Saturday, September 30, 2017
Wednesday, September 27, 2017
„Mossad can go to any distinguished American Jew and ask for help.“ (ex-CIA official, 9/3/1979, Newsweek)
„A U.S. Senator should have the same right as a member of the Knesset...to disagree with any government when its actions may not be in the United States’ interest.“ (Senator Percy, Wall Street Journal, 2/26/85)
„...the [Jewish] underground will strike targets that will make Americans gasp.“ [Victor Vancier, Village Voice Statements of New York City Jewish Defense League Commander, April, 1986)
1957: Jewish rabbi attacks the Lord’s Prayer in the schools. (NJO, Feb. 8, 1957).
„This means war! and organized Jewry, such as the B’nai B’rith, which swung their weight into the fight to defeat Taft. The Jewish ex-President ‘Teddy’ Roosevelt helped, in no small way, by organizing and running on a third Party ticket [the Bull-Moose Party], which split the conservative Republican vote and allowed Woodrow Wilson [A Marrino Jew] to become President.“ (The Great Conspiracy, by Lt. Col. Gordon „Jack“ Mohr)
„I knew Otto Kahn [According to the Figaro, Mr. Kahn on first going to America was a clerk in the firm of Speyer and Company, and married a grand-daughter of Mr. Wolf, one of the founders of Kuhn, Loeb & Company], the multi-millionaire, for many years. I knew him when he was a patriotic German. I knew him when he was a patriotic American. Naturally, when he wanted to enter the House of Commons, he joined the ‘patriotic party.’“ (All These Things, A.N. Field, pp. 56-57; The Rulers of Russia, Denis Fahey, p. 34)
From: Adam and Cain, p. 178, by Wm. N. Murray, former Governor of Oklahoma (1951): „Mr. W. Smith, who was for many years private secretary to Billy (William Ashley) Sunday, the Evangelist, makes a statement on oath before a Notary Public of Wayne, Michigan. The statement is to the following effect: President Coolidge shortly before his term of office expired, said publicly that he did not choose to compete again for the Presidency of the United States. Shortly afterwards, Billy Sunday interviewed him. Coolidge told him that after taking office, he found himself unable to carry out his election promises or to make the slightest move towards clean government. He was forced and driven by threats, even murder-threats, to carry out the orders of the Jews. Billy Sunday made public this statement of Coolidge. There followed a general attack upon the Evangelist. Then his son was framed and committed suicide, whilst the father’s death was hastened in sorrow for the loss.“
1957: American Jewish Congress brought suit to have a nativity scene of Christ removed from public school property in Ossining, N.Y. The Jews obtained an injunction and planned to take the case before the U.S. Supreme Court. (Jewish Voice, Dec. 20, 1957).
1954: ADL attorney Leonard Schroeter, is instrumental in preparing desegregation briefs for the NAACP for hearings before the U.S. Supreme court. He said „The ADL was working throughout the South to make integration possible as quickly as possible.“ (Oregon Journal, December 9, 1954).
1957: New Jersey Region of the American Jewish Congress urges the legislature to defeat a bill that would allow prayer in the schools. (American Examiner, Sep. 26, 1957).
Have you ever thought about it: if the Jews god is the same one as the Christian’s God, then why do they object to prayer to God in the schools? The answer is given in a 1960 Court Case by a Jewess Lois N. Milman, if Christians would only listen and observe!
1960: Jewish pupil objects to prayer in schools. Jewess Lois N. Milman, objected to discussing God in the Miami schools because the talk was about „A God that is not my god.“ (How true this is] In a court suit she also objected to „having to listen to Christmas carols in the schools.“ (L.A. Times, July 20, 1960).
1962: The American Jewish Congress has called the Philadelphia decision against Bible reading in the public schools a „major victory for freedom. A special three judge federal court in Philadelphia voided as unconstitutional Pennsylvania’s law requiring the reading of ten verses of the Bible in public schools each day. [Remember the Jews claim that the first five books of the Bible is also their Bible. Do you begin to see what liars they are?]. The Bible was read without comment and objectors were excused upon request from parents...The Jewish Congress is a major force in supporting challenges to traditional [Christian] practices in the public schools.“ (Los Angeles Times, Feb. 2, 1962).
1963: Jews Bernard Roseman and Bernard Copley arrested smuggling in a large quantity of LSD-25 from Israel. The drug was manufactured at the Wiseman Institute in Israel. [Do you see now why the government cannot stop the drug traffic?] Jews repay Christian Americans for their hospitality and aid by making drug addicts out of their children. (Los Angeles Times, April 4, 1963).
1972: The Jewish Committee Against Religious Encroachment in Schools filed in Federal Court to have the Yule Pageant in Westfield, N.J. banned. The suit charged, „the pageant favor belief in religion over non-religion and favors the Christian Religion over others [Jews].“ (New York Daily News, Nov. 15, 1972).
