Groups want FCC to police hate speech
No
HEAD: Groups want FCC to police hate speech on talk radio, cable news networks
By Gautham Nagesh
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is being urged to monitor "hate speech" on talk radio and cable broadcast
networks.
A coalition of more than 30 organizations argue in a letter to the FCC that the Internet has made it harder for the public to
separate the facts from bigotry masquerading as news.
The groups also charge that syndicated radio and cable television programs "masquerading as news" use hate as a profit model.
"As traditional media have become less diverse and less competitive, they have also grown less responsible and less
responsive to the communities that they are supposed to serve," the organizations wrote to the FCC. "In this same atmosphere
hate speech thrives, as hate has developed as a profit-model for syndicated radio and cable television program masquerading
as 'news.'"
The organizations, which include Free Press, the Center for Media Justice, the Benton Foundation and Media Alliance, also
argue that the anonymity of the Web gives ammunition to those that would spread hate.
The groups did not mention any specific programming on the right or the left in their letter, which supports a petition filed
by the National Hispanic Media Coalition last year requesting a probe of the relationship between hate speech and hate
crimes.
The groups argue the Internet has made it harder for the public to separate the facts from bigotry masquerading as news.
"The Internet gives the illusion that news sources have increased, but in fact there are fewer journalists employed now than
ever before. Moreover, on the Internet, speakers can hide in the cloak of anonymity, emboldened to say things that they may
not say in the public eye."
"For these reasons, as the Commission deliberates how the public interest will be served in the digital age, it should
consider the extent of hate speech in media, and its effects."
++++++++++++++++++
A WHOLE LOT OF COMMENTS FROM THE SITE
First they came for the "hate speakers," and I said nothing. Then, they came for Janet Jackson's pastie, and I said nothing.
Finally, they came for political speech they didn't like, and !@
BY Brett Glass on 06/01/2010 at 15:44
Liberals want to control the internet�t.v�and any news that goes against their beliefs. If you do not like what you
hear..don't listen. We are not in Venuzuela (yet).
BY Dawn on 06/01/2010 at 16:37
Get Obama first. That half breed hates whites and he lets them know.
BY meshiggana on 06/01/2010 at 16:37
If ypu don't like something on the radio- just turn the dial!!!Keep the govt out of our FREE SPEECH!!!
BY R Smith on 06/01/2010 at 16:43
"That half breed hates whites and he lets them know." - Meshiggana ����������������� Yup, the Tea Party is just the 21st
century Ku Klux Klan.
BY Karl on 06/01/2010 at 16:46
Face it, the federal government (via the FCC) is itching to control talk radio, cable networks and the internet. There are
sites online I don't like but we have the option of not visiting them. Freedom of speech is essential to freedom even if you
don't like or agree with what is being said. Remember, the next one to be censored will be YOU.
BY Pecos Bill on 06/01/2010 at 17:02
The fascist liberals are on the march. It's not enough that they control the major networks and much of the media. Americans
will NOT stand for these modern day Joseph McCarthys.
BY facist liberals suck on 06/01/2010 at 17:03
Free speech on the line. Sorry��-won't happen! Next thing you know they will stick a microchip in our foreheads. Can't wait
to get rid of this current government!
BY Bart on 06/01/2010 at 17:04
The term "hate" is too ambiguous to enforce. Where is the line between strong opinion and "hate?" In my view, that line is
obviously drawn arbitrarily by the listener. No better way to chill speech that should be protected by the constitution than
to create some arbitrary standard. I remember a day when liberals could disagree with the speech of another, yet fight to the
death to allow the person to say it. Where did these liberals go?
BY BBSD on 06/01/2010 at 17:08
@ Karl: "Yup, the Tea Party is just the 21st century Ku Klux Klan."That is hate speech, plain and simple.
What a load of HORSECRAP. According to the Libs and Progressives, free speech is only for those opinions in agreement with
them. This link explains the why and how of their thinking: http://www.crossroad.to/Quotes/communism/alinsky.htm
BY RAK on 06/01/2010 at 17:25
This move is idiotic. They only answer to hate speech is more speech, not suppression. I'm a raving liberal and I hate the
bigotry that I see out there. But as long as I can see it, I can argue with it.
BY RedSonja2000 on 06/01/2010 at 17:29
This isn't about political party. Both sides have supported free speech. This is more about whether it is important enough to
us all to be able to express what we think. We have freedom, if we are willing to defend it.
