Re: We Don't Need Ted Cruze To Protect Us From Terrorists Because We Have Guns

[Topaz]

The West is the White race.

The goal of America is to destroy the White race. The
multi-culture and pluralism they push is only at the expense of
Whites. No one is trying to push multi-culture in China or Japan or
anyplace but on the Whites. And they promote racial intermarriage.
If things continue as they are the White race is doomed.

And who is doing all of this? It is the USA government and the
media, in other words the Jews.

Many Whites are traitors. They support the USA government and their
own destruction. We should look for allies. And anyone who wants to
remove the Jews from power is our ally. In the past the Japanese were
our allies. Today it is the Muslims.

Osama bin Laden
September 24th statement published in Pakistan

"I have already said that we are not hostile to the United States. We
are against the system, which makes other nations slaves of the United
States, or forces them to mortgage their political and economic
freedom. This system is totally in control of the American Jews, whose
first priority is Israel, not the United States. It is simply that the
American people are themselves the slaves of the Jews and are forced
to live according to the principles and laws laid by them. So, the
punishment should reach Israel. In fact, it is Israel, which is giving
a blood bath to innocent Muslims and the U.S. is not uttering a single
word."



www.tomatobubble.com www.ihr.org http://nationalvanguard.org

http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com

[Michael Ejercito]

"Topaz" wrote in message news:tbch4b5sn4hq62tmo...@4ax.com...

> The West is the White race.

That would be news to people in Poland.

> 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.

Sometimes, interracial marriage is sexy.


http://www.vegasnews.com/17639/host-of-playboy-morning-show-andrea-lowell-and-james-kim-marry-in-vegas-party-at-playboy-club.html


Michael

[Sanetizer]

Michael Ejercito infested Usenet:

> http://www.vegasnews.com/17639/host-of-playboy-morning-show-andrea-
lowell-and-james-kim-marry-in-vegas-party-at-playboy-club.html

*aus.politics does not care* as this has nothing to do with Australian
politics.

Stop cross-posting this kind of US crap.

--
We also fumigate your brain free of charge, :P

[Mr. B1ack]

At least Cruz WANTS to protect us from terrorism ...
I'm not so sure about our current Fearless Leader.

[RightWing]

Mr. B1ack said :

> At least Cruz WANTS to protect us from terrorism ...
> I'm not so sure about our current Fearless Leader.

Obama said the other day "I don't want terrorism to rule the USA, but I'm
willing to trade Texas to ISIS so they'll leave us alone"

Maybe it's time for Texas to cede from the union and ally itself with Mexico.
You never hear of Muslim terrorism in Mexico! I wonder why the terrorists
are afraid of Mexicans?

Hell, one of the richest men in the world is Carlos Slim.

He's so rich that he could buy out Trump and have money left over to purchase
the butler services of the Koch brothers.

[Topaz]

On Sun, 15 Nov 2015 21:52:12 -0000 (UTC), Sanetizer
<nur...@your-mental-asylum.net.invalid> wrote:

\

>*aus.politics does not care* as this has nothing to do with Australian
>politics.
>
>Stop cross-posting this kind of US crap.

Who elected you to speak for all or Australia? And what goes on in the
rest of the world could easily affect Australia.

[Governor Swill]

On Sun, 15 Nov 2015 16:58:26 -0500, Mr. B1ack wrote:

>At least Cruz WANTS to protect us from terrorism ...
>I'm not so sure about our current Fearless Leader.

Cruz, the moron, would only make it worse. At least Obama seems to
have the brainpower to figure out a better way to go about a long term
solution.

Swill
--
"The security of the Nation is not at the ramparts alone.
Security also lies in the value of our free institutions.
A cantankerous press, an obstinate press, a ubiquitous
press must be suffered by those in authority in order
to preserve the even greater values of freedom of
expression and the right of the people to know." - Judge Murray Gurfein on the Pentagon Papers

[Mr. B1ack]

On Sun, 15 Nov 2015 20:08:25 -0800, pyotr filipivich
<ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:

>Let the Record show that fasgnadh <bo...@excite.com> on or about Sun,
>15 Nov 2015 13:34:30 +0000 (UTC) did write, type or otherwise cause to
>appear in talk.politics.guns the following:
>>
>>In a Cruz administration we would be using overhwleming air power
>>and the Kurds as our boots on the ground.
>
> A problem with that, is that the Kurds may not wish to be anyone
>"boots" outside of Kurdistan.

I agree, they're not interested in being the butt-boys
for the big countries. Their concerns are local. For
now, as they're in the middle of ISIL territory, we can
take advantage. However ISIL is rather fluid, so if they
shift to other areas the Kurds aren't gonna chase
them down.

> Not to mention that the Turks certainly do not want a strong
>Kurdish presence on the other side of the line on the map. Like wise
>the Iranians. The Syrian Government may not want a strong Kurdistan,
>but they will as the Russians tell them.

We HAD been on fair terms with the Kurds ... until
the Turks decided to oppress them - meaning we
had to kinda go along with it. I expect our relations
with the Kurds to go downhill over the next year
until they feel the same way about us as they do
the Turks.

Hmm ... kind of hard to run a proxy war when none
of your would-be proxies trust you.

[original groups re-restored]

[This is becoming a real annoyance. When
people reply only THEIR single home group
appears in the follow-up newsgroups list -
cutting-off the conversation from a lot of
people. Is this deliberate, or some new
"feature" of google-groups software ?]

[Mr. B1ack]

On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 01:17:47 -0500, Governor Swill
<governo...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 15 Nov 2015 16:58:26 -0500, Mr. B1ack wrote:
>
>>At least Cruz WANTS to protect us from terrorism ...
>>I'm not so sure about our current Fearless Leader.
>
>Cruz, the moron, would only make it worse.

On the whole, I agree. Ultra-hawkish gets us into
more troubles than it solves. The military-industrial
"donors" LOVE that however ...

>At least Obama seems to
>have the brainpower to figure out a better way to go about a long term
>solution.

Now there I disagree. All Obama has discovered is
a way to orbit the problem until he's safely out of
office. He's gonna make it the NEXT presidents
problem.

That said, there really IS NO "good way" to deal with
ISIL/al-Qaida and friends. They are thoroughly embedded
in the population from Morocco across to the pacific
islands and down through much of africa (as their big
surprise for Obamas homies demonstrated just the
other day) ... plotting ways to spread mayhem.

They are not particularly "special" or "unique" either, just
a certain end of indigenous Islam the way Jim Jones
and Koresh represented a certain end of Christianity.
In short, there's just no way to make 'em go away.
There'll always be new ones. Maybe different names
but the same goals, the same methods. This is not
gonna change for a LONG time.

So, "containment" - "coping" - IS the general longer-
term strategy. However there's passive coping and
active coping ... and Obama's been way too far
towards the passive end of things. This has led to
*poor* containment.

Cruz and the other ultra-hawks would go to the
other extreme, "overly-active coping". Not only
would this be dreadfully expensive (while never
accomplishing the stated goals) but would tend
to increase the number of militants.

Somewhere there's a sensible middle. Alas I don't
expect US politicians to find it. At least the Russians
and French seem to be more interested in being
engaged now so the full burden of "doing something"
won't be on US anymore.

[Topaz]

UN: Proven Ties Between ISIS And Israel

Posted by Sean Adl-Tabatabai

A new report from the UN reveals that the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF)
maintained regular contact with members of ISIS since May 2013. The UN
identified contact with IDF forces and ISIS soldiers. - See more at:
http://yournewswire.com/un-proven-ties-between-isis-and-israel/#sthash.X4jhsvpa.dpuf

- See more at:
http://yournewswire.com/un-proven-ties-between-isis-and-israel/#sthash.X4jhsvpa.dpuf

Documented Proof ISIS Is a Creation of The United States of America
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqIyJycXxOo

http://www.tomatobubble.com/id872.html
By destroying ancient Christian sites, and by murdering contemporary
Christians themselves, the godless Israeli attack dog known as 'ISIS'
is killing two birds with one stone. Christians suffer while Muslims
takes the blame. Only the deluded devotees of Sulzberger's Slimes and
the rest of the piranha press actually believe that the mercenary scum
of ISIS are real Muslims. True Muslims do not murder, rape and loot.
Nor do they oppress Christians. Indeed the Koran venerates Jesus as a
Holy Prophet and commands Muslims to respect Christians.

Please see this very important youtube video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfXecU3v-70

Even before the documentation, it was obvious that "moderate" ISIS was
only attacking things Israel hates. Syria, Russia, France (France
wants to recognize Palestine; Bibi publicly warned that that was a
"grave error" about a week before Charlie Hebdo), Christians, Europe
and Hamas. It was also clear that we knew about the con that was going
on, because the USA were not attacking them at all, although the USA
were certainly pretending to be at war with them. Then Russia came
along...
Christopher Helms


by Dean Obeidallah
Denounce ISIS? Muslims despise ISIS. (At least those who aren't
pathological.)
True, ISIS is compromised of people who claim to be Muslims. But the
number one victim of this barbaric terror group is Muslims. That's
undisputed. ISIS has killed thousands of Muslims across the Middle
East, including beheading Sunni Muslims in Iraq for failing to pledge
loyalty to them, executing Imams for not submitting to them, and even
killing an Imam in Iraq for simply denouncing them.
And just a few days before the brutal terrorist assault in Paris, ISIS
launched a coordinated terrorist attack in Beirut, killing 43 and
wounding 239 people who were primarily if not exclusively Muslims.
However, in contrast to Paris, American media outlets barely covered
the Beirut attack. Apparently Muslims being killed by ISIS doesn't
attract enough ratings for U.S. media outlets to justify "full team"
or even quarter team coverage.

[Governor Swill]

On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 09:51:23 -0500, Mr. B1ack <now...@nada.net>
wrote:

>On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 01:17:47 -0500, Governor Swill
><governo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 15 Nov 2015 16:58:26 -0500, Mr. B1ack wrote:
>>
>>>At least Cruz WANTS to protect us from terrorism ...
>>>I'm not so sure about our current Fearless Leader.
>>
>>Cruz, the moron, would only make it worse.
>
> On the whole, I agree. Ultra-hawkish gets us into
> more troubles than it solves. The military-industrial
> "donors" LOVE that however ...
>
>>At least Obama seems to
>>have the brainpower to figure out a better way to go about a long term
>>solution.
>
> Now there I disagree. All Obama has discovered is
> a way to orbit the problem until he's safely out of
> office. He's gonna make it the NEXT presidents
> problem.

I sharply disagree. From what I can see, Obama is laying the
foundations of a plan that can eliminate Islamist terrorism with a
minimum of western loss. In short, set them against each other.

> That said, there really IS NO "good way" to deal with
> ISIL/al-Qaida and friends. They are thoroughly embedded
> in the population from Morocco across to the pacific
> islands and down through much of africa (as their big
> surprise for Obamas homies demonstrated just the
> other day) ... plotting ways to spread mayhem.

Sadly, I suspect it will just get worse and worse until the world
decides it's had enough and being Muslim on this planet will be,
essentially, a death sentence. How the US will get around the first
amendment, I don't know, but the day may well come when Islam simply
becomes illegal everywhere.

> They are not particularly "special" or "unique" either, just
> a certain end of indigenous Islam the way Jim Jones
> and Koresh represented a certain end of Christianity.
> In short, there's just no way to make 'em go away.
> There'll always be new ones. Maybe different names
> but the same goals, the same methods. This is not
> gonna change for a LONG time.
>
> So, "containment" - "coping" - IS the general longer-
> term strategy. However there's passive coping and
> active coping ... and Obama's been way too far
> towards the passive end of things. This has led to
> *poor* containment.

Let's be real here, ok? Bush and the neocons opened Pandora's box,
not Obama. Clinton had it right. Obama's detractors are the very
people who helped Bush open that box and now all they can do is
complain that Obama can't close it.

> Cruz and the other ultra-hawks would go to the
> other extreme, "overly-active coping". Not only
> would this be dreadfully expensive (while never
> accomplishing the stated goals) but would tend
> to increase the number of militants.
>
> Somewhere there's a sensible middle. Alas I don't
> expect US politicians to find it. At least the Russians
> and French seem to be more interested in being
> engaged now so the full burden of "doing something"
> won't be on US anymore.

I think the US may be on the right track, at least to some extent.
We've drawn Russia into the fray, begun an alliance with Persian
Shiites who hate Arab Sunnis and sat back and watched as more and more
nations become motivated to follow us into the destruction of Islam.

I hate to say this, I really, REALLY do, but if Islam can't fix the
problem within itself, the rest of the world is simply going to
destroy it. It will make the holocaust look like a fender bender in
comparison.

[Governor Swill]

On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 09:32:34 -0500, Mr. B1ack wrote:

> [original groups re-restored]
>
> [This is becoming a real annoyance. When
> people reply only THEIR single home group
> appears in the follow-up newsgroups list -
> cutting-off the conversation from a lot of
> people. Is this deliberate, or some new
> "feature" of google-groups software ?]

I've found that the followups are often set to a group that never
appeared in the list or to a non-existent group. So, no, it's not a
"feature" of google groups.

An old trick on usenet is to refute an argument, then post it only to
one's own group so the poster you're rebutting never has the chance to
respond to you and take your argument apart.

[Mr. B1ack]

On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 20:11:45 -0500, Governor Swill

<governo...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 09:51:23 -0500, Mr. B1ack <now...@nada.net>
>wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 01:17:47 -0500, Governor Swill
>><governo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 15 Nov 2015 16:58:26 -0500, Mr. B1ack wrote:
>>>
>>>>At least Cruz WANTS to protect us from terrorism ...
>>>>I'm not so sure about our current Fearless Leader.
>>>
>>>Cruz, the moron, would only make it worse.
>>
>> On the whole, I agree. Ultra-hawkish gets us into
>> more troubles than it solves. The military-industrial
>> "donors" LOVE that however ...
>>
>>>At least Obama seems to
>>>have the brainpower to figure out a better way to go about a long term
>>>solution.
>>
>> Now there I disagree. All Obama has discovered is
>> a way to orbit the problem until he's safely out of
>> office. He's gonna make it the NEXT presidents
>> problem.
>
>I sharply disagree. From what I can see, Obama is laying the
>foundations of a plan that can eliminate Islamist terrorism with a
>minimum of western loss. In short, set them against each other.

I think he's replacing ISIL with Iran as our biggest
problem in the region. This is not a case of "The
enemy of my enemy is my friend" ... Iran is NOT
our friend EVER. Too many extreme things between
us over many decades for THAT to happen this
century. Sure, Iran would like to neutralize ISIL and
al-Qaida ... but it'll replace 'em with its OWN brands
of extremists that'll cause JUST as much mayhem
(maybe more 'cause they'll be better-financed).

>> That said, there really IS NO "good way" to deal with
>> ISIL/al-Qaida and friends. They are thoroughly embedded
>> in the population from Morocco across to the pacific
>> islands and down through much of africa (as their big
>> surprise for Obamas homies demonstrated just the
>> other day) ... plotting ways to spread mayhem.
>
>Sadly, I suspect it will just get worse and worse until the world
>decides it's had enough and being Muslim on this planet will be,
>essentially, a death sentence. How the US will get around the first
>amendment, I don't know, but the day may well come when Islam simply
>becomes illegal everywhere.

The legal phrase "sedition" is still availible ... as is
"treason" or a broader definition of "enemy combatant".
So, you CAN make being Moslem a de-facto crime
without officially banning Islam. Someone MAY do this,
but I have doubts.

I'm more concerned about what Machiavelli recommended,
create a perpetual state of emergency so extraordinary
powers are "justified" - that you mostly use against your
own citizens civil rights. They'll turn the USA from a
near-total surveillance state into the real deal - and all
that data WILL be abused sooner than later.

>> They are not particularly "special" or "unique" either, just
>> a certain end of indigenous Islam the way Jim Jones
>> and Koresh represented a certain end of Christianity.
>> In short, there's just no way to make 'em go away.
>> There'll always be new ones. Maybe different names
>> but the same goals, the same methods. This is not
>> gonna change for a LONG time.
>>
>> So, "containment" - "coping" - IS the general longer-
>> term strategy. However there's passive coping and
>> active coping ... and Obama's been way too far
>> towards the passive end of things. This has led to
>> *poor* containment.
>
>Let's be real here, ok? Bush and the neocons opened Pandora's box,
>not Obama. Clinton had it right. Obama's detractors are the very
>people who helped Bush open that box and now all they can do is
>complain that Obama can't close it.

Pandora's box was opened there - well, probably by
Pandora herself ... umpteen thousand years ago.
We and our 'neocons' are just the latest ship passing
by ... not the cause of abject nastiness in that part of
the world, just the latest to get caught up in it. The
middle-east/N.Africa were horrible long before us
and look as if they'll be horrible long after. To credit
any American politicians with having *any* significant
effect on things there is pure hubris.

>> Cruz and the other ultra-hawks would go to the
>> other extreme, "overly-active coping". Not only
>> would this be dreadfully expensive (while never
>> accomplishing the stated goals) but would tend
>> to increase the number of militants.
>>
>> Somewhere there's a sensible middle. Alas I don't
>> expect US politicians to find it. At least the Russians
>> and French seem to be more interested in being
>> engaged now so the full burden of "doing something"
>> won't be on US anymore.
>
>I think the US may be on the right track, at least to some extent.
>We've drawn Russia into the fray, begun an alliance with Persian
>Shiites who hate Arab Sunnis and sat back and watched as more and more
>nations become motivated to follow us into the destruction of Islam.
>
>I hate to say this, I really, REALLY do, but if Islam can't fix the
>problem within itself, the rest of the world is simply going to
>destroy it. It will make the holocaust look like a fender bender in
>comparison.

It is just not possible to afflict much of the population
over there with a cud-chewing contented euroamerican
middle-class lifestyle ... too many plus it's just not in
the culture. This means there'll be extremists, enough
periodically to be a real pain. The only way to deal with
them is with violence ... which will create even more
extremists. Fucked if we do, fucked if we don't.

Fundy Islam is *hot* again ... eye of the tiger, feel sure
they can take the world, winners attitude. This is gonna
mean more and more violence against every other
culture in the world ... if for no other reason than that
they're not fundy Islam. Our response will have to be
more and more violence against fundy Islam ... and
since you can't be sure who's who there'll be a lot of
"collateral damage".

I don't think Islam can or will be wiped out, but over
the next 25 years it's gonna take a serious beating.
The more terrorists, the less everybody worries
about the 'collateral damage' ... until they don't
care at all.

[Governor Swill]

On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 08:50:23 -0500, Mr. B1ack <now...@nada.net>

Again, I disagree. Iran has supported terrorism - against the Jewish
State. The Islamists that have caused us to address it as a priority,
the perpetrators of 9/11, Khobar, Beirut, Paris, 7/7 and so on have
all been Sunni Arabs. Iranians aren't Arabs or Sunnis. They're
Persians and Shiites. The Iranian people admire Americans and are
very friendly towards us. The conflict has been between our
governments only and Obama, to his credit, his recognized and acted
upon this. The Saudis, Arabs and Sunnis have repeatedly attacked us
directly through proxies. To date, I know of no time when Iran or
Shiite forces attacked us except for Beirut which was a direct result
of US military occupation in Lebanon on Israel's behalf.

>Too many extreme things between
> us over many decades for THAT to happen this
> century. Sure, Iran would like to neutralize ISIL and
> al-Qaida ... but it'll replace 'em with its OWN brands
> of extremists that'll cause JUST as much mayhem
> (maybe more 'cause they'll be better-financed).

I still disagree. The root of global terrorism is Sunni Islamists
funded from and through Saudi Arabia.

In any case, if we can use them against each other, we can weaken the
whole.

>>> That said, there really IS NO "good way" to deal with
>>> ISIL/al-Qaida and friends. They are thoroughly embedded
>>> in the population from Morocco across to the pacific
>>> islands and down through much of africa (as their big
>>> surprise for Obamas homies demonstrated just the
>>> other day) ... plotting ways to spread mayhem.
>>
>>Sadly, I suspect it will just get worse and worse until the world
>>decides it's had enough and being Muslim on this planet will be,
>>essentially, a death sentence. How the US will get around the first
>>amendment, I don't know, but the day may well come when Islam simply
>>becomes illegal everywhere.

Which I've said myself. It's just a question of how much punishment
we're willing to absorb before we make the decisions about Islam that
the Nazis did about the Jews. The weak point in this is the first
amendment. Most nations are in a legal position to ban a religion,
the US, uniquely, is not.

> The legal phrase "sedition" is still availible ... as is
> "treason" or a broader definition of "enemy combatant".
> So, you CAN make being Moslem a de-facto crime
> without officially banning Islam. Someone MAY do this,
> but I have doubts.

True, but the US cannot legally use these methods against a religion.
Only against individuals who might happen to be of a certain religion.

> I'm more concerned about what Machiavelli recommended,
> create a perpetual state of emergency so extraordinary
> powers are "justified" - that you mostly use against your
> own citizens civil rights. They'll turn the USA from a
> near-total surveillance state into the real deal - and all
> that data WILL be abused sooner than later.

This is a common practice and is as much the motivation for the
terrorists as the motivation for our actions against them. What is in
fact, economic and political competition, they take as religious
persecution. It's Islam that wants this to be a religious war and
they're doing everything in their power to make it so.

*sigh* There was never any such thing as Pandora's Box. It was a
myth, a parable for what we today call "unintended consquences". Daesh
is an unintended consequence of the 2003 invasion of Iraq. If there
is a silver lining to the cloud of that invasion, it's that this
unintended consequence, the founding of Daesh, may ultimately lead to
the end of violent religious extremism within Islam.

>>> Cruz and the other ultra-hawks would go to the
>>> other extreme, "overly-active coping". Not only
>>> would this be dreadfully expensive (while never
>>> accomplishing the stated goals) but would tend
>>> to increase the number of militants.
>>>
>>> Somewhere there's a sensible middle. Alas I don't
>>> expect US politicians to find it. At least the Russians
>>> and French seem to be more interested in being
>>> engaged now so the full burden of "doing something"
>>> won't be on US anymore.
>>
>>I think the US may be on the right track, at least to some extent.
>>We've drawn Russia into the fray, begun an alliance with Persian
>>Shiites who hate Arab Sunnis and sat back and watched as more and more
>>nations become motivated to follow us into the destruction of Islam.
>>
>>I hate to say this, I really, REALLY do, but if Islam can't fix the
>>problem within itself, the rest of the world is simply going to
>>destroy it. It will make the holocaust look like a fender bender in
>>comparison.
>
> It is just not possible to afflict much of the population
> over there with a cud-chewing contented euroamerican
> middle-class lifestyle ...

Nonsense! They love it! Iranian women wear makeup and shop at
European and American designer stores downtown. Everywhere consumer
freedom goes, it goes into western shops. Levis! Armani! Chanel!
Rock and Roll! Even China has been seduced by consumerism.

>too many plus it's just not in
> the culture.

Not now, but it would be if those cultures were given the choice. Do
not wealthy Arabs fill their palaces and garages with western goods?
Do they not travel to western destinations to take their pleasure in
activities and practices that would get them a death sentence at home?

Saying Arabs and Muslims are incapable of consumerism and physical
pleasure is to deny something even more fundamental than religious
upbringing; human nature.

>This means there'll be extremists, enough
> periodically to be a real pain. The only way to deal with
> them is with violence ... which will create even more
> extremists. Fucked if we do, fucked if we don't.

Extremists are motivated by a number of things, but fear of fine
clothes and orgasms are not among them.

Watched Fareed Zakaria's piece on the rise of Isis the other day. One
cultural observer noted that the vast majority of Daesh recruits are
young men. "Young men who've never had a job, never had power, never
held a girl's hand." So ISIL offers them a salary, power over others
and 72 virgins. Do the math.

> Fundy Islam is *hot* again ... eye of the tiger, feel sure
> they can take the world, winners attitude. This is gonna
> mean more and more violence against every other
> culture in the world ... if for no other reason than that
> they're not fundy Islam. Our response will have to be
> more and more violence against fundy Islam ... and
> since you can't be sure who's who there'll be a lot of
> "collateral damage".

And ultimately they will lose. They have too much against them. As
you pointed out above and as I have also pointed out, if pushed too
hard, the world will simply start blowing up mosques, burning Quarans
and killing anybody who professes Islam. Muslims, moderate and
extreme alike, should think their course in history through to it's
logical end. God isn't on their side, he's on the side of the biggest
guns.

> I don't think Islam can or will be wiped out, but over
> the next 25 years it's gonna take a serious beating.
> The more terrorists, the less everybody worries
> about the 'collateral damage' ... until they don't
> care at all.

It might eventually be driven underground, but I think, hope, that
before that day comes, they'll have learned their lesson and stopped
being assholes about religion.

[Topaz]

If America was not ruled by Jews it would have no problem with Islam.

The Jewish controlled media said that the Jews were America's only
friends in the Middle East. The truth is that before these Jews,
America didn't have any enemies in the Middle East.

Jewish-Zionist Power in America
Mark Weber - Video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNLIy7gckro

A factual, reasoned 16-minute talk on the immense power and influence
of the "Jewish lobby" in the US, and its harmful role, especially in
directing US Middle East policy. As long as this power remains
entrenched, says Weber, there will be no end to the Jewish-Zionist
domination of American political life and the mass media, Zionist
oppression of Palestinians, the Israeli threat to peace, and the
bloody conflict between Jews and non-Jews in the Middle East.

Overwhelming Evidence that 9/11 was an Inside Job, Who did it and Why
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfXecU3v-70

[Topaz]

[Topaz]

On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 20:52:41 -0500, Governor Swill
<governo...@gmail.com> wrote:

>"The security of the Nation is not at the ramparts alone.
>Security also lies in the value of our free institutions.
>A cantankerous press, an obstinate press, a ubiquitous
>press must be suffered by those in authority in order
>to preserve the even greater values of freedom of
>expression and the right of the people to know." - Judge Murray Gurfein on the Pentagon Papers

A lying Jewish controlled press should not be tolerated.


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."

"When Matsushita 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 is a quote from Steven Spielberg, "film is the greatest weapon
in the world".

Jewish control of the media:
MORTIMER ZUCKERMAN, owner of NY Daily News, US News & World Report and
chair of the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish American
Organizations, one of the largest pro-Israel lobbying groups.
LESLIE MOONVES, president of CBS television, great-nephew of David
Ben-Gurion, and co-chair with Norman Ornstein of the Advisory
Committee on Public Interest Obligation of Digital TV Producers,
appointed by Clinton.
JONATHAN MILLER, chair and CEO of AOL division of AOL-Time-Warner
NEIL SHAPIRO, president of NBC News
JEFF GASPIN, Executive Vice-President, Programming, NBC
DAVID WESTIN, president of ABC News
SUMNER REDSTONE, CEO of Viacom, "world's biggest media giant"
(Economist, 11/23/2) owns Viacom cable, CBS and MTVs all over the
world, Blockbuster video rentals and Black Entertainment TV.
MICHAEL EISNER, major owner of Walt Disney, Capitol Cities, ABC.
RUPERT MURDOCH, Owner Fox TV, New York Post, London Times, News of the
World (Jewish mother)
MEL KARMAZIN, president of CBS
DON HEWITT, Exec. Director, 60 Minutes, CBS
JEFF FAGER, Exec. Director, 60 Minutes II. CBS
DAVID POLTRACK, Executive Vice-President, Research and Planning, CBS
SANDY KRUSHOW, Chair, Fox Entertainment
LLOYD BRAUN, Chair, ABC Entertainment
BARRY MEYER, chair, Warner Bros.
SHERRY LANSING. President of Paramount Communications and Chairman of
Paramount Pictures' Motion Picture Group.
HARVEY WEINSTEIN, CEO. Miramax Films.
BRAD SIEGEL., President, Turner Entertainment.
PETER CHERNIN, second in-command at Rupert Murdoch's News. Corp.,
owner of Fox TV
MARTY PERETZ, owner and publisher of the New Republic, which openly
identifies itself as pro-Israel. Al Gore credits Marty with being his
"mentor."
ARTHUR O. SULZBERGER, JR., publisher of the NY Times, the Boston Globe
and other publications.
WILLIAM SAFIRE, syndicated columnist for the NYT.
TOM FRIEDMAN, syndicated columnist for the NYT.
CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER, syndicated columnist for the Washington Post.
Honored by Honest Reporting.com, website monitoring "anti-Israel
media."
RICHARD COHEN, syndicated columnist for the Washington Post
JEFF JACOBY, syndicated columnist for the Boston Globe
NORMAN ORNSTEIN, American Enterprise Inst., regular columnist for USA
Today, news analyst for CBS, and co-chair with Leslie Moonves of the
Advisory Committee on Public Interest Obligation of Digital TV
Producers, appointed by Clinton.
ARIE FLEISCHER, Dubya's press secretary.
STEPHEN EMERSON, every media outlet's first choice as an expert on
domestic terrorism.
DAVID SCHNEIDERMAN, owner of the Village Voice and the New Times
network of "alternative weeklies."
DENNIS LEIBOWITZ, head of Act II Partners, a media hedge fund
KENNETH POLLACK, for CIA analysts, director of Saban Center for Middle
East Policy, writes op-eds in NY Times, New Yorker
BARRY DILLER, chair of USA Interactive, former owner of Universal
Entertainment
KENNETH ROTH, Executive Director of Human Rights Watch
RICHARD LEIBNER, runs the N.S. Bienstock talent agency, which
represents 600 news personalities such as Dan Rather, Dianne Sawyer
and Bill O'Reilly.
TERRY SEMEL, CEO, Yahoo, former chair, Warner Bros.
MARK GOLIN, VP and Creative Director, AOL
WARREN LIEBERFORD, Pres., Warner Bros. Home Video Div. of AOL-
TimeWarner
JEFFREY ZUCKER, President of NBC Entertainment
JACK MYERS, NBC, chief.NYT 5.14.2
SANDY GRUSHOW, chair of Fox Entertainment
GAIL BERMAN, president of Fox Entertainment
STEPHEN SPIELBERG, co-owner of Dreamworks
JEFFREY KATZENBERG, co-owner of Dreamworks
DAVID GEFFEN, co-owner of Dreamworks
LLYOD BRAUN, chair of ABC Entertainment
JORDAN LEVIN, president of Warner Bros. Entertainment
MAX MUTCHNICK, co-executive producer of NBC's "Good Morning Miami"
DAVID KOHAN, co-executive producer of NBC's "Good Morning Miami"
HOWARD STRINGER, chief of Sony Corp. of America
AMY PASCAL, chair of Columbia Pictures
JOEL KLEIN, chair and CEO of Bertelsmann's American operations
ROBERT SILLERMAN, founder of Clear Channel Communications
BRIAN GRADEN, president of MTV entertainment
IVAN SEIDENBERG, CEO of Verizon Communications
WOLF BLITZER, host of CNN's Late Edition
LARRY KING, host of Larry King Live
TED KOPPEL, host of ABC's Nightline
ANDREA KOPPEL, CNN Reporter
PAULA ZAHN, CNN Host
MIKE WALLACE, Host of CBS, 60 Minutes
BARBARA WALTERS, Host, ABC's 20-20
MICHAEL LEDEEN, editor of National Review
BRUCE NUSSBAUM, editorial page editor, Business Week
DONALD GRAHAM, Chair and CEO of Newsweek and Washington Post, son of
CATHERINE GRAHAM MEYER, former owner of the Washington Post
HOWARD FINEMAN, Chief Political Columnist, Newsweek
WILLIAM KRISTOL, Editor, Weekly Standard, Exec. Director
Project for a New American Century (PNAC)
RON ROSENTHAL, Managing Editor, San Francisco Chronicle
PHIL BRONSTEIN, Executive Editor, San Francisco Chronicle,
RON OWENS, Talk Show Host, KGO (ABC-Capitol Cities, San Francisco)
JOHN ROTHMAN, Talk Show Host, KGO (ABC-Capitol Cities, San Francisco)
MICHAEL SAVAGE, Talk Show Host, KFSO (ABC-Capitol Cities, San
Francisco) Syndicated in 100 markets
MICHAEL MEDVED, Talk Show Host, on 124 AM stations
DENNIS PRAGER, Talk Show Host, nationally syndicated from LA. Has
Israeli flag on his home page.
BEN WATTENBERG, Moderator, PBS Think Tank.
ANDREW LACK, president of NBC
DANIEL MENAKER, Executive Director, Harper Collins
DAVID REMNICK, Editor, The New Yorker
NICHOLAS LEHMANN, writer, the New York
HENRICK HERTZBERG, Talk of the Town editor, The New Yorker
SAMUEL NEWHOUSE JR, and DONALD NEWHOUSE own Newhouse Publications,
includes 26 newspapers in 22 cities; the Conde Nast magazine group,
includes The New Yorker; Parade, the Sunday newspaper supplement;
American City Business Journals, business newspapers published in more
than 30 major cities in America; and interests in cable television
programming and cable systems serving 1 million homes.
DONALD NEWHOUSE, chairman of the board of directors, Associated Press.
PETER R KANN, CEO, Wall Street Journal, Barron's
RALPH J. & BRIAN ROBERTS, Owners, Comcast-ATT Cable TV.
LAWRENCE KIRSHBAUM, CEO, AOL-Time Warner Book Group

[Mr. B1ack]

On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 13:54:14 -0500, Governor Swill

Gee Swill ... when are you moving there ? Sounds
like such a swell place ...