1973: Jewish State Senator Anthony Beilenson (representing Beverly Hills) brought pressure on state officials and had the nativity scene removed from the Capitol grounds because it offended the Jews from his district. (Sacramento Union, December 22, 1973).
1977: President Jimmy Carter forced to apologize to the Jews living in America for telling his Bible class the truth, that The Jews Killed Christ. (Jewish Press, May 13, 1977)
1977: Russian Jews arriving in the U.S. given Medicaid by New York States as they claim being uncircumcised ruins their love life. They complain Jewish girls will not date them on RELIGIOUS grounds if they are not circumcised [I wonder if a Jew boy has to show the Jewish girls his privy member before he asks her for a date?] Despite Constitutional separation of Church & State, New York and Federal authorities give these foreign Jews taxpayer money to be circumcised so the Jew girls will date them. (Jewish Press, Nov. 25, 1977)
1977: Jews Urge Removal of Bible Toting Judge. The Anti-Defamation League sent a letter to the state Committee on Judicial Performance [California] to have Judge Hugh W. Godwin removed from the bench because „his Christian religious beliefs color the manner in which he dispenses justice.“ (L.A. Herald Examiner, June 24, 1977).
1977: Lutheran Church leaders are calling for the deletion of the hymn „Reproaches“ from Lutheran hymnals because the „hymn has a danger of fermenting anti-Semitism.“ The ADL sent a letter commending the president of the American Lutheran Church for the action.
1977: The American Jewish Committee was responsible for the Episcopal Church removing two hymns „Reproaches“ and „Improperia“ from the Book of Common Prayer because they [truthfully] accused the Jews of the Crucifixion of Christ. Rabbi Marc Tannenbaum congratulated Episcopal Bishop Allin for „his historic act of respect for Judaism and friendship for the Jewish people.“ (Jewish Press).
1977: The National Jewish Commission of Law and Public Affairs is now forcing cemeteries to bury Jews on legal holidays. Cemeteries were normally closed to burials on legal holidays. However, since the Jews bury their dead quickly after death they are now forcing cemeteries to make special rules for them. Jews have been instrumental in having Christian Crosses removed from graves in veterans cemeteries because the crosses „Offend Them.“ (Jewish Press, November 25, 1977).
1977: The Anti-Defamation League has succeeded in getting 11 major U.S. firms to cancel their adds in the „Christian Yellow Pages.“ To advertise in the CYP, people have to declare they believe in Jesus Christ. The Jews claim they are offended by the idea of having to say they believe in Jesus Christ and yet want to force their way into the Christian Directories.
The Jews whom he attempted to oust merely applied to their fellow Jews in Holland, and the order came back from the Company countermanding the expulsion. (For a similar situation during the Civil War, see ULYSSES GRANT). Among the reasons given by „their worships“ for over-ruling their governor, one stands out rather glaringly, in view of the usual Jewish contention that their people were ‘poor and persecuted:’ „ ...and also because of the large amount of capital which they have invested in shares of this Company.“ (Harry Golden and Martin Rywell, THE JEWS IN AMERICAN HISTORY)
Sunday, September 24, 2017
Friday, September 22, 2017
Wednesday, September 20, 2017
by Dr. William Pierce
Most of the comments I receive from listeners are very supportive, but I do get some hate mail as well. Most of the hate mail is either nutcase stuff from people who have some personal problem, which they project onto me, or it's from lemmings who are very indignant that I'm not in step with everyone else in the mass media. They just need someone to hate, and I think it makes them feel better if they tell me what a rotten person I am.
But I also receive a somewhat more thoughtful type of hate mail from people who curse me because I can't understand that race really doesn't count. They tell me that I should never judge another person as a member of the race to which he belongs, but only as an individual. They tell me that many Blacks are law-abiding, hardworking people who don't use drugs or throw their trash in their yards and that many White people are criminals, are on welfare, and are generally trashy and worthless. Therefore, these individualists tell me, racism is stupid. I'm stupid, they say, because I embrace all White people, the bad along with the good, and I condemn all Blacks, the good along with the bad.
They tell me that when they're looking at a neighborhood with the thought of renting an apartment or buying a house and moving into the area, they don't judge their prospective neighbors on the basis of whether their names are Chung Lung Fu and Abraham Goldberg or Bill Smith and Earl Turner; they judge instead on how much their neighbors paid for their homes and how well they keep them up. They'd rather live next to an Abe Goldberg or a Rastus Brown with a nicely waxed, new BMW in the driveway than next to a Bill Smith with a ten-year-old Ford.
Individualists also believe that whether a person is homosexual or heterosexual is unimportant. What counts is whether or not he's well groomed, well mannered, and pays his bills on time. Undoubtedly there are individualists who will say that sex doesn't matter, either. No one should be judged by group characteristics, but only by those individual characteristics relevant to the immediate situation: will he or she make a good neighbor, a good employee, a good congressman? That's all that counts, the individualist will say. And I'm sure that many individualists actually believe this. In fact, it is a religion for many of them, judging from the emotional nature of their hate mail to me.
