Topics

[Make it your Home Page Today]

https://creativityalliance.com/search.htm
Make it your Home Page Today

[British Schools Should End 'Nazi' Studies, Says Former Education Minister]

British Schools Should End 'Nazi' Studies, Says Former Education Minister
The Telegraph (Britain)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/8976283/Stop-teaching-about-the-holocaust-so-that-children-see-Germany-in-a-better-light-says-Lord-Baker.html

British schools should no longer teach children about the Nazis because it makes them think less favourably of modern Germany, the architect of the National Curriculum has claimed. Lord Baker of Dorking, who spent three years as Margaret Thatcher's education secretary, said that he would ban the topic and concentrate on British history instead. In an interview with The Daily Telegraph, he said that schools should concentrate on teaching "the story in our own country" rather than the events of the Second World War, including the Holocaust. Lord Baker, who introduced the National Curriculum in the 1980s, said: "I would ban the study of Nazism from the history curriculum totally." [more ...]

[Date/time Item Type Rate/min Duration Amount]

My Skype account was recently hacked. I know this will probably be of no use, but here is a list of the calls made from my Skype account by the hacker.

Date/time            Item                        Type                        Rate/min       Duration       Amount

Dec 15 14:35    +34665692336, Spain - Mobile - Orange    Call    AU$ 0.352    01:10    AU$ 0.833
Dec 15 14:11    +34691355179, Spain - Mobile    Call    AU$ 0.352    00:00    AU$ 0.000
Dec 15 14:10    +34691355179, Spain - Mobile    Call    AU$ 0.352    00:00    AU$ 0.000
Dec 15 14:07    +34665692336, Spain - Mobile - Orange    Call    AU$ 0.352    00:50    AU$ 0.481
Dec 15 11:28    +33646800204, France - Mobile    Call    AU$ 0.271    00:23    AU$ 0.400
Dec 15 11:06    +491734305330, Germany - Mobile Vodafone    Call    AU$ 0.328    00:55    AU$ 0.457
Dec 15 11:03    +491734305330, Germany - Mobile Vodafone    Call    AU$ 0.328    00:26    AU$ 0.457
Dec 15 08:33    +393401513405, Italy - Mobile    Call    AU$ 0.400    00:43    AU$ 0.529
Dec 15 07:12    +34689259189, Spain - Mobile    Call    AU$ 0.352    00:56    AU$ 0.481
Dec 15 07:01    +34659632204, Spain - Mobile    Call    AU$ 0.352    00:21    AU$ 0.481
Dec 15 06:56    +34689259189, Spain - Mobile    Call    AU$ 0.352    00:49    AU$ 0.481
Dec 15 06:49    +393423801412, Italy - Mobile    Call    AU$ 0.400    05:03    AU$ 2.529
Dec 15 06:49    +39383423801412, Italy - Mobile    Call    AU$ 0.400    00:00    AU$ 0.000

New Contacts recently added to my account without my authority were cherlyn.vandevort and webi_edu. All I could determine about the second is that it's Chinese based and often interferes with Skype accounts.

https://creativityalliance.com/forum/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view;id=373

dinka

[BBC]

BBC

To most Americans Abraham Lincoln is the nation's greatest president - a political genius who won the Civil War and ended slavery. But does Lincoln really deserve all this adulation? 150 years after the war his reputation is being re-assessed, as historians begin to uncover the dark side of his life and politics.

http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/6855735/Abraham.Lincoln.Saint.Or.Sinner.WS.PDTV.XviD-FTP

[More at]

People outside the alternative health community are often confused by the lack of autism in the Amish people.  The Amish do not experience autism, or any of the other learning disabilities that plague our technological society.  The Amish live in a society that consists of outdated technologies and ideals, by contemporary standards.  Their diet consists of eating organic, fresh, locally-grown produce, and of , they do not follow the established vaccination routines.  To the dismay of the mainstream media and the medical establishment, this has resulted in a healthier people, that are void of all of our chronic diseases.  Heart disease, cancer, and diabetes are virtually non-existent in Amish villages.  Equally non-existent are modern, chemically-engineered s, enhanced (chemically-engineered) foods, G.M.O. foods, and of course, vaccines.  How is it that those who are without the "miracles" of modern orthodox medicine are healthier?  The truth about health, medicine, and how they both relate to the Amish is becoming an embarrassment to some rather powerful people.

There have been 3 (yes three) verified cases of autism in the Amish, and at least two of those children were vaccinated.  No information is available for the third.  The strong correlation between vaccinations and autism is absolutely undeniable, unless you work for the medical establishment, the government, or Big Media.

More at http://wvoutpost.com/2011/06/07/the-amish-dont-get-autism-and-they-dont-get-vaccinations-possible-link

[A Thoughtful Look at the German-Soviet Clash Reassesses the Second World WarCould Hitler Have Won?Hitler's Panzers East: World War II Reinterpreted, by Russell H.S. Stolfi. University of Oklahoma Press, 1991. Hardcover. 280 pages. Photographs. Maps. Notes. Bibliography. Index. Reviewed by Joseph Bishop]

A Thoughtful Look at the German-Soviet Clash Reassesses the Second World War
Could Hitler Have Won?
Hitler's Panzers East: World War II Reinterpreted, by Russell H.S. Stolfi. University of Oklahoma Press, 1991. Hardcover. 280 pages. Photographs. Maps. Notes. Bibliography. Index.
Reviewed by Joseph Bishop

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v15/v15n6p38_Bishop.html

How close did Hitler come to winning World War II? What was the real turning point in the war, and why? In this pathbreaking revisionist study, Professor Stolfi provides some startling answers to these questions.

If Hitler had played his cards just a bit differently, contends the author -- a professor of Modern European History at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California -- he could have won the war. German forces came very close to defeating the Soviet Union in 1941. Because Britain alone posed no mortal threat to German power, the defeat of Soviet Russia would effectively have ended the war, resulting in German hegemony over all of Europe. The result would have been a drastic change in the course of world history.

When Americans think of the Second World War, it is understandably most often in terms of the United States role, such as in the D-Day invasion or the war in the Pacific against Japan. Often overlooked or improperly appreciated is the Russo-German conflict, even though it was on the eastern front that most of the fighting took place, and where the war was really decided. The war's greatest land battles were waged in the east, dwarfing those on other fronts. Three out of five German divisions were destroyed by Soviet forces. By the time American troops landed in France in the June 1944 D-Day invasion -- less then a year before the end of the war -- the outcome had already been determined.

Treacherous Surprise Attack?

According to the generally-accepted view of this chapter of history, Hitler's June 22, 1941, "Barbarossa" strike against the Soviet Union was a treacherous surprise attack against a peaceable and fearful neighbor. This view ("proven" at the Nuremberg Tribunal) holds that an insatiably imperialistic Hitler struck against Soviet Russia as part of his mad effort to "conquer the world."

The truth, Stolfi establishes, is quite different. A mass of evidence, including recently uncovered documents from Russian archives, shows instead that the massive Soviet forces encountered by the German invaders right on the western border areas were poised for their own imminent offensive. Writes Stolfi (p. 204):

Hitler seems barely to have beaten Stalin to the punch ... Recently, published evidence and particularly effective arguments show that Stalin began a massive deployment of Soviet forces to the western frontier early in June 1941. The evidence supports a view that Stalin intended to use the forces concentrated in the west as quickly as possible -- probably about mid-July 1941 -- for a Soviet Barbarossa. Statements of Soviet prisoners also support a view that the Soviets intended an attack on Germany in 1941. The extraordinary deployment of the Soviet forces on the western frontier is best explained as an offensive deployment for an attack without full mobilization by extremely powerful forces massed there for that purpose.

Stolfi's view is consistent with the detailed revisionist study by Russian historian Victor Suvorov (Vladimir Rezun), Icebreaker: Who Started the Second World War, as well as research by several German historians.

Hitler's 'Greatest Blunder'?

Hitler's "many detractors," writes Stolfi (p. 207), often point to his decision to invade Soviet Russia as his greatest blunder. Stolfi emphatically disagrees (pp. 206, 208):

The decision to attack the Soviet Union was the correct decision for Germany in July 1940, for whether or not Britain was defeated in the autumn of 1940, Russia would have to be attacked in the campaign season of 1941 ... Hitler made the correct decision at the right time to attack the Soviet Union as early as practicable in 1941. It was the most significant move in his political career. Making that decision in July 1940, he gave Germany a clear chance to win the Second World War in Europe.

As history is revised in accord with the facts, Hitler the insane aggressor becomes Hitler the defender of Germany and Europe, who carried out a preemptive strike against a real aggressor, Stalin, to save his homeland and the West from Soviet tyranny.

Catastrophic Miscalculation?

Other widely-accepted views hold that Hitler, in launching his attack against Russia, grossly underestimated Soviet military capabilities while at the same time overestimating his own, that exhausted German military forces suffered a logistical breakdown within months of the attack, and that road, terrain, and weather conditions precluded a German victory. Stolfi persuasively refutes such explanations as the assumptions of convenient historical hindsight ("it happened that way because it could not have happened any other way").

German planners, he argues, accurately anticipated both the military strength of their Soviet adversaries, as well as the adverse campaigning conditions. German forces were trained and prepared for precisely the campaign that unfolded, and consequently not only kept to their timetable objectives but in many cases exceeded them. Germany's panzer and motorized formations, along with her hard-marching infantry troops, rapidly traversed the primitive roads and terrain with no undue difficulties.

Within just a few weeks after launching "Barbarossa," German forces had succeeded in capturing or destroying eight of nine Soviet field armies, and had essentially shattered the vast Soviet forces facing "Army Group Center." By July 3, 1941 -- just eleven days after launching the Barbarossa attack -- the Soviets had lost 935,000 men (killed, wounded or captured), whereas Germans losses were just 54,892.

