former secretary general of the police
in the wartime Vichy government (and who was later deported by the
Germans), was struck down in his Paris residence by a fanatic. The
attacker, who spewed out verbiage … la Klarsfeld, explained his action
as that of a lover of justice who had already tried to kill Paul
Touvier. Writing in the French daily Le Monde (June 10, 1993, p. 28),
Annick Cojean referred to Serge Klarsfeld: "Was he not the slayer of
Bousquet? The one who had tracked him down, pursued him, attacked him,
forced him to resign from his every position from 1978 to 1989? And
was he not [by this killing] robbed of a long awaited trial? The
lawyer [Klarsfeld] quietly smiles: 'Why deny it? What I feel today is
relief above all. And if that runs counter to the interests of the
trial, so be it! I can't be worrying about what those people want.
That's too much for me'."

Full article
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v16/v16n2p-2_Faurisson.html

2006 NationalVanguard.org.

[Topaz]

On Sun, 7 Oct 2007 13:19:37 -0700, "Doug" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:

>
>Israel paid off the families of those victimized

Paid them to keep quiet more likely.

The Real Cost Of US Support
For Israel - $3 Trillion
By Christopher Bollyn
9-19-3

While it is commonly reported that Israel officially receives some $3
billion every year in the form of economic aid from the U.S.
government, this figure is just the tip of the iceberg. There are many
billions of dollars more in hidden costs and economic losses lurking
beneath the surface. A recently published economic analysis has
concluded that U.S. support for the state of Israel has cost American
taxpayers nearly $3 trillion ($3 million millions) in 2002 dollars.
"The Costs to American Taxpayers of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict:
$3 Trillion" is a summary of economic research done by Thomas R.
Stauffer. Stauffer's summary of the research was published in the
June 2003 issue of The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs.
Stauffer is a Washington, D.C.-based engineer and economist who writes
and teaches about the economics of energy and the Middle East.
Stauffer has taught at Harvard University and Georgetown University's
School of Foreign Service. Stauffer's findings were first presented at
an October 2002 conference sponsored by the U.S. Army College and the
University of Maine.
Stauffer's analysis is "an estimate of the total cost to the U.S.
alone of instability and conflict in the region - which emanates from
the core Israeli-Palestinian conflict."
"Total identifiable costs come to almost $3 trillion," Stauffer says.
"About 60 percent, well over half, of those costs - about $1.7
trillion - arose from the U.S. defense of Israel, where most of that
amount has been incurred since 1973."
"Support for Israel comes to $1.8 trillion, including special trade
advantages, preferential contracts, or aid buried in other accounts.
In addition to the financial outlay, U.S. aid to Israel costs some
275,000 American jobs each year." The trade-aid imbalance alone with
Israel of between $6-10 billion costs about 125,000 American jobs
every year, Stauffer says.
The largest single element in the costs has been the series of
oil-supply crises that have accompanied the Israeli-Arab wars and the
construction of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. ā?To date these have
cost the U.S. $1.5 trillion (2002 dollars), excluding the additional
costs incurred since 2001,ā? Stauffer wrote.
The cost of supporting Israel increased drastically after the 1973
Israeli-Arab war. U.S. support for Israel during that war resulted in
additional costs for the American taxpayer of between $750 billion and
$1 trillion, Stauffer says.
When Israel was losing the war, President Richard Nixon stepped in to
supply the Jewish state with U.S. weapons. Nixon's intervention
triggered the Arab oil embargo which Stauffer estimates cost the U.S.
as much as $600 billion in lost GDP and another $450 in higher oil
import costs.
"The 1973 oil crisis, all in all, cost the U.S. economy no less than
$900 billion, and probably as much as $1,200 billion," he says.
As a result of the oil embargo the United States created the Strategic
Petroleum Reserve (SPR) to "insulate Israel and the U.S. against the
wielding of a future Arab 'oil weapon'." The billion-barrel SPR has
cost U.S. taxpayers $134 billion to date. According to an Oil Supply
Guarantee, which former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger provided
Israel in 1975, Israel gets 'first call' on any oil available to the
U.S. if Israel's oil supply is stopped.
Stauffer's $3 trillion figure is conservative as it does not include
the increased costs incurred during the year-long buildup to the
recent war against Iraq in which Israel played a significant, albeit
covert, role. The higher oil prices that occurred as a result of the
Anglo-American campaign against Iraq were absorbed by the consumers.
The increase in oil prices provided a huge bonus for the leading oil
companies such as British Petroleum and Shell, who are major oil
producers as well as retailers. The major international oil companies
recorded record profits for the first quarter of 2003.
The Washington Report seeks to "provide the American public with
balanced and accurate information concerning U.S. relations with
Middle Eastern states." The monthly journal is known for keeping close
tabs on the amount of U.S. taxpayer money that goes to Israel and how
much pro-Israel money flows back to Members of Congress in the form of
campaign aid.
The journal's website, www.wrmea.com, has an up-to-date counter at the
top that indicates how much official aid flows to Israel. While the
counter currently stands at $88.2 billion, it only reflects the
minimum, as it does not include the many hidden costs.
"The distinction is important, because the indirect or consequential
losses suffered by the U.S. as a result of its blind support for
Israel exceed by many times the substantial amount of direct aid to
Israel," Shirl McArthur wrote in the May 2003 issue of Washington
Report.
McArthur's article, "A Conservative Tally of Total Direct U.S. Aid to
Israel: $97.5 Billion - and Counting" tallies the hidden costs, such
as interest lost due to the early disbursement of aid to Israel and
funds hidden in other accounts. For example, Israel received $5.45
billion in Defense Department funding of Israeli weapons projects
through 2002, McArthur says.
Loans made to Israel by the U.S. government, like the recently awarded
$9 billion, invariably wind up being paid by the American taxpayer. A
recent Congressional Research Service report indicates that Israel has
received $42 billion in waived loans. "Therefore, it is reasonable to
consider all government loans to Israel the same as grants," McArthur
says.
Support for Israel has cost America dearly - well over than $10,000
per
American - however the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been extremely
costly for the entire world. According to Stauffer, the total bill for
supporting Israel is two to four times higher than that for the U.S.
alone -
costing the global community an estimated $6 to $12 trillion
http://www.rense.com/general41/trill.htm

