Re: JUST WHAT EXACTLY IS FASCISM???

[walt tonne]

On Jan 20, 5:13 pm, "James Miller" <jamesmil...@spaminator.com> wrote:
> Excellent new article by James Miller, PhD
>
> What Is Fascism?http://immigration-globalization.blogspot.com/2011/09/what-is-fascism...

Worth reading!

[Gray Guest]

walt tonne <tonnew...@gmail.com> wrote in news:7a1523ca-94e7-4684-8499-
e3bbc0...@v14g2000yqh.googlegroups.com:

Facism was a good way to fool a bunch of antisemites into beleiving they
could rule the world and then exterminating them when they tried.

Your hero was burned with the trash. His henchmen were shot, bayoneted
poisoned and hung by the neck until dead. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

It appears that the Lord's Work is never done.

--
Words of wisdom

What does not kill you... probably didn't cause enough tissue damage.

[Bill Graham]

Greegor wrote:

> Then why did you repost your broken link?

Yes. It may be, "worth reading", but I sure can't read it from here. Why
don't you cut and paste it into your next post?

[Topaz]

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

No one is moaning because America once fought the British. But
suddenly Jews can not be the enemy under any circumstances. Why is
that? Because the Jews control the media. Think outside the box.

Now that America is ruled by the Jews it is no insult to be called
"anti-Semite". The insult is that they think we care about their self
serving verbiage.

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

This is what President Nixon said:

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

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


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

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

[tooly]

Remember that star trek episode where the mangled starship captain
[played by Jeff Hunter if I remember], was taken back to a barren
planet inhabited by mentats with oversized brains? The planet was off
limits to humans, as the mentats [my depiction] could 'throw
illusions' into one's mind and make them do whatever they wanted.

Throwing illusions? An interesting idea I think. I somehow find a
loose association to the idea in world history, and how...well, I
remember I was christian for example. I've decided this was mostly an
illusion placed in my brain...for many reasons, but at least one
reason, was to CONTROL ME [perhaps]?

I mean, I read the bible...and I wonder. Rules to live by? Wisdoms
for betterment? Or, perhaps blinders put on cattle that we do not
diverge from being driven to market?

Mentats...? Right here, on earth, in our midst? I dunno; I just
don't know. I decided some time ago, that even if this were the
deeper truth to things, I doubt it would do much good. One illusion
or another, if my brain is susceptible, well, it simply is. A mentat
on Star Trek's barren planet would just replace one illusion with
another.

And then, maybe if I discard such illusions, I'll find I'm like that
Jeffery Hunter's character, a mangled cripple with no hope.

In the meantime, my father's father's country is RUINED...and my woman
stolen away. Stealing away woman...that is the horrendous one; the
back breaker...for it leaves one without 'anything' left...a far worse
creature than anything sealed in some machine housing a mangled
body.

Equality; marxism; PROGRESSIVISM...communism and socialism...Saul
Alinsky, Obama...the rise of the black man and the disappearance of
the white woman...it all ties together somehow; a common thread
somewhere...somehow...and it all seems to fall back upon the MENTATs
among us; the power behind the scenes; the influence of academia, the
mind sweep of the human consciousness; the e=mc2 evolutionary
psychoanalysis of our spiritual domain....

What are they up to I wonder? A better world? For THEM? Or a prison
for me? Or maybe they are as dufus as the rest of us and just
guessing.

From my eyes, Hell itself rises.

[Bill Graham]

This guy tells it like it really is. It isn't a matter of Jews vs. Arabs.
It's a matter of a way of life that is impossible for any reasonable person
to accept:

http://dotsub.com/media/b5ee5ada-5b37-4b0b-9916-e0896337ec4b/e/m

[Immortalist]

On Jan 22, 9:42 am, Gray Guest <No_email_for_...@wahoo.com> wrote:
> walt tonne <tonnewalt...@gmail.com> wrote in news:7a1523ca-94e7-4684-8499-
> e3bbc0d6c...@v14g2000yqh.googlegroups.com:

>
> > On Jan 20, 5:13 pm, "James Miller" <jamesmil...@spaminator.com> wrote:
> >> Excellent new article by James Miller, PhD
>
> >> What Is Fascism?
>

Fascism is an authoritarian political ideology (generally tied to a
mass movement) that considers individual and other societal interests
subordinate to the needs of the state, and seeks to forge a type of
national unity, usually based on, but not limited to, ethnic,
cultural, or racial attributes. Various scholars attribute different
characteristics to fascism, but the following elements are usually
seen as its integral parts: nationalism, authoritarianism, statism,
militarism, totalitarianism, anti-communism, collectivism,
corporatism, populism, and opposition to economic and political
liberalism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

Historically, corporatism or corporativism (Italian: corporativismo)
refers to a political or economic system in which power is given to
civic assemblies that represent economic, industrial, agrarian,
social, cultural, and professional groups. These civic assemblies,
known as corporations (not necessarily in the same sense as
contemporary business corporations) are unelected bodies with an
internal hierarchy; their purpose is to exert control over their
respective areas of social or economic life. Thus, for example, a
steel corporation would be a cartel composed of all the business
leaders in the steel industry, coming together to discuss a common
policy on prices and wages. When much political and economic power
rests in the hands of such groups, then a corporatist system is in
place....

...Political scientists may also use the term corporatism to describe
a practice whereby an authoritarian state, through the process of
licensing and regulating officially-incorporated social, religious,
economic, or popular organizations, effectively co-opts their
leadership or circumscribes their ability to challenge state authority
by establishing the state as the source of their legitimacy, as well
as sometimes running them, either directly or indirectly through shill
corporations. This usage is particularly common in the area of East
Asian studies, and is sometimes also referred to as state corporatism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatism

[Topaz]

On Mon, 23 Jan 2012 19:25:55 -0800 (PST), tooly <rd...@bellsouth.net>
wrote:

>
>Remember that star trek episode where the mangled starship captain
>[played by Jeff Hunter if I remember], was taken back to a barren
>planet inhabited by mentats with oversized brains? The planet was off
>limits to humans, as the mentats [my depiction] could 'throw
>illusions' into one's mind and make them do whatever they wanted.

It's called "The Menagerie".

You ought to start with the basics then. You think therefore you are.
You are against Black men going with White women. You are not alone.
You should support some group that agrees with you. That doesn't mean
they are necessarily right or wrong on any other issues. But that is
your main issue.

You should also collect a lot of reasons why Black men should not be
with White women and post them on usenet often. Here is one example:


"Liberals and respectable conservatives say there is this RACE
problem. Everybody says this RACE problem will be solved when the
third world pours into EVERY white country and ONLY into white
countries."

"The Netherlands and Belgium are more crowded than Japan or Taiwan,
but nobody says Japan or Taiwan will solve this RACE problem by
bringing in millions of third worlders and quote assimilating unquote
with them."

"Everybody says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY
white country and ONLY white countries to "assimilate," i.e.,
intermarry, with all those non-whites."

"What if I said there was this RACE problem and this RACE problem
would be solved only if hundreds of millions of non-blacks were
brought into EVERY black country and ONLY into black countries?"

"How long would it take anyone to realize I'm not talking about a
RACE problem. I am talking about the final solution to the BLACK
problem?"

"And how long would it take any sane black man to notice this and
what kind of psycho black man wouldn't object to this?"

"But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of
genocide against my race, the white race, Liberals and respectable
conservatives agree that I am a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews."

They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white.

"Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white."

http://www.whitakeronline.org/blog/

[Topaz]

Here are some quotes from "The Eleventh Hour" by John Tyndall

"For a short time, Britons from all regions of the country and its
Empire, and from every social background, came together in a single
cause, casting aside all previous political party and class divisions
and joined hands in a common comradeship of the trenches.

And for the first time in centuries politicians in this country put
aside party warfare and joined forces in working for a single goal. A
coalition government was formed in 1916 and proceeded to coordinate
the whole national life in one mighty endeavor. Laissez-faire
Economics were dropped as Britain found that these methods, practiced
so long in the years of peace had rendered her industry hopelessly
incapable of producing her needs of survival in this titanic conflict.
New industries, such as chemicals, machine tools and optics, had to be
built practically from scratch, while others, such as electricity,
aircraft and aero-engines, had to be greatly expanded, in order to
provide the sinews of war; and this was done mainly on the initiative
of the state. By the end of the war, tremendous strides had been made
in making good these previous shortcomings of industry. What the
theoretical stimulus of the "free market" had failed to do for decades
beforehand was done in just three years of corporate effort, achieved
by firm national leadership directing economic resources, and by the
whole nation, and Empire, working as a team."

"Could not the super-human efforts displayed on the battlefield in the
face of a dangerous adversity now be displayed again in the creation,
from out of the rubble of newly born nations?"

"Sir Oswald Mosley... had crossed to the Labour benches after
despairing of the Tories' ability or will to overcome the evils of
poverty and unemployment in post 1918 Britain...

In time, however, Mosley came to recognize that in the ranks of
Labour, however ideal the ends, there was a total incomprehension of,
combined an unwillingness to accept, the necessary means... he said:

"This nation has to be mobilized and rallied for a tremendous effort,
and who can do that except the government of the day?"

In the simplest terms, nationalism is no more than team spirit. Just
as the school, the firm the regiment and the rugby team need, each in
its own way to be infused with a pride of identity and a desire to
win, so must nations, if they are to be effective forces for the
furtherance of their own interests and for their survival in the
world, be galvanized by the same vital forces."

[tooly]

> http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com   - Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

No question, you are hitting on REALITY. But like Carl Rove might
ask, 'what is electable'...or in this respect, 'what will catch hold
of the minds of men'?

We are products of many decades of intense programming; conditioning;
successful mind control, the for most Americans and westerners', there
have been place BOUNDARIES in our minds.

I think one real 'effective' mind in our midst is Pat Buchanon. He
argues NUMBERS...and NUMBERS are hard for anyone to deny. If most
white liberals today could understand those numbers, and how the world
REALLY is [as to majoritive vs minoritive political maneuverings],
they'd head for the hills and understand how they 'help' things to
their own demise [in time]. It make liberals FEEL GOOD, for now, to
think they helping the downtrodden, the underclasses, who are more
impoverished...but they don't understand. WE...that is 'white people'
are fast becoming MINORITIES in our own lands [especially America],
helped along by these progressives, who want to erase things like
national borders and race differentiation. Sure...the 'minorities'
play along...and why not; it is to their advantage. But as world
history has shown, time and again, 'population majorities work to
dispossess wealth minorities' under Democracy.

Whites, on a global scale, are a minority. They own the majority of
wealth [have generated it for the rest of the world]. But as national
borders are erased and weakened [by the efforts of those like George
Soros and his ilk], White are being thrown into an ever increasing
global political reality where the third world seeks to dispossess
white of that wealth through democratic 'redistribution' [marxist
ideology].

We need to awaken WHITE people up; those like myself, raised to rebuke
anything RACIAL in thought [as to being white or caucasian or
otherwise]...and to simply EDUCATE them on what is happening, and what
has happened. We've been sold a bill of goods that is not only a lie,
but suicidal.

I recommend EVERYONE to read Pat Buchanon's 'Suicide of a Super
Power'. It simply gives the numbers...but you'll come away realizing
the serious weakness of democracy [even as you were, if like myself,
raised to believe in democracy like an unassailable god]. Global
democracy could, most likely will, mean the demise of the white race
altogether.

[SaPeIsMa]

"Immortalist" <reanima...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:a48d8e7d-f285-4b86...@c8g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...

>
> What Is Fascism?
>
>
> Fascism is an authoritarian political ideology (generally tied to a
> mass movement) that considers individual and other societal interests
> subordinate to the needs of the state, and seeks to forge a type of
> national unity, usually based on, but not limited to, ethnic,
> cultural, or racial attributes. Various scholars attribute different
> characteristics to fascism, but the following elements are usually
> seen as its integral parts: nationalism, authoritarianism, statism,
> militarism, totalitarianism, anti-communism, collectivism,
> corporatism, populism, and opposition to economic and political
> liberalism.
>

Ironically, of the list

nationalism,
authoritarianism,
statism,
militarism,
totalitarianism,
anti-communism

collectivism,
corporatism,
populism,
and opposition to economic and political liberalism.

only anti-communism and corporatism don't apply to communism.
But then the communists are anti-fascist and run Government "corporations"
instead

SO really there's no difference between the two,

[Topaz]

On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 15:59:20 -0800 (PST), tooly <rd...@bellsouth.net>
wrote:

Great Post!

[Topaz]

The term "Corporatism" derives from Catholic doctrine and has nothing
to do with corporations or capitalism.

Corporatism was derived as a substitute for Marxism, a third way, so
to speak. Corporatists are hardly pro-big-business and anti-labor.
Chas

Of course Mussolini did not mean that corporations as in the USA
should have more power or profits.

"Corporativism wants each individual to see his or her own specific
place in the organic order as a whole. Only through this view can we
at last lay the clashes between classes aside and start working for
common goals again"
Benito Mussolini


Here are parts of a post about Mussolini written by a very
anti-Mussolini person. He has done his homework though and cites many
books which are also anti-Mussolini and anti-Fascist. These are some
things they admit:

"He had a profound contempt for those whose overriding ambition was to
be rich. It was a mania, he thought, a kind of disease, and he
comforted himself with the reflection that the rich were rarely happy"
Here Hibbert (1962, p. 47) is describing a lifelong attitude of
Mussolini that continued right into his time as Italy's Prime Minister
- when he refused to take his official salary.

"There was much truth in the comment of a Rome newspaper that the new
fasci did not aim at the defence of the ruling class or the existing
State but wanted to lead the revolutionary forces into the Nationalist
camp so as to prevent a victory of Bolshevism.

even after coming to power, to take drives in the country with his
wife and stop at various farmhouses on the way for a chat with the
family there. He would enjoy discussing the crops, the weather and all
the usual rural topics and obviously just liked the feeling of being
one of the people. His claim to represent the people was not just
theory but heartfelt. And he never gave up his "anti-bourgeois"
rhetoric.

His policies were basically protectionist. He controlled the
exchange-rate of the Italian currency and promoted that old favourite
of the economically illiterate - autarky - meaning that he tried to
get Italy to become wholly self-sufficient rather than rely on foreign
trade. He wanted to protect Italian products from competing foreign
products.

By 1939 he had doubled Italy's grain
production from its traditional level, enabling Italy to cut wheat
imports by 75% (Smith, 1967, p. 92).
He made Capri a bird sanctuary (Smith, 1967, p. 84) and
in 1926 he issued a decree reducing the size of newspapers to save
wood pulp. And, believe it or not, he even mandated gasohol - i.e.
mixing industrial alcohol with petroleum products to make fuel for
cars (Smith, 1967, p. 87).

Mussolini also disliked the population drift from rural areas into
the big cities and in 1930 passed a law to put a stop to it unless
official permission was granted he advocated private enterprise within
a strict set of State controls designed, among other things, to
prevent abuse of monopoly power (Gregor, 1979, Ch. 5).

...a big expansion of public works and a great improvement in social
insurance measures. He also set up the "Dopolavoro" (after work)
organization to give workers cheap recreations of various kinds (cf.
the Nazi Kraft durch Freude movement). His public health measures
(such as the attack on tuberculosis and the setting up of a huge
maternal and child welfare organization) were particularly notable for
their rationality and efficiency and, as such, were rewarded with
great success. For instance, the incidence of tuberculosis dropped
dramatically and infant mortality declined by more than 20% (Gregor,
p. 259).

"instituted a programme of public works hitherto unrivalled in modern
Europe. Bridges, canals and roads were built, hospitals and schools,
railway stations and orphanages, swamps were drained and land
reclaimed, forest were planted and universities were endowed."
In 1929 Mussolini and Pope Pius

12th signed the Lateran treaty - which is still the legal basis for
the existence of the Vatican State to this day - and Pius in fact at
one stage called Mussolini "the man sent by Providence". The treaty
recognized Roman Catholicism as the Italian State religion as well as
recognizing the Vatican as a sovereign state. What Mussolini got in
exchange was acceptance by the church - something that was enormously
important in the Italy of that time.

the great hatred that existed in prewar
Germany between the Nazis and the "Reds". And the early Fascists
battled the "Reds" too, of course.

The 1919 election manifesto, for instance, contained policies of
worker control of industry, confiscation of war profits, abolition of
the Stock exchange, land for the peasants and abolition of the
Monarchy and nobility. Further, Mussolini never ceased to inveigh
against "plutocrats".

