Monday, April 30, 2012

New York Times withholds key fact in story

By Jeremy Beck, Thursday, April 26, 2012, 9:30 AM EDT

The New York Times' April 23 story, "Justices to Rule on Role of the States in Immigration," was frightening, but dishonest.
The anti-enforcement wing of the agricultural lobby must have been pleased with the Times piece which portrayed farmers as the hapless victims of state enforcement laws run amok (the photo for the story online depicted a forlorn-looking farmer, alone in his fields). According to the Times, farmers in Georgia "could not recall a more acute labor shortage" after Georgia passed its local enforcement law. Farmers warned "that they could go out of business if the labor supply continues to decline." The story was smothered in negative language ("fear," "turmoil," "terror," "unanticipated consequences," "negative fallout") bookended by the cries of local farmers who claimed to "need the [illegal] labor."
I hate to be the one to let truth get in the way of a good story but the federal government gives farmers an unlimited guestworker program to fill all of their labor needs. According to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services:
When U.S. employers have a shortage of available U.S. workers to fill temporary or seasonal agricultural jobs, they may file an H-2A petition with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) for permission to employ foreign workers to perform that work in the United States. Once the petition is approved, these workers, if they are eligible for admission, may enter the United States in H-2A nonimmigrant status.
The H-2a visa program is well-known to the Times which reported last year that "Mexican workers can now receive their [H-2a] documents the same day that they apply." Ironically, the story reports that some farmers moved to North Carolina after Georgia passed its law. Perhaps they will join the North Carolina Growers Association which, according to its website, uses the H-2a program to provide its members with "a workforce that is legal, reliable, and ready to ensure that your crops are planted, maintained, and harvested in a timely fashion."
For reasons known only to the Times, the paper withheld the existence of the unlimited guestworker program from readers of the story.
The obligatory American-bashing frequently found in stories like this did, however, find its way into print. According to a farmer who spoke with the Times, a local advertisement he "placed for 16 workers brought one local man, who lasted half a day in the heat of Georgia summer." The Times did not track down the "local man" to verify the farmer's story (there is no indication that the reporter even tried). American workers are routinely abused like this by the press, which never gives the workers voice to present their side of the story. Had the reporter interviewed the "local man," readers would have gained a legal worker's perspective about pay and working conditions in Georgia's agricultural industry.
That insight would have been informative, but the Times must know that scary stories are best told to audiences left in the dark.
JEREMY BECK is the Director of the Media Standards Project for 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.
For a smart man, Mr. Beck is showing a lot of ignorance.  He said he doesn't know why the Times would withhold these facts.  I can answer that for him.  Jew York Times  Publisher:  Arthur Sutzberger, Jr.  Editor-In-Chief:  Jill Abramson, Opinion Editor:  Andrew Rosenthal, News Editor:  Richard Berkstein.  Lots more names, but I think I've made my point.  However, who actually owns the paper?  The New York Times Company does.  Who runs the company?  Why it's none other than the Times publisher Arthur Setzberger as Chairman of the Board, with Michael Golden as V. Chairman.  The number three person is Janet Robinson.  Not a Jew, but worse.  She is one of the Robinsons of Newport, Rhode Island, one of the oldest wealthy families in America - in other words, from an old family of Judeo-Capitalists.
As we all know, the Jews and Judeo-Capitalists want to keep the flow of illegals coming because they work cheaper than do Americans and legal immigrants.  THAT'S why they left out the bit about the H2a Visa program. The H2a makes these "guest" workers legal for agricultural jobs only, but it does make them legal which is why they don't want us to know about the program.  As soon as an illegal becomes legal, he wants more money, benefits, and all the rights that citizens and legal immigrants have.  This of course will cut into profits.
Now you might say that the farmers that are being effected by this are not Judeo-Capitalists.  Well, independent small farmers are not.  But large-scale corporate farming is becoming more and more common.  Also, who do farmers both independent and corporate sell their crops to?  Why to food companies that process and package them.  These companies are mostly corporations.  If farmers have to pay more for their labour, they have to charge more for their crops.  In turn, food companies must charge more to the grocery stores, who charge us more which makes the public angry.  Do they care if we're angry?  Not at all, but they still have to deal with us and it's easier at the moment to use illegal labour than legal labour and have to charge more and deal with our griping.  What I'm getting at is that corporations won't allow workers to get a fair wage if it comes out of THEIR profits.  They either under pay them, as with illegals, or pass along the cost to us.  Either way works as well for their profits, but by under paying the illegals, at least they don't have to do any spin control as they would if they had to raise food prices in order to pay LEGAL workers a fair wage.  Since illegals can't complain about their situation, it's just easier for them to use illegals.
National Socialist Germany had an excellent agricultural system.  Farmers were paid a fair price for their crops, and people paid a fair price for their food.  This system worked perfectly, at least until the war when Allied planes began bombing German farms in order to disrupt the food supply.  Not meaning to get off the track, but in my opinion, it was the Allies fault that Jews in concentration camps were under fed.  There simply was not enough food after the Allies began destroying German farms, food warehouses, and transports hauling food.  After all, what did the Allies expect Germany to do?  Deprive their people of food to feed enemies of the State?  I think not.
But back to the subject.  I am paying about $40.00 a month more for food (and other things you buy at grocery stores) than I did a mere two years ago, yet my monthly income on average is about the same - and it will only get worse.
Comrades, most of us are in the same boat.  And it's not just White Americans, it's ALL working class Americans.  The American Nazi Party is for White working and middle class Americans.  It's the ONLY hope our Folk have to survive.  However, non-Whites must realize that we are not their enemy.  We are FOR our Folk, not against  them.  The real enemy are the corrupt politicians and the greedy Judeo-Capitalists that pay them.    
I say this to all non-White Americans.  YOU are being dragged down into Serfdom just as we are.  You may get a few perks from the government like small business loans and Affirmative Action, but overall, you are becoming poorer and poorer just as we are.  Why are they giving you these things?  To help destroy the Whites.  When the White middle class is gone, what do you think will happen to you?  Do you think you will begin to prosper?  I'd think again if I were you.  The financial ruin of our people means the financial ruin of yours as well.
The real enemies of non-Whites don't wear Swastikas.  They wear dollar signs.
Dan  88!