[Doug]

"Tani Jantsang©" <tjs...@spampost.com> wrote in message
news:13gjaud...@corp.supernews.com...

I don't have anything against joos. They've never caused me any problems.
I'd rather see Israel in the mideast than ANOTHER islamic state. Jerusalem
is only islam's third holiest site -- they've got TWO other holier sites.
The jews
only have one holy site. Jerusalem wasn't built by mudslums either.

I've worked for mudslums before and I've read enough about islamic
atrocities/genocides to make up my own mind about the "religion of
peace."

[Doug]

You're delusional if you think islam despises western civilization
because of the joos. YOu should read up on the concept of
infidel in the koran sometime. You should also read up on
the concept of: "first saturday, then sunday."

Let's look at this another way there are only tens of millions of
joos in the world, but BILLIONS of mudslums. There is exactly
ONE jewish state in the world but how many mudslum states?
Let's see:

i. Kuwait
ii. Saudia Arabia
iii. Egypt
iv. Iran
v. Iraq
vi. Turkey
vii. Syria
viii. Libya
ix. Somalia

Now I'm really afraid of the joos...

"Tani Jantsang©" <tjs...@spampost.com> wrote in message
news:13gjaue...@corp.supernews.com...

> Notice how Doug NEVER answers you? NOtice how he fails to note that I
> said the SAME THING that Pat Buchanan said? In fact, Pat said it 100
> times stronger - about WHY the Muslims are attacking us. Pat said it
> stronger.
>
> At this point, I'd say Pat is wrong. Things have changed. We ARE at war
> with Islam NOW - and that is unfortunate. There are a lot more of them -
> and Russia might ally with them as a superpower. China might do that too.
> So it's very unfortunate.
>
> But notice how Doug ignores what you said - what Johnny said. He libels
> me - but doesn't say a word about Pat, who said the same things I just
> said.
>
> I think he's an emotional coward, at this point.
>
> "Imam Contemptus Mundi" <im...@divinepraxeology.org> wrote in message
> news:imam-28DA82.0...@news.motzarella.org...
>> In article <XVZNi.6924$6p6....@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net>,
>> "Doug" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>

>>> "Tani Jantsang©" <tjs...@spampost.com> wrote in message

[Topaz]

On Sun, 7 Oct 2007 13:32:26 -0700, "Doug" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:

>You're an able liar for Islam. Muslims have been slaughtering Christians
>in Lebanon for DECADES, islamboi. Ditto for Turkey artard. Ditto for
>Northern
>Africa artard (as a matter of fact I know a Christian from Eritrea who
>has DIRECT knowledge of the genocide of Christians in his country).
>Let's not forget the Armenian genocide either.

Your Jewish controlled media also says how bad White people are. The
Jews put their spin on everything. Jews control your media and your
mind:

NOT JOURNALISTS_ZIONIST PROPAGANDISTS
From: libb...@hotmail.com <mailto:libb...@hotmail.com> (libby)
Date: 9/4/02 6:46 PM Pacific Daylight

Sept.04/2002

It's important for the American people to know that all those
'American' journalists/talking heads that they see and read in the
Zionist controlled print and electronic mass media are not working for
America's interests. The very fact that they appear on CNN or write
for the Washington Post, for example, conveys the impression in the
minds of Americans that these 'journalists' are loyal Americans who
have America's best interests at heart. They are, in fact, leading
players in a huge deception and manipulation of the American people
that when attached to a cause such as, 'support of Israel', or
'attacking Iraq', is unrelenting in it's intensity and scope... Fact
is, they
are part of the same ruling elites of mostly Zionists who by now have
a virtual stranglehold on power in America.
And even as I write this, there on CNN's TALKBACK LIVE is Daniel Pipes
of Middle East Forum, propagandizing in favor of a unilateral military
attack on a sovereign nation, Iraq. An act that if committed by any
country other than America, would be considered a war crime and
justification for America to go to war against the invading country.
The following is an excerpt from the foreword to Aldous Huxley's BRAVE
NEW WORLD.
=============
begin excerpt
=============
The greatest triumphs of propaganda have been accomplished, not by
doing something, but by refraining from doing. Great is the truth, but
still greater, from a practical point of view, is silence about truth.
By simply not mentioning certain subjects, by lowering what Mr.
Churchill calls an 'iron curtain' between the masses and such facts or
arguments as the local political bosses regard as undesirable,
totalitarian propagandists have influenced [public] opinion much more
effectively than they could have done by the most eloquent
denunciations, the most compelling of logical rebuttals.
===========
end excerpt
===========
In plain English, propagandists don't necessarily need to lie to the
mass audience to control them. By not disclosing critical
facts/information, they ensure that no debate will ever take place on
these critical issues. This omitting of critical facts/information is
one of the very tactics used by CNN and the rest of the Zionist mass
media in America. There are many examples of this tactic and one that
comes to mind is the issue of Israel's weapons of mass
destruction(WMD's). The Zionist mass media in America does not discuss
this at all. They do not want public debate on this issue. One of the
reasons being, of course, that America's great 'ally' Israel stole
it's nuclear weapons program from America. Another issue that the
Zionists keep hidden from Americans is the $3,000,000,000 that goes to
Israel each year, payback from the 'Congress of traitors', no doubt,
for Zionist/Jewish election funding.