BY Pecos Bill on 06/01/2010 at 17:35
No legs on this one. In order to get Obama elected we needed people like Sarah Palin, Rush, Joe the (not really a plumber)
Plumber, Glen Beck etc� out there spewing hate speech so everyone could see where the right wing was coming from. You've got
to give their right to free speech credit for getting the Republicans voted out of power.
BY Jeff on 06/01/2010 at 17:35
Juat part of the natural progression away from freedom. Private, family owned companies, religious organizations, Boy Scouts
and on and on have been legislated into "accepting" those that are against their principles. Hate crimes (which only
trivialize the exact same crime not committed in "hate" and now one notch away from the thought police state. Lib or
Conservative - better beware - how long will it be before this beast you are creating turns on you. And BTW - nothing on the
internet is anonymous. If you people think your posting cannot be traced directly to you - you are a moron,
BY Right_Winger on 06/01/2010 at 17:44
The "NEW WORLD ORDER"according to George Soros,Maurice Strong and thier puppet Obama.
BY ORFINARK on 06/01/2010 at 17:46
You liberal buffoons will NEVER shut me down � for I AM the voice of honest, conservative, taxpaying citizens. We are the
silent majority.
BY rush limbaugh fan on 06/01/2010 at 17:50
This is ok. Once we conservatives take over, we will use this to silence the liberal extremists like Chris Mathews at MSNBC
and Rachel Madcow.
BY so long msnbc on 06/01/2010 at 17:52
What a surprise - NOT!! The protesters are George Soros funded groups wanting to stop free speech. Soros betrayed his own
people by working with the Nazis to confiscate Jewish property. He betrayed the Jews so it is no surprise he would betray
America.
BY ss794 on 06/01/2010 at 18:09
Karl I'm member of the 9-12 Movement and I find you statement about the group I belong to as hateful! Gota watch that Karl!!!
BY Catherine on 06/01/2010 at 18:17
if your corporate masters were progressive and instead of over 3K stations carrying the likes of a-hole Limbaugh ( versus <
200 for progressives) - your tune may be different. Limbaugh is a proven LIAR - many times over and to describe yourself as
"honest" and a Limbaugh fan is truly rich by the way. just saying.
BY jason on 06/01/2010 at 18:25
And who decides? I'm sure that, say, speaking out against health care "reform" could be considered "hate speech." After all,
wasn't it an anti-health-care nut who tried to blow up Times Square? Oh no, that's right, that was Mayor Bloomberg's form of
hate speech�
BY GUNNAR on 06/01/2010 at 18:26
Hey Karl, you need to be baned along with Allen both of you are full of hate, just like the great corrupt Obama and most Dems
in Washington!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
BY Dwayne on 06/01/2010 at 18:26
Oh, why not? Anything you dont like make illegal. Typical Hollywood answer to smoking and seat belts.
BY Warren Cloven on 06/01/2010 at 18:27
What is hate speech? The answer is simple. When a Republican is President it is any liberal who protest what the President is
doing. When a Democrat is President it is any Conservative who protest what the President is doing. Leave it alone liberals.
So called hate speech is the right of both sides. When the Government decides what is hate speech and outlaws it is the day
you lose your right to speech. But then again it is not the liberals who are after free speech. It is the Progressives. They
are following their hero President Wilson.
BY Shannon on 06/01/2010 at 18:30
SoIf i say anything the DAMED DEMONCRATS dont like i can now be hauled off to jail.?This fulfills my 30th propecy concerning
obama and the democrats..They wil come in to your homesarrest you for supposed thought crimesthen haul you off to pelosis /
democratRE-EDUCATION CAMPS..IMPEACH ALL DEMOCRATSwww.vetertanoutrage .comSTUFF it you liberal TRAITORS
BY veteranoutrage on 06/01/2010 at 18:50
I HATE the National Hispanic Media!
BY Tom D on 06/01/2010 at 18:54
They should start with MSNBC, Tinkle in the leg, then move on to NBC, CBS, then ABC and CNN. Then we should control NY and LA
Times, PBS and then we will be rid of 90% of hate speech.
BY shawn on 06/01/2010 at 18:54
Yes my friends the Libs are all about fee speech as long is it's theirs. Decent will not be tolerated! We know whats best for
you and you will like or else.
