Free Speech Directory || National Alliance Main Page
Privately the Clintonistas are irritated that White ranchers in Arizona have been interfering with the invasion, and that one of them, Roger Barnett, who owns a 22,000-acre cattle ranch near Douglas, Arizona, on the Mexican border, has arrested more than 3,000 illegal immigrants during the past two years and called attention to the government's willful failure to protect the border. The Clintonistas -- and by that term I mean all of those people, both inside the government and out, whose policies are supported by Bill Clinton and his government and who in turn approve of the government -- the Clintonistas want the invasion to continue, and they don't want anyone interfering with it. They also don't want anyone calling attention to it, because that might rouse public opposition to the invasion. The American public, or at least a substantial portion of the public might not believe the Clinton government's assertion that it is doing everything it can to protect our borders, but somehow just can't keep the mestizos from invading the United States. They've been hoping for the past two years that either Roger Barnett would be killed by some of the mestizos he was arresting or would kill a mestizo and could then be charged with murder and gotten out of the way. But Mr. Barnett is both a competent and a careful man, and he continues to be a thorn in the side of the Clintonistas.
So the Clintonistas now have taken the public position that they are concerned about "human rights" violations by vigilantes such as Barnett. They want to shift the public's perception from mass invasion to individual Mexicans who are being harassed by Barnett and other ranchers. That's just the sort of thing to distract the soccer moms and others who were captivated by the Elian Gonzales soap opera. In the hands of the Clintonista spin doctors the mestizo invasion has become a "human rights" problem. Bill Clinton's Jewish Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright, met with Mexico's Foreign Minister Rosario Green -- oy, veh!, did I say Green? That doesn't sound like a Mexican name, does it? Madeleine Albright met with Rosario Green last week to plan a joint strategy against the vigilantes who are arresting the illegal aliens. They issued a joint statement on May 18 condemning the American ranchers. They are considering asking the United Nations to post UN observers along the border to watch for "human rights" violations. In addition Rosario Green announced that she has hired lawyers in Washington to sue the ranchers on behalf of the illegal aliens. She said:
The government of Mexico will use all of the legal and political resources at its disposal to guarantee that any violation of the rights and dignity of Mexicans is investigated and, if applicable, penalized.
And Attorney General Janet Reno -- that's our attorney general, not Mexico's -- Janet Reno has pledged to help in gathering evidence to prosecute the ranchers.
You have to pinch yourself to be sure you're not dreaming when Alice in Wonderland statements of this sort come from Washington and are reported with a straight face by the media. The unfortunate fact is that Albright and Reno are officials of our government, and they are conspiring with an official of a foreign government to prosecute U.S. citizens for protecting their property against the depredations of foreign criminals. And Mexicans who cross our border illegally are criminals, plain and simple, despite the preference of the media and the Clinton government for the euphemism "undocumented migrants." So we have these female Clinton gangsters getting together in Washington with the female foreign minister of Mexico not to address the problem of mestizos from Mexico invading our country and trespassing on the property of U.S. citizens, but instead to figure out what to do about American ranchers violating the supposed "human rights" and "dignity" of illegal aliens. Albright and Reno and the other Clintonistas aren't concerned in the least about American sovereignty or the rights of U.S. citizens; that's too much a male thing. They're concerned only about keeping the flow of illegals coming and not hurting their feelings by making them feel unwelcome. As crazy as it sounds, that is what is happening. And soon we may have a United Nations "peackeeping" force on the border to shoot any American who tries to stop a mestizo from exercising his "human rights" by coming across the border.
Well, that's pretty bad, but I'll tell you something that's even worse, and that is the substantial element among ordinary citizens who don't see anything wrong with the invasion or with the government's way of dealing with it. Last week a patriotic Arizona resident who is fed up with the Clinton government's refusal to stop the flood of illegal immigrants put up a billboard in Cochise county, where Roger Barnett lives. He urged other residents to telephone their congressmen and to complain about the invasion. The state's biggest newspaper, the Arizona Republic, immediately published a statement by a trendy businessman in Bisbee, also in Cochise county, condemning the billboard as divisive and racist. There seems to be a big enough supply of such businessmen and preachers and bureaucrats around so that the media always can find one to make a statement of the sort they want.
Two weeks ago two illegal mestizos came up to the of home an American who lives in Brackettville, Texas, near the Mexican border. The area has been plagued by illegals breaking into homes, stealing everything not nailed down, and assaulting residents. The American homeowner, 74-year-old Samuel Blackwood, shot one of the illegals, who died. Blackwood was arrested and charged with murder. And I assure you, the local businessmen, politicians, preachers, and media people will see to it that he gets a judicial lynching, so that no one can suspect that they are racists. They'll behave just the way the establishment people in Jasper, Texas, did after three drunken rednecks dragged a Black behind their truck two years ago. A local judge, Herb Senne, commented on what he considered Blackwood's overreaction to the two illegals who came to his house:
Nobody likes to have their property stolen, but you just learn to adjust to it.