So Dear Americans: The next time you see/hear/read the 'work' of the
Zionist 'journalists', Kristol, Barnes, Krauthammer, Blitzer, Kagan
Zahn, Gaffney, Schneider, Limbaugh, Pipes, Kaplan, Lipsky, Zuckerman,
Goldberg and all the others, be aware that they and their bosses are
Zionists and their purpose is to serve the interests of
Zionism/Israel, AND NOT AMERICA. Take everything they say with a grain
of salt and a pound of critique.
=== =====
Roy Libby
=== =====
Truth and disclosure are a deceiver's greatest fears.

ZIONIST POWER STRUCTURE
IN AMERICA

Now that we have established the ruthless and criminal nature of
radical Zionism, one more lesson needs to be understood before we
return to the five dancing Israelis of 9-11 and other related stories.
Even the Zionists themselves have never denied that they have long
exerted great influence in America. But what we must understand is
that the Zionists do not merely influence United States policy....they
dominate it! It is this domination that enables them to pull off
monstrous crimes and then conceal them from the general public.

The observation that Zionists dominate the American media, government,
academia, and Hollywood has been made by many prominent Americans and
is easily verifiable by public information.

Henry Ford said this:

"If after having elected their man or group, obedience is not rendered
to the Jewish control, then you speedily hear of "scandals" and
"investigations" and "impeachments" for the removal of the
disobedient.
Usually a man with a "past" proves the most obedient instrument, but
even a good man can often be tangled up in campaign practices that
compromise him. It has been commonly known that Jewish manipulation of
American election campaigns have been so skillfully handled, that no
matter which candidate was elected, there was ready made a sufficient
amount of evidence to discredit him in case his Jewish masters needed
to discredit him." 33

Charles Lindbergh said this:

"Their greatest danger to this country lies in the Jewish ownership
and influence in our motion pictures, our press, our radio, and our
government. 34

Admiral Thomas Moorer, Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff under
Ronald Reagan said this:

"I've never seen a President-I don't care who he is-stand up to them
[the Israelis]. It just boggles the mind. They always get what they
want. The Israelis know what is going on all the time. If the American
people understood what a grip those people have got on our government,
they would rise up in arms. Our citizens certainly don't have any idea
what goes on."
35

While a guest on ABC's Face the Nation, William Fulbright - US Senator
and Chairman of the US Foreign Relations committee - said this before
a national television audience:

"Israel controls the United States Senate. We should be more concerned
about the United States' interests." 36

Nationally syndicated columnist and former presidential candidate
Patrick Buchanan said:

"The United States Congress is Israeli occupied territory." 37

And US religious leader Billy Graham and President Richard Nixon once
had the following exchange, which was caught on tape:

GRAHAM: The Jewish stranglehold on the media has got to be broken or
this country's going down the drain". NIXON: "You believe that?"
GRAHAM: "Yes, sir." NIXON: "Oh boy. So do I. I can't ever say that but
I do believe it" 38

But enough of quoting others. Let's look at the facts of Zionist
control.

FACT: ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, UPN, The Washington Post, The New York
Times, The Wall Street Journal, The New York Daily News, Time
Magazine, Newsweek, People Magazine, US News and World Report and
countless other media and Hollywood companies all have either a
Zionist CEO, a Zionist News Chief, or are owned by a media
conglomerate which has a Zionist CEO. 39 Have you ever noticed how
Hollywood movies always seem to portray Germans and Arabs as a bigoted
fanatics or as terrorists? Now you know why!

FACT: AIPAC, the Israeli lobbying organization, is the most feared
lobby in Washington DC. By their own admission, they are capable of
unseating Congressmen and Senators that do not carry out their
requests. The majority of Congressmen from both political parties
receive large donations from AIPAC. Writing for the Nation Magazine,
journalist Michael Massing explains:

"AIPAC is widely regarded as the most powerful foreign-policy lobby in
Washington. Its 60,000 members shower millions of dollars on hundreds
of members of Congress on both sides of the aisle. Newspapers like the
New York Times fear the Jewish lobby organizations as well. "It's very
intimidating," said a correspondent at another large daily. "The
pressure from these groups is relentless." 40 (emphasis added)

