Free Speech Directory || National Alliance Main Page
And we spoke about the fact that Americans still support the state of Israel with billions of dollars in military and financial aid every year, and we still behave as if the attempt by the Germans 60 years ago to rid their country of Jewish influence -- the so-called "Holocaust" -- was the most terrible crime in the history of the world. Our news media here still refer to the slave state of Israel as a "bastion of freedom and democracy" in the Middle East. Our President welcomes the prime minister of Israel at the White House with open arms, instead of sending our Navy to the eastern Mediterranean to blitz Tel Aviv with cruise missiles and smart bombs until the Jews free all their White sex slaves and permit an army of United Nations "peacekeepers" to occupy Israel so that country can be taught that slavery is a "no, no."
Why is that? Why are Jews not held to the same standards as other people? Indeed, I received some reactions from listeners to last week's broadcast who told me that Jews cannot be held to normal standards of behavior because they are "God's people" -- did you get that?: "God's people" -- and it is wicked to criticize them: it says so right in the Bible, these listeners told me.
Our first tendency might be to dismiss such listeners as hopelessly primitive Bible-thumpers. Why should we take seriously any White person who believes literally and lets himself be governed by the Jews' own collection of superstition, myth, and pseudo-history? Well, one reason for taking the thumpers seriously is that, unfortunately, there still are a lot of them out there -- and many of them, aside from their habit of Bible thumping, are not really bad people. They have been deluded by preachers and churches; they have had a lot of nonsense pounded into their heads when they were young. But really, are people who believe that the universe was created in six days and that the Jewish fortune teller Isaiah was able to make the sun reverse its course across the sky -- are they any more ignorant or gullible than people who maintain that the only difference between Whites and Blacks is the color of their skin? Is the religion of the Bible worse than the religion of egalitarianism, the TV religion?
A better reason for listening to the thumpers is that they have a good point: a point that is relevant to our own concern with the Jews. The Jews are the "chosen people," the so-called "people of the Book." It's not just the more primitive Christian sects that make that claim; it is the Jews themselves. That claim, in fact, is the fundament on which all of their religion, all of Judaism, is based, and it merits our serious consideration. We don't have time on this program for a comprehensive study of the Bible, but I recommend strongly such a course of study to anyone who is seriously interested in the Jewish question.
We can note quickly a couple of things about the Jews' Bible, however: about the Old Testament. It does condone slavery; it does condone the buying and selling of human beings. The Jewish god, Yahweh, or Jehovah, also sets his own stamp of approval on slavery in the Jews' Bible; he gives specific instructions to the Jews on buying and selling slaves. Slavery, of course, was an institution practiced by others as well as the Jews during the period of the Old Testament. What makes it relevant to the subject under discussion here is that Judaism is the most conservative of religions practiced in the world today. The Jews always have regarded every word of their Bible as inerrant. For centuries their rabbis have quibbled legalistically over the tiniest details, and their quibbling is set down in the Talmud, to serve as a guide for all observant Jews today. Every comment in the Old Testament about diet or clothing or grooming is taken as a divine commandment, which must be obeyed today by Orthodox Jews.
The Jews have insisted that the Christians change their religion to suit the Jews, and the Christians have been disgustingly accommodating. The New Testament accounts of the crucifixion, for example, have been drastically reinterpreted to absolve the Jews of all blame. The New Testament describes the Jewish mob which handed Jesus over for crucifixion and then demanded that the crucifixion be carried out, threatening to riot and screaming that they and their descendants would take the blame. When the Roman official in charge wanted to acquit Jesus of the Jews' charges against him, the Jews insisted that he be crucified and said, "His blood be on us and on our children." But in modern times the Jews complained that this New Testament account had led Christians to hold a grudge against them. And so the Christian theologians and church officials got busy and announced that it wasn't really the Jewish population of Jerusalem the New Testament was talking about in its accounts of the crucifixion -- it isn't the Jews who must bear guilt for the shedding of Jesus' blood -- it is all of humanity. That is the new interpretation.
And the rewriting of the account of the crucifixion is only one example of the ways in which the Christians have changed their religion in a vain effort to please the Jews. As a general rule, whenever the Jews yell, "Jump!" every Christian leader, from the Pope down to the most primitive radio evangelist, immediately responds, "How high, sir?"
But with the Jews it is quite different. Nobody even asks them to change their religion in order to make it less offensive to Christians or Muslims or others. And the Jews wouldn't dream of making any changes anyway. The interpretation in the Talmud is inerrant. If Yahweh told the children of Israel 4,000 years ago that it's okay to buy and sell slaves, then it's still okay today. And in the state of Israel today even the atheistic Jews in the government are very careful not to offend Orthodox Jews.
