YWC shot about 200 photos of the rally and an hour of footage with two video cameras. I’ve uploaded all our photos to Flickr here, here, and here. Some of the video footage is below, along with a slideshow with some of the images. We caught all kinds of stuff on tape that the MSM is not reporting.

Impressions:

1.) The crowd that gathered on the National Mall was overwhelmingly Latino. I would estimate that 85% to 90% of the demonstrators were immigrants, illegal aliens, or some type of Hispanic-American. In particular, El Salvador was drastically overrepresented. There also seemed to be more Dominicans and Columbians in attendance than Mexicans.

2.) At least half of the demonstrators were chattering among themselves in Spanish and other foreign languages. The chants from the crowd kept slipping back into Spanish over and over again. We got this on tape.

3.) The crowd that gathered on the National Mall WAS NOT representative of America. I felt highly conspicuous and out of place as a White Southern male from Alabama. I got lots of dirty looks. I kept sarcastically asking my YWC colleagues: where are the natives? It is clear that “comprehensive immigration reform” is supported by a narrow constituency (i.e., immigrants and their families) that will directly benefit from the legislation and opposed by the American Majority who will be forced to pay the costs.

4.) Most of the demonstrators were smart enough to wave the American flag, but the whole scene looked staged on closer inspection. This wasn’t a spontatneous outburst of American patriotism like you see at the Tea Parties. Rather, it was tens of thousands of people waving small American flags (which the organizers provided them with) … because they want something in return, namely, American citizenship and access to taxpayer subsidized public services. It was a PR stunt.

5.) The most passionate demonstrators were the ethnic chauvinists waving their huge foreign flags. There were A LOT of these people on the National Mall. There were so many of them in attendance that I quit snapping photos of foreign flags after 100th or so shot to prove my point.

6.) Some Latino demonstraters had bigoted, anti- European signs. There were signs at the rally which claimed that North America is a “Bronze Continent” that belongs to Indians and Latinos. There were others which claimed that Europeans were illegal immigrants. mECha and La Raza were there.

7.) Communists were at the “March for America” waving huge Red flags with the hammer and sickle and yellow star. These flags were on prominent display (stood out from the crowd) and we shot several photos of them.

8.) We encountered three or four Socialist groups working the crowd. One guy tried to SELL US a copy of The Socialist Action. Apparently, socialists are not adverse to the profit motive! The “Partido Socialista De Los Trabatadores” had a booth in front of the Smithsonian. Another socialist group had a sign that called the Democratic and Republican parties “two parties of racism, imperialism, and anti-worker attacks.” Another group of socialists was selling The Militant in English and Spanish.” “International Socialists for Social Equality” of the “World Socialist Web Site” had a booth where they were selling books about Leon Trotsky.

9.) Black power groups were at the rally. We saw attendees wearing black power shirts and selling copies of Malcolm X, Black Liberation, and the Road to Workers Power in English and Spanish.

10.) Che Guevera fans were out in force. When we got off the Metro, literally the first guy who approached us was a crazy leftist from LaRouche PAC. For those unfamilar with Lyndon LaRouche, his group believes that America is controlled by the Queen of England who invented AIDS to exterminate black people.

11.) Puerto Rican nationalists were at the rally.

12.) A crowd of filthy anarchists from SDS DC (some without t-shirts) marched down the street with various signs including “Smash the State,” “Smash Capitalism,” and “Funk the Borders.” Apparently, this group attacked a military recruiter with a paint bomb the day before.

13.) As we were leaving, we noticed Latino demonstrators walking over a discarded American flag on the sidewalk. We shot some video of those patriotic Americans which we will share on YouTube.

14.) A group of mimes threatened violence against Roy Beck of Numbers USA and the police escorted him off the National Mall. We also saw the mimes at the rally. Maybe Beck’s problem was the security. Leftists kooks were everywhere.

15.) The highlight of the demonstration was seeing a furious American and his wife enter the demonstration after touring the Smithsonian Natural History Museum. I saw him wave his hand and yell at the crowd, “if these people would all get jobs, there wouldn’t be a problem.”

Final Thoughts:

The tens of thousands of Latinos who demonstrated on the National Mall showed up there because they expect to personally benefit from “comprehensive immigration reform.” I doubt a hundred of them would have turned out simply to express pride in their adopted country.

An undercurrent of leftist radicalism and ethnic chauvinism simmered underneath the so-called “March for America.” It left me wondering which direction America will take after these people no longer have to put on faux displays of patriotism for access to the welfare state.

Youth for Western Civilization, March 22, 2010

The federal government is seeking applicants who are mentally ill, mentally retarded or both to work as lawyers in the Justice Department. Specifically, a job announcement for “up to 10 experienced attorneys for the position of Trial Attorney in the Voting Section in Washington, D.C.” contains the following language:

The Civil Rights Division encourages qualified applicants with targeted disabilities to apply. Targeted disabilities are deafness, blindness, missing extremities, partial or complete paralysis, convulsive disorder, mental retardation, mental illness, severe distortion of limbs and/or spine. Applicants who meet the qualification requirements and are able to perform the essential functions of the position with or without reasonable accommodation are encouraged to identify targeted disabilities in response to the questions in the Avue application system seeking that information.

Overlawyered.com, February 4, 2010

There’s a great article in Time magazine by Amanda Ripley (I wrote a review of her great book, The Unthinkable in the City Journal) on one of the most under covered security lessons of 9/11:  that an aware citizenry can defend itself.  It ends with this telling para which depicts the government reasserting its authority to prop up its legitimacy:

After the passengers [heroes] of Flight 253 deplaned in Detroit, they were held in the baggage area for more than five hours until FBI agents interviewed them. They were not allowed to call their loved ones. They were given no food. When one of the pilots tried to use the bathroom before a bomb-sniffing dog had finished checking all the carry-on bags, an officer ordered him to sit down, according to passenger Alain Ghonda, who thought it odd. “He was the pilot. If he wanted to do anything, he could’ve crashed the plane.” It was a metaphor for the rest of the country: Thank you for saving the day. Now go sit down.

The same spirit of being in control, regardless of government inaction/incompetence, should be true for other aspects of our lives under a similar assault by a global system run amok.What am I talking about?  Our economic and societal future.  If it’s not clear to you already after seeing a global economic meltdown caused by the gluttony of financial parasites, it should be.  But it’s worse than that.  The entire system has failed to produce anything resembling improvement in our lives for years:

• Median male incomes today are the same as they were in 1974 in the US (and likely all over the western world).  No progress has been made despite a doubling of productivity and massive top line GDP growth. Worse, given that female incomes aren’t on par with male incomes yet, the typical American family makes much less per hour worked than in 1974.
• All of the requirements for entry into the middle class are now private expenses.  From health care to a college education, if you can’t afford the minimum (let alone high quality versions), you aren’t allowed entry.  Worse, those expenses are spiraling out of control at rates many times the rate of inflation.  Nothing is being done to address this.
• The system is geared to make us fail.  Not only has outsourcing/off-shoring just started (everything that can be moved offshore to take advantage of the arbitrage opportunity in wage disparities between western and workers in developing countries will be) we are being laden with un-repayable debt. To wit: there’s been NO job growth in the last decade (despite tens of millions in population growth) and total debt from all sources is still near ALL time historical highs.

To add insult to injury, efforts to correct any of the above through governmental or regulatory reform have failed miserably (the government and both parties have been captured by transnational business interests):   from endless bailouts to industries actually writing the legislation that covers them to guarantee rich profit growth while solving nothing meaningful (as we saw with both the recent health care and finance bills).  We are at a dead end.So, take control.

NOTE:  My solution is to form a tribal layer.  Resilient communities that are connected by a network platform (a darknet).  A decentralized and democratic system that can provide you a better interface with the dominant global economic system than anything else I can think of.  Not only would this tribe protect you from shocks and predation by this impersonal global system, it would provide you with the tools and community support necessary to radically improve how you and your family does across all measures of consequence.  Of course, this may not be the right solution for you, but if it is…

NOTE2:  Seems like the term darknet is confusing people.  Going to need to rethink the branding and terminology.

From Global Guerrillas, January 3, 2010

“Barefoot and Panty-Scanned”
Fred Reed
Fred on Everything, January 31, 2009

OK, this goofy guy gets on an airplane with an at least somewhat explosive jockstrap and the entire earth goes wacko and orders porn-scanners and everyone has to watch Obama being Leaderly for hours. He is becoming tiresome to watch. A mahogany president with large white teeth. He looks like a goddam piano. Blacks have achieved racial equality. They can produce presidents as bad as the white ones.

What suckers we gringos are. How wonderfully amusing all of this must be for Al Quaeda. So little effort is needed to manipulate the decreasingly Great Satan into doing all manner of comic and expensive things.

For terrorists, the return on investment in phenomenal. They drop those office buildings in New York for not much money, and the US undertakes a war against Islam on which it spends a trillion dollars. Yes, Bush and Cheney and Israel wanted to invade Iraq anyway, but New York made it inevitable. Slick: Bush II couldn’t not invade some Moslem country. Leave your enemy with no choice but to do what you want him to do.

So little is necessary to terrorize the world’s hyperpower. A free-lance dingaling secretes a bomb of sorts in his shoe, whereupon the US goes into convulsions and long lines of Americans stand comically barefoot in airports. Dingaling Two popularizes liquid explosives, and so Washington frenziedly confiscates toothpaste. Yes, the world’s hyperpower is afraid of Colgate, with fluoride. Dinglaling Three hides the infernal machine in his skivvies, so Obama makes Firm Pronouncements, and we will now have to undergo examination by panty scanners. Always, over and over, the terrorists have the iniative. The country reacts hugely and predictably.

Won’t the panty scanners be wonderful? Now some affirmative-action federal retard can look at nekkid women all day. (Actually, as a guy, I can see the appeal. And, potentially, all else.)

Of course taking security pubic has its charms, and not just for the TSA guys who get to look at all those unwrapped cuties. Companies in the electronics racket are going to make out like Wall Street looters. How much does a panty-scanner cost? Multiply it by the number of security gates, and someone is going to swim in gravy. Throw in training contracts, maintenance, and upgrades. The federal teat remains a bounteous spigot.

How much does this have to do with security? Not much. On the evidence, TSA couldn’t stop a two-year-old from waddling across a living room. Note that both the Underwear Bomber and the Foot Bomber were stopped by passengers, after TSA let them board. The current bomber’s father told the US government about the guy, just as various sources warned of the New York attack. The feds can’t stop terrorism even when someone else does their homework for them. And a few weeks ago TSA managed to post its very secret screening manual on the web. It’s good to have security in the hands of experts. . . . Read the whole article.

(9) “I don’t know – not having been there and not seeing all the facts – what role race played in that, but I think it’s fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry; number two that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home” (Barack Hussein Obama, July 16, 2009, on the arrest of Harvard University racist Negro professor Henry Louis Gates).

(8) A tie: anything said or written by the $PLC and the ADL.

(7) The MIAC Report, The Modern Militia Movement, Feb. 20, 2009 (pretty much written by the $PLC and the ADL).

(6) “What happened at Fort Hood was a tragedy, but I believe it would be an even greater tragedy if our diversity becomes a casualty here” (Army Chief of Staff, Gen. George Casey, Nov. 8, 2009, “This Week with George Stephanopoulos” on the Ft. Hood massacre).

(5) “Lord, in the memory of all the saints who from their labors rest, and in the joy of a new beginning, we ask you to help us work for that day when black will not be asked to get back, when brown can stick around, when yellow will be mellow, when the red man can get ahead, man, and when white will embrace what is right” (Racist Negro Reverend Joseph Lowery, Jan. 20, 2009, at the inauguration of Obama).

(4) “Though this nation has proudly thought of itself as an ethnic melting pot, in things racial we have always been and I believe continue to be, in too many ways, essentially a nation of cowards” (Attorney General Eric Holder, Feb. 18, 2009).

(3) “It was a very unfortunate event” (Columbia University racist Negro professor Lionel McIntyre, Nov. 10, 2009, on his punching the face of university employee Camille Davis, a White woman, during a discussion about “White privilege”).

(2) “Let’s be very honest about what this is about. This is not about bashing Democrats. It’s not about taxes. They have no idea what the Boston Tea party was about. They don’t know their history at all. It’s about hating a black man in the White House. This is racism straight up and is nothing but a bunch of teabagging rednecks. There is no way around that” (Marxist activist and lousy actress Janeane Garofalo on MSNBC’s “Countdown with Keith Olbermann,” Apr. 16, 2009, referring to Tea party attendees).

(1) “It’s horrifying to imagine kids being proud to be white” (Newsweek, Sept. 14, 2009. This will probably be in the top 10 most hateful quotes EVER).

From The Political Cesspool, December 28, 2009

"Obey us, or we'll weep!"

“Ha’aretz says U.S. officials face ‘pro-Israel’ background check”
Stephen M. Walt
Foreign Policy, December 4, 2009

There is an amazing story in Ha’aretz today on the “pro-Israel” litmus test that determines who is permitted to serve in the United States government. Here’s the sort of lede you’re not likely to read in the New York Times or Washington Post:

Every appointee to the American government must endure a thorough background check by the American Jewish community.

In the case of Obama’s government in particular, every criticism against Israel made by a potential government appointee has become a catalyst for debate about whether appointing “another leftist” offers proof that Obama does not truly support Israel.”