Sunday, April 29, 2012

Today's Radio Show

Comrades, we in the ANP are realists.  We look at things practically and in a realistic way.

On today's show, Chairman Suhayda said something that some of the other NS groups will slam us for when they get wind of it - if they haven't already begun.

First off is the racial situation.  As was discussed, racialism is only a part of National Socialism.  An important part, but still only a part.  As the chairman said, if all non-Whites disappeared tonight, we would still be faced with many huge problems.  Most Judeo-Capitalists are White, so we would still be living under an oppressive, exploitative Capitalist regime.  Sure, they use non-Whites as a weapon against us.  But if all non-Whites suddenly disappeared, they'd fund something else to use against us.  They are not dummies.  They'll find another way to screw us over.

Also, as anyone who lives in places like Detroit, Baltimore, Atlanta, Jew York, and virtually the entire state of California knows,  the non-Whites are here and are not going anyplace.  Indeed, they will outnumber us in less than one generation.  Getting rid of them is simply out of the question.  There are just too many of them and their numbers grow daily, and ours are declining.

We'd like to see a return of racial separation.  How that would be accomplished is something that would have to be figured out later after this country collapses and we can see what and who is left still standing.

However, if we ever do have the opportunity to see racial separation come to pass, it will have to be done differently than in the old segregation days.  Non-Whites must be given the opportunity for self-determination, and not oppression.  Separate but equal must be more than just words.  Back in the days of segregation, it was anything but separate but equal.  If we ever have the chance for racial separation, they really must be equal as well as separate or it simply won't fly.

Now what's really going to cause a stir is our discussion of the War On Drugs.  The WOD is a dismal failure.  No matter what the government does, not only doesn't the drug situation improve, it continues to deteriorate.  Why?  Because of the incredible amount of money involved.  Drug lords make billions annually, and are not going to let our half-assed measures stop them.  Even the lowly street dealers are making more money pushing drugs than they could ever do flipping burgers or scrubbing toilets.  Let's also not forget the drug cartel's government payoffs which is why many politicians turn a blind eye to these things.

As a result of this, we have teen-age girls selling themselves on the street to support their drug habit, and sooner or later they'll get pregnant.  Many of these girls are White and will give birth to Mulatto children sired by some Black drug dealer - especially considering many Blacks consider bagging themselves a White Ho to be a real prize.

It was suggested that perhaps a solution would be to legalize drugs.  I don't mean we give pushers carte blanche to sell whatever they want on the streets.  If drugs were to be legalized, they would have to be treated the same as alcohol and tobacco.  They would be sold in stores in packages with a list of ingredients and a health warning, and would have the hell taxed out of them just like alcohol and tobacco.  Naturally they would only be available to those 21 years and older.

Wouldn't kids still be able to buy them on the street?  Well, I point out that the worst thing that happened to organized crime in the 1930's was when Prohibition ended, and alcohol returned to the stores.  Al Capone's power depended on alcohol remaining illegal.  When it was legalized again, his crime empire began to crumble.  He managed to keep it going for awhile, and did spend 22 months on Alcatraz, but the end of Prohibition caused him to lose a lot of his power and influence and he was never able to regain it all.

If drugs were legalized, the drug lords would lose a lot of power, money, and influence.  It could be the beginning of the end for them.

Now Hitler would never have approved of drugs.  However, he also did not smoke, drink, or eat meat, yet he never tried to outlaw these things either.

We must look at things realistically.  Drugs are here, and are not going away.  Even in NS Germany there was a Black Market that sold contraband goods - including drugs like cocaine, heroine, pills, and marijuana.  They didn't have the "designer" drugs we have today, but the old standbys were there.  They were never able to stop it, and neither will we.  

We can't stop drugs, but we can control them.  Perhaps the only way is to bring them out of the shadows and into the light.

I'm sure there are those who would never go for this "on principle."  Okay fine.  Keep your principles.  And while you're keep your principles, the corruption will continue to get worse and worse.  Well, at least you kept your principles and "honour" in tact, while everything else fell to pieces.  When it's put that way, it doesn't sound too smart, does it?

Dan  88!  

Saturday, April 28, 2012

Jailed for $280: The Return of Debtors' Prisons

By Alain Sherter | CBS MoneyWatch

How did breast cancer survivor Lisa Lindsay end up behind bars? She didn't pay a medical bill -- one the Herrin, Ill., teaching assistant was told she didn't owe. "She got a $280 medical bill in error and was told she didn't have to pay it," The Associated Press reports. "But the bill was turned over to a collection agency, and eventually state troopers showed up at her home and took her to jail in handcuffs."

Although the U.S. abolished debtors' prisons in the 1830s, more than a third of U.S. states allow the police to haul people in who don't pay all manner of debts, from bills for health care services to credit card and auto loans. In parts of Illinois, debt collectors commonly use publicly funded courts, sheriff's deputies, and country jails to pressure people who owe even small amounts to pay up, according to the AP.