When the Romans conquered Gaul and Britain and parts of Germany, every Roman legion which marched north from Rome was followed by Jewish slave dealers, ready to buy from the Roman commanders their prisoners of war and the civilian inhabitants of conquered towns and villages. It wasn't just that some of the slave dealers happened to be Jews; buying and selling slaves was almost a Jewish monopoly, to the extent that being in the fur business or being a diamond dealer in New York is a Jewish monopoly today. There's no law against a Gentile setting up a shop on New York's 47th Street and buying and selling diamonds, but no Gentile in his right mind would consider doing that. The Jews would gang up on him and have him fleeced and bankrupted within a week. An so it was with the buying of captives from the Roman Army. Jews, in fact, like to boast that they have been in some parts of Germany longer than the Germans have been there. And that's true to the extent that in the settlements that grew up around the permanent Roman camps along the Rhine and other places, the Jewish slave dealers had their own trading posts attached to the camps. When the Germans later forced the Romans out, some of the Jewish traders stayed.
A thousand years later the Jews still were buying and selling slaves in Europe to an extent which scandalized their Christian neighbors, resulting in a number of royal edicts during the Middle Ages prohibiting Jews from owning Christian slaves. After the discovery of the New World and the beginning of large-scale commerce in Black slaves between Africa and the West Indies, the Jews of the Netherlands -- especially those who recently had been expelled from Spain and Portugal -- were quick to grab a substantial part of the commerce in Black flesh for themselves. They were well positioned to do so, because they were prominent among ship owners and those already engaged in international trade.
My reason for making these historical and theological digressions is to establish the fact that slave dealing is sanctioned by both religion and tradition among the Jews. They can't get away with it in Europe or America these days, but in Israel, among themselves, they see no reason why they shouldn't follow their natural inclinations. They must disguise those inclinations, of course. But disguise, deception, is something that also comes naturally. The Jews have a modus vivendi that really is unique among the races of man. For at least the last 2,600 years -- that is, ever since the so-called "Babylonian captivity" -- and perhaps even much earlier, the Jews have striven to maintain their own separate identity and at the same time to live as a minority in non-Jewish societies. Other races have chosen one course or the other: either to be themselves, among their own kind, or to lose their own identity and assimilate into another society. The Jews always have wanted to have it both ways, and their skill at disguise and deception has been essential in the degree of success they have had.
And that gets us to the question I want to discuss with you today. What are the Jews really like? Which is the true Jew: is it the leering, hook-nosed slave dealer in Tel Aviv who brutalizes our women because his religion and the laws of his country permit him to do so, or is it the sensitive, violin-playing philanthropist Jew presented to us by Hollywood? More generally, is the real Jew the Israeli citizen who, while not a slave dealer himself, is comfortable with the traditions of his people and with the fact that his fellow Jews are still in the slave business -- or is it the friendly Jew who owns the clothing store at the mall where you shop and seems no more sinister than any other shop owner? Is it the alien-looking Orthodox Talmud-Jew, with his long sidelocks and yarmulke and black garb, that one sees in New York's "diamond district," or is it the normal-looking Jewish economics professor one had in college, who seemed like a nice guy?
Well, of course, the question is misleading. All of these Jews are "real Jews," but no one of them has all of the characteristics as an individual Jew that all of them together have. The fact is that there is quite a bit of diversity among the Jews. As an illustration of this, in Israel today the Orthodox Jews -- that is the Jews who take Judaism seriously -- and the rest of the Jews are practically at war with each other over policy issues. The Orthodox Jews are actually burning down the synagogues of the non-Orthodox Jews. They are calling each other "Nazis." The atheistic and other non-Orthodox Jews outnumber the Orthodox Jews in Israel, but the latter are more tightly organized and more fanatical. The point is that Jews do disagree on many things.
So is it at all meaningful to associate things such as the White slave trade in Israel or the promotion of interracial sex between Whites and non-Whites in America with the Jews as a whole?
And the answer to that question is yes, it is meaningful to assign certain characteristics to Jews as a whole -- as a people, a race, a nation -- and also to hold the whole Jewish people accountable for certain policies and certain actions: "His blood be on us and on our children." That is something which has been understood for a long time, much longer than 2,000 years. Yet, a great many Americans today have been so confused by the brainwashing propaganda of the past few decades that they no longer understand it. They think that it is a reasonable policy for newspapers not to mention the race of a criminal, for example, because to do so might prejudice people against Blacks. You might argue that if a Black rapist or a Black mugger is on the loose, our people should know about it, so that they can protect themselves. They should know what he looks like. Yet, the liberal will argue that since not all Blacks are rapists or muggers, it's bad to mention the race of some who are, because that will cause our people to be wary of Blacks generally.
