Free Speech Directory || National Alliance Main Page
Not everyone, of course. But for most people what is real is what they see on TV. If they don't see it on TV, then it doesn't exist -- or at least, it certainly isn't important. If it were anything to be concerned about, then certainly Tom Brokaw or Dan Rather or Peter Jennings would tell them all about it, with the proper expression of concern on his face and a serious tone of voice, so that everyone would know it was important.
Take the people of Canada, for example. They really are not very different from the people of the United States -- except perhaps just a shade more authoritarian in personality on the average. When our ancestors down here told King George III to go to hell, that we weren't going to pay his taxes any longer, the ancestors of the Canadians kept their mouths shut and continued paying their taxes. As a result they never really had the sort of iron-bound guarantees of freedom of speech and freedom of the press that people in the United States have had. But they always assumed that they had those freedoms anyway. If you ask the average Canadian today whether or not he is free to say what he wants and read what he wants, he'll tell you, "Of course!" And he'll believe it.
As a matter of fact, Canadians do not have those freedoms. Canadian publishers may not publish any book deemed Politically Incorrect by Canada's Jewish minority, and no Canadian bookstore may display or sell such a book. When the Canadian police find such books, they seize them and burn them.
Did you ever see the film Fahrenheit 451 or read the 1951 novel by science-fiction writer Ray Bradbury on which the film is based? In 1951 our freedom was in much less immediate jeopardy than it is now, but Bradbury saw the ominous trends even then, and he wrote about a future in which books were illegal because many of them contained facts and ideas which upset people, facts and ideas which caused people to worry and to think, facts and ideas which made people uncomfortable. So the government outlawed all books, and people received all of their information and entertainment through television, and then no one was uncomfortable. Squads of thought police sped around the cities on trucks which looked a lot like fire engines, looking for concealed books. Whenever they found any, the books were doused with kerosene and burned on the spot, and the owners of the books were arrested.
Now, the Canadian thought police are not as obvious about their mission as Ray Bradbury's thought police in Fahrenheit 451 were, but their mission is, in fact, exactly the same. I'll tell you about a recent run-in I had with the Canadian thought police. The sponsor of this broadcast, National Vanguard Books, is in the business of publishing and selling books, among other things. We sell books to people all over the world, including people in Canada. But whenever a Canadian orders a book from us we have to sneak it into Canada, so the thought police won't grab it at the border. Sometimes we are successful, and sometimes we aren't.
A couple of years ago the problem wasn't so bad, and the thought police mostly seized copies of my novels: novels which make some people uncomfortable. But children's books and history books and scientific books usually got through. But their list of banned books -- books the Jewish minority in Canada don't want the Canadian people to read -- has been growing. Now the thought police will seize almost any book which has anything in it that might be considered Politically Incorrect. In September we sent a package of books to a customer in British Columbia. The thought police in Vancouver opened the package and seized two items, which, according to the Jewish list of illegal books they go by, are classified as "hate propaganda." The two items seized were a copy of a magazine published by National Vanguard Books called Free Speech -- a magazine dedicated to the preservation of that precious commodity; and a scientific book titled Heredity and Humanity by Roger Pearson.
Dr. Pearson is a well-known anthropologist who has taught at several American universities. He was the chairman of the anthropology and sociology department at Queens College and then chairman of the anthropology department at the University of Southern Mississippi. He currently edits several scientific journals. He is the author of a well-known anthropology textbook. But anthropology is one of those fields of study which has been subjected to the scrutiny of the enforcers of Political Correctness. Like history, anthropology deals with various types of people, their characteristics, and their relationships, and these days in order for a history book or an anthropology book to be deemed Politically Correct the author must be very careful what he writes. He must be very careful never to suggest that all types of people are not equal in every way. Dr. Pearson wasn't sufficiently careful. He was more interested in the truth, more interested in accuracy and factuality, when he wrote Heredity and Humanity than in being Politically Correct. And so the Jews have put his book on their Index Librorum Prohibitorum, along with our journal Free Speech and thousands of other books which they believe might make some people uncomfortable or make them think. When the secret police in Canada find such a book, they seize it and burn it. Usually they're very secretive about this sort of thing, in contrast to the book-burners in Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451, but in the case of our customer in British Columbia we were able to obtain the police documents listing the seized items and classifying them as "hate propaganda."