The story goes on to rehearse what happened to Chas Freeman (whose appointment was derailed by the Israel lobby because he voiced a few mild criticisms of Israel’s behavior) and reports that similar complaints are now being raised against the appointment of former Senator Chuck Hagel. Even more bizarrely, the Zionist Organization of America and other right-wing Jewish groups are complaining about the appointment of Hannah Rosenthal to direct the Office to Combat and Monitor Anti-Semitism. Why? Apparently she’s been involved with J Street and other “leftwing” organizations that ZOA et al deem insufficiently ardent in their support for the Jewish state, and has suggested that progressive forces need to be more vocal in advancing the peace process.

One has to feel a certain sympathy for Ms. Rosenthal, who is forced to defend her own appointment by telling an interviewer:

“I love Israel. I have lived in Israel. I go back and visit every chance I can. I consider it part of my heart. And because I love it so much, I want to see it safe and secure and free and democratic and living safely.”

These are fine sentiments, but isn’t it odd that she has to defend her qualifications for a position in the U.S. government by saying how much she “loves” a foreign country? For an American official in her position, what matters is that she loves America, and that she believes anti-Semitism is a hateful philosophy that should be opposed vigorously. Whether she loves Israel or France or Thailand or Namibia, etc., is irrelevant. (And yes, it’s entirely possible to loathe anti-Semitism and not love Israel).

But the real lesson of all these episodes is the effect of this litmus test on the foreign policy community more broadly. Groups in the lobby target public servants like Freeman, Hagel, and Rosenthal because they want to make sure that no one with even a mildly independent view on Middle East affairs gets appointed. By making an example of them, they seek to discourage independent-minded people from expressing their views openly, lest doing so derail their own career prospects later on. And it works. Even if the lobby doesn’t manage to block every single appointment, they can make any administration think twice about a potentially “controversial” choice and use the threat to stifle open discourse among virtually all members of the mainstream foreign policy community (and certainly anyone who aspires to public service in Washington).

The result, of course, is the U.S. Middle East policy (and U.S. foreign policy more generally) is reserved for those who are either steadfastly devoted to the “special relationship” or who have been intimidated into silence. The result? U.S. policy remains in the hands of the same set of “experts” whose policies for the past seventeen years (or more) have been a steady recipe for failure. If a few more Americans read Ha’aretz, they might start to figure this out.

We’ll be fighting in the streets with our children at our feet
and the morals that they worship will be gone.
And the men who spurred us on sit in judgment of all wrong
they decide, and the shotgun sings the song.

~ Pete Townsend

It’s difficult not to experience a faint pang of sympathy for Hal Turner, albeit an ephemeral one deeply buried beneath multiple layers of well-earned disgust.

For at least five years, and probably more, Turner was a paid informant and provocateur in the employ of the world’s largest sponsor of terrorism, the Federal Government. His assignment was to bait easily influenced people with incendiary rhetoric about race and other resentments, and reel in anyone who bit a little too lustily on the bait. The Bureau credits Turner with personally bringing more than 100 “extremists” to their attention, many of whom (the Bureau won’t specify how many) were arrested.

There’s every likelihood that at least some of Turner’s victims were offered the same deal offered to Randy Weaver after he was set up on trivial and spurious firearms charges by an undercover snitch for the ATF: Become an informant/provocateur, and you’ll stay out of jail.

Weaver rejected the deal, and the FBI eventually retaliated by attacking his home and murdering his wife and son. José Padilla, a rougher customer than Weaver, rejected the same deal; he was declared an “enemy combatant,” subjected to prolonged torture intended to destroy his mental equilibrium and break his will, and eventually convicted on exceptionally dubious terrorism-related charges.

Before he was outed as a stukach in early 2007, Turner was the host of a web-based talk radio program and a freelance speaker who specialized in “incitement-and-indictment” entrapment of “right-wing extremists.” Hackers discovered a cache of e-mail correspondence between Turner and William Haug, an agent working for a Joint Terrorism Task Force who acted as the informant’s handler. Turner closed down his radio program while emitting great gusts of affected outrage over what he insisted were spurious accusations that he had collaborated with the Feds.

In a message posted to Pro Libertate after he was identified as an agent provocateur – along with federal assets tasked to carry out similar missions within Muslim sub-populations in the U.S. – Turner insisted that only “PARANOID FREAKS (like this blog)” would suspect him of collaboration.

By way of establishing his neo-Nazi bona fides, Turner boasted that “my [white supremacist] rallies in Kingston NY and Kalamazoo, MI cost those cities $60,000 and $120,000 respectively in police overtime and that there’s no way the FBI would have approved anything like that by an informant because the cities would have demanded the money back!”

Actually, as we’ll see anon, the FBI has no problem staging white supremacist rallies and protest marches that help “local” police departments rack up overtime. . . . Read the whole article.

The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering

If you’re like me and have been through the American education system, you as a child may have never learned a word of Greek or Latin, the history of the Bible or been assigned to read a work by a great philosopher. You probably do remember, however, learning about Martin Luther King, the Klan and the “six million who perished.” What gets placed in a curriculum is a zero-sum game and Western civilization had to lose for the cult of victimhood to win.

But unlike other unfortunates we’re supposed to feel sorry for, the Jews are successful, and the crimes against them didn’t take place in the United States. For them to become a protected class, the holocaust, a historical event, had to be turned into The Holocaust, a religious one. Liberal professor Norman Finkelstein wrote The Holocaust Industry to bring to the world’s attention the exploitation of Jewish suffering in World War II. His book also explains how we got here. Thanks to the Industry, Israel, “one of the world’s most formidable military powers, with a horrendous human rights record, has cast itself as a ‘victim’ state, and the most successful ethnic group in the United States has likewise acquired victim status.”

This is a recent phenomenon. In 1963 Hannah Arendt published Eichmann in Jerusalem. At the time there were only two other English language scholarly books on the Holocaust. One of them was Raul Hillberg’s The Destruction of the European Jews. His thesis advisor at Columbia University told him “It’s your funeral” to discourage him from touching the subject. Until the late 1960s, there was only one university course offering on the holocaust in the United States.

Jews themselves were indifferent to the events many of them had fled. In a 1961 Commentary symposium on the subject of “Jewishness and the Younger Intellectuals,” no more that two of thirty-one writers stressed the holocaust. It was almost completely ignored in a 1961 roundtable sponsored by the journal Judaism on “My Jewish Affirmation.” There were no museums, no monuments and no organizations dedicated to keeping the memory alive.

In 1956 after President Eisenhower pushed Israel to withdraw from the Sinai, his support among American Jews actually increased in that year’s presidential election. Attitudes would be different after the June 1967 war with the Arab states. Norman Podhoretz noted that after the conflict Israel became “the religion of American Jews.” To trace this journey from indifference to obsession, Finkelstein informs us that in 1955 and in 1965 the entries for Israel in The New York Times Index went on for 60 column inches. In 1975 the Israel entries filled 260. Now Jews would compare any situation the Israelis found themselves in to the peril Jewry faced in 1930s Germany. They told themselves they wouldn’t be like those that quietly went into the gas chambers.

Unfortunately, Finkelstein’s liberalism distorts his understanding of the change in Jewish activism. According to him, right after World War II talking about the holocaust was taboo due to US support of West Germany. In later years the Arabs would align with the Soviet Union and Israel became an important ally. The Jews were once again “matching in lockstep with American power.” What the author doesn’t admit is that by the 1960s Jews were American power. Mearsheimer and Walt’s The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy demolishes the idea that the alliance with Israel provides any benefit for the United States. It is a nuisance at best and bankrupting the nation at worst.

Secondly, Finkelstein doesn’t seem to see the rise in Jewish activism in the 1960s as part of a larger trend in American culture. He points to a few neo-cons who oppose affirmative action and ignores the critical role of Jewish left wing activism in establishing the culture of victimhood — what has become the culture of Western suicide. Finkelstein writes that of “Blacks, Latinos, Native Americans, women, gays and lesbians, Jews alone are not disadvantaged in American society” — as if who gets to play the identity politics game is decided by an objective measurement of who the victims are!

Despite his blind spots, the author does a fantastic job of exposing the gang of charlatans and frauds that constitute The Holocaust Industry. For a fee of $25,000, survivor Elie Wiesel will tell you that the “secret” of Auschwitz’s “truth lies in silence” and that The Holocaust “leads into darkness,” “negates all answers,” “lies outside, if not beyond, history,” “defies both knowledge and description,” “cannot be explained nor visualized,” and is “never to be explained or transmitted.” To him, to compare Jewish suffering to that of others is a “total betrayal of Jewish history.” A parody of a New York tabloid once had the headline: “Michael Jackson, 60 Million Others, Die in Nuclear Holocaust.” The parody included a letter supposedly from Eli Wiesel in which he protested “How dare people refer to what happened yesterday as a Holocaust? There was only one Holocaust.”

Not only does Wiesel think that Jewish suffering is in a class of its own, but he and organized Jewry guard their unique status in a very creepy way. He withdrew from a conference on genocide because the slaughter of Armenians by the Turks would be mentioned. Jewish organizations have lobbied against a day of remembrance for the Armenians.

Predictably, when the victims of violence are the enemies of Jews, compassion goes out the window.” To Wiesel, Arabs hate Jews for their existence. American Blacks are simply a race of ingrates, unable to appreciate what the Jews have done for them.

Wiesel not only appears to suffer from a histrionic personality disorder, he is also an inveterate liar. After surviving a death camp, he claims to have read Kant’s A Critique of Pure Reason in Yiddish. No such translation exists. He once met a “mysterious Talmudic scholar” who “mastered Hungarian in two weeks, just to surprise me.” He told The New York Times that after being hit by a taxi in Times Square he “flew an entire block. I was hit at 45th Street and Broadway, and the ambulance picked me up at 44th.”

While there’s a debate over whether Night by Wiesel is a memoir or novel, other writers have been exposed as frauds. Jerzy Kosinski wrote The Painted Bird, supposedly about his time as a young Polish Jew who wandered alone through rural Poland during the World War II. Finkelstein notes that one reader described the book as “the product of a mind obsessed with sadomasochistic violence.” Poles are depicted as pathological torturers of Jews. Kosinski’s work became required reading in many high school and college classes. On the speaking circuit, Kosinski would describe himself as a “cut-rate Elie Wiesel.”

In reality, the author of the book lived with his parents during the war. The Poles whom he had slandered had sheltered his family at great risk to themselves.

Binjamin’s Wilkomirski’s Fragments is a more recent hoax in the field of Holocaustology. According to Finkelstein the book is similar to The Painted Bird in that the author presents himself as a child victim of The Holocaust and “each chapter . . . climaxes in an orgy of violence.” In this book it’s the Germans who are the irredeemable sadists. After he’s freed, young Benjamin goes to Switzerland, where he’s taunted by the kids at school. They point at him “and make fists and yell ‘He’s raving, there’s no such thing. Liar! He’s crazy, mad, he’s an idiot.’”

Turns out the children were right. Wlkomirski spent the whole war in Switzerland and isn’t even Jewish. Nor is his name Binjamin Wilkomirski. It’s Bruno Dössekker. The fraud wasn’t exposed until the author of Fragments had had his book translated into a dozen languages and become a star through his participation in documentaries, Holocaust fund-raisers, and of course, the speaking scene.

Finkelstein says that with all the lies we’ve been fed, it’s amazing that there are so few Holocaust deniers. But he doesn’t cite the worst of the worst. For example, there’s this 1988 story from the New York Times:

Later, [retired butcher Morris Hubert] was sent to Buchenwald. ”In the camp there was a cage with a bear and an eagle,” he said. ”Every day, they would throw a Jew in there. The bear would tear him apart and the eagle would pick at his bones.” ”But that’s unbelievable,” whispered a visitor. ”It is unbelievable,” said Mr. Hubert, ”but it happened.”

I’m surprised they’ve yet to find an eagle to put on trial for the crime.

At least authors of Holocaust memoirs provide entertaining stories. Even worse, Jewish organizations have turned the Holocaust religion into a criminal Industry. In fact, they may have pulled off the biggest robberies in human history.

First, it was claimed that Swiss banks were denying heirs of Jewish holders of accounts their money. In 1995 two Representatives of the World Jewish Congress including President Edgar Bronfman met with Swiss bankers. Bronfman would later humbly tell the Senate Banking Committee that he spoke on behalf of “the 6 million, who cannot speak for themselves.” The Swiss could only find 775 unclaimed dormant accounts, holding $32 million. When the Swiss offered this number as a basis to begin negotiations, the WJC rejected it as too low.

The WJC would mobilize the American political establishment to lobby on its behalf. Bronfman recruited Catholic New York Senator Alfonse D’Amato to his cause — a move that assured D’Amato would receive Jewish money and votes. The House and Senate banking committees took up the issue. An aide to D’Amato would later brag that they forced the Swiss “into the court of public opinion where we controlled the agenda. . . . [w]e were judge, jury, and executioner.” A study supported by D’Amato’s office and the Simon Wiesenthal Center would claim that “dishonesty was a cultural code that individual Swiss had mastered to protect the nation’s image and prosperity” and that “Swiss greed was unique.”

In 1996 a parade of elderly Jews gave testimony before the US Congress on the malevolence of Swiss bankers. They presented no evidence that they actually had assents in the banks. To top off the spectacle, D’Amato for some reason brought none other than Elie Wiesel to address Congress. Testified poor Wiesel: “Is there no limit to pain? No limit to the outrage?”