And of course that's true. People do generalize. People do stereotype. That's why we're still on this earth. It's a survival trait. Our ancestors a million years ago saw what happened when one of their people got bitten by a poisonous snake, and they began avoiding snakes generally, even though many snakes aren't poisonous. Better to be safe than sorry, they thought, even though our bad opinion of snakes generally might not be justified. The White women who got stripped and probed by Blacks and Puerto Ricans in Central Park a little less than a month ago had failed to generalize. They had failed to conclude that it's a good idea to stay away from any area with a high concentration of non-Whites, just because some non-Whites are like those they encountered in Central Park.
The Whites of Rhodesia also failed to generalize when they turned their country over to Black rule more than 20 years ago. Their politicians and their media people and their preachers said to them, "All Blacks are not terrorists. There are many hard-working, law-abiding Blacks. The terrorists are only a minority. It will be all right to let the Black majority rule our country, because they will keep the terrorists under control. It would be wrong to generalize about Blacks and Black-run countries. It would be racist." And the Rhodesians believed their politicians and media people and preachers. They failed to look around them at the Black-ruled countries of Africa, every one of which is a pest-hole and a basket case. They failed to consider the lesson of history, to look at Black behavior generally over the centuries. They believed that it would be wicked of them to come to a general conclusion about Blacks as a whole, as a race, because not all Blacks are the same; some Blacks are not bad, and it would be unjust to lump them in with the rest by generalizing. And so now history is phasing out the White Rhodesians. They have proved themselves unfit to survive. Since Mugabe was reelected a few days ago the attacks on White farms and on White farm families have been stepped up. More and more of them are being forced off the farms they have owned for generations. Soon all of them will be gone.
So now, why is it fair to lump the nice Jewish economics professor you had in college, the nice Jewish shop owner you know, together with Ehud Barak and Ariel Sharon and the White slave-owners of Israel? It is fair because if we fail to do it -- if we fail to draw correct conclusions about the Jews as a whole, as a people -- we ourselves will not survive as a people. The Jewish shop owner, the Jewish professor, do not exist in a vacuum; they exist in an ethnic context. They are not simply individuals; they are members of a racial community, a national community. They are Jews, and that word has a real meaning for them. They are Jews whether they are religious or not, whether they ever have entered a synagogue or not. They are Jews whether they are in the White slave business in Israel or in the television business in America or simply shop owners or professors.
In Israel there are Jews who believe that permitting Israel to become the world center for the trade in White slaves was a tactical error that may end up costing the Jews as a whole more than it's worth, just as there were some Jews in Germany before the Second World War who believed that the promotion of communism was a tactical error for the Jews as a whole and might end up costing the Jews as a whole more than they would gain from communism. But when it comes to making a choice, the Jewish shop owner and the Jewish professor will not turn against their own people just because they believe that the Jews' trade in White slaves is a tactical error. The Jews in America overwhelmingly favored the bombing of Belgrade last year by Madeleine Albright in order to force the Serbs to be nice to the KLA terrorists who were trying to take over Serbia's Kosovo province. But they would not favor bombing Tel Aviv to force the Israeli government to stop the Jewish trade in White slaves. The friendly Jewish shop owner and the nice Jewish professor overwhelmingly favored the sending of troops into Kosovo to force the Serbs into line with the New World Order, but I will guarantee you that they would not favor the sending of troops into Israel to break the Israeli Jews of some of their nasty habits -- such as forcing Russian and Ukrainian and Latvian and Hungarian girls into prostitution -- or torturing Palestinian prisoners or sending Mossad assassination teams into other countries to murder people the Jews don't like by squirting poison into their ears or planting radio-controlled bombs in their telephones. No honest person who really knows the Jews will contradict me on that.
I'll reiterate: despite their diversity, the Jews are a unit, and if we are to survive we must understand that and act accordingly. In deciding our own policies we must consider the effects of the Jews as a whole on our society and on our people. The salient fact is not that the Jewish economics professor we had in college seemed to be a nice guy; the salient fact is that Jews own Hollywood and Madison Avenue and are using that ownership to persuade White girls that it is fashionable to have sex with Blacks. The salient fact is not that the Jewish shop owner we know is a friendly and helpful guy; the salient fact is that we have an open-borders policy which is flooding America with sub-human trash from Mexico and the rest of the Third World, and that policy is favored by the great majority of Jews in America, but by only a small minority of non-Jewish White people.
The salient fact is that if we do not think about the Jews as a whole and do something about them as a whole, history will phase us out just as surely as it is phasing out the White Rhodesians.
Free Speech Directory || National Alliance Main Page