******************
Think any of those assholes petitioning the FCC can even come close to these giants?:
"If the First Amendment has any force, it prohibits Congress from fining or jailing citizens, or association of citizens,
for simply engaging in political speech." --Justice Anthony Kennedy, SCOTUS
"As long as I am an American citizen and American blood runs in these veins I shall hold myself at liberty to speak, to
write, and to publish whatever I please on any subject."--Elija Lovejoy (1802-1837)
"Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech." --Benjamin Franklin
(1706-1790)
Not a chance.
No surrender!
Dionysus
Topaz
Exposing the Real Racists
Edgar Johnston, PhD. reviews an important new book
Jewish Supremacism by David Duke. Published by Free Speech Press, 2003
More than 500,000 copies of 'Jewish Supremacism' have been sold
worldwide. It is even sold within the Russian Duma (parliament).
Jewish leaders are extremely fearful of this book. I can illustrate
the cause of their concern by giving an example of David Duke's
technique in exposing what he calls Jewish supremacism.
If any prominent political person in the Western World publicly
announced that Jews are frequently disloyal to nations where they live
and that they view Gentiles as racially inferior, he would face
excoriation as an 'anti-Semite'. Probably, he would be driven from
office. Duke has no need to make such claims, for he simply quotes
very prominent and powerful Jews who make his point for him.
FROM THE HORSE'S MOUTH
In the first few pages of Jewish Supremacism, Duke quotes Dr.
Steinlight, a former head of National Affairs for the largest Jewish
organisation in the United States. Here is the quotation taken from a
2001 magazine article written by Dr. Steinlight:-
'I'll confess it at least, like thousands of other typical kids of my
generation I was reared as a Jewish nationalist, even a
quasi-separatist. Every summer for two months of ten formative
years... I attended Jewish summer camp. There, each morning, I saluted
a foreign flag, dressed in a uniform reflecting its colours, sang a
foreign national anthem, learned a foreign language... and was taught
the superiority of my people to the 'Gentiles' who oppressed us.
'We were taught to view non-Jews as... people less sensitive,
intelligent and moral than ourselves.'
This method of quoting major Jewish figures and sources is used
hundreds of times in Duke's book to advance his thesis that there is a
powerful Jewish supremacist element in Judaism and Zionism that
threatens not only the freedom of the Palestinian people but all
nations, including the United States.
Duke also uses direct quotes from the Talmud and other major Jewish
sources, such as the Jewish Encyclopedia to expose a long-standing
cadre of hateful, anti-Gentile Jewish supremacists. Shocking quotes
are displayed from major Jewish magazines that boast of a Jewish
supremacy over the media and politics of the United States. He finds
disturbing and hateful words from Jewish leaders, such as Ariel
Sharon, which openly support genocide, and he reveals quotations from
Israeli leaders who equate Zionism and Nazism. Of course, he also
cites many prominent Gentiles of historical and contemporary times,
but the Jewish quotations and sources have the greatest power.
Frankly, they are so convincing that Jewish leaders have sought to get
the book banned in many nations.
Interestingly, Jewish Supremacism was published first in Russia, the
same nation that gave birth to The Protocols of Zion. In 2000 it
quickly became a best seller throughout the entirety of the former
Eastern bloc. It even sells briskly in the corridors of the Russian
Duma (Parliament) and has prompted Levinsky, Goldman and other leading
Jews to seek its ban under old Soviet laws forbidding 'anti-Semitism'.
In the Autumn of 2000, Levinsky and others filed a formal complaint to
the Russian Prosecutor General and asked for the book to be classified
as anti-Semitic and thus illegal. After a year of close examination
(they painstakingly verified all 669 of the documentations), the
Russian Government shocked the Jewish community by officially
declaring that the book is not anti-Semitic. Jewish members of the
Duma then introduced new legislation aimed at outlawing 'Jewish
Supremacism', but it failed by a few votes.
Since then, the book has been sold in thousands of street corners
across the breadth of the Russian Federation and has now topped an
incredible 500,000 in print.
Translated into most of the Eastern European languages, the book has
won Duke many academic awards for its scholarship, including an
honorary Doctorate awarded by President's University, the second
largest university in the nation of Ukraine.
Subsequently the university itself published a best-selling Ukrainian
edition. In May of 2003, Free Speech Press published the English
version of Jewish Supremacism, accompanied by a storm of interest and
controversy. Jewish leaders are horrified that it is well on its way
to becoming the best-read book in the world on Zionism.
