Der Stürmer

The official blog of the site "Der Stürmer" – http://der-stuermer.org

Category: Speeches & Lectures

Dr. David Duke – “Six Steps to Communist Slavery”

Special guest Dr. Duke joins TradCatKnight to discuss: the hand behind the scene manipulating the masses, who was behind the immigration laws in 1965?, mass immigration, gun control, social justice movement, ISIS, rise in censorship, prophecy indicating Christian victory, Fatima and Russia, latest geopolitical moves of Trump, fake news propaganda, Catholic bashing and MUCH more!

Advertisements

Illusion and Leverage

by Dr. William L. Pierce

Today I’ll continue with the same general concept we talked about last week: the house-of-cards concept. The Jews maintain their power only by maintaining an illusion, and that illusion is that most people are in agreement with their policies and programs, when in fact a very large number of people are not. The Jews have, of course, a substantial number of willing Gentile collaborators, who collaborate because they depend upon the Jews to help them maintain their own unearned advantages: the feminists, the homosexuals, the welfare rabble, the politicians, and a significant portion of the business and corporate elite. And I’m speaking of White collaborators only. I’m not even concerned about non-Whites. But all of these White collaborators could be swept away were it not for the majority of Whites who are being fooled by the illusion.

After last week’s broadcast a listener commented that the people who pretend to be shocked by Atlanta Braves pitcher John Rocker’s expression of distaste for the denizens of Times Square and the New York subways are the same people who will never give an honest explanation of why they have fled the cities for the suburbs or small towns. The outflow of White families from the cities – the so-called “White flight” – is the direct consequence of the influx of non-Whites into the cities. The Whites are desperate to get away from the non-Whites – but not one in 20 will admit it. They believe that everyone around them will condemn them if they do admit it. They are so terrified of being thought “racists” that many of them won’t even admit the truth to themselves. Instead they invent a Politically Acceptable reason for their flight: the schools are better in the suburbs because of the higher teachers’ salaries, the suburbs provide easier access to the shopping malls, or whatever.

How is this illusion maintained? Almost entirely through the Jewish control of the mass media of news and entertainment. Most people – most White Americans, anyway – like to believe that they observe the world around them and then come to objective conclusions about things. They like to believe that they are rational individuals. They like to believe that they are independent thinkers. And of course, a few of them are – but most of them, about 95 per cent of them – aren’t. They are conformists. They conform their opinions, their thinking, their attitudes, to what they believe is expected of them.

Consider religion, as an example. People are not Baptists or Lutherans or Roman Catholics or Muslims because they have examined the various religious doctrines, compared them, and then made a rational decision. In 98 per cent of the cases one is a Lutheran or a Catholic or a Muslim or a Buddhist because one’s parents and the other people in one’s community are. A thoughtful person who takes his religion seriously may be prepared to argue about it and to defend cleverly the merits of his particular sect against the claims of a different sect, but the fact remains that his adherence to his own sect is not based on an independent decision. It was based from the beginning on conforming his beliefs to the perceived beliefs of the people around him. All of his arguments are only attempts to rationalize what in the first place was not rational. Think about it, and I’m sure you’ll agree with me.

It works a little differently with other types of belief, but the psychology, the human element, remains the same. In America, the government and the mass media don’t take a position favoring one Christian sect over another or even a position favoring Christianity over Buddhism or Islam, say. The pressure to conform in religious matters must come from family and neighbors. But in political ideology the pressure to conform comes very much from the government and even more from the mass media. And when I say pressure comes from the government, I mean all government-controlled institutions, including especially the schools. All of the media and all of the government institutions promote the belief that mass democracy, American style – television style – is the best possible form of government.

Beyond this they promote the beliefs that men and women are essentially the same, except for the configuration of their genitalia, and that it is “unfair” to treat them differently in any way; that homosexuals are just like heterosexuals except for a different sexual orientation, and that it is “bigoted” to treat them differently in any way; that Jews are clever and witty people, good at business, but honest and also sensitive and caring, and it is “hateful” to have any other ideas about them; and that Blacks and other non-Whites may look different, but under the skin they are just like us – in particular, they are just as intelligent, just as creative, just as good at solving problems, and just as inclined to accept personal responsibility.

Now, whether you personally believe these things or not, I think you’ll agree with me that the government and the mass media do push quite hard for conformity to these beliefs. For example, have you ever seen any television news program showing people using computers – children with computers in a classroom, say – in which a Black wasn’t shown at the keyboard? I mean, it’s like there is a rule that all news program directors must follow: you cannot show a computer unless you show a Black at the keyboard. It’s transparently obvious that they are pushing the idea that computers and Blacks go together, like blackeyed peas and collard greens. That’s what they want the public to believe.

The reality, of course, is that computers are a White thing and always have been: the invention, the engineering, the programming, you name it. Blacks just aren’t involved. You can teach a Black to use a computer, of course, just as you can teach a chimpanzee to ride a bicycle. But computers remain in the White domain, just as bicycles remain in the human domain. And that’s certainly not because anyone is holding Blacks back. It’s a matter of aptitude and inclination. Chinamen certainly are capable of understanding the science involved, which is why under the Clinton policy of globalizing the economy much of the computer technology we developed is moving to China, and we’re now forced to buy some computer products from the Chinese. But if you ever see computer products being imported from Ghana or Zambia it will only be because someone who is not a Black has built a factory there to take advantage of the cheap labor. It will not be because a Black computer whiz in Africa has developed something on his own.

You know, most people understand this at a certain level. They know that this business of always showing Blacks at computer keyboards is a media trick, but they have a hard time resisting it. They feel a compulsion to believe that the illusion is real.

The same trick is used in other ways. If NASA has a public announcement to make about one of its scientific space probes, the chances are pretty good there will be a Black chosen to stand in front of the television cameras, make the announcement, and explain to us the science involved – unless, of course, there has been a screwup and the space probe failed to do what it was supposed to do. Then it’s OK to have a White spokesman. Or if the National Institutes of Health or the Food and Drug Administration has something important to tell us, a Black in a white lab coat will be trotted out for the cameras. The idea is to create the illusion that technology and science and progress and intelligence are associated somehow with Blacks – or at least, that Blacks are just as good at that sort of thing as we are.

And as I already mentioned, it’s difficult to resist this sort of illusion. One cannot turn on a television set or pick up a mass-circulation magazine these days without seeing Blacks presented to us in White roles as if it were the most natural thing in the world. Flip through the channels, and you see Black face after Black face, and the smiling Whites all around them always are approving. Black doctors, Black businessmen, Black teachers, Black scientists, Black comedians, Black singers, Black dancers, Black announcers, Black ball players, Black detectives, Black men running off with White girls, and all the Whites around them smiling and approving. It’s almost hypnotic.

But you know, it is an illusion. The smiling Whites who are so approving of the Blacks are being paid to smile. The Whites in the television audience aren’t being paid, of course, but it’s difficult for them to resist smiling too. It’s a very primitive but very strong impulse, this need to laugh when those around you are laughing, to smile when everyone else is smiling. The television bosses understand this impulse perfectly, and they use it effectively.

And it’s not just in the United States that this illusion is being promoted. The mass media and the democratic politicians in Germany have been collaborating with the Jews for the past 55 years in an effort to foster a similar illusion in the public consciousness of the German people. The Germans always have believed that there was something special about being German, about being born of German parents. Every German inherited through his genes something of the greatness of his nation, its history, its genius.

Of course, the French and the Russians and the English and the Irish have similar beliefs about their own nations. It’s an ethnic thing – but very undemocratic: something which the Jews and their collaborators have been trying hard to stamp out. So shortly after the beginning of this year, early on New Year’s Day, German collaborators chose a newborn baby to be the “German of the Millennium.” And of course, they didn’t choose a German baby for this distinction; they chose a Turkish baby, born in a German hospital to two Turkish “guest workers.” And for the past week politicians and the media people have been holding up this Turkish baby to television audiences in Germany as a typical German of the new millennium, and all of the collaborators and paid media people on the screen at the same time have smiled proudly whenever this announcement has been made. And unfortunately, all too many German television viewers have smiled along with them. That’s the way our people are. And so the German public gradually begins falling victim to this carefully engineered illusion that Turks and Gypsies and Pakistanis and Zulus born in Germany are really Germans, just like all other Germans.

