Dr. David Duke exposes the Jewish role in the African and global slave trade.
The dishonest label “Holocaust denier” is used to prevent questioning.
Source: American Dissident Voices broadcast, February 8, 1997; reprinted in Free Speech magazine, March 1997, Volume III, No. 3
by Dr. William L. Pierce
There has been a lot of commotion in the controlled media recently about Swiss bankers who supposedly are hiding the assets of various Jews who perished more than 50 years ago, during the Second World War, in the so-called “Holocaust.” The idea is that during the war Jews in Germany, France, and other European countries squirreled their money away in secret Swiss bank accounts so the Germans couldn’t get it. Then the Jews were hauled off to concentration camps or otherwise came to an end, and their money still remains in the secret Swiss accounts. The news stories have hinted that the Swiss bankers have been remiss in simply keeping the money in the accounts, rather than searching for heirs or turning it over to Jewish organizations. It has been suggested that billions of dollars of Jewish money is being kept from the Jews to whom it rightfully belongs. Jewish groups are demanding that the Swiss set up a fund immediately to reimburse “Holocaust” survivors.
The Swiss, who are proud of the integrity of their banking system, are naturally indignant about these Jewish allegations that they have behaved improperly. The outgoing president of Switzerland, Jean-Pascal Delamuraz, called the Jewish media campaign “extortion” and “blackmail.” The Jews and the media have responded by clamoring even more insistently that the Swiss should pay billions of dollars to the Jews. In fact they now have begun making demands against Sweden as well. The Jews claim that the Germans bought raw materials from Sweden during the war using gold that had been confiscated from Jews, and that now Sweden owes that gold to Jewish “Holocaust” survivors.
It’s really an amazing campaign. The Swiss bankers have said repeatedly that they have checked their inactive accounts in the past, and that they are holding at most a few million dollars which may belong to the relatives of Jews who died during the war, that it could not possibly amount to the billions of dollars the Jews are claiming, and that they have treated the accounts of their Jewish depositors just like they treat all of their accounts. Yet the media virtually ignore what the Swiss say and continue to raise a huge hullabaloo about the poor, persecuted Jews and how they are being done wrong by the Swiss and the Swedes. And, of course, the U.S. politicians are jumping into the act, demanding that the Swiss and the Swedes satisfy the Jews. It’s really amazing.
You know, I haven’t talked much in the past about the so-called “Holocaust,” because I’ve felt that really is a job for the historians, and I’m not a professional historian. Unfortunately, however, the “Holocaust” is one of those politically sensitive subjects which makes professional historians very nervous. Jews – and apologists for the Jews – have written literally thousands of “Holocaust” books during the past 50 years, and many of the claims made in these books are patently false. The professional historians know that, but they hesitate to say anything, lest they be branded as “Holocaust deniers” by the powerful Jewish organizations and by the controlled news media.
Because of this timidity on the part of the professionals, perhaps we amateurs really have an obligation to speak out more. This whole “Holocaust” business is a fascinating subject, and there’s much to be learned from looking into it, even if one isn’t a professional historian. Take, for example, the label of “Holocaust denier,” which is pasted on anyone who dares to ask questions about the “Holocaust.” If I comment publicly that the official figure for the number of Jews who died in the big concentration and labor camp at Auschwitz, in Poland, has been revised downward recently by the Polish government from an earlier figure of four million to about one million, and I suggest that perhaps that means that the famous figure of “six million” Jews killed by the Germans also needs to be revised downward – if I make such a suggestion, then I’m immediately denounced as a “Holocaust denier.” That’s the standard phrasing that’s been agreed on by all of the big Jewish outfits, the news media, the bought politicians, and so on: “Holocaust denier.” That’s what you’re called if you question anything about the official myth. It’s a crooked tactic. It deliberately makes it look like you’re denying that there ever was any such thing as a “Holocaust.” It’s a label that’s designed to make any questioner look like some sort of extremist who denies that anything at all happened to the Jews during the Second World War. That’s crooked, isn’t it?
I know that Jews were killed during the war. I’ve talked with German soldiers who shot Jews. In the war against the Soviet Union and Communism, the Germans found that virtually all of the Jews they encountered on the Eastern Front were Communist partisans, that Jews were heavily involved in Communist guerrilla activities, in sabotage, and in other hostile actions against the Germans. Often the only way to pacify an area was to round up all of the Jews and ship them off to a concentration camp or to shoot them. Most of the other folks on the Eastern Front – the Poles, the Ukrainians, often even the Russians – were happy enough to have the German Army get the Communists off their backs, but the Jews were fanatically pro-Communist. The Soviet Political Commissars who were attached to all Red Army units to spy on ordinary Russian soldiers and look for any signs of Political Incorrectness nearly always were Jews, and the German Army in many cases separated these Jewish Political Commissars from their Russian prisoners of war and shot the commissars.
I also know that Germans didn’t like Jews, and Hitler especially didn’t like them, and as a consequence the German government tried very hard to encourage Jews to leave Germany, even before the war. Laws were passed limiting Jewish participation in some professions – such as the law and publishing – where they were heavily overrepresented.
So I know that something did happen to the Jews in Europe both before and during the Second World War, and if they want to call that something a “Holocaust,” that’s all right with me. I don’t deny that something did happen. I don’t deny that there was a “Holocaust.” I’m just interested in checking the details, in checking the facts. But as soon as I or anyone else does that, we’re called “Holocaust deniers.”
That’s interesting, because the obvious intent of the people who use that label is to discourage us from asking questions. They don’t want the details checked. They don’t want anyone looking for any facts other than the official facts they present to us. And after being called a “Holocaust denier” a hundred times or so, I’ve come to believe that the reason they don’t want their facts checked is that they know that in many cases their facts are false. That’s really crooked – but I believe that to be an accurate assessment of the situation.
I first became interested in the “Holocaust” enough to want to check it out when I encountered some especially fanciful accounts by so-called “survivors.” I read accounts by Jews who claimed that they saw German soldiers grabbing Jewish babies by their legs and swinging their heads against brick walls to smash out their brains. One Jewess told of witnessing German soldiers carrying Jewish children one at a time up the stairs to the top of a building, throwing them off, and laughing when they hit the pavement below and were killed. Other Jews made the claim that they saw German guards separate Jews out from prisoners arriving at concentration camps, pour gasoline on them, and set them afire, right on the train platform. And there were other stories about Jewish prisoners with colorful tattoos being selected from the camps and then skinned so that their tattooed skin could be made into lampshades. Now, these stories just didn’t jibe with what I knew about the German Army and the German government during that period. I knew that the Germans didn’t like Jews, but I also knew that the German Army was the best-disciplined army in the world. I knew that they had a better record of behavior in the countries they occupied than any other army in the Second World War – including the U.S. Army. I had until that point believed the stories that the Germans had methodically herded the Jews into gas chambers. But I really doubted that any disciplined army would tolerate its soldiers just killing prisoners for sport.