Really, that's an exact quote of what the judge said last week to a reporter for the Houston Chronicle: "You just learn to adjust to it." Don't try to defend yourself or your property. That's racist. That's male. Just adjust to having your property stolen. Just adjust to the trespassing. Just adjust to the invasion of your country by illegal mestizos. That's the safe, feminine thing to do. That's the Politically Correct thing to do.
That's the sort of reaction you might expect in New York City or in Washington, DC. But television has spread the sickness everywhere. There are people who dance to the media tune even in those areas most heavily impacted by the invasion. And that's what I really want to talk about today: not about the invasion of our country by mestizos, but about the reaction of our people to the invasion -- and to many other things that are being done to us. The question is: do we blame the Clinton government for the disaster which has befallen our country, or do we blame ourselves? After all, we elected this government -- twice. Even if we didn't vote for the piece of filth in the White House, we did nothing to stop him from what he is doing.
You know, the great bulk of our people always have lacked both judgment and principles. Most Americans have about as much moral sense as a brass doorknob. And I'm talking about your neighbors and colleagues and friends and relatives -- and mine. They have an instinct for conforming; for doing and saying what they think is expected of them; for adapting -- or as Judge Herb Senne of Brackettville, Texas, would put it -- for adjusting. And as I said, that's the way it's always been. We've always depended on a rather small minority to decide what is right and what is wrong, what is honorable and what is not, as well as what will benefit our race in the long run and what will not. When we had wise and good and honorable men as leaders, and when we followed their lead, our people prospered. If 225 years ago we'd had the sort of leaders we have today, Patrick Henry and Thomas Paine would have been locked up and forced to undergo sensitivity training, and we would have adjusted to King George's way of doing things. Well, on the bright side, at least, Bill Clinton wouldn't be in the White House, because there would be no White House.
So again: should we blame ourselves for being nothing but a worthless herd of lemmings, a herd which for the last few generations has failed to produce even a small minority of loyal and responsible leaders to show us the way? Or if the leaders were there and are there, should we blame ourselves for failing to heed them? Or should we look elsewhere for the cause of our disaster?
In trying to answer this very important question, let us note first that self-criticism often is a very beneficial thing. Only by recognizing our mistakes and shortcomings and studying them, analyzing them, can we hope for progress. The person who is unable to criticize himself or recognize his own faults -- the person who cannot blame himself for anything, but always blames others for his mistakes or failures -- will never be able to improve himself, because he cannot even admit the need for improvement. He always will be a loser and a failure. But above all, we must be objective in analyzing our problems. We must not be afraid to put the blame where it belongs because of some artificial taboo. Perhaps we are entirely to blame for our difficulties. On the other hand, perhaps someone else should share the blame for what has happened to us. If that is the case, let us not be afraid to say so. Our objective is to survive, and we must go wherever that objective leads us.
Having said that, I also should tell you that I believe that there is little to be gained by lambasting ourselves for being a herd of lemmings. There is little to be gained by bewailing human nature. We can change human nature only very slowly -- and with great caution -- over the course of generations. For now we must accept what we are and try to make the best of it. And if we think about the matter very carefully perhaps we will decide even that Mother Nature didn't really make a mistake in designing us as a race 98 per cent of whom are lemmings. That has its advantages as well as its dangers. It allows us to work together for a common purpose, for example, instead of having everyone running off in a separate direction.
So let's ask our question this way: Why have we not had good leadership during this century? Why have we followed crooks and liars with no regard for the welfare of our people, crooks and liars and charlatans who have led us into every sort of vice and degeneracy and false path and now are rushing us headlong down the slope to racial extinction? Why? What went wrong? Did natural flaws develop in our society, in the system by which we have governed ourselves, or has some external enemy laid us low? Is our society suffering from faulty design or from termites?
A quick answer is: both. Our society has design flaws which we must endeavor to correct, and it also has termites, which we must exterminate. To understand this answer and to elaborate on it, just look around. Look at other things which are happening to us besides the mestizo invasion and the government's refusal to stop that invasion. And when we think about what is happening, let us not focus entirely on what our people are doing which they shouldn't be doing; let us remember that most of our people do only what they are told to do, only what they are manipulated into doing, and so let us direct our inquiry primarily into who is manipulating them and how and why.
That, of course, is a very big inquiry. If you've been listening to my broadcasts for a while, you know that most of them have dealt with one aspect or another of this inquiry. Today we'll only have time for one aspect besides the immigration situation, and that's racial mixing. It's useful to look at that, because it leads us quickly to the heart of the termite problem -- because, you see, immediately behind the racemixing problem is the promotion of racemixing by the controlled media: the deliberate encouragement of racial mixing by Hollywood and Madison Avenue.
