29th March 17:10
The Nazification of America (respect)
He was of course talking about the Jews lies.
Hitler wrote in Mein Kampf that the Jews tell big lies. The
Jewish media took his words out of context and claimed that Hitler was
in favor of big lies. This was in itself a big lie and proof that
Hitler was right. Here is what Hitler wrote in Mein Kampf and in
"But it remained for the Jews, with their unqualified capacity
for falsehood, and their fighting comrades, the Marxists, to impute
responsiblity for the downfall precisely to the man who alone had
shown a superhuman will and energy in his effort to prevent the
catastrophe which he had forseen and to save the nation from that hour
of complete overthrow and shame. By placing responsiblity for the loss
of the world war on the shoulders of Ludendorff they took away the
weapon of moral right from the only adversary dangerous enough to be
likely to succeed in bringing the betrayers of the Fatherland to
justice. All this was inspired by the principle--which is quite true
in itself--that in the big lie there is always a certain force of
credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more
easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than
consciously or voluntarily, and thus in the primitive simplicity of
their minds they are more readily fall victims to the big lie than the
small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little
matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It
would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and
they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort
truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so
may be brought clearly to their minds, they still doubt and waver and
will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For
the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it
has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in
this world and to all who conspire together in tha art of lying. These
people know only too well how to use falsehood for the basest
"From time immemorial, however, the Jews have known better than
any others how falsehood and calumny can be exploited. Is not their
very existance founded on one great lie, namely, that they are a
religious community, whereas in reality they are a race? And what a
race! One of the greatest thinkers that mankind has produced has
branded the Jews for all time with a statement which is profoundly and
exactly true. He (Schopenhauer) called the Jew 'The Great Master of
Lies'. Those who do not realize the truth of that statement, or do not
wish to believe it, will never be able to lend a hand in helping Truth to prevail."
AMERICAN DISSIDENT VOICES
August 10, 2002
War Drums Sounding
Welcome to American Dissident Voices. I'm Kevin Alfred Strom.
Ever since September 11, Jewish commentators and columnists have
their war drums for an all-out war against Iraq -- Kristol, Kagan,
Krauthammer, Safire, Kondrake, Feder, Wattenberg, and many others --
of them deceptively pretending to be neutral observers, pretending to
place American interests before those of Israel. Mortimer Zuckerman
takes the cake in this category by being not only a columnist for US
News and World Report; but its owner as well, and the owner of the NY
Daily News to boot. And Zuckerman also apparently feels there's no
conflict of interest in his publications' coverage of the Middle East
caused by his current tenure as the Chairman of the Conference of
Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, an umbrella group of
national Jewish organizations, whose very name and structure reveal
enormity of Jewish power and influence.
Meanwhile, the cousins of the Jewish commentators and columnists are
busy at work in Washington, seeking to shape U.S. foreign policy
their official and advisory positions in the Bush administration.
Richard Perle, a Jew and Director of the Defense Policy Board, and a
Director of the Jerusalem Post as well, would like us to attack Iraq
now, as would Deputy Secretary of Defense, Paul Wolfowitz, a Jew who,
during the Gulf War aroused the fury of our senior military officers
claimed, quite correctly, that Wolfowitz was overly sympathetic to
Israel [ New York Times, Dec. 23, 1991, p. A14].
Perle and Wolfowitz are joined in their cabal by "our" Undersecretary
Defense for Policy, Douglas Feith, a Jew who recently approved a plan
nuke Iraq if it moves against Israel, and Vice President Cheney's
chief of staff, Lewis Libby, and Elliott Abrams, Bush's Jewish
Security Director for Democracy, Human Rights and International
Operations." And we can't forget Bush's Press Secretary and chief
handler, Ari Fleischer, also a Jew. Imagine the uproar if as many
pundits and government officials were of Iraqi or Palestinian descent!
Imagine the media outrage if even one major columnist or advisor was
discovered to be a member of the National Alliance.
