Saturday, March 31, 2012

Report On Black-On-White Hate Crimes

Hate Crimes You Don't Hear About, Part Two

By Russ Kick

The Exceptions That Prove the Rule

   On extremely rare occasions a vicious black-on-white hate crime does make the national news. This was the case with the Central Park jogger and Colin Ferguson. Just why these two violent acts of hatred bubbled up into mass consciousness — while others that are at least as heinous have been ignored — is not clear. Nevertheless, it is instructive to examine them because, though they received wide attention, they were still treated differently than their white-on-black counterparts.

   The Central Park jogger, you’ll recall, was a white woman who was gang raped and beaten almost to death by a gang of black and Hispanic teenagers in 1989. This incident introduced the term “wilding” to the nation. As Nicholas Stix described it: “The boys dragged her 200 yards to a secluded place, where they fractured her skull with a plastic-wrapped, four-foot lead pipe, and some large rocks. The boys ripped the Jogger’s clothes off of her, tying her hands behind her back with her sweatshirt, gagging her, and taking turns beating, stomping, and the unconscious woman, as 75 per cent of her blood oozed into the Central Park grass. They left her, with bruises, welts, and wounds literally from head to toe, for dead.”17

   Despite the fact that physical evidence, eye witnesses, and video-taped confessions by the attackers in their parents’ presence all pointed to the young men’s guilt, protestors outside the courtroom referred to the trial as a “lynching.”
   The assault was officially declared not to be a hate crime, and some influential black media and commentators — including Al Sharpton and two of New York’s African-American newspapers — declared that prosecuting the attackers was an act of racism. Some even questioned whether the attack really happened. Despite the fact that physical evidence, eyewitnesses, and videotaped confessions by the attackers in their parents’ presence all pointed to the young men’s guilt, protestors outside the courtroom referred to the trial as a “lynching.”18

   Four years later, a black man named Colin Ferguson opened fire inside a commuter train in Long Island. Six people died and nineteen were injured. “Police recovered from Ferguson’s pocket a handwritten note titled, ‘Reasons for This.’ It expressed hatred towards whites, Asians, and ‘Uncle Tom blacks,’ and stated that Nassau County, Long Island was chosen as ‘the venue’ because of its predominantly white population.”19 How did politicians and commentators respond to this racially motivated bloodbath? President Clinton ignored the racial aspects, instead using the incident as an excuse to once again call for tighter gun control laws. Commentators either denied that it was a hate crime or admitted that it was but then tied themselves in knots to explain it away. The Dallas Morning News interviewed a sociologist who “conceded that Ferguson picked his victims on the basis of race, but did not think this justified the hate crime label.”20

   A scholarly book on hate crimes (discussed more below) notes: “When the Reverend Louis Farrakhan, Nation of Islam leader, mentioned Colin Ferguson, the Long Island Railroad mass murderer, at a rally in New York City, the audience cheered. In a speech before an audience of 2,000 at Howard University, Nation of Islam spokesman Khalid Muhammed drew loud applause when he stated, ‘I love Colin Ferguson, who killed all those white folks on the train.’”21

Friday, March 30, 2012

Report On Black-On-White Hate Crimes

Comrades, this is an excellent report sent to me by Comrade Raymond Bxxxxxxx.  It is extremely long, so I'm going to break it up into two or three parts.  I'm going to hold off on making any comments until the entire report has been posted.  

Dan  88!

Hate Crimes You Don't Hear About, Part One
By Russ Kick

   Cleveland, Ohio. A white man on a moped accidentally bumped into a truck being driven by a black man. He fell over but was not injured. A crowd of 40 white people pulled the black driver from the truck and brutally beat him. One of them climbed in the truck and ran over the driver, killing him. The crowd cheered.

   Jacksonville, Florida. A group of four to six white men agreed that they would brutalize the next black person they saw walking down the street. That person turned out to be a mentally disabled 50-year-old, whom they beat and stomped into unconsciousness. He later died of his injuries.

