| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
RaaN
Guest
|
 Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2008 4:16 am Post subject: Re: If one can>t afford children, one should not have childr |
 |
|
On Jul 27, 2:00 pm, Topaz <mars1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 08:53:18 -0700 (PDT), RaaN <raan2...@hotmail.com
wrote:
On Jul 26, 9:08 am, Topaz <mars1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
By Walter Ruthard
I myself was brought up in a small village in the southwest of
Germany. In 1939, when the war broke out, we left for the less exposed
Odenwald area until the possible danger of a French invasion had
passed. Shortly after that my father was transferred to the Ruhr
region. He as requested work as a foreman for the Mauser arms factory.
The government, true to their claims to be national and socialist,
took their promises seriously and provided young people starting a
family, as well as those who already had children, with affordable
housing. The first child brought a reduction of the mortgage by 25
percent, and when the fourth child arrived the mortgage was no more.
My parents already had four children then and thus were eligible for a
free newly built house from the government.
This was but one of the many programs the government established in
order to improve the quality of life for its citizens..
Then there was the "Kinderlandverschickung" program. It was started
before the war and enabled mothers in need of recreation to spend some
time in rural settings together with their children..
Another very popular social program of the government was "Kraft
durch Freude" (strength through joy). Here deserving workers could
take all-inclusive tours on luxury liners that were built especially
for this purpose. On these ships there was only one class and
everybody was treated the same. They visited the Azores and
Spitsbergen among other places. Those ships were not allowed to dock
in and English port however. The reason was that the British
government did not want it>s citizens to see what it also could have
done for them..
The most misinterpreted program in Germany was the so-called
"Lebensborn". It was the exact opposite of what people are made to
believe it was, or should I say, of what people like to believe.. The
Lebensborn was the institution to help unwed mothers who did not know
where to turn for help. They were taken care of during their
pregnancies and afterward as well. This was the Lebensborn, and any
other interpretation is plain hogwash..
My father was able to buy not one but three guns plus two pistols,
together with plenty of ammunition. All it took him was proof that he
was indeed a German citizen without a criminal record. Then in 1945,
when the French "liberated" us, they disarmed him. I know that he was
not the only one to have guns at home, because I saw the many, many
arms that were handed over to the French, and this was in a very small
village..
Then, after the war was over, we had our first experience with a real
democracy. The French introduced it and gave us some shining examples;
one was that the lived off the country and stole everything which
wasn>t nailed down..
It was not until many years later that I learned that Hitler held at
least five plebiscites during the first half of his rule. In
democratic Germany, from 1945 until today there has never been a
plebiscite.
There were foreign workers employed in Germany during WWII. I knew
one of them. He worked on a farm and was treated exactly like the son
who was in the army. After the war he stayed on and married the
daughter of the house. He was a prisoner of war from Poland and I
never saw him guarded by any policeman. This is how foreigners were
treated in Germany. They earned the same wages as the Germans, they
took part in the social insurance program, had paid-for holidays
including free train fares, and many came back with friends who also
wanted to work for these "horrible" Germans. Today they are called
slave laborer.
Not everyone was entitled to go on to a university. Only good marks
and above-average performance in schools qualified. But good
performers were promoted with all means available. Today we are much
more democratic; everyone is entitled to a university education and if
the parents are wealthy enough, the son or daughter can study until
they are 35..
Germany was also the country to introduce, in 1933, the first-ever
comprehensive animal protection law. Farm animals had to be kept in
strictly natural environments and no animal factories were allowed. Of
course, no testing of products on animals was permitted, and no kosher
slaughter.
If new industrial facilities were built they had to conform to the
highest standards with adequate lighting and air inside, canteens
where the workers were served nutritious meals at affordable prices,
and beautiful lawns outside: all for the benefit of the workers.. In
national socialist Germany, no child labor was allowed as it still was
in other European countries.
And finally, although I could still go on for a while, I would like to
mention that on express orders from Hitler himself, it was strictly
forbidden to use corporal punishment in the army. He was of the
opinion that in was incompatible with the honor of a German to be
punished by such degrading means.
That was the Germany I grew up in, and I am glad that I did.
http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.nsm88.com/
http://wsi.matriots.com/jews.html
This account has been banned because it violated the Google Groups
Terms Of Use.
No, it>s a Jew thing.
Crusading 1990s paper was mercilessly attacked -- and destroyed --
when it led one crusade into forbidden territory; a personal story.by
Jack Killey
QUESTION: Do you really believe the Jews own the media?
Answer: Most of it, yes. But they don>t have to own it to control it.
An object lesson in this distinction was the downfall of northeastern
Ohio>s The Gateway Press, a general interest newsweekly to which I
devoted seven years of part-time work. A fierce smear campaign and
unremitting advertising boycott by Cleveland-area Jews -- many not
even in our circulation region -- caused the forced sale of a
newspaper that many readers trusted to deliver at least an
approximation of the truth about events in their communities...
But only 850 words on Clinton>s appointments reduced our county, after
twelve years of an alternative, to its former bland diet of
one-newspaper pabulum. A barely measurable percentage of our
readership, none of whom ever refuted the commentary on its
particulars, managed to deprive some 48,000 readers of a reliable news
source in their communities. The Jews' "persecuted minority" mantle
is, I suppose, apropos for a race that showed a gift for the
theatrical long before they created Broadway and Hollywood...
The commentary in question was published, as all my many commentaries
were, as my personal opinion, not as the editorial position of the
newspaper. The piece can be easily synopsized. I pointed out the high
percentage of Jews among Clinton>s appointees, hardly representative
of his stated goal to have an administration that "looks like
America." I wondered how this might affect American foreign policy
towards Israel, and (this was the part that brought in the big guns
against us) ventured the opinion that this facet of the Clinton
administration was being deliberately obscured by a Jewish-dominated
American media establishment.
You>d think I>d written a glowing reconsideration of Mein Kampf. My
editor>s phone started jumping off her desk. Sales reps were screamed
at and thrown from premises by red-faced merchants who had previously
described us as an asset to the community. One of the more prominent
Jewish businessmen in the area wrote the editor a venomous letter
(specifying, of course, that it was not for publication) telling her,
"You can>t say whether or not you>re an anti-Semite. Only we can
decide that."
Do you think the surrounding media establishment came to the defense
of one of their own embattled members as the pot began to boil beyond
the boundaries of Portage County, Ohio? Do you suppose that perhaps
they>d defend the First Amendment right of a 12-year-old mainstream
newspaper to publish controversial opinion articles? Think again.
It took the Newhouse-owned Cleveland Plain Dealer about ten working
days to run a lead editorial titled "One For the Fish," written by
Plain Dealer staffer Carolyn Davis, a Jewess who in a personal whine
piece once stated her wish that every gun be wiped off the face of the
Earth (no liberal bias here). Carolyn was mad, and maybe a little
jealous that I could write circles around her. She at least quoted the
commentary>s best sentence, which was that Clinton "seated enough
white European males to ensure that America will be ruined in a
competent, intelligent, and well-organized fashion." Otherwise it was
the stock denunciation of "anti-Semitic . . . crap," seething with
horrified disbelief that anyone could suggest that Jews control
America>s media. Let>s see, a Jewess writer for Ohio>s largest - and
Jew-owned --newspaper attacks a rural Gentile-owned weekly in a lead
editorial . . . doesn>t sound like control to me.
