Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old July 3rd, 2005 #1
lawrence dennis
Anti-anti-antisemite
 
lawrence dennis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Rocky Mountains
Posts: 1,265
lawrence dennis
Default Tracking down quotes cited on Goyfire

I have been listening to back issues of Goyfire and, while listening, occasionally hear one of the participants cite an interesting quote. So here are some of those quotes found using google:
Quote:
FROM GOYFIRE #7 (downloadable mp3 version @ playback time 43:25--44:15) the matter of sports 'heroes' who engage in criminal activities is discussed and mention is made of the profile page of non-white sports criminals on newnation.com: this webpage is at http://newnation.com/NNN-black-sports.html
Quote:
FROM GOYFIRE #6 (downloadable mp3 version @ playback time 2:49--3:06) mention is made by Alex Linder of the Fox News special on Israeli spying that was pulled from the Fox News website. The 4 videos of the special report are now available (you need Quicktime plugin) on the Information Clearinghouse website:
http://www.informationclearinghouse....rticle7545.htm
http://www.informationclearinghouse....rticle7544.htm
http://www.informationclearinghouse....rticle6480.htm
http://www.informationclearinghouse....rticle5133.htm
Quote:
FROM GOYFIRE #5 PART 2 (@ playback time 35:36--36:20): Concerning the psychology of argumentation, a website recommended by Chain: http://datanation.com/fallacies/index.htm
Quote:
FROM GOYFIRE #5 PART 1 (@ playback time 46:08--46:26): "Why should we hear about body bags and deaths," Barbara Bush said on ABC's "Good Morning America" on March 18, 2003. "Oh, I mean, it's not relevant. So why should I waste my beautiful mind on something like that?"
Quote:
FROM GOYFIRE #3 PART 5 (@ playback time 11:37--11:45): "I was brought up with lies all the time... that's how you got along... I have lied my entire life..." -- jewess Monica Lewinsky, on one of Linda Tripp's tapes.
Quote:
FROM GOYFIRE #3 PART 3 (@ time?) "Those who do not move, do not notice their chains." -- jewess Rosa Luxemburg
__________________

How is the faithful city become an harlot! It was full of judgment: righteousness lodged in it, but now murderers. Thy silver is become dross, thy wine mixed with water. Thy princes are rebellious, and companions of thieves: every one loveth gifts, and followeth after rewards.

Xian WN!

"The Jew can only be understood if it is known what he strives for: ... the destruction of the world.... [it is] the tragedy of Lucifer."

Holy-Hoax Exposed, Hollow-Cost Examined, How Low Cost? (toons)
 
Old July 6th, 2005 #2
lawrence dennis
Anti-anti-antisemite
 
lawrence dennis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Rocky Mountains
Posts: 1,265
lawrence dennis
Default Corrected link to film 'The Eternal Jew'

On the VNN media page at http://www.vanguardnewsnetwork.com/vnnmmc.htm there is the following which is supposed to link to the film 'The Eternal Jew':
Quote:

The Eternal Jew
A 'must see' for anyone that wants to discover the true nature of the jew.
Real Player (video download)
Unfortunately, the above link leads to a 'Code 404: Not Found' error. Here is a link which, at least for now, shows the film: http://www.solargeneral.com/library/TheEternalJew.rm

Early in the film is mentioned this quote:
Quote:
"The jew is the demon behind the corruption of mankind." -- Richard Wagner
__________________

How is the faithful city become an harlot! It was full of judgment: righteousness lodged in it, but now murderers. Thy silver is become dross, thy wine mixed with water. Thy princes are rebellious, and companions of thieves: every one loveth gifts, and followeth after rewards.

Xian WN!

"The Jew can only be understood if it is known what he strives for: ... the destruction of the world.... [it is] the tragedy of Lucifer."

Holy-Hoax Exposed, Hollow-Cost Examined, How Low Cost? (toons)
 
Old July 7th, 2005 #3
Stan Sikorski
Bannished
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Upper midwest around cattle.
Posts: 3,457
Stan Sikorski
Default

I'll fix that. Thanks for the word.
 