Under the law, debtors aren't arrested for nonpayment, but rather for failing to respond to court hearings, pay legal fines, or otherwise showing "contempt of court" in connection with a creditor lawsuit. That loophole has lawmakers in the Illinois House of Representatives concerned enough to pass a bill in March that would make it illegal to send residents of the state to jail if they can't pay a debt. The measure awaits action in the senate.

"Creditors have been manipulating the court system to extract money from the unemployed, veterans, even seniors who rely solely on their benefits to get by each month," Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan said last month in a statement voicing support for the legislation. "Too many people have been thrown in jail simply because they're too poor to pay their debts. We cannot allow these illegal abuses to continue."

Debt collectors typically avoid filing suit against debtors, a representative with the Illinois Collectors Association tells the AP. "A consumer that has been arrested or jailed can't pay a debt. We want to work with consumers to resolve issues," he said.

Yet Illinois isn't the only state where residents get locked up for owing money. A 2010 report by theAmerican Civil Liberties Union that focused on only five states -- Georgia, Louisiana, Michigan, Ohio, and Washington -- found that people were being jailed at "increasingly alarming rates" over legal debts. Cases ranged from a woman who was arrested four separate times for failing to pay $251 in fines and court costs related to a fourth-degree misdemeanor conviction, to a mentally ill juvenile jailed by a judge over a previous conviction for stealing school supplies.

According to the ACLU: "The sad truth is that debtors' prisons are flourishing today, more than two decades after the Supreme Court prohibited imprisoning those who are too poor to pay their legal debts. In this era of shrinking budgets, state and local governments have turned aggressively to using the threat and reality of imprisonment to squeeze revenue out of the poorest defendants who appear in their courts."

Some states also apply "poverty penalties," including late fees, payment plan fees, and interest when people are unable to pay all their debts at once, according to a report by the New York University's Brennan Center for Justice. Alabama charges a 30 percent collection fee, for instance, while Florida allows private debt collectors to add a 40 percent surcharge on the original debt. Some Florida counties also use so-called collection courts, where debtors can be jailed but have no right to a public defender.

"Many states are imposing new and often onerous 'user fees' on individuals with criminal convictions," the authors of the Brennan Center report wrote. "Yet far from being easy money, these fees impose severe -- and often hidden -- costs on communities, taxpayers, and indigent people convicted of crimes. They create new paths to prison for those unable to pay their debts and make it harder to find employment and housing as well to meet child-support obligations."

Such practices, heightened in recent years by the effects of the recession, amount to criminalizing poverty, say critics in urging federal authorities to intervene. "More people are unemployed, more people are struggling financially, and more creditors are trying to get their debt paid," Madigan told the AP.


Debtor's prisons were common during the Middle Ages until the early 1800's.  I've often said that the Judeo-Capitalists are slowly returning us to a Serf-like condition.  Debtor's prisons are just one more step in that direction.  That direction is backward, not forward.

The condition of the White working and middle class is becoming more desperate every day.  Our descent into Serfdom was barely noticeable 30 years ago.  Today, it's become more noticeable every single year.  For example, I do most of my grocery shopping at the 99 cent superstore, yet my grocery bill is about the same now as it was when I did all my shopping at a regular market two years ago.  

Most Americans are already debt slaves right now with an average debt of $10,000 in credit cards, plus car loans and mortgage - and everyday our financial resources continue to dwindle.

Right now, the best defense you have is to know your rights.  Yes, we still have some - for the time being.  And as long as we still have them we should make use of them.

First, if you're drowning in debt, don't be ashamed of bankruptcy.  It isn't a disgrace.  The Judeo-Capitalists make use of this right whenever it suits their needs, so why shouldn't we?  Never mind this crap about your honour.   "I promised to pay.  I gave my word I would and I have to."  Forget that.  Who did you give your word to in the first place?  The Judeo-Capitalists, and we all know how much their words are worth to us.  We all know the Judeo-Capitalists cheat us blind.  To cheat a cheater isn't cheating.  It's merely irony.  Besides, bankruptcy isn't cheating anyone.  It's still our right, so why not use it if necessary?  They wouldn't hesitate.  Why should we?

Unless there's real estate involved that you'd like to keep, a lawyer is not necessary.  I declared bankruptcy a few years ago.  All my lawyer did was file the proper papers with the court, field the calls from collection agencies, and sit next to me in court.  He didn't say one word there.  The commissioner asked me questions and I answered truthfully without attorney assistance.  I was awarded the bankruptcy.  

I could have filed my own papers and saved $1,000.  You can buy bankruptcy kits at Staples, Office Depot, and Office Max for about $25.  Filing fees can range up to $299 depending on your state.  California is $299 of course.  Why shell out another $1000 to some blood sucking lawyer so they can get a big fee for easy stuff you can do yourself?  

As to the collection agencies, all you have to do is notify them in writing to stop calling you.  If they don't, you can sue for harassment.  Collection agencies COUNT on people not knowing their rights.   If they don't stop, then you get a lawyer and sue.  

Debt collectors also count on being able to scare people by threats such as imprisonment and violence.  With imprisonment, it's not so much going to jail for not paying up, it's going to jail for not showing up in court when summoned.  If you do receive a summons, SHOW UP or you could go to jail for contempt of court.  Ha!  That's kind of an oxymoron for me because I'm already contemptuous of their courts.  Anyway, don't make it easy for them.  Show up.  You can't get blood out of a stone.  If your creditors are hauling YOU into court, then there is no question about it.  You're ready to file bankruptcy.  

If they threaten you with violence, DO NOT threaten them back.  These calls are all recorded.  If you threaten them with violence after they threaten you, they won't hesitate to edit out their threats, and the police will arrest YOU instead of them.  If they ever threaten me with violence, I'd simply say, "You better be sure.  I can give as good as I get."  I wouldn't mention any specific act.  Without their threat of violence in the recording, what I said would be very ambiguous and charges against me wouldn't hold up.  