You know, when the Jews in Canada got their book-burning legislation enacted, they did it under the pretense that it was to protect children from pornography. They got a whole regiment of publicity-hungry Christian preachers to beat the drums for this legislation under the pretense that it would keep sexual material out of the hands of children. So the report form the thought police use in listing and classifying the books they seize has nine separate classifications for the police to check, nine little boxes to check at the bottom of the form, indicating the type of book. Those classifications are: sex with violence, sex with degradation, sexual assault, sex with bondage, sex with juveniles, incest, bestiality, necrophilia, and -- the last category -- hate propaganda. But, you know, it's only that last little box that really counts. That's what this Canadian legislation was all about. It wasn't to keep books on necrophilia out of the country. The Jews don't care whether or not you read books on necrophilia or bestiality. The entire purpose of the law they got their ever-obedient Christian servants to push through the Canadian parliament for them was to allow the thought police to classify Politically Incorrect scientific books by anthropology professors as "hate propaganda" and keep them out of the hands of Canadians who might be made to think if they read the books.
This is by no means the first time our books have been seized by the Canadian thought police, and National Vanguard Books is by no means the only publisher whose books have been seized. These book burnings take place every day in Canada. It's just that this time we were able to get our hands on the thought police's documents, where they actually claim that Professor Pearson's anthropology book Heredity and Humanity and our journal Free Speech are "hate propaganda." Truly the situation in Canada today is much worse than it was in Europe in the Middle Ages, when the Church maintained its Index of prohibited books. The books the priests and bishops burned were virtually all books dealing with religion in some way, books they felt threatened their monopoly on that subject. The books the Jews burn today are almost any books which might cause some of the couch potatoes to think -- and then, perhaps, to rebel. And of course, the Church didn't try to make a secret of its book burning.
As I mentioned earlier, most Canadians have no idea that this book burning is going on in their country. They are too busy with their ball games and funny papers. But even if it were explained to them in detail -- even if the Canadian thought police roared around in fire engines looking for Politically Incorrect books to burn in public the way they did in Fahrenheit 451 -- would the sports fans and mall shoppers of Canada really care? No more, I suspect, than the contented and comfortable television viewers in Ray Bradbury's 1951 vision of the future, a future in which book-burning was a respectable profession. By the way, if you have any doubt that what I have told you is actually happening in Canada today, send me a stamped, self-addressed envelope, and I'll send you a photocopy of the Canadian thought police document I obtained after their latest seizure of our books. If you're a Canadian, you may want to show this document to any friends you may have who're interested in such things as freedom. Who knows? Maybe I'm wrong in assuming that Canadians are all sheep. Perhaps there are a few Canadians still willing to water the tree of liberty with the blood of tyrants.
And what about the slightly more rebellious population of the United States? Would they care? The Jews in the United States are proceeding on the assumption that they will not -- that is, that a majority of the voters will not, even if a few dissidents kick up a fuss. Certainly, the voters who make up the Clinton coalition -- the Democrats who elected Bill Clinton twice and who still think he shouldn't be impeached -- couldn't care less about preserving freedom of speech. Some of them, in fact, are positively hostile to free speech and are collaborating actively with the Jews in an effort to stamp it out.
Feminists, for example, are prominent in the Jews' campaign for "hate speech" legislation in the United States. Part of their zeal may be the touchy-feely feminine notion that people in general ought to be protected from "offensive" speech, which is any speech which hurts their feelings. A more important reason, however, is that feminists, like homosexuals and members of other government-favored groups in the population, want to hang on to the special status which 35 years of so-called "civil rights" legislation has given them, and they are afraid that any criticism might endanger that status. They understand that their present favored position in society is entirely artificial, entirely dependent on government support and government enforcement, and they are afraid that if dissenters are allowed to speak and influence public opinion, the government might be persuaded to stop enforcing feminist demands for special privileges. Blacks and welfare recipients are not as alert to these issues as the feminists and homosexuals are, but most of them have at least a dim understanding that they do have a community of interests tied to government support and government enforcement, and they would agree that free speech poses a threat to those interests.
And, alas, among the non-Jewish, non-feminist, non-homosexual, non-minority part of the population there are far too few Patrick Henrys these days. Two generations of watching Jewish television not only has softened the spines and the minds of heterosexual White males but, in fact, has convinced a substantial portion of them that it is more important for people to be comfortable than to be free. Many Americans have a vague notion that there's some sort of Constitutional right to feel good, to not be offended, and that when this Constitutional right to not be offended conflicts with the right to free speech and a free press, then some sort of compromise ought to be made. Really! That's what a lot of White American males believe!
They believe that, because that's what television has been teaching them subliminally for two generations. And added to that during the past five or six years, since domestic terrorism has gained more relevance, is the notion that free speech is really a little dangerous: everyone will be safer if we accept some limitations on free speech. That unspeakable piece of filth we have in the White House has explicitly encouraged that notion. After the Oklahoma City bombing Bill Clinton was on television telling everyone that people who criticize the government are to blame for such acts of terrorism. And a lot of White males who these days think and act like old maids took his warnings to heart.