Having initiated the media barrage calling for a U.S. attack on Iraq,
Jews are now trying to keep a low profile, fearful that the American
people might finally connect the dots and realize that the Jews'
for wanting war is not that they are concerned about the interests of
New York fire-fighters or Pennsylvania coal-miners -- but that they
primarily concerned, as they always have been, about the future of
Israel and World Jewry.
Fearing a Gentile backlash against their subversive activities, it is
critical for the Jews that most Americans not perceive who is behind
constant agitation for another war against Iraq. The Jewish
Agency reported last week [July 30] that "some ****ysts say that
leaders keep a low profile out of concern that critics might say
is attacking Iraq to benefit Israel."
God forbid that anyone should dare reach such a conclusion! Jews are
concerned not about whether attacking Saddam Hussein is good for
America, but whether it is good for Israel. Forget that American blood
and resources will be sacrificed. Forget that Jewish sabre-rattling
endanger the nation by making us the focus of Arab resentment. To the
"Chosen," it doesn't really matter if thousands of additional Iraqi
civilians are killed in an American attack. During the Gulf War, we
bombarded Iraqi cities for two months, killing 80,000 innocent
[Il Giorno, Milan. Found in the Cape Cod Times, Aug. 3, 2002, p. A14].
At least 333,000 children and elderly Iraqis, and perhaps three times
that many, have died prematurely since the war began, thanks to the
U.S.-sponsored blockade of medicine and food, and our destruction of
Iraqi water purification plants. Madeleine Albright, the Jewish former
Secretary of State, justified these cruel policies and coldly
humanitarian concerns with the comment that "the price is worth it."
333,000 dead babies and old people, worth it. 80,000 wives and
and children dead, worth it. All of this, against a country that
presents no threat to the United States! After all, Iraq is over 6,000
miles away, with no ballistic missiles that could reach us -- but,
missiles that could reach Tel Aviv. Since many Jews regard Israel as
"51st state," they have decided that we must launch a "preemptive war"
against their enemy. They have blood on their hands, up to their
shoulders. Yet they pretend to be innocent lambs who have the best
interests of America at heart.
Jews do not lose sleep at night worrying if such an attack will turn
virtually the entire Moslem world of over one billion people against
America, and subject us to further attacks like those of September
During World War II, there was a joke that, as the Gentiles marched
to war, the favorite song of the Jews was "Onward Christian Soldiers,"
and that may once again be the case again if we attack Iraq. For one
thing is certain -- the children of Wolfowitz and Perle and
and their ilk will not be marching off in uniform, or coming home in
body-bags, or with Purple Hearts.
The Jewish Telegraphic Agency article goes on to note the strategy of
one influential Jewish leader: "Why should it be a Jewish or Israeli
issue?" asked Morris Amitay, a pro-Israel activist and former
director of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, better known
around Washington as AIPAC: "We should stay as patriotic as the next
guy, but not be out front." As for the Jewish motivation for
a US war against Iraq, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency article reveals
that "[t]he Jewish community views an attack on Iraq as advantageous
several levels. . . .
"[A] regime change in Iraq would be in Israel's best interest. Iraq's
production of weapons of mass destruction and apparent willingness to
use them are a constant threat to Israel's security. . . .
"American engagement in Iraq could help Israel's standing in its
conflict with the Palestinians. President Saddam Hussein has been
financially assisting Palestinian terrorist groups and giving funds to
the families of suicide bombers. Many believe Hussein would try to
Arab governments to his side by attacking Israel.
"In addition, some argue that overthrowing Hussein would send a strong
message to the Palestinians about the consequences of terrorism."[End
The Jewish-owned New York Times said in a recent editorial [August 3,
2002] that what is crucial is that Iraq be disarmed of all
"unconventional weapons" -- the so-called "weapons of mass
In other words, what the Times wants, but doesn't quite dare say, is a
Middle East in which only one country has nuclear weapons -- Israel.