Germany's military formations and materiel were still relatively intact in mid-August, and her engineers were rapidly adapting the Soviet rail network to conform with the European gauge width. Meanwhile, Moscow's defenses were still chaotic and disorganized. Almost to a man Germany's officer corps and higher level military leaders were confident that they would soon capture Moscow in a final advance, and win the war in Russia. Even many Russians shared this view. Extensive interrogations of captured Russian officers and troops revealed a widespread belief that the Germans would definitely take Moscow after one more great battle.

Logistically and psychologically, contends Stolfi, German forces were more than adequately poised for a final, successful drive against Moscow -- which was the hub of the Soviet Union's road and rail communications system as well as by far the most important Soviet industrial center. Even taking into account the weather conditions, Stolfi convincingly posits that German forces could have reached their Moscow objective, and even beyond -- before the onset of the rain and mud season in mid-to-late October.

A Fatal Decision

What went wrong? Stolfi points to Hitler's momentous decision in mid-August to divert German forces southward. Overruling objections from several of his generals, Hitler ordered Army Group Center to veer south to first strike into Ukraine and Crimea, smashing the remaining Soviet forces there and capturing major economic and strategic objectives, before resuming the drive on Moscow.

This move, Stolfi asserts, fatally delayed the German offensive and enabled the Soviet forces before Moscow to regroup and strengthen the capital's defenses. When the Germans resumed the advance against Moscow in early October, they achieved great initial victories, but were also forced to contend with the debilitating autumn rain and mud, as well as shorter daylight hours for campaigning. In early December the German offensive ground to a halt in the Moscow suburbs.

Hitler's decision in August 1941 to strike south before continuing the drive east, Stolfi believes, was the critically fatal decision of the war. This, and not the later, "anti-climactic" battles of Stalingrad, Alamein, or Kursk, was the war's real turning point. "...The German failure to seize Moscow in August 1941," he writes (p. 202), "was the turning point in the Russian campaign. After that, the Germans faced certain defeat in the Second World War, an outcome that altered fundamentally the course of events in this century."

As impressive as they are, Stolfi's arguments for this thesis are inconclusive. If Moscow had fallen, would Stalin and the Soviet leadership really have lost popular credibility and authority? Would the Soviet people and troops have become too demoralized to carry on, leading to general military collapse?

Because the nature of the Soviet system and its military was dramatically different than that of Germany's earlier adversaries, the loss of the capital may not have been as critical as Stolfi contends. Moscow's fall may not have rendered untenable the strategic position of the strong Soviet forces still fighting in Ukraine or the Leningrad region. A continued German drive eastward might have dangerously exposed the flanks of Army Group Center to crippling attacks from the still formidable Soviet forces in the north and south. Hitler himself believed that Moscow's capture would not have ended Soviet resistance, but would only have meant a continuation of the war further east or south.

Strategic Considerations

Because he did not believe that his generals understood Germany's immense economic and strategic requirements, or the critical economic and strategic importance of the eastern campaign, Hitler rejected their pleas to push on to Moscow in August 1941.

In this southward drive German forces seized Ukraine, the Donetz basin, and the Crimea, destroying or capturing immense Soviet forces. Added to the earlier captures of Belarus (White Russia), the Baltic lands, and most of European Russia, these new gains denied to the Soviet opponent much of its huge population base as well as a large portion of its resources and industry. These gains deprived the Soviet colossus of a great deal of its ability to mobilize troops and materiel for war, while at the same time greatly strengthening Germany's economic base and war-making ability.

As it was, Germany's capture and occupation for several years of vast Soviet territories, with their enormous economic resources, did indeed enable her to resist the Soviet colossus for much longer than many expected. These victories also provided Germany with at least the possibility of victory. In Hitler's War (London: Focal Point, 1991; pp. 404-405), historian David Irving explains the German leader's reasoning:

It was most urgent in his [Hitler's] view to deprive Stalin of his raw materials and arms industry. Besides, a rapid advance southward would encourage Iran to resist the Anglo-Russian invasion which he already knew was in the cards; in any case, he wanted the Crimea in German hands: it was from Crimean airfields that Russian bombers had recently attacked Romania ... The army high command continued stubbornly with its plans to attack Moscow. Only later was it realized that Hitler's strategy would have offered the better prospects ... "Today I still believe," Göring was to tell his captors, "that had Hitler's original plan of genius not been diluted like that, the eastern campaign would have been decided by early 1942 at the latest."

Other Imponderables

Not discussed in Stolfi's study are additional indeterminate factors, such as the arrival several weeks earlier than usual of the Russian winter of 1941-42, a winter that was possibly also the harshest in several decades. Further imponderables include the reaction of Britain and the United States to the fall of Moscow. We simply do not know whether the fall of the Soviet capital would have moved Britain finally to acknowledge German hegemony on the continent and bring her to the negotiating table, or induce the United States to discontinue military aid to Soviet Russia.

Nor does Stolfi deal with the impact of the massive and rapidly increasing American economic and military aid to the Soviet Union, or its possible effect on the Soviet ability to wage war if the Germans captured Moscow.

As it was, the deliveries of US military supplies already in 1941 may have given the Soviets a psychological and material boost sufficient to insure their survival in late 1941.

Historical 'What Ifs'

Stolfi convincingly demonstrates that the German forces had the capability to at least capture Moscow within this time frame. What will always remain unknown is whether the fall of that city would have automatically led to the collapse of the other fighting fronts in Russia and a German victory, or would merely have been the capture of another major Soviet city in a continuing war.

However fascinating, historical "what ifs" such as Stolfi's can be misleading. In contrast to his provocative thesis, consider this possible scenario: Hitler seizes Moscow in September 1941, but his victorious Army Group Center is threatened with encirclement by the vast remaining Soviet forces deployed in the north and especially the south, striking pincer-like at its flanks. To avoid a catastrophic encirclement, Hitler is forced to withdraw and relinquish Moscow -- and a 1941 victory over the Soviet Union eludes him. Decades later, historians assail Hitler's decision to take Moscow directly, arguing that if only he had struck south first, destroying the large Soviet forces there, and seizing the economic wealth of that region, before striking against Moscow, he would have won the campaign and the war.

'Siege Mentality'

Stolfi contends that Hitler made decisions in keeping with a "siege mentality" based on Germany's harrowing First World War experience of geographic encirclement and economic strangulation. Hitler was acutely conscious of the severe limits to his nation's natural resources and its disadvantageous geographical place in the world. He thus made military decisions with thoughtful regard for these paramount economic and territorial considerations. Hitler, writes Stolfi (p. 211), "was a popular dictator, extraordinarily concerned about his personal popularity and the potential strain on it from the economic rigors of war. He was an uncompromising idealist who saw Germany secure as a great power only by the acquisition of enough contiguous space to ensure economic autarky [self-sufficiency]."

In this regard Stolfi cites (p. 221) Hitler's "Operation Barbarossa" directive of December 18, 1940. "The final objective of the operation," Hitler ordered, "is to erect a barrier against Asiatic Russia on the general line Volga-Archangel [Arkhangelsk]," essentially "a line from which the Russian air force can no longer attack German territory." What these words show, comments Stolfi, "is Hitler's astoundingly conservative cast of mind, pivoting around a Germany-under-siege mentality."

While Hitler stated his intention "to crush Soviet Russia in a rapid campaign," and anticipated a quick Russian campaign that would be concluded by the late summer or fall of 1941, he also foresaw German rule clearly limited to the territory west of the Volga river, apparently accepting a residual Soviet regime to the east. Hitler envisioned a mighty, economically self-sufficient European "fortress," under Germany hegemony, that would be able permanently to withstand a siege by residual Soviet, British, or American forces.

As further evidence of this mentality, Stolfi cites (p. 222) Hitler's words at a high-level conference on November 29, 1941 -- that is, at a moment when Moscow seemed ready to fall: "If we accomplish our European missions, our historical evolution can be successful. Then in the defense of our heritage, we will be able to take advantage of the triumph of our defense over the tank to defend ourselves against all attackers." To help insure a successful defense of this projected eastern barrier, at this meeting Hitler ordered a shift in production toward antitank weapons over tanks. Hitler's words at this conference, Stolfi comments (p. 222), "reveal an outlook one can characterize as concerned and cautious, representing siege thinking."

Stolfi rejects the conventional propaganda image of Hitler as a largely incompetent dictator driven by hysterical hate and limitless lust for conquest. Actually, the author shows, this "concerned and cautious" leader acted with intelligence and reason, giving thoughtful consideration to economic objectives and the capture of strategic areas to insure his nation's survival. It was the often cautious Hitler who had to restrain his generals, and not the reverse.

Sense of Urgency

The author contrasts this "siege thinking" with another aspect of Hitler's temperament -- a remarkable sense of urgency. Stolfi stresses (pp. 205-206, 203-204):

Hitler's political forcefulness and sense of timing to get things done quickly to reach his foreign policy goals were important elements in the remarkable string of foreign policy and war successes from 1935 to 1940.

... Hitler cannot be faulted for lack of forcefulness or pace in his foreign policy; rather, he was a paragon of concentration, force, and speed. While making his foreign policy decisions he was assailed by fears, doubts, and procrastination, but he always overcame them. He impressed his decisive will on his foreign policy opponents from 1935 to August 1939 and achieved every goal without recourse to war... When Hitler reached his greatest decision [to attack Soviet Russia], it was with the same forcefulness and sense of urgency that characterized the past.

Hitler's Blitzaussenpolitik [lightning swift foreign policy] advances and apparent lightning wars complemented one another ... Regarding his decision to attack the Soviet Union, one marvels at the consistency of pattern, the fanatical sense of urgency, and the sensitivity of the policy to time ... Hitler must be seen as attacking the Soviets to achieve the National Socialist Weltanschauung (world view) and end the war in Europe by seizing European Russia and smashing Soviet communism.