If you saw the anti-German propaganda film which came out a couple of years ago, Schindler’s List, you will remember that it portrayed the German commandant of a labor camp shooting Jewish inmates with a hunting rifle from his balcony. That was the sort of thing I had questioned when I first encountered these stories. And yet, very few other people were questioning these accounts. Newspapers and magazines and books were reporting them as if they were unquestionably true.
I began looking into the matter in detail, and I discovered many interesting things. I discovered that some Jews had been killed, and I discovered the circumstances under which they were killed. I discovered that many more Jews simply died under the conditions that existed toward the end of the war, when malnutrition and disease were rampant in the prison camps. I discovered that the total number of Jews who were killed and who died of disease was substantially less than the six million claimed by the Jewish propagandists. Most important, I discovered that a great many lies had been told about what had happened during the “Holocaust.” I discovered that most of the tales about gas chambers – that is, the ones that could be checked out – were not true. I discovered that not a single one of the stories about bashing out babies’ brains or throwing children off buildings or shooting prisoners with hunting rifles for sport, à la Schindler’s List, could be substantiated, and that they were all almost certainly false.
All of this is interesting in itself; at least, it is interesting to me. It is a part of our history. I could talk all day about the details, about the facts that I discovered when I began looking into the “Holocaust,” but I don’t want to bore you. If you really want to know the details, write to the Institute for Historical Review. They’re experts, and they’re honest. Their address is:
Institute for Historical Review
P.O. Box 2739
Newport Beach, CA 92659
To me what’s even more interesting about the “Holocaust” story than all of the holes in it is the motivation behind it, the way the story is being used today, and the response of various elements of our society to it. Let’s go back for a moment to that deliberately misleading label of “Holocaust denier” that I mentioned earlier. If you’ve spent any time exploring the Internet – especially some of the political discussion groups on the Internet – you’ll have heard that term “Holocaust denier” often enough. It’s not that the “Holocaust” is a hot topic of discussion on the Internet. It isn’t. But it is discussed occasionally, along with just about every other topic under the sun, and it’s discussed openly, without fear. The Internet is just about the only place left where one can discuss politically sensitive topics openly. And that just drives the big Jewish censorship organizations crazy. They don’t want any open discussion of the “Holocaust.” They’re terrified of it. The Simon Wiesenthal Center has been especially loud in its complaints about the lack of censorship on the Internet. Without censorship, they complain, the “Holocaust deniers” can say anything they want. If we don’t censor the Internet, the “Holocaust deniers” can come right into your home and contaminate your child’s mind while he’s using his computer to do his homework.
They’ve tried to intimidate people into silence. They’ll have one of their own people claim to be a World War II veteran, and his standard line will be, “Hey, don’t try to tell me there wasn’t a Holocaust. I was there. I saw the bodies. So don’t try to tell me there wasn’t a Holocaust.”
Now, that sort of tactic may work on television, where they control the whole medium and no one can contradict them. But on the Internet people have been contradicting them. People have been saying, “Hey, we’re not trying to tell you there were no bodies. We just want to know how many bodies. We want to know how they died.” But they will not engage in a rational discussion with you. If one trick won’t silence you, they’ll try another. They’ll say, “What difference does it matter how many? If only one Jew were killed just for being a Jew, that’s a terrible crime. That’s a Holocaust.” That’s supposed to embarrass you into shutting up. But on the Internet you can come back and say, “Well, what about the Germans who were killed just because they were Germans. What about the Russians and the Ukrainians and the Hungarians who were killed by some Jewish Commissar just because they were anti-Communists? Don’t they count? Wasn’t that a crime for which someone should be held accountable?”
They don’t like to hear that. They really don’t. Try it sometime, if you have a thick skin and don’t mind having them shriek insults at you.
Their final line of defense is governmental force, governmental repression. If they can’t embarrass you into silence, they turn to the politicians and demand laws to make you shut up. That’s what they’ve already done in Europe and in Canada, where you can be jailed for being a “Holocaust denier” – which means, for questioning anything at all about what really happened. There are many people in German prisons now who made the mistake of saying, “Hey, I was a guard at such and such a prison camp during the war, and there was no gas chamber there.” In Britain, they already have laws against criticizing Jews, but they want the laws toughened, and so they’ve turned to the politicians. And, I’m sorry to say, the politicians in Britain are just about as crooked a lot as we have here. The chairman of the British Labor Party, Tony Blair, is a real piece of filth, of about the same quality as Bill Clinton. He hopes to be the new prime minister after the parliamentary elections coming up in May. He has announced, with a little prodding from the Labor Party’s Jewish backers, that when he is prime minister he will propose a new law making “Holocaust denial” a specific crime, so that anyone who questions whether or not there was a gas chamber in such and such a place can be locked up, just as in Germany.
And that’s what they want in America too. The Jewish lawyers and journalists and professors – and their Gentile collaborators – already are working hard to persuade people that the First Amendment to our Constitution needs to be scrapped, or at least rewritten. The Founding Fathers never intended to protect all types of speech, they say. They never intended to protect indecent or hurtful speech. And to deny the “Holocaust” is indecent and hurtful. They’re working hard on it. The trendier Gentiles already are falling into line. Believe me, they’ll be making a strong push to abolish free speech in America soon. They’ll tell us that it’s for our own good.
But it’s for their own good, not ours. That’s the most interesting insight I gained from checking out the “Holocaust.” I learned why they push it so hard, why they’ve made so many Hollywood propaganda films like Schindler’s List, why they’ve told so many whoppers about bashing out babies’ brains and making lampshades out of skinned Jews, why they talked the politicians into letting them have a Holocaust Museum in Washington, why they’ve gotten politicians at the state level to pass laws requiring that the public schools carry “Holocaust” indoctrination courses, and why they’re so desperate to stop people from asking questions.
It’s not just because they’re afraid of being exposed as liars if they stop defending their old lies with new lies. It’s not just because they hate the Germans and like to beat them over the head with the “Holocaust.” And it’s not just because they find the “Holocaust” a convenient excuse for the crimes they have committed and still are committing against the Palestinian people. There’s a much bigger reason than all of these things – and a much more dangerous reason for us, for our people. But you are an intelligent person with at least a little bit of open-mindedness, a little bit of mental independence, or you wouldn’t be reading this magazine. Why don’t you discover for yourselves why the Jews are so defensive about the “Holocaust,” why they are so afraid for anyone to ask questions about it? It’s an easy thing to do, and I believe it’ll be much more convincing if you find out for yourselves, instead of having me tell you. There are thousands of books out there that they’ve written. Go into any large bookstore or library and you’ll find books about the “Holocaust” by the top “Holocaust” promoters, Jews like Elie Wiesel and Simon Wiesenthal. Read these books with an open mind, with a questioning mind. Think about the claims they make. Then get a copy of our book catalog and read a couple of the books we sell – or read some books from the Institute for Historical Review – and think about what you read in these books too. Make up your own mind. I believe you’ll find it an illuminating and rewarding experience.
