Free Speech Directory || National Alliance Main Page
Well, last month the Grammy awards had just been handed out by the folks in Hollywood who decide what sort of music we should listen to, and one of the winners was a Negress, Lauryn Hill, who had won a Grammy for a hip-hop record. That's not the sort of thing the Greaseman ordinarily played for his White listeners, but in light of the Grammy award he decided to play her record. Well, he stopped the record in disgust about halfway through and commented, "No wonder people drag them behind trucks."
It didn't take but a few minutes for the Hollywood bosses to hear about that, and the word came back quickly. The Greaseman was out of a job within hours. The same day he was fired from his part-time job as a deputy sheriff in suburban Falls Church, Virginia. It's not just that the Greaseman had made a Politically Incorrect reference to the trial which was taking place in Jasper, Texas, at the time; he had in effect contradicted the Hollywood media bosses as to what type of music White people should listen to. The media bosses have been pushing a program for years to popularize Black music among Whites. It's not only a way to disconnect young Whites from their own European roots, but it encourages more racial mixing. And the Greaseman had bucked the program. He had told his White audience that they didn't have to like hip-hop. It was okay not to listen to the trendy sort of non-White music the Hollywood media bosses wanted them to listen to. Perhaps the Greaseman could have gotten away with that back in 1986, but not in 1999. Things have gotten a lot more Politically Correct in the last 13 years.
I'll give you another example of this trend. Three weeks ago the superintendent of New Jersey's state police, Carl Williams, was fired by New Jersey's very trendy and ambitious female governor, Christine Whitman. Why? Because Williams, in an interview with a reporter for the Newark Star-Ledger had said that non-Whites are more likely to be involved in importing and dealing some types of illegal drugs than Whites are. The state police superintendent, in talking about New Jersey's drug problem, had told the reporter:
If you're looking at the methamphetamine market, that seems to be controlled by the motorcycle gangs, which are basically . . . White.
Now, that much was okay. Nothing wrong with saying that the methamphetamine trade is controlled by White motorcycle gangs. But then State Police Superintendent Williams continued:
If you're looking at heroin and stuff like that, your involvement is more or less Jamaicans.
Oooh! He really shouldn't have said that. Very Politically Incorrect! And Williams also told the reporter:
Today . . . the drug problem is cocaine or marijuana. It's most likely a minority group that's involved with that. They aren't going to ask some Irishman to be a part of their . . . [gang] because they don't trust him.
Well, sir, as soon as Governor Whitman heard that, she fired Williams, ending his 35-year career in law enforcement. His comments to the reporter, she said, were "insensitive." And today, you know, in the Clinton era, that's what really counts: not being an effective law enforcement officer, but being sensitive; not telling the truth, but being Politically Correct; not locking up the criminals, but feeling their pain.
Now, the enforcers of Political Correctness these days are mostly Whites. They may get their orders from the Middle Eastern clique in Hollywood or New York, but the station manager who fired the Greaseman and the governor who fired Superintendent Williams are trendy Whites. The non-Whites, however, have been quick to see the trend and to hop on the bandwagon. Just as they were screaming for the Greaseman's blood in Washington a few weeks ago, they also were baying and yelping in New Jersey when Williams went down. New Jersey State Assemblyman LeRoy Jones pompously said of Williams:
His views are dastardly; his thoughts are ill . . . and he's unfit to hold such a critical, important office . . . . He's a racist of the worst kind, because he doesn't even know it.
Did you hear that? The worst racists are those who don't even know they're racists. They're those White males who try to be Politically Correct, but they just aren't sensitive enough to keep up with the very latest trends in Political Correctness. They just don't feel the pain of all of those underprivileged and persecuted minority drug gangs and feminists and homosexuals the way a truly sensitive man like Bill Clinton does. And so, of course, those who aren't like Bill Clinton will just have to go. Making an example of them will help all the rest of us become more sensitive, more responsive to minority needs.
You know, I find the sort of thing that happened to New Jersey State Police Superintendent Carl Williams really funny. Here's this poor jerk trying as hard as he can to be sensitive, trying as hard as he can to jump through the hoop, and he just can't make it, so he's thrown to the dogs. Wonderful!