He wanted a harmonious and united Italy for all Italians of all
classes and was sure that achieving just treatment for the workers
needed neither revolution nor any kind of artificially enforced
equality.

This made Italian Fascism a much more popular creed than Stalin's
Communism. This is perhaps most clearly seen by the always persuasive
"voting with your feet" criterion. Mussolini made no effort to prevent
Italians from emigrating and although some anti-Fascists did, net
emigration actually FELL under Mussolini. Compare this with Stalin and
the Berlin wall.

Mussolini gained power through political rather than revolutionary
means. His famous march on Rome was only superficially revolutionary.
The King of Italy and the army approved of him because of his
pragmatic policies so did not oppose the march. So this collusion
ensured that Mussolini's "revolution" was essentially bloodless.
His considerable popularity for many years among a wide range of
Italians shows how effective his recipe for achieving that was.
In his "corporate state", Mussolini was the first to create ...a
system of capitalism under tight government control. And his corporate
state was one where the workers had (at least in theory) equal rights
with management.

REFERENCES Amis, M. (2002) Koba the Dread : laughter and the twenty
million.
N.Y.: Talk Miramax
Carsten, F.L. (1967) The rise of Fascism. London: Methuen. Funk &
Wagnall's New Encyclopedia (1983) Funk & Wagnall's Galbraith, J.K.
(1969) The affluent society. 2nd ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Gilmour, I.H.J.L. (1978) Inside right. London: Quartet.
Greene, N. (1968) Fascism: An anthology. N.Y.: Crowell. Gregor, A.J.
(1979) Italian Fascism and developmental dictatorship Princeton, N.J.:
Univ. Press.
Hagan, J. (1966) Modern History and its themes. Croydon, Victoria,
Australia: Longmans.
Hibbert, C. (1962) Benito Mussolini Geneva: Heron Books. Herzer, I.
(1989)
The Italian refuge: Rescue of Jews during the holocaust. Washington,
D.C.:
Catholic University of America Press
Horowitz, D. (1998) Up from multiculturalism. Heterodoxy, January.
See: http://www.cspc.org/het/multicul.htm Lenin, V.I. (1952)
"Left-Wing" Communism, an Infantile Disorder. In:
Selected Works, Vol. II, Part 2. Moscow: Foreign Languages Publishing
House.
Martino, A. (1998) The modern mask of socialism. 15th John Bonython
lecture,
Centre for Independent Studies, Sydney. See
http://www.cis.org.au/Events/JBL/JBL98.htm
Muravchik, J. (2002) Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism
San Francisco: Encounter Books.
Smith, D.M. (1967) The theory and practice of Fascism. In: Greene, N.
Fascism: An anthology N.Y.: Crowell.
Steinberg, J. (1990) All or nothing: The Axis and the holocaust
London:
Routledge.

[Eric S. Harris]

walt tonne wrote:

[snipped]

Too bad there isn't some kind of a reference work -- a book of some sort
-- where the meanings of words are listed.

It could be in alphabetical order, for convenience. We could find
"fascism" between "fart" and "fastball". -Eric

--
Replace the "w" with a "y" when replying via e-mail. If I haven't
replied to an alleged rebuttal (yet), it may not be the most deserving
of correction; it's a big Internet and I'm only one opinionated guy:
http://xkcd.com/386 Bitcoin addr: 19gYsCTyjyYwF48ea3rHaziDNzYhnvgLH5

[Bill Graham]

Eric S. Harris wrote:
> walt tonne wrote:
>
> [snipped]
>
> Too bad there isn't some kind of a reference work -- a book of some
> sort -- where the meanings of words are listed.
>
> It could be in alphabetical order, for convenience. We could find
> "fascism" between "fart" and "fastball". -Eric

Trouble is, all such books are written/edited by human beings, and these
creatures are known to be prejudiced and opinionated, and will add on/leave
out information that suits their agendas.

[tooly]

On Jan 22, 12:42 pm, Gray Guest <No_email_for_...@wahoo.com> wrote:
> walt tonne <tonnewalt...@gmail.com> wrote in news:7a1523ca-94e7-4684-8499-
> e3bbc0d6c...@v14g2000yqh.googlegroups.com:
>

> > On Jan 20, 5:13 pm, "James Miller" <jamesmil...@spaminator.com> wrote:
> >> Excellent new article by James Miller, PhD
>
> >> What Is Fascism?http://immigration-
>
> globalization.blogspot.com/2011/09/wha
>
> > t-is-fascism...
>
> > Worth reading!
>
> Facism was a good way to fool a bunch of antisemites into beleiving they
> could rule the world and then exterminating them when they tried.
>
> Your hero was burned with the trash. His henchmen were shot, bayoneted
> poisoned and hung by the neck until dead.  Good riddance to bad rubbish.
>
> It appears that the Lord's Work is never done.
>
> --
> Words of wisdom
>
> What does not kill you... probably didn't cause enough tissue damage.

I think we confuse tinhorn despotism with a bonifide political system
in Fascism. I say 'system' loosely, but maybe I mean more a simple
recognition of the 'reality' of how things work, and then perhaps to
be consicous of it, using our intelligence to design how best to go
about enhancing such natural design [perhaps to prevent such tinhorn
despots to gaining real power].

I make my argument upon a realization I came to some time ago, that no
matter the noble intent or the magnanimous reach of that authority,
any rule of law MUST be backed by power.

Fascism is nothing new [maybe the word is contempory, but the 'as the
duck waddles' is something at least as old as the American Electoral
college, or perhaps old world Monarchies [which were essentially
Fascist in nature]]. One of the main tennant of Fascism, as I
understand it, is that Human socialization has SPECIALIZED over eons
of development. This has resulted in some people being specially
'designed' over time for certain roles in society...ergo, the
candlestick maker wouild not make a good baker, and visa versa.

Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist papers of how selecting leaders
should be of those most moral, articulated, and with understanding of
the political realities of power [my rewording]. This was a main
reason for the electoral college, that IF the lesser endowed public-at-
large were to be swayed by POPULISM, and elect some scalywag into
office who knew how to sway such surficial mindplay, the electoral
college would act as a buffer to 'deselect' such obvious bad
leadership to installed someone 'BETTER SUITED'.

Better Suited. Now that is a mouthful if you think upon it. In a
single two word thought, the entire scope of fascism is explained [as
I understand it anyway]. The masses are prone to populism; and
scalywags learn quickly how to play to such POPULAR perception...which
is most of what the Democrat Party is all about these days. They
promise spending programs, to save the impoverished, to nurture the
infirm, to put a chicken in every pot and a car in every garage...and
just like any used carlot salesman, will TELL you anything to get your
vote; and then even undermine the very foundation of a national
integrity, if only to seal POLITICAL POWER.

Scalywag-ism at it's worst. But like negative campaigning, scalywag-
ism works. People vote for politicians who PROMISE them things, even
if those promises are as empty as giving everyone health care as the
boat sinks under 14 trillion dollars of debt [oh, what's that...it's
up to sixteen trillion now?]. Lordy lordy...promise the moon and
someday we'll all be eating green cheese.

Anyway, my view of Fascism is like a 'emergency brake' on a runaway
train. If we let things go, we're gonna crash. So...'Danger Will
Robinson, Danger!!'.

What we see in Washington now is a total quagmire stalemate. The
democrats have pushed us into a corner, sponsoring wide spread
DISPARATE immigration, who vote their way of course, and will always
VOTE for more spending. Spend, spend, spend...and then collapse?
Yep, the concrete wall DOES in fact exist, just up ahead...and
EVERYONE CAN SEE IT...where our economy is headed..a runaway train
that NO ONE CAN stop.

Well, at least not by present political process. Too many scalywags
in office now, and the most scalywagist of them all, Obama himself
[with a pronounced marxist agenda that one might assume, he could care
less if collapse is imminent, 'cuz it only brings and end to
capitalism all the quicker and a George Soros globalism to save us
from global warming and all]. Superman capes were made in his size I
think.

Ha...talk about fascism...I mean, 'cuz he's black, he gets to thumb
his nose at the constitution and no one seems to give a damn all that
much...especially the mainstream network media [hmm...did they go to
Columbia and Berkley too I wonder?].

So, Fascism to me, is like the Father of the family putting his foot
down in times of emergency. True, it's dictatorial, but if the RIGHT
leaders are selected, those most SPECIALIZED to perform and bring us
out such messes, then the concept is valid [IMHO}.

I see no other way out of our present mess. In Wisconsin, politicians
could not even install the most MINIMUM cuts in spending. We can't
even stay to our own debt ceilings passed in Congress...and anyone
TRYING to do something responsible, only gets lambasted in our
national media as ogres and vermin. Too bad, 'cuz WE need them there
trying to do something about this crisis, but will probably get ousted
for some shallow minded democrat with an open check book [our check
book].

Republicans try; but the political realities have now been so PADDED
by liberals who passed the Hart-Cellar Act back in 1965 to flood the
land with hispanics and other socialist leaning populations who would
vote democrat, well, half of the electorate out here now are of the
demographics that will ALWAYS vote for democrats [and more spending],
no matter how bad a job Obama does. And Republicans, trying to remain
viable as a party, only get more and more 'democrat-lite'...full of
RINO's and NEOCONS, like half-beasts of Greek Mythology. The Tea
Party was a noble 'last gasp' from an aging 'white' indigenous
population, the inheritance of the founding elements of this nation,
but too many Soros' out there now; too many left over marxists from
that old realm, out to destroy America and Capitalism.

It's all corrupted now. No way out.

Fascism would be one way. But the chances of that is almost 'nil'.
But...a charismatic leader to come along...who knows. Unfortunately,
such a 'charismatic' has come along, but he is black and takes us in
the OPPOSITE direction, to hasten America's demise [and probably
western civilization with it].

Where did America go wrong I wonder? Many dominoes along the way of
course; but as I study the situation, the year 1965 seems to stand out
[and possibly 1964] as a definite 'crossroads' to perdition. Lyndon
Baines Johnson's adminstration...an extension of JFK's ideals
perhaps. From that point on, all conservatives have been doing is
putting their finger in the dyke trying to prevent it from bursting
altogether. Some call it 'change'...[which is a mindless non-
descripte meainglessness]...but others of us call it 'collapse'. All
us conservatives have been doing for many years now is 'slowing' the
collapse down.

But critical mass appears just up ahead now. It could mean collapse,
chaos, and reformation [what the marxists have wanted ever since 1929
in the USA]. Or it could just mean the destruction of the Republican
Party. Or most likely, the final dispossession of WHITE PEOPLE of the
very nation they created. Either one of these outcomes are the
despair of al despair. We've already lost our white woman [in mind
and soul]...hell, why not all else.

Pretty pessimistic I realize. But probably pretty REAL also.
Of course, if you are white, you could try and fight back...and vote
REPUBLICAN. I mean, if you are BLACK, you WILL vote Democrat...right?

[Gray Guest]

tooly <rd...@bellsouth.net> wrote in news:09755d5a-9909-4d22-8aef-
ca90f1...@t2g2000yqk.googlegroups.com:

If you are saying that bad poltical systems are simply window dressing I
agree.

Look at China, they exchanged fuedalism for communism. Mainly becuase
"communism" sounds more modern and enlightened. It's pretty much the same
system except I think the commies killed far more of thier own people.

[tooly]

On Jan 31, 7:56 pm, Gray Guest <No_email_for_...@wahoo.com> wrote:
> tooly <rd...@bellsouth.net> wrote in news:09755d5a-9909-4d22-8aef-

> ca90f19b4...@t2g2000yqk.googlegroups.com:

>
>
>
>
> >
> > Pretty pessimistic I realize.  But probably pretty REAL also.
> > Of course, if you are white, you could try and fight back...and vote
> > REPUBLICAN.  I mean, if you are BLACK, you WILL vote Democrat...right?
>
> If you are saying that bad poltical systems are simply window dressing I
> agree.
>
> Look at China, they exchanged fuedalism for communism. Mainly becuase
> "communism" sounds more modern and enlightened. It's pretty much the same
> system except I think the commies killed far more of thier own people.
>
> --
> Words of wisdom
>

> What does not kill you... probably didn't cause enough tissue damage.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Very good. Command economic systems suggest 'control', like someone
driving a car. What the reality is of course, is political POWER by a
few who 'control people'...ergo, totalitarianism [a synonym to fascism
really]. But even in democracies, there is 'the' authority, and
people who control things. Ultimately, behind the mask of all
political systems is simply POWER. Even God battling the devil, MUST
be more powerful if his wishes are to be reality [symbolic]. The
trick for humanity of course is getting that power into the hands of
those who will do most good for that humanity, and not be like catfish
on stinkbait, taking the prize and running with it for their own
egotistical desires [despotism].

Democracy was the pet of all good men everywhere...that is, until
Democrats in the USA taught us that, even here, things can be
corrupted. Use noble ideas like Equality, and justify new immigration
policy, for instance, for those more impoverished [maybe from places
like Mexico and Haiti]...who would vote, once here, for socialism [in
all its various forms]...and of course, that Political Party that
pushed the addictive drug on the people [through spending programs].

And so, even Democracy can become corrupted in time, by the CLEVERness
of politicians with blind lust for power under the guise of 'party',
who are willing to even sacrifice the integrity of their own country
[racial, cultural, heritage, language, all ways, you name it]...just
to gain POWER. Ted Kennedy stood before congress and PROMISED that
Hart-Cellar would 'change' nothing. But what we find is the 'flood
gates' being opened to allow a tidal wave of Mexican hispanic and
other disparate peoples into the land, and now...just a few short
decades later, amassing in such numbers as to OUST the very progeny of
the creators from their own seat of ownership. Hmm...talk about
inviting Uncle Buck to visit and then he never leaves, ha...

Is this a type of fascism in itself? A Macheavellian undermine of
America? The case can be argued I think, when POWER itself is the ONLY
preponderant as to political success or failure [such as the Democrat
Party has assessed for itself now].

Of course, I'm white, and I can be dismissed with this nonsense about
'racist demogogery' to cover up their misdeeds over time. I mean,
that's how they opened the flood gates anyway...just to play upon the
guilt complex of a highly moral people and need to 'do what is
right'. While we were 'dazed and confused' perplexed with searching
out our own conscience as to the rightness of wrongness of our own
'exceptionalism', all them HORDES were crossing our borders flooding
our population...and now our ballot boxes.

So, all them europeans who founded the place...'thrown out of their
own teepee to freeze in the winter snow'. Even Tea Parties can't help
now.

Thank you Teddy Kennedy. Thank you LBJ and JFK. And thank you most
of all Barack Obama, as the intercedent avatar of socialist dreams
everywhere, come to 'seal the deal' once and for all. Ole Karl Marx
is dancing in the stars in his grave [while Washtington, Jefferson,
Franklin and company are just rolling over in theirs].

I'm no fan of Adolf...but one thing he understood I think, was that
the ONLY way to deal with the Bolsheviks was FORCE; to kick them out
of the land forthwith. Why? Their message is like DOPE to the
underclasses. There is ALWAYS gonna be stratification of
societies...losers and winners. NOTHING can prevent that. BUT...that
FACT can be played upon by CLEVER politicians to cause envy and
hatred, and then UPHEAVAL under new promises of a STATE designed
specifically to UNDO that stratification...and give all them poor
people whatever poor people want. And poor people and those who have
to work will ALWAYS outnumber those who are rich and don't have to
work as much. ERgo, under democracies and republics, MARXISM is a
dangerous commodity that will ALWAYS stand as threat to common
tranquility.

YOu can't vote it out...but you hafta spray bug spray out around the
baseboards and in crevices...wherever 'creepy' things of subtrafuge
and undermine can 'hide'. If you try and defeat marxism with
democratic process, well, what you get is Obama [And a limp dick
candidate to run against him, like McCain and now Romney]. All he has
to do is PROMISE something; or accentuate the idea that the opposition
wants to 'take something away'...and you have the quintessential
POPULIST arguement that is almost guaranteed to mesmerize the masses
into voting your way.

So, you get An Adolf to take care of things when things get so
decrepid I suppose; when the 'runaway train' needs it's emergency
brake pulled etc. It is just a time when a whole case of bug bombs
and poison spray won't do, and you have to throw a tent over the house
and 'fumigate'...OUST the marxists altogether; Knock back the bug
creep that will stand as threat to free people everywhere for all
time.

Unfortunately, POWER is it's own drug. And once those like an Adolf
have met their purpose, they usually go on and create things like
world wars and the like. it is even harder to erradicate them.