   Are you surprised that you’ve never heard of these sickening murders based on racial hatred? You didn’t see saturation coverage on the news. You didn’t hear politicians decrying racism. You didn’t see a livid Jesse Jackson on CNN. Why? Because these acts of brutality didn’t happen exactly as I described above. Oh, they happened, all right. The only thing is, the races of the attackers and victims were reversed. That is, a white man was beaten and then crushed by a mob of 40 black people who were furious that a black man bumped into his truck.¹ In Jacksonville, it was a gang of black men who stomped a mentally-disabled man to death solely because he was white.²
Because these hate crimes were perpetrated by black against whites — even though they were based completely on racial hatred — the national media, politicians, and civil rights leaders ignored them.
   If these acts of savagery had indeed happened as I originally described them above, you would have heard about them. But because they were perpetrated by blacks against whites — even though they were based completely on racial hatred — the national media, politicians, and civil rights leaders ignored them. As opposed to the deaths of Yusef Hawkins and James Byrd, these deaths are only reported in the local media. And even then, the races of the people involved are often not mentioned.   Below are some more hate crimes that have been ignored because they happened the “wrong way” (i.e., they were black-on-white instead of white-on-black).
  • Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Upset about a racial name-calling that occurred earlier that night, several black men savagely beat a random white man who had had nothing to do with the incident. He slipped away from his attackers, but they forced him to swim into a lake to escape. He drowned. The three men were sentenced to less than a year in jail.3
  • Massachusetts. Four black men decided to murder the next white person they saw. That unlucky soul was a college student from Boston, whom the men stabbed to death.4
  • Indiana. A black man was arrested for killing seven white people with a shotgun. He explained that he murdered his victims due to his “deep-rooted hatred” of white people.5
  • Miami, Florida. The leader of a black supremacist sect (i.e., the “Yaweh ben Yaweh cult”) was convicted of the murders of several white people. He ordered his followers to kill any and all “white devils.” They killed at least seven white people, bringing back body parts to their leader.6
  • North Carolina. Seven black men kidnapped a white woman, raped her, put her in a tub of bleach, shot her five times, and dumped her body. The murderers said they did this for racial reasons.7
  • North Carolina. Four black teenagers lured a white, ten-year-old girl into an empty house. “There, they sodomized her, strangled her with a cable wire, and beat her to death with a board. In the past few weeks, the trials in the Tiffany Long case have received extensive coverage in the North Carolina press. But with two of the three defendants already sentenced to lifelong prison terms, and the third now standing trial, the national media have all but ignored the story. Only the Associated Press has reported on the trials, in a single, cursory piece. The AP, of course, failed to mention the race of the people involved — an oversight it seldom if ever committed in the case of Amadou Diallo.”8
  • Boulder, Colorado. After discovering that one of their members had never had intercourse with a white woman, an Asian gang went looking for one. When they found a white University of Colorado student, the six men gang raped her in their minivan for two hours.

  •    At their trial, “Detectives described the woman’s night of terror, including repeated threats to kill her.

       “The woman leaped out of the minivan after one of the men raped her. Naked, she sprinted across Lefthand Canyon Road before Steve Yang tackled her, authorities said.

       “‘They were all screaming at her, calling her names and hitting her,’ Detective Jane Harmer testified.
       “Yang put her in a headlock and dragged her back into the van, where she was raped repeatedly, Harmer said.
       “‘It was a free-for-all,’ Harmer t
       “One man threatened to ‘cut and burn her,’ and another put a gun barrel to the back of her head when they released her, Harmer said.”9
  • Kansas City, Missouri. An Ethiopian immigrant shot two white coworkers — killing one and critically injuring the other — at his workplace, then turned the gun on himself. At his residence, police found a three-page, signed note he had written in which he railed at “black blood sucker supreme white people” for oppressing him and black people in general.10
  • New York City. In a Midtown office building, a white woman was assaulted, raped, and anally raped by a black man who called her racist names during the attack. Police refused to label it a hate crime.11
  • Alexandria, Virginia. A black man walking through a neighborhood went over to a white eight-year-old boy playing in his great-grandparents’ front yard and slit the child’s throat, killing him. A witness says that the attacker shouted racial epithets during the attack, and the main suspect in the case owns anti-white hate literature and had written a note about killing white children. He had been previously arrested for attacking an unarmed white stranger with a hammer. (During the attack, he called his victim “Whitey.”)12

  •    This particular case provides a perfect example of the terrible way that anti-white hate crimes are handled. First, the investigators decided not to tell police officers about the racial aspects of the case, even while the police were conducting a manhunt to find the boy’s killer. When this was revealed by the Washington Post, city council member Joyce Woodson defended this withholding of information from the cops on the front line. “What they did was proper. We already live in a racially charged world.” The Democratic mayor of Alexandria implied his agreement: “Efforts to sensationalize this investigation will only hurt this investigation.”13

       To make things even stranger, the FBI offered to send agents and a fugitive task force to help with the manhunt, but the local policerejected the offer. They also refused the help of the FBI’s profilers, forensics experts, and others.14

       Eventually, the police arrested a suspect who was reportedly tied to the scene by DNA evidence. In another bizarre move, the Justice Department — which had acknowledged that it was monitoring the case — declined to prosecute the killing as a hate crime. The government’s prosecutor in the case cannot charge the victim with a hate crime. “There’s no applicable hate crimes law in Virginia,” he explained.15

       An editorial in the Washington Times pointedly commented on the deafening silence surrounding the brutal child-murder: “Has anyone seen Jesse Jackson around lately? Kweisi Mfume? Al Sharpton? For persons whose political antennae are ordinarily so sensitive that they can pick up racial tremors a thousand miles away, they seem to have overlooked a possible hate crime right here in the vicinity of the nation’s capital.”