* * *
By Bradley R. Smith
Why does the American professorial class insist that students “believe” what they are told – and told and told — about Germans and Jews during World War 11? Why does the American academic refuse to encourage students to create a free exchange of ideas about what really happened during that fracas? Why? One word reveals the story. That word is “shame.”
by Dr. William L. Pierce
Sometimes the most important things occur virtually unnoticed, while people’s attention is focused on things of no consequence. Last week, while everyone was glued to his television screen, oohing and ahing over Hurricane Floyd and watching the huge traffic jams of lemmings fleeing the southeastern coastal areas lest they be obliged to do a little wading, much more dangerous and sinister doings than wind, rain, and high tides were afoot, but hardly anyone noticed. The Senate Judiciary Committee in Washington was holding a public hearing and listening to suggestions from various pressure groups on ways to eliminate free speech on the Internet.
That’s not what they called it, of course; they said they were trying to devise ways of keeping „hate“ off the Internet. They want to protect children from being exposed to „hate,“ they say. They want to reduce the amount of violence in the country, they say; many people learn from the Internet to hate, and then having learned to hate, they run out and commit acts of violence. Keep „hate“ off the Internet, and then there will be less violence. That’s what they claim to believe.
Well, whether their theory about the Internet provoking people to violence is correct or not, it sounds as if the Senate Judiciary Committee really means well, doesn’t it? I mean, who could be against reducing the amount of „hate“ in America? That’s really a Mom and apple pie issue, isn’t it?
Of course, if you’re a skeptical sort of person, as I am, you might want to know exactly what this „hate“ consists of that the senators and the witnesses testifying for them are so eager to keep off the Internet. „Hate,“ it seems to me, could be a tricky thing to define. Would you call any expression of dislike or contempt „hate“? Maybe only a strong expression of dislike? How strong? Maybe whether an expression of dislike or contempt is „hate“ depends on who is making the expression and who is the target of the dislike. I mean, really, how do you decide what is „hate“ and what isn’t?
Well, listen, you will be pleased and relieved to learn that we don’t have to bother our little heads about that at all. We don’t have to decide what is „hate“ and what isn’t. We have some very public-spirited people who have volunteered to do that for us. Lucky us! These are the very same public-spirited people who persuaded the senators to hold the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in the first place and then appeared as witnesses before the committee. They are Howard
These public-spirited citizens are referred to uniformly by the controlled media as „civil rights experts“ or „human rights advocates.“ Isn’t that reassuring to know that these people who want to protect us from „hate“ on the Internet also are concerned about our civil rights?
Reading the testimony of these Jewish witnesses and the comments of the eager-to-please politicians on the committee is a surreal experience. Their language is Orwellian. Nothing really
means what it sounds like it means. Rabbi Abraham Cooper referred to the Internet as a „terrorism tutor“ and implied that a substantial part of the violence in American life is the consequence of permitting „hate“ on the Internet. The truth, of course, is that most of the violent criminals in America never have had their hands on a computer keyboard. There is no evidence that even one act of real terrorism in the United States had anything at all to do with the Internet.
If, in fact, terrorists learn their trade from the media or are provoked to commit violent acts by the media, I would suspect Hollywood long before I would suspect the Internet. But I guess that Rabbi Cooper and Mr. Berkowitz and Mr. Dees would want to change the subject in a hurry if you began talking to them about violence inspired by television or by Hollywood films, however. After all, it’s their tribe which is in control of the television and film business.
The witnesses at the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing spoke of Internet sites where one can learn to make a bomb. Perhaps there are such sites, although I’ve never seen one. But I cannot think of a single terrorist bombing in the United States in which the bomber could have learned from the Internet how to build his bomb. Neither Timothy McVeigh nor the people accused of bombing the World Trade Center in New York were ever on the Internet, so far as I am aware. Certainly, no evidence was presented by the government at their trials to indicate they were.
Really, the whole notion that people commit violent crimes or terrorist acts as a consequence of „hate“ on the Internet is simply ridiculous. Do you know what these anti-hate crusaders presented as evidence of terrorism inspired or facilitated by the Internet? I’ll quote directly from the transcript of the hearing. The committee chairman, Utah’s Republican Senator Orrin Hatch, said that he was pleased to have as a witness the assistant U.S. attorney from Los Angeles, Michael Gennaco, who had gained „the first conviction against a hate-crime assailant for acts taken on the Internet.“ Assistant U.S. Attorney Gennaco then related his achievement to the committee:
„On the morning of March 5, 1998, 42 Latino faculty members turned on their computers at Cal State Los Angeles to read their e-mails. They read a mean-spirited derogatory statement against Latinos. Using the most demeaning racial slurs, the sender told the faculty members that he hated their race, that he wanted them to die, that the only reason the professors were hired was because of Affirmative Action, that their race was stupid, greedy, and ugly, and that the sender was going to personally come down and kill each of them.“
The student who sent this message to the Latino faculty members was tracked down, arrested, tried, and convicted. Of course, the name of the offending student wasn’t mentioned in the hearing – just for your information, his name is Kwon – and it also wasn’t mentioned in the hearing that Kwon is Chinese, because that inconvenient fact doesn’t fit the general theme the committee wanted to develop. Before we get into that theme, however, let us remember that what this Chinese student did – essentially sending a death threat by wire – certainly was nothing new, and it required no new laws for its prosecution.
The fact that this was the best example the committee could come up with of a genuine Internet- related „hate crime“ ought to tell us that this whole pretense of being concerned about the connection between „hate“ on the Internet and violence is phony. These Jewish „human rights
advocates“ like Berkowitz and Cooper understand that there simply are no convincing cases of violence or terrorism stemming from the Internet, so after giving us the pitiful example of Kwon and his derogatory e-mail to the Mexican faculty members – and giving it to us in such a way that many of us would assume that Kwon was a heterosexual White male, their stereotypical „hater“ – after this they try to bolster their case with all sorts of innuendo and misdirection.
For example, much was made in the hearing of the facts that Benjamin Smith, the University of Indiana student who shot a Korean and a Black this summer, belonged to the World Church of the Creator, and the World Church of the Creator has an Internet web site. The not so subtle implication was that if the World Church of the Creator had been kept off the Internet in some way, then the Black and the Korean shot by Benjamin Smith still would be alive. But that’s really a false implication. Benjamin Smith wasn’t incited by the Internet to shoot anyone. He knew personally the man who heads the World Church of the Creator; he was his close associate and helper. That man is an attorney; he has a law degree and wants to practice law in Illinois. And when that man was denied a law license by the Politically Correct Illinois bar committee because they didn’t like his religious beliefs, Smith went on a rampage. There is absolutely no evidence to indicate that the Internet had anything to do with it.
And there was a lot of other deliberate misdirection too by the politicians and the Jewish witnesses. The shootings at Columbine High School in Colorado were invoked by several witnesses. Rabbi Cooper claimed „In 1999 the Internet can serve as a terrorism tutor; it did for Eric Harris at Columbine.“ Rabbi Cooper seems to have forgotten that Eric Harris had a Jewish accomplice, Dylan Klebold.