The Cleveland Jewish News was even more generous, allotting a full
page to editor Cynthia Dettelbach herself rather than an underling. An
equally unexceptional attack it was, bristling with weasel words and
broad smears, but contradicting none of the commentary>s content with
opposing facts regarding Clinton>s appointees. I imagine the Jewish
News, like most of the other Jewish organs in the country, ran
bannered praise of Clinton>s favoritism towards Jews in his
administration. I guess it>s only impolitic for Gentile publications
to notice it, another point I made in the commentary.
This sort of notice by large media organs goes beyond "coverage" of a
hot topic. Neither publication took any interest in the community
served by The Gateway and probably cared even less who we, the paper
covering it, were.
The Newhouse-owned Akron Beacon Journal ran no editorial hate pieces,
but they stayed on top of the unfolding events around that
"anti-Semitic" newspaper in Streetsboro. The Plain Dealer nominally
covered our county, but we beat them regularly in an area they usually
assigned to worn-out hacks in their Summit County bureau. The point
is, the sudden interest and overbearing coverage of a heretofore
unnoticed region of their circulation area was looking mighty
selective. We had touched on a topic that was . . . unpermitted. A
Jewish topic. And they were going to make sure that the publication
impertinent enough to raise the thorny issue of Jewish power in the
American oval office and the American media wouldn>t publish for long.
The point man in the effort -- the visible one, anyway -- was Jerry
Brodsky, a Jewish principal in the largest and most affluent public
school district in our county. His most recent claim to fame had been
his opposition to the display of a Christmas tree at the predominantly
Gentile school he governed.
Also an attorney and a resident of Beachwood, a heavily-Jewish and
affluent Cleveland bedroom suburb, "Jerry the Jew," as he became
less-than-affectionately known in the Gateway office, mounted a
secondary advertising boycott against us, sending high-minded letters
to many of our advertisers warning them of the business to be lost if
they continued to advertise with us. He wrote the letters under his
legal letterhead, though he took care to remind recipients this wasn>t
official business (although he did remind them of his important
position in the school district).
I don>t think Jerry the Jew really scared anyone off, but he kept up
the momentum; the big advertisers who dropped us did so on their own
hoof. Jewish Rite Aid CEO Alex Grass suddenly took a personal interest
in the ad account of his rundown shop fifteen miles from us and pulled
their ads, declaring his offense at the article in a letter to us; Jew
Albert Klaben of Klaben Auto Stores, one of the region>s
biggest-volume auto-supply chains, was equally miffed and yanked his
ads. Both were important accounts. Several smaller but regular
advertisers pulled one by one, and a large Cleveland-area grocery
chain, Gentile-owned but with stores in heavily Jewish Cleveland
suburbs, began shuffling their feet and "reconsidering" their account
in phone calls and letters to my editor. Nervous local Gentile bankers
and realtors called with weak offers of continuing support, but whined
about all the "bad publicity" we were getting...
I thought back to a mysterious anonymous caller, a not-unfriendly
and apparently Gentile woman with a patrician accent who contacted me
early in the fray. She calmly told me the history of "the boycott,"
meaning not the current one against us but the
historical prototype of it, and said, "Your paper will be out of
business in eighteen months." It took, I think, fourteen.
What I found significant throughout this process was the outsized
influence wielded by a small clique, and a clique who would normally
have had no special interest in our paper or in our region, which is
largely rural and probably 99 percent Gentile. Even had a genuine
boycott been carried out its effect would have been negligible. Bad
publicity seems to have been the boycott>s purpose; since the largest
advertisers who pulled were Jews, a phone call to them from Brodsky or
the Jewish News or the Cleveland ADL probably would have sufficed.
Another feature of the boycott that struck me was the powerlessness of
our Gentile readers, many of whom were outraged by the attack on us.
We weren>t lacking in support from our readership, some of whom were
courageous enough to register their agreement with the commentary in
our letters column. I found encouraging the number of readers who told
me privately their feelings on Jewish power in U.S. politics.
Unfortunately, they didn>t wield the power the Jews do among U.S.
merchandisers, bankers, car dealers, and realtors, the people whose ad
dollars support small (and large) newspapers. It shouldn>t have
surprised me.
I had to laugh at Carloyn Davis>s description of "Jewish media power"
in the Plain Dealer editorial as a "bigoted buzz phrase that goes back
decades." One doesn>t have to sample overtly "racist" writings to
encounter references to Jewish media control, and they date back much
farther than decades. When I see past allusions to Jewish press power
from the pens of such august and "establishment" figures as historian
W.E.H. Lecky, Winston Churchill, Hillaire Belloc, or Sir Richard
Burton (among many others), two things cross my mind.
One is the casual manner of its mention, as though these writers are
noting that the sky is blue. Lecky, for example, in his late
nineteenth-century masterpiece "Democracy and Liberty," devotes a
paragraph or two to Jewish domination of the Russian press under the
Czars (he attributes at least some of the resentment the average
Russian felt for the Jews during the pogroms to this influence). No
earnest attempt is made to convince the reader of a doubtful precept,
no long lists of proofs are proffered: not because they couldn>t be
produced, one senses, but because it simply isn>t necessary to
document what appears to have been a commonly-known fact among the
less-numerous, but better-informed, literate members of earlier
generations.
A more troubling thought that strikes me about this situation is that
contemporary authors of comparative standing could not publish similar
observations, or at least not without sudden relegation to vanity
presses and maybe community college jobs. Probably only the eminence
and the solid corpus of work produced by earlier authors, and perhaps
less fear among Gentile publishers, allowed them to make such
references without destroying their careers.
At any rate, Jewish press control is hardly a malicious myth that>s
been propagated for decades (centuries?) by anti-Semites; it is rather
a truth that has been relentlessly obscured by increasingly powerful
Jewish interests within and outside the press. No one who has closely
studied the pertinent history at any length can convincingly argue
otherwise, even if the student limits himself to "permitted" books and
authors rather than documents some find inherently questionable (i.e.,
the Protocols. ) The extent to which an offending author is pushed to
the margins or isolated from the public by a self-interested Jewish
minority probably depends on a variety of factors, but one thing is
certain: he won>t emerge from the process quite intact.
So what has this to do with the experiences of a small-time writer for
a little newspaper in Streetsboro, Ohio? Only that I saw firsthand
what happens and has happened to many writers who dare to write and
publish on the fact of Jewish media and political influence. It was in
one sense a privilege to be in courageous company living and dead: to
be allocated the ire bestowed on people like Hillaire Belloc, G. K.
Chesterton, William Pierce, Douglas Reed, and Wilmot Robertson was a
badge of honor of sorts.
In other senses, not least the sacrifice of a good newspaper on the
altar of Jewish sensibilities, it was a tragedy. But not for me.
Although it>s virtually certain that despite fifteen years of some
pretty good journalism on my part, I>ll never work again for a
"respectable" journal, given the litmus tests and the rules imposed by
such publications, who would want to? If anything my experience in
fifteen years in the field has been one of progressive distaste for
the media, and in that sentiment at least I join a growing number of
Americans.
Unfortunately, most readers and television viewers will probably
continue to be guided by a thirst for entertainment and stimulation
despite their stated disgust for the mainstream media. But there>s no
doubt that awareness of the true nature and agenda of America>s
"mainstream," i.e., Jewish, media is growing, and perhaps we can take
a page from the Chosen Ones themselves when it comes to the
retribution a committed and aligned minority can impose.
2005 NationalVanguard.org.
http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.nsm88.com/
http://wsi.matriots.com/jews.html
[/quote]
So what if the Jews were conspiring to take over the world anyway?