Oh, btw, the "Iranian people" don't count - it's the
almighty Iranian GOVERNMENT/theocracy that's
gonna define our "relationship". But then 'liberals'
think almighty government can do no wrong ....

>>Too many extreme things between
>> us over many decades for THAT to happen this
>> century. Sure, Iran would like to neutralize ISIL and
>> al-Qaida ... but it'll replace 'em with its OWN brands
>> of extremists that'll cause JUST as much mayhem
>> (maybe more 'cause they'll be better-financed).
>
>I still disagree. The root of global terrorism is Sunni Islamists
>funded from and through Saudi Arabia.
>
>In any case, if we can use them against each other, we can weaken the
>whole.

Sound theory ... but the *practice* may be just a
little bit tricky dontchaknow.

I think that at some point the sectarian divisions
in modern fundy Islam are gonna break down,
leaving us with one united front dedicated to
tearing apart the 'west'. LATER they can fight
amongst themselves again over just WHICH
flavor of Islam to impose on the infidels ...

It's that "common enemy" thing ... the enemy
being *us* ... that temporarily unites disparate
factions.

>>>> That said, there really IS NO "good way" to deal with
>>>> ISIL/al-Qaida and friends. They are thoroughly embedded
>>>> in the population from Morocco across to the pacific
>>>> islands and down through much of africa (as their big
>>>> surprise for Obamas homies demonstrated just the
>>>> other day) ... plotting ways to spread mayhem.
>>>
>>>Sadly, I suspect it will just get worse and worse until the world
>>>decides it's had enough and being Muslim on this planet will be,
>>>essentially, a death sentence. How the US will get around the first
>>>amendment, I don't know, but the day may well come when Islam simply
>>>becomes illegal everywhere.
>
>Which I've said myself. It's just a question of how much punishment
>we're willing to absorb before we make the decisions about Islam that
>the Nazis did about the Jews. The weak point in this is the first
>amendment. Most nations are in a legal position to ban a religion,
>the US, uniquely, is not.
>
>> The legal phrase "sedition" is still availible ... as is
>> "treason" or a broader definition of "enemy combatant".
>> So, you CAN make being Moslem a de-facto crime
>> without officially banning Islam. Someone MAY do this,
>> but I have doubts.
>
>True, but the US cannot legally use these methods against a religion.
>Only against individuals who might happen to be of a certain religion.

Oh .. it depends on how legal opinions are *worded* ...

You don't HAVE to say "Islam", don't *have* to say "religion",
you just draw up specs for a generic enemy that just HAPPEN
to cover pretty much every Moslem ....

A current example would be at Old Mizzou where the agenda
is to fuck-over the free speech of "white people". But they don't
SAY "white people" ... instead they classify anything a "white"
person might say that's negative about the agenda/tactics of
the opposition as "hate speech" ... leaving out any explicit
racial target.

>> I'm more concerned about what Machiavelli recommended,
>> create a perpetual state of emergency so extraordinary
>> powers are "justified" - that you mostly use against your
>> own citizens civil rights. They'll turn the USA from a
>> near-total surveillance state into the real deal - and all
>> that data WILL be abused sooner than later.
>
>This is a common practice and is as much the motivation for the
>terrorists as the motivation for our actions against them. What is in
>fact, economic and political competition, they take as religious
>persecution. It's Islam that wants this to be a religious war and
>they're doing everything in their power to make it so.

And are becoming expert about it too ...

No, it was a myth about how "suffering" got into the world.
"Unintended consquences" are a different catagory, and
as "unintended" often goes with "unrealized" ... well, should
we all sit frozen in paralysis and fear because we can't
predict every possible outcome of doing *anything* about
*anything* ???

Usually ya just gotta GO for it dude ... such is life.
Every possible quantum fork in the timeline is
simply impossible to know.

I'd suggest you research the lifestyle, resources
and "contentedness" of average Iranians. It's not
nearly high enough to make 'em say "Jihad ... aw,
who has the time ?"

Chinese are also discontent ... but they've few to
no theological qualms about getting decadent
stuff or living decadent lifestyles. An Iranian does
and, if a new mullah comes in, "decadent" could
become a death sentence. "Westernized" Iranians
"disappear" regularly there ...

>>too many plus it's just not in
>> the culture.
>
>Not now, but it would be if those cultures were given the choice. Do
>not wealthy Arabs fill their palaces and garages with western goods?
>Do they not travel to western destinations to take their pleasure in
>activities and practices that would get them a death sentence at home?

You're talking about a long-elite upper class
that does whatever the hell it feels like even
as it chops bits off the regular Joes for doing
the same things.

>Saying Arabs and Muslims are incapable of consumerism and physical
>pleasure is to deny something even more fundamental than religious
>upbringing; human nature.

I didn't say they were "incapable" ... just that
they ain't gonna HAVE that big fat contented
materialistic middle class for a LONG time
any more than Mexicans will.

>>This means there'll be extremists, enough
>> periodically to be a real pain. The only way to deal with
>> them is with violence ... which will create even more
>> extremists. Fucked if we do, fucked if we don't.
>
>Extremists are motivated by a number of things, but fear of fine
>clothes and orgasms are not among them.

It's LACK of that nice lifestyle that's a motivator, we
have it, they are denied ... but would rather blame us
than their own rulers.

And westerners WON'T be being assholes about
their religion ? Hey, if we were so carefree about it
then the entire western world would just embrace
Islam immediately ..... but instead we drop cluster
bombs on the missionaries of Islam ......

It's a world of assholes ... probably not wise to
say you are "better" than them - just that you
plan to be the asshole at the top of the heap.

[Topaz]

Judeo Christians think it is the "end times" even though it has been
the "end times" for over two thousand years so far. They think the one
and only hope is for Jesus to return and straighten everything out.
And a big part of the plan is the destroy the world. They think wars
and everything being blown up is a great thing because it means Jesus
will return soon.

Marxists were murderous lowlifes but they said religion is the opium
of the masses. There obviously is some truth to that. Enemies often
have some truth in their arguments. On top of the opium there is the
Jewish propaganda started by Scofield.

Christians are great for telling what some of the problems are, such
as homosexual perversion, feminism etc. But to actually solve these
problems one should look elsewhere. Who do Christians hate the most,
first Hitler and then the Muslims. These are the two who actually
solved the problems that Christians are famous for speaking against.
Maybe the Muslims go a little overboard but they are the opposite of
liberalism. There is no way that "Brokeback Mountain" would be shown
in a Muslim ruled country.

[Governor Swill]

On Thu, 19 Nov 2015 Mr. B1ack wrote:
>On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 Governor Swill wrote:
>>On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 Mr. B1ack wrote:
>>>On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 Governor Swill wrote:
>>>>On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 Mr. B1ack wrote:
>>>>>On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 Governor Swill wrote:

>>>>>>On Sun, 15 Nov 2015 Mr. B1ack wrote:
>>>>>>>At least Cruz WANTS to protect us from terrorism ...
>>>>>>>I'm not so sure about our current Fearless Leader.

>>>>>>Cruz, the moron, would only make it worse.

>>>>> On the whole, I agree. Ultra-hawkish gets us into
>>>>> more troubles than it solves. The military-industrial
>>>>> "donors" LOVE that however ...

>>>>>>At least Obama seems to
>>>>>>have the brainpower to figure out a better way to go about a long term
>>>>>>solution.
>>>>> Now there I disagree. All Obama has discovered is
>>>>> a way to orbit the problem until he's safely out of
>>>>> office. He's gonna make it the NEXT presidents
>>>>> problem.
>>>>
>>>>I sharply disagree. From what I can see, Obama is laying the
>>>>foundations of a plan that can eliminate Islamist terrorism with a
>>>>minimum of western loss. In short, set them against each other.

And be patient. To quote the Wicked Witch, "These things must be done
delicately."

>>> I think he's replacing ISIL with Iran as our biggest
>>> problem in the region. This is not a case of "The
>>> enemy of my enemy is my friend" ... Iran is NOT
>>> our friend EVER.
>>
>>Again, I disagree. Iran has supported terrorism - against the Jewish
>>State. The Islamists that have caused us to address it as a priority,
>>the perpetrators of 9/11, Khobar, Beirut, Paris, 7/7 and so on have
>>all been Sunni Arabs. Iranians aren't Arabs or Sunnis. They're
>>Persians and Shiites. The Iranian people admire Americans and are
>>very friendly towards us. The conflict has been between our
>>governments only and Obama, to his credit, his recognized and acted
>>upon this. The Saudis, Arabs and Sunnis have repeatedly attacked us
>>directly through proxies. To date, I know of no time when Iran or
>>Shiite forces attacked us except for Beirut which was a direct result
>>of US military occupation in Lebanon on Israel's behalf.
>
>
> Gee Swill ... when are you moving there ? Sounds
> like such a swell place ...

Political realities change. The Saudis aren't our friends anymore.
Global Islamist terrorism is not Shiite, but Sunni. The Beirut
attacks DAESH just perpetrated were against Shiites in Lebanon. Assad
is Shiite. The Syrian rebels, including and especially DAESH are
Sunnis sponsored by Saudi Arabia.

Reality is what it is and one thing it isn't is static.

California is home to the largest Iranian Diaspora community in the
world.

Iranian-American public office holders include:
Goli Ameri, Assistant Secretary of State for Educational and Cultural
Affairs
Cyrus Amir-Mokri, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Financial
Institutions
Washington (state) Cyrus Habib, Member of the Washington House of
Representatives
Bob Yousefian, Mayor of Glendale
Jimmy Delshad, Mayor of Beverly Hills

Yes, Iranians, especially the women, love western ways. The
ayatollahs have had to be careful not to step on them too much but
it's an uneasy peace. They wear their makeup and western fashions,
but they're also very careful to keep their head scarves adjusted so
as not to exceed the legal limit of visible h-a-i-r. ;)

The last few elections have seen the Iranian people vote for more
moderate parties. It's no accident that as soon as Ahmedinewossname
was out of office, the new President got permission from the Supreme
Leader to approach the US with the possibility of rapprochement.

This has worked out well. Eventually, Iranian oil will begin to hit
the market driving prices down even further which will wreak even more
havoc with the Russian and Saudi economies.

Remember, the Saudis attacked us on 9/11, not Afghanistan. They have
become our mutual enemy. DAESH is Saudi sponsored Sunnis and they
have attacked Paris, Beirut and threaten Rome and New York. The
Madrid and London 7/7 attacks were also perpetrated by Saudi sponsored
Sunnis as were the Khobar Towers, Cole, Embassy bombings, and both WTC
attacks, and all the while, we've deluded ourselves into thinking Iran
was the culprit because we don't know the difference between Sunni and
Shiite and haven't cared. To the average American, they're all
ragheads. It's been up to our leaders to be able to tell the
difference and it appears Obama is the first one who can.

The Persians, who like us better than the Saudis do in the first
place, are more than happy to team with us in anything that hurts
Sunnis or Arabs.

> Oh, btw, the "Iranian people" don't count - it's the
> almighty Iranian GOVERNMENT/theocracy that's
> gonna define our "relationship". But then 'liberals'
> think almighty government can do no wrong ....

Of course they count. They VOTE. And yes, their government pays
attention to those votes.

>>>Too many extreme things between
>>> us over many decades for THAT to happen this
>>> century. Sure, Iran would like to neutralize ISIL and
>>> al-Qaida ... but it'll replace 'em with its OWN brands
>>> of extremists that'll cause JUST as much mayhem
>>> (maybe more 'cause they'll be better-financed).
>>
>>I still disagree. The root of global terrorism is Sunni Islamists
>>funded from and through Saudi Arabia.
>>
>>In any case, if we can use them against each other, we can weaken the
>>whole.
>
> Sound theory ... but the *practice* may be just a
> little bit tricky dontchaknow.

Every sound theory becomes tricky when you apply it and works better
as you get used to using it. Internal combustion is 19th century
technology, but a modern car engine is a FAR cry from the first car, a
Daimler 1 cylinder that used an external flame to ignite the
combustion chamber!

> I think that at some point the sectarian divisions
> in modern fundy Islam are gonna break down,
> leaving us with one united front dedicated to
> tearing apart the 'west'. LATER they can fight
> amongst themselves again over just WHICH
> flavor of Islam to impose on the infidels ...

They already have and their primary target isn't US, it's EACH OTHER.
Even during the Iraq invasion, scores of Muslims were dying for every
American who died. Christ in a sidecar! If they were targeting the
west only, why would they have targeted Beirut? Why would they be
beheading Muslims and attacking villages and towns across Syria and
Iraq? Why would they be fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan?

> It's that "common enemy" thing ... the enemy
> being *us* ... that temporarily unites disparate
> factions.

Maybe I'm older than you. I dunno. But the Iran deal left me with a
sense of . . . peace, relief, a realization that finally something was
going right for a change after the foreign policy nightmare of GW
Bush.

>>>>> That said, there really IS NO "good way" to deal with
>>>>> ISIL/al-Qaida and friends. They are thoroughly embedded
>>>>> in the population from Morocco across to the pacific
>>>>> islands and down through much of africa (as their big
>>>>> surprise for Obamas homies demonstrated just the
>>>>> other day) ... plotting ways to spread mayhem.
>>>>
>>>>Sadly, I suspect it will just get worse and worse until the world
>>>>decides it's had enough and being Muslim on this planet will be,
>>>>essentially, a death sentence. How the US will get around the first
>>>>amendment, I don't know, but the day may well come when Islam simply
>>>>becomes illegal everywhere.
>>
>>Which I've said myself. It's just a question of how much punishment
>>we're willing to absorb before we make the decisions about Islam that
>>the Nazis did about the Jews. The weak point in this is the first
>>amendment. Most nations are in a legal position to ban a religion,
>>the US, uniquely, is not.
>>
>>> The legal phrase "sedition" is still availible ... as is
>>> "treason" or a broader definition of "enemy combatant".
>>> So, you CAN make being Moslem a de-facto crime
>>> without officially banning Islam. Someone MAY do this,
>>> but I have doubts.
>>
>>True, but the US cannot legally use these methods against a religion.
>>Only against individuals who might happen to be of a certain religion.
>
> Oh .. it depends on how legal opinions are *worded* ...

Exactly. Language might be created that would make it possible to
*effectively* discriminate against a class of people. Certainly Jim
Crow taught us the 13th and 14th amendments could be got around. :)

> You don't HAVE to say "Islam", don't *have* to say "religion",
> you just draw up specs for a generic enemy that just HAPPEN
> to cover pretty much every Moslem ....
>
> A current example would be at Old Mizzou where the agenda
> is to fuck-over the free speech of "white people". But they don't
> SAY "white people" ... instead they classify anything a "white"
> person might say that's negative about the agenda/tactics of
> the opposition as "hate speech" ... leaving out any explicit
> racial target.
>
>>> I'm more concerned about what Machiavelli recommended,
>>> create a perpetual state of emergency so extraordinary
>>> powers are "justified" - that you mostly use against your
>>> own citizens civil rights. They'll turn the USA from a
>>> near-total surveillance state into the real deal - and all
>>> that data WILL be abused sooner than later.
>>
>>This is a common practice and is as much the motivation for the
>>terrorists as the motivation for our actions against them. What is in
>>fact, economic and political competition, they take as religious
>>persecution. It's Islam that wants this to be a religious war and
>>they're doing everything in their power to make it so.
>
>
> And are becoming expert about it too ...

If and when it is decided by their targets that this is another
Crusade, Islam as a whole will suffer for the sins of the few that the
majority has so far, not stopped from their violent ways.

But before that comes, moderate Islam, TRUE Islam may rear it's head
and realize that its own extremists are threatening its very
existence. If that happens, WE won't have to fight the war on terror
anymore, Islam will fight it for us and their extremists will go the
way of the dodo.

It can be described both ways. Pandora opening that box had
unintended consequences, didn't it?

> Usually ya just gotta GO for it dude ... such is life.
> Every possible quantum fork in the timeline is
> simply impossible to know.

This is true and is why POLITICAL REALITIES CHANGE. If we don't
change with them we will fail.

Right now we're at such a fork. The old path, the path of the Saudi
special relationship and hatred of Iranians goes one way, but at the
fork of 9/11 (aka "post 9/11 world") after the Saudi attack, we find
the opportunity to make a sea change in our relationship with Islamic
states.

If we don't change to that path, we're fucked. And if another fork
comes down the pike later, we have to evaluate it as well. Habitually
assuming this or that is, and will always be, true, is NOT the way to
successful foreign policy. If we had ALWAYS hated Britain because of
the revolution and 1812, where would we be now? Enemies of Britain
and friends of who? But we did change our attitude towards the crown
and I can't imagine a more productive or important relationship
between states on this planet than the one between us and the UK.

Ok, maybe in the long term our China relationship will mean as much .
. .

They've already said it. They said it when they voted against
Ahmendinejad's party in his last midterm. They said it again when
they voted against his party in this last election and selected a
noted moderate for the Presidency.

> Chinese are also discontent ... but they've few to
> no theological qualms about getting decadent
> stuff or living decadent lifestyles. An Iranian does
> and, if a new mullah comes in,

Stop listening to right wing hate based propaganda! Open your eyes
and see what is really happening! Iranian women don't wear burkas,
Saudi women do. Saudi women aren't allowed to drive. Iranian women
have the vote! The history of women's rights in Iran has been
checkered since the Revolution but they, and many of their men, are
fighting back, insisting on fairer laws and more equality for women
there. More women than men attend university. Women can go about
unchaperoned by men. Women can hold jobs. Most of this isn't true in
the Arabian peninsula or the Muslim nations of south Asia.

> "decadent" could
> become a death sentence. "Westernized" Iranians
> "disappear" regularly there ...

Which screed we always hear. But how much truth is there to it? And
what of truth do we not hear or, if heard, not listened to?

>>>too many plus it's just not in
>>> the culture.
>>
>>Not now, but it would be if those cultures were given the choice. Do
>>not wealthy Arabs fill their palaces and garages with western goods?
>>Do they not travel to western destinations to take their pleasure in
>>activities and practices that would get them a death sentence at home?
>
> You're talking about a long-elite upper class
> that does whatever the hell it feels like even
> as it chops bits off the regular Joes for doing
> the same things.

Bingo! And that elite class fears the Joes getting the upper hand.
That's why so many Arab Spring revolts failed.

>>Saying Arabs and Muslims are incapable of consumerism and physical
>>pleasure is to deny something even more fundamental than religious
>>upbringing; human nature.
>
> I didn't say they were "incapable" ... just that
> they ain't gonna HAVE that big fat contented
> materialistic middle class for a LONG time
> any more than Mexicans will.

Apples and oranges. Those cultures have very different problems
though some they have in common.

Doesn't change the fact that western ways are highly seductive and
that is what DAESH and the Saudis fear - being forced to share power
with other than the dominant male class. Their power is dependent on
subjugation through the Mosque of the populations they control just as
much as Medieval Europe depended on the Church to help control their
populations.

>>>This means there'll be extremists, enough
>>> periodically to be a real pain. The only way to deal with
>>> them is with violence ... which will create even more
>>> extremists. Fucked if we do, fucked if we don't.
>>
>>Extremists are motivated by a number of things, but fear of fine
>>clothes and orgasms are not among them.
>
> It's LACK of that nice lifestyle that's a motivator, we
> have it, they are denied ... but would rather blame us
> than their own rulers.

Not all of them. Don't generalize. As long as we treat them that
way, they'll be that way. If we treat them as individuals,
recognizing they aren't all that way, we'll be putting money in the
bank, so to speak.

Non sequitur. Westerners aren't all that serious about their own
religions anymore, let alone anybody else's. ;)

> It's a world of assholes ... probably not wise to
> say you are "better" than them - just that you
> plan to be the asshole at the top of the heap.

This is true, but it's also possible that once you've reached the top
of the heap, you won't necessarily have that asshole rep.

[Sn...@smack.com]

On Thu, 19 Nov 2015 15:51:20 -0600, Topaz <mars...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>Judeo Christians think it is the "end times" even though it has been
>the "end times" for over two thousand years so far.

Then your one-nutted hero rose up

Musta been funny with his brains splattered all over the couch.

>==========================================================

"These gentlemen are the moral equivalents of America’s
founding fathers.

Ronald Regan introducing the Mujahideen leaders, 1985).

[Mr. B1ack]

Swill, you've become an enemy sympathizer and
apologist of the most naive sort. PLEASE move to
wonderful Iran. Your head will be rolling down the
street inside a week .........

[Governor Swill]

On Thu, 19 Nov 2015 21:56:18 -0500, Mr. B1ack <now...@nada.net>
wrote:

Mr Black, you've shown yourself to be utterly blind. The Saudis have
attacked us repeatedly these last 15 years, but you still consider
them our friends?

I wish I was your friend. I could come to your house, steal
everything you own including your wife and you wouldn't care.

[Topaz]

by VNN Staff

revised December 2005

Introduction

The text below shows that Jews may well have influenced Western
culture more than any other ethnic group, particularly over the last
few hundred years. It is important to note that our writers allege no
'conspiracy' by Jews. Rather, the examples cited point to an inborn
tendency of Jews to engage in behavior they believe will ensure their
group's safety, no matter its effect on the gentiles they live among.

To be sure, the Jews -- a race and also a religion -- have a long
history. But we will focus here on the past 200 years. We begin their
saga with the rise of the Rothschild banking family in Europe.

The Rise of the Rothschilds and International Banking

Of significance in Jewish history is how important the Rothschilds --
and other Jewish bankers -- were to the solidification of Jewish power
in the West. A large percentage of banks in the West was originally
founded by Jews, e.g. the Rothschilds, Jacob Schiff, and Paul and Max
Warburg. In fact, Meyer Amschel Rothschild and his sons virtually
invented modernized banking and finance. Not only did the powerful
Rothschilds control banking in Europe from approximately 1815 onward,
but they also purchased European news outlets -- including the Reuters
news agency -- giving them the power to influence the opinions of
millions of gentiles. Furthermore, political and social-reform actions
naturally require money; since they were far wealthier than even royal
families -- who were in fact indebted to them -- the Rothschilds were
in a unique position to be able to transform aspects of European
society to benefit the Jewish community.

Two features remain key to the power of the international bankers.
First, many bankers are related by marriage. By the end of the 1800s
many Rothschild cousins had married. Second, many top politicians in
the West have been indebted to the international bankers for providing
them with loans at critical times, such as when a Rothschild loaned
fellow Jew and Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli millions of pounds so
he could buy shares of stock for control of the Suez Canal area to
benefit England.

Perhaps nowhere have Jewish international bankers had a bigger impact
than in funding wars. For example, they funded the Japanese in the
Japan/Russia war of the early 20th century, which has been described
as the first war in which non-Whites defeated White men. Many Western
political observers assert that wars are waged for economic reasons,
and if that is true, then Jews, by their domination of international
banking, have been vital but unseen players in modern warfare.

The Founding of Communism

The ideology that would murder and enslave more people than any other
idea in human history was crafted in the 1840s by a German Jew named
Karl Marx. Like many Jews who wanted to hide within gentile society,
Marx's family converted to Christianity. Marx's ideology was called
communism, a social and economic system in which the government
controlled all forms of property and wealth. Marx based his communism
on the historic kahal, a Jewish communal living system. The kahal was
essentially an early form of communism, with community needs such as
food, living arrangements, and vocations allocated in a collective
manner.

Furthermore, the Soviet Union - which spread communism across the
earth - would likely have never been created if the part-Jewish
leftist V. I. Lenin (see elsewhere) had not been heavily influenced by
Marx's book Das Kapital. In fact, Das Kapital can be credited as
having transformed the young Lenin into a full-blown revolutionary -
another Jewish root of communism.

It should be noted by the reader that communism is, as an ideology,
more severe than Nazism, its sworn enemy. As an example, in Nazi
Germany a citizen could own a gun with a permit. But no citizen could,
or can, own a gun in any communist country. Nazism wasn't
totalitarian. It was politically authoritarian. But communism is
totalitarian in that every aspect of a citizen's life is rigidly
controlled. The number of people murdered by communism worldwide since
1917 approaches 100 million people - 20 million in Russia alone, by
conservative estimate. That number does not include the other millions
of people who were imprisoned, tortured or forced to flee their homes
due to communist aggression in Eastern Europe.

The Rise of Zionism

In the late 1880s, Jews began looking for a permanent place to evade
gentiles irritated by their behavior. The place they envisioned for
their exile was Palestine, portions of which Jews claimed they had
occupied over 2,000 years ago. Jews began a global campaign to
convince the world that they were entitled to 'return' to Palestine.
The leader of this so-called Zionist movement was Theodor Herzl.
Zionism provided the motive for a number of Jewish actions over the
course of the twentieth century, including the manipulations leading
up to the Balfour Declaration (covered below) and the exaggeration of
the severity of the so-called Holocaust. The state of Israel was
brought into being by Jewish terrorism, characterized by such acts as
the bombing of the King David Hotel in 1946 and the Deir Yassin
massacre in 1948.

To date, Zionism -- which the UN described as a form of racism in its
1975 Resolution 3379 -- has caused much trouble in the world, through
continual violence in the so-called Middle East involving Israel.
American (read: gentile) tax dollars fund the state of Israel to the
tune of billions a year, which is one of the chief causes of Arab
anger towards the U.S.

The Creation of the Federal Reserve Corporation

In 1913, the U.S. Congress authorized the creation of the Federal
Reserve banking system, which is also known as the Federal Reserve
Corporation. This private, non-governmental entity issues America's
money. The Federal Reserve pays the U.S. Treasury a small fee to print
'Federal Reserve Note' currency, which is later loaned to the U.S.
government.

The Federal Reserve system was created largely by the actions of
Jewish banker Paul M. Warburg. It is debt money because when the U.S.
government needs money -- i.e., more money than the U.S. treasury
receives from taxes -- it borrows the cash from the Federal Reserve
(such borrowing is now routine). The government then agrees to pay
back the money that it borrowed from the corporation with added
interest paid on the collateral for the loan (the collateral being
interest-bearing government bonds). That interest -- minus smaller
government debts such as foreign aid -- is the national, or federal,
debt, or, what America owes the Federal Reserve Corporation.

The Federal Reserve also controls interest rates and the amount of
money that circulates within America, giving it enormous power over
the U.S. economy.

As the debt money system continues to be used, America's national debt
climbs, leading to the American citizen being progressively over-taxed
through the silent theft of inflation.

Of significance is that the leadership of the Federal Reserve and the
key owners of the corporation's stock -- i.e., banks -- have been
disproportionately Jewish. Even today, a Jew named Alan Greenspan
heads that corporation. (How ironic that the same year that America
gave up control of its money to private bankers, Canada did as well
under the Bank Act of 1913. In fact, private banks control the money
of almost all Western countries, and yes, those banks are very often
owned or controlled by Jews).

WWI

Fact: America became involved in WWI due to Jewish intervention.
England was in danger of losing the war when Jews secretly approached
the British government with an unusual offer: the Jews, using their
powerful influence within American President Woodrow Wilson's inner
circle, would persuade Wilson to enter America into the war if the
British government would declare its support for the creation of a
Jewish homeland in Palestine. As a result of that offer, Wilson's
close Jewish advisors, such as Louis Brandeis, Bernard Baruch and
Rabbi Stephen Wise, urged Wilson to aid the British war effort by
committing American troops to enter WWI. Another Jew, Chaim Weizmann,
was the key player on the British side of the plan to inject America
into WWI. That the vast majority of the American people wanted nothing
to do with the European war, and that Wilson had campaigned on the
specific promise to keep America out of the war, turned out not to
matter. The will of the people was abandoned for the will of the Jews.

The British government pledged its support for the creation of a
Jewish state in a document that became known as the Balfour
Declaration. That declaration was issued after America had entered
WWI. The Balfour Declaration was written by one Jew, Leopold Amery,
and edited by another Jew, Louis Brandeis, who was the first Jewish
justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. The reader should be aware of the
fact that WWI led directly to WWII. In fact, many people feel that
WWII was merely a continuation of WWI.

'Russian' Revolution/Comintern Founded

Probably the most important event in recent history, aside from WWII,
was the so-called 'Russian' Revolution, which occurred in late 1917.
In that revolution, communists gained control of Russia, murdering and
enslaving millions of its citizens, most of whom were gentiles. Nearly
all of the top communists in Russia -- first called 'Bolsheviks' but
later 'Soviets' -- were Jewish and not from Russian stock. Their
leader, V.I. Lenin, was, as we mentioned previously, part-Jewish.
After Lenin's death, Joseph Stalin led the Soviet communists. Stalin
was not Jewish but he was married to a Jew (in his third, common-law
marriage). The Russian Revolution was financed by the Jewish banker
Jacob Schiff, who furnished the communists with millions of dollars.

After gaining control of Russia, the Soviets spread communism
worldwide through an organ of the Soviet government called the
Comintern. The Comintern sent agents around the globe to foment
revolutions which, it hoped, eventually would result in the
installation of communist regimes in every nation. The Comintern was
run by a Jew named Grigory Zinoviev. Because of the Comintern's
actions many countries around the world were later enslaved under
communist dictatorships, e.g. North Korea and Cuba. China was also
communized by Jewish/Soviet emissaries, e.g. Adolf Abramovitch Joffe
(aka Yoffe) and Mikhail Markovich Borodin.

It should be recognized that the mass murder that occurred in Russia
from 1917 onward was carried out almost exclusively by Jews, including
Lazar Kaganovich, Leon Trotsky, Yakov Sverdlov, Yakov Yurovsky and
Genrikh Yagoda. The few top Soviet officials who were not Jewish were
married to Jews, for example Rykov, Molotov, Dzherzhinsky and Bukharin
(not counting the previously-mentioned Stalin). Soviet communism had
racially-Jewish roots until Stalin became frustrated with their
domination of the government and purged a significant number of Jews
including Kamenev, Zinoviev, Radek, and Yagoda.

Of interest regarding the 'Russian' Revolution is that British leader
Winston Churchill wrote a newspaper article in 1920 titled "Zionism
versus Bolshevism: A Struggle for the Soul of the Jewish People," in
which he echoed the coming Nazis in pointing out that that the
'Russian' revolution was led mostly by Jews. Churchill's
never-mentioned article is available on the web.

The Creation of the Versailles Treaty

Critically important to modern history was the Versailles Treaty of
1919, which carved Germany into pieces as the conclusion of WWI.
European states wanted to punish Germany for her role in the war, and
the way they did so was through that treaty. (It should be recognized
that WWI was not started by Germany, as is often claimed, but by
Austria-Hungary, which declared war upon Serbia in July 1914). Under
the questionable Versailles Treaty, parts of Germany were given to
various European countries including France, Poland, Denmark and
Belgium.

Most important about the Versailles Treaty, however, was the fact that
Jews were key advisors to most if not all of the top government
officials who attended the peace conference that produced it. The Jew
Bernard Baruch advised U.S. President Wilson at the conference, while
British Prime Minister Lloyd George was advised by the Jew Phil
Sassoon. And French leader Georges Clemenceau was advised by his
Jewish Interior Minister Georges Mandel aka Louis Rothschild.
Furthermore, Jewish leader Rabbi Stephen Wise advised U.S. president
Wilson about matters surrounding the impending treaty before Wilson
left America to attend the peace conference. The Versailles Treaty
caused WWII to occur by default, culminating in Hitler attempting to
unravel the Versailles Treaty by invading Poland in 1939. The treaty
was unjust and several Western leaders admitted that it was, including
British Prime Minister A. Neville Chamberlain.

The Impact of Jewish Marxists/Socialists in pre-Hitler Germany

From just after WWI until the early 1930s Germany was in severe
turmoil. Among the worst of her troubles were communist
revolutionaries starting riots in German cities lasting as long as
five days. The riots were intended to destabilize Germany as a first
step towards communization of the country. Also among Germany's
troubles was incredible monetary inflation.

Most of Germany's troublemaking revolutionaries were Jewish. Karl
Radek, Kurt Eisner, and Rosa Luxemburg, for example. In fact, those
three people attempted coups in several European locations.

Furthermore, pre-Hitler -- aka Weimar -- Germany was run by a
government containing many Jews, such as Foreign Minister Walter
Rathenau. The Weimar constitution was even written by a Jew, Hugo
Preuss. Jews drove the leftist and Marxist movements in Germany, which
influenced, for example, such matters as art and architecture and even
sexual behavior. Weimar Germany's media were also largely in Jewish
hands, as were her financial institutions -- not surprising since Jews
tend to dominate these vocations in most Western countries.

