Wednesday, July 31, 2013

Is This A Put On?

Comrades, as you know every now and again I like to lighten up a bit.  A friend of mine sent this clip to me and I'm still wondering is this for real or does this woman think that's how you lubricate an engine?  No, no one could be that dumb - could they?  If this is real she's giving blondes a bad name and setting Aryans back a few paces! LOL

Dan 88!

Tuesday, July 30, 2013

Four in Five Americans Face Near-poverty, No Work Under Obama

Associated Press - Sunday, 28 Jul 2013 02:57 PM

Four out of five U.S. adults struggle with joblessness, near-poverty, or reliance on welfare for at least parts of their lives, a sign of deteriorating economic security and an elusive American dream.

Survey data exclusive to The Associated Press point to an increasingly globalized U.S. economy, the widening gap between rich and poor, and the loss of good-paying manufacturing jobs as reasons for the trend.

The findings come as President Barack Obama tries to renew his administration's emphasis on the economy, saying in recent speeches that his highest priority is to "rebuild ladders of opportunity" and reverse income inequality.

As nonwhites approach a numerical majority in the U.S., one question is how public programs to lift the disadvantaged should be best focused — on the affirmative action that historically has tried to eliminate the racial barriers seen as the major impediment to economic equality, or simply on improving socioeconomic status for all, regardless of race.

Hardship is particularly growing among whites, based on several measures. Pessimism among that racial group about their families' economic futures has climbed to the highest point since at least 1987. In the most recent AP-GfK poll, 63 percent of whites called the economy "poor."

"I think it's going to get worse," said Irene Salyers, 52, of Buchanan County, Va., a declining coal region in Appalachia. Married and divorced three times, Salyers now helps run a fruit-and-vegetable stand with her boyfriend but it doesn't generate much income. They live mostly off government disability checks.

"If you do try to go apply for a job, they're not hiring people, and they're not paying that much to even go to work," she said. Children, she said, have "nothing better to do than to get on drugs."

While racial and ethnic minorities are more likely to live in poverty, race disparities in the poverty rate have narrowed substantially since the 1970s, census data show. Economic insecurity among whites also is more pervasive than is shown in the government's poverty data, engulfing more than 76 percent of white adults by the time they turn 60, according to a new economic gauge being published next year by the Oxford University Press.

The gauge defines "economic insecurity" as a year or more of periodic joblessness, reliance on government aid such as food stamps or income below 150 percent of the poverty line. Measured across all races, the risk of economic insecurity rises to 79 percent.

Marriage rates are in decline across all races, and the number of white mother-headed households living in poverty has risen to the level of black ones.

"It's time that America comes to understand that many of the nation's biggest disparities, from education and life expectancy to poverty, are increasingly due to economic class position," said William Julius Wilson, a Harvard professor who specializes in race and poverty. He noted that despite continuing economic difficulties, minorities have more optimism about the future after Obama's election, while struggling whites do not.

"There is the real possibility that white alienation will increase if steps are not taken to highlight and address inequality on a broad front," Wilson said.

Nationwide, the count of America's poor remains stuck at a record number: 46.2 million, or 15 percent of the population, due in part to lingering high unemployment following the recession. While poverty rates for blacks and Hispanics are nearly three times higher, by absolute numbers the predominant face of the poor is white.

More than 19 million whites fall below the poverty line of $23,021 for a family of four, accounting for more than 41 percent of the nation's destitute, nearly double the number of poor blacks.

Sometimes termed "the invisible poor" by demographers, lower-income whites generally are dispersed in suburbs as well as small rural towns, where more than 60 percent of the poor are white. Concentrated in Appalachia in the East, they are numerous in the industrial Midwest and spread across America's heartland, from Missouri, Arkansas and Oklahoma up through the Great Plains.

Buchanan County, in southwest Virginia, is among the nation's most destitute based on median income, with poverty hovering at 24 percent. The county is mostly white, as are 99 percent of its poor.

More than 90 percent of Buchanan County's inhabitants are working-class whites who lack a college degree. Higher education long has been seen there as nonessential to land a job because well-paying mining and related jobs were once in plentiful supply. These days many residents get by on odd jobs and government checks.

Salyers' daughter, Renee Adams, 28, who grew up in the region, has two children. A jobless single mother, she relies on her live-in boyfriend's disability checks to get by. Salyers says it was tough raising her own children as it is for her daughter now, and doesn't even try to speculate what awaits her grandchildren, ages 4 and 5.

Smoking a cigarette in front of the produce stand, Adams later expresses a wish that employers will look past her conviction a few years ago for distributing prescription painkillers, so she can get a job and have money to "buy the kids everything they need."

"It's pretty hard," she said. "Once the bills are paid, we might have $10 to our name."

Census figures provide an official measure of poverty, but they're only a temporary snapshot that doesn't capture the makeup of those who cycle in and out of poverty at different points in their lives. They may be suburbanites, for example, or the working poor or the laid off.

In 2011 that snapshot showed 12.6 percent of adults in their prime working-age years of 25-60 lived in poverty. But measured in terms of a person's lifetime risk, a much higher number — 4 in 10 adults — falls into poverty for at least a year of their lives.

The risks of poverty also have been increasing in recent decades, particularly among people ages 35-55, coinciding with widening income inequality. For instance, people ages 35-45 had a 17 percent risk of encountering poverty during the 1969-1989 time period; that risk increased to 23 percent during the 1989-2009 period. For those ages 45-55, the risk of poverty jumped from 11.8 percent to 17.7 percent.

Higher recent rates of unemployment mean the lifetime risk of experiencing economic insecurity now runs even higher: 79 percent, or 4 in 5 adults, by the time they turn 60.

By race, nonwhites still have a higher risk of being economically insecure, at 90 percent. But compared with the official poverty rate, some of the biggest jumps under the newer measure are among whites, with more than 76 percent enduring periods of joblessness, life on welfare or near-poverty.