So, I dunno the answer. I just know that the bug creep in America has
reached 'critical mass' now; and those like George Soros and dominions
'under the covers' of decent society everywhere with 'crusade like
missions' to save the world from Climate change and peak oil who knows
what else, are 'geometrically progressing' toward their end of
bringing the house down altogether. Like I said, Obama is really just
an Avatar...for something far deeper and extensive that threatens now
to take over the world.

A FASCIST counter attack would be risky; but...if the right leader
were found...I dunno. It's all pipe smoke now of course. The
socialists have pretty much solidified their path. All they need is
to get Obama elected one more time. I think that would do it for
them. I'm depressed. All good men everywhere are depressed [or
turned away].

[Eric S. Harris]

As long as the people in the conversation are using the same definition
for a word, the conversation has a chance of being productive.
Dictionaries are one place to go for definitions. (They can also be
agreed upon by the participants, but why re-invent the wheel, if you can
avoid it?)

Good definitions -- from the standpoint of productive discussion --
don't include conclusions and value judgments and snarky remarks. They
are simply descriptive in such a way that all the participants can
accept them, and agree with their meaning.

Then the concluding and such can begin.

Can you come up with -- find or devise, I don't care -- a definition of
fascism that fits the bill? One that: (1) includes all examples of
fascism that the participants agree are fascism, (2) excludes what the
participants agree are not fascism, (3) doesn't do anything else
(conclude, insult, condemn)? -Eric

[tooly]

> of correction; it's a big Internet and I'm only one opinionated guy:http://xkcd.com/386 Bitcoin addr: 19gYsCTyjyYwF48ea3rHaziDNzYhnvgLH5- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Harris might have a good way to 'narrow' the subject down...by
eliminating what is NOT a fascist

sooo...

Is a
Monarch a Fascist?
An oligarch?
A colusionist?
A monopolist?
A dictator?
A totalitarian party or committee?
A bolshevik?
A nazi?
An authoritarian?
An autocractic oversight?

Can someone espousing democracy be a Fascist?
Can a politician in a Republic become a Fascist?

I think one common thread of Fascism is the result of some people
having no say or control of their own destiny; where some excercise
absolute power over some others [no representation, no voice]. So,
one synonym of Fascism is possibly TYRANNY? or maybe Dicatorship? Or
perhaps Totalitarianism [if a group of leaders].

Definitions get fuzzy I'm afraid, since technically, Fascist was an
Italian PARTY under Mussolini. But of course, the usage of the term
goes far beyond simply identifying a political party or historical
event. We find a useful intuitiveness to the concept that can be
applied to many aspects of government, in limited ways. Many, for
example, thought the Patriot Act was 'slippage' into Fascist-like
qualities. So, it gets fuddled up with 'as like' or 'limited'
application etc.

So, there is an overlap of usage as people understand an essence of a
thing, that dictionary definitions might not help.

How about, Oppression of the few over the many...or maybe of the many
over the few? Question I ask, could there be JUSTIFICATION for such a
thing [any particular scenario that might arise where such oppression
might be called for?].

Or is fascism a blanket evil; forever and always a 'human bad' that
serves only bad things; without any circumstance that could EVER arise
where it might be logical and reasonable?

Hmm...just to confuse the topic [and throw a monkey wrench into
things]...CONSIDER...
IF...I repeat...IF
hmm...let me repeat again...IF
there is a God, would he be a Fascist?

Ok...there might not be a God...who knows; Sir says it all storyland
and fantasy...sooo...
But, let's not go so far...but just say "HIGHER EXISTENCE'. Say,
slugs are a 'lesser' thing than, say rats or snakes, and snakes lesser
than cats, and cats the "pets" of humans etc. A HEIRARCHY to things.
God only exemplifies a PINNCALE to some ladder of consciousness [or
something like that, who knows]...but 'higher existence' is a bit more
provable I think. Why do we find no pangs of conscience when we
squash a roach that runs across our living room floor, but would find
it reprehensible if we kill whales for food and other supplies?
See...HEIRARCHY...and if there is LOWER EXISTENCE, there follows, a
HIGHER EXISTENCE.

So forget the God question and simply ask, what exists on the next
NICHE above one's own self. That small step would be, logically,
HIGHER EXISTENCE...right?

It's an argument that just might support Fascism as I see it. Perhaps
there is some single creature out there, some leader for example,
who's very NATURE is to LEAD us. Not by decrea by anything or
anyone...but by NATURE itself; by specialization of evolution; by a
eons of precise niche pressures that produce whatever qualities that
make up the niche's function. TO LEAD. To NOT be a butcher, baker or
candlestick maker, but to LEAD.

I dunno. It's an argument. I think it has validity. My observation
of life is that equality is the bogus value. I see very little in
life that is equal. We exist on a wide spectrum of abilities and
characteristics, run a race and we finish 'not all together' but as a
long line, from first to last. A HEIRARCHY exists everywhere I
look.

But to date, we FORCE social structure to align itself with this bogus
notion of EQUALITY...and IMHO, we have distorted nature so much now,
there can be no good endings for us. Everything is OUT OF PLACE.
True, we 're-condition' ourselves to adapt to this monstrocity we have
now 'invented', but...

Well, things will need to be straightened out at some point. Or, my
assessment, we'll die.

Hey...just my butthole...I mean, opinion. I bet it makes sense
though.

[Topaz]

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 01:10:23 -0600, "Eric S. Harris"
<eric_ha...@wahoo.com> wrote:


>As long as the people in the conversation are using the same definition
>for a word, the conversation has a chance of being productive.
>Dictionaries are one place to go for definitions. (They can also be
>agreed upon by the participants, but why re-invent the wheel, if you can
>avoid it?)
>
>Good definitions -- from the standpoint of productive discussion --
>don't include conclusions and value judgments and snarky remarks. They
>are simply descriptive in such a way that all the participants can
>accept them, and agree with their meaning.
>
>Then the concluding and such can begin.
>
>Can you come up with -- find or devise, I don't care -- a definition of
>fascism that fits the bill? One that: (1) includes all examples of
>fascism that the participants agree are fascism, (2) excludes what the
>participants agree are not fascism, (3) doesn't do anything else
>(conclude, insult, condemn)? -Eric

There are those who want social laws such as outlawing prostitution.
But they don't want economic laws. They call themselves conservatives.

There are those who want economic laws such as stopping the CEO's from
making billions. But they don't want social laws. They call themselves
liberals.

There are those who don't want social laws or economic laws. They call
themselves libertarians.

Isn't it obvious that something is missing? What about those who want
social laws and economic laws? That would be fascism.

[Bill Graham]

"Eric S. Harris" <eric_ha...@wahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4F2E2B5F...@wahoo.com...

No. How can you do that when a large portion of the world (almost all the
believers in Islam) believe, or say they believe, that the United States is
a fascist country?

[Scout]

"Bill Graham" <we...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:n_6dnZuqpt927bLS...@giganews.com...

Further, it should be pointed out that beliefs of what something is, does
not necessarily reflect reality.

As such Eric is attempting to illicit a definition based on subjective
rather than objective evaluations.

Naturally that is going to be inaccurate and even contradictory because it
all depends of views of people who may not know what they are talking about
and simply parroting phrases they don't understand or comprehend.

I suggest that if Eric desires to look for a definition of fascism that any
authoritative source can provide 95% of that definition with the remaining
5% depending on who you talk to.

IOW, good enough for all practical purposes....just as we have defined every
other political system.

[deadrat]

First of all, how many Muslims are there? About a billion? I'd say that a
vanishing fraction of them know or care anything about the US.

Secondly, who cares what ignoramuses say? If we paid attention to them, we
would believe for instance, that the 1st Amendment doesn't apply to city
governments. And we'd never get a dictionary written at all.

[tooly]

> http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com   - Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Interesting.
could a fascist state exist under a democracy?
How do fascists come to power? How might they be 'deselected' for
rule [if the people so desired]?

One major preponderant I think is overlooked in today's political
analysis, is that of HOMOGENITY of the population. In a democracy for
example, where strick majority rule is maintained, it could be argued
that if there is a minority population, that minority might exist
under a fascist like control of the majority [it could never win
elections or be represented with simple popular vote].

But perhaps some people do not want to be 'multicultural'? The
question of what is a NATION comes to mind. Borders and government,
IMHO, do NOT explain nationhood. So, a Fascist state might be sought
by a NATION of people to maintain a particular majoritive integrity to
the society or something; to keep the riffraff out so to speak, that
the REAL nation is protected?

How closely are NATION and STATE associated to fascism?

[Michael Ejercito]

Very good answer.


Michael

[Michael Gordge]

On Jan 22, 9:41 pm, walt tonne <tonnewalt...@gmail.com> wrote:

> JUST WHAT EXACTLY IS FASCISM???

A kissing cousin of socialism.

MG

[Topaz]

On Sun, 5 Feb 2012 22:19:19 -0800, "Bill Graham" <we...@comcast.net>
wrote:

>No. How can you do that when a large portion of the world (almost all the
>believers in Islam) believe, or say they believe, that the United States is
>a fascist country?

In March 1937 Mussolini made a spectacular state visit to Libya, where
he opened a new military highway running the entire length of the
colon., He had himself declared protector of Islam and was presented
with a symbolic sword.

http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Libya/History

the Italian dictator Benito Mussolini arranged for Muslim notables
from Italian-ruled Libya to gird him with the "sword of Islam" during
a visit to Tripoli. "Muslims may rest assured," Mussolini intoned on
that occasion, "that Italy will always be the friend and protector of
Islam throughout the world." His foreign minister declared Muslim
values perfectly compatible with fascism: "The Islamic world, in
accordance with its traditions, loves in the Duce the wisdom of the
statesman united to the action of the warrior."74

http://www.danielpipes.org/article/90

Mussolini vows to help the Palestinian cause against the Jews.

http://www.stern.de/community/forum/thread.jsp?forum=35&thread=57402&message=840948

[Topaz]

On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 01:48:31 -0500, "Scout"
<me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:



>Further, it should be pointed out that beliefs of what something is, does
>not necessarily reflect reality.
>
>As such Eric is attempting to illicit a definition based on subjective
>rather than objective evaluations.
>
>Naturally that is going to be inaccurate and even contradictory because it
>all depends of views of people who may not know what they are talking about
>and simply parroting phrases they don't understand or comprehend.
>
>I suggest that if Eric desires to look for a definition of fascism that any
>authoritative source can provide 95% of that definition with the remaining
>5% depending on who you talk to.
>
>IOW, good enough for all practical purposes....just as we have defined every
>other political system.
>

Maybe, but never overlook the fact that the Jews control the media:


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."

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

[Michael Ejercito]

On Feb 6, 2:23 pm, Topaz <mars1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 01:48:31 -0500, "Scout"
>
>
>
> <me4g...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
> >Further, it should be pointed out that beliefs of what something is, does
> >not necessarily reflect reality.
>
> >As such Eric is attempting to illicit a definition based on subjective
> >rather than objective evaluations.
>
> >Naturally that is going to be inaccurate and even contradictory because it
> >all depends of views of people who may not know what they are talking about
> >and simply parroting phrases they don't understand or comprehend.
>
> >I suggest that if Eric desires to look for a definition of fascism that any
> >authoritative source can provide 95% of that definition with the remaining
> >5% depending on who you talk to.
>
> >IOW, good enough for all practical purposes....just as we have defined every
> >other political system.
>
> Maybe, but never overlook the fact that the Jews control the media:

You are a Nazi.

As a Nazi, you are, above all else, a craven coward.

You are afraid to compete with others as equals because you know
you can not measure up.

You are afraid of your own inadequacy, so you want to murder your
betters.

You are afraid of the truth, so you want to murder those who would
tell it.

You are afraid of history, so you want to murder the past, to wipe
out the knowledge of the degeneracy, cowardice and failure of
National
Socialism.

Finally, you are afraid of the power of educated, informed adults.
Freedom of choice terrifies you... which is why you choose minor
children as sexual partners. You can not interact with competent
adults in a consensually sexual
way. You need to be able to impose yourself on a helpless victim, be
it a prepubescent
boy, or a patient in a mental hospital.

That is what you are, a Nazi, and there is nothing polite or
honest about it.

Michael

[SaPeIsMa]

"Michael Gordge" <mikeg...@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
news:33184fcc-2e7b-43b6...@n8g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...

> On Jan 22, 9:41 pm, walt tonne <tonnewalt...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> JUST WHAT EXACTLY IS FASCISM???
>
> A kissing cousin of socialism.
>

It's always amazing how people deny the root definition of Fascism.
Fascism was the term applied to the Italian (National) Socialists who
adopted the Roman Fasces as their symbol.
National Socialism is only different from International Socialism - aka
Communism - in that the orientation is towards >>national<< interests
instead of Communism, which is for world-wide socialist interests.
Everything else about both forms and flavors of Socialism remain the same.

[Topaz]

On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 03:12:26 -0800 (PST), tooly <rd...@bellsouth.net>
wrote:

>Interesting.
>could a fascist state exist under a democracy?

You might have social laws and economic laws in a democracy. But
Mussolini coined the word and he was against democracy.

H.L. Mencken wrote "Democracy is the art of running the circus from
the monkey cage".

>How do fascists come to power? How might they be 'deselected' for
>rule [if the people so desired]?

Mussolini came to power by fighting the communists in the streets and
winning.

>One major preponderant I think is overlooked in today's political
>analysis, is that of HOMOGENITY of the population. In a democracy for
>example, where strick majority rule is maintained, it could be argued
>that if there is a minority population, that minority might exist
>under a fascist like control of the majority [it could never win
>elections or be represented with simple popular vote].
>
>But perhaps some people do not want to be 'multicultural'? The
>question of what is a NATION comes to mind. Borders and government,
>IMHO, do NOT explain nationhood. So, a Fascist state might be sought
>by a NATION of people to maintain a particular majoritive integrity to
>the society or something; to keep the riffraff out so to speak, that
>the REAL nation is protected?
>
>How closely are NATION and STATE associated to fascism?

Fascists are totally nationalist and for the nation. National
Socialists want a nation for White people. Mussolini wasn't so
concerned with race. But he put the communists down without kissing up
to capitalists. He did a lot of great things.

[Topaz]

Here is a quote from "The Battle for Berlin" by Joseph Goebbels:

We had no idea of the danger that threatened us then. I myself did not
yet know Marxism well enough to foresee the possible consequences. I
shrugged my shoulders as I read the dark prose of the red press and
awaited expectantly the decisive evening.
Around 8 p.m. we drove in an old rusty car from the city center to
Wedding. A cold gray mist hung under a starless sky. Our hearts were
bursting with impatience and expectation.
As we drove down Müllerstraße it was already clear that the evening
did not bode well. Groups of dark figures stood on every street
corner. They apparently planned to teach our party members a bloody
lesson before they even got to the meeting.

Dark masses of people stood outside the Pharus Hall, expressing their
rage and hate with loud and impudent threats.

The leader of the protective forces cleared a way for us and reported
briefly that the hall had been packed since 7:15 p.m. and had been
closed by police. About two-thirds of the audience were Red Front
Fighters. That was what we wanted. There would be a decision. We were
ready to give it all we had.

Entering the hall, we encountered a warm, stiffling aroma of beer and
tobacco. The hall was hot. A lively roar of voices filled the hall.
People were packed in tightly. We reached the podium only with
difficulty.

No sooner was I recognized than hundreds of voices filled with rage
and revenge thundered in my ears: "Bloodhound! Murder of Workers!"
Those were the mildest words they shouted. But a welcoming group of
some party members and S.A. Men answered with passion. Excited battle
cries sounded from the platform. I saw immediately that we were a
minority, but a minority determined to fight, and therefore win.

It was still our custom then for an S.A. leader to chair all of the
party's public meetings. Here too. Tall as a tree he stood up front
and asked for silence with his upraised arm. That was easier said than
done. Mocking laughter was the answer. Insults flew toward the
platform from every corner of the room. People growled and screamed
and raged. There were world revolutionaries scattered about who
apparently had gained the courage they needed by drinking. It was
impossible to quiet the hall. The class-conscious proletariat had not
come to discuss but to fight, to break things up, to put an end to the
Fascist specter with callused workers' fists.

We were not uncertain, even for a moment. We also knew that if the
enemy did not succeed this time in what he had threatened, the future
success of the movement in Berlin was assured.