Other Possible Turning Points

Unlike Stolfi, some historians maintain that Germany could still have won the war in the East in 1942 or even as late as mid-1943. Some scholars point to the German defeat at Stalingrad (February 2, 1943) as the war's turning point, at least psychologically. Yet even as late as July 1943 Germany was still able to seize the strategic initiative in launching the "Operation Citadel" offensive at Kursk-Orel, a clash that was to prove the greatest tank battle in history.

In Scorched Earth (London: 1970), historian Paul Carell contends that a German military victory against the Soviet Union was still possible as late as the summer of 1943. German forces, he argues, could have prevailed at Kursk, thus retaining the strategic initiative to pursue further victories, but were disengaged prematurely. Carell explains (pp. 87-95):

Just as Waterloo sealed the fate of Napoleon in 1815, putting an end to his rule and changing the face of Europe, so the Russian victory at Kursk heralded a turning-point in the war and led directly, two years later, to the fall of Hitler and the defeat of Germany, and thus changed the shape of the entire world. Seen in this light, Operation Citadel was the decisive battle of the Second World War.

Dispelling Propaganda Myths

Hitler's Panzers East is a solid, well-referenced work with an excellent bibliography that makes good use of archival and interview sources. Written in a clear, dispassionate style, this balanced book is refreshingly free of the all-too-common gratuitous Hitler-bashing or Germanophobia. Unfortunately, numerous textual and date errors show that the manuscript was not carefully proofread. Brought out by a respected academic publisher, professor Stolfi's book has deservedly earned respect and acclaim. Military History (Oct. 1993) lauded it as "reasoned, intelligent and well-informed," and Publisher's Weekly called it "a credible reevaluation of the war." It received reserved commendation from the American Historical Review (June 1993).

While it focuses on the eastern campaign, Hitler's Panzers East is a useful antidote to the seemingly endless blizzard of polemical nonsense that often passes for reputable history about the Second World War. Stolfi deftly demolishes many common propaganda myths about Hitler and wartime Germany's military leadership, as well as widely accepted misconceptions about Soviet policy and intentions.

This book further serves to help discredit popular myths, especially widespread in the United States, based on propaganda "documentaries" and such slanted historical works as William Shirer's bestselling Rise and Fall of the Third Reich. Finally, Hitler's Panzers East points up the yawning chasm between the popular Hollywood image of Hitler and the Third Reich, and the growing consensus of objective 20th-century historians. It is another revisionist milestone that shows how much progress has been made, and how much more work still needs to be done.

[@Cailen.]

Dear Sir

Please immediately remove the comment that has been added to your site under the article about the Adelaide Club. Link below.

https://sacreator.com/adelaide-club-succumbs-to-jewish-supremacism/#top

The comment contains no factual evidence and is defamatory please remove this comment immediately or we will take legal action.

Regards

Rachel Jones
Commercial Systems Manager
Transworld Enterprises Pty Ltd
PO Box 10040
Gouger Street BC
Adelaide  SA  5000
Australia
Phone: +61 8 8110 4140   ▫     Fax: +61 8 8110 4197    ▫    Mobile: +61 412 484 459
rachel.jones@twi.com.au

Even should we beat this rich Jew in court, it would not be much of a win for us other than inflate our ego. However, anybody we use as witnesses in court will without a doubt have their personal and professional lives ruined by both their connection to us and by the Jew himself as he sets out to destroy decent and brave people. A loss would only compound the problems for the witnesses, but wouldn't harm us in any major way. So, for the benefit of our witnesses, I will edit the original text as required, but only to a certain degree.

The origianl text is ...

Comment:

I really couldn't care less about Albert Bensimon's race or religion. Judging him by his own actions, Bensimon is a vile, contemptuous, self righteous, paedophile! He openly flaunts his paedophillia infront of those that work for him making use of the same threat he has for all of his employees; if you speak out, you will not only be fired, but his team of lawyers will make damned sure that you will lose everything you currently own and that you will never work again. Fortunately I do not work for Ben Simon and already own next to nothing.


The real reason Bensimon was refused entry to the Adelaide Club is because of his character – which is quite well known, but in a stereotypical Jewish way, Bensimon had to raise the cry of "anti-Semitism," thereby gathering the forces of Jewish supremacy to battle in his stead. And of course they won because White people just don't have the gumption to stand up for themselves again false accusations of "anti-semite" and "racist." All they ever do is make a feeble attempt to deny it and then give the Jewish supremacists whatever they demand, which is supposed to be for the benefit of all of society, but in reality is just another triumph for Jewish supremacy.

Albert Bensimon should be locked in one of South Australia's deepest and darkest dungeons, nevermind be lauded over as one of the top businessmen of South Australia.

Cailen.

Compare that with the new edited entry. I think it will serve our purposes to the same degree as the last, but there will be no further need for witnesses as it will be an opinion piece such as those commonly written about us in the media.

https://sacreator.com/adelaide-club-succumbs-to-jewish-supremacism

@Cailen.

[@Cailen.]

I have said to many that Russian Communism was just a Nationalist Russian form of Socialism. Like China, it might have had Marxist icons and spouted Marxist diatribe from time to time, but it was Nationalist in its approach to global affairs.

Just one question: Where in the text below is the chastising of Europe for screwing itself into the ground financially, racially and culturally ...? The Chink would not do that. He needs to blame Whitey. Not the refugee army that China is happy to see pollute and destroy old Europa. Meanwhile, China continues with its financial, racial and cultural expansionist policies leading to global domination.

@Cailen.



Jin Liqun: Europe induces 'sloth, indolence'

The chairman of China's sovereign wealth fund remains sceptical about supporting a European bailout.

http://english.aljazeera.net/programmes/talktojazeera/2011/11/2011114434664695.html

As the global financial crisis continues to hit the eurozone, Nicolas Sarkozy, the French president, and other European leaders have been banking on China to step in and wave its magic wand. But is China prepared to bail out Europe?

Al Jazeera's Teymoor Nabili talks to Jin Liqun, the supervising chairman of China Investment Corporation, China's sovereign wealth fund, to find out whether China is willing to invest more money in Europe, in particular in the European Financial Stability Fund (IFSF), which European leaders now want to beef up for future bailouts.

Jin, who has served as China's deputy minister of finance and vice president of the Asian Development Bank, manages $400bn worth of the nation's money through the sovereign wealth fund. He says that unless Europe changes its labour laws and adjusts its welfare system, he does not consider it to be a profitable investment.

If you look at the troubles which happened in European countries, this is purely because of the accumulated troubles of the worn out welfare society. I think the labour laws are outdated. The labour laws induce sloth, indolence, rather than hardworking. The incentive system, is totally out of whack...

Why should, for instance, within [the] eurozone some member's people have to work to 65, even longer, whereas in some other countries they are happily retiring at 55, languishing on the beach? This is unfair...

The welfare system is good for any society to reduce the gap, to help those who happen to have disadvantages, to enjoy the life, but a welfare society should not induce people not to work hard.

[Media: Chaptered | 64 kBit/s | 44.1 kHz | ~178 MB | ~6h28mn]

The award winning British actress Anna Massey CBE reads a collection of highly entertaining fairy stories and folk tales written by The Brothers Grimm. These stories, including Cinderella and Rapunzel are not the predictable yarns about Unicorns and magic, they are definitely somewhat darker!

Brought to life by Anna's wonderful talent for creating original voices, these original versions of the classic Fairy Stories are not only surprising – they're really rather shocking

Media: Chaptered | 64 kBit/s | 44.1 kHz | ~178 MB | ~6h28mn

Filesonic: http://www.filesonic.com/file/3167173134/BG_Fairy_Tales.abook.ws.rar

uploading.com: http://uploading.com/files/8f918m35/BG_Fairy_Tales.abook.ws.rar/

Fileserve: http://www.fileserve.com/file/QS8gFGG/BG_Fairy_Tales.abook.ws.rar

[That any Alien being a free white person]

Passed by the United States Congress,
"An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization" (March 26, 1790).

TEXT SOURCE: 1 Stat. 103-104. edited version: De Pauw, Linda Grant, et al., eds. Documentary History of the First Federal Congress of the United States of America, March 4, 1789 – March 3, 1791. 14 vols. to date. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1972-1995. 6:1516-1522.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That any Alien being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof on application to any common law Court of record in any one of the States wherein he shall have resided for the term of one year at least, and making proof to the satisfaction of such Court that he is a person of good character, and taking the oath or affirmation prescribed by law to support the Constitution of the United States, which Oath or Affirmation such Court shall administer, and the Clerk of such Court shall record such Application, and the proceedings thereon; and thereupon such person shall be considered as a Citizen of the United States. And the children of such person so naturalized, dwelling within the United States, being under the age of twenty one years at the time of such naturalization, shall also be considered as citizens of the United States. And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens: Provided, that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States: Provided also, that no person heretofore proscribed by any States, shall be admitted a citizen as aforesaid, except by an Act of the Legislature of the State in which such person was proscribed.

[Fraudulent Nazi Quotations]

Fraudulent Nazi Quotations

By Mark Weber | http://www.ihr.org/other/weber2011fakequotations.html


Fraudulent quotations attributed to Hitler and other Third Reich leaders have been widely circulated for years. Such quotes are often used by polemicists -- of both the left and the right -- to discredit their ideological adversaries by showing that Nazis held similar views. This tactic works because people have been educated to believe that anything Hitler and other Nazi leaders thought or said was malevolent, wrong-headed or evil, and that no reasonable or ethical person could hold similar views.

Here's a look at a few of the many remarks falsely attributed to Hitler and other top Nazis.

