Messages

[Matt Hale Ordered Creators to Recite the Five Fundamental Beliefs of Creativity Five Times a Day on their Knees.]

Matt Hale Ordered Creators to Recite the Five Fundamental Beliefs of Creativity Five Times a Day on their Knees.

It's only common sense that one should reinforce their beliefs as often as possible. I don't think that is really asking a lot of people, especially if they truly believe that, again, which pretty much comes naturally.

I think some of these folk were associated with someone who was making a really big issue out of it and forcing people to stop what they were doing 5 times a day to do this at specific times facing a certain direction, I'm not kidding. That would have put me in mind of Muslim prayer rituals or whatever that horrible nonsense is they do. It ceases to be natural when you are being told you MUST do something I guess.

This is a question to the Creativity Alliance group on New Saxon, so I am told.   

There should be no Creators who "believe" such nonessential, diversionary claptrap. If there are, they will soon be eclipsed by the more convicted, more militant, less compromising Creator soon enough.

On the other hand, a Church needs rituals to reinforce the passions and traditions of its congregants, and Founder Klassen had given much thought to celebrations of life's passages as Creators.

A profound difference between Nature-based, reality-based Creativity and the spook-chasing creeds is the unique factor of common sense and empirical, critical thinking. The Creator takes full advantage of his Creative intelligence, so would reject silly, thoughtless ritual like bowing and praying to the imaginary Jewish tribal god, and all that.

Whenever I find myself trapped in a group that for some reason or other is to be led in Xian prayer, my heart jumps a bit in anticipation. I can hardly wait to hold my head high and quickly scan all the others in the room to see if any are wide-eyed, like me, watching over the lambkins who have closed their eyes, bowed their heads, maybe even got on their knees to go along with the pretense of talking to Yahweh.  :'( It should always be a simple pleasure for a Creator to enjoy a smile and a nod from a kinsman during the group recitation by rote of the dreadful Lord's Prayer or the Apostles' Creed or of the 23rd Psalm. 

[BULLETIN]

This from the monthly National Alliance Membership BULLETIN from nine years ago:

Losers, Hobbyists, and the "Movement"

Dr William L. Pierce | National Alliance | The Bulletin | March 2000

An interesting psychological phenomenon on which I have commented on in several issues of the BULLETIN is that displayed by people who send hostile letters to the National Office saying, in effect: "You people claim to be Christians, but you ignore the teachings of the Bible, which says that all races are the same. Don't you even know that Jesus was a Jew?" They have had the idea planted in their heads that the Alliance is some sort of Christian organization, presumably by Jewish propaganda linking us to Christian Identity and Catholic traditionalist groups, which also are o the Jews' hit list. Reading our material or listening to one of my broadcasts should persuade them otherwise, but it doesn't. It probably took quite a bit of effort by the Jews to pound the idea into their heads, and it'll take dynamite to get it out.

Unfortunately, one can observe a similar phenomenon in many people nominally on our side, even in some Alliance members. I have announced over and over again our policy toward other organizations, and I nevertheless continue to receive letters to the effect: "All of us in the 'movement' must stick together. We should unite with all of the other patriotic organizations, and then we'll be much stronger. Etc." To me this view indicates either hobbyism or a serious deficiency in the writer's powers of discrimination. If you don't remember what hobbyism is, re-read section 3.c.iii.2 of your copy of the Membership Handbook

<a href="https://creativityalliance.com/23/ebooks/HolyBooks/CA-Handbook.pdf" target="_blank">https://creativityalliance.com/23/ebooks/HolyBooks/CA-Handbook.pdf</a>.

The Internet has given many inadequate people the ability to pretend to be more than they are. Any troubled teenager or unemployed alcoholic can get a web site, set himself up as a phone-booth Fuhrer, and begin collecting "followers," and many do. They are the ones to whom the Simon Wiesenthal Center and the Southern Poverty Law Center are referring when they announce that "the number of 'hate groups' on the Internet is now 457, up 23 per cent since 1999." Two outstanding examples are a teenaged Jew named Andy Greenbaum, who used the name "Bo Decker" and set up an "organization" he called "Knights of Freedom"; and a professional disseminator of disinformation named Harold Covington (a.k.a. "Winston Smith"). Greenbaum self-destructed last year, when he announced a giant march in Washington, and only two of his "followers" showed up for the march. Covington occasionally still makes Internet attacks on the Alliance, but he is far less prolific than he was a year or so ago.

