The official blog of the site “Der Stürmer” – http://der-stuermer.org
Wednesday, September 30, 2020
Sunday, September 27, 2020
Adolf Hitler About the Foreign Affairs
The three viewpoints, which dominate our revolution, in no way contradict the interests of the rest of the world: First: prevention of the threatening communist revolt and building up a folk-state, which reconciles the various interests of classes and social strata and the preservation of the concept of property as the foundation of our culture. Second: solution of the most severe social problem through the return of the army of millions of our unfortunate unemployed to production. Third: reestablishment of a stable and authoritarian form of government, supported by the trust and will of the nation, will finally again make this great folk capable to negotiate with the world.
Speech of May 17, 1933 in Berlin
All attempts of our (then Marxist) governments to improve Germany’s situation in foreign affairs, I hence view as futile as long has the German folk has not domestically again been forged into a healthy, honorable community.
„Adolf Hitler’s Program“, Appeal for the election of July 31, 1932
It is...false to say that a folk shapes foreign policy; rather the folks regulate their relationships according to the strengths within them and according to the education for the use of these strengths.
Lecture of January 27, 1932 in Düsseldorf
It is in my view also false to say that Germany’s present life (before the National Socialist uprising) is only determined by foreign affairs viewpoints, that the primacy of foreign affairs today regulates our whole internal life. Certainly, a folk can get so far that foreign affairs conditions totally influence and determine its internal life. But one should not say that this condition is a natural one or one desired in advance. It is much more important that a folk creates the prerequisites for a change of this condition.
Lecture of January 27, 1932 in Düsseldorf
If I... consciously speak as a German National Socialist, then I wish to proclaim in the name of the national government and the whole national uprising that precisely we in this young Germany are filled with the deepest understanding for the same feelings and attitudes as well as for the founded life claims of other folks.
Speech of May 17, 1933 in Berlin
Precisely because we are nationalist-minded, we have respect for the national feeling of other folks. And our national pride does not mean: despise others, rather respect and love for our own folk!
Speech of August 1, 1923 in Munich
We cling in just as much boundless love to our folk as we wish with whole heart, from this love, an agreement with the other folks and, wherever it is possible for us, also try to reach it.
Speech of October 14, 1933 in Berlin
Not hatred toward other folks, rather love for the German nation!
Speech of October 24, 1933 in Berlin
This new idea obligates to just as great and fanatical devotion to the life and thus to the honor and freedom of the own folk as well as to respect for the honor and freedom of others. This idea can thus provide a substantially better basis for the striving for a genuine pacification of the world than the purely power-politically perceived and undertaken sorting of nations into victors and vanquished, into those with rights and those subjugated without rights.
Speech of January 30, 1934 in Berlin
In our opinion the times without the „League of Nations” have been far more honorable and humane. The others, however, claim conversely that we - have reached the highest time of culture.
Speech of April 13, 1923 in Munich
What we sign, we will keep, what we do not believe we can keep, we do not sign!
Speech of October 28, 1933 in Stuttgart
We want peace and agreement, nothing else! We want to reach out our hand to our former opponents, a line must be drawn again under the saddest period in world history.
Speech of November 10, 1933 in Berlin
But never has the defeated so honestly tried to help heal the wounds of his opponents as the German folk in the long years of the fulfillment of the diktat forced on it.
Speech of October 14, 1933 in Berlin
For fourteen years the German folk has tried along the path of a truly suicidal politics of fulfillment to reconcile irreconcilable enemies and to contribute its share to the establishment of a new European community of states. The results were extremely sad.
Speech of January 30, 1934 in Berlin
Germany has too many people in its area. It lies in the world’s interest not to withhold the required life possibilities from a great nation. The question of the allotment of colonial territories, regardless where, will, however, never become a question of war for us. We are of the conviction that we are just as able to administer and organize a colony as other folks. But we see in all these questions no problems at all, which somehow touch the world’s peace, since they are only to be solved along the path of negotiations.
Interview of October 18, 1933 in Berlin
The national government is ready to extend its hand for sincere agreement to any folk, which is willing to fundamentally close the sad past. The world’s need can only pass, if through stable political conditions the foundation is created and if the folks again gain trust among one another.
Speech of March 23, 1933 in Berlin
Whoever feels a whole folk in its entirety behind him, will be careful that he does not frivolously squander this blood, and he will constantly think of looking after the interests of the folk with the means of peace, of work and of culture.
Speech of February 26, 1934 in Munich
Whoever represents an entire folk, will thoroughly ponder the consequences, which a frivolously started conflict can bring!
Speech of February 26, 1934 in Munich
One should not think of me that I would be so crazy as to want a war.
