Encouragement of Anti-White Hatred

The Resistance

There is a political ‘project’ to create a New British State, in which the ancestral rights of the native ethnic people are to be denied – their fundamental right to determine the future of their own homeland nations is to be refused. Dissent is being criminalised.

The creation of a new British State (the ‘Project’) is: unconstitional; contrary to law; contrary to natural justice; unethical; unnecessary; impracticable; and is demonstrably failing. It is also treason.

The political State is, to all intents and purpose, making seditious war (in stealth) against the native inhabitants of these islands.

Ethelfleda (scourge of the Vikings), with her young nephew Athelstan (destined to be the first King of all England) at her side.

An overview of the history behind our present dire circumstances, that justify a call to resistance, is provided in the research document ‘Treason, Genocide and Resistance‘.

In the city set upon slime and loam

They cry in their parliament ‘Who goes home?’

And there is no answer in arch or dome,

For none in the city of graves goes home.

Yet these shall perish and understand,

For God has pity on this great land.

Men that are men again; who goes home?

Tocsin and trumpeter! Who goes home?

For there’s blood on the field and blood on the foam,

And blood on the body when man goes home.

And a voice valedictory – Who is for Victory?

Who is for Liberty? Who goes home?

[From: 'The Flying Inn', by G K Chesterton, 1914]

Multiculturalism and diversifism are ideological deceits – lies concocted to conceal an intention for denationalisation, colonization, and for population replacement and genocide against the native English people. This is a fundamental betrayal of the indigenous community ­ and, especially, a betrayal of the “dead and the unborn“. For an English person to knowingly engage with these deceits is to be complicit in the greatest of treasons.

This ‘project’ is an illegal act of a self-serving political State, corrupted by power and of cowardly disposition, acting against the native people. It is an affront to the rights and entitlements of the peoples to an ancestral homeland and of having the freedom of self-determination. The recognition of indigenous identity, and the guardianship of the native people’s lawful and natural right to a homeland and chosen way of life, is fundamentally a matter only for those people. It is entirely non-negotiable.

Therefore not only do we have a right to resist this treasonous ‘project’ – we have a moral duty to do so.

The Charge of Treason

A charge of Treason is made against the many and various members of the political State. The charge is that they have engaged in treasonous acts against the peoples of these island – the native inhabitants.

These unlawful acts have included (but are not limited to) acts of oppression and malevolent destruction of nationhood and ethnicity – by the imposition and aggressive enforcement of the cult of diversifism directed against those of the first people of these islands.

The political State has introduced perverse Statutes (in Law) with the clear intention of divesting the people of these islands of what is their’s (and that of their descendents) by reason of birthright. The political State is attempting to use the apparatus of the State to end the State’s constitional obligations to protect and promote the inalienable rights of the people in their own lands.

The rights of ‘the people’, the English, to native title to their land (these islands) is established in Common Law and custom. It cannot be denied in Law – and all are subject to this Law. The State and the Crown are required and constrained by constitution and custom to act within the Law. The State must be the servant of the native people of these islands. The State must be subject to our Law and act in our interest – otherwise it has neither legitimacy nor authority.

The Crown, as Head of State, swears an Oath to the people of these islands (the ‘subjects’ of the Crown) to uphold their birthrights as the native people – of, in particular, their inheritance of Land, Law, Freedom and Church.

Those that aid or support diversifism are complicit in misprision in treason. Those who have sworn an Oath to serve the Crown, and have aided or supported diversifism have broken their Oath and are complicit in Treason.

Those that commit Treason, commit Treason against the people of these islands – against those of the first people, the native inhabitants.

Undoing The Treason

Not only must The Great Treason be opposed and stopped – it must also be undone.

An English resistance has the authority of native entitlement; of precedent set in ancient Constitutional agreement; of Natural Law; and of a powerful moral argument. The Resistance is a lawful act against an unlawful and treasonous State.

The objective of the Resistance is therefore to end the Great Treason; to bring the treasoners to account; and to undo the harm done to us and our land by these evil people.

The Great Charter of 1215 gave us the principles upon which the Resistance may be pursued. Article 61 of the Charter provides for the action of lawful rebellion. The Great Charter refers to “all the people of the land” – communa tocius terre – and does so in terms of Article 1 of the document with specific reference to “all freemen of the realm“. However this needs to be seen in the historical context. It is unambiguously a Charter for the freedom of English people. Clearly it does not provide a warrant for anyone resident in England to engage in rebellion (reference Articles 50 and 51). It does not extend to the treasoners (obviously) or to the treasoners’ collaborationists and auxiliaries.

Genocide is ‘the deliberate extermination of a people or nation’. This involves the destruction of their culture, the theft of their land, and ultimately the physical elimination of those people.

The English, as indigenous inhabitants of the British Isles, are experiencing the preliminary stages of organised genocide. This process involves: the ‘deconstruction’ of their culture and social institutions; the false stereotyping of the English people as “mad, bad and violent “; and State incitement of racially motivated violence against ‘white’ people (including murder). There is clear evidence of State encouragement of: anti-white hatred; of population displacement, replacement and colonisation (ethnic cleansing); of deliberate cultural destruction; and of the use of Statute law to suppress dissent within the indigenous population.

Genocide by a Treasonous State

The indictment summarises the manner in which the treasonous State (the UK Government) is pursuing a policy to ensure “there are no indigenous people in Britain”.

According to the United Nations Convention on Genocide [1] genocide is a crime under international law, where the prescribed punishment is not subject to the limitations of time and place. The UN Convention defines genocide as any of a number of acts commited with the intent to: destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group; deliberatedly inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group, and forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Already the UK Government is actively pursuing the first two of the above three methods of genocide against the English people.

Cultural ‘Deconstruction’

Sir Karl Popper (one of the greatest social and political philosophers of the 20th Century) was of the firm belief that it was the spiritual breakdown occasioned by Marxism that led to the growth of Fascism in Europe in the 1930s [2]. The treasoners and appeasers are now collaborating with those hostile to our spiritual (Christian) tradition – to assist in genocide.

The head of the British army, General Sir Richard Dannatt has observed: “We can’t wish the Islamist challenge to our society away and I believe that the army both in Iraq and Afghanistan and probably wherever we go next, is fighting the foreign dimension of the challenge to our accepted way of life.”  He went on to say “We need to face up to the Islamist threat, to those who act in the name of Islam and in a perverted way try to impose Islam by force on societies that do not wish it.” Most relevant to the historical ’dimension’, he continues: “When I see the Islamist threat in this country I hope it doesn’t make undue progress because there is a moral and spiritual vacuum in this country. Our society has always been embedded in Christian values; once you have pulled the anchor up there is a danger that our society moves with the prevailing wind. There is an element of the moral compass spinning. I think it is up to society to realise that is the situation we are in” [3].

“Peace Through Diversity“

[Metropolitan Police Service and Greater London Authority, 2nd Annual Peace Talks, 2006]

Rear Admiral Chris Parry warns: “Globalisation makes assimilation seem redundant … [the process] acts as a sort of reverse colonisation, where groups of people are self-contained, going back and forth between their countries, exploiting sophisticated networks and using instant communications on phones and the internet” [4]. In his speech, Rear Admiral Perry identified the most dangerous flashpoints by overlaying maps showing the regions most threatened by factors such as agricultural decline, booming youth populations, water shortages, rising sea levels and radical Islam. In particular he stressed that these mass population movements could lead to the “Rome scenario” – a reference to the collapse of the western Roman empire in the 4th and 5th centuries under repeated blows from groups such as Ostrogoths, Visigoths, Suevi, Huns and Vandals surging over its borders. Rear Admiral Parry went on to say he was not labelling any particular group as threatening stability, but observed that there were already more than 70 diaspora groups in Britain.

Many of the ‘leading figures’ of political science and cultural theory, within academia, actively involved in promoting the political ideologies of multiculturalism, identity politics, diversifism and cultural Marxism, target the native ethnic British people (and the English people in particular) for unjustified opprobrium [5].

False Stereotyping - ‘Mad, Bad and Violent Britons’

‘Research’ work, including studies sponsored by Goverment departments and agencies, use bogus methods (including Marxist-Freudian ‘psycho-sociological’ pseudo-science) to demonise the indigenous (white) population of Britain. These studies, highly regarded within academia, portray the British people as “melancholic“, “violent“, “self-loathing” and “manic” [6] – with a prediliction for indulging in a “morbidity of heritage” [7]. As one recent ESRC-funded piece of ‘psychoanalytical social’ research opines: “there is something quintessentially mad about British identity and it is based on thousands of years of hatred of the Other” [8].

Much of this so-called ‘research’ is little more than sophistry – the clever construction of narrative. There is much quoting from like-minded academics, but little original work on verifiable source material. And, not surprisingly, we find much of the arguments expressed only within a Marxist world view (of European colonialism, in particular). There is a noticeable avoidance in dealing with facts. This is perhaps not surprising given that the facts show the English to be extraordinary tolerant (of ‘others’) and law-abiding.

The truth is that an English person, or Briton, is much less likely to commit a racist crime, and more likely than expected to be a victim, than a person from the minority ethnic community (as shown by Home Office, Police, CPS, and British Crime Survey data). Most interestingly official data (Home Office, Ministry of Justice, BCS) shows the native community to be the most law-abiding of all the (identified) ethnic groups (within England and Wales) – in respect of the serious criminal offences of: murder (including interracial and racist murder); violence against the person; sexual offences; robbery; drugs offences; and burglary. This research concludes: “It appears, in particular, that the white community is being unfairly demonised in this respect, as the evidence shows that it is this community that exhibits the least propensity for serious criminal behaviour, the greatest (by far) tolerance towards other communities, and the least inclination (again, by far) for racist or interracial homicide” [9].

In terms of racist violence the ‘white’ (native) community suffers almost double the numbers experienced experienced by the ethnic minority communities of 75,300 against 47,100 for 2004 to 2005). There are more white victims of racially motivated homicide, and more white victims of interracial homicide, than there are ethnic minority victims – despite the ethnic minority community being less than 10 per cent of the total population (196 victims vs. 109 victims between 2003 and 2006) [10] [11].

The fact is that the likelihood of a member of the minority (BME) community making a violent racist attack against a member of the ‘white’ (English) community is approximately 30-fold greater than an English person commiting a violent racist attack against a member of the BME community. The evidence is that this extraordinary situation is the result of decades of anti-white (anti-English) hatred being whipped-up within the BME communities by the treasonous political groups.

The culture of anti-white bigotry – a consequence of ‘false stereotyping’ – is endemic within State agencies such as the Home Office and Police Service. Even the Crown Prosecution Service observes: “The police were more likely to identify the cause as a racist incident where the defendent was white than when the defendent was African Carribbean or Asian” [15]. Both the Home Office and the Crown Prosecution Service portray ‘hate crime’ as “typically committed by white people” – even though (as the actual crime data shows) such crime is far less typical within the white community, when compared to such crime within the ethnic minority communities.

The Macpherson Report (February 1999) into police investigation of the murder of Stephen Lawrence (in April 1993) is widely regarded (especially by those who have not read it) as having ‘proved’ the existence of racism in the police service and in (white) British society generally. Unfortunately the Macpherson Inquiry was little more than a political circus. It is worth quoting at some length the conclusions reached by academics Norman Dennis, George Erdos and Ahmed Al-Shahi: “Although the Inquiry had the appearance of a judicial procedure, it came close to the Stalinist show trials of the 1930s. Rules of procedure and evidence were relaxed, and indeed no evidence of racism in the police who dealt with the case was ever produced. Witnesses were harrased by members of the Inquiry team and by the crowd in the public gallery. They were urged to confess their guilt and repent … They were even asked to testify to the existence of the racist thoughts of other people” [12].

It is clearly a part of the institutional thinking within the Crown Prosecution Service that racist crime is commited (only) by white people [13][14][15]. A detailed analysis of ant-white racialist ideology that appears to underpin much of the CPS institutional thinking is available here [16].

We also find this form of bigoted thinking extending down to the regional and local centres of law enforcement. In a press release issued just 4 days after the London 2005 suicide bombings a joint meeting between representatives of a local (city) constabulary and no less than 7 different ethnic minority support agencies clearly identifies those that “behave in racist and hateful ways” as white people – and only white people [17].

This extreme bigotry directed towards white people is encouraged by publications from State sponsored/endorsed organisations (such as the National Civil Rights Movement) that portray white people as the only perpetrators of racial violence (assaults and homocide) [18]. Unfortunately this misrepresentation also extends into academia. For example, a book used widely as ‘teaching material’ and recommended as ‘required reading’ within our universities attempts to portray all racist crime as being perpetrated by white people. The authors go on to falsely declare that: “All studies show that the majority of victims of racist violence are Asian” [19]. That is untrue. Notably the authors used the British Crime Survey (1991) for their analysis of racist violence; however they would have known that it was only after 1994 that the BCS data included white victims of racist crime.

The overwhelming evidence is that the majority of victims of racist violence are white. The overwhelming evidence is also that the problem is getting rapidly worse (for the white population) – especially in terms of racist and interracial killing

Acquiescence to Anti-White Violence

The State seeks to justify and excuse the extraordinarly disproportionate number of violent offences against white people (by members of the BME community) on the ridiculous basis that white people form the majority population [20]. Clearly this is a crude attempt at deceit since these State agencies must know the number of victims should be proportionate to the size of the offenders’ community – not the other way around.

The suggestion is clear – that the white community should expect to have to suffer hugely disproportionate numbers of racist attacks against members of their community, for the reason that they are in the majority.

The path down which this sort of racialist thinking takes us is chilling in the extreme.

Encouragement of Anti-White Hatred

The political ideology behind this surreptitious ethnocide has a need for a heretical ‘other’ to legitimise the belief. Dr. Kaufman of the University of London observes: “Multiculturalism as a Left-wing movement is problematic without a dominant ethnic group against which to define itself” [21]. And, of course, that ‘dominant group’ is the white, indigenous population.

The highly offensive remark by BBC Chairman Greg Dyke towards the members of a boardroom meeting – of their being “hideously white” – is well known. Unfortunately this is a quite typical attitude of members of the political and cultural elite. Professor Ted Cantle, a senior race relations adviser for the Labour Government (and who wrote the definitive report on the 2001 riots in Bradford and Oldham) descibed in 2006 parts of the country as being “unhealthily all white“, a phrase that appeared to be an attempt to unfairly place the blame for ethnic tensions on the white community [22].

State Sponsered Ethnic Cleansing

A major policy of the New Labour Government is to encourage an ‘immigration’ policy that is resulting in the massive dislocation, relocation and replacement of the indigenous native population. In fact ‘immigration’ is an incorrect description for a process that is, to all intents and purpose, that of colonization. The Government’s anathema towards a majority indigenous population – that may one day decide to demand its right for self-determination – has resulted in a policy of piece-meal ethnic cleansing. Many parts of England now have almost no native English remaining.

Sometimes the mask of the political elite slips, and we see the real agenda. And increasingly the truth is beginning to emerge. In October 2009 the former Govrnment adviser Andrew Neather revealed that the Labour Party’s mass immigration policy was largely driven by political ideology. In February 2010 a request under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act produced a Government document [23] that clearly showed that the principle purpose for mass immigration was political – to force massive social change.

Mr. Wilfred Emmanuel-Jones is widely celebrated by the media and political establishment as the ‘Black Farmer’. He has recently been selected as Conservative Parliamentary candidate for Cheltenham, in Wiltshire. In a recent magazine article he is quoted as saying: “Our parents established beachheads in the cities; it is now up to our generation to move out of those beachheads and claim the rest of Britain as our own.” [24]. Clearly he believes that allusions to invasion and occupation to be a most appropriate metaphor for mass immigration. It is a policy of colonization – aggressively pursued.

And, of course this is a very insightful and accurate description of the nature of mass immigration. It is an invasion in which the indigenous people are being dispossed of their homeland – a form of ‘ethnic cleansing’ and denationalisation made possible by an unprecedented act of betrayal by those charged with the responsibility of defending the rights and interests of a sovereign people.

Suppression of Dissent

The weapon of choice for the political elite, against any members of the indigenous population who show dissent against loss of their homeland, is the charge of ‘racism’. This usually carries with it the implied, or actual, threat of arrest, interrogation, prosecution – and a long spell in prison.

It may seem strange, on reflection, that this form of particular insult, or motivation for a criminal act, should be given such extraordinary weight by the State. For example, for a person to be abused or assaulted because they are disabled is just as distressing (if not more so) than to suffer the same fate because of one’s racial appearance. They cannot help their disability. And yet there is no State sponsered crusade against ‘disability-ism’.

Of course it is not the insult that counts, it is the taboo subject. Somebody can be incredibly rude and hurtful to people without the police intervening, but the extreme left have negotiated a special taboo when it comes to physical characteristics such as race. This is because it suits their social programme of destroying homogenous nations. The powers that be do not have a social engineering interest in disabled people. The pursuance of ‘racism’ as the ultimate taboo is the means to a political end. This is about changing the face of a nation.

Those that express an opposition to this State-sponsored genocide are accused of ‘racism’, and are threatened with (or experience) unlawful assault and to false-imprisonment by the political police.

Democrat Fascism – population replacement

Democrat Fascism – population replacement

Watch Video

Are you ready for the Obama Youth?

by Roberto-Pro-America-Anti Obama

Michelle’s

Boot Camps For Radicals

By INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Thursday, September 04, 2008 4:20 PM PT

Election ’08: Democrats’ reintroduction of militant Michelle Obama in Denver was supposed to show her softer side. But it only highlighted a radical part of her resume: Public Allies.

IBD Series: The Audacity Of Socialism

Barack Obama was a founding member of the board of Public Allies in 1992, resigning before his wife became executive director of the Chicago chapter of Public Allies in 1993. Obama plans to use the nonprofit group, which he features on his campaign Web site, as the model for a national service corps. He calls his Orwellian program, “Universal Voluntary Public Service.”

Big Brother had nothing on the Obamas. They plan to herd American youth into government-funded reeducation camps where they’ll be brainwashed into thinking America is a racist, oppressive place in need of “social change.”

The pitch Public Allies makes on its Web site doesn’t seem all that radical. It promises to place young adults (18-30) in paid one-year “community leadership” positions with nonprofit or government agencies. They’ll also be required to attend weekly training workshops and three retreats.

In exchange, they’ll get a monthly stipend of up to $1,800, plus paid health and child care. They also get a post-service education award of $4,725 that can be used to pay off past student loans or fund future education.

But its real mission is to radicalize American youth and use them to bring about “social change” through threats, pressure, tension and confrontation — the tactics used by the father of community organizing, Saul “The Red” Alinsky.

“Our alumni are more than twice as likely as 18-34 year olds to . . . engage in protest activities,” Public Allies boasts in a document found with its tax filings. It has already deployed an army of 2,200 community organizers like Obama to agitate for “justice” and “equality” in his hometown of Chicago and other U.S. cities, including Cincinnati, Los Angeles, Milwaukee, New York, Phoenix, Pittsburgh and Washington. “I get to practice being an activist,” and get paid for it, gushed Cincinnati recruit Amy Vincent.

Public Allies promotes “diversity and inclusion,” a program paper says. More than 70% of its recruits are “people of color.” When they’re not protesting, they’re staffing AIDS clinics, handing out condoms, bailing criminals out of jail and helping illegal aliens and the homeless obtain food stamps and other welfare.

Public Allies brags that more than 80% of graduates have continued working in nonprofit or government jobs. It’s training the “next generation of nonprofit leaders” — future “social entrepreneurs.”

The Obamas discourage work in the private sector. “Don’t go into corporate America,” Michelle has exhorted youth. “Work for the community. Be social workers.” Shun the “money culture,” Barack added. “Individual salvation depends on collective salvation.”

“If you commit to serving your community,” he pledged in his Denver acceptance speech, “we will make sure you can afford a college education.” So, go through government to go to college, and then go back into government.

Many of today’s youth find the pitch attractive. “I may spend the rest of my life trying to create social movement,” said Brian Coovert of the Cincinnati chapter. “There is always going to be work to do. Until we have a perfect country, I’ll have a job.”

Not all the recruits appreciate the PC indoctrination. “It was too touchy-feely,” said Nelly Nieblas, 29, of the 2005 Los Angeles class. “It’s a lot of talk about race, a lot of talk about sexism, a lot of talk about homophobia, talk about -isms and phobias.”