Even before this event, the Swiss had set up a commission headed by former Chairman of the Federal Reserve Paul Volcker with three members of the World Jewish Restitution Organization and three from the Swiss Bankers Association. They would abide by whatever the group decided. Jewish organizations wouldn’t let up in the media, hoping that the Swiss would settle before the commission issued its report. After stories got out of indigent survivors, the Swiss in 1997 put $200 million into a “Special Fund for Needy Victims of the Holocaust.”

The commission was dangerous to the Industry for two reasons. First, as with the Holocaust itself, so many ridiculous stories had been told that some of them would inevitably prove to be illegitimate. Second, if the owners of the dormant accounts were identified, they themselves would be compensated, and not Jewish organizations.

When bad mouthing the Swiss through the media failed to extort enough money, the Jews filed class action lawsuits and ordered boycotts of the country. Volcker protested that such actions would interfere with the work of his commission, but that was precisely the point. In January 1997 chair of the Jewish Agency Avraham Burg threatened, “Until now we have held back international Jewish pressure.” New York Governor George Pataki publicly supported sanctions on Swiss banks. Local state governments in Illinois, Rhode Island, New Jersey and New York passed resolutions threatening a boycott unless the Swiss settled with organized Jewry. The city of Los Angeles was the first to impose sanctions. Other governments followed suit.

In June 1998 the Swiss made a final offer of $600 million. Head of the ADL Abraham Foxman called it “an insult to the memory of the victims.” By August the bankers finally gave in with a $1.25 billion settlement.

A year after the settlement, no plan was drawn up to distribute the money to actual Holocaust survivors. By December 1999 only half of the $200 million originally given in 1997 had reached the victims. Finkelstein’s last edition of the book was released in 2000 but as of 2009 only $490 million of the $1.25 billion had gone to individual claimants. The rest went to such worthy causes as lawyer fees, Jewish organizations, and Holocaust propaganda, presumably to help create a new generation of suckers. Holocaust programs in schools are recommended or required in seventeen states.

Volcker and his committee’s Report on Dormant Accounts of Victims of Nazi Persecution in Swiss Banks cost $500 million. They took all the accounts found to have belonged to Jewish victims of the Holocaust and modified them to their 1945 value. They then multiplied the number by ten to reflect long term investment rates and came up with a number of $380 million. Moreover, there was “no proof of systematic destruction of records of victim accounts, organized discrimination against the accounts of victims of Nazi persecution, or concerted efforts to divert the funds of victims of Nazi persecution to improper purposes.”

After routing the Swiss, the Holocaust Industry went on to try to steal from the Germans. They demanded $20 billion in compensation from German Industry for WWII slave labor. Full-page newspaper advertisements appeared claiming without evidence that pharmaceutical corporation Bayer “directed” the experiments of Josef Mengele. President Clinton lobbied for restitution. Never mind that monetary agreements reached shortly after WWII already covered slave labor. Germany had given the modern equivalent of close to a billion dollars to the Jewish Claims Conference. The organization characteristically used much of the money for their pet projects. In 1999 German corporations would agree to hand over another $5.1 billion. The country’s government has to date given more than $60 billion to Jewish organizations.

The Holocaust Industry continued East but found it much more difficult to whip up hysteria against impoverished former Soviet countries. The demands against Poland were so great that Jewish Week reported that the parliament was afraid that Jewish claims would bankrupt the nation. The fear of American pressure stops European countries from standing up to this blackmail. A Knesset member recalled his meeting with the uncooperative Prime Minister of Romania: “But I ask one remark, in the middle of the fighting, and it changed the atmosphere. I told him, you know, in two days I am going to be in a hearing here in Congress. What do you want me to tell them in the hearing? Whole atmosphere was changed.” The US is the muscle behind organized Jewry. Bronfman, the WJC president, in 1998 claimed that his organization alone had amassed around $7 billion in Holocaust compensation.

It’s not a coincidence that the only countries who’ve fallen for this scam are White ones, and not Arab nations that expelled Jews in the 20th century. As Kevin Macdonald wrote in The Culture of Critique:

The key for a group intending to turn Europeans against themselves is to trigger their strong tendency toward altruistic punishment by convincing them of the evil of their own people. Because Europeans are individualists at heart, they readily rise up in moral anger against their own people once they are seen as free riders and therefore morally blameworthy—a manifestation of their much stronger tendency toward altruistic punishment deriving from their evolutionary past as hunter gatherers.

Thus the current altruistic punishment so characteristic of contemporary Western civilization: Once Europeans were convinced that their own people were morally bankrupt, any and all means of punishment should be used against their own people. Rather than see other Europeans as part of an encompassing ethnic and tribal community, fellow Europeans were seen as morally blameworthy and the appropriate target of altruistic punishment.

It takes a special sort of goyim to fall for the scam: Holocaust propaganda helps create a people prone to extortion, and the money stolen goes to fund more Holocaust propaganda. Not to excuse the behavior of the thieves themselves, but the success of the Holocaust Industry is simply another symptom of a people that has lost its way.

From The Occidental Observer, December 10, 2009

Even so, the article is not old-fashioned, objective, meat and potatoes journalism. Instead, it serves a political purpose: it indirectly mediates a dispute between Jewish organizations and federal police about the details of surveillance and suppression of white speech and activity. Cued-in academic, journalistic, political, and other elite participants are part of the intended audience as well.

The Jewish representatives quoted by The Record express strong reservations about the feds employing someone like Turner, who they view as too ideologically committed despite the harm he eagerly inflicted. The same government-Jewish dialectic surfaced in Germany after it was revealed that the secret police there funded and controlled much of the white opposition.

This problem is peculiar to totalitarian states posturing as liberal democracies. Police states are now so omnipotent—when and where they want to be—that no spontaneous, naturally-occurring opposition can arise, much less flourish and transform society, unless elites approve it. It is this development, coupled with decisive Jewish input into the process, which marks a sharp departure from past tyrannies and renders historical precedents involving most liberation movements marginally relevant at best to the present global demographic crisis of the European people.

Although Turner clearly is no victim in the manner of white dissidents, but an enemy of the people, facts revealed or reiterated here are nonetheless deeply disturbing.

Again the involvement of the FBI and Joint Terrorism Task Force in monitoring and criminalizing white activity demonstrates the extremist inclinations of the state in “the murky realm of domestic intelligence in the years after the Sept. 11 terror attacks.” In an internal memorandum the FBI casually refers to the targets of Turner’s and the agency’s vendetta as “multiple subversive domestic organizations.”

This, plus the fact that the agency “appropriated as much as $100,000 for Turner’s work as an informant” is a chilling reminder of how the most powerful secret police agency on earth regards even the most innocuous white activity. (Turner’s claim that “he was earning about $15,000 a month from his suddenly popular radio show and blog” is patently absurd and should not have been reported with a straight face.)

Anyone with the slightest knowledge of the truth is painfully aware of the near-complete absence of opposition to totalitarianism and anti-white racism among white people, and of how powerless and pitiful the targets of FBI and Jewish hate really are. The viciousness inherent in fed statements and the intensity of their persecution reveals a disconnect with reality as profound as Stalin’s obsessions over nonexistent conspiracies and oppositionists.

The power to classify legally-protected, indeed constitutionally-protected, speech and associational activity as “hate,” “racism,” “anti-Semitism” and “terrorism” bodes ill for the future.

Yes, whites—and Arabs and Persians—are the victims now. But, having tasted blood, and finding it sweet, power-hungry oligarchs will rapidly expand their range of operations. More and more ideas and organizations will be classified and proscribed as “hate” and “terrorism.” Many politically correct ideologues and even government officials cheering the brutalization of white dissidents today will eventually be ground up in their own meat grinder.

It is inevitable. History is quite clear on this point.

Hal Turner: All the warning signs were there.

Editor’s Note: It is rather astonishing that given the level of anti-white provocation in this country that the US government needs to manufacture acts of violent white resistance. But such has been the pattern from the beginning of the civil rights movement to the present day. Hal Turner’s open advocacy of violent acts perfectly fits the profile of a federal agent provocateur. The Turners of the world will continue to pick off those who are more macho than intelligent. This might even be good for the movement in the long run. Studying cases like Turner’s will help you fall into the latter rather than the former camp.

The common denominator of agents provocateurs seems to be that they advocate particular, concrete acts of lawbreaking, especially violence, and they do so in a way that is easily monitored and documented by the government. It is a mistake to think that all such people will be patently insincere, tepid, or uninformed advocates of white nationalism. Often informants are very sincere people who are ensnared through vanity or careless lawbreaking then held and squeezed by blackmail. As the Turner case shows, the FBI probably dropped him as an informant because, ironically, he was too sincere about his beliefs.

“Records show feds used ultra-right radio host for years”
NorthJersey.com, Sunday, November 29, 2009
by Mike Kelly and Peter J. Sampson

They called him “Valhalla.”

But it was more than a nickname.

For more than five years, Hal Turner of North Bergen lived a double life.

The public knew him as an ultra-right-wing radio talk show host and Internet blogger with an audience of neo-Nazis and white supremacists attracted to his scorched-earth racism and bare-knuckles bashing of public figures. But to the FBI, and its expanding domestic counter-terror intelligence operations in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks, Turner was “Valhalla” — his code name as an informant who spied on his own controversial followers.

Turner’s clandestine past was confirmed this past summer when he was jailed on charges that he made threats on his blog against three federal judges in Chicago. In court after his arrest, federal prosecutors acknowledged Turner’s FBI ties but downplayed his importance and even described him as “unproductive.”

But an investigation by The Record — based on government documents, e-mails, court records and almost 20 hours of jailhouse interviews with Turner — shows that federal authorities made frequent use of Turner in its battle against domestic terrorism.

As Turner took to his radio show and blog to say that those who opposed his extremist views deserve to die, he received thousands of dollars from the FBI to report on such groups as the Aryan Nations and the white supremacist National Alliance, and even a member of the Blue Eyed Devils skinhead punk band. Later, he was sent undercover to Brazil where he reported a plot to send non-military supplies to anti-American Iraqi resistance fighters. Sometimes he signed “Valhalla” on his FBI payment receipts instead of his own name.

His dual life of shock jock and informant offers a window into the murky realm of domestic intelligence in the years after the Sept. 11 terror attacks — in particular, the difficult choices for the FBI in penetrating controversial fringe groups with equally controversial informants.

In interviews, conducted before Turner was released on bail, he said the FBI coached him to make racist, anti-Semitic and other threatening statements and now he feels double-crossed by the bureau after his arrest. The documents reviewed by The Record, however, show repeated instances of federal agents admonishing Turner for his extremism. . . . Read the whole article.

Officer Tina Griswold: Her life was a small price to pay to give Mike Huckabee a feel-good moment as he pontificated about American racism and congratulated himself on his Christ-like magnanimity.

It’s Official: Mike Huckabee is Toast

Mike Huckabee has a long history of letting violent criminals out of prison because It’s The Christian Thing To Do, and, according to Huckabee, many of those he gave clemency to were victims of a “racist” justice system in Arkansas. That’s his excuse for setting free Maurice Clemmons, who just murdered four police officers. Plus, Clemmons had “come to Christ,” so what choice did Reverend Huckabee have?

As governor of Arkansas, he handed out twice as many pardons and commutations as his three predecessors combined. (And one of those predecessors was Bill Clinton.) Huckabee’s clemencies in Arkansas also totaled more than those granted in the six surrounding states combined. He did this over strong objections from prosecutors in Arkansas, who often opposed his leniency. Huckabee preferred taking the word of his fellow preachers over listening to prosecutors about how much danger these convicts presented to the community. At least five people have been murdered by people that Mike Huckabee gave “a second chance” to, including four police officers this past weekend, gunned down in cold blood as they sat in a coffee shop. That’s bad enough. What’s even worse is that Huckabee (with the help of Bill O’Reilly), is lying and spinning his pardon of multiple cop killer Maurice Clemmons as something he had little to do with.

Officer Ronald Owens: His life was just chump change, spent by Mike Huckabee for some anti-white PC cachet. (We regret that this post is too short to display the faces of all four victims of this pious fool.)

But here’s the final nail in the coffin of “Reverend” Huckabee’s presidential aspirations. In 2004, Saline County prosecutor Robert Herzfeld wrote a letter to the then governor and told him he was letting too many criminals go without giving it much thought, that he was refusing to even ask prosecutors for input on these decisions, and that his whole approach to clemency was “fatally flawed.” Huckabee’s Deputy Legal Counsel and Adviser on Criminal Justice replied to Herzfeld. His letter was three lines long. Here it is:

The governor read your letter and laughed out loud.

He wanted me to respond to you. I wish you success as you cut down on your caffeine consumption.

Wow.

Mike Huckabee “laughed out loud” at a prosecutor telling him that he was releasing far too many dangerous criminals. He knew better. He didn’t have to listen to those racist prosecutors, because Jesus tells him what to do, and Jesus isn’t a racist. And that crack about cutting down on caffeine consumption is going to rub a whole lot of people the wrong way, too, after the guy Huckabee let loose on society mowed down four police officers – in a coffee shop.

"Attaboy Huck!"

I’m sure Mike Huckabee will spin this, too, and probably claim that his aide just made that letter up without consulting him. Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity will no doubt give him a helping hand. But it’s too late. The word is out, and Huckabee will never sit in the White House, thank God. He’s going to be a private citizen for the rest of his life. He’ll have plenty of free time to commune with Jesus about all the horrible racism in America.

From The Political Cesspool, December 3, 2009

A Medal for Negritude

Ninety-year-old Edward Brooke (R-MA) was awarded the Congressional Gold Medal on October 28, supposedly for being the first Negro elected by popular vote to the United States Senate. In truth, he was recognized for obtaining preferential treatment for his own people and laying the foundation for the sub-prime housing crash.

