Jewish Control of the American Mass Media Has Real
Consequences for the United States and the World
by Dr. William Pierce
One of the
subjects we've covered a number of times in this newsletter is the Jewish
control of the news and entertainment media and the enormous damage this
control is doing to America and to our people. We write about this so much
because there's hardly anything in the world more important, hardly anything
which demands our attention more urgently.
The evidence of the damage being
done is quite obvious, but somehow many people manage to not notice that
evidence. I had a newspaper reporter in my office a few weeks ago, and he asked
me, "Why do you object to the Jews controlling the media? Aren't they
running things about the same way anyone else would?"
I told him, "No, they're
running things to fit their Jewish agenda, and that agenda is not good for us."
Then he asked me for specific
examples: "What are the Jews doing with their control of the media that's
harmful to us?"
Now, I really don't believe that the
reporter wanted an answer to that question, because this was a man who knew
which side his bread was buttered on. He couldn't afford to be thinking bad
thoughts about the people on whom his career depended, but I gave him an answer
anyway. I gave him some specific, concrete examples of the way in which the
Jewish control of our news and entertainment media was damaging us as a people.
Perhaps you'll be interested in hearing some of those examples too, and so I'll
share them with you.
The first example I gave the
reporter involved the largest media conglomerate in America, the Walt Disney
Company. I reminded the reporter that Walt Disney, who was a Gentile -- who was
one of us -- had been a pioneer in the motion picture industry. He was one of
the men who built Hollywood. He built it by giving us films like Snow White and
Fantasia and Cinderella. These were not just healthy, wholesome films: they
were films, which struck a deeply responsive chord in us, because Walt Disney
shared our roots.
While Disney was winning a place in
the hearts of people of European descent all over the world, the rest of Hollywood
was being taken over by Jews. By the late 1920s it was apparent that not only
was there money to be made in motion pictures, but motion pictures could become
a very influential medium, and so Jews began taking over.
By the time Disney died he was about
the only major non-Jewish film maker left in Hollywood. After his death Jews
took control of the Disney company, and today it is controlled by Michael
Eisner. Eisner immediately began making propaganda films designed to encourage
degeneracy in viewers.
I gave to the reporter as an example
of Eisner's films one that came out a couple of years ago and received all
sorts of acclaim and awards from Jewish reviewers in the New York Times and
other Jewish newspapers: it was The Crying Game, which was made by the Miramax
division of Disney, a division headed by the Weinstein brothers. The Crying
Game was a film about homosexuality and transvestitism and interracial sex. The
message of the film was that these things are all right: that homosexuals and
transvestites are people just like us, and that we should love them, and that
it's all right for us to share their life-style.
Racial and sexual roles deliberately
were made ambiguous in the film: a British soldier who just happens to be a
Negro, an Irishman's mulatto girl friend who just happens to be a man wearing a
dress. I doubt that I've ever seen a film with a sicker, more destructive
message. And this film was held up by the Jewish media as wonderfully
"sensitive," as wonderfully artistic. Nor was The Crying Game any
sort of fluke or exception to the rule. Mr. Eisner has produced many other
films with a similarly destructive message.
I also gave the reporter to whom I
was speaking examples about the destructive way in which the Jews use their
control of the news media. Do you remember the enormous hullabaloo in the news
media a few months ago when two White soldiers at Fort Bragg, in North
Carolina, got drunk and shot a convicted Black crack dealer and his female
companion? It was on the television news and in the big newspapers day after
day after day. "Racism in the Army!" the headlines were screaming.
News commentators wrung their hands and agonized over "White
supremacy" at Fort Bragg. "What can we do about White supremacy in
the military?" they moaned. And, of course, the politicians, who certainly
know which side their bread is buttered on, had to get into the act. The White
House issued statements. The secretary of the Army announced that an
investigation would be launched to find out about White racists in the Army and
then to boot them out when it found them. We were treated to tearful television
interviews with the relatives of the slain Black crack dealer. We're still
hearing about the killing of this convicted Black criminal by two drunken White
soldiers, as Jewish groups continue to use it as an example in their media
campaign for new laws against what they call "hate crimes" and
"hate speech." Just two weeks ago there was yet another big article
about it headed "Extremism in the Ranks" in Newsweek magazine, which
is owned by the Jewish Washington Post. Everybody has heard about this shooting
at Fort Bragg.
Now I'll tell you about a shooting
you haven't heard about -- unless you happen to live in the immediate vicinity
of Camp Pendleton, the big Marine base in southern California. Last month, on
March 5, 1996, a 28-year-old Marine sergeant who was stationed at Camp
Pendleton hid a .45-caliber pistol under his jacket, walked into the office of
the executive officer of his unit, Lt. Colonel Daniel Kidd, and shot Kidd twice
in the back, killing him. He then turned his pistol on the commanding officer,
Lt. Col. Thomas Heffner, and shot Heffner in the chest, critically wounding
him.