Goebbels: `Truth is the Enemy of the State'

Hitler's propaganda chief, Joseph Goebbels, supposedly said:

"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."

Rush Limbaugh, the popular American radio commentator, is just one of the many influential Americans who has cited this quotation. During a May 2007 radio broadcast he claimed that these remarks are "from Hitler's war room, the Nazi spinmeister-in-chief, Joseph Goebbels," who was "speaking for his cronies in the Nazi party." Limbaugh went on to claim that American "Democrat Party" leaders were using "a version" of Goebbels' technique to try to "repress dissent." And in January 2011 US Congressman Steve Cohen, a Democratic party politician of Tennessee, accused Republicans of propagating "a big lie, just like Goebbels" about a proposed national health care plan.

In fact, Goebbels' views were quite different than what this fraudulent quote suggests. He consistently held that propaganda should be accurate and truthful.

In an address given in September 1934 in Nuremberg, he said: "Good propaganda does not need to lie, indeed it may not lie. It has no reason to fear the truth. It is a mistake to believe that people cannot take the truth. They can. It is only a matter of presenting the truth to people in a way that they will be able to understand. A propaganda that lies proves that it has a bad cause. It cannot be successful in the long run."

In an article written in 1941, he cited examples of false British wartime claims, and went on to charge that British propagandists had adopted the "big lie" technique that Hitler had identified and condemned in his book Mein Kampf. Goebbels wrote: "The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous."

Hitler and Gun Control

In a speech, sometimes said to have been delivered in 1935, Hitler is supposed to have exclaimed: "This year will go down in history! For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!"

This quote has been popular with Americans who defend the constitutional right to "keep and bear arms." It's cited to discredit those who support restrictions on firearms ownership and use. It's also cited to support the often-made charge that Hitler and his government curtailed gun ownership in Germany, and confiscated weapons held by private citizens.

The truth is rather different. When Hitler and his National Socialist Party took power in early 1933, they inherited a somewhat restrictive firearms law that the liberal-democratic "Weimar" government had enacted five years earlier. In 1938 Hitler's government revised the earlier law by loosening those restrictions, thereby enhancing the rights of Germans to own weapons. The most thorough confiscation of firearms ever imposed on Germans was carried out at the end of the Second World War by the occupation forces of the United States and other victorious Allied powers.

Hitler on `Law and Order'

Hitler is supposed to have said during a speech in 1932, shortly before he became Chancellor:

"The streets of our cities are in turmoil. The universities are filled with students rebelling and rioting. Communists are seeking to destroy our country. Russia is threatening us with her might and the Republic is in danger. Yes, danger from within and without. We need law and order! Yes, without law and order our nation cannot survive ... Elect us and we shall restore law and order. We shall, by law and order, be respected among the nations of the world. Without law and order our Republic shall fail."

This quotation, which is meant to embarrass and discredit those who support "law and order," was especially popular with younger Americans during the late 1960s and early 1970s. It appeared on posters and in the 1971 movie "Billy Jack."

In his many election campaign speeches in 1932 Hitler stressed the themes of justice, freedom, jobs and national unity -- not "law and order." German universities in 1932 were not "filled with students rebelling and rioting." In fact, German students were among the most fervent supporters of Hitler and his National Socialist movement.

Goering on Culture

Hermann Goering, a high-ranking Third Reich official, is often quoted as having said: "Whenever I hear the word culture, I reach for my revolver." Reichsmarschall Goering (Göring), who was commander of Germany's air force, would never have said anything like this. Along with other high-level Third Reich leaders, he esteemed the arts, and prided himself on his appreciation of culture.

This quote is a distortion of a line by a character in the play Schlageter by German writer Hanns Johst. The original line (translated) is "When I hear [the word] culture ... I release the safety on my Browning!" A version of this quote is presented in a staged scene in "Why We Fight," a US government wartime propaganda film, to suggest that the typical "Nazi" was an uncultured thug.

Hitler and Conscience

"I am liberating man from the degrading chimera known as conscience," Hitler is supposed to have said. This widely repeated quote appears, for example, in The Great Quotations, a supposedly authoritative collection compiled by Jewish American journalist and author George Seldes. It's a version of a remark attributed to Hitler by Hermann Rauschning in his book, The Voice of Destruction (Conversations with Hitler), which is a source of many fraudulent quotations supposedly based on private talks with Hitler that, in fact, never took place.

The "original" text of this quote, as presented by Rauschning, is: "Providence has ordained that I should be the greatest liberator of humanity. I am freeing men from the restraints of an intelligence that has taken charge; from the dirty and degrading self -mortifications of a chimera called conscience and morality, and from the demands of a freedom and personal independence which only a very few can bear."

In fact, Hitler repeatedly emphasized the importance of acting conscientiously. For example, in at least three different public statements or speeches 1941 alone, he spoke about acting in accord with his conscience. Rudolf Hess, a close friend and trusted colleague, once said that his devotion to Hitler was based in large measure on his regard for Hitler's resolute conscience. In a 1934 speech Hess said: "The conscience of a moral personality is a far greater protection against the misuse of an office than is the supervision of parliament or the separation of powers. I know no one who has a stronger conscience, or is more true to his people, than Adolf Hitler ... The Führer's highest court is his conscience and his responsibility to his people and to history."

Hitler: `Destroy By All Means'

The US government propaganda film, "Why We Fight," quotes Hitler as having said: "My motto is `Destroy by all and any means. National Socialism will reshape the world." This is a version of a remark attributed to Hitler by Hermann Rauschning in his influential book. The "original" text, as presented by Rauschning, is: "I want war. To me all means will be right ... My motto is not "Don't, whatever you do, annoy the enemy! My motto is `Destroy him by all and any means.' I am the one who will wage the war!" Another version of this invented remark appears in the book Hitler and Nazism (1961), by historian Louis Leo Snyder, who was a professor at City College of New York.

Hitler on Terrorism

Hitler has often been quoted as saying: "Terrorism is the best political weapon for nothing drives people harder than a fear of sudden death."

This quote is based on two invented remarks in Hermann Rauschning's mendacious book, The Voice of Destruction.

Hitler: `We Are Barbarians'

Hitler has often been quoted as saying: "They refer to me as an uneducated barbarian. Yes, we are barbarians. We want to be barbarians, it is an honored title to us. We shall rejuvenate the world. This world is near its end."

This is another fraudulent Hitler quote from the fanciful work of Hermann Rauschning.

Hitler and `Brutal Youth'

"A violently active, dominating, intrepid, brutal youth -- that is what I am after ... I want to see in its eyes the gleam of pride and independence, of prey. I will have no intellectual training. Knowledge is the ruin of my young men." This widely cited remark is included, for example, in George Seldes' The Great Quotations. The source cited by Seldes is an item in The Nation by the popular American journalist and author John Gunther (1901-1970).

In fact, this is a version of a remark attributed to Hitler by Hermann Rauschning, whose imaginative work is a source of many phony "quotes." Another fraudulent Hitler remark in this same spirit and from this same source, likewise cited by the supposedly authoritative Seldes, is this: "Universal education is the most corroding and disintegrating poison that liberalism ever invented for its own destruction."

These remarks misrepresent Hitler's real views. In fact, National Socialist Germany was a world leader in science, learning, technology and medicine. Hitler was admired by some of the leading intellectuals of the age, including Knut Hamsun, Ezra Pound, Louis-Ferdinand Celine and Martin Heidegger.



References / For Further Reading

Randall Bytwerk, "False Nazi Quotations" (http://bytwerk.com/gpa/falsenaziquotations.htm)

Paul F. Boller, Jr. and John George, They Never Said It: A Book of Fake Quotes, Misquotes, & Misleading Attributions (New York: Oxford, 1989).

Joseph Goebbels, "From Churchill's Factory of Lies," ("Aus Churchills Lügenfabrik"), January 1941. Reprinted in Zeit ohne Beispiel (http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/goeb29.htm) (1941)

Joseph Goebbels, "Propaganda" (Nuremberg: 1934) (http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/goeb59.htm)

William L. Pierce, Gun Control in Germany 1928-1945 (1994)

John Toland, Adolf Hitler (1976)

Mark Weber, "Goebbels and World War II Propaganda," 2011, (http://www.ihr.org/other/goebbels2011weber.html)

Mark Weber, "Goebbels' Place in History," The Journal of Historical Review, 1995. (http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v15/v15n1p18_Weber.html)

Mark Weber, "Hitler as 'Enlightenment Intellectual': The Enduring Allure of Hitlerism," 1997, (http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v16/v16n5p34_Weber.html)

Mark Weber, "Rauschning's Phony 'Conversations With Hitler': An Update," 1985, (http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v06/v06p499_Weber.html)

[We called our boy Adolf Hitler - but we're not racists]

We called our boy Adolf Hitler - but we're not racists

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/world/we-called-our-boy-adolf-hitler-but-were-not-racists/story-e6frea8l-1226179050588

HEATH and Deborah Campbell have three children: Adolf Hitler, 5, Aryan Nation and Honszlynn Hinler Jeannie, both 3.

They insist they aren't racist - they just like the names.

Heath and Deborah Campbell have covered their house in swastikas and have swastika tattoos.

But still, they insist they aren't racist - they just like swastikas.

[Snip]

"The judge and Division of Youth and Family Services told us that there was no evidence of abuse and that it was the names. They were taken over the children's names," Mr Campbell said. [more ...]