To explore this matter further: some individualists -- a minority of them, I suspect -- have bought into a semi-religious, semi-philosophical world view called "Objectivism" and peddled most notably by a Soviet-trained Jewess named Ayn Rand, who came to America from the Soviet Union in 1926 and began writing books extolling the virtues of selfishness and individualism. Some of her best-known books are The Fountainhead, Atlas Shrugged, and The Virtue of Selfishness. Another notable individualist in the Ayn Rand mold is Harry Browne, who recently has been the Libertarian Party's candidate for President of the United States and who wrote a book titled How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World.
The basic idea of Browne's book is that no one owes anything to anyone except himself, and that the only rational objective for any individual is to look out for himself, get as much for himself as he can, do whatever he wants to do that he can get away with, and to hell with everyone else. Anyone who doesn't accept this view of things is either a sucker, just waiting to be fleeced by a more objective and rational person -- or is a person with ulterior motives aiming to fleece others.
As I said, some people have made a semi-religion out of this way of looking at things. One finds many of these people in organizations such as the John Birch Society and the Libertarian Party. But for other people -- the majority, I suspect -- individualism is simply an excuse for their selfishness and lack of responsibility. Perhaps for some it's an indicator of cowardice: faced with an intolerable racial situation in America today, they opt for an explanation of things that will not get them kicked out of the country club. They are aware of what non-White immigration is doing to America, for example, but they are afraid to take a position that might be considered "racist." They are afraid of the label. And, at the same time, they can see the catastrophe that is looming for America, so they simply abjure all responsibility.
The views of most individualists have grown out of alienation. When people have been cut loose from their roots, when they have lost all sense of community and belonging, when they have become simply human atoms floating in a cosmopolitan soup, they try to make sense of things. They look for some standard or rule to go by to justify their behavior and their feelings. And some opt for individualism. Individualism doesn't have the social stigma that "racism" does. Individualism has been given the stamp of approval by Jews, and Jews are powerful people who are in good odor with the media and with the government, so it must be OK. They can't get kicked out of the country club for being individualists.
Before I talk further about the connection between alienation and individualism, let's back up a bit and look a little more closely at the individualist mind-set itself. Why do individualists send me hate letters? Because, they say, I stupidly embrace White welfare trash and condemn honest and hardworking non-Whites.
Now, that's really a misleading claim, although in a sense there may be some truth in it. I don't embrace White welfare trash, as such. I embrace my people, my race -- all of it -- recognizing that some White people are trashy and are not the sort I would want as neighbors or would want my sister to marry. It's like embracing my family, while recognizing that some of them are black sheep. And I don't condemn honest and hardworking non-Whites. It's not my business to set standards of honesty or industry for non-Whites. That's their business. I just want them off my people's turf, out of my people's territory -- all of them. When we have settled our external problems, then we will deal with our internal problems -- including our White welfare trash.
You know, this whole debate of individualism versus racism is really tricky. It's easy for people to become confused. I, for example, am more of an individualist than most of the individualists who hate me. What that means depends upon how one understands the term "individualist." I am an individualist in the sense that I don't have a lot of sympathy for people who can't or won't pull their own weight. I don't like to meddle in other people's business, and I like it even less when other people meddle in my business. If one of my fellow Whites doesn't want to take care of himself, that's his business. Just don't ask me to take care of him. I believe in natural selection and the survival of the fittest. I believe that we weaken our race when we help the least fit to survive and reproduce. If we're going to have a welfare system for our people, then we need a compulsory sterilization system to go along with it. I become more upset when I see a 400-pound White welfare mom surrounded by her brood of runny-nosed kids in the checkout line in front of me paying with food stamps than when I see a Black welfare mother.
I believe in helping my fellow White people in a way that strengthens them as a whole, not in a way that weakens them. I believe in helping the best and brightest and strongest of my people to be more effective, because by strengthening my whole people I strengthen that of which I am a part. That is my selfishness. That's the sense in which I'm an individualist. I'm an individualist within a certain framework: the framework of my race and my civilization. I'm an individualist with roots, an individualist with a sense of community, a sense of belonging, a sense of responsibility.
And you know, that's the sense in which our people have used the term for a long time. When the Greeks talked about individualism 2,500 years ago, they spoke about it with the same understanding I have today. In the sixth century BC, when individualism characterized Greek poetry, one of the greatest of the Greek poets, Theognis of Megara, expressed his sense of responsibility and his concern for his race when he deplored the careless breeding habits of many of his people and the consequent decline in their racial quality. Theognis wrote:
"The best men . . . wed, for money, runts of poor descent. So too a woman will demean her state And spurn the better for the richer mate. Money's the cry. Good stock to bad is wed, And bad to good, till all the world's cross-bred. No wonder if the country's breed declines. . . ."