       Even though all of the above incidents occurred in the last ten years, anti-white hate crimes are not new. The Village Voice writes of “the wave of random street killings that terrorized San Francisco in 1973. The ‘Zebra killers’ struck without warning, murdering whites at night. Most victims were shot. One was raped, another beheaded. Four young black Muslims were arrested in 1974 and charged with 14 murders, seven assaults, one rape, and an attempted kidnapping. The Zebra killers were convicted in 1976.”16

Thursday, March 29, 2012

States file challenge to Arizona immigration law

, San Francisco Chronicle

California Attorney General Kamala Harris

California Attorney General Kamala Harris has joined officials from 10 other states in asking the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn Arizona's immigration law, saying the law exceeds state authority, conflicts with national policy and would drive illegal immigrants into other states.

The law would require police to demand proof of legal status from anyone in their custody whom they suspect of being in the country illegally. Largely blocked by court order since its passage two years ago, it is scheduled for a Supreme Court hearing on April 25, with a ruling due by the end of June.

Harris said Tuesday that the Arizona law would disrupt a "cohesive federal immigration policy" that is particularly important in California. She cited a 2011 report by the Pew Hispanic Center that said California has more undocumented immigrants - 2.5 million - making up a greater share of the workforce - 9.7 percent - than any other state.

Arizona officials argue that the federal government has failed to police the nation's borders and say their law would aid federal enforcement.

But California and other states opposing the law told the Supreme Court that the Arizona statute goes beyond federal law in several respects - making it a crime, for example, to be in the country illegally and to seek work - and would interfere with a uniform national approach to immigration.

"Arizona is impermissibly attempting to chart its own course in the identification, apprehension and detention of undocumented immigrants for purposes of expelling them from the state," said the brief, drafted by the New York attorney general's office and signed by Harris and her counterparts in nine other states.

Federal law allows states to identify and arrest suspected illegal immigrants, they said - but only with the federal government's advance agreement and direct supervision.

And because Arizona cannot force the federal government to deport anyone, the states argued, its law would succeed only in "redirecting undocumented immigrants to other states."

Bob Egelko is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer.


When Comrade Hauptmann sent me this story, the email was entitled "Uh-oh!"  Uh-oh is right.  What court will hear the case first?  Why the Ninth Federal Circuit Court.  Not only are they the most liberal of the circuit courts (12 in all, I believe), the are located in San Francisco, California, liberal and weirdo capitol of America.

Attorney General Harris says that Arizona's new law will have a negative impact on California by driving Arizona's illegals over here.  Very possibly.  

However, if California would start kicking some illegal ass instead of kissing them, then it wouldn't be an issue.   They would go elsewhere.  If all 50 states did likewise, then maybe they'd all go home where they belong.  

It won't happen, and I don't need to repeat myself as to why.  

Comrades, a National Socialist state would deal with this by deporting all illegals immediately they are discovered, and would make it hard for those who remain undiscovered to get jobs and housing.  We would also end all immigration temporarily until this mess is cleaned up and some balance restored.  It makes absolutely no sense to bring in more immigrants when there isn't enough work for native borns and legal immigrants already here.  Like I said, we all know why they want to bring in as many foreign workers as they can.  Immigration is a privilege, not a right.

It's up to us to stop them.  The ANP is the best way.  Support us NOW!

Dan  88!

Wednesday, March 28, 2012

Would The ADL Like A Little Cheese With Their Whine?