<http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=53>

FACT: The Pentagon is under the control of a hard core Zionist named
Richard Perle. The civilian Defense Policy Board actually wields more
control over the military establishment than the Defense Secretary or
the generals and admirals. There are a number of other Zionists who
serve on the board (Kissinger, Cohen, Schlessinger) as well as
non-jewish members who have always supported Israel and the expansion
of the "War on Terror". The notoriously belligerent Perle, nicknamed
the "The Prince of Darkness", is Chairman of the Board. 41

With Perle as Chairman of the Defense Policy Board, Zionist Paul
Wolfowitz as Undersecretary of Defense, and Zionist award winner
Douglass Feith as Undersecretary of Defense Policy, the Zionist
Pentagon gang controls 3 of the top 4 civilian leadership positions of
America's armed forces. Careerist scoundrels like Condoleeza Rice and
Donald Rumsfeld are either under their influence or unwilling to
oppose their drive for WW III. The Perle-Wolfowitz-Feith gang
represent a fanatical and warmongering
"government-within-a-government". In league with these Zionist
Pentagon conspirators are jewish Zionist and potential 2004
Presidential candidate, Senator Joseph Lieberman (D-CT) and his
Gentile partner in crime Senator
John McCain (R-AZ).

<http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=706>

An Israeli journalist named Ari Shavit, lamenting the harsh treatments
that his government dishes out to the Palestinians, made the following
observation in Ha'aretz, a leading Israeli journal:

" We believe with absolute certitude that now, with the White House
and Senate in our hands along with the Pentagon and the New York
Times, the lives [of Arabs] do not count as much as our own. Their
blood does not count as much as our blood. We believe with absolute
certitude that now, when we have AIPAC [the Israel lobby] and [Edgar]
Bronfman and the Anti-Defamation League, , we truly have the right to
tell 400,000 people that in eight hours they must flee from their
homes. And that we have the right to rain bombs on their villages and
towns and populated areas. That we have the right to kill without any
guilt." 42 (emphasis added)

And this only scratches the surface of Zionist power! With such
awesome power to control and cover up events, is it any wonder why so
many of America's journalists and politicians are afraid to even talk
about this issue? Is it any wonder why former President Bill Clinton
would grovel before a jewish audience and say something as ridiculous
as the following statement:

"The Israelis know that if the Iraqi or the Iranian army came across
the Jordan River, I would personally grab a rifle, get in a ditch, and
fight and die." 43

I could go on and on at much greater length about this subject, but I
want to get back to the dancing Israelis. Have I made my point yet?

Subject: THE ZIONIST WHORE
From: "Rasputin" a.se...@worldnet.att.net
<mailto:a.se...@worldnet.att.net>
Date: 9/1/02 8:49 PM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:
<edBc9.46977$Ke2.3...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net
<mailto:edBc9.46977$Ke2.3...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>>

AMERICA BECOMES THE ZIONIST'S WHORE

We have reviewed how the Zionists used and discarded Germany. Then
they used and discarded Great Britain. After World War II, it was
clear that the chief remaining global power was the United States. Now
the USA had never had any problem with the Arab people, and had no
reason to quarrel with the Arabs.
For the Zionists to maintain and expand the support they were
receiving from America, it would benefit them greatly if the Arabs and
the mighty US could somehow become enemies. Could the Zionists
possibly stoop so low? Why not? Look at what they had already pulled
off! Remember that the official motto
of the Mossad (Israeli's intelligence organization) is "by way of
deception thou shalt do war." 26

In 1955, one of these "false flag" operations was publicly exposed for
the world to see. Israeli agents, impersonating Arab terrorists, were
caught staging a series of bombings against American installations in
Egypt. 27 When this conspiracy was exposed, it ultimately created such
a controversy that it brought down the Israeli government. The long
since forgotten scandal became known as "the Lavon Affair".

Then again during a 1967 war with the Arabs, Israeli gunboats and
fighter jets deliberately attacked the USS Liberty, an unarmed US
communications ship. 28 Thirty five American sailors were murdered and
170 others injured in a prolonged Israeli onslaught - carried out in
broad daylight and with the U.S. flag flying prominently. The intent
was to kill all of the Americans and then leave the Egyptians to take
the blame. Israel denied that the attack was deliberate but the
chilling stories of the lucky American survivors clearly contradicts
that lie. To this very day, the U.S. Congress has never investigated
the USS Liberty massacre.

In 1989, the Israelis once again succeeded in framing enemy Arabs in
order to enrage America. Former Mossad case officer Victor Ostrosvky
became so disgusted with the criminal behavior of his own government
that he defected from the Mossad and tried to warn America of just how
evil and dangerous
they were. Ostrosvky revealed exactly how the Israelis framed Libya
for the bombing of a German night club which killed American
servicemen. 29 It was this frame up job that caused President Reagan
to bomb Libya, killing the 4 year old daughter of Libyan leader Muamar
Qadaffi. France refused to allow
US bombers to fly over their air space and bomb Libya because French
intelligence knew that Libya was unjustly framed by the Israelis.
Among some of Ostrovosky's other amazing revelations are: that the
Mossad often uses Arab agents to carry out missions, that Israeli
agents are skilled at impersonating Arabs, that Mossad had a plan to
turn American public opinion against Iraq, and that wealthy Zionists
in America are often called upon to help carry out Mossad missions.
Ostrovsky, whose tell all book, By Way of
Deception, infuriated the Mossad and made him the target of numerous
death threats. 30