One of those -isms is “heterosexism,” which a Public Allies training seminar in Chicago describes as a negative byproduct of “capitalism, white supremacy, patriarchy and male-dominated privilege.”

The government now funds about half of Public Allies’ expenses through Clinton’s AmeriCorps. Obama wants to fully fund it and expand it into a national program that some see costing $500 billion. “We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded” as the military, he said.

The gall of it: The Obamas want to create a boot camp for radicals who hate the military — and stick American taxpayers with the bill.

Obama’s Civilian Army Begins

Obama’s Civilian National Security Force. Be ready to greet them as they greet you.

In a bill set to go to the House on Tuesday, H.R. 1388 is called the GIVE (Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and

Education) Act. The blogosphere and some on the right have been wondering when Obama said he was going to enforce a “National Civilian Security Force” what that means and if it was going to happen. Well, here it is in black and white.

‘SEC. 152. ESTABLISHMENT OF NATIONAL CIVILIAN COMMUNITY CORPS PROGRAM.’;

(2) in subsection (a), by striking ‘Civilian Community Corps Demonstration Program’ and inserting ‘National Civilian Community Corps Program’;

(3) in subsection (b)–

(A) by striking ‘Civilian Community Corps Demonstration Program’ and inserting ‘National Civilian Community Corps Program’; and

(B) by striking ‘a Civilian Community Corps’ and inserting ‘a National Civilian Community Corps’;

(4) in the heading of subsection (c), by striking ‘Programs’ and inserting ‘Components’; and

(5) in subsection (c), by striking ‘program components are residential programs’ and all that follows and inserting ‘programs referred to in subsection (b) may include a residential component.’.

SEC. 1503. ELIGIBLE PARTICIPANTS.

Section 153 (42 U.S.C. 12613) is amended–

(1) in subsection (a)–

(A) by striking ‘Civilian Community Corps Demonstration Program’ and inserting ‘National Civilian Community Corps Program’; and

(B) by striking ‘on Civilian Community Corps’ and inserting ‘on National Civilian Community Corps’;

(2) in subsection (b), by striking ‘if the person’ and all that follows through the period at the end and inserting ‘if the person will be at least 18 years of age on or before December 31 in the calendar year in which the individual enrolls in the program.’;

(3) in subsection (c)–

(A) by striking ‘Backrounds’ and inserting ‘Backgrounds’; and

(B) by adding at the end the following: ‘The Director shall take appropriate steps, including through outreach and recruitment activities carried out by the chief executive officer, to increase the percentage of participants in the program who are disadvantaged youth toward 50 percent of all participants by year 2011. The Director shall report to Congress biennially on such efforts, any challenges faced, and the annual participation rates of disadvantaged youth in the program.’; and

(4) by striking subsection (e).

There is nothing – NOTHING – in the Constitution of the United States that warrants, mandates or permits this. Chances are this will be voted down, but it is still scary to think that the Obamafurhen has this idea of a modern day Sturmabteilung in his head.

Democrat Fascism: What Obama Really is Building

From http://pajamasmedia.com/michaelledeen/2009/02/12/we-are-all-illiterates-now/

“There’s a element of truth to the basic theme (although not to the headline):  the [U.S.] state is getting more and more deeply involved in business, even taking controlling interests in some private companies.  And the state is even trying to “make policy” for private companies they do not control, but merely “help” with “infusions of capital,” as in the recent call for salary caps for certain CEOs.  So state power is growing at the expense of corporations.

But that’s not socialism.  Socialism rests on a firm theoretical bedrock:  the abolition of private property.  I haven’t heard anyone this side of Barney Frank calling for any such thing.  What is happening now–and Newsweek is honest enough to say so down in the body of the article–is an expansion of the state’s role, an increase in public/private joint ventures and partnerships, and much more state regulation of business.  Yes, it’s very “European,” and some of the Europeans even call it “social democracy,” but it isn’t.

It’s fascism.  Nobody calls it by its proper name, for two basic reasons:  first, because “fascism” has long since lost its actual, historical, content;  it’s been a pure epithet for many decades.  Lots of the people writing about current events like what Obama et. al. are doing, and wouldn’t want to stigmatize it with that “f” epithet.

[D]uring the great economic crisis of the 1930s, fascism was widely regarded as a possible solution, indeed as the only acceptable solution to a spasm that had shaken the entire First World, and beyond.  It was hailed as a “third way” between two failed systems (communism and capitalism), retaining the best of each.  Private property was preserved, as the role of the state was expanded.  This was necessary because the Great Depression was defined as a crisis “of the system,” not just a glitch “in the system.”  And so Mussolini created the “Corporate State,” in which, in theory at least, the big national enterprises were entrusted to state ownership (or substantial state ownership) and of course state management.  Some of the big “Corporations” lasted a very long time;  indeed some have only very recently been privatized, and the state still holds important chunks–so-called “golden shares”–in some of them.

When Roosevelt was elected in 1932, in fact, Mussolini personally reviewed his book, Looking Forward, and the Duce’s bottom line was, “this guy is one of us.”

As an economic fix, the Corporate State was not a great success, either in America or in Italy.  Roosevelt’s New Deal didn’t cure America’s economic ills any more than Mussolini’s Third Way did.  In both countries, however, its most durable consequence was the expansion of the ability of the state to give orders to more and more citizens, in more and more corners of their lives.  In the first half of the twentieth century, that was hardly unique to the “fascist” states;  tyranny was the order of the day in the “socialist” or “communist” countries as well (not for nothing were so many learned books written about “totalitarianism,” which embraced both “systems”).  Paul Johnson writes of a “new species” of “despotic utopias,” and Richard Pipes went so far as to call both Soviet Bolshevism and Italian fascism “heresies of socialism.””

And from http://pajamasmedia.com/michaelledeen/

“Our liberties are indeed threatened, but by a tyranny of a very different sort.

Most of us imagine the transformation of a free society to a tyrannical state in Hollywood terms, as  a melodramatic act of violence like a military coup or an armed insurrection.  Tocqueville knows better.  He foresees a slow death of freedom.  The power of the centralized government will gradually expand, meddling in every area of our lives until, like a lobster in a slowly heated pot, we are cooked without ever realizing what has happened.  The ultimate horror of Tocqueville’s vision is that we will welcome it, and even convince ourselves that we control it.

There is no single dramatic event in Tocqueville’s scenario, no storming of the Bastille, no assault on the Winter Palace, no March on Rome, no Kristallnacht.  We are to be immobilized, Gulliver-like, by myriad rules and regulations, annoying little restrictions that become more and more binding until they eventually paralyze us.

Subjection in minor affairs breaks out every day and is felt by the whole community indiscriminately.  It does not drive men to resistance, but it crosses them at every turn, till they are led to surrender the exercise of their own will.  Thus their spirit is gradually broken and their character enervated…

The tyranny he foresees for us does not have much in common with the vicious dictatorships of the last century, or with contemporary North Korea, Iran, or Saudi Arabia.  He apologizes for lacking the proper words with which to define it.  He hesitates to call it either tyranny or despotism, because it does not rule by terror or oppression.  There are no secret police, no concentration camps, and no torture.  “The nature of despotic power in democratic ages is not to be fierce or cruel, but minute and meddling.”  The vision and even the language anticipate Orwell’s 1984, or Huxley’s Brave New World. Tocqueville describes the new tyranny as “an immense and tutelary power,” and its task is to watch over us all, and regulate every aspect of our lives.

It covers the surface of society with a network of small complicated rules, minute and uniform, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate, to rise above the crowd.

We will not be bludgeoned into submission; we will be seduced.  He foresees the collapse of American democracy as the end result of two parallel developments that ultimately render us meekly subservient to an enlarged bureaucratic power: the corruption of our character, and the emergence of a vast welfare state that manages all the details of our lives.  His words are precisely the ones that best describe out current crisis:

That power is absolute, minute, regular, provident and mild.  It would be like the authority of a parent if, like that authority, its object was to prepare men for manhood; but it seeks, on the contrary, to keep them in perpetual childhood: it is well content that the people should rejoice, provided they think of nothing but rejoicing.  For their happiness such a government willingly labors, but it chooses to be the sole agent and the only arbiter of that happiness; it provides for their security, foresees and supplies their necessities, facilitates their pleasures, manages their principal concerns, directs their industry, regulates the descent of property, and subdivides their inheritances: what remains, but to spare them all the care of thinking and all the trouble of living?

The metaphor of a parent maintaining perpetual control over his child is the language of contemporary American politics.  All manner of new governmental powers are justified in the name of “the children,” from enhanced regulation of communications to special punishments for “hate speech;” from the empowerment of social service institutions to crack down on parents who try to discipline their children, to the mammoth expansion of sexual quotas from university athletic programs to private businesses.   Tocqueville particularly abhors such new governmental powers because they are Federal, emanating from Washington, not from local governments.”"

Look for the power creep from the state capitols to Washington.  With state governments going hat in hand to D.C. to get some of the “stimulus” gravy, it already has begun.  Our slide towards fascism is accelerating.

Governments vs The People: Replacing The Population By Another One

From the desk of Paul Belien

There are conspiracy theories that hold that Europe’s political establishment is deliberately attempting to replace the continent’s population by an entirely different one. Though conspiracy theories are rarely true, Europe’s political establishment is making it extremely hard for the sceptics to refute them. Take, for instance, the recent Belgian amnesty for illegal aliens.

Last July, the government of Belgium announced a collective amnesty for illegal aliens. It is Belgium’s second general amnesty in barely a decade. When the previous one was approved by the Belgian Parliament in 1999, the government promised Parliament that it would be the final one and that henceforward people who entered the country illegally would be sent back. Nevertheless, there has been no crack-down on illegal immigration in the past ten years and hardly any illegal aliens have been sent back.

Last July, immediately after the parliamentary recess had begun, the government of Prime Minister Herman Van Rompuy decided there should be a new amnesty to “regularize” illegal aliens who can demonstrate that they have “integrated sufficiently” into the country, e.g. by having children at school. The government took the decision unilaterally, without approval from the Parliament. This is against the law; the Belgian government cannot unilaterally grant a collective amnesty. Only Parliament has the power to do so.

The parties of Van Rompuy’s government coalition shrugged their shoulders. They refused to react against the usurpation of parliamentary powers because they did not want to open a public debate about immigration. Polls indicate that the overwhelming majority of the Belgians opposes the new round of regularizations. The Vlaams Belang, Belgium’s main opposition party, however, went to court. It requested the Council of State, Belgium’s highest administrative court, to annul the amnesty – which it did on December 11.

The government’s reaction to the annulment is astonishing. It announced that the court ruling would make no difference and that the illegal aliens need not worry. Mr. Melchior Wathelet, the Secretary of State for Immigration, said that, instead of collectively regularizing the 50,000 illegal aliens with one single signature, he will sign 50,000 individual regulations, granting each of them an individual amnesty.

Consequently, the 2009 amnesty will be Herman Van Rompuy’s farewell gift to the Belgians. Mr. Van Rompuy has meanwhile been appointed President of Europe, with an income higher than Mr. Obama’s, while the Belgians are left to foot the bill for thousands of new welfare recipients. Last September, a civil servant of Belgium’s Federal Agency for Aliens, warned: “This amnesty is madness. Our agency expects that one in every three is going to apply for welfare benefits.” Indeed, more than half of the aliens who were regularized in 1999-2000 received benefits as a result. The head of the Antwerp welfare department says that many of them are still on welfare ten years later; she expects the same to happen with those who are being regularized today.

Nevertheless, despite the court’s objections and despite the opposition of the people, the illegal aliens will be regularized. In three years’ time, the regularized aliens will be allowed to apply for Belgian citizenship. Meanwhile, figures indicate that half of the illegal aliens who have applied for regularization in the past months are Moroccans, while Moroccans already make up the largest group of immigrants in Belgium and many of them engage in criminal activities and refuse to integrate into Belgian society.

Conspiracy theorists can easily explain the conduct of the Belgian government. They will say it is an attempt to replace the Belgians by another population. For those who do not believe in this theory, it is harder to explain why Mr. Van Rompuy declared an amnesty which he knew to be unpopular, which will drain the Belgian welfare budget and which is, moreover, unlawful because the government usurped the prerogatives of Parliament. For those who do not believe in the population replacement theory, it is hard to explain why the Belgian government, despite a court ruling, stubbornly sticks to its decision.

For those who do not believe in a conspiracy theory, it is equally hard to explain why on 15 December, George Papandreou, the Prime Minister of Greece, announced that one of the measures to reduce his country’s crushing budget deficit will be to “bring illegal immigrants into the social security system.” It is true that some illegal aliens work in the country illegally and do not pay taxes and contributions, but it is equally true that many others do not and will, if “brought into the system,” be net consumers rather than net contributors.

Those who do not believe that Europe’s ruling establishment has engaged in a conspiracy against it own people will also have a hard time explaining the recent decision of the appeals chamber of the Bar Association’s disciplinary council in the Netherlands. On 12 December, it acquitted a Muslim lawyer of contempt of court. The Muslim lawyer, who wears a Muslim head covering during court sessions, refuses to rise when the judge enters the courtroom. He says that his religion maintains that everyone is equal and that, hence, he cannot rise for the judge. Though everyone is equal, however, the same lawyer refuses to shake hands with women. Nevertheless, the Muslim lawyer is getting away with behavior which the ruling establishment would not tolerate from indigenous Dutch lawyers, and, more importantly, which the majority of the Dutch people does not wish to tolerate from newcomers.

Europe’s ruling establishment is currently engaged in policies which go so radically against what ordinary Europeans want that a dangerous rift is growing between the people and those who govern them. If this situation is not remedied, Europe’s governments risk losing their legitimacy in the eyes of the people. One does not need to be a conspiracy theorist to realize that this can only contribute to the potential for a revolutionary explosion of violence and anger somewhere down the road.

The Age of White Masochism

The noted blogger Fjordman is filing this report via Gates of Vienna.
For a complete Fjordman blogography, see The Fjordman Files. There is also a multi-index listing here.

Imagine if you planned a country’s economic future using calculations exclusively based on even numbers. For ideological reasons you excluded odd numbers because you declared that they represent bigotry and have divisive nature since they cannot be divided equally in half. Absolutely all calculations for the future would then end up being wrong. This sounds insane and improbable, but what we’re doing now in the Western world is exactly this naïve. In the name of Multiculturalism we completely ignore all ethnic, religious, cultural and, yes, racial differences, because we have decided that these things don’t matter. But in real life, ethnicity, culture, religion and race do matter. Doesn’t that mean that all our projections for the future by necessity will end up being wrong, since they fail to take important factors into account?

Policy needs to be rooted in a realistic assessment of human nature, not in wishful thinking. Good intentions are far from sufficient to ensure good results. History is full of well-intended policies gone horrible wrong. We know from past experience that basing an ideological world view on a fundamentally flawed understanding of human nature is bound to end in disaster. Society will become more and more totalitarian in order to suppress all the information that doesn’t conform to the official ideology. Isn’t this what is happening in the West now?

I used to believe until quite recently that skin color was irrelevant. I was brought up that way. I still don’t think ethnicity or race does or should mean everything. In fact, I would say it is patently uncivilized to claim that it means everything. But I can no longer say with a straight face that it means absolutely nothing, and if it means more than nothing, it needs to be taken into account. Whether we like this or not is immaterial.

Numerous studies have demonstrated that people tend to prefer their own ethnic group above others. An international poll in 2007 showed that 90 percent of the inhabitants in Egypt, Indonesia and India believed that each country should guard their innate culture and lifestyle. Immigration concerned people in 44 out of the 47 countries.

Guarding your identity is thus a universal human trait, not a white trait. In fact, it is less pronounced among whites today than among anybody else. Only whites cling onto the idea of universalism, everybody else sticks with their own ethnic group. In white majority Western nations it has become a state-sponsored ideology to “celebrate diversity,” despite the fact that all available evidence indicates that more diversity leads to more conflict.

In May 2007, Osama bin Laden’s deputy terrorist leader Ayman al-Zawahri stated that “Al-Qaida is not merely for the benefit of Muslims. That’s why I want blacks in America, people of color, American Indians, Hispanics, and all the weak and oppressed in North and South America, in Africa and Asia, and all over the world.”

Read that statement closely. This Jihadist organization is calling for a global war against whites. Not Christians or Jews. Whites. I have been told all of my life that skin color is irrelevant, but this balancing act gets a lot more difficult when somebody declares war against you because of your race.

According to the columnist Leo McKinstry, the British government has declared war on white English people:

In the name of cultural diversity, Labour attacks anything that smacks of Englishness. The mainstream public are treated with contempt, their rights ignored, their history trashed. In their own land, the English are being turned into second-class citizens.

Keith Best, head of the Immigration Advisory Service, stated that immigrants are “better citizens” than native Britons. Matthew Elliott of the Taxpayers’ Alliance pressure group was shocked and replied that “Taxpayers shouldn’t be funding an outfit that describes them as being second-rate citizens.” But apparently, now they do.

DNA studies have proved that a significant majority of those who live in the British Isles today are descended directly from the Ice Age hunters, despite the Roman, Anglo-Saxon, Norse and Norman invasions. This accounts for 88% of the Irish, 81% of the Welsh, 70% of the Scots and 68% of the English.

The UK Commission for Racial Equality in 1996 claimed that “everyone who lives in Britain today is either an immigrant or the descendant of an immigrant.” But if everybody is an immigrant, how come people of European stock in the Americas and Australia are still viewed as alien elements by some, even though many of them have lived there for centuries? As Professor David Conway demonstrates in his book A Nation Of Immigrants?, after the invasion led by William the Conqueror in 1066, the total number of Norman settlers in Britain was never more than five per cent of the population. The inflow now is 25 times any previous level and frequently from totally alien cultures, not from neighboring territories and cultural cousins as previously.

I’m sure the English are told that this is a result of colonialism, but there are no Britons left in Pakistan, so why should there be Pakistanis in Britain? The Germans had a colony in Namibia. Why should they accept millions of Turks, who have a thousand years of extremely brutal colonial history of their own, because of this? There are not many Dutch people left in Indonesia, so why should the Dutch be rendered a minority in their major cities by Moroccans and others? And why should European countries such as Portugal, Spain and Greece, which have all suffered from centuries of Islamic colonization, have to accept Muslims into their lands? Switzerland, Sweden, Finland and Norway hardly have any colonial history at all, yet are still subject to mass immigration. The truth is that immigration policies bear little correlation to past colonialist history, population density or size. Ireland, Denmark, Britain, France, Sweden, Italy, Germany and the Netherlands have one, and only one, thing in common: The natives are white, and thereby have no legitimate claim to their own countries.

As Professor Ida Magli writes in an Italian essay entitled A Nation for Sale: “Why can’t we protest? Why aren’t we allowed what every people has always had the right to say, that is that no ruler, whatever the system of government — monarchy, dictatorship, democracy — has either the power or the right to sell off the homeland of their own subjects?”

The columnist Kevin Myers in Ireland thinks that no country has ever accepted, never mind assimilated, the volumes of immigrants now present in his country:
- – - - – - – - -

Why the presumption that an Asian Muslim who lives in Ireland is in any way Irish? My mother lived most of her life in England, but never for a second thought of herself as English. The media should be asking the big question, ‘Why are we still admitting hundreds of thousands of immigrants?’ Instead, we are obsessing with the relatively trivial question of: Are the Irish people, who after all have admitted vast armies of strangers to their national home, racist? This is self-hatred at its most pathetic, and its most self-defeating.

Rune Gerhardsen of the Labor Party in Oslo, the son of Norway’s longest-serving Prime Minister in history, states that “When I went to school we were taught about the Great Migrations. Today’s migrations are just as big. This is part of an international trend we neither can nor want to stop. I think this development is first and foremost exciting and positive.” He likes to say that we have lived for 10,000 years without anybody visiting us. Now we’ve had a massive change within an extremely brief historical period of time.

I will give Gerhardsen credit for frankly admitting that this is by far the greatest demographic change in our nation’s history since the end of the last Ice Age. The problem is, this change, which has already made the country a lot less safe than it was only a generation ago, has been conducted without real debate, solely with propaganda and censorship. And I’m not so sure all of these groups have come merely to “visit” us. Some of them are here to colonize and subdue us, and readily admit this if you care to listen to them.