Shampoo ad using Hitler’s image sparks outrage, calls for removal

By Eric Pfeiffer | The Sideshow – 16 hrs ago

A new Turkish shampoo commercial featuring video of Adolf Hitler declaring the hair rinse a product for "real men" has been met with formal complaints from the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and others who say it is deeply offensive.
"We follow with sadness and regret the use of Hitler figure in the Biomen Men Shampoo advertisement, which was brought to the screen in recent days," the Turkish Jewish Community said in a statement.  "It's totally unacceptable to make use of Hitler, the most striking example of cruelty and savagery. ... Using him in an advertisement for whatever reason is an unacceptable situation and could not be accepted by us at all. This is beyond all ethics as well as a huge insult to human rights."
The ad has been running on Turkish television stations for about a week, AFP reports.
In the ad from shampoo maker "Biomen," archived video of former Nazi leader Adolf Hitler is played in which he is seen yelling and gesturing wildly with his hands, while a fictional text translates his message across the screen.
"If you are not wearing a woman's dress, you should not use her shampoo either," Hitler says in the ad. "Here it is, a real mens' shampoo, Biomen." The video then cuts to a picture of the shampoo bottle with the on-screen message, "Real men use Biomen."
ADL National Director, and Holocaust survivor Abraham H. Foxman called the advertisement "disgusting" in a statement released by the group.
"The use of images of the violently anti-Semitic dictator who was responsible for the mass murder of 6 million Jews and millions of others in the Holocaust to sell shampoo is a disgusting and deplorable marketing ploy," Foxman said. "It is an insult to the memory of those who perished in the Holocaust, those who survived, and those who fought to defeat the Nazis.


Can't you just hear the violins?  I doubt the Jews will ever stop milking the Holohoax.  I just get so sick and tired of listening to them moan and groan.  Why doesn't anyone ever mention that Stalin killed nearly TWICE as many Jews as Hitler is accused of killing?  Never mind, we all know the answer to that question.

Well, at least I got a laugh out of this one.  I never heard of this "Biomen" shampoo, but I'll be sure to try it if I see it on the shelves.  If it's good enough for the Fuhrer, it's good enough for me!  LOL

Dan  88!

Tuesday, March 27, 2012

More Proof Our Politicians Couldn't Care Less What The People Think

Barack Obama Dmitry Medvedev

SEOUL, March 26 (Reuters) - President Barack Obama was caught on camera on Monday assuring outgoing Russian President Dmitry Medvedev he will have "more flexibility" to deal with contentious issues like missile defense after the U.S. presidential election.

Obama, during talks in Seoul, urged Moscow to give him "space" until after the November ballot, and Medvedev said he would relay the message to incoming Russian president Vladimir Putin.

The unusually frank exchange came as Obama and Medvedev huddled together on the eve of a global nuclear security summit in the South Korean capital, unaware their words were being picked up by microphones as reporters were led into the room.
U.S. plans for an anti-missile shield have bedeviled relations between Washington and Moscow despite Obama's "reset" in ties between the two former Cold War foes. Obama's Republican opponents have accused him of being too open to concessions to Russia on the issue.

Leaning toward Medvedev, Obama was overheard asking for time - "particularly with missile defense" - until he is in a better position politically to resolve such issues.

"I understand your message about space," replied Medvedev, who will hand over the presidency to Putin in May.

"This is my last election ... After my election I have more flexibility," Obama said, expressing confidence he will win a second term.

"I will transmit this information to Vladimir," said Medvedev, Putin's protege and long considered number two in Moscow's power structure.

The exchange, parts of it inaudible, was monitored by a White House pool of television journalists as well as Russian reporters listening live from their press center.

Russia strongly opposes the U.S.-engineered bulwark being built in and around Europe against ballistic missiles.
The United States insists it is intended as protection against a missile attack by countries such as Iran, but Russia says it fears the system could weaken its nuclear deterrent.

The White House, initially caught off-guard by about the leaders' exchange, later released a statement recommitting to implementing missile defense "which we've repeatedly said is not aimed at Russia" but also acknowledging election-year obstacles on the issue.

"Since 2012 is an election year in both countries, with an election and leadership transition in Russia and an election in the United States, it is clearly not a year in which we are going to achieve a breakthrough," U.S. deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes said.

"Therefore, President Obama and President Medvedev agreed that it was best to instruct our technical experts to do the work of better understanding our respective positions, providing space for continued discussions on missile defense cooperation going forward," he said. (Reporting By Matt Spetalnick; Editing by Robert Birsel)

 "This is my last election ... After my election I have more flexibility," Obama said, expressing confidence he will win a second term.
In other words, Obama knows he is free to do as he pleases since he cannot be elected again.  He no longer has to have voter approval, so to hell with all of us.
Comrades, this is typical politician behaviour.  ALL politicians are like this, but most especially the presidents.  In their first term, they are always, "I'll kiss YOUR asses" to the voters.   In their second term, it's always, "Now YOU can kiss MY ass!"
This is a perfect example of why the system DOESN'T work, and cannot be fixed.   We need National Socialism now more than ever.  If not, then nothing will ever change - except to get worse.  Support the ANP.  Send in your pledge or donation.  Hand out some literature.  Most importantly, consider running for office.  If you aren't willing to do anything except read about NS, then they have already won.  Remember, it's all up to the face in the mirror.
Dan  88! 

