Discussion:
Adolf the Great
(too old to reply)
t***@hotmail.com
2006-08-28 13:47:57 UTC
Permalink
http://www.adolfthegreat.com/
Hitler is looking better and better. While Europe, Canada, Oz and the USA
descend into the 3rd world muck, China is doing very well by following Nazi
principles, after their disaster with Judeo-Marxism..
GP
Interesting!

ted
Frank Arthur
2006-08-28 15:02:06 UTC
Permalink
Anyone country in Europe that wants to go back to Hitler days? Zero!
Post by t***@hotmail.com
http://www.adolfthegreat.com/
Hitler is looking better and better. While Europe, Canada, Oz and the USA
descend into the 3rd world muck, China is doing very well by following Nazi
principles, after their disaster with Judeo-Marxism..
GP
Interesting!
ted
Topaz
2006-08-29 01:35:03 UTC
Permalink
By Walter Ruthard

I myself was brought up in a small village in the southwest of
Germany. In 1939, when the war broke out, we left for the less exposed
Odenwald area until the possible danger of a French invasion had
passed. Shortly after that my father was transferred to the Ruhr
region. He as requested work as a foreman for the Mauser arms factory.
The government, true to their claims to be national and socialist,
took their promises seriously and provided young people starting a
family, as well as those who already had children, with affordable
housing. The first child brought a reduction of the mortgage by 25
percent, and when the fourth child arrived the mortgage was no more.
My parents already had four children then and thus were eligible for a
free newly built house from the government.

This was but one of the many programs the government established in
order to improve the quality of life for its citizens…

Then there was the "Kinderlandverschickung" program. It was started
before the war and enabled mothers in need of recreation to spend some
time in rural settings together with their children…

Another very popular social program of the government was "Fraft
durch Freude" (strength through joy). Here deserving workers could
take all-inclusive tours on luxury liners that were built especially
for this purpose. On these ships there was only one class and
everybody was treated the same. They visited the Azores and
Spitsbergen among other places. Those ships were not allowed to dock
in and English port however. The reason was that the British
government did not want it's citizens to see what it also could have
done for them…

The most misinterpreted program in Germany was the so-called
"Lebensborn". It was the exact opposite of what people are made to
believe it was, or should I say, of what people like to believe… The
Lebensborn was the institution to help unwed mothers who did not know
where to turn for help. They were taken care of during their
pregnancies and afterward as well. This was the Lebensborn, and any
other interpretation is plain hogwash…

My father was able to buy not one but three guns plus two pistols,
together with plenty of ammunition. All it took him was proof that he
was indeed a German citizen without a criminal record. Then in 1945,
when the French "liberated" us, they disarmed him. I know that he was
not the only one to have guns at home, because I saw the many, many
arms that were handed over to the French, and this was in a very small
village…

Then, after the war was over, we had our first experience with a real
democracy. The French introduced it and gave us some shining examples;
one was that the lived off the country and stole everything which
wasn't nailed down…

It was not until many years later that I learned that Hitler held at
least five plebiscites during the first half of his rule. In
democratic Germany, from 1945 until today there has never been a
plebiscite.

There were foreign workers employed in Germany during WWII. I knew
one of them. He worked on a farm and was treated exactly like the son
who was in the army. After the war he stayed on and married the
daughter of the house. He was a prisoner of war from Poland and I
never saw him guarded by any policeman. This is how foreigners were
treated in Germany. They earned the same wages as the Germans, they
took part in the social insurance program, had paid-for holidays
including free train fares, and many came back with friends who also
wanted to work for these "horrible" Germans. Today they are called
slave laborer.

Not everyone was entitled to go on to a university. Only good marks
and above-average performance in schools qualified. But good
performers were promoted with all means available. Today we are much
more democratic; everyone is entitled to a university education and if
the parents are wealthy enough, the son or daughter can study until
they are 35…

Germany was also the country to introduce, in 1933, the first-ever
comprehensive animal protection law. Farm animals had to be kept in
strictly natural environments and no animal factories were allowed. Of
course, no testing of products on animals was permitted, and no kosher
slaughter.

If new industrial facilities were built they had to conform to the
highest standards with adequate lighting and air inside, canteens
where the workers were served nutritious meals at affordable prices,
and beautiful lawns outside: all for the benefit of the workers…In
national socialist Germany, no child labor was allowed as it still was
in other European countries.


And finally, although I could still go on for a while, I would like to
mention that on express orders from Hitler himself, it was strictly
forbidden to use corporal punishment in the army. He was of the
opinion that in was incompatible with the honor of a German to be
punished by such degrading means.

That was the Germany I grew up in, and I am glad that I did.


http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
Robert Kolker
2006-08-29 11:11:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Topaz
And finally, although I could still go on for a while, I would like to
mention that on express orders from Hitler himself, it was strictly
forbidden to use corporal punishment in the army. He was of the
opinion that in was incompatible with the honor of a German to be
punished by such degrading means.
Too bad that consideration was not extended to German born Jews and
other "untermenschen"
Post by Topaz
That was the Germany I grew up in, and I am glad that I did.
My one regret about the conclusion of WW2 is that over 90 percent of the
German population surivived. I often find myself wishing that Germany
had persisted long enough to be A-bombed into the stone age. It would
have been fit and condign. The A-bomb was a product of "Jewish Physics"
and most of the people who developed the weapon were Jews. Shucks!
Justice was not done to the German People. We should have wiped you guys
off the face of the earth when we had the chance. In those days, the
death of a German in no wise decreased the well being of the human race.
A world free of Japs and Germans! What a thought!

After the war the Morganthau Plan was never implemented. I would have
loved to see the surviving Herrenvolk hitched to ploughs like draft
animals. What the U.S. did was to reward you bastards with the Marshall
Plan. Go figure.

Bob Kolker
RG
2006-08-29 11:22:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Kolker
Justice was not done to the German People. We should have wiped you guys
off the face of the earth when we had the chance.
Oh, fuck off! You're as stupid as Hitler.
Miriam Cohen
2006-08-29 14:52:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by RG
Post by Robert Kolker
Justice was not done to the German People. We should have wiped you
guys off the face of the earth when we had the chance.
Oh, fuck off! You're as stupid as Hitler.
Apparently among the plethora of things he doesn't know is that
Germany's scientists were working on an atom bomb, too. If Germany had
"persisted" they might have been successful at finishing theirs first
and London would have been nuked.
--
L'Chaim

Miriam

In the beginning
the Word already was.
Topaz
2006-08-30 02:08:18 UTC
Permalink
BERLIN, REICHSTAG
Adolf Hitler
Part of his Speech of May 4, 1941

Even my warnings against night bombings of the civilian
population, as advocated by Mr. Churchill, were interpreted as a sign
of German impotence. He, the most bloodthirsty or amateurish
strategist that history has ever known, actually saw fit to believe
that the reserve displayed for months by the German Air Force could be
looked upon only as proof of their incapacity to fly by night.

So this man for months ordered his paid scribblers to deceive the
British people into believing that the Royal Air Force alone - and no
others - was in a position to wage war in this way, and that thus ways
and means had been found to force the Reich to its knees by the
ruthless onslaught of the British Air Force on the German civilian
population in conjunction with the starvation blockade.

Again and again I uttered these warnings against this specific
type of aerial warfare, and I did so for over three and a half months.
That these warnings failed to impress Mr. Churchill does not surprise
me in the least. For what does this man care for the lives of others?
What does he care for culture or for architecture? When war broke out
he stated clearly that he wanted to have his war, even though the
cities of England might be reduced to ruins. So now he has got his
war.

My assurances that from a given moment every one of his bombs
would be returned if necessary a hundredfold failed to induce this man
to consider even for an instant the criminal nature of his action. He
professes not to be in the least depressed and he even assures us that
the British people, too, after such bombing raids, greeted him with a
joyous serenity, causing him to return to London refreshed by his
visits to the stricken areas.

It is possible that this sight strengthened Mr. Churchill in his
firm determination to continue the war in this way, and we are no less
determined to continue to retaliate, if necessary, a hundred bombs for
every one of his and to go on doing so until the British nation at
last gets rid of this criminal and his methods...

GOD KNOWS THAT I WANTED PEACE. But I can do nothing but protect
the interests of the Reich with those means which, thank God, are at
our disposal...


http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
Topaz
2006-08-30 02:07:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by RG
Post by Robert Kolker
Justice was not done to the German People. We should have wiped you guys
off the face of the earth when we had the chance.
Oh, fuck off! You're as stupid as Hitler.
by Theodore J. O'Keefe

Nothing has been more effective in establishing the authenticity of
the Holocaust story in the minds of Americans than the terrible scenes
US troops discovered when they entered German concentration camps at
the close of World War II.

At Dachau, Buchenwald, Dora, Mauthausen, and other work and detention
camps, horrified US infantrymen encountered heaps of dead and dying
inmates, emaciated and diseased. Survivors told them hair-raising
stories of torture and slaughter, and backed up their claims by
showing the GIs crematory ovens, alleged execution gas chambers,
supposed implements of torture, and even shrunken heads and
lampshades, gloves, and handbags purportedly made from skin flayed
from dead inmates.

US government authorities, mindful that many Americans who remembered
the atrocity stories fed them during World War I still doubted the
Allied propaganda directed against the Hitler regime, resolved to
"document" what the GIs had found in the camps. Prominent newsmen
and politicians were flown in to see the harrowing evidence, while
the US Army Signal Corps filmed and photographed the scenes for
posterity. Famous journalist Edward R. Murrow reported, in tones of
horror, but no longer of disbelief, what he had been told and shown,
and Dachau and
Buchenwald were branded on the hearts and minds of the American
populace as names of infamy unmatched in the sad and bloody history
of this planet.

For Americans, what was "discovered" at the camps -- the dead and the
diseased, the terrible stories of the inmates, all the props of
torture and terror -- became the basis not simply of a transitory
propaganda campaign but of the conviction that, yes, it was true: the
Germans did exterminate six million Jews, most of them in lethal gas
chambers.

What the GIs found was used, by way of films that were mandatory
viewing for the vanquished populace of Germany, to "re-educate" the
German people by destroying their national pride and their will to a
united, independent national state, imposing in their place
overwhelming feelings of collective guilt and political impotence.
And when the testimony, and the verdict, of the Nuremberg Tribunal
incorporated most, if not all, of the horror stories Americans were
told about
Dachau, Buchenwald, and other places captured by the US Army, the
Holocaust could pass for one of the most documented, one of the most
authenticated, one of the most proven historical episodes in the
human record.

A Different Reality

But it is known today that, very soon after the liberation of the
camps, American authorities were aware that the real story of the
camps was quite different from the one in which they were coaching
military public information officers, government spokesmen,
politicians, journalists, and other mouthpieces.

When American and British forces overran western and central Germany
in the spring of 1945, they were followed by troops charged with
discovering and securing any evidence of German war crimes.

Among them was Dr. Charles Larson, one of America's leading forensic
pathologists, who was assigned to the US Army's Judge Advocate
General's Department. As part of a US War Crimes Investigation Team,
Dr. Larson performed autopsies at Dachau and some twenty other German
camps, examining on some days more than 100 corpses. After his grim
work at Dachau, he was
questioned for three days by US Army prosecutors.

Dr. Larson's findings? In an 1980 newspaper interview he said: "What
we've heard is that six million Jews were exterminated. Part of that
is a hoax." And what part was the hoax? Dr. Larson, who told his
biographer that to his knowledge he "was the only forensic pathologist
on duty in the entire European Theater" of Allied military operations,
confirmed that "never was a case of poison gas uncovered."

Typhus, Not Poison Gas

If not by gassing, how did the unfortunate victims at Dachau,
Buchenwald and Bergen-Belsen perish? Were they tortured to death or
deliberately starved? The answers to these questions are known as
well.

As Dr. Larson and other Allied medical men discovered, the chief
cause of death at Dachau, Belsen and the other camps was disease,
above all typhus, an old and terrible scourge of mankind that until
recently flourished in places where populations were crowded together
in circumstances where public health measures were unknown or had
broken down. Such was the case in the overcrowded internment camps in
Germany at war's end, where, despite such measures as systematic
delousing, quarantine of the sick and cremation of the dead, the
virtual
collapse of Germany's food, transport, and public health systems led
to catastrophe.

Perhaps the most authoritative statement of the facts as to typhus and
mortality in the camps has been made by Dr. John E. Gordon, M.D.,
Ph.D., a professor of preventive medicine and epidemiology at the
Harvard University School of Public Health, who was with US forces in
Germany in 1945. Dr. Gordon reported in 1948 that "The outbreaks in
concentration camps and prisons made up the great bulk of typhus
infection encountered in Germany." Dr. Gordon summarized the causes
for the outbreaks as follows:

Germany in the spring months of April and May [1945] was an
astounding sight, a mixture of humanity travelling this way and that,
homeless, often hungry and carrying typhus with them ...Germany was in
chaos. The destruction of whole cities and the path left by advancing
armies produced a disruption of living conditions contributing to the
spread of the disease. Sanitation was low grade, public utilities were
seriously disrupted, food supply and food distribution was poor,
housing was inadequate and order and discipline were everywhere
lacking. Still more important, a shifting of populations was occurring
such as few countries and few times have experienced.

Dr. Gordon's findings are corroborated by Dr. Russell Barton, today a
psychiatrist of international repute, who entered Bergen-Belsen with
British forces as a young medical student in 1945. Barton, who
volunteered to care for the diseased survivors, testified under sworn
oath in a Toronto courtroom in 1985 that "Thousands of prisoners who
died at the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp during World War II
weren't deliberately starved to death but died from a rash of
diseases."

Dr. Barton further testified that on entering the camp he had credited
stories of deliberate starvation but decided such stories were untrue
after inspecting the well equipped kitchens and the meticulously
maintained ledgers, dating back to 1942, of food cooked and dispensed
each day.

Despite noisily publicized claims and widespread popular notions to
the contrary, no researcher has been able to document a German policy
of extermination through starvation in the German camps.

No 'Human Skin' Lampshades

What of the ghoulish stories of concentration camp inmates skinned for
their tattoos, flayed to make lampshades and handbags, or other
artifacts? What of the innumerable "torture racks," "meathooks,"
whipping posts, gallows, and other tools of torment and death that are
reported to have abounded at every German camp? These allegations, and
even more grotesque ones proffered by Soviet prosecutors, found their
way into the record at Nuremberg.

The lampshade and tattooed-skin charges were made against Ilse Koch,
dubbed by journalists the "Bitch of Buchenwald," who was reported to
have furnished her house with objects manufactured from the tanned
hides of luckless inmates.

But General Lucius Clay, military governor of the US zone of occupied
Germany, who reviewed her case in 1948, told his superiors in
Washington: "There is no convincing evidence that she [Ilse Koch]
selected inmates for extermination in order to secure tattooed skins
or that she possessed any articles made of human skin." In an
interview General Clay gave years later, he stated about the material
for the infamous lampshades: "Well, it turned out actually that it was
goat flesh. But
at the trial it was still human flesh. It was almost impossible for
her to have gotten a fair trial." Ilse Koch hanged herself in a German
jail in 1967.

It would be tedious to itemize and refute the thousands of bizarre
claims as to Nazi atrocities. That there were instances of German
cruelty, however, is clear from the testimony of Dr. Konrad Morgen, a
legal investigator attached to the Reich Criminal Police, whose
statements on the witness stand at Nuremberg have never been
challenged by proponents of the Jewish Holocaust story. Dr. Morgen
informed the court that he had been given full authority by Heinrich
Himmler,
commander of Hitler's SS and the dread Gestapo, to enter any German
concentration camp and investigate instances of cruelty and corruption
on the part of camp personnel. As he explained in sworn testimony at
Nuremberg, Dr. Morgen investigated 800 such cases, resulting in more
than 200 convictions. Punishments included the death penalty for the
worst offenders, including Hermann Florstedt, commandant of Lublin
(Majdanek), and Karl Koch (Ilse's husband), commandant of Buchenwald.

While German camp commandants in certain cases did inflict physical
punishment, such acts had to be approved by authorities in Berlin, and
it was required that a camp physician first certify the good health of
the prisoner to be disciplined, and then be on hand at the actual
beating. After all, throughout most of the war the camps were
important centers of industrial activity. The good health and morale
of the prisoners was critical to the German war effort, as is
evidenced in a January 1943 order issued by SS General Richard Glücks,
chief of the office that supervised the
concentration camps. It held the camp commanders "personally
responsible for exhausting every possibility to preserve the physical
strength of the detainees." Camp Survivors: Merely Victims?
US Army investigators, working at Buchenwald and other camps, quickly
ascertained what was common knowledge among veteran inmates: that the
worst offenders, the cruelest denizens of the camps, were not the
guards but the prisoners themselves. Common criminals of the same
stripe as those who populate US prisons today committed many
villainies, particularly when they held positions of authority, and
fanatical Communists, highly organized to combat their many
political enemies among the inmates, eliminated their foes with
Stalinist ruthlessness. Two US Army investigators at Buchenwald, Egon
W. Fleck and Edward A. Tenenbaum, carefully investigated circumstances
in the camp before its liberation. In a detailed report submitted to
their superiors, they revealed, in the words of Alfred Toombs, their
commander, who wrote a preface to the report, "how the prisoners
themselves organized a deadly terror within the Nazi terror."

Fleck and Tenenbaum described the power exercised by criminals and
Communists as follows:

The trusties, who in time became almost exclusively Communist
Germans, had the power of life and death over all other inmates. They
could sentence a man or a group to almost certain death ... The
Communist trusties were directly responsible for a large part of the
brutalities at Buchenwald.

Colonel Donald B. Robinson, chief historian of the American military
government in Germany, summarized the Fleck-Tenenbaum report in an
article published in an American magazine shortly after the war.
Colonel Robinson wrote succinctly of the American investigators'
findings: "It appeared that the prisoners who agreed with the
Communists ate; those who didn't starved to death."

Additional corroboration of inmate brutality has been provided by
Ellis E. Spackman, who, as Chief of Counter-Intelligence Arrests and
Detentions for the US Seventh Army, was involved in the liberation of
Dachau. Spackman, later a professor of history at San Bernardino
Valley College in California, wrote in 1966 that at Dachau "the
prisoners were the actual instruments that inflicted the barbarities
on their fellow prisoners."

'Gas Chambers'

In December 1944 US Army officers Colonel Paul Kirk and Lt. Colonel
Edward J. Gully inspected the German concentration camp at
Struthof-Natzweiler in Alsace. They submitted their findings to their
superiors at the headquarters of the US 6th Army Group, which
subsequently forwarded their report to the US War Crimes Division.
While, significantly, the full text of their report has never been
published, it has been revealed, by a historian supportive of
Holocaust claims, that the two investigators were careful to
characterize equipment exhibited to them by French informants as a
"so-called lethal gas chamber," and to claim it was "allegedly used as
a lethal gas chamber." (Emphasis added)

Both the careful phraseology of the Natzweiler report, and its
effective suppression, stand in stark contrast to the credulity, the
confusion, and the blaring publicity that accompanied official reports
of alleged gas chambers at Dachau. At first, a US Army photo depicting
a GI gazing at a steel door marked with a skull and crossbones and the
German words for: "Caution! Gas! Mortal danger! Don't open!," was
identified as showing the murder weapon.

Later, however, it was evidently decided that the apparatus in
question was merely a standard delousing chamber for clothing, and
another alleged gas chamber, this one cunningly disguised as a shower
room, was exhibited to American congressmen and journalists as the
site where thousands breathed their last. While there exist numerous
reports in the press as to the operation of this second "gas chamber,"
no official report by trained Army investigators has yet surfaced to
reconcile such problems as the function of the shower heads: Were they
"dummies," or did lethal cyanide gas stream through them? (Each theory
has appreciable support in journalistic and
historiographical literature.)

As with Dachau, so with Buchenwald, Bergen-Belsen, and the other camps
liberated by the Allies in western Germany. There was no end of
propaganda about "gas chambers," "gas ovens," and the like, but so far
not a single detailed description of the murder weapon and its
function, not a single report of the kind that is mandatory for the
successful prosecution of any assault or murder case in America at
that time and today, has come to light.

Furthermore, a number of Holocaust authorities have now publicly
decreed that there were no gassings, no extermination camps in Germany
after all. (We are now told that "gassing" and "extermination" camps
were located exclusively in what is now Poland, in areas captured by
the Soviet Red Army and made off-limits to western investigators.)

Dr. Martin Broszat of the Munich-based Institute for Contemporary
History, which is funded by the German government, stated
categorically in a 1960 letter to the German weekly Die Zeit: "Neither
in Dachau nor in Bergen-Belsen nor in Buchenwald were Jews or other
prisoners gassed." Professional "Nazi hunter" Simon Wiesenthal stated
in 1975 and again in 1993 that "there were no
extermination camps on German soil."

Dachau "gas chamber" No. 2, which was once presented to a stunned and
grieving world as a weapon that claimed hundreds of thousands of
lives, is now described in the brochure issued to tourists at the
modern Dachau "memorial site" in these words: "This gas chamber,
camouflaged as a shower room, was not used."

The Propaganda Intensifies

More than 50 years after American troops entered Dachau, Buchenwald
and other German camps, and trained American investigators established
the facts as to what had gone on in them, the government in
Washington, the entertainment media in Hollywood, and the print media
in New York continue to churn out millions of words and images
annually on the horrors of the camps and the infamy of the Holocaust.
Despite the fact that, with the exception of the defeated Confederacy,
no enemy of America has ever so suffered so complete and devastating
defeat as did Germany in 1945, the mass media and the politicians and
bureaucrats behave as if Hitler, his troops, and his concentration
camps continue to exist in an eternal present, and our opinion makers
continue to distort, through ignorance or malice, the facts about the
camps.

Time for the Truth

It is time that the government and the professional historians reveal
the facts about Dachau, Buchenwald and the other camps. It is time
they let the American public know how the inmates died, and how they
didn't die. It is time that the claims of mass murder by gassing are
clarified and investigated in the same manner as any other claims of
murder. It is time that the free ride certain groups have enjoyed as
the result of unchallenged Holocaust claims be terminated, just as it
is time to end the scapegoating of other groups, including Germans,
eastern Europeans, the
Roman Catholic hierarchy, and the wartime leadership of America and
Britain, either for their alleged role in the Holocaust or their
supposed failure to stop it.

Above all, it is time that the citizens of this great Republic have
the facts about the camps, facts they have a right to know, a right
that is fundamental to the exercise of their authority and their will
in the governance of their country. As citizens and as taxpayers,
Americans of all ethnic backgrounds, of all faiths, have a basic right
and an overriding interest in determining the facts of incidents that
are deemed by those in positions of power to be significant in
determining America's foreign and educational policy, as well as its
selection of past events to be memorialized in our
civic life.

Today the alleged facts of the Holocaust are at issue all over the
civilized world. The truth will be decided only by recourse to the
facts, in the public forum: not by concealing the facts, denying the
truth, stonewalling reality. The truth will out, and it is time the
government of this country, and governments and international bodies
throughout the world, make public the evidence of what actually
transpired in the German concentration camps in the years 1933-1945,
so that we may put paid to the lies, without fear or favor, and carry
out the work of reconciliation and renewal that is and must be the
granite foundation of mutual tolerance between peoples and of a peace
based on justice.

Summary
The conclusions of the early US Army investigations as to the truth
about the wartime German concentration camps have since been
corroborated by all subsequent investigators and can be summarized:

1.The harrowing scenes of dead and dying inmates were not the result
of a German policy of "extermination," but rather the result of
epidemics of typhus and other disease brought about largely by the
effects of Allied aerial attacks.
2.Stories of Nazi supercriminals and sadists who turned Jews and
others into handbags and lampshades for their private profit or
amusement were sick lies or diseased fantasies; indeed, the German
authorities punished corruption and cruelty on the part of camp
commanders and guards.
3.On the other hand, portrayals of the newly liberated inmates as
saints and martyrs of Hitlerism were quite often very far from the
truth; indeed, most of the brutalities inflicted on camp detainees
were the work of their fellow prisoners, in contravention of German
policy and German orders.
4.The alleged homicidal showers and gas chambers were used either for
bathing camp inmates or delousing their clothes; the claim that they
were used to murder Jews or other human beings is a contemptible
fabrication. Orthodox historians and professional "Nazi-hunters" have
quietly dropped claims that inmates were gassed at Dachau, Buchenwald
and other camps in Germany. They continue, however, to keep silent
regarding the lies about Dachau and Buchenwald, as well as to evade an
open discussion of the evidence for homicidal gassing at Auschwitz and
the
other camps captured by the Soviets.


Institute For Historical Review
Post Office Box 2739
Newport Beach, California 92659





http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
Golden helmet
2006-08-31 22:11:49 UTC
Permalink
Hello,

The german death camps used very brutal methods to kill, maim and sterilise
their dissidents. I have no idea why Hitler murdered the Jews, he must have
had some sort of brain damage done by a psychiatrist to cure him of
socialism. This destabilised him and turned him from an idealistic socialist
into a despot and a murder.

He was probably British because although the British claim they are free, it
is nonsence, all the population of Britain are slaves. Independant thought
and freedom is strongly suppresed.

The British equivalent of the death camps are mental hospitals where
dissidents are disabled by cutting holes in the brain, some so severe they
are mentally dead. Others have severe memory storage failure and some have
damage to the language centre to disable speech. Others are intellctually
damaged to restrict their ablity to earn money, even babies are damaged to
prevent an insurretion against the royals. Britain exisists to support the
royals.

In no way is Britain a democracy. It is acually a Theocracy.

I am ashamed to be British.

And the West is the land of slavery. The only free are those in investment
incomes, that they jealosly guard.

socialism that these people hate was always the way of bringing freedom and
weath the working class.

Jesus, Hitler, Hubbard, Lenim, Marx were all socialist.

In the west people sell the lives and their souls and their freedom for a
money. Chasing the shadow of wealth on the treadmill of death of the mind on
the production line.

The western man is a tamed person who just obeys verbal instruction and has
no mind.

The most evil westener of all is the christian with their false promise of
immortality. They kill the soul and sell the victims body.

They murder my friends to show how clever they are and they want to murder
me, Why?
--
Golden Helmet
Topaz
2006-09-01 00:48:17 UTC
Permalink
During World War Two the Germans put Jews and Communists in
concentration camps. The USA locked also up the Japanese and their
political opponents and for less reason. At the end of the war there
was a lot of deaths in the German camps from disease and starvation
because Germany was being bombed to rubble. There is no evidence that
the Germans had gas chambers or an extermination plan.
Newsweek magazine May 15, 1989 says on page 64:
"the way the Nazis did things: the secrecy, the unwritten orders, the
destruction of records and the innocent-sounding code names for the
extermination of the Jews. Perhaps it was inevitable that historians
would quarrel over just what happened"
The real reason there are no records of an extermination plan is
because there was no extermination plan. The Germans planned to deport
the Jews out of Germany. The records show that they planned to move
them to Madagascar.
Here is part of the Leuchter Report:
"Thirty-one samples were selectively removed from the alleged gas
chambers at Kremas I, II, III, IV and V. A control sample was taken
from delousing facility #1 at Birkenau. The control sample was removed
from a delousing chamber in a location where cyanide was known to have
been used and was apparently present as blue staining. Chemical
testing of the control sample #32 showed a cyanide content of 1050
mg/kg, a very heavy concentration. The conditions at areas from which
these samples were taken are identical with those of the control
sample, cold, dark, and wet. Only Kremas IV and V differed, in the
respect that these locations had sunlight (the buildings have been
torn down) and sunlight may hasten the destruction of uncomplexed
cyanide. The cyanide combines with the iron in the mortar and brick
and becomes ferric-ferro-cyanide or prussian blue pigmentation, a very
stable iron-cyanide complex.
"The locations from which the analyzed samples were removed are set
out in Table III.
"It is notable that almost all the samples were negative and that the
few that were positive were very close to the detection level
(1mg/kg); 6.7 mg/kg at Krema III; 7.9 mg/kg at Krerma I. The absence
of any consequential readings at any of the tested locations as
compared to the control sample reading 1050 mg/kg supports the
evidence that these facilities were not execution gas chambers. The
small quantities detected would indicate that at some point these
buildings were deloused with Zyklon B - as were all the buildings at
all these facilities"
Professional holocaust believers have admitted that the "gas chamber"
which is shown to the tourists at Auschwitz was actually built by the
allies after the war was over. This is what they wrote:
Brian Harmon <***@msg.ucsf.edu> wrote in article
<080620000051136373%***@msg.ucsf.edu>...
"You're confusing Krema I with Kremas II-V. Krema I is a
reconstruction, this has never been a secret. Kremas II-V are in
their demolished state as they were left."
Charles Don Hall <cdhall-***@erols.com> wrote in article
<***@news.erols.com>...
"Certainly not! The word "fake" implies a deliberate attempt to
deceive.
"The staff of the Auschwitz museum will readily explain that the Nazis
tried to destroy the gas chambers in a futile attempt to conceal their
crimes. And they'll tell you that reconstruction was done later on. So
it would be dishonest for me to call it a "fake". I'll cheerfully
admit that it's a "reconstruction" if that makes you happy."
They admit that the "gas chamber" shown to the tourists at Auschwitz
was built by the allies after the war was over. There is no physical
evidence that the Germans had gas chambers. No bodies of people who
died from gas have been found. The Communists were the first to enter
the camps. How do the other allies know the Communists didn't blow up
the buildings? Then they could claim that these demolished buildings
used to be gas chambers.
But then the believers will say the Germans confessed. Their main
confession is from Hoess. Here are the details:
"In the introduction to Death Dealer [Buffalo: Prometheus, 1992], the
historian Steven Paskuly wrote: "Just after his capture in 1946, the
British Security Police were able to extract a statement from Hoess by
beating him and filling him with liquor." Paskuly was reiterating what
Rupert Butler and Bernard Clarke had already described.
In 1983, Rupert Butler published an unabashed memoir (Legions of
Death, Hamlyn: London) describing in graphic detail how, over three
days, he and Clarke and other British policemen managed to torture
Hoess into making a "coherent statement." According to Butler [Legions
of Death, p. 237], he and the other interrogators put the boots to
Hoess the moment he was captured. For starters, Clarke struck his face
four times to get Höess to reveal his true identity.
<quote>
The admission suddenly unleashed the loathing of Jewish sergeants in
the arresting party whose parents had died in Auschwitz following an
order signed by Höss.
The prisoner was torn from the top bunk, the pajamas ripped from his
body. He was then dragged naked to one of the slaughter tables, where
it seemed to Clarke the blows and screams were endless.
Eventually, the Medical Officer urged the Captain: "Call them off,
unless you want to take back a corpse."
A blanket was thrown over Höss and he was dragged to Clarke's car,
where the sergeant poured a substantial slug of whisky down his
throat. Höss tried to sleep.
Clarke thrust his service stick under the man's eyelids and ordered in
Geffnan: "Keep your pig eyes open, you swine."
For the first time Höss trotted out his oft-repeated justification: "I
took my orders from Himmler. I was a soldier in the same way as you
are a soldier and we had to obey orders."
The party arrived back at Heide around three in the morning. The snow
was swirling
still, but the blanket was torn from Höss and he was made to walk
completely nude
through the prison yard to his cell.
</quote>

An article in the British newspaper Wrexham Leader [Mike Mason, "In a
cell with a Nazi war criminal-We kept him awake until he confessed,"
October 17, 1986] following the airing of a TV documentary on the case
of Rudolf Hoess included eyewitness recollections by Ken Jones:
<quote>
Mr. Ken Jones was then a private with the Fifth Royal Horse Artillery
stationed at
Heid[e] in Schleswig-Holstein. "They brought him to us when he
refused to
cooperate over questioning about his activities during the war. He
came in the winter
of 1945/6 and was put in a small jail cell in the barracks," recalls
Mr. Jones. Two
other soldiers were detailed with Mr. Jones to join Höss in his cell
to help break
him down for interrogation. "We sat in the cell with him, night and
day, armed with
axe handles. Our job was to prod him every time he fell asleep to
help break down
his resistance," said Mr. Jones. When Höss was taken out for exercise
he was made
to wear only jeans and a cotton shirt in the bitter cold. After three
days and
nights without sleep, Höss finally broke down and made a full
confession to
the authorities.
</quote>