And what is the understanding today of the individualists who send me hate letters? To be frank, I think that they understand nothing. They don't see themselves in any framework of race or history or civilization. They think of themselves as pure, disconnected individuals, with responsibilities to no one, existing only for themselves. They do not embrace a race. They embrace only themselves. When they choose neighbors or co-workers or business partners -- or marital partners -- they do so solely on the basis of what pleases them at the moment. A Chinese neighbor is just as good as a White neighbor of the same socioeconomic status. A Jewish co-worker is just as good as an Aryan co-worker. Individualists may form alliances with others they perceive as having similar interests, but their own interests always are strictly personal.
And they really think they're smart. Not only do they avoid the stigma of "racism," but by shedding all responsibility to anyone but themselves they believe they gain an advantage over suckers like me who are burdened with responsibility to my people, to my forefathers, to my descendants, and so on.
Let me tell you: this rootless individualism is not a "smart" way of relating to the world. It is an infantile way. It is based on the same attitude we see in an infant screaming and throwing things because he didn't get what he wanted. In a normal world, in a healthy environment, as an infant grows up he learns that he can't always get exactly what he wants when he wants it. He learns not to expect that or even to make that his goal. He learns that he is a part of something larger and more permanent and more important than himself. He develops roots in his community, in his race. He learns to see himself in a larger context, in a framework of race and history and culture. His concept of "self" expands to include these things of which he is a part.
That the type of development is normal and healthy, the type of development that leads to a sense of community responsibility and racial responsibility. And it leads to a stronger and healthier community and to a stronger and healthier race, in which the members of the community and of the race care about these larger collectives. But if a child grows up in a world where he is deliberately cut off from tradition and history, so that he cannot develop any sense of rootedness, or if his environment is so polluted with "diversity" and multiculturalism that he cannot identify with his racial community, then he does not have a proper framework within which to see himself relative to the world. He feels no sense of belonging and no sense of responsibility. He becomes an individual in the sense of Ayn Rand and Harry Browne.
There's a name for this condition. It's called alienation. It's what happens to many young White people who attend schools where they are in a minority, who attend universities where "Eurocentrism" is Politically Incorrect, who live in cities swarming with Third World immigrants, who see Black and Brown faces and get the Jewish slant on things every time they turn on the TV. Strong and healthy people react to this alienating environment by seeking their roots anyway, by doing whatever it takes to develop a sense of racial identity anyway, but many weak or confused people become individualists.
And you know, this alienating environment in which we live is not an accident. It was imposed on us deliberately by people who want to increase the level of alienation in our society, by people who encourageour people to become rootless individualists, by people who use all of the propaganda media at their disposal to convince everyone that it's "racist" to have roots, that it's "hateful" to have an interest in the history and traditions of one's own people, that it's practically criminal to be concerned about the welfare or even the survival of one's race -- if that race is White, if it's European.
My organization, the National Alliance, attempts to fight alienation among our people in many ways. For example, we distribute a sticker showing the simple message, "Earth's most endangered species: the White race. Help preserve it." That's all. No mention of any other race. Nothing even remotely "hateful." And yet every time these stickers of ours are mentioned by the controlled news media they are called "hate propaganda." Really: "hate propaganda."
Now, that is deliberate. This simple message calling on our people to be concerned about the preservation of our race always elicits a hysterical reaction from the controlled news media. The media bosses are afraid of our racial consciousness. They are terrified that we may feel responsible for our race. They are desperate to stamp out any feeling of rootedness or identity. That's why they always respond to our simple, inoffensive message with their favorite scare-word: hate, hate, hate. And that's a collective response. It's not based on the decision of any single, individual media boss. They have gotten together and formulated a strategy to advance their collective interests. And that is why they're winning their war against us now.
Well, I don't know that anything I've said today will change the attitude of the rootless individualists. They're lacking something in their upbringing that I can't give them in half an hour. They really do think they're being smart by not accepting any responsibility. They believe that they can survive and prosper as individuals, with no community or racial connections.
Listen: the world doesn't work that way. The rootless individualist doesn't realize it, but he really is all alone out there. The other people with whom he is competing -- the Jews, the non-Whites, the feminists, the homosexuals -- think of themselves as members of groups. They think collectively. They collaborate. Their aim is to disarm and destroy us -- collectively. And they're doing it.
I'll give you a very recent and shocking example of how this works. Do you remember the case of Matthew Shepard, the homosexual who went into a bar in Laramie, Wyoming, last year and tried to get a date? Two of the men in the bar gave him a good beating and then left him tied to a fence, where he died of exposure. Of course, there's no way you could forget that case. It has been a cause celebre in the national media ever since it happened. It has been on every television screen in America again this week in connection with the trial of Aaron McKinney, one of the men accused of killing Shepard. Janet Reno and Bill Clinton have given solemn commentary on the case and have cited it as a reason for why we need to have an expanded "hate crime" law to protect homosexuals from heterosexual White males. Half the Christian preachers and rabbis in America have publicly deplored the "hate" they say was responsible for Shepard's death.