Admin Edit: Harold Covington kicked the bucket on or about the 20th of July 2018.
For information on Weird Harold, HAC or Tubby as he was derisively known, see:
https://creativityalliance.com/category/harold-covington

Harold Covington – Jackass!

There are dozens of others who are still active, however. One is a TV repairman in California named Tom Metzger, who publishes a tabloid addressed primarily to skinheads and prisoners called "White Aryan Resistance' ("WAR"). Metzger promotes an ideology that is a blend of racial nationalism and class resentment, commonly called "national bolshevism." Another, also in California, publishes a newsletter called "The Nationalist Observer." Both are proponents of an "strategy" known as "leaderless resistance," according to which, at the appropriate time, hundreds or even thousands of revolutionary cells, consisting of one to five patriots each, will materialize spontaneously and will overthrow the government by sabotaging or bombing government and media facilities and assassinating politicians, leading Jews, collaborators, and other enemies of our people. All of these cells will operate independently, without centralized organization or direction or infrastructure, so that it will be nearly impossible for the government to infiltrate them or spy on them, and the government never will know where or when they will strike next.

Actually, Metzger and other "leaderless resistance" advocates are not so much in favor of "leaderless resistance" as they are against any sort of organized activity. Their thesis is that any organized activity is certain to fail because it will be infiltrated by government informants and provocateurs, and that any racial patriot who joins an organization is a fool who is allowing the government to get his name on the blacklist for unspecified, but presumably severe, reprisals.

All of this theorizing takes place in the make-believe world of revolutionary hobbyism. In the real world, "leaderless resistance" is simply an excuse for losers, cowards, and shirkers to do nothing except talk to each other. Building an effective organization of any sort is difficult work, and those who don't like work or who have tried to build an organization and failed often are resentful of any effort that shows signs of success. Their reasoning is, "I tried it and wasn't successful; therefore, it can't be done." And the reason that nearly every organizational effort has failed has not been government spies or provocateurs; it has been the low quality of the human material in the organization. Certainly, the Alliance has never had any damage done to it by government agents. Every major difficulty we have had has been the consequence of bad judgment or bad behavior on the part of a member. It's always difficult working with people. It must be a real nightmare trying to run an organization that has no quality standards for membership and that maintains a flamboyant and sensationalist public image attractive to hooligans, drunken brawlers, criminals, sociopaths, and other losers.

The latest issue of Resistance Magazine (of which I am the publisher) had an article written by a professional soldier who pointed out the unworkability of "leaderless resistance." Unfortunately, he mistakenly used the "Order" organized in 1984 by Robert Mathews as an example of why it doesn't work. In fact, the "Order," based on the fictional organization of the same name in The Turner Diaries, was a centralized organization with a strong leader. Because of the author's slip, a few of the phone-booth Fuhrers, who already were resentful of the Alliance's progress and were stung by the article's undiplomatic treatment of their favorite excuse for their own failure, saw an opportunity to criticize the Alliance and seized it. They Xeroxed dozens of copies of the offending article and mailed them to everyone on their mailing lists, including the imprisoned surviving members of the "Order." They wrote a letter to go with the Xeroxed article, and although Robert Mathews is not even named in the article, their letter said, in effect: "Look, look! Pierce is attacking Bob Mathews, our martyred hero! Isn't that shameful?"

Seeing the article described as an attack on Robert Mathews led some of the readers to look at it that way, and they duly registered their own indignation. The phone-booth Fuhrers then posted everything to the Internet, where it was the most titillating subject for gossip among the hobbyists for several weeks. The term "movement" was frequently used by the hobbyists, as in: "Pierce has shown disrespect for a martyr of the 'movement.' He should be expelled from the 'movement.'" Or: "No, no! We must have unity in the 'movement.'"