Most collection agencies are reasonable.  But never forget that no matter how friendly they seem, they are NOT your friends.  Their job is to get you to pay up.  

Some will come after you for debts you incurred several years ago.  There is a statute of limitations on all debt except student loans.   After seven years, they cannot legally make you pay - unless - you are foolish enough to try and "work something out".  The moment you try and work it out, the statute of limitations starts up again and you have suckered yourself into being legally liable again for seven more years.  If you had a debt over seven years old and some debt collector tries to get you to pay up, all you need to say is, "I know for a fact the statute of limitations has run out, and I am not liable for one cent.  If you continue calling me, I'll sue for harassment."  If the collector says, "You don't know what you're talking about.  The law says you still have to pay."  You say, "You're a liar.  I do not have to pay and I won't.  Never call me again or I'll sue you."  Then hang up.  If they keep calling, then sue them.  That way you get them to stop, and you may make a few bucks at the same time.

If the debt is a student loan, you have to pay, period.  There is no statute of limitations.  They can legally come after you thirty, forty years later or more.  In these cases, trying to work it out is best.  Bankruptcies do NOT cover student loans.

Now I know this post has kind of gotten long, but I just want to make sure everyone knows their rights.  Don't let them intimidate you.  If the statute of limitations is still running, either try and work it out or declare bankruptcy.  It's really  ignoring the  problem that can  land you in jail,  not being unable to pay.
As it was indicated in the article, Ms. Lindsay was arrested - not for failing to pay - but for contempt of court.  She wouldn't respond to a court summons and the judge busted her for that.  Unless you are absolutely sure the statute of limitations has run out, don't ignore the problem.  That's when things can get serious.  If you do get a summons, always respond - even if the statute of limitations has run out.  Bring your paperwork on the debt to court.  If it has run out, the judge will dismiss the case.  If you hide your head in the sand you could go to jail for up to 18 months for contempt.

Dan  88!

Friday, April 27, 2012

You're Next...

Comrades, as you know, I have absolutely no faith in ANY of the mainstream political candidates.  As Chairman Suhayda has often asked, how can someone who is part of this rotten system hope to be able to fix it?  Besides, it is beyond repair and we all know it.  Best to start from scratch again.

However, I do vote for the various propositions.  ZOG tends to do whatever it wants regardless of the law, but sometimes a good proposition puts up a stumbling block and ZOG has to find a way around it, which gives us some time.

Although what I'm going to discuss is a California proposition, one like it could and probably will come to your state eventually.

Proposition 29 is yet another attempt by the state to make a small group of people pay so the majority can get some more freebies.  Prop. 29 will place an additional $1.00 tax per pack on cigarettes and the equivalent amount on other tobacco products.  All too often, people WILL vote yes on a tax increase - as long as it doesn't cost them anything.  Well, statistically, 75% of California's adults are non-smokers.  I'm not even going  to mention what this tax will pay for because that is irrelevant.  The point is that as a smoker, why should I and the rest of the 25% pay for something that will benefit the 75% and they pay nothing at all?  It's just plain not fair.  If this passes, then 75% of the cost of a pack of cigarettes in California will be tax.  If you remember, during Colonial times, things like the Stamp Act and the Tea tax meant that colonists paid about 75% tax on any item that was taxed.  That was one of the main reason for the Revolution.

BTW, in California, a pack of Marlboro's costs $6.00 at a convenience store.  If Prop. 29 passes, it will jump to $7.00.

Most of us have some little guilty pleasure we enjoy.  If it's not smoking, then it's having a few beers or eating junk food.  There has been tax on liquor for years.  However, they don't try and slip though a new liquor tax every year.  Tobacco yes, but not liquor.  That's because so many more people drink than smoke that it wouldn't work.

Also, California doesn't tax anything you eat or drink - except liquor.  That almost changed two years ago.  They tried to sneak in a tax on all junk food.  It failed, but they will try again in due time.  Whatever your guilty pleasure is, they'll get round to you sooner or later.  Whatever it is, make no mistake.  YOU'RE NEXT.

How would you feel if they tried raising tax on your 12 packs a dollar a pack every year or so?  You'd scream bloody murder.  Right now we do pay a meal tax for restaurant food.  That's the tax on the cost to prepare and serve your meal.  How would you like them to slap on a sales tax as well?  I'm sure you wouldn't like it at all.

How do you think we smokers feel when they try and tax us - especially when we know we're a minority, and the non-smoking majority also benefits from the revenue raised, but didn't contribute one cent.  It makes us mad as hell and rightly so.

Now the state will tell you that most of the money used will go for tobacco cessation programs.  Even if that's true, I'd like to ask you if the state really cares whether we get emphysema or lung cancer or not?  Yes they care, but not for our sake.  They care for THEIR sake.  They don't want to have to pay for medical treatment on low income people.  Plus the insurance companies, all big time political contributors also don't want to have to pay claims for smoking related illnesses.  But neither them actually gives a damn about our well being - only about their profit margins.

As a smoker, I am well aware that I may be damaging my lungs beyond repair some day.  That's my business.  Is it any different than ruining your liver and kidneys by drinking every day, or clogging up your arteries and heart with cholesterol from fast food, or increasing your chances of diabetes by drinking several sodas every day with a couple of candy bars?  In principle, there is no difference at all.  I am basically a non-drinker.  If you want to damage yourself with beer, it's your business just as it's my business if I do the same with tobacco.  I do try and respect the rights of non-smokers.  I obey all no smoking regulations to the letter.  If I'm outside and someone near me asks if I'll put out my cigarette, I'll usually say something like, no, but I'll move a few feet away from you.  That's a fair compromise I think.