The confession Hoess signed was numbered document NO-1210; later
revamped, as document PS-3868, which became the basis for an oral
deposition Hoess made for the IMT on April 15, 1946, a month after it
had been extracted from him by torture...
Since what people confess to after they have been captured by the
Communists and their liberal comrades is not proof of anything, this
leaves only the stories of survivors. These contradict each other and
not believable. One professional survivor said that he could tell if
the Germans were gassing German Jews or Polish Jews by the color of
the smoke.
The fact that there are so many "survivors" is not proof of an
extermination plan. There may be six million survivors. Just about
every Jew that is old says he is a survivor.
The real "holocaust" was when the Communist Jews murdered millions of
Christians. Communism was Jewish. Here is proof:
Article Winston Churchill wrote in 1920:
"This movement amongst the Jews (the Russian Revolution) is not new.
From the days of Spartacus Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down
to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kuhn (Hungary), Rosa Luxembourg (Germany)
and Emma Goldman (United States), this world wide conspiracy for the
overthrow of civilization and the reconstruction of society on the
basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible
equality, has been steadily growing. It played, as a modern writer,
Mrs. Nesta Webster, has so ably shown, a definitely recognizable part
in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of
every subversive movement during the Nineteenth Century; and now at
last this band of extraordinary personalities has gripped the Russian
people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the
undisputed masters of that enormous empire. There is no need to
exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the
actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution by these international
and for the most part atheistic Jews. Moreover, the principal
inspiration and driving power comes from Jewish leaders." (ibid)
Lev Trotzky wrote a book called "Stalin: An Appraisal of the Man and
His Influence", Harper Bros., New York and London, 1941, translated by
Charles Malamuth.
In this book he told who the principle members of the October Central
Committee were. This group was the leadership of the Bolshevik Party
during the October Revolution. This is what he wrote:
"In view of the Party's semi-legality the names of persons elected by
secret ballot were not announced at the Congress, with the exception
of the four who had received the largest number of votes. Lenin--133
out of a possible 134, Zinoviev--132, Kamenev--131, Trotzky--131."
Of these four top leaders of the Bolshevik Party the last three were
known Jews. Lenin was thought to be a gentile married to a Jewess. It
was later proven that he was one quarter Jewish, London Jewish
Chronicle April 21, 1995, Lenin: Life and Legacy.
David Francis, the American Ambassador to Russia at the time of the
Revolution, wrote:
"The Bolshevic leaders here, most of whom are Jews and 90 percent of
whom are returned exiles, care little for Russia or any other country
but are internationalists and they are trying to start a world-wide
revolution."
The Director of British Intelligence to the U.S. Secretary of State
wrote this:
"There is now definite evidence that Bolshevism is an international
movement controlled by Jews."
In 1945 the FBI arrested six individuals for stealing 1700 highly
confidential documents from State Department files. This was the
Amerasia case they were:
Philip Jaffe, a Russian Jew who came to the U.S. in 1905. He was at
one time the editor of the communist paper "Labor Defense" and the
ringleader of the group arrested.
Andrew Roth, a Jew.
Mark Gayn, a Jew, changed his name from Julius Ginsberg.
John Service, a gentile.
Emmanuel Larsen, nationality unknown
Kate Mitchel, nationality unknown.
In 1949 the Jewess Judith Coplin was caught passing classified
documents from Justice Department files to a Russian agent.
The highest ranking communist brought to trial in the U.S. was Gerhart
Eisler. He was a Jew. He was the secret boss of the Communist Party
in the U.S. and commuted regularly between the U.S. and Russia.
In 1950 there was the "Hollywood Ten" case. Ten leading film writers
of the Hollywood Film Colony were convicted for contempt of Congress
and sentenced to prison. Nine of the ten were Jews. Six of the ten
were communist party members and the other four were flagrantly
pro-communist.
One of the top new stories of 1949 was the trial of Eugene Dennis and
the Convicted Eleven. This group comprised the National Secretariat of
the American Communist Party. Six were Jews, two gentiles, three
nationality unknown.
Also in 1949 the German-born atomic scientist Klaus Fuchs was
convicted for passing atomic secrets to the Russians. Acting on
information obtained from Fuchs the FBI arrested nine other members of
the ring. All of them were convicted. Eight of the nine were Jews.
Here are some quotes from a very pro-Jewish book that was first
published in 1925. The book is "Stranger than Fiction" by Lewis
Browne.
"But save for such exceptions, the Jews who led or participated in the
heroic efforts to remold the world of the last century, were neither
Reform or Orthodox. Indeed, they were often not professing Jews at
all.
"For instance, there was Heinrich Heine and Ludwig Borne, both
unfaltering champions of freedom. And even more conspicuously, there
was Karl Marx, one of the great prophetic geniuses of modern times.
"Jewish historians rarely mention the name of this man, Karl Marx,
though in his life and spirit he was far truer to the mission of
Israel than most of those who were forever talking of it. He was born
in Germany in 1818, and belonged to an old rabbinic family. He was not
himself reared as a Jew, however, but while still a child was baptized
a Christian by his father. Yet the rebel soul of the Jew flamed in him
throughout his days, for he was always a 'troubler' in Europe."
"Then, of course, there are Ludwig Borne and Heinrich Heine, two men
who by their merciless wit and sarcasm became leaders among the
revolutionary writers. Karl Marx, Ferdinand Lassalle, Johann Jacoby,
Gabriel Riesser, Adolphe Cremieux, Signora Nathan- all these of Jewish
lineage played important roles in the struggle that went throughout
Europe in this period. Wherever the war for human liberty was being
waged, whether in France, Germany, Austria, Hungary, or Italy, there
the Jew was to be found. It was little wonder that the enemies of
social progress, the monarchists and the Churchmen, came to speak of
the whole liberal movement as nothing but a Jewish plot."
The book "Soviet Russia and the Jews" by Gregor Aronson and published
by the American Jewish League Against Communism, quotes Stalin in an
interview in 1931 with the Jewish Telegraph Agency. Stalin said:
"...Communists cannot be anything but outspoken enemies of
Anti-Semitism. We fight anti-Semites by the strongest methods in the
Soviet Union. Active anti-Semites are punished by death under the
law."
The following quotes are taken directly from documents available from
the
U.S. Archives:
State Department document 861.00/1757 sent May 2, 1918 by U.S. consul
general in Moscow, Summers: "Jews prominent in local Soviet
government, anti-Jewish feeling growing among population...."
State Department document 861.00/2205 was sent from Vladivostok on
July 5, 1918 by U.S. consul Caldwell: "Fifty percent of Soviet
government in each town consists of Jews of the worst type."
From the Headquarters of the American Expeditionary Forces, Siberia on
March 1, 1919, comes this telegram from Omsk by Chief of Staff, Capt.
Montgomery Shuyler: "It is probably unwise to say this loudly in the
United States but the Bolshevik movement is and has been since it's
beginning, guided and controlled by Russian Jews of the greasiest
type" type."
A second Schuyler telegram, dated June 9, 1919 from Vladivostok,
reports on the make-up of the presiding Soviet government: "...(T)here
were 384 'commissars' including 2 negroes, 13 Russians, 15 Chinamen,
22 Armenians, AND MORE THAN 300 JEWS. Of the latter number, 264 had
come to Russia from the United States since the downfall of the
Imperial Government.
The Netherlands' ambassador in Russia, Oudendyke, confirmed this:
"Unless Bolshevism is nipped in the bud immediately, it is bound to
spread in one form or another over Europe and the whole world as it is
organized and worked by Jews who have no nationality, and whose one
object is to destroy for their own ends the existing order of things."
"The Bolshevik revolution in Russia was the work of Jewish brains, of
Jewish dissatisfaction, of Jewish planning, whose goal is to create a
new order in the world. What was performed in so excellent a way in
Russia, thanks to Jewish brains, and because of Jewish dissatisfaction
and by Jewish planning, shall also, through the same Jewish mental an
physical forces, become a reality all over the world." (The American
Hebrew, September 10, 1920 "In the Bolshevik era, 52 percent of the
membership of the Soviet communist party was Jewish, though Jews
comprised only 1.8 percent of the total population." (Stuart Kahan,
The Wolf of the Kremlin, p. 81)
Interestingly, one of the first acts by the Bolsheviks was to make
so-called "anti-Semitism" a capital crime. This is confirmed by Stalin
himself:
"National and racial chauvinism is a vestige of the misanthropic
customs characteristic of the period of cannibalism. Anti-semitism, as
an extreme form of racial chauvinism, is the most dangerous vestige of
cannibalism...under USSR law active anti-Semites are liable to the
death penalty." (Stalin, Collected Works, vol. 13, p. 30).
Here is a quote from Mein Kampf:
"Making an effort to overcome my natural reluctance, I tried to read
articles of this nature published in the Marxist Press; but in doing
so my aversion increased all the more. And then I set about learning
something of the people who wrote and published this mischievous
stuff. From the publisher downwards, all of them were Jews. I
recalled to mind the names of the public leaders of Marxism, and then
I realized that most of them belonged to the Chosen Race- the Social
Democratic representatives in the Imperial Cabinet as well as the
secretaries if the Trades Unions and the street agitators. Everywhere
the same sinister picture presented itself. I shall never forget the
row of names- Austerlitz, David, Adler, Ellonbogen, and others. One
fact became quite evident to me. It was that this alien race held in
its hands the leadership of that Social Democratic Party with whose
minor representatives I had been disputing for months past."
Solzhenitsyn named in his book the six top administrators of the
Soviet death camps. All six of them were Jews.
Here is something the National Socialists wrote:
"The Soviet Union was in fact a paradise for one group: the Jews. Even
at times when for foreign policy reasons Jews were less evident in the
government, or when they ruled through straw men, the Jews were always
visible in the middle and lower levels of the administration."



http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
Godzilla Pimp
2006-08-29 19:11:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Topaz
And finally, although I could still go on for a while, I would like to
mention that on express orders from Hitler himself, it was strictly
forbidden to use corporal punishment in the army. He was of the
opinion that in was incompatible with the honor of a German to be
punished by such degrading means.
Too bad that consideration was not extended to German born Jews and other
"untermenschen"
Post by Topaz
That was the Germany I grew up in, and I am glad that I did.
My one regret about the conclusion of WW2 is that over 90 percent of the
German population surivived. I often find myself wishing that Germany had
persisted long enough to be A-bombed into the stone age. It would have
been fit and condign. The A-bomb was a product of "Jewish Physics" and
most of the people who developed the weapon were Jews. Shucks! Justice was
not done to the German People. We should have wiped you guys off the face
of the earth when we had the chance. In those days, the death of a German
in no wise decreased the well being of the human race. A world free of
Japs and Germans! What a thought!
After the war the Morganthau Plan was never implemented. I would have
loved to see the surviving Herrenvolk hitched to ploughs like draft
animals. What the U.S. did was to reward you bastards with the Marshall
Plan. Go figure.
Bob Kolker
Why do you Jews feel that you....

#1 Have the right to live in white countries at all

#2 Have the right to attempt to force Marxism upon those countries

#3 Your victims have no right to resist you

GP
Topaz
2006-08-30 02:05:45 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 06:11:23 -0500, Robert Kolker
Post by Robert Kolker
Too bad that consideration was not extended to German born Jews and
other "untermenschen"
ADOLF HITLER
SCHWERIN, GUSTLOFF'S FUNERAL
SPEECH OF FEBRUARY 12, 1936

. . . BEHIND every murder stood the same power which is responsible
for this murder; behind these harmless insignificant fellow-countrymen
who were instigated and incited to crime stands the hate-filled power
of our Jewish foe, a foe to whom we had done no harm, but who none the
less sought to subjugate our German people and make of it its slave -
the foe who is responsible for all the misfortune that fell upon us in
1918, for all the misfortune which plagued Germany in the years that
followed. Those members of the Party and honorable comrades of ours
all fell, and the same fate was planned for others: many hundreds
survived as cripples or severely wounded, blinded or lamed; more than
40,000 others were injured. And among them were so many loyal folk
whom we all knew and who were near and dear to us, of whom we were
sure that they could never do any harm to anyone, that they had never
done any harm to anyone, whose only crime was that they devoted
themselves to the cause of Germany.

In the ranks of those whose lives were thus sacrificed there stood
also Horst Wessel, the singer who gave to the Movement its song, never
dreaming that he would join those spirits who march and have marched
with us.

And now on foreign soil National Socialism has gained its first
conscious martyr - a man who did nothing save to enter the lists for
Germany which is not only his sacred right but his duty in this world:
a man who did nothing save remember his homeland and pledge himself to
her in loyalty. He, too, was murdered, just like so many others. Even
at the time when on January 30 three years ago we had come into power,
precisely the same things happened in Germany, at Frankfort on the
Oder, at Köpenick, and again at Brunswick. The procedure was always
the same: a few men come and call someone out of his house and then
stab or shoot him down.

That is no chance: it is the same guiding hand which organized these
crimes and purposes to do so again. Now for the first time one who is
responsible for these acts has appeared in his own person. For the
first time he employs no harmless German fellow-countryman. It is a
title to fame for Switzerland, as it is for our own Germans in
Switzerland, that no one let himself be hired to do this deed so that
for the first time the spiritual begetter of the act must himself
perform the act. So our comrade has fallen a victim to that power
which wages a fanatical warfare not only against our German people but
against every free, autonomous, and independent people. We understand
the challenge to battle and we take up the gage! My dear comrade! You
have not fallen in vain!
Post by Robert Kolker
My one regret about the conclusion of WW2 is that over 90 percent of the
German population surivived.
Eyewitness account by Mrs. Leonora Geier (nee Cavoa, born Oct 22,
1925, Sao Paulo,
Brazil) to Dr. Trutz Foelsche, Ph.D

Deutsche Nationalzeitung, No. 17-65, p. 7:

"On the morning of February, 16, (1945) a Russian detachment
occupied the RAD
(Reichsarbeitsdienst) camp Vilmsee near Neustettin. The Commissar told
me in good
German language that the camp was dissolved and that we, as a unit
with uniforms (RAD - German Labour Service, not military uniforms),
would be transported to a collection camp. Since I, as a Brazilian
citizen, belong to an allied nation, he asked me to take over
as a leader of the transport that went to Neustettin, into the yard of
the former iron factory. We were about 500 girls (Maidens of the
Reichsarbeitsdienst - German Labour Service).

He said I could come into the orderly room, which I accepted.
Immediately he directed
me to make no further contact with other women, because they were
members of an illegal army. On my response that this what not true, he
cut me off with the remark that I would be shot immediately, if I
would repeat in any form a similar statement.

"Suddenly I heard loud screams, and promptly five girls were brought
in by the two Red Armists. The Commissar ordered them to undress. When
they, in a sense of shame, refused to do so, he ordered me to undress
them and follow him with the girls. We walked through the yard to the
former factory kitchen, which was completely cleared out
except for some tables along the window wall. It was dreadfully cold
and the unfortunate girls trembled. In the huge tiled room several
Russians waited for us who were obviously making obscene remarks
because every word was followed by loud laughter.
The Commissar then directed me to watch how one makes sissies out of
'The Master Race'.
Now two Poles, clad in trousers only, entered the room. At their
sight the girls cried out.
Briskly, they seized the first of the two girls and bent her over with
her back over the edge of the table until her joints cracked. I almost
fainted when one of the men pulled his knife and cut off her right
breast in the presence of the other girls. I have never heard a
human being scream as desperately as this young woman. After this
'operation' both men stabbed her several times in the abdomen,
accompanied by the howling of the Russians.
The next girl cried for mercy, in vain, since she was exceptionally
pretty. I had the impression that the 'work' was carried out very
slowly. The other three girls were completely broken down, cried for
their mothers and begged for a speedy death, but also
fate them overtook.
The last of the girls was still half a child, with barely developed
breasts, one tore the
flesh literally from her ribs until the white bone appeared.
Again, five girls were brought in. This time, they had been selected
carefully. All were
developed and pretty. When they saw the bodies of their predecessors,
they began to cry and scream. Weak as they were, they tried to defend
themselves but to no avail; the Poles became more cruel every time.
One of the girls, they cut open her womb and trunk over the whole
length; poured a can of machine oil into the mutilated body and tried
to set fire
to it. Another was shot in the genitals by a Russia, before they cut
off her breasts.
A great howling began when someone brought a saw from a toolbox.
Now, using the saw, they set to work to the breasts of the girls to
pieces, which in a short period of time
led to the floor being covered with blood. A blood rage seized the
Russians. Continuously
one of them brought more and more girls.
Like a red fog, I saw the gruesome happenings again and again and I
perceived the inhuman screaming at the torture of their breasts and
the load groaning at the mutilation of their private parts. When my
legs failed me I was forced into a chair. The Commissar persistently
watched me to make sure I was looking toward the torture scenes. In
fact, when I had to vomit, they even paused with their tortures. One
girl had not undressed completely, she may have been somewhat older
than the rest of the girls who were about 17-years old. One of the
torturers soaked her bra with oil and ignited it and, while she cried
out, another drove a thin iron rod into her vagina until it emerged at
her naval.
In the yard they liquidated entire groups of girls, after they had
selected the prettiest ones for the torture room. The air was filled
with the death cries of many hundreds of girls. But in view of what
happened here, the slaughter outside could be considered more humane.
It was a dreadful fact that not one of the girls brought into the
torture room lost here consciousness.
In their horror all were equal in their expressions. It was always
the same; the begging for mercy, the high-pitched scream when their
breasts were cut and their genitals mutilated. Several times the
slaughter was interrupted to sweep out the blood and to clear away the
corpses.
That evening I sank into a severe nerve fever. From then on I lack
any recollection
until the moment I awoke in a military hospital. German troops had
recaptured Neustettin temporarily, and had liberated us. As I learned
later, approximately 2,000 girls were murdered during the first three
days of the first round of Russian occupation."


http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
Robert Kolker
2006-08-29 11:19:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Topaz
Then, after the war was over, we had our first experience with a real
democracy. The French introduced it and gave us some shining examples;
one was that the lived off the country and stole everything which
wasn't nailed down…
What goes around comes around. Arthur "Bomber" Harris the lord of bomber
command in England noted that the Germans have sowed the wind and in due
course they will reap the whirlwind. So true. So true. The judgements of
the Lord are utterly true and righteous. As ye sow, so shall ye reap.
The only reason why you momsers got a break was that the Russians were
worse than you.
Post by Topaz
Germany was also the country to introduce, in 1933, the first-ever
comprehensive animal protection law. Farm animals had to be kept in
strictly natural environments and no animal factories were allowed. Of
course, no testing of products on animals was permitted, and no kosher
slaughter.
Of course. We could not have Jewish customs. Kosher slaughter is humane,
by the way. You will notice that you Kraut bastards did not have any
kindness toward Jews and other "untermenschen". You treated your cats
and dogs better than your Jews and Gypsies. That will not be forgotten
any time soon although the latter generations have been forgiven for the
sins of their parents and grandparents.
Post by Topaz
That was the Germany I grew up in, and I am glad that I did.
The Eight Airforce and Bomber Command changed that a bit, yes? The
schoene Deutschland wasn't so schoene after the bombers did their thing.
One of my regrets is that there were not two dozen Dresdens. There is
only one way to deal with an evil enemy. That is to bring a torch to his
house and fields and show him what Hell looks like. We did it with you
Kraut momsers and we did it to the Japs. They got exactly what they
deserved.

Bob Kolker
Topaz
2006-08-30 02:10:01 UTC
Permalink
Here is part of Hitler's speech at Rheinmetall-Borsig Works, Berlin,
on December 10, 1940:

"In this Anglo-French world there exists, as it were, democracy, which
means the rule of the people by the people. Now the people must
possess some means of giving expression to their thoughts or their
wishes. Examining this problem more closely, we see that the people
themselves have originally no convictions of their own. Their
convictions are formed, of course, just as everywhere else. The
decisive question is who enlightens the people, who educates them? In
those countries, it is actually capital that rules; that is, nothing
more than a clique of a few hundred men who possess untold wealth and,
as a consequence of the peculiar structure of their national life, are
more or less independent and free. They say: 'Here we have liberty.'
By this they mean, above all, an uncontrolled economy, and by an
uncontrolled economy, the freedom not only to acquire capital but to
make absolutely free use of it. That means freedom from national
control or control by the people both in the acquisition of capital
and in its employment. This is really what they mean when they speak
of liberty. These capitalists create their own press and then speak of
the 'freedom of the press.'
In reality, every one of the newspapers has a master, and in every
case this master is the capitalist, the owner. This master, not the
editor, is the one who directs the policy of the paper. If the editor
tries to write other than what suits the master, he is ousted the next
day. This press, which is the absolutely submissive and characterless
slave of the owners, molds public opinion. Public opinion thus
mobilized by them is, in its turn, split up into political parties.
The difference between these parties is as small as it formerly was in
Germany. You know them, of course - the old parties. They were always
one and the same. In Britain matters are usually so arranged that
families are divided up, one member being a conservative, another a
liberal, and a third belonging to the labor party. Actually, all three
sit together as members of the family, decide upon their common
attitude and determine it. A further point is that the 'elected
people' actually form a community which operates and controls all
these organizations. For this reason, the opposition in England is
really always the same, for on all essential matters in which the
opposition has to make itself felt, the parties are always in
agreement. They have one and the same conviction and through the
medium of the press mold public opinion along corresponding lines. One
might well believe that in these countries of liberty and riches, the
people must possess an unlimited degree of prosperity. But no! On the
contrary, it is precisely in these countries that the distress of the
masses is greater than anywhere else. Such is the case in 'rich
Britain.'
She controls sixteen million square miles. In India, for example, a
hundred million colonial workers with a wretched standard of living
must labor for her. One might think, perhaps, that at least in England
itself every person must have his share of these riches. By no means!
In that country class distinction is the crassest imaginable. There is
poverty - incredible poverty - on the one side, and equally incredible
wealth on the other. They have not solved a single problem. The
workmen of that country which possesses more than one-sixth of the
globe and of the world's natural resources dwell in misery, and the
masses of the people are poorly clad.. In a country which ought to
have more than enough bread and every sort of fruit, we find millions
of the lower classes who have not even enough to fill their stomachs,
and go about hungry. A nation which could provide work for the whole
world must acknowledge the fact that it cannot even abolish
unemployment at home. For decades this rich Britain has had two and a
half million unemployed; rich America, ten to thirteen millions, year
after year; France, six, seven, and eight hundred thousand. Well, my
fellow-countrymen - what then are we to say about ourselves?
It is self-evident that where this democracy rules, the people as such
are not taken into consideration at all. The only thing that matters
is the existence of a few hundred gigantic capitalists who own all the
factories and their stock and, through them, control the people. The
masses of the people do not interest them in the least. They are
interested in them just as were our bourgeois parties in former times
- only when elections are being held, when they need votes. Otherwise,
the life of the masses is a matter of complete indifference to them.
To this must be added the difference in education. Is it not ludicrous
to hear a member of the British Labor Party - who, of course, as a
member of the Opposition is officially paid by the government - say:
'When the war is over, we will do something in social respects'?
It is the members of Parliament who are the directors of the business
concerns - just as used to be the case with us. But we have abolished
all that. A member of the Reichstag cannot belong to a Board of
Directors, except as a purely honorary member. He is prohibited from
accepting any emolument, financial or otherwise. This is not the case
in other countries.
They reply: 'That is why our form of government is sacred to us.' I
can well believe it, for that form of government certainly pays very
well.. But whether it is sacred to the mass of the people as well is
another matter.
The people as a whole definitely suffer. I do not consider it possible
in the long run for one man to work and toil for a whole year in
return for ridiculous wages, while another jumps into an express train
once a year and pockets enormous sums. Such conditions are a disgrace.
On the other hand, we National Socialists equally oppose the theory
that all men are equals. Today, when a man of genius makes some
astounding invention and enormously benefits his country by his
brains, we pay him his due, for he has really accomplished something
and been of use to his country. However, we hope to make it impossible
for idle drones to inhabit this country.
I could continue to cite examples indefinitely. The fact remains that
two worlds are face to face with one another. Our opponents are quite
right when they say: 'Nothing can reconcile us to the National
Socialist world.' How could a narrow-minded capitalist ever agree to
my principles? It would be easier for the Devil to go to church and
cross himself with holy water than for these people to comprehend the
ideas which are accepted facts to us today. But we have solved our
problems.
To take another instance where we are condemned: They claim to be
fighting for the maintenance of the gold standard as the currency
basis. That I can well believe, for the gold is in their hands. We,
too, once had gold, but it was stolen and extorted from us. When I
came to power, it was not malice which made me abandon the gold
standard. Germany simply had no gold left. Consequently, quitting the
gold standard presented no difficulties, for it is always easy to part
with what one does not have. We had no gold. We had no foreign
exchange. They had all been stolen and extorted from us during the
previous fifteen years. But, my fellow countrymen, I did not regret
it, for we have constructed our economic system on a wholly different
basis. In our eyes, gold is not of value in itself. It is only an
agent by which nations can be suppressed and dominated.
When I took over the government, I had only one hope on which to
build, namely, the efficiency and ability of the German nation and the
German workingman; the intelligence of our inventors, engineers,
technicians, chemists, and so forth. I built on the strength which
animates our economic system. One simple question faced me: Are we to
perish because we have no gold; am I to believe in a phantom which
spells our destruction? I championed the opposite opinion: Even though
we have no gold, we have capacity for work.
The German capacity for work is our gold and our capital, and with
this gold I can compete successfully with any power in the world. We
want to live in houses which have to be built. Hence, the workers must
build them, and the raw materials required must be procured by work.
My whole economic system has been built up on the conception of work.
We have solved our problems while, amazingly enough, the capitalist
countries and their currencies have suffered bankruptcy.
Sterling can find no market today. Throw it at any one and he will
step aside to avoid being hit. But our Reichsmark, which is backed by
no gold, has remained stable. Why? It has no gold cover; it is backed
by you and by your work. You have helped me to keep the mark stable.
German currency, with no gold coverage, is worth more today than gold
itself. It signifies unceasing production. This we owe to the German
farmer, who has worked from daybreak till nightfall. This we owe to
the German worker, who has given us his whole strength. The whole
problem has been solved in one instant, as if by magic.
My dear friends, if I had stated publicly eight or nine years ago: 'In
seven or eight years the problem of how to provide work for the
unemployed will be solved, and the problem then will be where to find
workers,' I should have harmed my cause. Every one would have
declared: 'The man is mad. It is useless to talk to him, much less to
support him. Nobody should vote for him. He is a fantastic creature.'
Today, however, all this has come true. Today, the only question for
us is where to find workers. That, my fellow countrymen, is the
blessing which work brings.
Work alone can create new work; money cannot create work. Work alone
can create values, values with which to reward those who work. The
work of one man makes it possible for another to live and continue to
work. And when we have mobilized the working capacity of our people to
its utmost, each individual worker will receive more and more of the
world's goods.
We have incorporated seven million unemployed into our economic
system; we have transformed another six millions from part-time into
full-time workers; we are even working overtime. And all this is paid
for in cash in Reichsmarks which maintained their value in peacetime.
In wartime we had to ration its purchasing capacity, not in order to
devalue it, but simply to earmark a portion of our industry for war
production to guide us to victory in the struggle for the future of
Germany...
One thing is certain, my fellow-countrymen: All in all, we have today
a state with a different economic and political orientation from that
of the Western democracies.
Well, it must now be made possible for the British worker to travel.
It is remarkable that they should at last hit upon the idea that
traveling should be something not for millionaires alone, but for the
people too. In this country, the problem was solved some time ago. In
the other countries - as is shown by their whole economic structure -
the selfishness of a relatively small stratum rules under the mask of
democracy. This stratum is neither checked nor controlled by anyone.
It is therefore understandable if an Englishman says: 'We do not want
our world to be subject to any sort of collapse.' Quite so. The
English know full well that their Empire is not menaced by us. But
they say quite truthfully: 'If the ideas that are popular in Germany
are not completely eliminated, they might become popular among our own
people, and that is the danger. We do not want this.' It would do no
harm if they did become popular there, but these people are just as
narrow-minded as many once were in Germany. In this respect they
prefer to remain bound to their conservative methods. They do not wish
to depart from them, and do not conceal the fact.
They say, 'The German methods do not suit us at all.'
And what are these methods? You know, my comrades, that I have
destroyed nothing in Germany. I have always proceeded very carefully,
because I believe - as I have already said - that we cannot afford to
wreck anything. I am proud that the Revolution of 1933 was brought to
pass without breaking a single windowpane. Nevertheless, we have
wrought enormous changes.
I wish to put before you a few basic facts: The first is that in the
capitalistic democratic world the most important principle of economy
is that the people exist for trade and industry, and that these in
turn exist for capital. We have reversed this principle by making
capital exist for trade and industry, and trade and industry exist for
the people. In other words, the people come first. Everything else is
but a means to this end. When an economic system is not capable of
feeding and clothing a people, then it is bad, regardless of whether a
few hundred people say: 'As far as I am concerned it is good,
excellent; my dividends are splendid.'
However, the dividends do not interest me at all. Here we have drawn
the line. They may then retort: 'Well, look here, that is just what we
mean. You jeopardize liberty.'
Yes, certainly, we jeopardize the liberty to profiteer at the expense
of the community, and, if necessary, we even abolish it. British
capitalists, to mention only one instance, can pocket dividends of 76,
80, 95, 140, and even 160 per cent from their armament industry.
Naturally they say: 'If the German methods grow apace and should prove
victorious, this sort of thing will stop.'
They are perfectly right. I should never tolerate such a state of
affairs. In my eyes, a 6 per cent dividend is sufficient. Even from
this 6 per cent we deduct one-half and, as for the rest, we must have
definite proof that it is invested in the interest of the country as a
whole. In other words, no individual has the right to dispose
arbitrarily of money which ought to be invested for the good of the
country. If he disposes of it sensibly, well and good; if not, the
National Socialist state will intervene.
To take another instance, besides dividends there are the so-called
directors' fees. You probably have no idea how appallingly active a
board of directors is. Once a year its members have to make a journey.
They have to go to the station, get into a first-class compartment and
travel to some place or other. They arrive at an appointed office at
about 10 or 11 A.M. There they must listen to a report. When the
report has been read, they must listen to a few comments on it. They
may be kept in their seats until 1 P.M. or even 2. Shortly after 2
o'clock they rise from their chairs and set out on their homeward
journey, again, of course, traveling first class. It is hardly
surprising that they claim 3,000, 4,000, or even 5,000 as compensation
for this: Our directors formerly did the same - for what a lot of time
it costs them! Such effort had to be made worth while! Of course, we
have got rid of all this nonsense, which was merely veiled
profiteering and even bribery.
In Germany, the people, without any doubt, decide their existence.
They determine the principles of their government. In fact it has been
possible in this country to incorporate many of the broad masses into
the National Socialist party, that gigantic organization embracing
millions and having millions of officials drawn from the people
themselves. This principle is extended to the highest ranks.
For the first time in German history, we have a state which has
absolutely abolished all social prejudices in regard to political
appointments as well as in private life. I myself am the best proof of
this. Just imagine: I am not even a lawyer, and yet I am your Leader!
It is not only in ordinary life that we have succeeded in appointing
the best among the people for every position. We have
Reichsstatthalters who were formerly agricultural laborers or
locksmiths. Yes, we have even succeeded in breaking down prejudice in
a place where it was most deep-seated -in the fighting forces.
Thousands of officers are being promoted from the ranks today. We have
done away with prejudice. We have generals who were ordinary soldiers
and noncommissioned officers twenty-two and twenty-three years ago. In
this instance, too, we have overcome all social obstacles. Thus, we
are building up our life for the future.
As you know we have countless schools, national political educational
establishments, Adolf Hitler schools, and so on. To these schools we
send gifted children of the broad masses, children of working men,
farmers' sons whose parents could never have afforded a higher
education for their children. We take them in gradually. They are
educated here, sent to the Ordensburgen, to the Party, later to take
their place in the State where they will some day fill the highest
posts....
Opposed to this there stands a completely different world. In the
world the highest ideal is the struggle for wealth, for capital, for
family possessions, for personal egoism; everything else is merely a
means to such ends. Two worlds confront each other today. We know
perfectly well that if we are defeated in this war it would not only
be the end of our National Socialist work of reconstruction, but the
end of the German people as a whole. For without its powers of
coordination, the German people would starve. Today the masses
dependent on us number 120 or 130 millions, of which 85 millions alone
are our own people. We remain ever aware of this fact.
On the other hand, that other world says: 'If we lose, our world-wide
capitalistic system will collapse. For it is we who save hoarded gold.
It is lying in our cellars and will lose its value. If the idea that
work is the decisive factor spreads abroad, what will happen to us? We
shall have bought our gold in vain. Our whole claim to world dominion
can then no longer be maintained. The people will do away with their
dynasties of high finance. They will present their social claims, and
the whole world system will be overthrown.'
I can well understand that they declare: 'Let us prevent this at all
costs; it must be prevented.' They can see exactly how our nation has
been reconstructed. You see it clearly. For instance, there we see a
state ruled by a numerically small upper class. They send their sons
to their own schools, to Eton. We have Adolf Hitler schools or
national political educational establishments. On the one hand, the
sons of plutocrats, financial magnates; on the other, the children of
the people. Etonians and Harrovians exclusively in leading positions
over there; in this country, men of the people in charge of the State.
These are the two worlds. I grant that one of the two must succumb.
Yes, one or the other. But if we were to succumb, the German people
would succumb with us. If the other were to succumb, I am convinced
that the nations will become free for the first time. We are not
fighting individual Englishmen or Frenchmen. We have nothing against
them. For years I proclaimed this as the aim of my foreign policy. We
demanded nothing of them, nothing at all. When they started the war
they could not say: 'We are doing so because the Germans asked this or
that of us.' They said, on the contrary: 'We are declaring war on you
because the German system of Government does not suit us; because we
fear it might spread to our own people.' For that reason they are
carrying on this war. They wanted to blast the German nation back to
the time of Versailles, to the indescribable misery of those days. But
they have made a great mistake.
If in this war everything points to the fact that gold is fighting
against work, capitalism against peoples, and reaction against the
progress of humanity, then work, the peoples, and progress will be
victorious. Even the support of the Jewish race will not avail the
others.
I have seen all this coming for years. What did I ask of the other
world? Nothing but the right for Germans to reunite and the
restoration of all that had been taken from them - nothing which would
have meant a loss to the other nations. How often have I stretched out
my hand to them? Ever since I came into power. I had not the slightest
wish to rearm.
For what do armaments mean? They absorb so much labor. It was I who
regarded work as being of decisive importance, who wished to employ
the working capacity of Germany for other plans. I think the news is
already out that, after all, I have some fairly important plans in my
mind, vast and splendid plans for my people. It is my ambition to make
the German people rich and to make the German homeland beautiful. I
want the standard of living of the individual raised. I want us to
have the most beautiful and the finest civilization. I should like the
theater - in fact, the whole of German civilization - to benefit all
the people and not to exist only for the upper ten thousand, as is the
case in England.
The plans which we had in mind were tremendous, and I needed workers
in order to realize them. Armament only deprives me of workers. I made
proposals to limit armaments. I was ridiculed. The only answer I
received was 'No.' I proposed the limitation of certain types of
armament. That was refused. I proposed that airplanes should be
altogether eliminated from warfare. That also was refused. I suggested
that bombers should be limited. That was refused. They said: 'That is
just how we wish to force our regime upon you.' ...


http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
Godzilla Pimp
2006-08-30 09:29:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Kolker
Post by Topaz
Then, after the war was over, we had our first experience with a real
democracy. The French introduced it and gave us some shining examples;
one was that the lived off the country and stole everything which
wasn't nailed down…
What goes around comes around. Arthur "Bomber" Harris the lord of bomber
command in England noted that the Germans have sowed the wind and in due
course they will reap the whirlwind. So true. So true. The judgements of
the Lord are utterly true and righteous. As ye sow, so shall ye reap. The
only reason why you momsers got a break was that the Russians were worse
than you.
Post by Topaz
Germany was also the country to introduce, in 1933, the first-ever
comprehensive animal protection law. Farm animals had to be kept in
strictly natural environments and no animal factories were allowed. Of
course, no testing of products on animals was permitted, and no kosher
slaughter.
Of course. We could not have Jewish customs. Kosher slaughter is humane,
by the way. You will notice that you Kraut bastards did not have any
kindness toward Jews and other "untermenschen". You treated your cats and
dogs better than your Jews and Gypsies. That will not be forgotten any
time soon although the latter generations have been forgiven for the sins
of their parents and grandparents.
Post by Topaz
That was the Germany I grew up in, and I am glad that I did.
The Eight Airforce and Bomber Command changed that a bit, yes? The schoene
Deutschland wasn't so schoene after the bombers did their thing. One of my
regrets is that there were not two dozen Dresdens. There is only one way
to deal with an evil enemy. That is to bring a torch to his house and
fields and show him what Hell looks like. We did it with you Kraut momsers
and we did it to the Japs. They got exactly what they deserved.
Bob Kolker
"I did not become prime minister to preside over the dissolution of the
British Empire"

-Winston Asshole Churchill, fat bastard and hypocrite
Robert Kolker
2006-08-30 12:52:09 UTC
Permalink
Godzilla Pimp wrote:>
Post by Godzilla Pimp
"I did not become prime minister to preside over the dissolution of the
British Empire"
-Winston Asshole Churchill, fat bastard and hypocrite
Who saved Britain and helped save Western Civilization. That fat,
imperialist drunkard was Britain's savior. Think of what would have
happened if Neville Chamberlain and Lord Halifax had been in power.