I’ve spoken of the Jewish power structure shielded by this illusion as a “house of cards.” That’s a reasonable term to use, I believe, but let’s try now to understand it a little better. If tonight Washington and New York City and Hollywood all were devastated by massive earthquakes – if most of the people and the institutions which generate and maintain the illusion in America – suddenly were destroyed, the house of cards would not immediately come tumbling down. In fact, the illusion would not instantly be replaced by a clear view of reality. Illusions have a tendency to persist for a while. People who were deceived by the illusion would continue deceiving themselves for a while; they would continue clinging to the illusion. Many people would need guidance in freeing themselves from the illusion and gaining a firm grasp on reality. Providing that guidance would be a far easier task and require much less work than the work the Jews and their collaborators have put into building the illusion. The truth does have its advantages. But still, uprooting the illusion and pulling down the house of cards would not be something that could be accomplished overnight.

There’s another important consideration: the organizational consideration. If a minority wants to maintain its control over a majority – especially if a substantial number of the members of that majority don’t want to be controlled – then the controlling minority needs to have an effective organizational structure through which to exercise its control. The organizational structure provides the necessary leverage which a numerical minority needs in order to control an unwilling majority.

Well, that’s pretty simple and obvious, I guess, but it’s still something to think about in coming to an understanding of our situation. The rule is this: the larger the disparity in numbers, the more the organizational leverage that is required; and the greater the leverage needed, the less is the stability. Which is why the Jews are pushing a number of long-range programs to decrease our numbers, both absolutely and in relation to the feminists, homosexuals, non-Whites, and the others in their camp. At the moment their situation is still quite precarious, in that without governmental compulsion they could not maintain their control; illusion alone would not hold their house of cards up.

At this time, however, they have both: they have the machinery of illusion in their hands, and they have organizational leverage. And they need both. If someone could put a big enough monkey wrench into the gears of the illusion machinery to shut it down for an extended period, the leverage would become very shaky indeed. The politicians and the bureaucrats and the secret police agencies and the military people don’t do the will of the Jews because they love the Jews. They do it because they are part of an organization, part of the governmental establishment. Their paychecks come from the government, and they are hoping that one day their pensions also will come from the government. But the government itself still is based on the idea of popular support, on the idea of elections and votes. When the illusion machinery is no longer available to control the votes, the politicians will be making new calculations, and so will the head bureaucrats. In every case it will be their own advantage they will be seeking, of course. Patriotism is a thing of the past.

On the other hand, if a big enough monkey wrench could be thrown into the government’s gears, then even a fairly small number of determined people could wreck the illusion machinery, and I believe it’s not necessary for me to explain how that could be done. But now the government and the illusion machinery support each other, and I don’t know of anyone who has a big enough monkey wrench to shut down either of them. That’s a shortcoming to which we must address ourselves.

Anyway, do you remember the miniature civil war in Russia back in the early part of the Yeltsin era, in September and October 1993? That was just six years ago. Boris Yeltsin, of course, was the candidate of the Jews – sort of the Bill Clinton of Russia. He had been elected only with the all-out support of the mass media – especially the television networks, which then as now were under the tight control of the Jews, most notably Boris Berezovsky and Vladimir Gussinsky. Progressive Russian patriots, along with conservative elements from the earlier era, tried to take the organizational machinery away from Yeltsin – which is to say, away from the Jews. The Russian legislature – the Duma – voted to depose Yeltsin, but without anyone to take his place immediately the Army and the KGB continued to take their orders from him.

Patriots stormed the Russian parliament building in Moscow and also the main television station there. They broke through the troops around the parliament building, the so-called White House, seized the building, and barricaded themselves inside. They did not succeed in taking the main television station, however, because the KGB had its toughest troops – its elite troops – guarding the place. They were far more concerned about protecting the television headquarters – about maintaining their hold on the machinery of illusion – than they were about holding onto the White House and its legislative machinery. When the patriots tried to storm Berezovsky’s television station, the KGB troops simply machine-gunned them, and they died in the streets. Keeping the population entranced with the usual television fare, it was then a simple matter to send tanks against the White House. Yeltsin had the Russian Army shelling the White House with tanks to drive out the patriots. And so Yeltsin and his gang – which is to say, the Jews – were able to hang onto power. How different it might have been if the Russian patriots had succeeded in taking over the machinery of illusion at the same time they were barricaded in the White House! A day or two of control of Russian television by a crew of intelligent patriots could have been enough to bring hundreds of thousands of ordinary Russians into the streets and also to cause the Army and KGB bosses to make new calculations.

We might also note that organizational leverage works at the international level pretty much as it works at the national level. During the 1993 crisis in Russia, the Jews and their collaborators over here were sweating the outcome. I don’t know what threats and promises were made behind the scenes, but I can imagine. It’s clear that any small country, without nuclear weapons, that doesn’t take orders will get the same treatment Serbia got. It would have been quite a bit more difficult for the Jews if things had gone better for the patriots in Russia in 1993. And things still may take a turn for the better in Russia. Certainly, even a nuclear war, if it unhinges the leverage or wrecks the machinery of illusion, will be better than a continuation of the present course of events. The best chance for avoiding a nuclear war, however, and also for unhinging the Jews’ international leverage, would be to put a big enough monkey wrench into the organizational machinery here so that the U.S. government cannot exercise the Jews’ will against any other country using cruise missiles, the way it did against Iraq and Serbia.

Well, all of my talk today hasn’t provided anything in the way of a concrete plan of action, but perhaps it may help us focus our thinking a little better when we do work out a plan. For now what we must do is continue reaching our people in every way we can. I’ll be happy to have your help in this endeavor.

* * *

A Holocaust Inquiry

by David Duke

Subverting Freedom

Source: Free Speech – August 2001 – Volume VII, Number 8

by Dr. William Pierce

Today I want to talk again about a growing threat to our freedom in America. In every White society, at all times, there have been people who valued freedom over comfort and security, and there have been people who valued comfort and security over freedom. Sometimes there are more of the one, and sometimes there are more of the other.

When I’ve talked about this subject in the past, I’ve characterized the freedom-lovers as masculine and the security-lovers as feminine because under natural conditions men are a bit more willing to take chances and try new things and want to keep their options open, and they also are a bit more concerned with general principles, and women are a bit more concerned with the security of home and hearth – which is not to say, of course, that even the most adventurous and principled man has no concern for security or comfort or that even the most home-oriented woman has no concern for principles. It’s just that on the average men are more freedom oriented, and women are more security-and-comfort oriented.

As times and manners change, however, the degree to which men value freedom changes. In America 226 years ago Patrick Henry proclaimed, „Give me liberty, or give me death,“ and in doing so he won the general admiration of his fellows and the agreement of a majority of them. Today many Americans would question his sanity, and more would laugh or sneer at him than agree with him. Partly this change is the consequence of dysgenic immigration and breeding policies during the past century, but it is due more to permissive child-raising practices and a less masculine, less demanding social and civic environment.

And there’s another reason – a very important reason – for the devaluing of freedom in recent times, and that’s the propaganda line of the mass media. The media have worked diligently to undermine Americans’ attachment to certain specific freedoms – the freedom to keep and bear arms, for example – and at the same time have twisted and redefined the whole meaning of freedom, while cultivating a more feminine ideological climate in America. Sixty years ago Franklin Roosevelt did much to confuse the concept of freedom in the public mind by classifying comfort and security as „freedoms“ and then elevating them to the status of freedom of speech and freedom of religion. He included in his enumeration of his so-called „four freedoms“ freedom from want and freedom from fear, and the media bosses loved him for it.

Ever since then they have done everything they could to further twist meanings and compound the confusion, so that today the average couch potato or soccer mom can be persuaded easily that comfort – that is, „freedom from want“ – and security – that is, „freedom from fear“ – are indeed freedoms in the same sense as freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, freedom of self-defense, and freedom from excessive governmental intrusion.