According to the writer Kent Andersen, the greatest social experiment the population has ever been subject to was never decided democratically. The native majority were never allowed to have a say about whether they wanted to change the country forever. In his view, you don’t get mass immigration for decades unless somebody with power allows this and desires it.

During the Multicultural craze of the 1990s, novelist Torgrim Eggen in an essay entitled “The psychotic racism” warned against “race wars in the streets” as a result of mass immigration. The solution to this was not to limit immigration, but to limit criticism of immigration. According to Eggen, xenophobia and opposition to mass immigration should be viewed as a mental illness, and hence “the solution to this xenophobia is that you should distribute medication to those who are seriously affected. I have discussed this with professor of community medicine, Dr. Per Fugelli, and he liked the idea.” Mr Fugelli suggested putting anti psychotic drugs in the city’s drinking water.

This may sound too extreme to be meant seriously, but Mr. Fugelli has continued to publicly chastise those who are critical of national immigration policies. Eggen warned that arguments about how ordinary people are concerned over mass immigration shouldn’t be accepted because this could lead to Fascism: “One should be on one’s guard against people, especially politicians, who invoke xenophobia on behalf of others. And if certain people start their reasoning with phrases such as ‘ordinary people feel that,’ one shouldn’t argue at all, one should hit [them].”

Repeated violence committed by non-white immigrants against whites is dismissed because they come from “weak groups.” But whites are a weak group. We are a rapidly shrinking global minority, and Nordic-looking Scandinavians are a minority of a minority. Ethnologist Maria Bäckman in her study “Whiteness and gender” followed a group of Swedish girls in the immigrant-dominated suburb of Rinkeby outside Stockholm. Several of the native girls stated that they had dyed their hair to avoid harassment and being called “whore.” We thus already now have a situation where being blond in certain areas of Sweden, not just in Pakistan or Egypt, makes you a target of harassment and aggression.

In my country, the Equality and Anti-Discrimination Ombud from 2006 made Multiculturalism and total non-discrimination into an official state ideology. If a Muslim immigrant claims that a native has somehow discriminated against him, the native non-Muslim has to mount proof of his own innocence. I have later discovered that similar laws have been passed across much of Western Europe, encouraged by the European Union.

Native Europeans are being told that we don’t have a history and a culture, and that we thus “gain” a culture when others move to our countries. This is an insult to thousands of years of European history, to the Celtic, Germanic, Slavic and cultures and the Greco-Roman and Judeo-Christian heritage all Westerners share in. The funny part is, the next second we are told that we do have a culture, but it consists of nothing but a long line of crimes and is thus nothing to preserve, anyway.

My nation doesn’t even have a colonial history. It gained its independence as late as the twentieth century, at which point it was a poor country, yet because I am white, I am to be held personally responsible for every bad act, perceived or real, committed by every person who happens to have roughly similar skin color throughout history. American novelist Susan Sontag even stated that “The white race is the cancer of human history.” I am told that I am evil specifically because of my race, and five minutes later I’m told that race doesn’t matter.

I do not hold Abdullah who sells kebab down on the corner personally responsible for sacking Constantinople, abducting millions of Europeans to slavery, colonizing the Iberian Peninsula, ruining the Balkans or threatening Vienna several times. I criticize Islam because Muslims have never admitted their past and will continue to commit atrocities as long as the institution of Jihad is alive. I do not believe in collective responsibility, and I do not think a person should be held responsible for actions made by his ancestors centuries ago.

On the other hand, if I am to take the blame, personally, for every bad act, perceived or real, committed by any white person in the past, it is only fair that I, personally, should also take credit for their achievements. It was peoples of European stock who created the modern world, not anybody else. If I am to be held personally responsible for colonialism, I want personal credit for being a part of the one civilization that has taken the greatest strides for mankind of any civilization that has ever existed on this planet. I’m done with apologizing for my existence for the nameless crime of being born white.

As African-American writer Elizabeth Wright says:

After decades of inundation about the evils of ‘white racism’ coming from all directions, and most especially from the media and education establishments, the average white is programmed to avoid anything that smacks of conscious endorsement of his own race. In the current social climate, to display favorable regard towards that which is white, not only is forbidden, but is viewed as an automatic disparagement of non-whites. A ‘White Pride’ T-shirt is deemed a threatening symbol, whereas a ‘Black Supremacy’ slogan on a button or garment is viewed as an understandable, albeit angry response to undeserved past abuses. Any public effort to promote a white theme is doomed to failure, even if the proper bows to racial diversity are adhered to. Whites learn early to censor themselves.

I’ve been told by Americans that they have moved beyond race, but judging from examples such as this, it looks more as if they have established a culture of institutionalized white masochism. It’s not that Americans have moved beyond race, it’s just that the whites have unilaterally surrendered. The United States was almost 90% white as late as 1965, and will be minority white within a couple of generations. I don’t know of any example where the formerly dominant group has become a minority and this has not resulted in a complete change of the nature of that country, or to its dissolution, but in the USA, this entire subject is taboo because it is “racist.” That’s not rational.

I have listened to claims regarding the supposed benefits of mass immigration, why it is inevitable and why those who resist are bad people. The propaganda is remarkably similar from the Netherlands via Britain to Sweden and Italy, and that’s not a coincidence. This is all happening as a coordinated and well-planned assault on established national cultures, organized by the European Union and supported by the national political and media elites.

It has happened many times that a people move into an area and subdue those living there, but the natives have at least been allowed to defend themselves. It is unprecedented in the annals of history that a people is banned by their own leaders from defending their lands from foreign colonization and are even expected to fund this colonization. It is one of the greatest crimes of our age that the indigenous people of an entire continent, at least the Western half of it, are systematically deprived of their heritage, their history, their land and ultimately perhaps their entire physical existence, all with the active aid of the very individuals who are supposed to protect their interests. The only reason why this is considered positive, or even remotely acceptable, is because the natives in this case are white. There is no other reason for this.

In Glasgow, Scotland, Kriss Donald, a 15-year-old totally innocent white schoolboy was abducted, stabbed repeatedly and then doused in petrol and burned to death by a group of Pakistani immigrants. Labour politician Mohammad Sarwar, who helped in bringing some of the men to justice, later became the first elected representative in Britain to step down due to threats against his family.

The established historical pattern is that people who are conquered by others are harassed by the newcomers. I don’t see any reason to expect this to be different just because the natives happen to be white. On the contrary. We will be attacked even more viciously because we are a formerly dominant group. When we are told that mass immigration is “inevitable,” we are actually being told that verbal and physical abuse of out children is inevitable and that we should “get used to it.” I see no reason to accept that. If mass immigration leads to harassment of my children, it is my duty to resist it.

Jews were once told to “get back to Palestine.” When they did, they were told to “get out of Palestine.” The people who said this didn’t object to where Jews lived, they objected to the fact that they existed at all. I sometimes wonder whether whites of European descent, a global minority, are the Jews of the 21st century. I also notice that while people of European descent are told to “get back to Europe” in North America or Australia, whites in Europe are demonized if they resist being turned into a minority in their own countries. The problem then, apparently, isn’t where whites live, it’s that we exist at all.

Observer Ole Kulterstad notes that Europeans who are against free migration are labeled as “right-wing extremists.” But common sense indicates that giving away your country to alien cultures is more extreme than merely wanting to preserve it as it once was. I agree with him. I’m sick of hearing how Islamic organizations that want to destroy my civilization are called “moderates,” whereas Westerners are extremists if we resist, yet that is exactly what our media and our authorities do. We are not extremists; we are subject to policies that are extreme. Is gradually reducing a people to a minority in their own land, without proper debate about future consequences, not to be regarded as extreme?

I hear some writers fear an extremist backlash in Europe, but if people are so concerned about white extremism then they should cease creating the foundations for such extremism to grow. Native Europeans increasingly get the feeling that they are pushed into a corner and have an entirely justifiable fear of being overwhelmed. Fear leads to desperation, and desperation sometimes leads to aggression. If we do get an outbreak of political movements in Europe that really are extremist — and I sometimes fear this outcome, too — this will not come about because white Europeans are born evil, it will come about because white Europeans will be pushed into extremism, feel that their continued existence is at stake and that they have been abandoned by their own authorities. The solution to this is simply to recognize that Western nations have accepted more immigration from alien cultures in a shorter period of time than any other civilization has done peacefully in history. We have reached our limits and we need a break from mass immigration before our entire political and economic system breaks down.

The idea that every white person who desires self-determination and self-preservation is a racist, a white supremacist and a Nazi is nonsense and should flatly be rejected. The vast majority of racist violence in Western nations is by non-whites attacking whites. Consequently, if we limit immigration this is anti-racism, since we are protecting our children against racist violence. It is not about white supremacy, either, it is about equality. Whites are currently the only racial group specifically denied the opportunity to defend their countries and heritage. If we assert our right to do so we are thus fighting for equality, not supremacy.

The “Nazi” accusations so carelessly thrown out these days are completely baseless in this context. The Nazis believed that whites, and blondes in particular, had the right to colonize or eradicate others. But the policy we follow today could be dubbed reversed Nazism since it is based on the assumption that whites should have fewer rights than others and can be colonized or culturally eradicated with impunity. I don’t see why I should either be a “Nazi” or embrace and celebrate my extinction. It’s a false choice.

I suspect future historians will call this era the Age of White Masochism. The white man conquered the world and then suffered a nervous breakdown, a kind of collective neurosis shared by an entire civilization. However, I sense that this era is slowly coming to an end.

I would use two arguments as to why the current mass immigration the West should be halted:

1.		Whites, too, have a right to exist. The primary duty you have as a human being is to preserve the heritage of your ancestors and pass on to your children a country they can call their own and where they can live in dignity.
2.		The ongoing immigration is population dumping where less successful cultures dump their population in more successful ones. This is a form of global Communism and will generate the same effects by destroying successful communities and centers of excellence.

I believe whites in the 21st century should desire a room of our own where we can prosper, live in a major Western city without having to fear violence because of our race, and without being stripped of our heritage in order to placate people who moved to our countries out of their own free will. We have the right to preserve our heritage and are under no obligation to commit collective suicide or serve as a dumping ground for other countries. It has nothing to do with animosity towards others. For my part, I am being entirely honest if I say that I still love visiting other cultures, but I will love this even more if I know I can also return to my own.

Are the American people obsolete?

Are the American people obsolete?

The richest few don’t need the rest of us as markets, soldiers or police anymore. Maybe we should all emigrate

By Michael Lind

Have the American people outlived their usefulness to the rich minority in the United States? A number of trends suggest that the answer may be yes.

In every industrial democracy since the end of World War II, there has been a social contract between the few and the many. In return for receiving a disproportionate amount of the gains from economic growth in a capitalist economy, the rich paid a disproportionate percentage of the taxes needed for public goods and a safety net for the majority.

In North America and Europe, the economic elite agreed to this bargain because they needed ordinary people as consumers and soldiers. Without mass consumption, the factories in which the rich invested would grind to a halt. Without universal conscription in the world wars, and selective conscription during the Cold War, the U.S. and its allies might have failed to defeat totalitarian empires that would have created a world order hostile to a market economy.

Globalization has eliminated the first reason for the rich to continue supporting this bargain at the nation-state level, while the privatization of the military threatens the other rationale.

The offshoring of industrial production means that many American investors and corporate managers no longer need an American workforce in order to prosper. They can enjoy their stream of profits from factories in China while shutting down factories in the U.S. And if Chinese workers have the impertinence to demand higher wages, American corporations can find low-wage labor in other countries.

This marks a historic change in the relationship between capital and labor in the U.S. The robber barons of the late 19th century generally lived near the American working class and could be threatened by strikes and frightened by the prospect of revolution. But rioting Chinese workers are not going to burn down New York City or march on the Hamptons.

What about markets? Many U.S. multinationals that have transferred production to other countries continue to depend on an American mass market. But that, too, may be changing. American consumers are tapped out, and as long as they are paying down their debts from the bubble years, private household demand for goods and services will grow slowly at best in the United States. In the long run, the fastest-growing consumer markets, like the fastest-growing labor markets, may be found in China, India and other developing countries.

This, too, marks a dramatic change. As bad as they were, the robber barons depended on the continental U.S. market for their incomes. The financier J.P. Morgan was not so much an international banker as a kind of industrial capitalist, organizing American industrial corporations that depended on predominantly domestic markets. He didn’t make most of his money from investing in other countries.

In contrast, many of the highest-paid individuals on Wall Street have grown rich through activities that have little or no connection with the American economy. They can flourish even if the U.S. declines, as long as they can tap into growth in other regions of the world.

Thanks to deindustrialization, which is caused both by productivity growth and by corporate offshoring, the overwhelming majority of Americans now work in the non-traded domestic service sector. The jobs that have the greatest growth in numbers are concentrated in sectors like medical care and childcare.

Even here, the rich have options other than hiring American citizens. Wealthy liberals and wealthy conservatives agree on one thing: the need for more unskilled immigration to the U.S. This is hardly surprising, as the rich are far more dependent on immigrant servants than middle-class and working-class Americans are.

The late Patricia Buckley, the socialite wife of the late William F. Buckley Jr., once told me, “One simply can’t live in Manhattan without at least three servants — a cook and at least two maids.” She had a British cook and Spanish-speaking maids. New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg recently revealed the plutocratic perspective on immigration when he defended illegal immigration by asking, “Who takes care of the greens and the fairways in your golf course?”

The point is that, just as much of America’s elite is willing to shut down every factory in the country if it is possible to open cheaper factories in countries like China, so much of the American ruling class would prefer not to hire their fellow Americans, even for jobs done on American soil, if less expensive and more deferential foreign nationals with fewer legal rights can be imported. Small wonder that proposals for “guest worker” programs are so popular in the U.S. establishment. Foreign “guest workers” laboring on American soil like H1Bs and H2Bs — those with non-immigrant visas allowing technical or non-agriculture seasonal workers to be employed in the U.S. — are latter-day coolies who do not have the right to vote.

If much of America’s investor class no longer needs Americans either as workers or consumers, elite Americans might still depend on ordinary Americans to protect them, by serving in the military or police forces. Increasingly, however, America’s professional army is being supplemented by contractors — that is, mercenaries. And the elite press periodically publishes proposals to sell citizenship to foreigners who serve as soldiers in an American Foreign Legion. It is probably only a matter of time before some earnest pundit proposes to replace American police officers with foreign guest-worker mercenaries as well.

Offshoring and immigration, then, are severing the link between the fate of most Americans and the fate of the American rich. A member of the elite can make money from factories in China that sell to consumers in India, while relying entirely or almost entirely on immigrant servants at one of several homes around the country. With a foreign workforce for the corporations policed by brutal autocracies and non-voting immigrant servants in the U.S., the only thing missing is a non-voting immigrant mercenary army, whose legions can be deployed in foreign wars without creating grieving parents, widows and children who vote in American elections.

If the American rich increasingly do not depend for their wealth on American workers and American consumers or for their safety on American soldiers or police officers, then it is hardly surprising that so many of them should be so hostile to paying taxes to support the infrastructure and the social programs that help the majority of the American people. The rich don’t need the rest anymore.

To be sure, wealthy humanitarians might take pity on their economically obsolescent fellow citizens. But they no longer have any personal economic incentive to do so. Besides, philanthropists may be inclined to devote most of their charity to the desperate and destitute of other countries rather than to their fellow Americans.

If most Americans are no longer needed by the American rich, then perhaps the United States should consider a policy adopted by the aristocracies and oligarchies of many countries with surplus populations in the past: the promotion of emigration. The rich might consent to a one-time tax to bribe middle-class and working-class Americans into departing the U.S. for other lands, and bribing foreign countries to accept them, in order to be alleviated from a high tax burden in the long run.

Where would a few hundred million ex-Americans go? The answer is obvious: to the emerging markets where the work and investment are found. That will show all those American union members who complain that their jobs have been outsourced to China. Let them move to China themselves and compete, instead of complaining!

Needless to say, the Chinese and Indians might resist the idea of an influx of vast numbers of downwardly mobile North American workers. But like American capitalists, Chinese and Indian capitalists might learn that ethnic diversity impedes unionization, while the mass immigration of North Americans to East and South Asia would keep wages in those regions competitively low for another few decades at least.

Once emptied of superfluous citizens, the U.S. could become a kind of giant Aspen for the small population of the super-rich and their non-voting immigrant retainers. Many environmentalists might approve of the depopulation of North America, because sprawling suburbs would soon be reclaimed by the wilderness. And deficit hawks would be pleased as well. The middle-class masses dependent on Social Security and Medicare would have departed the country, leaving only the self-sufficient rich and foreign guest workers without any benefits, other than the charity of their employers.

Of course there are alternative options, which would not require the departure of most Americans from America for new lives on distant shores. One would be a new social contract, in which the American people, through representatives whom they actually control, would ordain that American corporations are chartered to create jobs in the U.S. for American workers, and if that does not interest their shareholders and managers then they can do without legal privileges granted by the sovereign people, like limited liability.

The American people also could put a stop to any thought of an American Foreign Legion and declare, through their representatives, that a nation of citizen-workers will be protected by citizen-soldiers, whether professionals or, in emergencies, conscripts. The American people, in other words, could insist that the United States will be a democratic republican nation-state, not a post-national rentier oligarchy.

But restoring democratic nationalism in the U.S. would inconvenience America’s affluent minority. So instead of making trouble, maybe most Americans should just find a new continent to call home.

Whites Use Black Babies as Alligator Bait

New Black Panther King Shamir Shabazz: Whites Use Black Babies as Alligator Bait

News just in: whites have been secretly for thousands of years, using black babies as alligator bait in secret underground  alligator pits built by white devils.

“Damn those white devils, they be so smart.”

Greatest Invention the black man has given us poor white devils

Greatest Invention the black man has given us poor white devils. Peanut butter? No. Traffic light? Nope.  Its the moon, that right my brothers, that big ball of dust and rock was invented by our morally-racially superior black masters. Damn they be so smart, I wish we poor white devils could think like that.

Black Inventions:

The Blackman invented the Moon

Malcolm X

from Blackmans History

So right here this planet that you and I live on
called Earth, that rotates around the sun, The
Honorable Elijah Muhammad teaches us that
sixty-six trillion years ago our people were
living on this planet: the black man was living
on this planet. But in those days it was larger
than it is now, and the planet Mars, that was
off here beyond it, had an effect upon our
planet then in the same manner that the moon
affects us today. At that time there was no
moon up there. Where was the moon? The moon
was down here, the moon was part of this planet,
the moon and this planet were one planet, and
the black man was living here then. He was a
scientist, he was a wise black man. Black men
have always been wise, black men have always
been the wisest beings in the universe, and
among these beings, black beings, there is on
who is supreme; he is referred to as the Supreme
Being, do you understand?
So The Honorable Elijah Muhammad tells
us that a wise black scientist, sixty-six
trillion years ago, began to argue with the
other scientists because he wanted the people of
Earth to speak a certain language, and since
they wouldn’t agree he wanted to destroy
civilization. So this scientist drove a shaft
into the center of the Earth and filled it with
high explosives and set it off. He was trying
to destroy civilization; he was trying to
destroy the black man. But you can’t destroy
the black man; the black man can’t destroy
himself. The black man has the most powerful
brain in the universe. So there is no
intelligence more powerful than the intelligence
of the black man. And because of this the black
man can’t even create thought that would destroy
him. He is indestructible. You can blow up
everything and the black man will still be here.
You just can’t get away form him, brother. So
The Honorable Elijah Muhammad said he filled the
Earth, the planet, with high explosives and set
it off, and when it was exploded the piece that
you and I today call the moon was tossed out
here into space and it rotated around the Earth.
It still rotates around the Earth; it came from
the Earth; it was blasted right off the Earth.
And as it was blasted right off the Earth, it
turned over and over and over and all of the
water that was on it stayed with the earth. So
that the piece that was blasted out there has no
water on it today, and because it has no water
on it it has no civilization on it, has no life
on it. You can’t have life where there’s no
water there’s no life; where there’s no life
there’s no civilization. Can you understand
that? So this dead piece, called the moon by us
today, turning over and over and over, lost all
of its water, all of the water coming with this
piece. The Honorable Elijah Muhammad told us
that this piece, that the earth, that we
remained on, shifted, dropped thirty-six
thousand miles in the pocket that we remained
in. And as it dropped and all of water came
with it, that left a situation in which today
the Earth that we now live on weighs six
sextillion tons. The weight of it is six
sextillion tons. And as it makes its way around
the sun, the strong power of the sun’s rays
striking the equator causes the planet to turn
on its own axis at the speed 10371/3 miles per
hour. And he teaches us that the square mileage
of the Earth is 196,940,000 square miles which
means only 57,255,000 square miles of land stuck
up out of 139,685,000 square miles of water.
Three-fourths of the Earth’s surface is covered
with water. Part of the water that left the
moon is here with the Earth. So you say since
it’s the natural law for water to seek its own
level, why doesn’t it overrun the land? The
Honorable Elijah Muhammad says that as the Earth
speeds around the sun turning on its axis
10371/3 miles per hour it creates gravity and
the strong attracting power of the sun pulls on
the waters of the Earth, drawing them up into
the Earth’s atmosphere in fine mist that the
naked eye can hardly detect. As this water
gathers into the Earth’s atmosphere it then
distills and comes back to Earth. When it gets
heavier than the atmosphere in which it is, it
distills and comes back to the Earth in the form
of water, rain, hail, or snow. All of the water
that you see coming out of the sky went up into
the sky. Everything that’s coming down on the
Earth got up thee by leaving the Earth. Do you
understand? And he teaches us that it comes
back down in the form of hail or rain or snow or
whatever else you have, depending upon the
temperature of the current atmosphere that it
was in. He says that at night the gravitational
pull of the moon takes over, and, because the
power of the moon is not as great as that of the
sun, once the attracting power of the sun is
absent at night the moon takes over, but since
it can’t pull the waters up like the sun does,
it still has that magnetic pull and it causes
the waves that you see out there on the ocean to
churn. It is the moon that does that; the moon
makes the waves go up and down. It never lets
them level out. If they leveled out the water
would overrun the land. It also causes the
shifting of the tide. This is the pull of the
moon upon the waters of the Earth. If it
weren’t for the attracting powers of the sun and
the moo upon the Earth, the waters would overrun
the land and drown out civilization. All of
this was done by man himself, not some Mystery
God. A black man set this up. And you and I
have been running around in the trap that the
white man put us in, thinking that the only one
who can do anything is a Mystery God and what
the Mystery God doesn’t do the white man does.