Speech of November 10, 1933 in Berlin
I know exactly what war is. I have seen it with my own eyes, in great difference to many statesmen who did not experience it themselves. Certainly, I do not reject it as traitor, rather I reject it as a decent German, who was also decent as a soldier and who is the future as well is willing to be decent. I will not, on that account, surrender the life right of the German folk or German honor.
Speech of November 6, 1933 in Elbing
The meaning of our political fighting and struggling is... not the winning or even conquest of foreign folks, rather the preservation and security of our own folk.
Speech of October 2, 1933 in Hameln
If we today demand the ultimate from everybody, then only in order to again be able to give him and his child the highest thing: freedom and the respect of the rest of the world.
Speech on April 24, 1923 in Munich
We realized, that... a slave-folk... will never be a paradise, rather always and eternally only hell or colony.
Speech of April 12, 1922 in Munich
We do not want to subjugate any foreign folks, rather we want to stand up for our homeland, which we will not allow to be put down and scolded.
Speech of October 28, 1933 in Stuttgart
In that we cling to our own folkdom with boundless love and loyalty, we also respect the rights of other folks based on the same attitude and desire with from innermost heart to live with them in peace and friendship.
Speech of May 5, 1933 in Berlin
The German folk has a right to insist on the fulfillment of the treaty and hence demand equal rights. The German folk has no other wish than to live in peace and friendship with the other folks.
Speech of November 6, 1933 in Elbing
Toward the world...we want, measuring the sacrifice of the past war, to be upright friends of a peace, which should finally heal the wounds under which all suffer.
Speech of March 21, 1933 in Potsdam
Neither politically nor economically could the use of any kind of force produce a more favorable situation in Europe than exists today. Even with a decisive success of a new European solution by force, the end result would be an enlargement of the disruption of the European balance of power and so one way or another the seeds would be planted for later, new conflicts and new entanglements. New wars, new uncertainty and a new economic distress would be the result. The outbreak of such an insanity without end, however, must lead to the collapse of the present social and political order. A Europe sinking into communist chaos would conjure up a crisis of unforeseeable extent and of unknown duration.
Speech of May 17, 1933 in Berlin
The German government wishes to peacefully discuss all difficult issues with the nations. It knows that any military action in Europe, even if entirely successful, would, measured against the sacrifices, not stand in any relation to the gain.
Speech of May 17, 1933 in Berlin
It is my will to obtain close and upright connections between Germany and the foreign powers.
Address of September 12, 1934 in Berlin
As far as it is up to Germany, there will be no new war!
Interview of August 5, 1934 in Berlin
When another world believes it can dispute our folk’s love of peace, then nothing speaks for this real and genuine spirit of our folk more convincingly and forcibly than the relationship of the German folk’s possession of living space compared to the possessions of other nations. Seventy million people lived even before the war in a more than limited area. That they lived and how they lived, they really owe only to their abilities and their work!
Speech of May 1, 1934 in Berlin
For the next century it will not be necessary for the German folk to restore its military honor.
Speech of August 7, 1934 in Tannenberg
The German folk does not lust for war, quite the opposite, because it loves peace, it fights for its life right and stands up for the prerequisites of the existence of our 65 million folk. Germany and the German folk have no reason to wish for a war in order to restore the honor of the nation, the honor of its men and of its soldiers. Our goal is to make our folk happy again in that we secure its daily bread, a tremendous work, and the world should leave us in peace in the process!
Speech of October 22, 1933 in Kelheim
The fixed goal of our politics is: to make Germany a firm refuge of peace.
Address of September 9, 1934 in Berlin
The Reich government, however, will precisely for that reason use all means to stand up for the final elimination of the division of the earth's folks into two categories.
Speech of March 23, 1933 in Berlin
We want to have peace with all. But we also want that the others to finally draw the conclusions from this, and indeed very clear conclusions.
Speech of October 24, 1933 in Berlin
We do not want to allow ourselves to be treated like a second- class nation any longer.
Speech of October 24, 1933 in Berlin
Through the conscious denial of the real, moral and objective equal rights of Germany, the German folk and its governments were again and again most deeply humiliated.
Appeal of October 14, 1933
The disqualification of a great folk to a nation of second rank and second class was proclaimed at the moment when a federation of nations was supposed to be baptized. This treatment of Germany could as a result not lead to the world’s pacification. The thus considered necessary disarmament and making defenseless of the vanquished, an unprecedented event in the history of European nations, was even less suited to reduce the general dangers and conflicts, rather led only to the condition of eternal threats, demands and sanctions, which as a continuous unrest and uncertainty threatened to become the grave of the whole economy. If in the life of folks every consideration regarding the risk of certain actions is missing, unreasonableness will all too easily triumph over reason. The League of Nations, leastwise so far, has on such occasions been unable to provide any noticeable help to the weak, the unarmed.