In 2001, the Washington Times ran a story about a 68 page research
paper issued by the Army School of Advanced Military Studies (SAMS).
The research was compiled by 60 US Army officers as an attempt to
predict the possible outcomes of deploying a US force to maintain
peace between the Israel and
Palestinians. Here's what SAMS had to say about the Israeli military
machine:

"a 500 pound gorilla in Israel. Well armed and trained. Operates in
both Gaza and the West Bank. Known to disregard international law to
accomplish mission" 31

Of Israel's Mossad, the officers issued this warning:

"Wildcard. Ruthless and cunning. Has capability to target US forces
and make it look like a Palestinian Arab act." 32 (emphasis added)

Why does the US, which is trillions of dollars in debt, gives away
billons of taxpayer dollars to a foreign government whose military
violates international laws and whose Mossad is capable of murdering
US troops in order to frame Arabs? Have we lost our minds?

Subject: Bush Must Say 'No' To Israeli Nuclear Blackmail
From: xdange...@aol.com <mailto:xdange...@aol.com>
(XDangerousDNA)
Date: 9/20/02 4:39 PM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id: <20020920193931...@mb-mc.aol.com
<mailto:20020920193931...@mb-mc.aol.com>>

LaRouche Says: Bush Must Say 'No' To Israeli Nuclear Blackmail
Statement by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr. September 18, 2002

Sept. 18 - I am warning President George W. Bush and European leaders:
If weapons inspectors return to Iraq and an otherwise-certain
Iraq-centered new Middle East war by the U.S. is thus averted, the
governments of the United States and Western Europe must be prepared
to forcefully intervene, to prevent an increasingly more desperate and
psychotic Ariel Sharon's nuclear-armed regime in Israel, the world's
third-ranking strategic nuclear-weapons power, from blowing up the
entire Middle East region, and beyond, with those weapons!

Therefore, I issued the following statement on behalf of my 2004
candidacy for the Democratic Presidential nomination.

At an international web cast, before a live audience in Washington on
Sept. 11, 2002, I identified three hurdles that had to be overcome to
avert an Iraq war that would trigger a perpetual "Clash of
Civilizations" religious conflict and a New Dark Age: First, the
United Nations Security Council had to become the venue for dealing
with the Iraq situation, and a reasonable resolution had to be
drafted, that would be agreed to by President Bush, overriding the
Sharon-influenced "war party" within his own Administration's senior
ranks. Second, the resolution had to be accepted by Iraq's Saddam
Hussein, as well as by President Bush. With those two conditions met,
LaRouche warned, the gravest, remaining danger to overcome would be a
berserker move by Sharon in Israel to sabotage the peaceful resolution
and blow up the region.

It was the threat of an Israeli nuclear attack on Iraq in 1991 that
blackmailed the first Bush Administration into launching Operation
Desert Storm. Today's Israel, under the insane Sharon regime, is the
only nation on Earth that genuinely fits the profile of a "rogue
state" armed to the teeth with "weapons of mass destruction." Israel
has the third largest nuclear weapons arsenal on Earth, and a triad of
submarine, missile, and bomber delivery systems, capable of
obliterating the entire Persian Gulf. Israeli scientists have recently
threatened that they now have the capability of launching an
intercontinental ballistic missile, meaning that no place on
Earth-including the United States-is exempt from an Israeli
preemptive nuclear attack. LaRouche asks you: Do you dare dismiss this
threat from Sharon?...

Since the 1956 attack on Egypt by Britain, France, and Israel, until
the 1989-1991 break-up of Soviet power, Israel's access to nuclear
weapons had made it the third "tilt" power in the global strategic
equation.

Already in 1956, it took an experienced military man, President Dwight
Eisenhower, to force Israel to back down from the Suez invasion, after
both Britain and France had withdrawn under American pressure.
Eisenhower not only threatened to cut off all U.S. military and
civilian aid to Israel; he also threatened to remove the tax-exempt
status of all American organizations that provided aid to Israel. An
even more resolute action will now be required from a far-less
qualified President George W. Bush, to stop Sharon from carrying out
either a false-flag "Islamist" terrorist attack against an American
target, or a nuclear attack on Iraq or Iran. This is deadly serious
stuff, and your personal involvement in the effort to stop it is
vital.

Are you prepared to have the Sharon regime in Israel once again
blackmail an American President into starting a war in the Persian
Gulf, out of fear of an Israeli weapons of mass destruction attack on
Baghdad? Do you have any idea what the consequences will be for the
U.S. and world economy, if a new Persian Gulf War, costing American
taxpayers between $2-3 trillion, is launched today, under the current
conditions of a collapsing U.S. economy and a thoroughly bankrupt
world financial system?

I warned that the toleration for the swamp of Sharon agents inside the
Bush Administration, is another grave impediment to the President
taking the urgently required action, in concert with our European
allies and Russia, to stop Sharon from provoking this perpetual war.
In a recent mass-circulation LaRouche in 2004 release, "The Pollard
Affair Never Ended," I named the names of the leading Sharonists
inside the Bush Pentagon and State Department-Paul Wolfowitz, Richard
Perle, Doug Feith, David Wurmser-some of whom literally prepared the
foreign policy doctrine of perpetual war for then-Israeli Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in July 1996. These Netanyahu-Sharon Likud
moles inside the Bush foreign policy and national security
establishment are still suspected, now with more and more evidence of
involvement with the convicted Israeli spy, the American-born Jonathan
Pollard.