So with the American population thus softened up, thus prepared to give up their freedom, the Jews are pushing their Fahrenheit 451 program forward. All of the big Jewish organizations are involved. The Simon Wiesenthal Center and the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith have been most noticeable in their campaign to censor the Internet, for example. The Jews of the Anti-Defamation League have just gotten a big pat on the back from the media Jews for developing what they call a "hate" filter for computers. Parents, they say, can install the filter program on their children's computers so the kiddies can't read "harmful" or "offensive" material on the Internet. And down here, just as in Canada, the Jews have a rabble of braindead Christians running interference for them, under the delusion that they are helping to protect children from exposure to sex.
Of course, parents are entitled to censor their own children's use of the Internet as much as they want. But with the Jews that's just a toe in the door. They also are peddling their filter to public libraries and to school officials, so that they can censor the Internet reading of all library users and school students. And the Anti-Defamation League is persuading some big software manufacturers to bundle its new "hate" filter with other software that is pre-installed on computers before the customers buy them. Of course, it's easy enough to deactivate such censorship software -- unless you're one of those millions of technically illiterate Americans who has never been able to figure out how to program your VCR.
Of course, the Jews, including the Anti-Defamation League, protest loudly that they're all in favor of freedom. They don't want to stop anybody from reading anything he wants. They're 100 per cent in favor of the First Amendment, they'll tell you. They're horrified by the very idea of burning books. They just want to protect children. But it's not true. This sudden and uncharacteristic interest of the Jews in protecting children from pornography is phony. What the Jews want for the United States is exactly what they already have imposed on Canada, on Britain, on France, on Germany, and on a dozen other White nations. That's why they have their number-one step'n'fetchit, Bill Clinton, making speeches about the need for "hate speech" legislation.
Now, to be sure, the Jews have other allies in their censorship plans besides corrupt politicians like Bill Clinton and the feminist-homosexual-minority special privilege groups and the couch potatoes who always are ready to trade freedom for the promise of more comfort or more security. There are White gentiles who have been sold on the idea that multiculturalism is here to stay. Some of them who are in business actually have a vested interest in multiculturalism and growing diversity in the population. They are happy with these trends because they profit from them. Others may have no vested interest in multiculturalism, but they are too soft-minded to think about the hard decision which will be required to reverse these trends. And they realize that a multicultural society is a fragile and unnatural thing, like a house of cards. Any breeze of dissent can cause it to collapse. And so they believe that it is necessary to protect it from dissent, from any speech which may offend any component of the multicultural society and result in destabilization. Perhaps they are not by nature enthusiastic enemies of freedom, but they nevertheless are willing to sacrifice freedom in order to avoid the bloody disintegration of this malignantly multicultural monstrosity of a society which is supplanting the White society we had in America prior to the Second World War.
You know, there are interesting and occasionally even amusing developments in the Jews' program to take away our freedom. Some of their feminist and homosexual allies, whose motivation is to protect their privileged status from criticism, have targeted Christian groups for censorship, because of the Christian opposition to abortion and homosexuality. Some of these Christian groups are perfectly willing to censor other people and, in fact, already have let themselves be used as dupes in the Jews' phony drive to protect children from pornography on the Internet, but they are not happy about being censored themselves. A current instance of this infighting involves The Learning Company, a large manufacturer of computer software, on one side, and on the other side the American Family Association, a Christian group which emphasizes so-called "family values" and disapproves of homosexual behavior.
The Learning Company has a program called CyberPatrol, which it developed at the behest of and in collaboration with the Anti-Defamation League. Installed on a school or library computer, it prevents students or library users from accessing any Internet site which the Jews of the Anti-Defamation League consider Politically Incorrect. Of course, the Jews have blocked both of the Internet sites at which you can access this American Dissident Voices program or see the books distributed by the sponsor of this program, such as those seized and burned by the Canadian thought police. But in order to keep their feminist and homosexual allies happy they also have blocked Internet access to the American Family Association. Many Christians are unhappy about this Jewish censorship of the American Family Association and are currently organizing a boycott of all software, children's books, and other materials published by The Learning Company but are being very careful not to mention the word "Jew" in their boycott efforts.
I believe that a boycott of The Learning Company -- and every other company which collaborates in any way with the Anti-Defamation League or other Jewish enemies of free speech is a worthy endeavor, but it's nowhere near enough. To protect our freedom, to keep the United States from following the same path that Canada is on, we need to water the tree of liberty with a great deal of blood. The time for that watering is close at hand.
Free Speech Directory || National Alliance Main Page