By 2030, based on the current trend of widening income inequality, close to 85 percent of all working-age adults in the U.S. will experience bouts of economic insecurity.

"Poverty is no longer an issue of 'them', it's an issue of 'us'," says Mark Rank, a professor at Washington University in St. Louis who calculated the numbers. "Only when poverty is thought of as a mainstream event, rather than a fringe experience that just affects blacks and Hispanics, can we really begin to build broader support for programs that lift people in need."

The numbers come from Rank's analysis being published by the Oxford University Press. They are supplemented with interviews and figures provided to the AP by Tom Hirschl, a professor at Cornell University; John Iceland, a sociology professor at Penn State University; the University of New Hampshire's Carsey Institute; the Census Bureau; and the Population Reference Bureau.

Among the findings:

—For the first time since 1975, the number of white single-mother households living in poverty with children surpassed or equaled black ones in the past decade, spurred by job losses and faster rates of out-of-wedlock births among whites. White single-mother families in poverty stood at nearly 1.5 million in 2011, comparable to the number for blacks. Hispanic single-mother families in poverty trailed at 1.2 million.

—Since 2000, the poverty rate among working-class whites has grown faster than among working-class nonwhites, rising 3 percentage points to 11 percent as the recession took a bigger toll among lower-wage workers. Still, poverty among working-class nonwhites remains higher, at 23 percent.

—The share of children living in high-poverty neighborhoods — those with poverty rates of 30 percent or more — has increased to 1 in 10, putting them at higher risk of teenage pregnancy or dropping out of school. Non-Hispanic whites accounted for 17 percent of the child population in such neighborhoods, compared with 13 percent in 2000, even though the overall proportion of white children in the U.S. has been declining.
The share of black children in high-poverty neighborhoods dropped from 43 percent to 37 percent, while the share of Latino children went from 38 percent to 39 percent.

—Race disparities in health and education have narrowed generally since the 1960s. While residential segregation remains high, a typical black person now lives in a nonmajority black neighborhood for the first time. Previous studies have shown that wealth is a greater predictor of standardized test scores than race; the test-score gap between rich and low-income students is now nearly double the gap between blacks and whites.

Going back to the 1980s, never have whites been so pessimistic about their futures, according to the General Social Survey, a biannual survey conducted by NORC at the University of Chicago. Just 45 percent say their family will have a good chance of improving their economic position based on the way things are in America.

The divide is especially evident among those whites who self-identify as working class. Forty-nine percent say they think their children will do better than them, compared with 67 percent of nonwhites who consider themselves working class, even though the economic plight of minorities tends to be worse.

Although they are a shrinking group, working-class whites — defined as those lacking a college degree — remain the biggest demographic bloc of the working-age population. In 2012, Election Day exit polls conducted for the AP and the television networks showed working-class whites made up 36 percent of the electorate, even with a notable drop in white voter turnout.

Last November, Obama won the votes of just 36 percent of those noncollege whites, the worst performance of any Democratic nominee among that group since Republican Ronald Reagan's 1984 landslide victory over Walter Mondale.

Some Democratic analysts have urged renewed efforts to bring working-class whites into the political fold, calling them a potential "decisive swing voter group" if minority and youth turnout level off in future elections. "In 2016 GOP messaging will be far more focused on expressing concern for 'the middle class' and 'average Americans,'" Andrew Levison and Ruy Teixeira wrote recently in The New Republic.

"They don't trust big government, but it doesn't mean they want no government," says Republican pollster Ed Goeas, who agrees that working-class whites will remain an important electoral group. His research found that many of them would support anti-poverty programs if focused broadly on job training and infrastructure investment. This past week, Obama pledged anew to help manufacturers bring jobs back to America and to create jobs in the energy sectors of wind, solar and natural gas.

"They feel that politicians are giving attention to other people and not them," Goeas said.


Well it's about time the Jews Media gave Aryans at least SOME attention.  Not that this will help us much, but at least it's something, which is better than nothing - which is what we've gotten so far. Whites shouldn't count on ZOG for anything simply because nothing is likely to come of it.

Comrades the only ones we can count on is OURSELVES.  If WE don't take action then no one else is likely to.

National Socialism saved our race once and it can do it again.  How?

First of all we withdraw from the "global economy" and stand on our own two feet again.  We can do some trading, but for the most part there isn't anything we need that we can't provide for ourselves from food to oil.

We must nationalize the Federal Reserve Bank.  In an economy as large as ours a central bank is necessary, but it should be government run and no private-for-profit.  Any man with half a brain can realize that the government jobbing out the handling of our money to a for-profit-bank cannot possibly be cheaper than government run. To be viable any government financial institution such as a central bank need only be self-supporting.  But a private bank needs to be self-supporting PLUS show a profit.  How can that possibly be cheaper?  It can't. We've got to dislodge the filthy hooks of the greedy banksters.

We stop the outsourcing.  In an NS state we would let the big corporations know that they will stop sending jobs overseas and reopen factories here.  They will NOT raise their prices to compensate for the reduction in profit.  They will be satisfied with less profit.  If they won't play ball we simply nationalize them and run them ourselves.

We must also bring back mandatory military service.  Serving one's country for four years should be required for all able bodied men and women.

We must overhaul the education system.  We must stop gearing all of education for the college bound. Not is everyone suited for it.  Those who are but cannot afford it should receive government subsidies based on ability to pay.  Perhaps we could do like the state of Oregon is doing now.  All state colleges have free tuition.  Students agree to pay the state a percentage of what they earn after graduation with no interest until the state is reimbursed.  If they can't find a job, they pay nothing until they do. If Oregon can do it, then every state can as well.  The problem with that is the banks that make student loans are very unhappy about this.  I say TOUGH SH*T.

Those who are not suited for college should be given REAL vocational training (not just "shop" classes). After high school graduation they should go into apprenticeship and get paid to train.  Many countries already do this such as Germany and Japan.  Interesting how they are both former Axis Powers.  We can do the same.