My comment that will be rejected

A former neighbour of mine got into massive gambling debts and changed his name to Joseph Stalin Lastnamewithheld. When asked about it, he would launch into long winded explanations about his hero being Stalin and how this country needs to change - consider the irony that he came here as a refugee from Hungary fleeing from the Iron Curtain of Communist dictatorships? The point is, anyone with a sense of history that questioned his choice in names was immediately accused of being a "Nazi!" If you persisted, he would ring the police, put on his "me no speak English well" act and have you harassed within an inch of your life for whatever it was that he could make up that day. Now, if Joseph Stalin is able to live peacefully and unvilified for his obnoxious beliefs that the worst mass murderer of all time is the greatest man that ever lived and impose them on others, why should little Adolf Hitler not be left alone? Considering Adolf's death count is significantly lower than Stalin's, I think they are just picking on poor little Adolf because those in power are hypocritical haters with no sense of true justice.

@Cailen.

[@Cailen.]

Demand for reparations payments by Whites to muds is a world wide phenomenon.  From Australia to ZiMUDwae the darkies want your green (that's cash, not cannabis for any dopers that might have accidentally stumbled in here). The argument is that we Whites live a life of privilege because our ancestors built a mighty empire on the backs of lower life forms. While true, I for one will certainly not be forking my hard earned cash out to a flock of woolly haired black sheep, complaining that one of my ancestors profited from the wool on their backs. You might think I'm joking, but it is an analogy that fits perfectly.

Consider the animal rights activists: I don't mean the ones that want to put an end to inhumane treatment of animals, such as live exports, and barbaric slaughter techniques such as Kosher and Halal killing. I mean the total loonies that want the cow and the chicken to be allowed to roam free in the countryside, never to run the risk of being slaughtered for food again. The fact is, those animals would not exist if it wasn't for extensive farming practices and animal husbandry. The same goes for the so-called African-American. Without slavery, he would not exist today. Without his refusal to return home when given the opportunity by Presidents Lincoln, Munroe et al, he wouldn't even be in America today with his hand out demanding reparations. And yet, in Australia where Black slavery was prevented right from first settlement on White Victory Day in 1788, the local Blacks also have their hand out demanding their own form of reparations; even, or should I say especially those that are 1/64th black demand and expect their wad of green. What the animal rights loonies and the reparations beggars both rely on is guilt. And because the White man is the only species in this world capable of fully surrendering himself to outwardly imposed feelings of guilt and remorse, it is Whitey that's going to lose.

But hey, while I'm on the subject, let's not talk about the White slaves that settled America and Australia. Let's not talk about their descendants being proud of their convict histories.  Whitey being the privileged is banned from the reparations and racial and cultural pride table.

Following is a video on the subject of Reparations from Penn and Teller. Probably 90% of the video is something we can agree on. The other 10%? Being libtards (they make the deliberate mistake of confusing skin colour with race as many Jews pretend and libtards do), they preach about racial and national pride being a sin, and no mention of the Germans that were locked up in the American concentration camps during White War II (a group that has rejected reparations for themselves). Basically the standard Jewish/Red insidiousness that goes with everything available in the mainstream media today.

Apart from that, enjoy the video and I hope you pick up some useful arguments from it.

@Cailen.

VIDEO DELETED AT SOURCE
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0805440/
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=penn+%26+teller+bullshit+"reparations"

Replacement Video
Penn & Teller: Bullshit! Explain Wealth Redistribution

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pz2p4EQtEXs

[@Cailen.]

What I mean to say is, why can't we do our own prevention programme for alcoholics based on Salubrious Living  and adherence to Creativity in its purest form? For that matter, why not for junk food-aholics, bulimics and the rest? An all encompassing programme that is set up to provide a service, promote our religion and continues with our ultimate goal of saving the White Race.

A rough outline would be accepting responsibility for your own actions. Recognise why you drink/eat/chunder as you do. Admit it. Move on and treat it with a special diet you must adhere to - the detox. In the long term, change the life pattern that causes you to drink/eat/chunder, and above all, you must embrace Creativity.

AA has a "Big Book" about this

http://www.aa.org/bigbookonline that we could probably begin by parodying (or would that be blaspheming?), and then we would make our own cuts and additions until the Christinsane crap made sense to us and actually did some good for people. If we are able to devise a comprehensive course of our own, and throw in a little councillor training at a night school for our ministers, I think it would do wonders for Creativity and for the White Race.

What do you think?

@Cailen.

P.S. And before anyone asks, the idea popped up while watching a Penn and Teller special about AA.

http://www.megavideo.com/?v=2R8X2IGV

No email given.
According to our statistics, the visitor is: http://www.ip-adress.com/ip_tracer/140.160.86.144
Which traces to Western Washington University: http://www.wwu.edu (Obviously so rich that the visitor has never had to face half a dozen niggers kicking them unconscious and the coppers threatening to charge them with a hate crime if they make a complaint about it).

FirstName: London
LastName: Smith
comments: I would just like to say all of you white supremacist ass-holes are beyond ignorant and vile. I am a white woman who loves EVERYONE despite their color. But I make an exception for people like you. I do not love ignorant scum bags such as yourselves because YOU are the spawn of satan. You call yourselves a church?! By what standards?! What merit do you have to call yourself a church. And furthermore, \"god\" did not give you the right to kill people based on their color. You are NOT better than anyone, in fact, you are lower on this earth than dirt itself. Our world would be a much better, cleaner place if people like you did not exist. I really hope one day you wake up and see what a douche bag you are. P.s, I hope you don\'t actually think there will be a \"racial holy war\" Even if there was you wouldn\'t win you idiot, your ignorant followers make up less than 2% of the U.S population and that is not enough to make an impact and eliminate races. AND your \"followers\" hide behind their computer screens and express their hate but I guarantee you once you call on them to do your dirty work they will not leave the comfort of their homes. Good luck winning your ridiculous war with all of the 1000 of you whom exist. YOU SUCK!

[2003-03-01 Race-Hate Websites Targeting Children]

2003-03-01 Race-Hate Websites Targeting Children



https://creativityalliance.com/forum/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view;id=1297

From the Adelaide Advertiser (South Australia) | March 01, 30 AC (2003 CE)
Re The former WCOTC SA website at http://creator.org/southaustralia
Archived at http://wayback.archive.org/web/*/http://www.creator.org/southaustralia
Now the Church of Creativity at https://sacreator.com

[Pardon hope as Britain asked to reopen Breaker Morant case]

Pardon hope as Britain asked to reopen Breaker Morant case

Ian McPhedran | Herald Sun | October 21, 2011

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/a-break-at-last-for-breaker-morant/story-e6frf7jx-1226172494878

ALMOST 110 years after he was executed by firing squad, "Breaker" Morant is a step closer to a pardon.

The Federal Government is to ask Britain to reopen the case of Morant and Peter Handcock - the only Australian soldiers executed as war criminals.

Attorney-General Robert McClelland has indicated he will write to Britain's Defence Secretary asking him to revisit the case because there had been a "denial of procedural fairness".

Material uncovered from the British archives ... suggests lieutenants Morant and Handcock and comrade George Witton were following orders in killing Boer prisoners in August and September 1901.

The archive papers include an opinion from the Judge Advocate General, Col James St. Clair, that the "no prisoners" order was issued by Morant's superiors, captains Alfred Taylor and Percy Hunt ... intelligence officer for British commander-in-chief Lord Kitchener [more ...]

Breaker Morant Film Trailer

Breaker Morant - Closing Argument

Morant Pardon Rejected

Last year's attempt at a pardon quashed

Comment:

So, according to Australia's Federal Attorney-General, a soldier who murders another and says "I was just obeying orders" is not guilty of any offence. Following the same reasoning, the Federal Attorney-General should also publicly apologise to all Germans and those who worked for the Germans during the Second World White War for Australia's part in the persecution of men that were only following orders. After all is said and done, the Jew (an only an anti-Semite would doubt the veracity of a Jew) claims that Adolf was originator of every order ending in an "atrocity" or "genocide" in the Third Reich. So following the reasoning of the Australia's Attorney-General, only Adolf can be charged and punished. Since Adolf was already dead by the close of the war, the Nuremberg and subsequent trials were and ARE the illegal persecution of innocent men. CASE DISMISSED! End of Holohoax guilt. End of Jewish domination.

Things would be a lot easier if they worked that way.

The truth about Breaker Morant

Under the laws of the time, he was guilty of murder because he carried out the offence. As an officer, he was aware of what could and could not be done in time of war. We know without a doubt that Morant and his co-accused were scapegoats for their military and political superiors, but that does not make them any less guilty of the murder of White South Africans, or the retrospective laws used at the Nuremberg Trials (in 1902 and indeed until 1945, following orders was justification for war crimes and it was the commander who gave the order that was guilty of the war crime - the Nuremberg trials were held under the false authority of new, retrospective laws designed to do in peacetime what bombs and bullets could not do during wartime). Further, Australia was a new nation barely a few months old when the crimes were committed, and did not have a standing army of its own. Which means that Morant was under the rule of British military law. Execution for any number of minor offences was standard procedure under British military law, and murder was no exception. So Australia's claim to never have executed an Australian soldier because of lessons learned from the Breaker Morant incident - no matter what the crime was - doesn't hold water here.  Especially when we have a military system in Australia that traditionally discharges the soldier at the moment of the accusation and then tries him as a civilian. I wonder how many former Australian soldiers have been sentenced to death using that method? That doesn't say much for Australia's moral stance re Morant.


And now we come to the feel good, politically correct parts of the case

Now that South Africa is under the control of Black Supremacists, who the hell is there to complain about the Australian government attempting to pardon the murderers of Boer insurgents? Boer soldiers? Farmers in defence of their land? White South African farmers? Certainly not the South African government. Or anyone in the Australian government - past or present - which itself claims responsibility for the war against White South Africa. See https://creativityalliance.com/forum/index.php?topic=5062 Perhaps the Attorney-General applauds the ongoing extermination of White South Africans? But then, maybe I am going to far? Because surely no member of a modern, democratically elected government in today's world would openly praise the killing of innocent White farmers? Or would they ...?