Really, I have had women – and men too – seriously defend the notion that freedom of speech needs to be balanced against comfort, in the form of freedom from feeling bad because of some „insensitive“ remark by another person. These couch potato and soccer-mom types will argue, „Well, yes, we have freedom of speech, and that’s important, but we can’t have people saying or writing things that offend other people, things that hurt the feelings of other people.“

For the most part, this is just simpleminded „feel-goodism.“ These soccer moms and couch potatoes just have very fuzzy notions about concepts such as freedom, and they’ve absorbed from TV the belief that there really is a „right“ to feel good about oneself. Imagine where we’d be today if the Americans at Valley Forge in the winter of 1778 had believed that they had a „right“ to be comfortable, and that „right“ was as important as the right to be free from domination by a foreign government. In the last couple of centuries we have not only become softer physically and morally, but we’ve become a bit soft in the head as well.

But it’s not just the couch potatoes: there are smarter people out there whose notions are not fuzzy at all but who also hate and fear our ideas about freedom. The radical feminists and the militant homosexuals and many of the leaders of various racial minorities understand the precariousness of their present positions. They understand that a very comfortable and confused White society that tolerates their antics now may someday lose its patience, especially if someone explains things. They understand that they could very quickly lose all of their unnatural privileges if someone explains to the public what their behavior is doing to our society.

They begin feeling very insecure and very uncomfortable when they hear me, for example, talking against government-imposed sexual and racial quotas. When I ridicule the idea that America needs more „diversity“ or more female fighter pilots or more Haitian or Mexican immigrants, they would like very much to shut me up. They are afraid that other people will listen and will begin thinking. When I say in one of my broadcasts that a society is sick unto death when its citizens are taught that there’s nothing wrong with men kissing and fondling each other in public, these people begin screeching about „hate speech“ and demanding laws to keep me quiet.

And a lot of the couch potatoes and soccer moms are ready to go along with them, because they’ve been conditioned in that direction by the media and the schools – especially if they have attended a college or university. The radical feminists and the homosexuals and the non-White militants established a beachhead in the university faculties and administrations in the 1960s, and since then they have metastasized to the point where they are the arbiters of Political Correctness in nearly every university in America.

Well, all of this is bad enough – on the one hand the positions of influence in our schools and our government held by freaks of various sorts and by non-Whites and on the other hand the general softness and state of confusion of our population – but what makes it much worse and much more dangerous is the campaign by well organized and well financed Jewish pressure groups to subvert legislative bodies and law-enforcement agencies at the same time that Jews in the media are continuing to soften up the public. There is a powerful effort underway now to abolish our Bill of Rights, piece by piece, both directly and indirectly, and it is succeeding.

You know, I’ve spoken with you before about the Jewish and liberal campaign to have more so-called „hate crime“ legislation enacted, at both the state and the Federal levels. That campaign continues, with groups such as the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith presenting their so-called „model hate crime“ bills to legislators everywhere and lobbying for their enactment. And it’s not just the Anti-Defamation League. It’s other Jewish organizations too, such as the Southern Poverty Law Center and all sorts of ad hoc groups. And politicians being what they are these days, these Jewish groups are having an alarming degree of success. Legislators, who take an oath of office to uphold and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, eagerly subvert the Constitution if it will win them favor with the Jews. They will enact patently unconstitutional laws without a second thought if the Anti-Defamation League will give them a pat on the head for it.

And let me assure you, even patently unconstitutional laws that should never be able to stand up in court are dangerous. In the first place, some of them do stand up in court because the courts themselves have been corrupted. But even when they aren’t enforceable they intimidate people. No person in his right mind wants to be charged even under a law that is so clearly unconstitutional that no court will uphold it, because he can be bankrupted by the legal fees involved in proving that it is unconstitutional.

At least, there are some more or less „mainstream“ groups in America that are as strongly opposed as I am to the whole concept of „hate crime“ laws, although for different reasons, and these groups undoubtedly have slowed down somewhat the rate at which the Constitution is being undermined. They could do much more if they weren’t so terrified of being labeled „haters“ or „anti-Semites“ for daring to take a Politically Incorrect position.

The Jews, however, are pushing their campaign to subvert the Constitution at more than one level. While using their media to persuade the public that everyone will be safer and more comfortable with more „hate crime“ laws, and lobbying the politicians to enact the laws, at the same time they have a massive effort underway to infiltrate and subvert law-enforcement agencies. And in this last effort, which in some ways is the most dangerous of all, there are no mainstream groups opposing them.

Here’s the way it works: the media in a particular area – say, in Arizona or in Michigan – raise the public’s consciousness of the threat of terrorism. The Jews persuade one of their favorite Gentile politicians in the area to speak up about the need to be prepared to deal with this new threat. The politician gives television interviews and speaks very seriously about the lack of preparedness on the part of police and other government agencies. State and local police agencies begin to worry that they will be blamed if they don’t do something to show that they are taking the threat of terrorism seriously. As a matter of fact, terrorism is completely new to them. They’ve never thought about it much. They don’t know anything about it.

Well, guess who comes to the rescue! An official of the Anti-Defamation League or another Jewish group goes to see the head of the state police, and he brings along a member of the Israeli secret-police organization Mossad. The two Jews tell the chief of the state police that they know all about terrorism and terrorists, and they want to share their information with him, because of their humanitarian concern for public safety. The police chief is happy to accept their offer, and so training seminars are set up. The Jews tell the police officials about terrorism – and especially about terrorists, about how to spot a terrorist, about what characteristics to look for.

Usually the irony of the situation is not even realized by the Gentile policemen. The Mossad is an organization that engages in state-sponsored terrorism. It commits terrorist acts on a larger scale than any other organization, including Osama bin Laden’s group. Its agents sneak into people’s hotel rooms in other countries and plant radio-detonated bombs under their beds. They put bombs in people’s telephones. They put bombs in people’s cars. They use exotic poisons to assassinate people. A couple of Mossad agents got caught in Jordan a couple of years ago when they tried to murder an Islamic religious leader they didn’t like by squirting poison into his ear as they passed him on a sidewalk in Amman. And these professional assassins and terrorists are supposedly teaching our policemen about how to spot terrorists!

Imagine the police hiring the Mafia to teach them about organized crime and how to fight it. Do you think that perhaps the Mafia instructors might tailor their teaching to give the police only the information that wouldn’t be harmful to the Mafia? Do you think that perhaps the Mafia might try to use the police for its own ends instead of being public-spirited and really helping the police fight organized crime?

It is not surprising that what our policemen learn about terrorism and terrorists from this relationship with the Jews is a bit one-sided. It is not surprising that the police learn that terrorists are likely to be Islamic extremists – or even more likely, White racists. It is not surprising that they learn that White racists and White patriots – in fact, any groups or individuals who are not Politically Correct – should be watched carefully, because they might be terrorists, or they might become terrorists as demographic and social conditions in the country continue to worsen. People who are opposed to the flood of non-White immigrants pouring into the country, people who are opposed to continually increasing „diversity“ in America, might become violent, might resort to terrorism, if the government doesn’t do something to control immigration.

Well, that’s just the beginning of this worrisome relationship between our police and the Jews. And you know, when I say „the Jews,“ I don’t mean just the Anti-Defamation League and the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Mossad. This ongoing subversion of our Constitution – this assault on our freedom – is also supported by the Jewish community, by the Jewish tribe, as a whole. The Jewish bosses of the mass media support it as well as the Jewish pressure groups.