Proposition 29 will appear on the ballot in the California primary on June 5.  I ask ALL Californians to be fair and vote NO on 29.  Perhaps you think that by voting yes, you'll be helping some of us to quit by raising cigarette prices out of our range.  Indeed you will, but the thing is, we don't want your help.  Don't be a do-gooder.  Just be fair.  Fair is NO on 29.

As for all of you non-California comrades, if a proposition like this hasn't already come to your state, it's just a matter of time.  When it does come, I hope you will do the fair thing as well.  

One of the most important principles of National Socialism is fairness to all citizens.  Making smokers pay for something that may or may not benefit everyone is not in the spirit of National Socialism.

A smoker must quit when he is READY to quit.  With many of us, trying to force us only makes us more determined to keep smoking out of defiance - myself included.  I'll quit when I feel I'm ready.  Please don't "help" in that way.  Thank you.

Dan  88!

Thursday, April 26, 2012


No, it's not my wedding anniversary.  It's even better.  Today is the second anniversary of Sense And Sensibility.  For some reason, I can no longer get a counter to work on this blog.  Besides, after the recent problems I've had with one of the non-Google gadgets having a malicious code which caused pop-ups and a redirect to some Romanian site (I don't even know what the site was about as I don't speak Romanian), I  am afraid to try and add another one anyway.  However, I can still check my statistics and I have had 60,479 hits in the last 24 months.  That's not including my own page hits.

I'd like to thank all my readers, both supporters, and yes, even detractors for visiting this blog as frequently as they do.  No one is more surprised at S & S's success than I, but I couldn't have done it without all of you.  BTW, I do get a lot of detractors.  I rarely publish their comments because most of them are incapable of commenting without insults and childish name calling, so most never see the light of day.  Remember, I'll publish ALL comments - even negative ones as long as you don't use obscenities, threats, or insults.  You know, it IS possible to make a negative comment without insults, threats, and obscenities.  All it takes is a little maturity and intelligence.

A special thanks to my regular contributors for sending me all kinds of relevant articles.  It makes things a lot easier for me and I deeply appreciate your efforts. 

For those who have ever wondered where the name Sense And Sensibility comes from, it's the title of a classic piece of British literature written by Jane Austen and first published in 1811.  It has nothing to do with National Socialism.  Since I try to approach every issue with an air of common sense, I felt it an appropriate title for my blog.  Yes, I know I haven't always talked common sense in the past, but I do better now that I used to.  I'm sure most of you know what I mean by that!

Anyway, thanks for being loyal supporters and keep coming back as I will continue dealing with issues relevant to National Socialism with as much sense and sensibility as I can.

Note - I now have an RSS feed directly to SA Political Adviser and Lobbyist John Taylor Bowle's blog, "NS Acumen of the Old Guard."  For those of you who visit both blogs, it's now even easier.

Dan  88!

Wednesday, April 25, 2012

How Asian immigrants get preferential treatment when starting a business

Contributed by Comrade Raymond Bxxxxxxx.