So Yacub knew that all he had
to do was make a man unlike any other man on
this Earth and because he would be different he
would attract all other people. Then he could
teach this man a science call tricknology, which
is a science of tricks and lies. So Yacub turned to
his uncle and said, “When I grow up I’m going to
make a man who will rule you.” And Yacub’s
uncle said,”What can you make other than that
which will cause bloodshed and wickedness in the
land?”

“…and dat’s how us niggers made da moon.”

Fortunately, da Honorable Louis Farrakhan has a direct line to da Honorable Elijah Muhammad sittin’ in da Mother Ship-

“Honorable Elijah Muhammad, da White blue-eyed Persian devil Pasdaran aks, Did niggers make da o’er moons in da solar system?”

“Sho’nuff.”

I’m glad I was able to share that with my poor white devil brothers.

Death of the Nation…part 2

Repeating the Mistakes of Ancient Egypt

Diversity will destroy America just as it destroyed other nations before us.

by Ian Mosley

Liberals endlessly tell us that Diversity is good for us or that Diversity makes us stronger. In reality Diversity has been at best a problem and at worst the ruin of civilization as Third World races replace the White nation-builders.

Egypt was the first great civilization and endured for thousands of years. The early Pharaohs and Egyptians were White people who settled in present-day Egypt and started building the great pyramids, statues and temples that still stand today. The Egyptians expanded their empire and brought back Semites and Black slaves, the genetic poison that would eventually wipe out the nation-builders and reduce Egypt to a chaotic Third World nation that relies on ancient White ruins for its tourist industry.

Egypt isn’t the only example of a White nation destroyed by race-mixing. Along the eastern Mediterranean coast (in present-day Turkey, Syria and Lebanon) there were once White city states just as prosperous and advanced as the city-states of Greece. Thanks to centuries of race-mixing, the city-states of the eastern Mediterranean all fell into a permanent state of decline, never again to see the creativity and magnificence of a White past long gone.

Ever wonder what the future holds for America if the Democrats get their way and all immigration restrictions are scrapped? Well, let’s take a glimpse at the Third World to see what wonders await us.

A BBC article reports: “A man carrying bags containing more than 70 dead babies has been arrested in Nigeria. He was employed by the Lagos University Teaching Hospital to take the corpses to a cemetery. The worker was allegedly trying to dump the corpses as he could not afford burial fees. A hospital spokesman said it was co-operating with police investigations into the incident. A BBC correspondent in Lagos says many families are too devastated to deal with the dead babies and others cannot afford morgue fees, so abandon them outside hospitals. Hospitals hire contractors to bury the corpses. A police preliminary investigation also led to the arrest of some workers in the Department of Morbid and Anatomy at the teaching hospital, said Lagos state police public relations officer Frank Mba. He also said that the suspect had not intended to use the bodies in any rituals.”

This brings up the widespread prevalence of voodoo in Black communities from the deepest part of the African jungle to Kenya, Zimbabwe, South Africa, Haiti and even New Orleans. According to a Zimbabwe-based news site, possibly the only one in Zinbabwe still functioning: “Young men are attacked and their genitals cut off while they are still alive; children’s throats are slit and their organs removed; and border-crossers are caught with bags containing human heads and sexual organs.These stories and more are contained in a horror report on the trafficking of human body parts in Mozambique and South Africa, which has unveiled a scary reality: body parts are frequently used in traditional medicine and there is a commonly held belief that such medicine is very powerful.”

This raises the question: Do liberals have the slightest idea what sort of “people” we are letting into our country, and how little of White civilization will remain once we are outnumbered?

The BBC article insists ” ‘We are sure that the suspect is neither a ritualist nor a murderer nor a trafficker. Other contending issues like corruption and abuse of office will be investigated,’ Mr Mba added. The hospital described the incident as an embarrassment to the organisation. The BBC’s Fidelis Mbah says there’s been a state of shock and disbelief among people in Lagos who cannot believe that a hospital with the magnitude of Lagos University Teaching Hospital would allow a contractor to handle that many corpses without supervision from its staff.”

If you can’t trust one of Nigeria’s foremost educational institutions, who can you trust? I wonder if that institute of higher learning has graduate classes on Internet scams.

The minute these kaffirs get their diploma from this Third World grove of academe, they’re getting on the first 707 to the United States. Has anyone noticed that it is now almost impossible for a poor White individual without medical insurance to get access to a White doctor any more? We’re always getting shoved off onto the charity clinics where the quacks got their medical degrees from the University of Ranjipur or perhaps even the College of the Congo.

Obamacare is going to force even more of us into the arms of poorly trained, borderline incompetent doctors, who will likely prescribe the wrong drug for a serious illness and hasten our demise.

Maybe we’ll even get a Doctor Barack Clk Clk Ngumbo from Mombassa, who will wave a lizard over the area of concern to drive out the evil spirits. After all, if we’re going to have Diversity, we need to be tolerant of alternative methods of healing.

http://www.whitecivilrights.com/?p=4015

Them folks jest helpin’ dem selves out after Hurricane Katrina, “shoppin’” & shit.

Dis black folks helpin’ out a stranger.

Race, Politics and Hypocrisy in 21st Century America- JAMES EDWARDS

Another outreach effort to black voters goes horribly awry

JAMES EDWARDS

Race, Politics and Hypocrisy in 21st Century America

http://www.thepoliticalcesspool.org/jamesedwards/

Bryan Wooley is a white man who’s running for mayor of Shreveport, Louisiana. Shreveport is heavily black, but no worries, because Bryan Wooley is a color blind conservative. So, hey, it’s cool. Everything is copacetic. Bryan is down with the bruthas, and, being a color blind conservative, he knows how to reach them with his message of economic freedom and law and order.

First, surround yourself with black people at your press conferences. Especially when it’s about Shreveport having the highest per capita crime rate in the nation. It never looks good for a white person to hold a press conference to denounce high crime rates; in fact, it looks “racist”, to be honest. The only way for a white man to pull it off is talk about how violent crime hurts the black community the most, and have a bunch of them around you when you hold your press conference. Bryan Wooley’s got that covered. Never mind that the people he’s so concerned about are evidently all single moms. In other words, they’re the ones getting pregnant and raising all these thugs and criminals to run wild. But it would be “racist” to point that out, so Bryan didn’t mention that at his press conference.

Second, give away a bunch of free stuff to get the vote out in the ghetto. Like food, and limo rides to the polling place. Free limo rides? Yes! Because God don’t make no junk! And have a big bash in the ghetto where you have free burgers and prime rib for anyone who shows up.

Bryan Wooley had that second part covered, too. Or at least he thought he did. But he made the mistake of scheduling the free burgers and prime rib shindig at a restaurant in a black neighborhood called Wings & More. It was going to be an Economic Freedom Rally. And the signs just said “free food”, not free burgers, etc.

Well, the next thing you know all hell broke loose. It seems “the community” was outraged that a white man was trying to buy black votes by promising err’body in da hood free chicken wings! And if the wings weren’t racist enough, they also didn’t appreciate a white man mocking the historic Freedom Riders by offering limo rides at a “Freedom Rally.” Word spread like wildfire about the “racist” event, and the wildfire soon turned into a real fire – an arsonist torched Wings & More the night before the big bash.

Never mind that the food promised was beef, not chicken wings.

Never mind that Bryan Wooley didn’t go out and buy a chicken wings joint and set it up in a black neighorhood. It was already there, as are many others, because black people like chicken wings.

A lot.

Nope. Never mind all that.

All that mattered was a white man said something about “wings” and “a freedom rally” in the same context as black people.

Now, Bryan Wooley is officially a “racist”, and nothing he can do can ever remove that stain from his soul.

No word yet that Wooley has apologized. But hopefully he has learned a lesson, and he’ll never again waste time on “outreach” to black voters. Look, Bryan…blacks don’t care about conservative issues like economic freedom and law and order, in fact, the vast majority of them radically oppose candidates who focus on these things. So you’re not gonna win any votes by pandering to them, and no matter how much of a “color blind conservative” you are, they’re always going to find some reason to take offense at your efforts and label you a racist. Why? Because you’re a white man, and all white men are racists, period.

So why bother?

Instead, read this book ASAP, and next time you won’t make this mistake!

We need Voter photo ID laws in every state!

Voter fraud is rampant all across the nation. Illegal aliens vote, dead people vote, felons vote, and many of them vote five and six times. Everyone knows it’s a widespread problem, but very little is being done about it. Every state needs to pass a law requiring voters to show government issued PHOTO ID when voting. Just look at this story from Texas: of 25,000 new voter registrations turned in, over 23,000 turned out to be phony:

Texas Insider, September 27 2010 – Service Employees International Union (SEIU) member Steve Caddle of Houston, Texas has been caught registering 23,207 fake voters in Harris County alone due to the hard detective work of Catherine Engelbrecht and her “True the Vote” project.

This is one of the best examples of what good citizen activism inspired by Tea Party principles can do for their community.
Catherine Engelbrecht was sick and tired of the vote fraud perpetrated by unions and Democrats and set out to expose it herself. Along with many friends who donated their time, computers, and sweat, they’ve uncovered thousands upon thousands of illegal Democrat “voters” in Texas.

“The integrity of the voting rolls in Harris County, Texas, appears to be under an organized and systematic attack by the group operating under the name Houston Votes,” the Harris voter registrar, Leo Vasquez, charged as he passed on the documentation to the district attorney. A spokesman for the DA’s office declined to discuss the case. And a spokesman for Vasquez said that the DA has asked them to refrain from commenting on the case.

The union thug behind this particular criminal enterprise admitted only that there “had been mistakes made.” Yeah, like not worrying about icebergs was just a “mistake” made by the Titanic’s crew! Of the 25,000 voter registrations turned in by Caddle only about 1,793 were legal.

“Vacant lots had several voters registered on them. An eight-bed halfway house had more than 40 voters registered at its address,” Engelbrecht said. “We then decided to look at who was registering the voters.”

….The other registrations included one of a woman who registered six times in the same day; registrations of non-citizens; so many applications from one Houston Voters collector in one day that it was deemed to be beyond human capability; and 1,597 registrations that named the same person multiple times, often with different signatures.

Does anyone have any doubt that this sort of crime has been perpetrated by Democrats the nation over? How many millions of fake, dead, nonexistent, and/or fraudulent voters have Democrats foisted upon the voter rolls in every corner of the nation?

This is the country that gave us the Magna Carta?

3 year old tots being turned in for “racism”?

Yes, it’s true.

Things are even worse in England than they are here, believe it or not. But rest assured, we’re headed for the exact same thing if we don’t act now:

Teachers are being forced to report children as young as three to the authorities for using alleged ‘racist’ language, it was claimed last night.

Munira Mirza, a senior advisor to London Mayor Boris Johnson, said schools were being made to spy on nursery age youngsters by the Race Relations Act 2000.

More than a quarter of a million children have been accused of racism since it became law, she said.

Writing in Prospect magazine, she said: ‘The more we seek to measure racism, the more it seems to grow.

‘Teachers are now required to report incidents of racist abuse among children as young as three to local authorities, resulting in a massive increase of cases and reinforcing the perception that we need an army of experts to manage race relations from cradle to grave.

‘Does this heightened awareness of racism help to stamp it out? Quite the opposite. It creates a climate of suspicion and anxiety.’

The Act compelled 43,000 public authorities, including schools and churches, ‘to promote good relations between persons of different racial groups’. Details of the incidents are logged on databases.

Teachers are allowed to report racism even if the alleged ‘victim’ was not offended or if the child does not understand what they were saying.

Freedom of Information replies obtained by civil liberties group the Manifesto Club show that between 2002 and 2009, 280,000 incidents have been reported.

As Dr. Kevin MacDonald points out, it probably won’t be long before the US government starts forcing white babies to spend time with non-white babies shortly after birth, because it’s when they’re only a few months old that babies develop strong preferences for people of their own race, unless they’re born into a multiracial family or other freakish circumstances. Discussing the media attacks on GOP Congressional candidate Jim Russell, Dr. MacDonald says:

Maddow then goes after Russell’s expressed concern about the effects of the media on imprinting children with images of other races because they may affect later mating preferences. Notice that Russell expresses himself quite tentatively: “One wonders how a child’s sexual imprinting is affected by forcible racial integration and near continual exposure to media stimuli promoting interracial contact.” But in fact, there is quite a bit of research that has come out since Russell wrote his article indicating just that. For example, this is a quote from an academic article of mine:

Research on humaninfants indicates that preference for own race occurs by 3 monthsof age but is not present at 1 month (Kelly et al., 2005). However,racial ingroup preferences are weakened by exposure to outgroupfaces during infancy (Bar-Haim, Ziv, Lamy, & Hodes, 2006;Sangrigoli, Pallier, Argenti, Ventureyra, & de Schonen, 2005).
Research on human infants indicates that preference for own race occurs by 3 months of age but is not present at 1 month (Kelly et al., 2005). However, racial ingroup preferences are weakened by exposure to outgroup faces during infancy (Bar-Haim, Ziv, Lamy, & Hodes, 2006; Sangrigoli, Pallier, Argenti, Ventureyra, & de Schonen, 2005). (p. 1022)

The reality is that social psychology provides strong support for the idea that exposure of babies to other races would make them favor their own race less. And Russell is certainly correct that the media is doing its best to aid this process. However, the good news is that the media does not really have access to infants, or at least much less access than it does to older children and adults. The research seems to indicate that babies learn who their people are by seeing family members–resulting in hysteria over “racist babies.” One can anticipate government programs that force White babies to be exposed to non-Whites (but exempt non-Whites from this process).

More New From the World wide attack on White by Blacks

Blacks riot, brutally attack white people at Paris festival.

An annual festival in Paris France was ruined when mobs of blacks rioted and attacked white people at random. Numerous white were attacked and had to be treated by paramedics. Several white women were sexually assaulted.

Imagine if the races had been reversed. A story like this would be the biggest news story in the world. However, since it is blacks attacking it white it is censored, buried, and blacklisted by the “mainstream” press. Race riots and vicious racially motivated attacks are being carried out by blacks all over the western world and the media does everything it can to hide it from the public.

This is the second time in a month that mobs of blacks rioted and carried out racially motivated attacks in Paris. Last month a parade by Chinese people living in France ended with mob attacks by black thugs.

DNA database leads to quick arrested in racially motivated murder.

Two black thugs brutally murdered a woman and attempted to murder the woman’s nine year old daughter. Both victims are white.

DNA from the crime scene was matched to a thug already in Louisiana’s DNA database, leading to a speedy arrest.

Police raided the home of the suspects relatives, finding the suspect as well as illegal drugs and a stolen firearm.

Louisiana has a state law requiring a DNA database of felons. In other states, the radical NAACP is fighting to keep DNA database laws from getting past.

The NAACP says that since blacks commit crimes in great disproportion to everyone else, they would be added to the DNA database in great disproportion. Therefore, according to the NAACP, DNA databases are “racist.”

Once again we see the extremists at the NAACP fighting to make America safe for brutal criminals.

Read story.

Black thugs torch restaurant to keep white politician out.

Hate campaign by Shreveport’s black leaders and politicians end in racially motivated arson.

A white politician running for office in majority black Shreveport, LA was openly denounced by black leaders simply because he is white and campaigned in black neighborhoods. Black leaders in Shreveport urged blacks to vote exclusively for black candidates, while denouncing Wooley as a “racist.”

Then when Wooley organized a rally in a restaurant on Martin Luther King Street with free hamburgers and limo rides, black thugs burned the venue down to try to cancel the event.

The event was aimed at older residents participating in an early voting program.

Read More

Another animal preserve wiped out in Africa.

An animal preserve in Zimbabwe set up by white charities was destroyed by Zimbabweans who slaughtered over a thousand rare animals. Mugabe loyalist are being blamed, who tore down miles of fencing and used it to make snares. All of Sub-Saharan Africa’s animal preserves were originally established by white governments and charities. These preserves are financially supported by white charities from the west, but are constantly attacked by Africans.

From AP…

Illegal occupiers on an animal reserve in southern Zimbabwe have killed hundreds of animals and torn down several miles (kilometers) of protective fencing, a conservation group said Friday.

Investigators of the Zimbabwe Conservation Task Force who visited the reserve near the southern border town of Beit Bridge and the Limpopo river reported the occupiers slaughtered 300 zebra for their skins in the last two months. Seven African antelope were killed this week.

The group said the owner of the reserve won a court order to evict the occupiers but it was ignored.

Four miles (7 kilometers) of specialized 16-strand game fencing – 70 miles (112 kilometers) of wire in all – were stolen to make animal traps and snares, the group said.

“It is tragic. Authorities have failed to enforce the judicial order and the slaughter is ongoing,” said Johnny Rodrigues, head of the task force.

The population of zebra in the formerly private run wildlife conservancy dropped from about 870 to just 160 – a loss of 710 animals – the group said. Nearly 560 eland, Africa’s largest antelope, have also been killed, it said.

Efforts to preserve wildlife around the world are led and financed by whites. Not that white people are ever given any credit for it.

Poaching syndicates and militias routinely invade preserves and slaughter the animals. Often murdering forest rangers and employees as well.

Recently a Hutu militia wiped out a population of rare gorillas in the Congo. Shooting each one in the face and close range with pistols, when forest rangers refused to let the thugs hide out in the preserve.

At other preserves whole herds are wiped out simple for one body part, such as an elphants tusks.

More left-wing violence caught on tape.

A man attends a public event and is video taping the left-wing former two term Governor of Oregon. Two large thugs with nametags identifying them as members of the radical far-left “African American Alliance” attack the man while he continues filming. The assault takes place right in front of the Governor, who ignores it and continues talking.

Watching the pot come to a boil – Generational Dynamics

“Watching the pot come to a boil”

Generational
Dynamics

29-Sep-10 News — The eclipsing of China’s Hu Jintao and Wen Jiaboa Anti-austerity sweep across Europe on Wednesday

The eclipsing of China’s Hu Jintao and Wen Jiaboa

My report yesterday described the increasingly belligerent actions of China in the recent confrontation with Japan indicates an astonishing change from a generally conciliatory foreign policy to a much more nationalistic and less compromising foreign population.