Now I'll tell you about another case involving murder and homosexuals that I'm certain you haven't heard about, unless you happen to live in northwestern Arkansas and read the newspapers there carefully. Less than three weeks ago, on September 26, two adult homosexuals in the town of Rogers, Arkansas, grabbed a 13-year-old boy off the street, took him to their apartment, drugged him, and tied him up and gagged him so that no one could hear his screams, and then they raped him to death.
The 13-year-old boy was Jesse Dirkhising. The two adult homosexuals are Davis Don Carpenter and Joshua Macave Brown, each charged with capital murder and six counts of forcible rape. I mention these names to help you search for information about this horrible crime on the Internet, so that you can verify for yourself what I'm telling you. Try the Internet site of The Morning News of Northwestern Arkansas, the local newspaper there, which has been virtually the only newspaper to carry news of the murder.
As I said, this vicious rape and murder of an innocent child by two adult homosexuals occurred less than three weeks ago, and it's been totally blacked out of the national news. At the same time the beating death of homosexual Matthew Shepard, who made the mistake of looking for a date in the wrong bar, is still receiving national news coverage every day, more than a year after it happened.
Why? I'll tell you. It's because other groups in this country want it this way. No individual in America has the power to black out the news of the homosexual rape and murder of 13-year-old Jesse Dirkhising. And no individual has the power to give the enormous, non-stop national coverage to the beating of Matthew Shepard that we are seeing. This is the result of a collective decision -- a racial decision -- by the Jews who control the news media in America. The message the Jews want to send to White Americans is that homosexuals are innocent victims and that heterosexual White males are aggressors who prey on them. And so they give us the news that fits this message, and they black out the news that doesn't.
I mean, really, think about it. Which is the more newsworthy crime: the beating to death of Matthew Shepard by two men he approached for a date or the kidnapping and raping to death of 13-year-old Jesse Dirkhising by two adult homosexuals? The Jews do this manipulation and distortion of the news for a reason: a collective reason, a racial reason. And it's working. Idiot White women and idiot White Christians are joining the homosexuals around the country in even more candlelight vigils in memory of Matthew Shepard. But there will never be a candlelight vigil for Jesse Dirkhising. No one will ever hear about Jesse Dirkhising -- except those of you listening to me now.
That is the way this world in which we are living works. The suckers are not people like me who feel a sense of racial identity and racial rootedness and racial responsibility. The suckers are the rootless individualists who follow the poisonous teachings of Ayn Rand and Harry Browne.
Sunday, September 17, 2017
By Hervé Ryssen
Judaism is not merely a “religion,” as many Jews are overt atheists or agnostics, and they do not consider themselves less Jewish for all that. Jewry is also not a race even if it is true that a “trained eye,” most of the time, can recognize a Jewish appearance, that is to say, a characteristic pattern which is the result of their strict observance of endogamy for centuries. Jews see themselves as the “chosen ones” of God, and marriage outside the community is strictly frowned upon. However, mixed marriages do exist and have also helped to renew the blood of Israel during all the centuries spent in the various ghettos where the Jews preferred to live, separately and apart from the rest of the population. The essential condition for such mixed marriages is that the mother be Jewish, since Orthodox Rabbis recognize as Jewish only the child born of a Jewish mother. However, having just a Jewish father or grandparent can suffice for a person to identify completely with Judaism. Jewishness is therefore a “mental race” that has been shaped over the centuries by the Hebrew religion and the universalist project of Judaism.
Judaism is a Political Project
Judaism is essentially a political project. It is important for Jews to work toward the emergence of a world at “peace,” a peace meant to be universal and permanent. It is therefore not a coincidence that this word “peace” (shalom in Hebrew) is found frequently in Jewish discourse worldwide. In the perfect world that they are building, all conflicts will disappear between the nations. This is why Jews have been militating tirelessly for many years for the abolition of all borders, the dissolution of national identities and the establishment of a global empire of “peace.” The very existence of separate nations is considered to be responsible for the triggering of wars and turmoil. so they must be weakened and eventually replaced by a world government, a “one world government,” a “New World Order,” one single world-ruling authority that will permit happiness and prosperity to reign, Jewish-style, on earth.
We find this idea more or less developed both in the writings of certain intellectual Marxists such as Karl Marx himself and the Jewish-French philosopher Jacques Derrida and also in the discourse of liberal thinkers such as Karl Popper, Milton Friedman and France’s Alain Minc. The idea is to unify the world by all means necessary and to generate cultural conflicts that will weaken nation-states. It is for this One World that intellectuals Jews labor tirelessly all over the world. Whether they call themselves left- or right-wing, liberal or Marxist, believers or atheists, they are the most ardent propagandists of the pluralistic society and of universal miscegenation, that is of racial mixture.