Hitler Comes to Power, and the Frankfurt School Leaves for America

When Adolf Hitler assumed power in Germany in 1933, he set about
correcting the problems Germany faced. Among his actions were
imprisoning Jewish revolutionaries and strengthening the German
economy by the ingenious use of 'Mefo' bonds, which in a short time
transformed Germany's economy into the most powerful in Europe.
Indeed, Germany achieved full employment in four years under Hitler's
rule. (It is important to contrast Hitler's quick and successful
transformation of Germany's economy to American president F. D.
Roosevelt's failed attempts to rescue America's economy from a severe
depression. FDR's economic programs were largely 'artificial' in that
the government, not private business, created jobs via large projects
funded by U.S. tax dollars. In other words, tax dollars were used to
pay taxpayers).

Coinciding with the rise of Nazism, an influential group of Jewish
intellectuals fled Germany and came to America. This group, known as
the Frankfurt School, injected Marxist ideas into American life via
major U.S. universities. The Frankfurt School -- including such Jews
as Theodor Adorno, Wilhelm Reich, Erich Fromm and Max Horkheimer --
profoundly changed America's social fabric. Indeed, much of the social
turmoil of the 1960s can be traced to the prior influence of these
Frankfurt Jews.

The Beginnings of WWII and the Role of FDR's Jewish Cabal

In the early 1930s, certain Jews began to set the stage for WWII. In
both Britain and America, Jews in important positions of power
maneuvered to get the British and American governments to actively
oppose Hitler's Germany. Furthermore, Jews themselves declared
financial 'war' on Germany just after Hitler took power. Such a 'war'
declaration occurred before Hitler had imprisoned the Jews or
curtailed Jewish legal rights. In other words, Jews struck the first
blow in their battle against Hitler's new regime.

It is important for the reader to understand that long before Hitler
had imprisoned the Jews or invaded any country, American president
Franklin D. Roosevelt officially recognized Germany's enemy, the
communist Soviet Union (in November 1933), That the president of a
free country would recognize a brutal communist state that had already
murdered millions of people -- a fact likely known to Roosevelt -- is
significant, and offers insight into Roosevelt's administration. Some
of the people surrounding Roosevelt were communists, for example U.S.
Treasury official Harry Dexter White. Other Roosevelt staffers were,
if not actual communists, then sympathetic towards communism, e.g.
FDR's vice-president Henry Wallace. Roosevelt himself told Congressman
Martin Dies that "several of the best friends I have got" were
communists (noted in the Congressional Record, Sept. 22, 1950, page
A6832).

The Jews in Roosevelt's inner circle persuaded him to treat both
Germany and Japan as dangerous enemies of America, which Roosevelt
did. Concerning Britain, powerful Jews such as Bernard Baruch worked
to push top officials in the same direction. (Of note regarding
England vis-a-vis Germany is that when Winston Churchill was in severe
debt due to gambling losses, he became indebted to Baruch since Baruch
helped rescue him from bankruptcy[2]; the world will likely never know
to what lengths Churchill was willing to go to return Baruch's favor.
Furthermore, Churchill deeply disliked Germany, and possibly envied
Hitler's success).

When President Roosevelt suggested in a speech in 1937 that America
might have to wage war in the near future, watchful Americans knew
that war with the future Axis powers -- Germany, Japan and Italy --
was imminent. Such an early suggestion of war, years before WWII
began, gave good insight into Roosevelt's intentions.

Roosevelt knew that war with Japan would provide a back door through
which America could enter WWII. That entry would allow America to help
defeat Hitler for the benefit of both world Jewry and England. FDR
knew that if he punished Japan - an ally of Germany - past a certain
point, the Japanese would attack America in retaliation. In fact, as
historian Harry Elmer Barnes pointed out in his 1953 book "Perpetual
War For Perpetual Peace," FDR began to antagonize Japan soon after
becoming president in 1933. In the end, FDR and world Jewry got
exactly what they wanted: the defeat of Nazi Germany, the biggest
threat to ever face world Jewry and international leftism. It must be
clearly understood: WWII was all about Germany and the Jews. Japan was
but a secondary issue, despite outward appearances to the contrary.

Before WWII began, Jew-dominated Hollywood played a crucial role in
persuading American citizens that Hitler and the Germans were
dangerous to America's safety. For example, Hollywood produced movies
that portrayed the Germans as wanting to take over either America or
the entire world. One such film was "Confessions of a Nazi Spy,"
starring Jewish actor Edward G. Robinson.

Jews were also key players in silencing people who opposed the growing
anti-Germany movement in America. Prominent citizens who questioned
the dangerousness of Germany to America were labeled "isolationists"
and fiercely criticized. Those isolationists, such as famed aviator
Charles Lindbergh, were unofficially blacklisted in America, their
voices silenced by a concerted campaign funded largely by Jewish
money. Jews funneled money into many anti-Germany organizations, such
as the Fight For Freedom Committee, which received some winking
support from Roosevelt's administration.

Also of note concerning the beginnings of WWII was Hitler's unique
economy. Among other features, the German economy had a barter system
that cut out the international Jewish bankers. For example, Germany
traded trucks to Argentina in exchange for grain. Instead of both
Germany and Argentina approaching international bankers for loans at
high interest rates, both countries simply bypassed the lenders via
barter. Such exchanges angered the Jew-dominated global financiers. As
a result, economic warfare was directed against Germany by Jew-led
factions fearful that other nations might copy her example.

The event that officially started WWII, Hitler's invasion of Poland,
can be explained by the fact that Hitler was attempting to reverse the
unfairness of the Versailles Treaty and reclaim traditionally German
territory. Hitler asked Poland at least twice to return the city of
Danzig and the Polish Corridor to Germany before invading in 1939.
Poland refused. Also of significance is that after Hitler invaded
Poland, he offered to pull his troops out of that country if he could
keep Danzig and the Corridor. Britain and France refused Hitler's
offer. (Did they prefer war instead?)

Of further importance concerning WWII is the fact that Hitler probably
did not realize how influential Jews were in shaping the policies of
the British government in 1939. Hitler likely thought that he was
opposing only gentiles in England. What he probably did not realize
about Britain was that, like most European governments, Britain was
beholden to powerful Jews. Those Jews not only aided the British
government financially, they also traveled in the highest social
circles, having been named 'barons' and 'lords' long before. The Jews
received those lofty titles not for their heritage but instead for
their important financial services to the British government. In fact,
ever since Oliver Cromwell allowed the Jews to return to England in
the 1650s (they had been expelled by King Edward the First, known as
"Longshanks," in 1290), Jews had exercised significant influence on
political and social events in England.

The popular idea that Britain and France had to guarantee Poland's
borders by declaring war on Germany after Germany invaded Poland is
wrong. Days after Germany invaded Poland, the Soviets invaded as well,
from the opposite side. Britain and France did not then declare war on
the Soviet Union. Why did England and France allow the Soviets to
invade Poland but not Germany? The 1939 Anglo-Polish treaty which led
to WWII, and not the secret protocols of it, did not specify which
countries Britain would defend Poland against. Additionally, that
treaty -- the Agreement of Mutual Assistance -- was not properly
ratified since it did not 'sit' for 21 days under the Ponsonby Rule,
as was normally required under British policy. Translation: Britain's
guaranteeing of Poland's borders was unlawful.

Most important of all, however, about WWII is that there is now clear
evidence that certain powerful men had planned to remove Hitler from
power long before he invaded Poland. As outlined in the book Which Way
Western Man? by William G. Simpson, both Winston Churchill and various
powerful Jews began making plans to topple Hitler as early as 1935, by
any means necessary. For example, U.S. General Robert E. Wood told a
U.S. Congressional committee that Churchill told him in 1936 that
England must "smash" Germany. That such a comment came 3 years before
WWII began is of critical historical importance.

The Defeat of Germany and the Creation of the Morgenthau Plan

The defeat of Nazi Germany in 1945 was not simply a military victory
for the allies. It amounted to the revenge of world Jewry. The biggest
racial threat to the Jews in recent history -- Nazi Germany -- had not
merely been defeated in war but had been virtually wiped off the map.
Entire cities such as Dresden were burnt to the ground. Millions of
innocent German citizens were either killed, injured or left homeless.
All traces of the former German culture were destroyed. People having
no official role in the Nazi government were executed by the allies,
such as Julius Streicher and Alfred Rosenberg. Other former Nazi
officials were tried and hanged by the allies at Nuremberg using ex
post facto laws, hearsay evidence, and confessions gained under
torture administered by interrogators - who were often Jewish. Of
significance is the fact that as early as December 1942 the allied
powers had decided to prosecute German military personnel for war
crimes committed during WWII.

Roosevelt's August 1944 comment that the entire German people -- not
simply former Nazis -- should be "castrated" to prevent them from
reproducing reveals the Roosevelt administration's attitude towards
Germany in general. U.S. General Dwight Eisenhower said that the top
German officials should be punished beyond the death penalty, whatever
that might have meant. Of possible interest regarding 'Ike's' comment
is that Eisenhower's nickname at West Point military academy was 'The
Swedish Jew.' Also, no castration suggestions were offered by allied
leaders concerning the Japanese people, even though the Japanese
attack on Pearl Harbor caused America to enter WWII in the first
place. Also of importance is the fact that two Jews -- Henry
Morgenthau, Jr. and the communist Harry Dexter White -- wrote the U.S.
government's Morgenthau Plan, which restructured post-war Germany to
Jewish benefit. A greater example of a conflict of interest would be
hard to find.

Also regarding the matter of post-war Germany, after the war the
director general of the organization in charge of providing food and
housing for homeless Germans (the United Nations Relief and
Rehabilitation Administration, or UNRRA) was a Jew, Herbert Lehman.
UNRRA's chief advisor was also a Jew, David Weintraub.

Jews also played key roles in the prosecution of German military
personnel for war crimes committed during WWII. For example, in the
Malmedy massacre trial (U.S. vs. Valentin Bersin, et al.), the chief
interrogator of the accused German soldiers was a Jew, William Perl.
The chief prosecutor, Burton Ellis, was also a Jew. The chief
assistant prosecutor was a Jew as well, Raphael Schumaker.

Jews were also key players in the U.S. Office of War Information
(OWI), which created anti-Axis films, posters and photos for
propaganda purposes. That propaganda was used to influence the
attitudes of Western citizens towards Germany and Japan. Among the
Jews who worked for OWI were James Paul Warburg, Bernard M. Baruch,
Herbert Marcuse and Leo Rosten. Jews also helped 'de-Nazify' German
military personnel and the German public after WWII, and conflicts of
interests often occurred when that happened. For example, Jewish
Marxist Herbert Marcuse a) advised the allies about how to portray
German fascism to the Western public via mass media; and b) wrote a
handbook for the allies concerning de-Nazification. The
de-Nazification of Germany is so complete today that a German citizen
risks a stiff jail sentence if he merely utters a pro-Nazi comment in
public.

The Founding of the UN

Not only was the 'architect' of the United Nations, Leo Pasvolsky,
Jewish, but among the most important people involved in the founding
of the UN in 1945 were Jewish communists, such as Victor Perlo, Harry
Dexter White and Solomon Adler. The UN is a global entity of
considerable power which has influenced the cultures of many Western
countries. For example, in the late 1940s America adopted at least
some educational ideas that were created by a UN department called
UNESCO (i.e., those found in their Towards World Understanding
report). Those ideas concerned the content of textbooks in American
schools. President Truman's Commission on Higher Education endorsed
the ideas, which included teaching children about the benefits of
"international government" (aka 'surrendering much of your country's
autonomy to a global body').

The controversial 1951 UN/UNESCO 'Statement on the Nature of Race and
Race Differences,' which denied human racial differences and altered
peoples' attitudes about race, was largely the invention of infamous
Jewish anthropologist Ashley Montagu. That statement seemed to further
highlight the ongoing Jewish agenda on race. Another example of that
agenda: as far back as 1935, Franz Boas -- the Jewish godfather of
race-denial who inspired Montagu's efforts -- approached two top
scientists and asked them to create an anti-racism/race-denial
statement, which would be signed by many other scientists and then
publicized. Both of the scientists that Boas approached,
anthropologist and psychologist Livingston Farrand and biologist
Raymond Pearl, turned Boas down. Not one to give up easily, Boas then
approached yet another race expert, anthropologist Earnest Hooton.
Hooton agreed to create such a race statement (he sent it to seven top
scientists but only one signed it).

Amazingly, the UNESCO race statement claimed that Jews are not a race
or ethnic group, even though Jews contract 'Jewish diseases,' such as
Tay-Sachs disease.

Other top experts who created race-denying/race-downplaying material
for the UN or UNESCO were also Jewish, including Melville Herskovits,
Otto Klineberg and Harry Shapiro. In fact, Jews pioneered the
false-but-ubiquitous 'official' theory that racial differences between
Whites and non-Whites do not really exist. The teachings of the Jews
mentioned above were used to drastically alter Western culture, e.g.
in arguing for the enactment of civil-rights legislation.

Despite the usual UN stance on Israel/Palestine, the UN has been good
for Jews, i.e. the UN's social leveling programs and equality-for-all
ideology have drastically lessened 'anti-Semitism' worldwide.

The Control of Eastern Europe After WWII

Not only was Russia controlled by Jews for many years, but countries
in post-war Eastern Europe were as well. For example, communist Poland
was run by Jewish figures including Jacob Berman, Boleslaw Bierut and
Colonel Jozef Rozanski. Communist Romania was run by people such as
Ana Pauker, Avram Bunaciu and Valter Roman. Hungary's communist
government was also heavily Jewish, for example Mathias Rakosi, Ernest
Gero and Michael Farkas. Under the leadership of those Jews, hundreds
of thousands of people -- most of them gentiles -- were murdered,
tortured or imprisoned throughout Eastern Europe.

The House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) Investigations

In 1947 the U.S. Congress, via the House Un-American Activities
Committee (HUAC), began investigating the Hollywood film industry due
to charges that Hollywood had been infiltrated by communism (it had
been). A large number of actors, directors and screenwriters were
members of the Communist Party and as such were getting marching
orders from the Soviet Union. During that period, a group of people
known as the Hollywood Ten refused to answer questions before the HUAC
committee. They were then charged with contempt of Congress. A
disproportionate number of the Hollywood Ten were Jews, including
Herbert Biberman, Samuel Ornitz, Ring Lardner, Jr. and Albert Maltz,
as were the people who were 'blacklisted' during that era. (A
blacklisting meant that a person could not work in Hollywood due to
his political activities.)

Of important note concerning HUAC was how that committee -- and the
similar McCarthy committee later on -- was portrayed by the media and
Hollywood. HUAC's mission - identifying people who were attempting to
communize America on behalf of the Soviet Union -- was described as an
un-American 'witch hunt.' Declassified U.S. and Soviet government
reports, such as the Venona Intercepts, show that those 'witch
hunters' were correct: communists had infiltrated many areas of
American society.

Significantly, the majority of American communist leaders have been
Jews, including Herbert Aptheker, Victor Perlo, Jay Lovestone and
Benjamin Gitlow.

The Founding of Israel

Immense and concerted pressure was placed upon U.S. President Harry
Truman so that he would endorse the idea of creating a Jewish state in
Palestine. Naturally, most of that pressure came from Jews. Indeed, at
one point Jewish Congressman Emanuel Celler led a group of Jews to the
White House. There, during a conversation with Truman, Celler pounded
on the president's desk and said that if Truman did not give his
blessing for a Jewish nation, "we'll run you out of town." In fact,
Truman said that "extreme Zionists" had threatened him. Also of note
is the fact that Truman's Jewish friend Eddie Jacobson contacted
Truman to urge him to support a Jewish state. But before Jacobson
contacted Truman, Jacobson was briefed on Palestinian matters by Dewey
Stone, a Zionist leader (which might make one wonder how Jacobson came
to contact Truman and on whose behalf he might have been acting).

The creation of the state of Israel was extremely important to the
Jews. Most of all, it gave them legitimacy. They were no longer seen
as a small tribe of 'troublemakers' who moved from country to country
getting evicted nearly every time. Now they were a people with their
own country and the trappings that go with it: ambassadors, a large
army and nuclear weapons. The Jews had finally arrived on the world
stage.

It should be understood that Israel was literally founded on
terrorism: Jewish revolutionaries, such as Menachem Begin, shot and
blew-up British soldiers, foreign diplomats and scores of Arabs in a
violent effort to reclaim 'their' land. (Ironically, Israel now
condemns and fights terrorism).

Today, the Zionist lobby in Washington, D.C. wields enormous power
over Congress. As a result, Congressmen dare not criticize Israel in
public; those who do are usually not re-elected. Another result of
Zionist power in Washington is the ever-increasing funding of the
state of Israel by U.S. taxpayers.

Arabs and Muslims throughout the world hate America and most other
White countries because they see those countries as partners and
protectors of Israel, which they are - especially America.

The Cold War

The 'cold' war between America and the Soviet Union, which began just
after WWII and which was centered around both countries' nuclear
arsenals, became more sophisticated and more expensive as America
entered the 1950s. Billions of U.S. tax dollars were spent on atomic
weapons and various security features both inside and outside of the
U.S.

Of importance is the fact that the Cold War would never have occurred
in the first place if Jews hadn't created the Soviet Union.
Ironically, Jews a) were prime figures in creating America's first
atomic weapons program, called 'The Manhattan Project'; and b) were
also key players in networks which secretly provided U.S. atomic
weapons technology to the Soviet Union, e.g. the Rosenbergs, Harry
Gold and Robert Soblen. (For more information on the transfer of
atomic secrets to the Soviet Union, see the Fuchs-Gold or the
Rosenberg spy ring cases in American historical documents).

The Increased Use of the Word "Democracy" in America

As the Jewish foothold in the American publishing world became more
solid, there appeared an increased use of the term "democracy" within
books, newspapers and magazines to describe America.

The U.S. constitution contains no mention of "democracy," nor did
America's founders use that word. America was created instead as a
White republic in which only White males could vote or hold public
office, and the Jews are very aware of that fact.

The U.S. Civil-Rights Movement

The history of the 1950s-1960s civil-rights movement might go
unnoticed by many White citizens if it were not for the fact that that
movement was created and steered by Jews, not by Blacks. Indeed, the
NAACP was founded by and run for many years by Jews, such as the
Spingarn brothers. Other important Jews in the NAACP included Henry
Moskowitz, Lillian Wald, Jack Greenberg and Kivie Kaplan.

The groundbreaking Brown v. Board of Education court ruling in 1954
resulted almost entirely from the work of Jewish lawyers and activists
connected with the NAACP, for example Jack Greenberg. Indeed, the
legal brief for Brown was signed almost exclusively by Jews. Jewish
activist Esther Swirk Brown was also a prime player in the Brown case.
In fact, Swirk Brown actually launched the Brown case herself.[3]

It could be said that, within the U.S. Congress at least,
Representative Celler (see elsewhere in this essay) launched the Black
civil-rights movement in America via his House bill H.R.6127, which
when signed into law became the first civil-rights law created since
the 1800s: the Civil Rights Act of 1957.

Furthermore, the constitutionally questionable U.S. Civil Rights Act
of 1964 came from a Jew, i.e. Congressman Celler's House bill H.R.
7152. That act created, among other things, affirmative action. It
ended the practice of business owners deciding for themselves whom to
hire and fire. In fact, the destruction of White rights in America was
caused largely by the Jew-created and Jew-led civil-rights movement.

(Of possible interest to the reader is that the Civil Rights Act of
1964 created the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
(EEOC), which is responsible for ensuring that private employers obey
the racial mandates of Title VII of the Act. Perhaps not surprisingly,
two Jews, Alfred and Ruth Blumrosen, were key players in the
construction of the EEOC, and Alfred was also the commission's first
compliance chief (and is also referred to as its conciliations chief).
Mr. Blumrosen shaped the racial quota guidelines that the EEOC would
follow for decades to come. In fact, Blumrosen could be considered to
be the godfather of racial quotas in America - at least as far as
federal enforcement of racial quotas in employment is concerned.[4]
Furthermore, Sonia Pressman, a Jewish EEOC attorney, was a prime
figure in the movement to extend the EEOC's reach to include
gender-discrimination-in-employment into its legal jurisdiction.
Pressman worked with NOW, a feminist group containing many Jews, in an
attempt to force the EEOC to become more involved with gender bias
matters).

The civil-rights movement also transformed the attitudes of American
Blacks: before the civil-rights movement Blacks were largely
respectful of Whites. Today Blacks openly denigrate White culture and
challenge White authority. They demand that 'whitey' now show them
respect which they may or may not have earned.

The Vatican's 1965 'Nostra Aetate' Declaration

As Look magazine noted in January 1966, in an article titled "How The
Jews Changed Catholic Thinking," a Jew named Jules Isaac approached
the Vatican about a possible Catholic condemnation of 'anti-Semitism.'
His action resulted in the famous, official Vatican ruling that the
Jews were not responsible for Jesus Christ's death. The ruling was a
very significant victory for all Jews worldwide. Of importance is that
after the Vatican statement was issued, Jews did not then issue a
similar declaration admitting to and condemning Judaism's historic and
harsh anti-gentile attitudes - attitudes which pre-date Christianity.

U.S. Immigration Law Altered

Jews have also led the movement in the U.S. Congress to open America
to non-European immigration. The best example of that is the 1965
Immigration Act, aka the Hart-Celler Act, which resulted in a
revolutionary change in U.S. immigration rules. Congressman Celler was
the point man for that law, even though he is listed second, after
Hart, in the title 'Hart-Celler.' Indeed, President Johnson mentioned
Celler twice at the signing of the bill, H.R. 2580, into law on Oct.
3, 1965, but did not mention Hart. Other Jews in Congress such as
Jacob Javits and Herbert Lehman also spearheaded the movement to allow
more non-Europeans into America. An influential Jew and immigration
lawyer named Edward Dubroff regularly advised Congressman Celler about
immigration issues.

Additionally, powerful Jewish organizations carried out intense,
ongoing campaigns in order to pressure individual Congressmen to vote
for the loosening of U.S. immigration laws. At nearly every step of
the campaign to alter U.S. immigration rules, Jews were at the
forefront.


The Rise of American Leftism and Counterculture

Not surprisingly, the American political Left was built largely by
Jews as well. For example, Frankfurt School icon Herbert Marcuse laid
the foundation for the American 'hippie' counterculture via his
popular book One-Dimensional Man (1964). Other famous Jews who led the
1960s hippie movement included Abbie Hoffman, Jerry Rubin and Paul
Krassner. Lesser Jews drove the counterculture movement from behind
the scenes by publishing, writing for, or editing leftist newspapers
and magazines. And anti-war/college activism groups were
disproportionately filled with Jews, too, e.g. Students for a
Democratic Society (SDS), the top leaders of which were Jews, for
example Todd Gitlin, Mike Spiegel, Al Haber, and Mike Klonsky.

Similarly, most of the leaders of the feminist movement have been
Jews, for example Betty Friedan, Letty Cottin Pogrebin, Lucy Komisar
and Gloria Steinem. Most of the leaders of the homosexual-rights
movement have been Jews, such as Larry Kramer, Alan Klein and Arnie
Kantrowitz. Gun control in the U.S. Congress has been dominated by
Jews such as Charles Schumer, Diane Feinstein and Howard Metzenbaum.
Indeed, Jews created two landmark anti-gun laws in the 1990s: the
Brady law, which came from Howard Metzenbaum and Charles Schumer, and
the assault-rifle ban, which came from Dianne Feinstein and Schumer.
In fact, America's first significant anti-gun legislation, the Gun
Control Act of 1968, came from Congressman Celler's House bill H.R.
17735. Probably the most disturbing anti-gun legislation in recent
years - for gun owners and constitutional-rights advocates alike -
came from Jewish Senator Frank Lautenberg, whose domestic confiscation
provision became law in 1996. That law prevents someone convicted of a
certain misdemeanor crime from owning a gun. In other words, a
misdemeanor conviction abolishes a constitutional right that our
gentile Founders gave us.

Even the famous 1969 Woodstock rock-and-roll concert was created by
Jews: Michael Lang, Artie Kornfeld, Joel Rosenman and John Roberts.
Furthermore, a Jewish man named Elliot Tiber persuaded yet another
Jew, Max Yasgur, to allow the Woodstock concert to be held on Yasgur's
farmland.

Jews guided almost every step of the American counterculture movement.

The Growth of Hollywood and the U.S. Media

Of tremendous importance to America's culture is that the Hollywood
film community, and the American media as well, is dominated by Jews.
In fact, Jews founded the major Hollywood movie studios, e.g. Carl
Laemmle (Universal Pictures), William Fox (Fox Film Corp.), Louis B.
Mayer (Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer) and Adolph Zukor (Paramount Pictures).

Some of the more well-known Jews in modern Hollywood and the media
include film directors Steven Spielberg and Woody Allen, the Disney
Co.'s Michael Eisner, actors Dustin Hoffman and Kirk Douglas,
comedians Milton Berle and Don Rickles and news journalists Mike
Wallace, Barbara Walters and Ted Koppel (more information about Jews,
Hollywood and the media can be found in the essay "Who Rules America?"
by National Vanguard Books, available on the web or in their book
catalogue).

Indeed, as the 1960s hippie revolution was occurring, another
revolution of sorts was happening in Hollywood. Jewish network
executives began to churn out movies and TV shows featuring Black
actors in leading roles. Hollywood also produced a notorious movie
that featured an interracial relationship, which was still taboo at
the time. It is apparent that the Jews in Hollywood, believing that
the pro-White attitudes of America's Founders would never return,
became much bolder during the 1960s. (Regarding the Founders'
attitudes about race, a law created in the Founders' era, 'Act of
March 26, 1790 (1 Stat 103-104),' stated that only Whites could become
American citizens. In fact, non-Whites had no significant rights in
America until the XV Amendment was created in 1870).

As America entered the 1970s it became common for White Americans to
see Blacks, Jews and even Asians in prominent vocations on TV shows
and in movies. Those minorities were seen portraying judges, police
detectives and attorneys on screens big and small all over the U.S.

Non-Hollywood media also flourished in America from the 1960s onward.
The news departments at most broadcasting companies were run by, or
heavily staffed by, Jews. Major U.S. newspapers also came under Jewish
control as small newspapers were bought out by big media conglomerates
which were dominated by Jews. Furthermore, as American culture was
being socially 'Jewified,' so were the cultures of other Western
countries being similarly Jewified via American movies and TV shows,
which became popular in many countries. America served as a base of
sorts for the exporting of Jew-created movies and TV shows which
featured leftist and politically-correct messages, which served
various Jewish social objectives.

The Rise of Big Capitalism

Big capitalism drives corner grocers out of business and outsources
jobs to third-world countries. It encourages materialism. And it leads
to the importing of inexpensive goods in massive quantities, which
also causes American jobs to vanish.

Even though Jews are known for their leftist behavior, they
nonetheless pioneered giant capitalism and corporatism. Jews
especially pioneered conglomerates, in which one large company owns a
dozen smaller companies.

The Rise of Neoconservatism

Beginning in the 1980s, the conservative or "right-wing" political
movement in America was slowly overtaken by what is known as the
"neoconservative" movement. The neoconservative ideology is not really
conservative but is instead politically moderate, and is even liberal
regarding certain issues like civil rights. The neoconservative
movement was launched by formerly-liberal Jews and its current leaders
are mostly Jews. The neoconservative movement's main focus is on how
to use America to protect the interests of Israel.

Neoconservatism has resulted in America being alienated from many
former allied countries in the world, e.g. France.

Neoconservatism has now almost completely replaced traditional
conservatism in America, with genuine conservatives now consigned to
the margins of politics and often referred to as "racists" or
"bigots."

The Bombing of the U.S. Marine Barracks

In October 1983, 220 U.S. Marine Corp soldiers were killed in a
suicide bombing of their barracks in Beirut, Lebanon. The Marines were
stationed in Beirut due to Israel's actions - most especially because
of Israel's role in the 1982 massacre of hundreds of Palestinians at
the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in Beirut.

Today, the barracks bombing is but a distant memory, and few people
connect the event with Israel.

Holocaust Remembrance Emerges as a Growth and Guilt Industry

Since the 1970s, the Jewish memorializing of the Holocaust has become
an industry of enormous and ever-increasing size. So powerful and
industrialized is Holocaust-remembrance-mania that some American
states require, by law, the teaching of Holocaust education in public
schools. Law-enforcement training academies often mandate Holocaust
studies as well.


The Sept. 11, 2001 attack on America/the 2003 Iraq War

The terrorist attack(s) upon the United States on Sept. 11, 2001
transformed not only America but also the rest of the West. It caused
all of the White Western countries to reexamine, and then rebuild,
their security apparatuses, at significant financial expense. More
than that, it changed how those countries viewed the Arab world, since
the attack appeared to have been planned and carried out by Arab
extremists.

As a result of the 2001 attack, the U.S. Congress passed a
heavy-handed law called the "USA PATRIOT Act." That law canceled or
curbed many of the rights that Americans had traditionally enjoyed -
rights that the Founders had included into the Bill of Rights.

It is no longer a secret that the reason the United States was
attacked by terrorists in Sept. 2001 was because of America's vigorous
support of Israel. Put another way, Jews caused the Sept. 11, 2001
attack, albeit indirectly, for if it wasn't for powerful Zionist
political influence in Washington, D.C., the United States would not
have been so staunchly supportive of Israel. (In fact, America didn't
vigorously support Israel until the 1973 Middle East war. Shortly
after that war, a Jewish-American diplomat, Henry Kissinger, created a
strong, lasting partnership between America and Israel by engineering
a document called the "Memorandum of Understanding." That document
created, for all practical purposes, the so-called "special"
relationship that now exists between the two countries).

The 2001 terrorist attack upon the U.S. also led to America's
involvement in the 2003-present Iraq War, since the former event was
used in a vague, roundabout way as an excuse for American soldiers to
invade and occupy Iraq.

Of significance regarding America's involvement in the Iraq War was a
committee within America's Pentagon called the Office of Special Plans
(OSP). The OSP was designed to funnel information about Iraq directly
to the White House, thereby bypassing the usual filters that such
information would normally travel through, i.e. other governmental
intelligence agencies. According to news sources, shortly before the
Iraq War, the OSP provided President George W. Bush with certain
information about Iraqi weapons programs. That information was
incorrect, but nonetheless it was later used by the White House as a
reason for American soldiers to invade Iraq - an invasion carried out
for Israel's benefit [5].

The OSP was staffed by a number of Jews, such as Harold Rhode, Douglas
Feith and OSP director Abram Shulsky. Feith, and various other
so-called "neoconservatives," had a history of suggesting an attack
upon Saddam Hussein's Iraq dating back to the 1990s, e.g. they were
involved in the creation of a 1996 policy paper that mentioned
"removing Saddam Hussein from power" [6]. That such a removal idea
emerged years before the pre-war "discovery" of Saddam's "weapons of
mass destruction" is significant. Furthermore, under OSP's watch,
Israeli officials came and went at the Pentagon in the days prior to
the Iraq War (apparently to aid American war efforts) while observing
few of the standard security procedures intended for visitors [7].
Also, the OSP itself was conceived by a Jew, Paul Wolfowitz, and
further, it worked closely with an anti-Iraq committee located within
the Israeli government, a committee which was similar to OSP in its
anti-Iraq aims [8].

It should be noted that the major claims of OSP regarding Iraq - that
Saddam had ties to the terrorist group Al Qaeda and that he possessed
"weapons of mass destruction" - proved to be false.

It is probable that without the actions of Jews, the Sept. 11, 2001
terrorist attack upon America and the 2003 Iraq War would not have
occurred, nor would America be such a vigorous supporter of Israel. In
fact, it is easy to conclude that America would have no significant
"Arab problem" if not for Jews.

The Creation of the U.S. Anti-Semitism-Monitoring Office

In 2004, an office was created within the U.S. State Department to
"monitor" anti-Semitism worldwide, despite the fact that 1) that
department insisted that it did not want such an office to be created;
and 2) America is not a Jewish country.

The legislation which created the anti-Semitism-monitoring office,
called the Global Anti-Semitism Awareness Act, came from Jewish
congressman Tom Lantos as bill H.R. 4230.

It was a big victory for the Jews. That office gave world Jewry a
powerful, 'official' weapon with which to combat people who oppose
Jewish supremacism and/or Zionism. (One might wonder how it's the
business of the U.S. government if, for example, anti-Semitic acts are
committed in Thailand. One might also wonder why there are no U.S.
government offices designed to monitor anti-White, anti-Black or
anti-Christian behavior worldwide).

Like the previously-mentioned OSI and the neoconservative movement, we
again see the Jews using the U.S. government as a tool with which to
further their racial agenda.

Summary

The information above shows that the impact that Jews have had upon
the world -- and especially upon the West -- during the past 200 years
is remarkable. Important questions arise from the impact of the Jews:
without their actions, would WWII have occurred? Would America have
had a 50-year Cold War with the Soviet Union? Would the Soviet Union
even have existed in the first place? Would the Vietnam War have
occurred? Would America be as politically liberal as it is today?
Would America have been involved in wars in the Middle East? Those are
questions for Westerners to ponder at length.

