Playing It Safe
The president of New York's Colgate University, Dr. George B. Cutten, gave an address to the Canadian Society of New York, the highlights of which were reported without editorial comment in the New York Times ˙under the headline "Colgate's Head Asserts Melting Pot U.S. Doom: Declares America Rushing Madly on to Race Suicide and End of Our Civilization." The text of the New York Times article follows:
Be assured that this New York Times report is no hoax. The president of a prestigious American school, Colgate University, actually gave the speech attributed to him here, and the New York Times simply reported it without denouncing him as a "hater" or a "neo-Nazi" or a "racist." The date of the report, however, was May 14, 1923.
What a difference 74 years makes in the life of a nation and a race! In 1923 George Cutten's views were shared by a majority of learned men in America, and the takeover of the New York Times by the Jews was still recent enough that its editor thought it wise not to attack those views openly and directly. But in 1923 the democrats, the egalitarians, and the melting-pot enthusiasts were crawling out from under their rocks and also were active giving speeches, delivering sermons, putting up stealth candidates for public office, and organizing liberal/leftist clubs on America's campuses--and receiving much warmer and more enthusiastic reports in the New York Times than Dr. Cutten. And gradually, ever so gradually, the New York Times became bolder and more open, while the men who should have been saying, forcefully and loudly and repeatedly, the things Cutten said opted instead in favor of playing it safe and not getting on the wrong side of this increasingly powerful newspaper.
And so here we are today--which proves once again that all that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.
The Clinton War Cabinet
The appointments to the second-term Clinton cabinet--especially to the key national-security posts--have shocked even the most cynical observers, but few dare make a public show of their shock. Clinton's totally Jewish national-security team--Madeleine Albright (the Catholic/Episcopalian who claims that the recent discovery of her Jewishness came as a complete surprise to her) as secretary of state, William Cohen (who says he's not really a Jew because his bar mitzvah didn't go according to schedule) as secretary of defense, and Samuel Berger (who makes no excuses for his Jewishness) as chief of the National Security Council--puts America in a precarious position indeed and makes U.S. involvement in another major war in the Middle East during the next four years far more likely.
These are not just three key bureaucrats who happen to be Jewish: they are three Jews who would not hesitate to start a war--including a nuclear war--or to damage America's own interests irretrievably in order to protect Jewish interests anywhere on the planet. Consider the most important of the three, Madeleine Albright, Clinton's choice for secretary of state. When she was Clinton's ambassador to the United Nations during his first term, she gained the reputation of being more hawkish than anyone in the Pentagon. She complained that America had a powerful military establishment but was not using it enough. She was in favor of military intervention to keep other countries in line with UN policies in several instances where military leaders were opposed to intervention.
During an interview on the CBS program 60 Minutes in May 1996 she was told that an estimated 500,000 Iraqi children had died as a consequence of the UN embargo which prevented Iraq from buying food and medical supplies. She sneeringly replied that that was a price worth paying to keep Saddam Hussein under control. One can imagine what a different reaction she would have had if the embargo were against Israel--a far greater threat to peace in the Middle East than Iraq--and 500,000 Jewish children had died!
Shakespeare vs. Democracy
When Georgetown University, the prestigious Jesuit school in Washington, D.C., decided recently that its English literature majors no longer had to study Shakespeare, a raw nerve was struck in some Georgetown alumni, and they made enough of a fuss about this step toward barbarism to gain some media coverage. Actually, however, Georgetown was just following a national trend. A survey conducted by the alumni discovered that two-thirds of America's major universities already had taken similar steps.
In place of Shakespeare most universities are substituting courses in pop-culture--comic books, checkout-stand tabloids, rap ditties, advertising jingles--or trashy pseudo-literature by Jewish novelists of the Saul Bellow/Norman Mailer/Philip Roth ilk, with the pretentious scribblings of Maya Angelou and other non-Whites thrown in for good measure. Georgetown now offers an English literature course on "The Gangster Film," while Duke University has substituted "Melodrama and Soap Opera" for Shakespeare. Dartmouth College no longer requires the study of Shakespeare but offers "20th-Century American Boxing Fiction and Film" instead.
The excuse offered by most of the universities for their changes in the English literature curriculum is that they're just giving the students what they want. There is some truth in that: students raised on television and permissiveness all too often opt for the trendy and the trivial and shun anything which might be demanding. In the democratic environment which prevails at most universities, Shakespeare just doesn't get enough votes to compete.