Old August 14th, 2005 #4
lawrence dennis
Anti-anti-antisemite
 
lawrence dennis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Rocky Mountains
Posts: 1,265
lawrence dennis
Default The SPLC endowment is now over $120,000,000.00

In Goyfire #7, the endowment of the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) is discussed (from 20:02 to 20:25). Alex Linder claims the endowment is over $120 million. This is absolutely correct.

From the SPLC itself (& from Wikipedia):
Quote:
"The Center also placed a portion of its income into a special, board-designated endowment fund to support the Center's future work. At the end of the fiscal year, the endowment stood at $120.6 million."
About this extraordinary amount, we learn from the article "The Church of Morris Dees" (subtitled "How the Southern Poverty Law Center profits from Intolerance" and written by left-wing jew Ken Silverstein, which appeared in the November 2000 issue of Harper's Magazine):
Quote:
Ah, tolerance. Who could be against something so virtuous? And who could object to the Southern Poverty Law Center, the Montgomery, Alabama-based group that recently sent out this heartwarming yet mildly terrifying appeal to raise money for its "Teaching Tolerance" program, which prepares educational kits for schoolteachers? Cofounded in 1971 by civil rights lawyer cum direct-marketing millionaire Morris Dees, a leading critic of "hate groups" and a man so beatific that he was the subject of a made-for-TV movie, the SPLC spent much of its early years defending prisoners who faced the death penalty and suing to desegregate all-white institutions like Alabama's highway patrol. That was then. Today, the SPLC spends most of its time--and money--on a relentless fund-raising campaign, peddling memberships in the church of tolerance with all the zeal of a circuit rider passing the collection plate. "He's the Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker of the civil rights movement," renowned anti death-penalty lawyer Millard Farmer says of Dees, his former associate, "though I don't mean to malign Jim and Tammy Faye." The Center earned $44 million last year alone--$27 million from fund-raising and $17 million from stocks and other investments--but spent only $13 million on civil rights program, making it one of the most profitable charities in the country.

The Ku Klux Klan, the SPLC's most lucrative nemesis, has shrunk from 4 million members in the 1920s to an estimated 2,000 today, as many as 10 percent of whom are thought to be FBI informants. But news of a declining Klan does not make for inclining donations to Morris Dees and Co., which is why the SPLC honors nearly every nationally covered "hate crime" with direct-mail alarums full of nightmarish invocations of "armed Klan paramilitary forces" and "violent neo-Nazi extremists," and why Dees does legal battle almost exclusively with mediagenic villains--like Idaho's arch-Aryan Richard Butler--eager to show off their swastikas for the news cameras. In 1987, Dees won a $7 million judgment against the United Klans of America on behalf of Beulah Mae Donald, whose son was lynched by two Klansmen. The UKA's total assets amounted to a warehouse whose sale netted Mrs. Donald $51,875. According to a groundbreaking series of newspaper stories in the Montgomery Advertiser, the SPLC, meanwhile, made $9 million from fund-raising solicitations featuring the case, including one containing a photo of Michael Donald's corpse. Horrifying as such incidents are, hate groups commit almost no violence. More than 95 percent of all "hate crimes," including most of the incidents SPLC letters cite (bombings, church burnings, school shootings), are perpetrated by "lone wolves." Even Timothy McVeigh, subject of one of the most extensive investigations in the FBI's history--and one of the most extensive direct-mail campaigns in the SPLC's [history]--was never credibly linked to any militia organization. [Discussed in goyfire #7 is the possibility that the FBI and SPLC knew in advance, through informants on the inside, of the OKC bombing.--L.D.]

No faith healing or infomercial would be complete without a moving testimonial. The student from whose tears this white schoolteacher learned her lesson is identified only as a child of color. "Which race," we are assured, "does not matter." Nor apparently does the specific nature of "the racist acts directed at him," nor the race of his schoolyard tormentors. All that matters, in fact, is the race of the teacher and those expiating tears. "I wept with him, feeling for once, the depth of his hurt," she confides. "His tears washed away the film that had distorted my white perspective of the world." Scales fallen from her eyes, what action does this schoolteacher propose? What Gandhi-like disobedience will she undertake in order to "reach real peace in the world"? She doesn't say but instead speaks vaguely of acting out against "the pain." In the age of Oprah and Clinton, empathy--or the confession thereof--is an end in itself.