Whenever you study public behavior, whenever you study fashions and trends, you quickly realize that the basic principle is "monkey see, monkey do." If you want to encourage a certain trend, a certain fashion, a certain type of public behavior, you don't try to reason with the public. You don't lecture the public. Instead you present to the public as many images as you can of the sort of behavior you want to encourage, and the lemming instinct will do the rest. Have you seen some of the advertisements put out for an Italian clothing manufacturer under the name "United Colors of Benetton"? Their favorite theme is racial mixing between Whites and Blacks: a little redheaded, blue-eyed White girl holding a Black infant, a Black baby in diapers kissing a White baby, and so on. They started on that theme a couple of years ago, and they are pushing it more and more boldly. Well, the clothing company is Italian, but their advertising agency, Saatchi & Saatchi, based in London, is entirely Jewish from top to bottom.
The same urge to depict scenes of racial mixing is rampant among advertising agencies on this side of the Atlantic. The Jews of Madison Avenue love to use models of indeterminate race for the advertisements they design: quadroons and octoroons and various Eurasian blends. And they seem to have a rule that whenever there is a group scene, there must be Blacks in it. It's gotten to the point where the lemmings feel uncomfortable if they see an advertisement which shows an all-White scene. If they see an advertisement with a group of White children playing together, or a scene in an all-White classroom, the lemmings wonder where the Black child is that is practically obligatory these days for advertisements featuring children. And it's not just advertising. Every reporter with a camera covering a news story or a feature for a slick magazine is on the lookout for a Black in the crowd when he composes his shots -- and if he is lucky enough to be able to focus on an interracial couple, he knows that he will get bonus points from his boss. The idea is to remind the readers over and over and over again that we live in a multi-racial society, and, oh, isn't it wonderful! The idea is to make Blacks and other non-Whites seem like part of White society and to make racial mixing seem not only normal but trendy, fashionable. Even National Geographic Magazine has climbed onto the media bandwagon. Look at the photographs on pages 7 and 14 of the current June issue.
Even the advertising on boxes of breakfast cereal directed at children has the same, poisonous message. Not only does the advertising depict Black and White children together, it depicts White children dressing and behaving like Blacks: backward baseball caps, baggy shorts, Black jive talk, and adult Black rappers or basketball players as role models. The idea behind this advertising is not to sell more breakfast cereal to Blacks; it is to make White children feel that it is cool to be Black, that it is cool to be a part of the hip-hop culture, that it is cool to have a lot of Black friends, that it is cool to be a wigger.
And you know, this interracial advertising has not merely followed changes in our society; the advertising has led the changes. Traditionally the purpose of advertising is to persuade the public to buy a product. The advertiser seeks to make the customer not only want the product but to feel comfortable with it, to trust the manufacturer, and for this reason the advertiser seeks to avoid taboos, to avoid angering or alienating the customer. With the interracial advertising that certainly hasn't been the case. The advertisers have been on a crusade. The purpose has not been just to sell products. It has been to change the ideas and attitudes of the White public. They have proceeded with a certain amount of caution, of course, but it is clear that the product they have been trying to sell is not just breakfast cereal or Calvin Klein blue jeans, but racial mixing between Whites and Blacks.
And the reason they're trying to sell it is exactly the same reason they don't want Roger Barnett interfering with the flood of mestizos pouring into White America from Brown Mexico. Do you understand that? It's really very important. It is the key to understanding everything else that is happening today. The Jewish advertisers on Madison Avenue have exactly the same purpose as the Jews in the Clinton government -- Jews like Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and the head of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, Doris Meissner -- who're trying to keep the illegal aliens coming into the country.
If you have even the slightest doubt that this is a deliberate, Jewish policy aimed at corrupting and destroying our people, then look at what the Jews in Hollywood are doing with the new films they are producing. I mentioned the film Black and White in my broadcast three weeks ago. You really should see it. Then you will have no doubt what the termites are up to. And I hardly need to tell you that the Jewish campaign is working. Arizona and Texas and California are becoming darker, more alien. White kids are behaving more like Blacks. White women are bedding down with Blacks and producing little mongrels in greater numbers than ever before. Monkey see, monkey do.
Yes, we do have a termite problem, and we do need to get an exterminator on the job soon. And we also have a problem with flaws in our society and in our government, flaws that gave the termites the opening they needed to get in and begin gnawing away at America and our people. When the exterminator has done his necessary work and we begin rebuilding our society, we need to fix those flaws so that we'll never again have a termite problem.
Free Speech Directory || National Alliance Main Page