Speech of May 17, 1933 in Berlin
Treaties, which were concluded for the pacification of the life of folks, only then have an inner meaning, if they proceed from real and upright equal rights. Precisely therein lies the chief reason for the discontent dominating the world for years.
Speech of May 17, 1933 in Berlin
Should we perhaps have less honor, because it was once possible for 26 states to defeat us?
Speech of October 30, 1933 in Frankfurt am Main
In this world very many wars have already been lost. If after each lost war in the past one took away forever from the unfortunate loser his honor and his equal rights, then the League of Nations would already today have to make do with nothing but unequal and this in the final analysis dishonored and inferior nations. For there is, after all, hardly a state or a nation, which did not once have the misfortune, even if it was in the right a thousandfold, to be defeated by a stronger opponent or a stronger coalition.
Interview of January 17, 1935 in Munich
The disqualification of a great folk cannot be historically perpetuated forever, rather it must one day come to an end. For how long does one believe to be able to commit such an injustice against a great nation? What does the advantage of the moment mean against the continuing development of the centuries? The German folk will remain just like the French.
Speech of May 17, 1933 in Berlin
We will never renounce those rights, which are inalienable for a great nation and could only be sold off by a small clique of petty politicians. These politicians, however, were mortal, and Germany is eternal!
Proclamation of September 5, 1934 in Nuremberg
The German government and the German folk...will under no circumstances let themselves be forced to any signature, which would mean the perpetuation of Germany’s disqualification. The attempt to influence that through threats against government and folk will not be able to make any impression. It is conceivable that one rapes Germany in violation of every right and in violation of every morality, but it is inconceivable and impossible that such an act could receive legal justification from us ourselves through a signature.
Speech of May 17, 1933 in Berlin
You can do what you want to do! But never will you bend us, never force us to accept a yoke! You will no longer be able to eliminate from our folk the call for equal rights!
Speech of May 1, 1933 in Berlin
We want to be peaceable, but under no circumstances without honor!
Interview in January 16, 1935 in Berchtesgaden
The German folk declares itself in this struggle for its equal rights and honor entirely identical with its government, ...both are most deeply filled with no other wish...than to help to end a human epoch of tragic erring, regrettable quarreling and fighting between those who - as inhabitants of the culturally most significant continent - in the future have a common mission to fulfill for all mankind.
Speech of October 14, 1933 in Berlin
One cannot in the long-run build a life community between nations, which do not have equal rights.
Speech of October 24, 1933 in Berlin
Germany demands equal rights. Nobody in the world has the right to deny these to a great nation, and nobody will have the strength to prevent them in the long-run.
Speech of January 30, 1934 in Berlin
Whether eighty million people in this world morally have equal rights or not, cannot, in the final analysis, be answered by anybody except at most the affected folk itself!
Interview of January 17, 1935 in Munich
Just as it was not possible for previous governments in Germany, by means of their external force, to break the psychology strength and the inner bond of National Socialists, so little can force from outside manage that either.
Speech of May 27, 1933 to the folk comrades in Danzig
I can... just repeat to the world one more time that no threat and no force will ever move the German folk to renounce those rights, which cannot be disputed for a sovereign nation. But I can also assure that this sovereign nation has no other wish than to happily employ the strength and the weight of its political, moral and economic assets not only for the healing of the wounds, which a past time inflicted on the human community, rather also in the service of the cooperation of those moral, cultured nations.
Speech of January 30, 1934 in Berlin
As unconditional as our love of peace is, as little as Germany wants a war, so fanatically will we stand up for German freedom and the honor of our folk. The world must know: the time of diktats is past!
Speech of June 18, 1934 in Gera
I quite openly state two affirmations: first, Germany for its part will never break the peace, and second, whoever seizes us, grabs thorns and needles. For just as we love peace, do we love freedom!
Interview of January 17, 1935 in Munich
Only the equal rights of folks alone can in the long-run form the basis of a real and true peace. In that we wage this struggle, we not only fight for ourselves, rather in the final analysis also for the community of folks.
Speech of October 30, 1933 in Frankfurt am Main
We wish nothing better for our folk than a life in honor and peace.
Appeal to the NSDAP of January 1, 1935
It is not true, when you declare that this folk wants to start a war out of hatred and revenge. No, it wants to be left alone, to have peace, but it also wants to have its honor and it wants its clear right!
Speech of November 6, 1933 in Kiel
Germany waited in vain for years for the keeping of the disarmament promise given us. It is the upright wish of the national government to be able to refrain from an enlargement of the German army and our arms, insofar as the rest of the world is finally also inclined to fulfill its promise of a radical disarmament. For Germany wants nothing but equal life rights and equal freedom.