SMEARS BACKFIRED
Although Zionist organisations have tried to use Duke's media
characterisation as a 'white supremacist' to discredit his book, so
far their exploitation of his early-life involvement in a KKK group
has only backfired by making the book and its author more newsworthy.
Attacks by the ADL and other pro-Zionist groups have led to
sensationalist news coverage, causing even greater interest and
confounding those who desperately wanted Duke's book to die a quiet
death.
David Duke decries the label of white supremacist and says that while
he certainly desires the preservation of his own heritage he seeks no
supremacy over others. He maintains that those who scream most
hatefully against him are themselves guilty of the most extreme and
powerful supremacism on earth: Jewish supremacism.
When Duke lectured in some Persian Gulf nations last year, Zionist
leaders attempted to undercut his support by allegations of 'racism'.
Those organised efforts had little affect on the overflow, mixed-race
audiences that cheered almost his every word. As a former university
professor and a writer who has lectured occasionally on behalf of the
people of Palestine, I approached David Duke's book out of a curiosity
elicited by the intense Zionist efforts to suppress it. Actually, I
had readily accepted the negative portrayals of him I had read in the
Jewish press, but I wanted to see what all the commotion was about.
Why were they so anxious to ban this book and slander its author? To
my great surprise I discovered a most amazing book!
David Duke stated that he had set out with the ambitious goal of
writing the most powerful expose of Zionism ever put into print. With
extreme scepticism of his ability to accomplish such a lofty goal, I
began to read. Three days later, as I turned the last page, I knew
that he had accomplished more than he dreamed. Rather than just
assembling his facts in a dry textbook fashion, David Duke presents
his thesis in the first person. It is the personal narrative of a
thoughtful and enlightened young man who is sympathetic to Zionism,
but is awakened to its supremacist core that not only threatens the
Palestinians but his own beloved European-Americans as well. I could
not find even a trace of hatred, intemperance or true anti-Semitism in
this book. However, by extensive quoting of important Jewish leaders
and Zionist source materials, Duke exposes a deep well of Jewish
supremacist hatred against Gentiles. He points out that one is
unfairly labelled an 'anti-Semite' simply for exposing the hateful
pronouncements of Jewish supremacists.
ABSOLVES SOME JEWS
The book is clearly not anti-Semitic. Duke goes at length to point out
that not all Jews are supremacists, and that the supremacists not only
endanger the Gentile world but threaten innocent Jews by exposing them
to an inevitably hostile Gentile reaction. The book is in fact
dedicated to the late Dr. Israel Shahak, a Holocaust survivor and
Israeli peace activist whose life was dedicated to saving both Jews
and Gentiles from the dangers of 'Jewish supremacism'. David Duke
cleverly turns the term 'anti-Semitic' on its head by quoting
columnist Joseph Sobran's remark that the 'anti-Semite' is no longer
someone who dislikes Jews; he is now simply a person whom the Jews
don't like.
Jewish Supremacism begins with David Duke's first great epiphany on
the Jewish question: his learning that the Russian Revolution wasn't
Russian but overwhelmingly Jewish. Using powerful documentary
evidence, he shows that the Bolshevik Revolution was actually financed
and led by Jews who had their own agenda against the Czar. He quotes
from familiar and impeccable sources such as Winston Churchill, the
dispatches of the American ambassador to Russia, the chief of British
Intelligence and copious Jewish sources. For instance, he quotes a
report from the National Archives of the United States showing that of
the 384 members of the first Bolshevik government, there were more
than 300 Jews and only 13 ethnic Russians.
How could such an enormous fact of history be hidden? Duke asks. His
rhetorical question is answered throughout the rest of this book by
giving the clear evidence of the tremendous power exercised by Jewish
supremacists in government, media and the academic establishment. Not
only has the pre-eminent Jewish role in the Bolshevik Revolution and
its Gulags been quietly suppressed, but also even the very existence
of Jewish supremacism has been kept from public awareness. One can
freely discuss the evils of white supremacism, but if one dares to
expose Jewish supremacism, one will assuredly be labelled an
'anti-Semite', the ultimate term of opprobrium in modern society. In
very effective arguments, Duke points out that one is not called
'anti-Christian' for exposing the excesses of the Inquisition or
'anti-Muslim' for opposing the intolerance of some extremist Moslem
sects. But dare simply to quote the hateful statements of important
leaders of Judaism and Zionism, and in many countries one could well
wind up in prison for 'hate speech'.