From the point of view of Generational Dynamics this indicates a generational change: Decisions are made less often by the conciliatory generation of survivors of the bloody Communist Revolution crisis civil war, and increasingly are made by the younger and much more confrontational younger generations, corresponding to America’s Boomers and Generation-X.

China’s President Hu Jintao (R) and Premier Wen Jiabao in 2008 (Source: Xinhua)

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has “scheduled” a generational change, in a way. The 18th CCP Congress will be held in 2012. At that time, the generation of war survivors, led by President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao, are expected to step down and give way to the next generation, born after the war.

The incident with Japan gives us a first glimpse of what things will be like after that generational change, and makes us wonder whether the younger generations will even wait until 2012 to take power.

Although nationalism has always been a big part of China’s policies, as is true of any country, it’s in the past couple of years that we’ve been seeing the signs of really aggressive Chinese nationalism.

The world financial crisis has been a big motivator, as most Chinese people, especially young people, blame America for the crisis, and for any suffering that it’s caused in China. Furthermore, the Chinese people felt enormously humiliated by the worldwide condemnation of their actions in Tibet. (See “Chinese embarrassment and anger grows over Tibet and Olympics.”)

A big turning point in public attitudes was the publication in March 2009 of a highly popular, highly nationalistic and highly anti-American book, as described in “New book, ‘Unhappy China,’ stokes Chinese nationalism and anti-Americanism.”

In that report, I quoted one summary of the book as saying: “The authors … denounce Western influences and specifically deride the United States for being “irresponsible, lazy, and greedy, and engaged in robbery and cheating.” They blame the United States for causing the current global recession. The authors urge the Chinese people to “conduct business with a sword in hand.” They call for the emergence of a group of heroes to “lead our people to successfully control and use more resources, ridding [the world of] of bullies and bringing peace to good people.””

In March, 2009, those were loudly stated opinions of the authors, and widely adopted by many Chinese in their thinking. What we’re seeing now, with the Japan incident, is that those opinions and thoughts are becoming national policy. The “bullies” are countries like Japan and the U.S., and China’s retaliation, and threats of further retaliation, for the boat captain jailing were just the first step in ridding the world of bullies and bring peace to good people. The implication is that no one should ever compromise or give concessions to bullies.

Is China afraid of its own people?

A new article from Foreign Policy magazine examines the change in policy from a different angle. The title of the article is, “Is China afraid of its own people?” This caught my attention because it’s a subject that I’ve written about many times for a totally different reason.

China’s history is full of major rebellions — the White Lotus rebellion around 1800, the Taiping Rebellion of the 1860s, and Mao’s Communist Revolution, that began with the Long March in 1934 and climaxed with his victory in 1949, are the most recent examples. From the point of view of Generational Dynamics, China is due for a new one, and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leaders are well aware that rebellion is in the air.

According to the article, China conducts its foreign policy in fear of a widespread nationalistic backlash:

“Apart from the party leadership’s well-known tradition of undemocratic governance, the main reason behind “black-box diplomacy” is to avoid taking responsibility for failing to stand up to foreign powers such as the United States or Japan. Despite the relative efficacy of the Great Firewall of China, fast-growing numbers of nationalists have frequently been able to use the Internet to express their views, including negative ones about Beijing’s foreign and security policies. These increasingly vocal nationalists generally believe that rising China has become a mature power and deserves a place in world affairs to match its burgeoning economic clout.It is out of fear of a nationalist backlash that China’s negotiations with the United States and other countries regarding its accession to the World Trade Organization for instance, were wrapped in secrecy. Beijing apparently worried that should ordinary Chinese learn about the considerable concessions that it had made in areas including tariff reductions, senior cadres including former Premier Zhu Rongji would be labeled “traitors” by WTO opponents. …

President Hu Jintao and then Japanese Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda reached a theoretical accord in mid-2008 to settle sovereignty disputes over the East China Sea. The agreement was largely based on the principle of “seeking joint development while shelving sovereignty.”

Again, Beijing made no efforts to explain to its citizens the rationale behind the potentially win-win solution. When the East China Sea accord was announced a couple of weeks after Hu left Tokyo, Chinese netizens expressed massive disapproval, even on official websites. Since then, Chinese diplomats have dragged their feet in negotiations on transforming the Hu-Fukuda theoretical agreement into a formal treaty.”

It’s out of fear of a backlash spinning out of control that the CCP has discouraged anti-Japanese protests in the current incident — the opposite of what happened after an incident in 2005.

I would restate the last sentence in the quoted paragraph much less optimistically: With the generational changes in China in recent years, the opportunity of signing a formal agreement is lost for good. It will not be possible to resolve sovereignty of the islands except by war.

And it won’t just be war between China and Japan.

Last week, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met with Japanese Foreign Minister Seiji Maehara in New York and said that the United States would be obligated to obligated to intervene militarily against China if China moved to take control of the Senkaku Islands, the islands under dispute.

Hillary Clinton referred to a 1960 treaty between the U.S. and Japan that obliged the U.S. to defend Japan against any attack on a territory under Tokyo’s administration, according to AFP. Clinton spokesman Philip Crowley later confirmed what she said: “We do believe that, because the Senkaku islands are under Japanese jurisdiction, that it is covered by the US-Japan security treaty. That said, we also stressed that we don’t take a position on the sovereignty of the Senkaku islands.”

And so the Senkaku Islands (called the Diaoyu Islands by the Chinese) now have the same status as Taiwan. China claims both as their sovereign territory, and we’re obligated to go to war with China to defend either of them.

From the point of view of Generational Dynamics, war with China is inevitable and unavoidable. The eclipsing of conciliators like the people in Hu Jintao’s and Wen Jiaboa’s generation, and their replacement by aggressively nationalistic people in their children’s generation, means that war will approach more quickly.

Additional links

Earlier this month, China’s president Hu Jintao met with a White House delegation and said, “China looks positively on the fresh progress made in China-US relations, and we are willing to work together with the United States in promoting the advance of healthy and stable China-US relations.” These kinds of conciliatory remarks from Chinese leaders are increasingly in the past. AFP

By contrast, an article in state-run Xinhua says that Japan is “sinisterly harboring two ulterior motives,” by adopting an “Ostrich Policy” domestically, and by hyping a “China Threat Theory” in foreign policy. People’s Daily

China and Japan have been in a kind of competition to find historical documents to prove that their side has sovereignty over the Senkaku / Diaoyu Islands. The Japanese claim to have found an article in the People’s Daily of January 8, 1953, that says that the Senkaku Islands are part of Japan’s territory. Japan Times

China is increasingly being accused of being the “new colonizer” of Africa, and is looking for ways to encounter that impression. One effort is by archeologists who are searching for a 15th century shipwreck off the coast of Kenya, to show that China beat white explorers in discovering Africa, and to demonstrate a long history of African-Chinese trade. Asia Times

China’s foreign policies may be changing, but domestic politics are changing as well. Strikes and labor unrest are still rare, but are more frequent, and are being dealt with sympathetically by the state-controlled press and the security forces which formerly arrested strike leaders. Current incidents of labor unrest have increased because of a wave of suicides among young workers of Foxconn International Holdings Ltd., which manufactures electronic computers and gadgets sold by western companies. South Asia Analysis Group

The first congress of the Workers’ Party of [North] Korea in 30 years has, as previously speculated, elevate president Kim Jong-il’s third son, Kim Jong-un, to an official status and positioned to succeed his father as president. He was made a general, and was named vice chairman of the party’s military commission. CS Monitor

Anti-austerity protests and strikes are sweeping across Europe on Wednesday, with major demonstrations in Greece, Spain, Ireland and Brussels. Associated Press

Pakistan is reeling in the wake of a devastating flood, rampant militancy, bad governance and a crisis between the executive and the judiciary. All it might take to trigger military intervention is one incendiary incident, possibly a clash between the judiciary and the government. Asia Times

Pakistan’s military is pushing for a change of government, because they’re angered by the governments inept handling of the country’s devastating floods, and alarmed by the collapse of the economy. NY Times

While Americans blame the bankers for the economic crisis, and the Chinese blame the Americans, the many Europeans are blaming immigrants, leading to xenophobic responses. Europe’s boom years were kept going by cheap migrant labor, but now foreign workers are being accused of petty crimes and of driving wages down. The Age (Australia)

Germany will make its last reparations payment for World War I on Oct. 3, settling its outstanding debt from the 1919 Versailles Treaty. That date is also the 20th anniversary of German reunification. Der Spiegel

The disadvantaged Russian minority in Estonia is panic-buying buckwheat, because of Russia’s ban on export of buckwheat, even though Estonia does not really face a shortfall. AFP

I’ve often joked that young American college students know so little geography that they couldn’t find China on a map. Apparently the same kind of thing is true in Israel, where young students don’t know what continent Israel is on, and some think that Napoleon Bonaparte is Israel’s chief of staff. Palestine Chronicle

A female Toronto judge has struck down all of Canada’s prostitution laws, saying that they “force prostitutes to choose between their liberty interest and their right to security of the person as protected under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.” Government lawyers will have 30 days to appeal, before all prostitution laws are invalidated. Toronto Star

Will the snuggle suit kill off the slanket? Telegraph

(Comments: For reader comments, questions and discussion, see the 29-Sep-10 News — The eclipsing of China’s Hu Jintao and Wen Jiaboa thread of the Generational Dynamics forum. Comments may be posted anonymously.) (29-Sep-2010) Permanent Link

28-Sep-10 News — China becomes more belligerent over disputed islands

Kazakhstan willl ban the export of buckwheat and oilseed

Japan demands compensation as China becomes more belligerent

Japan attempted to turn the tables on China on Monday, by demanding that China pay for repairs to two Coast Guard vessels that were damaged during the confrontation with a Chinese fishing boat on September 8, according to Bloomberg.

The Chinese boat had been fishing in waters surrounding uninhabited islands claimed by both China and Japan. During the confrontation, the Chinese boat collided with the Japanese Coast Guard vessels, causing some damage.

Japan arrested the boat captain, and faced a storm of retaliatory threats from China. China cut off shipments of rare earth metals to Japan, and then arrested four Japanese consultants working in China.

Japan released the boat captain within a few days, in order to improve relations between the two countries, and both Japanese and American officials fully expected the whole conflict to simmer down at that point.

But that hasn’t happened. Much to everyone’s surprise, Japan’s acquiescence to Chinese demands has resulted in even greater belligerence by the Chinese. China treated the returning boat captain as a national hero, and demanded an apology and monetary compensation from Japan.

China used to say that disputes over these islands should be resolved by negotiation, but now the Chinese are saying that the disputed islands belong to China unequivocally, and that no compromise of any kind is possible. China is also increasing its use of its own patrol boats in the disputed waters, according to Yomiuri.

From the point of view of Generational Dynamics, it appears that a significant generational change of some kind has occurred.

I’ve written several times in the past that China’s leaders, including president Hu Jintao and premier Wen Jiaboa, grew up during Mao’s Communist Revolution crisis war. Like America’s Silent Generation, they grew up in the midst of enormous human suffering, and they experienced a kind of generational child abuse that makes them put compromise and conciliation ahead of everything else when they’re adults.

This stunning change from a generally conciliatory foreign policy to a much more nationalistic and less compromising foreign policy indicates to me that Hu and Wen and their entire generation are losing influence rapidly, and that people from younger generations are beginning to make all the important decisions.

Of course we won’t know for a while, if ever, what’s going on in China’s government, and how the decision making process is changing. But analysts who expect this level of Chinese nationalism and belligerence to be a one-time event should prepare to be surprised.

Additional links

Kazakhstan will join Russia and other former Soviet republics in banning the export of buckwheat and oilseed. The Russian export is blamed for this year’s surging world food prices. Bloomberg

France remains on high alert, as new terrorist attacks are threatened. Washington Post

Israel’s Navy is closely watching a new “freedom flotilla” boat with Jewish activists that left Cyprus on Sunday with the goal of breaking the Gaza blockage, and says it will use force to stop it. Haaretz

Saudi Arabia’s Ministry of Islamic Affairs is implementing educational programs to Imams and preachers to encourage moderation in sermons. Media Line

Mazlan Othman, a Malaysian astrophysicist, will appointed by the United Nations to head UNOOSA, the UN Office for Outer Space Affairs. In case aliens ever land on earth and say “Take me to your leader,” it will be her responsibility to meet and greet them. At first I thought this story was a joke, but apparently it isn’t. Australian

(Comments: For reader comments, questions and discussion, see the 28-Sep-10 News — China becomes more belligerent over disputed islands thread of the Generational Dynamics forum. Comments may be posted anonymously.) (28-Sep-2010) Permanent Link

27-Sep-10 News — Iran’s nuclear plant attacked by Stuxnet computer virus

Mideast peace talks extended one more week as settlement freeze expires

Stuxnet computer virus attacks Iran’s Bushehr nuclear plant

A major computer virus attack has spread to the Windows computers at Iran’s Bushehr nuclear power plant, according to the Telegraph. However, the project manager at Bushehr said that the major systems at the plant have not been damaged.

Iran’s Bushehr nuclear power plant

Stuxnet is not an ordinary, garden variety computer virus, like the ones that erase your hard drives, steal your bank accounts, or send your browsers to porn sites.

In fact, experts aren’t completely sure what it is, or what it’s trying to do. One thing they’re sure of: This virus wasn’t concocted by some hacker sitting at a computer in his basement. This virus MUST have been created by some government or government-level group, using a well-financed highly organized team of programmers, with access to plenty of specialized resources.

This conclusion is reached because of the complexity and large numbers of components in the virus, and because it makes use of stolen encryption certificates and secret technical information that would be available only to high-level intelligence agencies.

Thus, it appears that Stuxnet was designed by one nation to target facilities in another nation, as a kind of guided missile. It’s not known which two nations are involved, but the unconfirmed speculation is that the virus was designed by Israel to target Iran.

Here’s what is known. Stuxnet has spread virally, around the world. And like any ordinary virus, it installs itself in Windows computers as a so-called “rootkit.” Once a virus gets installed in that way, it can do pretty much anything it wants to your computer, and is completely invisible to the computer operator. But Stuxnet doesn’t harm most computers.

Stuxnet then searches your computer for a certain kind of software — industrial control software (ICS) that’s used in pipelines or factories or chemical or power plants, according to Symantec.

If this kind of ICS software is on your computer, it then looks to see what kind of factory or plant the software is controlling.

Large factories and plants of this kind are generally not controlled directly by Windows computers. Instead, each device in the plant has its own computer that runs a special kind of software program known as a “programmable logic controller” (PLC). So, the Stuxnet virus looks for Windows software that’s communicating with a device running a PLC — specifically, certain kinds of PLCs made by the giant German company Siemens AG.

Finally, once the virus identifies the right kind of factory or plant, it installs yet another virus into the plant’s PLC software. From that point on, the attacker can invisibly control the entire plant or factory.

Whether the target is Bushehr is just a guess. Experts have attempted to reverse engineer the virus to determine what it’s doing, but these attempts have been only partially successful. All that’s known is that the virus is targeting one or more factories or power plants or pipelines or similar installations that satisfy certain unknown parameters.

Once it finds its target (or targets), it’s expected to issue a series of commands that will destroy the plant, according to PC World. This might happen, for example, by making the plant overheat, by making crucial machinery suddenly spin rapidly out of control, or by making dangerous chemicals get dispersed.

The larger picture here is that this is a new kind of warfare — cyber warfare — that will become increasingly prevalent. The military is now treating cyber as the “fifth domain,” after the other domains — land, sea, air and space. The bad news is that very few people in the U.S. military are trained to deal with this kind of warfare, but the good news is that the same is true of other countries.

So expect to see stories of this type more frequently. Inasmuch as a virus of this type can effectively destroy an entire factory or power plant, the results could be as spectacular as the detonation of a bomb. And there would be no trace of the bomber, or any way to find out who it is. There may yet be such an outcome from the Stuxnet virus. No one knows.

For the individual Windows computer user, there are a few lessons to be learned here. First, make sure that you subscribe to a computer anti-virus service. Second, make sure that you turn on the option that automatically installs all the regular Windows updates from Microsoft. The Stuxnet virus is able to infect computers because of vulnerabilities in Windows software that the automatic updates are now repairing.

Additional links

The Mideast peace talks will be extended for one more week, as the 10-month moratorium on Israeli settlement building in the West Bank ended on Sunday evening at midnight. Some settlement building began as the ban was ending, but not a great deal yet. The next crucial date will be October 4, when the Arab League meets, and decides whether to approve continued peace talks between the Israelis and the Palestinians. Jerusalem Post

A senior minister in Pakistan’s government has been forced to resign after accusing the army of being responsible for the deaths of Benazir Bhutto and some other high profile figures. This entire subject area is a super no-no for discussion in Pakistan, since the army leaders are mostly Sunni Muslims and Benazir Bhutto is from one of Pakistan’s leading Shia Muslim families. AP

A new “peace flotilla” has set sail from Cyprus with the intention of breaching Israel’s sea blockade of Gaza. This time, the passengers are Jewish activists. Earlier this year, a major international incident was triggered when nine Turkish citizens on a similar flotilla boat were killed in a confrontation with Israel’s army. That incident led to a continuing rift between former allies Turkey and Israel. BBC

The recent sea incident and subsequent legal battle between China and Japan over Japan’s jailing of the captain of a Chinese fishing trawler in disputed waters is straining relations with China’s neighbors, who fear similar treatment, as China becomes more nationalistic and belligerent. The result is improved relations between the U.S. and Asian countries. Bloomberg

(Comments: For reader comments, questions and discussion, see the 27-Sep-10 News — Iran’s nuclear plant attacked by Stuxnet computer virus thread of the Generational Dynamics forum. Comments may be posted anonymously.) (27-Sep-2010) Permanent Link

26-Sep-10 News — China turns the screws on a humiliated Japan

Mideast peace talks may collapse Sunday over moratorium issue

China turns the screws on a humiliated Japan

China gloated and sought to consolidate and enhance its diplomatic victory over Japan, after Japan’s capitulation on Friday, saying they would accede to China’s demand that the fishing trawler captain be released and sent back to China.

China is demanding that the Japanese issue a formal apology and pay compensation for the arrest. This demand has infuriated the Japanese, according to the NY Times, and Japan has firmly rejected the demand.

China is holding four Japanese nationals that it seized on Thursday, probably in retaliation for the Japanese arrest of the boat captain. It’s not known whether the release of the boat captain will have any effect on the status of the Japanese nationals, according to the Japan Times.

China is taking another form of revenge as well. China has unofficially begun an embargo on shipments of rare earth minerals to Japan, needed in the manufacture of electronic gadgets, according to Reuters.

An analysis by the Chinese government publication Global Times indicates that China’s foreign policy is becoming less conciliatory and more nationalistic, and that this incident is an example of that change. The article quotes a Chinese international expert as saying,

“A tougher stance would deter other countries from jeopardizing the nation’s maritime interests. China’s demand for an apology and compensation is to make it clear that China will never compromise on sovereignty. “China has sufficient military capabilities to secure its maritime territory, but resorting to war is absolutely not the optimal solution to maritime territorial disputes with Japan or Southeast Asian nations.”

This increasingly belligerent Chinese attitude is occurring as the survivors of Mao’s Communist Revolution all die off, and are replaced by young officers who feel completely unrestrained, and correspond to America’s Generation-X. I included the following in yesterday’s posting, but it’s worth repeating here:

“China’s military spending is growing so fast that it has overtaken strategy,” says a China expert from Singapore. “The young officers are taking control of strategy and it is like young officers in Japan in the 1930s. They are thinking what they can do, not what they should do. This is very dangerous. They are on a collision course with a US-dominated system.” Presumably, the ‘young officers’ correspond to America’s Generation-X. Telegraph

Additional links

Israel’s moratorium on building West Bank settlements is due to expire on Sunday, and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has taken a hard line, saying that negotiations will end unless the moratorium is extended. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has also taken a hard line, saying that the moratorium will not be extended. The Americans are frantically running around, trying to get everyone to compromise on some kind of partial moratorium, so far without success. Haaretz

India’s prime minister Manmoham Singh has announced an eight-point initiative to quell the violence in Indian-held Kashmir, which has a majority Muslim population. This will “begin the process of sustained dialogue” with the Kashmiris. Prisoners will be freed, and schools will be reopened. The Hindu

This week, the North Korean Workers’ party will hold its first conference since 1980. North Korean élites are jostling for power, and analysts outside of Korea are trying to figure out what’s going on. It’s possible that the increasingly frail president Kim Jong-il will announce that his successor will be his youngest son, Kim Jong-un. This transition of power into the hands of a young boy will certainly cause a powerful struggle with uncertain outcome. Guardian

(Comments: For reader comments, questions and discussion, see the 26-Sep-10 News — China turns the screws on a humiliated Japan thread of the Generational Dynamics forum. Comments may be posted anonymously.) (26-Sep-2010) Permanent Link

25-Sep-10 News — Japan kowtows to China over trawler captain

Sarkozy declares victory over striking labor unions

Japan kowtows to China over arrest of fishing trawler captain

Denying that he’s been pressured by the government in Tokyo, a Japanese prosecutor announced on Friday the decsion to release a Chinese fishing boat captain who had been held for two weeks

He said the decision came after “careful consideration of future Japan-China relations” and the repercussions caused by the incident, according to the Japan Times.