Even more remarkable is how the Western public never hears about the
influence of the Jews upon their cultures. Words such as 'leftist' or
'socialist' are used to describe Jewish social activists in the West
but never the word 'Jew.' We suggest that that lack of mention of the
Jews in Western societies is itself mute testimony to their tremendous
power. By using a) frequent mentions of the Holocaust; b) the media;
c) Hollywood; d) large amounts of money; and e) significant political
influence, Jews have rebuilt the West to their ends. Gentiles who
complain about that Jewish rebuilding -- and their own dispossession
as a result of it -- are labeled 'anti-Semitic' and marginalized into
ineffectiveness. Such Jewish behavior as outlined above is, again, not
a plot by Jews but is instead inborn, proactive behavior by them,
which supposedly helps to offset the chance that Jews will be
oppressed yet again, or, will be again expelled from Western countries
(Jews have been expelled from most Western countries at one time or
another).

Also curious, and telling, is the fact that even though the religion
of Judaism is based upon bigotry, that fact is rarely mentioned by
modern Christians. Their silence about Judaism's hatred is both
widespread and quite noticeable, as if Christians are constantly
checking themselves to ensure that they aren't uttering "anti-Semitic"
words or phrases. In other words, the power of the Jews is so great
that it actually produces self-censorship within the world's Christian
communities.

Finally, it is interesting to note how quickly Jews accomplished the
rebuilding of America, the Western powerbase of the Jews: in roughly
50 years. Before President Roosevelt took office in 1933 Jews had
little influence upon American culture on the whole. But by 1983 Jews
dominated American culture via television, movies, newspapers,
magazines and other cultural organs. That a people constituting just
2.5% of the U.S. population could significantly alter the culture of
the most powerful country in the world in such a short time is very
significant. Also significant is that there is not a single
educational institution anywhere in the United States in which you
will see the facts about Jews and their interests assembled and
presented in logical connection as we have here.

[Topaz]

By Paul J. Balles

What was the invasion and occupation of Iraq but an act of terrorism?
Everyone now knows that the faux war was born of a fraud. The
deception had no legitimate purpose except to terrorize countries that
(a) produce oil, (b) harbour Al-Qaeda or (c) threaten Israel.

Even the invasion of Afghanistan, considered a legitimate response to
9/11, could have been avoided. The Taliban appropriately asked the US
to provide evidence of Osama bin Laden's complicity in the 9/11 affair
before deporting him.

The icing on the spread-fear cake has involved the USA terrorizing
Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. Not only are the countries America
bombs terrorized. Every other country that might disobey it's commands
is threatened and made to fear for its existence.

Human life outside America and its stooges isn't worth a tinker's damn
to terrorist America. Some 567,000 Iraqi children under the age of
five died from American sanctions on Iraq. On 60 minutes in 1996,
Secretary of State Madeleine Albright said: "We think the price is
worth it."

As of January 2010 and since the invasion and occupation of Iraq in
2003, 1,366,350 Iraqi lives have been lost to terrorist slaughterers.
"Never mind," you say? "The price is worth it. Beside, they're only
Muslims who want to multiply and take over the world."

Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, Bagram and rendition programmes have been
nothing but terrorizing to plant fear in the hearts and minds of any
Arab or Muslim with negative feelings toward America.

According to Chris Hedges, "An Arab American, Syed Fahad Hashmi, made
provocative statements, including calling America "the biggest
terrorist in the world". That led to his arrest and prosecution on
trumped up charges, in much the same way that Professor Sami al-Aryan
lost his job and freedom for being an outspoken critic of US and
Israeli policy.

Hedges relates the terrorizing effect of these prosecutions even of
American citizens. "The state," he says, "can detain and prosecute
people not for what they have done, or even for what they are planning
to do, but for holding religious or political beliefs that the state
deems seditious. The first of those targeted have been observant
Muslims, but they will not be the last.

Chris Floyd points to incidents in countless towns and villages across
America's terror war fronts in Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia and Yemen
where a multitude of grieving, angry Iraqis are further embittered
against the American occupation by America's terrorist killings.

"You want to stop the 'radicalization' of young Muslims? Chris asks.
"It's simple: stop killing innocent Muslims in wars of domination all
over the world. Stop running 'covert ops' in every nation of the world
(as Obama's 'special envoy' Richard Holbrooke admitted last week) -
murders, kidnappings, corruption and deception that make a howling
mockery of the very 'civilized values' these wars and ops purport to
defend."

If America wants to stop terrorism, it needs to stop terrorizing the
world.

[Topaz]

Message of H.E. Dr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
President of the Islamic Republic of Iran
To the American People

In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful

O, Almighty God, bestow upon humanity the perfect human being promised
to all by You, and make us among his followers.

Noble Americans,

Were we not faced with the activities of the US administration in this
part of the world and the negative ramifications of those activities
on the daily lives of our peoples, coupled with the many wars and
calamities caused by the US administration as well as the tragic
consequences of US interference in other countries;

Were the American people not God-fearing, truth-loving, and
justice-seeking, while the US administration actively conceals the
truth and impedes any objective portrayal of current realities;

And if we did not share a common responsibility to promote and protect
freedom and human dignity and integrity;

Then, there would have been little urgency to have a dialogue with
you.

While Divine providence has placed Iran and the United States
geographically far apart, we should be cognizant that human values and
our common human spirit, which proclaim the dignity and exalted worth
of all human beings, have brought our two great nations of Iran and
the United States closer together.

Both our nations are God-fearing, truth-loving and justice-seeking,
and both seek dignity, respect and perfection.

Both greatly value and readily embrace the promotion of human ideals
such as compassion, empathy, respect for the rights of human beings,
securing justice and equity, and defending the innocent and the weak
against oppressors and bullies.

We are all inclined towards the good, and towards extending a helping
hand to one another, particularly to those in need.

We all deplore injustice, the trampling of peoples' rights and the
intimidation and humiliation of human beings.

We all detest darkness, deceit, lies and distortion, and seek and
admire salvation, enlightenment, sincerity and honesty.

The pure human essence of the two great nations of Iran and the United
States testify to the veracity of these statements.

Noble Americans,

Our nation has always extended its hand of friendship to all other
nations of the world.

Hundreds of thousands of my Iranian compatriots are living amongst you
in friendship and peace, and are contributing positively to your
society. Our people have been in contact with you over the past many
years and have maintained these contacts despite the unnecessary
restrictions of US authorities.

As mentioned, we have common concerns, face similar challenges, and
are pained by the sufferings and afflictions in the world.

We, like you, are aggrieved by the ever-worsening pain and misery of
the Palestinian people. Persistent aggressions by the Zionists are
making life more and more difficult for the rightful owners of the
land of Palestine. In broad day-light, in front of cameras and before
the eyes of the world, they are bombarding innocent defenseless
civilians, bulldozing houses, firing machine guns at students in the
streets and alleys, and subjecting their families to endless grief.

No day goes by without a new crime.

Palestinian mothers, just like Iranian and American mothers, love
their children, and are painfully bereaved by the imprisonment,
wounding and murder of their children. What mother wouldn't?

For 60 years, the Zionist regime has driven millions of the
inhabitants of Palestine out of their homes. Many of these refugees
have died in the Diaspora and in refugee camps. Their children have
spent their youth in these camps and are aging while still in the hope
of returning to homeland.

You know well that the US administration has persistently provided
blind and blanket support to the Zionist regime, has emboldened it to
continue its crimes, and has prevented the UN Security Council from
condemning it.

Who can deny such broken promises and grave injustices towards
humanity by the US administration?

Governments are there to serve their own people. No people wants to
side with or support any oppressors. But regrettably, the US
administration disregards even its own public opinion and remains in
the forefront of supporting the trampling of the rights of the
Palestinian people.

Let's take a look at Iraq. Since the commencement of the US military
presence in Iraq, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have been killed,
maimed or displaced. Terrorism in Iraq has grown exponentially. With
the presence of the US military in Iraq, nothing has been done to
rebuild the ruins, to restore the infrastructure or to alleviate
poverty. The US Government used the pretext of the existence of
weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, but later it became clear that
that was just a lie and a deception.

Although Saddam was overthrown and people are happy about his
departure, the pain and suffering of the Iraqi people has persisted
and has even been aggravated.

In Iraq, about one hundred and fifty thousand American soldiers,
separated from their families and loved ones, are operating under the
command of the current US administration. A substantial number of
them have been killed or wounded and their presence in Iraq has
tarnished the image of the American people and government.

Their mothers and relatives have, on numerous occasions, displayed
their discontent with the presence of their sons and daughters in a
land thousands of miles away from US shores. American soldiers often
wonder why they have been sent to Iraq.

I consider it extremely unlikely that you, the American people,
consent to the billions of dollars of annual expenditure from your
treasury for this military misadventure.

Noble Americans,

You have heard that the US administration is kidnapping its presumed
opponents from across the globe and arbitrarily holding them without
trial or any international supervision in horrendous prisons that it
has established in various parts of the world. God knows who these
detainees actually are, and what terrible fate awaits them.

You have certainly heard the sad stories of the Guantanamo and
Abu-Ghraib prisons. The US administration attempts to justify them
through its proclaimed "war on terror." But every one knows that such
behavior, in fact, offends global public opinion, exacerbates
resentment and thereby spreads terrorism, and tarnishes the US image
and its credibility among nations.

The US administration's illegal and immoral behavior is not even
confined to outside its borders. You are witnessing daily that under
the pretext of "the war on terror," civil liberties in the United
States are being increasingly curtailed. Even the privacy of
individuals is fast losing its meaning. Judicial due process and
fundamental rights are trampled upon. Private phones are tapped,
suspects are arbitrarily arrested, sometimes beaten in the streets, or
even shot to death.

I have no doubt that the American people do not approve of this
behavior and indeed deplore it.

The US administration does not accept accountability before any
organization, institution or council. The US administration has
undermined the credibility of international organizations,
particularly the United Nations and its Security Council. But, I do
not intend to address all the challenges and calamities in this
message.

The legitimacy, power and influence of a government do not emanate
from its arsenals of tanks, fighter aircrafts, missiles or nuclear
weapons. Legitimacy and influence reside in sound logic, quest for
justice and compassion and empathy for all humanity. The global
position of the United States is in all probability weakened because
the administration has continued to resort to force, to conceal the
truth, and to mislead the American people about its policies and
practices.

Undoubtedly, the American people are not satisfied with this behavior
and they showed their discontent in the recent elections. I hope that
in the wake of the mid-term elections, the administration of President
Bush will have heard and will heed the message of the American people.

My questions are the following:

Is there not a better approach to governance?

Is it not possible to put wealth and power in the service of peace,
stability, prosperity and the happiness of all peoples through a
commitment to justice and respect for the rights of all nations,
instead of aggression and war?

We all condemn terrorism, because its victims are the innocent.

But, can terrorism be contained and eradicated through war,
destruction
and the killing of hundreds of thousands of innocents?

If that were possible, then why has the problem not been resolved?

The sad experience of invading Iraq is before us all.

What has blind support for the Zionists by the US administration
brought for the American people? It is regrettable that for the US
administration, the interests of these occupiers supersedes the
interests of the American people and of the other nations of the
world.

What have the Zionists done for the American people that the US
administration considers itself obliged to blindly support these
infamous aggressors? Is it not because they have imposed themselves on
a substantial portion of the banking, financial, cultural and media
sectors?

I recommend that in a demonstration of respect for the American people
and for humanity, the right of Palestinians to live in their own
homeland should be recognized so that millions of Palestinian refugees
can return to their homes and the future of all of Palestine and its
form of government be determined in a referendum. This will benefit
everyone.

Now that Iraq has a Constitution and an independent Assembly and
Government, would it not be more beneficial to bring the US officers
and soldiers home, and to spend the astronomical US military
expenditures in Iraq for the welfare and prosperity of the American
people? As you know very well, many victims of Katrina continue to
suffer, and countless Americans continue to live in poverty and
homelessness.

I'd also like to say a word to the winners of the recent elections in
the US:

The United States has had many administrations; some who have left a
positive legacy, and others that are neither remembered fondly by the
American people nor by other nations.

Now that you control an important branch of the US Government, you
will also be held to account by the people and by history.

If the US Government meets the current domestic and external
challenges with an approach based on truth and Justice, it can remedy
some of the past afflictions and alleviate some of the global
resentment and hatred of America. But if the approach remains the
same, it would not be unexpected that the American people would
similarly reject the new electoral winners, although the recent
elections, rather than reflecting a victory, in reality point to the
failure of the current administration's policies. These issues had
been extensively dealt with in my letter to President Bush earlier
this year.

To sum up:

It is possible to govern based on an approach that is distinctly
different from one of coercion, force and injustice.

It is possible to sincerely serve and promote common human values, and
honesty and compassion.

It is possible to provide welfare and prosperity without tension,
threats, imposition or war.

It is possible to lead the world towards the aspired perfection by
adhering to unity, monotheism, morality and spirituality and drawing
upon the teachings of the Divine Prophets.

Then, the American people, who are God-fearing and followers of Divine
religions, will overcome every difficulty.

What I stated represents some of my anxieties and concerns.

I am confident that you, the American people, will play an
instrumental role in the establishment of justice and spirituality
throughout the world. The promises of the Almighty and His prophets
will certainly be realized, Justice and Truth will prevail and all
nations will live a true life in a climate replete with love,
compassion and fraternity.

The US governing establishment, the authorities and the powerful
should not choose irreversible paths. As all prophets have taught us,
injustice and transgression will eventually bring about decline and
demise. Today, the path of return to faith and spirituality is open
and unimpeded.

We should all heed the Divine Word of the Holy Qur'an:

"But those who repent, have faith and do good may receive Salvation.
Your Lord, alone, creates and chooses as He will, and others have no
part in His choice; Glorified is God and Exalted above any partners
they ascribe to Him." (28:67-68)

I pray to the Almighty to bless the Iranian and American nations and
indeed all nations of the world with dignity and success.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
President of the Islamic Republic of Iran
29 November 2006

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15952309/

[Topaz]

http://www.mintpressnews.com/classified-evidence-us-soldiers-raped-boys-in-front-of-their-mothers/200160/


Classified Evidence: US Soldiers Raped Boys In Front Of Their Mothers

Now, over a decade later the evidence of these events are beginning to
surface, but the Department of Defense is still doing their best to
keep it under the radar.

By John Vibes | December 19, 2014

According to a number of global mainstream media sources, the Pentagon
is covering up a disturbing video that was never made public with the
rest of the recent torture report.


According to various well respected journalists, including Seymour
Hersh, the appalling video was recorded at Abu Ghraib, the notorious
US torture dungeon in Iraq that made headlines roughly a decade ago,
when the inhumane tactics being used at the prison were exposed.

Sadly, it seems that the evidence released years ago was only
scratching the surface.

While the video has remained under wraps thus far, Hersh says it is
only a matter of time before it comes out.

Giving a speech at the ACLU last week after the senate torture report
was initially released, Hersh gave some insight into what was on the
Pentagon's secret tape.

In the most revealing portion of his speech he said that:


"Debating about it, ummm Some of the worst things that happened you
don't know about, okay? Videos, um, there are women there. Some of you
may have read that they were passing letters out, communications out
to their men. This is at Abu Ghraib The women were passing messages
out saying 'Please come and kill me, because of what's happened' and
basically what happened is that those women who were arrested with
young boys, children in cases that have been recorded. The boys were
sodomized with the cameras rolling. And the worst above all of that is
the soundtrack of the boys shrieking that your government has. They
are in total terror. It's going to come out."


"It's impossible to say to yourself how did we get there? Who are we?
Who are these people that sent us there? When I did My Lai I was very
troubled like anybody in his right mind would be about what happened.
I ended up in something I wrote saying in the end I said that the
people who did the killing were as much victims as the people they
killed because of the scars they had, I can tell you some of the
personal stories by some of the people who were in these units
witnessed this. I can also tell you written complaints were made to
the highest officers and so we're dealing with a enormous massive
amount of criminal wrongdoing that was covered up at the highest
command out there and higher, and we have to get to it and we will. We
will. You know there's enough out there, they can't (Applause). So
it's going to be an interesting election year."

Put into context with another speech that Hersh gave earlier this
year, it becomes clear that the women who witnessed these young boys
being raped were actually their mothers.

At a speech in Chicago this past June Hersh was quoted as saying:


"You haven't begun to see evil horrible things done to children of
women prisoners, as the cameras run."

Other stories at the London Guardian also talked of young Iraqi
detainees getting violently raped by US soldiers.

Ten years ago when the initial Abu Ghraib scandal was in the news, the
Guardian published the testimony of an Abu Ghraib detainee who
allegedly witnessed one of these brutal attacks.


Former detainee Kasim Hilas said in their testimony that:


"I saw [name blacked out] fucking a kid, his age would be about 15-18
years. The kid was hurting very bad and they covered all the doors
with sheets. Then when I heard the screaming I climbed the door
because on top it wasn't covered and I saw [blacked out], who was
wearing the military uniform putting his dick in the little kid's ass,
I couldn't see the face of the kid because his face wasn't in front of
the door. And the female soldier was taking pictures."

Now, over a decade later the evidence of these events are beginning to
surface, but the Department of Defense is still doing their best to
keep it under the radar. That is why now more than ever, it is
important to keep the pressure on and force the release of this
evidence, while the torture report is fresh in the minds of the
general population.

[Joe Cooper]

Topaz <mars...@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:0o4v4b918hepl8ob6...@4ax.com:

> What was the invasion and occupation of Iraq but an act of terrorism?

What is Alex but a supporter of one of the worst terrorists in world
history?

--
Obama Nine Hours Before Paris Terror Attack: "We've Contained ISIS"

"Never underestimate the willingness of white progressives to be offended
on behalf of people who aren’t and to impose their will on those who didn’t
ask for it." (Derek Hunter)

"Liberals never argue with one another over substance; their only dispute
is how to prevent the public from figuring out what they really believe."
(Ann Coulter)

[Joe Cooper]

Topaz <mars...@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:tq4v4bhi8a78n83ir...@4ax.com:

> Message of H.E. Dr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
> President of the Islamic Republic of Iran
> To the American People

"Death to America" is the message. That's why Alex pimps for him.

[Joe Cooper]

Topaz <mars...@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:1s4v4b5o4b6skvppk...@4ax.com:

> Classified Evidence: US Soldiers Raped Boys In Front Of Their Mothers

Unclassified evidence that 50,000,000 people died because of Adolf
Hitler...anywhere you look.

[Joe Cooper]

Topaz <mars...@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:bm4v4bhuomjsa8frl...@4ax.com:

> The text below shows that Jews may well have influenced Western
> culture more than any other ethnic group,

In other words, according to the mentally challenged Alex, Jews are vastly
superior to Gentiles.

[Mr. B1ack]

On Thu, 19 Nov 2015 22:13:55 -0500, Governor Swill
<governo...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 19 Nov 2015 21:56:18 -0500, Mr. B1ack <now...@nada.net>
>wrote:
>
>>Swill, you've become an enemy sympathizer and
>>apologist of the most naive sort. PLEASE move to
>>wonderful Iran. Your head will be rolling down the
>>street inside a week .........
>
>Mr Black, you've shown yourself to be utterly blind. The Saudis have
>attacked us repeatedly these last 15 years, but you still consider
>them our friends?

You don't know anything about Saudi Arabia. It is not
a "country" in the traditional sense but instead a
collection of princedoms only nominally loyal to the
head honcho.

"Saudi Arabia" did not attack us because it's not a
unified entity - it only pretends to be. Some of the
little princelings are very pro-western, others don't
give a shit, a few are Islamist rads. They all kinda
do their own thing and it'd be bad politics for the
rest to intefere too much.

The best european analogy would be Italy during
the city-states era, although the Saud family tree
isn't quite as bound to one plot of geography.

[Mr. B1ack]

On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 23:06:22 -0000 (UTC), Joe Cooper
<drag...@removeunseen.is> wrote:

>Topaz <mars...@hotmail.com> wrote in
>news:1s4v4b5o4b6skvppk...@4ax.com:
>
>> Classified Evidence: US Soldiers Raped Boys In Front Of Their Mothers
>
>Unclassified evidence that 50,000,000 people died because of Adolf
>Hitler...anywhere you look.

Yep, the 'Dolf cause a LOT of damage, world's record
no doubt. It's worth taking into account when anybody
complains about "damage" or "evil times" today ...

[Mr. B1ack]

On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 23:05:41 -0000 (UTC), Joe Cooper
<drag...@removeunseen.is> wrote:

>Topaz <mars...@hotmail.com> wrote in
>news:tq4v4bhi8a78n83ir...@4ax.com:
>
>> Message of H.E. Dr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
>> President of the Islamic Republic of Iran
>> To the American People
>
>"Death to America" is the message. That's why Alex pimps for him.

He seems to be in love with our enemies - thinks they're
all just wunnerful folks maybe just a tiny bit miffed-off
about some old stuff America was involved in.

And as for the Iranian people ... last time any of them
made a play to "liberalize" - they got shot. They're
still getting shot.

Earlier this year, Anthony Bourdain did a show from
Iran. He talked to some people, some of whom implied
that things weren't so great there. An airtime footnote
was that those people could no longer be contacted ...
"disappeared" it seems ..........

And that's how they do things there.

"The people" - well, a fair number - really DON'T seem
to hate America or europe very much. Alas it's the
ayatollahs and military calling the shots and you WILL
tow the official line - or else .........

Oh, and last I heard, "Death To America" means
JUST THAT.

There IS something weird about how American
presidents have been treating Iran ... and I mean
Clinton and "W" too, not just Obama. Despite
clear evidence they're lending significant material
and financial support to a number of outright
terrorist organizations dedicated to destroying
Israel, we've been impressively "hands off". We
knew they were creating a HUGE nuclear industry
for a LONG time, yet not even a cruise missile
and barely a harsh word until just a couple of
years ago. Now why IS that ?

I have a theory ... that Iran *already* has at least
*some* nukes - maybe has for ten of fifteen years.
Could be entirely of domestic making or it could
be black-market stuff from when the USSR
imploded. In any case, a velvet glove for Iran
even as we use the iron fist on so many others
means *something* is up, something that badly
worries us.

Oh well, by this time next year they'll surely have
a *lot* of nukes - and decent delivery vehicles too.
Interesting times ahead ....

[Topaz]

Germany's Declaration of War Against the United States
Here are some quotes from:
Hitler's Reichstag Speech of December 11, 1941
In it the German leader recounted the reasons for the outbreak of war
in September 1939, explained why he decided to strike against the
Soviet Union in June 1941, reviewed the dramatic course of the war
thus far, and dealt at length with President Franklin Roosevelt's
hostile policies toward Germany. Hitler detailed the increasingly
belligerent actions of Roosevelt's government, and then dramatically
announced that Germany was now joining Japan in war against the United
States. The day after it was delivered, an inaccurate and misleading
translation of portions of the address appeared in The New York Times!
Although this historic address should be of particular interest to
Americans, a complete text has apparently never before been made
available in English!
-- Mark Weber

After the repeated rejection of my peace proposal in 1940 by the
British prime minister [Winston Churchill] and the clique that
supports and controls him, it was clear by the fall of that year that
this war would have to be fought through to the end
The German people and its soldiers work and fight today not only for
themselves and their own age, but also for many generations to come. A
historical task of unique dimensions has been entrusted to us by the
Creator that we are now obliged to carry out.

The western armistice which was possible shortly after the conclusion
of the conflict in Norway [in June 1940] compelled the German
leadership, first of all, to militarily secure the most important
political, strategic and economic areas that had been won.
From Kirkenes [in northern Norway] to the Spanish frontier stretches
the most extensive belt of great defense installations and fortresses.
Countless air fields have been built, including some in the far north
that were blasted out of granite.

I am determined to make this European front impregnable against any
enemy attack.

Compelled by bitter necessity, I decided in the fall of 1939 to at
least try to create the prerequisite conditions for a general peace by
eliminating the acute tension between Germany and Soviet Russia [with
the German-Soviet non-aggression pact of August 23, 1939]. This was
psychologically difficult because of the basic attitude toward
Bolshevism of the German people and, above all, of the [National
Socialist] Party.

I may remind you, deputies and men of the German Reichstag, that
throughout the spring and summer of 1939 Britain offered military
alliances to a number of countries, claiming that Germany intended to
invade them and rob them of their freedom. However, the German Reich
and its government could assure them with a clear conscience that
these insinuations did not correspond to the truth in any way.

The best and strongest guarantee against the [Soviet] threat from the
East was Germany. When those countries, on their own initiative, cut
their ties with the German Reich and instead put their trust in
promises of aid from a power [Britain] that, in its proverbial
egotism, has for centuries never given help but has always demanded
it, they were thereby lost. Even so, the fate of these countries
aroused the strongest sympathy of the German people. The winter war of
the Finns [against the Soviet Union, 1939-1940] aroused in us a
feeling of admiration mixed with bitterness: admiration because, as a
soldierly nation, we have a sympathetic heart for heroism and
sacrifice, and bitterness because our concern for the enemy threat in
the West and the danger in the East meant that we were no position to
help.

Already in 1940 it became increasingly clear from month to month that
the plans of the men in the Kremlin were aimed at the domination, and
thus the destruction, of all of Europe. I have already told the nation
of the build-up of Soviet Russian military power in the East during a
period when Germany had only a few divisions in the provinces
bordering Soviet Russia. Only a blind person could fail to see that a
military build-up of unique world-historical dimensions was being
carried out. And this was not in order to protect something that was
being threatened, but rather only to attack that which seemed
incapable of defense.

What we call Europe is the geographic territory of the Occident,
enlightened by Greek culture, inspired by the powerful heritage of the
Roman empire, its territory enlarged by Germanic colonization. Whether
it was the German emperors fighting back invasions from the East on
the Unstrut [river, in 933] or on the Lechfeld [plain, in 955], or
others pushing back Africa from Spain over a period of many years, it
was always a struggle of a developing Europe against a profoundly
alien outside world.

Just as Rome once made her immortal contribution to the building and
defense of the continent, so now have the Germanic peoples taken up
the defense and protection of a family of nations which, although they
may differ and diverge in their political structure and goals,
nevertheless together constitute a racially and culturally unified and
complementary whole.

And from this Europe there have not only been settlements in other
parts of the world, but intellectual-spiritual [geistig] and cultural
fertilization as well, a fact that anyone realizes who is willing to
acknowledge the truth rather than deny it. Thus, it was not England
that cultivated the continent, but rather Anglo-Saxon and Norman
branches of the Germanic nation that moved from our continent to the
[British] island and made possible her development, which is certainly
unique in history. In the same way, it was not America that discovered
Europe, but the other way around. And all that which America did not
get from Europe may seem worthy of admiration to a Jewified mixed
race, but Europe regards that merely as symptomatic of decay in
artistic and cultural life, the product of Jewish or Negroid blood
mixture.

I have to make these remarks because this struggle, which became
obviously unavoidable in the early months of this year, and which the
German Reich, above all, is called upon this time to lead, also
greatly transcends the interests of our own people and nation. When
the Greeks once stood against the Persians, they defended more than
just Greece. When the Romans stood against the Carthaginians, they
defended more than just Rome. When the Roman and Germanic peoples
stood together against the Huns, they defended more than just the
West. When German emperors stood against the Mongols, they defended
more than just Germany. And when Spanish heroes stood against Africa,
they defended not just Spain, but all of Europe as well. In the same
way, Germany does not fight today just for itself, but for our entire
continent.

And it is an auspicious sign that this realization is today so deeply
rooted in the subconscious of most European nations that they
participate in this struggle, either with open expressions of support
or with streams of volunteers.

When I became aware of the possibility of a threat to the east of the
Reich in 1940 through [secret] reports from the British House of
Commons and by observations of Soviet Russian troop movements on our
frontiers, I immediately ordered the formation of many new armored,
motorized and infantry divisions.

We realized very clearly that under no circumstances could we allow
the enemy the opportunity to strike first into our heart.
Nevertheless, in this case the decision [to attack Soviet Russia] was
a very difficult one. When the writers for the democratic newspapers
now declare that I would have thought twice before attacking if I had
known the strength of the Bolshevik adversaries, they show that they
do not understand either the situation or me.

I have not sought war. To the contrary, I have done everything to
avoid conflict. But I would forget my duty and my conscience if I were
to do nothing in spite of the realization that a conflict had become
unavoidable. Because I regarded Soviet Russia as the gravest danger
not only for the German Reich but for all of Europe, I decided, if
possible, to give the order myself to attack a few days before the
outbreak of this conflict.

A truly impressive amount of authentic material is now available which
confirms that a Soviet Russian attack was intended. We are also sure
about when this attack was to take place. In view of this danger, the
extent of which we are perhaps only now truly aware, I can only thank
the Lord God that He enlightened me in time, and has given me the
strength to do what must be done. Millions of German soldiers may
thank Him for their lives, and all of Europe for its existence.

I may say this today: If this wave of more than 20,000 tanks, hundreds
of divisions, tens of thousands of artillery pieces, along with more
than 10,000 airplanes, had not been kept from being set into motion
against the Reich, Europe would have been lost.

If the Slovaks, Hungarians and Romanians had not also acted to defend
this European world, then the Bolshevik hordes would have poured over
the Danube countries as did once the swarms of Attila's Huns,
If Italy, Spain and Croatia had not sent their divisions, then a
European defense front would not have arisen that proclaims the
concept of a new Europe and thereby powerfully inspires all other
nations as well. Because of this awareness of danger, volunteers have
come from northern and western Europe: Norwegians, Danes, Dutch,
Flemish, Belgians and even French. They have all given the struggle of
the allied forces of the Axis the character of a European crusade, in
the truest sense of the word.

And now let me speak about another world, one that is represented by a
man [President Franklin Roosevelt] who likes to chat nicely at the
fireside while nations and their soldiers fight in snow and ice: above
all, the man who is primarily responsible for this war.

When the nationality problem in the former Polish state was growing
ever more intolerable in 1939, I attempted to eliminate the
unendurable conditions by means of a just agreement. For a certain
time it seemed as if the Polish government was seriously considering
giving its approval to a reasonable solution. I may also add here that
in all of these German proposals, nothing was demanded that had not
previously belonged to Germany. In fact, we were willing to give up
much that had belonged to Germany before the [First] World War.
You will recall the dramatic events of that period -- the steadily
increasing numbers of victims among the ethnic Germans [in Poland].
You, my deputies, are best qualified to compare this loss of life with
that of the present war. The military campaign in the East has so far
cost the entire German armed forces about 160,000 deaths, whereas
during just a few months of peace [in 1939] more than 62,000 ethnic
Germans were killed, including some who were horribly tortured. There
is no question that the German Reich had the right to protest against
this situation on its border and to press for its elimination, if for
no other reason than for its own security, particularly since we live
in an age in which [some] other countries [notably, the USA and
Britain] regard their security at stake even in foreign continents. In
geographical terms, the problems to be resolved were not very
important. Essentially they involved Danzig [Gdansk] and a connecting
link between the torn-away province of East Prussia and the rest of
the Reich. Of much greater concern were the brutal persecutions of the
Germans in Poland. In addition, the other minority population groups
[notably the Ukrainians] were subject to a fate that was no less
severe.

During those days in August [1939], when the Polish attitude steadily
hardened, thanks to Britain's blank check of unlimited backing, the
German Reich was moved to make one final proposal. We were prepared to
enter into negotiations with Poland on the basis of this proposal, and
we verbally informed the British ambassador of the proposal text.
Proposal for a settlement of the Danzig-Corridor problem and the
German-Polish minority question:

The situation between the German Reich and Poland is now such that any
further incident could lead to action by the military forces that have
taken position on both sides of the frontier. Any peaceful solution
must be such that the basic causes of this situation are eliminated so
that they are not simply repeated, which would mean that not only
eastern Europe but other areas as well would be subject to the same
tension. The causes of this situation are rooted in, first, the
intolerable border that was specified by the dictated peace of
Versailles [of 1919], and, second, the intolerable treatment of the
minority populations in the lost territories.

In making these proposals, the German Reich government is motivated by
the desire to achieve a permanent solution that will put an end to the
intolerable situation arising from the present border demarcation,
secure to both parties vitally important connecting routes, and which
will solve the minority problem, insofar as that is possible, and if
not, will at least insure a tolerable life for the minority
populations with secure guarantees of their rights.

On the basis of these considerations, we make the following concrete
proposals:

The Free City of Danzig returns immediately to the German Reich on
the basis of its purely German character and the unanimous desire of
its population.

The territory of the so-called [Polish] Corridor will decide for
itself whether it wishes to belong to Germany or to Poland. This
territory consists of the area between the Baltic Sea [in the north]
to a line marked [in the south] by the towns of Marienwerder,
Graudenz, Kuhn and Bromberg -- including these towns -- and then
westwards to Schoenlanke.

For this purpose a plebiscite will be conducted in this territory.
All Germans who lived in this territory on January 1, 1918, or were
born there on or before that date will be entitled to vote in the
plebiscite. Similarly, all Poles, Kashubians, and so forth, who lived
in this territory on or before that date, or were born there before
that date, will also be entitled to vote. Germans who were expelled
from this territory will return to vote in the plebiscite.

Not included in this territory is the Polish port of Gdynia, which is
regarded as fundamentally sovereign Polish territory, to the extent of
[ethnic] Polish settlement, but as a matter of principle is recognized
as Polish territory. The specific border of this Polish port city will
be negotiated by Germany and Poland and, if necessary, established by
an international court of arbitration.