Manny Feld
Topaz
2006-08-30 14:17:20 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 07:52:09 -0500, Robert Kolker
Post by Robert Kolker
Who saved Britain and helped save Western Civilization. That fat,
imperialist drunkard was Britain's savior. Think of what would have
happened if Neville Chamberlain and Lord Halifax had been in power.
England's Guilt
by Joseph Goebbels

It is a major error to assume that England's plutocrats slipped into
the war against their will or even against their intentions. The
opposite is true. The English warmongers wanted the war and used all
the resources at their disposal over the years to bring it about. They
surely were not surprised by the war. English plutocracy had no goal
other than to unleash war against Germany at the right moment, and
this since Germany first began to seek once again to be a world power.
Poland really had little to do with the outbreak of war between the
Reich and England. It was only a means to an end. England did not
support the Polish government out of principle or for humanitarian
reasons. That is clear from the fact that England gave Poland no help
of any kind whatsoever when the war began. Nor did England take any
measures against Russia. The opposite, in fact. The London warring
clique to this day has tried to bring Russia into the campaign of
aggression against Germany.
The encirclement of Germany long before the outbreak of the war was
traditional English policy. From the beginning, England has always
directed its main military might against Germany. It never could
tolerate a strong Reich on the Continent. It justified its policy by
claiming that it wanted to maintain a balance of forces in Europe.
Today there is still another reason. The English warmongers conceal
it. It is crassly egotistic. The English prime minister announced the
day the war began that England's goal was to destroy Hitlerism.
However, he defined Hitlerism in a way other than how the English
plutocracy actually sees it. The English warmongers claim that
National Socialism wants to conquer the world. No nation is secure
against German aggression. An end must be made of the German hunger
for power. The limit came in the conflict with Poland. In reality,
however, there is another reason for England's war with Germany. The
English warmongers cannot seriously claim that Germany wants to
conquer the world, particularly in view of the fact that England
controls nearly two thirds of the world. And Germany since 1933 has
never threatened English interests.
So when Chamberlain says that England wants to destroy Hitlerism in
this war, he is in one sense incorrect. But in another sense, he is
speaking the truth. England does want to destroy Hitlerism. It sees
Hitlerism as the present internal state of the Reich, which is a thorn
in the eye of English plutocracy.
England is a capitalist democracy. Germany is a socialist people's
state. And it is not the case that we think England is the richest
land on earth. There are lords and City men in England who are in fact
the richest men on earth. The broad masses, however, see little of
this wealth. We see in England an army of millions of impoverished,
socially enslaved and oppressed people. Child labor is still a matter
of course there. They have only heard about social welfare programs.
Parliament occasionally discusses social legislation. Nowhere else is
there such terrible and horrifying inequality as in the English slums.
Those with good breeding take no notice of it. Should anyone speak of
it in public, the press, which serves plutocratic democracy, quickly
brands him the worst kind of rascal. They do not hesitate from making
major changes in the Constitution if they are necessary to preserve
capitalist democracy.
Capitalism democracy suffers from every possible modern social
ailment. The Lords and City people can remain the richest people one
earth only because they constantly maintain their wealth by exploiting
their colonies and preserving unbelievable poverty in their own
country.
Germany, on the other hand, has based its domestic policies on new and
modern social principles. That is why it is a danger to English
plutocracy. It is also why English capitalists want to destroy
Hitlerism. They see Hitlerism as all the generous social reforms that
have occurred in Germany since 1933. The English plutocrats rightly
fear that good things are contagious, that they could endanger English
capitalism.
That is why England declared war on Germany. Since it was accustomed
to letting others fight its wars, it looked to the European continent
to find those ready to fight for England's interests. France was ready
to take on this degrading duty, since the same kind of people ruled
France. They too were ready for war out of egotistic reasons. Western
European democracy is really only a Western European plutocracy that
rules the world. It declared war on German socialism because it
endangered their capitalist interests.
A similar drama began in 1914. England had more luck during those four
and a half years than it is having today. Europe's nations had no
chance to see what was happening. The nations of Europe today have no
desire to play the same role they played during the World War. England
and France stand alone. Still, England is trying once again to wage
war without making any personal sacrifice. The goal is to blockade
Germany, to gradually bring it to submit by starvation. That is
longstanding English policy. They used it successfully in the
Napoleonic wars, and also during the World War. It would work now as
well, if the German people had not been educated by National
Socialism. National Socialism is immune to English temptations.
English propaganda lies no longer work in Germany. They have gradually
lost their effectiveness in the rest of the world as well, since
German propaganda today reaches far beyond its borders. This time,
English plutocracy will not succeed in driving a wedge between the
German people and their leadership, though that is their goal.
The German nation today is defending not only its honor and
independence, but also the great social accomplishments it has made
through hard and untiring work since 1933. It is a people's state
built on the foundation of justice and economic good sense. In the
past, England always had the advantage of facing a fragmented Germany.
It is only natural that English plutocracy today seeks to split the
German people and make it ripe for new collapse.
English lying propaganda can no longer name things by their proper
names. It therefore claims that it is not fighting the German people,
only Hitlerism. But we know this old song. In South Africa, England
was not fighting the Boers, only Krugerism. In the World War, England
wanted to destroy Kaiserism, not the German people. But that did not
stop English plutocracy from brutally and relentlessly suppressing the
Boers after that war or the Germans after our defeat.
A child once burned is twice shy. The German people were once victims
of lying English war propaganda. Now it understands the situation. It
has long understood the background of this war. It knows that behind
all English plutocratic capitalism's fine words, its aim is to destroy
Germany's social achievements. We are defending the socialism we have
build in Germany since 1933 with every military, economic and
spiritual means at our disposal. The bald English lies have no impact
on the German people.
English plutocracy is finally being forced to defend itself. In the
past, it always found other nations to fight for it. This time, the
English people must themselves risk their necks for the lords and City
men. They will meet a unified German people of workers, farmers and
soldiers who are prepared to defend their nation with every means at
their disposal.
We did not want war. England inflicted it on us. English plutocracy
forced it on us. England is responsible for the war, and it will have
to pay for it.
The whole world is waking up today. It can no longer be ruled by the
capitalist methods of the 19th Century. The peoples have matured. They
will one day deal a terrible blow to the capitalist plutocrats who are
the cause of their misery.
It is no accident that National Socialism has the historical task of
carrying out this reckoning. Plutocracy is collapsing intellectually,
spiritually, and in the not too distant future, militarily. We are
acting consistently with Nietzsche's words: "Give a shove to what is
falling."


http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
Robert Kolker
2006-08-30 15:54:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Topaz
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 07:52:09 -0500, Robert Kolker
Post by Robert Kolker
Who saved Britain and helped save Western Civilization. That fat,
imperialist drunkard was Britain's savior. Think of what would have
happened if Neville Chamberlain and Lord Halifax had been in power.
England's Guilt
by Joseph Goebbels
Cripple, coward and suicide.
Post by Topaz
English people must themselves risk their necks for the lords and City
men. They will meet a unified German people of workers, farmers and
soldiers who are prepared to defend their nation with every means at
their disposal.
Who kicked the shit out of whom? The English Plotocracy along with the
United States and the Soviety Union ruined Germany, and rightly so. The
faces of the Herrenvolk were ground into the mud and rightly so.

The only reason why Germany survived is that the U.S gave it handouts in
order to be an ally against the Soviet Union. Germany was reduced to
mooching.

Bob Kolker
Topaz
2006-09-01 00:49:45 UTC
Permalink
The Germans believed in death before dishonor. They knew the allies
were subhuman monsters:

Eyewitness account by Mrs. Leonora Geier (nee Cavoa, born Oct 22,
1925, Sao Paulo,
Brazil) to Dr. Trutz Foelsche, Ph.D

Deutsche Nationalzeitung, No. 17-65, p. 7:

"On the morning of February, 16, (1945) a Russian detachment
occupied the RAD
(Reichsarbeitsdienst) camp Vilmsee near Neustettin. The Commissar told
me in good
German language that the camp was dissolved and that we, as a unit
with uniforms (RAD - German Labour Service, not military uniforms),
would be transported to a collection camp. Since I, as a Brazilian
citizen, belong to an allied nation, he asked me to take over
as a leader of the transport that went to Neustettin, into the yard of
the former iron factory. We were about 500 girls (Maidens of the
Reichsarbeitsdienst - German Labour Service).

He said I could come into the orderly room, which I accepted.
Immediately he directed
me to make no further contact with other women, because they were
members of an illegal army. On my response that this what not true, he
cut me off with the remark that I would be shot immediately, if I
would repeat in any form a similar statement.

"Suddenly I heard loud screams, and promptly five girls were brought
in by the two Red Armists. The Commissar ordered them to undress. When
they, in a sense of shame, refused to do so, he ordered me to undress
them and follow him with the girls. We walked through the yard to the
former factory kitchen, which was completely cleared out
except for some tables along the window wall. It was dreadfully cold
and the unfortunate girls trembled. In the huge tiled room several
Russians waited for us who were obviously making obscene remarks
because every word was followed by loud laughter.
The Commissar then directed me to watch how one makes sissies out of
'The Master Race'.
Now two Poles, clad in trousers only, entered the room. At their
sight the girls cried out.
Briskly, they seized the first of the two girls and bent her over with
her back over the edge of the table until her joints cracked. I almost
fainted when one of the men pulled his knife and cut off her right
breast in the presence of the other girls. I have never heard a
human being scream as desperately as this young woman. After this
'operation' both men stabbed her several times in the abdomen,
accompanied by the howling of the Russians.
The next girl cried for mercy, in vain, since she was exceptionally
pretty. I had the impression that the 'work' was carried out very
slowly. The other three girls were completely broken down, cried for
their mothers and begged for a speedy death, but also
fate them overtook.
The last of the girls was still half a child, with barely developed
breasts, one tore the
flesh literally from her ribs until the white bone appeared.
Again, five girls were brought in. This time, they had been selected
carefully. All were
developed and pretty. When they saw the bodies of their predecessors,
they began to cry and scream. Weak as they were, they tried to defend
themselves but to no avail; the Poles became more cruel every time.
One of the girls, they cut open her womb and trunk over the whole
length; poured a can of machine oil into the mutilated body and tried
to set fire
to it. Another was shot in the genitals by a Russia, before they cut
off her breasts.
A great howling began when someone brought a saw from a toolbox.
Now, using the saw, they set to work to the breasts of the girls to
pieces, which in a short period of time
led to the floor being covered with blood. A blood rage seized the
Russians. Continuously
one of them brought more and more girls.
Like a red fog, I saw the gruesome happenings again and again and I
perceived the inhuman screaming at the torture of their breasts and
the load groaning at the mutilation of their private parts. When my
legs failed me I was forced into a chair. The Commissar persistently
watched me to make sure I was looking toward the torture scenes. In
fact, when I had to vomit, they even paused with their tortures. One
girl had not undressed completely, she may have been somewhat older
than the rest of the girls who were about 17-years old. One of the
torturers soaked her bra with oil and ignited it and, while she cried
out, another drove a thin iron rod into her vagina until it emerged at
her naval.
In the yard they liquidated entire groups of girls, after they had
selected the prettiest ones for the torture room. The air was filled
with the death cries of many hundreds of girls. But in view of what
happened here, the slaughter outside could be considered more humane.
It was a dreadful fact that not one of the girls brought into the
torture room lost here consciousness.
In their horror all were equal in their expressions. It was always
the same; the begging for mercy, the high-pitched scream when their
breasts were cut and their genitals mutilated. Several times the
slaughter was interrupted to sweep out the blood and to clear away the
corpses.
That evening I sank into a severe nerve fever. From then on I lack
any recollection
until the moment I awoke in a military hospital. German troops had
recaptured Neustettin temporarily, and had liberated us. As I learned
later, approximately 2,000 girls were murdered during the first three
days of the first round of Russian occupation."


http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
Godzilla Pimp
2006-08-30 18:47:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Kolker
Godzilla Pimp wrote:>
Post by Godzilla Pimp
"I did not become prime minister to preside over the dissolution of the
British Empire"
-Winston Asshole Churchill, fat bastard and hypocrite
Who saved Britain and helped save Western Civilization. That fat,
imperialist drunkard was Britain's savior. Think of what would have
happened if Neville Chamberlain and Lord Halifax had been in power.
Manny Feld
I'm still waiting for someone to explain why England had the right to
conquer Ireland, Cornwall and Wales (those people are not English), let
alone India and 1/4th of the rest of the planet.

Meanwhile, the whole world had to go up in flames to prevent the Germans
from annexing East Prussia.

Now Britain is going to be majority Muslim by mid century. So much for
"Western Civilization" (which is no longer a required subject in US
colleges). Hitler is looking down from Valhalla and laughing.

GP
Robert Kolker
2006-08-30 20:43:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Godzilla Pimp
I'm still waiting for someone to explain why England had the right to
conquer Ireland, Cornwall and Wales (those people are not English), let
alone India and 1/4th of the rest of the planet.
The same "right" as the Normans had when they conquered England from the
Saxon dogs.

Manny Feld
Godzilla Pimp
2006-08-30 21:13:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Kolker
Post by Godzilla Pimp
I'm still waiting for someone to explain why England had the right to
conquer Ireland, Cornwall and Wales (those people are not English), let
alone India and 1/4th of the rest of the planet.
The same "right" as the Normans had when they conquered England from the
Saxon dogs.
Manny Feld
So why didn't the Germans have the right to annex other Germans? Did anyone
think the "Polish Corridor" would last?

Speaking of that, the US should get busy and conquer Canada (should tale
about a week) and then build an oil pipeline from Alaska to the NE USA where
the fucking thing was originally proposed to go.

GP
Michael Scheltgen
2006-08-30 23:58:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Godzilla Pimp
Post by Robert Kolker
Post by Godzilla Pimp
I'm still waiting for someone to explain why England had the right to
conquer Ireland, Cornwall and Wales (those people are not English), let
alone India and 1/4th of the rest of the planet.
The same "right" as the Normans had when they conquered England from the
Saxon dogs.
Manny Feld
So why didn't the Germans have the right to annex other Germans? Did anyone
think the "Polish Corridor" would last?
Speaking of that, the US should get busy and conquer Canada (should tale
about a week) and then build an oil pipeline from Alaska to the NE USA where
the fucking thing was originally proposed to go.
LOL! A week? It would take Americans a week to find Canada on
a map. 150 weeks and counting and the USA is still trying to
conquer Iraq.
Godzilla Pimp
2006-08-31 00:03:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Godzilla Pimp
Post by Robert Kolker
Post by Godzilla Pimp
I'm still waiting for someone to explain why England had the right to
conquer Ireland, Cornwall and Wales (those people are not English), let
alone India and 1/4th of the rest of the planet.
The same "right" as the Normans had when they conquered England from the
Saxon dogs.
Manny Feld
So why didn't the Germans have the right to annex other Germans? Did
anyone think the "Polish Corridor" would last?
Speaking of that, the US should get busy and conquer Canada (should tale
about a week) and then build an oil pipeline from Alaska to the NE USA
where the fucking thing was originally proposed to go.
LOL! A week? It would take Americans a week to find Canada on a map.
150 weeks and counting and the USA is still trying to conquer Iraq.
Canadians are white wimps, not nasty ragheads. We could take them over a
weekend. Trust me.

GP
RG
2006-09-02 06:08:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Godzilla Pimp
Post by Godzilla Pimp
Post by Robert Kolker
Post by Godzilla Pimp
I'm still waiting for someone to explain why England had the right to
conquer Ireland, Cornwall and Wales (those people are not English), let
alone India and 1/4th of the rest of the planet.
The same "right" as the Normans had when they conquered England from the
Saxon dogs.
Manny Feld
So why didn't the Germans have the right to annex other Germans? Did
anyone think the "Polish Corridor" would last?
Speaking of that, the US should get busy and conquer Canada (should tale
about a week) and then build an oil pipeline from Alaska to the NE USA
where the fucking thing was originally proposed to go.
LOL! A week? It would take Americans a week to find Canada on a map.
150 weeks and counting and the USA is still trying to conquer Iraq.
Canadians are white wimps, not nasty ragheads. We could take them over a
weekend. Trust me.
GP
Oh, come back, proud Canadians
To before you had TV,
No hockey night in Canada,
There was no CBC (Oh, my God!).
In 1812, Madison was mad,
He was the president, you know
Well, he thought he’d tell the British where they ought to go
He thought he’d invade Canada,
He thought that he was tough
Instead we went to Washington....
And burned down all his stuff!

And the White House burned, burned, burned,
And we’re the one’s that did it!
It burned, burned, burned,
While the Americans ran and cried.
It burned, burned, burned,
And things were very historical.
And the Americans ran and cried like a bunch of little babies
Waa waa waah!
In the War of 1812!

Now some hillbillies from Kentucky,
Dressed in green and red,
Left home to fight in Canada,
But they returned home dead
It’s the only war the Yankees lost, except for Vietnam
And also the Alamo... and the Bay of... ham.
The loser was America,
The winner was ourselves,
So join right in and gloat about the War of 1812

And the White House burned, burned, burned,
And we’re the one’s that did it!
It burned, burned, burned,
While the president ran and cried.
It burned, burned, burned,
And things were very historical.
And the Americans ran and cried like a bunch of little babies
Waa waa waah!
In the War of 1812!

In 1812, we were just sittin’ around,
Mindin’ our own business, puttin’ crops into the ground.
We heard the soldiers coming and we didn’t like that sound.
So we took a boat to Washington and burned it to the ground.

Oh... we... fired our guns, but the Yankees kept-a coming,
There wasn’t quite as many as there was a while ago.
We fired once more and the Yankees started running,
Down the Mississippi to the Gulf of Mexico, oh, oh....
They ran through the snow and they ran through the forest,
They ran through the bushes where the beavers wouldn’t go.
They ran so fast, they forgot to take their culture,
Back to America, and Gulf and Texaco

So, if you go to Washington, its buildings clean and nice,
Bring a pack of matches, and we’ll burn the White House twice!