Any good salesman [i.e., "every jew"--L.D.] knows that a products "value" is a highly mutable quality with little relation to actual worth, and Morris Dees--who made millions hawking, by direct mail, such humble commodities as birthday cakes, cookbooks (including Favorite Recipes of American Home Economics Teachers), tractor seat cushions, rat poison, and, in exchange for a mailing list containing 700,000 names, presidential candidate George McGovern--is nothing if not a good salesman. So good in fact that in 1998 the Direct Marketing Association inducted him into its Hall of Fame. "I learned everything I know about hustling from the Baptist Church," Dees has said. "Spending Sundays on those hard benches listening to the preacher pitch salvation--why, it was like getting a Ph.D. in selling." Here, Dr. Dees (the letter's nominal author) masterfully transforms, with a mere flourish of hyperbole, an education kit available "at cost" for $30 on the SPLC website into "a $325 value."

This is one of the only places in this letter where specific races are mentioned. Elsewhere, Dees and his copywriters, deploying an arsenal of passive verbs and vague abstractions, have sanitized the usually divisive issue of race of its more disturbing elements--such as angry black people--and for good reason: most SPLC donors are white. Thus, instead of concrete civil rights issues like housing discrimination and racial profiling, we get "communities seething with racial violence." Instead of racially biased federal sentencing laws, or the disparity between poor predominantly black schools and affluent white ones, or the violence against illegals along the Mexican border, [WTF?!--L.D.] the SPLC gives us "intolerance against those who are different," turning bigotry into a color-blind, equal-opportunity sin. It's reassuring to know that "Caucasians" are no more and no less guilty of this sin than African Americans, Asian Americans, Native Americans, and Hispanics. In the eyes of Morris Dees, we're all sinners, all victims, and all potential contributors.

Morris Dees doesn't need your financial support. The SPLC is already the wealthiest civil rights group in America, though this letter quite naturally omits that fact. Other solicitations have been more flagrantly misleading. One pitch, sent out in 1995--when the Center had more than $60 million in reserves--informed would-be donors that the "strain on our current operating budget is the greatest in our 25-year history." Back in 1978, when the Center had less than $10 million, Dees promised that his organization would quit fund-raising and live off interest as soon as its endowment hit $55 million. But as it approached that figure, the SPLC upped the bar to $100 million, a sum that, one 1989 newsletter promised, would allow the Center "to cease the costly and often unreliable task of fund raising. " Today, the SPLC's treasury bulges with $120 million, and it spends twice as much on fund-raising--$5.76 million last year--as it does on legal services for victims of civil rights abuses. The American Institute of Philanthropy gives the Center one of the worst ratings of any group it monitors, estimating that the SPLC could operate for 4.6 years without making another tax-exempt nickel from its investments or raising another tax-deductible cent from well-meaning "people like you."

The SPLC's "other important work justice" consists mainly in spying on private citizens who belong to "hate groups," sharing its files with law-enforcement agencies, and suing the most prominent of these groups for crimes committed independently by their members--a practice that, however seemingly justified, should give civil libertarians pause. The legal strategy employed by Dees could have put the Black Panther Party out of business or bankrupted the New England Emigrant Aid Company in retaliation for crimes committed by John Brown. What the Center's other work for justice does not include is anything that might be considered controversial by donors. According to Millard Farmer, the Center largely stopped taking death-penalty cases for fear that too visible an opposition to capital punishment would scare off potential contributors. In 1986, the Center's entire legal staff quit in protest of Dees's refusal to address issues--such as homelessness, voter registration, and affirmative action--that they considered far more pertinent to poor minorities, if far less marketable to affluent benefactors, than fighting the KKK. Another lawyer, Gloria Browne, who resigned a few years later, told reporters that the Center's programs were calculated to cash in on "black pain and white guilt." Asked in 1994 if the SPLC itself, whose leadership consists almost entirely of white men, [= "male jews"--L.D.] was in need of an affirmative action policy, Dees replied that "probably the most discriminated people in America today are white men when it comes to jobs."