Both Lt. Colonel Kidd and Lt.
Colonel Heffner are White. The murderer, Sergeant Jessie Quintanilla, is a
dark-skinned Pacific Islander from Guam. When Quintanilla ran out of the office
after shooting the two White officers, he shouted that he had done it "for
the Brown side" and that the killings of Whites would continue until all
non-Whites are released from prison.
Amazingly, not even the San
Diego-area newspapers, which could hardly avoid at least reporting the bare
facts of the shootings, suggested that race was a motive or that the killing of
Lt. Colonel Kidd was a "hate crime." They ignored the race factor.
The national media, so far as I am aware, have scrupulously avoided the whole
story. No statements from the White House, no call for investigations of Brown
racism in the Marines, no headlines anywhere about "extremism," no
calls from Jewish organizations for new laws to control "haters" in
the military.
Now, what is the difference between
the shootings at Fort Bragg and the shootings at Camp Pendleton which could
have justified the glaring difference in the way they were treated by the
controlled news media? Was it that the Fort Bragg shootings were a more serious
crime than the Camp Pendleton shootings? Was the killing of a convicted Black
drug dealer by two drunken White soldiers more newsworthy than the cold-blooded
murder of a White Marine Corps officer with an outstanding service record by a
non-White sergeant with a hatred of White people? Was the Fort Bragg shooting
more cause for concern on the part of ordinary Americans than the Camp
Pendleton shooting?
I don't think so.
Let me suggest that the difference
in the way in which the shootings were treated by the news media stems from the
fact that the Jewish bosses of the media have an agenda of their own, and they
slant the news accordingly. They make the news fit their agenda. The Jews who
control the news media have a program to "sensitize" White Americans
about racial matters, and by that I mean that they want to instill in White
Americans a sense of White racial guilt, to make White Americans feel that any
sense of White racial solidarity is reprehensible, to persuade them that any
White resistance to demands by non-Whites is "racist" and therefore
wicked.
And so they deliberately -- I say
deliberately, knowingly, calculatingly -- create the impression with their
biased and selective reporting of the news that White attacks on non-Whites are
a far bigger problem than non-White attacks on Whites, whereas exactly the
opposite is true. The shooting at Fort Bragg suited the Jews' purpose, and so
they gave it enormous publicity and drummed it into everyone's consciousness.
The shooting at Camp Pendleton didn't suit their purpose, and so they gave it
minimal coverage in the news media they control. That's the sort of thing I
have in mind when I say that the Jewish control of the media is doing enormous
damage to our people. It's giving the average American a grossly distorted view
of the world.
I'll give you another example, one
which most of us probably have heard about. In Chicago earlier this year a
White mother and her two young children were murdered by Blacks in an
especially horrible manner. The White woman was slashed open with a butcher
knife, and an unborn infant was ripped from her womb by Blacks who wanted the
baby. The woman's children, a ten-year-old daughter and an eight-year-old son,
were stabbed to death. These were racial killings, but because the victims were
White and the murderers were Black most of the media would have preferred to
ignore them. The unusually atrocious nature of the crime caught the attention
of the tabloids, however, and so the rest of the news media were obliged to
give it minimal and grudging coverage. But there were no demands from Jewish
organizations, like the Anti-Defamation League and the Southern Poverty Law
Center, for new "hate crime" laws because of these hate-inspired
murders. There were no hand-wringing editorials about the murders in the New
York Times or the Washington Post. The television networks wasted no tears on
the victims. The whole attitude of the media was: the less said about these
murders the better.
Can you imagine how different the
treatment by the media would have been if the races of the victims and the
murderers had been interchanged? Imagine that a gang of neo-Nazi skinheads had
grabbed a pregnant Black woman and her two Black children, had stabbed the
Black children to death and then killed the Black woman by ripping her open
with a knife and tearing her unborn child from her body and running off with
it. That would have been on the front page and the editorial page of the New
York Times, the Washington Post, and every other Jewish newspaper in the
country for weeks. Tom Brokaw and Dan Rather would still be telling us about it
every evening. Every television screen in the country would still be full of
politicians, priests, and rabbis telling us what we must do to eliminate
"White racism." They would be telling us what kind of
"racist" books and "racist" radio programs and
"racist" music the skinheads were exposed to which led them to kill
the Black family. And of course, spokesmen for the Southern Poverty Law Center
and the Anti-Defamation League would be given non-stop media coverage as they
clamored for laws to make Politically Incorrect speech illegal. You know that's
the way it would be handled.