Of course, there are individual exceptions. There are a few Jews who, for one reason or another, refuse to march in lockstep with the rest of the tribe. In an earlier program I told you about Norman Finkelstein, whose book The Holocaust Industry, exposes the chicanery and fraud of the media Jews and other Jews who have lied about and exaggerated Jewish losses during the Second World War in order to gain economic and political advantages for their fellow Jews. Despite Finkelstein’s dissent, the Holocaust fraud remains a Jewish fraud, because it is supported by nearly all Jews, not just by Simon Wiesenthal and Elie Wiesel and a few other professional Holocaust hucksters. I’ve discussed with you Robert Friedman’s revelations of the Jewishness of so-called „Russian“ organized crime in his book Red Mafiya. But despite Friedman’s exposé, virtually all the Jews in the controlled media continue to pretend that the members of the organized crime gangs that came to America from the former Soviet Union are Russians instead of Jews.

And there are a few individual Jews who speak out against the campaign to enact „hate crime“ and „speech crime“ laws. They warn that this campaign threatens our most fundamental freedoms. Nat Hentoff, a Jew who works for the Jewish newspaper Village Voice and has a syndicated newspaper column, is one of these. Hentoff has for years spoken out against threats to free speech, and he is speaking out now against the „speech crime“ campaign being pushed by his fellow Jews.

Of course, Hentoff doesn’t refer to it as a Jewish campaign, but that’s exactly what it is. I’m happy that Hentoff is at least speaking out against „speech crime“ laws, but it is a fact that one cannot really understand what is going on unless one sees the campaign as Jewish and sees how it meshes with long-term Jewish goals. And one cannot effectively fight against this campaign unless one is willing to fight against the Jews as a whole.

Well, I told you that the Anti-Defamation League’s teaching of law-enforcement agencies about terrorism is just the beginning. Having established a cozy relationship with police departments around the country, Jewish organizations next put themselves forward as experts on „hate crime“ legislation, which is as new and strange to most law enforcement people as terrorism is. „Hate crime“ and „speech crime“ are the coming things, the Jews persuade the policemen. If you want to stay on the right side of the media in the future, you’ll be spending much less time chasing robbers and rapists and instead will be arresting „hate criminals“ and „speech criminals.“ You’ll need to know how to recognize them. Let us teach you.

And the Jews are teaching them. In Phoenix, Arizona, the police department has a special „bias crimes detail“: an incipient thought police unit. Although the Phoenix cops do not yet have the authority to arrest people for expressing Politically Incorrect thoughts, they do keep official police records – „information cards,“ they are called – on people overheard saying things that might be used later as evidence against them if they ever are charged with a „hate crime.“ For example, a White man reports to the Phoenix police that he has just been mugged and robbed on the street by two illegal aliens from Mexico. While the police are taking his report he says, „I’d like to see all of these wetbacks rounded up and shot.“ An „information card“ reporting that remark goes into the police files. Two years later the same White man gets in a fight with a Mexican and beats him up. Has a „hate crime“ been committed? The „bias crimes detail“ finds the two-year-old „information card“ in its files and on that basis charges the White man with a „hate crime“ carrying twice the penalty that a simple assault would carry.

And Phoenix certainly isn’t the only community where the Jews have persuaded the local cops to begin collecting evidence of what people are thinking so that they can be prosecuted later. In Laguna Beach, California, Police Chief Jim Spreine encourages citizens to report to the police any „hate-style comments,“ to use the chief’s words, that they overhear. People who make „hate-style comments“ are more likely to commit acts of violence later and so bear watching, the chief told a reporter for the Orange County Register. And I do not need to tell you who it is that advises the chief exactly what constitutes a „hate-style comment.“

This is the sort of thing that is happening all over America at a rapidly increasing rate. The whole meaning of law enforcement is being transformed. The police used to protect normal, law-abiding citizens by locking up violent predators. Nowadays in many cities the police are doing less of that from fear of being charged with „racism“ or „racial profiling,“ because violent predators are disproportionately non-White. The police instead are spending their time watching, gathering information on, and in some cases arresting White men who are suspected of having Politically Incorrect attitudes and thinking Politically Incorrect thoughts.

As I told you earlier in this broadcast, there are two principal reasons for this transformation. One is the general feminization of America: the shift from a freedom-loving citizenry to a comfort-loving and security-loving citizenry. The other reason is deliberate subversion on a huge scale, in which the controlled mass media and Jewish pressure groups have played the largest role.

If America is to survive much longer its citizens must once again come to value freedom more than comfort and security. But before this shift in attitude can be effected, the grip of the Jews on the mass media and on the political process in America must be broken. And before that can happen, those Americans who still love freedom must find the courage to speak out and accuse those who are subverting their country.

Certainly, anger is growing. The rage is growing. But along with the rage must grow understanding and courage.

Ursula Haverbeck – The Hooton Plan and the Migrant Crisis

Source: https://katana17.wordpress.com/2016/09/20/ursula-haverbeck-the-hooton-plan-and-the-migrant-crisis-transcript/

In this 28-minute video, recorded in September 2015, Ursula Haverbeck, a German woman who lived through WWII discusses how the “migrant” invasion is part of larger plan to destroy Germany and is a continuation of the WW II era Hooton Plan (and similar schemes) created by organized jewry as part of their larger goal of world domination, aka, the Jew World Order

Transcript (Download in PDF format)

Folk and the Jewish Question

Source: http://www.renegadetribune.com/folk-and-the-jewish-question/

The NSDAP Policy on the jews

Translated by Hadding Scott

FOLK (Nation) is a community of human beings with the same descent, language, culture, history, and homeland, and the same political will. The folk is a community of blood and destiny. Shared ancestry is the most important characteristic. We Germans are all related to each other. Other characteristics of a folk, language, culture, history, and homeland are not as important.

Language is the most conspicuous sign of nationality. One recognizes the scion of a folk by his language. It can also happen however that a folk adopts an alien tongue. The Jewish folk for example speaks the language of the respective host nation.

Every true culture is bound to the folk. Art is always rooted in folkdom; it is never “international.” This does not rule out the possibility that certain masterworks acquire supranational importance. On the other hand there are peoples that are capable of no cultural achievement.

Every folk has its own history. Perhaps no people has a past so great and proud as ours. In the convoluted course of German history the German folk was indeed torn asunder again and again into separate states, but, because of the mighty, historic deed of our Leader, united Germandom now will bear a single shared destiny.

Every folk has a special settlement region, a homeland. It is one of the greatest tasks of every nation to adjust its living space to fit its population-count. Germany was for centuries a “folk without space,” while other European peoples ruled great world-empires. Because German living space was too small, hundreds of thousands of the best Germans emigrated to foreign lands, with the result that they were mostly lost to Germandom. We therefore demand living space which corresponds to the accomplishments of the German people upon this earth (cf. the Party Program, Point 3). No people has a greater right to colonies than the German people.

An important characteristic is the common political will. The awareness of belonging together, national consciousness, is of decisive importance for a people. A folk becomes a nation when it is animated by a unitary political will and unifies itself in a durable state. It was through the National-Socialist Revolution that the Germans first became a nation. Adolf Hitler has given to the German people a singular political will; he has thereby made it into a true nation. While the concept “folk” in German history often expressed something contemptible (niederes Volk, “common folk”), National-Socialism has elevated the folk to the central and most important value.

The folk articulates itself organically into tribes (Stämme), clans (Sippen), and families.

The family is the germ-cell of the folk. It is, as the smallest and most natural blood-bond, one of the most important foundations of our entire life. Every human being is decisively influenced in the house of his parents. The Jew knows very well that he can only destroy the peoples among whom he lives if he destroys the family. On the other hand the soundness of our folk is only possible through a purposeful nurturing of the family.

While one understands by “family” only the nearest relatives, one calls the broader circle of blood-relationship the clan. In Germanic prehistory the clan played a major role. It will again acquire greater importance in the folkish state.

The largest hereditary units within a people are the tribes. They define themselves through the same dialect, through the same customs and usages, and through a common homeland. In Germany we are acquainted for example with the tribes of Lower Saxony, Franconia, Swabia, Bavaria, Saxony, Silesia, etc. However great the differences between the particular German tribes may appear, the commonality which binds them all is greater by far. The tribes are only parts of the folk, a community of destiny.

Folk and race are not the same. “Folk” is a political and cultural concept; “race” is a concept of biology and natural science. The folk is a bond of destiny; the race by contrast is not a political community but the eternal spring from which the people derives its strength.