Contributors to Teaching Tolerance might be surprised to learn how little of the SPLC's reported educational spending actually goes to education. In response to lobbying by charities, the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants in 1987 began allowing nonprofits to count part of their fundraising costs as "educational" so long as their solicitations contained an informational component. On average, the SPLC classifies an estimated 47 percent of the fund-raising letters that it sends out every year as educational, including many that do little more than instruct potential donors on the many evils of "militant right-wing extremists" and the many splendid virtues of Morris Dees. According to tax documents, of the $10. 8 million in educational spending the SPLC reported in 1999, $4 million went to solicitations. Another $2.4 million paid for stamps.

In the early 1960s, Morris Dees sat on the sidelines honing his direct-marketing skills and practicing law while the civil rights movement engulfed the South. "Morris and I...shared the overriding purpose of making a pile of money," recalls Dees's business partner, a lawyer named Millard Fuller (not to be confused with Millard Farmer). "We were not particular about how we did it; we just wanted to be independently rich." They were so unparticular, in fact, that in 1961 they defended a man, guilty of beating up a journalist covering the Freedom Riders, whose legal fees were paid by the Klan. ("I felt the anger of a black person for the first time," Dees later wrote of the case. "I vowed then and there that nobody would ever again doubt where I stood.") In 1965, Fuller sold out to Dees, donated the money to charity, and later started Habitat for Humanity. Dees bought a 200-acre estate appointed with tennis courts, a pool, and stables, and, in 1971, founded the SPLC, where his compensation has risen in proportion to fund-raising revenues, from nothing in the early seventies to $273,000 last year. A National Journal survey of salaries paid to the top officers of advocacy groups shows that Dees earned more in 1998 than nearly all of the seventy-eight listed, tens of thousands more than the heads of such groups as the ACLU, the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, and the Children's Defense Fund. The more money the SPLC receives, the less that goes to other civil rights organizations, [economists note that giving to charities is a zero-sum game: money given to one is money not given to another.--L.D.] many of which, including the NAACP, have struggled to stay out of bankruptcy. Dees's compensation alone amounts to one quarter the annual budget of the Atlanta-based Southern Center for Human Rights, which handles several dozen death-penalty cases a year. "You are a fraud and a conman," the Southern Center's director, Stephen Bright, wrote in a 1996 letter to Dees, and proceeded to list his many reasons for thinking so, which included "your failure to respond to the most desperate needs of the poor and powerless despite your millions upon millions, your fund-raising techniques, the fact that you spend so much, accomplish so little, and promote yourself so shamelessly." Soon the SPLC will move into a new six-story headquarters in downtown Montgomery, just across the street from its current headquarters, a building known locally as the Poverty Palace.

The SPLC and the Klan/Nazis share a true symbiotic relationship. The SPLC needs the "threat" of the Klan/Nazis to raise money. So they produce videos for TV grimly warning of the "alarming rise" of the number of "hate groups." These videos feature film and interviews with any handful of crackpots who run around in sheets or swastikas, and make them look like a burgeoning mass movement. Those videos in turn act as infomercials for those groups. Any messed up individual who might be attracted to these groups is told "look these guys think like you, and are a threat to those you hate." What a great recuriting aid for those groups. Which of course is exactly what Dees wants, because the bigger the Klan/Nazi groups become, the more money he raises.
__________________

How is the faithful city become an harlot! It was full of judgment: righteousness lodged in it, but now murderers. Thy silver is become dross, thy wine mixed with water. Thy princes are rebellious, and companions of thieves: every one loveth gifts, and followeth after rewards.

Xian WN!

"The Jew can only be understood if it is known what he strives for: ... the destruction of the world.... [it is] the tragedy of Lucifer."