Partaking or Taking Over

by Stephanie Galonska
I’ve known about the Asian ownership of our gas stations, hotels and dunkin’ donuts for quite some time but I had no idea just how prevalent the ‘Asian ownership’ was until I drove from Des Moines, Iowa to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania some few years ago.
The Mississippi River had flooded again so I had to take a long detour around I-80 and it was there where I saw it. Imagine my surprise when I walked into an Antique store to ask for directions and saw, to my great dismay, an Indian from India. Now these weren’t Antiques from India, they were American and European Antiques. Needless to say, I didn’t ask for any directions. The next Town I stopped in only had one gas station and guess what? It was owned by a Chinese person.
Throughout my trip, a pattern was emerging. Everywhere I stopped, no matter how small the Town, an Asian could be found owning something. How did this come to be?
Well, we all know it came slow and long ago but as far as I’m concerned, it came mostly in 1990 when our “Leaders” enacted IMMACT which gives us this: “under the new provisions; increases in the proportion of immigrants coming from Asia, with a corresponding decrease in the numbers from northern and western Europe” [1] All one needs to do is look around to see that that’s true.
Add that to all the Government and Business Sponsored Minority Privilege and what do ya get? According to BUSINESS.COM, you get “over 50 percent of all U.S. minority-owned businesses with sales exceeding $1 million are owned by Asian-Americans.” [2]
How did that fifty percent Asian ownership happen in what seems to be, so quickly? Once again, according to BUSINESS.COM, Bank of America and its special program called the “Minority and Women Prequalification Program” [2] helps them but they’re far from the only ones.
BUSINESS.COM goes on to mention how Asians can “meet prospective customers in person at one of the regional procurement events sponsored by The US Pan Asian American Chamber of Commerce (USPAACC).” [2]
Now who supports USPAACC? According to them, just about everybody. One Government Department they mention is The Social Security Administration [3] and I wonder, do they mean this: “Greta is the admissions coordinator in a federally-subsidized senior citizens housing facility in the San Francisco Bay area. She remarks that, when one of her tenants, an immigrant from Taiwan whom we will call Wen, told her that he had just passed his citizenship test, “I was
congratulating and welcoming him, but he laughed and said, ‘Now they can’t take my [welfare] money away.’” [4]
I find it worthy to remind us all that in that quote are two significant points of interest and they are “federally-subsidized” and “[welfare]“. Immigrants were supposed to support their own elderly immigrant family members when they brought them here but no, once again, our “leaders” changed that Law for them too.
Back to the USPAACC. Who pays for them? We all do. Aside from the numerous government agencies they name, they have plenty of corporate sponsors too. Lockheed Martin, Frito Lays, Dallas/Fort Worth Airport, Verizon, it just goes on and on. It’s one thing for Businesses to give to the Community but it’s discrimination to set aside business opportunities and/or funding for minorities because they’re “minorities”. Minorities have done nothing for America except be non-white and/or female and that’s just not a contribution worthy of any “recognition” or the “Supplier Diversity Program” these companies have set up for them.
What’s a Supplier Diversity Program? That is a program created by yet another minority group called “The National Minority Supplier Development Council” who created “The Business Consortium Fund, Inc. (BCF) which “provides contract financing to NMSDC certified minority businesses across America through a network of local participating banks and NMSDC affiliates.” And who funds the BCF? According to them, it comes from “several sources including corporations, state governments and foundations.” [5]
The Supplier Diversity Program is a program that is used by businesses in which they purchase goods and services from minority owned businesses. Minorities get help from government and businesses because they’re “minorities” and then they get business from businesses because they’re “minorities”.
The Privilege for Non-Whites shall not end as is proven with this gem from allBusiness: “The Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA) is the only federal agency created specifically to foster the establishment and growth of minority-owned businesses. MBDA provides funding for a network of Minority Business Development Centers (MBDCs), Native American Business Development Centers (NABDCs), and Business Resource Centers (BRCs) located throughout the country. The centers provide minority entrepreneurs with personalized assistance in writing business plans, marketing, management and technical assistance, and financial planning to secure adequate financing for business ventures.” [6]
The MBDA’s Organizational Chart begins with the “Office of the White House Initiative on Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders” [7] Aside from Affirmative Action, this is the most blatant form of discrimination I can name.
This Federally Funded Department promotes non-whites and only non-whites. Does this sound fair to you? “Federal” means you’re payin’ for it and worse, this Program assumes minorities need Help so, not only are they eligible for various Welfare Programs because they’re “poor” but also, they get extra help because they’re “minorities”. Huh? Confusing, I know. It’s a Double Dip and when they play it right, a Triple Dip and for all nothing but for our American Gullibility.
Did I mention how there are NO Privileges for White Men just for being White Men?
To carry on, aside from the MBDA, minorities also have the SBA and its various programs like the 8(a) Business Development in which the SBA boasts that “Under the Small Business Act, certain individuals are presumed socially disadvantaged: African-Americans, Hispanic Americans, Asian Pacific Americans, Native Americans (American Indians, Eskimos, Aleuts, or Native Hawaiians), and Subcontinent Asian Americans. An individual who is not a member of one of the groups listed can be admitted to the program if he/she shows – through a “preponderance of the evidence” – that he/she is socially disadvantaged. For instance, an individual may show social disadvantage due to race, ethnic origin, gender, physical handicap, long-term residence in an environment isolated from the mainstream of American society; or other similar causes.” [8]
The most disturbing thing about this is how it is “presumed” that non-whites are all automatically “socially disadvantaged” but if you don’t fall into any one of those non-white groups, you must prove, through a “preponderance of the evidence”, that you are “socially disadvantaged”. I have no proof but this sounds like a program specifically designed for their favored non-whites.
The Small Business Administration gets $978,000,000.00 for FY2012. “The bill contains $978 million for the Small Business Administration (SBA) – $249 million more than last year’s level and $7 million below the request. Small business loans – which have seen marked increase in demand and higher subsidy costs due to the current economic situation – receive an increase of $128 million.” [9]
How much of that money goes to minority only programs? I don’t know but when I look around, it seems to me like they’re getting quite a good bit of it and from everywhere else too.
According to Reuters, “SAN FRANCISCO–(Business Wire)–In celebration of Asian Pacific American Heritage Month, Wells Fargo Asian Business Services announced today it has reached its 10-year goal to lend $3 billion to Asian business owners nationwide — three years ahead of schedule. The goal was established at the program`s inception in 2002. The company also announced they have expanded the goal to $5 billion by the end of 2013.” [10]
I looked but I couldn’t find any special Divisions for White Men at Wells Fargo like they do for the Asians with their “Asian Business Owners” page and I couldn’t find any five billion dollar set-aside for loans that only White Men can apply for like they did for the Asians neither.
Banks aren’t supposed to be setting aside money to loan to a specific group of people. They’re supposed to be concerned about one’s ability to pay it back and that’s it. And to add insult to injury, these same people, these companies, bankers and our government just love to tell us how smart and capable these people are but if that’s true then why do they need so much special help?
If you’re not concerned by now, perhaps this, coming from the Office of Refugee Resettlement will concern you: “Microenterprise Development Program assists refugees to become financially independent by helping them develop capital resources and business expertise to start, expands, or strengthens their own business. The program provides training and technical assistance in business plan development, management, bookkeeping, and marketing to equip refugees with the skills they need to become successful entrepreneurs. In FY 2011, there are 18 grantees in 15 states that receive grants totaling $4.0 million.” “The targeted refugee population for these programs may include refugees who receive public assistance or subsidies, and/or who lack the financial resources, credit history, or personal assets to qualify for business loans or assistance through commercial institutions. Refugees who are not yet citizens may participate in the Microenterprise Development Program regardless of their date of arrival in the U.S.” [11]
They get to live off Welfare because they’re ‘poor refugees’ and then because they’re “minorities”, they get Minority Business Loans and Minority Grants too and they don’t even have to be Citizens. Isn’t that nice? Don’t recall if I mentioned or not, but I’m still lookin’ for those special government and business set-asides for White Men…
Aside from all the government and corporate business funding they get, the Asians also have their own private groups that work very hard to make sure their own people are getting everything out of America they possibly can. The following is from USINPAC (United States and India PAC):
15% – percentage of Silicon Valley start-up firms owned by Indian-Americans • 59.9% of Indian-Americans work in top managerial positions • Average yearly income of an Indian worker is $51,904 • More than 300,000 Indian-Americans work in the Information Technology sector • $69,470 – the median income of Indian-American families, nearly double the median income of all American families — $38,885 • Nearly 10% of the physicians in the US are of Indian origin • Indian-Americans also have a huge marked presence in the national and local political arena. At least 12 candidates won various elections in 2010 • Of the total non-farm business owned by
the Asians, the Indians own close to 1/5 of the business in America and have earned over $150 billion in revenue • Indian-Americans owned 19.9% of the total Asian firms with a value of $152.5 billion and a recorded growth of 38.2 % in 2007 • Over 50% of the H1-B and L visas are issued in India • Over 900,000 Hotel rooms – Asian-Americans currently own 50 percent of the economy lodging sector and 37 percent of all hotels (Source: Asian American Hotel Owners Association). [12]
The above are only a few mentions of their “accomplishments”. Make no mistake about the Indians, they have every intention of taking over single last piece of America they can.
There is something to be learned from these Third World Indians though. They have no shame in seeking power and control for themselves. White People used to do that and we need to learn how to do it again before it truly is too late. If we don’t pull it together, the Asians are all too happy to take it from us.
The Committee of 100 is a group of Chinese people whose goal is “To encourage constructive relations between the peoples of the United States and Greater China. • To promote the full participation of Chinese Americans in all fields of American life.” This is from Committee of 100. [13]
And the Koreans… “Nurture the sense of pride and confidence in Korean cultural heritage and tradition.” From the Korean-American Scholarship Foundation. [14]
See what I mean? It’s an all out ‘in your face, dare to ya do something about it’ take-over of our Country and us.
Name your Asian and somewhere out there is something for them but don’t take my word for it; look it up yourself. Type in your Asian Flavor and I guarantee you, you will find something that helps only, their own kind. And it’s worth noting, none of them are called “racist” or “bigot” for doing so neither.
[13] [14]