Comrades I've only listed a small part of what can be done when the government works for the best interests of the 99%.  But it will NEVER happen unless we take action and MAKE it happen.  By supporting the ANP you are helping to make the dream a reality.  HAIL VICTORY!

Dan 88!

Monday, July 29, 2013

Racial Psychology: Why Do Black People Want to be White?

Imagine if, tomorrow morning, you woke up and found that every white woman you saw was wearing an Afro wig and had painted themselves black.
Not just one white woman, or even a few, or a “trend,” but EVERY white woman.
What would you think?
Would you think there was something strange going on?
Would you not wonder what would drive every white woman to want to hide their natural hair and deliberately adopt another race’s physical features?
You would, no doubt, think it very weird.
If every white woman you saw was “trying to be black,” you would correctly assume that there was some deep, dark, psychological process at work.
Perhaps some sort self-hatred, envy, desire to emulate . . . something.
Doubtless there would be TV shows about the phenomenon, about what psychological sea-change had occurred to make this happen . . .
Yet strangely enough, almost all black people today have gone to the most extreme measures to appear as white as possible—and no-one has dared to explain it on a racial psychological level – except, of course, to blame white people for “racism.”
Black hair straighteners, or “relaxers” as they are now deviously called, have flooded the world market. They are as common in Africa as they are amongst black populations in Europe and America.
Everywhere you look, African females suddenly have straight or “good” hair, as they call it.
The black comedian Chris Rock has even made a film about the phenomenon, called “Good Hair” which revealed that his community spends $5,000 per treatment to get “good” (i.e. straight) hair and that the industry is worth $9 billion a year in America alone.
You hardly see a “natural” haired African person any more.
Not only the females, but also the men.
obama-change1Black males, such as President Barack Obama, now keep their hair closely cropped to avoid being seen with “African” hair.
In addition, skin lighteners are all the rage, with a lighter skin tone being openly acknowledged as being “better” and associated with beauty and intelligence amongst black communities.
The Associated Press recently looked into why and how more and more people in Jamaica’s slums are “using skin bleaching cream to ‘lighten’ their complexions. Skin lightening is nothing new, especially in third world countries in Africa and also in India, which boasts the biggest marketplace for these dangerous creams.” According to the AP, “hardcore bleachers use illegal ointments smuggled into the Caribbean country that contain toxins like mercury, a metal that blocks production of melanin, which give skin its color, but can also be toxic.”
Hair relaxers are also dangerous chemicals which “work” by breaking the bonds which naturally strengthen hair. In other words, “straight” hair on Africans is chemically-damaged hair.
side-products1There are numerous side effects to hair relaxers, varying from extreme scalp burns to hair loss. One of the “unknown” side products (unknown to white people, at least) is something called “Temple Balm” which is applied to the temples of black females in an attempt to generate a full head of hair as part of the illusion.
White people are also mostly ignorant of the extent to which blacks wear wigs as part of their everyday wardrobe.  In fact, most “long” hair that one sees on black females today is a wig or what is called a “hair extension” (fake or human hair bonded into the wearer’s real hair to create the illusion of long flowing locks).
This process actually requires glue and adhesive, another “side product” virtually unknown to white people.
The big questions remain:
(1) why do black people, en masse, want to look like white people? And
(2) what would people say if ALL white females wanted to have Afro hair?
To answer the first question, some liberals and black activists have resorted to the old standby excuse: blame white “racism.”
This line first came to prominence in the 1960s, during the famous “Brown vs Board of Education,” which was a school desegregation court case in America. Part of the proceedings including a film of an experiment conducted by black activist Kenneth Clark.
Black children were shown two identical dolls, one dark-skinned and the other white-skinned. When asked which one they preferred, almost all chose white doll. This was presented to the court as “evidence” of racial stereotyping which segregation had caused, and was pivotal in persuading the court to order desegregation (the events are detailed outlined in Carleton Putnams’s book, Race and Reality).
The argument was that black children aspired to be white because of “racism” and segregation, and that if they were allowed to mix freely with whites, this sense of self-inferiority would vanish.
The interesting part is that this experiment was conducted once again in 2007 in New York City by a young black filmmaker, Kiri Davis. Using identical props, young black kids at a school in the city were asked to choose the “best” doll.
Six decades after desegregation, the results were identical.
The black children said that the white dolls were better and that the black dolls were bad. They even identified themselves with the black dolls, when specifically asked. The video, which unintentionally also reveals many other racial psychological insights, can be seen here.  [I recommend you  all click on the link and watch the video.  The results are very interesting.  It's about 7 minutes. - Dan]
In other words, sixty years plus of desegregation has not done away with the black desire to be white – and this is nowhere better reflected than in the huge hair relaxer and skin lightener business.
The blame for a “desire to be white” can therefore no longer be put at the door of “segregation” (i.e. white people’s fault.)
The real reason for the white doll experiment results, the hair relaxer and skin lightener craze, is simply that the white aesthetic norm is desired by all races.
This is the simple fact, and it is nothing short of wicked and malicious to “blame” white people for this reality.
If tomorrow morning, all white women started applying chemicals to themselves to look black and started wearing Afro wigs, society would question their psychological well-being, not blame black people.
The time is surely long past for some racial reality in the world today.
Recommended reading:  Race and Reason: A Yankee View and Race and Reality: A Search for Solutions by Carelton Putnam. Both these classic works are now back in print from Ostara Publications.
The author was one of America’s foremost writers on racial matters. Holding science and law degrees from Princeton and Columbia universities, he was founder and president of Chicago & Southern Airlines, which later merged with another company to become Delta Air Lines. Putnam served as chief executive of Delta, and remained a director until his death in 1998.
Race and Reason was his first book which explained the reality of race in the face of a determined assault on racial realism in the 1960s. Written in question and answer format, this book answers every liberal argument on race with passion, reason, compassion, and intellect. It is a testament to the fact that some people, at least, understood racial dynamics at the height of the “civil rights” assault on Western Civilization.
Race and Reality is the sequel to his earlier work, Race and Reason. Written in the form of a midnight soliloquy, Race and Reality recounts the author’s experiences with the scientific hierarchy. It reviews the evidence for racial differences, the crisis facing the white world, and tells the inside story of the Stell trial and explores the methods by which the truth about it has been evaded and ignored.
Finally, in a question and answer section similar to that in Race and Reason, it deals with the scores of related issues which so often confuse the central problem. In the last two chapters, it focuses on that problem and proposes a solution.
I haven't got all that much to say except if Black people aspire to look like the Aryan norm, how is this our fault?  No one is forcing them to straighten their hair or lighten their skin.  And after over 50 years - from a time when segregation was the law to a time when there is no segregation and we have Black doctors, lawyers, scientists, teachers, not to mention our Black president and our Black Attorney General, why are the results the same?  
Of course there are many cases of White teenagers "acting" Black  (Whiggers), but that's not the same as trying to LOOK Black.  Besides, most of these kids grow out of it anyway when they get a little older and more mature.
This brings to mind an old TV commercial for a woman's beauty product.  Some supermodel appears on screen and says, "Don't hate me because I'm beautiful."  It's the same for the Aryan race.  IF we are the most attractive race - and I said IF - it's not our fault.  Perhaps this is one of the reasons non-Whites want us to become extinct.  Get rid of the object of envy and you get rid of the envy.  If they succeed in getting rid of us I think they'll be in for a rude awakening.
Dan 88!