Since the release and circulation of a million copies of the "Pollard
Affair Never Ended" campaign document, new, even more damning evidence
has surfaced. Therefore, I must intensify my demand for a thorough
national security investigation into key staffers in the Office of
Vice President Dick Cheney, beginning with his chief of staff and
national security advisor, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby.

Libby, a protégé of Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz for the
past 30 years, has assembled a "shadow national security council" in
the Vice President's Office, which has protected the Israeli agents
nest inside the Pentagon and State Department-and blocked an urgently
needed purge of these Likudniks. Libby has his own longstanding deep
ties to the Sharon circles, including to the Pollard spy ring.

While out of government, Libby served between 1985-2000 as the
personal attorney for fugitive swindler Marc Rich. Rich was indicted
by the U.S. Justice Department in 1983 for tax evasion and for trading
with the enemy, and he fled the United States, establishing a
luxurious hide-away in Zug, Switzerland.

Today, according to Israeli sources, Rich is under investigation, for
illegal contributions to Ariel Sharon's last political campaign. He
has been involved in Russian Mafia operations in Africa, and, through
his Marc Rich Foundation in Israel, has openly financed international
operations of the Israeli Mossad. Libby's law partner and mentor,
Leonard Garment, was a pivotal player in the Israeli government's
damage control effort, following the Pollard arrest in November 1985,
and he served as the attorney for Israeli Air Force Col. Aviem Sella,
the man who recruited and deployed Jonathan Pollard.

Now, Ariel Sharon's regime is Hell-bent on provoking a regional war in
the Middle East, a war pivoted on an Israeli pre-emptive attack on
Iraq. The threat is that, if President Bush does not virtually
exterminate Iraq, and neighboring countries, too, Israel will. This
means the likely use of nuclear, biological or chemical weapons. All
the while, Sharon's Washington moles are operating under the shadows
of the Vice President and the Secretary of Defense of the United
States. If Sharon is to be stopped from launching World War III in the
Middle East, this entire Pollard stay-behind apparatus must be
thoroughly investigated, exposed, and removed from government-now! It
is time for these Israeli agents and spies to be kicked out of
government, and the Israeli government to desist from its nuclear
blackmail. I demand it. I can not believe that any sane and patriotic
American would not back me up "100%" on this specific issue.

Support me actively on this issue. If you are serious about the
security of our nation and its people, I should be able to count on
you.

<http://www.larouchein2004.net/pages/pressreleases/2002/020918isrblackmail>_
prt.htm

the following is the Israeli black propaganda article:

<http://www.mediamonitors.net/gillespie1.html>

Israel is the third largest arms dealer in the world. They have
violated hundreds of UN resolutions and they constitute a threat to
the entire Middle East, having occupied three countries, Syria
(www.ussliberty.org <http://www.ussliberty.org>) Lebanon, and
Palestine.

So, why not bomb Israel?

<http://www.independent.co.uk/story.jsp?story=334318>

ISN'T IT INTERESTING HOW THE ABOVE ARTICLE BY FISK IS THE ONLY
PRESS/MEDIA THAT I HAVE SEEN SO FAR THAT MENTIONED THAT RITTER WAS
MAKING REGULAR TRIPS TO ISRAEL TO BRIEF THE ISRAELIS AS TO WHAT HE WAS
DOING WITH THE UNSCOM WEAPONS INSPECTIONS TEAMS IN IRAQ WHEN THEY WERE
UNDER THE DIRECTION OF RICHARD BUTLER. NO WONDER IRAQ WANTED THEM OUT
BACK IN 1998 AS I CAN EASILY UNDERSTAND SUCH (ESPECIALLY AFTER ISRAEL
HAD VIOLATED IRAQI SOVEREIGNTY WITH THE EARLIER BOMBING OF THE NUCLEAR
REACTOR).

I HOPE SUCH SPYING DOES NOT HAPPEN AGAIN IF PEACE IS GIVEN A CHANCE BY
aLLOWING WEAPONS INSPECTORS BACK INTO IRAQ... HOWEVER, I THINK THE
ONLY WAY TO PREVENT A US ZIONIST-DRIVEN INVASION WOULD BE TO FLOOD
BAHGDAD WITH US AND EUROPEAN PEACE ACTIVISTS... IRAQ COULD PUT THEM UP
FOR A YEAR TO LEARN ARABIC OR SIMILAR.

OUR BIASED PRO-ISRAEL MEDIA ONLY SOMETIMES MENTIONS SPYING BUT NOT
THAT IT WAS ISRAELI SPYING VIA UNSCOM... THE BRITISH PRESS/MEDIA
PROVIDES MUCH BETTER
COVERAGE...

Subject: ISRAEL SHOULD HAVE UN WEAPONS INSPECTIONS AS WELL MANY
AMERICANS ARE WAKING UP TO ISRAELI TREACHERY LIKE WITH THE USS LIBERTY
ATTACK IN WHICH ISRAEL MURDERED 34 SAILORS AND WOUNDED 171 MORE JUST
TO STEAL EVEN MORE LAND IN THE GOLAN IN SYRIA:

<http://www.ussliberty.org>

israel should be made to accept UN weapons inspections as well FOR ITS
NUKES AND CHEMICAL/BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS:..