Speech of March 23, 1933 in Berlin
The German government... is... convinced that there can today be only one great task: to secure the world’s peace. I feel obligated to state that the reason for the present armaments of France or Poland can under no circumstances be these nations’ fear of a German invasion. For this fear would only have its justification in the existence of those modern offensive weapons. Precisely these modern offensive weapons, however, Germany does not possess at all, neither heavy artillery nor tanks nor bomber-planes nor poison gases.
Speech of May 17, 1933 in Berlin
Germany has in the past taken over all the security obligations, which result from the signing of the Treaty of Versailles, entry into the League of Nations, the Locarno Pact, the Kellogg Pact, the arbitration court treaties, the War Prevention Pact, the No Force Pact etc. What are the concrete assurances, which Germany can still make? What assurances does Germany have?
Speech of May 17, 1933 in Berlin
According to the information of the League of Nations, France alone possesses in active service 3 046 airplanes, Belgium 350, Poland 700, Czechoslovakia 670. In addition to that are immeasurable quantities of reserve airplanes, thousands of tanks, thousands of heavy guns as well as all the technical means for the waging of war with poison gases. Does not Germany, in its defenselessness and lack of arms, have more justification to demand security than that of armed states bound together in a coalition?
Speech of May 17, 1933 in Berlin
Nonetheless, Germany is ready at any time to take upon itself additional security obligations of an international kind, if all nations for their part are ready to do so and this benefits Germany. Germany would be ready without further ado to dissolve its entire military institution and destroy the smallest remnants of the weapons it still has, if the neighboring nations completely do likewise. But if the other states are not willing to carry out the disarmament terms, which the Treaty of Versailles obligates them to as well, then Germany must at least insist on its demand for equal rights.
Speech of May 17, 1933 in Berlin
One first made an unreasonable treaty and then had the feeling that for the prevention of this monstrous treaty huge armies were necessary.
Speech of October 24, 1933 in Berlin
It is not so that all these states are afraid of Germany - that honors us too much. No, they do not disarm among themselves!
Speech of October 24, 1933 in Berlin
The illegal condition of unilateral disarmament and Germany’s resultant national insecurity can go on no longer.
Speech of March 23, 1933 in Berlin
One will be able to suggest that I only try to win time in order to complete my preparations. To that I reply the work plan is such that the man who can reach the goal, which I have given myself, will deserve a far greater monument from the gratitude of his folk than a glorious leader after numerous victories could deserve.
Interview in November 1934 for the French National Association of Former Front-Fighters
Nobody would be happier, if the world disarmed, than I.
Interview on April 3, 1934 in Berlin
The young, new, German generation passionately demands actual equal rights for our folk as with other cultured nations.
Open Letter to Brüning of October 14, 1931
Toward our brother folk in Austria we have the feeling of empathy with its cares and needs.
Speech of March 23, 1933 in Berlin
I believe I today still know my homeland (German-Austria) well enough in order to know that the pulse beat, which fills 65 million Germans in the Reich, moves their hearts and senses as well.
Speech of January 30, 1934 in Berlin
(We feel) ... with special gratitude the understanding kindness with which Germany’s national uprising was greeted in Italy. We wish and hope that the sameness of the spiritual ideals will be the basis for a firm deepening of the friendly relations between both lands.
Speech of March 23, 1933 in Berlin
We are...of the conviction that an... arrangement in our relationship to France is possible, if both governments take up the problems affecting them with real farsightedness.
Speech of March 23, 1933 in Berlin
After the return of the Saar region to the Reich only a lunatic could think of the possibility of a war between both states.
Speech of October 14, 1933 in Berlin
We and the whole German folk would all be happy with the idea of sparing our children and grandchildren what we ourselves as honorable men had to see in suffering and pain and ourselves endure in bitter long years. As a National Socialist I, together with all my supporters, on the basis of our national principles reject gaining people of a foreign folk, who do not like us anyway, with the blood and life of those who are dear and precious to us.
Speech of October 14, 1933 in Berlin
Your decision, German folk comrades of the Saar, today gives me the opportunity to make the declaration regarding our so sacrifice-rich historical contribution to Europe’s so necessary pacification, that after the completion of your return the German Reich will make no more further territorial demands on France!
Words of gratitude to the Germans of the Saar on the occasion of the election victory of January 15, 1935
It would be a gigantic event for all of mankind, if both folks would forever banish violence from their common life. The German folk is ready for that.
Speech of October 14, 1933 in Berlin
I was once on August 4, 1914 deeply unhappy that now both great Germanic folks (Germans and Englishmen), who had lived peacefully next to each through all the erring and confusion of human history for centuries, were pulled into the war. I would be happy, if finally this unholy psychosis would come to an end and both related nations again return to the old friendship.
Interview of October 18, 1933 in Berlin
Our relationship with the great states beyond the ocean: with which Germany has long been bound by friendly bonds and economic interests.