A simple majority of the votes cast will decide whether the territory
will go to Germany or to Poland.

If the Corridor returns to Germany, the German Reich declares that it
is ready to carry out an exchange of population with Poland to the
extent that this would be suitable for the [people of the] Corridor.

The German Reich government has protested in the strongest terms
against the Polish treatment of its minority populations. For its
part, the Polish government also believes itself called upon to make
protests against Germany. Accordingly, both sides agree to submit
these complaints to an international investigation commission, which
will be responsible for investigating all complaints of economic and
physical damage as well as other acts of terror.

This is the treaty proposal - as straight-forward and as generous as
has ever been presented by a government - that was made by the
National Socialist leadership of the German Reich.

The former Polish government refused to respond to these proposals in
any way. In this regard, the question presents itself: How is it
possible that such an unimportant state could dare to simply disregard
such proposals and, in addition, carry out further cruelties against
the Germans, the people who have given this land its entire culture,
and even order the general mobilization of its armed forces? A look at
the documents of the [Polish] Foreign Ministry in Warsaw later
provided the surprising explanation. They told of the role of a man
[President Roosevelt] who, with diabolical lack of principle, used all
of his influence to strengthen Poland's resistance and to prevent any
possibility of understanding. These reports were sent by the former
Polish ambassador in Washington, Count [Jerzy] Potocki, to his
government in Warsaw. These documents clearly and shockingly reveal
the extent to which one man and the powers behind him are responsible
for the Second World War. Another question arises: Why had this man
[Roosevelt] developed such a fanatic hostility against a country that,
in its entire history, had never harmed either America or him?
With regard to Germany's relationship with America, the following
should be said:

Germany is perhaps the only great power which has never had a colony
in either North or South America. Nor has it been otherwise
politically active there, apart from the emigration of many millions
of Germans with their skills, from which the American continent, and
particularly the United States, has only benefited.

Furthermore, there are no territorial or political conflicts between
the American and German nations that could possibly involve the
existence or even the [vital] interests of the United States. The
forms of government have always been different. But this cannot be a
reason for hostility between different nations, as long as one form of
government does not try to interfere with another, outside of its
naturally ordained sphere.

History itself has rendered its verdict on Wilson. His name will
always be associated with the most base betrayal in history of a
pledge [notably, Wilson's "14 points"]. The result was the ruin of
national life, not only in the so-called vanquished countries, but
among the victors as well. Because of this broken pledge, which alone
made possible the imposed Treaty of Versailles [1919], countries were
torn apart, cultures were destroyed and the economic life of all was
ruined. Today we know that a group of self-serving financiers stood
behind Wilson. They used this paralytic professor to lead America into
a war from which they hoped to profit. The German nation once believed
this man, and had to pay for this trust with political and economic
ruin.

After such a bitter experience, why is there now another American
president who is determined to incite wars and, above all, to stir up
hostility against Germany to the point of war? National Socialism came
to power in Germany in the same year [1933] that Roosevelt came to
power in the United States. At this point it is important to examine
the factors behind the current developments.

First of all, the personal side of things: I understand very well that
there is a world of difference between my own outlook on life and
attitude, and that of President Roosevelt. Roosevelt came from an
extremely wealthy family. By birth and origin he belonged to that
class of people that is privileged in a democracy and assured of
advancement. I myself was only the child of a small and poor family,
and I had to struggle through life by work and effort in spite of
immense hardships. As a member of the privileged class, Roosevelt
experienced the [First] World War in a position under Wilson's shadow
[as assistant secretary of the Navy]. As a result, he only knew the
agreeable consequences of a conflict between nations from which some
profited while others lost their lives. During this same period, I
lived very differently. I was not one of those who made history or
profits, but rather one of those who carried out orders. As an
ordinary soldier during those four years, I tried to do my duty in the
face of the enemy. Of course, I returned from the war just as poor as
when I entered in the fall of 1914. I thus shared my fate with
millions of others, while Mr. Roosevelt shared his with the so-called
upper ten thousand.

After the war, while Mr. Roosevelt tested his skills in financial
speculation in order to profit personally from the inflation, that is,
from the misfortune of others, I still lay in a military hospital
along with many hundreds of thousands of others. Experienced in
business, financially secure and enjoying the patronage of his class,
Roosevelt then finally chose a career in politics. During this same
period, I struggled as a nameless and unknown man for the rebirth of
my nation, which was the victim of the greatest injustice in its
entire history.

Two different paths in life! Franklin Roosevelt took power in the
United States as the candidate of a thoroughly capitalistic party,
which helps those who serve it. When I became the Chancellor of the
German Reich, I was the leader of a popular national movement, which I
had created myself. The powers that supported Mr. Roosevelt were the
same powers I fought against, out of concern for the fate of my
people, and out of deepest inner conviction. The "brain trust" that
served the new American president was made up of members of the same
national group that we fought against in Germany as a parasitical
expression of humanity, and which we began to remove from public life.
And yet, we also had something in common: Franklin Roosevelt took
control of a country with an economy that had been ruined as a result
of democratic influences, and I assumed the leadership of a Reich that
was also on the edge of complete ruin, thanks to democracy. There were
13 million unemployed in the United States, while Germany had seven
million unemployed and another seven million part-time workers. In
both countries, public finances were in chaos, and it seemed that the
spreading economic depression could not be stopped.

From then on, things developed in the United States and in the German
Reich in such a way that future generations will have no difficulty in
making a definitive evaluation of the two different socio-political
theories. Whereas the German Reich experienced an enormous improvement
in social, economic, cultural and artistic life in just a few years
under National Socialist leadership, President Roosevelt was not able
to bring about even limited improvements in his own country. This task
should have been much easier in the United States, with barely 15
people per square kilometer, as compared to 140 in Germany. If
economic prosperity is not possible in that country, it must be the
result of either a lack of will by the ruling leadership or the
complete incompetence of the men in charge. In just five years, the
economic problems were solved in Germany and unemployment was
eliminated. During this same period, President Roosevelt enormously
increased his country's national debt, devalued the dollar, further
disrupted the economy and maintained the same number of unemployed.
But this is hardly remarkable when one realizes that the intellects
appointed by this man, or more accurately, who appointed him, are
members of that same group who, as Jews, are interested only in
disruption and never in order. While we in National Socialist Germany
took measures against financial speculation, it flourished
tremendously under Roosevelt. The New Deal legislation of this man was
spurious, and consequently the greatest error ever experienced by
anyone. If his economic policies had continued indefinitely during
peace time, there is no doubt that sooner or later they would have
brought down this president, in spite of all his dialectical
cleverness. In a European country his career would certainly have
ended in front of a national court for recklessly squandering the
nation's wealth. And he would hardly have avoided a prison sentence by
a civil court for criminally incompetent business management.
Many respected Americans also shared this view. A threatening
opposition was growing all around this man, which led him to think
that he could save himself only by diverting public attention from his
domestic policies to foreign affairs. In this regard it is interesting
to study the reports of Polish Ambassador Potocki from Washington,
which repeatedly point out that Roosevelt was fully aware of the
danger that his entire economic house of cards could collapse, and
that therefore he absolutely had to divert attention to foreign
policy.

The circle of Jews around Roosevelt encouraged him in this. With Old
Testament vindictiveness they regarded the United States as the
instrument that they and he could use to prepare a second Purim
[slaughter of enemies] against the nations of Europe, which were
increasingly anti-Jewish. So it was that the Jews, in all of their
satanic baseness, gathered around this man, and he relied on them.
The American president increasingly used his influence to create
conflicts, intensify existing conflicts, and, above all, to keep
conflicts from being resolved peacefully. For years this man looked
for a dispute anywhere in the world, but preferably in Europe, that he
could use to create political entanglements with American economic
obligations to one of the contending sides, which would then steadily
involve America in the conflict and thus divert attention from his own
confused domestic economic policies.

His actions against the German Reich in this regard have been
particularly blunt. Starting in 1937, he began a series of speeches,
including a particularly contemptible one on October 5, 1937, in
Chicago, with which this man systematically incited the American
public against Germany . He threatened to establish a kind of
quarantine against the so-called authoritarian countries. As part of
this steady and growing campaign of hate and incitement, President
Roosevelt made another insulting statement [on Nov. 15, 1938] and then
called the American ambassador in Berlin back to Washington for
consultations. Since then the two countries have been represented only
by charges d'affaires.

Starting in November 1938, he began systematically and consciously to
sabotage every possibility of a European peace policy. In public he
hypocritically claimed to be interested in peace while at the same
time he threatened every country that was ready to pursue a policy of
peaceful understanding by blocking credits, economic reprisals,
calling in loans, and so forth. In this regard, the reports of the
Polish ambassadors in Washington, London, Paris and Brussels provide a
shocking insight.

This man increased his campaign of incitement in January 1939. In a
message [on Jan. 4, 1939] to the U.S. Congress he threatened to take
every measure short of war against the authoritarian countries.
He repeatedly claimed that other countries were trying to interfere in
American affairs, and he talked a lot about upholding the Monroe
Doctrine. Starting in March 1939 he began lecturing about internal
European affairs that were of no concern of the President of the
United States. In the first place, he doesn't understand these
problems, and secondly, even if he did understand them and appreciated
the historical circumstances, he has no more right to concern himself
with central European affairs than the German head of state has to
take positions on or make judgments about conditions in the United
States.

Mr. Roosevelt went even beyond that. Contrary to the rules of
international law, he refused to recognize governments he didn't like,
would not accept new ones, refused to dismiss ambassadors of
non-existent countries, and even recognized them as legal governments.
He went so far as to conclude treaties with these ambassadors, which
then gave him the right to simply occupy foreign territories
[Greenland and Iceland ].

But now the honorable wife [Eleanor Roosevelt] took his place. She and
her sons [she said] refused to live in a world such as ours. That is
at least understandable, for ours is world of work and not one of
deceit and racketeering. After a short rest, though, he was back at
it. On November 4, 1939, the Neutrality Act was revised and the arms
embargo was repealed in favor of a one-sided supply [of weapons] to
Germany's adversaries. In the same way, he pushed in eastern Asia for
economic entanglements with China that would eventually lead to
effective common interests. That same month he recognized a small
group of Polish emigrants as a so-called government in exile, the only
political basis of which was a few million Polish gold pieces they had
taken from Warsaw.

This man revealed his true attitude in a telegram of June 15 [1940] to
French premier [Paul] Reynaud. Roosevelt told him that the American
government would double its aid to France, on the condition that
France continue the war against Germany. In order to give special
emphasis to his desire that the war continue, he declared that the
American government would not recognize acquisitions brought about by
conquest, which included, for example, the retaking of territories
that had been stolen from Germany. I do not need to emphasize that now
and in the future, the German government will not be concerned about
whether or not the President of the United States recognizes a border
in Europe. I mention this case because it is characteristic of the
systematic incitement of this man, who hypocritically talks about
peace while at the same time he incites to war.

And now he feared that if peace were to come about in Europe, the
billions he had squandered on military spending would soon be
recognized as an obvious case of fraud, because no one would attack
America unless America itself provoked the attack. On June 17, 1940,
the President of the United States froze French assets [in the USA] in
order, so he said, to keep them from being seized by Germany, but in
reality to get hold of the gold that was being brought from Casablanca
on an American cruiser.

In July 1940 Roosevelt began to take many new measures toward war,
such as permitting the service of American citizens in the British air
force and the training of British air force personnel in the United
States. In August 1940 a joint military policy for the United States
and Canada was established. In order to make the establishment of a
joint American-Canadian defense committee plausible to at least the
stupidest people, Roosevelt periodically invented crises and acted as
if America was threatened by immediate attack. He would suddenly
cancel trips and quickly return to Washington and do similar things in
order to emphasize the seriousness of the situation to his followers,
who really deserve pity. He moved still closer to war in September
1940 when he transferred fifty American naval destroyers to the
British fleet, and in return took control of military bases on British
possessions in North and Central America. Future generations will
determine the extent to which, along with all this hatred against
socialist Germany, the desire to easily and safely take control of the
British empire in its hour of disintegration may have also played a
role.

After Britain was no longer able to pay cash for American deliveries
he imposed the Lend-Lease Act on the American people [in March 1941].
As President, he thereby obtained the authority to furnish lend-lease
military aid to countries that he, Roosevelt, decided it was in
America's vital interests to defend. After it became clear that
Germany would not respond under any circumstances to his continued
boorish behavior, this man took another step forward in March 1941.
As early as December 19, 1939, an American cruiser [the Tuscaloosa]
that was inside the security zone maneuvered the [German] passenger
liner Columbus into the hands of British warships. As a result, it had
to be scuttled. On that same day, US military forces helped in an
effort to capture the German merchant ship Arauca. On January 27,
1940, and once again contrary to international law, the US cruiser
Trenton reported the movements of the German merchant ships Arauca, La
Plata and Wangoni to enemy naval forces.

On June 27, 1940, he announced a limitation on the free movement of
foreign merchant ships in US ports, completely contrary to
international law. In November 1940 he permitted US warships to pursue
the German merchant ships Phrygia, Idarwald and Rhein until they
finally had to scuttle themselves to keep from falling into enemy
hands. On April 13, 1941, American ships were permitted to pass freely
through the Red Sea in order to supply British armies in the Middle
East.

In the meantime, in March [1941] all German ships were confiscated by
the American authorities. In the process, German Reich citizens were
treated in the most degrading way, ordered to certain locations in
violation of international law, put under travel restrictions, and so
forth. Two German officers who had escaped from Canadian captivity [to
the United States] were shackled and returned to the Canadian
authorities, likewise completely contrary to international law.

On March 27 [1941] the same president who is [supposedly] against all
aggression announced support for [General Dusan] Simovic and his
clique of usurpers [in Yugoslavia], who had come to power in Belgrade
after the overthrow of the legal government. Several months earlier,
President Roosevelt had sent [OSS chief] Colonel Donovan, a very
inferior character, to the Balkans with orders to help organize an
uprising against Germany and Italy in Sofia [Bulgaria] and Belgrade.
In April he [Roosevelt] promised lend-lease aid to Yugoslavia and
Greece. At the end of April he recognized Yugoslav and Greek emigrants
as governments in exile. And once again, in violation of international
law, he froze Yugoslav and Greek assets. Starting in mid-April [1941]
US naval patrols began expanded operations in the western Atlantic,
reporting their observations to the British. On April 26, Roosevelt
delivered twenty high speed patrol boats to Britain. At the same time,
British naval ships were routinely being repaired in US ports. On May
12, Norwegian ships operating for Britain were armed and repaired [in
the USA], contrary to international law. On June 4, American troop
transports arrived in Greenland to build air fields. And on June 9
came the first British report that a US war ship, acting on orders of
President Roosevelt, had attacked a German submarine near Greenland
with depth charges.

On June 14, German assets in the United States were frozen, again in
violation of international law. On June 17, on the basis of a lying
pretext, President Roosevelt demanded the recall of the German consuls
and the closing of the German consulates. He also demanded the
shutting down of the German "Transocean" press agency, the German
Library of Information [in New York] and the German Reichsbahn
[national railway] office.

On July 6 and 7 [1941], American armed forces acting on orders from
Roosevelt occupied Iceland, which was in the area of German military
operations. He hoped that this action would certainly, first, finally
force Germany into war [against the USA] and, second, also neutralize
the effectiveness of the German submarines, much as in 1915-1916. At
the same time, he promised military aid to the Soviet Union. On July
10 Navy Secretary [Frank] Knox suddenly announced that the US Navy was
under orders to fire against Axis warships. On September 4 the US
destroyer Greer, acting on his orders, operated together with British
airplanes against German submarines in the Atlantic. Five days later,
a German submarine identified US destroyers as escort vessels with a
British convoy.

In a speech delivered on September 11 [1941], Roosevelt at last
personally confirmed that he had given the order to fire against all
Axis ships, and he repeated the order. On September 29, US patrols
attacked a German submarine east of Greenland with depth charges. On
October 17 the US destroyer Kearny, operating as an escort for the
British, attacked a German submarine with depth charges, and on
November 6 US armed forces seized the German ship Odenwald in
violation of international law, took it to an American port, and
imprisoned its crew.

I will overlook as meaningless the insulting attacks and rude
statements by this so-called President against me personally. That he
calls me a gangster is particularly meaningless, since this term did
not originate in Europe, where such characters are uncommon, but in
America. And aside from that, I simply cannot feel insulted by Mr.
Roosevelt because I regard him, like his predecessor Woodrow Wilson,
as mentally unsound [geisteskrank].

We know that this man, with his Jewish supporters, has operated
against Japan in the same way. I don't need to go into that here. The
same methods were used in that case as well. This man first incites to
war, and then he lies about its causes and makes baseless allegations.
He repugnantly wraps himself in a cloak of Christian hypocrisy, while
at the same time slowly but very steadily leading humanity into war.
And finally, as an old Freemason, he calls upon God to witness that
his actions are honorable. His shameless misrepresentations of truth
and violations of law are unparalleled in history.

I am sure that all of you have regarded it as an act of deliverance
that a country [Japan] has finally acted to protest against all this
in the very way that this man had actually hoped for, and which should
not surprise him now [the attack on Pearl Harbor, December 7, 1941].
After years of negotiating with this deceiver, the Japanese government
finally had its fill of being treated in such a humiliating way. All
of us, the German people and, I believe, all other decent people
around the world as well, regard this with deep appreciation.

We know the power behind Roosevelt. It is the same eternal Jew that
believes that his hour has come to impose the same fate on us that we
have all seen and experienced with horror in Soviet Russia. We have
gotten to know first hand the Jewish paradise on earth. Millions of
German soldiers have personally seen the land where this international
Jewry has destroyed and annihilated people and property. Perhaps the
President of the United States does not understand this. If so, that
only speaks for his intellectual narrow-mindedness.

And we know that his entire effort is aimed at this goal: Even if we
were not allied with Japan, we would still realize that the Jews and
their Franklin Roosevelt intend to destroy one state after another.
The German Reich of today has nothing in common with the Germany of
the past. For our part, we will now do what this provocateur has been
trying to achieve for years. And not just because we are allied with
Japan, but rather because Germany and Italy with their present
leaderships have the insight and strength to realize that in this
historic period the existence or non-existence of nations is being
determined, perhaps for all time. What this other world has in store
for us is clear. They were able to bring the democratic Germany of the
past [1918-1933] to starvation, and they seek to destroy the National
Socialist Germany of today.

When Mr. Churchill and Mr. Roosevelt declare that they want to one day
build a new social order, that's about the same as a bald-headed
barber recommending a tonic guaranteed to make hair grow. Rather than
incite war, these gentlemen, who live in the most socially backward
countries, should have concerned themselves with their own unemployed
people. They have enough misery and poverty in their own countries to
keep themselves busy insuring a just distribution of food there. As
far as the German nation is concerned, it doesn't need charity, either
from Mr. Churchill, Mr. Roosevelt or [British foreign secretary] Mr.
Eden -- but it does demand its rights. And it will do what it must to
insure its right to life, even if a thousand Churchills and Roosevelts
conspire together to prevent it.

Our nation has a history of nearly two thousand years. Never in this
long period has it been so united and determined as it is today, and
thanks to the National Socialist movement it will always be that way.
At the same time, Germany has perhaps never been as far-sighted, and
seldom as conscious of honor. Accordingly, today I had the passports
returned to the American charge d'affaires, and he was bluntly
informed of the following:

President Roosevelt's steadily expanding policy has been aimed at an
unlimited world dictatorship. In pursuing this goal, the United States
and Britain have used every means to deny the German, Italian and
Japanese nations the prerequisites for their vital natural existence.
For this reason, the governments of Britain and the United States of
America have opposed every effort to create a new and better order in
the world, for both the present and the future. Since the beginning of
the war [in September 1939], the American President Roosevelt has
steadily committed ever more serious crimes against international law.
Along with illegal attacks against ships and other property of German
and Italian citizens, there have been threats and even arbitrary
deprivations of personal freedom by internment and such. The
increasingly hostile attacks by the American President Roosevelt have
reached the point that he has ordered the U.S. navy, in complete
violation of international law, to immediately and everywhere attack,
fire upon and sink German and Italian ships. American officials have
even boasted about destroying German submarines in this criminal
manner. American cruisers have attacked and captured German and
Italian merchant ships, and their peaceful crews were taken away to
imprisonment In addition, President Roosevelt's plan to attack Germany
and Italy with military forces in Europe by 1943 at the latest was
made public in the United States [by the Chicago Tribune and several
other newspapers on Dec. 4, 1941], and the American government made no
effort to deny it.

Despite the years of intolerable provocations by President Roosevelt,
Germany and Italy sincerely and very patiently tried to prevent the
expansion of this war and to maintain relations with the United
States. But as a result of his campaign, these efforts have failed.
Faithful to the provisions of the Tripartite Pact of September 27,
1940, German and Italy accordingly now regard themselves as finally
forced to join together on the side of Japan in the struggle for the
defense and preservation of the freedom and independence of our
nations and realms against the United States of America and Britain.
The three powers have accordingly concluded the following agreement,
which was signed today in Berlin:

Article 1. Germany, Italy and Japan will together conduct the war that
has been forced upon them by the United States of America and Britain
with all the means at their command to a victorious conclusion.

Article 2. Germany, Italy and Japan pledge not to conclude an
armistice or make peace with either the United States of America or
Britain unless by complete mutual agreement.

Article 3. Germany, Italy and Japan will also work very closely
together after a victorious conclusion of the war for the purpose of
bringing about a just new order in accord with the Tripartite Pact
concluded by them on September 27, 1940.

Ever since my peace proposal of July 1940 was rejected, we have
clearly realized that this struggle must be fought through to the end.
We National Socialists are not at all surprised that the
Anglo-American, Jewish and capitalist world is united together with
Bolshevism. In our country we have always found them in the same
community. Alone we successfully fought against them here in Germany,
and after 14 years of struggle for power we were finally able to
annihilate our enemies.

When I decided 23 years ago to enter political life in order to lead
the nation up from ruin, I was a nameless, unknown soldier. Many of
you here know just how difficult those first years of that struggle
really were. The way from a small movement of seven men to the taking
of power on January 30, 1933, as the responsible government is so
miraculous that only the blessing of Providence could have made it
possible.

Our adversaries today are the same familiar enemies of more than
twenty years.

When we think of the sacrifice and effort of our soldiers, then every
sacrifice of [those here in] the homeland is completely insignificant
and unimportant. And when we consider the number of all those in past
generations who gave their lives for the survival and greatness of the
German nation, then we are really conscious of the magnitude of the
duty that is ours.

The government of the United States of America, having violated in the
most flagrant manner and in ever increasing measure all rules of
neutrality in favor of the adversaries of Germany, and having
continually been guilty of the most severe provocations toward Germany
ever since the outbreak of the European war, brought on by the British
declaration of war against Germany on September 3, 1939, has finally
resorted to open military acts of aggression.

On September 11, 1941, the President of the United States of America
publicly declared that he had ordered the American Navy and Air Force
to shoot on sight any German war vessel. In his speech of October 27,
1941, he once more expressly affirmed that this order was in force.
Acting under this order, American naval vessels have systematically
attacked German naval forces since early September 1941. Thus,
American destroyers, as for instance, the Greer, the Kearny and the
Reuben James, have opened fire on German submarines according to plan.
The American Secretary of the Navy, Mr. Knox, himself confirmed that
the American destroyers attacked German submarines.

Furthermore, the naval forces of the United States of America, under
order of their government and contrary to international law, have
treated and seized German merchant ships on the high seas as enemy
ships.

The German government therefore establishes the following facts:
Although Germany on her part has strictly adhered to the rules of
international law in her relations with the United States of America
during every period of the present war, the government of the United
States of America from initial violations of neutrality has finally
proceeded to open acts of war against Germany. It has thereby
virtually created a state of war.

The government of the Reich consequently breaks off diplomatic
relations with the United States of America and declares that under
these circumstances brought about by President Roosevelt, Germany too,
as from today, considers herself as being in a state of war with the
United States of America.

[Topaz]

Iran's 'Death to America' Slogan Refers to US Policies, Not People,
Says Supreme Leader
Associated Press
http://news.yahoo.com/iran-ayatollah-death-america-refers-us-policies-105914348.html

The slogan "Death to America" is not aimed at the American people, but
rather American policies, Iran's supreme leader said in comments
reported on his official website Tuesday. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei
discussed the slogan while meeting with Iranian students ahead of the
anniversary of the takeover of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran on Nov. 4,
1979 ... Khamenei says the "aim of the slogan is not death to American
people. The slogan means death to U.S. policies and arrogance." The
slogan has "strong support" In Iran, he said. Khamenei and hard-liners
in the Iranian government remain deeply suspicious of the United
States and view its policies a threat to the country.

[Topaz]

On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 21:45:46 -0500, Mr. B1ack <now...@nada.net>
wrote:



>

> And as for the Iranian people ... last time any of them
> made a play to "liberalize" - they got shot. They're
> still getting shot.

Iran should not be liberalized. The Jewish controlled USA and CIA
finance and start trouble in countries that are not Jewed.

>
> Earlier this year, Anthony Bourdain did a show from
> Iran. He talked to some people, some of whom implied
> that things weren't so great there. An airtime footnote
> was that those people could no longer be contacted ...
> "disappeared" it seems ..........

At the very beginning of what he promised would be a controversial
episode of Parts Unknown, in which he covered the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict, Anthony Bourdain mentioned that he was half-Jewish on his
mother’s side.

The media in the USA is run by the Jews and it is all rubbish.
You probably are a Jew anyway.

[Governor Swill]

On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 21:29:26 -0500, Mr. B1ack wrote:
>On Thu, 19 Nov 2015 22:13:55 -0500, Governor Swill wrote:

>>On Thu, 19 Nov 2015 21:56:18 -0500, Mr. B1ack wrote:
>>>Swill, you've become an enemy sympathizer and
>>>apologist of the most naive sort. PLEASE move to
>>>wonderful Iran. Your head will be rolling down the
>>>street inside a week .........
>>Mr Black, you've shown yourself to be utterly blind. The Saudis have
>>attacked us repeatedly these last 15 years, but you still consider
>>them our friends?
>
> You don't know anything about Saudi Arabia.

And neither, apparently, do you.

>It is not
> a "country" in the traditional sense but instead a
> collection of princedoms only nominally loyal to the
> head honcho.

The United States is not a "country" in the traditional sense but
instead a collection of sovereign states only provisionally loyal to a
central government.

>
> "Saudi Arabia" did not attack us because it's not a
> unified entity - it only pretends to be. Some of the
> little princelings are very pro-western, others don't
> give a shit, a few are Islamist rads. They all kinda
> do their own thing and it'd be bad politics for the
> rest to intefere too much.

Then call it bad politics. Excuse it however you want, the fact is
that while we've been looking at Persians and Shiites, Arabs and
Sunnis have been killing westerners and other Muslim and have now
declared war on both.

Daesh is Sunni, Arab and they get their money from wealthy, radical
Sunni Arabs in the Arabian peninsula. Their victims are non Muslims,
non Arabs and Shiite Muslims they increasingly see as apostate.

> The best european analogy would be Italy during
> the city-states era, although the Saud family tree
> isn't quite as bound to one plot of geography.

There was never any such nation as Italy until the 1860s. During the
city states era, roughly from the fall of Rome until the mid 19th
century they truly were a collection of independent states which is
why they kept falling to Spain, France, the Hapsburgs and each other
every time they stood up straight.

Saudi Arabia is much more unified than that. While its coastlines are
punctuated with various other kingdoms and states, the House of Saud
does indeed speak for all the kingdoms within its borders.

Radical Islam = Arab, Sunni Islam. The Shiites and Persians have
proven themselves much more tolerant and less religiously radical.

And finally, the Taliban are also about to become our "friends". Why?
Because Daesh has been muscling in on their territory in eastern
Afghanistan and western Pakistan.

Daesh is destined to failure because they insist on pissing off
*everybody* all at the same time.

[Topaz]

If America was not ruled by Jews it would have no problem with Islam.

The Jewish controlled media said that the Jews were America's only
friends in the Middle East. The truth is that before these Jews,
America didn't have any enemies in the Middle East.

Jewish-Zionist Power in America
Mark Weber - Video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNLIy7gckro

A factual, reasoned 16-minute talk on the immense power and influence
of the "Jewish lobby" in the US, and its harmful role, especially in
directing US Middle East policy. As long as this power remains
entrenched, says Weber, there will be no end to the Jewish-Zionist
domination of American political life and the mass media, Zionist
oppression of Palestinians, the Israeli threat to peace, and the
bloody conflict between Jews and non-Jews in the Middle East.

Overwhelming Evidence that 9/11 was an Inside Job, Who did it and Why
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfXecU3v-70

[Governor Swill]

On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 Mr. B1ack wrote:
>On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 Joe Cooper wrote:
>>Topaz wrote

>>> Classified Evidence: US Soldiers Raped Boys In Front Of Their Mothers
>>
>>Unclassified evidence that 50,000,000 people died because of Adolf
>>Hitler...anywhere you look.
>
> Yep, the 'Dolf cause a LOT of damage, world's record
> no doubt. It's worth taking into account when anybody
> complains about "damage" or "evil times" today ...

Russia suffered 20,000,000 of those.

Mao killed tens of millions by starvation in the fifties.

Stalin also killed tens of millions during his time aside from the
war.

[Governor Swill]

On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 21:45:46 -0500, Mr. B1ack <now...@nada.net>
wrote:

You've been listening to Rush again, haven't you?

[Sn...@smack.com]

On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 14:06:41 -0500, Governor Swill
<governo...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 Mr. B1ack wrote:
>>On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 Joe Cooper wrote:
>>>Topaz wrote
>>>> Classified Evidence: US Soldiers Raped Boys In Front Of Their Mothers
>>>
>>>Unclassified evidence that 50,000,000 people died because of Adolf
>>>Hitler...anywhere you look.
>>
>> Yep, the 'Dolf cause a LOT of damage, world's record
>> no doubt. It's worth taking into account when anybody
>> complains about "damage" or "evil times" today ...
>
>Russia suffered 20,000,000 of those.
>
>Mao killed tens of millions by starvation in the fifties.
>
>Stalin also killed tens of millions during his time aside from the
>war.

Don't sound like they were "liberals" or "progressives to me.

[Sn...@smack.com]

Limpballs was a big fan of that ol' righwing minister that used to be
on radio. Limpballs also admitted that he "reflects his viewers
beliefs", (his words)*---which should alert a rational person to
consider that "truth" isn't necessarily contained in his diatribes.

*(Radio and TV talk show host symposium aired on C-SPAN)

[Mr. B1ack]

On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 14:06:41 -0500, Governor Swill

<governo...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 Mr. B1ack wrote:
>>On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 Joe Cooper wrote:
>>>Topaz wrote
>>>> Classified Evidence: US Soldiers Raped Boys In Front Of Their Mothers
>>>
>>>Unclassified evidence that 50,000,000 people died because of Adolf
>>>Hitler...anywhere you look.
>>
>> Yep, the 'Dolf cause a LOT of damage, world's record
>> no doubt. It's worth taking into account when anybody
>> complains about "damage" or "evil times" today ...
>
>Russia suffered 20,000,000 of those.

So many it refused to *admit* it for decades ... thought
it made 'em look bad somehow.

>Mao killed tens of millions by starvation in the fifties.

Yep, something the "Little Red Book" quoters
never seem to mention ..... guess they think it
was OK because it was all in the name of
creating a Marxist utopia .........

>Stalin also killed tens of millions during his time aside from the
>war.

A serious paranoid and thought the iron fist
was the solution to everything ...

Still has his fans in Russia though, they've kinda
made a cult figure of him.

We left out Pol Pot ... who *proportionally* killed
off the greatest percentage of his population that's
ever been documented. But he'll get the same pass
as Mao from that certain segment .....

One far-rightie, three far-lefties (Franco, Tojo
and Mussolini did some damage too so they
might be on the list except that the *scale* was,
a bit, smaller). We've yet to see what fundy Islam
will spawn. In any case, it demonstrates the
danger of "extremists" and maybe a serious
flaw in the statement "Extremism in the defense
of liberty is no vice". Sorry, but extremism NEVER
keeps company with "liberty" ...

Odd thing is that We The People never seem to
recognize batshit extremists for what they are
until well *after* there's no turning back. You'd
think 14,000+ years of "civilization" would have
had *some* educational quality - but no. IMHO
this is something wired into our genes - "Follow
the loud boisterous extrovert !" says the DNA.

Maybe, likely, over 14,000 years ago that sort
of individual really WAS the best kind to lead
the tribe. Alas when "tribes" turned into "cities"
and "civilizations" the little flaws in that sort of
personality profile were *amplified* in some
exponential fashion.

[Mr. B1ack]

On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 14:07:35 -0500, Governor Swill

Hmm ... ya know ... I haven't actually *heard* Rush
in ... let's see ... maybe a decade.

Sorry, but there's something weird about Iran relative
to the western nations. We've been treating it as if
it DID have nukes, kinda delicately, so I'm gonna
conclude that it does have some.