Sunday, July 28, 2013

Another First For Whitey!

Found after 10,000 years: the world’s first calendar

Humans had a sophisticated calendrical system thousands of years earlier than previously thought, according to new research.

The discovery is based on a  detailed analysis of data from an archaeological site in northern Scotland – a row of ancient pits which archaeologists believe is the world’s oldest calendar. It is almost five thousand years older than its nearest rival – an ancient calendar from Bronze Age Mesopotamia.

Created by Stone Age Britons some 10,000 years ago, archaeologists believe that the complex of pits was designed to represent the months of the year and the lunar phases of the month. They believe it also allowed the observation of the mid-winter sunrise – in effect the birth of the new year – so that the lunar calendar could be annually re-calibrated to bring it back into line with the solar year.

Remarkably the monument was in use for some 4,000 years – from around 8,000BC (the early Mesolithic period)  to around 4,000BC (the early Neolithic).

The pits were periodically re-cut – probably dozens of times, possibly hundreds of times – over those four millennia. It is therefore impossible to know whether or not they originally held  timber posts or standing stones after they were first dug 10,000 years ago. However variations in the depths of the pits suggest that the arc had a complex design -  with each lunar month potentially divided into three roughly ten day ‘weeks’ – representing the waxing moon,  the gibbous/full moon and the waning moon.

The  50 metre long row of 12 main pits was arranged as an arc facing a v-shaped dip in the horizon out of which the sun rose on mid-winter’s day. There are 12.37 lunar  cycles (lunar months) in a solar year – and the archaeologists believe that each pit represented a particular month, with the entire arc representing a year.

The 12 pits may also have played a second role by representing the lunar month. Mirroring the phases of the moon, the waxing and the waning of which takes 29 and half days, the succession of pits, arranged in a shallow arc  (perhaps symbolizing the movement of the moon across the sky), starts small and shallow at one end, grows  in diameter and depth towards the middle of the arc and then wanes in size at the other end.

In its role as an annual calendar (covering 12 months – one for each pit), a pattern of alternating pit depths suggests that adjacent months may have been paired in some way, potentially reflecting some sort of dualistic cosmological belief system – known in the ethnographic and historical record in many parts of the world, but not previously detected archaeologically from the Stone Age.

Keeping track of time would have been of immense economic and spiritual use to the hunter gatherer communities of the Mesolithic period. Their calendar would have helped them to pinpoint the precise time that animal herds could be expected to migrate or the most likely time that salmon might begin to run.

But Stone Age communal leaders – potentially including Shamans – may also have used the calendar to give themselves the appearance of being able to predict or control the seasons or the behaviour of the moon and the sun.

The site – at Warren Field, Crathes, Aberdeenshire –  was excavated in 2004 by the National Trust for  Scotland, but the data was only analysed in detail over the past six months using the specially written software which permitted an interactive exploration of the relationship between the 12 pits, the local topography and the movements of the moon and the sun.

The analysis has been carried out by a team of specialists led by Professor Vincent Gaffney of the University of Birmingham.

“The research demonstrates that Stone Age society 10,000 years ago was much more sophisticated than we had previously suspected. The site has implications for the way we  understand how Mesolithic society developed in economic, social and cosmological terms, ” said Professor Gaffney.

“The evidence suggests that hunter-gatherer societies in Scotland had both the need and sophistication to track time across the years, to correct for seasonal drift of the lunar year and that this occurred nearly 5000 years before the first formal calendars known in the Near East. In doing so, this illustrates one important step towards the formal construction of time and therefore history itself,” he said.


The heck with the Mayans and their "Apocalypto".  Once again our people have proven their genius and ingenuity.

An old friend of mine who is living in Scotland at the time sent this to me.  Thanks comrade.

Dan 88!