The bill making the award was authored by non-voting House Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC), and passed by white renegades of both parties. A release from Norton’s office gushed that D.C.-born Brooke, “Although he served as Senator of Massachusetts, worked vigilantly for his hometown throughout his service. He called his Republican and Democrat friends in the Senate seeking support for full representation for his native town” — meaning, of course, supporting his race. Negroes who throw in their lot with the GOP today are derided by so-called “civil rights leaders” and the media alike as plain traitors to their race, but dusky infiltrators and seditionists of the 1960s are honored for their accomplishments.

As Massachusetts Attorney General, he supported enactment of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the latter mandating today’s obscenely gerrymandered congressional districts and forbidding the reduction of minority voting strength. After election to the Senate in 1966, Brooke conspired with the execrable Walter Mondale (D-MN) and convinced other GOP members to abridge Americans’ property rights with the Orwellian-titled “Fair Housing” Act of 1968. He introduced and passed the Equal Credit Opportunity Act — an essential tool used by the Clinton and Bush Administrations to create the sub-prime mortgage industry and a direct cause of the housing debacle of the past few years.

Plenty of white politicians are equally to blame for these anti-white disasters, but no one honors a traitor, least of all those who benefit from his treason. Only because of his negritude and his longevity was Brooke singled out from the congressional rat-pack for this extremely dubious distinction.

Justice — For the Moment

The Supreme Court has refused to hear a group of American Indians suing to invalidate the Washington Redskins football team’s trademark on its name, on the grounds that the term is “offensive” to them. The case began in 1992. The Patent and Trademark Office canceled the trademark in 1999, but was reversed by a federal court in 2003 because the plaintiffs waited too long to sue. (The trademark was issued in 1967.) That lawsuit is now over.

Another group of six young Indians filed a similar suit two years ago, which has been held in abeyance pending the outcome of this case. Their argument is that they should have standing to sue because they were not born in 1967, and all being between 18 and 24 now, this is their first chance to challenge the trademark.

If the courts accept this laughable contention, there are plenty of white 18-year-olds who should step forward to file suit over the Fourteenth Amendment, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, Roe v. Wade, affirmative action and other longstanding anti-white outrages. They will certainly have more real damages to cite than the Indians’ mere hurt feelings.

. . . But They Can’t Take It

On the lighter side, a letter to the editor in D.C.’s Dupont Current neighborhood newspaper (November 18) declared the writer “outraged” about an earlier missive (unseen) from a Jim McGrath, who dared to criticize one Morton Bender’s proposal to use a local property he owns as a hotel.

McGrath’s “remarks about the applicant’s zoning proposal containing ‘a gallon of schmaltz’ and ‘a generous coating of chutzpah’ are tasteless and offensive,” declared the writer, who will remain nameless here, but who is obviously a Member of the Tribe. “Furthermore, Mr. McGrath’s metaphor of Mr. Bender as King Solomon (originally put forth by the chair of the neighborhood commission) is equally distasteful. References to Mr. Bender’s Jewish background have no place in public criticism of his business activities.”

Of course, calling a critic everything but an anti-Semite and a racist apparently is relevant to the public discussion. If it weren’t for double standards, these people would have no standards at all.

Hispanics now make up 31.5 percent of US Customs and Border Protection personnel. Franklin Jones (race unspecified, but we have our suspicions), executive director of CBP’s equal employment opportunity, boasts that this glowing accomplishment was achieved by “community outreach, career development, and targeted recruiting for under-represented groups.” In other words, CBP actively discriminated against whites.

Since Hispanics make up only 10.7 percent of the US workforce, according to the Feds, they are already vastly over-represented at CBP, and even make up about 13 percent of the agency’s highest-paid employees.

So when will “outreach” start for “under-represented” whites? Hold your breath.

Must be Racism!

Members of the Congressional Black Caucus are reported “outraged” because the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, laughably known as the “ethics committee” for an organization that has no ethics, is currently investigating no fewer than seven Negro members.

Never mind that the committee exists not to ferret out wrongdoing, but to cover up public ethical lapses among its members or, at worst, grant absolution by slapping them lightly on the wrist. This is an opportunity to scream “racism!,” and no black politician ever misses a chance like that. “Is there concern whether someone is trying to set up [CBC] members? Yeah, there is,” an anonymous black Democrat told Politico.com. “It looks as if there is somebody out there who understands what the rules [are] and sends names to the ethics committee with the goal of going after” the CBC. CBC Chairman Barbara Lee (D-CA) and other Negro House members met with Office of Congressional Ethics officials earlier this year to raise “concerns.” And things have only gotten worse since that meeting.

At the end of October, new ethics investigations were opened on Maxine Waters (D-CA) and Laura Richardson (D-CA). This in addition to pending probes on Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel (D-NY), whose numerous woes were summarized in our last report, Carolyn Kilpatrick (D-MI), Bennie Thompson (D-MS), Donald Payne (D-NJ) and Donna Christensen (D-VI). The only black senator, Roland Burris (D-IL), who was appointed last year by the disgraced Gov. Rod Blagojevich (D), is under investigation by that chamber’s ethics panel.

Kilpatrick Thompson, Payne, and Christensen are being scrutinized for taking corporate-paid trips to “multinational business conferences” in the black islands in the Caribbean — a violation of a rule change implemented by Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) in 2007. The most amusing aspect of this particular farce is that Negro G. K. Butterfield (D-NC), who took the same trip before Pelosi outlawed it, is leading the “investigation.” He claims, of course, that he has no conflict of interest, either in having made the now-forbidden trip or in being black. “To put one of their own [CBC] members in charge of the investigation just shows that nothing has changed — the ethics process is still a complete mockery,” observed an official of one of the Washington “watchdog” groups.

Similarly, Negro Emanuel Cleaver (D-MO) is one of those sitting in judgment of Waters for using her position to get “bailout” money for a minority-owned bank whose board of directors once included her husband, and in which he still owns sizeable stock holdings. Richardson is being probed over a house she abandoned after being elected to Congress, but reacquired after a third party purchased it in foreclosure.

Most interesting from a racial point of view is the blacks’ bitter complaint that Jewish Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA) is not being investigated after being caught on a federal wiretap talking to an Israeli agent about her plans to chair the House Intelligence Committee. (Pelosi later blocked her from taking that post.) The paranoid black Democrat who spoke to Politico railed that Harman is getting a pass “because she has plenty of money to defend herself” and the committee is fearful of “going up against” the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).

Well, even paranoid Negroes are not always wrong.

Feeding Our Destruction

A new analysis of Food Stamp statistics says that nearly half of all US children — including 90 percent of Negro kids — are eating off taxpayers during some part of their childhood. Overall, 37 percent of “whites” use Food Stamps by the time they are 20, according to the study — and this figure apparently includes Hispanics, since they are not mentioned separately in reports on the study.

What this really demonstrates is the real magnitude of demographic disaster that has overcome once-white America.

What Do You Mean, ‘We,’ White Man?

For more than two centuries, Haiti has stood as the incontrovertible monument to the black man’s ability to govern himself without white assistance. After 200 years of black rule, it is unquestionably the most wretched, poverty-drenched hell-hole in the entire Western Hemisphere — excepting, perhaps, Detroit — a political, social, economic, educational and environmental disaster par excellance.

The 75-year-old chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Jim Oberstar (D-MN), visited that island recently with black Reps. Gregory Meeks (D-NY) and Corinne Brown (D-FL), to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the time he spent there teaching French and Creole to US military personnel during one of their periodic occupations of the country.

“There are hopeful signs” for Haiti, lied Oberstar when interviewed by a writer for The Hill newspaper. “If the [presidential election of 2011] is honest and goes off successfully without disruption, it will be an expression of the people’s will, and Haiti will then have the stability it needs to implement the changes in government structure, and attract back the Haitian diaspora . . . . They’d come home if there were no reprisals and opportunities for them. But there are some things we need to do . . . .”

“We” need to “distribute US produced charcoal fuel for heating and cooking” because Haitians have chopped down the 130 million trees “we” planted there long ago and used the wood for fuel. “We’ve got to reforest the countryside,” says Oberstar, not even being honest enough to add “again.”

“That’s the starting point. Then we and the international community have to support the government encourage outside investment.” And on and on.

While “we’re” at it, why not stock that island paradise with unicorns, centaurs, and mermaids, to give the inhabitants some much-needed food and sport?

From BBC News, November 2, 2009

The USS New York sailed up the Hudson River to near Ground Zero, where it fired a 21-gun salute in tribute to those killed in the 2001 attacks.

It was watched by relatives of 9/11 victims, along with members of the emergency services and the public.

The US Navy is to hold an official commissioning ceremony for the new warship on Saturday.

The New York set off on its maiden voyage from Louisiana, where it was built, nearly three weeks ago.

The bow of the boat contains 7.5 tonnes of melted steel from the fallen buildings of the World Trade Center.

The ship’s crest includes images of the Twin Towers and features the colours of the city departments that first responded to the terrorist attacks in which nearly 3,000 people died.

‘A transformation’

People gathered by the waterfront to watch the ship’s 21-gun salute honouring those who died in the 11 September attacks.

The crew stood to attention along the deck as the guns were fired.

Among those watching was JoAnn Atlas, who lost her firefighter husband in the attacks.

“We have to remember. It’s a way to honour them,” she told the Associated Press news agency.

Rosaleen Tallon, whose firefighter brother was among those killed, said she was pleased that the steel from the towers had been reused in the ship.

“It’s a transformation of it from something really twisted and ugly,” she told AP. “I’m proud that our military is using that steel.”

About one in seven of the 361 sailors serving on the ship are from New York state, a higher percentage than would normally be the case, a Navy spokeswoman told AP.

She said there had been many requests from Navy personnel to serve on the ship.

The unrepentant, in-your-face lawbreaking of Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY) has nationalized the racial woes that Democrats were already facing at the state level in New York. The party appeared fully prepared to lose the governorship, and suffer collateral damage in the legislature, rather than offend Negroes by allowing a serious primary candidate to run against disastrous accidental Gov. David Paterson (D), whose approval rating recently fell to 27 percent. Only after it was leaked that Barack Obama himself wanted Paterson out was anyone willing to whisper a word of opposition to the current black ruler, and there is still no credible Democratic challenger, although former Rep. Rick Lazio (R) has declared for the seat.

Now, with Rangel’s recent admission that for years he concealed more than $600,000 in assets, he is poised to become the poster boy for a new “culture of corruption” campaign — this time run by the GOP. Rangel has been under investigation for more than a year by the House ethics committee for failure to pay taxes, abuse of rent-controlled properties in Harlem, promising political favors in exchange for a City College institution he created with an earmark and named after himself, and still more depredations. In a recent, unsuccessful GOP attempt to dethrone him, two “Blue Dog” Mississippi Democrats — Travis Childers and Gene Taylor — voted with Republicans in a desperate attempt to save their seats in conservative-leaning districts. Those who sided with the crook can expect to see opponents use that vote against them in the next campaign.

Despite low-key complaints by Democratic House members who fear this scandal may cost them their jobs in 2010, Speaker Nancy Pelosi won’t force Rangel to step down as the powerful chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, thereby deepening her party’s peril as he continues to stink and shine like a mackerel in the moonlight. But it’s not entirely her fault. There’s little question she would jettison him as quickly as she did Rep. William Jefferson (D-LA) last year, but for the unanimous and openly defiant opposition of the Congressional Black Caucus. She desperately needs those 41 CBC votes to get anything done in the House; without them, she does not have a majority.

When you lie down with dogs . . . .

The Dangers of Free Speech

Freshman Rep. Jim Himes (D-CT), who defeated RINO Christopher Shays last year, has run afoul of the Sensitivity Police for “tweeting” about another House member: “Minority colleague just said he’s glad his dad is dead so he wont see consumer finance reform. Sheesh.”

After catching grief for allegedly slandering a “protected class,” Himes whined: “Realized when I referred to ‘minority colleague’ some thought I meant ethnic minority. In fact, I meant Republican. Gotta watch the DC-speak!”

Yes, we all do. Big Bro is watching you!

The Department of Injustice

Negroes and white Democrats are so stupid, according to Attorney General Eric Holder’s Justice Department, that they can’t be trusted to vote “correctly” unless there is a “D” on the ballot to guide them in making their “X.”

Last November, at the same time the two-thirds-black town turned out to give Obama a solid majority, residents of Kinston, NC, voted to eliminate partisan elections for mayor and city council. Only nine of the state’s 551 local jurisdictions still hold partisan contests.

But Loretta King, acting head of the Justice Department’s civil rights division, refused to allow that decision to be honored because its “effect will be strictly racial.” Departmental review is required by the Voting Rights Act of all electoral changes in North Carolina, but not in most non-Southern states.

King declared that it is only the party designation on ballots that “results in enough white cross-over to allow the black community to elect a candidate of choice.” Therefore, “Removing the partisan cue in municipal elections will, in all likelihood, remove the single factor that allows black candidates to be elected to office.”

The proudly racist King is also the person responsible for dropping voter intimidation charges against three New Black Panther Party goons who were recorded blocking access to the polls and threatening both whites and Republican blacks last November in Philadelphia. Charges were dropped over the objections of career prosecutors, and after summary judgment had been awarded against the Negroes in this only documented case of racial voter intimidation during the lifetime of most Americans.