Before I say anything else, I'd like to mention for the heck of it that it came out in an episode of "The Simpsons" that Apu (pictured above) is an illegal alien (Homer helped him pass his citizenship test).

What really galls me is that when we Whites start to demand our own privilege programs, the first word out of people's mouths are "RACIST!".

Back in the day, when Whites asked why they weren't entitled to an organization to look after their interests, the pat answer was, "Because Whites are the majority and not disadvantaged."  Well a lot has changed in a very short time.  We are already disadvantaged.  We are the only group who are not given special protection under the law.  If a White attacks a non-White, it's a hate crime.  If a non-White attacks a White, the White had better be able to show a mountain of evidence that it was a hate crime or no dice.  Non-Whites get help in business.  We get nothing.  They have Affirmative Action, not us.  They get away with playing the race card.  We don't.  It sure as hell sounds like we're disadvantaged to me.

Let's also not forget that we WILL be in the minority in twenty or thirty years.  Even ZOG itself confirms this fact.

But Whites DO have an organization to look after their interests:  The ANP.  We are NOT hatemongers.  We are NOT Supremacists.  We are simply White Americans demanding our fair share of the American Pie.  It's true that in the past, Whites did get a disproportionately large share.  But that's over now.  I shouldn't have to do with a disproportionately smaller piece to make up for past injustices because I didn't commit those injustices.  I REFUSE TO PAY FOR THE SINS OF MY FATHERS.  

The ANP is here for every White American and legal White immigrant.  All you have to do is support us.  By helping us, you're helping yourself.  More importantly, you're helping to secure the existence of our people and a future for White children.  Hail Victory!

Dan  88!

Tuesday, April 24, 2012

Now This Is The Truth!

Comrades, we all know why the Democrats cater to the illegals.  It's because every illegal that the Democrats help will vote Democrat as soon as they are eligible - even sooner if they can!

However, as I've been saying, it doesn't matter who is in office.  They are all incompetent, corrupt crooks who work for the benefit of the 1% at the expense of the 99%.  But still, pointing these things out is extremely important.  The more White Americans become disillusioned with the current system and fed up with its leaders, the greater chance we have of swinging them over to our side.  So keep up with the literature, and keep spreading the truth.

I'd like people to download this cartoon and email it to as many people as you can.  You don't have to even mention National Socialism for now.  Just spread this around.  The more the better.  Hail Victory!

Dan  88!