And that sort of slanted news is
damaging, because tens of millions of White Americans actually believe what
they see on television and read in the newspapers. They cannot distinguish between
the real world and the slanted world portrayed by the media masters. They
assume that real people behave the way the actors in Mr. Eisner's The Crying
Game behaved; moreover, they assume that's approved behavior. They assume that
the news stories selected for the evening television news programs are truly
representative of what is happening in the world. Their opinions and attitudes
are shaped by the slanted world of the media rather than by the real world. In
the long run this Jewish media control is not just damaging: it is lethal. It
will destroy us. And that, of course, is just what it is intended to do.
Here's another specific example of
the way in which the Jewish control of our media is used to damage us as a
people. Do you remember the Republic of South Africa? Do you remember what the
media did to that country? Let me remind you. For years the mass media in
America maintained a solid wall of hostility against South Africa. The Whites
there were unspeakably wicked, according to the media, because they practiced a
system they called "apartheid," which simply means apartness, or
separation of the races.
Now, it is true that we always have
had a busybody element among our own people -- egalitarians and other foolish
or malicious types who always are looking for an opportunity to force others to
conform to their ideas -- but without the support of the Jewish media the
busybody element would not have been able to do much damage. It was the
controlled media which made "apartheid" a dirty word; it was the
controlled media which made the attitude toward South Africa a major political
issue in this country; it was the controlled media which made a government
enforced boycott of trade with South Africa politically popular; it was the
controlled media which viciously attacked anyone who had a good word to say
about South Africa; it was the controlled media over here which provided a
forum for the handful of South African traitors and terrorists who were trying
to destabilize their own society.
And ultimately it was the controlled
media which destroyed South Africa. As the economic damage to South Africa from
the trade boycott mounted, White South Africans found themselves under
increasing pressure. Furthermore, they were being subjected to the same
anti-White hate propaganda that we were. The films they saw, the television
programs they watched in South Africa came from Hollywood and New York. And
eventually the South Africans became so demoralized that they foolishly turned
their country over to Black rule, hoping that somehow that would make the world
love them and their economy would improve.
What actually has happened, of
course, is that crime and mismanagement have skyrocketed and standards have
fallen, and now the White South Africans who are able to go some place else are
leaving. What has happened to every other country in sub-Saharan Africa after
the Whites turned the government over to the Blacks is now happening to South
Africa. It is slipping back toward the jungle. And the controlled media in America
played the largest single role in bringing this result about.
And this result was deliberate. It
was calculated. It was planned. It was not because of any fuzzy-minded,
do-gooder sentiment on the part of the media bosses. They knew exactly what
they were doing. It was cold-blooded. Compare this media concern with equality
for Blacks in South Africa with the attitude of the media toward the behavior
of the Jewish government in Israel. That government practices what is known as
collective punishment. If a Palestinian is suspected of being a freedom fighter
-- suspected, not convicted -- the Jewish government punishes his whole family.
His wife, his parents, his children will be arrested and tortured. The house
they live in will be blown up. Have you ever heard the controlled media
criticize this sort of behavior?
Now, patriots have various concerns,
various priorities. Some of them believe that we should concern ourselves first
and foremost with the way the U.S. government handles its finances, with ruinous
taxation and scandalous welfare programs. Some of them believe that our
out-of-control immigration situation is our most pressing problem. Others are
concerned primarily with the government's failure to deal effectively with
street crime. And some have focused on the breakdown of our educational system
under the impact of forced equality, or on the decay of our morals.
But I tell you that we can solve
none of these problems until we regain control of our news and entertainment
media. So long as the Jews control our mass media they will control our
politicians, and so long as they control our politicians they will control the
policies of the government. We will not be able to shut down the welfare system
or control our borders or make our cities safe or restore our standards and
values so long as the controlled mass media are able to make a majority of our
people feel guilty for wanting to do these things, so long as the media are
able to make people believe that keeping Mexicans and Haitians out of the
country or shutting off the flow of welfare is racist, and that racism is the
worst of all sins.
So long as the Jews control our mass
media they will be able to keep enough of our people confused and misled and
divided so that we cannot regain control of our government by peaceful,
democratic means.
If we are to regain control of our
destiny and survive as a people, then we have only two choices: violent
revolution to take the control of the mass media back by force, or gentle but
effective persuasion to lead more and more of our people from confusion into
understanding.
I personally believe that violent
revolution is not feasible at this time, and as long as the course of gentle
persuasion remains open to us, that is the course we must choose. I believe
that the only proper thing for us to do now is to continue building our own
media and making them more effective -- media like our series of radio
broadcasts and our World Wide Web sites on the Internet and the books and
magazines published by National Vanguard Books.
No comments:
Post a Comment