Thus, all their strength the Jews – basically, ALL the vocal Jews in the world – encourage non-white immigration into every country in which they are located, not only because the multicultural society is their fundamental political aim, but also because the disintegration of national identity in each nation and the massive presence of anti-white immigrants is designed to prevent the original white population from succeeding in any nationalistic outbursts against the Jewish sway over finance, politics, and the media. All Jewish intellectuals, without any exception, are focused on this question of building the “pluralistic society” and for this they practice constant “vigilance against racism.” In France, influential writers and journalists such as Bernard-Henri Levy, Jacques Attali, Jean Daniel, Guy Sorman, and Guy Konopniki agree on pluralism and anti-racism despite their political divergences in other areas. This obsession, which is very characteristic of Judaism, is also manifested in movies, where many producers and directors are influential Jews. As soon as a film starts defending and promoting interbreeding, “tolerance” and pluralism, we can be sure that the producer of it is Jewish.
Now we can understand better why the former communists and leftists of the 1970s did not have to make such a big leap to become today’s “neoconservatives.” They have merely switched to a different strategy to achieve the same goal: the rule by racially pure Jews over a racially mixed society.
The fact is that after the Palestinian intifada began in October 2000, the Jews in France and the rest of the Western world have realized that nowadays the danger to their interests and their project comes primarily from Islam and from young African immigrants, both Arabic and black. Their aim is to strengthen the modern race-mixing and race-blending society, which they have contributed so much to establish in our country of France. But this mosaic now threatens to break up into separate communities, and this the Jews do not want. They want no separate identities or separateness at all, except a separate Jewish identity and Jewish separateness. Former Marxists in France such as Alexandre Adler, André Glucksmann, and Pascal Bruckner thus support nowadays, along with Alain Finkielkraut, the right-wing, pro-Washington, pro-Zionist party of Nicolas Sarkozy. And yet they have not become French patriots. They react only for the exclusive benefit of Jewry, asking, as American Jews proverbially do on every issue: “Is it good for the Jews ?”
“Tolerance” as a Weapon
The members of the Jewish sect are the most proselytizing people on earth, but unlike Christians or Muslims, who dream of converting all peoples of all races to their faith, the Jews have no plan to convert the world to their own faith, Judaism, but simply to encourage other nationalities to give up their national and religious identities – and live only for the goal of “tolerance.” The unceasing campaigns to blame all Whites for slavery, colonialism, the plundering of the Third World or for Auschwitz have no other purpose than putting the opponent on the defensive, and getting him on his knees not by violence but via guilt. When the Jews are the only people left on earth who are keeping their faith and their traditions, they will finally be recognized by everyone as God’s “chosen people.”
Their “mission” (and Jews frequently use this term “mission”) is to disarm the other peoples, to dissolve anything which is not Jewish or Jewish-controlled, to grind the people down to a powder for making a new identity-free work force, and thus to favor a universal “peace” among the peoples who have no more “divisive” identities.
As their prophet Isaiah said: “The wolf shall dwell with the lamb, the tiger will rest with the kid, the lion and the ram shall live together, and a young child will lead them” (Isaiah 11: 6-9). The Messiah, coming from Israel, and awaited for three thousands years, will establish anew the kingdom of David and will give the Jews an empire over all the earth. And certain Jewish texts explicitly call for this.
Jews are therefore continuously encouraged to campaign, in whatever society they inhabit, in order to promote the unification of the world – and thus to also hasten the arrival of their promised and cherished Messiah. Propaganda is a Jewish specialty, and it is no coincidence that Jews become so influential in all the media. In their hands, the concepts of “tolerance” and “human rights” have become incredibly efficient weapons of white guilt and accusation against the majority culture. In fact, it is not through Jewish-sounding names or a Jewish physical appearance that we can best recognize Jews, but rather from what they write and say wherever they are on earth.
Selective Amnesia and Fabulation
Many Jews, as we know, played an absolutely huge role in the Soviet tragedy 1917-1991 and the thirty million deaths that marked this era. Let us remember that Karl Marx was born into a Jewish family and that Lenin himself had a Jewish maternal grandfather, that Leon Trotsky, the Bolshevik founder and head of the Red Army, was born a Bronstein, while Kamenev (real name: Rosenfeld) and Zinoviev (real name: Apfelbaum) were running the two Bolshevik-conquered capitals of Moscow and St. Petersburg. But the list of Jews who stood out in the mega-crimes of Communism is endless. It must be said and it must be repeated: Jewish officials and Jewish torturers bore a very heavy responsibility in this tragedy. The “perfect” world they concocted and which was supposedly “historically inevitable” turned out from the very beginning to be a nightmare for the Russian population. It was not until 1948 when the Jewish intellectual elite Jewish began distancing itself from the Stalinist government, and this was only because Stalin had launched his “anti-Zionist” campaign, meant to purge pro-Israel Jews from senior leadership positions.