And the White House burned, burned, burned,
But the Americans won’t admit it
It burned, burned, burned,
It burned and burned and burned
It burned, burned, burned,
Now, I bet that made them mad
And the Americans ran and cried like a bunch of little babies
Waa waa waah!
Topaz
2006-09-01 00:51:32 UTC
Permalink
By Mark Weber
Much has already been written about Roosevelt's campaign of deception
and outright lies in getting the United States to intervene in the
Second World War prior to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in
December 1941. Roosevelt's aid to Britain and the Soviet Union in
violation of American neutrality and international law, his acts of
war against Germany in the Atlantic in an effort to provoke a German
declaration of war against the United States, his authorization of a
vast "dirty tricks" campaign against U.S. citizens by British
intelligence agents in violation of the Constitution, and his
provocations and ultimatums against Japan which brought on the attack
against Pearl Harbor -- all this is extensively documented and
reasonably well known.[1]
Not so well known is the story of Roosevelt's enormous responsibility
for the outbreak of the Second World War itself. This essay focuses on
Roosevelt's secret campaign to provoke war in Europe prior to the
outbreak of hostilities in September 1939. It deals particularly with
his efforts to pressure Britain, France and Poland into war against
Germany in 1938 and 1939.
Franklin Roosevelt not only criminally involved America in a war which
had already engulfed Europe. He bears a grave responsibility before
history for the outbreak of the most destructive war of all time.
This paper relies heavily on a little-known collection of secret
Polish documents which fell into German hands when Warsaw was captured
in September 1939.
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v04/v04p135_Weber.html
These documents clearly establish Roosevelt's crucial role in
bringing on the Second World War…
Poland had refused to even negotiate over self-determination for the
German city of Danzig and the ethnic German minority in the so-called
Polish Corridor. Hitler felt compelled to resort to arms when he did
in response to a growing Polish campaign of terror and dispossession
against the one and a half million ethnic Germans under Polish rule.
In my view, if ever a military action was justified, it was the German
campaign against Poland in 1939.
Poland's headstrong refusal to negotiate was made possible because of
a fateful blank check guarantee of military backing from Britain -- a
pledge that ultimately proved completely worthless to the hapless
Poles. Considering the lightning swiftness of the victorious German
campaign, it is difficult to realize today that the Polish government
did not at all fear war with Germany. Poland's leaders foolishly
believed that German might was only an illusion. They were convinced
that their troops would occupy Berlin itself within a few weeks and
add further German territories to an enlarged Polish state. It is also
important to keep in mind that the purely localized conflict between
Germany and Poland was only transformed into a Europe-wide
conflagration by the British and French declarations of war against
Germany…
On 9 February 1938, the Polish Ambassador in Washington, Count Jerzy
Potocki, reported to the Foreign Minister in Warsaw on the Jewish role
in making American foreign policy:
The pressure of the Jews on President Roosevelt and on the State
Department is becoming ever more powerful ...
... The Jews are right now the leaders in creating a war psychosis
which would plunge the entire world into war and bring about general
catastrophe. This mood is becoming more and more apparent.
in their definition of democratic states, the Jews have also created
real chaos: they have mixed together the idea of democracy and
communism and have above all raised the banner of burning hatred
against Nazism.
This hatred has become a frenzy. It is propagated everywhere and by
every means: in theaters, in the cinema, and in the press. The Germans
are portrayed as a nation living under the arrogance of Hitler which
wants to conquer the whole world and drown all of humanity in an ocean
of blood.
In conversations with Jewish press representatives I have repeatedly
come up against the inexorable and convinced view that war is
inevitable. This international Jewry exploits every means of
propaganda to oppose any tendency towards any kind of consolidation
and understanding between nations. In this way, the conviction is
growing steadily but surely in public opinion here that the Germans
and their satellites, in the form of fascism, are enemies who must be
subdued by the 'democratic world.'…
Ambassador Potocki's report from Washington of 9 January 1939 dealt in
large part with President Roosevelt's annual address to Congress:
President Roosevelt acts on the assumption that the dictatorial
governments, above all Germany and Japan, only understand a policy of
force. Therefore he has decided to react to any future blows by
matching them. This has been demonstrated by the most recent measures
of the United States.
The American public is subject to an ever more alarming propaganda
which is under Jewish influence and continuously conjures up the
specter of the danger of war. Because of this the Americans have
strongly altered their views on foreign policy problems, in comparison
with last year.
Of all the documents in this collection, the most revealing is
probably the secret report by Ambassador Potocki of 12 January 1939
which dealt with the domestic situation in the United States. This
report is given here in full:
The feeling now prevailing in the United States is marked by a growing
hatred of Fascism and, above all, of Chancellor Hitler and everything
connected with Nazism. Propaganda is mostly in the hands of the Jews
who control almost 100 percent radio, film, daily and periodical
press. Although this propaganda is extremely coarse and presents
Germany as black as possible-above all religious persecution and
concentration camps are exploited-this propaganda is nevertheless
extremely effective since the public here is completely ignorant and
knows nothing of the situation in Europe…
It is interesting to note that in this extremely well-planned campaign
which is conducted above all against National Socialism, Soviet Russia
is almost completely excluded. If mentioned at all, it is only in a
friendly manner and things are presented in such a way as if Soviet
Russia were working with the bloc of democratic states. Thanks to the
clever propaganda the sympathy of the American public is completely on
the side of Red Spain.
Besides this propaganda, a war psychosis is being artificially
created. The American people are told that peace in Europe is hanging
only by a thread and that war is unavoidable. At the same time the
American people are unequivocally told that in case of a world war,
America must also take an active part in order to defend the slogans
of freedom and democracy in the world…
These groups of people who occupy the highest positions in the
American government and want to pose as representatives of 'true
Americanism' and 'defenders of democracy' are, in the last analysis,
connected by unbreakable ties with international Jewry.
For this Jewish international, which above all is concerned with the
interests of its race, to portray the President of the United States
as the 'idealist' champion on human rights was a very clever move. In
this manner they have created a dangerous hotbed for hatred and
hostility in this hemisphere and divided the world into two hostile
camps. The entire issue is worked out in a masterly manner. Roosevelt
has been given the foundation for activating American foreign policy,
and simultaneously has been procuring enormous military stocks for the
coming war, for which the Jews are striving very consciously. With
regard to domestic policy, it is very convenient to divert public
attention from anti-Semitism, which is constantly growing in the
United States, by talking about the necessity of defending religion
and individual liberty against the onslaught of Fascism.
On 16 January 1939, Polish Ambassador Potocki reported to the Warsaw
Foreign Ministry on another lengthy conversation he had with
Roosevelt's personal envoy, William Bullitt…
1. The vitalizing of foreign policy under the leadership of President
Roosevelt, who severely and unambiguously condemns totalitarian
countries.
2. United States preparations for war on sea, land and air will be
carried out at an accelerated pace and will consume the colossal sum
of 1.25 billion dollars.
3. It is the decided opinion of the President that France and Britain
must put an end to any sort of compromise with the totalitarian
countries. They must not get into any discussions aiming at any kind
of territorial changes.
4. They have the moral assurance that the United States will abandon
the policy of isolation and be prepared to intervene actively on the
side of Britain and France in case of war. America is ready to place
its whole wealth of money and raw materials at their disposal.
The Polish Ambassador to Paris, Juliusz (Jules) Lukasiewicz, sent a
top secret report to the Foreign Ministry in Warsaw at the beginning
of February 1939 which outlined U.S. policy towards Europe as
explained to him by William Bullitt:
A week ago, the Ambassador of the United States, William Bullitt
returned to Paris after a three months' leave in America. Meanwhile, I
have had two conversations with him which enable me to inform you of
his views regarding the European situation and to give a survey of
Washington's policy.
The international situation is regarded by official circles as
extremely serious and in constant danger of armed conflict. Those in
authority are of the opinion that if war should break out between
Britain and France on the one hand, and Germany and Italy on the
other, and should Britain and France be defeated, the Germans would
endanger the real interests of the United States on the American
continent. For this reason, one can foresee right from the beginning
the participation of the United States in the war on the side of
France and Britain, naturally some time after the outbreak of the war.
As Ambassador Bullitt expressed it: 'Should war break out we shall
certainly not take part in it at the beginning, but we shall finish
it.'
On 7 March 1939, Ambassador Potocki sent a remarkably lucid and
perceptive report on Roosevelt's foreign policy to his government in
Warsaw. This document was first made public when leading German
newspapers published it in German translation, along with a facsimile
reproduction of the first page of the Polish original, in their
editions of 28 October 1940. The main National Socialist party
newspaper, the Voelkischer Beobachter, published the Ambassador's
report with this observation:
The document itself needs no commentary. We do not know, and it does
not concern us, whether the internal American situation as reported by
the Polish diplomat is correct in every detail. That must be decided
by the American people alone. But in the interest of historical truth
it is important for us to show that the warmongering activities of
American diplomacy, especially in Europe, are once again revealed and
proven by this document. It still remains a secret just who, and for
what motives, have driven American diplomacy to this course. In any
case, the results have been disastrous for both Europe and America.
Europe was plunged into war and America has brought upon itself the
hostility of great nations which normally have no differences with the
American people and, indeed, have not been in conflict but have lived
for generations as friends and want to remain so…
While the Polish documents alone are conclusive proof of Roosevelt's
treacherous campaign to bring about world war, it is fortunate for
posterity that a substantial body of irrefutable complementary
evidence exists which confirms the conspiracy recorded in the
dispatches to Warsaw…
On 19 September 1938 -- that is, a year before the outbreak of war in
Europe -- Roosevelt called Lindsay to a very secret meeting at the
White House. At the beginning of their long conversation, according to
Lindsay's confidential dispatch to London, Roosevelt "emphasized the
necessity of absolute secrecy. Nobody must know I had seen him and he
himself would tell nobody of the interview. I gathered not even the
State Department." The two discussed some secondary matters before
Roosevelt got to the main point of the conference. "This is the very
secret part of his communication and it must not be known to anyone
that he has even breathed a suggestion." The President told the
Ambassador that if news of the conversation was ever made public, it
could mean his impeachment. And no wonder. What Roosevelt proposed was
a cynically brazen but harebrained scheme to violate the U.S.
Constitution and dupe the American people.
The President said that if Britain and France "would find themselves
forced to war" against Germany, the United States would ultimately
also join. But this would require some clever maneuvering. Britain and
France should impose a total blockade against Germany without actually
declaring war and force other states (including neutrals) to abide by
it. This would certainly provoke some kind of German military
response, but it would also free Britain and France from having to
actually declare war. For propaganda purposes, the "blockade must be
based on loftiest humanitarian grounds and on the desire to wage
hostilities with minimum of suffering and the least possible loss of
life and property, and yet bring the enemy to his knees." Roosevelt
conceded that this would involve aerial bombardment, but "bombing from
the air was not the method of hostilities which caused really great
loss of life."
The important point was to "call it defensive measures or anything
plausible but avoid actual declaration of war." That way, Roosevelt
believed he could talk the American people into supporting war against
Germany, including shipments of weapons to Britain and France, by
insisting that the United States was still technically neutral in a
non-declared conflict. "This method of conducting war by blockade
would in his [Roosevelt's] opinion meet with approval of the United
States if its humanitarian purpose were strongly emphasized," Lindsay
reported.[19]
The American Ambassador to Italy, William Phillips, admitted in his
postwar memoirs that the Roosevelt administration was already
committed to going to war on the side of Britain and France in late
1938. "On this and many other occasions," Phillips wrote, "I would
like to have told him [Count Ciano, the Italian Foreign Minister]
frankly that in the event of a European war, the United States would
undoubtedly be involved on the side of the Allies. But in view of my
official position, I could not properly make such a statement without
instructions from Washington, and these I never received."[20]…
The fateful British pledge to Poland of 31 March 1939 to go to war
against Germany in case of a Polish-German conflict would not have
been made without strong pressure from the White House…
In their nationally syndicated column of 14 April 1939, the usually
very well informed Washington journalists Drew Pearson and Robert S.
Allen reported that on 16 March 1939 Roosevelt had "sent a virtual
ultimatum to Chamberlain" demanding that henceforth the British
government strongly oppose Germany. According to Pearson and Allen,
who completely supported Roosevelt's move, "the President warned that
Britain could expect no more support, moral or material through the
sale of airplanes, if the Munich policy continued."[22] Chamberlain
gave in and the next day, 17 March, ended Britain's policy of
cooperation with Germany in a speech at Birmingham bitterly denouncing
Hitler. Two weeks later the British government formally pledged itself
to war in case of German-Polish hostilities…
In a confidential telegram to Washington dated 9 April 1939, Bullitt
reported from Paris on another conversation with Ambassador
Lukasiewicz. He had told the Polish envoy that although U.S. law
prohibited direct financial aid to Poland, it might be possible to
circumvent its provisions. The Roosevelt administration might be able
to supply war planes to Poland indirectly through Britain. "The Polish
Ambassador asked me if it might not be possible for Poland to obtain
financial help and aeroplanes from the United States. I replied that I
believed the Johnson Act would forbid any loans from the United States
to Poland but added that it might be possible for England to purchase
planes for cash in the United States and turn them over to
Poland."[24]
On 25 April 1939, four months before the outbreak of war, Bullitt
called American newspaper columnist Karl von Wiegand, chief European
correspondent of the International News Service, to the U.S. embassy
in Paris and told him: "War in Europe has been decided upon. Poland
has the assurance of the support of Britain and France, and will yield
to no demands from Germany. America will be in the war soon after
Britain and France enter it."[25]
In a lengthy secret conversation at Hyde Park on 28 May 1939,
Roosevelt assured the former President of Czechoslovakia, Dr. Edvard
Benes, that America would actively intervene on the side of Britain
and France in the anticipated European war.[26]
In June 1939, Roosevelt secretly proposed to the British that the
United States should establish "a patrol over the waters of the
Western Atlantic with a view to denying them to the German Navy in the
event of war." The British Foreign Office record of this offer noted
that "although the proposal was vague and woolly and open to certain
objections, we assented informally as the patrol was to be operated in
our interests."[27]
Many years after the war, Georges Bonnet, the French Foreign Minister
in 1939, confirmed Bullitt's role as Roosevelt's deputy in pushing his
country into war. In a letter to Hamilton Fish dated 26 March 1971,
Bonnet wrote: "One thing is certain is that Bullitt in 1939 did
everything he could to make France enter the war."[28] An important
confirmation of the crucial role of Roosevelt and the Jews in pushing
Britain into war comes from the diary of James V. Forrestal, the first
U.S. Secretary of Defense. In his entry for 27 December 1945, he
wrote:
Played golf today with [former Ambassador] Joe Kennedy. I asked him
about his conversations with Roosevelt and [British Prime Minister]
Neville Chamberlain from 1938 on. He said Chamberlain's position in
1938 was that England had nothing with which to fight and that she
could not risk going to war with Hitler. Kennedy's view: That Hitler
would have fought Russia without any later conflict with England if it
had not been for [William] Bullitt's urging on Roosevelt in the summer
of 1939 that the Germans must be faced down about Poland; neither the
French nor the British would have made Poland a cause of war if it had
not been for the constant needling from Washington. Bullitt, he said,
kept telling Roosevelt that the Germans wouldn't fight; Kennedy that
they would, and that they would overrun Europe. Chamberlain, he says,
stated that America and the world Jews had forced England into the
war. In his telephone conversations with Roosevelt in the summer of
1939, the President kept telling him to put some iron up Chamberlain's
backside.[29]…
"In the West," the Ambassador told Szembek, "there are all kinds of
elements openly pushing for war: the Jews, the super-capitalists, the
arms dealers. Today they are all ready for a great business, because
they have found a place which can be set on fire: Danzig; and a nation
that is ready to fight: Poland. They want to do business on our backs.
They are indifferent to the destruction of our country. Indeed, since
everything will have to be rebuilt later on, they can profit from that
as well."[30]
On 24 August 1939, just a week before the outbreak of hostilities,
Chamberlain's closest advisor, Sir Horace Wilson, went to Ambassador
Kennedy with an urgent appeal from the British Prime Minister for
President Roosevelt. Regretting that Britain had unequivocally
obligated itself in March to Poland in case of war, Chamberlain now
turned in despair to Roosevelt as a last hope for peace. He wanted the
American President to "put pressure on the Poles" to change course at
this late hour and open negotiations with Germany. By telephone
Kennedy told the State Department that the British "felt that they
could not, given their obligations, do anything of this sort but that
we could." Presented with this extraordinary opportunity to possibly
save the peace of Europe, Roosevelt rejected Chamberlain's desperate
plea out of hand. At that, Kennedy reported, the Prime Minister lost
all hope. "The futility of it all," Chamberlain had told Kennedy, "is
the thing that is frightful. After all, we cannot save the Poles. We
can merely carry on a war of revenge that will mean the destruction of
all Europe."[31]…
But Roosevelt rejected out of hand this chance to save the peace of
Europe. To a close political crony, he called Kennedy's plea "the
silliest message to me that I have ever received." He complained to
Henry Morgenthau that his London Ambassador was nothing but a pain in
the neck: "Joe has been an appeaser and will always be an appeaser ...
If Germany and Italy made a good peace offer tomorrow, Joe would start
working on the King and his friend the Queen and from there on down to
get everybody to accept it."[33]
Infuriated at Kennedy's stubborn efforts to restore peace in Europe or
at least limit the conflict that had broken out, Roosevelt instructed
his Ambassador with a "personal" and "strictly confidential" telegram
on 11 September 1939 that any American peace effort was totally out of
the question. The Roosevelt government, it declared, "sees no
opportunity nor occasion for any peace move to be initiated by the
President of the United States. The people [sic] of the United States
would not support any move for peace initiated by this Government that
would consolidate or make possible a survival of a regime of force and
aggression."[34]
In the months before armed conflict broke out in Europe, perhaps the
most vigorous and prophetic American voice of warning against
President Roosevelt's campaign to incite war was that of Hamilton
Fish, a leading Republican congressman from New York. In a series of
hard-hitting radio speeches, Fish rallied considerable public opinion
against Roosevelt's deceptive war policy. Here are only a few excerpts
from some of those addresses.[35]
On 6 January 1939, Fish told a nationwide radio audience:
The inflammatory and provocative message of the President to Congress
and the world [given two days before] has unnecessarily alarmed the
American people and created, together with a barrage of propaganda
emanating from high New Deal officials, a war hysteria, dangerous to
the peace of America and the world. The only logical conclusion to
such speeches is another war fought overseas by American soldiers.
All the totalitarian nations referred to by President Roosevelt ...
haven't the faintest thought of making war on us or invading Latin
America.
I do not propose to mince words on such an issue, affecting the life,
liberty and happiness of our people. The time has come to call a halt
to the warmongers of the New Deal, backed by war profiteers,
Communists, and hysterical internationalists, who want us to
quarantine the world with American blood and money.
He [Roosevelt] evidently desires to whip up a frenzy of hate and war
psychosis as a red herring to take the minds of our people off their
own unsolved domestic problems. He visualizes hobgoblins and creates
in the public mind a fear of foreign invasions that exists only in his
own imagination.
On 5 March, Fish spoke to the country over the Columbia radio network:
The people of France and Great Britain want peace but our warmongers
are constantly inciting them to disregard the Munich Pact and resort
to the arbitrament of arms. If only we would stop meddling in foreign
lands the old nations of Europe would compose their own quarrels by
arbitration and the processes of peace, but apparently we won't let
them.
Fish addressed the listeners of the National Broadcasting Company
network on 5 April with these words:
The youth of America are again being prepared for another blood bath
in Europe in order to make the world safe for democracy.
If Hitler and the Nazi government regain Memel or Danzig, taken away
from Germany by the Versailles Treaty, and where the population is 90
percent German, why is it necessary to issue threats and denunciations
and incite our people to war? I would not sacrifice the life of one
American soldier for a half dozen Memels or Danzigs. We repudiated the
Versailles Treaty because it was based on greed and hatred, and as
long as its inequalities and injustices exist there are bound to be
wars of liberation.
The sooner certain provisions of the Versailles Treaty are scrapped
the better for the peace of the world.
I believe that if the areas that are distinctly German in population
are restored to Germany, except Alsace-Lorraine and the Tyrol, there
will be no war in western Europe. There may be a war between the Nazis
and the Communists, but if there is that is not our war or that of
Great Britain or France or any of the democracies.
New Deal spokesmen have stirred up war hysteria into a veritable
frenzy. The New Deal propaganda machine is working overtime to prepare
the minds of our people for war, who are already suffering from a bad
case of war jitters.
President Roosevelt is the number one warmonger in America, and is
largely responsible for the fear that pervades the Nation which has
given the stock market and the American people a bad case of the
jitters.
I accuse the administration of instigating war propaganda and hysteria
to cover up the failure and collapse of the New Deal policies, with 12
million unemployed and business confidence destroyed.
I believe we have far more to fear from our enemies from within than
we have from without. All the Communists are united in urging us to go
to war against Germany and Japan for the benefit of Soviet Russia.
Great Britain still expects every American to do her duty, by
preserving the British Empire and her colonies. The war profiteers,
munitions makers and international bankers are all set up for our
participation in a new world war.
On 21 April, Fish again spoke to the country over nationwide radio:
It is the duty of all those Americans who desire to keep out of
foreign entanglements and the rotten mess and war madness of Europe
and Asia to openly expose the war hysteria and propaganda that is
impelling us to armed conflict.
What we need in America is a stop war crusade, before we are forced
into a foreign war by internationalists and interventionists at
Washington, who seem to be more interested in solving world problems
rather than our own.
In his radio address of 26 May, Fish stated:
He [Roosevelt] should remember that the Congress has the sole power to
declare war and formulate the foreign policies of the United States.
The President has no such constitutional power. He is merely the
official organ to carry out the policies determined by the Congress.
Without knowing even who the combatants will be, we are informed
almost daily by the internationalists and interventionists in America
that we must participate in the next world war.
On 8 July 1939, Fish declared over the National Broadcasting Company
radio network:
If we must go to war, let it be in defense of America, but not in
defense of the munitions makers, war profiteers, Communists, to cover
up the failures of the New Deal, or to provide an alibi for a third
term.
It is well for all nations to know that we do not propose to go to war
over Danzig, power politics, foreign colonies, or the imperialistic
wars of Europe or anywhere in the world.
President Roosevelt could have done little to incite war in Europe
without help from powerful allies. Behind him stood the self-serving
international financial and Jewish interests bent on the destruction
of Germany. The principal organization which drummed up public support
for U.S. involvement in the European war prior to the Pearl Harbor
attack was the cleverly named "Committee to Defend America by Aiding
the Allies." President Roosevelt himself initiated its founding, and
top administration officials consulted frequently with Committee
leaders.[36]
Although headed for a time by an elderly small-town Kansas newspaper
publisher, William Allen White, the Committee was actually organized
by powerful financial interests which stood to profit tremendously
from loans to embattled Britain and from shrewd investments in giant
war industries in the United States.
At the end of 1940, West Virginia Senator Rush D. Holt issued a
detailed examination of the Committee which exposed the base interests
behind the idealistic-sounding slogans:
The Committee has powerful connections with banks, insurance
companies, financial investing firms, and industrial concerns. These
in turn exert influence on college presidents and professors, as well
as on newspapers, radio and other means of communication. One of the
powerful influences used by the group is the '400' and social set. The
story is a sordid picture of betrayal of public interest.
The powerful J.P. Morgan interest with its holdings in the British
Empire helped plan the organization and donated its first expense
money.
Some of the important figures active in the Committee were revealed by
Holt: Frederic R. Coudert, a paid war propagandist for the British
government in the U.S. during the First World War; Robert S. Allen of
the Pearson and Allen syndicated column; Henry R. Luce, the
influential publisher of Time, Life, and Fortune magazines; Fiorella
LaGuardia, the fiery half-Jewish Mayor of Now York City; Herbert
Lehman, the Jewish Governor of New York with important financial
holdings in war industries; and Frank Altschul, an officer in the
Jewish investment firm of Lazard Freres with extensive holdings in
munitions and military supply companies.
If the Committee succeeded in getting the U.S. into war, Holt warned,
"American boys will spill their blood for profiteers, politicians and
'paytriots.' If war comes, on the hands of the sponsors of the White
Committee will be blood-the blood of Americans killed in a needless
war."[37]
In March 1941 a list of most of the Committee's financial backers was
made public. It revealed the nature of the forces eager to bring
America into the European war. Powerful international banking
interests were well represented. J.P. Morgan, John W. Morgan, Thomas
W. Lamont and others of the great Morgan banking house were listed.
Other important names from the New York financial world included Mr.
and Mrs. Paul Mellon, Felix M. and James F. Warburg, and J. Malcolm
Forbes. Chicago department store owner and publisher Marshall Field
was a contributor, as was William Averill Harriman, the railroad and
investment millionaire who later served as Roosevelt's ambassador in
Moscow.
Of course, Jewish names made up a substantial portion of the long
list. Hollywood film czar Samuel Goldwyn of Goldwyn Studios was there,
along with David Dubinsky, the head of the International Ladies
Garment Workers Union. The William S. Paley Foundation, which had been
set up by the head of the giant Columbia Broadcasting System,
contributed to the Committee. The name of Mrs. Herbert H. Lehman, wife
of the New York Governor, was also on the list.[38]
Without an understanding of his intimate ties to organized Jewry,
Roosevelt's policies make little sense. As Jewish historian Lucy
Dawidowicz noted: "Roosevelt himself brought into his immediate circle
more Jews than any other President before or after him. Felix
Frankfurter, Bernard M. Baruch and Henry Morgenthau were his close
advisers. Benjamin V. Cohen, Samuel Rosenman and David K. Niles were
his friends and trusted aides."[39] This is perhaps not so remarkable
in light of Roosevelt's reportedly one-eighth Jewish ancestry.[40]
In his diary entry of 1 May 1941, Charles A. Lindbergh, the American
aviator hero and peace leader, nailed the coalition that was pushing
the United States into war:
The pressure for war is high and mounting. The people are opposed to
it, but the Administration seems to have 'the bit in its teeth' and
[is] hell-bent on its way to war. Most of the Jewish interests in the
country are behind war, and they control a huge part of our press and
radio and most of our motion pictures. There are also the
'intellectuals,' and the 'Anglophiles,' and the British agents who are
allowed free rein, the international financial interests, and many
others.[41]
Joseph Kennedy shared Lindbergh's apprehensions about Jewish power.
Before the outbreak of war he privately expressed concerns about "the
Jews who dominate our press" and world Jewry in general, which he
considered a threat to peace and prosperity. Shortly after the
beginning of hostilities, Kennedy lamented "the growing Jewish
influence in the press and in Washington demanding continuance of the
war "[42]
Roosevelt's efforts to get Poland, Britain and France into war against
Germany succeeded all too well. The result was untold death and misery
and destruction. When the fighting began, as Roosevelt had intended
and planned, the Polish and French leaders expected the American
president to at least make good on his assurances of backing in case
of war. But Roosevelt had not reckoned on the depth of peace sentiment
of the vast majority of Americans. So, in addition to deceiving his
own people, Roosevelt also let down those in Europe to whom he had
promised support.
Seldom in American history were the people as united in their views as
they were in late 1939 about staying out of war in Europe. When
hostilities began in September 1939, the Gallup poll showed 94 percent
of the American people against involvement in war. That figure rose to
96.5 percent in December before it began to decline slowly to about 80
percent in the Fall of 1941. (Today, there is hardly an issue that
even 60 or 70 percent of the people agree upon.)[43]
Roosevelt was, of course, quite aware of the intensity of popular
feeling on this issue. That is why he lied repeatedly to the American
people about his love of peace and his determination to keep the U.S.
out of war, while simultaneously doing everything in his power to
plunge Europe and America into war.
In a major 1940 re-election campaign speech, Roosevelt responded to
the growing fears of millions of Americans who suspected that their
President had secretly pledged United States support to Britain in its
war against Germany. These well-founded suspicions were based in part
on the publication in March of the captured Polish documents. The
speech of 23 October 1940 was broadcast from Philadelphia to the
nation on network radio. In the most emphatic language possible,
Roosevelt categorically denied that he had
pledged in some way the participation of the United States in some
foreign war. I give to you and to the people of this country this most
solemn assurance: There is no secret Treaty, no secret understanding
in any shape or form, direct or indirect, with any Government or any
other nation in any part of the world, to involve this nation in any
war or for any other purpose.[44]
We now know, of course, that this pious declaration was just another
one of Roosevelt's many brazen, bald-faced lies to the American
people.
Roosevelt's policies were more than just dishonest-they were criminal.
The Constitution of the United States grants authority only to the
Congress to make war and peace. And Congress had passed several major
laws to specifically insure U.S. neutrality in case of war in Europe.
Roosevelt continually violated his oath as President to uphold the
Constitution. If his secret policies had been known, the public demand
for his impeachment would very probably have been unstoppable.
The Watergate episode has made many Americans deeply conscious of the
fact that their presidents can act criminally. That affair forced
Richard Nixon to resign his presidency, and he is still widely
regarded as a criminal. No schools are named after him and his name
will never receive the respect that normally goes to every American
president. But Nixon's crimes pale into insignificance when compared
to those of Franklin Roosevelt. What were Nixon's lies compared to
those of Roosevelt? What is a burglary cover-up compared to an illegal
and secret campaign to bring about a major war?
Those who defend Roosevelt's record argue that he lied to the American
people for their own good -- that he broke the law for lofty
principles. His deceit is considered permissible because the cause was
noble, while similar deception by presidents Johnson and Nixon, to
name two, is not. This is, of course, a hypocritical double standard.
And the argument doesn't speak very well for the democratic system. It
implies that the people are too dumb to understand their own best
interests. It further suggests that the best form of government is a
kind of benevolent liberal-democratic dictatorship.
Roosevelt's hatred for Hitler was deep, vehement, passionate -- almost
personal. This was due in no small part to an abiding envy and
jealousy rooted in the great contrast between the two men, not only in
their personal characters but also in their records as national
leaders.
Superficially, the public fives of Roosevelt and Hitler were
astonishingly similar. Both assumed the leadership of their respective
countries at the beginning of 1933. They both faced the enormous
challenge of mass unemployment during a catastrophic worldwide
economic depression. Each became a powerful leader in a vast military
alliance during the most destructive war in history. Both men died
while still in office within a few weeks of each other in April 1945,
just before the end of the Second World War in Europe. But the
enormous contrasts in the lives of these two men are even more
remarkable.
Roosevelt was born into one of the wealthiest families in America. His
was a life utterly free of material worry. He took part in the First
World War from an office in Washington as UnderSecretary of the Navy.
Hitler, on the other hand, was born into a modest provinicial family.
As a young man he worked as an impoverished manual laborer. He served
in the First World War as a front line soldier in the hell of the
Western battleground. He was wounded many times and decorated for
bravery.
In spite of his charming manner and soothing rhetoric, Roosevelt
proved unable to master the great challenges facing America. Even
after four years of his presidency, millions remained unemployed,
undernourished and poorly housed in a vast land richly endowed with
all the resources for incomparable prosperity. The New Deal was
plagued with bitter strikes and bloody clashes between labor and
capital. Roosevelt did nothing to solve the country's deep, festering
racial problems which erupted repeatedly in riots and armed conflict.
The story was very different in Germany. Hitler rallied his people
behind a radical program that transformed Germany within a few years
from an economically ruined land on the edge of civil war into
Europe's powerhouse. Germany underwent a social, cultural and economic
rebirth without parallel in history. The contrast between the
personalities of Roosevelt and Hitler was simultaneously a contrast
between two diametrically different social-political systems and
ideologies.
And yet, it would be incorrect to characterize Roosevelt as merely a
cynical politician and front man for powerful alien interests.
Certainly he did not regard himself as an evil man. He sincerely
believed that he was doing the right and noble thing in pressuring
Britain and France into war against Germany. Like Wilson before him,
and others since, Roosevelt felt himself uniquely qualified and called
upon by destiny to reshape the world according to his vision of an
egalitarian, universalist democracy. He was convinced, as so many
American leaders have been, that the world could be saved from itself
by remodeling it after the United States.
Presidents like Wilson and Roosevelt view the world not as a complex
of different nations, races and cultures which must mutually respect
each others' separate collective identities in order to live together
in peace, but rather according to a selfrighteous missionary
perspective that divides the globe into morally good and evil
countries. In that scheme of things, America is the providentially
permanent leader of the forces of righteousness. Luckily, this view
just happens to correspond to the economic and political interests of
those who wield power in the United States.
President Roosevelt's War
In April 1941, Senator Gerald Nye of North Dakota prophetically
predicted that one day the Second World War would be remembered as
Roosevelt's war. "If we are ever involved in this war, it will be
called by future historians by only one title, 'the President's War,'
because every step of his since his Chicago quarantine speech [of 5
October 1937] has been toward war.[45]
The great American historian, Harry Elmer Barnes, believed that war
could probably have been prevented in 1939 if it had not been for
Roosevelt's meddling. "Indeed, there is fairly conclusive evidence
that, but for Mr. Roosevelt's pressure on Britain, France and Poland,
and his commitments to them before September 1939, especially to
Britain, and the irresponsible antics of his agent provocateur,
William C. Bullitt, there would probably have been no world war in
1939, or, perhaps, for many years thereafter."[46] In Revisionism: A
Key to Peace, Barnes wrote:
President Roosevelt had a major responsibility, both direct and
indirect, for the outbreak of war in Europe. He began to exert
pressure on France to stand up to Hitler as early as the German
reoccupation of the Rhineland in March 1936, months before he was
making his strongly isolationist speeches in the campaign of 1936.
This pressure on France, and also England, continued right down to the
coming of the war in September 1939. It gained volume and momentum
after the quarantine speech of October 1937. As the crisis approached
between Munich and the outbreak of war, Roosevelt pressed the Poles to
stand firm against any demands by Germany, and urged the English and
French to back up the Poles unflinchingly.
There is grave doubt that England would have gone to war in September
1939 had it not been for Roosevelt's encouragement and his assurances
that, in the event of war, the United States would enter on the side
of Britain just as soon as he could swing American public opinion
around to support intervention.
Roosevelt had abandoned all semblance of neutrality, even before war
broke out in 1939, and moved as speedily as was safe and feasible in
the face of anti-interventionist American public opinion to involve
this country in the European conflict.[47]
One of the most perceptive verdicts on Franklin Roosevelt's place in
history came from the pen of the great Swedish explorer and author,
Sven Hedin. During the war he wrote:
The question of the way it came to a new world war is not only to be
explained because of the foundation laid by the peace treaties of
1919, or in the suppression of Germany and her allies after the First
World War, or in the continuation of the ancient policies of Great
Britain and France. The decisive push came from the other side of the
Atlantic Ocean.
Roosevelt speaks of democracy and destroys it incessantly. He slanders
as undemocratic and un-American those who admonish him in the name of
peace and the preservation of the American way of life. He has made
democracy into a caricature rather than a model. He talks about
freedom of speech and silences those who don't hold his opinion.
He talks about freedom of religion and makes an alliance with
Bolshevism.
He talks about freedom from want, but cannot provide ten million of
his own people with work, bread or shelter. He talks about freedom
from the fear of war while working for war, not only for his own
people but for the world, by inciting his country against the Axis
powers when it might have united with them, and he thereby drove
millions to their deaths.
This war will go down in history as the war of President
Roosevelt.[48]
Officially orchestrated praise for Roosevelt as a great man of peace
cannot conceal forever his crucial role in pushing Europe into war in
1939.
* * * * *
It is now more than forty years since the events described here took
place. For many they are an irrelevant part of a best-forgotten past.
But the story of how Franklin Roosevelt engineered war in Europe is
very pertinent -- particularly for Americans today. The lessons of the
past have never been more important than in this nuclear age. For
unless at least an aware minority understands how and why wars are
made, we will remain powerless to restrain the warmongers of our own
era.

Notes
1. See, for example: Charles A. Beard, President Roosevelt and
the Coming of the War 1941 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1948);
William Henry Chamberlin, America's Second Crusade (Chicago: Regnery,
1952, 1962); Benjamin Colby, 'Twas a Famous Victory (New Rochelle,
N.Y.: Arlington House, 1979); Frederic R. Sanborn, Design for War (New
York: Devin-Adair, 1951); William Stevenson, A Man Called Intrepid
(New York: Ballantine Books, 1980); Charles C. Tansill, Back Door to
War (Chicago: Regnery, 1952); John Toland, Infamy: Pearl Harbor and
Its Aftermath (New York: Doubleday, 1982).
2. Saul Friedlander, Prelude to Downfall: Hitler and the United
States 1939-1941 (New York: Knopf, 1967), pp. 73-77; U.S., Congress,
House, Special Committee on Investigation of Un-American Activities in
the United States, 1940, Appendix, Part II, pp. 1054-1059.
3. Friedlander, pp. 75-76.
4. New York Times, 30 March 1940, p. 1.
5. Ibid., p. 4, and 31 March 1940, p. 1.
6. New York Times, 30 March 1940, p. 1. Baltimore Sun, 30 March
1940, p. 1.
7. A French-language edition was published in 1944 under the
title Comment Roosevelt est Entre en Guerre.
8. Tansill, "The United States and the Road to War in Europe," in
Harry Elmer Barnes (ed.), Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace (Caldwell,
Idaho: Caxton, 1953; reprint eds., New York: Greenwood, 1969 and
Torrance, Calif.: Institute for Historical Review [supplemented],
1982), p. 184 (note 292). Tansill also quoted from several of the
documents in his Back Door to War, pp. 450-51.
9. Harry Elmer Barnes, The Court Historians Versus Revisionism
(N.p.: privately printed, 1952), p. 10. This booklet is reprinted in
Barnes, Selected Revisionist Pamphlets (New York: Arno Press & The New
York Times, 1972), and in Barnes, The Barnes Trilogy (Torrance,
Calif.: Institute for Historical Review, 1979).
10. Chamberlin, p. 60.
11. Edward Raczynski, In Allied London (London: Weidenfeld and
Nicolson, 1963), p. 51.
12. Orville H. Bullitt (ad.), For the President: Personal and
Secret (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1972), p. x1v [biographical
foreword]. See also Time, 26 October 1936, p. 24.
13. Current Biography 1940, ed. Maxine Block (New York: H.W.
Wilson, 1940), p. 122 ff.
14. Gisleher Wirsing, Der masslose Kontinent: Roosevelts Kampf um
die Weltherrschaft (Jena: E. Diederichs, 1942), p. 224.
15. Bullitt obituary in New York Times, 16 February 1967, p. 44.
16. Jack Alexander, "He Rose From the Rich," Saturday Evening
Post, 11 March 1939, p. 6. (Also see continuation in issue of 18 March
1939.) Bullitt's public views on the European scene and what should be
America's attitude toward it can be found in his Report to the
American People (Boston: Houghton Mifflin [Cambridge: Riverside
Press], 1940), the text of a speech he delivered, with the President's
blessing, under the auspices of the American Philosophical Society in
Independence Hall in Philadelphia shortly after the fall of France.
For sheer, hyperventilated stridency and emotionalist hysterics, this
anti-German polemic could hardly be topped, even given the similar
propensities of many other interventionists in government and the
press in those days.
17. Michael R. Beschloss, Kennedy and Roosevelt (New York: Norton,
1980), pp. 203-04.
18. Robert Dallek, Franklin D. Roosevelt and American Foreign
Policy 1932-1945 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1979), p. 31. See
also pp. 164-65.
19. Dispatch No. 349 of 20 September 1938 by Sir. R. Lindsay,
Documents on British Foreign Policy (ed. Ernest L. Woodward), Third
series, Vol. VII (London, 1954), pp. 627-29. See also: Joseph P. Lash,
Roosevelt and Churchill 1939-1941 (New York: Norton, 1976), pp. 25-27;
Dallek, pp. 164-65; Arnold A. Offner, America and the Ori-, gins of
World War II (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1971), p. 61.
20. William Phillips, Ventures in Diplomacy (North Beverly, Mass.:
privately published, 1952), pp. 220-21.
21. Carl Burckhardt, Meine Danziger Mission 1937-1939 (Munich:
Callwey, 1960), p. 225.
22. Drew Pearson and Robert S. Allen, "Washington Daily
Merry-Go-Round," Washington Times-Herald, 14 April 1939, p. 16. A
facsimile reprint of this column appears in Conrad Grieb (ed.),
American Manifest Destiny and The Holocausts (New York: Examiner
Books, 1979), pp. 132-33. See also: Wirsing, pp. 238-41.
23. Jay P. Moffat, The Moffat Papers 1919-1943 (Cambridge: Harvard
University Press, 1956), p. 232.
24. U.S., Department of State, Foreign Relations of the United
States (Diplomatic Papers), 1939, General, Vol. I (Washington: 1956),
p. 122.
25. "Von Wiegand Says-," Chicago Herald-American, 8 October 1944,
p. 2.
26. Edvard Benes, Memoirs of Dr. Eduard Benes (London: George
Allen & Unwin, 1954), pp. 79-80.
27. Lash, p. 64.
28. Hamilton Fish, FDR: The Other Side of the Coin (Now York:
Vantage, 1976; Torrance, Calif.: Institute for Historical Review,
1980), p. 62.
29. James V. Forrestal (ads. Walter Millis and E.S. Duffield), The
Forrestal Diaries (New York: Viking, 1951), pp. 121-22. I have been
privately informed by a colleague who has examined the original
manuscript of the Forrestal diaries that many very critical references
to the Jews were deleted from the published version.
30. Jan Szembek, Journal 1933-1939 (Paris: Plan, 1952), pp.
475-76.
31. David E. Koskoff, Joseph P. Kennedy: A Life and Times
(Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1974), p. 207; Moffat, p. 253;
A.J.P. Taylor, The Origins of the Second World War (London: Hamish
Hamilton, 1961; 2nd ed. Greenwich, Conn.: Fawcett Premier [paperback],
1965), p. 262; U.S., Department of State, Foreign Relations of the
United States, 1939, General, Vol. I (Washington: 1956), p. 355.
32. Dallek, p. 164.
33. Beschloss, pp. 190-91; Lash, p. 75; Koskoff, pp. 212-13.
34. Hull to Kennedy (No. 905), U.S., Department of State, Foreign
Relations of the United States, 1939, General, Vol. I (Washington:
1956), p. 424.
35. The radio addresses of Hamilton Fish quoted here were
published in the Congressional Record Appendix (Washington) as
follows: (6 January 1939) Vol. 84, Part 11, pp. 52-53; (5 March 1939)
same, pp. 846-47; (5 April 1939) Vol. 84, Part 12, pp. 1342-43; (21
April 1939) same, pp. 1642-43; (26 May 1939) Vol. 84, Part 13, pp.
2288-89; (8 July 1939) same, pp. 3127-28.
36. Wayne S. Cole, Charles A. Lindbergh and the Battle Against
American Intervention in World War II (New York: Harcourt Brace
Jovanovich, 1974), pp. 128, 136-39.
37. Congressional Record Appendix (Washington: 1941), (30 December
1940) Vol. 86, Part 18, pp. 7019-25. See also: Appendix, Vol. 86, Part
17, pp. 5808-14.
38. New York Times, 11 March 1941, p. 10.
39. Lucy Dawidowicz, "American Jews and the Holocaust," The New
York Times Magazine, 18 April 1982, p. 102.
40. "FDR 'had a Jewish great-grandmother'" Jewish Chronicle
(London), 5 February 1982, p. 3.
41. Charles A. Lindbergh, The Wartime Journals of Charles A.
Lindbergh (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1970), p. 481.
42. Koskoff, pp. 282, 212. The role of the American press in
fomenting hatred against Germany between 1933 and 1939 is a subject
that deserves much more detailed treatment. Charles Tansill provides
some useful information on this in Back Door to War. The essay by
Professor Hans A. Muenster, "Die Kriegsschuld der Presse der USA" in
Kriegsschuld und Presse, published in 1944 by the German
Reichsdozentenfuehrung, is worth consulting.
43. An excellent essay relating and contrasting American public
opinion measurements to Roosevelt's foreign policy moves in 1939-41 is
Harry Elmer Barnes, Was Roosevelt Pushed Into War By Popular Demand in
1941? (N.p.: privately printed, 1951). It is reprinted in Barnes,
Selected Revisionist Pamphlets.
44. Lash, p. 240.
45. New York Times, 27 April 1941, p. 19.
46. Harry Elmer Barnes, The Struggle Against the Historical
Blackout, 2nd ed. (N.p.: privately published, ca. 1948), p. 12. See
also the 9th, final revised and enlarged edition (N.p.: privately
published, ca. 1954), p. 34; this booklet is reprinted in Barnes,
Selected Revisionist Pamphlets.
47. Harry Elmer Barnes, "Revisionism: A Key to Peace," Rampart
Journal of Individualist Thought Vol. II, No. 1 (Spring 1966), pp.
29-30. This article was republished in Barnes, Revisionism: A Key to
Peace and Other Essays (San Francisco: Cato Institute [Cato Paper No.
12], 1980).
48. Sven Hedin, Amerika im Kampf der Kontinente (Leipzig: F.A.
Brockhaus, 1943), p. 54.

Bibliography
Listed here are the published editions of the Polish documents, the
most important sources touching on the questions of their authenticity
and content, and essential recent sources on what President Roosevelt
was really-as opposed to publicly-doing and thinking during the
prelude to war. Full citations for all references in the article will
be found in the notes.
Beschloss, Michael R. Kennedy and Roosevelt. New York: Norton, 1980.
Bullitt, Orville H. (ed.). For the President: Personal and Secret.
[Correspondence between Franklin D. Roosevelt and William C. Bullitt.]
Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1972.
Germany. Foreign Office Archive Commission. Roosevelts Weg in den
Krieg: Geheimdokumente zur Kriegspolitik des Praesidenten der
Vereinigten Staaten. Berlin: Deutscher Verlag, 1943.
Germany. Foreign Office. The German White Paper. [White Book No. 3.]
New York: Howell, Soskin and Co., 1940.
Germany. Foreign Office. Polnische Dokumente zur Vorgeschichte des
Kriegs. [White Book No. 3.] Berlin: F. Eher, 1940.
Koskoff, David E. Joseph P. Kennedy: A Life and Times. Englewood
Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1974.
Lukasiewicz, Juliusz (Waclaw Jedrzejewicz, ed.). Diplomat in Paris
1936-1939. New York: Columbia University Press, 1970.
Wirsing, Giselher. Der masslose Kontinent: Roosevelts Kampf um die
Weltherrschaft. Jena: E. Diederichs, 1942.


http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
Tuco Ramirez
2006-08-31 01:35:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Kolker
Godzilla Pimp wrote:>
Post by Godzilla Pimp
"I did not become prime minister to preside over the dissolution of the
British Empire"
-Winston Asshole Churchill, fat bastard and hypocrite
Who saved Britain and helped save Western Civilization. That fat,
imperialist drunkard was Britain's savior. Think of what would have
happened if Neville Chamberlain and Lord Halifax had been in power.
Manny Feld
Then maybe you would still have your empire you stupid brit!

In case you haven't noticed, he DID preside over the beginning of the
end of the British Empire.

He wasn't very good for Britain but he was very good (unintentionally)
for the world.
Robert Kolker
2006-08-31 03:51:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tuco Ramirez
Then maybe you would still have your empire you stupid brit!
I am a United Statesean, sir.
Post by Tuco Ramirez
In case you haven't noticed, he DID preside over the beginning of the
end of the British Empire.
That he did. He did not expect to do so, but it happened anyway. No good
deed shall go unpunished.
Post by Tuco Ramirez
He wasn't very good for Britain but he was very good (unintentionally)
for the world.
Whatever his motives were, he did the Right Thing. He showed some
backbone and courage and defiance. Neville Chamberlain whent all the may
to Munich on his knees to give Hitler and von Ribbentrop a blow job.

Manny Feld
Tuco Ramirez
2006-08-31 06:03:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Kolker
Post by Tuco Ramirez
Then maybe you would still have your empire you stupid brit!
I am a United Statesean, sir.
Post by Tuco Ramirez
In case you haven't noticed, he DID preside over the beginning of the
end of the British Empire.
That he did. He did not expect to do so, but it happened anyway. No good
deed shall go unpunished.
Churchill never did a good deed; he was a piece of shit.
Post by Robert Kolker
Post by Tuco Ramirez
He wasn't very good for Britain but he was very good (unintentionally)
for the world.
Whatever his motives were, he did the Right Thing. He showed some
backbone and courage and defiance. Neville Chamberlain whent all the may
to Munich on his knees to give Hitler and von Ribbentrop a blow job.
And he was a drunk incompetent too, he completely missed the mark on
what he was trying to do, which was to keep England ruling over most of
the world. I am sure you will agree that he failed misserably.

Let's see: England "won" the war, but lost an empire and helped create
a much bigger threat than Germany. That's sound leadership alright!

As I said before, I am glad he failed. Overall american imperialism is
"kinder and gentler' than any other before it.
hc23hc
2006-08-31 08:17:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tuco Ramirez
Churchill never did a good deed; he was a piece of shit.
You're absolutely right about that. My grandfather knew him well.
Churchill was a horrible little drunk. But connected, in that Sopranos
sense of the term. Churchill was one of the earliest of several
generations of modern day war-criminal carpet-baggers, kinda like
Christopher Hitchens would be if he had a fixed abode.

One good thing about Churchill was, at least he *knew* he was ugly.
Ugly to the bone. He wasn't one of those effete primping faggoty war
criminals like Negroponte, Asscroft, Netan-Yahoo! or Paul Bremer who
try to have it both ways with each other at the same time.

Just don't expect Cock Balker to stop going Goo-Goo-Ga-Joo,
Nay-Tan-Yahoo! for Churchill any time soon. Today's vampire war
criminals don't have quite the same chutzpah as the old, dead ones.

Today's newer, weaker war delinquents lack gravitas -- and, when push
comes to shove, are sure to be found hiding behind the Churchills of
this world, especially when trouble comes a-knocking.

Granted, they could all use a drink or two. Even so, none of them will
be any the less ugly than Churchill in the morning-after, but you're
never likely to hear anything as honest as that from them.

Today's major war criminals prefer to be thought of as cute. I'm not
kidding.

To which you're perfectly entitled to reply: "Cute ? Maybe when
they're dead."


.
.
.
DCI
2006-08-31 08:47:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by hc23hc
Post by Tuco Ramirez
Churchill never did a good deed; he was a piece of shit.
You're absolutely right about that. My grandfather knew him well.
Churchill was a horrible little drunk. But connected, in that Sopranos
sense of the term. Churchill was one of the earliest of several
generations of modern day war-criminal carpet-baggers, kinda like
Christopher Hitchens would be if he had a fixed abode.
One good thing about Churchill was, at least he *knew* he was ugly.
Ugly to the bone. He wasn't one of those effete primping faggoty war
criminals like Negroponte, Asscroft, Netan-Yahoo! or Paul Bremer who
try to have it both ways with each other at the same time.
Just don't expect Cock Balker to stop going Goo-Goo-Ga-Joo,
Nay-Tan-Yahoo! for Churchill any time soon. Today's vampire war
criminals don't have quite the same chutzpah as the old, dead ones.
Today's newer, weaker war delinquents lack gravitas -- and, when push
comes to shove, are sure to be found hiding behind the Churchills of
this world, especially when trouble comes a-knocking.
Granted, they could all use a drink or two. Even so, none of them will
be any the less ugly than Churchill in the morning-after, but you're
never likely to hear anything as honest as that from them.
Today's major war criminals prefer to be thought of as cute. I'm not
kidding.
To which you're perfectly entitled to reply: "Cute ? Maybe when
they're dead."
Slick ole Goos needs to lay off the sauce. History doesn't support
Slick's opinion.