What>s it to you? Are the people now in charge of the world doing
such a great job? You think the Jews could do worse? What bloody
difference would it make? Less Neo-Nazi fruitcakes? Great!
--
RaaN |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
Topaz
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2008 6:00 am Post subject: Re: Re: If one can>t afford children, one should not have ch |
|
|
On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 21:16:24 -0700 (PDT), RaaN <raan2000@hotmail.com>
wrote:
[quote]
So what if the Jews were conspiring to take over the world anyway?
What>s it to you?
[/quote]
The Jewish Agenda
By Phaedrus
Here>s what they>re up to:
The progressive elimination of all national borders world-wide.
Elimination of foreign currency exchange controls world-wide to aid
unimpeded capital flight.
The imposition of the preferred Jewish method of control - so called
'democracy' - around the world then engineering the installation of
compliant governments who are nothing more than puppets of Zionist
control.
Total control of television, radio, newspapers, periodicals, magazines
and advertising.
The promotion of inter-breeding between disparate races through
pervasive media suggestion and political dogma.
The encouragement of unsustainable levels of immigration in Europe and
the United States, whether legal or not and regardless of the worth of
the immigrants involved or their likely contribution to Western
economies.
Direct control of international finance and banking.
The formation of ever-larger eco-political blocs and free-trade
regions with uniform rules and standards that will one day all be
merged to form the One World Government, which they of course will
control.
The propagation of the mind virus that 'political correctness' is the
enlightened, modern way to go and its rejectionists as in some way
wicked and bigoted or at the very least woefully old-fashioned.
The crushing of any form of dissent against the implementation of the
New World Order.
Stricter gun control measures in the United States with the aim of
eventually disarming the people altogether.
The promotion via their media holdings of homosexuality, mixed-race
relationships and any other forms of aberrant and socially damaging
behavior.
Engendering the idea through media control that blacks are superior to
what they really are and that whites are in fact, inferior to what
they really are.
The idea that homosexuals and lesbians should be proud of what they
are and AIDS is nothing to be ashamed of any more.
The restriction of free expression on the Internet.
The propagation of the concept of 'Hate Crime' - reminiscent of George
Orwell>s 'Thought Crime' in his prescient, dystopian novel, Nineteen
Eighty-Four.
The encouragement of under-age sex preferably between children of
different races through their numerous teenage magazine titles (theft
of childhood and innocence).
Elimination of trade barriers and the creation of a global,
business-friendly trading environment giving rise to massive job
losses in Europe and America.
The debasement of traditional family values and the destruction of the
family unit.
To ridicule and debase Christianity and anyone who dares uphold moral
values.
To campaign for the intolerance of 'racism' and 'homophobia.'
The promotion of "Affirmative Action" type programs that put the
interests of hopelessly incompetent blacks ahead of struggling, hard
working white people.
The stimulation of inter-tribal violence between Arabs.
The generation of inter-cultural tensions in countries that have
adopted Jew-promoted 'multiculturalism.'
The expansion of a 'Greater Israel' into what remains of Palestine.
And we allow these poisonous rodents to shape our perceptions for us??
We MUST be mad. In the future, after the forthcoming struggle is won,
no Jew must ever be allowed within a million miles of a transmitter or
a printing press - NEVER - for as long as mankind survives.
http://worldpeace-phaedrus.blogspot.com/2007/12/that-jewish-agenda-in-full.html
[quote]Are the people now in charge of the world doing
such a great job?
[/quote]
The Jews are the people now in charge.
[quote]You think the Jews could do worse? What bloody
difference would it make? Less Neo-Nazi fruitcakes? Great!
[/quote]
Here are some quotes from Mein Kampf:
"The man who is not opposed and vilified and slandered in the
Jewish Press is not a staunch German and not a true National
Socialist. The best rule whereby the sincerity of his convictions, his
character and strength of will, can be measured is by the hostility
which his name arouses among the mortal enemies of our people.
"The followers of the movement, and indeed the whole nation,
must be reminded again and again of the fact that, through the medium
of his newspapers, the Jew is always spreading falsehood and that if
he tells the truth on some occasions it is only for the purpose of
masking some greater deceit, which turns the apparent truth into a
deliberate falsehood. The Jew is the Great Master of Lies. Falsehood
and duplicity are the weapons with which he fights.
"Every calumny and falsehood published by the Jews are tokens of
honor which can be worn by our comrades. He whom they decry most is
nearest to our hearts and he whom they mortally hate is our best
friend.
"If a comrade of ours opens a Jewish newspaper in the morning
and does not find himself vilified there, then he has spent yesterday
to no account. For if he had achieved something he would be
persecuted, slandered, derided and abused. Those who effectively
combat this mortal enemy of our people, who is at the same time the
enemy of all Aryan peoples and all culture, can only expect to arouse
opposition on the part of this race and become the object of its
slanderous attacks.
"When these truths become part of the flesh and blood, as it
were, of our members, then the movement will be impregnable and
invincible."
" Then I began to examine my favorite 'World Press', with that fact
before my mind. "The deeper my soundings went the lesser grew my
respect for that Press which I formerly admired. Its style became
still more repellant and I was forced to reject its ideas as entirely
shallow and superficial. To claim that in the presentation of facts
and views its attitude was impartial seemed to me to contain more
falsehood than truth. The writers were- Jews.
"Thousands of details that I had scarcely noticed before seemed
to me now to deserve attention. I began to grasp and understand
things which I had formerly looked at in a different light."
"Thus another weapon beside that of freemasonry would have to be
secured. This was the Press. The Jew exercised all his skill and
tenacity in getting hold of it. By means of the Press he began
gradually to control public life in its entirety."
http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.nsm88.com/
http://wsi.matriots.com/jews.html |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
possum
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2008 7:09 am Post subject: Re: Re: If one can>t afford children, one should not have ch |
|
|
"Topaz" <mars1933@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:fpqs841cpgso25r64e4jhdk3k5u0dsmdmi@4ax.com...
[quote]On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 21:16:24 -0700 (PDT), RaaN
raan2000@hotmail.com
wrote:
So what if the Jews were conspiring to take over the world
anyway?
What>s it to you?
The Jewish Agenda
By Phaedrus
Here>s what they>re up to:
The progressive elimination of all national borders
world-wide.
Elimination of foreign currency exchange controls
world-wide to aid
unimpeded capital flight.
The imposition of the preferred Jewish method of control -
so called
'democracy' - around the world then engineering the
installation of
compliant governments who are nothing more than puppets of
Zionist
control.
Total control of television, radio, newspapers,
periodicals, magazines
and advertising.
The promotion of inter-breeding between disparate races
through
pervasive media suggestion and political dogma.
The encouragement of unsustainable levels of immigration
in Europe and
the United States, whether legal or not and regardless of
the worth of
the immigrants involved or their likely contribution to
Western
economies.
Direct control of international finance and banking.
The formation of ever-larger eco-political blocs and
free-trade
regions with uniform rules and standards that will one day
all be
merged to form the One World Government, which they of
course will
control.
The propagation of the mind virus that 'political
correctness' is the
enlightened, modern way to go and its rejectionists as in
some way
wicked and bigoted or at the very least woefully
old-fashioned.
The crushing of any form of dissent against the
implementation of the
New World Order.
Stricter gun control measures in the United States with
the aim of
eventually disarming the people altogether.
The promotion via their media holdings of homosexuality,
mixed-race
relationships and any other forms of aberrant and socially
damaging
behavior.