Monday, March 26, 2012

Zimmerman was on the ground being punched when he shot Trayvon Martin Continue reading on Zimmerman was on the ground being punched when he shot Trayvon Martin

Comrades, since the following article is basically a commentary on the now infamous Trayvon Martin shooting, I won't make a commentary of my own except to say I agree with the author 100%.  Take note of the photographs of Zimmerman and Martin.  They BOTH are obviously not White.

BTW, take note of the fact that the author is also NON-WHITE, and even HE realizes that the media is trying to whip up another White on Black violence campaign to further their anti White agenda.

Thanks to Comrade Raymond Bxxxxxxx for sending me this story, and yesterday's as well.

Dan  88!

Charleston Conservative Examiner

Zimmerman/Martin Last weekend in the city of Chicago alone, gangbangers slaughtered ten people and wounded another forty. The youngest fatality is only six years old. The youngest person wounded is only one-year-old. Many of the victim were pedestrians sprayed with bullets in drive by shootings. The national news has said nothing about this.
So why does one shooting in Florida warrant weeks of national news? Why has there been thousands of articles a day, for the last four days, about one single shooting?
Almost all of the news items about George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin contains a combination of false statements, opinions presented as facts, transparent distortions, and a complete absence of some of the most relevant details. Almost all news items are written soley from the point of view of the grieving family. The media also fills their articles with outdated baby-faced pictures of Trayvon. Very few include that he was a towering 6'2” football player. Is the media really reporting the news, or is this classic agitation/propaganda to advance a political agenda.
Literally thousands of articles contain at least one false statement in the first couple of lines. They usually read "George ZImmerman, a white man," or "shoot by a white man." Zimmerman is described by family as a multiracial Hispanic. His appearance is clearly that of a Latino/Mestizo individual. However, the media wants him to be white because that better fits the political narrative they are trying to artificially create. Many news articles have also claimed the neighborhood is "mostly white." This is also a lie. The neighborhood is only 49% white. It is over half non-white.
 All the way back on February 27th, the local Orlando Fox station interviewed the witness who dialed 911. Almost none of the thousands of articles since have mentioned any of the details described by the witness. Some, however, have attributed false statements to this witness. On March 16th, the Sanford police department released new details to the Orlando Sentinel. Once again, these details have been ignored or changed by the media.
  1. The witness reports that George Zimmerman was on the ground and Trayvon is on top of him punching him.
  2. The witness says that George Zimmerman was screaming and yelling for help.
  3. Police arrive and find Zimmerman bleeding on his face and the back of his head. He also has had grass stains on his back. All this confirms the story told by Zimmerman and the witness.
  4. Police play the 911 tape for Trayvon Martin's father, who tells police that the voice screaming is not the voice of his son.
The neighborhood this took place in has seen a lot of crime. Would you be surprised to learn that there were eight burglaries, nine thefts, and a shooting just in the past year? In fact, the local homeowners' association reports that George Zimmerman actually caught one thief and aided in the apprehension of other criminals. The Miami Herald wrote about this on March 17th. None of the thousands of articles and cable news segments that came after, thought this was important.
In fact the Miami Herald goes on to interview neighbor, Ibrahim Rashada, who is black. Rashada ​confirms that there has been a lot of crime in the neighborhood and indicates to the reporter that the perpetrators are usually black.
The media also characterizes Trayvon as a "model student." In fact, he under a five day suspension when the shooting took place. That is why he was staying at a house so far from his school on a school night. A laywer for Trayvon's family has blocked access to his school records. However, you have to do something pretty bad to get suspended for five days.
Now that you know the suppressed facts of the case, you can for form a better more balanced opinion. Maybe you still think Zimmerman was wrong to pull the trigger. However, I think you will come to the conclusion that the "mainstream" clearly is pushing an agenda. Even when they have to grossly alter and adjust a story to fit that agenda.