DCI
Jafo
2006-08-31 11:27:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by DCI
Post by hc23hc
Churchill was a horrible little drunk. But connected, in that
Sopranos sense of the term. Churchill was one of the earliest
of several generations of modern day war-criminal carpet-baggers,
kinda like Christopher Hitchens would be if he had a fixed abode.
Slick ole Goos needs to lay off the sauce. History doesn't support
Slick's opinion.
It seldom does.

--
Jafo
hc23hc
2006-08-31 16:04:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jafo
Post by DCI
Post by hc23hc
Churchill was a horrible little drunk. But connected, in that
Sopranos sense of the term. Churchill was one of the earliest
of several generations of modern day war-criminal carpet-baggers,
kinda like Christopher Hitchens would be if he had a fixed abode.
Slick ole Goos needs to lay off the sauce. History doesn't support
Slick's opinion.
It seldom does.
"Old Goos" makes more sense than Mendel Schleim, posting as Kok Bolker,
spinner of fanciful yarn on either side of the trousers also in the
form of driech odes to War Criminal Winnie Churchill.

On Warmonger Churchill's watch, there came to pass one of the most
hideous abortions in modern Trojan politics: the cancerously malformed
state of Israel, a brothel of corruption and war crime.

"In a state established on a founding myth -- that the native
Palestinian population left of their own accord rather than that they
were ethnically cleansed -- and in one that seeks its legitimacy
through a host of other lies, such as that the occupation of the West
Bank is benign and that Gaza's has ended, deception becomes a political
way of life."

-- which doesn't make Israelis 'bad people': only the pigs who
whitewash their fascist leaders --

Most Israelis are deeply unhappy about what one commentator has called
Olmert's "committee of non-inquiry". Separate investigations mean that
the remit of each committee will be very narrow, focusing on technical
issues and failings, and unable to look at the wider picture.

The members of the committee who will be investigating Olmert have been
handpicked by him. All the judges approached to head the committee
turned down the offer, as did the country's foremost constitutional law
expert, Amnon Rubinstein, apparently aware that being party to a
whitewash would permanently tarnish his reputation.

It will now be led by a former head of Mossad, Israel's international
spy agency. Observers have speculated that 77-year-old Nahum Admoni's
room for criticising the government will be extremely limited, given
that he himself was admonished by the Kahan Commission of Inquiry that
in 1982 investigated Israel's role in the massacre of Palestinian
civilians in the Lebanese refugee camps of Sabra and Shatilla. Admoni
failed to give "an unequivocal warning about the danger entailed in the
Phalangists' entry into the camps" that resulted in the slaughter of
more than 1,000 Palestinians. Mossad was keenly involved with the
Christian Phalangists, attempting to install them in power as a puppet
regime.

Kahan took no action against Admoni, however, because he -- like Olmert
now -- had only recently taken up his job. It will be hard for Admoni
to treat Olmert more harshly than Kahan treated him two decades ago.

-- Jonathan Cook, August 2006


.
.
.
DCI
2006-08-31 16:40:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jafo
Post by DCI
Post by hc23hc
Churchill was a horrible little drunk. But connected, in that
Sopranos sense of the term. Churchill was one of the earliest
of several generations of modern day war-criminal carpet-baggers,
kinda like Christopher Hitchens would be if he had a fixed abode.
Slick ole Goos needs to lay off the sauce. History doesn't support
Slick's opinion.
It seldom does.
For Slick Ole Goose, the world is divided into two camps, hers and
everyone else's. The only revelations Slick can provide is a
psychiatric report.

DCI
Tuco Ramirez
2006-08-31 15:20:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by hc23hc
Post by Tuco Ramirez
Churchill never did a good deed; he was a piece of shit.
You're absolutely right about that. My grandfather knew him well.
Churchill was a horrible little drunk. But connected, in that Sopranos
sense of the term. Churchill was one of the earliest of several
generations of modern day war-criminal carpet-baggers, kinda like
Christopher Hitchens would be if he had a fixed abode.
One good thing about Churchill was, at least he *knew* he was ugly.
Ugly to the bone. He wasn't one of those effete primping faggoty war
criminals like Negroponte, Asscroft, Netan-Yahoo! or Paul Bremer who
try to have it both ways with each other at the same time.
Just don't expect Cock Balker to stop going Goo-Goo-Ga-Joo,
Nay-Tan-Yahoo! for Churchill any time soon. Today's vampire war
criminals don't have quite the same chutzpah as the old, dead ones.
Today's newer, weaker war delinquents lack gravitas -- and, when push
comes to shove, are sure to be found hiding behind the Churchills of
this world, especially when trouble comes a-knocking.
Granted, they could all use a drink or two. Even so, none of them will
be any the less ugly than Churchill in the morning-after, but you're
never likely to hear anything as honest as that from them.
Today's major war criminals prefer to be thought of as cute. I'm not
kidding.
True, in the good old days criminals were more honest about being
criminals. Yesterday's "War Department" is today's "Defense
Department", etc.
Post by hc23hc
To which you're perfectly entitled to reply: "Cute ? Maybe when
they're dead."
.
.
.
Jafo
2006-08-31 15:24:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tuco Ramirez
True, in the good old days criminals were more honest about being
criminals. Yesterday's "War Department" is today's "Defense
Department", etc.
I guess that War Department just sounded so damn violent in the
dawning age of PC.

BTW, that wouldn't be Tuco Benedito Pacifico Juan Maria Ramirez,
would it?

--
Jafo
Tuco Ramirez
2006-09-01 02:31:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jafo
Post by Tuco Ramirez
True, in the good old days criminals were more honest about being
criminals. Yesterday's "War Department" is today's "Defense
Department", etc.
I guess that War Department just sounded so damn violent in the
dawning age of PC.
BTW, that wouldn't be Tuco Benedito Pacifico Juan Maria Ramirez,
would it?
BANG!!!
.
.
.
When you have to shoot, shoot!, don't talk.
Tuco Ramirez
2006-09-01 02:40:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by hc23hc
Post by Tuco Ramirez
Churchill never did a good deed; he was a piece of shit.
You're absolutely right about that. My grandfather knew him well.
Churchill was a horrible little drunk. But connected, in that Sopranos
sense of the term. Churchill was one of the earliest of several
generations of modern day war-criminal carpet-baggers, kinda like
Christopher Hitchens would be if he had a fixed abode.
One good thing about Churchill was, at least he *knew* he was ugly.
Ugly to the bone. He wasn't one of those effete primping faggoty war
criminals like Negroponte, Asscroft, Netan-Yahoo! or Paul Bremer who
try to have it both ways with each other at the same time.
Just don't expect Cock Balker to stop going Goo-Goo-Ga-Joo,
Nay-Tan-Yahoo! for Churchill any time soon. Today's vampire war
criminals don't have quite the same chutzpah as the old, dead ones.
Today's newer, weaker war delinquents lack gravitas -- and, when push
comes to shove, are sure to be found hiding behind the Churchills of
this world, especially when trouble comes a-knocking.
Granted, they could all use a drink or two. Even so, none of them will
be any the less ugly than Churchill in the morning-after,
I think I understand what you mean when you say your grandfather knew
him well.
.
.
Just kidding.
How did he know Churchill?
Post by hc23hc
but you're
never likely to hear anything as honest as that from them.
Today's major war criminals prefer to be thought of as cute. I'm not
kidding.
Robert Kolker
2006-08-31 09:41:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tuco Ramirez
Let's see: England "won" the war, but lost an empire and helped create
a much bigger threat than Germany. That's sound leadership alright!
England survived as a sovreign nation. Considering the threat against
her, that is an accomplishment. Are you suggesting the Britain should
have made a deal the the Nazis? And if they had, how long would it have
taken Germany to destroy the soviet union, consolidate its goals and
then turn on England?
Post by Tuco Ramirez
As I said before, I am glad he failed. Overall american imperialism is
"kinder and gentler' than any other before it.
In one goal Chruchill and others succeeded and that was in obliterating
Naziism from the face of the earth. Mission accomplished.

Bob Kolker
Tuco Ramirez
2006-08-31 15:15:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Kolker
Post by Tuco Ramirez
Let's see: England "won" the war, but lost an empire and helped create
a much bigger threat than Germany. That's sound leadership alright!
England survived as a sovreign nation. Considering the threat against
her, that is an accomplishment. Are you suggesting the Britain should
have made a deal the the Nazis? And if they had, how long would it have
taken Germany to destroy the soviet union, consolidate its goals and
then turn on England?
It's up to debate what would have happened after Germany had time to
"digest" the Soviet Union, but what actually happened is history.
It's a question of whether Germany would have been a greater threat
than the Soviet Union was during the Cold War. I don't think they
would have been a great threat, and if they were, then they would have
had the same (nuclear) deterrence as the Soviet Union had.
If Britain hadn't been fighting the germans, then it would not have
weakened itself to the point that it could not hold to its empire.
BOTH wars were about the same thing: Britain being greedy and wanting
the whole pie to mostly to itself instead of "sharing", and that's the
bottom line.
Post by Robert Kolker
Post by Tuco Ramirez
As I said before, I am glad he failed. Overall american imperialism is
"kinder and gentler' than any other before it.
In one goal Chruchill and others succeeded and that was in obliterating
Naziism from the face of the earth. Mission accomplished.
At what price? Paying $100 for $5 worth of goods is not a good deal.
Topaz
2006-09-01 00:57:15 UTC
Permalink
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.


http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
Godzilla Pimp
2006-08-31 21:01:04 UTC
Permalink
Are you suggesting the Britain should have made a deal the the Nazis?
Yes!
And if they had, how long would it have taken Germany to destroy the
soviet union, consolidate its goals and then turn on England?
The English ARE Germans, but degenerated. They haven't had any fresh
continental blood since 1066. Now they are going to become Muslim. You think
THAT is better?

GP
Miriam Cohen
2006-08-31 22:40:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Godzilla Pimp
Are you suggesting the Britain should have made a deal the the Nazis?
Yes!
And if they had, how long would it have taken Germany to destroy the
soviet union, consolidate its goals and then turn on England?
The English ARE Germans, but degenerated. They haven't had any fresh
continental blood since 1066. Now they are going to become Muslim. You think
THAT is better?
GP
As usual you've got it ass backwards. England's Queen Victoria was the
grandmother of virtually all of continental Europe's ruling leaders. It
looks more like Germany is the one needing the infusion.
--
L'Chaim

Miriam

In the beginning
the Word already was.
Robert Kolker
2006-09-01 01:06:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Miriam Cohen
As usual you've got it ass backwards. England's Queen Victoria was the
grandmother of virtually all of continental Europe's ruling leaders. It
looks more like Germany is the one needing the infusion.
Besides Kaiser Wilhelm was a little bit deranged in the brain.

Bob Kolker
Miriam Cohen
2006-09-01 04:16:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Kolker
Post by Miriam Cohen
As usual you've got it ass backwards. England's Queen Victoria was the
grandmother of virtually all of continental Europe's ruling leaders.
It looks more like Germany is the one needing the infusion.
Besides Kaiser Wilhelm was a little bit deranged in the brain.
Bob Kolker
Yeah, a couple of Queen Vicki's grand kids had that problem :)
--
L'Chaim

Miriam

In the beginning
the Word already was.
h***@mac.com
2006-09-01 00:11:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Miriam Cohen
England's Queen Victoria was the
grandmother of virtually all of continental
Europe's ruling leaders.
There must be a fire sale on crack in Mimsy's Nachbarschaft... The old
bitch Victoria had less sexual intercourse than Mimsy, or Den-Mother
Teresa, if such a thing is humanly possible.
Post by Miriam Cohen
It looks more like Germany is the one
needing the infusion.
Any infusion determined by Leather Mimsy is a terrible thing to
countenance, indeed.

Haven't the Germans been made to bleed enough, Mimsy ?


.
.
.
DCI
2006-09-01 01:13:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by h***@mac.com
Post by Miriam Cohen
England's Queen Victoria was the
grandmother of virtually all of continental
Europe's ruling leaders.
There must be a fire sale on crack in Mimsy's Nachbarschaft... The old
bitch Victoria had less sexual intercourse than Mimsy, or Den-Mother
Teresa, if such a thing is humanly possible.
Post by Miriam Cohen
It looks more like Germany is the one
needing the infusion.
Any infusion determined by Leather Mimsy is a terrible thing to
countenance, indeed.
Haven't the Germans been made to bleed enough, Mimsy ?
Slick Ole Goose, never one to speak truth, takes great delight in
spraying bullshit all over the newsgroups as if she thinks she doing a
public service. Along with it, the iceberg of Slick's bigotry pops up
more and more. With no credibility, Slick's staggers on in search of
someone to believe her lies.

DCI
Robert Kolker
2006-09-01 01:04:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Godzilla Pimp
Are you suggesting the Britain should have made a deal the the Nazis?
Yes!
The English ARE Germans, but degenerated. They haven't had any fresh
The English are as much Norman as Saxon and Angle.
Post by Godzilla Pimp
continental blood since 1066. Now they are going to become Muslim. You think
Poor Britain. They only owned the ocean and invented the industrial
revolution, those pathetics degenerates.
Post by Godzilla Pimp
THAT is better?
Not at all. But the vitality of a nation is not determined genetically.

Bob Kolker
Tuco Ramirez
2006-09-01 03:39:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Kolker
Post by Godzilla Pimp
Are you suggesting the Britain should have made a deal the the Nazis?
Yes!
The English ARE Germans, but degenerated. They haven't had any fresh
The English are as much Norman as Saxon and Angle.
Post by Godzilla Pimp
continental blood since 1066. Now they are going to become Muslim. You think
Poor Britain. They only owned the ocean and invented the industrial
revolution, those pathetics degenerates.
Post by Godzilla Pimp
THAT is better?
Not at all. But the vitality of a nation is not determined genetically.
You are right, it is determined by a lottery system.
Topaz
2006-09-01 00:56:26 UTC
Permalink
England's Guilt
by Joseph Goebbels

It is a major error to assume that England's plutocrats slipped into
the war against their will or even against their intentions. The
opposite is true. The English warmongers wanted the war and used all
the resources at their disposal over the years to bring it about. They
surely were not surprised by the war. English plutocracy had no goal
other than to unleash war against Germany at the right moment, and
this since Germany first began to seek once again to be a world power.
Poland really had little to do with the outbreak of war between the
Reich and England. It was only a means to an end. England did not
support the Polish government out of principle or for humanitarian
reasons. That is clear from the fact that England gave Poland no help
of any kind whatsoever when the war began. Nor did England take any
measures against Russia. The opposite, in fact. The London warring
clique to this day has tried to bring Russia into the campaign of
aggression against Germany.
The encirclement of Germany long before the outbreak of the war was
traditional English policy. From the beginning, England has always
directed its main military might against Germany. It never could
tolerate a strong Reich on the Continent. It justified its policy by
claiming that it wanted to maintain a balance of forces in Europe.
Today there is still another reason. The English warmongers conceal
it. It is crassly egotistic. The English prime minister announced the
day the war began that England's goal was to destroy Hitlerism.
However, he defined Hitlerism in a way other than how the English
plutocracy actually sees it. The English warmongers claim that
National Socialism wants to conquer the world. No nation is secure
against German aggression. An end must be made of the German hunger
for power. The limit came in the conflict with Poland. In reality,
however, there is another reason for England's war with Germany. The
English warmongers cannot seriously claim that Germany wants to
conquer the world, particularly in view of the fact that England
controls nearly two thirds of the world. And Germany since 1933 has
never threatened English interests.
So when Chamberlain says that England wants to destroy Hitlerism in
this war, he is in one sense incorrect. But in another sense, he is
speaking the truth. England does want to destroy Hitlerism. It sees
Hitlerism as the present internal state of the Reich, which is a thorn
in the eye of English plutocracy.
England is a capitalist democracy. Germany is a socialist people's
state. And it is not the case that we think England is the richest
land on earth. There are lords and City men in England who are in fact
the richest men on earth. The broad masses, however, see little of
this wealth. We see in England an army of millions of impoverished,
socially enslaved and oppressed people. Child labor is still a matter
of course there. They have only heard about social welfare programs.
Parliament occasionally discusses social legislation. Nowhere else is
there such terrible and horrifying inequality as in the English slums.
Those with good breeding take no notice of it. Should anyone speak of
it in public, the press, which serves plutocratic democracy, quickly
brands him the worst kind of rascal. They do not hesitate from making
major changes in the Constitution if they are necessary to preserve
capitalist democracy.
Capitalism democracy suffers from every possible modern social
ailment. The Lords and City people can remain the richest people one
earth only because they constantly maintain their wealth by exploiting
their colonies and preserving unbelievable poverty in their own
country.
Germany, on the other hand, has based its domestic policies on new and
modern social principles. That is why it is a danger to English
plutocracy. It is also why English capitalists want to destroy
Hitlerism. They see Hitlerism as all the generous social reforms that
have occurred in Germany since 1933. The English plutocrats rightly
fear that good things are contagious, that they could endanger English
capitalism.
That is why England declared war on Germany. Since it was accustomed
to letting others fight its wars, it looked to the European continent
to find those ready to fight for England's interests. France was ready
to take on this degrading duty, since the same kind of people ruled
France. They too were ready for war out of egotistic reasons. Western
European democracy is really only a Western European plutocracy that
rules the world. It declared war on German socialism because it
endangered their capitalist interests.
A similar drama began in 1914. England had more luck during those four
and a half years than it is having today. Europe's nations had no
chance to see what was happening. The nations of Europe today have no
desire to play the same role they played during the World War. England
and France stand alone. Still, England is trying once again to wage
war without making any personal sacrifice. The goal is to blockade
Germany, to gradually bring it to submit by starvation. That is
longstanding English policy. They used it successfully in the
Napoleonic wars, and also during the World War. It would work now as
well, if the German people had not been educated by National
Socialism. National Socialism is immune to English temptations.
English propaganda lies no longer work in Germany. They have gradually
lost their effectiveness in the rest of the world as well, since
German propaganda today reaches far beyond its borders. This time,
English plutocracy will not succeed in driving a wedge between the
German people and their leadership, though that is their goal.
The German nation today is defending not only its honor and
independence, but also the great social accomplishments it has made
through hard and untiring work since 1933. It is a people's state
built on the foundation of justice and economic good sense. In the
past, England always had the advantage of facing a fragmented Germany.
It is only natural that English plutocracy today seeks to split the
German people and make it ripe for new collapse.
English lying propaganda can no longer name things by their proper
names. It therefore claims that it is not fighting the German people,
only Hitlerism. But we know this old song. In South Africa, England
was not fighting the Boers, only Krugerism. In the World War, England
wanted to destroy Kaiserism, not the German people. But that did not
stop English plutocracy from brutally and relentlessly suppressing the
Boers after that war or the Germans after our defeat.
A child once burned is twice shy. The German people were once victims
of lying English war propaganda. Now it understands the situation. It
has long understood the background of this war. It knows that behind
all English plutocratic capitalism's fine words, its aim is to destroy
Germany's social achievements. We are defending the socialism we have
build in Germany since 1933 with every military, economic and
spiritual means at our disposal. The bald English lies have no impact
on the German people.
English plutocracy is finally being forced to defend itself. In the
past, it always found other nations to fight for it. This time, the
English people must themselves risk their necks for the lords and City
men. They will meet a unified German people of workers, farmers and
soldiers who are prepared to defend their nation with every means at
their disposal.
We did not want war. England inflicted it on us. English plutocracy
forced it on us. England is responsible for the war, and it will have
to pay for it.
The whole world is waking up today. It can no longer be ruled by the
capitalist methods of the 19th Century. The peoples have matured. They
will one day deal a terrible blow to the capitalist plutocrats who are
the cause of their misery.
It is no accident that National Socialism has the historical task of
carrying out this reckoning. Plutocracy is collapsing intellectually,
spiritually, and in the not too distant future, militarily. We are
acting consistently with Nietzsche's words: "Give a shove to what is
falling."


http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
a***@gmail.com
2006-09-01 01:43:52 UTC
Permalink
****Please Pass
Along*****

Sundance Film Fest Award-winning Documentary
'AMERICAN BLACKOUT' Hits Theatres

"Engrossing, fast-paced, stylish... a powerful examination of voting
rights in America." -Sura Wood, HOLLYWOOD REPORTER

"...a provocative look at black disenfranchisement in the 2004
election." -David Halbfinger, NY TIMES

"...a muckraking indictment of ... the systematic disenfranchisement of
African American voters..." -Kenneth Turan, LA TIMES


Winner of the Special Jury Prize at the 2006 Sundance Film Festival,
director Ian Inaba's searing documentary American Blackout will open
for an theatrical engagement in the

September 8th-15th
Cleveland, Ohio-AMC Magic Johnson Randall Park Mall 12.
Texas,
Pasadena

September 4th & 5th
Florida- Cinema Paradiso, 503 SE 6th St,Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301



The release is part of a nationwide theatrical rollout and grassroots
DVD effort first launched in Atlanta.

Recently featured in the New York Times, American Blackout is a
multi-year effort that chronicles the recurring patterns of minority
disenfranchisement witnessed in the 2000 and 2004 elections.

American Blackout gains unprecedented access to one of the most
controversial and dangerous politicians in
America and examines the contemporary tactics used to control our
democratic process and silence political dissent.

This film is a perfect hook for a feature looking at these formidable
voting issues as we approach the 2006-midterm elections in November and
with the recent debate in Congress over the renewal of the Voting
Rights Act. It serves as an alarming wake-up call for voters that
forces are actively conspiring to co-opt and even steal their votes.
We are urging and asking for the support of all Ohio community
organizations with an interest in the future advancements of
African-Americans in this country. Please feel free to pass this
information along, as well as, turn out in the theatres. Director Ian
Inaba is available for interviews.

Thank you for your support.
The American Blackout Team

To View the trailer:
http://www.gnn.tv/V00064

GNN Productions
www.gnn.tv

www.americanblackout.com

www.endtheblackout.org
To View the trailer:
http://www.gnn.tv/V00064

GNN Productions

www.gnn.tv
www.americanblackout.com
www.endtheblackout.org
Post by Topaz
England's Guilt
by Joseph Goebbels
It is a major error to assume that England's plutocrats slipped into
the war against their will or even against their intentions. The
opposite is true. The English warmongers wanted the war and used all
the resources at their disposal over the years to bring it about. They
surely were not surprised by the war. English plutocracy had no goal
other than to unleash war against Germany at the right moment, and
this since Germany first began to seek once again to be a world power.
Poland really had little to do with the outbreak of war between the
Reich and England. It was only a means to an end. England did not
support the Polish government out of principle or for humanitarian
reasons. That is clear from the fact that England gave Poland no help
of any kind whatsoever when the war began. Nor did England take any
measures against Russia. The opposite, in fact. The London warring
clique to this day has tried to bring Russia into the campaign of
aggression against Germany.
The encirclement of Germany long before the outbreak of the war was
traditional English policy. From the beginning, England has always
directed its main military might against Germany. It never could
tolerate a strong Reich on the Continent. It justified its policy by
claiming that it wanted to maintain a balance of forces in Europe.
Today there is still another reason. The English warmongers conceal
it. It is crassly egotistic. The English prime minister announced the
day the war began that England's goal was to destroy Hitlerism.
However, he defined Hitlerism in a way other than how the English
plutocracy actually sees it. The English warmongers claim that
National Socialism wants to conquer the world. No nation is secure
against German aggression. An end must be made of the German hunger
for power. The limit came in the conflict with Poland. In reality,
however, there is another reason for England's war with Germany. The
English warmongers cannot seriously claim that Germany wants to
conquer the world, particularly in view of the fact that England
controls nearly two thirds of the world. And Germany since 1933 has
never threatened English interests.
So when Chamberlain says that England wants to destroy Hitlerism in
this war, he is in one sense incorrect. But in another sense, he is
speaking the truth. England does want to destroy Hitlerism. It sees
Hitlerism as the present internal state of the Reich, which is a thorn
in the eye of English plutocracy.
England is a capitalist democracy. Germany is a socialist people's
state. And it is not the case that we think England is the richest
land on earth. There are lords and City men in England who are in fact
the richest men on earth. The broad masses, however, see little of
this wealth. We see in England an army of millions of impoverished,
socially enslaved and oppressed people. Child labor is still a matter
of course there. They have only heard about social welfare programs.
Parliament occasionally discusses social legislation. Nowhere else is
there such terrible and horrifying inequality as in the English slums.
Those with good breeding take no notice of it. Should anyone speak of
it in public, the press, which serves plutocratic democracy, quickly
brands him the worst kind of rascal. They do not hesitate from making
major changes in the Constitution if they are necessary to preserve
capitalist democracy.
Capitalism democracy suffers from every possible modern social
ailment. The Lords and City people can remain the richest people one
earth only because they constantly maintain their wealth by exploiting
their colonies and preserving unbelievable poverty in their own
country.
Germany, on the other hand, has based its domestic policies on new and
modern social principles. That is why it is a danger to English
plutocracy. It is also why English capitalists want to destroy
Hitlerism. They see Hitlerism as all the generous social reforms that
have occurred in Germany since 1933. The English plutocrats rightly
fear that good things are contagious, that they could endanger English
capitalism.
That is why England declared war on Germany. Since it was accustomed
to letting others fight its wars, it looked to the European continent
to find those ready to fight for England's interests. France was ready
to take on this degrading duty, since the same kind of people ruled
France. They too were ready for war out of egotistic reasons. Western
European democracy is really only a Western European plutocracy that
rules the world. It declared war on German socialism because it
endangered their capitalist interests.
A similar drama began in 1914. England had more luck during those four
and a half years than it is having today. Europe's nations had no
chance to see what was happening. The nations of Europe today have no
desire to play the same role they played during the World War. England
and France stand alone. Still, England is trying once again to wage
war without making any personal sacrifice. The goal is to blockade
Germany, to gradually bring it to submit by starvation. That is
longstanding English policy. They used it successfully in the
Napoleonic wars, and also during the World War. It would work now as
well, if the German people had not been educated by National
Socialism. National Socialism is immune to English temptations.
English propaganda lies no longer work in Germany. They have gradually
lost their effectiveness in the rest of the world as well, since
German propaganda today reaches far beyond its borders. This time,
English plutocracy will not succeed in driving a wedge between the
German people and their leadership, though that is their goal.
The German nation today is defending not only its honor and
independence, but also the great social accomplishments it has made
through hard and untiring work since 1933. It is a people's state
built on the foundation of justice and economic good sense. In the
past, England always had the advantage of facing a fragmented Germany.
It is only natural that English plutocracy today seeks to split the
German people and make it ripe for new collapse.
English lying propaganda can no longer name things by their proper
names. It therefore claims that it is not fighting the German people,
only Hitlerism. But we know this old song. In South Africa, England
was not fighting the Boers, only Krugerism. In the World War, England
wanted to destroy Kaiserism, not the German people. But that did not
stop English plutocracy from brutally and relentlessly suppressing the
Boers after that war or the Germans after our defeat.
A child once burned is twice shy. The German people were once victims
of lying English war propaganda. Now it understands the situation. It
has long understood the background of this war. It knows that behind
all English plutocratic capitalism's fine words, its aim is to destroy
Germany's social achievements. We are defending the socialism we have
build in Germany since 1933 with every military, economic and
spiritual means at our disposal. The bald English lies have no impact
on the German people.
English plutocracy is finally being forced to defend itself. In the
past, it always found other nations to fight for it. This time, the
English people must themselves risk their necks for the lords and City
men. They will meet a unified German people of workers, farmers and
soldiers who are prepared to defend their nation with every means at
their disposal.
We did not want war. England inflicted it on us. English plutocracy
forced it on us. England is responsible for the war, and it will have
to pay for it.
The whole world is waking up today. It can no longer be ruled by the
capitalist methods of the 19th Century. The peoples have matured. They
will one day deal a terrible blow to the capitalist plutocrats who are
the cause of their misery.
It is no accident that National Socialism has the historical task of
carrying out this reckoning. Plutocracy is collapsing intellectually,
spiritually, and in the not too distant future, militarily. We are
acting consistently with Nietzsche's words: "Give a shove to what is
falling."
http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
Topaz
2006-09-02 04:40:35 UTC
Permalink
Portugal was once a great nation. It might have been the greatest
nation on earth at one time. But now it is almost like a third world
country. What happened? Race-mixing is what happened. They let a lot
of Black people in and of course the result was racial inter-marriage.
Now the Portuguese people are not as White as they were. We need to
preserve the White race. Here are some quotes from Mein Kampf:

"All that we admire in the world to-day, its science, its art, its
technical developments and discoveries, are the products of the
creative activities of a few peoples, and it may be true that their
first beginnings must be attributed to one race. The maintenance of
civilization is wholly dependant on such peoples. Should they perish,
all that makes this earth beautiful will descend with them into the
grave."
"All the great civilizations of the past became decadent because the
originally creative race died out, as a result of the contamination on
the blood."
"Every manifestation of human culture, every product of art, science
and technical skill, which we see before our eyes to-day, is almost
exclusively the product of the Aryan creative power. This very fact
fully justifies the conclusion that it was the Aryan alone who founded
a superior type of humanity"
"The foundations of actual life in Japan to-day are not those of the
native Japanese culture, although this characterizes the external
features of the country, which features strike the eye of European
observers on account of their fundamental difference from us; but the
real foundations of contemporary Japanese life are the enormous
scientific and technical achievements of Europe and America, that is
to say, of Aryan peoples."
"A people that fails to preserve the purity of its racial blood
thereby destroys the unity of the soul of the nation in all its
manifestations. A disintegrated national character is the inevitable
consequence of the process of disintegration in the blood. And the
change which takes place in the spiritual and creative faculties of a
people is only an effect of the change that had modified its racial
substance."
"For in a world which would be composed of mongrels and Negroid all
ideals of human beauty and nobility and all hopes of an idealized
future for our humanity would be lost forever."
"It is especially the cultural creativeness which disappears when a
superior race inter-mixes with an inferior one."
"There may be hundreds of excellent States in this earth, and yet if
the Aryan, who is the creator and custodian of civilization, should
disappear, all culture that is on an adequate level with the spiritual
needs of the superior nations to-day would also disappear."
"We National Socialists know that in holding these views we take up a
revolutionary stand in the world to-day and that we are branded as
revolutionaries. But our views and our conduct will not be determined
by the approbation or disapprobation of our contemporaries, but only
by our duty to follow a truth which we have acknowledged. In doing
this we have reason to believe that posterity will have a clearer
insight"
"Thus for the first time a high inner purpose is accredited to the
State. In face of the ridiculous phrase that the State should do no
more than act as the guardian of public order and tranquility, so that
everybody can peacefully dupe everybody else, it is given a very high
mission indeed to preserve and encourage the highest type of humanity
which a beneficent Creator has bestowed on this earth."


http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
Robert Kolker
2006-09-02 17:59:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Topaz
Portugal was once a great nation. It might have been the greatest
nation on earth at one time. But now it is almost like a third world
country. What happened? Race-mixing is what happened. They let a lot
of Black people in and of course the result was racial inter-marriage.
Now the Portuguese people are not as White as they were. We need to
"All that we admire in the world to-day, its science, its art, its
technical developments and discoveries, are the products of the
creative activities of a few peoples, and it may be true that their
That is why the Jewish Mongrels invented the A-bomb and the Aryan
superduperueber scientists failed miserably at the task. Face it
schmuck. Jews are smarter (on average) than Aryans. And they build
better nuclear weapons, too. That is why the greatest mathematician who
ever lived, Ramanujan, was blacker than the ace of spades.

Your Fuehrer was a great believer in survival of the fittest. So why did
you superduperueber Aryans lose the war? Huh? Why was your country
utterly wrecked, mostly by Asiatic Barbarians from the East? Why were
your beautiful Aryan cities reduced to rubble by the untermenschen? If
the fittest do survive, the outcome of WW2 prove that the Aryans are
second rate mud people. And it does not matter one bit whether they have
blue eyes or are blonde. Facts show that the Aryans are legends in their
own minds, but are really inferior. They are just too dumb to admit it.

Bob Kolker
RG
2006-09-02 21:10:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Kolker
Post by Topaz
Portugal was once a great nation. It might have been the greatest
nation on earth at one time. But now it is almost like a third world
country. What happened? Race-mixing is what happened. They let a lot
of Black people in and of course the result was racial inter-marriage.
Now the Portuguese people are not as White as they were. We need to
"All that we admire in the world to-day, its science, its art, its
technical developments and discoveries, are the products of the
creative activities of a few peoples, and it may be true that their
That is why the Jewish Mongrels invented the A-bomb and the Aryan
superduperueber scientists failed miserably at the task. Face it
schmuck. Jews are smarter (on average) than Aryans. And they build
better nuclear weapons, too. That is why the greatest mathematician who
ever lived, Ramanujan, was blacker than the ace of spades.
If Jews are smarter, on average, it's only because Hitler and
the Germans and the Russians killed the stupid ones. Which
makes me wonder how you survived.
Topaz
2006-09-04 00:34:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by RG
If Jews are smarter, on average, it's only because Hitler and
the Germans and the Russians killed the stupid ones. Which
makes me wonder how you survived.
Article Winston Churchill wrote in 1920:
"This movement amongst the Jews (the Russian Revolution) is not new.
From the days of Spartacus Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down
to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kuhn (Hungary), Rosa Luxembourg (Germany)
and Emma Goldman (United States), this world wide conspiracy for the
overthrow of civilization and the reconstruction of society on the
basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible
equality, has been steadily growing. It played, as a modern writer,
Mrs. Nesta Webster, has so ably shown, a definitely recognizable part
in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of
every subversive movement during the Nineteenth Century; and now at
last this band of extraordinary personalities has gripped the Russian
people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the
undisputed masters of that enormous empire. There is no need to
exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the
actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution by these international
and for the most part atheistic Jews. Moreover, the principal
inspiration and driving power comes from Jewish leaders." (ibid)

Lev Trotzky wrote a book called "Stalin: An Appraisal of the Man and
His Influence", Harper Bros., New York and London, 1941, translated by
Charles Malamuth.
In this book he told who the principle members of the October Central
Committee were. This group was the leadership of the Bolshevik Party
during the October Revolution. This is what he wrote:
"In view of the Party's semi-legality the names of persons elected by
secret ballot were not announced at the Congress, with the exception
of the four who had received the largest number of votes. Lenin--133
out of a possible 134, Zinoviev--132, Kamenev--131, Trotzky--131."
Of these four top leaders of the Bolshevik Party the last three were
known Jews. Lenin was thought to be a gentile married to a Jewess. It
was later proven that he was one quarter Jewish, London Jewish
Chronicle April 21, 1995, Lenin: Life and Legacy.
David Francis, the American Ambassador to Russia at the time of the
Revolution, wrote:
"The Bolshevic leaders here, most of whom are Jews and 90 percent of
whom are returned exiles, care little for Russia or any other country
but are internationalists and they are trying to start a world-wide
revolution."
The Director of British Intelligence to the U.S. Secretary of State
wrote this:
"There is now definite evidence that Bolshevism is an international
movement controlled by Jews."
In 1945 the FBI arrested six individuals for stealing 1700 highly
confidential documents from State Department files. This was the
Amerasia case they were:
Philip Jaffe, a Russian Jew who came to the U.S. in 1905. He was at
one time the editor of the communist paper "Labor Defense" and the
ringleader of the group arrested.
Andrew Roth, a Jew.
Mark Gayn, a Jew, changed his name from Julius Ginsberg.
John Service, a gentile.
Emmanuel Larsen, nationality unknown
Kate Mitchel, nationality unknown.
In 1949 the Jewess Judith Coplin was caught passing classified
documents from Justice Department files to a Russian agent.
The highest ranking communist brought to trial in the U.S. was Gerhart
Eisler. He was a Jew. He was the secret boss of the Communist Party
in the U.S. and commuted regularly between the U.S. and Russia.
In 1950 there was the "Hollywood Ten" case. Ten leading film writers
of the Hollywood Film Colony were convicted for contempt of Congress
and sentenced to prison. Nine of the ten were Jews. Six of the ten
were communist party members and the other four were flagrantly
pro-communist.
One of the top new stories of 1949 was the trial of Eugene Dennis and
the Convicted Eleven. This group comprised the National Secretariat of
the American Communist Party. Six were Jews, two gentiles, three
nationality unknown.
Also in 1949 the German-born atomic scientist Klaus Fuchs was
convicted for passing atomic secrets to the Russians. Acting on
information obtained from Fuchs the FBI arrested nine other members of
the ring. All of them were convicted. Eight of the nine were Jews.
Here are some quotes from a very pro-Jewish book that was first
published in 1925. The book is "Stranger than Fiction" by Lewis
Browne.
"But save for such exceptions, the Jews who led or participated in the
heroic efforts to remold the world of the last century, were neither
Reform or Orthodox. Indeed, they were often not professing Jews at
all.
"For instance, there was Heinrich Heine and Ludwig Borne, both
unfaltering champions of freedom. And even more conspicuously, there
was Karl Marx, one of the great prophetic geniuses of modern times.
"Jewish historians rarely mention the name of this man, Karl Marx,
though in his life and spirit he was far truer to the mission of
Israel than most of those who were forever talking of it. He was born
in Germany in 1818, and belonged to an old rabbinic family. He was not
himself reared as a Jew, however, but while still a child was baptized
a Christian by his father. Yet the rebel soul of the Jew flamed in him
throughout his days, for he was always a 'troubler' in Europe."