Engendering the idea through media control that blacks are
superior to
what they really are and that whites are in fact, inferior
to what
they really are.
The idea that homosexuals and lesbians should be proud of
what they
are and AIDS is nothing to be ashamed of any more.
The restriction of free expression on the Internet.
The propagation of the concept of 'Hate Crime' -
reminiscent of George
Orwell>s 'Thought Crime' in his prescient, dystopian
novel, Nineteen
Eighty-Four.
The encouragement of under-age sex preferably between
children of
different races through their numerous teenage magazine
titles (theft
of childhood and innocence).
Elimination of trade barriers and the creation of a
global,
business-friendly trading environment giving rise to
massive job
losses in Europe and America.
The debasement of traditional family values and the
destruction of the
family unit.
To ridicule and debase Christianity and anyone who dares
uphold moral
values.
To campaign for the intolerance of 'racism' and
'homophobia.'
The promotion of "Affirmative Action" type programs that
put the
interests of hopelessly incompetent blacks ahead of
struggling, hard
working white people.
The stimulation of inter-tribal violence between Arabs.
The generation of inter-cultural tensions in countries
that have
adopted Jew-promoted 'multiculturalism.'
The expansion of a 'Greater Israel' into what remains of
Palestine.
And we allow these poisonous rodents to shape our
perceptions for us??
We MUST be mad. In the future, after the forthcoming
struggle is won,
no Jew must ever be allowed within a million miles of a
transmitter or
a printing press - NEVER - for as long as mankind
survives.
[/quote]
you still posting?
you>ll like this.
http://twitter.com/Borat
> |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
RaaN
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2008 5:21 pm Post subject: Re: If one can>t afford children, one should not have childr |
|
|
On Jul 28, 9:00 pm, Topaz <mars1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 21:16:24 -0700 (PDT), RaaN <raan2...@hotmail.com
wrote:
So what if the Jews were conspiring to take over the world anyway?
What>s it to you?
The Jewish Agenda
By Phaedrus
Here>s what they>re up to:
The progressive elimination of all national borders world-wide.
Elimination of foreign currency exchange controls world-wide to aid
unimpeded capital flight.
The imposition of the preferred Jewish method of control - so called
'democracy' - around the world then engineering the installation of
compliant governments who are nothing more than puppets of Zionist
control.
Total control of television, radio, newspapers, periodicals, magazines
and advertising.
The promotion of inter-breeding between disparate races through
pervasive media suggestion and political dogma.
The encouragement of unsustainable levels of immigration in Europe and
the United States, whether legal or not and regardless of the worth of
the immigrants involved or their likely contribution to Western
economies.
Direct control of international finance and banking.
The formation of ever-larger eco-political blocs and free-trade
regions with uniform rules and standards that will one day all be
merged to form the One World Government, which they of course will
control.
The propagation of the mind virus that 'political correctness' is the
enlightened, modern way to go and its rejectionists as in some way
wicked and bigoted or at the very least woefully old-fashioned.
The crushing of any form of dissent against the implementation of the
New World Order.
Stricter gun control measures in the United States with the aim of
eventually disarming the people altogether.
The promotion via their media holdings of homosexuality, mixed-race
relationships and any other forms of aberrant and socially damaging
behavior.
Engendering the idea through media control that blacks are superior to
what they really are and that whites are in fact, inferior to what
they really are.
The idea that homosexuals and lesbians should be proud of what they
are and AIDS is nothing to be ashamed of any more.
The restriction of free expression on the Internet.
The propagation of the concept of 'Hate Crime' - reminiscent of George
Orwell>s 'Thought Crime' in his prescient, dystopian novel, Nineteen
Eighty-Four.
The encouragement of under-age sex preferably between children of
different races through their numerous teenage magazine titles (theft
of childhood and innocence).
Elimination of trade barriers and the creation of a global,
business-friendly trading environment giving rise to massive job
losses in Europe and America.
The debasement of traditional family values and the destruction of the
family unit.
To ridicule and debase Christianity and anyone who dares uphold moral
values.
To campaign for the intolerance of 'racism' and 'homophobia.'
The promotion of "Affirmative Action" type programs that put the
interests of hopelessly incompetent blacks ahead of struggling, hard
working white people.
The stimulation of inter-tribal violence between Arabs.
The generation of inter-cultural tensions in countries that have
adopted Jew-promoted 'multiculturalism.'
The expansion of a 'Greater Israel' into what remains of Palestine.
And we allow these poisonous rodents to shape our perceptions for us??
We MUST be mad. In the future, after the forthcoming struggle is won,
no Jew must ever be allowed within a million miles of a transmitter or
a printing press - NEVER - for as long as mankind survives.
http://worldpeace-phaedrus.blogspot.com/2007/12/that-jewish-agenda-in...
Are the people now in charge of the world doing
such a great job?
The Jews are the people now in charge.
You think the Jews could do worse? What bloody
difference would it make? Less Neo-Nazi fruitcakes? Great!
Here are some quotes from Mein Kampf:
"The man who is not opposed and vilified and slandered in the
Jewish Press is not a staunch German and not a true National
Socialist. The best rule whereby the sincerity of his convictions, his
character and strength of will, can be measured is by the hostility
which his name arouses among the mortal enemies of our people.
"The followers of the movement, and indeed the whole nation,
must be reminded again and again of the fact that, through the medium
of his newspapers, the Jew is always spreading falsehood and that if
he tells the truth on some occasions it is only for the purpose of
masking some greater deceit, which turns the apparent truth into a
deliberate falsehood. The Jew is the Great Master of Lies. Falsehood
and duplicity are the weapons with which he fights.
"Every calumny and falsehood published by the Jews are tokens of
honor which can be worn by our comrades. He whom they decry most is
nearest to our hearts and he whom they mortally hate is our best
friend.
"If a comrade of ours opens a Jewish newspaper in the morning
and does not find himself vilified there, then he has spent yesterday
to no account. For if he had achieved something he would be
persecuted, slandered, derided and abused. Those who effectively
combat this mortal enemy of our people, who is at the same time the
enemy of all Aryan peoples and all culture, can only expect to arouse
opposition on the part of this race and become the object of its
slanderous attacks.
"When these truths become part of the flesh and blood, as it
were, of our members, then the movement will be impregnable and
invincible."
" Then I began to examine my favorite 'World Press', with that fact
before my mind. "The deeper my soundings went the lesser grew my
respect for that Press which I formerly admired. Its style became
still more repellant and I was forced to reject its ideas as entirely
shallow and superficial. To claim that in the presentation of facts
and views its attitude was impartial seemed to me to contain more
falsehood than truth. The writers were- Jews.
"Thousands of details that I had scarcely noticed before seemed
to me now to deserve attention. I began to grasp and understand
things which I had formerly looked at in a different light."
"Thus another weapon beside that of freemasonry would have to be
secured. This was the Press. The Jew exercised all his skill and
tenacity in getting hold of it. By means of the Press he began
gradually to control public life in its entirety."
http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.nsm88.com/
http://wsi.matriots.com/jews.html
[/quote]
I was thinking free speech was the worst thing threatened but after
reading this I>m not so sure anymore.
--
RaaN |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Noel Friesen
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2008 10:51 pm Post subject: Re: Re: If one can>t afford children, one should not have ch |
|
|
"Topaz" <mars1933@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:fpqs841cpgso25r64e4jhdk3k5u0dsmdmi@4ax.com...