The Southern Poverty Law Center’s Joseph Roy, who was also a witness, testified:
„In Littleton, Colorado, the two youths who opened fire on their classmates at Columbine High School may well have been inspired, in some part, by neo-Nazi propaganda they encountered on the Net. It seems clear that they found plans for building pipe bombs and other weapons there.“
Now, that is really deceptive, and I’m sure that Mr. Roy intended it to be. He knows that Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold were not „neo-Nazis“; he knows that one was a Jew and that both were anti-racist. He knows that Eric Harris had an Internet web site in which he said that he wanted to torture and kill White racists. If Harris and Klebold were inspired by anything they encountered on the Net, it certainly wasn’t „neo-Nazi propaganda“; on the contrary, the evidence suggests that they were inspired by the sort of multicultural „love“ and diversity-mongering with which the Southern Poverty Law Center, the Simon Wiesenthal Center, and the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith poison the Net. As to whether or not Harris and Klebold found plans on the Net for making pipe bombs, that’s really beside the point, since they did all of their killing and wounding with shotguns and pistols. They neither killed nor injured anyone with a pipe bomb.
So without the least bit of evidence that Politically Incorrect web sites on the Internet have any connection to terrorism, why did the Jews and the politicians bother to have this hearing? Why try to persuade anyone that the Internet is a „terrorism tutor“ when it plainly isn’t? What’s the point?
The point is that the Jews aren’t concerned about the Internet as a so-called „terrorism tutor“; that is just a smoke-screen. What they are concerned about is keeping inconvenient facts and ideas off the Internet. They don’t want to stop terrorism; they want to stop the spread of truth. Until the Internet came along the Jews had a virtual monopoly on the dissemination of ideas and information to the general public. If they wanted to persuade the public that in most interracial crime White males are the aggressors, there was no one to contradict them with the facts. They could report – over and over and over again, with non-stop coverage – any interracial crime in which Whites actually were the aggressors and ignore all Black-on-White crimes, which is essentially what they’re still doing – but with the Internet people like me are embarrassing them with the facts.
Five or six years ago they could talk about „Russian“ organized crime on television or in the New York Times, and there was no one to tell the public that it wasn’t „Russian“ organized crime at all: that it was 100 per cent Jewish organized crime. They could whine about how they were „persecuted“ by the Swiss and the Germans and the Swedes and the Poles and the Ukrainians and the Russians and the Lithuanians and the Latvians and everyone else during the Second World War, and how everyone owed them hundreds of billions of dollars in „reparations“ now, and there was no one to tell the world about the persecution of other peoples and nations by the Jews. There was no one to point out to the world that for every dollar taken from the Jews during the war, the Jews stole 100 dollars from those countries which fell victim to their communist racket. They could moan to the world about how the cold and cruel Gentiles just stood by and let six million Jews be led into the gas chambers, and so now the very least the world could do for the Jews was to give them a free ride. Anyone who questioned their story was immediately shrieked down as a „Holocaust denier,“ and the questioner had no way of presenting the historical facts to the public. People like me could print a few pamphlets and distribute them on street corners, but for all practical purposes we had no effective way of exposing the lies of the Jews.
The Jews liked it that way. They liked having a monopoly on the dissemination of ideas and information to the public. The Internet robs them of that monopoly, and they don’t like that a bit. They don’t like having me and others exposing their lies and telling the public things they prefer to keep quiet.
Of course, even with the Internet available to us, we can’t challenge the hold the Jews have on America’s political system – at least, not yet. The great mass of the voters, the couch potatoes, the ball game fans, don’t use the Internet and never will – except perhaps to access porno sites and check their horoscopes. But the perceptive and intelligent minority of White men and women capable of independent thought now have a new information medium, a new medium for the exchange of ideas, and the Jews aren’t able to control it. That’s what they don’t like. That’s what they’re afraid of, certainly not terrorism.
They’re afraid of the fact that as the sickness of American society becomes more and more evident to the perceptive few, that as the craziness and destructiveness going on in Washington and Hollywood take a greater and greater toll, more and more of the people who really count, the intelligent and productive White men and women in the universities and in the professions and in industry who somehow keep this civilization staggering along under its growing burden – these people are looking for answers, and Rabbi Cooper and his fellow tribesmen are afraid they may
find the answers. They are desperately afraid of that. And that’s why they told the politicians to hold the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing last week. They are desperate to control the Internet the same way they control television and the New York Times; they are desperate to censor the Internet, to choke off the free flow of information. But of course, they won’t tell us that. What they tell us is that they want to protect us from violence and terrorism caused by „hate“ on the Internet.
So what do you think? Are the American people too smart to fall for that sort of deception? Are we so fond of our freedom that we won’t give it up just because the Jews have cleverly labeled it as „hate“? Can we relax because Senator Hatch and the other senators on the committee all swore to uphold and defend the Constitution and therefore won’t let these Jews get away with their scheme?
Listen, you know as well as I do that Senator Hatch and every other politician in the Congress would fall all over themselves to abolish the whole Bill of Rights in order to please Rabbi Cooper and Mr. Berkowitz and the rest – if they thought the American people would let them get away with it. They know that the couch potatoes won’t object, but they’re still concerned about that minority of perceptive and responsible White Americans who aren’t quite ready yet to give up their freedom without a fight.
So the hearing last week was well larded with assurances that new laws can be devised to keep „hate“ off the Internet without infringing on anyone’s freedom of speech. If that leaves you a little uncertain as to exactly what these Jews have in mind, let me tell you about something which happened this month in the Fort Lauderdale, Florida, suburb of Oakland Park. Lloyd Shank is a 73-year-old retired carpenter who lives in Oakland Park, which is in Broward County. Mr. Shank doesn’t much like the Clinton government, and he also doesn’t like Jews. On August 23 he hand-delivered copies of a one-page letter he had written to members of the Broward County Commission. All but one of the members of the county commission are Jews, and the one who is not is a woman married to a Jew. After the Second World War New York Jews migrated in large numbers to Florida and virtually took over the southeastern part of the state.
In his letter Mr. Shank said some unkind things about the Clinton government, including the charge that the government is responsible for the deaths of more than 80 members of a church in Waco, Texas, that the FBI and other secret police agencies laid siege to and then burned to the ground on April 19, 1993, with most of the church members, including women and children, inside. Mr. Shank also said some unkind things about Jews in his letter, calling them „perverts“ and accusing them of liking to be hated. He wound up his letter with the statement:
„When your holocaust reprisals come, hide in the New York subways for security from nuclear bombs. Don’t forget your money.“
No threats, just an expression of dislike.
Now, I don’t know about you, but I don’t see the point in sending letters to Jews telling them that they’re bad people and that you don’t like them. To me that seems like foolishness and a waste of time. But we have a right to be foolish and waste our time if we want to. We have a right to send
letters to people and call them perverts and tell them that we don’t like them, whether they are Jews or not. The Jews should not be exempted from criticism, and no one should be punished for criticizing them. We do still have a Constitution and freedom of speech – except in Broward County, Florida, apparently.