The folk is the only political community. Everything we do should be for the benefit of the German folk. We struggle and sacrifice for our German folk.

Adolf Hitler: “By fending off the Jew, I fight for the work of the Lord.”

The Jews are a folk, not a race. They are often portrayed as a race in order to emphasize their distinctness. They are a folk completely alien to us Germans, with an entirely different racial composition. The chief racial components of Jewry are the Armenoid (vorderasiatische) and Semitic (orientalische) races. In the course of their history they have mixed themselves with almost all other races of the world.

We National-Socialists are anti-Semites, i.e. adversaries of the Jews. We do not oppose Jewry as a religion. A baptized Jew remains racially and folkishly still a Jew. — We are likewise not gutter anti-Semites (Radau-Antisemiten) nor are we strictly anti-Semites (Nur-Antisemiten). Rather, we are adversaries of the Jews for the following reasons:

  1. Jewry is a foreign folk. The Jew is of completely different descent, of alien blood; he has an entirely different political will. A Jew is always in the first place only a Jew, then also perhaps — when it is of benefit to him — “German,” “English,” “French,” etc. — Jewry considers itself the “Chosen People” and strives for world power.
  2. The Jew is a parasite, a sponger. He always corrupts the folk in which he dwells. Jewry deliberately destroys the host people’s basic prerequisites for life. Jewry is the “ferment of decomposition” (Mommsen), i.e. the force of destruction. The Jew knows very well how to camouflage himself and to adapt himself (to “assimilate”) to the people among whom he dwells. He systematically poisons every healthy folk; for in an unhealthy folk the Jewish sponger thrives better.

Jews were most of the black-marketeers and profiteers from war and inflation. Jews were the key “leaders” of the Marxist and Liberal parties. The Jew systematically divided the German people in order to be able to govern. He corrupted art, undermined all moral and heroic strengths of our people. All of public life became more and more judaized. This alien folk pushes its way into all important positions (examples!). Almost the entire press, and thus public opinion, were controlled by Jews. Above all the economic power of the Jew escalated more and more. He prevailed not because of his greater ability but as a consequence of his brazenness, brutality, and lack of conscience. The Jew ruled the German people. (Regarding the Jewish question cf. the entire following chapter!)

Against this, National-Socialism organizes the unified defense of the German nation.

Adolf Hitler has broken the Jewish influence in Germany. All the more does World Jewry now agitate throughout the world for the National-Socialist Reich, which it hates, to be destroyed in a second World War. But this war, on the contrary, will end Jewish world power. Through the victorious campaign of the 18 days in Poland and Galicia, the core province of today’s Jews, this world plague has already been struck to the core. Furthermore the Fuehrer will eliminate Jewry in all Europe, and thereby frustrate all Jewish plans for world government.*

* This paragraph reflects the circumstances of 1940 and is totally absent from the original 1934 edition. It is an elaboration of a statement from Hitler’s speech of 30 January 1939, which said that if “international finance Jewry within Europe and abroad” succeeded in fomenting another world war, the result would be the Vernichtung of the Jewish race in Europe. The rationale given in this paragraph is that getting the Jews out of Europe gets them away from the centers of power in the world.

Also see, inter alia: Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, especially Vol. I, chapters 2, 3, and 11, and Vol. II, chapters 2 and 10; Theodor Fritsch, Handbook of the Jewish Question; Schwartz-Bostunitsch, Jewish Imperialism, Chapter 2.

Source: Politische Fibel by Hansjoerg Maennel, 16th edition (1940); translated by Hadding Scott (2009)

Dr. David Duke – “Exposing the Jew World Order”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19RW48FbHDs&bpctr=1521792873

Talk given 5-22-16 (approx. 1 hr. 30 mins)

Topics included in this talk: the Jew Problem, David’s new upcoming book, awakening and educating the sheeple, The Jews and the Immigration crisis, Jew Zuckerberg and his Facebook censorship, ISIS deception, current state of the USA, elections, Trump, message of Fatima and Russia crucial to Counter Revolution, Jew gun grab, Jews and communism/socialism, Anti-Zionists are “Neo-Nazis”?, Catholic Resistance, Bishop Williamson, Fr. Coughlin, Benjamin Freedman, Vatican II, apostasy, New Mass and the Jews, quotes from Scripture and Tradition against the Jews, Holohoax, Anti-Semitism farce, Jews and Revolution, Jew Control of society at every level in every sector, gentile collaboration, Pope St. Pius X against the Jews/Zionism and MUCH more…. This is a can’t miss talk!

Germany and America

Source: American Dissident Voices broadcast, November 13th 1999

by Dr. William L. Pierce

Last week we talked about conditions in Germany, where I had been to address a congress of the National Democratic Party of Germany. I emphasized two things: the racial and cultural degradation of Germany during 54 years of rule by an Occupation government and the lack of freedom of Germans today: specifically, their lack of freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. That’s as good a place as any to start today.

What I want to talk about today is the evidence that the same people who are degrading Germany and preventing Germans from speaking and assembling freely are degrading America and are doing their damnedest to take away Americans’ freedom as well. Much of the evidence I’ll give you is merely suggestive. With my limited investigative resources that’s all I can do. You’ll have to make your own judgment on what the evidence means.

Let’s begin with the case of Gary Lauck. Mr. Lauck is a native of Lincoln, Nebraska. For years he published materials characterized by the Jewish media here as “neo-Nazi,” and he shipped these materials to friends in Germany, who distributed them to the German public through “underground” channels, much to the annoyance of the German government, which does not permit Germans to read such materials. In fact, the German government complained long and loud about Lauck, and the Clinton government in Washington apologized and said that, unfortunately, there was nothing it could do to punish Lauck or stop his publishing activity, since, unfortunately, the U.S. Constitution permits American citizens to do that sort of thing. Well, actually there was something the Clinton government could do to stop Lauck, and that’s what it did. In 1995, when Lauck was visiting friends in Denmark, Mr. Clinton’s government, which keeps track of the coming and going of U.S. citizens, tipped off the secret police in Germany, the Verfassungschutz, that Lauck was in Denmark. The Verfassungschutz asked the Danish government, which since the Second World War has not been much better than the German government, to arrest Lauck and extradite him to Germany. And that’s what happened. The German government then put Lauck in prison for four years.

Think about it. Lauck broke no law in the United States, and he broke no law in Germany. The German government imprisoned Lauck because of his perfectly legal activities in the United States: because of his Constitutionally protected activities. And the Clinton government helped the German government do it. The Jews and the other Clintonistas like to talk about “freedom” and “civil rights” and so on, but what they mean is freedom for homosexuals to flaunt their life-style in public and become Boy Scout leaders, freedom for Haitians and Mexicans to pour across our borders unchecked, freedom for feminists to make rules which everyone else must obey, freedom for Blacks to mug and rape Whites in the secure knowledge that the Whites can’t defend themselves because the government has taken away their guns. That’s what they mean by “freedom.”

The Clintonistas do not mean freedom for White Americans to exercise their Constitutional rights. They hate the idea of civil rights for heterosexual White males. That scares them. Heterosexual White males are the enemy. They don’t deserve freedom. That is what the Clintonistas really believe. They couldn’t figure a way to lock up Lauck themselves, so they arranged for the German government to do it. And then they grinned and sat on their hands for four years while Lauck rotted in a German prison. Not a word in the mass media over here and not a word of protest from the Clinton government to the German government: not a single letter from Madeleine Albright or any of the other Jews running our State Department.

Can you imagine the hullabaloo Madeleine Albright would have raised if a Jew from the United States, while visiting Jordan, say, were arrested by the Jordanian government and extradited to Iraq at the request of Saddam Hussein, and then were sentenced to four years in an Iraqi prison because while in the United States he had published unkind things about Saddam? Can you imagine how that horrid, old Jewess would shriek until Saddam released the Jew and apologized? I mean, really, the Clinton State Department would have threatened war and would have been happy to blast Baghdad with more cruise missiles. But when precisely the same thing happens to an American citizen who is a heterosexual White male like Lauck, the Clinton government ignores it, and the mass media ignore it. They really believe that Lauck shouldn’t have freedom of speech, because he publishes Politically Incorrect things. The Jews and their collaborators in the Clinton government are really happy that they were able to punish Lauck for publishing things they don’t approve of.