[quote]On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 21:16:24 -0700 (PDT), RaaN <raan2000@hotmail.com
wrote:
So what if the Jews were conspiring to take over the world anyway?
What>s it to you?
The Jewish Agenda
By Phaedrus
Here>s what they>re up to:
The progressive elimination of all national borders world-wide.
Elimination of foreign currency exchange controls world-wide to aid
unimpeded capital flight.
The imposition of the preferred Jewish method of control - so called
'democracy' - around the world then engineering the installation of
compliant governments who are nothing more than puppets of Zionist
control.
Total control of television, radio, newspapers, periodicals, magazines
and advertising.
The promotion of inter-breeding between disparate races through
pervasive media suggestion and political dogma.
The encouragement of unsustainable levels of immigration in Europe and
the United States, whether legal or not and regardless of the worth of
the immigrants involved or their likely contribution to Western
economies.
Direct control of international finance and banking.
The formation of ever-larger eco-political blocs and free-trade
regions with uniform rules and standards that will one day all be
merged to form the One World Government, which they of course will
control.
The propagation of the mind virus that 'political correctness' is the
enlightened, modern way to go and its rejectionists as in some way
wicked and bigoted or at the very least woefully old-fashioned.
The crushing of any form of dissent against the implementation of the
New World Order.
Stricter gun control measures in the United States with the aim of
eventually disarming the people altogether.
The promotion via their media holdings of homosexuality, mixed-race
relationships and any other forms of aberrant and socially damaging
behavior.
Engendering the idea through media control that blacks are superior to
what they really are and that whites are in fact, inferior to what
they really are.
The idea that homosexuals and lesbians should be proud of what they
are and AIDS is nothing to be ashamed of any more.
The restriction of free expression on the Internet.
The propagation of the concept of 'Hate Crime' - reminiscent of George
Orwell>s 'Thought Crime' in his prescient, dystopian novel, Nineteen
Eighty-Four.
The encouragement of under-age sex preferably between children of
different races through their numerous teenage magazine titles (theft
of childhood and innocence).
Elimination of trade barriers and the creation of a global,
business-friendly trading environment giving rise to massive job
losses in Europe and America.
The debasement of traditional family values and the destruction of the
family unit.
To ridicule and debase Christianity and anyone who dares uphold moral
values.
To campaign for the intolerance of 'racism' and 'homophobia.'
The promotion of "Affirmative Action" type programs that put the
interests of hopelessly incompetent blacks ahead of struggling, hard
working white people.
The stimulation of inter-tribal violence between Arabs.
The generation of inter-cultural tensions in countries that have
adopted Jew-promoted 'multiculturalism.'
The expansion of a 'Greater Israel' into what remains of Palestine.
And we allow these poisonous rodents to shape our perceptions for us??
We MUST be mad. In the future, after the forthcoming struggle is won,
no Jew must ever be allowed within a million miles of a transmitter or
a printing press - NEVER - for as long as mankind survives.
http://worldpeace-phaedrus.blogspot.com/2007/12/that-jewish-agenda-in-full.html
Are the people now in charge of the world doing
such a great job?
The Jews are the people now in charge.
You think the Jews could do worse? What bloody
difference would it make? Less Neo-Nazi fruitcakes? Great!
Here are some quotes from Mein Kampf:
"The man who is not opposed and vilified and slandered in the
Jewish Press is not a staunch German and not a true National
Socialist. The best rule whereby the sincerity of his convictions, his
character and strength of will, can be measured is by the hostility
which his name arouses among the mortal enemies of our people.
"The followers of the movement, and indeed the whole nation,
must be reminded again and again of the fact that, through the medium
of his newspapers, the Jew is always spreading falsehood and that if
he tells the truth on some occasions it is only for the purpose of
masking some greater deceit, which turns the apparent truth into a
deliberate falsehood. The Jew is the Great Master of Lies. Falsehood
and duplicity are the weapons with which he fights.
"Every calumny and falsehood published by the Jews are tokens of
honor which can be worn by our comrades. He whom they decry most is
nearest to our hearts and he whom they mortally hate is our best
friend.
"If a comrade of ours opens a Jewish newspaper in the morning
and does not find himself vilified there, then he has spent yesterday
to no account. For if he had achieved something he would be
persecuted, slandered, derided and abused. Those who effectively
combat this mortal enemy of our people, who is at the same time the
enemy of all Aryan peoples and all culture, can only expect to arouse
opposition on the part of this race and become the object of its
slanderous attacks.
"When these truths become part of the flesh and blood, as it
were, of our members, then the movement will be impregnable and
invincible."
" Then I began to examine my favorite 'World Press', with that fact
before my mind. "The deeper my soundings went the lesser grew my
respect for that Press which I formerly admired. Its style became
still more repellant and I was forced to reject its ideas as entirely
shallow and superficial. To claim that in the presentation of facts
and views its attitude was impartial seemed to me to contain more
falsehood than truth. The writers were- Jews.
"Thousands of details that I had scarcely noticed before seemed
to me now to deserve attention. I began to grasp and understand
things which I had formerly looked at in a different light."
"Thus another weapon beside that of freemasonry would have to be
secured. This was the Press. The Jew exercised all his skill and
tenacity in getting hold of it. By means of the Press he began
gradually to control public life in its entirety."
http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.nsm88.com/
http://wsi.matriots.com/jews.html
[/quote]
*plonk* |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
RaaN
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2008 2:47 am Post subject: BOYCOTT THIS THREAD Re: If one can>t afford children, one sh |
|
|
On Jul 29, 7:43 pm, Topaz <mars1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
[quote]By Luke O>Farrell
Snipped Antisemitic Hate-Mongering Propganda[/quote] |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Topaz
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2008 4:40 am Post subject: Re: Re: Re: If one can>t afford children, one should not hav |
|
|
By LUKE O>FARRELL
http://www.heretical.com/ofarrell/index.html
There are two types of people in the world: people who think there are
two types of people in the world and people who don>t. I>m among the
first type and I think the world is divided into people who recognize
the Jewish problem and people who don>t.
In other words, the world is divided into smart people and dumb
people. If you>ve got an IQ of 80, have difficulty operating a
can-opener, and recognize the Jewish problem, you>re smart. If you>ve
got an IQ of 180, have already won a couple of Nobel Prizes, and don>t
recognize the Jewish problem, you>re dumb.
I>ve been dumb for most of my life: it took me a long time to
recognize the Jewish problem. I didn>t think for myself, I just
accepted the propaganda and conformed to the consensus. Jews are good
people. Only bad people criticize Jews. Jews good. Anti-Semites bad.
But then, very slowly, I started to see the light.
Recognizing Jewish hypocrisy was the first big step. I was reading an
article by someone called Rabbi Julia Neuberger, a prominent British
liberal. I didn>t like liberals then, so I didn>t like her for that
(and because her voice and manner had always grated on me), but her
Jewishness wasn>t something I particularly noticed. But as I read the
article I came across something that didn>t strike me as very liberal:
she expressed concern about Jews marrying Gentiles, because this
threatened the survival of the Jewish people.
That made me sit up and think. Hold on, I thought, I know this woman
sits on all sorts of "multi-cultural" committees and is constantly
being invited onto TV and radio to yap about the joys of diversity and
the evils of racism. She>s all in favor of mass immigration and
there>s no way she>s worried about Whites marrying non-Whites, because
"Race is Just a Social Construct" and "We>re All the Same Under the
Skin". She>s a liberal and she thinks that race-mixing is good and
healthy and Holy. Yet this same woman is worried about Jews marrying
Gentiles. Small contradiction there, n>est ce-pas?