Saturday, July 27, 2013

DHS Ignores Detailed Border Analysis

A new investigative report from the Arizona Republic has found that the Department of Homeland Security has refused to consider academic analysis of the situation along the Southwest border with Mexico and has refused to move forward with proposed analysis that would provide the agency with much needed data. The report states, "DHS officials don't want to know, and don't want the public to know" what's really happening along the border.
"There is zero interest in that kind of analysis among DHS' leadership," economist Bryan Roberts, who served as the agency's assistant director of the Office of Program Analysis and Evaluation until 2010, told the Arizona Republic. "There was no interest when I was there, and there still isn't any." 
Through Freedom of Information requests, the Arizona Republic has found that up to and possibly more than three-quarters of migrants who try to cross the border make it into the United States eventually. Migrants will continue to try to cross the border even if they're caught and sent back to Mexico. It's also found evidence that the consequences for entering the country illegally, including the 5- to 10-year bars, have little impact on cutting down on repeat illegal crossings despite the costs. The investigation also found that fencing and the number of border agents have had little to no impact as well. Instead, it's driven migrants to more dangerous parts of the border that are less guarded by Border Patrol.
The Department of Homeland Security basis its success on apprehensions along the border. The Schumer-Obama amnesty bill, S.744, that passed through the Senate would require a 90% apprehension rate, but that only considers the illegal crossers that DHS knows about and omits the illegal crossers the agency doesn't know about. 
A recent study conducted by the National Academy of Sciences found that three-quarters of illegal crossers made it into the United States over the time period studies while DHS reported an 85-90% apprehension rate over the same time period.
"Almost everybody who really tries eventually gets in," Jeffrey Passel, a member of the panel and a senior demographer at the Pew Hispanic Center, told the Arizona Republic.
The National Academy of Science said DHS ignored the study even though it was the one that commissioned the study.
The report also found that there is little cooperation between the different immigration enforcement agencies within DHS to determine the true effectiveness of current border patrol efforts. 
For more information, see the Arizona Republic.
I love these stories that serve to prove that the government doesn't give a damn what the people want.  The people want secure borders.  The government is NOT securing them and they don't even want to hear about.  Gotta keep that source of cheap labour flowing don't they?
The only form of government that listens to its people is National Socialism.  
In NS Germany the people wanted racial purity.  The government gave it to them.  What, you didn't think that Anti-Semitism began with Hitler did you?  It's ALWAYS been there.  The Holohoax was NOT an attempt at mass genocide, but it was an attempt to encourage Jews to leave Germany and those that didn't were relocated to Work Camps.  Didn't the United States do the same to Japanese Americans?  You bet your boots they did.  Japanese were encouraged to go back to Japan, and those that didn't were sent to "Relocation Camps".  Did they sit on their asses in these camps?  Not on your life.  They were put to work.  I've visited the Japanese Relocation Camp at Manzanar, California.  It had barracks, communal toilets, fences with barbed wire, guard towers.  Except for the desert landscape it looked amazingly like the photos of Auschwitz I've seen.  But I digress.
The people wanted secure borders.  Hitler gave it to them.
They wanted job security and they got it.  In Nazi Germany no one could be fired from their jobs unless it was for cause (incompetence, insubordination, or racial/political undesirability). They couldn't be fired because their boss didn't like them or because the boss's daughter just got married and her husband is out of work and he wants to let you go and give his son-in-law your job (the latter happened to me once).
The people wanted fair paid vacation.  Hitler instituted the first standard three weeks a year vacation.  Hitler felt everyone needed two weeks a year for their health, plus a week to piss away like taking a day off to go to traffic court, or a three day weekend to attend your sister's wedding, and other similar things.
Let's not forget the "Strength Through Joy" program which offered government subsidized vacations on cruise ships and to resorts like Bad Tolz and Baden Baden.  Can you imagine a gardener being able to afford a cruise ship?  In NS Germany they could with the government's help.
The point is that the German government listened to its people.  The government today listens only to their Judeo-Capitalist masters.
Dan 88!

Friday, July 26, 2013

The Check's In The Mail?

Comrades, I certainly hope it is.  I'm referring to your monthly pledge.  Of course you can't send in a check. I'm just using the most commonly used sentence when a bill collector calls:  The check's in the mail. August will be here in less than a week, so if your July pledge isn't in the mail don't be surprised if you don't get your next copy of the White Worker.  If you are truly strapped this month at least email HQ and let them know. Even a dollar is better than nothing and it shows your dedication.  Even if you can't afford $10 this month surely you can afford a symbolic pledge of $1.

On our last ANP Radio Show Chairman Suhayda mentioned a few problems that I have never gone over on this blog regarding mailing in pledges and I thought it would be a good idea to do so.  I had to go through some of these same problems when I was teaching, like going blind every weekend trying to decipher my students' chicken scratchings on their essays.

Firstly, when you address your envelope do it clearly.  If  your handwriting is sloppy then print it - and print it clearly.  What's the difference?  Well you want the post office to be able to read it.  If they can read neither the address nor the return address they send it to the Dead Letter Office.  That's where they send undeliverable mail.  They keep it awhile (I don't know how long but I think it's a year) in case someone comes looking for it.  Then it goes to recycle and it's gone forever.  Also HQ needs to be able to read the return address so we know who it came from.  Sure your signature is on your money order but often signatures are even harder to read.  If we don't know who sent a particular pledge in, they don't get credit for it.  We're not psychics.

Secondly, it's a good idea to fold a piece of paper around your money order so it can't be seen by holding the envelope up to the light.  There are a lot of sticky fingers about - especially if you make out the money order to CASH.  It's safer to make it out to ANP.  Less chance of the wrong person cashing it.  I can't speak for the rest of the country but here in California there are no more "No ID Required" check cashing places.  I don't know about other states.  But if they still have them then anyone could cash it in so it's best to hide it within the envelope by folding a piece of paper around it or by using a smaller envelope.

Thirdly, just licking the envelope isn't enough.  For one thing people often lick too much and later the envelope comes open.  Also it's easy for someone like the PO or even the NSA to open your envelope and examine the contents, then reseal and put it back in the mail.  If you both lick your envelope and put scotch tape on it there is no way anyone can get a hold of your envelope and open it and reseal it without your knowing it.