"Then, of course, there are Ludwig Borne and Heinrich Heine, two men
who by their merciless wit and sarcasm became leaders among the
revolutionary writers. Karl Marx, Ferdinand Lassalle, Johann Jacoby,
Gabriel Riesser, Adolphe Cremieux, Signora Nathan- all these of Jewish
lineage played important roles in the struggle that went throughout
Europe in this period. Wherever the war for human liberty was being
waged, whether in France, Germany, Austria, Hungary, or Italy, there
the Jew was to be found. It was little wonder that the enemies of
social progress, the monarchists and the Churchmen, came to speak of
the whole liberal movement as nothing but a Jewish plot."
The book "Soviet Russia and the Jews" by Gregor Aronson and published
by the American Jewish League Against Communism, quotes Stalin in an
interview in 1931 with the Jewish Telegraph Agency. Stalin said:
"...Communists cannot be anything but outspoken enemies of
Anti-Semitism. We fight anti-Semites by the strongest methods in the
Soviet Union. Active anti-Semites are punished by death under the
law."
The following quotes are taken directly from documents available from
the
U.S. Archives:
State Department document 861.00/1757 sent May 2, 1918 by U.S. consul
general in Moscow, Summers: "Jews prominent in local Soviet
government, anti-Jewish feeling growing among population...."
State Department document 861.00/2205 was sent from Vladivostok on
July 5, 1918 by U.S. consul Caldwell: "Fifty percent of Soviet
government in each town consists of Jews of the worst type."
From the Headquarters of the American Expeditionary Forces, Siberia on
March 1, 1919, comes this telegram from Omsk by Chief of Staff, Capt.
Montgomey Shuyler: "It is probably unwise to say this loudly in the
United States but the Bolshevik movement is and has been since it's
beginning, guided and controlled by Russian Jews of the greasiest
type" type."
A second Schuyler telegram, dated June 9, 1919 from Vladivostok,
reports on the make-up of the presiding Soviet government: "...(T)here
were 384 'commissars' including 2 negroes, 13 Russians, 15 Chinamen,
22 Armenians, AND MORE THAN 300 JEWS. Of the latter number, 264 had
come to Russia from the United States since the downfall of the
Imperial Government.
The Netherlands' ambassador in Russia, Oudendyke, confirmed this:
"Unless Bolshevism is nipped in the bud immediately, it is bound to
spread in one form or another over Europe and the whole world as it is
organized and worked by Jews who have no nationality, and whose one
object is to destroy for their own ends the existing order of things."
"The Bolshevik revolution in Russia was the work of Jewish brains, of
Jewish dissatisfaction, of Jewish planning, whose goal is to create a
new order in the world. What was performed in so excellent a way in
Russia, thanks to Jewish brains, and because of Jewish dissatisfaction
and by Jewish planning, shall also, through the same Jewish mental an
physical forces, become a reality all over the world." (The American
Hebrew, September 10, 1920
"In the Bolshevik era, 52 percent of the membership of the Soviet
communist party was Jewish, though Jews comprised only 1.8 percent of
the total population." (Stuart Kahan, The Wolf of the Kremlin, p. 81)
Interestingly, one of the first acts by the Bolsheviks was to make
so-called "anti-Semitism" a capital crime. This is confirmed by Stalin
himself:
"National and racial chauvinism is a vestige of the misanthropic
customs characteristic of the period of cannibalism. Anti-semitism, as
an extreme form of racial chauvinism, is the most dangerous vestige of
cannibalism...under USSR law active anti-Semites are liable to the
death penalty." (Stalin, Collected Works, vol. 13, p. 30).

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



http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
Robert Kolker
2006-09-04 15:30:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Topaz
"The Soviet Union was in fact a paradise for one group: the Jews. Even
at times when for foreign policy reasons Jews were less evident in the
government, or when they ruled through straw men, the Jews were always
visible in the middle and lower levels of the administration."
After Uncle Joe consolidated power, things were not so good for Jews. If
you recall Uncle Joe had Trotsky (Lev Brownstein) assassinate in Mexica.
Just before Uncle Joe die he was planning to execute the Mother of all
Pograms and purge Jews from the the communist power structure, once and
for all.

Uncle Joe and his buddies disliked Jews as much as did Hitler and his
buddies.

Bob Kolker
Topaz
2006-09-04 17:17:22 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 10:30:45 -0500, Robert Kolker
Post by Robert Kolker
After Uncle Joe consolidated power, things were not so good for Jews. If
you recall Uncle Joe had Trotsky (Lev Brownstein) assassinate in Mexica.
Just before Uncle Joe die he was planning to execute the Mother of all
Pograms and purge Jews from the the communist power structure, once and
for all.
Uncle Joe and his buddies disliked Jews as much as did Hitler and his
buddies.
The Jewish Telegraph Agency, on Jan 12, 1931, reported on an
inquiry, which they sent to Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin asking him
to describe the Soviet Union's stand on "anti-Semitism". The JTA
reported that Stalin sent back the following response:

"Anti-Semitism benefits the exploiters for it serves as a lightening
conductor to divert from capitalism the blows of the toilers.
Anti-Semitism is dangerous for the toilers, for it is a false track
which diverts them from the proper road and leads them into the
jungle. Hence, Communists, as consistent internationalists, cannot but
be irreconcilable and bitter enemies of anti-Semitism. In the USSR
anti-Semitism is strictly prosecuted as a phenomenon hostile to the
Soviet system. According to the laws of the USSR active anti-Semites
are punished with death!"

Stalin cared about Russia and came into conflict with other
Communists who had other motives.

David Francis, the American Ambassador to Russia at the time of the
Revolution, wrote:

"The Bolshevic leaders here, most of whom are Jews and 90 percent
of whom are returned exiles, care little for Russia or any other
country but are internationalists and they are trying to start a
world-wide revolution."

The fact is that most Communist leaders were Jews. Some of them were
executed but not just because they were Jews. In Czechoslovakia the
Minister of Justice who ordered the execution of nine Communist Jews
was Stefan Reis, recognized by the Jewish Chronicle, a leading Jewish
periodical of England, of 5th May, 1950, as a Jew himself.
In Rumania, the Jewess Anna Parker was replaced by another Jew, A.
Bughici.

Stalin married a Jewess and his daughter in 1951 also married a Jew.

http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
Robert Kolker
2006-09-04 19:04:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Topaz
Bughici.
Stalin married a Jewess and his daughter in 1951 also married a Jew.
So? He was still ready to do a pogrom. By the way, he came to dislike
his Jewish wife itensely. He infamous "doctor's plot" was aimed
primarily at Jews. If Stalin had lived long enough he would have purged
the Communist apparatus of Jews.

Have you ever wondered why so many Soviet Jews were trying to get out of
Russia? If it was to great for Jews there, why leave?

Bob Kolker
FiveTwoAlphaOne
2006-09-04 18:42:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Kolker
Post by Topaz
"The Soviet Union was in fact a paradise for one group: the Jews. Even
at times when for foreign policy reasons Jews were less evident in the
government, or when they ruled through straw men, the Jews were always
visible in the middle and lower levels of the administration."
After Uncle Joe consolidated power, things were not so good for Jews. If
you recall Uncle Joe had Trotsky (Lev Brownstein) assassinate in Mexica.
Just before Uncle Joe die he was planning to execute the Mother of all
Pograms and purge Jews from the the communist power structure, once and
for all.
Uncle Joe and his buddies disliked Jews as much as did Hitler and his
buddies.
Yet there were millions and millions of them that survived
Joe and were actually quite prosperous and powerful.
Strange...
--
MikeOscarPapa
Vote out all incumbents in November '06
Reform the Media:Boycott CBS, CNN, FOX, ABC, NBC
(C-SPAN is on warning)
http://www.freepress.net/
http://www.prwatch.org/
http://www.alternet.org/
http://mediamatters.org/
Robert Kolker
2006-09-04 23:41:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by FiveTwoAlphaOne
Yet there were millions and millions of them that survived
Joe and were actually quite prosperous and powerful.
Strange...
The ones who wanted out of the Soviet Union weren't so prosperous and
powerful. Otherwise they would not have wanted out.

Bob Kolker
Topaz
2006-09-06 22:24:38 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 18:41:50 -0500, Robert Kolker
Post by Robert Kolker
The ones who wanted out of the Soviet Union weren't so prosperous and
powerful. Otherwise they would not have wanted out.
Of course the Christains wanted out. But they don't control the
media so they don't get the coverage. Communism was atheistic and
started by atheistic Jews. Most of the Jews in the Jew country are
also atheists.

http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
Topaz
2006-09-02 20:56:52 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 02 Sep 2006 12:59:04 -0500, Robert Kolker
Post by Robert Kolker
That is why the Jewish Mongrels invented the A-bomb and the Aryan
superduperueber scientists failed miserably at the task.
Einstein basicly said you can get a lot of energy from a chunk of
uranium. That is a far cry from building the bomb.
Post by Robert Kolker
Face it
schmuck. Jews are smarter (on average) than Aryans. And they build
better nuclear weapons, too.
"It is said that the Jews, at least the Ashkenazi Jews, have a
higher average IQ than Whites, at least Whites as loosely defined
by the designers of the IQ tests. [ <http://tinyurl.com/ihhe> ]
According to Professor Richard Lynn, writing in Personality and
Individual Differences on April 2d, 2003, the average verbal IQ
of American Jews is about 108, which, some people argue, might
explain the disproportionate number of Jews in certain positions.
[ <http://tinyurl.com/ihif> ] For example, although Jews are only
about 2 to 3% of the U.S. population, they constitute 23% of the
wealthiest Americans, 30% of the faculty at "elite" universities,
11% of Nobel Physics prizes, 60% of Yale graduate students, 60%
of "top Hollywood positions" (according to 60 Minutes), and 76%
of "most influential intellectuals" (according to Alan
Dershowitz).

It's in verbal IQ -- not mathematical or visuospatial ability --
that Jews excel, and, when you consider that the fast-talking,
quick-thinking sharpster or con man is almost a Jewish
stereotype, then common experience confirms the data. [
<http://tinyurl.com/ihje> ] This would mean that the Jewish
advantage would show itself mainly in areas like law, politics,
journalism, media, advertising, public relations, and other
fields in which verbal skills, persuasion, word-weaving, or
illusion-weaving are especially valuable. And that's what the
statistics indicate. Though Jews are overrepresented in physics
and math, they are far more overrepresented in Hollywood and law.
This is another case where our day-to-day experience perfectly
matches the science, and is essentially undeniable.

According to Professor Lynn, in the article cited above, we would
expect that the Jewish population would produce highly
intelligent individuals, with an IQ over 130, at a rate four
times higher than that of Whites. Even if we put the Jewish
percentage at 3% of the total population, that would mean that we
would expect that Jews would constitute some 12% of
high-achievers in the United States. But that isn't the case,
especially in areas well-known to be dominated by Jews. Instead
we see them at 76% of "influential intellectuals," 60% of
Hollywood executives, and 30% of "elite" college faculty. Why
this wild overrepresentation, far beyond what we'd expect based
on the IQ scores? [ <http://tinyurl.com/ihk2> ] Some have argued
that Jewish families are far more concerned than White families
about the academic and professional success of their offspring,
and concentrate far more of their time and energy and money on
making sure that their children succeed in school and go on to
the best careers possible. Others point out that Jews have a far
higher degree of group consciousness -- of racial identity --
than Whites, and that this intense ethnic identity makes Jews
willing and eager to put their group interests above other
interests, even individual economic interests. Thus Jews are more
willing to help their fellow Jews because they are Jews (which
experience tells us they do in so many different ways that it
boggles the mind) than Whites are willing to help their fellow
Whites because they are Whites (which happens far too seldom, and
which is socially unacceptable anyway -- even illegal -- in the
insane social and "moral" system which crafty Jews and decadent
Whites have imposed on us). So Jews will preferentially hire
other Jews; Jews will openly organize themselves to advance
Jewish interests; Jews will portray Jews as sympathetic
characters in their entertainment media; Jews will show Jewish
interests as morally right in their news media; and, most
importantly in my view, Jews will demonize any who oppose Jewish
interests or who promote White interests. All of these things
have an effect on the Jewish success rate in various fields, and
the last mentioned has a profound effect in making many Gentiles,
many Whites, act to promote Jewish success and Jewish interests
and also makes them, in many cases, act against their own
individual interests and their own racial interests. In fact,
Jewish influence has been paramount in constructing the 'liberal'
moral paradigm of the 20th century, which in effect says that
acting in the interest of White people and doing anything which
tends to support our continued existence in the world -- whether
opposing racial mixing or working for an exclusive living space
for Whites -- is "racism" and of course "racism" is the ultimate
in evil according to this Jewish-created "morality...'

Kevin Alfred Strom
Post by Robert Kolker
That is why the greatest mathematician who
ever lived, Ramanujan, was blacker than the ace of spades.
not possible
Post by Robert Kolker
Your Fuehrer was a great believer in survival of the fittest.
We replaced survival of the fittest with something better. We
encouraged the best people to have a lot of children and those with
serious genetic defects were sterilized.
Post by Robert Kolker
So why did
you superduperueber Aryans lose the war? Huh?
Compare the size of Germany to the size of the Jewish controlled
counties, the USA and the USSR. And it was still a close fight.
Post by Robert Kolker
Why was your country
utterly wrecked, mostly by Asiatic Barbarians from the East? Why were
your beautiful Aryan cities reduced to rubble by the untermenschen? If
the fittest do survive, the outcome of WW2 prove that the Aryans are
second rate mud people. And it does not matter one bit whether they have
blue eyes or are blonde. Facts show that the Aryans are legends in their
own minds, but are really inferior. They are just too dumb to admit it.
Bob Kolker
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 througout
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 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 Erikson, 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 witchdocter 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
specilaizes 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?"

Clarense 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 Renaisance 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 skyscapers, 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 floormates 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 shellshocked 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 abilties. 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?


http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
Robert Kolker
2006-09-02 22:22:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Topaz
On Sat, 02 Sep 2006 12:59:04 -0500, Robert Kolker
Post by Robert Kolker
That is why the Jewish Mongrels invented the A-bomb and the Aryan
superduperueber scientists failed miserably at the task.
Einstein basicly said you can get a lot of energy from a chunk of
uranium. That is a far cry from building the bomb.
True. But the crew at Los Alamos was mostly Jewish.


Bob Kolker
hc23hc
2006-09-02 21:29:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Kolker
Post by Topaz
On Sat, 02 Sep 2006 12:59:04 -0500, Robert Kolker
Post by Robert Kolker
That is why the Jewish Mongrels invented the A-bomb and the Aryan
superduperueber scientists failed miserably at the task.
Einstein basicly said you can get a lot of energy from a chunk of
uranium. That is a far cry from building the bomb.
True. But the crew at Los Alamos was mostly Jewish.
As in... <Topaz mode on> "expendable" ?
--
'American Blackout' : see it.


.
.
.
RG
2006-09-03 01:20:34 UTC
Permalink
Topaz wrote:

<It's a racial "Wonderful World" fairy tale snipped>

You do realize it was only a handful of people of all races that
were responsible for those inventions, don't you? Gun powder,
etc... And that it had nothing at all to do with you. You do
realize that don't you? You're a piggy backer. And you do
realize a Jew invented the computer you're using.

Most white women (even racist ones) would rather reproduce with
a good looking black man than you.
Topaz
2006-09-04 00:33:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by RG
You do realize it was only a handful of people of all races that
were responsible for those inventions, don't you?
No, Whites invented the cars and airplanes and refrigerators etc etc
etc
Post by RG
Gun powder,
When it comes to inventions we can name the individuals who made the
greatest advancements. And they are almost all White. The Wright
Brothers, Edison, etc. When it comes to gunpowder it was discovered so
long ago no one knows the individuals involved. Whites traveled all
over the world and it might have been Whites. Or it might have been
Chinese. Anyway, it is more a discovery than an invention. All you do
is put some minerals together and you have gunpowder. It's not like
inventing a car or an airplane or anything.

Indo-European: The Mummies of Xinjiang
The Mummies of Xinjiang
In the dry hills of this central Asian province, archeologist have
unearthed more than 100 corpses hat are as much s 4,000 years old.
Astonishingly well preserved - and Caucasian.
One glimpse of the corpses was enough to shock Victor Mair profoundly.
In 1987, Mair, a professor of Chinese at the University of
Pennsylvania, was leading a tour group through a museum in the Chinese
city of Urumqi, in the central Asian province of Xinjiang, when he
accidentally strayed into gloomy, newly opened room. There, under
glass, lay the recently discovered corpses of a family - a man, a
woman, and a child of two or three - each clad in long, dark purple
woolen garments and felt boots. Even today I get chills thinking about
that first encounter," says Mair. "The Chinese said they were 3,000
years old, yet the bodies looked as if they were buried yesterday."
But the real shock came when Mair looked closely at their faces. In
contrast to most central Asian peoples,these corpses had obvious
Caucasian, or European, features - blond hair, long noses, deep-set
eyes, and long skulls."I was thunderstruck," Mair recalls. "Even
though I was supposed to be leading a tour group, I just couldn't
leave that room. The questions kept nagging at me: Who were these
people? How did they get out here at such an early date?"
The corpses Mair saw that day were just a few of more than 100 dug up
by
Chinese archeologists over the past 16 years. All of them are
astonishingly
well preserved.They come from four major burial sites scattered
between the arid foothills of the Tian Shan ("Celestial Mountains") in
northwest China and the fringes of the The Taklimakan Desert, some 150
miles due south. All together, these bodies,dating from about 2000
B.C. to 300 B.C., constitute significant addition to the world's
catalog of prehistoric mummies. Unlike the roughly contemporaneous
mummies of ancient Egypt, the Xinjiang mummies were not ruler or
nobles; they were not interred in pyramids or other such monuments,nor
were they subjected to deliberate mummification procedures.
They were preserved merely by being buried in the parched, stony
desert, where daytime temperatures often soar over 100 degrees. In the
heat the bodies were quickly dried, with facial hair, skin, and other
tissues remaining largely intact.
Where exactly did these apparent Caucasians come from? And what were
they doing at remote desert oases in central Asia?
Any answers to these questions will most likely fuel a wide-ranging
debate about the role outsiders played in the rise of Chinese
civilization. As far back as the second century B.C., Chinese texts
refer to alien peoples called the Yuezhi and the Wusun, who lived on
China's far western borders; the texts make it clear that these people
were regarded as troublesome "barbarians." Until recently, scholars
have tended to downplay evidence of any early trade or contact between
China and the West, regarding the development of Chinese civilization
as an essentially homegrown affair scaled off from outside influences;
indeed, this view is still extremely congenial to the present Chinese
regime. Yet some archeologists have begun to argue that these supposed
barbarians might have been responsible for introducing into China such
basic items as the wheel and the first metal objects. Exactly who
these central Asian outsiders might have been, however what language
they spoke and where they came from - is a puzzle. No wonder, then,
that scholars see the discovery of the blond mummies as a sensational
new clue...
Most researchers now think the birthplace of horsedrawn vehicles and
horse riding was in the steppes east and west of the Urals rather than
in China or the Near East. As archeologist David Anthony and his
colleagues have shown through microscopic study of ancient horse
teeth, horses were already being harnessed in the Ukraine 6,000 years
ago. The Ukraine horses, Anthony found, show a particular kind of
tooth wear identical to that of modern horses that "fight the bit."
The world's earliest high-status vehicles also seem to have originated
in the steppes; recent discoveries of wooden chariots with elaborate
spoked wheels were reported by Anthony to date to around 2000 B.C.
Chariots do not seem to have appeared in China until some 800 years
later...
had wagons and well-tailored clothes. Were they mere goat and sheep
farmers? Or did they profit from or even control prehistoric trade
along the route that later became the Silk Road? If so, they probably
helped spread the first wheels and certain metalworking skills into
China.
"Ultimately I think our project may end up having tremendous
implications for the origins of Chinese civilization," Mair reflects.
"For all their incredible inventiveness, the ancient Chinese weren't
cut off from the rest of the world, and influences didn't just flow
one way, from China westward."
Unfortunately, economics dictates that answers will be slow in coming.
The Chinese have the money to spare for this work, and Wang and his
team continue to operate on a shoestring. Currently most of the
corpses and artifacts are stored in a damp, crowded basement room at
the Institute of Archeology in Urumqi, in conditions that threaten
their continued preservation. If Mair's plans for a museum can be
financed with Western help, perhaps the mummies can be moved. Then,
finally, they'll receive the study and attention that will ultimately
unlock their secrets.
Post by RG
etc... And that it had nothing at all to do with you. You do
realize that don't you? You're a piggy backer. And you do
realize a Jew invented the computer you're using.
Most white women (even racist ones) would rather reproduce with
a good looking black man than you.
They wouldn't if Jews didn't control the media.

http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
Robert Kolker
2006-09-04 15:38:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Topaz
No, Whites invented the cars and airplanes and refrigerators etc etc
etc
But not atomic bombs. Or a good vaccination against polio. Or computers.
Those were the doings of Jewish Mongrels.

By the way did you know that one pillar of Quantum Electodynamics upon
which over half of our technology is based is the theory of relativity.
Invented by who? I bet you didn't now that. You stupid Goy Putz.

Bob Kolker
Godzilla Pimp
2006-09-07 00:24:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Kolker
Post by Topaz
No, Whites invented the cars and airplanes and refrigerators etc etc
etc
But not atomic bombs. Or a good vaccination against polio. Or computers.
Those were the doings of Jewish Mongrels.
By the way did you know that one pillar of Quantum Electodynamics upon
which over half of our technology is based is the theory of relativity.
Invented by who? I bet you didn't now that. You stupid Goy Putz.
Bob Kolker
You brilliant Jews really ought to go off and live all by yourselves. We
won't mind.

BTW, fission was discovered by the Germans and the Jews have yet to found a
single successful country. The only reason you Ashkenazi have higher IQs
then your Sephardic cousins is because to have been screwing white women for
a thousand years.

GP
Mani Deli
2006-09-08 02:15:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Godzilla Pimp
BTW, fission was discovered by the Germans and the Jews have yet to found a
single successful country. The only reason you Ashkenazi have higher IQs
then your Sephardic cousins is because to have been screwing white women for
a thousand years.
GP
Lie Meitner was Jewish.
Robert Kolker
2006-09-08 03:23:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mani Deli
Lie Meitner was Jewish.
Lise Meitner. And yes, she was. Shw was Otto Hahn's prefrontal cortex. A
Jewish lady discovered that uranium fissions. A Jewish gentleman, Leo
Szillard figured out how to parley they into a chain reaction. Szillard
was a Jungarian Hew, just like von Neuman and Teller.

We note in passing that the Aryan Superduperueberman Heisenberg did not
succeed in producing an a-bomb even though his program had a two year
head start on the American program. I guess he wasn't superduperueber
enough.

Bob Kolker
Godzilla Pimp
2006-10-07 23:36:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Kolker
Post by Mani Deli
Lie Meitner was Jewish.
Lise Meitner. And yes, she was. Shw was Otto Hahn's prefrontal cortex. A
Jewish lady discovered that uranium fissions. A Jewish gentleman, Leo
Szillard figured out how to parley they into a chain reaction. Szillard
was a Jungarian Hew, just like von Neuman and Teller.
We note in passing that the Aryan Superduperueberman Heisenberg did not
succeed in producing an a-bomb even though his program had a two year head
start on the American program. I guess he wasn't superduperueber enough.
Bob Kolker
Gee, I wonder if that had anything to do with the fact that Germany was
being bombed day and night (by Jew-controlled Aryan traitors) and the US was
not?

GP
Bob Kolker
2006-10-08 02:25:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Godzilla Pimp
Gee, I wonder if that had anything to do with the fact that Germany was
being bombed day and night (by Jew-controlled Aryan traitors) and the US was
not?
The heavy duty bombing of the Reich did not really get into the groove
until mid 1943. Germany's A-bomb program began in 1939. An all that time
Heisenberg and company could not get the critical mass of U-235 right.

Heisenberg and Weisacker screwed the pooch. The really did not know how
to build an A-bomb. The British Farm Hall Report where the Brits bugged
the Nazi scientists they had in detention (including Heisenberg and
Weisacker) show both were totally non-plussed when the heard the
Americans nuked the Japan. They could scarely believe that the Americans
succeeded and they failed. But it is no surprise. America's Jewish
physicists were better than Germany's Jewish physicists.

The Aryan Superduperuebermen were not UuberSuperDuper enough. You might
say they were out-Jewed.

Bob Kolker
anon
2006-10-08 03:18:40 UTC
Permalink
Heisenberg and Weisacker screwed the pooch. The really did not know how to
build an A-bomb. The British Farm Hall Report where the Brits bugged
it is said that heisenberg sabotaged the german bomb. if he did, he showed
more wisdom than those in america.
Bob Kolker
2006-10-08 12:05:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by anon
it is said that heisenberg sabotaged the german bomb. if he did, he showed
more wisdom than those in america.
That is nonsense. When he was detained by the Brits (and his
covnersations were recorded) he expressed amazement, envy and
disappointment at the American success. He wanted to build a bomb for
the Fatherland. He failed. He did not have either the team to do it or
the smarts. That must have rankled him no end.

Heisneberg and his team were outJewed, plain and simply. Our Jewish
physicists were better than their Jewish physicists.

It is unfortunate that the A-bomb was never used on Germany. Having the
product of Jewish intellected used on the tormentors of Jews would have
been perfect Justice.

Bob Kolker

George Leroy Tyrebiter, Jr.
2006-09-04 15:03:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Topaz
Portugal was once a great nation. It might have been the greatest
nation on earth at one time. But now it is almost like a third world
country. What happened?
"Following its heyday as a world power during the 15th and 16th
centuries, Portugal lost much of its wealth and status first through
the loss of its military and naval power due to the military disaster
of Alcacer-Kibir, and shortly thereafter its fleet, which had had been
incorporated into the Spanish Armada so the country was unable to
defend its interests overseas. It was further weakened later with the
destruction of much of the capital, Lisbon in a 1755 earthquake,
occupation during the Napoleonic Wars, and the independence in 1822 of
its largest colony Brazil. A 1910 revolution deposed the monarchy;
however, the Republic was unable to solve the country's problems, amid
corruption, repression of the Church and near bankruptcy of State, and
in 1926, a military coup installed a dictatorship that would only come
to an end in 1974, when a left-wing military coup installed broad
democratic reforms."

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




























Race-mixing is what happened. They let a lot
Post by Topaz
of Black people in and of course the result was racial inter-marriage.
Now the Portuguese people are not as White as they were. We need to
"All that we admire in the world to-day, its science, its art, its
technical developments and discoveries, are the products of the
creative activities of a few peoples, and it may be true that their
first beginnings must be attributed to one race. The maintenance of
civilization is wholly dependant on such peoples. Should they perish,
all that makes this earth beautiful will descend with them into the
grave."
"All the great civilizations of the past became decadent because the
originally creative race died out, as a result of the contamination on
the blood."
"Every manifestation of human culture, every product of art, science
and technical skill, which we see before our eyes to-day, is almost
exclusively the product of the Aryan creative power. This very fact
fully justifies the conclusion that it was the Aryan alone who founded
a superior type of humanity"
"The foundations of actual life in Japan to-day are not those of the
native Japanese culture, although this characterizes the external
features of the country, which features strike the eye of European
observers on account of their fundamental difference from us; but the
real foundations of contemporary Japanese life are the enormous
scientific and technical achievements of Europe and America, that is
to say, of Aryan peoples."
"A people that fails to preserve the purity of its racial blood
thereby destroys the unity of the soul of the nation in all its
manifestations. A disintegrated national character is the inevitable
consequence of the process of disintegration in the blood. And the
change which takes place in the spiritual and creative faculties of a
people is only an effect of the change that had modified its racial
substance."
"For in a world which would be composed of mongrels and Negroid all
ideals of human beauty and nobility and all hopes of an idealized
future for our humanity would be lost forever."
"It is especially the cultural creativeness which disappears when a
superior race inter-mixes with an inferior one."
"There may be hundreds of excellent States in this earth, and yet if
the Aryan, who is the creator and custodian of civilization, should
disappear, all culture that is on an adequate level with the spiritual
needs of the superior nations to-day would also disappear."
"We National Socialists know that in holding these views we take up a
revolutionary stand in the world to-day and that we are branded as
revolutionaries. But our views and our conduct will not be determined
by the approbation or disapprobation of our contemporaries, but only
by our duty to follow a truth which we have acknowledged. In doing
this we have reason to believe that posterity will have a clearer
insight"
"Thus for the first time a high inner purpose is accredited to the
State. In face of the ridiculous phrase that the State should do no
more than act as the guardian of public order and tranquility, so that
everybody can peacefully dupe everybody else, it is given a very high
mission indeed to preserve and encourage the highest type of humanity
which a beneficent Creator has bestowed on this earth."
http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
Topaz
2006-09-04 16:47:59 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 08:03:37 -0700, "George Leroy Tyrebiter, Jr."
Post by George Leroy Tyrebiter, Jr.
Post by Topaz
Portugal was once a great nation. It might have been the greatest
nation on earth at one time. But now it is almost like a third world
country. What happened?
"Following its heyday as a world power during the 15th and 16th
centuries, Portugal lost much of its wealth and status first through
the loss of its military and naval power due to the military disaster
of Alcacer-Kibir, and shortly thereafter its fleet, which had had been
incorporated into the Spanish Armada so the country was unable to
defend its interests overseas. It was further weakened later with the
destruction of much of the capital, Lisbon in a 1755 earthquake,
occupation during the Napoleonic Wars, and the independence in 1822 of
its largest colony Brazil. A 1910 revolution deposed the monarchy;
however, the Republic was unable to solve the country's problems, amid
corruption, repression of the Church and near bankruptcy of State, and
in 1926, a military coup installed a dictatorship that would only come
to an end in 1974, when a left-wing military coup installed broad
democratic reforms."
There is the PC version. But the USA and Canada became great while
Mexico and other countries to the South did not. The USA and Canada
did not intermix with the natives and they became White countries.


The former White nations and Japan are the first world. The Black
nations and India are the third world. In the middle, or the second
world are the Arabs and China. It is just as racialists would predict.
It is because the White race is on average much more intelligent than
the Black race. The people in Japan are much lighter in color than the
people in India.

All IQ tests have proven that Whites are on average much more
intelligent than Blacks. White people invented just about everything
important. Most leftists admit that Whites on average score higher on
the tests. They have their excuses for it, but all of their excuses
are demolished in "My Awakening" by David Duke. Here is an example:

"One of the most powerful direct studies of race and environment
was conducted by psychologists Sandra Scarr, Richard Weinberg and I.
D. Waldman. All three were quite well-known for their environmental
opinions. The study analyzed White, Black, and Mixed-race adopted
children in more than 100 White families in Minnesota. The study was
an egalitarian's dream, because the children's adoptive parents had
prestigious levels of income and education and were anti-racist enough
to adopt a Black child into their own family. Scarr is a strong
defender of racial equality and maintained that environment played an
almost exclusive role in IQ differences between the races. Scarr
supports the importance of heredity in causing individual differences
within a race, but she has argued that between-race differences are
mostly environmental.