Saturday, March 24, 2012

ZOG to keep data on those with no ties to terrorism

The Associated Press The Associated Press Posted: Friday, March 23, 2012 12:00 am

WASHINGTON - The U.S. intelligence community will now be able to store information about Americans with no ties to terrorism for up to five years under new Obama administration guidelines.
Until now, the National Counterterrorism Center had to immediately destroy information about Americans that was already stored in other government databases when there were no clear ties to terrorism.
Giving the center expanded record-retention authority had been called for by members of Congress who said the intelligence community did not connect strands of intelligence held by multiple agencies leading up to the failed bombing attempt on a Detroit-bound airliner on Christmas 2009.
"Following the failed terrorist attack in December 2009, representatives of the counterterrorism community concluded it is vital for NCTC to be provided with a variety of datasets from various agencies that contain terrorism information," Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said in a statement late Thursday.
"The ability to search against these datasets for up to five years on a continuing basis as these updated guidelines permit will enable NCTC to accomplish its mission more practically and effectively."
The new rules replace guidelines issued in 2008 and prompted concern among privacy advocates about the potential for data-mining information on innocent Americans.
"It is a vast expansion of the government's surveillance authority," Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, said of the five-year retention period.
The government put in strong safeguards at the center for the data that would be collected on U.S. citizens for intelligence purposes, Rotenberg said. These new guidelines undercut the Federal Privacy Act, he said.
"The fact that this data can be retained for five years on U.S. citizens for whom there's no evidence of criminal conduct is very disturbing," Rotenberg said.
"Total Information Awareness appears to be reconstructing itself," Rotenberg said, referring to the Defense Department's post-9/11 data-mining research program that was killed in 2003 because of privacy concerns.
The Washington Post first reported the new rules Thursday.
The Obama administration said the new rules come with safeguards for privacy and civil liberties. Before the center may obtain data held by another government agency, there is a high-level review to assure that the data "is likely to contain significant terrorism information," Alexander Joel, the civil liberties protection officer at national intelligence directorate", said in a news release Thursday.
The center was created after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to be the central U.S. organization to analyze and integrate intelligence regarding terrorism.


Amendment 4 - Search and Seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791. [Suspended 2012 - Dan]
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment 5 - Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings. Ratified 12/15/1791.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

It looks like someone forgot about a little something called the Constitution.  Well, it's nothing new.  ZOG threw the Constitution into the circular file a long time ago with WW I and the formation of income taxes to fund it.  Coincidentally, it was only one year earlier (1913) that the Federal Reserve Bank was founded.  Maybe it's not a coincidence?  

I think the National Counter Terrorism Centre and the Department Of Homeland Security should be combined and renamed "The Ministry Of Truth." (see George Orwell's "1984)

Now I admit that the Fourth and Fifth Amendments say nothing about collecting information on the citizens.  However, I also feel that our Founding Fathers would not have approved - even in the name of national security.  If we kept our noses out of international affairs, America wouldn't be the hated country it has become, and there would be far less chance of terrorist activities effecting us.  Muslim extremists are not insane, just fanatics.  If in their minds we were not a potential or actual threat, they would not do anything against us.

It's time the United States stopped trying to impose its self-righteous morality on cultures that simply don't look at the world the way we do.  Maybe if they offered us a secret 50% discount on oil (that way big oil could still keep gas prices high because the discount is a secret) that would get us to leave them alone.  No, not entirely.  America has to protect Israel at all costs.  There are too many rich Jews in this country dropping their money in the right pockets at the right time.

Dan  88!

White Immigrants

A patriotic St. Pat's Day wish -- No more pandering to illegal Irish taking Americans' jobs