The only people I really feel sympathy for are the ones who don't even try, the ones who are too honorable and too dignified -- too White -- to try to be Politically Correct. I still have a warm spot in my heart for Dan White. Remember him? That was 20 years ago. Dan White was the conservative San Francisco supervisor who had been a policeman himself and who was supported by the San Francisco police department at a time when the minions of Political Correctness were attempting to force a gay agenda on the cops. In 1978 the mayor there, a fellow named George Moscone, thought White wasn't sensitive enough to the needs of San Francisco's homosexual population, who had wormed their way quite thoroughly into the political power structure there. The mayor and the homosexuals were attempting to ease White out of his supervisor's position, so that he could be replaced by someone who would feel the pain of the gay community. Well, on November 27, 1978, old Dan White just walked into the mayor's office with his service pistol and blew away the mayor and his head homosexual, a fellow named Harvey Milk. Of course, that didn't go very far toward solving San Francisco's homosexual problem, and it did cost Dan White five years in the state penitentiary, but it was a nice symbolic gesture. It's really too bad that Police Superintendent Carl Williams didn't handle his problem with New Jersey's oh-so-Correct governess the same way -- and with Assemblyman LeRoy Jones at the same time. That would have been another nice gesture. You can understand now why these Politically Correct types are so eager to replace straight, White cops everywhere with non-Whites, lesbians, and so on.
What Dan White did 20 years ago is much less likely these days, of course. These days going quietly, like Carl Williams did, is more likely, unfortunately. The country has been substantially sensitized. This is the Clinton era. Anyway, one of the points I want to make today is that there is a very unhealthy trend in America: a trend toward punishing Politically Incorrect speech, the way the Greaseman and Police Superintendent Williams were punished. And there's also a trend toward passivity, toward non-resistance, in much of the population. Ordinary people are more likely to let themselves be pushed around now than they were 20 years ago and also to discipline themselves, to be careful not to say anything Politically Incorrect, regardless of what they're thinking.
But really, meekness and self-discipline on our part are not enough for the zealots of Political Correctness. They want to be able to put us in prison for making Politically Incorrect statements or thinking Politically Incorrect thoughts. That's why the media bosses and the Clinton government are pushing hard for so-called "hate crime" laws now. If they had had a "hate crime" law in place when Dan White dispatched Harvey Milk and the mayor of San Francisco, they could have put him away for a lot longer than five years. They could have used the fact that he didn't approve of homosexuals to give him a much stiffer sentence for shooting Milk. Perhaps they could have had someone testify that he didn't like Jews either, and then they could have sent him to the gas chamber.
They will deny this, but you had better believe me when I tell you that the media bosses and the Clinton government are aiming not only for new laws against what they like to call "bias-motivated" acts, which punish people for what they were thinking when they did something; they're also aiming for laws against Politically Incorrect speech that's not associated with any act. Of course, they will tell you now that they're 100 per cent in favor of freedom of speech and freedom of the press, but in fact, they fully intend to do away with those freedoms.
I know that this is what they intend to do, because I've seen their counterparts do it in a dozen other countries, and they always tell the same lies. They always say that they're in favor of freedom, but that new laws are necessary to put an end to "hate." They will have their cheerleader squads chanting, "Freedom doesn't mean freedom to hate." And of course, hate means whatever they say it means. Just as they have the kiddies learning in school now that the Second Amendment only guarantees the right of state militias to keep and bear arms, not the right of individual citizens to defend themselves, they will have the kiddies learning that the First Amendment only guarantees the right to say non-hateful things. I mean, who would want to say hateful things anyway? Who needs that kind of freedom? And really, as long as the lemmings still can buy their horoscope magazines at the checkout stand and watch their ball games on television and keep their fiberglass speedboats in their driveways, they will believe they are free.
I know that this is the way it will be because, as I said, I've seen it happen in many other countries. In Canada the lemmings believe they are free, but any Canadian who publishes the text of this broadcast is liable to arrest and prosecution by the secret police. The same is true in Britain and in France and in Germany and in Switzerland and in a dozen other European countries. In Germany hundreds of patriots are rotting in prisons now because they dared to say Politically Incorrect things. But the average German -- the German lemming -- isn't bothered by this; he thinks that anyone who would want to say something which is Politically Incorrect must be a very strange person who probably is dangerous and probably should be locked up.
And the trend in America is plain enough: the lemmings already have been prepared to relinquish their freedom. They are ready and willing to give it up. And the non-lemmings are being conditioned. They are being taught to hold their tongues. They are being taught that it is dangerous to say Politically Incorrect things or even to have Politically Incorrect ideas.