The children in the study included Whites, Blacks, and Mulattos as
well as the biological children of the White adoptive couples. At the
age of 7, the children were tested for IQ, and all of the groups
including the Blacks and Mulattos, scored above average in IQ. Scarr
and Weinberg published a paper claiming to have proven the almost
exclusive power of environment over race in IQ, even though they had
to admit that the White children, whether adopted or not, scored well
above the Black and Mulatto children and that the Mulatto children
scored above the Blacks. (88)

A decade later, when the children reached the age of 17, a
follow-up study was conducted that that again included IQ
measurements. As they matured, Black children had dropped back to an
average of 89 in IQ, which is the average IQ for Blacks in the region
of the United States where the study was done. The White adopted
children scored an average of 106 in IQ, 17 points higher than the
Black children, which is consistant with traditional studies of Black
and White IQ differences. In line with genetic theory the half-White,
half-Black Mulatto adopted children scored almost exactly between the
adopted Whites and Blacks. (89)

RESULTS OF MINNESOTA TRANSRACIAL ADOPTION STUDY

IQ

Parental IQ 115.35
Biological Children 109.4
White Adopted children 105.6
Mulatto parents adopted children 98.5
Black parents adopted children 89.4

Scarr and Wienberg reluctantly published their data from the
follow up survey, but they waited close to four years to do so, almost
as if they were embarrassed by what they had found. Through a tortured
reasoning process, they still argued that environment played a
dominant role in IQ. But in their follow-up survey, unlike their first
paper, they also admitted that genes had an important impact as well.
Both Richard Lynn and Michael Levin effectively showed in their
re-analysis of Scarr's own data, that genes clearly comprise the
dominant role in intelligence levels of those adopted children. (90)
(91)"

(88) Scarr, S, & Weinberg R. A. (1976). IQ Test Perfomance of Black
Children Adopted By White Families. American Psychologist. Vol. 31.
p.26-739

(89) Weinberg, R. A. , Scarr, S., & Waldman, I. D. (1992). The
Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study. A Follow-Up of IQ Test
Performance at Adolescence, Intelligence. Vol 16.
p.17-135

(90) Lynn, R. (1994). Reinterpretations Of The Minnesota Transracial
Adoption Study. Intelligence. Vol. 19. p.1-27

(91) Levin, M. (1994). Comment on The Minnesota Transracial Adoption
Study. Intelligence Vol. 19. p.3-20

http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
George Leroy Tyrebiter, Jr.
2006-09-04 23:01:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Topaz
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 08:03:37 -0700, "George Leroy Tyrebiter, Jr."
Post by George Leroy Tyrebiter, Jr.
Post by Topaz
Portugal was once a great nation. It might have been the greatest
nation on earth at one time. But now it is almost like a third world
country. What happened?
"Following its heyday as a world power during the 15th and 16th
centuries, Portugal lost much of its wealth and status first through
the loss of its military and naval power due to the military disaster
of Alcacer-Kibir, and shortly thereafter its fleet, which had had been
incorporated into the Spanish Armada so the country was unable to
defend its interests overseas. It was further weakened later with the
destruction of much of the capital, Lisbon in a 1755 earthquake,
occupation during the Napoleonic Wars, and the independence in 1822 of
its largest colony Brazil. A 1910 revolution deposed the monarchy;
however, the Republic was unable to solve the country's problems, amid
corruption, repression of the Church and near bankruptcy of State, and
in 1926, a military coup installed a dictatorship that would only come
to an end in 1974, when a left-wing military coup installed broad
democratic reforms."
There is the PC version. But the USA and Canada became great while
Mexico and other countries to the South did not. The USA and Canada
did not intermix with the natives and they became White countries.
England trained locals in government. So that when England left there
were locals who knew how to take over. Spain did not do that, keeping
all government positions in the hands of Spaniards.

Thus former colonies of England have done much better that former
colonies of Spain. Everywhere, not just in North America.
Post by Topaz
The former White nations and Japan are the first world. The Black
nations and India are the third world. In the middle, or the second
world are the Arabs and China. It is just as racialists would predict.
It is because the White race is on average much more intelligent than
the Black race. The people in Japan are much lighter in color than the
people in India.
All IQ tests have proven that Whites are on average much more
intelligent than Blacks. White people invented just about everything
important. Most leftists admit that Whites on average score higher on
the tests. They have their excuses for it, but all of their excuses
"One of the most powerful direct studies of race and environment
was conducted by psychologists Sandra Scarr, Richard Weinberg and I.
D. Waldman. All three were quite well-known for their environmental
opinions. The study analyzed White, Black, and Mixed-race adopted
children in more than 100 White families in Minnesota. The study was
an egalitarian's dream, because the children's adoptive parents had
prestigious levels of income and education and were anti-racist enough
to adopt a Black child into their own family. Scarr is a strong
defender of racial equality and maintained that environment played an
almost exclusive role in IQ differences between the races. Scarr
supports the importance of heredity in causing individual differences
within a race, but she has argued that between-race differences are
mostly environmental.
The children in the study included Whites, Blacks, and Mulattos as
well as the biological children of the White adoptive couples. At the
age of 7, the children were tested for IQ, and all of the groups
including the Blacks and Mulattos, scored above average in IQ. Scarr
and Weinberg published a paper claiming to have proven the almost
exclusive power of environment over race in IQ, even though they had
to admit that the White children, whether adopted or not, scored well
above the Black and Mulatto children and that the Mulatto children
scored above the Blacks. (88)
A decade later, when the children reached the age of 17, a
follow-up study was conducted that that again included IQ
measurements. As they matured, Black children had dropped back to an
average of 89 in IQ, which is the average IQ for Blacks in the region
of the United States where the study was done. The White adopted
children scored an average of 106 in IQ, 17 points higher than the
Black children, which is consistant with traditional studies of Black
and White IQ differences. In line with genetic theory the half-White,
half-Black Mulatto adopted children scored almost exactly between the
adopted Whites and Blacks. (89)
RESULTS OF MINNESOTA TRANSRACIAL ADOPTION STUDY
IQ
Parental IQ 115.35
Biological Children 109.4
White Adopted children 105.6
Mulatto parents adopted children 98.5
Black parents adopted children 89.4
Scarr and Wienberg reluctantly published their data from the
follow up survey, but they waited close to four years to do so, almost
as if they were embarrassed by what they had found. Through a tortured
reasoning process, they still argued that environment played a
dominant role in IQ. But in their follow-up survey, unlike their first
paper, they also admitted that genes had an important impact as well.
Both Richard Lynn and Michael Levin effectively showed in their
re-analysis of Scarr's own data, that genes clearly comprise the
dominant role in intelligence levels of those adopted children. (90)
(91)"
(88) Scarr, S, & Weinberg R. A. (1976). IQ Test Perfomance of Black
Children Adopted By White Families. American Psychologist. Vol. 31.
p.26-739
(89) Weinberg, R. A. , Scarr, S., & Waldman, I. D. (1992). The
Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study. A Follow-Up of IQ Test
Performance at Adolescence, Intelligence. Vol 16.
p.17-135
(90) Lynn, R. (1994). Reinterpretations Of The Minnesota Transracial
Adoption Study. Intelligence. Vol. 19. p.1-27
(91) Levin, M. (1994). Comment on The Minnesota Transracial Adoption
Study. Intelligence Vol. 19. p.3-20
http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
Topaz
2006-09-06 22:26:57 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 16:01:58 -0700, "George Leroy Tyrebiter, Jr."
Post by George Leroy Tyrebiter, Jr.
England trained locals in government. So that when England left there
were locals who knew how to take over. Spain did not do that, keeping
all government positions in the hands of Spaniards.
It's not about training locals. It's about race.

"I was listening to a speech that he gave in Sweden. You can listen at
the
Url below if ya want. http://www.davidduke.com/

Anyway, the guy made an analogy that sums it all up.

He said, lets look at Iceland. They have one of the worlds lowest
crime rates, and have some of the worlds highest test scores.

He then went on to say: Haiti is rich in natural resources, they have
great weather, beaches etc.. Yet its a murder, rape capital of the
world. etc, etc.

He went on to say: If we were to take all of the people from Haiti &
Move them to Iceland, Well, they would soon die.

Take those from Iceland and move them to Haiti and within one
generation Haiti would be paradise on earth.

He explained it better than I did. But you should get the gist of the
Iceland / Haiti analogy. Better yet, listen to the Stockholm speech
and hear it for yourself.."

Tommy
Post by George Leroy Tyrebiter, Jr.
Thus former colonies of England have done much better that former
colonies of Spain. Everywhere, not just in North America.
Post by Topaz
The former White nations and Japan are the first world. The Black
nations and India are the third world. In the middle, or the second
world are the Arabs and China. It is just as racialists would predict.
It is because the White race is on average much more intelligent than
the Black race. The people in Japan are much lighter in color than the
people in India.
All IQ tests have proven that Whites are on average much more
intelligent than Blacks. White people invented just about everything
important. Most leftists admit that Whites on average score higher on
the tests. They have their excuses for it, but all of their excuses
"One of the most powerful direct studies of race and environment
was conducted by psychologists Sandra Scarr, Richard Weinberg and I.
D. Waldman. All three were quite well-known for their environmental
opinions. The study analyzed White, Black, and Mixed-race adopted
children in more than 100 White families in Minnesota. The study was
an egalitarian's dream, because the children's adoptive parents had
prestigious levels of income and education and were anti-racist enough
to adopt a Black child into their own family. Scarr is a strong
defender of racial equality and maintained that environment played an
almost exclusive role in IQ differences between the races. Scarr
supports the importance of heredity in causing individual differences
within a race, but she has argued that between-race differences are
mostly environmental.
The children in the study included Whites, Blacks, and Mulattos as
well as the biological children of the White adoptive couples. At the
age of 7, the children were tested for IQ, and all of the groups
including the Blacks and Mulattos, scored above average in IQ. Scarr
and Weinberg published a paper claiming to have proven the almost
exclusive power of environment over race in IQ, even though they had
to admit that the White children, whether adopted or not, scored well
above the Black and Mulatto children and that the Mulatto children
scored above the Blacks. (88)
A decade later, when the children reached the age of 17, a
follow-up study was conducted that that again included IQ
measurements. As they matured, Black children had dropped back to an
average of 89 in IQ, which is the average IQ for Blacks in the region
of the United States where the study was done. The White adopted
children scored an average of 106 in IQ, 17 points higher than the
Black children, which is consistant with traditional studies of Black
and White IQ differences. In line with genetic theory the half-White,
half-Black Mulatto adopted children scored almost exactly between the
adopted Whites and Blacks. (89)
RESULTS OF MINNESOTA TRANSRACIAL ADOPTION STUDY
IQ
Parental IQ 115.35
Biological Children 109.4
White Adopted children 105.6
Mulatto parents adopted children 98.5
Black parents adopted children 89.4
Scarr and Wienberg reluctantly published their data from the
follow up survey, but they waited close to four years to do so, almost
as if they were embarrassed by what they had found. Through a tortured
reasoning process, they still argued that environment played a
dominant role in IQ. But in their follow-up survey, unlike their first
paper, they also admitted that genes had an important impact as well.
Both Richard Lynn and Michael Levin effectively showed in their
re-analysis of Scarr's own data, that genes clearly comprise the
dominant role in intelligence levels of those adopted children. (90)
(91)"
(88) Scarr, S, & Weinberg R. A. (1976). IQ Test Perfomance of Black
Children Adopted By White Families. American Psychologist. Vol. 31.
p.26-739
(89) Weinberg, R. A. , Scarr, S., & Waldman, I. D. (1992). The
Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study. A Follow-Up of IQ Test
Performance at Adolescence, Intelligence. Vol 16.
p.17-135
(90) Lynn, R. (1994). Reinterpretations Of The Minnesota Transracial
Adoption Study. Intelligence. Vol. 19. p.1-27
(91) Levin, M. (1994). Comment on The Minnesota Transracial Adoption
Study. Intelligence Vol. 19. p.3-20
http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
Robert Kolker
2006-09-07 00:44:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Topaz
He said, lets look at Iceland. They have one of the worlds lowest
crime rates, and have some of the worlds highest test scores.
Interesting. Now what have the Icelanders invented lately. What is the
sum total of their contribution to human culture. Any great theories?
Any great art? Any great literature? But they have high test scores. Who
are the top ten Icelandic physicists and mathematicians?

This reminds me of that great line from -The Third Man-.


Harry Lime: Don't be so gloomy. After all it's not that awful. Like the
fella says, in Italy for 30 years under the Borgias they had warfare,
terror, murder, and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo
da Vinci, and the Renaissance. In Switzerland they had brotherly love -
they had 500 years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce?
The cuckoo clock.

Low crime rate and high test scores and what have the Icelanders produced?

I am sure the world would be better off if there were six billion Swiss
rather than six billion Ugandans, but it would be boring place.


Bob Kolker
Topaz
2006-09-08 01:32:21 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 06 Sep 2006 19:44:56 -0500, Robert Kolker
Post by Robert Kolker
Interesting. Now what have the Icelanders invented lately. What is the
sum total of their contribution to human culture. Any great theories?
Any great art? Any great literature? But they have high test scores. Who
are the top ten Icelandic physicists and mathematicians?
Iceland is much better than Haiti because it is White.

There is no Escape!
By David Duke
European-American Unity and Rights Organization (EURO), National
President
There is no escape from the terror of the future.
You can run away for a while.
But the terror will catch up to you.
It will destroy you and everything you love.
No, I am not talking about a new Hollywood horror movie. I am talking
about America. America is changing from the land of our forefathers to
a place where we are no longer at home in spirit, and where our
families are no longer safe in their own homes.
New Orleans has become increasingly like Haiti since the 1960's Civil
Rights movement integrated the schools. Since then, White civil rights
have steadily disappeared.
First the schools deteriorated into cesspools of violence, drugs,
ignorance, barbarity and venereal disease. Blacks always had access to
public schools, but now, almost all Whites were driven from them. They
went from a majority, to less than four percent today. Whites were
driven from the buses and streetcars. In the buses where Blacks once
rode in the back, now Whites dare not ride at all! To do so is just
too dangerous. Friendly and tidy White neighborhoods discovered the
true joys of forced racial integration: junk cars, prostitutes and
drug dealers on the streets. The only Whites remaining in many
neighborhoods fearfully live now behind bars in homes that have become
reverse jails meant to keep the criminals out.
Black political power transformed New Orleans into a corrupt Black
banana republic. Taxes went up, services went down. The condition of
the streets wrecks the cars. Housing projects are so strewn with trash
they look as though they belong in a Third World Country. Rape, murder
and robbery are daily occurrences in the same city where I could once
walk anywhere as a child. Of course, traditional American values and
culture are gone now also. America founding fathers names such as
George Washington's are removed from schools by the Black school board
because he is, "an immoral example for the children." Kwanzaa, a Black
pagan celebration, has replaced Christmas celebrations in schools.
For the last forty years, Whites have steadily fled the city of New
Orleans. They left thousands of the beautiful and stately homes; many
of the beautiful, oak-lined boulevards; and the intangible history and
charm of what was once America's most romantic city. Now its old charm
can only be found in a few heavily policed areas that the tourists
visit or where the very richest live. Yet, frequently a tourist will
veer from the protected areas and find themselves robbed, raped, or
murdered by denizens that would be more at home in the most primitive
tribes of Africa.
The White refugees first fled mostly to Jefferson Parish, a White
redoubt where they could regain the semblance of a normal life. But,
then, Jefferson began its demographic darkening, so the Whites again
packed up their belongings once more and moved even further away. Some
ended up across Lake Ponchartrain, willing to drive three hours a day
to get to and from work, all so their families would be safe.
Some even pretended that they came to North Shore for the trees. But
they certainly didn't move to the now Black areas in New Orleans where
flourish live oaks, some of the most magnificent and beautiful trees
in the world. Most of the new North Shore residents knew, at least
somewhere deep inside, why they fled and why they came to the area
where I now live. I was candid about my choice of Mandeville. I like
the demographics. I like being among my own kind, living in the kind
of clean and beautiful environment our people create. In the last
election for U.S. Congress, I warned my neighbors on the North Shore.
I told them that conditions of New Orleans would eventually come to
them unless a great political change happened in America. A week ago,
a graphic example of what I had warned them about, occurred.
Just a mile from where I live and work, in a subdivision called
Woodridge, a beautiful 25-year-old mother of four, Samantha Jaume, was
brutally murdered in her home by a Black intruder who had followed her
home from a shopping center. He apparently wanted to steal her new
vehicle. The quick thinking of her seven-year-old son, Jason, almost
saved his mother and probably prevented the murder of his sisters and
himself. He hid himself under a desk and called the police.
Samantha lost all of her civil rights including her right to live. Her
husband's civil rights were also violated, and her four children
suffered loss of their Civil Rights more than any Black person in the
1960's who had to use separate water fountains. This family lost wife
and mother for the rest of their lives. If you want to know the true
cost of integration, it is White lives. If Mandeville were truly the
White area so many seek, Samantha would still be alive. Do we dare to
discuss the other hundreds of victims who have suffered a similar fate
over the years on the North Shore? Or the millions of White victims of
Black crime across America. And, it can only get worse. When the North
Shore population goes the way of New Orleans, Jefferson, and of the
new America of the 21st century, the loss of Samantha will be replayed
so many times that Whites will become refugees once more. But, where
will they go? Massive non-white immigration, differential birthrates,
and intermarriage will make our people a rapidly shrinking minority.
Our racial enemies will not stop their darkening of America until
there is no refuge for our people, only annihilation.
This is no movie. This is real life. There is no escape from the
coming terror. It is time we turn around and fight. We must wrest
control of our political system from those who would obliterate our
people. It is too late for Mrs. Samantha Jaume, but not too late for
her children, and for our children if we begin our road back today. My
life is consecrated to that task. How about yours?
Visit our website at www.whitecivilrights.com
Post by Robert Kolker
This reminds me of that great line from -The Third Man-.
Harry Lime: Don't be so gloomy. After all it's not that awful. Like the
fella says, in Italy for 30 years under the Borgias they had warfare,
terror, murder, and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo
da Vinci, and the Renaissance. In Switzerland they had brotherly love -
they had 500 years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce?
The cuckoo clock.
Low crime rate and high test scores and what have the Icelanders produced?
I am sure the world would be better off if there were six billion Swiss
rather than six billion Ugandans, but it would be boring place.
Bob Kolker
This is what Jews believe:

"One of the most astounding instances of Jewish hypocrisy was uttered
by a Jew named Isi Leibler, who is no less than the chairman of the
governing board of the World Jewish Congress. Now Isi Leibler is
well-known as a powerful Jew in Australia, where he was for years the
official head of the Jewish community there. He now lives in Israel.
In an interview with a Jerusalem newspaper, he stated about Israel
"This is a country which was set up and created as a Jewish country
for the Jews." In an essay he wrote for the World Jewish Congress, he
decried intermarriage between Jews and non-Jews as a kind of racial
suicide, and likened assimilation with non-Jews as a slow bleeding to
death of the Jewish people. He emphasized that focus of Israeli policy
should be to sharpen and intensify Jewish identity and that even
giving up territory was acceptable if it meant getting rid of non-Jews
and making Israel a more nearly all-Jewish state. Leibler argues that
post-Zionists threaten Israel when they publish textbooks that
de-emphasize Jewish racial
interests and replace them with "universalist" history. In the
interview mentioned, Leibler went so far as to say: "Multiculturalism
has no place in Israel. Israel was created as a Jewish state for the
Jews." That's the Jew Isi Leibler talking about his own people's
country, talking about Israel. [Leibler, Isi: Is the Dream Ending?
Post-Zionism and its
Discontents - A Threat to the Jewish Future, Institute of the World
Jewish Congress, Israel]

But what was Isi Leibler saying when he lived in Australia, a White
country, a non-Jewish country? What was Isi Leibler saying when he was
the head of Australia's powerful Jewish minority? Isi Leibler's advice
to Israel is to protect its racial and cultural heritage. Isi
Leibler's advice to Jews is to avoid intermarriage. Isi Leibler thinks
it's just
fine -- even necessary -- to separate non-Jews from Jews in Israel, to
get non-Jews on the other side of a well-defended border, to throw
them out of Israel. But to Australians Isi Leibler played quite a
different tune. When Australian politician Pauline Hanson was
galvanizing White Australians in 1993 with her questioning of the
wisdom of non-White
immigration to that country, Leibler warned that "extremists" were
threatening precious multiculturalism. He said: "There is a need to
sit together and establish a way in which Australians can recapture
that spirit of multiculturalism which I think we are all proud being
part and parcel of, and which is really under threat?" [Australian
Herald-Sun,
September 27, 2000]

How much clearer does it have to be before you see it? Leibler and his
fellow powerful Jews want racial nationalism for their own people,
because racial nationalism makes them strong and ensures their
survival. They want racial nationalism because they want their kind to
survive and racial nationalism is the key to survival. They're not
stupid. They want what is best for Jews.

But Leibler and his fellow powerful Jews don't want racial nationalism
for White people. In Australia and Europe and South Africa and the
United States - wherever White people live -- Leibler and his kind in
Jewish organizations and in the Jewish-controlled media do everything
in their power to destroy racial nationalism for White people,
everything
in their power to keep us from having it, everything in their power to
make it disreputable and impossible and illegal. Just the other day,
Leibler said that one of the most important things in the world to him
was Israel's "right to exist as a sovereign Jewish state." [Israel
Insider, November 24, 2002] But Leibler and his co-racialists in the
Jewish ADL and other groups devote their lives and their billions to
preventing White people from claiming their right to sovereign White
states. Keeping Britain British, or keeping America American, or
keeping France French, is anathema to them, it is the ultimate in evil
and they never let us forget that."



http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
Robert Kolker
2006-09-08 03:18:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Topaz
Iceland is much better than Haiti because it is White.
It is also a much duller place than the U.S., Britain or Japan. Being
White is not all that great. The French were White and the Germans
rolled right over them in three wars. The Germans were the Whitest White
people in the world and the Russians, larglely asiatic ground their
Aryan faces into the mud. Think of it. All those Aryan
superduperuebermenchhes being butt fucked by the Rooskies.

In the field of science and mathematics white aryans are woefully
underrepresented.

Bob Kolker
Topaz
2006-09-09 01:27:04 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 07 Sep 2006 22:18:51 -0500, Robert Kolker
Post by Robert Kolker
It is also a much duller place than the U.S., Britain or Japan. Being
White is not all that great.
It is that great.

Safest / Most Dangerous Cities and Percentage of Blacks

Safest Cities (75,000 or more) per
http://advertisers.americancityandcounty.com/ar/government_amherst_ny_tops/

1. Amherst, N.Y 3.9%
http://www.epodunk.com/cgi-bin/popInfo.php?locIndex=91

2. Newton, Mass. 2.0%
http://www.city-data.com/city/Newton-Massachusetts.html

3. Mission Viejo, Calif. 1.1%
http://www.city-data.com/city/Mission-Viejo-California.html

4. Cary, N.C. 6.1%
http://www.city-data.com/city/Cary-North-Carolina.html

5. Brick Township, N.J. (Less than 1% as computed by dividing 75,325
population into 751 blacks)
http://www.co.ocean.nj.us/planning/databook/09RACE2000.htm

6. Simi Valley, Calif. 1.3%
http://www.city-data.com/city/Simi-Valley-California.html

7. Sunnyvale, Calif. 2.2%
http://www.city-data.com/city/Sunnyvale-California.html

8. Colonie, N.Y. 3.5%
http://www.city-data.com/city/Colonie-New-York.html

9. Sterling Heights, Mich. 1.3%
http://www.city-data.com/city/Sterling-Heights-Michigan.html

10. Clarkstown, N.Y 7.9%
http://www.epodunk.com/cgi-bin/popInfo.php?locIndex=409
____________________

Most Dangerous Cities (75,000 or more) per
http://advertisers.americancityandcounty.com/ar/government_amherst_ny_tops/

1. Detroit 81.6%
http://www.city-data.com/city/Detroit-Michigan.html

2. Atlanta 61.4%
http://www.city-data.com/city/Atlanta-Georgia.html

3. St. Louis 51.2%
http://www.city-data.com/city/St.-Louis-Missouri.html

4. Baltimore 64.3%
http://www.city-data.com/city/Baltimore-Maryland.html

5. Gary, Ind. 84.0%
http://www.city-data.com/city/Gary-Indiana.html

6. Camden, N.J. 53.3%
http://www.city-data.com/city/Camden-New-Jersey.html

7. Tampa 26.1%
http://www.city-data.com/city/Tampa-Florida.html

8. West Palm Beach, Fla. 32.2%
http://www.city-data.com/city/West-Palm-Beach-Florida.html

9. Compton, Calif. 40.3% (White non-Hispanic 1.0%)
http://www.city-data.com/city/Compton-California.html

10. Memphis, Tenn. 61.4%
http://www.city-data.com/city/Memphis-Tennessee.html

BroJack
Post by Robert Kolker
The French were White and the Germans
rolled right over them in three wars. The Germans were the Whitest White
people in the world and the Russians, larglely asiatic ground their
Aryan faces into the mud.
Compare the size of Germany to the size of the Jewish controlled
countries the USA and the USSR. And it was a close fight.
Post by Robert Kolker
Think of it. All those Aryan
superduperuebermenchhes being butt fucked by the Rooskies.
In the field of science and mathematics white aryans are woefully
underrepresented.
Bob Kolker
By Robert N. Proctor

The problem with the "science vs. fascism" thesis is that it fails to
take into account the eagerness with which many scientists and
physicians embraced the Reich, and the many scientific disciplines
which actually flourished under the Nazis. Anyone who has ever
examined
a V-2 engine will have few doubts about this, and there are numerous
other examples. During the Nazi era, German scientists and engineers
either developed or greatly improved television, jet-propelled
aircraft
(including the ejection seat), guided missiles, electronic computers,
the electron microscope, atomic fission, data-processing
technologies,…
The first magnetic tape recording was of a speech by Hitler,…

The story of science under German fascism is not, as conventional
wisdom would have it, only a narrative of suppression and survival; a
truthful account will explain how and why Nazi ideology promoted
certain areas of inquiry, and how projects and policies were
championed
or disappeared because of political considerations.

In this article, I want to explore some of the obstacles that have
hindered our efforts to understand Nazi science and medicine. I will
concentrate on two myths: the myth of flawed science and the myth of
abandoned ethics. The Nazis, I shall suggest, supported many kinds of
science, left politics (as we often think of it) out of most, and did
not abandon ethics. There was an ethics of Nazi medical practice --
sometimes explicit, sometimes not; often cruel, but sometimes not.
This
is important to understand if we are not to perceive the German
physicians who endorsed Nazism as absolutely alien and otherworldly…

Nazi Ideology and Anti-Tobacco Research

If you ask most experts when the first good evidence arose that
tobacco
was a major cause of lung cancer, they will point to a series of
epidemiological studies by English and American researchers in the
early 1950s. If you ask when a medical consensus on this question
first
arose, they will most likely point to the 1964 Surgeon General's
report, which took a strong stand on this question, or a similar
report
by Britain's Royal College of Physicians two years earlier.

I have become convinced, however, that there was an earlier and
overlooked consensus, a consensus within the German medical and
scientific community, that emerged during the Nazi period. The Nazis
had a powerful anti-tobacco movement, arguably the most powerful in
the
world at that time. Tobacco was opposed by racial hygienists fearing
the corruption of the German "germ plasm" (i.e., genetic material), by
industrial hygienists fearing a reduction of people's capacity to
work,
by nurses and midwives fearing harm to the "maternal organism."
Tobacco
was said to be a "corrupting force in a rotting civilization that has
become lazy." The Nazis' anti-tobacco rhetoric drew from an earlier
generation's eugenics rhetoric and also reflected an ethic of bodily
purity and zeal for work.3 Tobacco use was attacked as an "epidemic,"
a
"plague," as "dry drunkenness," and as "lung masturbation"; tobacco
and
alcohol abuses were "diseases of civilization" and "relics of a
liberal
lifestyle."

Anti-tobacco research flourished in the Third Reich…

Third Reich scientists also performed extensive work in the area of
occupational carcinogenesis. Physicians documented the health hazards
of asbestos, and in 1943 Germany became the first nation to recognize
lung cancer and mesothelioma caused by asbestos inhalation as
compensable occupational illnesses. Nazi Germany also pioneered what
we
now call experimental epidemiology: two striking papers -- a 1939
article by Franz H. Mueller of Cologne, and a 1943 paper by Eberhard
Schairer and Erich Schueniger of Jena -- presented the most convincing
demonstrations up to that time that cigarettes were a major cause of
lung cancer. ..

How should we interpret such studies? How can we explain the fact that
Nazi Germany was home to the world's foremost tobacco-cancer
epidemiology and the world's strongest cancer prevention policy? Do we
say that "pockets of innovation" existed in Nazi Germany, resistant to
ideological influence?8 What if we find, on closer inspection, that
Germany's anti-tobacco research flourished not in spite of the Nazis,
but in large part because of the Nazis? And would it then be
appropriate, from a moral point of view, to cite such research in
scientific studies today?9

I ask this last question partly because the two tobacco studies I have
just discussed have, in fact, been repeatedly cited by postwar
scientific researchers, though rarely with any mention of the social
context within which they were carried out. There is never any
mention,
for example, of the fact that the founding director of Schueniger and
Schairer's Institute was Karl Astel, Rector of the University of Jena,
a vicious racial hygienist, and an SS officer. One never hears that
the
grant application for the Institute was written by Gauleiter Fritz
Sauckel, chief organizer of Germany's system of forced labor and a man
hanged after the war for crimes against humanity (most leaders of Nazi
Germany's anti-tobacco movement were silenced in one way or another
after 1945). No mention is ever made of the fact that funding for
Astel's Institute, and therefore for Schairer and Sch=F6niger's study,
came from a gift of 100,000 Reichsmarks from the Fuehrer-- himself an
ardent anti-smoking activist. It is clear to anyone who follows the
money trail and the research interests that Schairer and Schueniger's
study would not have been undertaken had it not been for Hitler's
anti-tobacco sentiments and those of his like-minded underlings.
Hitler
once even attributed the rise of German fascism to his quitting
smoking: the young artist-architect had smoked a couple of packs a day
until 1919, when he threw his cigarettes into the Danube and never
reached for them again.

Again, how should we interpret such Nazi-era papers? How should we
judge the fact that Nazi ideology in this case (and there are others)
appears not to have hindered research, but actually to have promoted
it?…

I raise the questions I do about Nazism and science because it is poor
scholarship and perhaps even dangerous to caricature the Nazis as
irrational or anti-science. What we have to look at more carefully is
the relationship between science and ideology at this time. It is not
the case, for example, that the papers on tobacco epidemiology I have
mentioned were uninfluenced by Nazi ideology. The Reich's anti-tobacco
program was motivated by Nazi ideals of bodily purity and racial
hygiene: there was a kind of "homeopathic paranoia" pervading Nazi
ideology that led many of its adherents to believe that tiny,
corrosive
elements were insinuating themselves into "the German body," sapping
its strength, causing harm. Appreciating this helps us understand how
Nazi science/ideologues could declare that tobacco tar, lead, mercury,
asbestos -- and Jews -- all posed a threat to the Nordic race. It also
may help us better understand why so many doctors were supporters of
Hitler's regime…

Why were German doctors such avid fans of fascism?
Why did nearly half of all German physicians join the Nazi party?

I don't think it was the tirades of Julius Streicher in Der Stuermer
that attracted their interest, but rather the promises of Nazi leaders
to solve Germany's problems medically, surgically. The Nazi state was
supposed to be a hygienic state; Nazism was supposed to be "applied
biology" (Fritz Lenz coined this phrase in 1931). Hitler was
celebrated
as the "great doctor" of German society and as the "Robert Koch of
politics" (Koch was a nineteenth century pioneer in studying the
bacterial origin of diseases). The seductive power of National
Socialism for many physicians lay in its promise to cleanse German
society of its corrupting elements -- not just communism and Jews, but
also metallic lead and addictive tobacco, along with homosexuality…

The relation of science and politics in Nazi Germany was therefore
more
complex than most people like to think. Part of the misunderstanding,
I
would suggest, lies in the widely accepted belief that when science is
politicized, "real" science inevitably suffers: the freedom of
scientists is abrogated, distorting biases are introduced into
research, minds are closed, avenues of inquiry are blocked. In many
areas of science, of course, that is indeed what happened in Nazi
Germany; one thinks of the fate of Einstein's relativity theory, for
example. But in other areas -- e.g., many areas of public health --
that was not the case at all.

Biology was another field that thrived. Ute Deichmann in her book,
Biologists Under Hitler (Harvard University Press, 1996), shows that
the majority of biologists in the Thirties and early Forties joined
the
Nazi party; but it was still quite possible for non-Nazi biologists to
obtain grants from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Germany's
leading scientific grant agency. Not only possible but easy: Deichmann
discovered that there was no correlation at all between a researcher
receiving a grant and whether that researcher belonged to the Nazi
party. I would argue that biology prospered under the Nazis because it
was so integral to their worldview. Apart from the reasons I have
already discussed, there is the fact that Nazism placed a much higher
value on nature than on nurture in the development of human talents
and
disabilities.

I am not sure I would agree with Deichmann that scientists in the
Third
Reich were more independent of the regime than we usually think.
Independent research flourished in many fields but it was, after all,
also in the Nazi state's interest to cultivate a strong scientific
community, at least in certain disciplines. What is clearly wrong
about
the autonomy thesis, applied to science and medicine as a whole, is
that many professionals did not retreat into the purely technical. It
took a lot of medical enthusiasm to forcibly sterilize 350,000
Germans,…

There is nothing inherently evil about physicians working and
cooperating with their government. The moral failure of the German
medical profession was its willingness to collaborate with the Nazi
state, its willingness to serve Nazi values. There is nothing wrong
with physicians working to preserve the health of a larger community;
that, after all, is the essence of responsible public health. What
differentiated National Socialist public health from genuine public
health in a reasonably civilized society was the exclusive nature of
what the Nazis considered "the community." Nazi values excluded Jews
and others deemed racially or genetically unfit from the volkisch
community...

It is just as misguided to believe that scientists who cooperated with
the Nazis were bereft of ethics as to believe the Nazis were
intrinsically hostile to science. There was an ethic of Nazi medical
practice, and it should be examined and understood…

It might be hard to believe, but there were, in fact, ethical
standards
that governed medical research and the practice of medicine in the
Third Reich. Medical students took courses on medical ethics; medical
textbooks in Nazi Germany discussed medical ethics. There was a great
deal of attention given to the obligations of physicians to society,
the state, and sometimes even to the individual. Nazi medical
philosophers were critical of the ideal of value-free science, which
was often equated with useless ivory-tower liberal -- or Jewish --
"science for its own sake." Science was supposed to be "for the
people," though not of course for all people: Science was supposed to
be at the service of the German Volk, the healthy and productive white
races of Europe. Nazi medical ethics was underpinned by sexist
paternalism, Nordic supremacy, cleanliness, punctuality, orderliness,
unquestioned obedience to authority, and public and environmental
health. It tended to emphasize preventive medicine, cost efficiency,
the natural lifestyle, and the superiority of the productive worker.
Clearly, Nazi medicine was imbued with ethical principles ..

One sees evidence of these principles in Nazi public health practice.
Nazi health officials cleaned up water supplies and removed lead and
mercury from consumer products. Doctors were urged to counsel patients
against tobacco use, to maintain the efficiency of workers, safeguard
public and genetic health, and ensure the best possible medical care
for every pregnant woman and newborns judged "genetically fit." There
were debates about medical malpractice -- whether, for example,
natural
healers were to be barred from treating cancer patients (they
eventually were) -- and the limits of medical confidentiality and
medical disclosure. A 1943 article in a leading German cancer journal
cited the "demands of medical ethics" to inform patients of the
severity of their diseases, and in at least one case a physician was
prosecuted for failing to inform a woman she had cancer (physicians
protested the ruling in print)…

The Nazi doctors were not madmen; that is why we must work so hard to
understand the origins of Nazism if we are to have any success in
preventing its resurgence.