Monday, April 23, 2012

Jews Arrested For Assaulting A Black Teenager

Md. neighborhood watch trial set against Fla. fury

BALTIMORE (AP) — Two brothers accused of beating a black teenager while patrolling an Orthodox Jewish neighborhood are set to go on trial Monday in a case with similarities to the Trayvon Martin shooting.
The brothers, who are white and Jewish, have claimed self-defense, saying the teen was holding a nail-studded board. Local civil rights activists hope the Martin case will draw more attention to what they believe was racial profiling by neighborhood watch vigilantes.
Eliyahu and Avi Werdesheim are accused of beating a 15-year-old boy who was walking through a Baltimore neighborhood in November 2010. The brothers pulled up next to the teen in a vehicle, then got out and "surrounded him," according to charging documents. The passenger threw the teen to the ground and the driver hit him in the head with a hand-held radio and patted him down.
The teen remembered the driver yelling, "You wanna (mess) with us, you don't belong around here, get outta here!" according to court documents, which do not identify which brother was driving.
While the teen struggled, a third man got out of a van and kneed the teen, pinning him to the ground. The teen told police that he stopped struggling and the third man continued to search him, while the teen insisted he didn't have anything on him.
Eliyahu Werdesheim told the Baltimore Jewish Times that he was acting in self-defense because the teen was holding the piece of wood. The teen picked up the board during the encounter, but put it back down, said J. Wyndal Gordon, an attorney for the teen's family. He said the family did not want to speak publically.
After the trio left, the teen called police and was taken to a hospital with a cut on the back of his head and a broken wrist, according to court documents. Using a photo book compiled by investigators, the teen later identified Eliyahu Werdesheim, now 24, as one of the men who assaulted him. He was arrested after about 10 days; his now 21-year-old brother was charged two months later.
The brothers are charged with second-degree assault, false imprisonment and carrying a deadly weapon (the hand-held radio). The pair face up to 13 years in prison if convicted on all three counts. A third man, identified in a lawsuit brought by the teen's family as Ronald Rosenbluth, does not face charges.
Police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi said investigators don't believe Rosenbluth was involved in the beating. Rosenbluth said he doesn't believe there was a third person and he was only called to the scene after the incident.
Law enforcement officials emphasize that neighborhood watchers' responsibility is to report crime, and leave interventions to police. Most follow the rules, and confrontations are rare.
"We owe a lot of our success to communities that have stepped up and partnered with police. They help us out," Guglielmi said. "But when they step too far, we have to hold people accountable."
In the Florida case, authorities charged neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman this month with second-degree murder in Martin's death Feb. 26. Zimmerman claims self-defense, but Martin's family claims he targeted Martin mainly because he was black. Zimmerman's father is white and his mother Hispanic.
It's unusual to have a trial in which the allegations mirror a case so prominent in the news, said Steven Levin, a former federal prosecutor.
"Since the Trayvon Martin case, people cannot help but think about that case and draw comparisons, whether they are fair or not," he said.
In the Werdesheim case, the six trial postponements could significantly hinder the defense's case, Levin said. However, the charges against Zimmerman since the last postponement may mean jurors won't feel that they need to somehow set things right through the case they are deciding.
Eliyahu Werdesheim was suspended from the neighborhood group while Avi was never a member, according to Nathan Willner, general counsel for Shomrim of Baltimore, a group that patrols neighborhoods with a large concentration of Jewish residents and institutions in the Baltimore area. Shomrim, which is Hebrew for guard, has about 30 volunteer, unarmed responders. It was founded in 2005 to provide security and gather information for police, Willner said.
While the case has not garnered the attention the Martin shooting has, Cortly C.D. Witherspoon, president of the local chapter of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, has organized protests outside the courthouse during court hearings and has been frustrated by the postponements.
"We feel that justice should have been served long ago. I would contend that the urgency for justice (in this case) is affected by the Trayvon Martin case because of the similarities," he said.
Members of the area's Jewish community also rallied outside the courthouse when the brothers appeared in court to enter not guilty pleas in February. Jakob Lurman, the owner of a barbershop, was among them.
"I have a business in the community. Shomrim do good work," Lurman said. "I don't know what happened in that case, but I wanted to show support."
Jewish neighborhood watch groups in New York City have faced accusations of unnecessary force against blacks, creating tensions between the Jewish and black communities. That hasn't yet happened in Baltimore, according to the Rev. Alvin Gwynn Sr., president of the Interdenominational Ministerial Alliance. The organization of predominantly black clergy met with leaders of the area's Jewish community to keep relationships between the two communities strong.
"We were already working with them when this came up," Gwynn said. "It hasn't done much damage yet."
Baltimore is a city that's 64 percent black, and the jury will likely have eight or nine black members. So race will be a factor, said University of Baltimore School of Law professor and practicing attorney Byron Warnken.
"What the defense has to do is completely downplay that," he said, and show the force was necessary to prevent a crime.
Susan Green, an attorney for Avi Werdesheim, said last month that she hoped the media coverage would not create an atmosphere that would make it difficult for her client, but declined to comment further. The attorney for Eliyahu Werdesheim did not return calls for comment.
This case ought to be very interesting.  Since the suspects are Jewish, let's see if this is handled any differently than if they were Aryans.  Take note that their attorney is Jewish (Green), and so is the reporter who wrote this story (Brumfield).
Notice how the suspects are described as "White" and "Jewish".  It seems that even the author doesn't know (or is deliberately trying to mislead the public - big surprise) that Jews are not technically White.  There are basically two kinds of Jews:   Khazars and Hebrews.  Khazars are basically Orientals, and Hebrews are Semitic, like Arabs.  Neither kind are truly White.  Indeed, the Jews of Jesus's time would have looked more like Arabs.   Aryans may have similar colouring, but I point out that Blacks and Australian Aborigines have similar colouring but are both two separate and distinct races.  Aryans and Jews may have similar colouring, but are also two separate and distinct races.
Also, I find that usually if it looks like a duck and sounds like a duck, it's probably a duck.  What was a 15 -year-old Black kid doing walking about an Orthodox Jewish neighbourhood at night?  As Orthodox Jews usually don't socialize with non-Jews, it's unlikely he was visiting anyone there.  Considering Orthodox Jews usually self-segregate themselves, a Black kid - or any non-Jew in their neighbourhood is highly suspicious - especially at night.
At any rate, it wouldn't surprise me if the Werdesheim brothers go Scot free or get a slap on the wrist, while Zimmerman goes to prison.  After all, Zimmerman isn't one of "The Chosen".  Oy Vey!
Thanks to Comrade Dr. Johann Hauptmann for sending this to me.
Dan  88!