Well, no. Big contradiction. She obviously didn>t apply the same rules
to everyone else as she applied to her own people, the Jews. She was,
in short, a hypocrite. But not just that - she was a Jewish hypocrite.
And that>s a big step for a brainwashed White to take: not just
thinking in a negative way about a Jew, but thinking in a negative way
about a Jew because of her Jewishness.
After that, I slowly started to see the world in a different way. Or
to be more precise: I started to see the world. I started to see what
had always been there: the massive over-representation of Jews in
politics and the media. And I started to notice that a lot of those
Jews - like Rabbi Julia Neuberger, in fact - gave me the creeps. There
was something slimy and oily and flesh-crawling about them. And it
wasn>t just me, either: other Gentiles seemed to feel it too.
Politicians often attract nicknames based on some outstanding aspect
of their character or behavior. Margaret Thatcher was "The Iron Lady".
Ronald Reagan was "Teflon Ron". Bill Clinton was "Slick Willy". But
these are Gentile politicians and their nicknames are at least
half-affectionate. Jewish politicians seem to attract a different kind
of nickname. In Britain, Gerald Kaufman, bald, homosexual Member of
Parliament for Manchester Gorton, is nicknamed "Hannibal Lecter".
Peter Mandelson, now Britain>s Euro-Commissioner and Tony Blair>s
suspected former lover, is "The Prince of Darkness". Michael Howard
(né Hecht), the leader of the British Conservative Party, is
"Dracula".
When I noticed this kind of thing, I started to ask questions. What
was going on here? Why did Jews attract nicknames like that? And why
had Gentiles reacted to them like that not just now, but a long way
into the past? Shakespeare seems to have felt the same kind of
repulsion when he created the vengeful lawyer Shylock, and Dickens
when he created the parasitic master-thief Fagin. Classic
"anti-Semitic" stereotypes, but I knew that stereotypes aren>t always
wrong. If anti-Semitic stereotypes aren>t always wrong, then there>s
an obvious conclusion: neither is anti-Semitism. Gentiles are
sometimes right to dislike and distrust Jews.
After all, at the same time I was noticing something else: the massive
over-representation of Jews, not just among politicians and
journalists, but among crooked businessmen too. In fact, among very,
very crooked businessmen, the ones responsible for really big frauds
at Gentile expense. Men like Robert Maxwell (né Hoch), Ivan "Greed is
Good" Boesky, and Michael Milken. And, on a slightly lesser scale,
Ernest Saunders, who finagled an early release from prison because he
was coming down with Alzheimer>s, that well-known incurable brain
disease from which no-one ever recovers. Only Saunders managed to
confound medical science and recover from it.
Slimy. Hypocritical. Crooked. In a word: Jewish. But I didn>t take the
final step, the step to full recognition of the Jewish problem, until
I watched the reaction to Mel Gibson>s The Passion of the Christ. I>m
not a Christian and I have little sympathy with modern Christianity,
but I had a lot of sympathy for Mel Gibson as I watched the hysterical
campaign against him. The hysterical, well-organized, international
campaign by the slimy, hypocritical, crooked Jew Abe Foxman, Head of
the Anti-Defamation League, and his fellow slimy, hypocritical,
crooked Jews around the world. They didn>t like something and they
were moving heaven and earth to get it stopped.
And what was it they didn>t like? A movie about an event at the heart
of European art, literature, and culture: the crucifixion of Christ.
So here was another obvious conclusion: Jews hate European art,
literature, and culture. In other words, Jews hate White civilization
and the White race who created it.
After that, it all fell into place. I finally recognized that Jews
weren>t just slimy, hypocritical, and crooked, but actively dangerous
too. If I thought of something harmful to White civilization and the
survival of the White race - mass immigration, feminism,
multi-culturalism, anti-racism, gay rights - I realized that Jews were
behind it, were promoting it through their control of the media, and
had been doing so for decades.
Finally, I had seen the light. Finally, I had gotten smart and
recognized the Jewish problem, the problem that even dumb Gentiles
subconsciously recognize when they give nicknames like "Hannibal
Lecter" and "Prince of Darkness" and "Dracula" to Jewish politicians.
Jews really do want to eat us, and steal our souls, and suck our
blood, and it>s about time we started firing a few silver bullets.
http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.nsm88.com/
http://wsi.matriots.com/jews.html |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Topaz
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2008 4:43 am Post subject: Re: Re: If one can>t afford children, one should not have ch |
|
|
By Luke O>Farrell
"We propose that it be made an offence to download material from the
internet that could incite racial or religious hatred." When it was
claimed that the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) made that sinister,
totalitarian proposal in September 2006, you could understand what
George W. Bush meant when he said: "They hate us for our freedoms."
Staunch in defense of freedom, Britain>s conservative commentariat
rushed to condemn the MCB. "Free speech is the bedrock of a free
society!" they thundered. "Any group that seeks to undermine it has no
place in a democracy. If Muslims don>t like Britain>s proud,
centuries-old tradition of free speech, they know what they can do:
get out!"
Shamefully, however, many defenders of Western freedom against
Islamist tyranny seem to have forgotten what the MCB said in 2006. If
you>re one of them, here>s an extract from The Times to refresh your
memory:
The All-Party Parliamentary Inquiry into Anti-Semitism was set up last
year. None of the 14 members of the panel is Jewish, but evidence was
taken from across the Jewish community. The report proposes that it be
made an offence to download material from the internet that could
incite racial or religious hatred. Drawing on the view of the
Macpherson report that a racist act is defined by its victim, not by
whether a perpetrator considers himself racist, anti-Semitism is
defined in the report as "any remark, insult or act, the purpose or
effect of which is to violate a Jewish person>s dignity or create an
intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment
for him". (Loc. cit., 7th September 2006)
Oh dear, so it wasn>t the MCB who wanted to turn us into a
police-state after all: it was the philosemitic politicians who
conducted the All-Party Parliamentary Inquiry into Anti-Semitism.
Whoever would have guessed it? Anyone who knows about Jews and free
speech, that>s who. If Jews have power and influence, they start
working to take away free speech. It>s no use arguing that some Jews
support free speech and some white goyim oppose it: the average effect
of the two groups is perfectly clear. It was whites who created free
speech in the West and it is Jews who are taking it away. Was there
any popular support for Britain>s race laws, introduced in the 1960s
and steadily harshened ever since? No, there wasn>t, but what does the
will of the people matter in a democracy? The Board of Jewish Deputies
wanted the race laws and got them. The Jewish Anti-Defamation League
would like identical laws in the United States; so far, thanks to the
evil white males who created the First Amendment, it hasn>t gotten
them. Canadians haven>t been so lucky, as the neo-con Mark Steyn has
discovered. He>s gotten into trouble for saying things Muslims don>t
like, but let>s give him his due: he>s admitted that Jews aren>t
entirely blameless:
Submission from the Board of Deputies of British Jews
The Board of Deputies of British Jews welcomes the opportunity to make
this submission to the Select Committee on Religious Offences. The
Board is the representative body and voice of the British Jewish
community. It was founded in 1760. The Jewish community is covered by
the provisions of the Race Relations Acts. The Board is generally
satisfied with the format of the current legislation following the
amendments to Part 3 of the Public Order Act in the Criminal Justice
and Public Order Act 1994, the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and the
Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001. The Malicious Communications Act
1998 and its subsequent amendment offer further protection. Together
these have removed the legal and linguistic barriers which previously
had hampered prosecutions.