There is another reason for easing Shakespeare and other dead, White, European males--or "dwems," as they're contemptuously referred to in the ranks of the Politically Correct--out the door: they are dangerously racist and sexist, not to mention homophobic and anti-Semitic. The study of literature, like history, can lead students to all sorts of Politically Incorrect conclusions if it is not carefully controlled. Who can read the Iliad without feeling a connection to those ancient people and events? Who cannot be moved by the same spirit that moved Homer? And that is a spirit which has nothing to do with the sickly spirit of democracy and equality.
And then there's Shakespeare: there was never a man who observed the human condition with truer eye. He stripped away every pretense and showed us as we are, the good and the bad--but hardly equal!
The real danger in literature--real literature--for the democrats and the egalitarians is that it helps us to understand ourselves and to place ourselves in the context of our people. It expands our horizons and enables us to see the big picture. It gives us ideals and models, and those ideals, in our literature, are not egalitarian ideals, nor are the models Politically Correct. To the people who run our universities these days, heroes are dangerous; they much prefer the safe anti-heroes of the Jewish novelists. When you are trying to prepare students to be rootless, cosmopolitan citizens of the New World Order, you certainly don't want them coming into contact with the undemocratic spirit of Homer or Shakespeare.
Feinstein Says No Vests
Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) is pushing a bill she wrote, the Federal Gang Violence Act, in order to make our streets safer, she says. One of the provisions of her bill would make it illegal to wear a bulletproof vest.
For whom will that make the streets safer? One can only suspect that this viciously anti-Second Amendment Jewess doesn't want law-abiding citizens to be able to protect themselves. That also seems to be the motive behind laws in many states banning the carrying of teargas cannisters by citizens, for example.
There is a mind-set in the anti-gun crowd that is hostile to any form of self-defense beyond dialing 911. They don't trust people who would rather defend themselves than call for the police. Self-reliant people make them nervous. It is this same mind-set which leads to the prosecution of citizens who shoot burglars in their homes or otherwise use "excessive force" in protecting themselves or their property.
Much of what has been taught in the area of "Black history" during the past few years was nutty enough already--claims that virtually all of the historic personages who lived on the African continent, including the great Carthaginian general Hannibal and the Greek queen of Egypt, Cleopatra, were Negroes, for example--but new courses in "Black history" are reaching unprecedented heights of absurdity. A curriculum called "African-American Baseline Essays" has provided the basis for many of these new courses, which have become especially popular at largely Black schools, where the concept of Afrocentrism has been embraced warmly. Unfortunately, however, Afrocentric nonsense also is being taught to White children in some of the trendier suburban schools, especially during February, which has been designated "Black History Month" by the education bureaucrats in Washington.
According to the Afrocentrists, not only were the Egyptians and Phoenicians (Hannibal's Carthage was a Phoenician colony) Black--as also were Greeks and members of other ethnic groups who lived in northern Africa, such as the fourth century B.C. Greek geometer Euclid, who lived in Alexandria--but every philosophical, scientific, and technological development in Western Civilization was "stolen" from Black Africans, who developed it first. Even the airplane: according to the Afrocentrists, Black Egyptians were using airplanes to fly around the pyramids for business and pleasure, until European savages came barging in and enslaved the Black inventors and stole their ideas.
Not surprisingly, many of the school officials of Washington, DC, where 95 per cent of the students are Black, look with favor on Afrocentrism. Last December the Washington Times sent one of its reporters, 28-year-old Susan Ferrechio, who is White, to the Marcus Garvey School, a Washington school with an especially ambitious Afrocentric program, to gather information for a news story.
The school's principal, "Mama" Anigbo, became incensed when Ms. Ferrechio could not stop herself from smiling at one of the wilder "Black history" fantasies being taught in a class, and she assailed the White reporter, first with angry words and then with her fists. The Black students joined the assault on Ms. Ferrechio, kicking and punching her. As she fled in terror, the students yelled after her, "Get yo' White ass outa here."
A Federal grand jury is investigating the matter and making noises about charging someone with a "hate crime." Since the chance of getting a jury of Blacks in Washington to convict "Mama" Anigbo of a "hate crime" for punching a White reporter is nil, the Federal prosecutor's office could make better use of its time by seeking an indictment of Ms. Ferrechio on a charge of "face crime" for smiling in a Politically Incorrect context.
Fruits of Democracy
Zimbabwe's first Black president has been accused of raping a young male police officer.