One of the fascinating themes to which David Duke repeatedly turns is
the easily documented Jewish supremacist strategy of fostering extreme
chauvinism among their own people while at the same time working to
break down the group loyalty of the Gentiles among whom they live.
Jewish leaders have long made clear that Jewish communities often have
agendas that conflict with their Gentile hosts. Duke describes the
struggle over those agendas as similar to the contest of two football
teams. One team cultivates an extreme group loyalty through a chronic
recital of Gentile persecution and an accompanying 'chosen-people'
supremacist vision. The other is instilled with guilt and the idea
that teamwork is immoral. The main Jewish holidays are dominated by
the recounting of Gentile persecutions, and the Holocaust has now
achieved almost a religious significance in Jewish life. Duke quotes
many Jewish leaders proclaiming Jewish superiority and the need for
the race to preserve its racial genotype. Even today, Israel will
grant instant citizenship to an atheist Jew from New York, but forbids
Palestinians who were born in Israel to return. Israel also forbids
marriages between Jews and Gentiles.
While Jewish supremacists have these supremacist policies for their
own people, they relentlessly work to break down the immigration laws
of other nations. While they preach multi-culturalism and diversity
for almost every other country in which they dwell, they themselves
support and expect Americans to support a Zionist State, dedicated
exclusively to the Jewish people, religion and culture.
INFLUENCE ON MEDIA AND GOVERNMENT
In chapters on Jewish influence over the American mass media and
government, Duke offers extensive documentation that exceeds almost
anyone's suspicions. Major Jewish sources are quoted which boast of
their takeover and control of Hollywood, the news media and the most
sensitive part of the Government of the United States. For instance,
Duke quotes a major Israeli newspaper bragging about the fact that
Jews loyal to Israel make up seven out of the eleven members of the
secretive and sensitive National Security Council (NSC). The article
goes on to assert that "America no longer has a government of Goyim"
(Gentiles). Duke also quotes many US presidents and high government
officials who have dared to speak out about the Jewish supremacy over
the establishment. After thoroughly documenting Jewish supremacy in
government and media, he shows how their media power is used to stifle
public knowledge and understanding of this critical issue. Any
legitimate criticism of Jewish Supremacism is labelled
'anti-Semitism', and the Jewish supremacists almost exclusively define
that term.
In particularly interesting passages, Duke recounts how that when he
looked up the term 'anti-Semitism' in some popular encyclopaedias, he
found that the articles and recommended reading lists were authored
entirely by Jewish zealots! In every conflict with Gentiles, Jews are
always portrayed as completely innocent while Gentiles are portrayed
as totally evil. Duke suggests that the chronic portrayal of Gentiles
as inherently evil toward Jews is for Gentiles the equivalent of
'blood libel' for Jews.
Duke makes a compelling case that the nation of Israel is the doctrine
of Jewish supremacism put into action. In startling documentary
evidence from Israel, he shows that some of the early Zionist founders
of the country readily co-operated with Nazi Germany, praised Nazi
policies and claimed that their own ideology was similar. He also
quotes major Jewish figures in Israel who have had the courage to
condemn Israel's Nuremberg style racial laws, such as former Israeli
Supreme Court member Haim Cohen, thus:-
'The bitter irony of fate, which has led the same biological and
racist laws propagated by the Nazis and which inspired the infamous
Nuremberg laws to serve as a basis of Judaism within the state of
Israel.'
With these kinds of powerful quotes, it is no wonder that Zionists
around the world are extremely fearful of this book.
ON ISRAELI TERROR
Americans will find the last chapter on Israel of particular interest.
Duke unveils the long Israeli record of terrorism. He documents the
horrendous terror waged against the Palestinians; he also exposes
Israel's long record of terrorism and treachery against its greatest
benefactor, the United States! From major Jewish sources, he recounts
the Israeli terrorist attacks against America in the Lavon Affair, in
which Israeli agents set off bombs in American installations in Egypt
in a treacherous attempt to provoke America into war against that
nation. Duke presents copious evidence exposing the deliberate,
murderous Israeli attack on the USS Liberty in which 34 Americans were
killed and 172 grievously wounded. The terrible damage inflicted on
the United States by Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard is also recounted.