Well, Gary Lauck served his four years in a German prison and returned to the United States earlier this year. Then he decided to buy a handgun and applied for a pistol permit as required by Nebraska law. On the application he answered “no” to a question as to whether or not he is a convicted felon, because he has never been convicted of a felony in the United States, and he considered his conviction in a German court for his exercise of his Constitutional rights in the United States to be spurious and of no legal validity. The state of Nebraska routinely checks all applications for pistol permits with the FBI, and the FBI reported back that Lauck was indeed a convicted felon because of the German government’s charges against him. He was arrested last week and charged with swearing falsely on his application for a permit. He faces up to five years in prison and a $10,000 fine. The Jews in the Clinton government are really giggling over this one, but I’ll bet you haven’t even heard about it before this broadcast, unless you happen to live in Lincoln, Nebraska. What this amounts to is an affirmation by the U.S. government of the German government’s treatment of Lauck.

You know, what was done to Gary Lauck is really outrageous. It shouldn’t happen to an American citizen. The Clinton government not only permitted it to happen without protest but actually caused it to happen because the Clintonistas don’t like what Lauck publishes. They really do want to have the same sort of laws in the United States which the Jews have imposed on Germany, so that only Politically Correct speech is protected by the Constitution. They lie about it. They put on a big show of defending free speech, but it is all pretense and deception.

Here’s another example of their deceit which shows the parallels between what they’ve done to Germany and what they’re doing to America. First a little background: Since the end of the Second World War the biggest Jewish racket has been the bleeding of Germans for “reparations.” The so-called “Holocaust” has been used to extract more than 60 billion dollars from the German people supposedly to compensate Jews for the suffering and loss they claim to have experienced during the war as a result of Hitler’s anti-Jewish policies. “Oi, veh! The Nazis took all our gold and put us in gas chambers. So now you must pay us!” Well, this racket worked for more than 50 years, but many Germans were getting tired of it. They said, “The Nazis are all dead. We weren’t born until after the war. We aren’t Nazis. We don’t owe you anything.”

So the Jews shifted their tactic. They said, “Oi, veh. It vasnt chust the Nazis. It vas all the Germans. You all persecuted us.” A Jewish professor at Harvard, Daniel Goldhagen, came out with a book titled Hitler’s Willing Executioners, the theme of which was that all Germans, not just the Nazis, had hated and mistreated Jews, and so all Germans owe the Jews reparations. The book was given an inordinate amount of publicity by the Jewish media, and the browbeaten Germans began groveling and apologizing again. Just to drive the point home, the Jews and their collaborators organized a traveling photo exhibit to persuade the German people that the entire German military establishment, not just Hitler’s elite SS troops, had persecuted the Jews and committed atrocities during the war. Therefore, all the Germans still owe the Jews. The exhibit, titled War of Extermination: Crimes of the Wehrmacht, 1941-1944, has more than 800 photographs supposedly showing atrocities committed by German soldiers. During the four years this exhibit has been traveling around Germany, German veterans and other patriots have protested that many of the photographs are fakes and that the whole exhibit, in effect, is a lie intended to make Germans feel guilty and to extort more payments from them.

Despite the protests, the German lemmings continued to view the exhibit and to feel guilty as intended. And I should mention that Jews are not the only ones promoting it. Treasonous German liberals, in business, politics, and the academy, who have hitched their wagons to the Jewish star and tried to outdo one another in expressing hatred for their own people, are enthusiastic supporters of the exhibit. Its biggest financial support comes from a billionaire German cigarette maker, Jan Reemtsma. The exhibit was scheduled to begin a tour of the United States next month, opening in New York on December 2.

Well, all that was changed a few days ago, when a few courageous historians came forward with convincing arguments that the exhibit is, in fact, a lie. I say “courageous” because in Germany the government puts people in prison for contradicting any aspect of the “Holocaust” story. The historians presented irrefutable evidence that several of the “atrocity” photographs had been staged after the war, and that others, while showing genuine atrocities, were of atrocities committed by the Soviet secret police, the NKVD. The historians pointed out that piles of bodies in some of the photographs, claimed to be victims of the Wehrmacht, are in fact Polish, German, and Baltic civilians murdered by the Soviet NKVD. This is especially embarrassing to the exhibit’s promoters, because the NKVD at the time the photographs were taken was led and heavily staffed by Soviet Jews. So the exhibit has been withdrawn while the matter is studied. It will not be coming to New York next month after all. And that’s too bad, because it might do the American lemmings some good to see what the Jews — those poor, innocent, persecuted darlings — were themselves doing to non-Jews during the war. But let me tell you something: If it weren’t for the fact that the evidence of fraud uncovered by a few courageous historians is beginning to find its way into the historical journals, where it no longer can be ignored, the promoters of this anti-Wehrmacht exhibit would have brazenly continued their road show, knowingly deceiving Germans and Americans in order to promote their own Jewish agenda.

Do you begin to see what all of this is suggesting? Let me give you another recent example. Before Madeleine Albright launched her murderous war against Serbia earlier this year, Jewish television was full of atrocity stories about what the terrible, Nazi-like Serbs were doing to the poor, innocent, persecuted Albanians in Serbia’s Kosovo province. Albright’s Jewish spokesman, James Rubin, was on the air every night moaning about the “genocide” and the “ethnic cleansing” in Kosovo. Before the bombing began Rubin claimed that 2,500 Albanians already had been killed in Kosovo by the Serbs. Rubin and other Jews in the government and the media were constantly and stridently calling for war — except that they didn’t call it “war”; they called it “humanitarian intervention.”

Careful observers may have noted that many of the alleged Serb atrocities being shown to American television viewers during the prewar period had an uncanny similarity to each other. We saw the same Albanian corpse or alleged massacre site on our screens night after night, just filmed from a different angle and with slightly different commentary each time. The intent clearly was to make a few killings seem like many. And the politicians participated in the deceit. Before the bombing started, the Jews’ number one step’n’fetchit in Britain, Clinton clone Tony Blair, announced, and I quote, “We must act to save thousands of innocent men, women, and children from humanitarian catastrophe, from death, barbarism, and ethnic cleansing by a brutal dictatorship.”

Eight weeks after the bombing started, when the war was coming under increasing criticism from dissidents, in an effort to build voter support for the war, Clinton’s Jewish Secretary of Defense William Cohen announced that as many as 100,000 Albanians of military age had been murdered in Kosovo by the Serbs. Tony Blair’s ministers were not quite as hyperbolic as Bill Clinton’s, but Blair’s Foreign Minister Geoff Hoon announced on June 17, and I quote: “According to the reports we have gathered . . . it appears that around 10,000 people have been killed in more than 100 massacres. The final toll may be much worse.”

After Slobodan Milosevic finally caved in and permitted NATO to send its troops into Serbia, the media continued to announce huge numbers of Albanians supposedly murdered by the Serbs. When NATO had occupied all of Kosovo province, we still were hearing figures of 44,000 butchered Albanians, hundreds of mass graves, etc. Then the figure of murdered Albanians dropped to 22,000, then to 11,000. Bernard Kouchner, the United Nations chief administrator in occupied Kosovo, announced that 11,000 bodies already had been found in mass graves throughout Kosovo. Altogether 20 forensic teams were sent in to dig up the mass graves and count the bodies.

Well, that was more than four months ago, and somehow all of the body-hunters, including a team from the FBI, actually have found a grand total of 670 bodies of Albanians, and not all of those were killed by Serbs. It’s beginning to look as if that’s all they will find. That’s fewer Albanians than Madeleine Albright killed accidentally, when her “smart” bombs went astray or her trigger-happy pilots shot up refugee columns. And of course, it’s a lot less than the number of Serbs murdered by KLA gangsters under NATO protection since the bombing stopped in June. Those murders, by the way, are continuing on a daily basis, but the Jewish media no longer bother to report them.