The Jews ran immediately to the police with Shank’s letter and demanded that he be arrested. Broward County Sheriff Ken Jenne jumped to obey. With an eagerness to please that put Senator Orrin Hatch in the shade, Jenne arrested Shank and began making statements to the press: „We will not allow extremists to terrorize any member of our community.“ That sounds suspiciously like the sheriff of Broward County and his Jewish constituents believe that extremists – which is to say, people who criticize Jews – should have fewer rights than the rest of the citizenry.
A news story in the September 10 issue of the Miami Herald about Mr. Shank’s arrest stated:
„In the wake of a shooting spree at a Jewish community center in Los Angeles last month, authorities are taking anti-Semitic rhetoric like Shank’s seriously.“
Yes, but apparently they no longer take the Constitution of the United States seriously in Broward County. And believe me, that’s exactly what Rabbi Abraham Cooper and Mr. Howard Berkowitz and Mr. Morris Dees and their pals have in mind for the rest of the country, despite all of their deceptive claims that they’re not out to abolish the First Amendment.
I have been reading about Aldrich Ames, an employee in our Central Intelligence Agency who was caught spying against the United States. There have been several other Americans caught recently who were spying for foreign governments, including one who was an FBI agent, but Ames was the most important, in terms of the amount of damage he did. A book about Ames, who was arrested three years ago, has been published recently. Its author is Pete Earley, and it’s titled Confessions of a Spy. The most interesting thing to me in the book was Ames’s explanation of why he decided to sell American secrets to the KGB. He never really thought of himself as a traitor. He needed money, and he didn’t think the CIA was paying him enough; he was essentially an alienated person who felt no sense of loyalty to anything.
There are a great many other people in this country who are just as alienated, just as self-oriented and rootless as Aldrich Ames. Most of them, of course, aren’t in a position like Ames was where they can do a great deal of damage. They don’t have the opportunity he had. And even among those who do have the opportunity, most aren’t enterprising enough or bold enough to take the risks involved. And that is the main reason there aren’t more spies being caught: there is a certain element of risk involved.
It used to be, 50 or 60 years ago, that people didn’t spy against their country because of a sense of loyalty. They felt themselves a part of the United States, and they would no more betray their country than they would betray a family member. During and shortly after the Second World War, for example, most of the American citizens caught spying against this country were Jews who were selling information to the Soviet Union. Part of the reason was because there was much more sympathy for Communism among Jews than among non-Jews, but part of the reason also was that Jews, as a group apart, felt no sense of loyalty to America. Their loyalty was to other Jews and to Jewish interests, but not to the country in which they happened to be living at the moment. Nowadays, Gentile Americans are nearly as lacking in loyalty to America, nearly as lacking in patriotism, as Jews are. People still feel a sense of loyalty to their friends and their families, but not much else.
Why is this? What has changed in America during the past 50 years to erode the sense of patriotism so much?
If you think about it for a minute you’ll know the answer. The average White person can no longer look on America as his family. He no longer feels a part of it. It’s just the place where he happened to have been born and happens to be living. He no longer feels a sense of kinship with all other Americans. The reason he doesn’t is primarily the result of the enormous increase in what liberals and the media fondly call „diversity“: that is, the great increase in the number of people with whom we feel nothing in common – people with different roots, people who look different, think differently, behave differently, and have different values – people whom we cannot even imagine being part of our family. When we look at America and see a great many people like that, when we see all of this „diversity,“ then we no longer feel ourselves a part of
America. We no longer feel a sense of loyalty to America. We no longer feel like traitors if we do something to hurt America.
To be sure, not everyone is as alienated yet as Aldrich Ames – but we’re getting there. And „diversity“ isn’t the only thing which is eroding our sense of patriotism. The liberals and the media are working hard at it. The Vietnam war took us a giant step away from patriotism. Some of you may not remember, but 25 years ago there were giant demonstrations in Washington on behalf of the Viet Cong and the Communists, who were killing American soldiers at the rate of 100 a day. Left-wing groups with Jewish leaders organized these demonstrations, and they bused in college students from all over the country, hundreds of thousands of them, for these demonstrations. Most of the kids weren’t Communists or even Communist sympathizers: they were just following the people on their campuses who were the loudest and pushiest and going along for the excitement and because it was the trendy thing to do. Some Jew would hand one of them a Viet Cong flag, and he would carry it, because everyone else was. It was very trendy, very fashionable to be anti-American.
And the worst thing about all this uproar during the Vietnam war is that the government did nothing to stop it. The government was sending young men over to Vietnam to be killed by the Viet Cong and the North Vietnamese and at the same time was permitting Viet Cong sympathizers to organize huge demonstrations in Washington and even providing police protection for them. The politicians were afraid to do anything, because the Jew-controlled media all sympathized with the demonstrators, and the politicians were afraid of the Jews. The net effect of this was a huge loss of respect for the government on the part of nearly everyone. The kids found that they could burn their draft cards and thumb their noses at the government and get away with it, and so they lost their respect for the government. The Vietnam vets came home and were treated like pariahs and felt unappreciated even by the government which had sent them to Vietnam, and so they lost their respect for the government. And I and many other patriots watched all of this in disgust, and we lost our respect for the government.
Back during the war I used to organize anti-Communist demonstrations to counter the big pro- Viet Cong demonstrations the Jews were organizing, and I used to give speeches against the politicians who were collaborating most openly with the Jews. I said in my speeches that these politicians were guilty of treason and ought to be dealt with summarily: they ought to be shot. And because of this the government sicced the FBI on me: not on them, but on me. I, and many others, developed a very negative feeling for the government during that time. That was 25 years ago, but everyone who went through that experience was changed by it. Much of the contempt for the government remains with them. And the kids who learned that it was fashionable to be anti-American kept some of that attitude even after they graduated from their colleges.
Of course, loss of respect for the government and loss of patriotism are two different things, but they both have been happening at the same time. It is interesting that today the media are trying to coax people into respecting the government again, while their assault on patriotism continues unabated. We have so many new laws and new governmental programs that are to the liking of the Jews in the media, and the politicians are so much more corrupt than they were 25 years ago, that the media now view the government more as an ally than as a rival. But the Jews in the media still hate and fear patriotism as much as ever. They have tried to make patriotism a dirty word. And they have succeeded pretty well among the trendy yuppies and the urban rabble over whom they have the strongest influence. They hold up the militias as the epitome of patriotism, and they try to frighten the lemmings with the specter of the angry, rural, White male with a gun and an American flag who is threatening the government which provides their welfare checks.
It may be that the people in the militias are not very sophisticated and don’t have very good public relations programs, but most of them still do have a little sense of patriotism: more patriotism, at least, than the folks who take their cue from the controlled media. The reason the media and the big Jewish pressure groups like Morris Dees’s Southern Poverty Law Center and the B’nai B’rith and the Simon Wiesenthal Center hate the militias and their old-fashioned patriotism so much is that they stand in the way of the New World Order. The Jews and their fellow travelers want the American people to transfer their loyalty from America as it used to be – that is, from the White America built by our ancestors when they came here from Europe, the America we could think of as our extended family – and give that loyalty instead to their New World Order.