This would give Israel's Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, known as the
"Butcher of Beirut" for his bloody massacres of innocents going back
decades and still happening today, the power to perpetually dominate
Arab world. It is Israel, and not Iraq nor other Arab nations that
possesses the greatest Middle Eastern arsenal of over 450 nuclear
weapons of mass destruction -- many of which were built during a time
when Israel deceitfully disavowed any intention to build nuclear
Of course Israel's vast nuclear arsenal has evoked nary a peep of
criticism from American bureaucrats, elected officials or political
commentators. According to American law, all aid to Israel would have
stop if it were proven that she had built nuclear weapons in violation
of her agreements. All official Washington knows that Israel has done
exactly that, but they keep silent to oblige Israel in getting more
American money and more American blood. They have blood on their
up to their shoulders. Yet they pretend to be innocent lambs who have
the best interests of America at heart.
It is also Israel, and not Iraq, that is in the process of
genocidal biological weapons capable of killing Iraqis while leaving
Jews unharmed. On November 15, 1998, the Sunday Times of London
that Israel was developing an "ethno-bomb." It is reported that
scientists are trying to exploit medical advances by identifying a
carried by some Arabs, and then creating a genetically-modified
bacterium or virus. The deadly micro-organisms would attack only Arabs
or other non-Jews, leaving Jews unscathed. Talk about genocide and
"weapons of mass destruction"!
A senior Israeli intelligence official has admitted that "There is
hardly a single known or unknown form of chemical or biological weapon
which is not manufactured [in Israel]." [John Steinbach, "Nuke Nation:
Israel's weapons of mass destruction" in Covert Action, April-June
The big threat in the Middle East is Israel, not Iraq. The only
of mass destruction in the Middle East are in Israel. Its 450 nuclear
weapons [Wash. Post, March 11, 2001, B2], are far more than it needs
deterrence. Israel has ballistic missiles and bombers capable of
reaching Moscow. They are the world's fourth or fifth most powerful
nuclear power, and Israel is the only Middle Eastern nation that
adamantly refuses to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Don't forget that from the 1950s the United States was training
nuclear scientists and providing nuclear-related technology. [John
Steinbach, Covert Action Quarterly - April - June 2001.
http://www.covertactionquarterly.org <http://www.covertactionquarterly.org> ]
It is clear that Israel has had no
interest in peace except that which is dictated on its own terms.
is the primary destabilizing force driving the Middle East arms race
compelling the region's states to seek their own deterrents. George W.
Bush talks about an "Axis of Evil," a term cooked up by David Frum,
Jewish speech-writer, but this absurd attempt at demonization
a grotesque double-standard by which Iraq, Iran, and North Korea are
condemned for developing nuclear weapons, while Israel -- the
culprit -- is permitted to increase its nuclear and biological arsenal
in blatant violation of American laws that ought to cut off all aid to
the Jewish state. Even the Jewish writer Seymour Hersh has admitted
"the size and sophistication of Israel's nuclear arsenal allows men
as Ariel Sharon to dream of redrawing the map of the Middle East aided
by the implicit threat of nuclear force." [quoted in Steinlight]
Thanks to Israeli expansionism and terrorism, and international Jewish
agitation, a wide-scale nuclear conflict in the Middle East has now
become a distinct possibility. It could be triggered by religious
zealots, or by secular Zionist fanatics, or both. Such a war would be
directed by Ariel Sharon, a war criminal whose record as a murderer
stretches from the massacre of Palestinian civilians in 1953 to the
massacres at Sabra and Shatila in 1982, to this year's massacre at
Jenin, to this month's openly-admitted rocket attack on a civilian
apartment complex. They have blood on their hands, up to their
shoulders. Yet they pretend to be innocent lambs who have the best
interests of America at heart.
How has the United States benefited from its love affair with Israel,
after having deferred to its every whim for over half a century?
to withdraw from Palestinian and Syrian territory, disregard for UN
resolutions and U.S. requests, proliferation of nuclear weapons,
aggression against its neighbors, damage to American relations with
other Middle East countries, the deliberate bombing of the U.S.S.
Liberty, and espionage against the U.S. by Jonathan Pollard and
In fact, the Israeli Cabinet honored Pollard by declaring him an
citizen in 1995, and he has been elevated to the status of a national
hero there. Israel, the nation that is the largest recipient of
foreign and military aid in the world has reciprocated by placing
in our government. Unfortunately, Pollard's case may be only the tip
the iceberg. Confirmation of recent Israeli spying on American soil
offered by the French newspaper Le Monde this past March and discussed
by Dr. Pierce in prior American Dissident Voices broadcasts.