Fifteen or twenty S.A. and S.S. men stood before the platform in
uniforms and arm bands, an impudent and direct provocation to the Red
Front Fighters. Behind me was a select group of reliable people ready
at any moment to risk their lives to defend me from the onrushing red
mob with brutal force.
The Communists made an obvious mistake in their tactics. They had
scattered small groups throughout the hall, but clumped most of the
rest in the right rear of the hall. I recognized immediately that
there was the center of unrest, and if anything was to be done, we
first had to deal ruthlessly with them. Whenever the chair tried to
open the meeting, a dark chap stood up on a stool and shouted "Point
of Order!" Hundreds of others yelled the same after him.

If one takes from the mass their leader or also their seducer, they
are leaderless and easily controlled. Our tactic therefore was to
silence this cowardly troublemaker at any cost. He felt secure back
there, surrounded by his comrades. We tried to do this peacefully a
few times. The chair shouted over the uproar: "There will be
discussion afterward! But we determine the rules of order!"

That was an ineffective attempt at an unsuitable object. The screamer
wanted to throw the meeting into confusion by his endless shouts and
bring things to the boiling point. Then a general melee would result.

As our efforts to bring the meeting to order peacefully proved
unsuccessful, I took the head of the defensive forces to the side, and
immediately after groups of his men slipped through the thundering
Communist masses. Before the astonished and surprised Red Front troops
realized what was happening, our comrades had hauled the troublemaker
down from his stool and brought him through the raging crowd to the
podium. That was unexpected, but what followed was no surprise. A beer
glass flew through the air and crashed to the floor. That was the
signal for the first major meeting hall battle. Chairs were broken and
legs ripped from tables. Glasses and bottles suddenly appeared and all
hell broke loose. The battle raged for ten minutes. Glasses, bottles,
table and chair legs flew randomly through the air. A deafening roar
rose; the red beast was set free and wanted its victims.

At first it looked as if we were lost. The Communist attack was sudden
and explosive, completely unexpected. But soon the S.A. and S.S. men
distributed throughout the hall and in front of the platform recovered
from their surprise and counterattacked with bold courage. It quickly
became clear that although the Communist Party had masses behind it,
these masses became cowards when faced with a firmly disciplined and
determined opponent. They ran. In short order the red mob that had
come to break up our meeting had been driven from the hall. The order
that could not be secured by good will was gained by brute force.

Usually one is not aware of the stages of a meeting hall battle. Only
later does one recall them. I still remember a scene that I will never
forget; on the podium stood a young S.A. man whom I did not know. He
was hurling his missiles into the on-coming red mob. Suddenly a beer
glass thrown from the distance hit him on the head. A wide stream of
blood ran down his face. He sank with a cry. After a few seconds he
stood up again, grabbed water bottle from the table and threw it into
the hall, where it clattered against the head of an opponent.

The face of this young man is engraved in my memory. This
lightening-fast moment is unforgettable. This gravely-wounded S.A. man
would soon, and indeed for all times, become my most reliable and
loyal comrade.

Only after the red mob had been driven howling, growling and cursing
from the field could one tell how serious and costly the battle had
been. Ten lay in their blood on the platform, most with head injuries,
two with severe concussions. The table and stairs to the platform were
covered in blood. The whole hall resembled a field of ruins.

In the midst of this bloody and ruined wasteland, our tree-high S.A.
leader resumed his place and declared with iron calm: "The meeting
will continue. The speaker has the floor."

Never before or since have I spoken under such dramatic conditions.
Behind me, groaning in pain and bleeding, were seriously injured S.A.
comrades. Around me were broken chair legs, shattered beer glasses and
blood. The whole meeting was icily silent.
We lacked then a medical corps. Since we were in a proletarian
district, we had to have our seriously wounded carried out by
so-called worker volunteers. There were scenes outdoors of
unimaginable inhumanity. The bestial people who were supposedly
fighting for universal brotherhood insulted our poor and defenseless
injured with phases like: "Isn't that pig dead yet?"

Under such conditions it was impossible to give a coherent speech.
Scarcely had I begun to speak when another group of volunteers entered
the hall to carry off a seriously wounded S.A. man on a stretcher. One
of them, encountering the brutal apostles of humanity outside the door
and their unflattering and crude language, shouted for me in
desperation. His voice could be heard loudly and unmistakably on the
platform I interrupted my speech and went through the hall, where
there were still scattered Communist commando groups. Still surprised
by what had happened, they stood quietly and shyly to the side. I bade
farewell to the seriously wounded S.A. comrades.

[Topaz]

Capitalism and Communism are both bad. The problem with
capitalism is that it puts no special value on people. Capitalism is
based on supply and demand. A capitalist company that made potato
chips for example would need--X number of potatoes, Y amount of salt,
and Z number of human beings for labor. The human beings have no more
value than the potatoes or the salt. And they consider it good to pay
the humans as little as they possibly can to increase their profits.

According to capitalist theory people must compete to see who
will work for the least pennies per hour. They say everyone must
compete with the people in Mexico and China to see who will work for
the fewest pennies. If a company makes billions in profit while paying
its employees starvation wages that is perfectly fine. At least the
sacred laws of supply and demand are not violated. If the people die
of starvation that is fine too. You can always get more people. If
there is not enough work for everyone to do then they think people
need to die off. Ebenezer Scrooge did everything right according to
the capitalists and followed the beliefs and values of capitalism.

The apologists for the Scrooges correctly point out that
people only start business for a profit. Of course that is true.
Anyone can see that communism is a big mistake. But wouldn't people
start the business for only millions in profits rather than billions?
What if there were laws that made sure working people got a reasonable
share of the profit? Would that be so terrible?

In a hypothetical case suppose technology progressed so far that
all
the work were done by machines. Huge farms gathering food and all
automated. You would think everything would be great, but under
capitalism the people would starve because there wouldn't be enough
jobs.

Capitalists oppose welfare and say that orphans and other needy
people should be helped by charity. How much charity would there be
when capitalists openly say that selfishness is a great virtue? If
there was no welfare then the charitable people would have to pay for
everything while most people would not pay one thin dime. We have
welfare so people all pay their fair share. It is part of having
civilization.

We have many laws that make things better for people.
There are laws that give people extra pay if they work over forty
hours. There are laws that ensure people will have retirement.
Capitalism is for doing away with the laws so businesses can be free
to be as greedy as possible.There are laws that keep people from
getting ripped off when they buy a house. Capitalism is against that.
Capitalism is bad for people.

[Topaz]

On Tue, 7 Feb 2012 08:37:23 -0600, "SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@HotMail.com>
wrote:

>
>It's always amazing how people deny the root definition of Fascism.
>Fascism was the term applied to the Italian (National) Socialists who
>adopted the Roman Fasces as their symbol.
>National Socialism is only different from International Socialism - aka
>Communism - in that the orientation is towards >>national<< interests
>instead of Communism, which is for world-wide socialist interests.

That is only one difference.

National Socialism really was for the people. Communism was the phony
Jewish version. Here are some quotes from Mein Kampf:

"There were millions and millions of workmen who began by being
hostile to the Social Democratic Party; but their defences were
repeatedly stormed and finally had to surrender. Yet this defeat was
due to the stupidity of the bourgeois parties, who had opposed every
demand put forward by the working class. The short-sighted refusal to
making an effort towards improving labour conditions, the refusal to
adopt measures which would insure the workmen in case of accidents in
the factories, the refusal to forbid child labour, the refusal to
consider protective measures for female workers, especially expectant
mothers--all this was of assistance to the Social Democratic leaders,
who were thankful for every opportunity which they could exploit for
forcing the masses into their net. Our bourgeois parties can never
repair the damage that resulted from the mistake that was made. For
they sowed the seeds of hatred when they opposed all efforts at social
reform. And thus they gave, at least, apparent grounds to justify the
claim put forward by the Social Democrats--namely that they alone
stand up for the interest of the working class.
"And this became the principle ground for the moral
justification of the actual existance of the Trades Unions, so that
the labour organizations became from that time onwards the chief
political recruiting ground to swell the ranks of the Social
Democratic Party."

"the Jew seized upon the manifold possiblities which the
situation offered him for the future. While on the one hand he
organized capitalistic methods of exploitation to their ultimate
degree of efficiency, he curried favour with the victims of his policy
and his power and in a short while became the leader of their struggle
against himself. 'Against himself' is here only a figurative way of
speaking; for this 'Great Master of Lies' knows how to appear in the
guise of the innocent and throw the guilt on others. Since he had the
impudence to take a personal lead among the masses, they never for a
moment suspected that they were falling prey to one of the most
infamous deceits ever practiced. And yet that is what it actually
was."

>Everything else about both forms and flavors of Socialism remain the same.

Utter nonsense.

"We stand for the maintenance of private property...We shall protect
free enterprise as the most expedient, or rather the sole possible
economic order." - Adolf Hitler

Here are some quotes from Hitler's speech on January 27, 1932, at
Dusseldorf:

IF TODAY the National Socialist Movement is regarded amongst
widespread circles in Germany as being hostile to our business life, I
believe the reason for this view is to be found in the fact that we
adopted towards the events which determined the development leading to
our present position an attitude which differed from that of all the
other organizations which are of any importance in our public life.
Even now our outlook differs in many points from that of our
opponents....

There are indeed especially two other closely related factors which
we can time and again trace in periods of national decline: the one is
that for the conception of the value of personality there is
substituted a levelling idea of the supremacy of mere numbers -
democracy - and the other is the negation of the value of a people,
the denial of any difference in the inborn capacity, the achievement,
etc., of individual peoples. Thus both factors condition one another
or at least influence each other in the course of their development.
Internationalism and democracy are inseparable conceptions. It is but
logical that democracy, which within a people denies the special value
of the individual and puts in its place a value which represents the
sum of all individualities - a purely numerical value - should proceed
in precisely the same way in the life of peoples and should in that
sphere result in internationalism. Broadly it is maintained: peoples
have no inborn values, but, at the most, there can be admitted perhaps
temporary differences in education. Between Negroes, Aryans,
Mongolians, and Redskins there is no essential difference in value...

Let no one say that the picture produced as a first impression of
human civilization is the impression of its achievement as a whole.
This whole edifice of civilization is in its foundations and in all
its stones nothing else than the result of the creative capacity, the
achievement, the intelligence, the industry, of individuals: in its
greatest triumphs it represents the great crowning achievement of
individual God-favored geniuses, in its average accomplishment the
achievement of men of average capacity, and in its sum doubtless the
result of the use of human labor-force in order to turn to account the
creations of genius and of talent. So it is only natural that when the
capable intelligences of a nation, which are always in a minority, are
regarded only as of the same value as all the rest, then genius,
capacity, the value of personality are slowly subjected to the
majority and this process is then falsely named the rule of the
people. For this is not rule of the people, but in reality the rule of
stupidity, of mediocrity, of half-heartedness, of cowardice, of
weakness, and of inadequacy....

I may cite an example: you maintain, gentlemen, that German business
life must be constructed on a basis of private property. Now such a
conception as that of private property you can defend only if in some
way or another it appears to have a logical foundation. This
conception must deduce its ethical justification from an insight into
the necessity which Nature dictates. It cannot simply be upheld by
saying: 'It has always been so and therefore it must continue to be
so.' For in periods of great upheavals within States, of movements of
peoples and changes in thought, institutions and systems cannot remain
untouched because they have previously been preserved without change.
It is the characteristic feature of all really great revolutionary
epochs in the history of mankind that they pay astonishingly little
regard for forms which are hallowed only by age or which are
apparently only so consecrated. It is thus necessary to give such
foundations to traditional forms which are to be preserved that they
can be regarded as absolutely essential, as logical and right. And
then I am bound to say that private property can be morally and
ethically justified only if I admit that men's achievements are
different. Only on that basis can I assert: since men's achievements
are different, the results of those achievements are also different.
But if the results of those achievements are different, then it is
reasonable to leave to men the administration of those results to a
corresponding degree. It would not be logical to entrust the
administration of the result of an achievement which was bound up with
a personality either to the next best but less capable person or to a
community which, through the mere fact that it had not performed the
achievement, has proved that it is not capable of administering the
result of that achievement. Thus it must be admitted that in the
economic sphere, from the start, in all branches men are not of equal
value or of equal importance. And once this is admitted it is madness
to say: in the economic sphere there are undoubtedly differences in
value, but that is not true in the political sphere. IT IS ABSURD TO
BUILD UP ECONOMIC LIFE ON THE CONCEPTIONS OF ACHIEVEMENT, OF THE VALUE
OF PERSONALITY, AND THEREFORE IN PRACTICE ON THE AUTHORITY OF
PERSONALITY, BUT IN THE POLITICAL SPHERE TO DENY THE AUTHORITY OF
PERSONALITY AND TO THRUST INTO ITS PLACE THE LAW OF THE GREATER NUMBER
- DEMOCRACY. In that case there must slowly arise a cleavage between
the economic and the political point of view, and to bridge that
cleavage an attempt will be made to assimilate the former to the
latter - indeed the attempt has been made, for this cleavage has not
remained bare, pale theory. The conception of the equality of values
has already, not only in politics but in economics also, been raised
to a system, and that not merely in abstract theory: no! this economic
system is alive in gigantic organizations and it has already today
inspired a State which rules over immense areas.
But I cannot regard it as possible that the life of a people should in
the long run be based upon two fundamental conceptions. If the view is
right that there are differences in human achievement, then it must
also be true that the value of men in respect of the production of
certain achievements is different It is then absurd to allow this
principle to hold good only In one sphere - the sphere of economic
life and its leadership - and to refuse to acknowledge its validity in
the sphere of the whole life-struggle of a people - the sphere of
politics. Rather the logical course is that if I recognize without
qualification in the economic sphere the fact of special achievements
as forming the condition of all higher culture, then in the same way I
should recognize special achievement in the sphere of politics, and
that means that I am bound to put in the forefront the authority of
personality. If, on the contrary, it is asserted - and that, too, by
those engaged in business - that in the political sphere special
capacities are not necessary but that here an absolute equality in
achievement reigns, then one day this same theory will be transferred
from politics and applied to economic life. But in the economic sphere
communism is analogous to democracy in the political sphere. We find
ourselves today in a period in which these two fundamental principles
are at grips in all spheres which come into contact with each other;
already they are invading economics.
To take an example: Life in practical activity is founded on the
importance of personality: but now gradually it is threatened by the
supremacy of mere numbers. But in the State there is an organization -
the army - which cannot in any way be democratized without
surrendering its very existence. But if a Weltanschauung cannot be
applied to every sphere of a people's life, that fact in itself is
sufficient proof of its weakness. In other words: the army can exist
only if it maintains the absolutely undemocratic principle of
unconditional authority proceeding downwards and absolute
responsibility proceeding upwards, while, in contradistinction to
this, democracy means in practice complete dependence proceeding
downwards and authority proceeding upwards. But the result is that in
a State in which the whole political life - beginning with the parish
and ending with the Reichstag - is built up on the conception of
democracy, the army is bound gradually to become an alien body and an
alien body which must necessarily be felt to be such...

To sum up the argument: I see two diametrically opposed principles:
the principle of democracy which, wherever it is allowed practical
effect is the principle of destruction: and the principle of the
authority of personality which I would call the principle of
achievement, because whatever man in the past has achieved - all human
civilizations - is conceivable only if the supremacy of this principle
is admitted.

[Michael Ejercito]

On Feb 7, 6:12 pm, Topaz <mars1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>   Here is a quote from "The Battle for Berlin" by Joseph Goebbels:

The Nazi nithings lost that one.

>
> We had no idea of the danger that threatened us then. I myself did not
> yet know Marxism well enough to foresee the possible consequences.

They were obvious in 1946.

You are a nithing- homo sapiens by birth, subhuman BY CHOICE. The
key word is CHOICE. You were born with the same human nature as the
rest of us. Your CHOICES made you a nithing.

Bill explains what nithings are.

http://www.israpundit.com/2008/?p=9446

Define and Dehumanize the Enemy: Jihadists as Nithings or Nidings

by Bill Levinson
It is an ancient principle of magic (which modern people recognize as
stories that reflect a society’s culture and psychology) that
knowledge of a person’s real or True Name delivers power over that
person. What it really means is that, if you know the person’s
psychology, you can gain an advantage over him. It is also well known
that the side that controls the language of an argument controls the
argument. As an example, Hamas terrorists and their enablers refer to
Israel’s military as an “occupation force” and terrorisitic violence
against civilians as “resistance.”