Of course, they understand the idea of loyalty based on blood, on kinship, on common roots. That’s the kind of loyalty they have to each other and to Israel, but they don’t want us to have that. They know how powerful it is. They hate the idea of us being united by such a sense of patriotism. They hate it and fear it. And that’s why they’ve been working so hard to undermine old-fashioned American patriotism and replace it by allegiance to a faceless, raceless, rootless, cosmopolitan New World Order – under their control, of course.
And they’re succeeding at least half way. They are destroying patriotism in a substantial portion of the American public – which is why we’re seeing more people like Aldrich Ames in the news these days. They are not really succeeding, however, in building much allegiance to the New World Order. Of course, they’ve made it a fashionable idea among the liberals and the mindless trendies, and all of the politicians are giving lip service to it. But ultimately they cannot succeed in establishing loyalty to the New World Order in the place of old-fashioned, race-based patriotism, because, no matter how fashionable they make their idea of a New World Order among the liberals and the politicians, it is an unnatural idea. Liberals may gush about equality and the „brotherhood of man“ and the human race being the only race to which they feel loyalty, but that is empty sophistry. Fools may let themselves be convinced that they have become raceless, cosmopolitan patriots – patriots of the New World Order – but one will find very few of them who are willing to die or even make any major sacrifice for this new pseudo-patriotism.
Real patriotism is not some artificial idea dreamed up by Jews: It is something based in our genes, an instinct, an extension of the instinct for self-preservation to include our kin, our nation. One can undermine that patriotism by muddying and confusing the concept of nation, the image of nation, as has been done during the past half-century by promoting „diversity.“ When the enemies of our people, with the collaboration of the treasonous politicians in Washington – politicians of the sort I publicly urged should be shot during the Vietnam war – when these enemies infiltrate tens of millions of non-White immigrants into our country and stifle any effort to halt the flood, when they subsidize the breeding of a non-White underclass in our cities with our own tax money, when they force us to accept these growing non-White masses into our schools and neighborhoods and workplaces, when they saturate all of the news and entertainment media with the alien faces, alien tones, and alien antics of these non-Whites and gloatingly tell us that we’d better get used to the idea of becoming a minority in our own land within the next 50 years, then, of course, the patriotism which came naturally to our people in the past becomes meaningless – and we hear people like Aldrich Ames telling us that he sold national security information to the KGB because he needed money and he didn’t think he was doing anything worse than the politicians in Washington do every day. And I guess it’s hard to argue with him about that.
The process of social atomization, of deracination, of separating people from their roots and cutting the bonds to their natural communities so that they can become interchangeable units – human atoms – for building the New World Order is being promoted ruthlessly by the Jews and their collaborators, and the rising incidence of treason is only one of the smaller and less important consequences of this genocidal process.
I say that this process is genocidal, because it will certainly destroy us as a people, as a race, as well as destroying us as a nation. People with no sense of patriotism are people unable to defend themselves collectively. They are people who will be victimized by any group which still has a group feeling.
One of the factors which has made it possible for the Jews and their collaborators to undermine our patriotism is that we took it too much for granted in the past. Most of our people didn’t really think about it, analyze it, and understand its true basis. We let our idea of patriotism gradually drift from a racial idea to a geographical idea, a political idea. When our ancestors in Europe were defending their people against Huns or Moors or Mongols or Turks, they understood patriotism. Even after the rise of all of Europe’s national states, when patriotism began expressing itself as nationalism, it still had a racial – or at least an ethnic – basis. The words themselves tell us what their original meanings were. Patriotism, of course, comes from the Roman word for „father.“ Patriotism is love of the fatherland, love of the land inhabited by all of the people descended from a common father. Nationalism also comes to us from the Romans, from the Latin word for „birth.“ A nation is a group of people related by birth, by blood, and nationalism is love for that people, loyalty to that people. These feelings of patriotism or nationalism are very powerful feelings, because they are natural feelings. They contributed to our survival over a very long period of evolution.
But when we forget the racial meaning of patriotism and think of it only in geographical or political terms, as loyalty to every person, of whatever race, color, or creed, who happens to be living within a specified geographical area at the moment, then patriotism is no longer a natural feeling, but instead becomes artificial, and consequently much easier to subvert. And that is what has happened to people like Aldrich Ames – and is happening to more and more White Americans all the time, as the growth of „diversity“ proceeds.
The cure for this disease, for this erosion of patriotism, is not difficult to find. It is obvious. It is simply to understand and assimilate our patriotism as it originally was. The cure for what is happening to America begins by returning to the natural, race-based patriotism that our ancestors had when they halted the invading Moors at the Pyrenees nearly 1300 years ago and when, a thousand years later, they defended their settlements in North America against marauding Indians.
The enemies of our people have anticipated this possibility, of course. Just as Morris Dees and his Southern Poverty Law Center rail against the patriotism of the militias today, so have the Jews of the media and their collaborators been stigmatizing natural patriotism for the last 50 years. They call it „racism,“ and they have intimidated most of our people into running for cover whenever they begin throwing out their accusations of „racism.“
So while the cure for what has made White America sick is not difficult to find, it is a little harder to apply. It requires a little courage. It requires a little open-mindedness. It requires a little mental independence. It requires a little moral strength. It requires enough of us with these qualities to make patriotism a vital force in the life of our country again.
I believe that we can find enough such people to do the job. It will not be easy, of course. The media bosses and all of the other people who hate the real America will fight us all the way. The politicians will collaborate with them. Bill Clinton and everyone else who was demonstrating for the Viet Cong during the Vietnam war will try to stop us.
But I believe that ultimately we will prevail. I believe that natural patriotism will prevail over the phony loyalty to the New World Order that the Jews and the trendies are promoting. The only uncertainty I have is how long it will take us and how many must die in overcoming America’s disease. Your help will make the victory come sooner and will make our casualties fewer.
By Denis Wise
Hollywood: the modern-day Babylon. The Hollywood motion picture industry is the most important vehicle of propaganda in the English-speaking world today. In the long run Hollywood exerts a greater influence over the English-speaking peoples than all other propaganda mediums combined. It has therefore become a prime target for communist infiltration. And since the film industry is overwhelmingly Jewish, it was a minimum of difficulty in setting up shop.
The movie by Spike Lee, BlacKkKlansman, which features David Duke as one of its characters, is now out in theaters. David Duke himself comes to discuss the veracity of the story presented in the movie.
Source: American Dissident Voices broadcast, July 2000
by Dr. William L. Pierce
Today I have some new information I want to share with you. It is information on a subject I’ve discussed with you more than once in the past: namely, the Jewish trade in White female slaves. The reason this new information is noteworthy is that it comes directly from the horse’s mouth, so to speak. It is from the June 16 issue of the Jerusalem Post – actually, the Saturday supplement to the Jerusalem Post. In Israel, of course, they have Saturday supplements instead of Sunday supplements. The Jerusalem Post‘s documentary article on Israel’s trade in White slaves, published just two weeks ago, is astoundingly frank and straightforward, and in today’s broadcast I will read to you directly from the article.