And by now it's less public facilities have produced
plenty of HE uranium and at least some plutonium,
so Iran sure as shit *will* have nukes. Maybe it's
intentional, part of a plan that Machiavelli would
endorse relating to the utility of viable enemies ?
Might also give us more leverage over Israel ...

[Joe Cooper]

Topaz <mars...@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:1uh05btjudgja8kis...@4ax.com:

> Germany's Declaration of War Against the United States

> Here are some quotes from Alex:

"I am Alex. I, and all other white people, are vastly inferior to the
Jews."

"I am Alex, and I believe my own people are too inept to control their own
lives."

Whadda champ.

[Joe Cooper]

Mr. B1ack <now...@nada.net> wrote in
news:vslv4b1upckh4q8so...@4ax.com:

> He seems to be in love with our enemies - thinks they're
> all just wunnerful folks maybe just a tiny bit miffed-off
> about some old stuff America was involved in.

Alex, in common with poor, stupid Gary, is not the brightest light on the
tree...he's more like the used toilet paper being flushed down the drain.

[Joe Cooper]

Topaz <mars...@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:cji05bpd3vogaqbbj...@4ax.com:

> Iran's 'Death to America' Slogan Refers to US Policies, Not People,

Just when you thought Alex couldn't possibly get any dumber...

[Joe Cooper]

Topaz <mars...@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:jni05bd2rma2ac3m8...@4ax.com:

> Iran should not be liberalized. The Jewish controlled USA and CIA
> finance and start trouble in countries that are not Jewed.

Alex, why do you constantly insult Gentiles by insisting they're incapable
of governing themselves?

I mean, really, just because your family IQ is somewhere south of 4, it
doesn't mean everyone else's is.

[Joe Cooper]

Topaz <mars...@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:o7415bps5c0msf4oh...@4ax.com:

> The Jewish controlled media said that the Jews were America's only
> friends in the Middle East. The truth is that before these Jews,
> America didn't have any enemies in the Middle East.

Alex, I'm not all that opposed to your smoking that shit, but really,
crack's not good for you.

[Governor Swill]

On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 Mr. B1ack wrote:
>On Sat, 21 Nov Governor Swill wrote:
>>On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 Mr. B1ack wrote:
>>>On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 Joe Cooper wrote:
>>> Yep, the 'Dolf cause a LOT of damage, world's record
>>> no doubt. It's worth taking into account when anybody
>>> complains about "damage" or "evil times" today ...
>>
>>Russia suffered 20,000,000 of those.
>
> So many it refused to *admit* it for decades ... thought
> it made 'em look bad somehow.

In later years, the number was played as the western allies using
Russian dead to keep Hitler busy while they took their sweet time
attacking him.

>>Mao killed tens of millions by starvation in the fifties.
>
> Yep, something the "Little Red Book" quoters
> never seem to mention ..... guess they think it
> was OK because it was all in the name of
> creating a Marxist utopia .........

True. And all because Mao fancied himself a better farmer than the
farmers who'd been feeding the nation for millennia without govt help.

>>Stalin also killed tens of millions during his time aside from the
>>war.
>
> A serious paranoid and thought the iron fist
> was the solution to everything ...

"Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb, Iran . . ."

> Still has his fans in Russia though, they've kinda
> made a cult figure of him.

Such is the power of propaganda when all the news comes from the same
copy office.

> We left out Pol Pot ... who *proportionally* killed
> off the greatest percentage of his population that's
> ever been documented. But he'll get the same pass
> as Mao from that certain segment .....

Left him out because his numbers were unimpressive, except, as you
note, by percentage.

> One far-rightie, three far-lefties (Franco, Tojo
> and Mussolini did some damage too so they
> might be on the list except that the *scale* was,
> a bit, smaller).

A LOT smaller. All three were perfectly willing to eliminate
political opposition, but none of them were interested in slaughtering
their own populations in boxcar lots.

>We've yet to see what fundy Islam
> will spawn. In any case, it demonstrates the
> danger of "extremists" and maybe a serious
> flaw in the statement "Extremism in the defense
> of liberty is no vice". Sorry, but extremism NEVER
> keeps company with "liberty" ...

Plenty of extremists in the US. Always eager to vote for killing
folks who annoy them, not so willing to be inspired by the first
amendment or to tolerate others opinions.

> Odd thing is that We The People never seem to
> recognize batshit extremists for what they are
> until well *after* there's no turning back.

We haven't done too badly in the US. The People always manage to
elect Presidents, at least, who aren't rabid extremists hell bent on
destroying the population that put them in power.

>You'd
> think 14,000+ years of "civilization" would have
> had *some* educational quality - but no. IMHO
> this is something wired into our genes - "Follow
> the loud boisterous extrovert !" says the DNA.
>
> Maybe, likely, over 14,000 years ago that sort
> of individual really WAS the best kind to lead
> the tribe. Alas when "tribes" turned into "cities"
> and "civilizations" the little flaws in that sort of
> personality profile were *amplified* in some
> exponential fashion.

The root of the problem is, people want simple solutions and instant
gratification. Got a roomie who gave up on cooking. No patience for
it. Everything gets cooked on high. Food burns *and* is raw and he
can ruin a skillet or a pot faster than anybody I ever saw. Me, I'm a
slow cooker. Take my time, don't rush, and I love long, slow cooking
recipes, things that simmer or slowly roast for hours.

Did a fast dinner tonight. Was my other roomie's birthday. Scampied
some prawns and served with fettuccine alfredo. Butter, cream, cheese
and a kiss of garlic tossed into fresh made pasta. Was careful with
the salt and nobody added any at the table - always a complement to
the cook!

[Mr. B1ack]

On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 20:52:12 -0500, Governor Swill
<governo...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 Mr. B1ack wrote:
>>On Sat, 21 Nov Governor Swill wrote:
>>>On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 Mr. B1ack wrote:
>>>>On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 Joe Cooper wrote:
>>>> Yep, the 'Dolf cause a LOT of damage, world's record
>>>> no doubt. It's worth taking into account when anybody
>>>> complains about "damage" or "evil times" today ...
>>>
>>>Russia suffered 20,000,000 of those.
>>
>> So many it refused to *admit* it for decades ... thought
>> it made 'em look bad somehow.
>
>In later years, the number was played as the western allies using
>Russian dead to keep Hitler busy while they took their sweet time
>attacking him.

Propaganda mostly. The western powers weren't sitting
on their asses at all ... it required a huge well-coordinated
plan to actually overpower the Reich. Russia fought 'em
in Russia, but the rest fought 'em in Africa and the middle
east, Greece, Sicily, Italy, France ... and let's not forget
the enemy in the pacific. Everybody was very busy.

>>>Mao killed tens of millions by starvation in the fifties.
>>
>> Yep, something the "Little Red Book" quoters
>> never seem to mention ..... guess they think it
>> was OK because it was all in the name of
>> creating a Marxist utopia .........
>
>True. And all because Mao fancied himself a better farmer than the
>farmers who'd been feeding the nation for millennia without govt help.

Well, the agriculture thing was only part of it ... there
was a lot of deliberate extermination too. Took a page
from Hitler ... recruited the righteous and energetic
youth to do his dirtywork - which they did with great
enthusiasm. Give power to the underdogs and they'll
do anything to show their gratitude.

>>>Stalin also killed tens of millions during his time aside from the
>>>war.
>>
>> A serious paranoid and thought the iron fist
>> was the solution to everything ...
>
>"Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb, Iran . . ."

The USA does often think that way ... however we don't
have an all-powerful dictator whose word is law. Cooler
heads tone down the chanting, dilute the madness.

Do you know what "bigger stick logic" is ? It informs
you that if beating a problem with a stick yeilds
negative results it just means you need a bigger stick.
We probably inherited that thinking from the Brits,
though it didn't really become an issue until after
WW-2. In any case, subtle, nuanced, smart, solutions
to problems just doesn't seem to be in the American
psyche. The big and powerful just don't think that way.

>> Still has his fans in Russia though, they've kinda
>> made a cult figure of him.
>
>Such is the power of propaganda when all the news comes from the same
>copy office.

Putin, orginally, was against the Cult Of Stalin ... but
later on I think he found ways to *use* it, ways to
kinda put his face on the mighty man of steel.

>> We left out Pol Pot ... who *proportionally* killed
>> off the greatest percentage of his population that's
>> ever been documented. But he'll get the same pass
>> as Mao from that certain segment .....
>
>Left him out because his numbers were unimpressive, except, as you
>note, by percentage.
>
>> One far-rightie, three far-lefties (Franco, Tojo
>> and Mussolini did some damage too so they
>> might be on the list except that the *scale* was,
>> a bit, smaller).
>
>A LOT smaller. All three were perfectly willing to eliminate
>political opposition, but none of them were interested in slaughtering
>their own populations in boxcar lots.

Well, the volume, methods and mindset of slaughtering
OTHER peoples populations are part of the overall "damage"
equation too.

>>We've yet to see what fundy Islam
>> will spawn. In any case, it demonstrates the
>> danger of "extremists" and maybe a serious
>> flaw in the statement "Extremism in the defense
>> of liberty is no vice". Sorry, but extremism NEVER
>> keeps company with "liberty" ...
>
>Plenty of extremists in the US. Always eager to vote for killing
>folks who annoy them, not so willing to be inspired by the first
>amendment or to tolerate others opinions.

Of late our "left" seems least inspired by the Bill-o-Rights.

Alas our "right" is only marginally more trustworthy.

Somewhere we need to find a whole new gig
dontchathink, not like our "left" OR "right", the
kind of small-"L" libertarianism our Founders
found so compelling. "Land of the Free" ought
to MEAN something after all ..........

>> Odd thing is that We The People never seem to
>> recognize batshit extremists for what they are
>> until well *after* there's no turning back.
>
>We haven't done too badly in the US. The People always manage to
>elect Presidents, at least, who aren't rabid extremists hell bent on
>destroying the population that put them in power.

No, just the other half of the population that didn't
vote for them or contribute campaign funds ....

>>You'd
>> think 14,000+ years of "civilization" would have
>> had *some* educational quality - but no. IMHO
>> this is something wired into our genes - "Follow
>> the loud boisterous extrovert !" says the DNA.
>>
>> Maybe, likely, over 14,000 years ago that sort
>> of individual really WAS the best kind to lead
>> the tribe. Alas when "tribes" turned into "cities"
>> and "civilizations" the little flaws in that sort of
>> personality profile were *amplified* in some
>> exponential fashion.
>
>The root of the problem is, people want simple solutions and instant
>gratification.

Of course. Everybody does. Waiting sucks.

But it takes a 3-digit IQ to realize that's rarely gonna
be possible.

About 50% of the population has a 2-digit IQ.

>Got a roomie who gave up on cooking. No patience for
>it. Everything gets cooked on high. Food burns *and* is raw and he
>can ruin a skillet or a pot faster than anybody I ever saw. Me, I'm a
>slow cooker. Take my time, don't rush, and I love long, slow cooking
>recipes, things that simmer or slowly roast for hours.

Roomies personality type is MUCH more common.
Combined with contemporary times, I've come to
call them the "instant generation" or "microwave
generation"... they expect *everything* RIGHT NOW.

That might eventually work with a burrito, tech marches
on, but it CAN'T work with "social issues". Hell, such
"soft" problems don't even have bone-fide "solutions",
it's all touchie-feelie crap that changes every time the
wind blows.

>Did a fast dinner tonight. Was my other roomie's birthday. Scampied
>some prawns and served with fettuccine alfredo. Butter, cream, cheese
>and a kiss of garlic tossed into fresh made pasta. Was careful with
>the salt and nobody added any at the table - always a complement to
>the cook!

But tomorrow Roomie will be back to McCrapo burgers ...
instant on-demand.

Lemme guess, thinks Trump is a demigod ? :-)

I always remember the line from the old song ...

"You gave me fortune,
You gave me fame,
You gave me power in
your gods name ..."

[Sn...@smack.com]

On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 20:52:12 -0500, Governor Swill

<governo...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 Mr. B1ack wrote:
>>On Sat, 21 Nov Governor Swill wrote:
>>>On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 Mr. B1ack wrote:
>>>>On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 Joe Cooper wrote:

>>>> Yep, the 'Dolf cause a LOT of damage, world's record
>>>> no doubt. It's worth taking into account when anybody
>>>> complains about "damage" or "evil times" today ...
>>>
>>>Russia suffered 20,000,000 of those.
>>
>> So many it refused to *admit* it for decades ... thought
>> it made 'em look bad somehow.
>
>In later years, the number was played as the western allies using
>Russian dead to keep Hitler busy while they took their sweet time
>attacking him.

He was a ally of Stalin

>>>Mao killed tens of millions by starvation in the fifties.
>>
>> Yep, something the "Little Red Book" quoters
>> never seem to mention ..... guess they think it
>> was OK because it was all in the name of
>> creating a Marxist utopia .........
>
>True. And all because Mao fancied himself a better farmer than the
>farmers who'd been feeding the nation for millennia without govt help.

You believe that an "elite" given all the wealth and advantaged would
better serve the millions--- than insure the millions had resouces for
those "elite" to "go after?

>>>Stalin also killed tens of millions during his time aside from the
>>>war.
>>
>> A serious paranoid and thought the iron fist
>> was the solution to everything ...
>
>"Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb, Iran . . ."

You sing the tune of rightwing idiots with glee. Why is that?

>> Still has his fans in Russia though, they've kinda
>> made a cult figure of him.
>
>Such is the power of propaganda when all the news comes from the same
>copy office.

If you compare the foundation of places like "TownHall" and Rushed
Limpballs and faux snooze---you'll discover the same theories as
propounded by Herr Hitler in his manifesto

>> We left out Pol Pot ... who *proportionally* killed
>> off the greatest percentage of his population that's
>> ever been documented. But he'll get the same pass
>> as Mao from that certain segment .....
>
>Left him out because his numbers were unimpressive, except, as you
>note, by percentage.
>
>> One far-rightie, three far-lefties (Franco, Tojo
>> and Mussolini did some damage too so they
>> might be on the list except that the *scale* was,
>> a bit, smaller).
>
>A LOT smaller. All three were perfectly willing to eliminate
>political opposition, but none of them were interested in slaughtering
>their own populations in boxcar lots.

Republicans (read Rightwing conservative/loonytarians) would ship all
them "darkies" back to the plantations so southern drawling,
knuckle-dragging wealthy can have the care-free life again.

>>We've yet to see what fundy Islam
>> will spawn. In any case, it demonstrates the
>> danger of "extremists" and maybe a serious
>> flaw in the statement "Extremism in the defense
>> of liberty is no vice". Sorry, but extremism NEVER
>> keeps company with "liberty" ...
>
>Plenty of extremists in the US.

Just the good old Republican party.

>
>> Odd thing is that We The People never seem to
>> recognize batshit extremists for what they are
>> until well *after* there's no turning back.
>
>We haven't done too badly in the US. The People always manage to
>elect Presidents, at least, who aren't rabid extremists hell bent on
>destroying the population that put them in power.

You don't think Nixon, Raygun and dumbya weren't radical, extreme and
inveterate lying assholes??

>>You'd
>> think 14,000+ years of "civilization" would have
>> had *some* educational quality - but no. IMHO
>> this is something wired into our genes - "Follow
>> the loud boisterous extrovert !" says the DNA.
>>
>> Maybe, likely, over 14,000 years ago that sort
>> of individual really WAS the best kind to lead
>> the tribe. Alas when "tribes" turned into "cities"
>> and "civilizations" the little flaws in that sort of
>> personality profile were *amplified* in some
>> exponential fashion.
>
>The root of the problem is, people want simple solutions and instant
>gratification.

Exactly a good description of the republican party of the last 30
years

>
>Did a fast dinner tonight. Was my other roomie's birthday.

Now you sound exactly like FILEDUD

[Governor Swill]

On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 15:54:44 -0500, Mr. B1ack <now...@nada.net>
wrote:

> Sorry, but there's something weird about Iran relative
> to the western nations. We've been treating it as if
> it DID have nukes, kinda delicately, so I'm gonna
> conclude that it does have some.

I suspect there are other reasons to treat it "delicately". Would you
say we treat North Korea "delicately". After all, we know they not
only have nukes, but have an advanced missile delivery system.

> And by now it's less public facilities have produced
> plenty of HE uranium and at least some plutonium,
> so Iran sure as shit *will* have nukes. Maybe it's
> intentional, part of a plan that Machiavelli would
> endorse relating to the utility of viable enemies ?
> Might also give us more leverage over Israel ...

Conjecture. That said, things change continually. We make a
decision, set a policy, others react, their behavior changes, we
modify our policy to reflect that, they modify their policies to
reflect our changes . . . and so on.

I suspect the US government has belatedly realized that it's been Arab
Sunnis attacking the west, not Persians, Shiites or Iran. Perhaps
they've been leaving us alone as part of their long game to gain our
support against their mortal enemy, Saudi Arabia.

Remember, Reagan was negotiating with Iran way back in the 1980s.

Finally, don't accept rhetoric as being the same as reality or even
national intent. For all Ahmedinewossname's anti America and Death to
Israel rhetoric, the Iranian man in the street rejected him and his
party and has replaced them with moderates who seek closer ties to an
American led west.

I understand the *habit* of hating and distrusting Iran, but in the
light of such facts, I don't understand the inability to honestly
review the situation.

[Topaz]

Leon Degrelle

"We have the power. Now our gigantic work begins."
Those were Hitler's words on the night of January 30, 1933, as
cheering crowds surged past him, for five long hours, beneath the
windows of the Chancellery in Berlin.

His political struggle had lasted 14 years. He himself was 43, that
is, physically and intellectually at the peak of his powers. He had
won over millions of Germans and organized them into Germany's largest
and most dynamic political party, a party girded by a human rampart of
hundreds of thousands of storm troopers, three fourths of them members
of the working class. He had been extremely shrewd. All but toying
with his adversaries, Hitler had, one after another, vanquished them
all.

Standing there at the window, his arm raised to the delirious throng,
he must have known a feeling of triumph. But he seemed almost torpid,
absorbed, as if lost in another world.

It was a world far removed from the delirium in the street, a world of
65 million citizens who loved him or hated him, but all of whom, from
that night on, had become his responsibility. And as he knew-as almost
all Germans knew on January 1933 -- that this was a crushing, an
almost desperate responsibility.

Half a century later, few people understand the crisis Germany faced
at that time. Today, it's easy to assume that Germans have always been
well-fed and even plump. But the Germans Hitler inherited were virtual
skeletons.

During the preceding years, a score of "democratic" governments had
come and gone, often in utter confusion. Instead of alleviating the
people's misery, they had increased it, due to their own instability:
it was impossible for them to pursue any given plan for more than a
year or two. Germany had arrived at a dead end. In just a few years
there had been 224,000 suicides - a horrifying figure, bespeaking a
state of misery even more horrifying.

By the beginning of 1933, the misery of the German people was
virtually universal. At least six million unemployed and hungry
workers roamed aimlessly through the streets, receiving a pitiful
unemployment benefit of less than 42 marks per month. Many of those
out of work had families to feed, so that altogether some 20 million
Germans, a third of the country's population, were reduced to trying
to survive on about 40 pfennigs per person per day.

Unemployment benefits, moreover, were limited to a period of six
months. After that came only the meager misery allowance dispensed by
the welfare offices.

Notwithstanding the gross inadequacy of this assistance, by trying to
save the six million unemployed from total destruction, even for just
six months, both the state and local branches of the German government
saw themselves brought to ruin: in 1932 alone such aid had swallowed
up four billion marks, 57 percent of the total tax revenues of the
federal government and the regional states. A good many German
municipalities were bankrupt.

Those still lucky enough to have some kind of job were not much better
off. Workers and employees had taken a cut of 25 percent in their
wages and salaries. Twenty-one percent of them were earning between
100 and 250 marks per month; 69.2 percent of them, in January of 1933,
were being paid less than 1,200 marks annually. No more than about
100,000 Germans, it was estimated, were able to live without financial
worries.

During the three years before Hitler came to power, total earnings had
fallen by more than half, from 23 billion marks to 11 billion. The
average per capita income had dropped from 1,187 marks in 1929 to 627
marks, a scarcely tolerable level, in 1932. By January 1933, when
Hitler took office, 90 percent of the German people were destitute.
No one escaped the strangling effects of the unemployment. The
intellectuals were hit as hard as the working class. Of the 135,000
university graduates, 60 percent were without jobs. Only a tiny
minority was receiving unemployment benefits.

"The others," wrote one foreign observer, Marcel Laloire (in his book
New Germany), "are dependent on their parents or are sleeping in
flophouses. In the daytime they can be seen on the boulevards of
Berlin wearing signs on their backs to the effect that they will
accept any kind of work."

But there was no longer any kind of work.
The same drastic fall-off had hit Germany's cottage industry, which
comprised some four million workers. Its turnover had declined 55
percent, with total sales plunging from 22 billion to 10 billion
marks.

Hardest hit of all were construction workers; 90 percent of them were
unemployed.

Farmers, too, had been ruined, crushed by losses amounting to 12
billion marks. Many had been forced to mortgage their homes and their
land. In 1932 just the interest on the loans they had incurred due to
the crash was equivalent to 20 percent of the value of the
agricultural production of the entire country. Those who were no
longer able to meet the interest payments saw their farms auctioned
off in legal proceedings: in the years 1931-1932, 17,157 farms-with a
combined total area of 462,485 hectares - were liquidated in this way.
The "democracy" of Germany's "Weimar Republic" (1918 -1933) had proven
utterly ineffective in addressing such flagrant wrongs as this
impoverishment of millions of farm workers, even though they were the
nation's most stable and hardest working citizens. Plundered,
dispossessed, abandoned: small wonder they heeded Hitler's call.
Their situation on January 30, 1933, was tragic. Like the rest of
Germany's working class, they had been betrayed by their political
leaders, reduced to the alternatives of miserable wages, paltry and
uncertain benefit payments, or the outright humiliation of begging.
Germany's industries, once renowned everywhere in the world, were no
longer prosperous, despite the millions of marks in gratuities that
the financial magnates felt obliged to pour into the coffers of the
parties in power before each election in order to secure their
cooperation. For 14 years the well-blinkered conservatives and
Christian democrats of the political center had been feeding at the
trough just as greedily as their adversaries of the left..

One inevitable consequence of this ever-increasing misery and
uncertainty about the future was an abrupt decline in the birthrate.
When your household savings are wiped out, and when you fear even
greater calamities in the days ahead, you do not risk adding to the
number of your dependents.

In those days the birth rate was a reliable barometer of a country's
prosperity. A child is a joy, unless you have nothing but a crust of
bread to put in its little hand. And that's just the way it was with
hundreds of thousands of German families in 1932..

Hitler knew that he would be starting from zero. From less than zero.
But he was also confident of his strength of will to create Germany
anew-politically, socially, financially, and economically. Now legally
and officially in power, he was sure that he could quickly convert
that cipher into a Germany more powerful than ever before.
What support did he have?

For one thing, he could count on the absolute support of millions of
fanatical disciples. And on that January evening, they joyfully shared
in the great thrill of victory. Some thirteen million Germans, many of
them former Socialists and Communists, had voted for his party.
But millions of Germans were still his adversaries, disconcerted
adversaries, to be sure, whom their own political parties had
betrayed, but who had still not been won over to National Socialism.
The two sides-those for and those against Hitler-were very nearly
equal in numbers. But whereas those on the left were divided among
themselves, Hitler's disciples were strongly united. And in one thing
above all, the National Socialists had an incomparable advantage: in
their convictions and in their total faith in a leader. Their highly
organized and well-disciplined party had contented with the worst kind
of obstacles, and had overcome them..

In the eyes of the capitalists, money was the sole active element in
the flourishing of a country's economy. To Hitler's way of thinking,
that conception was radically wrong: capital, on the contrary, was
only an instrument. Work was the essential element: man's endeavor,
man's honor, blood, muscles and soul.

Hitler wanted not just to put an to the class struggle, but to
reestablish the priority of the human being, in justice and respect,
as the principal factor in production..

For the worker's trust in the fatherland to be restored, he had to
feel that from now on he was to be (and to be treated) as an equal,
instead of remaining a social inferior. Under the governments of the
so-called democratic parties of both the left and the right, he had
remained an inferior; for none of them had understood that in the
hierarchy of national values, work is the very essence of life; ..

The objective, then, was far greater than merely getting six million
unemployed back to work. It was to achieve a total revolution.
"The people," Hitler declared, "were not put here on earth for the
sake of the economy, and the economy doesn't exist for the sake of
capital. On the contrary, capital is meant to serve the economy, and
the economy in turn to serve the people."

It would not be enough merely to reopen the thousands of closed
factories and fill them with workers. If the old concepts still ruled,
the workers would once again be nothing more than living machines,
faceless and interchangeable..

Nowhere in twentieth-century Europe had the authority of a head of
state ever been based on such overwhelming and freely given national
consent. Prior to Hitler, from 1919 to 1932, those governments piously
styling themselves democratic had usually come to power by meager
majorities, sometimes as low as 51 or 52 percent.

"I am not a dictator," Hitler had often affirmed, "and I never will
be. Democracy will be rigorously enforced by National Socialism."
Authority does not mean tyranny. A tyrant is someone who puts himself
in power without the will of the people or against the will of the
people. A democrat is placed in power by the people. But democracy is
not limited to a single formula. It may be partisan or parliamentary.
Or it may be authoritarian. The important thing is that the people
have wished it, chosen it, established it in its given form.

That was the case with Hitler. He came to power in an essentially
democratic way. Whether one likes it or not, this fact is undeniable.
And after coming to power, his popular support measurably increased
from year to year. The more intelligent and honest of his enemies have
been obliged to admit this, men such as the declared anti-Nazi
historian and professor Joachim Fest, who wrote:

For Hitler was never interested in establishing a mere tyranny. Sheer
greed for power will not suffice as explanation for his personality
and energy-He was not born to be a mere tyrant. He was fixated upon
his mission of defending Europe and the Aryan race ... Never had he
felt so dependent upon the masses as he did at this time, and he
watched their reactions with anxious concern.
These lines weren't written by Dr. Goebbels, but by a stern critic of
Hitler and his career..

When it came time to vote, Hitler was granted plenary powers with a
sweeping majority of 441 votes to 94: he had won not just two thirds,
but 82.44 percent of the assembly's votes. This "Enabling Act" granted
Hitler for four years virtually absolute authority over the
legislative as well as the executive affairs of the government..

After 1945 the explanation that was routinely offered for all this was
that the Germans had lost their heads. Whatever the case, it is a
historical fact that they acted of their own free will. Far from being
resigned, they were enthusiastic. "For the first time since the last
days of the monarchy," historian Joachim Fest has conceded, "the
majority of the Germans now had the feeling that they could identify
with the state."..

"You talk about persecution!" he thundered in an impromptu response to
an address by the Social Democratic speaker. "I think that there are
only a few of us [in our party] here who did not have to suffer
persecutions in prison from your side ... You seem to have totally
forgotten that for years our shirts were ripped off our backs because
you did not like the color . . . We have outgrown your persecutions!"
"In those days," he scathingly continued, "our newspapers were banned
and banned and again banned, our meetings were forbidden, and we were
forbidden to speak, I was forbidden to speak, for years on. And now
you say that criticism is salutary!"..

Hitler's millions of followers had rediscovered the primal strength of
rough, uncitified man, of a time when men still had backbone..

Gustav Noske, the lumberjack who became defense minister - and the
most valiant defender of the embattled republic in the tumultuous
months immediately following the collapse of 1918 - acknowledged
honestly in 1944, when the Third Reich was already rapidly breaking
down, that the great majority of the German people still remained true
to Hitler because of the social renewal he had brought to the working
class..

Here again, well before the collapse of party-ridden Weimar Republic,
disillusion with the unions had become widespread among the working
masses. They were starving. The hundreds of Socialist and Communist
deputies stood idly by, impotent to provide any meaningful help to the
desperate proletariat.

Their leaders had no proposals to remedy, even partially, the great
distress of the people; no plans for large-scale public works, no
industrial restructuring, no search for markets abroad.
Moreover, they offered no energetic resistance to the pillaging by
foreign countries of the Reich's last financial resources: this a
consequence of the Treaty of Versailles that the German Socialists had
voted to ratify in June of 1919, and which they had never since had
the courage effectively to oppose..

In 1930, 1931 and 1932, German workers had watched the disaster grow:
the number of unemployed rose from two million to three, to four, to
five, then to six million. At the same time, unemployment benefits
fell lower and lower, finally to disappear completely. Everywhere one
saw dejection and privation: emaciated mothers, children wasting away
in sordid lodgings, and thousands of beggars in long sad lines.
The failure, or incapacity, of the leftist leaders to act, not to
mention their insensitivity, had stupefied the working class. Of what
use were such leaders with their empty heads and empty hearts-and,
often enough, full pockets?

Well before January 30, thousands of workers had already joined up
with Hitler's dynamic formations, which were always hard at it where
they were most needed. Many joined the National Socialists when they
went on strike. Hitler, himself a former worker and a plain man like
themselves, was determined to eliminate unemployment root and branch.
He wanted not merely to defend the laborer's right to work, but to
make his calling one of honor, to insure him respect and to integrate
him fully into a living community of all the Germans, who had been
divided class against class.

In January 1933, Hitler's victorious troops were already largely
proletarian in character, including numerous hardfisted street
brawlers, many unemployed, who no longer counted economically or
socially.

Meanwhile, membership in the Marxist labor unions had fallen off
enormously: among thirteen million socialist and Communist voters in
1932, no more than five million were union members. Indifference and
discouragement had reached such levels that many members no longer
paid their union dues. Many increasingly dispirited Marxist leaders
began to wonder if perhaps the millions of deserters were the ones who
saw things clearly. Soon they wouldn't wonder any longer.
Even before Hitler won Reichstag backing for his "Enabling Act,"
Germany's giant labor union federation, the ADGB, had begun to rally
to the National Socialist cause. As historian Joachim Fest
acknowledged: "On March 20, the labor federation's executive committee
addressed a kind of declaration of loyalty to Hitler." (J. Fest,
Hitler, p. 413.)

Hitler than took a bold and clever step. The unions had always
clamored to have the First of May recognized as a worker's holiday,
but the Weimar Republic had never acceded to their request. Hitler,
never missing an opportunity, grasped this one with both hands. He did
more than grant this reasonable demand: he proclaimed the First of May
a national holiday..

I myself attended the memorable meeting at the Tempelhof field in
1933. By nine o'clock that morning, giant columns, some of workers,
others of youth groups, marching in cadence down the pavement of
Berlin's great avenues, had started off towards the airfield to which
Hitler had called together all Germans. All Germany would follow the
rally as it was transmitted nationwide by radio..

In the dark, a group of determined opponents could easily have heckled
Hitler or otherwise sabotaged the meeting. Perhaps a third of the
onlookers had been Socialists or Communists only three months
previously. But not a single hostile voice was raised during the
entire ceremony. There was only universal acclamation.
Ceremony is the right word for it. It was an almost magical rite.
Hitler and Goebbels had no equals in the arranging of dedicatory
ceremonies of this sort. First there were popular songs, then great
Wagnerian hymns to grip the audience. Germany has a passion for
orchestral music, and Wagner taps the deepest and most secret vein of
the German soul, its romanticism, its inborn sense of the powerful and
the grand.

Meanwhile the hundreds of flags floated above the rostrum, redeemed
from the darkness by arrows of light.

Now Hitler strode to the rostrum. For those standing at the of the
field, his face must have appeared vanishingly small, but his words
flooded instantaneously across the acres of people in his audience.
A Latin audience would have preferred a voice less harsh, more
delicately expressive. But there was no doubt that Hitler spoke to the
psyche of the German people.

Germans have rarely had the good fortune to experience the enchantment
of the spoken word. In Germany, the tone has always been set by
ponderous speakers, more fond of elephantine pedantry than oratorical
passion. Hitler, as a speaker, was a prodigy, the greatest orator of
his century. He possessed, above all, what the ordinary speaker lacks:
a mysterious ability to project power.

A bit like a medium or sorcerer, he was seized, even transfixed, as he
addressed a crowd. It responded to Hitler's projection of power,
radiating it back, establishing, in the course of myriad exchanges, a
current that both orator and audience gave to and drew from equally.
One had to personally experience him speaking to understand this
phenomenon.

This special gift is what lay at the basis of Hitler's ability to win
over the masses. His high-voltage, lightning-like projection
transported and transformed all who experienced it. Tens of millions
were enlightened, riveted and inflamed by the fire of his anger,
irony, and passion.