Only the Kinston City Council has standing to take this explosive issue to court, and it voted four to one against that action after receiving the decision. William Barker, the dissenting council member, was against the change, but declared, “It bothers me, even though I’m on the winning side now, that you have a small group, an outside group, coming in and saying, ‘Your vote doesn’t count.’”

Holder’s minions also refused to approve Georgia’s plan for verifying the citizenship of its voters. Although the Help America Vote Act supposedly requires states to verify the identities of those who cast ballots, Obama’s feds say the Georgia program has a “discriminatory effect” on minority voters.

Useful Idiots

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) has finally achieved a long-term dream — Congress has passed his resolution calling for a posthumous pardon for Jack Johnson, the first black heavyweight champion. According to the bill, Johnson’s “racially motivated conviction in 1913 . . . diminished [his] athletic, cultural, and historic significance . . . and unduly tarnished his reputation.” Johnson was jailed for violating the federal Mann Act — transporting a (white) woman across state lines for “immoral purposes.” After being convicted, he fled the country, but later returned through a bargain in which he served just ten months in prison.

Incredibly, this legislation was not a Congressional Black Caucus effort. The bill has been introduced in every Congress since 2004 by two honky lickspittles — McCain in the Senate and Rep. Peter King (R-NY) in the House. McCain had never been able to attract many co-sponsors except the always racially shaky Sam Brownback (R-KS), who, thankfully, is departing the Senate next year. The only others joining him this year were Harry Reid (D-NV) and Patrick Leahy (D-VT), which should have tipped anyone off that something was wrong. King generally had almost all members of the CBC backing his version; this year, only eight Negroes signed on before passage — Jesse Jackson, Jr. (D-IL), Carolyn Kilpatrick (D-MI), Gwen Moore (D-WI), Bobby Rush (D-IL), Al Green (D-TX), Gregory Meeks (D-NY), Charlie Rangel (D-NY), and Edolphus Towns (D-NY).

McCain and King sent a letter to the White House this month, citing their congressional resolution and requesting that Obama formally pardon his “brother.”

Studies in Classic American Literature

Benjamin Franklin, 1706 - 1790

The Perfectibility of Man! Ah heaven, what a dreary theme! The perfectibility of the Ford car! The perfectibility of which man? I am many men. Which of them are you going to perfect? I am not a mechanical contrivance.

Education! Which of the various me’s do you propose to educate, and which do you propose to suppress?

Anyhow, I defy you. I defy you, oh society, to educate me or to supress me, according to your dummy standards.

The ideal man! And which is he, if you please? Benjamin Franklin or Abraham Lincoln? The ideal man! Roosevelt or Porfirio D¡az?

There are other men in me, besides this patient ass who sits here in a tweed jacket. What am I doing, playing the patient ass in a tweed jacket? Who am I talking to? Who are you, at the other end of this patience?

Who are you? How many selves have you? And which of these selves do you want to be?

Is Yale College going to educate the self that is in the dark of you, or Harvard College?

The ideal self! Oh, but I have a strange and fugitive self shut out and howling like a wolf or a coyote under the ideal windows. See his red eyes in the dark? This is the self who is coming into his own.

The perfectibility of man, dear God! When every man as long as he remains alive is in himself a multitude of conflicting men. Which of these do you choose to perfect, at the expense of every other?

Old Daddy Franklin will tell you. He’ll rig him up for you, the pattern American. Oh, Franklin was the first downright American. He knew what he was about, the sharp little man. He set up the first dummy American.

At the beginning of his career this cunning little Benjamin  drew up for himself a creed that should ‘satisfy the professors of every religion, but shock none’.

Now wasn’t that a real American thing to do ?

‘ That there is One God, who made all things.’

(But Benjamin made Him.)

‘That He governs the world by His Providence.’

(Benjamin knowing all about Providence.)

‘ That He ought to be worshipped with adoration, prayer, and thanks- giving.’

(Which cost nothing.)

‘But–’ But me no buts, Benjamin, saith the Lord.

‘But that the most acceptable service of God is doing good to men.’

(God having no choice in the matter.)

‘ That the soul is immortal.’

(You’ll see why, in the next clause.)

‘And that God will certainly reward virtue and punish vice, either here or hereafter.’

Now if Mr Andrew Carnegie, or any other millionaire, had wished to invent a God to suit his ends, he could not have done better. Benjamin did it for him in the eighteenth century. God is the supreme servant of men who want to get on, to produce. Providence. The provider. The heavenly storekeeper. The everlasting Wanamaker.

And this is all the God the grandsons of the Pilgrim Fathers had left. Aloft on a pillar of dollars.

‘ That the soul is immortal.’

The trite way Benjamin says it!

But man has a soul, though you can’t locate it either in his purse or his pocket-book or his heart or his stomach or his head. The wholeness of a man is his soul. Not merely that nice little comfortable bit which Benjamin marks out.

It’s a queer thing is a man’s soul. It is the whole of him. Which means it is the unknown him, as well as the known. It seems to me just funny, professors and Benjamins fixing the functions of the soul. Why, the soul of man is a vast forest, and all Benjamin intended was a neat back garden. And we’ve all got to fit into his kitchen garden scheme of things. Hail Columbia !

The soul of man is a dark forest. The Hercynian Wood that scared the Romans so, and out of which came the white-skinned hordes of the next civilization.

Who knows what will come out of the soul of man? The soul of man is a dark vast forest, with wild life in it. Think of Benjamin fencing it off!

Oh, but Benjamin fenced a little tract that he called the soul of man, and proceeded to get it into cultivation. Providence, forsoothl And they think that bit of barbed wire is going to keep us in pound for ever? More fools they.

This is Benjamin’s barbed wire fence. He made himself a list of virtues, which he trotted inside like a grey nag in a paddock.

1. TEMPERANCE

Eat not to fulness; drink not to elevation.

2. SILENCE

Speak not but what may benefit others or yourself; avoid trifling conversation.

3. ORDER

Let all your things have their places; let each part of your business have its time.

4. RESOLUTION

Resolve to perform what you ought; perform without fail what you resolve.

5. FRUGALITY

Make no expense but to do good to others or yourself i.e., waste nothing.

6. INDUSTRY

Lose no time, be always employed in something useful; cut off all unnecessary action.

7. SINCERITY

Use no hurtful deceit; think innocently and justly, and, if you speak, speak accordingly.

8. JUSTICE

Wrong none by doing injuries, or omitting the benefits that are your duty.

9. MODERATION

Avoid extremes, forbear resenting injuries as much as you think they deserve.

10. CLEANLINESS

Tolerate no uncleanliness in body, clothes, or habitation.

11. TRANQUILLITY

Be not disturbed at trifles, or at accidents common or unavoidable.

12. CHASTITY

Rarely use venery but for health and offspring, never to dulness, weakness, or the injury of your own or another’s peace or reputation.

13. HUMILITY

Imitate Jesus and Socrates.A Quaker friend told Franklin that he, Benjamin, was generally considered proud, so Benjamin put in the Humility touch as an afterthought. The amusing part is the sort of humility it displays. ‘Imitate Jesus and Socrates,’ and mind you don’t outshine either of these two. One can just imagine Socrates and Alcibiades roaring in their cups over Philadel- phian Benjamin, and Jesus looking at him a little puzzled, and murmuring: ‘Aren’t you wise in your own conceit, Ben?’

Henceforth be masterless,’ retorts Ben. ‘ Be ye each one his own master unto himself, and don’t let even the Lord put His spoke in.’ ‘Each man his own master’ is but a puffing up of masterlessness.

Well, the first of Americans practiced this enticing list with assiduity, setting a national example. He had the virtues in columns, and gave himself good and bad marks according as he thought his behaviour deserved. Pity these conduct charts are lost to us. He only remarks that Order was his stumbling  block. He could not learn to be neat and tidy.

Isn’t it nice to have nothing worse to confess ?

He was a little model, was Benjamin. Doctor Franklin. Snuff-coloured little man! Immortal soul and all!

The immortal soul part was a sort of cheap insurance policy.

Benjamin had no concern, really, with the immortal soul. He was too busy with social man.

(1) He swept and lighted the streets of young Philadelphia.

(2) He invented electrical appliances.

(3) He was the centre of a moralizing club in Philadelphia, and he wrote the moral humorisms of Poor Richard.

(4) He was a member of all the important councils of Philadelphia, and then of the American colonies.

(5) He won the cause of American Independence at the French Court, and was the economic father of the United States.

Now what more can you want of a man? And yet he is infra dig., even in Philadelphia.

I admire him. I admire his sturdy courage first of all, then his sagacity, then his glimpsing into the thunders of electricity, then his common-sense humour. All the qualities of a great man, and never more than a great citizen. Middle-sized, sturdy, snuff-coloured Doctor Franklin, one of the soundest citizens that ever trod or ‘used venery’.

I do not like him.

And, by the way, I always thought books of Venery were about hunting deer.

There is a certain earnest naivet‚ about him. Like a child. And like a little old man. He has again become as a little child, always as wise as his grandfather, or wiser.

Perhaps, as I say, the most complete citizen that ever ‘used venery’.

Printer, philosopher, scientist, author and patriot, impeccable husband and citizen, why isn’t he an archetype?

Pioneer, Oh Pioneers! Benjamin was one of the greatest pioneers of the United States. Yet we just can’t do with him.

What’s wrong with him then ? Or what’s wrong with us ?

I can remember, when I was a little boy, my father used to buy a scrubby yearly almanac with the sun and moon and stars on the cover. And it used to prophesy bloodshed and famine. But also crammed in corners it had little anecdotes and humorisms, with a moral tag. And I used to have my little priggish laugh at the woman who counted her chickens before they were hatched and so forth, and I was convinced that honesty was the best policy, also a little priggishly. The author of these bits was Poor Richard, and Poor Richard was Benjamin Franklin, writing in Philadelphia well over a hundred years before.

And probably I haven’t got over those Poor Richard tags yet. I rankle still with them. They are thorns in young flesh.

Because, although I still believe that honesty is the best policy, I dislike policy altogether; though it is just as well not to count your chickens before they are hatched, it’s still more hateful to count them with gloating when they are hatched. It has taken me many years and countless smarts to get out of that barbed wire moral enclosure that Poor Richard rigged up. Here am I now in tatters and scratched to ribbons, sitting in the middle of Benjamin’s America looking at the barbed wire, and the fat sheep crawling under the fence to get fat outside, and the watch-dogs yelling at the gate lest by chance anyone should get out by the proper exit. Oh America! Oh Benjamin! And I just utter a long loud curse against Benjamin and the American corral.

Moral America! Most moral Benjamin. Sound, satisfied Ben!

He had to go to the frontiers of his State to settle some disturbance among the Indians. On this occasion he writes:

We found that they had made a great bonfire in the middle of the square; they were all drunk, men and women quarrelling and fighting. Their dark-coloured bodies, half-naked, seen only by the  gloomy light of the bonfire, running after and beating one another with fire-brands, accompanied by their horrid yellings, formed a scene the most resembling our ideas of hell that could be well imagined. There was no appeasing the tumult, and we retired to our lodging. At midnight a number of them came thundering at our door, demanding more rum, of which we took no notice.

The next day, sensible they had misbehaved in giving us that disturbance, they sent three of their counsellors to make their apology. The orator acknowledged the fault, but laid it upon the rum, and then endeavoured to excuse the rum by saying: ‘The Great Spirit, who made all things, made everything for some use; and whatever he designed anything for, that use it should always be put to. Now, when he had made the rum, he said: ” Let this be for the Indians to get drunk with.” And it must be so.’

And, indeed, if it be the design of Providence to extirpate these savages in order to make room for the cultivators of the earth, it seems not improbable that rum may be the appointed means. It has already annihilated all the tribes who formerly inhabited all the seacoast . . .

This, from the good doctor with such suave complacency, is a little disenchanting. Almost too good to bc true.

But there you are! The barbed wire fence. ‘Extirpate these savages in order to make room for the cultivators of the earth.’ Oh, Benjamin Franklin! He even ‘ used venery’ as a cultivator of seed.

Cultivate the earth, ye gods! The Indians did that, as much as they needed. And they left off there. Who built Chicago? Who cultivated the earth until it spawned Pittsburgh, Pa?

The moral issue! Just look at it! Cultivation included. If it’s a mere choice of Kultur or cultivation, I give it up.

Which brings us right back to our question, what’s wrong with Benjamin, that we can’t stand him? Or else, what’s wrong with us, that we kind fault with such a paragon?

Man is a moral animal. All right. I am a moral animal. And I’m going to remain such. I’m not going to be turned into a virtuous little automaton as Benjamin would have me. ‘This is good, that is bad. Turn the little handle and let the good tap flow,’ saith Benjamin, and all America with him. ‘But first of all extirpate those savages who are always turning on the bad tap.’

I am a moral animal. But I am not a moral machine. I don’t work with a little set of handles or levers. The Temperance- silence-order- resolution-frugality-industry-sincerity – justice- moderation-cleanliness-tranquillity-chastity-humility keyboard is not going to get me going. I’m really not just an automatic piano with a moral Benjamin getting tunes out of me.

Here’s my creed, against Benjamin’s. This is what I believe:

‘That I am I.’

‘ That my soul is a dark forest.’

‘That my known self will never be more than a little clearing in the forest.’

‘That gods, strange gods, come forth from the forest into the clearing of my known self, and then go back.’

‘ That I must have the courage to let them come and go.’

‘ That I will never let mankind put anything over me, but that I will try always to recognize and submit to the gods in me and the gods in other men and women.’