Speech of March 23, 1933 in Berlin
We greet it...the effort for a stabilization of relations in the east through a system of pacts, if the leading points are less of tactical-political nature and are much more supposed to serve the strengthening of peace.
Speech of January 30, 1934 in Berlin
For this reason and in order to correspond to these intentions, the German government has endeavored from the first year on to find a new and better relationship with the Polish state.
Speech of January 30, 1934 in Berlin
There are Germans in Europe, there are Poles in Europe. Both will have to get accustomed to living next to and with each other and to get along. Neither the Poles can wish away the German folk from the European map nor are we unreasonable enough to perhaps want to think away the Poles. We know both are there, they must live with each other.
Speech of October 24, 1933 in Berlin
None of us think of starting a war with Poland over the corridor. But we all want to hope that both nations will one day dispassionately discuss and negotiate the issues affecting them. It can only be left to the future, whether a path possible for both folks and a solution bearable for both is found.
Interview of October 18, 1933 in Berlin
The German government was hence happy to find with the leader of the present Polish state, Marshal Pilsudski, the same generous view and to set down this mutual realization in a treaty, which...also represents a great contribution to the preservation of general peace.
Speech of January 30, 1934 in Berlin
Toward the Soviet Union the Reich government is willing to nurture friendly, for both sides beneficial relations. Precisely the government of the national revolution sees itself capable of such a positive policy toward Soviet Russia. The fight against communism in Germany is our internal affair, in which we will never tolerate inference from outside. The state-political relations to other powers, with which common interests connect us, are not touched by that.
Speech of March 23, 1933 in Berlin
Fundamentally, the German government proceeds from the idea that it is naturally meaningless for the formation of our relations to other lands, what kind of constitution or form of government the folks want to give themselves.
Speech of January 30, 1934 in Berlin
But there as well, where the reciprocal relations...are encumbered with difficulties, we will strive for an arrangement.
Speech of March 23, 1933 in Berlin
As through our action...at the end a reconciliation came between those in Germany who were hostile toward each other... so, too, will a reconciliation come between the folks who are still agitated against each other by slanderous elements.
Speech of November 9, 1933 in Munich
If we today turn against an irresponsible agitation, then also only because not the agitators, rather, unfortunately, the folks must atone with their blood for these sins of this world poisoning.
Speech of October 14, 1933 in Berlin
It is a rootless international clique, which agitates the folks against each other. Those are the people who are at home everywhere and nowhere.
Speech of November 10, 1933 in Berlin
Those are the same elements who drove our folk to the internal fight of brother against brother and who today agitate the folks of the world against each other.
Speech of November 6, 1933 in Kiel
I do not know how many of the foreign statesmen took part in the war as soldiers at all. I take part in it. I know it. But of those who today agitate against Germany and slander the German folk, this I know, of them not one ever even heard a bullet whistle.
Speech of November 10, 1933 in Berlin
There is no better guarantor for peace than the fanatical unity of the German nation.
Speech of October 22, 1933 in Kelheim
Thursday, September 24, 2020
David Duke & David Gahary: WWII Book „Hellstorm“, and the Horrors of Zio-Bolshevism
Dr. Duke and author & broadcaster David Gahary talked about Mr. Gahary’s great book on World War II, „Hellstorm“. The book will certainly help you understand what’s going on today with the new push for Zio-Bolshevism.
Tuesday, September 22, 2020
Sunday, September 20, 2020
MTV and Hate
Source: Free Speech magazine – January 2001
by Dr. William L. Pierce
Three weeks ago I began telling you about a horrible mass murder and rape of young White people in Wichita, Kansas, by a couple of Blacks. The main point I emphasized in talking about this awful crime against our people was that the Jewish news media and the White liberals who collaborate with them – the Clintonista types – were deliberately covering up the news about it. It wasn’t that they didn’t think it was important; they knew it was important, and that’s why they were covering it up. The people who should have been reporting to you every detail of what happened in Wichita weren’t saying a word about it. They were hoping you wouldn’t learn about it. And so I told you about what happened in Wichita, and I explained to you why the Jewish media bosses didn’t want you to know about it.
Of course, the massacre in Wichita wasn’t the only newsworthy event being covered up by the Jewish media while I was talking to you about Wichita. I just decided to focus on Wichita, and I thought it likely that meanwhile news about some of the other crimes against our people would leak out through other media. Well, that didn’t happen. The Jews successfully kept the lid on. And then last week one of the top Jewish media bosses, Sumner Redstone (pictured), owner of Viacom and MTV and Paramount and CBS, provoked me and made me decide that perhaps I really should talk more about the horrible things being done to our people by this multicultural society the Jews and their friends have forced on us.