It's a little hard to say exactly what the term means to the Internet gossips. To most, it seems to be a clubby sort of concept which includes all of "us" and excludes everyone else. Although I have found the term useful in some contexts in the past, it probably should be abandoned because it has been so badly misused by the hobbyists. Really, what self-respecting racial nationalist wants to be considered part of a "movement' which includes all of the phone-booth Fuhrers, the Internet gossips, and an embarrassingly high quota of born losers?

It's easy enough to understand this club mentality. As our society disintegrates under the onslaught of Jew-instigated multiculturalism, people look for something to hold onto: a sense of belonging, of community. We feel more secure when we have a sense of solidarity with others of like mind. A comforting sense of security is not the primary thing that Alliance members should be seeking, however. We want strength. We want new capabilities. We want to gain an advantage over the enemies of our people. We want anything which brings us closer to victory, whether it is comfortable or not.

The truth of the matter is, there's not much advantage to be gained inside the "movement." It is too heavily freighted with chronic losers, incurable hobbyists, phone-booth Fuhrers, and other defectives. Perhaps the "movement" is no worse than the general public in this regard, but we're looking for the best and strongest people we can find, and we find them much more often outside the "movement" than inside it. It is time for all members who have been focused on the "movement" either to reorient themselves in an outward direction or to find another organization to devote themselves to. As our tempo and our work load increase, being in the Alliance will be less and less fun for those whose primary aim is to amuse themselves with "movement" gossip. And I will have less patience with hobbyists and with those who believe that the Alliance is part of the "movement." Our aim is not to be the biggest and best organization in the "movement"; it is to leave the "movement" to its clubby introspection while we get on with the job of building a revolutionary infrastructure.

We respect our martyrs, and all of those who have shown courage or made sacrifices for our people, but we'll build monuments to them after the revolution. Meanwhile, winning is all that we care about, not the fun of playing the game by "movement" rules.

WLP

[The Distemper of the Times]

This is the sort of stuff the long suffering White American responds to. I just posted what's below to a local forum as "Community Organizer." The usual suspects are trying to spam me off the little-used board, as usual, but I've got a few Creative "EXPAND & ADVANCE" tricks up my sleeve for them. Any readers here interested in helping and having some fun by putting up a couple of reinforcing posts? If so, just post as "guest," or as another local concerned about the loss of race and nation: http://www.mountaincityonline.com/forum.html
===================

The New York Times smells blood. Unfortunately for them it's their own.  :shock:

Q: Am I the only reader of Pat's who is wondering how a half-Jew/half-asian named Marcus Epstein can be a "white supremacist?" That's a good one.
---
http://www.Buchanan.org

The Distemper of the Times[size=200][/size]
By Patrick J. Buchanan
February 06, 2009

With reports circulating of its imminent demise, The New York Times
announced in January that it had found a white knight.

Sort of. For the knight in question, who already owns 6 percent of
the sinking Times and was investing $250 million in notes carrying
14 percent interest, was Carlos Slim. Reputedly the richest man in
the world, taking the title from Bill Gates in 2007, Carlos is not
so highly regarded in his own country.

In Mexico, according to Forbes, "the media and the masses long have
held a sneaking suspicion that there is something shady about Slim.
He is described as a rapacious monopolist who built his empire on
cozy ties to Mexican presidents ... ."

For this column, however, the issue is not how Carlos bought up the
Mexican telephone monopoly, but whether this Big Enchilada has
bought up Andrew Rosenthal's editorial page.

For, two weeks after Carlos' bailout cash arrived, Rosenthal's page
launched a hysterical attack on the patriots' movement that seeks
to halt the invasion of the United States from Mexico.

Targets: my sister Bay; our American Cause foundation and its
executive director, Marcus Epstein; Peter Brimelow, the author of a
seminal work on U.S. immigration, "Alien Nation"; Jim Pinkerton of
Fox News, a White House aide to Bush I; Fox's Bill O'Reilly; and
this writer.

In the Times' editorial, "Return of the Nativists," Brimelow is
said to run an "extremist Website" (VDARE.com) where he and I post
"musings about racial dilution and the perils facing white people."
Pinkerton was behind the "racist Willie Horton ads." Epstein holds
"white-supremacist"views. And we all are into "racialist extremism" and
"Latino-bashing," which calls to mind "the days of the
Know-Nothings and the Klan."