There is my creed. He who runs may read. He who prefers to crawl, or to go by gasoline, can call it rot.

Then for a ‘list’. It is rather fun to play at Benjamin.

1. TEMPERANCE

Eat and carouse with Bacchus, or munch dry bread with Jesus, but don’t sit down without one of the gods.

2. SILENCE

Be still when you have nothing to say; when genuine passion moves you, say what you’ve got to say, and say it hot.

3. ORDER

Know that you are responsible to the gods inside you and to the men in whom the gods are manifest. Recognize your superiors and your inferiors, according to the gods. This is  the root of all order.

4. RESOLUTION

Resolve to abide by your own deepest promptings, and to sacrifice the smaller thing to the greater. Kill when you must, and be killed the same: the must coming from the gods inside you, or from the men in whom you recognize the Holy Ghost.

5. FRUGALITY

Demand nothing; accept what you see fit. Don’t waste your pride or squander your emotion.

6. INDUSTRY

Lose no time with ideals; serve the Holy Ghost; never serve mankind.

7. SINCERITY

To be sincere is to remember that I am I, and that the other man is not me.

8. JUSTICE

The only justice is to follow the sincere intuition of the soul, angry or gentle. Anger is just, and pity is just, but judgement is never just.

9. MODERATION

Beware of absolutes. There are many gods.

10. CLEANLINESS

Don’t be too clean. It impoverishes the blood.

11. TRANQUILITY

The soul has many motions, many gods come and go. Try and find your deepest issue, in every confusion, and abide by that. Obey the man in whom you recognize the Holy Ghost; command when your honour comes to command.

12. CHASTITY

Never ‘use’ venery at all. Follow your passional impulse, if it be answered in the other being; but never have any motive in mind, neither offspring nor health nor even pleasure, nor even service. Only know that ‘venery’ is of the great gods. An offering-up of yourself to the very great gods, the dark ones, and nothing else.

13. HUMILITY

See all men and women according to the Holy Ghost that is within them. Never yield before the barren.There’s my list. I have been trying dimly to realize it for a long time, and only America and old Benjamin have at last goaded me into trying to formulate it.

And now I, at least, know why I can’t stand Benjamin. He tries to take away my wholeness and my dark forest, my freedom. For how can any man be free, without an illimitable background? And Benjamin tries to shove me into a barbed wire paddock and make me grow potatoes or Chicagoes.

And how can I be free, without gods that come and go? But Benjamin won’t let anything exist except my useful fellow men, and I’m sick of them; as for his Godhead, his Providence, He is Head of nothing except a vast heavenly store that keeps every imaginable line of goods, from victrolas to cat-o’-nine tails.

And how can any man be free without a soul of his own, that he believes in and won’t sell at any price? But Benjamin doesn’t let me have a soul of my own. He says I am nothing but a servant of mankind — galley-slave I call it — and if I don’t get my wages here below — that is, if Mr Pierpont Morgan or Mr Nosey Hebrew or the grand United States Government, the great US, US or SOMEOFUS, manages to scoop in my bit, along with their lump — why, never mind, I shall get my wages HEREAFTER.

Oh Benjamin! Oh Binjum! You do NOT suck me in any longer.

And why, oh why should the snuff-coloured little trap have wanted to take us all in? Why did he do it?

Out of sheer human cussedness, in the first place. We do all like to get things inside a barbed wire corral. Especially our fellow men. We love to round them up inside the barbed wire enclosure of FREEDOM, and make ‘em work. ‘ Work, you free jewel, WORK!’ shouts the liberator, cracking his whip. Benjamin, I will not work. I do not choose to be a free democrat. I am absolutely a servant of my own Holy Ghost.

Sheer cussedness! But there was as well the salt of a subtler purpose. Benjamin was just in his eyeholes — to use an English vulgarism, meaning he was just delighted — when he was at Paris judiciously milking money out of the French monarchy for the overthrow of all monarchy. If you want to ride your horse to somewhere you must put a bit in his mouth. And Benjamin wanted to ride his horse so that it would upset the whole apple-cart of the old masters. He wanted the whole European apple-cart upset. So he had to put a strong bit in the mouth of his ass.

‘Henceforth be masterless.’

That is, he had to break-in the human ass completely, so that much more might be broken, in the long run. For the moment it was the British Government that had to have a hole knocked in it. The first real hole it ever had: the breach of the American rebellion.

Benjamin, in his sagacity, knew that the breaking of the old world was a long process. In the depths of his own underconsciousness he hated England, he hated Europe, he hated  the whole corpus of the European being. He wanted to be American. But you can’t change your nature and mode of consciousness like changing your shoes. It is a gradual shedding. Years must go by, and centuries must elapse before you have finished. Like a son escaping from the domination of his parents. The escape is not just one rupture. It is a long and half-secret process.

So with the American. He was a European when he first went over the Atlantic. He is in the main a recreant European still. From Benjamin Franklin to Woodrow Wilson may be a long stride, but it is a stride along the same road. There is no new road. The same old road, become dreary and futile. Theoretic and materialistic.

Why then did Benjamin set up this dummy of a perfect citizen as a pattern to America ? Of course, he did it in perfect good faith, as far as he knew. He thought it simply was the true ideal. But what we think we do is not very important. We never really know what we are doing. Either we are materialistic instruments, like Benjamin, or we move in the gesture of creation, from our deepest self, usually unconscious. We are only the actors, we are never wholly the authors of our own deeds or works. IT is the author, the unknown inside us or outside us. The best we can do is to try to hold ourselves in unison with the deeps which are inside us. And the worst we can do is to try to have things our own way, when we run counter to IT, and in the long run get our knuckles rapped for our presumption.

So Benjamin contriving money out of the Court of France. He was contriving the first steps of the overthrow of all Europe, France included. You can never have a new thing without breaking an old. Europe happens to be the old thing. America, unless the people in America assert themselves too much in opposition to the inner gods, should be the new thing. The new thing is the death of the old. But you can’t cut the throat of an epoch. You’ve got to steal the life from it through several centuries.

And Benjamin worked for this both directly and indirectly. Directly, at the Court of France, making a small but very dangerous hole in the side of England, through which hole Europe has by now almost bled to death. And indirectly in Philadelphia, setting up this unlovely, snuff-coloured little ideal, or automaton, of a pattern American. The pattern American, this dry, moral, utilitarian little democrat, has done more to ruin the old Europe than any Russian nihilist. He has done it by slow attrition, like a son who has stayed at home and obeyed his parents, all the while silently hating their authority, and silently, in his soul, destroying not only their authority but their whole existence. For the American spiritually stayed at home in Europe. The spiritual home of America was, and still is, Europe. This is the galling bondage, in spite of several billions of heaped-up gold. Your heaps of gold are only so many muck-heaps, America, and will remain so till  you become a reality to yourselves.

All this Americanizing and mechanizing has been for the purpose of overthrowing the past. And now look at America, tangled in her own barbed wire, and mastered by her own machines. Absolutely got down by her own barbed wire of shalt-nots, and shut up fast in her own ‘productive’ machines like millions of squirrels running in millions of cages. It is just a farce.

Now is your chance, Europe. Now let Hell loose and get your own back, and paddle your own canoe on a new sea, while clever America lies on her muck-heaps of gold, strangled in her own barbed wire of shalt-not ideals and shalt-not moralisms. While she goes out to work like millions of squirrels in millions of cages. Production!

Let Hell loose, and get your own back, Europe!

James Fenimore Cooper, 1789 - 1851

Benjamin Franklin had a specious little equation in providential mathematics:

Rum + Savage = 0. Awfully nice! You might add up the universe to nought, if you kept on.

Rum plus Savage may equal a dead savage. But is a dead savage nought? Can you make a land virgin by killing off its aborigines ?

The Aztec is gone, and the Incas. The Red lndian, the Esquimo, the Patagonian are reduced to negligible numbers.

0u sont les neiges d’antan?

My dear, wherever they are, they will come down again next winter, sure as houses.

Not that the Red Indian will ever possess the broad lands of America. At least I presume not. But his ghost will.

The Red Man died hating the white man. What remnant of him lives, lives hating the white man. Go near the Indians, and you just feel it. As far as we are concerned, the Red Man is subtly and unremittingly diabolic. Even when he doesn’t know it. He is dispossessed in life, and unforgiving. He doesn’t believe in us and our civilization, and so is our mystic enemy, for we push him off the face of the earth.

Belief is a mysterious thing. It is the only healer of the soul’s wounds. There is no belief in the world.

The Red Man is dead, disbelieving in us. He is dead and unappeased. Do not imagine him happy in his Happy Hunting Ground. No. Only those that die in belief die happy. Those that are pushed out of life in chagrin come back unappeased, for revenge.

A curious thing about the Spirit of Place is the fact that no place exerts its full influence upon a new-comer until the old inhabitant is dead or absorbed. So America. While the Red Indian existed in fairly large numbers, the new colonials were in a great measure immune from the daimon, or demon, of America. The moment the last nuclei of Red life break up in America, then the white men will have to reckon with the full force of the demon of the continent. At present the demon of the place and the unappeased ghosts of the dead Indians act within the unconscious or under-conscious soul of the white American, causing the great American grouch, the Orestes-like frenzy of restlessness in the Yankee soul, the inner malaise which amounts almost to madness, sometimes. The Mexican is macabre and disintegrated in his own way. Up till now, the unexpressed spirit of America has worked covertly in the American, the white American soul. But within the present generation the surviving Red Indians are due to merge in the great white swamp. Then the Daimon of America will work overtly, and we shall see real changes.

There has been all the time, in the white American soul, a dual feeling about the Indian. First was Franklin’s feeling, that a wise Providence no doubt intended the extirpation of these savages. Then came Crevecoeur’s contradictory feeling about the noble Red Man and the innocent life of the wigwam. Now we hate to subscribe to Benjamin’s belief in a Providence that wisely extirpates the Indian to make room for ‘cultivators of the soil’. In Crevecoeur we meet a sentimental desire for the glorification of the savages. Absolutely sentimental. Hector pops over to Paris to enthuse about the wigwam.

The desire to extirpate the Indian. And the contradictory desire to glorify him. Both are rampant still, today.

The bulk of the white people who live in contact with the Indian today would like to see this Red brother exterminated; not only for the sake of grabbing his land, but because of the silent, invisible, but deadly hostility between the spirit of the two races. The minority of whites intellectualize the Red Man and laud him to the skies. But this minority of whites is mostly a high-brow minority with a big grouch against its own whiteness. So there you are.

I doubt if there is possible any real reconciliation, in the flesh, between the white and the red. For instance, a Red Indian girl who is servant in the white man’s home, if she is treated with natural consideration, will probably serve well, even happily. She is happy with the new power over the white woman’s kitchen. The white world makes her feel prouder, so long as she is free to go back to her own people at the given times. But she is happy because she is playing at being a white woman. There are other Indian women who would never serve the white people, and who would rather die than have a white man for a lover.

In either case, there is no reconciliation. There is no mystic conjunction between the spirit of the two races. The Indian girl who happily serves white people leaves out her own race-consideration, for the time being.

Supposing a white man goes out hunting in the mountains with an Indian. The two will probably get on like brothers. But let the same white man go alone with two Indians, and there will start a most subtle persecution of the unsuspecting white. If they, the Indians, discover that he has a natural fear of steep places, then over every precipice in the country will the trail lead. And so on. Malice! That is the basic feeling in the Indian heart, towards the white. It may even be purely unconscious.

Supposing an Indian loves a white woman, and lives with her. He will probably be very proud of it, for he will be a big man among his own people, especially if the white mistress has money. He will never get over the feeling of pride at dining in a white dining-room and smoking in a white drawing-room. But at the same time he will subtly jeer at his white mistress, try to destroy her white pride. He will submit to her, if he is forced to, with a kind of false, unwilling childishness, and even love her with the same childlike gentleness, sometimes beautiful. But at the bottom of his heart he is gibing, gibing, gibing at her. Not only is it the sex resistance, but the race resistance as well.

There seems to be no reconciliation in the flesh. That leaves us only expiation, and then reconciliation in the soul. Some strange atonement: expiation and oneing.

Fenimore Cooper has probably done more than any writer to present the Red Man to the white man. But Cooper’s presentment is indeed a wish-fulfilment. That is why Fenimore is such a success still.

Modern critics begrudge Cooper his success. I think I resent it a little myself. This popular wish-fulfilment stuff makes it so hard for the real thing to come through, later.

Cooper was a rich American of good family. His father founded Cooperstown, by Lake Champlain. And Fenimore was a gentleman of culture. No denying it.

It is amazing how cultured these Americans of the first half of the eighteenth century were. Most intensely so. Austin Dobson and Andrew Lang are flea-bites in comparison. Volumes of very raffine light verse and finely drawn familiar literature will prove it to anyone who cares to commit himself to these elderly books. The English and French writers of the same period were clumsy and hoydenish, judged by the same standards.

Truly, European decadence was anticipated in America; and American influence passed over to Europe, was assimilated there, and then returned to this land of innocence as something purplish in its modernity and a little wicked. So absurd things are.

Cooper quotes a Frenchman, who says, ‘L’Am‚rique est pourrie avant d’etre mure.’ And there is a great deal in it. America was not taught by France — by Baudelaire, for example. Baudelaire learned his lesson from America.

Cooper’s novels fall into two classes: his white novels, such asHomeward Bound, Eve Effingham, The Spy, The Pilot, and then the Leatherstocking Series. Let us look at the white novels first.