However, it also came a day after the Chinese arrested four Japanese contractors in China. The Japanese have had no contact with the abducted contractors, according to Yomiuri (Japan).

A survey by the Mainichi Times (Japan) indicates, not surprisingly, that many foreign media outlets are saying that Japan is bowing to China’s pressure.

According to the official Chinese news service Xinhua, Japan has not yet done enough to atone for its action. The demand from China’s Foreign Ministry is that the Japanese must apologize and pay compensation for the incident. “Such an act seriously infringed upon China’s territorial sovereignty and violated the human rights of Chinese citizens. Japan’s detention, investigation or any form of judiciary measures for the Chinese trawler and fishermen are unlawful and invalid.”

The Japanese had arrested the fishing trawler captain because his boat was fishing in waters surrounding the Senkaka Islands (called the Diaoyu Islands by the Chinese), and those waters are claimed by both countries. The statement from China’s Foreign Ministry claims that the Diaoyu Islands and surrounding islets have been “China’s inherent territory since the ancient time and China possesses undisputable sovereignty over the islands.” It adds, “The stance of the Chinese side has not and will not change.”

A new statement by Japan’s Foreign Ministry indicates that a new confrontation may be close by. The Wall Street Journal (Access) reports that Japan’s new Foreign Minister Seiji Maehara has warned China against starting drilling in a gas field near the disputed islands, saying that Japan would take countermeasures if evidence of Chinese gas extraction work is confirmed.

Aerial photographs taken by Japan’s Self-Defense Forces revealed that the Chinese had transferred some “equipment” to the gas field, according to the article.

In my opinion, this whole situation is a really big deal.

Sarkozy declares victory over striking labor unions

A bill to raise France’s legal retirement age from 60 to 62 triggered nationwide strikes by France’s public service unions on Thursday.

President Nicolas Sarkozy claimed victory after government estimates indicated the size of the protest was smaller than a similar protest staged on Septeber 7, according to the Telegraph. However, the unions disputed this finding, and claimed that the protests were in fact larger.

The next two days of strikes and demonstrations will be October 2 and October 12. According to Bloomberg, the unions chose the Oct 2 date because it’s a Saturday, and will therefore permit more people to participate in the demonstrations and protests.

This whole situation has become something of an international joke because French labor unions are demanding that the retirement age remain at 60, while other European countries have increased their retirement ages to 65 or even 67.

Additional links

“China’s military spending is growing so fast that it has overtaken strategy,” says a China expert from Singapore. “The young officers are taking control of strategy and it is like young officers in Japan in the 1930s. They are thinking what they can do, not what they should do. This is very dangerous. They are on a collision course with a US-dominated system.” Presumably, the ‘young officers’ correspond to America’s Generation-X. Telegraph

Friction is rising between China and its Asian neighbors, with the result that the United States is beginning to look better and better to the neighbors. NY Times.

Three people — two Russian cosmonauts and one American astronaut — were stuck in space on Friday, when a Russian space craft that was supposed to bring them all back to earth failed to undock from the International Space Station. It’s believed that the problem is in a sensor, and they will try again over the weekend. Ria Novosti

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is meeting with Palestinian and Israeli leaders to try to prevent total collapse of the Mideast peace talks when the settlement freeze expires on Sunday. Reuters

Britain is facing a new terrorism threat: A revival of Irish-related terrorism by dissident republican groups trying to copy the Provisional IRA (Irish Republican Army). However, this threat is not as great as the threat from international terrorism. BBC

The United States and South Korea will hold a new round of joint naval exercises, to last for five days. The exercises will emphasize anti-submarine warfare. VOA

(Comments: For reader comments, questions and discussion, see the 25-Sep-10 News — Japan kowtows to China over trawler captain thread of the Generational Dynamics forum. Comments may be posted anonymously.) (25-Sep-2010) Permanent Link

The Collapse Of Western Morality

By Paul Craig Roberts

Yes, I know, as many readers will be quick to inform me, the West never had any morality. Nevertheless things have gotten worse.

In hopes that I will be permitted to make a point, permit me to acknowledge that the US dropped nuclear bombs on two Japanese cities, fire-bombed Tokyo; that Great Britain and the US fire-bombed Dresden and a number of other German cities, expending more destructive force, according to some historians, against the civilian German population than against the German armies; that President Grant and his Civil War war criminals, Generals Sherman and Sheridan, committed genocide against the Plains Indians; that the US today enables Israel’s genocidal policies against the Palestinians, policies that one Israeli official has compared to 19th century US genocidal policies against the American Indians; that the US in the new 21st century invaded Iraq and Afghanistan on contrived pretenses, murdering countless numbers of civilians; and that British prime minister Tony Blair lent the British army to his American masters, as did other NATO countries, all of whom find themselves committing war crimes under the Nuremberg standard in lands in which they have no national interests, but for which they receive an American pay check.

I don’t mean these few examples to be exhaustive. I know the list goes on and on. Still, despite the long list of horrors, moral degradation is reaching new lows. The US now routinely tortures prisoners, despite its strict illegality under US and international law, and a recent poll shows that the percentage of Americans who approve of torture is rising. Indeed, it is quite high, though still just below a majority.

And we have what appears to be a new thrill: American soldiers using the cover of war to murder civilians. Recently American troops were arrested for murdering Afghan civilians for fun and collecting trophies such as fingers and skulls.

This revelation came on the heels of Pfc. Bradley Manning’s alleged leak of a US Army video of US soldiers in helicopters and their controllers thousands of miles away having fun with joy sticks murdering members of the press and Afghan civilians. Manning is cursed with a moral conscience that has been discarded by his government and his military, and Manning has been arrested for obeying the law and reporting a war crime to the American people.

US Rep. Mike Rogers, a Republican, of course, from Michigan, who is on the House Subcommittee on Terrorism, has called for Manning’s execution. According to US Rep. Rogers it is an act of treason to report an American war crime.

In other words, to obey the law constitutes “treason to America.”

US Rep. Rogers said that America’s wars are being undermined by “a culture of disclosure” and that this “serious and growing problem” could only be stopped by the execution of Manning.

If Rep. Rogers is representative of Michigan, then Michigan is a state that we don’t need.

The US government, a font of imperial hubris, does not believe that any act it commits, no matter how vile, can possibly be a war crime. One million dead Iraqis, a ruined country, and four million displaced Iraqis are all justified, because the “threatened” US Superpower had to protect itself from nonexistent weapons of mass destruction that the US government knew for a fact were not in Iraq and could not have been a threat to the US if they were in Iraq.

When other countries attempt to enforce the international laws that the Americans established in order to execute Germans defeated in World War II, the US government goes to work and blocks the attempt. A year ago on October 8, the Spanish Senate, obeying its American master, limited Spain’s laws of universal jurisdiction in order to sink a legitimate war crimes case brought against George W. Bush, Barack H. Obama, Tony Blair,and Gordon Brown.

The West includes Israel, and there the horror stories are 60 years long. Moreover, if you mention any of them you are declared to be an anti-semite. I only mention them in order to prove that I am not anti-American, anti-British, and anti-NATO, but am simply against war crimes.

It was the distinguished Zionist Jewish Judge, Goldstone, who produced the UN report indicating that Israel committed war crimes when it attacked the civilian population and civilian infrastructure of Gaza. For his efforts, Israel declared the Zionist Goldstone to be “a self-hating Jew,” and the US Congress, on instruction from the Israel Lobby, voted to disregard the Goldstone Report to the UN.

As the Israeli official said, we are only doing to the Palestinians what the Americans did to the American Indians.

The Israeli army uses female soldiers to sit before video screens and to fire by remote control machine guns from towers to murder Palestinians who come to tend their fields within 1500 meters of the inclosed perimeter of Ghetto Gaza. There is no indication that these Israeli women are bothered by gunning down young children and old people who come to tend to their fields.

If the crimes were limited to war and the theft of lands, perhaps we could say it is a case of jingoism sidetracking traditional morality, otherwise still in effect.

Alas, the collapse of morality is too widespread. Some sports teams now have a win-at-all-cost attitude that involves plans to injure the star players of the opposing teams. To avoid all these controversies, let’s go to Formula One racing where 200 mph speeds are routine.

Prior to 1988, 22 years ago, track deaths were due to driver error, car failure, and poorly designed tracks compromised with safety hazards. World Champion Jackie Stewart did much to improve the safety of tracks, both for drivers and spectators.

But in 1988 everything changed. Top driver Ayrton Senna nudged another top driver Alain Prost toward a pit wall at 190 mph. According to AutoWeek (August 30, 2010), nothing like this had been seen before. “Officials did not punish Senna’s move that day in Portugal, and so a significant shift in racing began.” What the great racing driver Stirling Moss called “dirty driving” became the norm.

Nigel Roebuck in AutoWeek reports that in 1996 World Champion Damon Hill said that Senna’s win-at-all-cost tactic “was responsible for fundamental change in the ethics of the sport.” Drivers began using “terrorist tactics on the track.” Damon Hill said that “the views that I’d gleaned from being around my dad [twice world champion Graham Hill] and people like him, I soon had to abandon,” because you realized that no penalty was forthcoming against the guy who tried to kill you in order that he could win.

When asked about the ethics of modern Formula One racing, American World Champion Phil Hill said: “Doing that sort of stuff in my day was just unthinkable. For one thing, we believed certain tactics were unacceptable.”

In today’s Western moral climate, driving another talented driver into the wall at 200 mph is just part of winning.

Michael Schumacher, born in January 1969, is a seven times World Champion, an unequaled record. On August 1 at the Hungarian Grand Prix, AutoWeek Reports that Schumacher tried to drive his former Ferrari teammate, Rubens Barrichello, into the wall at 200 mph speeds.

Confronted with his attempted act of murder, Schumacher said: “This is Formula One. Everyone knows I don’t give presents.”

Neither does the US government, nor state and local governments, nor the UK government, nor the EU.

The deformation of the police, which many Americans, in their untutored existence as naive believers in “law and order,” still think are “on their side,” has taken on new dimensions with the police militarized to fight “terrorists” and “domestic extremists.”

The police have been off the leash since the civilian police boards were nixed by the conservatives. Kids as young as 6 years old have been handcuffed and carted off to jail for school infractions that may or may not have occurred. So have moms with a car full of children (see, for example, this video.).

Anyone who Googles videos of US police gratuitous brutality will call up tens of thousands of examples, and this is after laws that make filming police brutality a felony. A year or two ago such a search would call up hundreds of thousands of videos.

In one of the most recent of the numerous daily acts of gratuitous police abuse of citizens, an 84-year-old man had his neck broken because he objected to a night time towing of his car. The goon cop body-slammed the 84-year old and broke his neck. The Orlando, Florida, police department says that the old man was a “threat” to the well-armed, much younger police goon, because the old man clenched his fist.

Americans will be the first people sent straight to Hell while thinking that they are the salt of the earth.

The Americans have even devised a title for themselves to rival that of the Israelis’ self-designation as “God’s Chosen People.” The Americans call themselves “the indispensable people.” Paul Craig Roberts [email him] was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury during President Reagan’s first term.  He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal.  He has held numerous academic appointments, including the William E. Simon Chair, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Georgetown University, and Senior Research Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University. He was awarded the Legion of Honor by French President Francois Mitterrand. He is the author of Supply-Side Revolution : An Insider’s Account of Policymaking in Washington; Alienation and the Soviet Economy and Meltdown: Inside the Soviet Economy, and is the co-author with Lawrence M. Stratton of The Tyranny of Good Intentions : How Prosecutors and Bureaucrats Are Trampling the Constitution in the Name of Justice. Click here for Peter Brimelow’s Forbes Magazine interview with Roberts about the recent epidemic of prosecutorial misconduct.

What The U.S. Must Learn From Japan’s Kowtow To China and Americas march towards war with China.

What The U.S. Must Learn From Japan’s Kowtow To China

By Patrick J. Buchanan

Hubris will do it every time.

The Chinese have just made a serious strategic blunder.

They dropped the mask and showed their scowling face to Asia, exposing how the Middle Kingdom intends to deal with smaller powers, now that she is the largest military and economic force in Asia and second largest on earth.

A fortnight ago, a Chinese trawler rammed a Japanese patrol boat in the Senkaku Islands, administered by Japan but also claimed by China. Tokyo released the ship and crew, but held the captain.

His immediate return was demanded by Beijing.

Japan refused. China instantly escalated the minor incident into a major confrontation, threatening a cut off of Japan’s supply of “rare-earth” materials, essential to the production of missiles, batteries and computers.

Through predatory trading, China had killed its U.S. competitor in rare-earth materials, establishing almost a global monopoly.

The world depends on China.

Japan capitulated and released the captain.

Now Beijing has decided to rub Japan’s nose in her humiliation by demanding a full apology and compensation.

Suddenly, the world sees, no longer as through a glass darkly, the China that has emerged from a quarter century of American indulgence, patronage and tutelage since Tiananmen Square.

The Chinese tiger is all grown up, and it’s not cuddly anymore.

And with Beijing’s threat to use its monopoly of rare-earth materials to bend nations to its will, how does the Milton Friedmanite free-trade ideology of the Republican Party, which fed Beijing $2 trillion in trade surpluses at America’s expense over two decades, look now?

How do all those lockstep Republican votes for Most Favored Nation status for Beijing, ushering her into the World Trade Organization and looking the other way as China dumped into our markets, thieved our technology and carted off our factories look today?

The self-sufficient Republic that could stand alone in the world is more dependent than Japan on China for rare-earth elements vital to our industries, for the necessities of our daily life, and for the loans to finance our massive trade and budget deficits.

How does the interdependence of nations in a global economy look now, compared to the independence American patriots from Alexander Hamilton to Calvin Coolidge guaranteed to us, that enabled us to win World War II in Europe and the Pacific in less than four years?

Yet China’s bullying of Japan is beneficial, for it may wake us up to the world as it is, as it has been, and ever shall be.

Consider.

China now claims all the Paracel and Spratly islands in the South China Sea, though Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines, Taiwan and Brunei border that sea. To reinforce her claim, a Chinese fighter jet crashed a U.S EP-3 surveillance plane 80 miles off Hainan Island in 2001. Not until Secretary of State Colin Powell apologized twice did China agree to release the American crew.

China’s claim to the Senkakus (the Diaoyu Islands to the Chinese) was emphasized last week. While these are largely volcanic rocks rather than habitable islands, ownership would give a nation a powerful claim to all the oil, gas and minerals in the East China Sea.

China has repeatedly warned the United States to keep its warships, especially carriers, out of the 100-mile-wide Taiwan Strait. On the mainland opposite, Beijing has planted 1,000 missiles to convince Taipei of the futility and cost of declaring independence.

When the U.S. Navy launched exercises with South Korea after the sinking of South Korea’s warship Cheonan by the North, China threatened the United States should it move the 97,000-ton carrier George Washington into the Yellow Sea between Korea and China. The carrier stayed out of the Yellow Sea and remained east of the Korean Peninsula.

In addition to her claims to sovereignty over all the seas off her southern and eastern coasts, China occupies a large tract of Indian land in the Aksai Chin area of India’s northwest. Thousands of square miles were seized by Beijing in the 1962 war with New Delhi—and annexed.

In 1969, China and the Soviet Union battled on the Amur and Ussuri rivers over lands Czar Alexander I seized at the end of that bloodiest war of the 19th century, the Chinese civil war known as the Taiping Rebellion. Leonid Brezhnev reportedly sounded out the Nixon White House on U.S. reaction to Soviet use of atomic weapons to effect the nuclear castration of Mao’s China.

China’s claims to her lost lands in Siberia and the Russian Far East have not been forgotten in Beijing, and remain on Chinese maps.

How should America respond?

As none of these territorial disputes involves our vital interests, we should stay out and let free Asia get a good close look at the new China.

Then explore the depths of our own dependency on this bellicose Beijing and determine how to restore our economic independence.

Ending the trade deficit with China now becomes a matter of national security.

COPYRIGHT CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.

Patrick J. Buchanan needs no introduction to VDARE.COM readers; his book State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and Conquest of America, can be ordered from Amazon.com. His latest book is Churchill, Hitler, and “The Unnecessary War”: How Britain Lost Its Empire and the West Lost the World, reviewed here by Paul Craig Roberts.

The Rise Of The Egalitarian Society Means The Death Of The Free Society

By Patrick J. Buchanan

If you would understand why America has lost the dynamism she had in the 1950s and 1960s, consider the new Paycheck Fairness Act passed by the House 256 to 162.

The need for such a law, writes Valerie Jarrett, the ranking woman in Barack Obama’s White House, is that “working women are still paid only 77 cents for every dollar earned by a man.”

But why is that a concern of the U.S. government, and where is the empirical evidence that an inequality of pay between the sexes is proof of sexist hostility to women?

On average, Asians earn more than Hispanics; blacks less than whites. Mormons earn more than Muslims; Jews more than Jehovah’s Witnesses. And Polish Americans earn more than Puerto Ricans.

Does that prove America is a racist and religiously bigoted country?

The assumption of the Jarrett-backed law is that the sexes are equal in capacity, aptitude, drive and interest, and if there is a disparity in pay, only bigotry can explain it.

But are there not other, simpler answers for why women earn less?

Perhaps half of American women leave the job market during their lives, sometimes for decades, to raise children, which puts them behind men who never leave the workforce. Women gravitate to teaching, nursing, secretarial and service work, which pay less than jobs where men predominate: mining, manufacturing, construction and the military.

Over 95 percent of our 40,000 dead and wounded from Afghanistan and Iraq were men. Men in prison outnumber women 10 to one. Is that the result of sex discrimination?

Sports have become a national obsession, and among the most rewarded professions in fame and fortune. And TV viewers prefer to watch male athletes compete in baseball, basketball, football, hockey, golf, tennis and boxing.

Is unequal pay for men and women professional athletes a matter for the government?

Larry Summers lost his job as president of Harvard for suggesting that women have less aptitude for higher math and that may explain why they are underrepresented on Ivy League faculties in the sciences, economics and math. Would not that male aptitude help explain why men are dominant in investment banking and corporate finance, where salaries are among the highest?

Jarrett wants to empower the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to more closely monitor all businesses until women reach pay parity.

But if inequality of pay is a result of human nature and a free society, a greater equality of rewards can only be achieved through coercion, a government declaring its value, economic parity, to be supreme, and imposing its value and its preferred pay structure upon employers.

If this is where America is headed, why not go all the way and dictate that Asians and Hispanics, Muslims and Jews, women and men, blacks and whites, gay and straight must all be paid the exact same for the same work—and let the EEOC hire 100,000 more bureaucrats to see that it happens?

Would that be a great country or a socialist hell?

And before we empower the EEOC to monitor every business for sexism and racism, perhaps the commissioners will explain why African-Americans are 40 percent of all EEOC employees, while only 10 percent of the civilian labor force. Not a single white male sits on the commission.

Whence comes this egalitarian fanaticism?

Not from our Declaration of Independence, which spoke of all men being equal in their Creator-endowed rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Nor from the America Revolution, which was about liberty not equality, not this alien ideology of egalitarianism.

Equality is not even mentioned in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights, and the 14th Amendment’s “equal protection” clause did not even make an appearance until after the Civil War. And that was about equal justice under law, not the socioeconomic equality of all Americans.

No, this egalitarian ideology is traceable to the French Revolution, where the royalty and aristocracy went to the guillotine in the name of “egalite.”