Racism "is all around us," wails the Times. And the nation has a
"perpetual need for vigilance," even in this new "age of Obama."

What occasioned this wilding attack? A news conference at the
National Press Club, where the Times reporter failed to show, and
release of a dry report by Epstein that contends that GOP defeats
in 2008 had nothing to do with the strong stand most Republicans
took for border security.

The Times calls the report "nonsense." But the case is open and
shut. Of 26 House Republicans who lost, Epstein found only one who
was a strong border-control candidate defeated by a pro-amnesty
Democrat. In every other GOP defeat, either the Democrat was tough
on amnesty and border security or the Republican was wimpish.

That John McCain, who led the effort to put illegal aliens on a
path to citizenship, got less than a third of the Hispanic vote
shows that being pro-amnesty does not necessarily win the Hispanic
vote. And the 70 percent of New Yorkers who rejected Eliot
Spitzer's proposal to give driver's licenses to illegals, forcing
Hillary Clinton to abandon her own governor, should tell even the
obtuse Times which way the wind is blowing.

But rather than argue with us, the Times chose to slime us as
racists and white supremacists. This is of a piece with the Times'
sliming of the Californian electorate that voted against state
recognition of homosexual marriage. To the Times, that 52-48 vote
meant "right-wing forces, led by the Mormon Church," had "enshrined
bigotry in the state's Constitution."

Both diatribes reveal much about the fall of a great newspaper and
the degeneration of a political philosophy that was once hegemonic
in America. Liberalism has hardened into an ideology, a rabid
religion that anathematizes any and all heretics.

To the Times' editorial writers, dissent from orthodoxy on illegal
aliens or gay rights can only be explained by bigotry, hatred,
racism or xenophobia in the hearts of the dissidents. To oppose the
Times' agenda on social or moral issues is ascribed to mental illness or
moral sickness.[size=150][/size] [another good one!  ]

Yet, as these negative views on homosexual marriage and illegal
immigration remain mainstream views, the Times comes off, as it did
in Sunday's sophomoric editorial, as loathing Middle America.

In its own mind, the Times is battling heroically the forces of
hatred. Can it not, by rereading its own words, see the hatred in
its own heart?

As Christ Himself said, Andrew, "Thou hypocrite, first cast out the
beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast
out the mote out of thy brother's eye."

Let it be said. There is nothing wrong about Americans fighting to
preserve the culture and country they grew up in. That is what
patriotic conservatism is all about. And if the Times can
understand and support the right of native tribes like the Navajo
and Apache to preserve their unique character and culture, why this
viral hatred of those of us who wish to preserve the Western and
Christian character of America?

Why does the Times want to see our America destroyed? From what
poisoned well comes this hatred of the America we love?
---

Duh! What's the most notable thing Rosenthal and all those others on the Times' masthead share in common, Pat?he New York Times smells blood. Unfortunately for them it's their own.  :shock:

=================================

[Brainwashing Our Children]

...for a dose of "Black History":


Brainwashing Our Children
by Dr. William Pierce
January 1998

Last week a member of the organization I head, the National Alliance, sent me something his nine-year-old daughter had brought home from school. He lives in Macon, Georgia, and his daughter is a fourth grader at a private school there. Last week her class went on a field trip to visit a Black museum in Macon and learn a bit about Black history. The museum is the federally funded Tubman African American Museum. It's supported by our tax dollars.

It is named after Harriet Tubman, a Black slave who was employed by Abolitionist organizations in the North during the period just before the Civil War to induce other slaves in the South to leave their plantations and head north along the so-called "Underground Railroad." Sometimes she used a revolver to coax those who weren't sure they wanted to go. The White fourth graders visiting the museum got a little sermon about the wickedness of slavery and of White people for having imposed it on Blacks. They also had a lecture on the history and accomplishments of Negroes, and each was handed a sheet headed "African American Inventor's" (sic) listing 120 or so things supposedly invented by Blacks.