The Effinghams are three extremely refined, genteel Americans who are ‘Homeward Bound’ from England to the States. Their party consists of father, daughter, and uncle, and faithful nurse. The daughter has just finished her education in Europe. She has, indeed, skimmed the cream off Europe. England, France, Italy, and Germany have nothing more to teach her. She is bright and charming, admirable creature; a real modern heroine; intrepid, calm, and self-collected, yet admirably impulsive, always in perfectly good taste; clever and assured in her speech, like a man, but withal charmingly deferential and modest before the stronger sex. It is the perfection of the ideal female. We have learned to shudder at her, but Cooper still admired.

On board is the other type of American, the parvenu, the demagogue, who has ‘done’ Europe and put it in his breeches pocket, in a month. Oh, Septimus Dodge, if a European had drawn you, that European would never have been forgiven by America. But an American drew you, so Americans wisely ignore you.

Septimus is the American self-made man. God had no hand in his make-up. He made himself. He has been to Europe, no doubt seen everything, including the Venus de Milo. ‘What, is that the Venus de Milo?’ And he turns his back on the lady. He’s seen her. He’s got her. She’s a fish he has hooked, and he’s off to America with her, leaving the scum of a statue standing in the Louvre.

That is one American way of Vandalism. The original Vandals would have given the complacent dame a knock with a battle-axe, and ended her. The insatiable American looks at her. ‘Is that the Venus de Milo? – come on!’ And the Venus de Milo stands there like a naked slave in a market-place, whom someone has spat on. Spat on!

I have often thought, hearing American tourists in Europe — in the Bargello in Florence, for example, or in the Piazza di San Marco in Venice – exclaiming, ‘Isn’t that just too cunning!’ or else, ‘Aren’t you perfectly crazy about Saint Mark’s! Don’t you think those cupolas are like the loveliest turnips upside down, you know’ — as if the beautiful things of Europe were just having their guts pulled out by these American admirers. They admire so wholesale. Sometimes they even seem to grovel. But the golden cupolas of St Mark’s in Venice are turnips upside down in a stale stew, after enough American tourists have looked at them. Turnips upside down in a stale stew. Poor Europe!

And there you are. When a few German bombs fell upon Rheims Cathedral up went a howl of execration. But there are more ways than one of vandalism. I should think the American admiration of five-minutes tourists has done more to kill the sacredness of old European beauty and aspiration than multitudes of bombs would have done.

But there you are. Europe has got to fall, and peace hath her victories.

Behold then Mr Septimus Dodge returning to Dodge-town victorious. Not crowned with laurel, it is true, but wreathed in lists of things he has seen and sucked dry. Seen and sucked dry, you know: Venus de Milo, the Rhine or the Coliseum: swallowed like so many clams, and left the shells.

Now the aristocratic Effinghams, Homeward Bound from Europe to America, are at the mercy of Mr Dodge: Septimus. He is their compatriot, so they may not disown him. Had they been English, of course, they would never once have let themselves become aware of his existence. But no. They are American democrats, and therefore, if Mr Dodge marches up and says: ‘Mr Effingham? Pleased to meet you, Mr Effingham’ — why, then Mr Effingham is forced to reply: ‘Pleased to meet you, Mr Dodge.’ If he didn’t he would have the terrible hounds of democracy on his heels and at his throat, the moment he landed in the Land of the Free. An Englishman is free to continue unaware of the existence of a fellowcountryman, if the looks of that fellow-countryman are distasteful. But every American citizen is free to force his presence upon you, no matter how unwilling you may be.

Freedom!

The Effinghams detest Mr Dodge. They abhor him. They loathe and despise him. They have an unmitigated contempt for him. Everything he is, says, and does, seems to them too vulgar, too despicable. Yet they are forced to answer, when he presents himself: ‘Pleased to meet you, Mr Dodge.’

Freedom !

Mr Dodge, of Dodge-town, alternately fawns and intrudes, cringes and bullies. And the Effinghams, terribly ‘superior’ in a land of equality, writhe helpless. They would fain snub Septimus out of existence. But Septimus is not to be snubbed. As a true democrat, he is unsnubbable. As a true democrat, he has right on his side. And right is might.

Right is might. It is the old struggle for power.

Septimus, as a true democrat, is the equal of any man. As a true democrat with a full pocket, he is, by the amount that fills his pocket, so much the superior of the democrats with empty pockets. Because, though all men are born equal and die equal, you will not get anybody to admit that ten dollars equal ten thousand dollars. No, no, there’s a difference there, however far you may push equality.

Septimus has the Effinghams on the hip. He has them fast, and they will not escape. What tortures await them at home, in the Land of the Free, at the hands of the hideously affable Dodge, we do not care to disclose. What was the persecution of a haughty Lord or a marauding Baron or an inquisitorial Abbot compared to the persecution of a million Dodges ? The proud Effinghams are like men buried naked to the chin in ant-heaps, to be bitten into extinction by a myriad ants. Stoically, as good democrats and idealists, they writhe and endure, without making too much moan.

They writhe and endure. There is no escape. Not from that time to this. No escape. They writhed on the horns of the Dodge dilemma.

Since then Ford has gone one worse.

Through these white novels of Cooper runs this acid of ant-bites, the formic acid of democratic poisoning. The Effinghams feel superior. Cooper felt superior. Mrs Cooper felt superior too. And bitten.

For they were democrats. They didn’t believe in kings, or lords, or masters, or real superiority of any sort. Before God, of course. In the sight of God, of course, all men were equal. This they believed. And therefore, though they felt terribly superior to Mr Dodge, yet, since they were his equals in the sight of God, they could not feel free to say to him: ‘ Mr Dodge, please go to the devil.’ They had to say: ‘Pleased to meet you.’

What a lie to tell! Democratic lies.

What a dilemma! To feel so superior. To know you are superior. And yet to believe that, in the sight of God, you are equal. Can’t help yourself.

Why couldn’t they let the Lord Almighty look after the equality, since it seems to happen specifically in His sight, and stick themselves to their own superiority. Why couldn’t they ?

Somehow they daren’t.

They were Americans, idealists. How dare they balance a mere intense feeling against an IDEA and an IDEAL?

Ideally — i.e., in the sight of God, Mr Dodge was their equal.

What a low opinion they held of the Almighty’s faculty for discrimination.

But it was so. The IDEAL of EQUALITY.

Pleased to meet you, Mr Dodge.

We are equal in the sight of God, of course. But er –

Very glad to meet you, Miss Effingham. Did you say — er? Well now, I think my bank balance will bear it.

Poor Eve Effingham.

Eve! Think of it. Eve! And birds of paradise. And apples.

And Mr Dodge.

This is where apples of knowledge get you, Miss Eve. You should leave ‘em alone.

‘Mr Dodge, you are a hopeless and insufferable inferior.’

Why couldn’t she say it? She felt it. And she was a heroine.

Alas, she was an American heroine. She was an EDUCATED WOMAN. She KNEW all about IDEALS. She swallowed the IDEAL of EQUALITY with her first mouthful of KNOWLEDGE. Alas for her and that apple of Sodom that looked so rosy. Alas for all her knowing.

Mr Dodge (in check knickerbockers): Well, feeling a little uncomfortable below the belt, are you, Miss Effingham?

Miss Effingham (with difficulty withdrawing her gaze from the INFINITE OCEAN): Good morning, Mr Dodge. I was admiring the dark blue distance.

Mr Dodge: Say, couldn’t you admire something a bit nearer ?

Think how easy it would have been for her to say ‘Go away! ‘ or ‘Leave me, varlet!’ — or ‘Hence, base-born knave!’ Or just to turn her back on him.

But then he would simply have marched round to the other side of her.

Was she his superior, or wasn’t she?

Why surely, intrinsically, she was. Intrinsically Fenimore Cooper was the superior of the Dodges of his day. He felt it. But he felt he ought not to feel it. And he never had it out with himself.

That is why one rather gets impatient with him. He feels he is superior, and feels he ought not to feel so, and is therefore rather snobbish, and at the same time a little apologetic. Which is surely tiresome.

If a man feels superior, he should have it out with himself. ‘Do I feel superior because I am superior? Or is it just the snobbishness of class, or education, or money?’

Class, education, money won’t make a man superior. But if he’s just born superior, in himself, there it is. Why deny it ?

It is a nasty sight to see the Effinghams putting themselves at the mercy of a Dodge, just because of a mere idea or ideal. Fools. They ruin more than they know. Because at the same time they are snobbish.

Septimus at the Court of King Arthur.

Septimus: Hello, Arthur! Pleased to meet you. By the way, what’s all that great long sword about?

Arthur: This is Excalibur, the sword of my knighthood and my kingship.

Septimus: That so! We’re all equal in the sight of God, you know, Arthur.

Arthur: Yes.

Septimus: Then I guess it’s about time I had that yard-and- a-half of Excalibur to play with. Don’t you think so ? We’re equal in the sight of God, and you’ve had it for quite a while.

Arthur: Yes, I agree. (Hands him Excalibur.)

Septimus (prodding Arthur with Excalibur): Say, Art, which is your fifth rib?

Superiority is a sword. Hand it over to Septimus, and you’ll get it back between your ribs. — The whole moral of democracy.

But there you are. Eve Effingham had pinned herself down on the Contrat Social, and she was prouder of that pin through her body than of any mortal thing else. Her IDEAL. Her IDEAL of DEMOCRACY.

When America set out to destroy Kings and Lords and Masters, and the whole paraphernalia of European superiority, it pushed a pin right through its own body, and on that pin it still flaps and buzzes and twists in misery. The pin of democratic equality. Freedom.

There’ll never be any life in America till you pull the pin out and admit natural inequality. Natural superiority, natural inferiority. Till such time, Americans just buzz round like various sorts of propellers, pinned down by their freedom and equality.

That’s why these white novels of Fenimore Cooper are only historically and sardonically interesting. The people are all pinned down by some social pin, and buzzing away in social importance or friction, round and round on the pin. Never real human beings. Always things pinned down, choosing to be pinned down, transfixed by the idea or ideal of equality and democracy, on which they turn loudly and importantly, like propellers propelling. These States. Humanly, it is boring. As a historic phenomenon, it is amazing, ludicrous, and irritating.

If you don’t pull the pin out in time, you’ll never be able to pull it out. You must turn on it for ever, or bleed to death.

Naked to the waist was I
And deep within my breast did lie,
Though no man any blood could spy,
The truncheon of a spear –

It is already too late?

Oh God, the democratic pin!

Freedom, Equality, Equal Opportunity, Education, Rights of Man.

The pin! The pin!

Well, there buzzes Eve Effingham, snobbishly impaled. She is a perfect American heroine, and I’m sure she wore the first smartly-tailored ‘suit’ that ever woman wore. I’m sure she spoke several languages. I’m sure she was hopelessly competent. I’m sure she ‘adored’ her husband, and spent masses of his money, and divorced him because he didn’t understand LOVE.

American women in their perfect ‘suits’. American men in their perfect coats and skirts!

I feel I’m the superior of most men I meet. Not in birth, because I never had a great-grandfather. Not in money, because I’ve got none. Not in education, because I’m merely scrappy. And certainly not in beauty or in manly strength.

Well, what then?

Just in myself.

When I’m challenged, I do feel myself superior to most of the men I meet. Just a natural superiority.

But not till there enters an element of challenge.

When I meet another man, and he is just himself — even if he is an ignorant Mexican pitted with small-pox — then there is no question between us of superiority or inferiority. He is a man and I am a man. We are ourselves. There is no question between us.

But let a question arise, let there be a challenge, and then I feel he should do reverence to the gods in me, because they are more than the gods in him. And he should give reverence to the very me, because it is more at one with the gods than is his very self.

If this is conceit, I am sorry. But it’s the gods in me that matter. And in other men.

As for me, I am so glad to salute the brave, reckless gods in another man. So glad to meet a man who will abide by his very self.

Ideas! Ideals! All this paper between us. What a weariness.

If only people would meet in their very selves, without wanting to put some idea over one another, or some ideal.

Damn all ideas and all ideals. Damn all the false stress, and the pins.

I am I. Here am I. Where are you?

Ah, there you are! Now, damn the consequences, we have met.

That’s my idea of democracy, if you can call it an idea.

We pause in our round-the-clock defamation of Iran to bring you, Michael Jackson.

Our Zionist-controlled media have temporarily shifted from hysterical denunciation of Iran to pious genuflection before the altar of an androgyne.

To the extent that Iran has been demonized, Mr. Jackson is being canonized — as “the” iconic American entertainer. How strange and at the same time, revelatory.

No white actor may wear blackface today, but Mr. Jackson –who reputedly was once a Black man- -wore permanent whiteface thanks to modern surgery and chemicals. His visage was reportedly collapsing faster than his finances. Where are the photos? Why the coverup?

I don’t lament the demise of blackface “entertainment” by white performers, for, as William N. Grimstad documents in his classic work, “Talk About Hate,” the lowbrow shtick of vaudeville and movie “coon song” blackface was a Judaic art-form perfected by Sophie Kalish (“Sophie Tucker” the “World-renowned coon-shouter”), Asa Yoelson (“Al Jolson”), Edward Israel Iskowitz (“Eddie Cantor”) and Joe Yule (“Mickey Rooney”), promoted by moguls like Louis Lazar (“Louis B. Mayer”) and Max Aronson (“Bronco Billy Anderson”), and such early Zionist movie studios as Selig Polyscope.