It is high time that Americans woke up and spoke out about what this
one-sided relationship is costing us. Israel has worked against our
interests on other occasions, too. In 1992, Israel illegally resold
American military technology to China, and resold aerial refueling
technology to Latin America. [Tim Weiner, "The Man Who Protects
from Terrorism," New York Times, Feb. 1, 1999, A3]
Do you remember Mordechai Vanunu? He is the Israeli whistle blower who
is finishing his twelfth year in captivity -- and the American news
media continue to treat him as a non-person. On Sept. 30, 1986,
government lured Vanunu to Rome, abducted him, and put him on a cargo
ship back to Israel. At a secret trial, he faced charges of espionage
and treason. A military court sentenced him to 18 years in prison.
was Vanunu's crime? He gave detailed information about Israel's secret
arsenal of nuclear bombs to journalists at the Sunday Times of London.
After growing up in a Jewish family that emigrated to Israel from
Morocco when he was a boy, Mordechai Vanunu became an employee at the
Dimona nuclear plant in 1976. Nearly a decade later -- shortly before
his employment ended at the remote nuclear facility -- he took photos
areas inside Dimona which had always been illegally hidden from
international inspection. Using severance pay to travel abroad in
Vanunu contacted the famous Insight investigative unit of Britain's
Sunday Times. "During his extensive debriefing by our Insight team,"
newspaper reported, "he offered to give the paper his photographs and
all his information for nothing, provided we did not publish his name,
insisting his sole interest was in stopping nuclear proliferation in
Middle East." However, the Sunday Times persuaded Vanunu to allow his
name to be used. The paper agreed to pay him for the serialization of
his story, or for a book. Peter Hounam, the main reporter on the story
for the Sunday Times said: "My impression of the man was of someone
had a genuine desire to tell the world of something that was going on
which he felt was genuinely wrong for Israel to do. He felt it was
that the Israeli public and parliament were not given any information
about what was happening in Dimona." On Oct. 5, 1986, the Sunday Times
broke the story under the front-page headline "REVEALED: THE SECRETS
ISRAEL'S NUCLEAR ARSENAL." But by then, Vanunu was a prisoner of the
Israeli government. That's how the world learned that he'd been
kidnapped. From then on, when he was transported to court, the van
windows were painted black. And it is still very dark for him. After a
dozen years, much of them in isolation, he is still in prison.
Can you imagine what would have happened if another country in the
Middle East -- say, Iraq or Iran -- kidnapped one of its citizens from
Western Europe to retaliate for spilling the beans about its nuclear
weaponry? That person would have become an instant media hero in the
United States. But if you mention Mordechai Vanunu's name to an
American, you're likely to get a blank stare. On this side of the
Atlantic, he's a media phantom. The United States' media coverage of
Vanunu has remained paltry: just a few scattered newspaper articles.
New York Times - America's supposed "newspaper of record" -- has
mentioned Vanunu at all. That's quite a contrast to the situation in
Britain, where coverage of Vanunu's case has been extensive and
sustained. Recently, in the course of several months, mainstream
outlets have done at least 45 major stories about Vanunu, according to
Nexis. Six**** of them appeared in the Sunday Times alone. Top
politicians and journalists in Washington wag their fingers at India
Pakistan for joining the world's nuclear club without an invitation.
there is no such scolding of Israel, which receives U.S. aid at a rate
of about $10 Million a day, while maintaining a stockpile of hundreds
If you wonder why this broadcast is virtually the only voice in the
United States of America which dares to tell the truth on this vital
issue, consider the fate of Mordechai Vanunu, for daring to tell the
truth about Israel's weapons of mass destruction.
Speaking of the suppression of news that is unfavorable to Israel,
you heard about the case of former Israeli secret agent, Victor
Ostrovsky? Although he fled to Canada after revealing the tactics of
Mossad (Israel's spy and assassination agency) in a book, he continued
to be pursued by the allies of Israel there and in the United States.