Jewish supremacy in the American media and government has suppressed
any outcry against Israel's treachery. The Jewish supremacists have
even been able to prevent a formal Congressional investigation into
the attack on the USS Liberty. Duke makes the powerful point that
billions of dollars of American aid continue to flow to Israel even
after its treacherous attacks. He writes that supplying this aid is
the moral equivalent of sending military aid to Japan after the attack
on Pearl Harbour.
Duke also shows how the Zionist domination of American foreign policy
led directly to America's 9/11 catastrophe and a whole new series of
foreign policy moves that are leading to disaster. This timely book
shows the Jewish supremacist power behind the Iraq War, the
manipulation of the President and the American people with false
information, and the horrendous damage the war has done to our economy
and even our security. Duke shows how the war is costing us hundreds
of billions of dollars, continues to spill the blood of our military
men and certainly increases world hatred and terrorism against
America.
In one of the most shocking chapters of his work, Duke reveals the
damning evidence of Israeli treachery in the 9/11 attacks. He shows
that a massive Israeli spy ring was uncovered and apprehended in the
months before and after the attacks, and that some of the Mossad
agents had actually monitored the hijackers, including the leader
Mohammed Atta (five Israeli agents lived on his street). Warning
messages of the impending attacks were sent to Israeli firms with
offices both in Israel and the World Trade Centre. A group of Mossad
agents was arrested on 9/11 after they were found to have been filming
and cheering the attacks while they occurred. After they had been held
for a few months, Zionist Michael Chertoff of the US Department of
Justice released all the members of the Israeli spy ring and allowed
them to return to Israel - out of the reach of Congressional 9/11
investigators.
It is impossible to give the reader more than a glance into the depth
and power of this incredible book. Practically every paragraph is a
revelation. There is so much more that I could write about: detailing
how the Holocaust has cynically been used as a Zionist tool in
heightening Jewish solidarity and deflating criticism of Zionism and
Israel; how Jewish supremacists have used immigration as a weapon of
conquest, not only in Palestine but in the Western World as well. I
was fascinated by Duke's expose of Sigmund Freud as a secret Jewish
supremacist who thought of himself as a Hannibal destroying the
foundations of the Christian church and the European family as
Hannibal had sacked Rome. I could go on and on, but I will leave these
discoveries to you when you read this amazing book.
After I completed the book, I wanted to find out if it had the same
affect on others as it had on me. I gave it to two long-time friends
at the university where I taught for 11 years. One has conservative
leanings; the other is decidedly liberal; and I would describe both of
them as sympathetic to Israel. Both were so fascinated that they could
hardly put the book down, and one became so engrossed that he missed
his regular two o'clock class. They both agreed that Duke's book is
one of the best-argued that they have ever read, and used the
identical term of 'amazing' to describe it. My conservative friend
commented that many quotations were so shocking that he began to check
out the references and found them all to be accurate. "Hell" he said,
"If only half the documents Duke cites are authentic, there is enough
evidence here to start a revolution."
http://www.ihr.org/ www.vanguardnewsnetwork.com/
http://www.natvan.com http://www.nsm88.org
http://heretical.com/ http://immigration-globalization.blogspot.com/
Tim Crowley
> Exposing
Topaz and Denny. Two peas in a pod. Nothing but ignorance, fear and
hate. You deserve one another. America despises the both of ya.
Topaz
By LUKE O'FARRELL
http://www.heretical.com/ofarrell/index.html
There are two types of people in the world: people who think there are
two types of people in the world and people who don't. I'm among the
first type and I think the world is divided into people who recognize
the Jewish problem and people who don't.
In other words, the world is divided into smart people and dumb
people. If you've got an IQ of 80, have difficulty operating a
can-opener, and recognize the Jewish problem, you're smart. If you've
got an IQ of 180, have already won a couple of Nobel Prizes, and don't
recognize the Jewish problem, you're dumb.
I've been dumb for most of my life: it took me a long time to
recognize the Jewish problem. I didn't think for myself, I just
accepted the propaganda and conformed to the consensus. Jews are good
people. Only bad people criticize Jews. Jews good. Anti-Semites bad.
But then, very slowly, I started to see the light.