This indisputable Jewish guilt for the gigantic crimes of Bolshevism is now systematically being shoved down the Memory Hole (the phrase from George Orwell’s 1984). In Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s 2002 book Two Centuries Together, the Nobel Laureate and 11-year veteran of the Bolshevik gulag expresses outrage that Jewish intellectuals were still refusing to recognize their ethnic responsibility in the slaughter of millions of Christians. Solzhenitsyn also denounces modern Jews who pose as victims of an “antisemitic” Bolshevik government when that government was in fact heavily Jewish and Jews were among the worst perpetrators.
This selective amnesia is necessary for a people who ceaselessly proclaim their “innocence” of any provocative acts, as we regularly note in their writings, for example in an editorial in Israel magazine of April 2003, “the first Israeli monthly magazine in the French language” written under the name of a certain André Darmon.
He wrote: “To kill a Jew or a child makes God cry, for we are exterminating [in the Jew] the bearer of universal ethics and innocence.”
With this mindset of absolute innocence Jews cannot conceive bearing any responsibility for their atrocities. Jews are only victims, only “scapegoats” in an evil and hostile world. But very soon the Messiah will punish the “wicked” and will restore the victimized sons of Israel to their full rights.
Nevertheless, in this same Israel magazine editorial, a certain Frederick Stroussi asserted that the Nazi government was worse than the Stalin regime. He quoted the cruelties he claimed were perpetrated by certain SS men. For example, we learn from Stroussi that the Latvian SS man Cukur’s hobby was to toss Jewish babies in the air to shoot them in their head as in skeet shooting. He also writes of other episodes, such as the rape of children by the SS before they killed them. The Second World War has certainly stimulated the fertile imagination of the children of Israel.
Or perhaps this imagination is once again a case of the Jews’ own “projection” syndrome, that is, accusing others systematically of one’s very own crimes as a matter of consistent PR policy: always attack. We know in fact – even if the media never speak about it – that many Jews and their rabbis are involved in the felony crime of pedophilia (see Psychanalyse du Judaisme, 2007).
And murdering a child would seem to be more a Jewish specialty than a characteristic of the SS mind. The revelations of tenured professor Ariel Toaff of Bar Eilan University in Israel – the son of the former Grand Rabbi of Rome – and buttressed in February 2007 by his 147-page, heavily footnoted, scholarly work Pasqua di Sangue [ Blood Passover] – reveals proof of ritual murder among some Ashkenazi Jews (Jews of Eastern European origin).
We outsiders are thus supposed to understand that the sufferings of Jews cannot be compared to those of any others. As a consequence, we are supposed to get as indignant as they do when a serious historian such as Stephane Courtois states (in the preface of his famous Black Book of Communism): “The death of a Ukrainian child of Kulak origin [ from the independent farmer class] who is deliberately forced to starve to death by the Stalinist government is as significant as the death of a Jewish child in the Warsaw ghetto.” These simple words were enough to provoke the ire of Frederic Stroussi who declares he was “stunned” by such an affront. Such a remark, according to him, was “despicable” and represented a vulgar attack against Israel: “What does this comparison have to do here?” he writes. “Why do we have to use the slaughter of a Jewish child to transmit this underlying, false and hateful rumor that the Jews overshadow all other victims of totalitarianism and monopolize all the attention on themselves?”
The author of the article, as we can notice, reacts in a outraged and totally disproportionate way to the modest and certainly justified intentions of the level-headed historian Stephane Courtois. Stroussi demonstrates here the “great intolerance to the frustration” which are so characteristic of the Jewish intellectual. Such reactions are clearly not “normal.”
We note that Israel magazine is a monthly magazine designed for the Jewish community and that, consequently, one can hardly accuse Frederick Sroussi of lying to goyish readers, or hiding from the goyim the true nature of Bolshevism and the supposedly malefic cruelty of the SS. His discourse here does not correspond to any false dialectic, as anti-Semites claim, but here, in this magazine by and for Jews, he is reflecting, as a Jew among Jews, writing to Jews, the very essence of their soul: 1) We are always innocent – and 2) Jewish lives are more valuable than those of others.
There is an “attack anti-Semitism” that stems from a failure to understand the Jewish identity and only sees deliberate perfidy where there is in reality a genuine existential anxiety, one generated by a deep psychological dysfunction.
The Jews have never dared to collectively approach the mirror on their inner lives represented by Freudian psychoanalysis, a prism through which the Jews claim to see all humanity, but which, on closer analysis, sheds far more light on the specific neuroses of Judaism. Psychoanalysis, like Marxism, is a “Jewish science” and a product of the Jewish mind. It was therefore logical to wonder how this Freudian “discovery” corresponds to Jewish specificities.
The answer was not initially obvious to the author, and it took the reading and analysis of hundreds of books of all kinds, mostly written by Jews themselves, for him to realize that the searing question of incest stands at the throbbing heart of the Jewish question, and not theoretically either.
Jewish mothers do love their sons, as is well known, but outright incest is at the origin of a well-known mental illness – one that especially afflicts Jews – called “hysteria.” Incest attracted early the attentions of Freud while he was developing his theories. The parallels between Judaism and hysterical pathology are quite natural.