[The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (October/November 1997,
37, 84-85).] He has written that "[t]he same people who presumably
praise someone from the CIA or the U.S. armed forces who exposed
wrongdoing in those institutions were now hard at work to smother my
criticisms of an intelligence agency for a foreign country that, to
it as charitably as possible, does not have America's best interests
heart." In 1995, an Israeli television executive called for
assassination during a broadcast telephone interview with him. Those
same "Americans" who call Ostrovsky a traitor to Israel for exposing
Mossad's tactics hail as a hero Jonathan Pollard, a traitor to the
who spied on the American government for Israel.
The suppression of criticism of Israel continues. There is the case of
the two Oneida, New York Daily Dispatch editors who were fired last
September for daring to mention Israeli terrorism and Israel's acts of
oppression in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It is horrifying to
think that in a land priding itself on free speech that simply
out Israel's crimes in the Middle East can cause the firing of two
editors. But when you're dealing with the Jewish power structure
not dealing with Americans, and you're not dealing with people who
any respect for freedom of speech. The Jews were even able to get the
offending editorial removed from the newspaper's website, as Dr.
told us in a recent broadcast [October 27, 2001 ]. These high-handed
tactics of intimidation and suppression combined with the virtual
stranglehold on the U.S. news and entertainment industry help explain
why most Americans are so easily misled on political issues where
is a vested Jewish interest and agenda.
Now, as our pro-Israeli President threatens Iraq, it becomes
increasingly obvious that Israel would love to have thousands of U.S.
troops permanently stationed nearby. Just as plans for an attack on
seem to have originated from a mentality of "Oh, since we're already
Afghanistan, why not attack Iraq, too" what is to prevent the whining
(but secretly smiling) Israeli-firsters in the media and government
convincing Bush and Congress to decide that since we're already in
we might as well pay a visit to Israel to help them decimate the
If we truly want peace in the Middle East and if we truly want to
the escalation of that regional conflict into a nuclear and biological
catastrophe, we'd better wake up and learn how to deal with what the
French ambassador to England so bluntly but aptly referred to as "that
shitty little country Israel" which places us "in danger of World War
III." The French ambassador is not the only one who is waking up. All
over Europe mainstream politicians and writers are speaking out
the Jewish disease of unmitigated aggression and genocide, against the
Jewish-led bloodbath. Our kinfolk in Europe are learning the score.
Isn't it about time that we joined them -- before it's too late?
The text above is based on a broadcast of the American Dissident
Voices radio program sponsored by National Vanguard Books.
It is distributed by e-mail each Saturday to subscribers of ADV-list. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
==> To subscribe send an e-mail message to:
The subject of the message should be: Subscribe
==> TO BE REMOVED send an e-mail message to:
The subject of the message should be: Unsubscribe
==> The National Alliance has a strict anti-spamming policy. This
information is intended for interested parties only and is not to be
indiscriminately distributed via mass e-mailing or newsgroup posting.
To comment on this broadcast, please write to: firstname.lastname@example.org To
report typos and technical errors in ADV-list or our web site, please
write to: email@example.com
To contact us via "snail mail," write to:
National Vanguard Books
P.O. Box 330 Hillsboro, WV 24946
The National Alliance: <http://www.natvan.com>
29th March 17:10
The Nazification of America
Is a coward's manner of stating that the u.s. of a[sses] is fascist.
Nazism being a subset of fascism.
New-age americaaaaaanpaxism another subset of fascism.
If americaaaaa is so into being fascist then simply embrace
it honestly without subtefuge and pandering, which are such
demeaning and pathetic character traits.
Hey waitasec americaaaaaaa is demeaning and pathetic.
Oh well, carry on as if you are in your right minds.
29th March 19:28
The Nazification of America (id)
Godwin, you lose.
"Iraq was a brilliant campaign fought with minimal
casualties, 11 September was a humiliating failure
by government to fulfill its primary role of
national defence. But Democrats who complained that
Bush was too slow to act on doubtful intelligence
re 9/11 now profess to be horrified that he was too
quick to act on doubtful intelligence re Iraq. This
is not a serious party."