Recognizing Jewish hypocrisy was the first big step. I was reading an
article by someone called Rabbi Julia Neuberger, a prominent British
liberal. I didn't like liberals then, so I didn't like her for that
(and because her voice and manner had always grated on me), but her
Jewishness wasn't something I particularly noticed. But as I read the
article I came across something that didn't strike me as very liberal:
she expressed concern about Jews marrying Gentiles, because this
threatened the survival of the Jewish people.
That made me sit up and think. Hold on, I thought, I know this woman
sits on all sorts of "multi-cultural" committees and is constantly
being invited onto TV and radio to yap about the joys of diversity and
the evils of racism. She's all in favor of mass immigration and
there's no way she's worried about Whites marrying non-Whites, because
"Race is Just a Social Construct" and "We're All the Same Under the
Skin". She's a liberal and she thinks that race-mixing is good and
healthy and Holy. Yet this same woman is worried about Jews marrying
Gentiles. Small contradiction there, n'est ce-pas?
Well, no. Big contradiction. She obviously didn't apply the same rules
to everyone else as she applied to her own people, the Jews. She was,
in short, a hypocrite. But not just that - she was a Jewish hypocrite.
And that's a big step for a brainwashed White to take: not just
thinking in a negative way about a Jew, but thinking in a negative way
about a Jew because of her Jewishness.
After that, I slowly started to see the world in a different way. Or
to be more precise: I started to see the world. I started to see what
had always been there: the massive over-representation of Jews in
politics and the media. And I started to notice that a lot of those
Jews - like Rabbi Julia Neuberger, in fact - gave me the creeps. There
was something slimy and oily and flesh-crawling about them. And it
wasn't just me, either: other Gentiles seemed to feel it too.
Politicians often attract nicknames based on some outstanding aspect
of their character or behavior. Margaret Thatcher was "The Iron Lady".
Ronald Reagan was "Teflon Ron". Bill Clinton was "Slick Willy". But
these are Gentile politicians and their nicknames are at least
half-affectionate. Jewish politicians seem to attract a different kind
of nickname. In Britain, Gerald Kaufman, bald, homosexual Member of
Parliament for Manchester Gorton, is nicknamed "Hannibal Lecter".
Peter Mandelson, now Britain's Euro-Commissioner and Tony Blair's
suspected former lover, is "The Prince of Darkness". Michael Howard
(n� Hecht), the leader of the British Conservative Party, is
"Dracula".
When I noticed this kind of thing, I started to ask questions. What
was going on here? Why did Jews attract nicknames like that? And why
had Gentiles reacted to them like that not just now, but a long way
into the past? Shakespeare seems to have felt the same kind of
repulsion when he created the vengeful lawyer Shylock, and Dickens
when he created the parasitic master-thief Fagin. Classic
"anti-Semitic" stereotypes, but I knew that stereotypes aren't always
wrong. If anti-Semitic stereotypes aren't always wrong, then there's
an obvious conclusion: neither is anti-Semitism. Gentiles are
sometimes right to dislike and distrust Jews.
After all, at the same time I was noticing something else: the massive
over-representation of Jews, not just among politicians and
journalists, but among crooked businessmen too. In fact, among very,
very crooked businessmen, the ones responsible for really big frauds
at Gentile expense. Men like Robert Maxwell (n� Hoch), Ivan "Greed is
Good" Boesky, and Michael Milken. And, on a slightly lesser scale,
Ernest Saunders, who finagled an early release from prison because he
was coming down with Alzheimer's, that well-known incurable brain
disease from which no-one ever recovers. Only Saunders managed to
confound medical science and recover from it.
Slimy. Hypocritical. Crooked. In a word: Jewish. But I didn't take the
final step, the step to full recognition of the Jewish problem, until
I watched the reaction to Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ. I'm
not a Christian and I have little sympathy with modern Christianity,
but I had a lot of sympathy for Mel Gibson as I watched the hysterical
campaign against him. The hysterical, well-organized, international
campaign by the slimy, hypocritical, crooked Jew Abe Foxman, Head of
the Anti-Defamation League, and his fellow slimy, hypocritical,
crooked Jews around the world. They didn't like something and they
were moving heaven and earth to get it stopped.
And what was it they didn't like? A movie about an event at the heart
of European art, literature, and culture: the crucifixion of Christ.
So here was another obvious conclusion: Jews hate European art,
literature, and culture. In other words, Jews hate White civilization
and the White race who created it.