The arguments for special work visas for Irish workers that may come to a vote in the Senate any day are among the most offensive and baseless that I've ever seen.  As engorged and harmful as is our current level of foreign workers, can you imagine what would happen if every nationality asked for the same favors that the Irish lobby is asking in this bill?
Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) -- in a tough re-election bid this year -- apparently thinks he must pander to American voters of Irish descent bypromising to put more U.S. citizens out of work by giving 10,500 new work permits to Irish citizens.
And within the Irish blogophere, it is pretty clear that a primary recipient for those new work permits are Irish citizens who managed to come to the U.S. legally at some point and have over-stayed their visas.  Yes, illegal aliens just as surely as if they had walked across the U.S.-Mexico border. 
Sen. Brown's Democratic opponent,  Elizabeth Warren, apparently has the same low regard for Irish Americans and is pushing the same idea that these Americans have more loyalty to citizens of Ireland than to unemployed citizens of the United States.  Did anybody notice that this isn't the 1860s?  What next, New York City draft riots?
There had been a powerful push to pass this form of ethnic pork-barreling before St. Patrick's Day.  Thankfully, enough thoughtul Senate heads prevailed to prevent that kind of embarrassing exclusionary ethno-centric spectacle.
Neither Brown nor Warren seems to be aware that 20 million Americans of all nationality backgrounds either can't find a job or are forced to work part-time.
But they don't hear the suffering of Americans over the sound of the Irish lobby pipers.  They only hear the voices again demanding special favors for the Irish because they are . . .   ?   I can't think of a logical or non-offensive explanation. 
While a Massachusetts Senator, John F. Kennedy led the way to the 1965 immigration act that ended nationality-based preferences that had the effect of racial and ethnic discrimination in our immigration system. 
But the Irish lobby has spent more than two decades arguing that the white Irish ought to have special privileges.  The worst example of this was in 1990 when JFK's brother Sen. Teddy Kennedy (D-Mass.) created the Visa Lottery that raffles off permanent work permits and paths to U.S. citizenship every year.  The reason we are stuck at present with this insanity is that it was a package that Teddy used to help illegal alien Irish already in this country to legalize their status.  For the first three years, 40 percent of the lottery slots were reserved for the Irish.   
So, the two people competing for Teddy's old Senate seat, are now falling all over themselves to walk in Teddy's footsteps and dishonor the honorable principles of Sen. JOHN Kennedy.
Antoinette Kelly, a staff writer for, reports today that Republican incumbent Sen. Scott Brown's office claims his proposal is vital to the Irish community because "for decades, the Irish have been unfairly shut out by our immigration laws."
Kelly reports that Democrat Elizabeth Warren "agrees" and that many skilled Irish cannot access the U.S. because of the current system. 
Again, I ask, do these candidates think it is the 1860s?
"Unfairly shut out?"  What are they talking about?  There are no rules that pick on the Irish or that put Irish applicants in an inferior position compared to applicants from other parts of the world. 
All I can see is that Brown and Warren and the Irish lobby are mad because the Irish don't get SPECIAL treatment that discriminates against everybody else in the world.  I can't imagine that most Americans of Irish descent think like this. 
Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York says he has lined up 53 Democratic Senators to support this ethno-centric special favor, even though his own bill to give preferential treatment to the Irish only has four cosponsors.  He has been battling for amnesties and increased foreign workers his whole career. You know that he has no desire to stop with the irish.   I have no doubt that he wants this Irish bill to pass so he can come back and claim the discrimination that it truly represents as a reason to then push through one bill after another favoring first this ethnic group and then that one.  Just like all pork barrel activity, passage of the Brown bill will set up a never-ending string of opportunities for special interests at the detriment of the American public. 
What makes any of these ethno-nationalist lobbies think that the government of the American people owes jobs to them instead of to Americans of all ethnicities who are already standing in line? Well, what makes any special interest seek selfish gain over the public interest?  Only when the public demands a higher standard will these shameful legislative efforts cease.
ROY BECK is Founder & CEO of NumbersUSA

NumbersUSA's blogs are copyrighted and may be republished or reposted only if they are copied in their entirety, including this paragraph, and provide proper credit to NumbersUSA. NumbersUSA bears no responsibility for where our blogs may be republished or reposted.
Comrades, my mother's parents were Irish immigrants.  Even so, I am AGAINST work visas for the Irish.  White or not, they are not Americans, and our jobs MUST go to Americans - preferably White Americans first.
But why do the Irish need visas in the first place?  After all, they are NOT a Third World Country - or even a Second World Country for that matter.  They have industry, technology, and the same comforts and material possession as does this country.
The problem is the European Union.  EU charter requires they allow any nationality to immigrate there as long as the immigrants in question have been legally in some EU country for at least six months.  Why would Indians, Arabs, Somalians and the like go to Ireland in the fist place?  Well, that's an easy question to answer.  Ireland, like their neighbour England has one of the best system of freebies for immigrants in the EU.  Third Worlders flock to Great Britain and Ireland to take advantage of their over-generous social programs.  
Ironically, the Irish people are being pushed out of their own country and becoming immigrants themselves because of the Third World immigrants pouring into their country.  In a way, that's tragically funny.  And the Irish have only themselves to blame.  They thought the EU would bring them prosperity.  Instead, they are being destroyed and a once proud White nation is becoming a nation of non-Whites.
I'm sure you all know the old saying, "When something seems too good to be true, it probably is."  Well, that's the EU in a nutshell.  It made White Europeans a lot of fancy promises about unity and prosperity.  Look at them now.  The entire continent is divided, and poverty is everywhere.
The United States is considering something similar:  A North American Union combining the U.S., Canada, and Mexico, all with a common currency (tentatively called the Amero), and all with open borders.  Like the EU, any immigrant from any country who is admitted to say Mexico, and who lives there legally for six months, cannot be denied entrance to the U.S.
In view of the state of the EU, even considering this plan is insanity.  It's like watching a neighbour build a house in an inferior manner, and the house collapses, and you say,  "Gee, I think I'll build my house in exactly the same way." It makes no sense at all.  The only ones who will benefit from this are the Mexicans.  Even most Canadians are against this proposal.
There are those who say that the only reason the EU is falling apart is because of the bad economy.  Did they ever consider that it was the existence of the EU (among other things) that caused their economy to fall apart?
If the EU falls apart completely BEFORE the formation of a NU, we may be spared.  Since the EU has already begun to crumble, let's hope that it dies quickly, and that it's death kills the NU before it even begins.
Dan  88!