We have long sought a single word that strips the enemy of all
humanity, and reduces him to something less than an animal that is
worthy of nothing less than extermination. As far as we know, the
English language contains no such word, although “dreck” (garbage or
refuse) comes close. “Homo sapiens by BIRTH, subhuman by CHOICE”
describes Islamic supremacists perfectly, but it is a phrase and not a
word. We now propose to refer to Islamic supremacists as nithings or
nidings: a Scandinavian word that strips its object of all humanity.
Webster’s dictionary (1913) defines it as “A coward; a dastard; — a
term of utmost opprobrium.”

We remind readers who object to the dehumanization of Islamic
supremacists that those enemies are already attempting to dehumanize
Jews, and to a lesser degree Christians, with images that could have
come directly from Adolf Hitler. As they have chosen to sow the
dragon’s teeth, our position is that they must now reap their rightful
harvest: the complete hatred and loathing of all civilized human
beings.
nithings

Nithing or niding was more than a common insult, because Scandinavian
culture required its subject to fight a duel with the accuser or
become an outlaw: totally devoid of rights, honor, and even
recognition as a human being. Per the Wikipedia entry,

The actual meaning of the adjective argr or ragr [= Anglo-Saxon
earg] was the nature or appearance of effeminacy, especially by
obscene acts. Argr was the worst, most derogatory swearword of all
known to the Norse language. According to Icelandic law, the accused
was expected to kill the accuser at once. …If the accused did not
retort by violent attack yielding either the accuser to take his words
back or the accuser’s death, he was hence proven to be a weak and
cowardly nithing by not retorting accordingly.

A nithing was devoid of all human rights, and he was considered the
enemy of civilized humanity: a perfect depiction of Islamic
supremacists. The word therefore strips the enemy of all humanity, and
degrades him to the status of a wolf or strangler (per Scandinavian
tradition) or a virulent disease like the Black Plague. Black Plague
is a deadly and contagious disease whose vector consists of plague-
carrying rats, while the Green Plague of militant “Islam” is a deadly
and contagious ideology that is spread by bipedal rats: nidings or
nithings, non-humans that raise violent hands to all of civilized
Humanity.

The immediate consequence of being proven a nithing was
outlawing. The outlawed did not have any rights, he was exlex (Latin
for “outside of the legal system”), in Anglo-Saxon utlah, Middle Low
German uutlagh, Old Norse utlagr. Just as feud yielded enmity among
kinships, outlawry yielded enmity of all humanity.[63] …”Yet that is
but one aspect of outlawry. The outlaw is not only expelled from the
kinship, he is also regarded henceforth as an enemy to mankind.”

The actual definition of a nithing is somewhat more involved and
complex, and it gets into sexual perversions and zoomorphical
transformations (Loki’s transformation of himself into a mare to have
sexual intercourse with a stallion, and thus beget Odin’s horse
Sleipner is probably an example), but the following line is pertinent:
“The nithing used its malicious seid magic to destroy anything owned
and made by man, ultimately the human race and Midgard itself[6], due
to its basically unlimited envy, hate, and malice that were nith.”

“Destruction of everything owned and made by Man” (the Palestinians’
destruction of the greenhouses in Gaza comes to mind immediately) and
“unlimited envy, hate, and malice” describe militant “Islam”
perfectly, and further underscore the application of nithing or niding
to describe it. The propensity for mindless destruction also appears
in Orson Scott Card’s Alvin Maker series, in which a supernatural
enemy is known as the Unmaker: a personification of evil that is the
total antithesis of God the Creator.

The Unmaker is the main antagonist in Orson Scott Card’s
alternate history/fantasy series The Tales of Alvin Maker. Never
directly confronted, it is a supernatural force that breaks apart
matter and aims to destroy and consume everything and everyone. …To
make something is to oppose the Unmaker, but a point often made is
that this is futile. By natural law the Unmaker can tear down faster
than any man can build.

This also is an outstanding definition of militant “Islam” or Islamic
supremacy: an ideology that seeks to destroy everything into which it
comes in contact, and with which no reason, negotiation, or compromise
is possible.

In summary, a nithing or niding is the enemy of Civilization, a
subhuman (through its behavioral choices, and emphatically NOT due to
its racial or ethnic origin) monster with total hatred and malice
toward all human industry and arts, and worthy of nothing but
extermination like any virulent disease. This is the word we will now
apply to Islamic supremacists and their enablers, and we encourage
others to do likewise.

[Jigme Dorje]

That's right. We don't have enough bigotry and hate. We need to invent
some more.

[tooly]

On Feb 6, 8:18 pm, Michael Ejercito <mejer...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 6, 2:23 pm, Topaz <mars1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
:
>
>    You are a Nazi.
>
>    As a Nazi, you are, above all else, a craven coward.
>
>   You are afraid to compete with others as equals because you know
> you can not measure up.
>
>    You are afraid of your own inadequacy, so you want to murder your
> betters.
>
>    You are afraid of the truth, so you want to murder those who would
> tell it.
>
>    You are afraid of history, so you want to murder the past, to wipe
> out the knowledge of the degeneracy, cowardice and failure of
> National
> Socialism.
>

>.
>
>    That is what you are, a Nazi, and there is nothing polite or
> honest about it.
>

> Michael- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

I wonder of your depiction of today's nazi as coward. Think of what
it must be like to march, numbering only in the dozens, along streets
aligned with many hundreds, even thousands, who stand with keen hatred
and vehiemence against you. No other group has been so villianized by
the ruling hegemony as the nazi in today's society. So, whatever else
one may think, they are not cowards. Imagine...standing against the
world; the danger of it; the audacity; the boldness.

Hmm..."are they afraid of competing with others because they know they
can't measure up"? This is a tough one I think. I mean...to explain
well. Imagine the 'advanced' kind...as something 'evolved' enough to
have cast off much of the necessity for NEANDERTHALL-like
mindsets...where a whole host of tastes, values, sensitivities,
behaviors, all lead up to a 'characterization' that is lost of much of
it's 'animalness'. Such sensitivity might evoke the creation of
things like majestic symphonies and masterpiece literature, while also
becoming at the 'mercy' of the more 'animal' kind, whose attributes
are more 'worldly, earthy' and sexual [if that lesser evolved kind is
re-introduced under a new ruling law of egalitarianism].

I see it at our local high schools, where negroes and some latinos,
with a coarser temperment, with less abstraction of behavior and more
direct 'penis to pussy' mindset, has corrupted the socialness of
romantic courtship that once resulted in high conscience and social
performance that was beneficial to human relations. That's all quaint
now of course...all about pussies and penis' as mentioned...and candy
and flowers and meeting the parents are all passe...and along with it,
the nuclear family unit is desinegrating under sexual promiscuity that
no longer can afford great degrees of emotional commitment.

So..Afraid to compete is not the 'raised consciousness' of what is
going on. But a need to protect a more civil condition in the growing
mindsets of our OWN youth, might be one predication of resolving to
use whatever tactics that might work against the 'lesser
endowed'...and here I mean 'in 'brain power'.

Murder? Who's talking about murder? If I have a son or daughter, I
just want to PROTECT them from the wrong and bad associations of
life.

Truth? Anyone who denies that Western Civilization as harbinger of
the overwhelming influence of law, order, morality, science, art...you
name it, all human civilized construct that is worth much, has been
essentially a caucasian artifact. it is not to deny others who have
contributed...but you ask for 'TRUTH' here. Liberals will bend over
backwards trying to disprove this little 'inconvenient fact', bringing
up every anecdotal exception they can think of. A recent study showed
that something like 96% of all major influences in the world have come
from white western nations. What can you say. But you asked for the
TRUTH. I mean, who's afraid of that truth? Why would any caucasian
be afraid of it?

Now...about national socialism. I just watched 'Trials of Nuremberg'
on the boob tube again tonight. It was a good movie; but watch out
for Spencer Tracy movies, 'cuz' they were usually packaged delivery
systems for the often progressive liberal hollywood mindset that has
become mired in marxist philosophy at it's core. The movie does bring
to bear a terrible soul searching however. I see my own country, the
USA, now being 'overrun' by leftist mindsets, and a very good argument
for clandestine activity to undermine our society that dates back to
the foundation of cultural marxism in this land in 1929 [at Columbia
UNiv, where it spread out to become a major influence throughout our
education system now].

Back in Hitler's day, the great enemy was Bolshevism. Of course,
marxism can be packaged in many ways...but today's radical leftist is
wrapped in a mixture of feminism, civil rightts, minority empowerment,
black liberation theology, socialism, labor unions, and progressivism
in general, all coming together under what Antonio Gramsci called the
"NEW PROLETARIAT" [designed specifically to undo the Western
Civilization, which was the WALL bolshevism was stopped cold at back
in the day].

So, in some ways, we can see much of what was taking place in early
1930 Germany, now taking place here, in the good old USA. Bolshevism
is dead of course, but Cultural Marxism has succeeded in spades to
become a cultural idealism hidden behind all these 'social movements'
based in civil rights.

Some of us are AWARE of what's going on is all. I think the nazis
were aware back in those times too. DEMOCRACY cannot win against the
marxists; the thinking man knows this. Why? Because the very nature
of the marxist ploy is POPULISM...and what is democracy except POPULAR
VOTE. Add to that a dishonest and corrupt political party like the
Democrats, who would sell their own nation down the toilet by passing
Hart-Cellar Immigration Act to flood the land with 'socialist leaning'
disparate NEW POPULATION [essentially latino hispanics from the
south]...and then enlist women, minorities, outcasts one and all [just
like Antonio Gramsci strategized to do]...and wala...we see our very
nation being TAKEN AWAY FROM US.

Did the national socialists see the same dynamic taking place in the
1930's? Sure they did. The Communist movement was on a fast rise in
Germany. Today we don't see communism [by label], but the dynamics of
an Obama socialism is one and the same as 'social democracy' put on a
no-return path, what will someday collapse capitalism to become a new
world socialism [most likely]. Anyone denying that Obama is NOT a
marxist is someone simply not wanting to see the truth.

will continue about nuremberg trials...

[Jigme Dorje]

The old racial stereotypes of black promiscuity and latino inferiority
rear their ugly heads.

When white slave owners break up families of African American slaves and
create ghettos by exclusion, isn't this the pot calling the kettle
black? Of course it conveniently ignores the prevalence of divorce among
white people - some 50% of all marriages. And it ignores the fact that
out-of-wedlock birth is increasing across demographic groups.

Speaking of "coarse", it is your analysis that is particularly crude and
unnuanced. According to Stanford law professor Ralph Richard Banks who
studied the matter, marriage remains a social ideal and status marker in
American culture. He writes that African-Americans value marriage as
much as other groups, despite the statistics, but that the impediments
to marriage for black people are daunting and multifaceted.

Banks conducted some 100 interviews with African-Americans about their
experiences with marriage and dating, and sought additional answers in
the social science research. Marriage, he finds, remains a social ideal
and status marker in American culture.

Black women significantly outperform black men in high school and
college. As a result, the black middle class is disproportionately
female and the black poor are disproportionately male, and the gap is
widening. Extraordinary rates of incarceration for black men, and the
long-term effects of a prison record on employment, exacerbate this
situation. Studies indicate that “in evaluating potential mates,
economic stability still matters more for African-Americans than for
other groups.” Yet they may never find that security, and therefore
never marry.

The criminalization of the African American male is something an
apparently Caucasian person should look to his own culture for answers to.

Moreover, marriage simply isn’t an essential component for their
well-being, and the benefits of marriage don’t accrue as readily for
African-Americans as for other groups because of their economic
instability. Black children with married parents fare no better
academically or economically in the long run than their
born-out-of-­wedlock counterparts.

Banks sheds light on the powerful specter of stereotypes about welfare
queens and Jezebels, and plumbs the emotional lives of black women,
describing the loneliness they feel when marriage prospects are dim. He
also explains that because economically successful black men are
relatively rare, their power on the dating market is heightened;
affluent black men can “play the field” indefinitely, and this too has a
negative impact on marriage.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/18/books/review/is-marriage-for-white-people-by-ralph-richard-banks-book-review.html?pagewanted=all

> all about pussies and penis' as mentioned...and candy
> and flowers and meeting the parents are all passe...and along with it,
> the nuclear family unit is desinegrating under sexual promiscuity that
> no longer can afford great degrees of emotional commitment.

The popularity of the nuclear family in the West, as opposed to the
traditional extended family living together, came about in the early
20th century, prompted in part by increased wages earned by the working
class, enabling families to be economically independent, and own their
own home.

The Census shows that 70% of children in the US live in traditional
two-parent families. Tthe figures suggest that the tumultuous shifts in
family structure since the late 1960s have leveled off since 1990.
Single-parent families constitute a minority of households with rising
prevalence of other family arrangements.

> So..Afraid to compete is not the 'raised consciousness' of what is
> going on. But a need to protect a more civil condition in the growing
> mindsets of our OWN youth, might be one predication of resolving to
> use whatever tactics that might work against the 'lesser
> endowed'...and here I mean 'in 'brain power'.
>
> Murder? Who's talking about murder? If I have a son or daughter, I
> just want to PROTECT them from the wrong and bad associations of
> life.
>
> Truth? Anyone who denies that Western Civilization as harbinger of
> the overwhelming influence of law, order, morality, science, art...you
> name it, all human civilized construct that is worth much, has been
> essentially a caucasian artifact. it is not to deny others who have
> contributed...but you ask for 'TRUTH' here. Liberals will bend over
> backwards trying to disprove this little 'inconvenient fact', bringing
> up every anecdotal exception they can think of. A recent study showed
> that something like 96% of all major influences in the world have come
> from white western nations. What can you say. But you asked for the
> TRUTH. I mean, who's afraid of that truth? Why would any caucasian
> be afraid of it?

The fallacy of that argument are the various false embedded assumptions.

Art, law, order, morality are not Western phenomena - this claim is
simply incorrect.

Your assertion also confutes gross material development with the social
aspects of civilization, which were no more advanced in the West than
anywhere else in the world.

The most egregious of your embedded assumptions is the specious
implication that race has something to do with this. This is a causal
fallacy. It goes something like this: "White people dominated world
trade. Therefore the absence of melatonin in their skin is responsible
for world trade." It's an obvious fallacy.

Finally, it conveniently ignores the barbarism of the "white nations,"
the atrocity of their religious intolerance, oppression of outlying
nations, forcible colonization, genocide of aboriginals and subjugation
of other peoples.

Perhaps had the "white nations" not interfered with the world at large,
and not been as aggressive and subjugating, world history would have
unfolded in a more peaceful and life affirming way.

The world is in a dreadful state precisely because of the influence of
Western nations - pollution, climate warming, the rise of the ultra rich
with a growing underclass, increased criminalization of youth
(statistically shown), religious intolerance, the instability in the
Middle East as the result of Western hegemony, discrimination, massive
unemployment, sweatshops, the erosion of rights...the list goes on and on.

The bigoted mind cherry picks those elements of the story that serve his
fantasy. It has nothing to do with liberalism, but a sheltered and
biased fantasy of world history.

> Now...about national socialism. I just watched 'Trials of Nuremberg'
> on the boob tube again tonight. It was a good movie; but watch out
> for Spencer Tracy movies, 'cuz' they were usually packaged delivery
> systems for the often progressive liberal hollywood mindset that has
> become mired in marxist philosophy at it's core. The movie does bring
> to bear a terrible soul searching however. I see my own country, the
> USA, now being 'overrun' by leftist mindsets, and a very good argument
> for clandestine activity to undermine our society that dates back to
> the foundation of cultural marxism in this land in 1929 [at Columbia
> UNiv, where it spread out to become a major influence throughout our
> education system now].
>
> Back in Hitler's day, the great enemy was Bolshevism. Of course,
> marxism can be packaged in many ways...but today's radical leftist is
> wrapped in a mixture of feminism, civil rightts, minority empowerment,
> black liberation theology, socialism, labor unions, and progressivism
> in general, all coming together under what Antonio Gramsci called the
> "NEW PROLETARIAT" [designed specifically to undo the Western
> Civilization, which was the WALL bolshevism was stopped cold at back
> in the day].

None of this is Marxism. It's social advancement, the very thing you
were touting above and falsely attributing to white power.

> So, in some ways, we can see much of what was taking place in early
> 1930 Germany, now taking place here, in the good old USA. Bolshevism
> is dead of course, but Cultural Marxism has succeeded in spades to
> become a cultural idealism hidden behind all these 'social movements'
> based in civil rights.

Nonsense. There is no such thing as cultural marxism. It's another of
those undefined, meaningless polemical phrases intended to evoke an
emotional response, as used by right wing demogogues.

> Some of us are AWARE of what's going on is all.

Yes, some of us are.