By the time the cheering died away that May first evening, hundreds of
thousands of previously indifferent or even hostile workers who had
come to Tempelhof at the urging of their labor federation leaders were
now won over. They had become followers, like the SA stormtroopers
whom so many there that evening had brawled with in recent years.
The great human sea surged back from Tempelhof to Berlin. A million
and a half people had arrived in perfect order, and their departure
was just as orderly. No bottlenecks halted the cars and busses. For
those of us who witnessed it, this rigorous, yet joyful, discipline of
a contented people was in itself a source of wonder. Everything about
the May Day mass meeting had come off as smoothly clockwork.
The memory of that fabulous crowd thronging back to the center of
Berlin will never leave me. A great many were on foot. Their faces
were now different faces, as though they had been imbued with a
strange and totally new spirit. The non-Germans in the crowd were as
if stunned, and no less impressed than Hitler's fellow countrymen.
The French ambassador, André François-Poncet, noted:
The foreigners on the speaker's platform as guests of honor were not
alone in carrying away the impression of a truly beautiful and
wonderful public festival, an impression that was created by the
regime's genius for organization, by the night time display of
uniforms, by the play of lights, the rhythm of the music, by the flags
and the colorful fireworks; and they were not alone in thinking that a
breath of reconciliation and unity was passing over the Third Reich.
"It is our wish," Hitler had exclaimed, as though taking heaven as his
witness, "to get along together and to struggle together as brothers,
so that at the hour when we shall come before God, we might say to
him: 'See, Lord, we have changed. The German people are no longer a
people ashamed, a people mean and cowardly and divided. No, Lord! The
German people have become strong in their spirit, in their will, in
their perseverance, in their acceptance of any sacrifice. Lord, we
remain faithful to Thee! Bless our struggle!" (A. François-Poncet,
Souvenirs d'une ambassade à Berlin, p. 128.)

Who else could have made such an incantatory appeal without making
himself look ridiculous?

No politician had ever spoken of the rights of workers with such faith
and such force, or had laid out in such clear terms the social plan he
pledged to carry out on behalf of the common people.

The next day, the newspaper of the proletarian left, the "Union
Journal," reported on this mass meeting at which at least two thirds-a
million-of those attending were workers. "This May First was victory
day," the paper summed up.

With the workers thus won over, what further need was there for the
thousands of labor union locals that for so long had poisoned the
social life of the Reich and which, in any case, had accomplished
nothing of a lasting, positive nature?

Within hours of the conclusion of that "victory" meeting at the
Tempelhof field, the National Socialists were able to peacefully take
complete control of Germany's entire labor union organization,
including all its buildings, enterprises and banks. An era of Marxist
obstruction abruptly came to an end : from now on, a single national
organization would embody the collective will and interests of all of
Germany's workers.

Although he was now well on his way to creating what he pledged would
be a true "government of the people," Hitler also realized that great
obstacles remained. For one thing, the Communist rulers in Moscow had
not dropped their guard-or their guns. Restoring the nation would take
more than words and promises, it would take solid achievements. Only
then would the enthusiasm shown by the working class at the May First
mass meeting be an expression of lasting victory.

How could Hitler solve the great problem that had defied solution by
everyone else (both in Germany and abroad): putting millions of
unemployed back to work?

What would Hitler do about wages? Working hours? Leisure time?
Housing? How would he succeed in winning, at long last, respect for
the rights and dignity of the worker?

How could men's lives be improved-materially, morally, and, one might
even say, spiritually? How would he proceed to build a new society fit
for human beings, free of the inertia, injustices and prejudices of
the past?

"National Socialism," Hitler had declared at the outset, "has its
mission and its hour; it is not just a passing movement but a phase of
history."

The instruments of real power now in his hands-an authoritarian state,
its provinces subordinate but nonetheless organic parts of the
national whole-Hitler had acted quickly to shake himself free of the
last constraints of the impotent sectarian political parties.
Moreover, he was now able to direct a cohesive labor force that was no
longer split into a thousand rivulets but flowed as a single, mighty
current.

Hitler was self-confident, sure of the power of his own conviction. He
had no intention, or need, to resort to the use of physical force.
Instead, he intended to win over, one by one, the millions of Germans
who were still his adversaries, and even those who still hated him.
His conquest of Germany had taken years of careful planning and hard
work. Similarly, he would now realize his carefully worked out plans
for transforming the state and society. This meant not merely changes
in administrative or governmental structures, but far-reaching social
programs.

He had once vowed: "The hour will come when the 15 million people who
now hate us will be solidly behind us and will acclaim with us the new
revival we shall create together." Eventually he would succeed in
winning over even many of his most refractory skeptics and
adversaries.

His army of converts was already forming ranks. In a remarkable
tribute, historian Joachim Fest felt obliged to acknowledge
unequivocally:

Hitler had moved rapidly from the status of a demagogue to that of a
respected statesman. The craving to join the ranks of the victors was
spreading like an epidemic, and the shrunken minority of those who
resisted the urge were being visibly pushed into isolation-The past
was dead. The future, it seemed, belonged to the regime, which had
more and more followers, which was being hailed everywhere and
suddenly had sound reasons on its side.

And even the prominent leftist writer Kurt Tucholsky, sensing the
direction of the inexorable tide that was sweeping Germany, vividly
commented: "You don't go railing against the ocean." (J. Fest, Hitler,
pp. 415 f.)

"Our power," Hitler was now able to declare, "no longer belongs to any
territorial fraction of the Reich, nor to any single class of the
nation, but to the people in its totality."

Much still remained to be done, however. So far, Hitler had succeeded
in clearing the way of obstacles to his program. Now the time to build
had arrived.

So many others had failed to tackle the many daunting problems that
were now his responsibility. Above all, the nation demanded a solution
to the great problem of unemployment. Could Hitler now succeed where
others had so dismally failed?..

Unemployment could be combated and eliminated only by giving industry
the financial means to start up anew, to modernize, thus creating
millions of new jobs.

The normal rate of consumption would not be restored, let alone
increased, unless one first raised the starvation-level allowances
that were making purchases of any kind a virtual impossibility. On the
contrary, production and sales would have to be restored before the
six million unemployed could once again become purchasers.
The great economic depression could be overcome only by restimulating
industry, by bringing industry into step with the times, and by
promoting the development of new products..

Nearly ten years earlier, while in his prison cell, Hitler had already
envisioned a formidable system of national highways. He had also
conceived of a small, easily affordable automobile (later known as the
"Volkswagen"), and had even suggested its outline. It should have the
shape of a June bug, he proposed. Nature itself suggested the car's
aerodynamic line.

Until Hitler came to power, a car was the privilege of the rich. It
was not financially within the reach of the middle class, much less of
the worker. The "Volkswagen," costing one-tenth as much as the
standard automobile of earlier years, would eventually become a
popular work vehicle and a source of pleasure after work: a way to
unwind and get some fresh air, and of discovering, thanks to the new
Autobahn highway network, a magnificent country that then, in its
totality, was virtually unknown to the German worker.

From the beginning, Hitler wanted this economical new car to be built
for the millions. The production works would also become one of
Germany's most important industrial centers and employers.
During his imprisonment, Hitler had also drawn up plans for the
construction of popular housing developments and majestic public
buildings.

Some of Hitler's rough sketches still survive. They include groups of
individual worker's houses with their own gardens (which were to be
built in the hundreds of thousands), a plan for a covered stadium in
Berlin, and a vast congress hall, unlike any other in the world, that
would symbolize the grandeur of the National Socialist revolution.
"A building with a monumental dome," historian Werner Maser has
explained, "the plan of which he drew while he was writing Mein Kampf,
would have a span of 46 meters, a height of 220 meters, a diameter of
250 meters, and a capacity of 150 to 190 thousand people standing. The
interior of the building would have been 17 times larger than Saint
Peter's Cathedral in Rome." (W. Maser, Hitler, Adolf, p. 100.)

"That hall," architect Albert Speer has pointed out, "was not just an
idle dream impossible of achievement."

Hitler's imagination, therefore, had long been teeming with a number
of ambitious projects, many of which would eventually be realized.
Fortunately, the needed entrepreneurs, managers and technicians were
on hand. Hitler would not have to improvise.

Historian Werner Maser, although quite anti-Hitler-like nearly all of
his colleagues (how else would they have found publishers?) - has
acknowledged: "From the beginning of his political career, he [Hitler]
took great pains systematically to arrange for whatever he was going
to need in order to carry out his plans."

"Hitler was distinguished," Maser has also noted, "by an exceptional
intelligence in technical matters." Hitler had acquired his knowledge
by devoting many thousands of hours to technical studies from the time
of his youth.

"Hitler read an endless number of books," explained Dr. Schacht. "He
acquired a very considerable amount of knowledge and made masterful
use of it in discussions and speeches. In certain respects he was a
man endowed with genius. He had ideas that no one else would ever have
thought of, ideas that resulted in the ending of great difficulties,
sometimes by measures of an astonishing simplicity or brutality."
Many billions of marks would be needed to begin the great
socioeconomic revolution that was destined, as Hitler had always
intended, to make Germany once again the European leader in industry
and commerce and, most urgently, to rapidly wipe out unemployment in
Germany. Where would the money be found? And, once obtained, how would
these funds be allotted to ensure maximum effectiveness in their
investment?

Hitler was by no means a dictator in matters of the economy. He was,
rather, a stimulator. His government would undertake to do only that
which private initiative could not.

Hitler believed in the importance of individual creative imagination
and dynamism, in the need for every person of superior ability and
skill to assume responsibility.

He also recognized the importance of the profit motive. Deprived of
the prospect of having his efforts rewarded, the person of ability
often refrains from running risks. The economic failure of Communism
has demonstrated this. In the absence of personal incentives and the
opportunity for real individual initiative, the Soviet "command
economy" lagged in all but a few fields, its industry years behind its
competitors.

State monopoly tolls the death of all initiative, and hence of all
progress.

For all men selflessly to pool their wealth might be marvelous, but it
is also contrary to human nature. Nearly every man desires that his
labor shall improve his own condition and that of his family, and
feels that his brain, creative imagination, and persistence well
deserve their reward.

Because it disregarded these basic psychological truths, Soviet
Communism, right to the end, wallowed in economic mediocrity, in spite
of its immense reservoir of manpower, its technical expertise, and its
abundant natural resources, all of which ought to have made it an
industrial and technological giant.

Hitler was always adverse to the idea of state management of the
economy. He believed in elites. "A single idea of genius," he used to
say, "has more value than a lifetime of conscientious labor in an
office."

Just as there are political or intellectual elites, so also is there
an industrial elite. A manufacturer of great ability should not be
restrained, hunted down by the internal revenue services like a
criminal, or be unappreciated by the public. On the contrary, it is
important for economic development that the industrialist be
encouraged morally and materially, as much as possible.

The most fruitful initiatives Hitler would take from 1933 on would be
on behalf of private enterprise. He would keep an eye on the quality
of their directors, to be sure, and would shunt aside incompetents,
quite a few of them at times, but he also supported the best ones,
those with the keenest minds, the most imaginative and bold, even if
their political opinions did not always agree with his own.
"There is no question," he stated very firmly, "of dismissing a
factory owner or director under the pretext that he is not a National
Socialist."

Hitler would exercise the same moderation, the same pragmatism, in the
administrative as well as in the industrial sphere.
What he demanded of his co-workers, above all, was competence and
effectiveness. The great majority of Third Reich functionaries - some
80 percent-were never enrolled in the National Socialist party.
Several of Hitler's ministers, like Konstantin von Neurath and
Schwerin von Krosigk, and ambassadors to such key posts as Prague,
Vienna and Ankara, were not members of the party. But they were
capable..

"Herr Schacht," he said, "we are assuredly in agreement on one point:
no other single task facing the government at the moment can be so
truly urgent as conquering unemployment. That will take a lot of
money. Do you see any possibility of finding it apart from the
Reichsbank?" And after a moment, he added: "How much would it take? Do
you have any idea?"

Wishing to win Schacht over by appealing to his ambition, Hitler
smiled and then asked: "Would you be willing to once again assume
presidency of the Reichsbank?" Schacht let on that he had a
sentimental concern for Dr. Luther, and did not want to hurt the
incumbent's feelings. Playing along, Hitler reassured Schacht that he
would find an appropriate new job elsewhere for Luther.
Schacht then pricked up his ears, drew himself up, and focused his big
round eyes on Hitler: "Well, if that's the way it is," he said, "then
I am ready to assume the presidency of the Reichsbank again."
His great dream was being realized. Schacht had been president of the
Reichsbank between 1923 and 1930, but had been dismissed. Now he would
return in triumph. He felt vindicated. Within weeks, the ingenious
solution to Germany's pressing financial woes would burst forth from
his inventive brain.

"It was necessary," Schacht later explained, "to discover a method
that would avoid inflating the investment holdings of the Reichsbank
immoderately and consequently increasing the circulation of money
excessively."

"Therefore," he went on, "I had to find some means of getting the sums
that were lying idle in pockets and banks, without meaning for it to
be long term and without having it undergo the risk of depreciation.
That was the reasoning behind the Mefo bonds."

What were these "Mefo" bonds? Mefo was a contraction of the
Metallurgische Forschungs-GmbH (Metallurgic Research Company). With a
startup capitalization of one billion marks - which Hitler and Schacht
arranged to be provided by the four giant firms of Krupp, Siemens,
Deutsche Werke and Rheinmetall-this company would eventually promote
many billions of marks worth of investment.

Enterprises, old and new, that filled government orders had only to
draw drafts on Mefo for the amounts due. These drafts, when presented
to the Reichsbank, were immediately convertible into cash. The success
of the Mefo program depended entirely on public acceptance of the Mefo
bonds. But the wily Schacht had planned well. Since Mefo bonds were
short-term bonds that could be cashed in at any time, there was no
real risk in buying, accepting or holding them. They bore an interest
of four percent-a quite acceptable figure in those days-whereas
banknotes hidden under the mattress earned nothing. The public quickly
took all this into consideration and eagerly accepted the bonds.
While the Reichsbank was able to offer from its own treasury a
relatively insignificant 150 million marks for Hitler's war on
unemployment, in just four years the German public subscribed more
than 12 billion marks worth of Mefo bonds!

These billions, the fruit of the combined imagination, ingenuity and
astuteness of Hitler and Schacht, swept away the temporizing and
fearful conservatism of the bankers. Over the next four years, this
enormous credit reserve would make miracles possible.
Soon after the initial billion-mark credit, Schacht added another
credit of 600 million in order to finance the start of Hitler's grand
program for highway construction. This Autobahn program provided
immediate work for 100,000 of the unemployed, and eventually assured
wages for some 500,000 workers.

As large as this outlay was, it was immediately offset by a
corresponding cutback in government unemployment benefits, and by the
additional tax revenue generated as a result of the increase in living
standard (sping) of the newly employed.

Within a few months, thanks to the credit created by the Mefo bonds,
private industry once again dared to assume risks and expand. Germans
returned to work by the hundreds of thousands.

Was Schacht solely responsible for this extraordinary turnaround?
After the war, he answered for himself as a Nuremberg Tribunal
defendant, where he was charged with having made possible the Reich's
economic revival:

I don't think Hitler was reduced to begging for my help. If I had not
served him, he would have found other methods, other means. He was not
a man to give up. It's easy enough for you to say, Mr. Prosecutor,
that I should have watched Hitler die and not lifted a finger. But the
entire working class would have died with him!

Even Marxists recognized Hitler's success, and their own failure. In
the June 1934 issue of the Zeitschrift für Sozialismus, the journal of
the German Social Democrats in exile, this acknowledgement appears:
Faced with the despair of proletarians reduced to joblessness, of
young people with diplomas and no future, of the middle classes of
merchants and artisans condemned to bankruptcy, and of farmers
terribly threatened by the collapse in agricultural prices, we all
failed. We weren't capable of offering the masses anything but
speeches about the glory of socialism.

VI. The Social Revolution
Hitler's tremendous social achievement in putting Germany's six
million unemployed back to work is seldom acknowledged today. Although
it was much more than a transitory achievement, "democratic"
historians routinely dismiss it in just a few lines. Since 1945, not a
single objective scholarly study has been devoted to this highly
significant, indeed unprecedented, historical phenomenon.
Similarly neglected is the body of sweeping reforms that dramatically
changed the condition of the worker in Germany. Factories were
transformed from gloomy caverns to spacious and healthy work centers,
with natural lighting, surrounded by gardens and playing fields.
Hundreds of thousands of attractive houses were built for working
class families. A policy of several weeks of paid vacation was
introduced, along with week and holiday trips by land and sea. A
wide-ranging program of physical and cultural education for young
workers was established, with the world's best system of technical
training. The Third Reich's social security and workers' health
insurance system was the world's most modern and complete.
This remarkable record of social achievement is routinely hushed up
today because it is embarrasses those who uphold the orthodox view of
the Third Reich. Otherwise, readers might begin to think that perhaps
Hitler was the greatest social builder of the twentieth century..

Nevertheless, restoring work and bread to millions of unemployed who
had been living in misery for years; restructuring industrial life;
conceiving and establishing an organization for the effective defense
and betterment of the nation's millions of wage earners; creating a
new bureaucracy and judicial system that guaranteed the civic rights
of each member of the national community, while simultaneously holding
each person to his or her responsibilities as a German citizen: this
organic body of reforms was part of a single, comprehensive plan,
which Hitler had conceived and worked out years earlier.
Without this plan, the nation would have collapsed into anarchy.
All-encompassing, this program included broad industrial recovery as
well as detailed attention to even construction of comfortable inns
along the new highway network.

It took several years for a stable social structure to emerge from the
French Revolution. The Soviets needed even more time: five years after
the Bolshevik revolution of 1917, hundreds of thousands of Russians
were still dying of hunger and disease. In Germany, by contrast, the
great machinery was in motion within months, with organization and
accomplishment quickly meshing together..

Hitler personally dug the first spadeful of earth for the first
Autobahn highway, linking Frankfurt-am-Main with Darmstadt. For the
occasion, he brought along Dr. Schacht, the man whose visionary credit
wizardry had made the project possible. The official procession moved
ahead, three cars abreast in front, then six across, spanning the
entire width of the autobahn..

Hitler's plan to build thousands of low-cost homes also demanded a
vast mobilization of manpower. He had envisioned housing that would be
attractive, cozy, and affordable for millions of ordinary German
working-class families. He had no intention of continuing to tolerate,
as his predecessors had, cramped, ugly "rabbit warren" housing for the
German people. The great barracks-like housing projects on the
outskirts of factory towns, packed with cramped families, disgusted
him.

The greater part of the houses he would build were single story,
detached dwellings, with small yards where children could romp, wives
could grow vegetable and flower gardens, while the bread-winners could
read their newspapers in peace after the day's work. These
single-family homes were built to conform to the architectural styles
of the various German regions, retaining as much as possible the
charming local variants.

Wherever there was no practical alternative to building large
apartment complexes, Hitler saw to it that the individual apartments
were spacious, airy and enhanced by surrounding lawns and gardens
where the children could play safely.

The new housing was, of course, built in conformity with the highest
standards of public health, a consideration notoriously neglected in
previous working-class projects.

Generous loans, amortizable in ten years, were granted to newly
married couples so they could buy their own homes. At the birth of
each child, a fourth of the debt was cancelled. Four children, at the
normal rate of a new arrival every two and a half years, sufficed to
cancel the entire loan debt.

Once, during a conversation with Hitler, I expressed my astonishment
at this policy. "But then, you never get back the total amount of your
loans?," I asked. "How so?" he replied, smiling. "Over a period of ten
years, a family with four children brings in much more than our loans,
through the taxes levied on a hundred different items of consumption."
As it happened, tax revenues increased every year, in proportion to
the rise in expenditures for Hitler's social programs. In just a few
years, revenue from taxes tripled. Hitler's Germany never experienced
a financial crisis.

To stimulate the moribund economy demanded the nerve, which Hitler
had, to invest money that the government didn't yet have, rather than
passively waiting-in accordance with "sound" financial principles-for
the economy to revive by itself.

Today, our whole era is dying economically because we have succumbed
to fearful hesitation. Enrichment follows investment, not the other
way around..

Even before the year 1933 had ended, Hitler had succeeded in building
202,119 housing units. Within four years he would provide the German
people with nearly a million and a half (1,458,128) new dwellings!
Moreover, workers would no longer be exploited as they had been. A
month's rent for a worker could not exceed 26 marks, or about an
eighth of the average wage then. Employees with more substantial
salaries paid monthly rents of up to 45 marks maximum.

Equally effective social measures were taken in behalf of farmers, who
had the lowest incomes. In 1933 alone 17,611 new farm houses were
built, each of them surrounded by a parcel of land one thousand square
meters in size. Within three years, Hitler would build 91,000 such
farmhouses..

Everywhere industry was hiring again, with some firms-like Krupp, IG
Farben and the large automobile manufacturers-taking on new workers on
a very large scale. As the country became more prosperous, car sales
increased by more than 80,000 units in 1933 alone. Employment in the
auto industry doubled. Germany was gearing up for full production,
with private industry leading the way.

The new government lavished every assistance on the private sector,
the chief factor in employment as well as production. Hitler almost
immediately made available 500 million marks in credits to private
business.

This start-up assistance given to German industry would repay itself
many times over. Soon enough, another two billion marks would be
loaned to the most enterprising companies. Nearly half would go into
new wages and salaries, saving the treasury an estimated three hundred
million marks in unemployment benefits. Added to the hundreds of
millions in tax receipts spurred by the business recovery, the state
quickly recovered its investment, and more.

Hitler's entire economic policy would be based on the following
equation: risk large sums to undertake great public works and to spur
the renewal and modernization of industry, then later recover the
billions invested through invisible and painless tax revenues. It
didn't take long for Germany to see the results of Hitler's recovery
formula.

Economic recovery, as important as it was, nevertheless wasn't
Hitler's only objective. As he strived to restore full employment,
Hitler never lost sight of his goal of creating a organization
powerful enough to stand up to capitalist owners and managers, who had
shown little concern for the health and welfare of the entire national
community.

Hitler would impose on everyone-powerful boss and lowly wage earner
alike-his own concept of the organic social community. Only the loyal
collaboration of everyone could assure the prosperity of all classes
and social groups.

Consistent with their doctrine, Germany's Marxist leaders had set
class against class, helping to bring the country to the brink of
economic collapse. Deserting their Marxist unions and political
parties in droves, most workers had come to realize that strikes and
grievances their leaders incited only crippled production, and thus
the workers as well.

By the of 1932, in any case, the discredited labor unions were
drowning in massive debt that realistically could never be repaid.
Some of the less scrupulous union officials, sensing the oncoming
catastrophe, had begun stealing hundreds of thousands of marks from
the workers they represented. The Marxist leaders had failed:
socially, financially and morally.

Every joint human activity requires a leader. The head of a factory or
business is also the person naturally responsible for it. He oversees
every aspect of production and work. In Hitler's Germany, the head of
a business had to be both a capable director and a person concerned
for the social justice and welfare of his employees. Under Hitler,
many owners and managers who had proven to be unjust, incompetent or
recalcitrant lost their jobs, or their businesses.

A considerable number of legal guarantees protected the worker against
any abuse of authority at the workplace. Their purpose was to insure
that the rights of workers were respected, and that workers were
treated as worthy collaborators, not just as animated tools. Each
industrialist was legally obliged to collaborate with worker delegates
in drafting shop regulations that were not imposed from above but
instead adapted to each business enterprise and its particular working
conditions. These regulations had to specify "the length of the
working day, the time and method of paying wages, and the safety
rules, and to be posted throughout the factory," within easy access of
both the worker whose interests might be angered and the owner or
manager whose orders might be subverted.

The thousands of different, individual versions of such regulations
served to create a healthy rivalry, with every factory group vying to
outdo the others in efficiency and justice.

One of the first reforms to benefit German workers was the
establishment of paid vacations. In France, the leftist Popular Front
government would noisily claim, in 1936, to have originated legally
mandated paid vacations-and stingy ones at that, only one week per
year. But it was actually Hitler who first established them, in 1933
-- and they were two or three times more generous.

Under Hitler, every factory employee had the legal right to paid
vacation. Previously, paid vacations had not normally exceed four or
five days, and nearly half of the younger workers had no vacation time
at all. If anything, Hitler favored younger workers; the youngest
workers received more generous vacations. This was humane and made
sense: a young person has more need of rest and fresh air to develop
his maturing strength and vigor. Thus, they enjoyed a full 18 days of
paid vacation per year.

Today, more than half a century later, these figures have been
surpassed, but in 1933 they far exceeded European norms.
The standard vacation was twelve days. Then, from the age of 25 on, it
went up to 18 days. After ten years with the company, workers got a
still longer vacation: 21 days, or three times what the French
socialists would grant the workers of their country in 1936.
Hitler introduced the standard forty-hour work week in Europe. As for
overtime work, it was now compensated, as nowhere else in the
continent at the time, at an increased pay rate. And with the
eight-hour work day now the norm, overtime work became more readily
available.

In another innovation, work breaks were made longer: two hours each
day, allowing greater opportunity for workers to relax, and to make
use of the playing fields that large industries were now required to
provide.

Whereas a worker's right to job security had been virtually
non-existent, now an employee could no longer be dismissed at the sole
discretion of the employer. Hitler saw to it that workers' rights were
spelled out and enforced. Henceforth, an employer had to give four
weeks notice before firing an employee, who then had up to two months
to appeal the dismissal. Dismissals could also be annulled by the
"Courts of Social Honor" (Ehrengerichte).

This Court was one of three great institutions that were established
to protect German workers. The others were the "Labor Commissions" and
the "Council of Trust."

The "Council of Trust" (Vertrauensrat) was responsible for
establishing and developing a real spirit of community between
management and labor. "In every business enterprise," the 1934 "Labor
Charter" law stipulated, "the employer and head of the enterprise
(Führer), the employees and workers, personnel of the enterprise,
shall work jointly toward the goal of the enterprise and the common
good of the nation."

No longer would either be exploited by the other-neither the worker by
arbitrary whim of the employer, nor the employer through the blackmail
of strikes for political ends.

Article 35 of the "Labor Charter" law stated: "Every member of an
enterprise community shall assume the responsibility required by his
position in said common enterprise." In short, each enterprise would
be headed by a dynamic executive, charged with a sense of the greater
community-no longer a selfish capitalist with unconditional, arbitrary
power.

"The interest of the community may require that an incapable or
unworthy employer be relieved of his duties," the "Labor Charter"
stipulated. The employer was no longer unassailable, an all-powerful
boss with the last word on hiring and firing his staff. He, too, would
be subject to the workplace regulations, which he was now obliged to
respect no less than the least of his employees. The law conferred the
honor and responsibility of authority on the employer only insofar as
he merited it..

In the Third Reich, the worker knew that "exploitation of his physical
strength in bad faith or in violation of his honor" was no longer
tolerated. He had obligations to the community, but he shared these
obligations with every other member of the enterprise, from the chief
executive to the messenger boy. Finally, the German worker had clearly
defined social rights, which were arbitrated and enforced by
independent agencies. And while all this had been achieved in an
atmosphere of justice and moderation, it nevertheless constituted a
genuine social revolution..

Factories and shops, large and small, were altered or transformed to
conform to the strictest standards of cleanliness and hygiene:
interiors, so often dark and stifling, were opened up to light;
playing fields were constructed; rest areas where workers could unbend
during break, were set aside; employee cafeterias and respectable
locker rooms were opened. The larger industrial establishments, in
addition to providing the normally required conventional sports
facilities, were obliged to put in swimming pools!

In just three years, these achievements would reach unimagined
heights: more than two thousand factories refitted and beautified;
23,000 work premises modernized; 800 buildings designed exclusively
for meetings; 1,200 playing fields; 13,000 sanitary facilities; 17,000
cafeterias.

To assure the healthy development of the working class, physical
education courses were instituted for younger workers. Some 8,000 were
eventually organized. Technical training was equally emphasized.
Hundreds of work schools, and thousands of technical courses were
created. There were examinations for professional competence, and
competitions in which generous prizes were awarded to outstanding
masters of their craft.

Eight hundred departmental inspectors and 17,300 local inspectors were
employed to conscientiously monitor and promote these improvements.
To provide affordable vacations for German workers on a hitherto
unprecedented scale, Hitler established the "Strength through Joy"
program. As a result, hundreds of thousands of workers were now able
to make relaxing vacation trips on land and sea each summer.
Magnificent cruise ships were built, and special trains brought
vacationers to the mountains and the seashore. In just a few years,
Germany's working-class tourists would log a distance equivalent to 54
times the circumference of the earth! And thanks to generous state
subsidies, the cost to workers of these popular vacation excursions
was nearly insignificant..

Was Hitler's transformation of the lot of the working class
authoritarian? Without a doubt. And yet, for a people that had grown
sick and tired of anarchy, this new authoritarianism wasn't regarded
as an imposition. In fact, people have always accepted a strong man's
leadership.

In any case, there is no doubt that the attitude of the German working
class, which was still two-thirds non-Nazi at the start of 1933, soon
changed completely. As Belgian author Marcel Laloire noted at the
time:

When you make your way through the cities of Germany and go into the
working-class districts, go through the factories, the construction
yards, you are astonished to find so many workers on the job sporting
the Hitler insignia, to see so many flags with the swastika, black on
a bright red background, in the most densely populated districts.
Hitler's "German Labor Front" (Deutsche Arbeitsfront), which
incorporated all workers and employers, was for the most part eagerly
accepted. The steel spades of the sturdy young lads of the "National
Labor Service" (Reichsarbeitsdienst) could also be seen gleaming along
the highways.

Hitler created the National Labor Service not only to alleviate
unemployment, but to bring together, in absolute equality, and in the
same uniform, both the sons of millionaires and the sons of the
poorest families for several months' common labor and living.
All performed the same work, all were subject to the same discipline;
they enjoyed the same pleasures and benefited from the same physical
and moral development. At the same construction sites and in the same
barracks, Germans became conscious of what they had in common, grew to
understand one another, and discarded their old prejudices of class
and caste.

After a hitch in the National Labor Service, a young worker knew that
the rich man's son was not a pampered monster, while the young lad of
wealthy family knew that the worker's son had no less honor than a
nobleman or an heir to riches; they had lived and worked together as
comrades. Social hatred was vanishing, and a socially united people
was being born.

Hitler could go into factories-something few men of the so-called
Right would have risked in the past-and hold forth to crowds of
workers, at times in the thousands, as at the huge Siemens works. "In
contrast to the von Papens and other country gentlemen," he might tell
them, "in my youth I was a worker like you. And in my heart of hearts,
I have remained what I was then."

During his twelve years in power, no untoward incident ever occurred
at any factory he visited. Hitler was at home when he went among the
people, and he was received like a member of the family returning home
after making a success of himself.

But the Chancellor of the Third Reich wanted more than popular
approval. He wanted that approval to be freely, widely, and repeatedly
expressed by popular vote. No people was ever be more frequently asked
for their electoral opinion than the German people of that era-five
times in five years.

For Hitler, it was not enough that the people voted from time to time,
as in the previous democratic system. In those days, voters were
rarely appealed to, and when they expressed an opinion, they were
often ill-informed and apathetic. After an election, years might go
by, during which the politicians were heedless and inaccessible, the
electorate powerless to vote on their actions.

To enable the German public to express its opinion on the occasion of
important events of social, national, or international significance,
Hitler provided the people a new means of approving or rejecting his
own actions as Chancellor: the plebiscite.

Hitler recognized the right of all the people, men and women alike, to
vote by secret ballot: to voice their opinion of his policies, or to
make a well-grounded judgment on this or that great decision in
domestic or foreign affairs. Rather than a formalistic routine,
democracy became a vital, active program of supervision that was
renewed annually.

The articles of the "Plebiscite Law" were brief and clear:

1.The Reich government may ask the people whether or not it approves
of a measure planned by or taken by the government. This may also
apply to a law.

2. A measure submitted to plebiscite will be considered as established
when it receives a simple majority of the votes. This will apply as
well to a law modifying the Constitution.

3. If the people approves the measure in question, it will be applied
in conformity with article III of the Law for Overcoming the Distress
of the People and the Reich.

The Reich Interior Ministry is authorized to take all legal and
administrative measures necessary to carry out this law.
Berlin, July 14, 1933.
Hitler, Frick..

From the first months of 1933, his accomplishments were public fact,
for all to see. Before end of the year, unemployment in Germany had
fallen from more than 6,000,000 to 3,374,000. Thus, 2,627,000 jobs had
been created since the previous February, when Hitler began his
"gigantic task!" A simple question: Who in Europe ever achieved
similar results in so short a time?..

In his detailed and critical biography of Hitler, Joachim Fest limited
his treatment of Hitler's extraordinary social achievements in 1933 to
a few paragraphs. All the same, Fest did not refrain from
acknowledging:

The regime insisted that it was not the rule of one social class above
all others, and by granting everyone opportunities to rise, it in fact
demonstrated class neutrality-These measures did indeed break through
the old, petrified social structures. They tangibly improved the
material condition of much of the population. (J. Fest, Hitler, pp.
434-435.)

Not without reason were the swastika banners waving proudly throughout
the working-class districts where, just a year ago, they had been
unceremoniously torn down.