Fourthly, I've been told that many OS have been slacking off on doing their monthly activity report. Comrades the activity report is not voluntary - it is REQUIRED.  People don't like to do it because - unless they are willing to falsify it - HQ will know who is doing things like handing out literature and who is blowing it off.  But that's the whole point.  We want to know who is working and who is not.  Even if you do as much as I do it only takes me about ten minutes.  If all you did was hand out 100 pieces of literature all you have to do is put your name and the month in question and "Gave out 100 pieces of literature."  We don't need an essay on how you did it.  That won't take more than a minute or two.  So please comrades, let's get those activity reports in.

Finally, let's also fill out and return that small form you get every month along with your White Worker.  It only takes a couple of minutes.  Unfortunately every organization has to do a certain amount of boring paperwork to stay organized.

Thank you comrades for putting up with this boring post.

Dan 88!

Thursday, July 25, 2013

National Review Is Back to Warning White People About Black People

Elspeth Reeve July 23, 2013

Fifteen months after The National Review ended its relationship with longtime writer John Derbyshire for an essay he wrote for in which he instructs his children to be afraid of black people, the conservative magazine has published Victor Davis Hanson's version of the same article. It is unlikely Hanson will meet the same fate as his former colleague.

What's changed? Well, all the attention on the killing of Trayvon Martin and the trial and acquittal of George Zimmerman and the hardening of stances on the merits of racial stereotyping. Derbyshire's piece was a response to several essays written in the aftermath of Martin's death about "The Talk" that black parents give their sons about how to deal with with white police officers and other authority figures. In "The Talk: Nonblack Version," Derbyshire wrote, "There is a talk that nonblack Americans have with their kids, too." In his talk, he said, he told his children that they should "Avoid concentrations of blacks" who are strangers, "Stay out of heavily black neighborhoods," "Do not act the Good Samaritan to blacks in apparent distress," and "If accosted by a strange black in the street, smile and say something polite but keep moving."
In The National Review on Tuesday, Hanson notes that Attorney General Eric Holder told the NAACP that George Zimmerman's acquittal meant he had to give his son "The Talk," about how black people are assumed to be violent by some white people and thus at great risk for harm. Hanson says, "Yet I fear that for every lecture of the sort that Holder is forced to give his son, millions of non-African-Americans are offering their own versions of ensuring safety to their progeny." Hanson does not try to be funny, the way Derbyshire did, and he doesn't make the same kind of vague warnings about a simmering race war. (Derbyshire said about 5 percent of blacks were "ferociously hostile to whites," and another 50 percent or so of them would go along out of solidarity and becaue they think white people have it coming.) But his basic idea is the same: watch out for black kids.
Hanson says his father — a Democrat! — told him once, "When you go to San Francisco, be careful if a group of black youths approaches you." Hanson continues:
Note what he did not say to me. He did not employ language like “typical black person.” He did not advise extra caution about black women, the elderly, or the very young — or about young Asian Punjabi, or Native American males.  In other words, the advice was not about race per se, but instead about the tendency of males of one particular age and race to commit an inordinate amount of violent crime.
It was after some first-hand episodes with young African-American males that I offered a similar lecture to my own son.
When he was a grad student, Hanson says, two black guys tried to break into his apartment while he was in it. Another time, four black guys tried to steal his bike while he was on it.  "Regrettably, I expect that my son already has his own warnings prepared to pass on to his own future children," he says.
This is dumb and not very polite, The Atlantic's Ta-Nehisi Coates writes, but also does not actually make Hanson's kids safe. 
If I were to tell you that I only employ Asian-Americans to do my taxes because "Asian-Americans do better on the Math SAT," you would not simply question my sensitivity, but my mental faculties. That is because you would understand that in making an individual decision, employing an ancestral class of millions is not very intelligent. Moreover, were I to tell you I wanted my son to marry a Jewish woman because "Jews are really successful," you would understand that statement for the stupidity which it is.
But racism makes people do dumb things, Coates writes. So does politics. There have been pretty clear political "sides" to the Trayvon Martin case ever since President Obama spoke about him in March 2012.Coates wrote last fall:
As civil-rights activists descended on Florida, National Review, a magazine that once opposed integration, ran a column proclaiming“Al Sharpton Is Right.” The belief that a young man should be able to go to the store for Skittles and an iced tea and not be killed by a neighborhood-­watch patroller seemed un­controversial…
The moment Obama spoke, the case of Trayvon Martin passed out of its national-mourning phase and lapsed into something darker and more familiar—racialized political fodder.
Since the Zimmerman verdict, many people have defended racial profiling as the right reaction to crime rates — black people have a higher crime rate, though it is dropping, as it is with other demographics. The Washington Post's Richard Cohen did, so did Kathleen Parker, calling it "common sense." The racial debate intensified again after Obama's speech last Friday, when he said "Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago." Several people pointed out that black people commit crimes too, and why didn't Obama mention that? "If you think of the young mother whose 2-year-old son was shot in the face by the two black teens that approached her in Atlanta and that baby had died, why do presidents choose to speak about one case and not the other?" former George W. Bush press secretary Dana Perino said on Sunday. Hanson points out that black men allegedly robbed a jewelry store the same day Holder gave his talk:
What were the names of two of the men suspected of being the ones who last week shot it out with the Santa Rosa jeweler as Eric Holder demagogued the Trayvon Martin shooting?
Traveon Banks-Austin and Alexander Tyvon Brandon.And so the tragedy continues.
They had similar names, so... so that must mean something, right?

And Fox News' Bill O'Reilly said on Monday night, "The sad truth is that from the president on down, our leadership has no clue, no clue at all about how to solve problems within the black community." The real problem black people face is not white racism, he said, but instead, "The reason there is so much violence and chaos in the black precincts is the disintegration of the African-American family." This is about personal choice, not oppression, O'Reilly said — "White people don't force black people to have babies out of wedlock" — except in the case of the liberal entertainment industry, which "encourages the irresponsibility by marketing a gangster culture, hip hop, movies, trashy TV shows to impressionable children." He continued, "President Obama has welcomed some of the worst offenders in that cesspool to the White House when he should be condemning what these weasels are doing. These so-called entertainers get rich while the kids who emulate their lyrics and attitude destroy themselves." Get it?  Maybe the black president, in some small way, is the one who's really responsible for some black crime, too. 