You know, one of the biggest problems facing me or anyone else trying to inform the public in a way which contradicts the party line propagated by the television networks is credibility. I tell the average citizen something like, “In Israel it is legal to buy and sell slaves, as long as they aren’t Jews. The slave trade is big business in Israel, and it’s legal.” The average citizen’s response to this statement is: “I don’t believe it. That can’t be true. Everyone knows that Jews are liberals and are big supporters of human rights. They would never tolerate such a thing as the buying and selling of human beings in their own country. Don’t you ever watch television? If you did, you’d know that Jews just aren’t like that.” That reminds me of the refrain from a hymn I used to sing in Sunday school when I was a child. It went something like: “This I know, for the Bible tells me so.” Today, of course, television has replaced the Bible as the source of all truth for the great mass of people – certainly for everyone who is incapable of looking at the world around him and reaching his own conclusions based on the evidence.
Actually, I believe that no amount of evidence will change the mind of a true believer in the TV religion, any more than it will change the mind of a Bible-believer. Get yourself a copy of the Jerusalem Post – and it’s available in the New York Public Library and in a number of other larger libraries around the country – and show it to a true believer, and he’ll still tell you that he doesn’t believe it. He’ll tell you it’s a forgery. It can’t be true, because it doesn’t agree with what he’s seen and heard from television. Anyway, here goes. I quote from the June 16 issue of the Jerusalem Post:
“Every year hundreds of women, and an unknown number of girls under the age of 18, are bought, sold, drugged, imprisoned, and forced to work as prostitutes in Israel’s thriving sex industry. In countries such as Russia, Ukraine, Latvia, and Hungary, traffickers prey on desperate women. Facing poverty, the women are lured to Israel with the promise that they will make fabulous salaries working as teachers or caregivers.”
Here, I will interject two comments of my own. First, the reason that so many young women in eastern Europe are facing poverty and are desperate is that the countries in which they live were bled dry by half a century of Jewish communism. In the case of Russia and Ukraine, of course, it was nearly three-quarters of a century. In the case of Hungary and Latvia it was the United States government which turned these formerly free countries over to the communists at the end of the Second World War to do with as they pleased.
Do you remember what started the Second World War? Initially it was just a territorial dispute between Germany and Poland. The Germans wanted back the German territory which had been taken away from Germany and given to Poland at the end of the First World War. But when the Germans, under Hitler, began taking back that territory, in September 1939, Britain and France declared war on Germany, ostensibly to protect the freedom of Poland. The Germans had done nothing against Britain and France and wanted very much to remain at peace with those countries, but the politicians of Britain and France had other considerations.
The fact that the Soviet Union also invaded Poland in September 1939 was all right with Britain and France. They didn’t declare war on the Soviet Union, because the Soviet Union was for all practical purposes under Jewish rule. They did declare war on Germany, because Germany, under Hitler, had broken loose from the grip of the Jews, had freed the German media and German education and German finance and German politics and German culture from Jewish influence, and was in the process of kicking all of the Jews out of Germany. That was the reason for the Second World War, not Polish freedom or Polish territorial integrity. That was the reason why, when in April 1943 the German Army discovered the mass graves of some of the 25,000 Polish officers and intellectuals murdered by Jewish communists and invited the International Red Cross and journalists from many nations to view the evidence, the controlled media in Britain and the United States ignored the evidence and blamed the atrocity on the Germans. That was the reason why, at the end of the war, those countries which had gone to war ostensibly to insure the freedom of Poland agreed to turn Poland and Latvia and Hungary and the rest of eastern Europe over to the communist butchers who had carried out the massacre of the elite of the Polish nation.
Of course, the communists economically drained and ruined all of these countries. And these communists were Jews. Which is to say, the Jews were the prime movers in the communist regimes imposed on these countries after the war and also were the primary beneficiaries of the regimes. In Hungary, for example, there was the regime of the communist Jew Matyas Rakosi, followed by another communist Jew, Ernö Gerö; in Romania the communist Jewess Ana Pauker ruled the country as First Secretary of the Central Committee; in Poland the Minister for State Control was the communist Jew Roman Zumbrowski; in Czechoslovakia the Secretary General of the Communist Party was the communist Jew Rudolf Slansky; in Yugoslavia, while Tito held the spotlight, the communist Jew Moshe Pijade was the chairman of the National Assembly and president of Serbia; and so it went. And this in a Europe whose Jews supposedly had all been “Holocausted” by Hitler. There were tens of millions of Hungarians and Poles and Latvians and Serbs and other eastern Europeans under the yoke of communism who were wishing that Hitler had actually “Holocausted” the Jews. These communist Jews were so hated by the eastern Europeans they ruled and exploited that there was constant turmoil, and after the Hungarian uprising in 1956, many of the leading communist Jews were replaced by Gentile front men, while the Jews continued to exploit the people from behind the scenes.
Even as the communist regimes of eastern Europe began collapsing during the last 15 years or so and their economies were “privatized,” Jews continued to plunder the people among whom they lived. Using money from their brethren abroad and collusion with their corrupt kinsmen still in the various governments, they managed to buy up the most valuable factories, mines, and other national resources at fire-sale prices and then milked them for all they were worth.
I apologize for the long digression, but I wanted to make it clear just why so many of our young women in eastern Europe are living in poverty today and are desperate to improve their prospects, making them easy prey for Jewish slave dealers. It is the Jews who, more than anyone else, are responsible for the impoverishment of eastern Europe. The Jews, beginning with Karl Marx, invented communism, and then they used it to exploit the Gentiles among whom they lived.
My second comment is that the women lured and entrapped by Jewish slave dealers are made doubly easy prey because they never have been warned to beware of Jews. And the reason that they never have been warned is that the Jewish communists of every regime in eastern Europe enacted legislation making it illegal to do so. To warn a young woman never to trust a Jew – to tell a young woman what Jews are like and what they do – is “hate speech,” and “hate speech” is a penal offense in nearly every country of eastern Europe. Jews may not be criticized. It is illegal to tell the truth about them. And of course, the Jews and their bought politicians and their feminist and homosexual and minority allies are pushing hard for similar laws against so-called “hate speech” in the United States.
Let’s return to the June 16 issue of the Jerusalem Post, where I read to you how financially desperate eastern European girls are lured to Israel with the promise of big salaries as secretaries or teachers or caregivers. The article continues:
“But when they come to Israel their passports and travel papers are taken away, in order to prevent them from leaving. They are raped and beaten. Trafficked women are treated as objects, as commodities to be bought and sold by pimps for thousands of dollars or held in debt bondage, forced to work to pay off large sums of money. Their “owners” imprison them in locked houses or apartments with barred windows. They can rarely leave the apartment and are prevented from going out unaccompanied. They are frequently abused, especially if they refuse to have sex with a customer or try to escape. . . . In brothels, massage parlors, and sex clubs throughout the country, these women “slaves” are subjected to violence, degradation, and terror. According to a report released last month by Amnesty International entitled ‘The Trafficking of Women to Israel,’ the country is rapidly becoming a major destination for sex trafficking and slavery.”