First, the provocation. Actually MTV’s regular programming is a nonstop provocation. Racial mixing is its persistent theme, the theme pushed day and night, week after week: all races and both sexes mixed together, gyrating and jerking and rapping to throbbing Negroid music. A few years ago I couldn’t understand why any sane White parents would expose their kids to this filth. Now I have a better understanding of the lemming phenomenon. I understand that the majority of our people – White people – will do anything, no matter how disgusting or depraved or self-destructive, that they believe is fashionable. And I also have a better understanding of the way in which the Jews are able to use their control over the mass media of news and entertainment to create fashions and to corrupt our institutions, to corrupt our society, to corrupt a whole army of collaborators – of businessmen, of actors and actresses, of spokesmen, of preachers and politicians and writers and teachers – from our own people to help them with their filthy business. And let me tell you, when the day of reckoning comes, the punishment for all of these traitors, for all of those from among us who consciously and deliberately collaborated with the enemies of our people, for all of those White people who let their faces, their voices, their names be used to conceal the Jews who were paying them – their punishment will be awful.
Well, let’s not get ahead of ourselves. Last week MTV interrupted its regular fare of filth to present a special dose of brainwashing. The occasion was a big push for new “hate crime” and “speech crime” legislation. For two decades the Jews have been pushing harder and harder for more laws designed to control what we say and what we think. It was the largest of the Jewish pressure groups, the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith, which invented the concept of “hate crime” and took the lead in promoting it among law-enforcement people, the government, and the general public. The politicians were willing to go along, of course, but the Jews were having a hard time persuading the White public that people ought to be punished for what they said or for what they presumably were thinking when committing a crime instead of solely for what they did. This Jewish concept is contrary to our whole Western tradition of law, contrary to our whole sense of justice.
So the Jews decided to spend more time on propaganda, on brainwashing, to swing the public around. The first step, before continuing the push for more legislation to penalize speech and thought, was to get the public accustomed to the concept of “hate crime,” to get them to accept this newly invented category of crime. And so they did two things. They began talking and writing about “hate crime” in all of their mass media. If you are able to search back issues of publications such as the New York Times or Time or Newsweek magazine, for the term “hate crime,” you’ll discover the term simply didn’t exist before about 1985, and then suddenly it appeared in nearly every issue of these publications. The campaign to condition the public to think of “hate crime” and “speech crime” as recognized categories of crime was on – and it was a planned, carefully designed campaign; it didn’t just happen.
Then in April 1990 they pushed the Hate Crimes Statistics Act through the Congress, and President George Bush signed it into law. It merely required law enforcement agencies to keep track of crimes in which racial feelings or dislike of homosexuals might have been a factor. The aim really was not to gather statistics: it was to condition law enforcement people to accept the new categories of crime. And then actual legislation followed, mostly at the state level. What the Jews want now is greatly strengthened legislation, and they want it at the Federal level. That was the purpose of Sumner Redstone’s special MTV programming last week. It consisted of hour after hour of recitations of supposed “hate crimes” – assaults on Blacks, Asians, Jews, and homosexuals by heterosexual White males. The Jews who did the programming even threw in a few assaults on Whites by non-Whites, but the clear message of the programming was that “hate” is a White phenomenon and that most so-called “hate crimes” are committed by heterosexual White males.
The truth of the matter is that in the great majority of interracial assaults the victims are White, and the perpetrators are non-White. In virtually every interracial rape, for instance, the victim is White. And if you question whether or not hate is involved in these Black-on-White rapes, go to any library for a copy of Eldridge Cleaver’s autobiographical book Soul on Ice and read what he has to say about it. Cleaver was a Black rapist who was a darling of the Jews and is described by them in obituaries as a “civil rights activist.” Cleaver wrote:
I crossed the tracks and sought out White prey. I did this consciously, deliberately, willfully, methodically... Rape was an insurrectionary act. It delighted me that I was defying and trampling upon the White man’s law... and that I was defiling his women...
The facts of interracial crime are easy enough to determine from the crime statistics that were collected by the FBI long before the ADL’s Hate Crimes Statistics Act of 1990 and are still collected and compiled every year and are available to the public from the Department of Justice in Washington as the Uniform Crime Reports. But the truth was not a consideration in last week’s “hate crime” programming. Promoting a feeling of White guilt, morally disarming White viewers, was one of Mr. Redstone’s considerations, and working up a feeling that we really do need new and stronger laws to keep those awful, hateful, heterosexual White males under control was another of his considerations.
So it was important to maintain the deception that in interracial crimes non-Whites and homosexuals are the victims and heterosexual White males are the perpetrators. That’s why MTV told us once again about the dragging death of a Black convict in Jasper, Texas, and about the beating death of a homosexual in Laramie, Wyoming, but had not a word to say about the terrible interracial massacre in Wichita last month. And also not a word to say about many other recent and atrocious hate crimes, in which the victims were White.