Nelson Mandela sings about killing whites

A personal touch with a message for the AG

My own family history has at least two Great ... Grandfathers serving in the Boer War and Zulu Wars before that with the Argyles and Sutherland Highlanders, and the Royal Scots Fusiliers. As many would say, a proud military tradition within the family. However, if they were to be convicted of war crimes retrospectively, I would suck it up. Tell the truth and get on with my life without any change. I would do the same again if it turned out that they were murdered by Boers that refused to take any prisoners. But I would not be a hypocrite about it and separate the  duties and actions of my ancestors from those of any other soldier from his or any other comparable period in history.

History is history. Put all history under a magnifying glass Mr Attorney-General; not just the aspects that make you feel good - or get you a vote and a pile of Jewish gold.

@Cailen.


For any South Africans (or anyone else for that matter) who would like to protest the actions of Australian Federal Attorney-General Robert McLelland MP, his contact details are:

http://www.attorneygeneral.gov.au
http://www.robertmcclelland.com.au

Parliament House Office:
Parliament House
Canberra ACT 2600
Tel: (02) 6277 7300
Fax: (02) 6273 4102
Email: attorney@ag.gov.au

Online Contact Form:
http://www.attorneygeneral.gov.au/www/ministers/mcclelland.nsf/Page/Contact_EmailtheAttorney

Electorate Office:
202, 13A Montgomery St,
Kogarah NSW 2217

Postal Address:
PO Box 32
Kogarah NSW 2217  
Tel: (02) 9553 4111
Fax: (02) 9553 0855

['Tintin in Congo' is 'paternalistic', not racist, court told]

'Tintin in Congo' is 'paternalistic', not racist, court told

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5h_wdkg_K1omUQEkR_FDvZ_TibZKA?docId=CNG.14aedb15885aaac4cb5e428231bbfdcb.1e1

BRUSSELS — Publishers of "Tintin in Congo" denied racism charges against the controversial comic book Friday, telling a Belgian court it reflected the "kind paternalism" of the 1930s, when it was penned.

[Snip]

Lawyers for Bienvenu Mbutu Mondondo, a Congolese citizen who brought the charges, claim the book to be "a justification of colonisation and of white supremacy" that should be deemed racist under Belgian law and pulled off shelves.

Publishers of "Tintin in Congo" denied racism charges against the controversial comic book (AFP/File, Georges Gobet)

Rejecting the charge as "a totally twisted reading" of the book, which has sold 10 million copies worldwide, the lawyer for the publisher and the copyright firm, Alain Berenboom, said Herge's book was a mere reflection of his times.

[Snip]

He said that should the book be banned or the publisers ordered to add a warning to a new edition, they might as well take the knife "to (Charles) Dickens on the Jews, Jules Verne on blacks or the Bible's attitude towards women." [more ...]

'Tintin in the Congo' lawsuit in Brussels

Download and View the PDF here: http://thepiratebay.org/search/tintin%20in%20the%20congo/0/99/600


Comment:

I was always a big fan of Tintin and Asterix and Obelix as a kid. At the time I devoured everything I could find on the characters. Even today I have them on disc and put them on when kids come over. The problem these days is that the kids only seem to want Jap Manga cartoons and the moralistic have a good time at nobody else's expense is just not good enough for them. So here's the thing Brothers and Sisters, don't bring your kids around my home unless you want to put up with weeks of moaning about how Uncle Cailen forced the little horrors to shutup, watch Tintin and behave like respectable proto-Creators, instead of screaming at Jap kiddy-pseudo-porn.

@Cailen.

[A New book from award winning reporter Colin Flaherty]

http://www.whitegirlbleedalot.com/

A New book from award winning reporter Colin Flaherty

EXCERPT

Race riots are back.

Along with widespread racial crime and violence.

In hundreds of episodes in more than 50 cities since 2010,  groups of black people are roaming the streets of America — assaulting, intimidating, stalking, threatening, vandalizing, stealing, shooting, stabbing, even raping and killing.

But local media and public officials are silent. Crime is color blind, says a Milwaukee police chief. Race is not important,  a Chicago newspaper editor says.

That denies the obvious: America is the most race conscious society in the world.

[Torrent download software]

http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/6255455/David_Duke_-_My_Awakening__Audio_Book_2011_--_Latest

Torrent download software (if you need it) http://utorrent.com




If you have a torrent with the previous version ... Please delete and seed this NEW updated version!

Thanks!

DrDDuke




The latest 2011 updated audio edition - Remastered of Official downloadable audio version of Dr. David Duke's worldwide bestseller in four parts:

Please Be Sure to Seed!

This is an amazing book. If you have a truly open mind and can think for yourself rather than let the globalist media do your thinking for you then you will find this book one of the most insightful that you have ever read.

For information on obtaining the printed version with footnotes, charts and illustrations and complete index:


TABLE OF CONTENTS

New 2011 Introduction by Dr. David Duke

Author PREFACE

PART I:  AN AMERICAN SON

1. AN AMERICAN SON                           1
2. SANCTUARY IN BOOKS AND NATURE           11
3. THE TRANSFORMATION OF A SON OF THE SOUTH   21

PART II: RACE AND REALITY

4.   RACE AND REASON                           33
5.   A QUESTION OF INTELLIGENCE           41
6.   HEREDITY OR ENVIRONMENT?           47
7.   RACE AND INTELLIGENCE                   55
8.   THE ROOTS OF RACIAL DIFFERENCE           71
9.   THE EVOLUTION OF RACE                   79
10.   RACE HISTORY                          109
11.   RACE AND SOCIETY                  127
12.   THE RISING TIDE OF COLOR               169
13.   SEX AND SOCIETY   185

PART III:  THE JEWISH QUESTION

14.   THE JEWISH QUESTION                  209
15.   THE ROOTS OF JEWISH SUPREMACISM          227
16.   CHRISTIANITY, JUDAISM & ISLAM          247
17.   JEWS, COMMUNISM AND CIVIL RIGHTS       263
18.   JEWISH MEDIA SUPREMACY   281
19.   JEWISH POLITICAL SUPREMACY          307
20.   THE ROOTS OF ANTI-SEMITISM I: ECONOMIC EXPLOITATION 323
21.   THE ROOTS OF ANTI-SEMITISM II: CRIME AND TREACHERY  339
22.   ISRAEL I : A JEWISH SUPREMACIST STATE               367
23.   ISRAEL II: SUPREMACISM THROUGH TERROR               383
24.   ISRAEL III: TREACHERY AGAINST AMERICA               399
25.   A HOLOCAUST INQUIRY                               429
26.   THE JEWISH LED INVASION                               477
27.   JEWISH EVOLUTIONARY STRATEGY AND CLAIMS OF JEWISH SUPERIORITY 487

PART IV : THE FIGHT FOR THE TRUTH

28.   MY BEGINNING ACTIVISM   511
29.   AN LSU WHITE TIGER      523
30.   AROUND THE WORLD   539
31.   MY INDIAN ODYSSEY: A GHOST FROM INDIA HAUNTS ME STILL 547
32.   A TASTE OF ISRAEL   557
33.   GREECE: A CELEBRATION OF LIFE   565
34.   TO EUROPE AND HOME           575
35.   IN THE BELLY OF THE BEAST   587
36.   THE KNIGHTS OF THE KU KLUX KLAN   601
37.   THE KLAN RISES                   607
38.   THE GRAND DRAGON AND THE JEWISH PSYCHE   625
39.   DISILLUSIONMENT AND NEW DIRECTIONS   631
40.   POLITICAL VICTORY   635
41.   AN ARYAN VISION           661
42.   WHAT WE MUST DO NOW   691

INDEX      697
NOTES   707

[Example 6:]

A portion from one of one of my old websites (World Church of the Creator South Australia to be exact) on the (in)Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC) website ...

http://www.humanrights.gov.au/racial_discrimination/cyberracism/examples.html

NOT WHITE ... NOT WELCOME (one of my old slogans from the 90's)

Example 6:

One page, entitled "Politically Incorrect Humour", contains the following:

"Dictionary: Coon (c-oo-n) n. Nigger (nig-er) n. Abo (a-bb-o) n. Boong (b-OO-ng) n.
An Australian anthropoid scrub ape of the primate family Austropongidae (superfamily cercopithecoidea). Escaping from Africa in prehistory, these wild creatures now roam freely, while destroying the economic and social infrastructures of Australia and various other nations. These flamboyant sub-humans love to consume large quantities of greasy fried chicken, inhale petroleum gasoline and listen to fellow apes "sing" rhymes over deaf beats. One can find these lazy sub-humans infesting areas of the world called urban slums."


"How do you get a coon out of a tree?
Cut the rope."

"How do you make a dead coon float?
Take your foot off its head and let it rise to the surface."

"What is the correct way to stare at a coon?
Down a gun barrel."

"What's the difference between a Jew and a pizza?
Pizzas don't scream when you put them in the oven."

I want to be white on Tyra Banks show

[Just Say No To Racial Suicide]

Just Say No To Racial Suicide



https://creativityalliance.com/forum/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view;id=1291

Scaled down version for preview only.

@Cailen.

[@Cailen.]

Take note: This article is 100% accurate and shows why Creativity is the Only Salvation for the White Race (without once mentioning Creativity).

@Cailen.

The case for the White racialist Right is often made in terms of racial or cultural preservation. A civilisation, the argument goes, is inextricably linked with the genius of a race, and, because the Western civilisation was created by the White race, and Western civilisation is unique and an asset to humanity, the race must be preserved so that the civilisation may continue. A variation of this argument is that the White race itself is unique, because it created Western civilisation. Yet another variation is that the White race must be preserved because White folk have the right to exist as a distinct people, and to live how they like, among whom they like, just like any other people on Earth.