Mr. O'Reilly is quite right.  In Black culture as in Hip Hop and Gangsta, gangs are painted out to be cool and heroes of the ghetto.  And the ghetto itself is painted out to be the cool place to be.  There are many impressionable children - both White and Non-White who buy into all of this hook, line, and sinker - most of whom have never even seen a real ghetto.

But once again Whitey is made the scapegoat for all of the Black's problems.  It's never their fault it's always ours.

There are plenty of Black Americans out there that are fine decent people.  But  I ask all Blacks to pretend for a moment you are not Black, take a step back and take a good hard look objectively at what is known as "Black Culture" ie Hip Hop, Gangsta, Reggae, Rap and tell me what you see.  What I see is glorified violence, drugs, street gangs made into heroes, extreme clothing (such as wearing clothing two or three times too big and/or with your pants below your ass with your boxer shorts showing) and extreme hair styles (such as corn rows or shaving elaborate designs in your crew cut), and boys taught that women are "Ho's" and should be treated that way.  If Blacks could see their culture as White people do they just may not like what they see.

Many thanks to Comrade Dr. Johann Hauptmann for sending this article to me.

Dan 88!

Wednesday, July 24, 2013

GOP's Issa, US Postal Service Plan End to Home Delivery

Image: GOP's Issa, US Postal Service Plan End to Home Delivery

Tuesday, 23 Jul 2013 11:03 AM
By Melanie Batley

Mail delivery to the doorstep may be a thing of the past as lawmakers consider ways to cut costs to save the cash-strapped U.S. Postal Service, which lost $16 billion in 2012.

According to CNN Money, the agency is working toward a more "centralized delivery" approach in which residents pick up their mail from a mailbox at the curb or at clusters of mailboxes within their neighborhoods. 

The practice already is being adopted for new houses and developments, and some House Republicans want it rolled out universally.

"A balanced approach to saving the Postal Service means allowing USPS to adapt to America's changing use of mail," said Rep. Darrell Issa, the California Republican leading the House effort to save the Postal Service. 

Doing away with doorstep delivery has become a central part of Issa's proposal to save money. Ending door-to-door deliveries would save $4.5 billion a year from the $30 billion the mail service currently spends on delivery. 

How? Right now, 35 million residences and businesses get mail delivered to their doorstep. CNN reports that it costs $353 per stop for a delivery in most American cities, taking into account such things as salaries and cost of transport. 

Curbside-mailbox delivery costs $224, and cluster boxes cost $160, according to a report from the Postal Service Office of Inspector General cited by CNN.

In addition to the $16 billion lost by the agency last year, it twice defaulted on payments owed to the federal government to prefund retiree healthcare benefits totaling $11 billion. The agency also has exhausted a $15 billion line of credit from the U.S. Treasury. 

Nevertheless, the plan has received criticism from unions, which say it would be disruptive for the elderly and disabled, and from otehrs who claim it would be inconvenient and possibly unsafe.

"It's madness," Jim Sauber, chief of staff for the National Association of Letter Carriers, told CNN. "The idea that somebody is going to walk down to their mailbox in Buffalo, N.Y., in the winter snow to get their mail is just crazy."

Others, such as industry groups, support the idea as an alternative to the proposal of cutting Saturday service, which the service floated earlier this year before reversing the decision. 

The Postal Service also continues to struggle with mail volume, especially drops in first-class mail, its big revenue driver, as more Americans move to electronic bill-pay and e-mail. To many critics, the service has become little more than a junk-mail delivery service. 


The very idea that the USPS would even consider ending doorstep delivery may seem outrageous to some but consider a few things.  Last year the USPS lost $16 Billion.  At that rate it CANNOT sustain itself much longer.

For most Americans a more centralized delivery spot should not be a problem.  In my mobile home park they could set up a set of boxes like PO Boxes down at the clubhouse.  I live furtherest away from there, yet it would take me less than ten minutes to walk down and pick up my mail and get back.  Better yet, I could pick it up going to or coming from work.

You don't want to have to walk to your box in the cold and snow?  Want a little cheese with your whine?  I wouldn't have a problem walking a few minutes in 115 degree heat, so I don't see a problem with the cold either.

The only ones it would be a problem for are shut ins such as some elderly and disabled persons. These people could qualify for door step delivery because of their condition.  The rest of us can get off of our fat asses and walk a few minutes to get our mail.

I know we are letting go of a more than 200 year old service, but how much do we really need it?  I pay all my bills by computer.  The only obligation I have that I need the USPS for is sending in my monthly pledge to the ANP.  I don't have to have a mailbox right in front of my house.  I can walk a few minutes to mail it. The only thing I receive in the mail (not counting Christmas cards) is my copy of the White Worker.  Literally 95% of my mail is junk mail that I don't even look at.  It goes right from my mailbox to my recycle pile without it even getting a second look.  I'm sure most of you do the same.

As long as acommodatioons for the elderly and disabled are made, I don't have a problem with this plan.

Dan 88!

Tuesday, July 23, 2013

How Much Compassion Should We Show?