I mean, it’s becoming a bit embarrassing for them. If they begin reporting the continuing murder of Serb civilians by the KLA, that might remind people to ask how many Albanians the Serbs killed, how many mass graves have been uncovered, and so on. It’s hard enough to keep the more independent-minded UN inspectors from blurting out the facts. The chief Spanish forensic inspector, Juan Lopez Palafox, told a Spanish newspaper, and I quote “They told us that we should prepare ourselves to perform more than 2,000 autopsies. The result is very different. We found only 187 cadavers, and now we are going to return [to Spain].”

Inspectors were told that there was a mass grave near the town of Ljubenic containing 350 bodies. They dug everything up and found just seven bodies. They were told that the bodies of 700 Albanians had been dumped down mine shafts at Trepca, in northern Kosovo. After an exhaustive search inspectors concluded that there were no bodies at all there.

It might seem a bit reckless of the Jews to try to justify an unpopular war, such as the recent one against Serbia, with lots of phony atrocity stories they knew wouldn’t stand up to scrutiny. But just consider the way it has worked out. Madeleine Albright, Bill Clinton, and Tony Blair still are able to claim in public that their murderous bombing of Serbia was a “humanitarian mission,” that they saved the lives of many thousands of Albanians by chasing the Serb Army out of Kosovo, and that their so-called “peacekeeping” troops have brought peace and security to the region. They are able to claim these things despite the facts I have cited, because only a few voters know the truth. Only a few voters are interested in the truth. Most voters know only what they see on network television, and network television isn’t about to make Madeleine or Bill or Tony look bad. It was a Jewish war, and so it had to be a good war, a justified war.

I’ll reiterate: in a democracy like we have in the United States, the truth isn’t really important. What’s important is what the mass of voters believe to be true, and since the mass of voters never investigate anything or even do any independent reading, whoever controls television controls what they believe. Someone like Gary Lauck can have his Constitutional rights violated, and the voters never will know about it, because it won’t be on network television.

The Jews can cook up the most outrageous atrocity stories, whether about what supposedly happened to them during the Second World War or what the Serbs supposedly did to the Albanians before Madeleine began her bombing, and the stories don’t really have to hold water in order to be effective. They can be the flimsiest and most transparent lies, because the average voter simply isn’t discriminating enough to see through them. They believe whatever Tom Brokaw or Dan Rather or Peter Jennings tells them to believe.

I’m really surprised that the phony Wehrmacht atrocity exhibit was pulled just because a few historians were raising hell about faked photographs and NKVD Jews murdering Gentile civilians and blaming it on the Germans. The sports fans and soccer moms, who learn what’s going on from Tom Brokaw, Dan Rather, and Peter Jennings, certainly never would have learned what the historians were saying. If the German liberals weren’t so wishy-washy, the historians simply could have been thrown in prison for “hate speech,” the exhibit could open in New York as scheduled, and the lemmings would have believed everything they were told.

One thing that may have played a role in killing the phony Wehrmacht exhibit, is that information about the faked photos in it has been circulating on the Internet during the past couple of weeks. The Jews are working hard to keep what they call “hate” off the Internet. The Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith, the Simon Wiesenthal Center, and other Jewish groups are lobbying to make it mandatory to have what they call “hate filters” installed on all school and library computers, so that the kiddies can’t have their minds polluted by inconvenient facts about phony Wehrmacht atrocities or phony gas chamber stories or phony Serb massacres of Albanians.

Well, my point today is that what is happening in Germany and what is happening in the United States are connected. They are connected by the same lies told by the same liars. Many of the things that have been done to Germany-mass immigration by non-Whites, the cultural degradation, the non-White crime, and so on-also have been done to the United States. The loss of our freedom of speech and assembly will be next.

Thanks for being with me again today.

Who is the Real Threat to European Identity – Dr. David Duke

Who Are the Haters?

by Dr. William Pierce

My organization, the National Alliance, concerns itself with all things relevant to the welfare and progress of the European peoples, the White people of this earth. We are advocates for all things which could be beneficial to our people, and we are opponents of all the influences and tendencies and groups who are harmful or to our people. As a consequence of this we receive a certain amount of hate mail, and I find it interesting to read these hate letters and try to understand the psychology, the motivations, of the people who write them. I won’t read any of these hate letters to you today, because they’re all pretty nasty and tend to lean pretty heavily on the use of four-letter words. They also tend to be blindly and irrationally hateful and to be based less on what I actually have said or done than on some misrepresentation about me or the National Alliance which has appeared recently in the controlled media.

In fact, there’s a strong correlation between some sensational story appearing on television or in the New York Times or the Village Voice about the National Alliance being a so-called “hate group” and my novel The Turner Diaries being a “blueprint” for various acts of domestic terrorism on the one hand, and on the other hand the arrival of these hate letters at our office a few days thereafter. It is clear to me that these sensational stories in the controlled media, which all purport to be against hate — in fact, they claim to deplore the growth of hate in our society, to be alarmed about it, and to be seeking ways to ameliorate it — these stories denouncing hate have the effect of causing the arrival of hate letters at our office. There is a cause-and-effect relationship. And the more I’ve thought about it, the more I’ve become convinced that it was planned that way.

Which is to say, all of these media protests about the growth of hate in America are intended for the specific purpose of provoking hate, of inciting hate. If you collect these stories from the New York Times, Time, Newsweek, or other Jewish publications and study them, you’ll see a certain pattern. For example, they always use the word “hate” in writing about me or the National Alliance. Even a short story may use the word “hate” or “hater” or the phrase “hate group” a dozen or more times. It’s clear that this isn’t just a fluke, because it occurs so consistently. What they’re deliberately trying to do is create an association in the mind of the average reader or television viewer between any mention of me or my organization and the emotion of hatred. In fact, they not only want the listeners or viewers to reflexively think “hate” when they hear my name or the name of the National Alliance, they want them to feel hate. And it seems to work to a certain extent, judging from this correlation I mentioned between the appearance of these stories and the arrival of hate mail at our office.

It’s an irrational, Pavlovian sort of thing, because as I mentioned a minute ago, the National Alliance is not a hate group of any sort but instead is a group dedicated to the welfare and progress of our people. But clearly there are folks out there who feel threatened by any such effort: folks who regard any activity aimed at building a sense of racial solidarity and racial consciousness among Europeans as a threat to themselves. And foremost among these folks are those who control the mass media: those who own the New York Times, the Village Voice, Time, Newsweek, and the rest. They are a deceitful bunch. They don’t come right out and say that they are opposed to White people regaining an understanding of our roots and an appreciation for our own unique qualities in a rapidly darkening world and a sense of responsibility for the future of our people. They don’t say this. Instead they attempt to generate negative associations in the minds of their mass audience. They attempt to use psychological trickery to keep our people confused and disorganized. They don’t want us thinking clearly about what is in our own interest and what is not. They deliberately attempt to incite hatred against me and others who are concerned about the future of our people.

They’ve had a lot of experience at inciting hatred. If you’re a person of German ancestry, you’ll certainly understand this. For the past 60 years, ever since the late 1930s, the media bosses have been cranking out films — hundreds of them — designed to incite hatred against Germans: crude, heavy-handed films, full of distortions and outright lies, but still effective enough to profoundly affect public opinion and national policy.

You may be better able to understand this media bias if you compare the films they have made about Germans with the films they have made about Japanese. You know, it was Japan who attacked the United States in the Second World War, not Germany. The Germans wanted to avoid a conflict with America and even ignored the deliberate provocations of the Roosevelt government, such as American attacks on German ships. After we were in the war, the Germans treated American prisoners correctly, in contrast to the Japanese, who often behaved brutally toward American prisoners, starving and torturing them. But the films coming out of Hollywood don’t reflect this reality. For every anti-Japanese film there are a hundred anti-German films. In fact, Hollywood’s tendency has been to generate sympathy toward the Japanese by reminding Americans at every opportunity about our internment of Japanese civilians in concentration camps in this country during the war. By way of contrast, the Germans are portrayed as sadistic automatons, clicking their heels and shouting “Sieg Heil” as they massacre prisoners.