Here are the first six items on the list of Black inventions: the pyramids, paper, chess, the alphabet, medicine, and civilization.

After this start the rest of the list is a bit anticlimactic, with such items as the doorknob, the mop, the curtain rod, peanut butter, and the helicopter.

With the exception of peanut butter, which is generally credited to Black agricultural technician George Washington Carver, this list is so fantastic that most of us get a good chuckle when we read it.

But the really tragic part of this story is that, although these wild pipedreams about Blacks designing and architecting the pyramids, inventing the alphabet and the helicopter, and so on may be funny to us, they're not funny to White fourth graders. When a museum guide, even a Black guide, or their teacher tells them that Blacks invented paper, the alphabet, and civilization, they take it all very seriously. They believe it. My member's nine-year-old daughter believed it. She came home from school after the field trip and told her parents quite seriously that she had learned that Blacks had done just about everything worth doing in the development of our civilization, and she wondered why Whites hadn't done anything.

Now, that was not why my member was paying to send his daughter to a private school, and he was pretty steamed about this effort to brainwash her against her own race. And I'm steamed too. We all ought to be mad as hell. We all ought to be in the mood for getting out our rifles and beginning a general cleanup in America. Which, of course, is why the Jews, feminists, and liberals promoting this sort of brainwashing are so hot to get our guns away from us.

Before I talk further about the brainwashing campaign directed at our children, I want to make a few distinctions among the people involved in the campaign.

First, it should be noted that the Blacks are as much victims of this campaign as Whites are -- even though many Blacks are involved in it. The childishly naive list of supposed Black inventions distributed by the Tubman African American Museum in Macon, Georgia, for example, is obviously a Black creation. One can understand the fascination this sort of thing has for most Blacks. Since they never developed an alphabet or writing when they were in Africa (contrary to the claims of the Tubman Museum), they had no written history at all before being brought to the White world as slaves. And the history they have acquired since then is a rather inglorious one. Many Blacks feel this shortcoming. Despite all of the assurances of White liberals that they are "equal," they don't really believe it. Deep inside them there is a nagging certainty of their inferiority, and they have clutched at straws in an effort to quell that nagging. Their fictitious Black history, with all its imagined great Black intellectual accomplishments, is one of those straws. Such straws would not be necessary if they were living in a society of their own. It is only when they try to become the "equals" of Whites in a White society that they feel inferior.

Anyone who encourages them to clutch such straws only postpones their coming to grips with the fact that they need their own society as much as we need ours. Thus, these people do them a disservice. And of course, the White schoolteacher of my member's nine-year-old daughter who did nothing to refute the Tubman Museum's claims also is one who does such a disservice. I do not know this schoolteacher myself, but it's a pretty good bet that, like most of her colleagues, she is simply going with the flow of Political Correctness. She understands that Blacks didn't invent writing or the helicopter or even the doorknob, but she feels that it would not be polite to say so. It might even be considered -- heaven forbid -- racist, so she keeps her mouth shut and lets her students be brainwashed.

She is not consciously malevolent. She doesn't really want to misinform her students or rob them of their culture and racial pride. But she is so deficient in her understanding of her responsibility as a teacher that she would be better fitted to cleaning latrines for a living than teaching our children. And unfortunately that is true of most White teachers today. They go with the flow rather than teaching the truth. They fail to speak out against lies whenever the Politically Correct thing to do is keep their mouths shut instead. They are no worse than the average White American -- but also no better.

The people that we really ought to be looking for when we get our guns out are the people who consciously and deliberately promote the brainwashing, the people who want to make White schoolchildren feel guilty because their White ancestors enslaved the wonderfully inventive and creative Black race. These are people who consciously and deliberately aim at making Whites feel that they owe something to Blacks, people who aim at making Whites feel that they are bad if they identify with other Whites and don't want to associate with Blacks, intermarry with Blacks, or have their children go to school with Blacks.