From NumbersUSA
Speaker Boehner and Majority Leader Cantor have made it fairly clear that they want to give some kind of amnesty to illegal aliens who were brought here when they were young.
    I would feel a lot better about the "compassion" of Speaker Boehner and Majority Leader Cantor if they would acknowledge that they are trying to clean up a mess made by:

  • the illegal-alien parents who knowingly violated their visitors visas or illegally crossed the borders and kept their children here long enough for it to be a hardship to go back to their home country,

  • tens of thousands of employers who broke the law and provided jobs to the parents of these young illegal residents,

  • Presidents Bush One, Clinton, Bush Two and Obama who refused to aggressively enforce laws to punish the illegal employers and allowed the illegal-alien parents to hold jobs for years that provided the ability to sink their children's roots into this country and diminish roots with their home country,

  • the 1995-96 Congress that was persuaded by corporate lobbyists to turn down legislation containing the recommendations of the bi-partisan U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform that would have prevented most of the illegal immigration that has since brought the "kids" into this country,

  • every Congress since 1996 that has refused to enact a robust and comprehensive E-Verify workplace verification system to keep illegal-alien parents from being able to earn a living to plant their kids long enough for them to forget their home countries.

  • all the religious, business, media, academic and rights organization voices that have fought nearly every enforcement effort the last 20 years to halt illegal immigration and to keep foreign citizens from illegally putting down roots here. All of them have passively or actively encouraged millions of foreign citizens not only to break our immigration laws but often to risk their and their kids' lives in doing so.
Let's urge Speaker Boehner and Leader Cantor to acknowledge that those are the culprits who created the compelling victims that have captured your compassion this week. If Boehner and Cantor don't acknowledge their complicity, the American people have no reason to believe that you won't push an action that will create more of the very thing you say you are trying to solve.
The kids may be innocent, but there are a lot of guilty people in their stories.
You don't repeat the mistakes that created the current predicament. You halt rewards and incentives for people to live illegally in this country for long periods. You make it much more difficult to get into this country illegally and much easier for the government to track you if you do.
    Here's the list:

  • No more jobs for unauthorized foreign citizens: Mandatory E-Verify for every employer. Robust programs by the Social Security Administration to use no-match letters and multiple-use notifications to combat identity fraud and legacy illegal employment.

  • No more benefits for unauthorized foreign citizens: An end to Earned Income Tax Credits and other public non-emergency benefits for people illegally in this county.

  • Know who is in the country illegally: Fully implemented entry/exit system for every visitor at every land crossing, airport and seaport. This won't mean every visa over-stayer will be immediately located, but they will be known and then identified as soon as they try to engage any number of financial, government, transportation computer systems.

  • A truly secure border: The exact criteria can be worked out. If all of the above are met, I'm willing to be satisfied when the ranchers along the border say they and their property now feel safe.
After 27 years of broken promises in seven amnesties, two other major immigration bills and dozens of pronouncements during presidential and congressional floor speeches, the American people don't deserve to keep their country if they are willing to trust even one more promise about enforcement.
We have learned that the only way to trust that the government will implement enforcement is when it is already implemented.
No amnesty involving work permits and benefits can be considered for the "kids" as long as any of the above has not been fully implemented. We know from a quarter-century of experience that the minute the kids get their amnesty the chief promoters of that amnesty will turn their energies to blocking all additional enforcement.
To grant amnesty before all the enforcement is implemented would be to entice a giant new wave of illegal immigration of parents from all over the world to get their own kids ready for the next amnesty.
I'm not going to bother much with the nonsense that nobody gets hurt when amnesties are granted.
The one or two million younger illegal aliens who might get an amnesty would be competing directly with under-30-age Americans who many economists fear will be a Lost Generation economically because of their incredibly low labor participation rates. Every indication is that most of the younger illegal aliens are less educated and will remain less-educated whether or not they are legalized. That means they will be competing for jobs with less-educated Americans who already suffer the worst unemployment in the country and they will be seeking jobs in occupations where real wages have been declining for three decades.
It is quite possible to argue -- as I have for several years -- that large numbers of young illegal aliens do indeed have compelling cases for some kind of amnesty.
Those Americans whose philosophy is one of radical individualism can argue that these compelling cases deserve an amnesty regardless of the consequences to the members of our national community.
I argue, however, from a community-oriented ethic that the compelling cases of the younger illegal aliens are still secondary to the compelling cases of members of our national community who also suffer in this economy and whose suffering would be made worse by an amnesty.
At this point of the debate, large numbers of Americans can find no reason to go any further in considering an amnesty; there simply is no justification for inflicting harm on one's fellow citizens.
Others, though, are interested to see if there is a way to minimize the harm so that both kinds of compelling cases can receive relief.
The main harm of such an amnesty would be in the numbers. How many extra potential laborers are being added to the legal labor pool?
Thus, the key way to minimize harm is to reduce the net additions to the labor pool.
    Fortunately, the bi-partisan U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform identified two easy categories of immigration to eliminate:

  • Chain migration of relatives who are not a spouse or a minor child.

  • The Visa Lottery that raffles off permanent work permits and path to citizenship to people in countries that have the weakest ties to the American people.
Chain Migration was established in the late 1950s and opened to the entire world in 1965, while the Lottery was established in 1990 in the bill that created the Immigration Surge that continues to this day.
Neither serves any national interest. Both fill the labor pools with foreign citizens with almost no regard to education or skill.
At the point that any amnesty might be implemented, there would at the least need to be a reduction in green card categories to lessen the future in-flow of foreign workers as an off-set to all the additional foreign workers added through the amnesty.
That just about covers it all.  But how much compassion should we show?  If we give these Dreamer Kids an amnesty and a pathway to citizenship as in the Senate Bill, as soon as they became citizens the first thing they would do is sponsor their parents and any sibling who didn't qualify for the amnesty on some technicality to get their green cards.  Then they'd sponsor relatives from Mexico.  In other words:  Chain migration.
In addition to that we'd be encouraging more illegals to come up from Mexico and wait for the next amnesty.
As to the Mexican government officials who have called our anti-immigration efforts racist let me say that if you took better care of your citizens they wouldn't be trying to sneak in here all the time.  Mexico is a poor country?  Why is it so poor?  Mexico has quite a lot of oil.  If there wasn't so much corruption and incompetence in the government (way more than in this country) they would be able to properly take care of their people and give them decent lives IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY.
Dan 88!