Robert N. Proctor is professor of the history of science at
Pennsylvania State University.

http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
Topaz
2006-09-01 00:53:37 UTC
Permalink
"We National Socialists have grown accustomed since our takeover in
1933 to the particular attention of the leading politicians of the
U.S.A. and of the international Jews who stand behind them. Our
defensive measures against international Jewry have aroused increasing
tirades against Germany in America. Sometimes it seemed as if it would
be impossible to increase the flood of hatred and lies...
After leading politicians such as the American Secretary of the
Interior Harold Ickes and Senator Pittman attacked the German
government in the foulest manner, President Roosevelt did even more in
his New Year address. He tried to persuade the American people that
world peace was not assured, and that it was the duty of the American
people to defend three vital principles: those of religion, democracy
and international good will. Roosevelt did not believe these
principles were threatened by Soviet Russia or Soviet Spain, rather by
authoritarian Germany and Italy.
Millions are dead in Soviet Russia and Spanish priests estimate that a
half million people have been murdered there only because of their
faith, but that is not important and proves nothing. The dead do not
trouble the American President's conscience, indeed they did not stop
him from being the single world statesman to congratulate the Soviet
Russian government on the anniversary of the Bolshevist Revolution. No
other statesman did this, which explains why no other statesman
received such praise from the Soviet press. The Soviet press praised
the "noble efforts of the great American statesman."
Roosevelt also ignored the murder of millions of people when it was
called to his attention by a letter from the former Spanish ambassador
in Great Britain, the Marquis de Merry del Wal. The ambassador told
Mr. Roosevelt the following:
Your country's press tells the world of Your Excellency's protests
against the "persecution of the Jews" in Germany. According to the
press, you are deeply distressed by these events. How is it then that
the murder and massacre of 400,000 defenseless men, women and children
in Spain has not resulted in the slightest distress on your part?
These unfortunate people did not die on the battlefields of a civil
war. They were torn from their homes and murdered in public not only
because of their political, but also their religious, beliefs. Their
murderers openly declared their goal of destroying the very
civilization that Your Excellency defends. They have intentionally
destroyed thousands of churches and monuments along with uncounted
works of art and private homes. They have torn the clothes from nuns
and revealed them to everyone's eyes. They raped women and looted to a
degree unknown in the annals of the Christian era.
Your own ambassador, Your Excellency, against all the laws, norms and
customs of international law, has been forced to live away from the
government to which he is accredited, since as he said his personal
security would otherwise be in danger. I further know, Your
Excellency, that you have received certain proof of my assertions, for
I have made efforts to ensure that you have received reports that
support what I have said. Despite that, Your Excellency, you complain
about events in Germany, events that cannot be compared with what is
happening in Spain-and you have not given even the slightest sign of
disapproval at the death of hundreds of thousands of people who have
18 million fellow believers who are among the best citizens of your
country, far more than the two million Jews.
These people have been murdered solely because of their beliefs. Mr.
Roosevelt however has never spoken of a threat to faith or religion.
But they were only believers in a Christian church, after all. Mr.
Roosevelt is conducting a crusade against the authoritarian states
under the banner of religion only because the religious compatriots of
his closest friends have been put in their place in the authoritarian
states.
If President Roosevelt believes that he has to take the field to
defend democracy, we may ask where and when we have ever threatened or
attacked democracy. In the past years Germany has done nothing more
than to partially undo the injustices inflicted on it by the
predecessor of the current president of the U.S.A. Germany has not
arbitrarily altered the map of Europe as he did, creating states
against the will of their peoples only for purposes of power politics.
It has only reclaimed its citizens who suffered a decade long under
governments foreign or hostile to Germany...
In a closed session, he told the Defense Committee of the Senate that
the United States must be ready to support England and France in the
event of a European war. The President reportedly even suggested that
definite agreements already existed to this effect. He further
proposed the unrestricted sale of war materials to Western Europe. The
only restriction was that they had to be able to pay for it. When a
member of the American Senate asked how this policy could be squared
with the law demanding strict neutrality over against Europe,
Roosevelt replied: "We'll cross that bridge when we come to it."
These revelations naturally were a sensation throughout the world. The
impact was greater than the master of the White House in Washington
wanted. He therefore denied the reports. The force of his denial was
somewhat weakened by excited reports in the American press in which
various members of Congress refused to be called liars, and
furthermore suggested that Roosevelt had said even more during the
session than has been reported. The force of the denial was also
weakened by a cynical article in a French newspaper that noted that
"the strength of the claim has not been weakened, for it is not a
matter of the letter of the law, but of the spirit."...
Roosevelt is acting as the mouthpiece and puppet of international
Jewry when he attacks the authoritarian states. They want to use every
means to destroy the newly awakened nations...
The leaders of the Soviet Union tried to persuade their people that
true communism could only develop after all the other states of the
world were allies of the powers in Moscow, and the Red rulers in
Soviet Spain tried and tried to conceal their governmental
incompetence by unleashing a world conflict. We are not surprised to
see the American President in such company. The real rulers of the
Soviet Union are the same as in the United States: international
Jewry.
The truth of this claim is confirmed by the behavior of the wife of
the American President. Mrs. Roosevelt, as a sign of her support for
the Spanish Bolshevist rulers, accepted a gift of stolen etchings by
Spanish masters. Mrs. Roosevelt chaired an exhibition of busts of
Spanish Communist leaders, made by the Jew Josef Davidson. She also
invited the well-known top Bolshevist Toller to lunch. She surrounds
herself with wounded bigwigs of Soviet Spain under whose orders
500,000 Spaniards were killed only because they were faithful to their
beliefs and their religion...
America today is not governed by men like Roosevelt, Ickes, etc.,
rather its fate is determined by the Jews who stand behind them, Jews
like Baruch, Frankfurter, Morgenthau, etc. They are the real rulers of
America, and Roosevelt, Ickes, etc., are only their tools. The fact
that this is known in America is evident from a variety of newspaper
articles. The "New York Daily News," for example, wrote that "the wave
of anti-Semitism in America has increased significantly in recent
weeks and months." The fact that the Jew Bernard Baruch, the
President's closest adviser, is called the unofficial president of the
United States is proof of this fact.
But enough of that. We refuse to interfere in the affairs of other
nations. We think that every country gets the Jews that it deserves.
But we demand the same principle be extended to us. Let Mr. Roosevelt
carry out his reforms and crusades in his own country. He will not
live long enough to do it all. We do not think we have yet seen
anything on the other side of the ocean that is worth imitating. We
think it not a sign of ability, rather of incompetence, that a nation
with such enormous resources and space, with all modern methods, finds
itself in such mass misery and is unable to do anything to alleviate
that misery.
Where would Roosevelt be if he had had to deal with the situation the
Führer faced when he took power in Germany? Mr. Roosevelt has
agricultural resources more than sufficient to feed the country, yet
his people are starving. His country has enormous resources, yet
millions are unemployed. There is only one conclusion to be drawn."


http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
otto
2006-08-29 10:41:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Frank Arthur
Anyone country in Europe that wants to go back to Hitler days? Zero!
We have blown right through Hitler and have reached Bush.


otto

otto's Corollary to Godwin's Rule:

As an online discussion grows, any discussion that begins
with Hitler will reach a probability of one of a comparison
with Bush.
Robert Kolker
2006-08-29 11:49:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by otto
Post by Frank Arthur
Anyone country in Europe that wants to go back to Hitler days? Zero!
We have blown right through Hitler and have reached Bush.
But the administration of Bush II is an eight year Reich, not a thousand
year Reich. Comes Jan 20, 2009, Dubyah is history. And without a shot
(in the U.S., anyway) being fired. Democracy may not be the most elegant
form of government, but it is the least bloodiest.

Bob Kolker
Miriam Cohen
2006-08-29 14:57:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Kolker
Post by otto
Post by Frank Arthur
Anyone country in Europe that wants to go back to Hitler days? Zero!
We have blown right through Hitler and have reached Bush.
But the administration of Bush II is an eight year Reich, not a thousand
year Reich. Comes Jan 20, 2009, Dubyah is history. And without a shot
(in the U.S., anyway) being fired. Democracy may not be the most elegant
form of government, but it is the least bloodiest.
Bob Kolker
I wouldn't lay money on it, but I'm pretty sure the "Bush" Otto was
talking about was *PRESCOT* Bush, grandfather of W and Nazi collaborator.
--
L'Chaim

Miriam

In the beginning
the Word already was.
otto
2006-08-30 01:52:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Miriam Cohen
Post by Robert Kolker
Post by otto
Post by Frank Arthur
Anyone country in Europe that wants to go back to Hitler days? Zero!
We have blown right through Hitler and have reached Bush.
But the administration of Bush II is an eight year Reich, not a thousand
year Reich. Comes Jan 20, 2009, Dubyah is history. And without a shot
(in the U.S., anyway) being fired. Democracy may not be the most elegant
form of government, but it is the least bloodiest.
Bob Kolker
I wouldn't lay money on it, but I'm pretty sure the "Bush" Otto was
talking about was *PRESCOT* Bush, grandfather of W and Nazi collaborator.
Your odds were good, but unfortunately it didn't occur to me.

But not all is lost, I think you have exposed another corollary.

otto
Post by Miriam Cohen
--
L'Chaim
Miriam
In the beginning
the Word already was.
Topaz
2006-08-30 02:11:46 UTC
Permalink
Democracy is a cruel joke when the Jews control the media.

"Jewry rules from behind the mask of democracy. What one calls
democracy today is concealed Jewish domination. Jews determine what
happens in the democratic states"
Julius Streicher, Der Stürmer, #34/1939.

"A couple of weeks ago I quoted a few sentences from a book published
in 1928 titled Propaganda, by ... Edward Bernays. Today I'll read to
you an expanded set of excerpts from Bernays' book to give you a
little more of the gist of his message. I quote:

"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits
and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic
society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society
constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of
our country.

"We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes are formed, our
ideas suggested largely by men we have never heard of. This is a
logical result of the way in which our democratic society is
organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner
if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. . . .

"Whatever attitude one chooses to take toward this condition, it
remains a fact that in almost every act of our daily lives, whether in
the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our
ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of
persons . . . who understand the mental processes and social patterns
of the masses.
It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind, who
harness old social forces and contrive new ways to bind and guide the
world. . .

"No serious sociologist believes any longer that the voice of the
people expresses any divine or especially wise and lofty idea. The
voice of the people expresses the mind of the people, and that mind is
made up for it by the group leaders in whom it believes and by those
persons who understand the manipulation of public opinion. . . .

"Whether in the problem of getting elected to office or in the problem
of interpreting and popularizing new issues, or in the problem of
making the day-to-day administration of public affairs a vital part of
the community life, the use of propaganda, carefully adjusted to the
mentality of the masses, is an essential adjunct of political life." -
end of quote -

I should mention that Bernays' book is not profound or especially
valuable in itself. It merely states a few self-evident facts about
the way in which a modern society works. For the person interested in
propaganda, far more useful books are available. The fact that Bernays
was a Jew is not even especially relevant here except to emphasize
that propaganda, the mass media, psychology, and the manipulation of
others always have been subjects of special interest to the Jews. It
is not for nothing that they are as thick in these fields today as
they were in the time of Bernays and Freud. The reason I chose
Bernays' book to quote is that it provides a more concise and clear
summary, in a few quotable paragraphs, of the role of propaganda in
modern life than most other
books on the subject.

If I were you I wouldn't even waste time trying to hunt down a copy of
Bernays' book. Although it is available in larger libraries, it's long
been out of print, and all it does is state the obvious: namely, that
the whole concept of democracy is meaningless in an age where a few
people have in their hands the mechanism for controlling the attitudes
and opinions of a majority of the electorate. And Bernays also takes
the disingenuous position that not only is this control a fact of
life, but it is a good thing; it is necessary to control and regiment
the thinking of the public in order to avoid chaos, and it can only
lead us to greater progress and prosperity. He simply glosses over the
question of
who should exercise this control and what their motives should be.

If you really want to study the subject of propaganda, a good place to
start is with the 1962 book, also titled Propaganda, by the Frenchman
Jacques Ellul. That book is still in print and is available from the
sponsor of this program, National Vanguard Books. Professor Ellul
deals with the subject in much greater depth and with much greater
honesty than Bernays does, but he agrees with Bernays on the most
obvious and
fundamental conclusions: on the irrelevance of the idea of democracy,
for example. I quote from Professor Ellul's book:

"If I am in favor of democracy, I can only regret that propaganda
renders the true exercise of it almost impossible. But I think that it
would be even worse to entertain any illusions about a coexistence of
true democracy and propaganda." -- end of quote --

To me it is frustrating that a conclusion that seems so obvious is
nevertheless resisted by so many otherwise intelligent people.
Democracy has become almost a sacred concept to them, this idea that
the policies guiding our nation should be decided by counting the
votes of every featherless biped who has reached the age of 18. It's
like motherhood:
they're almost afraid to question it.

This seems to be as true of intellectuals in our society as it is of
Joe Sixpacks. The fact is that intellectuals are no more likely to be
independent-minded than people who work with their hands; most
intellectuals, just like most Joe Sixpacks, are lemmings. In fact, as
Ellul points out, it is precisely the intellectuals who are most
strongly controlled by propaganda, because they are more open to every
medium of propaganda.

And I must admit that it took me a long time to overcome the ideas
drummed into me when I was in school that under a democracy people are
more free than under any other political system, that under a
democracy we are all free to think and say whatever we want, and that
we have a greater responsibility as citizens of a democracy to make up
our own minds about things independently, and so on. Actually, we
still have some degree of individual freedom in the United States
today because more than 200 years ago men whose temperament was far
more aristocratic than democratic in the modern sense of the word were
willing to go to war against their legitimate government in order to
secure that freedom for us, and people with a truly democratic
temperament, who have been
gnawing away at that freedom ever since, haven't yet succeeded in
suppressing it completely.

Well, it should not be surprising to us that although books such as
Professor Ellul's Propaganda - and many others - are readily
available, almost no one has heard of them. Keeping the public
believing in the myth of democracy is an important element in
maintaining control over the thinking and behavior of the public. It
is simply immoral and
scandalous to question the reality of democracy. It's like questioning
the truth of the "Holocaust" story. And for that reason we're not
likely to be taught in our social studies classes in school or to read
in the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal even the most obvious
and self-evident conclusions presented by Bernays or Ellul. We're
still
taught how democracy safeguards our freedom, even while those who
control the mechanism of propaganda in our democratic society are
working day and night to eliminate that freedom."

The text above is based on a broadcast of the American Dissident
Voices radio program sponsored by National Vanguard Books. It is
distributed by e-mail each Saturday to subscribers of ADV-list.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

==> To subscribe send an e-mail message to:
adv-list-***@NatVan.com
The subject of the message should be: Subscribe


http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
otto
2006-08-30 10:16:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Topaz
Democracy is a cruel joke when the Jews control the media.
"Jewry rules from behind the mask of democracy. What one calls
democracy today is concealed Jewish domination. Jews determine what
happens in the democratic states"
Julius Streicher, Der Stürmer, #34/1939.
"A couple of weeks ago I quoted a few sentences from a book published
in 1928 titled Propaganda, by ... Edward Bernays. Today I'll read to
you an expanded set of excerpts from Bernays' book to give you a
"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits
and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic
society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society
constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of
our country.
"We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes are formed, our
ideas suggested largely by men we have never heard of. This is a
logical result of the way in which our democratic society is
organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner
if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. . . .
"Whatever attitude one chooses to take toward this condition, it
remains a fact that in almost every act of our daily lives, whether in
the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our
ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of
persons . . . who understand the mental processes and social patterns
of the masses.
It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind, who
harness old social forces and contrive new ways to bind and guide the
world. . .
"No serious sociologist believes any longer that the voice of the
people expresses any divine or especially wise and lofty idea. The
voice of the people expresses the mind of the people, and that mind is
made up for it by the group leaders in whom it believes and by those
persons who understand the manipulation of public opinion. . . .
"Whether in the problem of getting elected to office or in the problem
of interpreting and popularizing new issues, or in the problem of
making the day-to-day administration of public affairs a vital part of
the community life, the use of propaganda, carefully adjusted to the
mentality of the masses, is an essential adjunct of political life." -
end of quote -
I should mention that Bernays' book is not profound or especially
valuable in itself. It merely states a few self-evident facts about
the way in which a modern society works. For the person interested in
propaganda, far more useful books are available. The fact that Bernays
was a Jew is not even especially relevant here except to emphasize
that propaganda, the mass media, psychology, and the manipulation of
others always have been subjects of special interest to the Jews. It
is not for nothing that they are as thick in these fields today as
they were in the time of Bernays and Freud. The reason I chose
Bernays' book to quote is that it provides a more concise and clear
summary, in a few quotable paragraphs, of the role of propaganda in
modern life than most other
books on the subject.
If I were you I wouldn't even waste time trying to hunt down a copy of
Bernays' book. Although it is available in larger libraries, it's long
been out of print, and all it does is state the obvious: namely, that
the whole concept of democracy is meaningless in an age where a few
people have in their hands the mechanism for controlling the attitudes
and opinions of a majority of the electorate. And Bernays also takes
the disingenuous position that not only is this control a fact of
life, but it is a good thing; it is necessary to control and regiment
the thinking of the public in order to avoid chaos, and it can only
lead us to greater progress and prosperity. He simply glosses over the
question of
who should exercise this control and what their motives should be.
If you really want to study the subject of propaganda, a good place to
start is with the 1962 book, also titled Propaganda, by the Frenchman
Jacques Ellul. That book is still in print and is available from the
sponsor of this program, National Vanguard Books. Professor Ellul
deals with the subject in much greater depth and with much greater
honesty than Bernays does, but he agrees with Bernays on the most
obvious and
fundamental conclusions: on the irrelevance of the idea of democracy,
"If I am in favor of democracy, I can only regret that propaganda
renders the true exercise of it almost impossible. But I think that it
would be even worse to entertain any illusions about a coexistence of
true democracy and propaganda." -- end of quote --
To me it is frustrating that a conclusion that seems so obvious is
nevertheless resisted by so many otherwise intelligent people.
Democracy has become almost a sacred concept to them, this idea that
the policies guiding our nation should be decided by counting the
votes of every featherless biped who has reached the age of 18. It's
they're almost afraid to question it.
This seems to be as true of intellectuals in our society as it is of
Joe Sixpacks. The fact is that intellectuals are no more likely to be
independent-minded than people who work with their hands; most
intellectuals, just like most Joe Sixpacks, are lemmings. In fact, as
Ellul points out, it is precisely the intellectuals who are most
strongly controlled by propaganda, because they are more open to every
medium of propaganda.
And I must admit that it took me a long time to overcome the ideas
drummed into me when I was in school that under a democracy people are
more free than under any other political system, that under a
democracy we are all free to think and say whatever we want, and that
we have a greater responsibility as citizens of a democracy to make up
our own minds about things independently, and so on. Actually, we
still have some degree of individual freedom in the United States
today because more than 200 years ago men whose temperament was far
more aristocratic than democratic in the modern sense of the word were
willing to go to war against their legitimate government in order to
secure that freedom for us, and people with a truly democratic
temperament, who have been
gnawing away at that freedom ever since, haven't yet succeeded in
suppressing it completely.
Well, it should not be surprising to us that although books such as
Professor Ellul's Propaganda - and many others - are readily
available, almost no one has heard of them. Keeping the public
believing in the myth of democracy is an important element in
maintaining control over the thinking and behavior of the public. It
is simply immoral and
scandalous to question the reality of democracy. It's like questioning
the truth of the "Holocaust" story. And for that reason we're not
likely to be taught in our social studies classes in school or to read
in the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal even the most obvious
and self-evident conclusions presented by Bernays or Ellul. We're
still
taught how democracy safeguards our freedom, even while those who
control the mechanism of propaganda in our democratic society are
working day and night to eliminate that freedom."
The text above is based on a broadcast of the American Dissident
Voices radio program sponsored by National Vanguard Books. It is
distributed by e-mail each Saturday to subscribers of ADV-list.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
The subject of the message should be: Subscribe
http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
I'll admit you offered interesting insights into propaganda.
But then you link to nationalvanguard, which proves that
you don't understand propaganda.

Does the internet offer democracy hope, to lift us above
the scourge of propaganda? Slime to nun, in my opinion;
it is a tool, yet it is "freer" than other media. The hope
lies within ourselves, but we are not ready (imho).


otto


"Be Free" is a command and thus a contradiction; given
to, and by, a people that believe Freedom means letting
Whim be the Ruler.
Topaz
2006-08-30 14:25:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by otto
I'll admit you offered interesting insights into propaganda.
But then you link to nationalvanguard, which proves that
you don't understand propaganda.
The Jews control your media and everything you think you know is a
lie.

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."
Post by otto
Does the internet offer democracy hope, to lift us above
the scourge of propaganda?
Yes
Post by otto
Slime to nun, in my opinion;
it is a tool, yet it is "freer" than other media. The hope
lies within ourselves, but we are not ready (imho).
otto
"Be Free" is a command and thus a contradiction; given
to, and by, a people that believe Freedom means letting
Whim be the Ruler.
http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
Topaz
2006-08-30 02:11:00 UTC
Permalink
by Kevin Alfred Strom

...The May 18th meeting of the
American Israel Public Affairs Committee (or AIPAC for short) in
Washington, DC... AIPAC is the most influential lobby in Washington,
and is totally focused on maintaining and increasing American taxpayer
support for Israel, both financial and military, and in destroying all
critics of Israel or of Jewish supremacism...
When Bush ascended to the AIPAC podium, flanked by leading Jewish
supremacists on both sides, behind him was a huge new flag design,
probably 50 feet long, consisting of American stars and stripes
interspersed with huge Stars of David. Bush, interrupted by wild
applause and several standing ovations from the Zionist audience which
included Ariel Sharon, referred to the leading Jewish supremacists on
the platform by their first names:
"I'm honored to be here at AIPAC, thank you for such a warm welcome.
It's good to be with so many friends-friends of mine and friends of
Israel. ...I want to thank Amy for her leadership. I appreciate you
taking time to serve a cause that-in which you believe deeply. I want
to thank Bernice for her willingness to serve, as well. I've known
Howard for a long time. He's effective. I want to thank the AIPAC
board-AIPAC board members for their friendship and leadership. I'm
honored to be in the presence of my friend, the Ambassador from
Israel, Danny Ayalon. I appreciate you being here, Danny."
How cozy. The president went on in this vein for about forty minutes,
acting more like an Israeli cabinet minister than an American
president. He congratulated himself for his unwavering support for
Zionism, justified the horrible terror-war being waged on Israel's
behalf in Iraq, and engaged in some saber-rattling against other
Muslim states that don't want to have a government supervised by Jews.
Bush also repeated the catch-phrase that has a hidden meaning to
Jewish supremacists, the phrase I've spoken about before on American
Dissident Voices-"committed to the security of Israel as a Jewish
state," which is repeated almost word-for-word again and again by
Israel's sycophants and Capitol Hill puppets. and which means much
more than seems. [ http://www.nationalvanguard.org/story.php?id=1282 ]
The words 'as a Jewish state' are crucial: they mean support for
Israel as a racial state for one people alone, something that the
Jewish power structure denies to every White nation-yet White
politicians must express their "commitment" to Israel. Bush stated:
"The United States is strongly committed, and I am strongly committed,
to the security of Israel as a vibrant Jewish state." Identical to the
catch-phrase, with only the addition of the word 'vibrant.' Bush is
not committed to America as an American state -- in fact, he supports
amnesty for illegal invaders.
All that is to be expected from Bush, considering his dependence on
Jewish favor, Jewish money, and Jewish media for his election. But
what I found most chilling about Bush's groveling speech before his
masters was this section, in which he makes reference to a recent
meeting of the so-called Organization for Security and Cooperation in
Europe (OSCE), which is working with American and European governments
to outlaw free speech by "monitoring" and outlawing criticism of Jews
[ http://www.natvan.com/pub/2003/053103.txt
http://www.natvan.com/pub/2003/062803.txt ]:
"The Jewish people have seen, over the years and over the centuries,
that hate prepares the way for violence. The refusal to expose and
confront intolerance can lead to crimes beyond imagining. So we have a
duty to expose and confront anti-Semitism, wherever it is found. Some
of you attended a very important event in Berlin last month, the
International Conference on Anti-Semitism. You understand that
anti-Semitism is not a problem of the past; the hatred of Jews did not
die in a Berlin bunker. In its cruder forms, it can be found in some
Arab media, and this government will continue to call upon Arab
governments to end libels and incitements. Such hatred can also take
subtler forms. The demonization of Israel, the most extreme
anti-Zionist rhetoric can be a flimsy cover for anti-Semitism, and
contribute to an atmosphere of fear in which synagogues are
desecrated, people are slandered, folks are threatened. I will
continue to call upon our friends in Europe to renounce and fight any
sign of anti-Semitism in their midst."
[ http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/05/20040518-1.html
]

You'll notice two things here: 1) Bush is conflating negative feelings
about Jews, and 'rhetoric,' with actual violent acts and a supposed
'atmosphere' that 'creates' them, thus setting the stage for the
legally-required 'monitoring' of all critics of Jewish power and the
criminalization of the free speech of these critics, and 2) the
redefinition of criticism of Israel or Zionism, making them into just
another form of so-called "anti-Semitism," so they, too, can be
'monitored' and eventually criminalized. Both of these are something
that Jewish pressure groups worldwide have been pushing hard for
recently, and Bush promised to give them exactly what they want.
Meanwhile, at yet another meeting, John Kerry, who is actually of
Jewish ancestry himself, tried to out-promise Bush with his
protestations of love for Zionism and hatred of any who would
criticize Jewish supremacism. At a meeting last month of the
crime-linked Jewish spying operation and pressure group, the
'Anti-Defamation League' (ADL) in Washington, Kerry said the
following:
"...what ADL stands for is what I would like to fight for. ...And
after last week's [OSCE] conference in Berlin, we celebrate 55
countries that came together who have pledged to intensify their
efforts to combat anti-Semitism and to spread tolerance. ...And we
still know that anti-Semitism, notwithstanding the meeting of 55
countries, has been growing, and demands global leadership in order to
stand up against it. ...Across the Atlantic we've seen a new wave of
anti-Semitism, masking as anti-Israel sentiment, and it's creeping its
way across Europe and the Middle East. ...The people of Israel should
also know that for the entire 20 years that I have been in the United
States Senate, I'm proud that my commitment to a secure Jewish state
has been unwavering; not even by one vote or one letter or one
resolution has it wavered. And as president, I can guarantee you that
that support and that effort for our ally, a vibrant democracy, will
continue. ...The security of Israel is paramount."
[ http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/US-Israel/kerryadl.html ]
Ladies and gentlemen, you cannot have more than one paramount value.
If a certain thing is your highest value, that means that all other
things are of lesser or no value. Kerry says "The security of Israel
is paramount." Not the security of the United States. Not the security
of our children's future. Not the security of Western civilization or
its founding race. None of these are paramount to Kerry, or for that
matter Bush or any of the bought politicians. The Jewish state alone
is paramount. (In one of those coincidences that is simply too funny
to have been made up, I note that Kerry's 'liaison with the Jewish
community' is a person named Jay Footlik.)
As for Ralph Nader, he himself, like Kerry, is not entirely White
(though he's not Jewish) and he cannot be expected to articulate the
interests of White Americans. He has approached Middle Eastern issues
with more objectivity than Kerry or Bush-he recently referred to Kerry
as "part of the Washington puppet show on the Israeli/Palestinian
matter"-and he would restrict some of the worst abuses of the
open-border maniacs for rational economic reasons...
[ http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/US-Israel/kerry.html ]
And what of that OSCE conference on 'anti-Semitism' to which both
Kerry and Bush referred in such glowing terms? Attended by
representatives of 55 nations, many of them dependent on US/Zionist
favor for their economic survival, it marked the agreement of those
governments to 'root out' all criticism of Jews, continue their
efforts to criminalize such criticism, and begin the most extensive
internal surveillance and spying operation ever known, to be directed
against their own citizens suspected of being aware of the issue of
Jewish supremacism.
According to the New Jersey Jewish News, at the conference "European
governments acknowledged that much of the current anti-Semitism
revival hides behind criticism of Israel. ...Several congressional
participants praised the work of the conference, but warned that the
meeting is only the first step in combating a problem that continues
to grow."
One of those US Congressmen attending the event was New Jersey's
Republican Representative Chris Smith, who said "When national leaders
fail to denounce anti-Semitic violence and slurs, the void is not only
demoralizing to the victims, but silence actually enables the
wrongdoing. Silence by elected officials in particular conveys
approval - or at least acquiescence - and can contribute to a climate
of fear and a sense of vulnerability. ...we hope the results of this
conference will serve as a blueprint for serious and hopefully bold
action. Our words here in Berlin, however, must be repeated at home
with frequency, passion, and tenacity and matched - and even exceeded
- by deeds."
Laszlo Kovacs, the foreign minister of Hungary, told the OSCE meeting
"There can be no tolerance of extremist hate speech. We will not
tolerate it in parliament, in meetings, on the streets, squares or
football stadiums." By "extremist hate speech" they now mean criticism
of Israel, Zionism, or Jewish power. They do not mean and will not
punish Jewish supremacists when they declare their hatred of White
people or others, nor will they punish the Jewish funding and
promotion of policies which are leading directly to genocide of the
European race.
Another attendee was Democratic Congressman from Maryland Ben Cardin,
who declared "We ended up with a document that acknowledges the
importance of national leadership in fighting anti-Semitism, and which
commits nations not just to gather information about the problem but
to take action based on that."
The article continues: "As a result, OSCE members will share
information on the spread of anti-Semitism and 'best practices' for
combating it. Member nations agreed to invest in educational and law
enforcement programs aimed at reducing hate crimes and to appoint a
roving OSCE envoy to help members 'develop specific strategies.'"
Jewish spokesman Mark Levin said of the OSCE meeting "The bottom line
is that members states of the OSCE are now committed to monitoring and
hopefully implementing programs to counter increasing
anti-Semitism..." Levin also said that America must also monitor and
'combat' critics of Jewish power: "It was clear we have a lot to look
at in our own backyard, including using education, law enforcement,
and the Internet to combat new forms of hatred." With every questioner
of Jewish policy now put in the 'anti-Semite' category if Jewish
groups so declare, Levin and Foxman are going to be very very busy in
the near future.
[ http://www.njjewishnews.com/njjn.com/50604/wldadl.html ]
[ http://www.eubusiness.com/afp/040523124619.zfxkfwap ]
They may have to 'monitor' the halls of Congress. In the U.S.
Senate, Senator Ernest Hollings is about to retire-and from
the secure position of never having to worry about reelection
again, Mr. Hollings has decided to come clean, at least
partially, on the nature of Jewish power in Washington. (By the
way, Hollings' designated successor has been chosen by the
Democratic Party: Inez Tenenbaum, the Democratic state education
superintendent. No more worries about South Carolina Senators
spilling the beans for a while, anyway. [
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/GuestColumns/printLondon20040525.shtml
] )

Hollings' remarks included the following: "They [the Israeli military]
are coming in there [Palestinian refugee camps] with U.S. equipment,
U.S. gun helicopters, U.S. tanks that are bulldozing. That is our
policy. That is the reason for 9/11. ...I think, frankly, we have
caused more terrorism than we have gotten rid of. ...I can tell you no
President takes office-I don't care whether it is a Republican or a
Democrat-that all of a sudden AIPAC will tell him exactly what the
policy is... I don't apologize for this column. I want them to
apologize to me for talking about anti-Semitism. They are not getting
by with it. ...Now we have killed almost 800, maimed for life
thousands of others. Are we going to just continue on?"
[ http://hollings.senate.gov/~hollings/statements/2004521A35.html
]

Good question, Senator Hollings. My question is: Why did it take you
dozens of years to tell us the truth about Jewish domination of
Washington? Other establishment figures have, perhaps reluctantly and
hesitantly, revealed the truth about who has led us into the war:
Middle East expert General Anthony Zinni has now stated that the
purpose of the war was Israel's security, and that Jewish
neocons-naming Douglas Feith, Paul Wolfowitz, Lewis Libby, Richard
Perle, and Elliot Abrams-were the ones pushing for war from the
beginning.
[ http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=13549 ]
In parallel with the OSCE efforts in Europe, Jewish efforts to
suppress criticism are right now on track to be made into law in the
US Congress: H.R.4230 is a bill to "To authorize the establishment
within the Department of State of an Office to Monitor and Combat
Anti-Semitism, to require inclusion in annual Department of State
reports of information concerning acts of anti-Semitism around the
world, and for other purposes."
The bill states that "It is the sense of Congress that-- (1) the
United States should continue to vigorously support efforts to combat
anti-Semitism worldwide through bilateral relationships and
interaction with international organizations such as the Organization
of Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE); (2) the United States
delegation to the OSCE conference in Berlin should advocate for the
appointment of a High Commissioner on anti-Semitism; (3) the President
should direct the United States Ambassador to the United Nations to
introduce in the most appropriate forum in the United Nations a
measure condemning anti-Semitism; (4) the Secretary of State should
establish a permanent office in the Department of State to monitor and
combat anti-Semitism; and (5) the Department of State should
thoroughly document acts of anti-Semitism and anti-Semitic incitement
that occur around the world."
[ http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:HR04230:@@@P ]
It does indeed seem that there are meetings, meetings everywhere -- in
Berlin, in Washington, in the halls of Congress itself. For the most
part, these are meetings of liars and faceless bureaucrats eager to
accept Jewish money and keep their jobs by doing what they are told.
Meanwhile, we're having some meetings of our own. Last month, National
Alliance members participated in the Institute for Historical Review
revisionist conference in Sacramento, which we helped rescue from
cowardice and Jewish censorship efforts. Just one week earlier, we
held the largest-ever National Alliance Leadership Conference in the
newly-constructed William Pierce Memorial Hall in the beautiful
mountains of West Virginia. And just a few days ago, the New Orleans
European-American Conference gathered together Alliance members and
supporters, members of other groups, and individual activists from
around the world to meet in cooperation in setting lofty goals,
putting in place a 'zero tolerance' policy on violence or lawlessness
often instigated by provocateurs, and distancing ourselves from
irresponsible elements by setting a high moral tone in our efforts to
secure a future for White children. The ideas in the New Orleans
Protocol, as it is called, are those that the National Alliance has
been promoting for years. The New Orleans Protocol will have historic
significance as we advance toward our vision: a nation for White
people, where the government is responsible to us alone, where our
interests-and not the interests of a foreign nation like Israel-come
first.


http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
HR
2006-08-30 22:11:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Frank Arthur
Anyone country in Europe that wants to go back to Hitler days? Zero!
Post by t***@hotmail.com
http://www.adolfthegreat.com/
Hitler is looking better and better. While Europe, Canada, Oz and the USA
descend into the 3rd world muck, China is doing very well by following Nazi
principles, after their disaster with Judeo-Marxism..
GP
Interesting!
ted
Judeo-Marxism?
Another frothing loon surfaces from the ooze.
Schmetterling
2006-08-31 07:20:42 UTC
Permalink
"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/
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...