I have never seen this argument work with anyone outside of the racialist Right. At best, ordinary White folk outside the movement are left cold by appeals to their collective self-preservation; at worst, they react negatively, and dismiss the appeal as hateful nonsense, Nazism, and a rationale for genocide.

This is baffling, and it is certainly frustrating, at least for those of us who care about the future of the White race, but there are good reasons for this.

Firstly, Western civilisation is highly individualistic—individualism being, in fact, one of the principal traits that contribute to the uniqueness of Western civilisation.

This is particularly true among Anglo-Saxon folk, probably the most individualistic Westerners of all, responsible for extremist ideologies like Liberalism, and thanks to whose fanatical attachment to universalist abstractions has caused individualism across the West to be exacerbated to the point of fundamentalism.

Both the cause and the result of this is that White folk, already weakly ethnocentric by nature, have become culturally much less ethnocentric, much less racial, than other peoples of the world.

Western man sees himself as an autonomous, or sovereign individual, as a generic man, who may be from a town, a state or county, or a country; who may support a football team; who may belong to a leisure subculture; who may belong to a church, or a religious denomination; who may work for a given company, or work in a given industry. Very rarely—and only because minorities, politically correct politicians, and the multiculturalist media remind him—he remembers that he happens to be White.

In fact, when he develops friendships with non-Whites, he often forgets that the non-White is not of the same race as he is. The non-racial nature of his identity and self-concept is such that even drawing attention to Whites in private conversation is socially awkward.

This is not to say that he is incapable of a White racial identity, because the various identitarian political parties in Europe and the various forms of White advocacy in the United States are proof that he is. But, it requires a much higher level of existential threat, real or perceived, for Western man to adopt such an identity. Before he does so he is more likely to adopt all manner of other collective identities, a racial one being the very last resort.

It is only those who are contrarian by nature, obdurately independent, or unusually principled, who adopt racial identities today.

Thus, an appeal to racial self-preservation means nothing to someone for whom his race is so unimportant.

And it means even less when the surrounding culture only sanctions a negative White identity as part of a narrative that depicts Whites as privileged enslavers and oppressors.

Secondly, the threat of racial extinction seems so remote to most White folk as to appear but a preposterous delusion. Many Whites remain unaware of the extent to which their homelands have been colonised because the different races have automatically—explicitly or implicitly—self-segregated into ethnic or racial communities, and diversity is something they only encounter in the unreal worlds of television, airports, offices, and the public spaces of metropolitan areas, while commuting to their all- or nearly all-White peripheral enclaves.

What is more, while most White folk are aware and will openly acknowledge that the ethnic composition of their native countries has changed, the change, which in most cases he has witnessed from afar, and which in many cases began before he was born, has taken decades to occur. Racial extinction, therefore, seems to them so far off as to be of no personal import. 'I won't be here to see it, so what do I care?'

There is also a certain normalcy bias. So far most Whites, and almost all the Whites with meaningful power in our societies, have successfully avoided most of the unpleasantness of diversity. To them the prospect of extinction seems doubly remote.

Equally remote is the unpleasantness they would experience as a dispossessed minority, following a change in the balance of power away from the Whites. Comparatively few Whites, except some of those now residing in former colonies like South Africa, have any real experience of life as a dispossessed minority. The experience of those in highly diversified Western cities, like London or Los Angeles, is relatively recent and can be conceived in ways other than as an ontological threat as a race: it can be conceived in terms of political correctness being a nuisance; immigration being a requisite for economic growth, propping up state pension funds, and 'doing the jobs that Whites refuse to do'; and muggings, rapes, and murders being part and parcel of living in a large city, easily avoided through sensible precautions.

This makes it easy for White folk to believe the narrative of the radical Left, which explains the extinction scenario as a concoction of paranoid, fear-mongering haters.

Thirdly, preservation is about the past, and appeals to something of the past in a culture that prizes progress and modernity is a marker of irrelevance.

To frame the battle against the radical Left in terms of preserving the race is to cast oneself as a conservative. And a conservative is always easy pickings, because he negates the new without ideas of his own; he represents stasis, ossification, museology—concepts linked to old age.

Against him the radical Leftist can easily cast himself as a force of innovation, as the voice of the future, because he does have an idea of his own: his is an act of affirmation. What he affirms may now be old, decrepit, orthodox; it may have been exhausted, it may be bankrupt, and, because of its inherently destructive nature, it may offer no way out; but an affirmation is always more appealing than a negation, and the Leftist's affirmation, though of an old idea, is newer than the idea defended by the conservative, which is even older.

Worse still, conservatives seek to conserve the ideas of superseded radicals, so he is by implication a dealer in antiquated, second-hand goods.

Hence, why scribblers of the radical Left strain to portray their enemy's events as gatherings of superannuated pensioners, consigned to irrelevance and reduced to waving an arthritic fist at a world that has left them behind.

Hence, why the radical Left loves the racial preservation argument. For the reasons given above, its ideologues and supporters understand better than anyone the degree to which said argument is an own-goal for their enemies. After all, it was the radical Left that campaigned to move the goalposts further apart, and to hire a midget for a goalie.

The racial preservation argument is only good for 1) endangered non-White ethnic groups, and 2) racialist Right-wingers in need of self-justification.

White racial preservationism is dead.

What, then, is the alternative?

As I said earlier, it is always better to affirm rather than to negate; to be for something rather than against the opposite.

Therefore, rather than speaking in terms of preservation, we need to speak in terms of destiny; not in terms of what we are, let alone what we were, but in terms of what we can be, of what we ought to be, of what we must be.

Rather than lament the loss of the West, we must pursue its future glory; we need to imagine it, to daydream, to fantasise about it, and we need to project our visions out there, in the most seductive manner possible, with the most modern media, methods, and techniques.

If we are not masters of the present it is because the radical Left defined it in the past as their glorious future.

We can only be masters of the future if we define it ourselves.

Framing our proposition in terms of destiny is utopian, and implies regeneration and rebirth. In other words, it implies a renaissance.

And after so many decades of misery under the Left; after so many decades of broken promises, failure, and decline; after so many decades of disillusion, scepticism, cynicism, guilt-mongering, and forced apologies, people in the West are crying out for a renaissance, for strength, for pride, for glory.

A renaissance, or rebirth, goes well with a traditional outlook. Tradition is the ongoing affirmation of the archaic, which is endlessly regenerated and renewed, always rooted in the past, but also always futuristic.

Hence, why a radical traditionalist outlook is also called archeofuturist.

Framing our proposition in such terms also avoids the negativity of a preservationist argument, with its implied fear and pessimism. Because it implies fear and pessimism, such an argument is the marker of a losing faction, of people who have lost power and are en route also to lose their future. And with good reason, according to the Left, since those who talk about preserving the White race are an evil anachronism.

As no one wants to be part of that, doing away with the fearful and pessimistic preservation argument further eliminates the risk of denial, for most find living in denial preferable to being sober realists.

One additional advantage: a utopian conception of destiny cannot be deconstructed, cannot be disproven, because it is about belief; whereas arguments about preservation can be subjected to forensic investigation, to case-making, because there is a historical record that can be used and interpreted as evidence to support any imaginable position, including the revisionist slander preferred by the Left. Facts can be neutralised with other facts, logical arguments with other logical arguments, and rationalisations with other rationalisations, ad infinitum; but belief cannot be paralysed in this fashion because it is transcendent, metaphysical, not of this world.

Ultimately, to get us from here to there, we have to know in our hearts, and visualise in our minds, what there could, ought, must look like. It is about ideals—about ideals that give life meaning, that cause individualist man to reach outwards, higher, beyond. It is, in short, about being Westerners.

Alex Kurtagic - Occidental Quarterly
http://www.toqonline.com/blog/white-preservationism-is-dead/

[@Cailen.]

Went to the ISD Concert in Melbourne (Victoria, Australia) this weekend. 1,500 KM round trip at 9 hours each way. Stayed at Reverend S.'s home over the weekend. Had a good time there and at the concert where I met some new faces and reacquainted myself with some old ones, and wherever I went and no matter whom I spoke with, I (as a Creator) was always welcomed as a brother.

Also, I wasn't the only one there from South Australia. In fact, I think we (the South Australians - B&H, Creativity Alliance, and Australia First) may have been the largest contingent there.

As much as I enjoyed the music, someone else will have to give a review of that, because other than a few Open Season songs, the rest were all new to me and outside my usual genre.

I recommend ISD to anyone with an interest in Racial Loyalty and a liking for hard rock music.

Edit 2018: Creators do not associate with Skinheads. Going to that concert only opened Creativity and me personally up to the Skinhead world of bitching and kindergarten antics. Going to that concert in 2011 taught me that skinheads are the same WIGGAS WITH SWASTIKAS no matter where they are in the world.

@Cailen.

[@Cailen.]

This one doesn't even deserve a reply ... unless it pesters me like they often do 

@Cailen.

-----Original Message-----
From: talsaleem@illuminarecreations.com
Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 4:17 AM
To: PM@creativityalliance.com
Subject: Documentary Film Interview Request

Pontifex Maximus,

My name is Talal H. Alsaleem. I am the owner of Illuminare Creations, an
upcoming production company that specializes in making documentaries about
issues of social significance. The mission of Illuminare Creations is to
provide the general public with a unique, unbiased presentation of the
issues depicted in our films.

Currently, I am working on a film that explores the power of individual
beliefs and shared values of all different kinds of social groups and the
interests they represent.  The purpose of the film is to investigate
commonalties and differences between individuals regardless of their
belief systems.  The goal I am hoping to achieve is to provide the public
with an opportunity to understand why people believe what they believe or
do what they do outside the context of the shared beliefs and value
systems they represent.  My hope is to elicit empathy and understanding
which can serve as ground for communication about our differences and
their origin.