For example, here’s one I haven’t told you about yet. Less than a month ago, on the evening of December 23, Vickie Lynn McGraw, left her Shreveport, Louisiana, home to visit friends. The 48-year-old White mother of two, former wife of a Shreveport police lieutenant, never made it to her friends’ home. Two Blacks were loitering outside Mrs. McGraw’s home, and as soon as she got into her car they rushed her, pointed guns at her, forced their way into her car, and drove off with her.
After that it was a familiar story. The Blacks drove her to an automatic teller machine and forced her to withdraw money. Then they beat, raped, and sodomized her. Finally, they threw her from her car, killed her by firing a bullet into the back of her head, and left her corpse in a roadside ditch, where a passerby found her on Christmas Eve morning. Meanwhile the two Blacks rounded up five more of our colored “equals,” and they all went on a spending spree with Mrs. McGraw’s credit cards.
It only took the Shreveport police and the local sheriff three days to round up the killers and their friends. And the local newspaper, the Shreveport Times, did report the matter diligently, with photographs of Vickie McGraw and of the sub-humans who raped and murdered her. The New Orleans newspaper, the Times-Picayune carried a very brief report of the murder, without photographs or any other clue as to the race of the victim or the murderers. And that’s about it. Outside of Louisiana no one has heard about what happened to Vickie Lynn McGraw.
And she wasn’t just some White welfare slut who hung around with Blacks, some piece of race-mixing White trash of the Nicole Brown Simpson category, of whom we could say that she got what she deserved. She was a decent, middle-class White woman, a wife and mother with whom literally millions of other White American women could identify and sympathize – which is exactly why the Jewish media bosses blacked out the news about what happened to her. The last thing in the world they want is millions of decent White women sympathizing with Vickie McGraw, thinking about what happened to her, and then perhaps thinking about the whole business of multiculturalism and where it’s taking us. If they think too much about Vickie McGraw, they may not take to heart the lesson of Sumner Redstone’s special MTV programming on “hate crimes” last week.
I mean, really, if you are in the news business to make money, if you are simply a businessman, you grab a story like the Vickie McGraw story, and you make the most of it, because it is obvious that millions of Americans will be moved by it. But if your primary reason for being in the news business is to condition the public, to brainwash the public, then you have different considerations, don’t you? If you’re not just a media businessman who incidentally happens to be Jewish, but instead are a coldly calculating predator, working in conspiratorial concert with other predators whose aim, like yours, is to deceive and demoralize the White public, then you impose a blackout on stories like the Vickie McGraw story and the Wichita massacre story and every other story that doesn’t fit your destructive, genocidal purpose.
Let’s change the subject from Black-on-White crime for a moment and look at another aspect of Sumner Redstone’s effort to sensitize the White public on the matter of “hate crime” and “speech crime.” Some of the “hate crime” victims he listed in his special programming last week were homosexuals, most notably Matthew Shepard, the young sodomite who made the fatal error of trying to find a date in the wrong bar in Laramie, Wyoming, a couple of years ago. And just as he lied about interracial crime, trying to persuade us that Whites are the principal perpetrators and non-Whites the principal victims, he also lied about crimes involving homosexuals and heterosexuals, trying to make us believe that in nearly all such crimes the homosexuals are the victims, and heterosexuals are the perpetrators.
Do you remember the name John Wayne Gacy? He was a homosexual serial killer, the most prolific serial killer in America’s history. Gacy handcuffed, raped, sexually tortured, and murdered 33 young men between 1972 and 1978, burying most of his victims in the crawl space under his house in Chicago. How about Jeffrey Dahmer? Is that name familiar? Dahmer took up where Gacy left off. Between 1978 and 1991 he murdered 16 boys and young men after drugging them and having sex with them. He then ate parts of their corpses and kept their heads and genitalia in his refrigerator for months. Gacy and Dahmer both received quite a bit of media publicity when they were caught, because that was before the current drive to cast homosexuals in the role of “victim” had gained much speed.
But during the Clinton era – the 1990s – the drive picked up a great deal of speed indeed. If you’ve been listening to my broadcasts for much more than a year you’ll remember the name Jesse Dirkhising. I talked about him a couple of times in October 1999. He was the 13-year-old boy in Rogers, Arkansas, who was kidnapped by two homosexuals, tied up, drugged, and raped to death, on September 26, 1999. This horrible homosexual murder was totally blacked out by the Jewish media bosses outside of Arkansas. The Mathew Shepard beating death, which had occurred the previous year, was still receiving worldwide publicity, and any publicity about the murder of Jesse Dirkhising would have taken the steam out of the media publicity campaign about Mathew Shepard. And so the media bosses said not a word about little Jesse.