The UK is now faced with a growth in inter-religious friction, sparked
in large measure by conflict in the Middle East and the Indian
subcontinent. This has led to the dissemination of propaganda
deliberately attacking Jews qua Jews by Muslims. The Sikh and Hindu
communities have similarly been targeted. We are in touch with
representative bodies within these communities and can provide
examples of such incitement. The Board of Deputies welcomes the
proposal to introduce new laws to combat incitement to religious
hatred, but notes that this must be matched by the political will to
prosecute offenders. Otherwise any new powers risk becoming as
ineffective as the existing laws against incitement to racial hatred.
"It>s not enough, already! Ve vont more laws! No free speech for ze
vicked goyim!" And Mark Steyn isn>t tackling another vital question:
that of how Muslims got into the West in such large numbers to join
the Jew-initiated, Jew-continued assault on free speech. Was there any
popular support for mass immigration by Muslims in Britain, for
example? No, there wasn>t: there was massive popular opposition. But
what does the will of the people matter in a democracy? Britain is run
for the benefit of those who fund its political parties: men like
"Lord" Levy, his pals from Jewish Care, and David Abrahams, whose
excuse for conspiring to make secret payments to New Labour was that
he wanted to avoid the appearance of "a Jewish conspiracy". That>s
what democracy means in Britain: Jews pay, pols obey. Want thought
crime laws? You got 'em! Want mass immigration? You got it! Want war
in Iraq? You got that too!
Stone is president of the Jewish Council for Racial Equality
Stone wants to keep "racism" high on the agenda because he wants to
keep bashing whites. How racist is Britain? Very racist - against
whites. When you trace the sources of the "Hammer Honky!" religion,
you find that Jews are there every time, controlling, "advising",
passing laws to suppress white dissent. Free speech is indeed the
bedrock of a free society, which is why free societies and Jews don>t
mix. Those are the joys of Judeocracy and they>ll keep on coming until
we take our societies back.
Full article at
http://www.heretical.com/ofarrell/joyim.html
http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.nsm88.com/
http://wsi.matriots.com/jews.html |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Topaz
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2008 4:45 am Post subject: Re: Re: Re: If one can>t afford children, one should not hav |
|
|
by Kevin MacDonald
The current situation in the United States is really an awesome
display of Jewish power and influence. People who are very strongly
identified as Jews maintain close ties to Israeli politicians and
military figures and to Jewish activist organizations and pro-Israeli
lobbying groups while occupying influential policy-making positions in
the defense and foreign policy establishment. These same people, as
well as a chorus of other prominent Jews, have routine access to the
most prestigious media outlets in the United States. People who
criticize Israel are routinely vilified and subjected to professional
abuse.
Perhaps the most telling feature of this entire state of affairs is
the surreal fact that in this entire discourse Jewish identity is not
mentioned. When Charles Krauthammer, Bill Kristol, Michael Rubin,
William Safire, Robert Satloff, or the legions of other prominent
media figures write their reflexively pro-Israel pieces in the New
York Times, the Wall Street Journal, or the Los Angeles Times, or
opine on the Fox News Network, there is never any mention that they
are Jewish Americans who have an intense ethnic interest in Israel.
When Richard Perle authors a report for an Israeli think tank; is on
the board of directors of an Israeli newspaper; maintains close
personal ties with prominent Israelis, especially those associated
with the Likud Party; has worked for an Israeli defense company; and,
according to credible reports, was discovered by the FBI passing
classified information to Israel - when, despite all of this, he is a
central figure in the network of those pushing for wars to rearrange
the entire politics of the Middle East in Israel>s favor, and with
nary a soul having the courage to mention the obvious overriding
Jewish loyalty apparent in Perle>s actions, that is indeed a
breathtaking display of power.
One must contemplate the fact that American Jews have managed to
maintain unquestioned support for Israel over the last thirty-seven
years, despite Israel>s seizing land and engaging in a brutal
suppression of the Palestinians in the occupied territories - an
occupation that will most likely end with expulsion or complete
subjugation, degradation, and apartheid. During the same period Jewish
organizations in America have been a principal force - in my view the
main force - for transforming America into a state dedicated to
suppressing ethnic identification among Europeans, for encouraging
massive multiethnic immigration into the U.S., and for erecting a
legal system and cultural ideology that is obsessively sensitive to
the complaints and interests of non-European ethnic minorities - the
culture of the Holocaust. All this is done without a whisper of
double standards in the aboveground media...
http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.nsm88.com/
http://wsi.matriots.com/jews.html |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
RFHall
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2008 1:20 pm Post subject: Re: If one can>t afford children, one should not have childr |
|
|
On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 08:08:57 -0500, Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Walter:
Thanks for giving us a peek at a part of Nazi Germany that not many of
us know.
RFHall
http://www.seanet.com/~realistic/idealism.html
Realistic Idealism
Philosophy based on evidence. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
RFHall
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2008 1:43 pm Post subject: Re: If one can>t afford children, one should not have childr |
|
|
On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 18:40:45 -0500, Topaz <mars1933@hotmail.com>
wrote:
[quote]
By LUKE O>FARRELL
http://www.heretical.com/ofarrell/index.html
There are two types of people in the world: people who think there are
two types of people in the world and people who don>t. I>m among the
first type and I think the world is divided into people who recognize
the Jewish problem and people who don>t.
In other words, the world is divided into smart people and dumb
people. If you>ve got an IQ of 80, have difficulty operating a
can-opener, and recognize the Jewish problem, you>re smart. If you>ve
got an IQ of 180, have already won a couple of Nobel Prizes, and don>t
recognize the Jewish problem, you>re dumb.
I>ve been dumb for most of my life: it took me a long time to
recognize the Jewish problem. I didn>t think for myself, I just
accepted the propaganda and conformed to the consensus. Jews are good
people. Only bad people criticize Jews. Jews good. Anti-Semites bad.
But then, very slowly, I started to see the light.
Recognizing Jewish hypocrisy was the first big step. I was reading an
article by someone called Rabbi Julia Neuberger, a prominent British
liberal. I didn>t like liberals then, so I didn>t like her for that
(and because her voice and manner had always grated on me), but her
Jewishness wasn>t something I particularly noticed. But as I read the
article I came across something that didn>t strike me as very liberal:
she expressed concern about Jews marrying Gentiles, because this
threatened the survival of the Jewish people.
That made me sit up and think. Hold on, I thought, I know this woman
sits on all sorts of "multi-cultural" committees and is constantly
being invited onto TV and radio to yap about the joys of diversity and
the evils of racism. She>s all in favor of mass immigration and
there>s no way she>s worried about Whites marrying non-Whites, because
"Race is Just a Social Construct" and "We>re All the Same Under the
Skin". She>s a liberal and she thinks that race-mixing is good and
healthy and Holy. Yet this same woman is worried about Jews marrying
Gentiles. Small contradiction there, n>est ce-pas?
Well, no. Big contradiction. She obviously didn>t apply the same rules
to everyone else as she applied to her own people, the Jews. She was,
in short, a hypocrite. But not just that - she was a Jewish hypocrite.
And that>s a big step for a brainwashed White to take: not just
thinking in a negative way about a Jew, but thinking in a negative way
about a Jew because of her Jewishness.