Not In Our Name... <http://www.nion.us/> Petition against a war with
Iraq.

<http://www.itsforums.co.uk/zone0/viewforum.php?f=10>

<http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=668>

<http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=643>

<http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=706>

>
>Muslims in Iran persecuted Christians to such a degree that there are
>now few left. Talk to Christian Amanpour about this sometime.

A number of Christian denominations are represented in Iran. Many
members of the larger, older churches belong to ethnic groups with
their own distinctive culture and language. The members of the newer,
smaller churches are drawn both from the traditionally Christian
ethnic minorities and to an increasingly larger degree converts from
non-Christian background.

The main Christian churches are:

* Armenian Apostolic Church of Iran (about 110,000
adherents),[citation needed]
* Assyrian Church of the East of Iran (about 11,000 adherents),
* Chaldean Catholic Church of Iran (about 7,000 adherents),
* various Protestant denominations, most important of which are:
o Presbyterian, including the Assyrian Evangelical Church ()
o Jama'at-e Rabbani (the Iranian Assemblies of God churches)
o and the Anglican Church of Iran.

All statistical information is from church-based sources [1] and
reflects the situation in the year 2000 (Christians formed 0.2% of
total Iranian population in 2000).

According to the same sources there are between 7,000 and 15,000
members and adherents of the various Protestant and Evangelical
churches in Iran, though these numbers are particularly difficult to
verify under the current political circumstances.[citation needed]

The International Religious Freedom Report 2004 by the U.S. State
Department [2] quotes a somewhat higher total number of 300,000
Christians in Iran, without giving separate numbers for the different
denominations.

Iranian government sources are sometimes quoted as giving a total of
110,000 Christians in Iran.[citation needed] At present there are 73
registered churches in Iran.[1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christians_in_Iran

>
>But they blow up Synagogues in Turkey. The few churches left are
>armed fortresses.

Christians should not side with the Jew devils.

>
>If you love Islam get the fuck out of Europe or the US and move back
>to your 7th century, third world islamic theocracy. Stop pretending you're
>a neo-nazi and come out of the closet.

Here's why Jews and other leftists hate theocracy:

The Culture War:

Israel Line - Friday, June 10, 2005

Thousands Participate in Gay Pride Parade in Tel Aviv.

Thousands of people took to the streets of Tel Aviv this
afternoon to participate in the city's annual gay pride parade,
HA'ARETZ reported. The parade set out from Rabin Square and was to end
in Yarkon Park, where musical performances were planned.

MKs Yosef Lapid (Shinui), Eitan Cabel (Labor) and Zehava Gal-On
(Yahad), as well as Tel Aviv Mayor Ron Huldai, were set to speak at
the event.

The chairman of the national Association of Gay Men, Lesbians,
Bisexuals and Transgender in Israel, Mike Hamel, said today the parade
was organized with the "close cooperation" of the Tel Aviv
municipality. "It's great to see it, and great that it's one of the
few places in the world that has the support of a municipal body, a
government body," he said.

Hamel said the event is called a "pride parade," because it has
to do with "being proud of the way we are and the demand to accept
every person as a person, as he is, and not trying to change him."

Full story:

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/586950.html

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -
- -- - -- -
http://www.commondreams.org/news2005/1122-03.htm
Iran: Two More Executions for Homosexual Conduct
NEW YORK - November 22 -
Iran's execution of two men last week for homosexual conduct
highlights a
pattern of persecution of gay men that stands in stark violation of
the rights
to life and privacy, Human Rights Watch said today. On Sunday,
November 13, the semi-official Tehran daily Kayhan reported that the
Iranian
government publicly hung two men, Mokhtar N. (24 years old) and Ali A.
(25 years old), in the Shahid Bahonar Square of the northern town of
Gorgan. The government reportedly executed the two men for the crime
of "lavat." Iran's shari'a-based penal code defines lavat as
penetrative and non-penetrative sexual acts between men. Iranian law
punishes all penetrative sexual acts between adult men with the death
penalty.
Non-penetrative sexual acts between men are punished with lashes until
the fourth offense, when they are punished with death…

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - -- - - - - - -
-

NEA, Gay Militants: Joined At The Hip
Lee Duigon

If a private citizen tells his neighbor's children that they ought to
try gay sex, he might wind up in a correctional facility. If he talks
that way to your 13-year-old son, you'll want him put away-pronto.

But when this very same behavior, toward the same children, is
displayed by adults who belong to America's biggest teachers' union,
most parents simply let them do it. In fact, they pay them to.

The NEA is committed to the cause of militant homosexuality. It's the
richest, most politically powerful union in America, and it has daily
access to most of America's children. And it wants to recruit them for
the homosexual lifestyle.

Lean this equation, America:

Public schools=The homosexual agenda

If you don't believe it, visit nea-glc.org/, the website of the
National Education Association's Gay and Lesbian Coalition. There,
among their "great achievements" in shaping NEA policy, the homosexual
militants cite the NEA's promotion of "the lesbian-gay-bisexual
curriculum" and "family life education... regarding the diversity of
sexual orientation."

The NEA has also campaigned for the proclamation of
"Gay-Lesbian-Bisexual-Transsexual History Month" (try putting that on
a T-shirt), homosexual studies at Catholic colleges--and, of course,
homosexual "marriage."