Perhaps I’ve made my point. If you go by the body count, the homosexuals have the heterosexuals beat by a wide margin. So why did Mr. Redstone try so hard to convince us otherwise? Well, in the first place, the very loose coalition that has long existed among most of the enemies of traditional White society – Jews, feminists, racial minorities, liberals, and homosexuals – became much tighter and better organized during the two Clinton administrations. Homosexuals have moved up in this coalition and now have achieved full “victim” status, alongside Jews, Blacks and other non-Whites. And in the second place, it serves their purpose of proving to the lemmings that heterosexual White males are dangerous “haters” who need to be disarmed and constrained by new laws.
Well, actually, from Mr. Redstone’s point of view, there’s more to it. Building public sympathy for homosexuals and giving them a special, legally protected status, serves to undermine further the morale, and to morally soften up, the society Redstone and his fellow tribesmen are busy devouring. Their current “hate crime” and “speech crime” campaign is not just to keep homosexuals from getting beaten up when they solicit in the wrong bars or from having their feelings hurt when some insensitive heterosexual makes a crude joke about them. There’s a whole syndrome of more-or-less related social changes being pushed along with the acceptance of homosexuality: pedophilia, for example, and child pornography, which is very largely homosexual in nature. In my view, none of these changes is healthy; none of them is good for us. They’re good only for the people who want to weaken us and to destroy us.
Some of the listeners I receive letters from take issue with that. They don’t want to believe that this media campaign is malicious. They prefer to believe that it is based only on the liberalism of media people, who naturally sympathize with the underdogs and the outcasts, with the meek and the weak and the alien and the morally crippled. That means we’re supposed to believe that Sumner Redstone and all of his high-priced employees at MTV and CBS and Paramount have never heard of the Justice Department’s Uniform Crime Reports or the Wichita or Shreveport murders or John Wayne Gacy or Jeffrey Dahmer or the Jesse Dirkhising murder. We’re supposed to think that they actually believe that Whites are more often the perpetrators of interracial assaults, and that homosexuals are gentle, inoffensive people.
Well, I’m sure that they don’t actually believe those things. I’m sure that they consciously and deliberately manipulate the news with malice aforethought. They deliberately make the news fit the false picture of life they portray with their entertainment media. And they do it maliciously; they do it because they want to weaken and destroy us.
Despite the listeners who don’t want to accept that conclusion, I believe that most of you agree with me on that point: namely, that the media bosses do know exactly what they’re doing, that they do distort the news deliberately and deliberately cover up the news they don’t want us to know about. That’s really the only conclusion that a reasonable observer can draw from the evidence.
Many more listeners balk at accepting another conclusion of mine, and that is that it’s not just a few evil Jewish media bosses deliberately distorting our news and producing films designed to encourage miscegenation and to persuade us that homosexuality is normal, and a few Jewish pressure groups such as the Anti-Defamation League and the Southern Poverty Law Center pushing for “hate crime” and “speech crime” legislation, but that it is the Jews as a whole who are doing these things. The Jewish media bosses and the Jewish pressure groups are doing their malicious and destructive work as a part of and on behalf of the Jewish community as a whole. Many listeners still don’t want to believe that because they still think in a sort of fuzzy, feminine, subjective way. They focus on the individual exceptions, on the Jews here and there who more or less behave themselves, and these individual exceptions keep them from seeing the big picture.
Let me try to bring the big picture into a little better focus for these folks. I’m sure you’ve all heard about the controversy in the media over the refusal of the Boy Scouts to permit homosexuals to be Scout leaders. The media have portrayed this ban on homosexual Scout leaders as a case of intolerance, bigotry, hate, and so on. They have pooh-poohed the idea that homosexual Scout leaders might use their position to take advantage of the young boys in their care. Well, Boy Scout officials know better and have held to their refusal to let homosexuals be Scout leaders. So now the Clinton coalition types are increasing the pressure. I’ll read you the beginning of a news report that was in the New York Times just ten days ago. The report, by Laurie Goodstein, is headed “Jewish Group Recommends Cutting Ties to Boy Scouts: A Protest Against the Ban on Gay Members.”
I’m reading now from the January 10 issue of the New York Times, page A12:
Reform Jewish leaders are recommending that parents withdraw their children from membership in the Boy Scouts of America and that synagogues end their sponsorship of Scout troops, the strongest reaction yet by a religious group to the Supreme Court decision allowing the Boy Scouts to exclude gay members.
The report goes on to point out that Reform Judaism represents about 40 per cent of America’s six million Jews. This declaration by the leaders of Reform Judaism is really just a media event, however, because practically no Jews are actually involved in the Boy Scouts, either as sponsors or as members. But it is a pretty good indicator that the Jewish community as a whole stands behind the Jewish media bosses, at least on this issue of trying to persuade us that homosexuals are “normal” and pose no danger to our society.
In future broadcasts we’ll look at where the Jewish community as a whole stands on other policies promoted by the Jewish media bosses.
* * *
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)