One of the people with such aims is the current President of the United States, who is running around the country holding meetings and telling White people that they must overcome their natural racial instincts and mix more with Blacks and not object to the government giving special advantages to Blacks. I saw this piece of filth at a carefully staged "town meeting" in Akron, Ohio. White members of the audience were being encouraged to confess their racial sins in public. One young White man arose and confessed that he felt uneasy when he encountered a Black on the street who was "poorly dressed." Mr. Clinton congratulated the young White man for having the courage to make this confession and implied that all Whites needed to suppress their feelings of uneasiness around Blacks, that it is sinful of us to have such feelings, and that we ought to regard Blacks just the way we do our fellow Whites.

Another of these people who consciously wish to harm Whites is one of the richest Jews in Hollywood, Steven Spielberg.

Spielberg has just produced a new film, Amistad, which purports to tell the historical story of a group of Black slaves who managed to get the drop on the White crew of a ship which was transporting them from Havana, Cuba, in 1839. After the Blacks had taken over the ship they cut the throats of all but two of their White prisoners. Then they were captured by the U.S. Coast Guard and put on trial. Abolitionist groups hired some high-powered lawyers to defend the Blacks, and eventually they were freed after a New York trial in which North-South politics played a much larger role than law and justice.

Any historical incident, of course, may be a suitable subject for a movie. History, however, is not Mr. Spielberg's interest. His interest is in portraying Blacks as noble and heroic and unjustly treated by Whites. His aim is the same as that of the other media bosses in Hollywood and New York. It is to brainwash White people and undermine their resistance to racial mixing in America. It is to instill a subconscious feeling of guilt in White people who see his film, a feeling that they are evil if they resist giving Blacks whatever they want. Spielberg's Amistad is trying to do, in its glitzy, Jewish, Hollywood way what Mr. Clinton is doing in his phony-folksy way with his interracial town meetings and public confessions.

And while Mr. Spielberg and Mr. Clinton carry on their brainwashing campaign, many of Mr. Spielberg's kinsmen in the media are subtly pushing the idea that White America should issue a collective apology to Blacks and offer them monetary compensation because their ancestors were slaves. Mr. Clinton has said that he hasn't yet made up his mind about an apology. He may want to give the Jewish media bosses a little more time to brainwash his White constituents into going along with the idea.

If any apology is owed, it is an apology to White Americans today from the very small percentage of our ancestors who were in the business of running plantations in the pre-Civil War South and whose desire for slave labor inflicted the Black presence on us. It really is a shame that all of the original North American colonies didn't have the sort of geography and climate which existed in New England, where giant cotton, sugar cane, and tobacco plantations just weren't feasible, and the farms were worked by the families which owned them instead of by Black slaves.

Most of the Southern plantation owners were decent people; they just weren't foresighted enough. They let immediate economic necessities dictate their behavior rather than long-range considerations of what was good for their people and for America. For their plantations to be prosperous, they needed slave labor. But if they could have looked two or three centuries into the future and seen the havoc wreaked on our cities and on American society by the descendants of their slaves, I think many of them would have sent their slaves back to Africa, given up the plantation business, and gone into another line of work.

I've said this before, but I'll say it again now: Whites didn't enslave Blacks -- ever. What Whites did was make the mistake buying Black slaves from other Blacks who had enslaved them and then bringing their merchandise to this country. That was a terrible mistake, and we should rectify it at once by sending back to Africa all of the descendants of those slaves we bought. We shouldn't even charge them for the time they spent here, which was a much more pleasant time than they would have spent in Africa, and which has been a very expensive time indeed for us.

And I think we should send Mr. Clinton and Mr. Spielberg with them. The Blacks voted for Mr. Clinton here; maybe they'd like to vote for him in Africa. He can run around making campaign speeches at the dedication of all sorts of new Harriet Tubman Museums, which will be able to do a lot less damage with their imaginative lists of Black inventions over there than over here.

And maybe they will appreciate Mr. Spielberg making propaganda films in Africa. He can make a film about the African invention of the doorknob, for example. He can depict brilliant Black scientists laboring in their laboratories to develop the doorknob while vicious, scheming Whites plot to steal this invention from them. That film ought to be a big hit in Senegal, Guinea, and the Ivory Coast.