Yes, it is dangerous even to have Politically Incorrect ideas or to read Politically Incorrect books. Imagine: you wake up one night to find a Black or mestizo burglar in your bedroom. You shoot him. When the police come to make a report, they notice racist books and magazines in your house. Aha! Now your shooting of a burglar has taken on the character of a "hate crime." You shot the burglar because he wasn't White! At least, that's the way it will go in court. That's the way Tom Brokaw will explain it on the NBC Nightly Evening News. How lucky those Canadians and Germans are to have had their Politically Incorrect books outlawed, so that they can't get themselves into that sort of mess.
Anyway, in America the trend toward enforced Political Correctness is here. The fear already is present. The laws will be here shortly. And now the most interesting question for us is, "Why?" Why is it so important for the media bosses and the Clintonistas to silence Politically Incorrect Americans? Why not leave us free to hate them and their policies and programs? The lemmings have been conditioned. Mr. Clinton's popularity polls are still up. Why do they care what we say?
Well, they care because silencing their critics will be important later. Stifling dissent will be essential as they continue implementing their programs. You know, they are trying to build a very complex house of cards. It may seem relatively stable now, when the economy is good and the lemmings are happy. But when the economy no longer is so good, their house of cards will be much less stable, and it may not be able to withstand much dissent. What the Jewish media bosses -- and in fact, the Jewish establishment generally -- are aiming for is total control, total ownership. For many years they were able to work behind the scenes, quietly acquiring control of the media, corrupting politicians, implementing their government programs very cautiously. Observant individuals tried to warn the people what they were up to, but it really sounded very far-fetched. People didn't believe it, because everything was still pretty much under cover.
Now things are approaching a climax. It's no longer possible to work just behind the scenes. Now things are becoming more visible. Look at the crew controlling the Clinton government. The United States has never before had such a Jew-ridden government. There have never before been anywhere near as many Jews out in the open, in visible control of the powerful posts.
And look what they are doing. Consider foreign affairs, for example. It's not just their genocidal policy against Iraq, in order to make the Middle East safer for continued Israeli expansion. It's their policy in the Balkans too. It's unfortunate that the Albanians and the Serbs can't get along and seem to enjoy cutting each other's throats and gouging out each other's eyes. But that's not the reason that Madeleine Albright and her kosher crew are so hot to send U.S. troops into Kosovo. Their reason is control. It is to set an example. It is to demonstrate that no country is any longer truly independent. It is to show the world that any country which doesn't obey orders will have so-called "peacekeeping" troops rolling through its streets in tanks in short order.
And you know, that's a very risky business. As clever as the Jews are, they do make mistakes. An attack on Serbia could backfire. The Clinton government's policy of intervention could suddenly become very unpopular. And they don't want dissidents like me to be free to say, "I told you so," and to explain to the public what the real reason is behind Madeleine Albright's policy.
Or consider domestic policy. If there's one thing I've been harping on that even the lemmings agree with me on, it's the necessity for the United States to halt the flood of Third World immigrants into this country. But it's quite clear that the Jewish establishment intends to keep the floodgates open. For years they have been pretending to be concerned about illegal immigrants and have pretended to be making plans to beef up border security, but it's really obvious now that they have no intention of stopping the flood. They want more and more "diversity," as they like to call it. They and the trendy Clinton supporters are looking forward to a non-White majority in America, and the sooner the better.
The Jewish leaders are aiming for a totally diverse, totally fragmented country, in which there will be no group able to challenge their control. But as this flood of Mexicans and Haitians and Nigerians and Chinese and God only knows what else continues pouring into the country and taking over our schools and our neighborhoods and our jobs, there will be many unhappy White people: White people who may not be upset yet, because they haven't felt a personal impact yet. But they will, and then a lot more of them will be paying attention to what I and others have been saying. And so it's important to shut us up before the pinch comes. It's important to shut us up now, because by God we will tell the people who has wrecked their country and why. And the people will listen.
That is, the people will listen if I and other dissidents have not been outlawed and silenced. What the media bosses and their collaborators do now is fire people who say anything Politically Incorrect. They apply pressure behind the scenes to force radio stations to stop carrying American Dissident Voices. And they generate a huge amount of propaganda -- as, for example, in the case of the recent trial in Jasper, Texas -- to persuade the thoughtless that "hate" is something that needs to be dealt with by more laws. The next step will be the enactment of such laws, and then we'll have a legal situation in America similar to that in Canada and Germany and elsewhere.
Of course, ultimately their plan for world domination, for world ownership by Jews, will fail. Ultimately something will go wrong, and the house of cards will come tumbling down. But it is better -- far better -- for us to bring down their house sooner rather than later: far better for us to be able to do it simply by speaking the truth instead of having to use other means.
Free Speech Directory || National Alliance Main Page