After that, it all fell into place. I finally recognized that Jews
weren't just slimy, hypocritical, and crooked, but actively dangerous
too. If I thought of something harmful to White civilization and the
survival of the White race - mass immigration, feminism,
multi-culturalism, anti-racism, gay rights - I realized that Jews were
behind it, were promoting it through their control of the media, and
had been doing so for decades.
Finally, I had seen the light. Finally, I had gotten smart and
recognized the Jewish problem, the problem that even dumb Gentiles
subconsciously recognize when they give nicknames like "Hannibal
Lecter" and "Prince of Darkness" and "Dracula" to Jewish politicians.
Jews really do want to eat us, and steal our souls, and suck our
blood, and it's about time we started firing a few silver bullets.
No
***********
Ah, Timmy The Twink (Jello Biafra, really!!), again you get it wrong. I stand with these giants of free speech:
"If the First Amendment has any force, it prohibits Congress from fining or jailing citizens, or association of citizens,
for simply engaging in political speech." --Justice Anthony Kennedy, SCOTUS
"As long as I am an American citizen and American blood runs in these veins I shall hold myself at liberty to speak, to
write, and to publish whatever I please on any subject."--Elija Lovejoy (1802-1837)
"Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech." --Benjamin Franklin
(1706-1790)
So tell us Twink, whom do you bend over for in the shower?
No surrender!
Dionysus
>
No
>In article <6edc06h7k79k8res4...@4ax.com>, No Surr...@never.net
>wrote:
>
>> So tell us Twink, whom do you bend over for in the shower?
>
>I wonder why you see every political conflict in terms of gay rape.
******
You're the one using the term "gay rape," not me. Look to the log in your own eye (and in other body parts, too?).
No surrender!
Dionysus
Tim Crowley
> In article <6edc06h7k79k8res4k3ig45o9ulbgl2...@4ax.com>, No Surren...@never.net
> wrote:
>
> > So tell us Twink, whom do you bend over for in the shower?
>
Much like Topaz, all Denny has to make life feel real is hate. Both
of them mostly hate themselves. Self loathing is on the
characteristics of all these racist idjits. Watch them, they are
exactly the same. Frightened little boys that hate.
Topaz
by Joseph Sobran
Western man towers over the rest of the world in ways so
large as to be almost inexpressible. It's Western
exploration, science, and conquest that have revealed the
world to itself. Other races feel like subjects of Western
power long after colonialism, imperialism, and slavery have
disappeared. The charge of racism puzzles whites who feel
not hostility, but only baffled good will, because they
don't grasp what it really means: humiliation. The white
man presents an image of superiority even when he isn't
conscious of it. And superiority excites envy. Destroying
white civilization is the inmost desire of the league of
designated victims we call 'minorities.'
From Sobran's Newsletter, April 1997
Tim Crowley
>
tion. The white
> man presents an image of superiority even when he isn't
> conscious of it. And superiority excites envy. Destroying
> white civilization is the inmost desire of the league of
> designated victims we call 'minorities.'
Topaz
"Keep bashing the dead white males, and the live ones, and the
females, too, until the social construct known as the white race is
destroyed. Not deconstructed, but destroyed."
--- Noel Ignatiev, Jewish Harvard professor and editor of Race
Traitor magazine (Washington Times, September 4, 2002)
"The white race is the cancer of human history."
--- Susan Sontag (much-celebrated Jewish "intellectual," whose
recent passing was lamented loudly in Jewish circles)
"I don't care about your idiot children."
--- Willie Brown (Mayor of San Francisco, to a white parent
complaining that affirmative action would penalize his children),
quoted in The Social Contract (Summer 1998, p. 290)
"It's always illegitimate for white men to organize as white men."
--- William Raspberry (black columnist), Dubiously Exclusive,
(Washington Post, Nov. 24, 1995)
"Q: What kind of world do you want to leave to your children?
A: A world in which there aren't any white people. . . ."
--- Leonard Jeffries (chairman of the African-American studies
department of the City College of New York), interviewed by T.L.
Stanclu and Nisha Mohammed, Rutherford Magazine (May 1995, p. 13)
"You guys have been practicing discrimination for years. Now it is
our turn."
--- Black Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall (in a conversation
with Justice William Douglas about racial preferences), quoted by
William O. Douglas, The Court Years, 1939-1975 (New York, Random
House, 1980)