Really, this is no joking matter. The brainwashing of our children is a fighting matter. White children in public and private schools all over America are being indoctrinated and lied to about racial matters. Most of the lies are not as naively concocted as those distributed by the Tubman African American Museum, but they are all the more dangerous for being more sophisticated. The lies come in many forms. Some of them are in the form of Politically Correct textbooks and Politically Correct history lessons. Others are in the form of popular entertainment, such as Steven Spielberg's Amistad, and just about any TV show you can name. Some are in the form of folksy posturing and pretended concern and compassion of the sort the whole country is being subjected to in Mr. Clinton's racial-togetherness program.

This is a fighting matter, because the aim of this brainwashing is nothing less than our physical destruction as a people, nothing less than our annihilation as a race. It is designed to sap our will to resist the racially destructive programs which have been imposed on us during the past 50 years. It is designed to make us feel guilty if we hesitate to go along with our own destruction. It is designed to rob us of our racial consciousness, our culture, our racial roots. It is designed to make racial suicide and racial treason trendy and fashionable.

And it is working. It is having the intended effect. Being anti-White is the Politically Correct attitude in most of our universities today. Welcoming the impending demise of Whites everywhere and the inheritance of the earth by the colored hordes of the Third World is fashionable among White students. Supporting this fashion are the sort of erroneous ideas being promoted in Black history courses and mass entertainment a la Spielberg: ideas that all races are essentially equal intellectually and morally, that they all have equal civilization building potential.

The fact that the Blacks have never built a civilization is only proof that they have been held down by White racism. The fact that the Black crime rate is about ten times the White rate and the fact that Blacks do so poorly on IQ tests are also due to White racism. When the Whites are gone -- or at least so outnumbered that they can't run the show -- all the races will get along fine, they all will be able to show their full potential, and everyone will live happily ever after.

This is the kind of muddled thinking that Mr. Clinton is encouraging with his current campaign for racial togetherness. And anyone who raises his voice against this brainwashing campaign or the lethally fashionable attitudes on race it has fostered is routinely denounced by Mr. Spielberg's Jewish media colleagues as a "hater." That's the way they talk about me. Mr. Clinton then calls for new legislation to outlaw hate. And the trendy airheads at our universities applaud.

"Yes, yes, let's outlaw the hate. Let's have love and brotherhood and peace. Peace between the races," they cry. But there is no peace. Look at our cities and our schools today. There is no peace. If there were peace Mr. Clinton would not have an excuse for his present campaign of chicanery and fraud about racial togetherness.

And is it my fault that there is no peace? I did not make the policies which have brought about the present situation. I have not sponsored the policies which have brought us the crime, disorder, fear, and hatred which characterize racial relations in the United States today. Those policies are the work of Mr. Spielberg's kinsmen and of the corrupt politicians like Mr. Clinton who have adopted those policies in return for media support. They are the ones who have brought so much hatred and unhappiness to our society.

The one thing that will quell that hatred and disorder and give people hope again is racial separation. And racial separation is what we will have. We will put an end to the brainwashing and the lies. We will have an America in which no little White girl is ever again taught the destructive lies my member's nine-year-old daughter was taught in Macon, Georgia. And Mr. Clinton and Mr. Spielberg be damned.

Its not my position to judge as i'm not in the US but is it time for a tactical withdrawal of Whites from certain areas in the States? Should Whites move to the interior, rural and Northern areas? Is this happening already? A tactical withdrawal just preserves the Race until it wakes up  seizes control of its own destiny and then does a reconquest of stolen land.
Should racial Loyalists back the secessionist movements in each state? Fifty states would be harder for the Jews to control than a single entity.

I favor secession, but regionally, not state by state. Though landlocked, southern Appalachia is my homeland of choice, comprising roughly parts of eight states, mostly southern. We're still a White stronghold in this region.
'
I tried to hook up on Amazon.com books and give you a link to my ol friend Tom Chittum's book, Civil War II, but can't get through to that site now. Better still, I found this site where CWII is online: http://www.timebomb2000.com/misc/CWII.pdf Tom's book addresses most of your questions. Many of the "mileposts" he warned his readers to watch for on our way to racial balkanization and CWII are now already in our rear view mirrors.

In Civil War II our skin will be our uniforms, as it should be.