After that, I slowly started to see the world in a different way. Or
to be more precise: I started to see the world. I started to see what
had always been there: the massive over-representation of Jews in
politics and the media. And I started to notice that a lot of those
Jews - like Rabbi Julia Neuberger, in fact - gave me the creeps. There
was something slimy and oily and flesh-crawling about them. And it
wasn>t just me, either: other Gentiles seemed to feel it too.
Politicians often attract nicknames based on some outstanding aspect
of their character or behavior. Margaret Thatcher was "The Iron Lady".
Ronald Reagan was "Teflon Ron". Bill Clinton was "Slick Willy". But
these are Gentile politicians and their nicknames are at least
half-affectionate. Jewish politicians seem to attract a different kind
of nickname. In Britain, Gerald Kaufman, bald, homosexual Member of
Parliament for Manchester Gorton, is nicknamed "Hannibal Lecter".
Peter Mandelson, now Britain>s Euro-Commissioner and Tony Blair>s
suspected former lover, is "The Prince of Darkness". Michael Howard
(né Hecht), the leader of the British Conservative Party, is
"Dracula".
When I noticed this kind of thing, I started to ask questions. What
was going on here? Why did Jews attract nicknames like that? And why
had Gentiles reacted to them like that not just now, but a long way
into the past? Shakespeare seems to have felt the same kind of
repulsion when he created the vengeful lawyer Shylock, and Dickens
when he created the parasitic master-thief Fagin. Classic
"anti-Semitic" stereotypes, but I knew that stereotypes aren>t always
wrong. If anti-Semitic stereotypes aren>t always wrong, then there>s
an obvious conclusion: neither is anti-Semitism. Gentiles are
sometimes right to dislike and distrust Jews.
After all, at the same time I was noticing something else: the massive
over-representation of Jews, not just among politicians and
journalists, but among crooked businessmen too. In fact, among very,
very crooked businessmen, the ones responsible for really big frauds
at Gentile expense. Men like Robert Maxwell (né Hoch), Ivan "Greed is
Good" Boesky, and Michael Milken. And, on a slightly lesser scale,
Ernest Saunders, who finagled an early release from prison because he
was coming down with Alzheimer>s, that well-known incurable brain
disease from which no-one ever recovers. Only Saunders managed to
confound medical science and recover from it.
Slimy. Hypocritical. Crooked. In a word: Jewish. But I didn>t take the
final step, the step to full recognition of the Jewish problem, until
I watched the reaction to Mel Gibson>s The Passion of the Christ. I>m
not a Christian and I have little sympathy with modern Christianity,
but I had a lot of sympathy for Mel Gibson as I watched the hysterical
campaign against him. The hysterical, well-organized, international
campaign by the slimy, hypocritical, crooked Jew Abe Foxman, Head of
the Anti-Defamation League, and his fellow slimy, hypocritical,
crooked Jews around the world. They didn>t like something and they
were moving heaven and earth to get it stopped.
And what was it they didn>t like? A movie about an event at the heart
of European art, literature, and culture: the crucifixion of Christ.
So here was another obvious conclusion: Jews hate European art,
literature, and culture. In other words, Jews hate White civilization
and the White race who created it.
After that, it all fell into place. I finally recognized that Jews
weren>t just slimy, hypocritical, and crooked, but actively dangerous
too. If I thought of something harmful to White civilization and the
survival of the White race - mass immigration, feminism,
multi-culturalism, anti-racism, gay rights - I realized that Jews were
behind it, were promoting it through their control of the media, and
had been doing so for decades.
Finally, I had seen the light. Finally, I had gotten smart and
recognized the Jewish problem, the problem that even dumb Gentiles
subconsciously recognize when they give nicknames like "Hannibal
Lecter" and "Prince of Darkness" and "Dracula" to Jewish politicians.
Jews really do want to eat us, and steal our souls, and suck our
blood, and it>s about time we started firing a few silver bullets.
You mean it isn>t just the Muslims and the Blacks?[/quote] |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Michael Ejercito
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2008 4:19 pm Post subject: Re: If one can>t afford children, one should not have childr |
|
|
On Jul 30, 8:46 am, Topaz <mars1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 07:44:39 -0400, Haines Brown
bro...@teufel.hartford-hwp.com> wrote:
I>ve not been at all following this thread, which seems inappropriate in
this newsgroup, but since it has gone on at length, perhaps I may be
permitted to inject a comment.
To characterize the Council for proposing a ban on downloading offensive
material from the Internet as totalitarian and sinister strikes me as
simplistic.
You strike me as Jewish.
You strike me as a lazy pedophile Nazi.[/quote]
[quote]
Freedom of choice may have been an ideological absolute when it was
invented during the Enlightenment, but it has never been an absolute in
practice. There are many choices you can>t make without punishment:
yelling "fire" in a crowded theater;
What if there really is a fire. The Jews really do rule America. That
is why America is always involved in the Middle East.
Nazis only rule meth labs and kiddie porn outlets.[/quote]
[quote]
saying that someone should shoot
George Bush as pass through the airport check in;
But Bush is a mass murderer and a terrorist.
Drinking that Kool-aid, I see.[/quote]
[quote]
distributing child
porn to your friends; etc.
Everyone knows that is different from the free speech we are talking
about.
Nazis are into kiddie porn big time.[/quote]
You are a Nazi.
As a Nazi, you are, above all else, a craven coward.
You are afraid to compete with others as equals because you know
you can not measure up.
You are afraid of your own inadequacy, so you want to murder your
betters.
You are afraid of the truth, so you want to murder those who would
tell it.
You are afraid of history, so you want to murder the past, to wipe
out the knowledge of the degeneracy, cowardice and failure of
National
Socialism.
Finally, you are afraid of the power of educated, informed adults.
Freedom of choice terrifies you... which is why you choose minor
children as sexual partners. You can not interact with competent
adults in a consensually sexual
way. You need to be able to impose yourself on a helpless victim, be
it a prepubescent
boy, or a patient in a mental hospital.
That is what you are, a Nazi, and there is nothing polite or
honest about it.
Michael |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Michael Ejercito
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2008 4:20 pm Post subject: Re: BOYCOTT THIS THREAD Re: If one can>t afford children, on |
|
|
On Jul 30, 8:37 am, Topaz <mars1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
[quote]Jews say that being "anti-Semitic" is a terrible crime. Do they say
being "anti-Arab" is a terrible crime? What about "anti-Christian", or
"anti-German"? Of course the Jews think
they are special. Any other group could be our enemy, but not the
Jews, they say. The Jews tell us the Arabs are our enemies. The
Jewish controlled media tells us that the Jews are America>s only
friend in the Middle East. The truth is that before these Jews America
didn>t have any enemies in the Middle East.
No one is moaning because America once fought the British. But
suddenly Jews can not be the enemy under any circumstances. Why is
that? Because the Jews control the media. Think outside the box.
Nazis control meth labs and kiddie porn operations.[/quote]
You are a Nazi.
As a Nazi, you are, above all else, a craven coward.
You are afraid to compete with others as equals because you know
you can not measure up.
You are afraid of your own inadequacy, so you want to murder your
betters.
You are afraid of the truth, so you want to murder those who would
tell it.
You are afraid of history, so you want to murder the past, to wipe
out the knowledge of the degeneracy, cowardice and failure of
National
Socialism.
Finally, you are afraid of the power of educated, informed adults.
Freedom of choice terrifies you... which is why you choose minor
children as sexual partners. You can not interact with competent
adults in a consensually sexual
way. You need to be able to impose yourself on a helpless victim, be
it a prepubescent
boy, or a patient in a mental hospital.
That is what you are, a Nazi, and t | |