The people of Massachusetts know the teachers' union's commitment to
"gay marriage." Aline Isaacson of GLSEN (Gay-Lesbian-Straight
Education Network), the media's favorite poster gal for "gay
marriage", is also--surprise!-a paid consultant to the Massachusetts
teachers' union. Paid in taxpayer dollars, to boot. (You may remember
Massachusetts GLSEN from a few years ago as the organizers of graphic,
intensely perverted sex "workshops" for public school children--a
scandal that came to be known as "fist-gate.")

Ms. Isaacson, according to the grass-roots Article 8 Alliance, these
days makes it a full-time job lobbying state legislators to keep them
from jumping ship on "gay marriage" and voting for the Bill of Address
which would remove the outlaw Supreme Judicial Court judges who
imposed this oxymoron on the people of Massachusetts. Supported by
taxpayers' money, she makes daily, face-to-face visits to individual
lawmakers. Nice work if you can get it.

Too bad you couldn't make it to the gym teachers' state convention in
New Jersey, in February. It wasn't about volleyball. For public school
gym teachers, Job One--according to the convention's floor displays,
handouts, posters, and workshop topics (all of which I saw
personally)--is getting the kids comfy with homosexuality. To this
end, they handed out a "resource guide"--handsomely produced, slick,
paid for largely by Fleet Bank
Inc.--intended for distribution in all the public schools. (For more
information, see my article, "Now It's the Gym Teachers," in the
February archive of the Chalcedon website, chalcedon.edu.)

You would have seen even more of the same at "Twenty Years of Great
Sex (Ed)" last year, a national conference of "sex educators" hosted
by Rutgers, New Jersey's taxpayer-funded state university. Again,
there was no effort to hide the educators' whole-hearted penchant for
homosexuality...

>
>It's nice how you've ignored the numerous fatwahs issued by islamic
>imam's against the enemies of islam, incl. such people as Rushdie,
>cartoonists, and women who have spoken out against islam.

Rushdie called the Koran "Satanic Verses". You think this person
and cartoonists should have free speech but what about those on the
good side of the fence:

By David Irving

The German Government has quietly admitted that over the last twelve
months it prosecuted over 18,000 Germans for offences of "right-wing
extremism," of which only a few hundred involved actual violence: i.e.
they prosecuted over seventeen thousand thought-crimes-people
unwitting displaying the old swastika emblem, or even worse, National
Socialist ideas, and perhaps even "denying the H."

As the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung recently pointed out in a
courageous editorial, most of these new criminal records have been
sprung on ordinary citizens blissfully unaware of the criminality of
their actions and thoughts, because the tame German media are too
cowardly to report any of these cases-even the major trials like those
involving the revisionists Ernst Zundel and Germar Rudolf.

These absurd laws themselves are protected by fresh layers of other,
even more absurd, laws making it impossible even for court-appointed
attorneys to provide an adequate and conscientious defence to those
accused under the thought-crime laws. Any German or Austrian lawyer
who does, can be-and frequently is-himself ordered arrested by the
judge, for having associated himself with these criminal thoughts and
deeds. Zundel's court-appointed defence attorney Sylvia Stolz (right)
made herself unpopular with the prosecutor for "hampering the
prosecution," and is now to be prosecuted for so hampering. Go figure,
as the Americans say.

More than once my chosen Austrian lawyer, Dr Herbert Schaller, left,
arrived in the Vienna prison with fresh horror tales from Zundel's
Mannheim courtroom-the judge Meinerzhagen had warned him that if he
asked certain questions of the court, or made certain defence motions,
he too would be arrested.

I remember that in January 1993, when I was tried in Munich under
Germany's laws for the suppression of free speech, one of my three
lawyers turned up apologetically on the morning of the hearing
apologizing that he could not continue to act for me, as the Munich
Bar Association had threatened him with dismissal-i.e. the end of his
career-if he did. He showed me their actual letter. I was fined thirty
thousand deutschmarks, around twenty thousand dollars, for uttering a
single sentence which the Polish authorities now belatedly admit was
true.

I NOTICED when I was in Viennese prison that the jailhouse, built to
hold eight hundred malfeasors, currently held 1,400 inmates, a quarter
of them Blacks. It was a tight fit but it was possible, provided we
did not all breathe at the same time.

This morning I have received a letter from Frau K., an elderly
Viennese lady in her nineties. Exercising what is the constitutional
right of every citizen in most other countries, on September 27 of
last year she had written a personal letter to the President of
Austria, one Herbert Fischer-a small, straw-haired gentleman of even
smaller character and endowed with all the intellect and bearing of
Lady Chatterley's gardener-to protest against my arrest, trial, and
imprisonment. "What D. I. said was right," she wrote in one passage of
this incriminating letter.

She received no presidential reply? Right.-She heard no more? Wrong.

On March 8 the Austrian criminal authorities sent her a letter fining
her the sum of 200 euros under penalty of jail for having written
these seditious words to their august president. No trial, no hearing,
no defence-no lawyer would have dared to defend her anyway.

This is the new Europe, coming soon to a jailhouse near us. I for one
shall do my damndest to prevent it.

>
>You're repeated lies about islam being the religion of peace have
>destroyed any credibilty you had w/me. You're not worth my time
>anymore.
>

I never said they were a religion of peace or a religion of pansies.
They should destroy the evil Jew bastards.