> I think the nazis
> were aware back in those times too. DEMOCRACY cannot win against the
> marxists; the thinking man knows this. Why? Because the very nature
> of the marxist ploy is POPULISM...and what is democracy except POPULAR
> VOTE. Add to that a dishonest and corrupt political party like the
> Democrats, who would sell their own nation down the toilet by passing
> Hart-Cellar Immigration Act to flood the land with 'socialist leaning'
> disparate NEW POPULATION [essentially latino hispanics from the
> south]...and then enlist women, minorities, outcasts one and all [just
> like Antonio Gramsci strategized to do]...and wala...we see our very
> nation being TAKEN AWAY FROM US.
>
> Did the national socialists see the same dynamic taking place in the
> 1930's? Sure they did. The Communist movement was on a fast rise in
> Germany. Today we don't see communism [by label], but the dynamics of
> an Obama socialism is one and the same as 'social democracy' put on a
> no-return path, what will someday collapse capitalism to become a new
> world socialism [most likely]. Anyone denying that Obama is NOT a
> marxist is someone simply not wanting to see the truth.

Obama is hardly a socialist. He is a moderate progressive. You are
simply applying polemical labels in order to not want to see the
truth.The fact is that the ideology you espouse is far, far closer to
Naziism than vice versa. There are very specific elements of Naziism
that you ignore, because you simply attempt to dishonestly use the term
as a pejorative rhetorical device while ignoring the actual facts.

Relying on Wikipedia, what you advocate is Nazi in several core aspects
either directly or by implication:

"Nazism advocated the supremacy of the supposed Aryan master race over
all other races. Nazis viewed the progress of humanity as depending on
the Aryans and believed that it could maintain its dominance only if it
retained its purity and instinct for self-preservation."

So far, ideologically, this puts you firmly in the Nazi camp, doesn't
it? Now I say this not as a personal attack but as an examination of the
actual issues as opposed to rhetoric.

"They claimed that Jews were the greatest threat to the Aryan race. They
considered Jews a parasitic race that attached itself to various
ideologies and movements to secure its self-preservation, such as
capitalism, democracy, the Enlightenment, industrialisation, liberalism,
Marxism, parliamentary politics, and trade unionism."

Substitute African Americans for Jews here, and again we see your ideology.

" 'Degenerate' and 'asocial' groups that included: Jews, homosexuals,
Romani, blacks, the physically and mentally disabled, Jehovah's
Witnesses and political opponents."

Bingo.

"Nazism promoted political violence, militarism, and war, it conceived
of politics as being a "battle", and the Nazis utilized their
paramilitary organization, the Sturmabteilung for violent attacks upon
those they opposed, particularly communists, Jews, and social democrats.
The Nazis glorified war and openly promoted German territorial
expansionism into Eastern Europe to be Lebensraum ("living space") for
German settlers that would result in the creation of a "greater German
empire"."

There's much here in common with right wing administrations of Reagan
and the Bushes, isn't there?

Legally, there are certain elements that reflect white privilege in
America: "Nazism promoted an economic system that supported a stratified
economy with classes based on merit and talent while rejecting universal
egalitarianism...the Nazis' official economic policies were designed to
exclusively benefit Aryans while deliberately excluding non-Aryans...
and full legal rights to those able people of...Aryan blood but
deliberately excluded people outside of this definition who were
regarded as inferior and rejected the conception of universal human
equality."

So where does Nazism fit in the political spectrum?

"A majority of scholars identify Nazism in practice as being a far right
form of politics."

And it employs precisely the rhetoric you did above. Hitler in Mein
Kampf attacked left-wing politics in Germany, saying:

"Today our left-wing politicians in particular are constantly insisting
that their craven-hearted and obsequious foreign policy necessarily
results from the disarmament of Germany, whereas the truth is that this
is the policy of traitors."

You are probably not listening, but it is useful to have someone whisper
truth back to bigotry if only as an exercise in intellectual integrity
and honesty.

[Topaz]

Obviously losing the war didn't prove they were wrong. It only proved
they were outnumbered. Compare the size of Germany to the size of the
Jewish controlled countries, the USA and the USSR. Hitler made Germany
great. Of course the Jew parasites couldn't stand that. Unfortunately
the bad side won the war.

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 tabu 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.
Thoughout 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 threateend 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]

It's a Wonderful Race

by James Bronson
There once was a college freshman named George who thought he knew it
all. One night over dinner, George got into an argument with his
father. The argument began when the young student tried to explain to
his father that as White people, they should be held accountable for
all the evils that they had inflicted upon non-Whites throughout
history. George explained: "Because of European racism, we stole the
Indians' land, we held blacks in slavery, we persecuted the Jews, and
we plundered the environment. We've been oppressive racists for
thousands of years so it's only fair that we pay economic reparations
for all the harm we've done to the world. I'm pleased to see that we
are ending our political and economic domination of the oppressed
peoples."

George's dad was shocked to hear such talk. "Who put such commie-pinko
nonsense into your head, boy? Did one of your sandal-wearing hippie
college professors teach you that?" the father asked.

To which the son replied: "That's the truth dad. My anthropology
professor, Dr.Irving Silverstein, says so. He ought to know. Dr.
Silverstein is a well-respected Ph.D. People of your generation just
don't understand because you were raised in a White supremacist racist
society. That's why I've come to admire Dr. Rev. Martin Luther King as
the greatest man in American history. He stood up to the racists of
your generation. Because of him, my generation of White kids is
completely colorblind."

The father angrily replied: "That's bullshit! I've always been
fair-minded and tolerant of people from all backgrounds and races. I
haven't 'oppressed' anybody, and furthermore there's nothing wrong
with being proud of one's own people, including the European race of
people. Your race is in your blood. It's like an extension of your
biological family and you ought to be proud of your European heritage
and identity, just like every other racial group in America is proud
of its. Why is it OK for them to have a strong sense of racial
identity but it's evil for us Europeans to feel that way?"

The young "intellectual" laughed at his father. "Come on dad, that's
the kind of crap Hitler tried to peddle. Those racist attitudes were
discredited years ago. There's only one race and that's the human
race. Diversity is our greatest strength. Differences in so-called
"race" are as insignificant as differences in belly buttons. And
besides, UN statistics now show that low White birth rates, along with
the fact that we live in an multicultural
society, will mean that Europeans and their ethnocentrist and racist
culture will have died out by the end of the century," young George
said.

Turning red with anger, the father yelled: "You are a walking cliché
you know that boy? And you think it's a good thing that the European
peoples of the world will have faded out and ceased to exist?" Young
George replied; "I think it's great! It will mean the end of racism
and the end of hate. The oppressed peoples of the world would have
been better off if us racist Europeans had never existed to begin
with."

Suddenly there was a blast of cold wind, an explosion, and a huge
smoke cloud. When the smoke had settled, George found himself alone
and lost in a cold open field. An angel named Clarence then appeared
to him and said "Well George, you've got your wish."

George asked: "Where am I? What's going on here? And who are you?"

The angel answered, "George, I'm Clarence the Angel. I was sent here
to show you what the world would have been like if Europeans, or
Whites, had never existed. You now live in a world where Europeans
never existed."

"Oh. That's cool. I'll have no problem adapting because there's not a
racist bone in my body. And when I get back to my world, I'll be able
to tell my professor and my friends how great this non-racist world
was. Say, I'm freezing my ass off out here. Where's the nearest
motel?"

"Motel?" replied the angel. "There are no motels here in what was once
called North America. But there are some caves up in those mountains
where you can find shelter."

"Caves? No way man. I want a nice warm bed to sleep in."

"I don't think you understand George. There are no buildings here in
non-white America because the evil Europeans never came here to build
them. Whites never existed, remember? The natives live in tents. Would
you like to go meet some local Indians? Perhaps they'll let you stay
in a tent."

"A tent? But it's 10 degrees outside?...Oh well. It's better than a
cave I suppose. Let's go talk to these Indians...... Wait a second,
are these Indians friendly or hostile?"

"Why, George, that's a racist question to ask. Just because some
Indians were brutal savages who scalped their victims alive, it
doesn't mean they all were" said the angel sarcastically.

"I know that Clarence. And I'm not a racist. I hate racism.
Nonetheless, I'd feel safer if I could have a gun to defend myself if
they turn out to be violent."

"Gun?" replied the angel. "There are no guns for you to defend
yourself with. Firearms were invented by evil Europeans. Though we
could make a spear with those twigs over there."

"That's too much work. Give me a telephone then. I'll call the Indians
to ask if it's OK."

"Telephone"? replied the angel. There are no telephones here.
Alexander Graham Bell was another evil white man, so he never existed.
No Europeans remember?" "Forget it then" replied George. "I'll sleep
in the damn cave."

Upon arriving at the cave, a shivering George asked the angel for a
lighter so that he could light a fire. "A lighter?" replied Clarence.
"There are no lighters here, and no matches. Those are European
gadgets and evil Europeans never existed remember? If you want to get
warm, you need to do like the locals do and start rubbing twigs
together."

"Oh come on man! You mean to tell me these people still rub sticks
together for fire?"

"That's right George. The Indians live exactly as they did before the
evil pilgrims arrived from Europe just a few centuries ago." said the
angel sarcastically.

"I refuse to stay in this cold cave and I damn sure ain't gonna light
a fire with twigs, and I refuse to sleep in a teepee. I'll go to South
America. I can make it in a warmer climate and I'll adapt quickly to
the great Incan civilization I learned about at college. Since
European racists like Columbus, Cortez and Pizzaro never existed, the
Incans will still be there.
... I need a car"

"Car?" replied the angel. "There are no cars here. Daimler and Benz,
the evil German inventors of the internal combustion engine, were
never born..nor was Henry Ford. There are no paved roads either. This
is a world without evil Europeans remember?"

"No cars! Oh. I'll just have to take a train."

"There are no trains in this world either George. Evil Europeans
weren't here to build locomotive engines or to discover the many uses
of coal, oil and gas, or to build trains or lay tracks. But I'll allow
you to cheat just a bit. Grab hold of my magic robe and we'll fly
south."

George touched the angel's robe and they flew south until they arrived
in an abandoned mud hut in the midst of Incan territory. George was
grateful for the warm weather but it wasn't long until he began to
complain about the heat and humidity.

"Clarence, this hut is a little shithole and I'm sweating up a storm
here. Get me an air-conditioner please."

"Air-conditioner?" replied the angel. "There are no air-conditioners
here. Air conditioning and refrigeration were inventions created by
evil White men." "What?!! You mean to tell me that in the year 2002
these people still haven't figured out a way to keep themselves or
their food cool? a frustrated George asked.

"No George, they haven't. And they never will."

"This is ridiculous. Let's go to the main city to see the Emperor. I
can't live like this. Where's a car...oh I forget...no cars! Dammit
I'll walk. let's go."

After walking through the jungle for about an hour or so, it began to
get dark. George then asked Clarence to give him a flashlight so that
he could see. "Flashlight? Sorry George, but Thomas Edison was an evil
White man too...and he was never born. There are some branches over
there if you want to make a torch."

"Never mind that!" George shouted back.

By morning time, Clarence and George had arrived at the temple of the
Incans. A bloody human sacrifice was in progress. George turned to
Clarence and cried, "They're going to butcher that poor soul! Somebody
has got to stop this. What horrible murdering beasts! Can't anyone
stop them?"

The angel replied "I'm afraid not. Ritual killings are common place
here."Those evil European racists like Columbus, Cortez and Pizzaro
never existed so the Incans just continued their brutal ways. In fact,
it was the oppressed peoples themselves who made up the bulk of the
Spanish armed forces. The people saw the Spaniards as liberators who
would rid them of the oppressive Incan and Mayan rulers and give them
a better life."

"I can't blame them for helping the Spaniards then. This is a horrible
place. Get me out of this shithole now!" said George.

'Where would you like to go?" Clarence replied.

George said: "Take me to Africa, maybe there's a more advanced and
humane civilization there that I can fit into. Where the nearest
airport?"

"Oh, I forgot...no Wright Brothers." George said. "How about a boat?"

"Boats?" replied the angel. "I'm afraid the most seaworthy rafts
available to you won't be of much help in crossing the vast Atlantic
Ocean. The great Viking sailors and European navigators never existed.
No Phoenicians, no Leif Erickson, no Henry the Navigator, no Columbus,
no Magellan, no Hudson and no Robert Fulton. Even if you could build
your own ship, there would be no compass for you to navigate with and
no sextant either. I'm afraid you're stuck here George."

"Can I touch your robe and fly to Africa then" asked George.

"You're cheating again George, but all right. Touch my robe and we'll
fly to Africa."

When they arrived in Africa, George saw thousands of half-naked
African tribesmen being herded along a dirt path. They were guarded by
other Africans with spears. "What are they doing to those poor men?"
George asked Clarence.

"They are being enslaved by another tribe. Slavery was common in
Africa long before the whites arrived." Clarence said. "In fact, most
of the slaves who were shipped to the Americas were sold to the slave
traders by African tribal leaders."

"That's so sad.' George said. "I want to meet Martin Luther King.
Since his White assassin never existed, this great man should still be
alive. He's probably a great tribal chief somewhere and leader of an
advanced civilization. He will free these slaves from their African
masters. Take me to him Clarence."

Clarence led George to a little hut deep in the heart of Africa. The
naked women and children looked at George in wonder. The young men
were out on a hunt but the older men stayed behind. George was led to
the dingy little hut of the tribal witchdoctor and spiritual leader.
There he saw a wild-looking man with a necklace of teeth around his
neck and a huge ring pierced through his nose. "What the hell is that?
George asked.

"Meet Witch-doctor Matunbo Lutamba Kinga" Clarence said. He never
became Reverend Martin Luther King because there were no universities
or seminaries built to educate him. Europeans weren't there to create
such opportunities. But he did become the tribe's spiritual leader. He
specializes in casting evil spells. Perhaps he can help you?"

The witch doctor gazed in wonder at George. Then he motioned to his
henchmen to seize young George. The tribesmen grabbed hold of George
and tied him to a nearby tree.

"Stop it! Let me go. What are they going to do to me?" cried George
hysterically.

"They're going to perform a ritual killing on you George. The good
doctor King...I mean Kinga -- believes that by cutting your heart out
while you are still alive, it will bring good fortune and fertility to
his tribe," laughed Clarence.

"Clarence! Clarence! Help me Clarence! Help me!

"But George, you told me that you wanted to go to Africa and to meet
your hero Reverend King."

George said: "This part of Africa has not developed yet. I can see
that now. Take me to North Africa where Egypt and Carthage established
great civilizations. Just get me out of here, please."

Just as the witch doctor's spear was about to carve out George's
heart, George vanished into thin air. He then found himself on the
banks of the river Nile in Egypt.

"Thank you Clarence. Thank you," George said. "I don't understand it
Clarence. Why does so much of the world remain so brutal and
primitive? I learned during Black History Month about many talented
black inventors and scientists. Garrett Morgan, George Washington
Carver, Benjamin Banneker, Granville Woods. Then there's Dr. Carson,
the preeminent brain surgeon in all of America. Where are these men?"

Clarence replied: "Don't you understand yet? America, and Africa,
exist exactly as they did before the Europeans discovered them.
Civilization as you had known it had only been introduced to these
people just a few centuries ago by the Europeans. There are no
universities, no hospitals, no means of transportation other than
animals, no science, no medicine, no machines. In fact, the wheel
hasn't even been discovered in Sub-Saharan
Africa! Those black scientists, inventors, doctors, athletes, and
entertainers you speak of were never given the opportunity to realize
their full human potential because Europeans weren't around to
introduce higher civilization and learning to them. There are no
George Washington Carvers in this non-European world, no Dr. Carsons,
no Booker T. Washingtons, no Benjamin Bannekers, no Michael Jordans,
no Oprah Winfreys, no Bill Cosbys, no..."

"Stop it! That can't be!" cried George. "Let's walk over to the great
pyramids of Egypt right now and I'll show you one of the great wonders
of the world .....built by non-Whites"

They walked a few miles before George stopped and asked where the
nearest toilet was. "Toilets?" replied the angel. There are no toilets
or urinals in this world. Plumbing was developed by evil Europeans.
The people in this non-White world still relieve themselves in open
fields."

Clarence turned around so George could do his business. "I need some
toilet paper." George said.

"Toilet paper?" replied the angel. "There..."

"I know. I know. Toilet paper hasn't been invented yet. Just hand me a
rag then".

Clarence obliged and the two of them went on their way.

"I don't understand. According to my recollections from Geography
class, the great pyramids should be near this very spot. We ought to
be able to see them from miles away," said George.