Think about this difference between the Hollywood portrayal of Japanese and Germans. You won’t have to think very long to understand that the reason the media bosses want to incite hatred against the Germans but not against the Japanese is based on the fact that the Germans were in the business of freeing their own country of Jewish influence and of fighting against Jewish Communism everywhere in Europe, while the Japanese were blessed by not having a Jewish problem to deal with. The media bosses, in other words, couldn’t care less about the fact that the Germans treated American prisoners of war correctly and the Japanese didn’t; all they care about is the way their fellow Jews were treated. That ethnic self-centeredness of theirs shows up in almost all of their propaganda.

For the last few years their hate propaganda has been directed not just at Germans, but also at everyone who is not Politically Correct — especially those groups like the National Alliance whose stand on the Jewish issue or the race issue differs from their own. And they have added a new twist: using a pretended campaign against hate to incite hate.

You know, I didn’t think much about hate myself until becoming the target of this Jewish hate campaign. And then I had to ask myself, am I really a hater? Certainly not in the way the people who send those hate letters are. But, yes, I suppose I do hate some people.

Whenever I look at what has happened to our cities and our schools during the past 30 or 40 years, I cannot suppress my feeling of hostility toward the Blacks, mestizos, and Asians who have made so much of our country an enemy-occupied wasteland. I feel a surge of anger every time I see a non-White face on television or in an advertisement. Thirty or 40 years ago, before all of the new civil-rights laws gave them a privileged status and when there were 25 or 30 million fewer of them in the country, I didn’t feel this hostility. I figured that we could each stay in our own communities and we wouldn’t get in each other’s way. But now I want them out of our country, out of our living space. But even so, my hostility toward these non-Whites who are overrunning my world is not the nasty sort of hatred embellished with obscenity that I see expressed in the hate letters I receive.

When I see a hate letter I often feel a flash of anger at the hater who wrote it, but I cannot say that I really hate even these hate-letter writers. They are simply the people, most of them White, who are incited by the real hatemongers, the media bosses. My feeling toward these Jewish media bosses — and all of the clever, little Jewish propagandists who write news stories about so-called “hate groups” in an attempt to make ordinary people hate me — is much closer to real hatred. Over the years they have done enormous damage to our people with their poisonous propaganda, and they aspire to do even more. One way or another we must stop them and make sure that they can never harm our people again.

But I reserve my most heartfelt hatred for the collaborators among my own people who make it possible for the Jews to do their damage: collaborators who consciously and deliberately betray their own people, lie to their own people, in order to gain advantage for themselves — the politicians, generals, public officials, clergymen, professors, writers, businessmen, and publicists who are not incited to hatred by the psychological tricks of the Jews, as are the suggestible fools who write hate letters, but who consciously and deliberately choose race treason, believing that they will gain a personal advantage from it. There is no fire in hell hot enough to punish these traitors, and there will be no place for them to hide when the day of retribution comes.

Yes, I hate traitors, I hate liars and deceivers, and I cannot say that I feel at all apologetic about the fact that I hate them. Hate may be an unpleasant sort of emotion, but it can serve a good purpose, and that is why Mother Nature gave us the capability to hate. It is one of the faculties which protects us from traitors and deceivers by ensuring that we will punish them, that we will weed them from our midst when we catch them, instead of forgiving them and giving them a chance to betray us again.

Nevertheless, I reject the label of “hater,” with which the real hatemongers have tried to brand me. I spend very little of my time hating and a great deal of my time spreading understanding with the hope that it will benefit my people. One of the things I believe that we must understand, that we must always be aware of, is the motivation of the professional hatemongers, as well as the trickery with which they ply their trade.

Their trick of using the pretense of altruistically fighting hate in order to incite hate against their enemies is relatively new. They invented the terms “hate crime” and “hate speech” only a little over a decade ago — unless one wants to give the credit for that to George Orwell, who popularized the essentially identical concept of “thought crime” in 1948, with his futuristic novel 1984. In any case, they used their political influence to force the government and the various police agencies around the country to give official recognition to their invention, or Orwell’s invention if you prefer, with the passage of the so-called “Hate Crimes Statistics Reporting Act” of 1990. Then almost overnight all of the mass media began using the terms. Now they’ve got the President of the United States running around the country giving speeches about stamping out “hate crime” and “hate speech.” It’s their way of demonizing their enemies, of making their enemies seem like irrational, dangerous, and hateful people: the sort of people that it’s all right for decent folks to hate.

So the trick is new, but the hate they bear against humanity certainly isn’t new. Two thousand years ago the great Roman historian Tacitus noted as the principal distinguishing characteristic of the Jews their hatred for every nation but their own. This hatred they bear against other peoples may serve a useful purpose for the Jews by helping them to remain apart and to retain their own identity while existing as a small but influential minority among much larger host populations, but it certainly isn’t helpful to our people. They almost instinctively are hostile to every institution of ours which holds us together and gives us our strength and solidarity. Back during the Vietnam war they were at the forefront of the flag-burners, and they persuaded a whole generation of university students and other young Americans to despise patriotism. Today their deceptive hate campaign is still directed against patriots, whom they portray as terrorists or potential terrorists.

Consider the whole set of ideas and attitudes associated with Political Correctness. Political Correctness really has not been codified in any formal way, so that one can refer to some official proclamation in order to determine what is Politically Correct and what is not. Nevertheless, we all know. We absorb this knowledge from the mass media.

We know, for example, that the United Negro College Fund and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People are Politically Correct. No one flinches or protests at the mention of those very real organizations. But at the same time we all know that if anyone dared to attempt to organize a college fund reserved for White students, he would be met with howls of outrage from the guardians of Political Correctness. We know that any association for the advancement of White interests will be branded immediately a “hate group” by the Jewish media and all of the politicians who dance to their tune, as the National Alliance is. In fact, any club or other organization with an all-White membership is bound to be under suspicion of being a “hate group,” although the same suspicion is never directed against an all-Jewish organization, an all-Chinese organization, or an organization all of whose members are American Indians.

We all know that to express revulsion for the practices of homosexuals is the height of Political Incorrectness and will get us branded as “haters” in an instant. Even if we want to give our own children positive examples of heterosexual masculinity or heterosexual femininity in order to guide the development of their own attitudes toward sex, we had better do it quietly if we don’t want to be accused of “hate.” Likewise, any expression of support for the maintenance of traditional sex roles — any suggestion that armed combat is not a proper role for women, for example — is sure to bring one under suspicion as a “hater.”

We all know that whenever White people, European people, are in conflict with non-Whites, whether in South Africa or America or anywhere else on this increasingly overcrowded planet, it is Politically Correct to be on the non-White side. To be on the White side is to be a “hater.” If one expresses agreement with the French people who believe that the French government should cut off the immigration of Africans from the former French colonies in Africa, for example, one is a “hater.” If one agrees with the Germans who believe that there are too many Turkish “guest workers” in Germany, one is a “hater.” If one agrees with Englishmen that the Pakistanis in England should be sent back to Pakistan, one is a “hater.” And if we suggest that the American government should not let wetbacks continue to pour into the United States across the Rio Grande, we are “haters.” Indeed, only a “hater” would dare use the term “wetback” these days.

If we are sufficiently sensitive to the message of the controlled media, we understand that any expression of concern for our people, any effort to safeguard the future of our people, any public support for our traditions and our culture and our folkways is hateful. The unspoken message is that we will be hated if we are not Politically Correct. The message is that the sort of trendy fools who send me viciously obscene hate letters will be incited to hate anyone who does not toe the political line of the Jewish media.

It’s a shame that it still has to be that way for a while yet. It’s a shame that any of our people are incited to hate others of our people. But we have a big mess to clean up in America and elsewhere throughout the White world, and until the mess has been cleaned up there will be hatred.

At least, we can understand who is responsible for this hatred. We can understand who the real haters are.