Under the Paycheck Fairness Act, writes Jarrett, “employers will be required to prove in court that any wage differences were based on factors other than sex—such as education, training or experience—and were consistent with business necessity.”

In short, women alleging sexist practices by their bosses do not have to prove their guilt. The boss must prove his innocence. This is another way of saying businessman are to be presumed guilty when charged.

If that is not un-American, it surely once was.

Should this bill become law, the effects are predictable: more forms to be filled out by businesses, more bureaucrats for the EEOC, more charges of sex discrimination, more class-action suits, more fines, more lawyers getting rich via the litigious looting of the private sector.

America’s decline is directly related to the growth in government power and the concomitant loss of freedom.

Except in God-given and constitutional rights, we are not equal. We are all unequal. The utopian promise of equality is but the banner of every power-hungry politician in modern history. And the rise of the egalitarian society means the death of the free society.

COPYRIGHT CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.

Patrick J. Buchanan needs no introduction to VDARE.COM readers; his book State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and Conquest of America, can be ordered from Amazon.com. His latest book is Churchill, Hitler, and “The Unnecessary War”: How Britain Lost Its Empire and the West Lost the World, reviewed here by Paul Craig Roberts.

The Pledge To America- Republican Establishment Not Fit To Rule

The Pledge To America: A Sucker’s Bet

The Republicans have released their “Hail Mary” playbook for the mid-term elections, and it’s called “The Pledge To America.” To describe this as a cynical effort to dupe the American people would be an insult to cynics and con men everywhere. The GOP has dealt the cards as the house, and they are hoping and praying that the American people will make a Sucker’s Bet in November.

What is a “Sucker’s Bet”? It’s a gamble that someone makes based on a false view of the odds. The gambler believes he has a higher likelihood of winning than he actually does. In most cases, the sucker does not realize he is being put at a disadvantage. It’s not until the gamblers come up short that they realize that the house always wins.

So what’s this particular “Sucker’s Bet?” It will happen when the American people believe the Republicans and vote for them based upon what the media is telling them is in The Pledge To America. I say that because the Pledge is 21 pages long. Very few Americans will actually read it…they’ll just believe what the media tells them it says. Americans will actually believe that these criminals in DC want to obey the Constitution and will act accordingly in every way.

The Republicans are SAYING all the right Conservative things to America in the Pledge in a desperate plea to regain control of Congress. They know that Americans hold Congress members in lower esteem than even drug dealers, child molesters and used car salesmen. And they also know that all they have to do to win over most Americans is SAY the right things. America seldom watches the things that the Republicans DO, and holds them accountable for their tyranny and perfidy even less often.

This Pledge is not about legal, moral or ethical governance. It is a desperate ploy to regain control…and power.

(This Pledge To America is a smoothly written fraud. Read it for yourself.)

The Republicans have heard the sermon…so to speak, and are entering the confessional booth. They have written a 21-page confession of their many sins. Let’s hit the highlights…or the new heights in low.

The general overview of the Pledge is that the Republicans…using the inclusive term “Washington”…have confessed to the crimes of violating the Constitution over decades. May we now prosecute them?

Here is a quote from page one:

”In a self-governing society, the only bulwark against the power of the state is the consent of the governed, and regarding the policies of the current government, the governed do not consent.
An unchecked executive, a compliant legislature, and an overreaching judiciary have combined to thwart the will of the people and overturn their votes and their values, striking down long-standing laws and institutions and scorning the deepest beliefs of the American people.
An arrogant and out-of-touch government of self-appointed elites makes decisions, issues mandates, and enacts laws without accepting or requesting the input of the many.”

The “deepest beliefs of the American people” don’t matter one whit. If you believe that the United States Constitution is the supreme law of the land, then law is supreme to all beliefs. And Washington has flouted the law for at least 160 years.

Here are more excerpts from pages one and two, with my comments in bold:

”With this document, we pledge to dedicate ourselves to the task of reconnecting our highest aspirations to the permanent truths of our founding by keeping faith with the values our nation was founded on, the principles we stand for, and the priorities of our people. This is our Pledge to America. Look at all the warm fuzzy words here which are devoid of definitions. The words they used are cleverly crafted to evoke feelings, but mean nothing.

“We pledge to honor the Constitution as constructed by its framers and honor the original intent of those precepts that have been consistently ignored – particularly the Tenth Amendment, which grants that all powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” What does it mean to honor the Constitution? There is not one word of commitment to abiding by the law, nor what penalty they would anticipate when the Constitution is violated.

“We pledge to advance policies that promote greater liberty, wider opportunity, a robust defense, and national economic prosperity.”Dear God, where do I start? (a) to promote greater liberty, decades of regulation and taxation have to be cast aside. Property rights have to be once again protected. (b) promoting wider opportunity is much the same as (a), (c) promote a robust defense is clearly undefined…as we’ll see later in the article, and (d) promote national economic prosperity goes right back to (a). It is impossible for Washington to promote any of these four features without slashing the size of Washington’s government down to its Constitutionally-authorized size.

“We pledge to honor families, traditional marriage, life, and the private and faith-based organizations that form the core of our American values.” Once again, what does it mean to “honor” anything? The Federal Government has no business whatsoever being involved in any of these four human behaviors.

“We pledge to make government more transparent in its actions, careful in its stewardship, and honest in its dealings.” Being transparent, careful and honest would be great things. But they give no details, and do not recognize that others in government might disagree with their interpretations of moral good.

“We pledge to uphold the purpose and promise of a better America, knowing that to whom much is given, much is expected and that the blessings of our liberty buoy the hopes of mankind.” Once again, warm fuzzy words cleverly crafted to illicit feelings. I don’t want them to manipulate my feelings. I want them to obey the damned law. My feelings will get REAL warm and fuzzy when I’m not regulated and taxed to death and beyond.

“We make this pledge bearing true faith and allegiance to the people we represent, and we invite fellow citizens and patriots to join us in forming a new governing agenda for America.” Washington, you’ve ALL already taken an Oath of Office in which you swore you would protect and defend the Constitution. Does your Pledge have the weight of law? Why should we believe that you’ll keep your Pledge when you haven’t kept your Oath?

Now let’s look at key points on various pages of this vacuous Pledge To America:

Page four: First, their very words prove that they have no concept of what jobs are. They think jobs are things that can be magically created…not the labor component of a product or service when a business fills a market need. They pledge to create jobs by stopping tax hikes and “allowing” small business to have a 20% tax deduction. They still think that small business’ income belongs to them, and they are going to “allow” them to keep more. Nothing here about scrapping the IRS and the income tax.

They will repeal the new health care law, and “rein in the red-tape factory.” Not a word about repealing decades of monstrous regulation by all the Federal bureaucracies presently existing. They only want to restrict NEW regulations.

Page five: They pledge to roll back government spending to “pre-stimulus, pre-bailout levels, saving us $100 Billion in the first year…” That’s only 4% of a $2.5 Trillion budget…and we all know that Washington spends a lot more off-budget. Nothing is said about slashing spending below a couple trillion a year.

They pledge to reform the budget process. They pledge to require any bill introduced to Congress to have Constitutional authority attached. But they didn’t say that they would throw out all bills not meeting Constitutional muster. Further, most of the stuff done over the last 150 years was done under the Commerce Clause. So is someone going to begin interpreting original intent of the Constitution? Deadly silence about that, folks. And they pledge that Congress members will have a whopping THREE DAYS to read any new bill before a vote.

They pledge to keep the Guantanamo base open to house the “enemy combatants” captured in a non-declared war. They pledge to “fully support” our troops scattered over the globe, fully fund missile defense, and enforce sanctions against Iran. Nothing here about bringing ALL foreign-based military personnel home inside American borders and minding our own business. And the pledge to “act decisively” to protect our borders…whatever the hell that means.

Page ten – thirteen: They SAY they want a “fact-based conversation” with America about reigning in Federal Spending. But until the Feds disclose all their spending this is Bullshyt. Page eleven talks about cutting spending to pre-stimulus levels. That’s all? They talk about a hard cap on NEW discretionary spending. What about rolling back OLD discretionary spending? In addition, within a few years, just the interest on the Federal debt will be greater than ALL discretionary spending. Not a word about that.

Page fourteen: Repeal the new health care law. But they want to write their own new reforms, not just leave the medical insurance industry alone. Remember that this subject is all about MEDICAL INSURANCE, not health care.

Page seventeen and eighteen: Reforming Congress. Incredibly, their reform is to have Congress read the bills and adhere to the Constitution. Merely obeying the law is considered reform for Congress.

Page nineteen: National Security at home and abroad. The Republicans still cannot see nor will admit that terrorism exists because we have troops in foreign lands, and those nations’ citizens want our troops to leave. So, Republicans pledge to continue policies such as Homeland Security, fully-funded foreign military missions, and sanctions against Iran, predicated upon monstrous government lies.

Page twenty: Republicans think that our problems lie in strengthening visa security and gaining operational control of our borders…which really means the Mexican border. But there is not a word in here about not interfering with Southwestern states as they secure their borders .

Page twenty one: The stated, written summary in the pledge is that the Republicans intend to be the “Checks And Balances” against schemes that are against the “priorities and rights of the American people.” There is not one word here about the STATES being the checks and balances of a runaway Washington government. They still think it’s ALL ABOUT THEM!!!

My concluding comments: There is not a word in this Pledge about auditing the Federal Reserve…or stripping the central bank of its authority…or auditing the US gold supply…or saving the dollar…or paying off the trillions of dollars of debt. Monetary policy is what will cause the collapse of the American economy, with the assistance of Congressional cupidity and stupidity.

The GOP wants to blame all America’s ills on the Democrats and the Obama Administration. Look at all the times that the Republicans controlled the Congress in the last twenty years. Then add in the years that the Republicans controlled the Congress and the White House. Where were all these commitments when they had all the power? Did spending, regulation, national debt and war-making all diminish in those years? Did stimulus spending start with a Republican President or a Democrat President?

Further, even if the Republicans swept back into the Congressional majority in both houses, there is the tiny complication of the Democrats in the minority. The system will not change. Republicans dominating Congress will not substantively affect the gigantic Federal bureaucracies that rumble along unimpeded.

Remember the old adage, “Actions speak louder than words.”

Also remember the definition of the word “credulous:” The readiness or willingness to believe, especially upon slight or uncertain evidence.”

The “Pledge to America” are the words of ideologues, hearkening back to real Conservatism. These are the principals of men who will not compromise. These are the ways that statesmen would behave. Men and women of these very principles would hold these principles as inviolable, and would never negotiate their principles away to get a bill passed.

However, we know these men and women who populate the Republican Party of 2010. All they do is compromise. Their actions are as far removed from this Pledge as night is from day. In the years in which they held the Congress, or in the years in which they held the Congress AND the White House, they did not accomplish ANY of these things which they now name as their bedrock principles.

But they want Americans to believe that they have now seen the light…that God met them on the mountain, and they are bringing us the new tablets scrolled in God’s own handwriting. The masses WANT TO BELIEVE. The Tea Partiers, the Tenth Amendment guys, the Article V enthusiasts, the Glenn Beck fans, the Rush dittoheads…they ALL want to believe that American can be saved. So, for the most part, this farcical Kabuki theater will convince the credulous Americans.

Finally…if you read the Pledge To America, do you see any signatures of any Republicans affixed below the pledges? This 21-page piece of fiction is neither contract nor treaty. There is no force of law behind it. There are no penalties for non-compliance. These are the ramblings of deluded men and women who will say anything to regain the power they once enjoyed and abused. Just like the lowest heroin addict or the most pathetic crystal meth user, there is nothing they would not do to get another power fix. They will sell themselves and you and all our children to get back the power.

No, Ladies and Gentlemen. A pledge is not sufficient as the hope for liberty here in America. Keeping the United States together as a hopelessly broken Empire is not the answer.

Secession is the hope for mankind. Who will be first?

DumpDC. Six Letters That Can Change History.

© Copyright 2010, Russell D. Longcore. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.

Republican Establishment Not Fit To Rule

By Patrick J. Buchanan

Is the Republican Establishment losing it?

Is the party leadership capable of uniting a governing coalition as Richard Nixon did before Watergate and Ronald Reagan resurrected in the 1980s?

Observing the hysteria and nastiness of Karl Rove and the GOP Establishment at the stunning triumph of Tea Party Princess Christine O’Donnell, the answer is no.

This party is not ready to rule.

Consider. In its grand strategy to recapture a Senate that George W. Bush and Rove lost in 2006, the GOP Senate leadership endorsed all its own caucus members for re-election, if they chose to run, then picked out all its favorite candidates for the open and Democratic seats.

Conservatives and Tea Party activists, however, had other ideas. They began to pick their own candidates. And, again and again, the Senate’s chosen were rejected in favor of Tea Party challengers who had the endorsement of Sarah Palin or South Carolina’s Jim DeMint.

Arlen Specter was rejected by the Pennsylvania GOP and left the party. Rand Paul routed Sen. Mitch McConnell’s man in Kentucky. Charlie Crist was challenged by Marco Rubio in Florida. Crist, too, departed. Sen. Bob Bennett was denied renomination in Utah. Sen. Lisa Murkowski lost her primary in Alaska to a little-known fellow named Joe Miller.

But Delaware was the stunner. Rep. Mike Castle, a former two-term governor who had been winning elections for 40 years, was a certain victor in November.

Challenger O’Donnell, however, ended all that.

Yet, though her conservative credentials are far superior to those of Castle, O’Donnell was made the object of a wilding attack by National Review and The Weekly Standard, Charles Krauthammer, who lashed out at Palin and DeMint for “irresponsibility,” and Rove, who on Sean Hannity’s show went postal as soon as the returns came in.

Now, on paper, O’Donnell is a far tougher sell in Delaware than is Castle. But her defeat is not certain. Not in this volatile year.

And what is the justification for the savagery of the attacks on her, from her own?

What has this woman done? Did she vote for Sonia Sotomayor or Elena Kagan for the Supreme Court like Lindsey Graham? Did she support the Obama stimulus like Olympia Snow and Susan Collins? What did she do to deserve the trashing?

The answer is not distant.

To the Republican Establishment, Tea Party people are field hands. Their labors are to be recognized and rewarded, but they are to stay off the porch and not presume to sit at the master’s table.

And what O’Donnell did, with her amazing victory, is to imperil that Establishment’s return to power. That is why these Republicans went ballistic.

O’Donnell’s conservative convictions and Castle’s social liberalism mean nothing to them.

They are about power and all that goes with it.

And that raises a question too long put off.

What is the Republican Establishment going to do, what are the neoconservatives going to do, if returned to power?

Are not these the same people who assisted George W. Bush in stampeding the nation into an unnecessary war that got 4,400 Americans killed to strip Saddam Hussein of weapons he did not have?

Are these not the same people who misled or deceived us about Iraq’s role in 9/11?

Are these Republican scribes and senators not the same folks who went all-out for NAFTA and GATT and the WTO and MFN and PNTR for China, those brilliant trade deals that gave us $5 trillion in trade deficits, wiped out 6 million manufacturing jobs and 50,000 factories in one decade, and put us into permanent debt to China?

Are these not some of the same folks who backed the Bush-McCain amnesty and did nothing for 20 years, as millions of illegals invaded America? Now that all America is on fire, they too want to “build the dang fence.”

Are not the National Review and Weekly Standard scribblers and their neocon comrades of the Main Stream Media not now drumming up another war for Americans to fight, against Iran?

Are these not the same folks who went along with No Child Left Behind and the biggest run-up in social spending since Great Society days?

Beltway Republicans say they have learned their lesson. But the Tea Party folks and conservatives who vaulted O’Donnell to victory are saying: You had your chance. Now, move aside for new leaders.

Why is the Tea Party wrong — and the Establishment right?

The first Tea Party rebellion was the Barry Goldwater movement. When it triumphed at the Cow Palace, Nelson Rockefeller denounced the movement as riddled with radicals, baited the Goldwater people at the convention and refused to endorse the nominee.

A decade later, Vice President Rockefeller got his payback, when conservatives demanded that President Ford drop him off the ticket as the price of renomination. Ford agreed.

In its contemptuous response to O’Donnell’s victory, the GOP Establishment of today looked like nothing so much as the Rockefeller Republican Establishment of yesteryear. Its time is coming, too.

COPYRIGHT CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.

Patrick J. Buchanan needs no introduction to VDARE.COM readers; his book State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and Conquest of America, can be ordered from Amazon.com. His latest book is Churchill, Hitler, and “The Unnecessary War”: How Britain Lost Its Empire and the West Lost the World, reviewed here by Paul Craig Roberts.

What Would Life Be Like Under Martial Law? (Exerpts)

September 29, 2010

by Giordano Bruno, Neithercorp

The U.S. Federal Government under both the Bush and Obama administrations has made it perfectly clear that in the event of almost any major disaster scenario, including economic and environmental, they see the institution of Martial Law as not only viable, but inexorable. From legislative actions like the Patriot Act and the Enemy Belligerents Act (currently in committee) to continuity of government programs such as Rex 84 (formerly classified) and Presidential Directive PDD 51 (currently classified, even from Congress), all the “legal” precedents have been put into place to allow the Executive Branch to implement military oversight of civilian affairs, dissolution of Constitutional liberties, even the end of Miranda Rights and the right to a speedy impartial trial as protected under the Sixth Amendment. In some cases, government legislation allows for the rendition and torture of American citizens as combatants, all for the “greater good”, of course…

Some in this country dismiss such bills and directives as abstract novelties that don’t constitute any real threat to our freedoms or our daily life. People have a tendency to assume that the atmosphere we live in today will remain the same tomorrow and always. Many of us never consider that dramatic, even violent change in American domestic policy is possible on a moment’s notice. On the contrary, the continuity legislation now in place shows that our government under the direction of corporate globalists is not only prepared to implement a military lockdown of this country, they fully anticipate that such an event will occur in the near future.

In this article, we will examine how Martial Law will be presented to the citizens of the U.S., how it would likely evolve and progress, and what the ultimate end result will be if such action is not stopped by the Liberty Movement and the American public.

A “Reasonable” Tyranny

Tyranny does not always burst through your front door wearing body armor and brandishing an assault rifle. Sometimes, it waltzes through your living room and sweeps you off your feet. Sometimes it wears a glad mask that promises warmth and safety. Sometimes, tyranny invites you out to the party and makes you feel like you belong.

NEVER leave your drink unattended around tyranny…

Regardless of how apathetic the American public may seem at any given moment, the majority of them at their core hate false authority backed by thuggish jackboot mentality when directly faced with it, and will not capitulate to despotism easily. That’s just the way we are. Revolution is in our blood (though now slightly diluted), and it is an undeniable aspect of our national psyche. Widespread and immediate military control of U.S. streets would be met with a fury the world has never seen. If martial law were ever to be achieved by the Federal Government, it would have to be presented to Americans gradually, as absolutely reasonable and necessary to their personal well being not to mention that of their family. Globalists would have to twist the reality of martial law into a tapestry of fuzzy logic and two dimensional rationalizations, making the action appear almost mathematically evident. They would also need a crisis on a scale nearly beyond belief.

The U.S. is on the verge of many such crises. The economic health of this country is blatantly unstable, and even some mainstream analysts who called us “fear mongers” six months ago are now reluctantly admitting that some form of collapse is probable.

Under circumstances like these, people tend to allow their fear to dictate what is “reasonable” at the moment. Principles often take a back seat to “moral relativity” in the face of misfortune, even though wisdom demands that principles be held as most important in the worst of times. Freedom and civilian control over government are vital not just when our wallets are stuffed, our stomachs are fed, and the weather is mild, but when the threat of national upheaval hangs in the sky like a sun-baked vulture. When an early and unpleasant demise becomes a distinct possibility for a significant majority of the citizenry, this is when liberty should take precedence over all things.

One argument is always presented by tyrants and their flock during the initial stages of social enslavement: “You can’t enjoy freedom if you are dead. It is always better to be alive, no matter the cost.”

However, what they fail to mention is that it is exceedingly difficult to enjoy being alive when you are a modern feudal peasant whose destiny is subject to the whim of power hungry corporatists and madmen. There is nothing meaningful in that kind of life, just as there is nothing meaningful in the life of a cog in a great machine except to turn around and around. You can’t enjoy freedom if you are dead, but you also can’t enjoy living if you’re not free.