"Well, George, I'm sure your professors at the college never told you
this, but the ancient Egyptians were not black or brown. They were
Caucasians. The anthropologists who examined the Egyptian mummies
confirmed this fact. There are no pyramids and no Sphinx either. And
the Carthaginians were White too."

George became depressed, but he was determined to prove his beliefs.
"What's in Europe?" he asked.

"Europe became populated by Huns and other Asiatic tribes. They've
settled down a bit but life is much the same as it is in North
America. A nomadic existence based on hunting and food gathering. No
great cities, no science, no buildings, no culture, no fine art - just
a hard daily struggle against life and the elements of nature. In a
Europe without evil Whites, the Roman Empire never existed nor did the
Greeks. There was no Renaissance either."

"Take me to Asia then. Surely the great civilizations of Persia,
India, China, and Japan will suit me" George said. "Clarence, to the
Taj Mahal please." "The Taj Mahal?" replied the angel. "Don't you know
that the ancient Persian and Indian civilizations were established by
ancient Indo-European tribes who crossed the Himalayas? They are the
ones who civilized India and built the Taj Mahal. Those are the great
civilizations
that Marco Polo, Columbus, and others were searching for.Did you know
that Iran is Persian for "land of the Aryan?"

George said: "Don't tell me that the Indians were White men! That
can't be. In the world I came from, I knew many Indians and they were
not White!"

Clarence explained: "As the centuries passed, the Indo-Europeans who
created Indian civilization intermarried with the native majorities
who populated the Indian subcontinent. Gradually there were less and
less evil White people until they faded out completely, along with the
advanced civilization they had built. You will notice that there are
still a few white-skinned and fair-haired Indians and Pakistanis
around today -- in the world you came from that is.

George became worried. He knew he could never fit into the harsh
primitive world he had been thrust into. Suddenly he thought of Japan.
"Japan! I'll show you now Clarence. Take me to Japan. If the Japanese
can make TVs and cameras then I'm sure I'll find a decent civilization
that I can live in."

Clarence transported George to Japan. George observed that Japanese
society was the most orderly, advanced and civil that he had seen, but
it seemed as if almost everyone was either a rice farmer, a fisherman,
or a soldier. There were no cars, no skyscrapers, no lights, no
stereos, no sciences, no technologies, no universities. It was a
stagnant agricultural society that seemed to have reached its high
water mark and was incapable of moving forward. George knew he could
not live here either.

Clarence explained to George: "Even the industrious Japanese and
Chinese peoples had to rely on the evil Europeans to build the modern
Asia that you had in mind. In this world, Japan exists exactly as it
did before Commodore Perry's American naval ships arrived in Japan in
the 1850s. There's no industry, no technology, no Fuji film, no Sony,
no Hitachi, no Panasonic, no Toyota, no Sushi bars, no baseball...none
of the trappings or comforts of modern life. These things don't exist
in Japan or anywhere else because
Europeans weren't there to create them and share them with the rest of
the world. Would you care for a bowl of rice George?"

George began to feel sick in both his body and his mind. Not only was
he depressed, but exposure to the harsh elements of nature had left
him physically ill. "Clarence, I seem to have contracted some type of
sickness. I must have some anti-biotics."

"Anti-biotics? There's no...

"Oh Shut up already! Then just take me back to the world as it was!"

"Sorry George. I'm not authorized to do that. Only my boss can make
that call." Clarence said to him: "You see George. Your father was
right. You really had a wonderful race. Don't you see what a foolish
mistake it is to be ashamed and guilty about your own people, and to
let them die out? This is what the world would be like without the
creative spark of Edison and Ford and Pasteur and Marconi. No great
scientists, or mathematicians, or inventors or fine artists. No
Archimedes, no Aristotle, no Socrates, no
Alexander, no Renaissance, no Newton, no Kepler, no Goddard, no
Mendel, no Tesla, no Faraday, no Guttenberg, no Shakespeare, no
Dickens, no Twain, no Mozart, no Beethoven, no Da Vinci, no
Michelangelo, no Galileo, no Copernicus. No Venice, no Paris, no
Lisbon, no Madrid, no Zurich, no Berlin, no St. Petersburg, no
Budapest, no Rome, no Milan, no Vienna, no London, no New York, no
Rio, no Sydney. No orchestras, no museums, no universities, no
hospitals, no libraries, no theaters, no radio, no books, no
television, no electricity, no refrigeration, no heating, no plumbing,
no houses, no steel, no stadiums, no vaccines, no cars, no planes, no
trains, no ships, no
dentists, no surgeons, no computers, no telephones, and most important
- there's no creative genius to be found that could create and sustain
such a high level of civilization. There's nothing for the people of
this world to build upon. It's just a daily struggle for subsistence.
A brutal planet where the few people who aren't mired in eternal
ignorance and darkness have reached their peak of civilization and are
advancing no further."

Clarence went on to lecture the broken and depressed young man for
seven days straight. He covered everything. History, science,
economics, philosophy, art, literature, fine music, architecture,
medicine, politics, agriculture, religion, and all the creations and
contributions that the European peoples had made in every conceivable
field of human endeavor. George listened closely to every word. He
felt like a man who had been
reborn.

After his lecture, Clarence the Angel floated away towards heaven. "I
hope you have found all this to be educational, and I hope you have
learned an important lesson. Enjoy your world George!" mocked the
departing angel.

George began to sob like a baby. It was the year 2002 and he was alone
and hungry in a backwards world where Europeans had never existed. He
cried out to the stars: "Please God. I see what a fool I've been. I
understand now what my father was trying to tell me. I want to go back
to the world that I came from. A world where Europeans not only
existed, but blessed the rest of humanity world with their unique
creative ability. I want to live in a civilized world. Please
God!...take me back!...take me back!...Oh God....please."

Suddenly George was transported back to his college dormitory. Drunk
with joy, George jumped into the showers before he could even take his
clothes off!.

"Warm water! and soap! Life is beautiful!" he screamed.

George's floor mates looked at him as if he was crazy. "George! Have
you gone crazy?" asked a bewildered schoolmate.

"No my friend. I haven't taken leave of my senses. I've come to them!"
George replied. George then began to sing classic European folk songs
in the shower. Miraculously, he was able to sing in many different
languages. He sang O Sole Mio in Italian, Amazing Grace in English,
Gloire Immortelle in French, Das Ist Der Tag in German, and also
Belgian, Spanish and French ballads and waltzes. Tears of sheer joy
began to stream down his cheeks. The degenerate music of Hip-Hop and
Rap lost all of its appeal to young George.

After his shower, George drove to a nearby restaurant and ordered two
whole entrees. One was Lasagna and the other was a delicious Veal
Marsala. With his Italian food he had a Greek salad with Spanish
olives and Russian dressing, drank a whole bottle of French wine,
followed by a German pastry for dessert. He finished his meal off with
a hot cup of English tea and a Cuban cigar.

George said out loud: "Oh those European peoples and their delicious
cuisine. Clarence was right after all. What a wonderful race!"

George was happy, but at the same time he realized there was much work
to be done. He thought of all those poor whites in Rhodesia and South
Africa who were being murdered and raped ever since they gave up
control of those once-European nations. He thought of the many
thousands of qualified Whites who were passed up for good jobs and
college entrance because of racial quotas that discriminate against
Europeans. He thought about the declining birthrates among all the
European nations of the world. He remembered that
Europeans everywhere were dwindling in numbers every year even as
their own nations were being flooded with third world immigration. He
recalled the O.J. Simpson verdict and how millions of blacks in
America cheered when that brutal double murderer was set free by a
black jury after he stabbed two Whites to death. He remembered the Los
Angeles riots of 1992, where dozens of Whites were dragged out of
their vehicles and killed like dogs in the streets by packs of
White-hating monsters who were never even punished! He remembered the
time when Jesse Jackson led a cheer at Stanford University: "Hey Hey
Ho Ho, Western Civ. has got to go!" His European blood began to
boil in righteous indignation when he recalled how Jesse Jackson once
said he had spit in White people's food when he was a young restaurant
worker. George now understood that that his people were on a collision
course with worldwide disaster and genocide. George realized that this
great people must not perish from the face of the earth.

George could not wait to see his father. He longed to embrace him and
apologize for all of the foolish and disrespectful things he had said
to him. But first, George had a score to settle with a certain college
professor. He walked into Dr. Silverstein's auditorium and quietly
took a seat in the back row. The nasal voiced Silverstein was
lecturing on and on
about racial and gender inequalities in European-centered
civilizations. It was vintage Silverstein. George's impressionable
White schoolmates, with their baggy pants, hip-hop clothes and
backwards baseball caps, were swallowing Silverstein's poison pills
hook, line and sinker. After letting Silverstein spew his cultural
poison for about 15 minutes or so, George raised his hand so that he
could give the professor a piece of his newly educated mind.

"George? Is that you? I remember you from last semester. I wasn't
aware that you were here today. I failed to recognize you in that
shirt and tie, and without your earrings. You must have enjoyed my
course so much that you signed up again eh? Class, I'd like for you to
meet George. He was one of my brightest students last semester. He
truly has a thorough grasp of the ideas presented in this course.
George, would you be so kind as to tell my class about that brilliant
term paper you wrote about European racism,
imperialism, and the need for monetary reparations?"

That's when young George let loose on the unsuspecting Professor.

"ENOUGH! You scheming devil! You mendacious fabricator of falsehoods!
You pusillanimous purveyor of pinko propaganda! How dare you try to
corrupt and manipulate our young minds when your filthy lies. We
Europeans have nothing to be ashamed of, nothing to apologize for, and
everything to be proud of. And most of all, we don't owe anybody
jack-shit - not one thin dime! To the contrary, it is the rest of
humanity that owes us a debt which can never be repaid! We are the
rightful heirs and protectors of a rich cultural heritage. You vile
manipulator! We are the sons of the Romans, the sons of
the Greeks, the Celtics, the Vikings, the Normans, the Saxons. Why do
you inflict shame and guilt upon us? We Europeans didn't just
contribute to civilization...WE ARE CIVILIZATION! And I declare that I
will no longer tolerate you shithead "intellectuals" trying to tear
our people down. Never again will we walk on eggshells when we speak,
always fearing that we might be called "racist." I no longer care what
people think. All that matters is the truth which you have sought to
pervert!"

"What are you up to anyway? Why do you to corrupt my young peers by
shoving false heroes down their throats. Enough of your Marxist games
of divide and conquer, you commie pinko subversive! I don't want to
learn anymore about Martin Luther King, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton or
Black History Month. They would not have amounted to anything without
the institutions of high civilization created by the European peoples.
I'm going to set this class straight about who the truly great men of
history are - the European
statesmen, scientists, explorers, monarchs, navigators, conquerors,
inventors, artists, writers, philosophers - the innovative giants of
history that you and your ilk have erased from our collective
memories. You speak of a world liberated from European influence?
Permit me tell your students about such a world, Silverstein, because
I can speak from personal experience, you wretched little conspiring
monster!"

Silverstein turned white as a ghost. He was shell-shocked and rendered
speechless for the first time in his career! Never in all of his years
at the University had a student dared to so boldly challenge his
falsehoods. Speaking from the heart as well as the mind, and with an
eloquence he never thought he could muster, George broke out into a
60-minute monologue on history, science, philosophy, culture, and all
the other attributes that
constitute high civilization. The young students were captivated by
George's brilliant oratory. Many were moved to tears. By the end of
his tirade, George's reawakened classmates were thundering their
approval of his speech. The class gave George a standing ovation and
they thanked him for helping them rediscover and reclaim their own
sense of pride and lost identity. The unstoppable power of truth had
melted away years of Marxist guilt tripping, self hate, wimpishness
and cultural brainwashing in just one unforgettable hour. The inspired
students proceeded to storm out of Silverstein's class,
throwing their hip-hop baseball caps and nose earrings at him as they
stampeded out and vowed never to return. They lifted George up upon
their shoulders and carried him out of the auditorium like a
conquering hero. With a glint in his eye, George glanced up towards
the sky, winked and said "Thank you, Clarence."

Dr. Silverstein was left humiliated and visibly shaken. He knew that
these reawakened European kids could never again be brainwashed with
"political correctness" and White guilt. Silverstein's greatest fear
was that more of these proud European youths would one day reawaken
and take their country and civilization back from the Silversteins of
the world.

Silverstein was worried, but he remained confident that most young men
and women would never learn the truth about their glorious past and
unique creative abilities. After all, the mass media, Hollywood, the
music industry, the colleges, and the public schools are all
controlled by "liberals" like Dr. Silverstein. With the power of
political correctness in their hands, they can continue to tear down
our European ancestors, destroy our
institutions and traditions, instigate blacks and other races against
the whites, flood America with third-world immigration, and push
"hip-hop" music, homosexuality, and other garbage onto a weak,
confused and morally degenerate youth. After reflecting upon these
facts, Silverstein smiled a devilish grin and muttered to himself: "A
few of these European sheep may wake up to what's being done to them,
but the majority of these idiots never will." And he smiled
again....and laughed with diabolical Marxist glee. Then
he repeated to himself "No...they will never figure it all out until
it's too late."

Or will they?

[tooly]

> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/18/books/review/is-marriage-for-white-...

> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Well,like I said, liberals will bend over backwards to refute this
'simple' truth, observable by anyone. Did you sell any ice cubes to
eskimoes today? Not here anyway; no sale. But your reply was very
predictable. Fallacy this, fallacy that...I live in the 'real' world
myself.

If I took the time [I'm too lazy] I could demolish you with
statistics, history, and simple outcomes. But, I'm too lazy; and it's
not worth the effort to me. I'll NEVER convince you. LIke most
leftists today [I assume you are radical...liberal at the very
least]...like most of you today, you are on a crusade; minds already
made up. You are out to save the world; to save the whales and the
black man and indians and whatever else you find along the way that
NEEDS saving. Glory be...may we build statues in your honor in the
town square.

Today, the liberal 'owns' the playing field though, no denying that;
the hegemony that we must all contend with. But I am quite certain
that time will turn the tables. In the USSR, an experiment was FORCED
for seventy some odd years...but it's failure was destined from the
start. Why? REALITY...and how the world REALLY works. As I always
say, you can kill any messenger out here...me, I'm just flesh and bone
and easily drawn and quartered. But the TRUTH...that one is a bit
harder to dispense with. We already know...deep down. Don't let the
cognizant dissonance get you down though; that nagging 'sense' inside
where you know how wrong you are.

I wish you well no matter though. Sobriety goes a long way, hehe...

[Jigme Dorje]

No, you couldn't. You just spout unsupported rhetorical platitudes
that confirm your biases.

> But, I'm too lazy; and it's
> not worth the effort to me.

It's much more than simple intellectual laziness. It's fundamental
dishonesty - tenacious clinging to beliefs and opinions driven by
desperation and fear.

> I'll NEVER convince you.  LIke most
> leftists today [I assume you are radical...liberal at the very
> least]...like most of you today, you are on a crusade; minds already
> made up.

I'm moderate, nonpartisan, open minded and objective. That's why I'm
able to objectively assess facts and rely on them rather than personal
opinions or cherry pick data for the sake of confirmation bias.

You are out to save the world; to save the whales and the
> black man and indians and whatever else you find along the way that
> NEEDS saving.  Glory be...may we build statues in your honor in the
> town square.

I'm only out to reach out to a fellow human being who is suffering,
smothering in hate and fear.

> Today, the liberal 'owns' the playing field though, no denying that;
> the hegemony that we must all contend with.

Paranoid delusions? A familliar right wing fantasy.

> But I am quite certain
> that time will turn the tables.  In the USSR, an experiment was FORCED
> for seventy some odd years...but it's failure was destined from the
> start.  Why?  REALITY...and how the world REALLY works.  As I always
> say, you can kill any messenger out here...me, I'm just flesh and bone
> and easily drawn and quartered.  But the TRUTH...that one is a bit
> harder to dispense with.  We already know...deep down.  Don't let the
> cognizant dissonance get you down though; that nagging 'sense' inside
> where you know how wrong you are.
>
> I wish you well no matter though.  Sobriety goes a long way, hehe...

It takes a lot more than just sobriety. You need self reflection and
mental discipline to be able to dismantle your ideological filters and
develop a dispassionate perspective. Be courageous. Expand your
perspectives. Face up to your fears and hatred. They're destrying you
from the inside.

[Topaz]

Why They Hate Us
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

[Eric S. Harris]

So the answer to my question is "No", then. Oh, well. I tried.