Now, I should tell you that I am skipping around in this long article and reading you just bits and pieces. It is full of heart-rending stories about individual female slaves, and there’s not time to read all of them to you. One of the stories is about Anna, a 31-year-old unemployed physics teacher from St. Petersburg. She was lured to Israel by a Jew who promised her good working conditions and $1000 a month, which was 20 times what her salary had been in Russia. Now I’ll read to you exactly what the Jerusalem Post says about Anna:
“Anna arrived here in October 1998 on a tourist visa. She was met at the airport and taken to an apartment and locked up with six other women . . . [from eastern Europe]. She was auctioned twice and finally bought for $10,000. Taken to Haifa, she was held in captivity with two other women. The apartment in which she lived had bars on the windows.” Et cetera. The article goes on to say that the Jew who had bought Anna repeatedly reminded her that he knew where her family lived in St. Petersburg, and that he would harm them if she escaped or failed to obey his orders. Anna was not able to escape, but she finally was deported back to Russia by Israeli immigration authorities because her tourist visa had expired. Her former “owner” remains at liberty, and Anna remains in terror that he will one day show up again at her residence in St. Petersburg.
Then there is the story of a young woman from Belarus – from White Russia. Again, I read the exact words of the Jerusalem Post:
“Tatiana (not her real name) had been promised a job working as a cleaner in a hotel in Eilat. She was told the job would pay enough to support her mother and six-year-old son. In Eilat a man pretending to be from the hotel where she thought she was going to be employed took her to a brothel, where she was forced to work as a prostitute. She was told that she would have to repay her ‘sale price’ and travel costs. She tried unsuccessfully to escape and was finally freed after a police raid. She was held in Neveh Tirza. Three days after her arrest Tatiana found an anonymous note on her prison bunk threatening to kill her and punish her family if she spoke out about what had happened to her. She petitioned the chief of police but was told that the Israel Police cannot guarantee anyone’s safety abroad. She testified in June 1999 and was deported later that month. . . . Her fate is not known. A police spokesman refused to comment on the case.” End of Tatiana’s story.
Now, listen very carefully, because we are getting to the real meat of this article. I will read you exactly what the Jerusalem Post says about the role of the Israeli government and Israeli law in this horrifying business. I quote:
“In Israel prostitution is not illegal. Nor is there legislation against trafficking or slavery, though there is a law forbidding taking people out of the country by force. Police officials complain that in the absence of legislation their options are limited. . . .” Now I’m skipping to another paragraph, and again I quote:
“According to the statistics provided by the Israel Police, in 1997 between 500 and 600 police files were opened under Article 10 of the penal code, which covers prostitution and obscenity offenses. An unknown additional number of cases against traffickers and pimps were also opened under other sections of the penal code, for crimes such as assault, kidnapping, and unlawful possession of passports. And though the police have opened more than 1,100 files during the past three years, only 126 cases against men involved in trafficking have actually been brought to court. During the same period more than 1,200 women were deported from Israel. According to sociologist Esther Herzog, director of Shin – “The Movement for Equal Representation for Women” – in 1999 the police arrested more than 400 women but only 28 pimps. And even these minuscule numbers, she says, are probably inflated. Since there is no law here against trafficking in human beings or slave trading, it is impossible to know how many of the above cases were related to trafficking, and how many were connected to prostitution-related offenses, such as pimping or operating a brothel.” End of quote.
I hope that you absorbed what I just read: There is no law in Israel against trafficking in human beings or slave trading – and consequently there is a flourishing trade in White slaves in Israel today. I didn’t write that, and it’s not from the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. It was written by two female Israeli journalists and published two weeks ago in a prominent Jewish newspaper in Jerusalem. You might wonder why such devastating information was published by a Jewish newspaper.
There are a couple of reasons. First, the same feminism which the Jews push so enthusiastically in America has cropped up in Israel too. Jewish women always have resented the greater sexual attractiveness which Gentile women have for Jewish men. After all, there’s not much a Jewess can do about her face or her personality. Too many Jewesses look like Ana Pauker or Madeleine Albright and swear like Madeleine Albright. These Russian and Ukrainian girls being forced into prostitution in Israel not only are better looking, but they are much softer and more feminine than Israeli women. I believe that there is no question but that Israeli Jewesses would like to see them out of Israel. They don’t like the sexual competition, and as organized feminists they have enough muscle to be able to express their views in Israel’s mass media.
That’s one reason this article appeared in the Jerusalem Post. The other reason is that the Jews who publish the Jerusalem Post understand that there’s no real danger that the Jews will be called to account for their slave trafficking. They understand that with their control of the mass media everywhere in the Gentile world, they can say whatever they want among themselves with little risk that the soccer moms or couch potatoes of America will ever hear about it; and if they do happen to hear about it, they won’t believe it; and even if they do believe it they’re too demoralized and spineless to do anything about it.
Want to try an experiment? Get yourself a xerox copy of the June 16 Jerusalem Post article from a library. If that issue has mysteriously disappeared by the time you get to the library, send me $25 for my time and trouble and I’ll xerox my copy of the article and mail it to you. Take your copy of the article to the editor of your local newspaper. Send a copy to your congressman. Have your kid take it to his high school social studies teacher for class discussion. If you’re a university student enrolled in a class in international relations or ethics or law or any subject relevant to this article, take it to your professor and ask him what he thinks about it.
I’ll guarantee you: not one of these people will appreciate having this matter brought to his attention. The newspaper editor and the congressman will already know about it, but they won’t want to talk about it. The high school social studies teacher would prefer that your kid bring a case of live hand grenades to class for discussion. And the university professor will have visions of his chances for tenure evaporating if he can’t get you to shut up and go away quickly. And as I said at the beginning of this program, the average lemming will find the whole issue unreal because he didn’t see it on TV. You won’t even be able to embarrass a Jew with it. He’ll just brazenly deny it and accuse you of “anti-Semitism.”
That, unfortunately, is the state of public and private morale in America today. That’s why our civilization is going down the tubes. That’s why Timothy McVeigh blew up the Federal building in Oklahoma City. It was the only way he knew to get people to look up from their ball games for a minute and pay attention to what’s happening to their world.
So, why do I bother? I bother because between the ball-game fans at one end and the corrupt politicians and corrupt Christian preachers and corrupt newspaper editors at the other end there is an intelligent and responsible two percent or so of the population – a moral two percent – capable of understanding and caring about what the Jews are doing to our world and to our people. And these Russian and Latvian and Hungarian girls lured to Israel and forced into a life of slavery and degradation are our people.
Among the moral two per cent of the U.S. population there are people who care as much as I do about the fact that their government sends billions of dollars a year to prop up a regime which permits beautiful, young White girls to be stripped, raped, beaten, put up on an auction block, and sold to whichever leering, swarthy, hook-nosed kike makes the highest bid. We fight wars to protect that regime from its Arab neighbors. We permit the kinsmen of those who make up that regime to control our mass media of news and entertainment. We condemn the Germans for trying to free themselves from such control.
There are Americans who care about these things as much as I do. And by God, we intend to do something about these things, even if we have to do it Timothy McVeigh’s way. I hope it doesn’t come to that, but we will break the grip of these Jews and their collaborators on our society.