Jackson was a mirror image of this degraded process, only instead of white greasepaint he resorted to permanent bleach. Was he a Black impersonation of a White transvestite? Or was his alchemy an elaborate fantasy-in-life –a desire to deceive himself into thinking he had actually become a kind of public White aristocrat? In the midst of the idolatry that has followed his death, no one seems to be asking these questions, even as Jackson is portrayed as the focus of the adulation of Blacks the world over. If that’s the case, one can only conclude that most Blacks wish they were White. Yet that conclusion seems dubious, to say the least.

Jackson was the first race-change personality on the world stage. Sad to say, he was sick physically, mentally and spiritually. From his dalliances with young boys to his occult persona as “Captain Eo,” he was the exoteric manifestation of the esoteric putrefaction exuded by a rootless, soulless, deracinated and boastful capitalist System, which demands that conservative nations like Iran follow its degenerate example or face media-generated hate and if all else fails, Israeli bombs. . . . Read the rest of the article

Henrik Holappa

On Monday March 9, 2009, Esa Henrik Holappa was arrested at gun point and incarceration by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for “immigration violations” near Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.  I learned of this incident from an active League member the following day. As an ardent patriot and practicing attorney, my initial response was both astonishment and an intense curiosity for detail. That evening I concluded our conversation by offering to assist with the legal defense if necessary. As Henrik’s case was venued in the Immigration Court’s eastern Pennsylvania District, everyone assumed that he was placed in the US Government’s York, PA facility. However, shortly after his arrest, without explanation he was brought to the Immigration Detention Center in Batavia, New York (near Buffalo) and placed in solitary confinement. Though we just concluded this matter in the Federal court system, I am not at liberty to discuss some of the particulars of Henrik’s case.

On Thursday March 12, my colleague informed me of his recent communications with Mr. Holappa’s associates from the Pittsburgh area. Henrik had lived there between his arrival in the US from Finland in July of 2008 and his recent abduction by DHS. Upon contacting them, I learned that Mr. Holappa’s original immigration attorney had recused herself from the case shortly after preparing his asylum application in October of 2008. Further, there was no money available to hire another specialist in this highly complex legal field. I volunteered at once to represent this fellow nationalist even though I am a general practitioner — an attorney who handles various types of cases. Over the next forty eight hours, I obtained the necessary paperwork and learned the circumstances of this unusual case. During that period, an intermediary spoke with Henrik; he enthusiastically assented to my representing him.

On the morning of Sunday March 15, I traveled seven plus hours to Batavia, New York (near Buffalo) with two other League members. I had asked one of them to assist me with the trip up there because distance driving is among the most tedious activities for me. Along the way our discussions focused on details of the case, League business and other political issues. Since none of us had actually spoken with him by phone at that point, we were most concerned about Henrik’s state of mind following DHS’s sadistic arrest and his week-long incarceration under 23 hour lock down. After checking into a subpar hotel nearby and grabbing a bite to eat, I went over to the prison. This newly built facility could have passed for a modern metropolitan area library but for the fenced-in yard towards the rear. Following some wrangling back and forth with the dim officer in charge (it was Sunday evening); I was escorted into one of the attorney-client meeting rooms to see Henrik. I immediately sat down to compose my thoughts, check notes on his asylum application and review my checklist of questions.

A fresh-faced, slender young man in an all red prison-issued outfit stepped into the room. I cannot reveal the details of our initial consultation. However, I will take this opportunity to summarize Mr. Holappa’s application for asylum. Several of his associates in Pennsylvania had posted it on their websites immediately after his arrest. Henrik applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the U.N. Convention Against Torture based on the persecution he experienced in Finland for his political beliefs. Unfortunately, in recent years, Finland has accepted many immigrants from African and Arab nations. Since the government sanctioned influx of these Third World invaders, that country has experienced a previously unknown phenomenon: gang rapes of Finnish women.  Henrik has been a patriot activist in his native Finland for some time even though he is only 23 years of age. Despite the excruciating taboos involved, Henrik spoke out against these vicious attacks of his countrywomen. He had been harassed by the Finnish security police, the SUPO, since 2006. They have ransacked Henrik’s and a family member’s residence, threatened him about “not having any place in (Finnish) society,” and incarcerated him — incommunicado and without charge – for several days. Also, the Finnish authorities deprived Henrik of burgeoning military and civilian careers.

In May of 2008, shortly before fleeing to the US, police informed Henrik that he was to be indicted for “incitement of racial hatred,” “defaming the honor of the African community of Finland,” and “copyright violation” for an article that he allegedly wrote on this gang rape phenomenon. He faced four and a half years in prison if convicted of these charges. Accordingly, Henrik had an “objectively reasonably” fear of persecution for his political opinion, both by the Finnish authorities and the Third World immigrant population there. Obviously, the more serious first two are not criminal offenses in America. The free speech provision of the Constitution’s First Amendment would absolutely protect the author of such an article. Further, Henrik was completely law abiding since coming to this country.

Mr. Holappa immediately struck me as exceptionally bright, articulate and upstanding man during our first meeting. Though the violent arrest, sudden imprisonment and isolation in lockdown weighed heavily upon him, I sensed Henrik’s strength of character and fortitude. Such qualities compelled him to take a public stand against Third World gang rapists in his homeland. I remember feeling quite dejected upon leaving the prison that night. I was very distressed, though in no way surprised, that the US government unjustifiably incarcerated a law-abiding young spokesman for the plight of our people — in Finland and worldwide. I also visited Henrik the following Monday morning and afternoon. I felt confident in my understanding of the case after reviewing his DHS paperwork and spending a total of three hours meeting him. He later told me how much he appreciated my words of encouragement during the visits. My resolve to win Henrik’s uphill legal battle had thoroughly hardened upon leaving the prison that day.

To this day, DHS has not explained their decision to ship Henrik all the way up to the Canadian border. As stated on several websites, in December of 2008, Henrik had dutifully appeared for his preliminary hearing in Philadelphia. There the judge simply informed him of his right to counsel and that the court would permit him adequate time to do so. Recall that the original immigration attorney had recused herself from this case that fall. Her office simply told me that dealing with Henrik’s associates became intolerable. Shortly thereafter, the court set the second procedural (non-merit) hearing for July 2009. DHS could not have reasonably presumed that Henrik would become uncooperative given that up to the day of his arrest, he had complied with all of the requirements for his asylum application. This included driving five hours for the brief, routine court appearance. Nor had he engaged in any criminal activity while in this country; DHS typically only detains criminal “immigration violators” such as murderers, drug dealers and sexual deviants. Despite my diligent efforts, DHS never explained their consistent determination not to permit bond in Henrik’s case.

Shortly after arresting Henrik, DHS motioned to change the case venue from the eastern District of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) to Batavia, New York, where he has been held without the option of bond since early March. I must take this opportunity to note how uncooperative DHS was since I first took Henrik’s case. The nature of Henrik’s political activities, both here and in Finland, coupled with his legal representation by the League of American Patriots, prompted DHS to unnecessarily complicate the case. I had to physically bring our opposition to their venue change motion from my office in northern New Jersey to Philadelphia on March 20. Needless to say, on March 25, the presiding immigration judge in Philadelphia (apparently an affirmative action appointee) granted DHS’s motion to change the case venue to Batavia, NY without explanation. Predictably, it took an entire week for Henrik’s case to actually be transferred from east PA to west NY.

On March 31, I selected the soonest possible date for the preliminary (master calendar) hearing in Batavia: April 7. These appearances are similar to arraignments in criminal courts; the actual hearing only lasted fifteen minutes. I then scheduled the merit hearing for the afternoon of Monday July 6. Again, I sought the earliest possible court date for Henrik’s sake. Then I focused on getting him released from DHS custody. I was appalled by the prospect of Henrik having to spend another three months of his life behind bars for no legitimate legal reason. Just as I was preparing my application for his release pending the final hearing, an astounding development was brought to my attention in mid April.

Fortunately, I was in regular contact with Henrik’s only English-speaking immediate family member. I instantaneously apprised her of all significant developments in Henrik’s case. On April 17, she informed me that Mika Illman, the state persecutor who had originally threatened Henrik with the offenses discussed earlier, indicated that he did not intent to press charges against Henrik for the Third World gang rape article at issue. Last year Illman, a Jewish attorney, had apparently decided to make an example of Henrik so as to crush racism in Finland. Officially, this meant that Henrik was no longer in “imminent danger” of political prosecution there. Naturally I was suspicious of this drastic change in circumstances. Henrik’s family and I spent the next week procuring written confirmations from both Illman and Isometsä-Tihinen, the police investigator in Oulu, Finland who had repeatedly harassed Henrik for his politics prior to his departure to the US. The authorities assured us that they would not charge him with any political crimes upon his return. Incidentally, only a few weeks earlier, Illman had charged a Finnish councilman with ethnic agitation after he posted unflattering facts about the foundations of Islam. I promptly requested another hearing in Batavia. On April 30, I officially withdrew Henrik’s application for asylum and consented to deportation. I can only speculate that Henrik’s denial of asylum in the US would have had serious repercussions for the Finnish government. This young intelligent individual would have attracted widespread international attention had his case progressed.

Henrik made many nationalist friends during his year-long stay in the US. One was a highly capable paralegal in the Washington D.C. area. He is a friend of the Holappa family who assisted me with some of the comprehensive research during the trying two months following Henrik’s arrest. Also, one of Ernst Zundel’s attorneys enlightened me on some of the nuances of immigration law along with his insight into this perplexing case. Henrik’s immediate family was unquestionably supportive in his urgent plight for freedom. Their cooperation and assistance proved invaluable throughout the three month long endeavor. This further illustrates the quality of individual that the League of American Patriots had chosen to represent. Despite the Finnish Government’s decision, had Henrik represented himself (pro se); he would have been incarcerated in Batavia, NY for at least twice the amount time. Though I took this case pro-bono, the costs associated with it totaled over $1,000. I am proud to report that this was entirely covered by generous contributions from League members.

The process of arranging the deportation of incarcerated persons to their country of origin takes Homeland Security about a month. During the month of May, DHS refused to give Henrik or me any information about his actual deportation, repeatedly citing “national security.” Henrik was deported during the early morning hours of Wednesday June 3. Three DHS agents escorted him on the plane from New York to Helsinki. A colleague suggested that they might have been concerned he would exit the plane over the North Atlantic prior to arriving in Finland. That day an agent informed Henrik that the Obama administration had a “special interest” in him. To no one’s surprise, Homeland Security has not provided Henrik or me with a time frame for his ability to return to the United States.  Nonetheless, Henrik told me how happy he is to be a free man and how grateful he was for our services.
Henrik is certainly not alone in his frustration over Third Worlders raping white women. Per the FBI’s crime statistics, over 100,000 of our women in the US have been raped by black men since 2004; the inverse number for such interracial crime is “0″. Our people worldwide have had enough of these outrages. Prophetically, nationalist political parties throughout Europe gained many seats during the recent EU election. Two Englishmen are sitting in a So. California prison after seeking political asylum in the US a year ago due to charges of “publishing racially inflammatory written material” in the UK: http://www.vdare.com/stix/090604_hate_crimes.htm
Henrik’s ordeal will no doubt resonate with our comrades who routinely face government persecution for speaking out against the Third World invasion of, and horrific consequences from, our ancestral homelands.  We must organize our people now to counter the constant attempts by the Jewish community and their nefarious collaborators in government to censor our First Amendment right to free speech, irrespective of those with “hurt feelings.” Millions of our people in Europe have been plagued by such restrictions for decades. This indomitable activist’s story, along with that of the year old League of American Patriots, is “to be continued. . .”

Thank you

The following quotes are taken from a sensationalistic paperback exposé of the nation’s capital, Washington Confidential by Jack Lait and Lee Mortimer, published more than half a century ago (New York: Dell, 1951):

No Negro is ever fired from a government job if it can possibly be helped. When necessary to cut down a staff, the whites go first . . . .

If they can’t do their work, whites are hired to do it for them. An instance, typical of thousands, occurred in the Bureau of the Census, where five Negro women were so inefficient that their department head requested permission to discharge them. His immediate superior almost had a stroke . . . .

The upshot of the matter was that the section head was told to keep the five colored women and to hire five white girls to do the work over for them, on the night shift . . . . (pp. 41-42)

There is a daily [newspaper] in Washington (as there are others in principal cities) which never identifies a Negro as such unless he wins a Nobel prize or is selected the rookie of the year . . . . (p.46)

Of every four felonies and other breaches of the law [committed in the District] in the grades where a defendant has the right of trial by jury, more than three are committed by Negroes . . . .

Arrests for Part Two felonies (less serious) and important misdemeanors showed an even higher incidence of Negro crime.

Estimating the Negro population at 50 percent, this means half the people commit 85 percent of all the crimes . . . . (pp. 46-47)

We have indicated that many white women-especially government workers-are receptive to sexual attentions of Negro men. But the comparative ease with which a black man can get a white girl, even a so-called respectable one, does not seem to deter colored men from committing rape on women of their own race and whites . . . . (p. 53)

One of [organized crime's] favorite tactics is to buy in the open market enough stock of a company to create a nuisance value. They organize a minority stockholders’ committee and dig up proxies. They have no real intention of trying to get control, but some time before the stockholders’ meeting, they approach the management and offer to sell it at a premium, usually three or four times above the market listing. This is cold blackmail . . . . (p. 179)

Wives of high officials, members of Congress, and society dames . . . fork over sums to astrologers, palmists, psychics, clairvoyants, and other miracle mongers. Many government officials furtively consult fortune-fakers . . . . (p. 278).

Now how about some change we can believe in?