Buh bye. -Eric

[Jigme Dorje]

On Feb 14, 10:49 pm, "Eric S. Harris" <eric_harris...@wahoo.com>
wrote:

For the right wing, Fascist is just like Socialist, a meaningless
defamation.

[Gray Guest]

walt tonne <tonnew...@gmail.com> wrote in news:7a1523ca-94e7-4684-8499-
e3bbc0...@v14g2000yqh.googlegroups.com:

> On Jan 20, 5:13 pm, "James Miller" <jamesmil...@spaminator.com> wrote:
>> Excellent new article by James Miller, PhD
>>
>> What Is Fascism?http://immigration-
globalization.blogspot.com/2011/09/wha
> t-is-fascism...
>
> Worth reading!

It's a political system for people with spastic right arms.

--
I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to
be sure.

What I like about this attitude is it works equally well for Iran and the
Democrat National Covention.

http://nukeitfromorbit.com/

[SaPeIsMa]

"Jigme Dorje" <jdor...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ba61c430-32f1-427b...@t30g2000vbx.googlegroups.com...

It's not "defamation"
It's just description of various types of turds

[mcafee]

You are an undereducated dolt.

[mcafee]

On 02/15/12 00:26, Gray Guest wrote:
> walt tonne<tonnew...@gmail.com> wrote in news:7a1523ca-94e7-4684-8499-
> e3bbc0...@v14g2000yqh.googlegroups.com:
>
>> On Jan 20, 5:13 pm, "James Miller"<jamesmil...@spaminator.com> wrote:
>>> Excellent new article by James Miller, PhD
>>>
>>> What Is Fascism?http://immigration-
> globalization.blogspot.com/2011/09/wha
>> t-is-fascism...
>>
>> Worth reading!
>
> It's a political system for people with spastic right arms.
>

I wouldn't call Obama a right arm. He's a left nut.

[Jigme Dorje]

Sorry, I don't do yo mamma jokes.

[Jigme Dorje]

So it's scatology.

[Topaz]

Here are some quotes from "The Eleventh Hour" by John Tyndall

"For a short time, Britons from all regions of the country and its
Empire, and from every social background, came together in a single
cause, casting aside all previous political party and class divisions
and joined hands in a common comradeship of the trenches.

And for the first time in centuries politicians in this country put
aside party warfare and joined forces in working for a single goal. A
coalition government was formed in 1916 and proceeded to coordinate
the whole national life in one mighty endeavor. Laissez-faire
Economics were dropped as Britain found that these methods, practiced
so long in the years of peace had rendered her industry hopelessly
incapable of producing her needs of survival in this titanic conflict.
New industries, such as chemicals, machine tools and optics, had to be
built practically from scratch, while others, such as electricity,
aircraft and aero-engines, had to be greatly expanded, in order to
provide the sinews of war; and this was done mainly on the initiative
of the state. By the end of the war, tremendous strides had been made
in making good these previous shortcomings of industry. What the
theoretical stimulus of the "free market" had failed to do for decades
beforehand was done in just three years of corporate effort, achieved
by firm national leadership directing economic resources, and by the
whole nation, and Empire, working as a team."

"Could not the super-human efforts displayed on the battlefield in the
face of a dangerous adversity now be displayed again in the creation,
from out of the rubble of newly born nations?"

"Sir Oswald Mosley... had crossed to the Labour benches after
despairing of the Tories' ability or will to overcome the evils of
poverty and unemployment in post 1918 Britain...

In time, however, Mosley came to recognize that in the ranks of
Labour, however ideal the ends, there was a total incomprehension of,
combined an unwillingness to accept, the necessary means... he said:

"This nation has to be mobilized and rallied for a tremendous effort,
and who can do that except the government of the day?"

In the simplest terms, nationalism is no more than team spirit. Just
as the school, the firm the regiment and the rugby team need, each in
its own way to be infused with a pride of identity and a desire to
win, so must nations, if they are to be effective forces for the
furtherance of their own interests and for their survival in the
world, be galvanized by the same vital forces."

[Topaz]

Mussolini, Benito - The Doctrine of Fascism

Fascism is the name of an ancient way of keeping a group of people
together under a united goal. Dating back to the Roman Empire,
political leaders like Julius Caesar used fascism as a way of
maintaining a consensus between the individuals in his land, as well
as establishing the kind of self-sacrificing heroism that has always
defined the basis for Indo-European culture. Fascism puts focus on the
whole, which includes people, culture, religion and nature.

It is therefore totally opposed to liberalism, which claims that the
freedom of the individual is of highest importance. It can be said
that the essence of fascism is that of an integralist tradition: each
nation is seen as an organic entity, meaning that there are no
internal conflicts between man and nature, nor man and state. In
liberal democracies, there is a constant conflict between the state
and the individual. Left wants to increase the power of the state,
while the Right wants to do the opposite. Fascism solves this by
simply equating the state with the people: what the state wants, the
people want, and vice versa.

Thus fascism is a way of finding a balance between the needs of
different individuals and having them work towards shared goals. This
will always remain as the stable foundation to healthy civilizations.
As soon as a house needs to be built it's absolutely necessary to let
all parts involved focus on their task and work together in order to
fulfill each other with their respective specialization. Opposed to
the democratic view on work, where each individual is assumed to be
able to control and handle any given task, fascism claims the
opposite: only those who are in accordance with the natural abilities
of a specific task may fulfill them with the greatest perfection in
art. Anyone can build a fairly functioning place to stay, but how many
have the inherent skills to make it last for several years? It's thus
not about "who can do what", but merely "who can do it best". As seen
from a democratic point of view, this is promotion of "inequality".
Fascism sees it as natural and is not bound to moral obligations: each
individual has a unique ability and should thus work towards improving
it.

Put into a pragmatic context, this form of political specialization is
solved through the traditional system of guilds, or "corporativism",
as it is also called. This means that all carpenters will unite under
a union for carpenters, all leaders will unite under a union of
leaders etc. The benefits of this are many, but practically it is a
fully mature way of combining cheap and effective education with an
economic stability for all parts involved. It develops each respective
craft and creates a sense of pride in one's own ability and art. The
fascist form of corporativism is therefore a close relative to the
caste society, which focuses on individual specialization and denies
the democratic-capitalist way of valuing people according to money.
Within fascism, the natural ability of the individual is not seen as
an economic question, but a purely pragmatic one, leaving space for
individual improvement and development.

It must therefore be said that fascism is totally against the
political system of socialism, which sees all individuals as equal in
ability, but most importantly, divides the people up into economic
groups called "classes", where the working class is seen as suppressed
by the bourgeois class. Fascism wants to erase this clash and unite
the people under the things that ultimately bind them together:
history, culture and religious belief. In relation to this we can thus
address another common misconception about fascism: it is not simply a
political stance, but an overtly spiritual and transcendentalist
outlook on life..

The most noticeable difference between liberal democracy and a fascist
society, is however the question of leadership. Democracy is built
around the assumption that numerical votes automatically can decide
which idea is the one worth striving towards. Fascism claims the
opposite: no numerical votes or principle of the majority can find the
best solution to our problems. Only by recognizing the inherent
variation in ability among individuals, including leadership, may we
find a way of controlling and managing the issues of the state and its
different organs. Therefore, all traditional fascist societies have
been ruled by political leaders and not by the people, although the
general goals and ideals of both parties remain the same. Note that
this is not an actual hierarchy, as it is often presented from a
democratic point of view: a leader is just as worthy and useful for
society as a whole as a carpenter or an engineer. Corporativism wants
each individual to see his or her own specific place in the organic
order as a whole. Only through this view can we at last lay the
clashes between classes aside and start working for common goals
again...

Ultimately fascism is a philosophy for the future of modern
civilizations. Not until we dare to face the inherent problems with
democracy and its ways of creating moral illusions, can we find a
political system based on natural reality.

Benito Mussolini

[Topaz]

WHAT IS FASCISM?

By James Miller, PhD

Unfortunately, Fascism has an undeserved bad reputation. Regardless of
this reputation, Fascism is a very sensible economic and social
ideology. There are a few different "flavors" of Fascism, but
basically they all come down to the following.

Fascism is an economic system in which a nation's government plays a
central role in monitoring all banking, trade, production, and labor
activity which takes place within the nation. Such monitoring is done
for the sole purpose of safeguarding & advancing the nation and its
people. Under Fascism, the government will not approve of any business
activity unless that business has a positive impact on the nation as a
whole and the people of the nation - this is the axiom which
determines everything under Fascism.

In other words, the government asks, "Is XYZ Enterprises good for our
nation and our people?" If yes, it's approved. If no, it's not
approved. When they ask, "Is it good?", they mean, "Is XYZ Enterprises
good for the workers, do they pay a fair wage, do they produce a
product or provide a service which advances our nation & our people
technologically, morally, spiritually, health-wise, etc???" For
example, a pornography company would not be allowed because
pornography corrupts people generally and exploits & degrades women
particularly. Also, "free" trade agreements (such as what the U.S. has
with China) would never be allowed because such trade agreements
result in companies sending jobs overseas (where labor is dirt cheap).
Such an activity, of course, would undermine a nation's labor class.
This is entirely unnacceptable and thus not allowed under a Fascist
economic model.

Fascism is based on free enterprise - but with constraints (the
primary constraint being, "Is the particular economic activity in
question good for our nation?"). Also, a businessman can become
wealthy in a Fascist country, and the government has no objection to
this (this is in stark contrast to Communism). Fascism also encourages
private ownership of property (again, in stark contrast to Communism
where private property is not allowed).

In a nutshell, Fascism basically tells entrepreneurs, "Go ahead and
start a business, earn a lot of money, be successful, but don't
produce any products or services which damage our nation and our
nation's people... and make sure you treat your workers fair and pay
them a living wage. If you don't do these things, we'll shut you
down."

The above is the economic aspect of Fascism. There is also a
cultural/social aspect to Fascism as well. Under Fascism, government
plays a key role in monitoring: film, theatre, art, literature, music,
education, etc in order to maintain a high moral standard, keep things
clean and respectable, promote a strong sense of patriotism and honor,
and prevent the dissemination of depraved filth which corrupts
society.

A few other things to mention. Fascism encourages respect for the
enviroment as Fascists understand that nature is the giver of life and
thus must be preserved. Contrast this environmental view with that of
Capitalism which too often takes the short term view and foolishly
believes that pollution is a necessary byproduct of profit.

Also, under Fascism, if a person doesn't like things, he/she can leave
the country. Contrast this with Communism where if you don't like
things, you better keep your mouth shut. And, of course, there is no
option to leave the country. You will submit or else be sent to a
re-education camp where you'll be brainwashed to accept the Communist
system. And if you still resist, you'll probably be killed. Again,
there is no leaving. Submit or suffer the consequences.

Lastly, Fascism holds women in very high regard. Women are the
carriers of new life. They are expected to be educated, worldly, and
well read. Women are encouraged to pursue their interests and have a
career but only if a career won't interfere with her family's needs;
family comes first, always. Women are encouraged to be strong yet
feminine.

In Germany, the NSDAP essentially followed the above described Fascist
system.

###


For SERIOUS conservative writing, please visit my website:
http://immigration-globalization.blogspot.com

[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/

[SaPeIsMa]

"Jigme Dorje" <jigme.d...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:jhgl8h$grs$1...@dont-email.me...

Not a surprise, since you are a "mama joke".

[Jigme Dorje]

What I mean by this is that an ad hominem argument is an admission of
failure.

[Gray Guest]

mcafee <san...@Use-Author-Supplied-Address.invalid> wrote in
news:bff567df7e1db89f...@tioat.net:

Left and right is nonsense, he jsut wants to be a dick-tator.

[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."

[mcafee]

Of course not, your momma is your sister.

[mcafee]

What argument? It was an observation.

[SaPeIsMa]

"Jigme Dorje" <jigme.d...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:jhhejs$hkk$4...@dont-email.me...

Well there you go
I'll accept your admission of failure

[Eric S. Harris]

Bill Graham wrote:

>
> "Eric S. Harris" <eric_ha...@wahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:4F2E2B5F...@wahoo.com...
>
>> Bill Graham wrote:
>>
>>> Eric S. Harris wrote:
>>>
>>>> walt tonne wrote:
>>>>
>>>> [snipped]
>>>>
>>>> Too bad there isn't some kind of a reference work -- a book of some
>>>> sort -- where the meanings of words are listed.
>>>>
>>>> It could be in alphabetical order, for convenience. We could find
>>>> "fascism" between "fart" and "fastball". -Eric
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Trouble is, all such books are written/edited by human beings, and
>>> these creatures are known to be prejudiced and opinionated, and will
>>> add on/leave out information that suits their agendas.

>>
>>
>> As long as the people in the conversation are using the same
>> definition for a word, the conversation has a chance of being
>> productive. Dictionaries are one place to go for definitions. (They
>> can also be agreed upon by the participants, but why re-invent the
>> wheel, if you can avoid it?)
>>
>> Good definitions -- from the standpoint of productive discussion --
>> don't include conclusions and value judgments and snarky remarks.
>> They are simply descriptive in such a way that all the participants
>> can accept them, and agree with their meaning.
>>
>> Then the concluding and such can begin.
>>
>> Can you come up with -- find or devise, I don't care -- a definition
>> of fascism that fits the bill? One that: (1) includes all examples of
>> fascism that the participants agree are fascism, (2) excludes what the
>> participants agree are not fascism, (3) doesn't do anything else
>> (conclude, insult, condemn)? -Eric
>
>

> No. How can you do that when a large portion of the world (almost all
> the believers in Islam) believe, or say they believe, that the United
> States is a fascist country?

I meant "the participants in this discussion". Sorry that wasn't clear.

[Bill Graham]

Apparently SCOTUS uses a different dictionary than I do. they interpreted
the second amendment of the Constitution to mean that I can't carry my
pistol when in New York City. Now the second amendment is one sentence long.
All the words are in any standard dictionary. I challenge you to show me why
I can't carry a pistol in my pocket when in New York City, using any of
these volumes.

[Scout]

"Bill Graham" <we...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:7OWdnYwBh46nENTS...@giganews.com...

Excuse me, sorry to jump in here, but exactly what case ruling by SCOTUS
would I find that interpretation?

I know most of their cases that involve guns and gun control, but I don't
seem to recall that particular SCOTUS interpretation.

[Bret Cahill]

Fascism, like any sub category of despotism, is based on fear.

Jefferson would have called today's GOP an "engine of despotism."


Bret Cahill

[SNORDO]

"Bret Cahill" <Bret_E...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e87b72bf-c9db-405a...@l16g2000vbl.googlegroups.com...
: Fascism, like any sub category of despotism, is based on fear.

:
: Jefferson would have called today's GOP an "engine of despotism."
:
:
: Bret Cahill

:




he might have called them stupid,ignorant, dumb ass, trailer trash hillbillies

[Topaz]

[Topaz]

Many people think they arrive at their own ideas all by themselves,
when in fact their ideas are usually made for them by Hollywood. Take
two movies that are anti-leadership propaganda, Gladiator, and
Braveheart.

In Gladiator they show a corrupt leader of Rome, but would it be
corrupt if Maximus was the leader? That would be much better than
having the lame senators running Rome. And of course in Braveheart the
Scots should have made William their leader. If he was the leader he
could have put the corrupt nobles in their place.

The purpose of the propaganda is to stop good people from wanting
power. The people who have the real power now, the bankers and the
media, are not threatened in the least by libertarians. But if there
was a leader that was really for the people they know they would be
put in their place.

In democracies money talks and those who can buy TV stations are
the rulers. These rulers don't even claim to be for anything but their
own profits and interests. People are much better off with a good
leader who has power above the money power.

[Bill Graham]

Really? - I wonder what you think he would have called Obama's "Cash for
Clunkers" program?

[Bret Cahill]

> > Fascism, like any sub category of despotism, is based on fear.
>
> > Jefferson would have called today's GOP an "engine of despotism."
>
> > Bret Cahill
>
> Really?

And it really shows that Jefferson understood heat engines as well as
politics.

The compressor feeds the expander which powers the compressor which
feeds . . .

Economic insecurity feeds the religious right which votes GOP which
increases economic insecurity . . .

> I wonder what you think he would have called Obama's "Cash for
> Clunkers" program?

Patriotic enlighted government.


Bret Cahill

[Bill Graham]

Only if Thomas Jefferson was a socialist., - I Don't think so. Funny how
you guys can twist the truth about 180 degrees.......Maybe you think that if
you repeat the lie over and over you might actually get someone to believe
it.