Friday, March 23, 2012

Ain't It The Truth!

Thursday, March 22, 2012

The European Union Has Finally Begun To Break Up

Comrades, I'm basically rewriting this story because the original is too full of financial jargon for many people, so I'm simplifying it.

There has been talk of the EU disintegrating for years, but now it looks like it has begun - not with Greece - as most expected, but with Spain.  The EU has ordered Spain to enact many austerity cuts in its budget such as reduction of unemployment insurance (Spain's unemployment rate is 20% +), reduction of disability benefits, and welfare programs.  At a meeting of the EU Assembly in Brussels, Belgium, Spain's premier, Mariano Rajoy dropped a bombshell.  He flat out refused to comply.  Before addressing the general assembly it is customary to advise assembly leaders of what you're going to say.  This he did not do.  He just announced his refusal to comply in a manner that said, "What are you going to do about it. douchebags?"  He didn't call them douches, but that was his attitude.

Rajoy was also reacting to German Chancellor Merkel's demands that Spain, like Greece must turn over control of its financial affairs to Germany if Spain expects another bailout from her government.  Rajoy, in a polite and professional way told Merkel what she can do with her bailouts.

In support of his premier, Spanish financial commentator Pablo Sebastian said, "Spain isn’t any old country that will allow itself to be humiliated by the German Chancellor."

"The behaviour of the European Commission towards Spain over recent days has been infamous and exceeds their treaty powers… these Eurocrats think they are the owners and masters of Spain.
"Spain and other nations in the EU are sick and tired of Chancellor Merkel’s meddling and Germany’s usurpation – with the help of Sarkozy’s France and their pretended "executive presidency" that does not in fact exist in EU treaties.
"Rajoy must not retreat one inch. The stakes are high and the country is in no mood to suffer humiliations from a Chancellor who is amassing all the savings of Europe and won’t listen to anybody, as if she were the absolute ruler of the Union. Merkel and the Commission should think hard before putting their hand into the sovereignty of this country – or any other – because it will be burned."
As things are now, French President Sarkozy supports the EU and Chancellor Merkel.  However, Sarkozy is expected to lose the next election later this year.  The projected winner, Francois Hollande supports Spain, and favours leaving the EU.
Comrades, it really looks like it's all over for the EU.  This will be a devastating blow to Judeo-Capitalism.  
What does this mean to America?  Outside of the United States, the EU is the largest Judeo-Capitalist entity in the world.  Now that it has actually begun to collapse, the financial ripples it will cause will hit us very quickly.  Unless the Rothschilds and other central bankers call pull a few tricks and hold things together a little while longer, things will get very sticky for them.  And it will get sticky for us as well.  Things will deteriorate shortly after the collapse is complete.  When either France or Germany leaves, then the EU will have begun its death rattle.  When Great Britain eventually pulls out as well, then the EU will finally be dead.
The German Central Banks such as the Bundesbank and Deutschebank are already at odds with the European Union Central Bank.  They are already balking at the EUCBanks efforts at trying to hold the EU together.  
When big banksters start fighting with each other, you know that Judeo-Capitalism is in serious trouble.   America will see hyper-inflation and increased unemployment.  Things will be bad.  It could mean the collapse of the U.S. as well.
If it does, what will take its place?  Will a Judeo-Capitalist disguised as a White Knight ride in to "save" the people.  Almost certainly.  Can we stop this at the national level?  Absolutely not.  But we can at the local level.  This we can accomplish by running our own candidates at the local level.  If we can do this in towns and small cities across the country, then we will have something going that can actually do some good for our Folk.  But we need some of you who are willing to run for office in the first place.
I've already been contacted by potential candidates looking for help and guidance.  The more the better.  As they say, there is no such thing as being too rich or too thin.  I'm adding a third one:  There is no such thing as having too many candidates running for offices.
How much will this cost you?  In most cases for local offices, it will cost little to nothing.  What will you get?  The satisfaction of helping your race, and in most cases, a PAYING office.  It's a no brainer.  The ANP needs YOU.  With all that's happening, this could be the most important year in the history of the ANP.  You could be a big part of it.
Dan  88!