[Topaz]

An article by Dr. Joseph Goebbels, January 21, 1945
The Creators of the World's Misfortunes
by Joseph Goebbels

One could not understand this war if one did not always keep in mind
the fact that International Jewry stands behind all the unnatural
forces that our united enemies use to attempt to deceive the world and
keep humanity in the dark. It is so to speak the mortar that holds the
enemy coalition firmly together, despite its differences of class,
ideology and interests. Capitalism and Bolshevism have the same Jewish
roots, two branches of the same tree that in the end bear the same
fruit. International Jewry uses both in its own way to suppress the
nations and keep them in its service. How deep its influence on public
opinion is in all the enemy countries and many neutral nations is
plain to see that it may never be named in newspapers, speeches and
radio broadcasts. There is a law in the Soviet Union that punishes
anti-Semitism - or in plain English, public education about the Jewish
Question - by death. The expert in these matters is in no way
surprised that a leading spokesman for the Kremlin said over the New
Year that the Soviet Union would not rest until this law was valid
throughout the world. In other words, the enemy clearly says that its
goal in this war is to put the total domination of Jewry over the
nations of the earth under legal protection, and to threaten even a
discussion of this shameful attempt with the death penalty.

It is little different in the plutocratic nations. There the struggle
against the impudent usurpation of the Jewish race is not punished by
the executioner, rather by death through economic and social boycott
and by intellectual terror. This has the same effect in the end.
Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt were made by the Jewry. They enjoy its
full support and reward it with their full protection. They present
themselves in their speeches as upright men of civil courage, yet one
never hears even a word against the Jews, even though there is growing
hatred among their people as a result of this war, a hatred that is
fully justified. Jewry is a taboo theme in the enemy countries. It
stands outside every legal boundary and thus becomes the tyrant of its
host peoples. While enemy soldiers fight, bleed and die at the front,
the Jews make money from their sacrifice on the stock exchanges and
black markets. If a brave man dares to step forward and accuse the
Jews of their crimes, he will be mocked and spat on by their press,
chased from his job or otherwise impoverished, and be brought into
public contempt. Even that is apparently not enough for the Jews. They
want to bring Soviet conditions to the whole world: to give Jewry
absolute power and freedom from prosecution. He who objects or even
debates the matter gets a bullet in the back of his head or an axe
through his neck. There is no worse tyranny than this. This is the
epitome of the public and secret disgrace that Jewry inflicts on the
nations that deserve freedom.

That is all long behind us. Yet it still threatens us in the distance.
We have, it is true, entirely broken the power of the Jews in the
Reich, but they have not given up. They did not rest until they had
mobilized the whole world against us. Since they could no longer
conquer Germany from within, they want to try it from without. Every
Russian, English and American soldier is a mercenary of this world
conspiracy of a parasitic race. Given the current state of the war,
who could still believe that they are fighting and dying at the front
for the national interests of their countries! The nations want a
decent peace, but the Jews are against it. They know that the end of
the war would mean the dawning knowledge of humanity of the unhealthy
role that International Jewry played in preparing for and carrying out
this war. They fear being unmasked, which has in fact become
unavoidable and must inevitably come, just as the day follows the
night. That explains their raging bursts of hatred against us, which
are only the result of their fear and their feelings of inferiority.
They are too eager, and that makes them suspicious. International
Jewry will not succeed in turning this war to its advantage. Things
are already too far along. The hour will come in which all the peoples
of the earth will awake, and the Jews will be the victims. Here too
things can only go so far.

It is an old, often-used method of International Jewry to discredit
education and knowledge about its corrupting nature and drives,
thereby depending on the weaknesses of those people who easily confuse
cause with effect. The Jews are also masters at manipulating public
opinion, which they dominate through their network of news agencies
and press concerns that reaches throughout the world. The pitiful
illusion of a free press is one of the methods they use to stupefy the
publics of enemy lands. If the enemy press is as free as it pretends
to be, let it take an open position, for or against, on the Jewish
Question. It will not do that because it cannot and may not do so. The
Jews love to mock and criticize everything except themselves, although
everyone knows that they are most in need of public criticism. This is
where the so-called freedom of the press in enemy countries ends.
Newspapers, parliaments, statesmen and church leaders must be silent
here. Crimes and vices, filth and corruption are covered by the
blanket of love. The Jews have total control of public opinion in
enemy countries, and he who has that is also master of all of public
life. Only the nations that have to accept such a condition are to be
pitied. The Jews mislead them into believing that the German nation is
backward. Our alleged backwardness is actually proof of our progress.
We have recognized the Jews as a national and international danger,
and from this knowledge have drawn compelling conclusions. This German
knowledge will become the knowledge of he world at the end of this
war. We think it our primary duty to do everything in our power to
make that happen.

Humanity would sink into eternal darkness, it would fall into a dull
and primitive state, were the Jews to win this war. They are the
incarnation of that destructive force that in these terrible years has
guided the enemy war leadership in a fight against all that we see as
noble, beautiful and worth keeping. For that reason alone the Jews
hate it. They despite our culture and learning, which they perceive as
towering over their nomadic worldview. They fear our economic and
social standards, which leave no room for their parasitic drives, They
are the enemy of our domestic order, which has excluded their
anarchistic tendencies. Germany is the first nation in the world that
is entirely free of the Jews. That is the prime cause of its political
and economic balance. Since their expulsion from the German national
body has made it impossible for them to shake this balance from
within, they lead the nations they have deceived in battle against us
from without. It is fine with them, in fact it is part of their plan,
that Europe in the process will lose a large part of its cultural
values. The Jews had no part in their creation. They do not understand
them. A deep racial instinct tells them that since these heights of
human creative activity are forever out of their reach, they must
attack them today with hatred. The day is not distant when the nations
of Europe, yes, even those of the whole world, will shout: The Jews
are guilty for all our misfortunes! They must be called to account,
and soon and thoroughly!
International Jewry is ready with its alibi. Just as during the great
reckoning in Germany, they will attempt to look innocent and say that
one needs a scapegoat, and they are it. But that will no longer help
them, just as it did not help them during the National Socialist
revolution, The proof of their historical guilt, in details large and
small, is so plain that they can no longer be denied even with the
most clever lies and hypocrisy.

Who is it that drives the Russians, the English and the Americans into
battle and sacrifices huge numbers of human lives in a hopeless
struggle against the German people? The Jews! Their newspapers and
radio broadcasts spread the songs of war while the nations they have
deceived are led to the slaughter. Who is it that invents new plans of
hatred and destruction against us every day, making this war into a
dreadful case of self-mutilation and self-destruction of European life
and its economy, education and culture? The Jews! Who devised the
unnatural marriage between England and the USA on one side and
Bolshevism on the other, building it up and jealously ensuring its
continuance? Who covers the most perverse political situations with
cynical hypocrisy from a trembling fear that a new way could lead the
nations to realize the true causes of this terrible human catastrophe?
The Jews, only the Jews! They are named Morgenthau and Lehmann and
stand behind Roosevelt as a so-called brain trust. They are named
Mechett and Sasoon and serve as Churchill's money bags and order
givers. They are named Kaganovitsch and Ehrenburg and are Stalin's
pacesetters and intellectual spokesmen. Wherever you look, you see
Jews. They march as political commisars behind the Red army and
organize murder and terror in the areas conquered by the Soviets. They
sit behind the lines in Paris and Brussels, Rome and Athens, and
fashion their reins from the skin of the unhappy nations that have
fallen under their power.

That is the truth. It can no longer be denied, particularly since in
their drunken joy of power and victory the Jews have forgotten their
ordinarily so carefully maintained reserve and now stand in the
spotlight of public opinion. They no longer bother, apparently
believing that it is no longer necessary, that their hour has come.
And this is their mistake, which they always make when think
themselves near their great goal of anonymous world domination.
Throughout the history of the nations, whenever this tragic situation
developed, a good providence saw to it that the Jews themselves became
the grave diggers of their own hopes. They did not destroy the healthy
peoples, rather the sting of their parasitic effects brought the
realization of the looming danger to the forefront and led to the
greatest sacrifices to overcome it. At a certain point, they become
that power that always wants evil but creates good. It will be that
way this time too.

The fact that the German nation was the first on earth to recognize
this danger and expel it from its organism is proof of its healthy
instincts. It therefore became the leader of a world struggle whose
results will determine of fate and the future of International Jewry.
We view with complete calm the wild Old Testament tirades of hatred
and revenge of Jews throughout the world against us. They are only
proof that we are on the right path. They cannot unsettle us. We gaze
on them with sovereign contempt and remember that these outbursts of
hate and revenge were everyday events for us in Germany until that
fateful day for International Jewry, 30 January 1933, when the world
revolution against the Jews that threatened not only Germany, but all
the other nations, began.
It will not cease before it has reached its goal. The truth can not be
stopped by lies or force. It will get through. The Jews will meet
their Cannae at the end of this war. Not Europe, rather they will
lose. They may laugh at this prophecy today, but they have laughed so
often in the past, and almost as often they stopped laughing sooner or
later. Not only do we know precisely what we want, we also know
precisely what we do not want. The deceived nations of he Earth may
still lack the knowledge they need, but we will bring it to them. How
will the Jews stop that in the long run? They believe their power
rests on sure foundations, but it stands on feet of clay. One hard
blow and it will collapse, burying the creators of the misfortunes of
the world in its ruins.

[Topaz]

On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 22:52:36 -0700, Sn...@smack.com wrote:


>
>He was a ally of Stalin
>

The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, named after Soviet foreign minister
Vyacheslav Molotov and German foreign minister Joachim von Ribbentrop,
refers to the officially-titled Treaty of Non-aggression between
Germany and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

A treaty of non-aggression does not mean they were allies. The USA
really was allies with the Soviet Union but your Jewish controlled
media doesn't instruct you to think about that.

The Germans made radio broadcasts to America from Berlin. This is
part of what they said:

"The world today is divided into two camps. On the one side
Bolshevism, and on the other the forces for civilization. Why is
America on the wrong side?


Here are some quotes from Mein Kampf:

"the problem of how the future of the German nation can be secured is
the problem of how Marxism can be exterminated."

"The largest so-called bourgeois mass meetings were accustomed to
dissolve, and those in attendance would run away like rabbits when
frightened by a dog as soon as a dozen communists appeared on the
scene."

"We used to roar with laughter at these silly faint-hearted bourgeosie
and their efforts to puzzle out our origin, our intentions, and our
aims.
"We chose red for our posters after particular and careful
deliberation, our intention being to irritate the Left, so as to
arouse their attention and tempt them to come to our meetings--if only
to break them up--so that in this way we got a chance of talking to
the people."

"At meetings, particularly outside Munich, we had in those days from
five to eight hundred opponents against fifteen to sixteen National
Socialists; yet we brooked no interference, for we were ready to be
killed rather than capitulate. More than once a handful of party
colleagues offered a heroic resistance to a raging and violent mob of
Reds. Those fifteen or twenty men would certainly have been
overwhelmed in the end had not the opponents known that three or four
times as many of themselves would first get their skulls cracked. And
that was a risk they were not willing to run."

When Hitler marched through the streets with his Storm Troops he
carried a walking stick. The Reds came to oppose them and throw stones
and things, but when it got very bad Hitler would raise the stick.
This was the signal to his men to clear the streets of the Reds. And
soon there was not a Red left to be found.

[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."

[Topaz]

Message of H.E. Dr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
President of the Islamic Republic of Iran
To the American People

In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful

O, Almighty God, bestow upon humanity the perfect human being promised
to all by You, and make us among his followers.

Noble Americans,

Were we not faced with the activities of the US administration in this
part of the world and the negative ramifications of those activities
on the daily lives of our peoples, coupled with the many wars and
calamities caused by the US administration as well as the tragic
consequences of US interference in other countries;

Were the American people not God-fearing, truth-loving, and
justice-seeking, while the US administration actively conceals the
truth and impedes any objective portrayal of current realities;

And if we did not share a common responsibility to promote and protect
freedom and human dignity and integrity;

Then, there would have been little urgency to have a dialogue with
you.

While Divine providence has placed Iran and the United States
geographically far apart, we should be cognizant that human values and
our common human spirit, which proclaim the dignity and exalted worth
of all human beings, have brought our two great nations of Iran and
the United States closer together.

Both our nations are God-fearing, truth-loving and justice-seeking,
and both seek dignity, respect and perfection.

Both greatly value and readily embrace the promotion of human ideals
such as compassion, empathy, respect for the rights of human beings,
securing justice and equity, and defending the innocent and the weak
against oppressors and bullies.

We are all inclined towards the good, and towards extending a helping
hand to one another, particularly to those in need.

We all deplore injustice, the trampling of peoples' rights and the
intimidation and humiliation of human beings.

We all detest darkness, deceit, lies and distortion, and seek and
admire salvation, enlightenment, sincerity and honesty.

The pure human essence of the two great nations of Iran and the United
States testify to the veracity of these statements.

Noble Americans,

Our nation has always extended its hand of friendship to all other
nations of the world.

Hundreds of thousands of my Iranian compatriots are living amongst you
in friendship and peace, and are contributing positively to your
society. Our people have been in contact with you over the past many
years and have maintained these contacts despite the unnecessary
restrictions of US authorities.

As mentioned, we have common concerns, face similar challenges, and
are pained by the sufferings and afflictions in the world.

We, like you, are aggrieved by the ever-worsening pain and misery of
the Palestinian people. Persistent aggressions by the Zionists are
making life more and more difficult for the rightful owners of the
land of Palestine. In broad day-light, in front of cameras and before
the eyes of the world, they are bombarding innocent defenseless
civilians, bulldozing houses, firing machine guns at students in the
streets and alleys, and subjecting their families to endless grief.

No day goes by without a new crime.

Palestinian mothers, just like Iranian and American mothers, love
their children, and are painfully bereaved by the imprisonment,
wounding and murder of their children. What mother wouldn't?

For 60 years, the Zionist regime has driven millions of the
inhabitants of Palestine out of their homes. Many of these refugees
have died in the Diaspora and in refugee camps. Their children have
spent their youth in these camps and are aging while still in the hope
of returning to homeland.

You know well that the US administration has persistently provided
blind and blanket support to the Zionist regime, has emboldened it to
continue its crimes, and has prevented the UN Security Council from
condemning it.

Who can deny such broken promises and grave injustices towards
humanity by the US administration?

Governments are there to serve their own people. No people wants to
side with or support any oppressors. But regrettably, the US
administration disregards even its own public opinion and remains in
the forefront of supporting the trampling of the rights of the
Palestinian people.

Let's take a look at Iraq. Since the commencement of the US military
presence in Iraq, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have been killed,
maimed or displaced. Terrorism in Iraq has grown exponentially. With
the presence of the US military in Iraq, nothing has been done to
rebuild the ruins, to restore the infrastructure or to alleviate
poverty. The US Government used the pretext of the existence of
weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, but later it became clear that
that was just a lie and a deception.

Although Saddam was overthrown and people are happy about his
departure, the pain and suffering of the Iraqi people has persisted
and has even been aggravated.

In Iraq, about one hundred and fifty thousand American soldiers,
separated from their families and loved ones, are operating under the
command of the current US administration. A substantial number of
them have been killed or wounded and their presence in Iraq has
tarnished the image of the American people and government.

Their mothers and relatives have, on numerous occasions, displayed
their discontent with the presence of their sons and daughters in a
land thousands of miles away from US shores. American soldiers often
wonder why they have been sent to Iraq.

I consider it extremely unlikely that you, the American people,
consent to the billions of dollars of annual expenditure from your
treasury for this military misadventure.

Noble Americans,

You have heard that the US administration is kidnapping its presumed
opponents from across the globe and arbitrarily holding them without
trial or any international supervision in horrendous prisons that it
has established in various parts of the world. God knows who these
detainees actually are, and what terrible fate awaits them.

You have certainly heard the sad stories of the Guantanamo and
Abu-Ghraib prisons. The US administration attempts to justify them
through its proclaimed "war on terror." But every one knows that such
behavior, in fact, offends global public opinion, exacerbates
resentment and thereby spreads terrorism, and tarnishes the US image
and its credibility among nations.

The US administration's illegal and immoral behavior is not even
confined to outside its borders. You are witnessing daily that under
the pretext of "the war on terror," civil liberties in the United
States are being increasingly curtailed. Even the privacy of
individuals is fast losing its meaning. Judicial due process and
fundamental rights are trampled upon. Private phones are tapped,
suspects are arbitrarily arrested, sometimes beaten in the streets, or
even shot to death.

I have no doubt that the American people do not approve of this
behavior and indeed deplore it.

The US administration does not accept accountability before any
organization, institution or council. The US administration has
undermined the credibility of international organizations,
particularly the United Nations and its Security Council. But, I do
not intend to address all the challenges and calamities in this
message.

The legitimacy, power and influence of a government do not emanate
from its arsenals of tanks, fighter aircrafts, missiles or nuclear
weapons. Legitimacy and influence reside in sound logic, quest for
justice and compassion and empathy for all humanity. The global
position of the United States is in all probability weakened because
the administration has continued to resort to force, to conceal the
truth, and to mislead the American people about its policies and
practices.

Undoubtedly, the American people are not satisfied with this behavior
and they showed their discontent in the recent elections. I hope that
in the wake of the mid-term elections, the administration of President
Bush will have heard and will heed the message of the American people.

My questions are the following:

Is there not a better approach to governance?

Is it not possible to put wealth and power in the service of peace,
stability, prosperity and the happiness of all peoples through a
commitment to justice and respect for the rights of all nations,
instead of aggression and war?

We all condemn terrorism, because its victims are the innocent.

But, can terrorism be contained and eradicated through war,
destruction
and the killing of hundreds of thousands of innocents?

If that were possible, then why has the problem not been resolved?

The sad experience of invading Iraq is before us all.

What has blind support for the Zionists by the US administration
brought for the American people? It is regrettable that for the US
administration, the interests of these occupiers supersedes the
interests of the American people and of the other nations of the
world.

What have the Zionists done for the American people that the US
administration considers itself obliged to blindly support these
infamous aggressors? Is it not because they have imposed themselves on
a substantial portion of the banking, financial, cultural and media
sectors?

I recommend that in a demonstration of respect for the American people
and for humanity, the right of Palestinians to live in their own
homeland should be recognized so that millions of Palestinian refugees
can return to their homes and the future of all of Palestine and its
form of government be determined in a referendum. This will benefit
everyone.

Now that Iraq has a Constitution and an independent Assembly and
Government, would it not be more beneficial to bring the US officers
and soldiers home, and to spend the astronomical US military
expenditures in Iraq for the welfare and prosperity of the American
people? As you know very well, many victims of Katrina continue to
suffer, and countless Americans continue to live in poverty and
homelessness.

I'd also like to say a word to the winners of the recent elections in
the US:

The United States has had many administrations; some who have left a
positive legacy, and others that are neither remembered fondly by the
American people nor by other nations.

Now that you control an important branch of the US Government, you
will also be held to account by the people and by history.

If the US Government meets the current domestic and external
challenges with an approach based on truth and Justice, it can remedy
some of the past afflictions and alleviate some of the global
resentment and hatred of America. But if the approach remains the
same, it would not be unexpected that the American people would
similarly reject the new electoral winners, although the recent
elections, rather than reflecting a victory, in reality point to the
failure of the current administration's policies. These issues had
been extensively dealt with in my letter to President Bush earlier
this year.

To sum up:

It is possible to govern based on an approach that is distinctly
different from one of coercion, force and injustice.

It is possible to sincerely serve and promote common human values, and
honesty and compassion.

It is possible to provide welfare and prosperity without tension,
threats, imposition or war.

It is possible to lead the world towards the aspired perfection by
adhering to unity, monotheism, morality and spirituality and drawing
upon the teachings of the Divine Prophets.

Then, the American people, who are God-fearing and followers of Divine
religions, will overcome every difficulty.

What I stated represents some of my anxieties and concerns.

I am confident that you, the American people, will play an
instrumental role in the establishment of justice and spirituality
throughout the world. The promises of the Almighty and His prophets
will certainly be realized, Justice and Truth will prevail and all
nations will live a true life in a climate replete with love,
compassion and fraternity.

The US governing establishment, the authorities and the powerful
should not choose irreversible paths. As all prophets have taught us,
injustice and transgression will eventually bring about decline and
demise. Today, the path of return to faith and spirituality is open
and unimpeded.

We should all heed the Divine Word of the Holy Qur'an:

"But those who repent, have faith and do good may receive Salvation.
Your Lord, alone, creates and chooses as He will, and others have no
part in His choice; Glorified is God and Exalted above any partners
they ascribe to Him." (28:67-68)

I pray to the Almighty to bless the Iranian and American nations and
indeed all nations of the world with dignity and success.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
President of the Islamic Republic of Iran

29 November 2006

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15952309/

[Beam Me Up Scotty]

Progressives and Marxists believe in change, they force change, they us
Alinksyite methods to create crisis to coerce and force change.

Liberals are part of that. Liberalism is as much a problem as Mao Stalin
and Pol-Pot and their followers.


--
That's Karma

[Joe Cooper]

Topaz <mars...@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:09935b1i60r006v0f...@4ax.com:

> "We have the power. Now our gigantic work begins."
> Those were Hitler's words on the night of January 30, 1933,

But, you see, Alex, Hitler - according to YOU - did NOT, and never COULD
"have the power." Those superior Jews you prattle on about endlessly like
the mindless buffoon you are - THEY had the power.

Poor Hitler, by your own terms, didn't stand a chance.

Poor, inferior Alex.

[Joe Cooper]

Topaz <mars...@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:09935b1i60r006v0f...@4ax.com:

> Leon Degrelle

Belgian traitor. (Which is why Alex adores him, even though, as a lowly
Gentile, he was vastly inferior to the lowest Jew.)

[Joe Cooper]

Topaz <mars...@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:8n935b153fvjubgv5...@4ax.com:

> Tiptoeing around Our Problems
> By Dr. William Pierce

Pierce had a fondness for little boys, and a talent for milking his
clueless supporters (Alex) for everything he could get out of them. He was
also, as Alex never tires of pointing out, inferior to Jews.

[Joe Cooper]

Topaz <mars...@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:bu935b93f3uvu18ml...@4ax.com:

> Message of H.E. Dr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
> President of the Islamic Republic of Iran
> To the American People

"Death to Americans."

No wonder Alex loves him, even though, by Alex's own admission, Ahmadinejad
is vastly inferior to the lowest, most stupid Jew.

[Governor Swill]

On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 23:07:25 -0500, Mr. B1ack <now...@nada.net>

wrote:

>On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 20:52:12 -0500, Governor Swill
><governo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 Mr. B1ack wrote:
>>>On Sat, 21 Nov Governor Swill wrote:
>>>>On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 Mr. B1ack wrote:
>>>>>On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 Joe Cooper wrote:
>>>>> Yep, the 'Dolf cause a LOT of damage, world's record
>>>>> no doubt. It's worth taking into account when anybody
>>>>> complains about "damage" or "evil times" today ...
>>>>
>>>>Russia suffered 20,000,000 of those.
>>>
>>> So many it refused to *admit* it for decades ... thought
>>> it made 'em look bad somehow.
>>
>>In later years, the number was played as the western allies using
>>Russian dead to keep Hitler busy while they took their sweet time
>>attacking him.
>
> Propaganda mostly. The western powers weren't sitting
> on their asses at all ... it required a huge well-coordinated
> plan to actually overpower the Reich. Russia fought 'em
> in Russia, but the rest fought 'em in Africa and the middle
> east, Greece, Sicily, Italy, France ... and let's not forget
> the enemy in the pacific. Everybody was very busy.

Nevertheless, Stalin made much hay about the continental invasion
being delayed. Even if the allies had headed straight for Germany in
1942 or 43 and even if they had been able to win, Russia wouldn't have
ended up with anywhere near the power and reach they did. Stalin owes
his post war empire to that allied "delay".

>>>>Mao killed tens of millions by starvation in the fifties.
>>>
>>> Yep, something the "Little Red Book" quoters
>>> never seem to mention ..... guess they think it
>>> was OK because it was all in the name of
>>> creating a Marxist utopia .........
>>
>>True. And all because Mao fancied himself a better farmer than the
>>farmers who'd been feeding the nation for millennia without govt help.
>
> Well, the agriculture thing was only part of it ... there
> was a lot of deliberate extermination too. Took a page
> from Hitler ... recruited the righteous and energetic
> youth to do his dirtywork - which they did with great
> enthusiasm. Give power to the underdogs and they'll
> do anything to show their gratitude.
>
>>>>Stalin also killed tens of millions during his time aside from the
>>>>war.
>>>
>>> A serious paranoid and thought the iron fist
>>> was the solution to everything ...
>>
>>"Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb, Iran . . ."
>
> The USA does often think that way ... however we don't
> have an all-powerful dictator whose word is law. Cooler
> heads tone down the chanting, dilute the madness.

Sometimes. I shudder to think of the mess we'd be in if Bush was
still President and his advisors and polices prevailed.

> Do you know what "bigger stick logic" is ? It informs
> you that if beating a problem with a stick yeilds
> negative results it just means you need a bigger stick.

If you keep doing the same thing and expecting a different result ...

> We probably inherited that thinking from the Brits,
> though it didn't really become an issue until after
> WW-2. In any case, subtle, nuanced, smart, solutions
> to problems just doesn't seem to be in the American
> psyche. The big and powerful just don't think that way.

Not true. Not at all true. The thing with subtle, nuanced, smart
solutions is that they work best when invisible to the People.
Consider the dollar as global reserve currency for just one example.
Even today, most Americans don't know what a "reserve currency" is let
alone how our control of it makes our lives better in every way and
has for seven decades.

>>> Still has his fans in Russia though, they've kinda
>>> made a cult figure of him.
>>
>>Such is the power of propaganda when all the news comes from the same
>>copy office.
>
> Putin, orginally, was against the Cult Of Stalin ... but
> later on I think he found ways to *use* it, ways to
> kinda put his face on the mighty man of steel.

It's a means, I think, of distancing himself from the horrors of Old
Joe, which have become more generally known in Russia, while
continuing to use a similar philosophy.

>>> We left out Pol Pot ... who *proportionally* killed
>>> off the greatest percentage of his population that's
>>> ever been documented. But he'll get the same pass
>>> as Mao from that certain segment .....
>>
>>Left him out because his numbers were unimpressive, except, as you
>>note, by percentage.
>>
>>> One far-rightie, three far-lefties (Franco, Tojo
>>> and Mussolini did some damage too so they
>>> might be on the list except that the *scale* was,
>>> a bit, smaller).
>>
>>A LOT smaller. All three were perfectly willing to eliminate
>>political opposition, but none of them were interested in slaughtering
>>their own populations in boxcar lots.
>
> Well, the volume, methods and mindset of slaughtering
> OTHER peoples populations are part of the overall "damage"
> equation too.

Franco didn't do much of that either. The other two above were major
combatants in the war so FDR and Churchill fit right into that
category of killing with them.

>>>We've yet to see what fundy Islam
>>> will spawn. In any case, it demonstrates the
>>> danger of "extremists" and maybe a serious
>>> flaw in the statement "Extremism in the defense
>>> of liberty is no vice". Sorry, but extremism NEVER
>>> keeps company with "liberty" ...
>>
>>Plenty of extremists in the US. Always eager to vote for killing
>>folks who annoy them, not so willing to be inspired by the first
>>amendment or to tolerate others opinions.
>
> Of late our "left" seems least inspired by the Bill-o-Rights.

I don't see it that way. I see the left often exploiting it for
liberal purposes except for their apparent desire to gut the 2nd. Both
sides have little love for the fourth.

> Alas our "right" is only marginally more trustworthy.

The right seems willing to gut pretty much what's left of the BoR.
They do like the second, but the rest of them depend on circumstances.

> Somewhere we need to find a whole new gig
> dontchathink, not like our "left" OR "right", the
> kind of small-"L" libertarianism our Founders
> found so compelling. "Land of the Free" ought
> to MEAN something after all ..........

We do, actually, but it's usually only the extremes of either side
that make the biggest noises. Most of the rest just sits and watches
them like it's a bloody tennis match, and then go vote for the
centrist candidate who seems likely to do the least damage.

>>> Odd thing is that We The People never seem to
>>> recognize batshit extremists for what they are
>>> until well *after* there's no turning back.
>>
>>We haven't done too badly in the US. The People always manage to
>>elect Presidents, at least, who aren't rabid extremists hell bent on
>>destroying the population that put them in power.
>
> No, just the other half of the population that didn't
> vote for them or contribute campaign funds ....

That's really the number one issue. The "People" don't donate enough
to the candidates. The big bucks come through the major donors.
That's why candidates end up beholden to the special interests.

>>>You'd
>>> think 14,000+ years of "civilization" would have
>>> had *some* educational quality - but no. IMHO
>>> this is something wired into our genes - "Follow
>>> the loud boisterous extrovert !" says the DNA.
>>>
>>> Maybe, likely, over 14,000 years ago that sort
>>> of individual really WAS the best kind to lead
>>> the tribe. Alas when "tribes" turned into "cities"
>>> and "civilizations" the little flaws in that sort of
>>> personality profile were *amplified* in some
>>> exponential fashion.
>>
>>The root of the problem is, people want simple solutions and instant
>>gratification.
>
> Of course. Everybody does. Waiting sucks.
>
> But it takes a 3-digit IQ to realize that's rarely gonna
> be possible.
>
> About 50% of the population has a 2-digit IQ.

Those voters are split between the two extremes though I suspect the
right may have a slight edge on that demographic. Their solutions
seem to be the simplest and the ones requiring the least sacrifice on
the part of the voters.

>>Got a roomie who gave up on cooking. No patience for
>>it. Everything gets cooked on high. Food burns *and* is raw and he
>>can ruin a skillet or a pot faster than anybody I ever saw. Me, I'm a
>>slow cooker. Take my time, don't rush, and I love long, slow cooking
>>recipes, things that simmer or slowly roast for hours.
>
> Roomies personality type is MUCH more common.
> Combined with contemporary times, I've come to
> call them the "instant generation" or "microwave
> generation"... they expect *everything* RIGHT NOW.

That's part of what I mean about modern Americans being lazy and
afraid. Their lack of patience fits right into that mix.

> That might eventually work with a burrito, tech marches
> on, but it CAN'T work with "social issues". Hell, such
> "soft" problems don't even have bone-fide "solutions",
> it's all touchie-feelie crap that changes every time the
> wind blows.

IF you want your burrito to be frozen in the center, too hot to eat at
the ends and not have any flavor anywhere. But give a an hour or two
and I'll serve you a burrito that'll make you want to slap your
Mexican Momma. ;)

>>Did a fast dinner tonight. Was my other roomie's birthday. Scampied
>>some prawns and served with fettuccine alfredo. Butter, cream, cheese
>>and a kiss of garlic tossed into fresh made pasta. Was careful with
>>the salt and nobody added any at the table - always a complement to
>>the cook!
>
> But tomorrow Roomie will be back to McCrapo burgers ...
> instant on-demand.

Nope. That roomie has been banned from cooking. He's now in charge
of washing dishes and scrubbing pots. :) In about an hour, I'll be
putting a fresh, pork shoulder in at 300 degrees for 4 hours. *shlurp*

> Lemme guess, thinks Trump is a demigod ? :-)

Lol! No, but he does agree with The Donald on immigration policy!

> I always remember the line from the old song ...
>
> "You gave me fortune,
> You gave me fame,
> You gave me power in
> your gods name ..."

What God Wants (Roger Waters - abridged)

The kid in the corner looked at the priest
And fingered his pale blue Japanese guitar
The priest said
God wants goodness
God wants light
God wants mayhem
God wants a clean fight
God wants peace
God wants war
God wants famine
God wants chain stories
God wants sedition
God wants sex
God wants freedom
God wants semtex
God wants boarders
God wants crack
God wants rainfall
God wants wetbacks
God wants voodoo
God wants shrines
God wants law
God wants organised crime
God wants crusade
God wants jihad
God wants good
God wants bad
What God wants God gets

[Governor Swill]

On Sun, 22 Nov 2015 09:20:50 -0500, Beam Me Up Scotty wrote:

>Progressives and Marxists believe in change, they force change, they us
>Alinksyite methods to create crisis to coerce and force change.

Correction: Change is inevitable - no need to force it.

Liberals embrace it as part of life. Conservatives fear it because it
makes them have to think.

[Topaz]

On Sun, 22 Nov 2015 13:06:52 -0500, Governor Swill
<governo...@gmail.com> wrote:


>
>Correction: Change is inevitable - no need to force it.
>
>Liberals embrace it as part of life. Conservatives fear it because it
>makes them have to think.
>

In the good old days a man could afford children and his wife
didn't have to work. The biggest problem in schools was gum chewing.
But it was more than that. It was the entire culture. Look in the old
movies and you can see it. Men were men. Women were women. And
everybody was White.

Look at America now. There are non-Whites everywhere. Anyone can
see Black neighborhoods and not safe and not where you want to live.
America is slowly turning into a third world country.

The National Socialists were fighting for the good old days. They
were fighting for civilization.

The Jews make the movies and control the media. Now you can hardly
go to the movies without seeing race-mixing and feminism. Hopefully
the world will not continue to go down the tubes forever. If we stop
the Jews from controlling the media and society we can be on the path
back to the good old days.

Here is a quote from Mein Kampf:

"Thus another weapon beside that of freemasonry would have to be
secured. This was the Press. The Jew exercised all his skill and
tenacity in getting hold of it. By means of the Press he began
gradually to control public life in its entirety."