Jewry is well-known for these syndromes: Hysteria, depression, introspection, amnesia, manipulation, pathological lying, ambivalent identity, prophetic deception, sexual ambiguity, and so on. Every Jewish symptom is found in hysteria.
Freud, as a loyal Jew, merely projected the traits of a specific community onto the rest of humanity. In reality, there is no “Oedipus complex” but rather an Israel complex (all Jews together technically being Israel, not just the Near Eastern state). In fact, Jews do not seem to really wish to discuss the topic of incest within their families. On the other hand, all the psychiatrists mention: “The hysterical woman so much wants a child from her father or her doctor that she can persuade herself that she is pregnant by one of them and thus develops a ‘nervous pregnancy.’”
It is interesting that all Jewish writers use the same term to refer to the coming of their Messiah, namely, the “delivery” of the Messiah. The whole Jewish community, we must understand, is “the wife of God” (the Shekhinah of the Kabbalist) who is some day supposed to give birth to the Messiah, and thus the whole of Jewry is indeed suffering from a “nervous pregnancy” not unlike that found in nervous, hysterical women.
Karl Kraus, the Austrian Jewish journalist who did not agree with Freud, wrote sarcastically: “Psychoanalysis is the mental illness of which it claims to be the cure.” But the right and the best formula can be stated in ten words: “Judaism is the disease that psychoanalysis is meant to cure.”
The Sexual Revolution
After Freud, other Jewish thinkers came along who produced a symbiosis between Freudian doctrine and Marxism. Wilhelm Reich and Herbert Marcuse preached sexual revolution in order to break down the patriarchal family and unleash “free sex.” Their theories largely inspired the student riots of May ‘68. The 1970s saw a new wave of Freudo-Marxism and Jewish women were in the forefront (such as Gisele Halimi and Elisabeth Badinter in France and Bella Abzug, Betty Friedan and Gloria Steinem in the USA). As time passed, a series of Jewish-inspired laws appeared, one after the other, designed to dissolve the family. In France, a Neuwirth-promoted law legalized the contraceptive pill (1967), then came the challenge to the authority of the father as head of the household (1970), then divorce by mutual consent (1974) and the “right” to abortion promoted by “Holocaust survivor” Simone Veil (1975). A great wave of movie porn accompanied this “liberation” from traditional family values. Here we are compelled to note that Jewish producers and film directors play a very important role in the sex film industry. (See my La Mafia Juive [The Jewish Mafia], 400 pages, 2008). Parallel to this, the Freudian concept of bisexuality favored the acceptance of overt “gay pride” and homosexuality.
A War Machine against Humanity
In fact, the only tangible results of this moral “liberation” was the systematic demoralization and criminalization of the white man, who is denounced tirelessly in movies, literature and history as the cause of all the planet’s ills and of the collapse of the West. The appeal of egalitarianism – as intended by Jewry – tends to level all ethnic differences and identities and brings about their slow destruction.
Yitzhak Attia, director of French-language seminars at the Yad Vashem Holocaust institute in Tel Aviv wrote this himself in the same issue of Israel magazine:
Even if reason tells us, even shouts with all its force the very absurdity of this confrontation between the small and insignificant people of Israel [i.e, all Jewry worldwide, not just “the State of Israel”] and the rest of humanity… as absurd, as incoherent and as monstrous as it may seem, we are engaged in close combat between Israel and the Nations – and it can only be genocidal and total because it is about our and their identities.
You read it right : Between the Jewish people and the rest of humanity the struggle can only be “genocidal and total.” The “peace” which Israel intends to confer is no more and no less than “genocide,” the warrant for the execution of all humanity – except for those allowed to live as cultureless slaves.
The Neutralization of the Devil
The question is whether the aggressiveness of Judaism can be neutralized in order to save humanity from its evils, evils that could prove even more serious than Marxism such as psychoanalysis and the ideology of globalism. First of all, we must face the facts: After all these centuries of mutual misunderstanding, the anti-Semitic Christians, the Muslims, and Hitler have all failed to resolve the Jewish question. The fact is that the Jews feed on and grow off the hatred they have engendered among all the peoples of this world. This hatred, it must be said, is vital for their survival and for their spiritual genetics. It has allowed them for many centuries now to close ranks within their community against an external enemy, while other civilizations have disappeared.
For their part, the rabbis spare no efforts to keep their gene pool Jewish. And so even a renegade Jew remains a Jew, and therefore it is perfectly useless to attempt to leave the Jewish prison community. Judaism is indeed a prison. Claiming that a Jew cannot ever stop being Jewish works in favor of Jewry’s survival.
Our mission must be to accommodate these sick among us, because the Jews are not “perfidious” people as much as they are sick people to be cured.
Jews are to be loved individually and sincerely in order to free them from the prison in which they are locked. Only then will they become free from the cult’s grip – and from the threat they pose to themselves and to all humanity.
Only then we will become free from this grip, and at the same time, they will free themselves from the evil inside them that threatens all mankind.