At the beginning of any autocratic system, total authoritarian control is almost always presented as a panacea, a wonder-drug for the masses. When confronted with epic struggle, some people would rather defer responsibility for their survival to someone else rather than make the effort to save themselves, and thus, totalitarianism is born. Martial law in America would be no different. It will be presented to us as purely rational and absolutely necessary; an “extreme solution to extreme times”. Its success would rest solely on how many of us are willing to make the effort to determine our own destinies, and how many of us are too cowardly to do so.

Consequences Of Martial Law

Regardless of how well governments sugarcoat the prospect of martial law at its introduction, after it has been instituted, it doesn’t take very long for the people to realize they have been duped. The consequences of a militarized society cannot be hidden after the fact, nor does the establishment feel the need to hide those consequences after they have been handed unlimited power.

To peer into the future of what American martial law might look like, one need only research the history of martial law and dictatorships in general. From the Philippines to China to the Soviet Union, the stages of tyranny are pretty much the same no matter where you are in the world. Anyone who believes martial law in America will forgo any of these terrible steps, or that we will somehow maintain a sense of propriety and fairness, is going to be sorely disappointed.

Free Press Destroyed: The very first action of any government that has achieved military control of a country is to dominate the flow of information. The greatest threat to elitist domination is usually the people who they mean to rule over. Ending freedom of the press stalls chances that a view that opposes government control will gain footing. In America, the mainstream media is already under globalist control and would likely remain active during martial law, at least for a time. FOX, CNN, CNBC, etc, would change little, while the true free press (alternative web news which now dominates over the ratings of mainstream media) would be attacked, if not shut down completely. Government enforced web filters (like those in China and being legislated in Australia) could be put in place, and arrests of citizen journalists are liable to occur.

Dissolution Of Checks And Balances: In some cases, military rule allows for the dissolution of states rights and even of Congress itself. If Congress is allowed to remain, it would be in a ceremonial capacity only. Under martial law, all decision making is “streamlined” into the hands of the executive branch. The excuse given for this is often the same everywhere; the President (dictator) must not have his hands tied by checks and balances during a state of crisis, otherwise, his decisions are slowed, and more people could be hurt. Once the executive branch of a country removes checks and balances, they almost never put them back willingly, even after the so-called “crisis” has subsided.

Erasure Of Civil Liberties: Say goodbye to Habeas Corpus immediately. All tyrannies have abruptly suspended rights to fair trial, rights to legal representation, Miranda Rights, even the right to know what one has been charged with before being arrested. This process quickly devolves the justice system to the point where those who are detained simply disappear, and are never heard from again. The U.S. currently has many pieces of legislation that have passed or are pending which allow rendition and even torture of regular citizens, specifically in the event of a national emergency, which under current rules, the President can declare at his leisure.

Curfews, Checkpoints, Searches, Citizen Spies: Say goodbye to privacy. Expect ID checkpoints, and arrests for lack of ID. Expect nighttime curfews in cities enforced with extreme prejudice. Expect warrant-less searches of your home without cause, not to mention surveillance of web and phone traffic. Also count on the fact that some people, out of paranoia, or out of some twisted desire for petty influence, will start pointing an accusing finger at anyone who looks at them the wrong way, and the establishment will encourage this. Tyranny is much easier when the citizens police each other. We actually see some of this behavior today, however, under martial law, there is absolutely no chance whatsoever of holding the authorities or anyone who supports them legally accountable for any wrongdoing. There is essentially no means to voice grievance. Martial law is like a free pass to law enforcement officials to do whatever they please, whenever they please.

Arrests Of Activists And Dissidents: Political opponents of the establishment, no matter how honorable and peaceful they may be, would likely be arrested. Those who have the capability to lead a movement in opposition of the current government or those who have the respect of a sizable percentage of the populace will become priority targets during martial law. All tyrants seek to quash other voices, especially strong voices, so that they can create an environment in which THEIR voice is the only one that can be heard. Activists are normally labeled as subversives, insurgents, or terrorists. They are arrested and treated as enemy combatants. The reigning government will claim that such people are “dangerous” to the stability of the country, and a threat to national security. Associating activists with terrorists also makes the idea of rendition and torture slightly more palatable to the fearful public.

Economic Feudalism: In an autocracy, everything becomes a matter of national security, even the state of the workforce. All jobs become state jobs. The very poor become a possible burden. The middle class and the very rich (if not already part of the establishment) become possible competition. This is why most tyrannies seek to establish “harmonization”, which is really just a flowery way of saying that everyone is made equally dependent on the system for their survival. It is hard to become a successful man in an oppressive society if you are not one of the elite. It is even harder to be a pauper in the same society because you are seen as a parasite feeding off the collective (though you are probably hurting no one). Martial law is always followed by an end to economic prosperity for the average citizen and the removal of the traditional middle class. In the end, this causes the public to subjugate themselves. It creates a system which rewards those who submit with a semblance of the status they once had. The alternative: barely eking out an existence while under constant fear that you could be labeled an impediment to social progress. Given this choice, many would choose to conform.

Food, Water, and Healthcare Rationing: Food and water are life. Control these two things in a culture, and you have the makings of a tyranny. One of the most notable aspects in the elitist quest for empire is the trail of hunger and starvation they leave in their wake. All methods are greenlighted. Burning of farmland, hording of grain, heavy taxation on livestock or harvests, government micromanagement of planting, everything is fair game. Food regulation can be taken to a whole other level in our modern age. With malicious corporations like Monsanto in operation, genetically modified crops can be created to control diet, ‘terminator seeds’ which yield only one crop can be used to keep the masses from replanting, and the pollen from these plants can be used to infect the genus of non-GMO crops birthing mutant strains which damage the food chain. By creating a food shortage, rationing then becomes inevitable, and with rationing comes greater influence. Healthcare rationing would be a natural extension, until every moment of ones life relies on the good graces of a centralized bureaucracy.

It is rare for a government to implement all of these actions in a single instant. Usually, they are introduced slowly over a period of years, and with each new decree a problem is preemptively engineered by the elites to give a “reasonable” cause, or generate a concrete fear. As time passes, people forget what life was like before, left only with the dreadful circumstances of the present, and a disquieting sensation in the pit of their stomachs, telling them that the world they have been presented is not the world we should have settled for.

Never Compromise Liberty

Tyrants prevail when they are able to fool the masses into compromising their ideals, and their conscience. They enjoy devising scenarios by which we are made to tread through a “grey area”, a place where the truth is supposedly a matter of perspective, and that which is right and balanced could become unbalanced and destructive. Once you choose to compromise a fundamental principle, they then use that moment to set precedence.

“If torture is tolerable in the chance that it could save some lives, then perhaps it is tolerable in other situations…” they say. “If some freedoms are expendable in the name of security, then perhaps others are as well.”

How do we stop elites from setting precedence in this way? We never compromise.

“Grey Area” scenarios are a charade. A rigged casino game in which there is only a single outcome and a single winner, and the winner is definitely not you. The crisis is usually one that the establishment created in the first place, i.e. the economic collapse, the BP oil spill, false flag terror, etc. And, the solution is always predetermined. No obstacle has only one solution, there are a myriad of answers to every dilemma, some far better than others. Yet, time and time again, we are offered only one way to resolve every disaster; greater centralization and extended government power.

Most disingenuous of all is the constant promise by government to keep us safe. No government has the power to offer security. Security provided by others is an illusion. The only true safety is that which one provides for himself. We accomplish this by becoming self reliant, self aware, and tough minded. We do not wait for some abstract ruling body to come to our aid, and we do not trade our freedom on the false promise that they will honor their agreement.

I have heard it argued that America is different, that we should not suspect our government capable of tyranny because “we are the government”. I find this assumption extraordinarily naïve. Our government has not represented the wishes of the people for decades. The leaderships of both major parties have supported almost identical legislative measures and extolled parallel globalist ideologies, making a mockery of our election process by giving us only one choice in the casting of our vote. We should be very suspect of such a government, for we are not the same, our goals are entirely opposed, and only one group can be allowed to endure; those who wish to dictate, or those who wish to be free.

I have also heard it said that freedom exists under the purview of government. That the liberties we enjoy are only possible because of the protections that government provides. Elitists often take advantage of our presumption that government is some kind of cultural obligation, one that we must bow to, and that by attrition, we must bow to them. In reality, government is a philosophical construct; a framework that only exists because we will it so, and that administrates freedoms only so far as we allow it to do so. WE are the source of our liberty, NOT government. It is we as individuals who ultimately must protect the freedoms we enjoy. Under no circumstance is any government more vital than our personal liberty. The choice is eternally simple; when asked to sacrifice one or the other, government must go.

Martial law is a tool by which the power hungry can remove the restraints of the Constitution and cast aside freedoms on a whim. This is unacceptable no matter the state of affairs. War, terrorism, economic collapse, environmental catastrophe, none of these events gives anyone the license to usurp our liberties. It cannot and will not be allowed. As the 4th of July approaches, we here in America should remember what it means to call ourselves a “sovereign people”. It is a title every man is born with but few men have the strength and fortitude to keep. “Independence” requires taxing vigilance, a persevering spirit, and the determination to see that neither is tread upon. Independence has a price. In the event that we are confronted with martial law in this country, it is a price we may have to pay all over again.

©2009-2010 Giordano Bruno, all rights reserved. http://www.militantlibertarian.org

Global Cooling

Global Cooling and the New World Order

Bilderberg. Whether you believe it’s part of a sinister conspiracy which will lead inexorably to one world government or whether you think it’s just an innocent high-level talking shop, there’s one thing that can’t be denied: it knows which way the wind is blowing. (Hat tips: Will/NoIdea/Ozboy)

At its June meeting in Sitges, Spain (unreported and held in camera, as is Bilderberg’s way), some of the world’s most powerful CEOs rubbed shoulders with notable academics and leading politicians. They included: the chairman of Fiat, the Irish Attorney General Paul Gallagher, the US special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke, Henry Kissinger, Bill Gates, Dick Perle, the Queen of the Netherlands, the editor of the Economist…. Definitely not Z-list, in other words.

Which is what makes one particular item on the group’s discussion agenda so tremendously significant. See if you can spot the one I mean:

The 58th Bilderberg Meeting will be held in Sitges, Spain 3 – 6 June 2010. The Conference will deal mainly with Financial Reform, Security, Cyber Technology, Energy, Pakistan, Afghanistan, World Food Problem, Global Cooling, Social Networking, Medical Science, EU-US relations.

Yep, that’s right. Global Cooling.

Which means one of two things.

Either it was a printing error.

Or the global elite is perfectly well aware that global cooling represents a far more serious and imminent threat to the world than global warming, but is so far unwilling to admit it except behind closed doors.

Let me explain briefly why this is a bombshell waiting to explode.

Almost every government in the Western world from the USA to Britain to all the other EU states to Australia and New Zealand is currently committed to a policy of “decarbonisation.” This in turn is justified to (increasingly sceptical) electorates on the grounds that man-made CO2 is a prime driver of dangerous global warming and must therefore be reduced drastically, at no matter what social, economic and environmental cost. In the Eighties and Nineties, the global elite had a nice run of hot weather to support their (scientifically dubious) claims. But now they don’t. Winters are getting colder. Fuel bills are rising (in the name of combating climate change, natch). The wheels are starting to come off the AGW bandwagon. Ordinary people, resisting two decades of concerted brainwashing, are starting to notice.

All this, of course, spells big trouble for the global power elite. As well as leading to  food shortages (as, for example, it becomes harder to grow wheat in northerly latitudes; adding, of course, to such already-present disasters as biofuels and the rejection of GM), global cooling is going to find electorates increasingly angry that they have been sold a pup.

Our fuel bills have risen inexorably; our countryside, our views and our property values have been ravaged by hideous wind farms; our holidays have been made more expensive; our cost of living has been driven up by green taxes; our freedoms have been curtailed in any number of pettily irritating ways from what kind of light bulbs we are permitted to use to how we dispose of our rubbish. And to what end? If man-made global warming was really happening and really a problem we might possibly have carried on putting up with all these constraints on our liberty and assaults on our  income. But if it turns out to have been a myth……

Well then, all bets are off.

The next few years are going to be very interesting. Watch the global power elite squirming to reposition itself as it slowly distances itself from Anthropogenic Global Warming (”Who? Us? No. We never thought of it as more than a quaint theory…”), and tries to find new ways of justifying green taxation and control. (Ocean acidification; biodiversity; et al). You’ll notice sly shifts in policy spin. In Britain, for example, Chris “Chicken Little” Huhne’s suicidal “dash for wind” will be re-invented as a vital step towards “energy security.” There will be less talk of “combatting climate change” and more talk of “mitigation”. You’ll hear enviro-Nazis like Obama’s Science Czar John Holdren avoid reference to “global warming” like the plague, preferring the more reliably vague phrase “global climate disruption.”

And you know what the worst thing is? If we allow them to, they’re going to get away with it.

Our duty as free citizens over the next few years is to make sure that they don’t.

Al Gore, George Soros, Bill Gates, Carol Browner, John Holdren, Barack Obama, David Cameron, Ed Miliband, Tim Yeo, Michael Mann, Ted Turner, Robert Redford, Phil Jones, Chris Huhne, John Howard (yes really, he was supposed to be a conservative, but he was the man who kicked off Australia’s ETS), Julia Gillard, Kevin Rudd, Yvo de Boer, Rajendra Pachauri….The list of the guilty goes on and on. Each in his own way – and whether through ignorance, naivety idealism or cynicism, it really doesn’t matter for the result has been the same – has done his bit to push the greatest con-trick in the history of science, forcing on global consumers the biggest bill in the history taxation, using “global warming” as an excuse to extend the reach of government further than it has ever gone before.

It is time we put a stop to this. In the US, the Tea Party movement is showing us the way. We need to punish these dodgy politicians at the ballot box. We need to ensure that those scientists guilty of malfeasance are, at the very least thrown out of the jobs which we taxpayers have been funding these last decades. We need to ensure that corporatist profiteers are no longer able to benefit from the distortion and corruption of the markets which result from green regulation.

We need a “Global Warming” Nuremberg.

Wasn’t the Crisis Caused by Too Much Spending?

Wait a Minute…

Wasn’t the Crisis Caused by Too Much Spending?

By Alex Kurtagic

The following article appeared in The Daily Mail on Tuesday 28 September 2010. I fail to see how a problem that was caused by too much spending — and therefore too much debt — can be fixed by even more spending and therefore even more debt. Are they stupid, or plain evil?

Spend for Britain: Bank tells UK’s 22million savers to boost faltering economy

The Daily Mail by Becky Barrow

28 September 2010

The Bank of England’s deputy governor yesterday urged the country to go on a shopping spree to boost the fragile economy.

In an extraordinary move, Charles Bean said he wanted to see Britons ‘not saving more, but spending more’.

His remarks will surprise many at a time when record numbers are facing insolvency, the majority of workers do not have a pension and millions do not have a penny in any other savings.

But Mr Bean, who enjoys a basic annual salary of just over £250,000, said a culture of spending, not saving, was desperately needed to help the economy to recover.

For example, they should be spending money on the high street or home renovations to help businesses, rather than siphoning this money into a nest egg for the future.

Speaking to Channel 4 News, he said: ‘What we’re trying to do by our policy [low interest rates] is encourage more spending. Ideally, we’d like to see that in the form of more business spending but part of the mechanism that might encourage that is having more household spending. So, in the short-term, we want to see households not saving more, but spending more.’

As interest rates have plunged, millions of homeowners with a variable rate mortgage, such as a tracker, have seen their monthly repayments slashed.

Rather than save this money, the Bank hopes many will spend it on anything from a haircut to a new bathroom.

In reality, many people have been so spooked by the past few years that they have become far more prudent.

It comes as Britain’s debt mountain, including mortgages and credit cards, is £1,456billion, close to a record high.

Andrew Hagger, from the financial comparison website Moneynet, said: ‘Suggesting that the public should embark on a spending spree gives out completely the wrong message, particularly when so many people have no savings, no pension provision and are already struggling to make ends meet.

‘While extra spending may give the high street a temporary quick fix, the longer-term consequences could mean irreparable damage to household budgets for years to come.’

Mark Sands, national head of bankruptcy at the accountants RSM Tenon, said he was ‘stunned’ by the comments.

He predicts a record 140,000 people will be plunged into insolvency this year and said: ‘The vast majority of people became insolvent because they borrowed for something that they could have done without.’

Former Downing Street pensions adviser Ros Altmann condemned Mr Bean’s comments, warning that they would undermine retirement savings.

She said: ‘Does he not understand how dangerous it is to undermine pensions and savers?

‘The Bank of England should be controlling inflation, not damaging prudent savers.Instead it has created inflation and taken away savings income. Policymakers are only looking short-term, which is dreadfully dangerous.’

However, during the interview with Channel 4 News, Mr Bean went on to make clear that he does think that saving is a good idea overall. He said there is ‘a lot to be said for encouraging people’ to save, such as putting aside money for a deposit for a home.

Mr Bean, 52, who is a member of the Bank’s interest-rate-­setting committee and can look forward to an annual pension currently worth £70,700, said: ‘One of the most important issues that faces us is to ensure households save enough to provide for retirement, especially as people are living longer.’

The Consumer Credit Counselling Service advises people to have at least six months’ worth of their salary in a savings pot in the event of an emergency.

It seems the advice of Mr. Bean (and is that not an appropriate appellation for the Deputy Governor of the Bank of England?) enjoys warm support from readers. Here is a selection of comments:

Charlie Bean looks really evil. He looks like he doesn’t care about anyone. He is totally selfish and hopes everyone spends all their money to get the economy boosted and he can be left with all his money so he remains rolling in it. What a hateful man.
- A lady, England, 28/9/2010 22:05

I am not going to spend. I am on benefits and I am waiting until I get a job to do any spending.
- A lady, England, 28/9/2010 21:50

It’ll be an arctic day in Hell before I take financial advice from a goon like this. I hope he gets the sack and ends up living in a cardboard box under the arches, along with the rest of the former high-flyers.
- Philip, Bankrupted Britain, 28/9/2010 20:59

Perhaps he should ask all the city bonus takers to spend their cash first!!!!!!
- eric, belfast, 28/9/2010 19:57

haha iam saving thxs, you lot spend your money , i’ll clean up after.
- LUKE, london, 28/9/2010 19:32

Protester: Did You Not Max Out Your Credit Too?

By Alex Kurtagic

• text size Decrease text size Increase text size
• Comments
• Print
• 

• Article
• Comments

Madrid, Spain

Brussels, Belgium

Warsaw, Poland

While some of the arguments being deployed in Europe in support of the current protests have merit, I have to laugh when I witness such vociferous opposition to the public sector cuts that governments are now being forced to implement. There is no question that the cuts are needed and that they have to be deep: Western governments have grown bloated and voracious for taxpayers’ money, to the point where they have been living beyond their (stolen) means. There is no question either that the cuts will be painful for everyone. Nor is there any question that those who will experience the resulting hardship were not the ones who bailed out the banks or squandered the public purse on unaffordable, unfunded vote-catching programmes.

But this does not mean that those brandishing plackards and shouting out slogans in the streets today are free from blame. They voted for the political parties now in government, and they also voted for their predecessors, who are equally to blame for the financial quagmire that we are currently in. Take, for example, the case of Spain, where, despite universal contempt for the useless Socialist Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, the incumbent Socialist party won the last election after public sector employees knowingly allowed themselves the be bribed by the Socialists with a €400 payout. That money, and more, is now being taken away, as is often the case with government handouts. Those who voted for Zapatero have no right to complain now: they deserve him and any penury caused by his criminal government.

Very much the same can be said elsewhere.

Also noteworthy is the fact that the general citizenry is just as guilty of having engaged in exactly same practice it now condemns governments for having indulged in: profligate spending and living beyond available means. According to a report presented at the Davos World Economic Forum by the McKinsey Global Institute earlier this year, the ratio of private debt to GDP in the United Kingdom — the worst offender, incidentally — grew by 102 per cent between 2000 and 2008, by which time household debt as debt to income ratio was already 160.

Therefore, while I am eagerly awaiting the moment when the current political establishment in Europe (and North America) is swept out of power and purged from the system, let us not ignore that the public that tolerated, financed, and kept that establishment in power needs first to accept its part of the blame. This is a pre-requisite for fundamental change.

Absent some much-needed soul-searching, no effective action will be taken (protests notwithstanding), and all we will end up with is yet more of the same.