The film will be comprised of interviews with many individuals from varied
backgrounds and interests that represent American society. The focus of
the film is not on the organization that these individuals represent, but
is on the individuals themselves. The goal here is to examine the
psychosocial forces and motivations that drive individuals to strongly
advocate for a cause.

It is note-worthy to emphasize that the project is not an attempt compare
different groups or organizations to one another, but rather to find the
commonalities different individuals experience in their pursuit of the
causes they advocate for.

There are no spiritual, philosophical, or
political agendas behind the project other than the scientific agenda that
is aimed at bettering our understanding of our human existence.

As far as the target audience, there is no clear marketing plan at the
current moment, but the film is intended for viewing by the general
public.

The reason you were approached for this project is solely based on the
online research which revealed that you are the communication contact for
the Creativity Alliance.

This is a privately funded project by myself for the sole purpose of
enhancing the public awareness. This means that there is no monetary
compensation for the participation in the project. If this is something
you are interested in please contact directly to discuss the details.


If you are not interested in participating in this project or I was
mistaken in my research that lead me to you please forgive my intrusion. I
would also appreciate it if you can direct me to individuals that you know
of in your circle, who might be interested in participating in the
project. Thank you for taking the time to read my email and I look forward
to your response.

Sincerely,

Talal H. Alsaleem
Chief Executive Officer
Illuminare Creations

[@Cailen.]

Typically the attachment of my name to a comment or letter to a Murdoch paper in Australia is enough to have it censored. Ordinarily the media are able to make up whatever they like about us and refuse us our right of reply; but not today. With Murdoch's chief neo-Con journo, Andrew Bolt being found guilty under racial vilification law for telling the truth about wealthy Whites with barely a single drop of Abo blood in their veins, milking the system for personal gain by fraudulently demanding that their Aboriginality be recognised and subsidised by the Australian tax payer, the Murdoch Empire Downunder has gone into defence mode. Since this is a freedom of speech issue, Murdoch's hacks are rightly playing the free speech card. However, this also plays into our hands because instead of just pretending to play the righteous defenders of free speech as they always do, Murdoch's Empire has been forced to put its usual hypocrisy aside and allow genuine free speech lest they be caught out by the gullible, dollar holding public for being the two-faced, manipulative bastards that they are. And so, even our controversial opinions, once branded as "White Supremacist" and banned by the censors are able to get through the Jewish ideological security net. Don't kid yourself. The moment the free speech subject begins to die down, Murdoch's Empire will revert to its true hypocritical/Jewish nature. True free speech will be tossed out the window and the papers will go back to its main task of destroying the White Race. So, while the situation is in our favour, make the most of it. Get writing.

@Cailen.

From https://sacreator.com/adelaide-advertiser-editor-hypocrite-extraordinaire

Melvin Mansell, the Editor of arguably the most extreme Left of the Murdoch Empire's Australian newspapers, the Adelaide Advertiser – the man who personally put a stop to interviews of real Creators in Australia because we do not fit the mentally deficient, violent neo-Nazi image so carefully concocted by Hollywood scriptwriters, and demands that all articles written about Creativity within the Australian portion of the Murdoch Empire are sent to him so that he can personally ensure that the articles remain devoid of truth and strip the humanity from all Creators – defends neo-Con and fellow Murdoch Empire journalist Andrew Bolt and freedom of speech.

Google Search: Andrew Bolt Racial Vilification Decision

Editorial: Court muddies the waters for free speech

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/opinion/editorial-court-muddies-the-waters-for-free-speech/story-e6freabl-1226154437456

Melvin Mansell | The Advertiser | September 30, 2011

THE full ramifications of this week's Federal Court judgment against Melbourne columnist Andrew Bolt for breaching racial discrimination laws are still unknown.

But there is no doubt the decision has further muddied the waters for proponents of freedom of speech and freedom of the press.

[snip]

There is perhaps a tendency to take for granted concepts such as freedom of speech and freedom of the press.

But to remain a free country we need to be able to discuss any subject without fear. If you don't like the views of Andrew Bolt the answer is not to shut him down. The answer does not lie with less debate. The answer lies with more debate, more talking, more exchanging of ideas.

Anything else diminishes us as a society.



Comment:
(Surprisingly) The Following comment can also be read and commented on at the above article's comments page – Comment #8.
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/opinion/editorial-court-muddies-the-waters-for-free-speech/comments-e6freabl-1226154437456


(To Melvin Mansell,)

While I agree with your defence of Andrew Bolt, I say bollocks to your hypocrisy! As Editor of the Adelaide Advertiser, you are guilty of shutting down discussion, exchange of ideas and debate on any subject that does not match your totalitarian, Marxist ideology. That you choose to defend Andrew Bolt is not testimony to your belief in freedom of speech, but is instead testimony to your belief in a dictatorial press, libelling the non-politically correct as a matter of due course. You rightly fear for your own livelihood, but you are a bloody hypocrite and you know it.

Cailen Cambeul of Oaklands Park.

For more information on Andrew Bolt see ZOG-bot Andrew Bolt reveals his true "colours"!  in the Downunder News section at https://creativityalliance.com/forum/index.php?topic=5968.0

[Bankstown in Sydney's Western Suburbs:]

Bankstown in Sydney's Western Suburbs: Mouhamad Khaled, his race-traitor girlfriend Daphne Florence Austin and his father Walid Khaled went on a bloody rampage after a mix up at the order counter at McDonald's fast food outlet resulted in the Muslims receiving a burger containing bacon.

Unable to restrain themselves, the Muslims began abusing counter staff. Police officers at the scene - probationary Constable Matthew Sutherland and Senior Constable Alicia Bridges - stepped in and were assaulted, forcing them to use batons and capsicum spray to detain the ambassadors for the religion of peace.

Image: Mouhamad Khaled and race-traitor Daphne Austin leaving Court. Source: The Daily Telegraph

More at http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/sydney-nsw/court-hears-how-bacon-led-to-big-mac-attack/story-e6freuzi-1226147303697

[Note:]

Note: The Creativity Alliance was formerly known as the White Crusaders of the RaHoWa
http://www.google.com/search?q=white+crusaders+of+the+rahowa

Home detention spent posting racist statements online

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/270985

A Taupo Nazi sympathiser sentenced to home detention for a racially motivated attack on an Asian teenager has spent his time at home posting white supremacist statements online and making light of his sentence.

Brendon Rimmer was sentence to six months home detention in the Taupo District Court this month and ordered to pay $350 reparation after pleading guilty to three charges of common assault.

The charges relate to an incident in Napier in July when Rimmer approached a group of four teenagers - aged between 15 and 17 - and verbally abused them before assaulting some of them.

According to the police summary of facts Rimmer asked "why are you hanging around with this chink?". He then asked an Asian teenager what he was doing in "my country" before saying "why are you here? Get out of my country".

Rimmer then spat in the teenager's face before hitting him in the face. Rimmer plead guilty to the charges in November and was sentenced in Taupo on February 5.

Taupo Times investigations show Rimmer operates a homepage on the website NewSaxon.org a site described as Bebo for white supremacists.

Just days after his sentencing postings were made to his homepage making fun of his sentence and to organise a racially motivated online meeting.

In one posting to the site he described how good his home detention had been.

"Yeah mate not too bad, actually heaps of ladies have been around to visit, haven't had a night by myself in bed all week," he posted. A reply from a friend joked "you must be enjoying paying your debt to society, ha ha". The friend also described Rimmer as an "inspiration".

Garth McVicar of the Sensible Sentencing Trust described the sentence as a mockery.

He says offenders think home detention is great, describing how much easier it is for them.

"The judge was seriously mistaken giving him home detention."

He says home detention is being used to unload the prison population "putting members of the public a serious risk".

He says it shows the failures of a social experiment.

Legislation is encouraging more of this and doesn't attempt to stamp it out.

"It's not okay. New Zealanders have to stand up in their droves to stop it. On his NewSaxon homepage Rimmer describes himself as being a proud white supremacist since he was 16.

He says he was once a member and youth leader of the National Front NZ and Co-leader of the New Zealand Nazi Militia. He then joined a group known as the White Crusaders Of The Rahowa (Rahowa means Racial Holy War). He is currently a member of Creativity NZ described as a white racial religion.

In postings to the site made during the time he was on home detention Rimmer organised an online meeting of Creativity NZ and also posted a long blog about "recognising your enemy" in which he says: "Number one on the list is the International Jew, the whole Jewish network, the Jew as an individual. Number two is the mass of colored races, whom we shall designate simply as the mud races".

- Taupo Times

[Note:]

Note: The Creativity Alliance was formerly known as the White Crusaders of the RaHoWa
http://www.google.com/search?q=white+crusaders+of+the+rahowa

The Advertiser: RACE HATE BASE Authorities investigate Adelaide website

http://dokmz.wordpress.com/2006/01/31/the-advertiser-race-hate-baseauthorities-investigateadelaide-website-31jan06

WHITE supremacist "crusaders" have gained a foothold in Adelaide, setting up a racist website attacking "Jews, niggers and mud races," and soliciting for donations. Advocates of a racial holy war, the group operates through at Oaklands Park post office box linked to an Australian Business Number.

One part of the group's multifaceted website is hosted by an Adelaide-based internet firm, although there is no suggestion the firm is linked to the group. The website of the White Crusaders of the Rahova (racial holy war) contains blatantly racist material, including statements bemoaning the fact Adolf Hitler "unfortunately did not break the back of the Jewish monster."

After being alerted to the site by The Advertiser, Justice Minister Chris Ellison has asked the Australian Federal Police to investigate Whether the site breaches federal laws.

From the Adelaide Advertiser http://www.adelaidenow.com.au