When Rhodesia, at the time one of only two civilized countries in sub-Saharan Africa, was pressured by the West to subject itself to democratic rule in 1980, the country got its first Black government. The country's name was changed to "Zimbabwe," Black terrorist leader Robert Mugabe became the country's strongman, and civilization went out the window. Prime Minister for Life Mugabe then appointed one of his supporters, the Reverend Canaan Banana (sic), a Methodist minister, to the office of president. President Banana held the office for seven years, until Mugabe arranged to have the constitution changed in 1987 so that he could be both prime minister and president. Banana is now a professor of theology at the University of Zimbabwe.
In February 1997 a Zimbabwean policeman, Jefta Dube, testified in a court in Harare that he had been sodomized repeatedly by President Banana and the president's cronies a decade earlier, when he had been assigned as a guard at the presidential palace. Dube related to the court how he had been drugged and then raped. He woke up one morning in the president's office, minus his pants, and found Banana leaning over him and leering. "We helped ourselves," Banana told him. After that the abuse continued through threats, with Banana telling Dube that in Zimbabwe, "I am the final court of appeal."
Before White Americans smirk too much over this example of democracy at work in Africa, they should reflect on the fact, presently demonstrated in their own country, that democracy can bestow presidential authority on a degenerate or a criminal even without a majority of Black voters.
Israel's Postal Authority has a real headache. Postal officials had planned to release a new 2-shekel stamp featuring American inventor Thomas Edison at the Hong Kong 97 Stamp Exhibition. Everything was ready to go when an American Jew, Ken Lawrence, a vice-president of the American Philatelic Society, learned of the new Edison stamp and informed the Israelis that Edison was an anti-Semite.
Researchers at the Jerusalem Post looked into the matter and decided that Lawrence was correct in his assessment of Edison. They turned up an instance where Edison had hired a man one day and then fired him the next when he discovered that his new employee was a Jew. They also turned up an article in Henry Ford's newspaper, the Dearborn Independent, quoting Edison in a 1914 statement blaming the outbreak of the First World War on Jewish machinations. Apparently Edison also expressed a less-than-worshipful attitude toward Jews in a number of letters he wrote to his close friend Ford and to the editor of the Dearborn Independent, E.G. Liebold. Finally, they discovered that a portion of Edison's fortune had been bequeathed, through a grandniece, Jean Edison-Farrel, to a nest of "Holocaust deniers," the California-based Institute for Historic Review.
These revelations put the Postal Authority in a turmoil. Officials bemoaned the fact that Edison was only the fifth goy chosen for an Israeli stamp in the 49 years of Israel's existence, and he turned out to be an anti-Semite. Oi, veh! Whom can you trust?
Hey! How about a 30-shekel stamp with Bill Clinton? But wait a minute: with his trousers up or down?
As American society continues to unravel, more and more individual men and women are becoming mentally unravelled at the same time. Some of these unravelled folks take to drink, and others take guns to their places of employment and "get even" with the world by shooting three or four fellow employees who had been getting on their nerves. Shootings in the workplace have become a major occupational hazard in the United States during the last quarter of the 20th century.
This is a real boon for practitioners of the psychiatry racket, who have more unravelled clients than they can take money from these days. They also hire themselves out as consultants to worried employers, who would like to be able to spot an unravelled employee before he opens fire. One of these psychiatric consultants is a nice Jewish boy named Martin Blinder, who collects most of his fees in San Francisco and Honolulu. Dr. Blinder has prepared a "psychological profile" of likely workplace shooters, and he was kind enough to share this profile with all of us in an article he wrote for the February 11, 1997, issue of the Wall Street Journal. According to Dr. Blinder:
Dr. Blinder lists several more traits after these, but you get the picture. This Hebraic practitioner of Freudian charlatanry brazenly lists the traits of the types of people he personally hates and would like to see unemployed, along with traits genuinely indicating an unravelled state. And among the latter traits it is interesting to note that several of them are those of chronic complainers. Can you think of any ethnic group which fits this chronic complainer profile especially well--and which also thinks of itself as a nation of perpetual "victims"?
In his Wall Street Journal article Blinder gives just one example of a workplace killer he implies fits his profile: Richard Wade Farley, who in February 1988 shot 11 people, killing seven of them, at his former Silicon Valley workplace. But Farley, according to fellow employees who knew him, was a liberal, not a right winger. And he was hardly a racist: he had a Chinese girl friend, whom he had introduced to other workers. Blinder, of course, does not mention these facts about Farley, although he certainly was aware of them because he conducted a court-ordered psychiatric evaluation of Farley in 1989.
National Alliance Main Page | National Vanguard Directory