Holy-Hoax Exposed, Hollow-Cost Examined, How Low Cost? (toons)
 
Old August 14th, 2005 #5
Stan Sikorski
Bannished
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Upper midwest around cattle.
Posts: 3,457
Stan Sikorski
Default

Fantastic work LD
 
Old August 14th, 2005 #6
lawrence dennis
Anti-anti-antisemite
 
lawrence dennis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Rocky Mountains
Posts: 1,265
lawrence dennis
Default On the Frankfurter-led jewish conspiracy to overturn segregation by judicial fiat

FROM GOYFIRE #7 (mp3 version @ playback time of 53:38--54:01) Alex Linder refers to the 'arm-twisting' role of Jew Justice Felix Frankfurter in overturning segregation based on bogus sociology. More on this at http://www.lewrockwell.com in the article The Brown Decision:
Quote:
"...Thurgood Marshall's eventual victory in the Brown decision could not have occurred without Justice Felix Frankfurter. Recognizing the strength of the arguments against ending segregation by judicial fiat, Frankfurter designed a strategy to ease the Court around the obstacles. He knew that a decision striking down segregation had to be unanimous to have the sheen of legitimacy. To achieve this outcome, Justice Frankfurter had to figure out some way to neutralize the decades of precedent stemming from Plessy ... The former law professor had to persuade old-fashioned lawyers to give sociology priority over law.

Initially, Frankfurter was not sure how he was going to reeducate the Court. So he orchestrated a two-year delay and subsequent reargument of the case to overcome Marshall's initial failure before the Court in 1952. During the time gained, he conspired with the solicitor general's office to shape the Justice Department's briefs and oral argument in a manner designed to sway his colleagues on the Court. It took him almost two years and required the help of his clerk, Alexander Bickel, [jew alert] and former clerk, Philip Elman, [jew alert] a Justice Department official, to overcome the legal scruples of his fellow Supreme Court Justices. Thus, the Brown decision was won not only at the expense of the democratic process, but also at the expense of judicial impartiality.

The change in administration from Truman to Eisenhower early in 1953 gave Frankfurter an opportunity....

Toward the end of May 1953 ... Frankfurter ... told his clerk, Alexander Bickel ... that he had convinced his colleagues to order a reargument the next autumn.

Unbeknownst to his fellow colleagues, Frankfurter had assigned Bickel to do research on the history of the 14th Amendment ... Jack Greenberg, [jew alert] a member of the NAACP's legal team, reports in his autobiography that ... historian Henry Steele Commager told the NAACP that the framers of the 14th Amendment did not "intend that it should be used to end segregation in schools." ...

Bickel found that it was impossible to conclude that the 39th Congress foresaw that segregation might be abolished, because public education was in its infancy. Moreover, where it existed it was often segregated, even in the North.... Had segregation not existed in the schools, public education would have lost what weak support it had.

Bickel urged a different approach. He argued that the language used by the Constitution's framers was so elastic that the Court could reinterpret it according to the needs of the times. From this perspective, Bickel argued that the legislative history of the 14th Amendment was "inconclusive."

On June 8, 1953, the Supreme Court unanimously restored Brown to the docket ... To be discussed were questions about original intent and the implementation of a possible decree ending segregation that Bickel and Frankfurter had drafted. The last sentence of the two-page order's list of questions invited the attorney general of the United States to take part in the oral argument and file an additional brief "if he so desires."

This seemingly innocuous sentence was in reality a lateral pass from Frankfurter to Philip Elman who, after a stint as Frankfurter's clerk in the 1940s, had been serving on the solicitor general's staff. At the solicitor general's office, Elman handled all civil rights cases before the Supreme Court in which the United States was involved as either a party or amicus curiae.

In the judicial equivalent of insider trading, Frankfurter and Elman frequently discussed Brown by telephone and in person. Elman had used confidential information from Frankfurter to shape the Truman administration's Brown brief ... Frankfurter and Elman used code names for the various Justices, Justice Douglas was "Yak" because he came from Yakima, Washington.... Stanley Reed was "Chamer," meaning fool, dolt, or mule in Hebrew....

Frankfurter counted on Elman collaborating again. In fact, the idea that the cases should be reargued was hatched during one of Frankfurter and Elman's strategy sessions. The coconspirators believed that if the government's "independent" examination of original intent would mirror the conclusion of Bickel's internal court memo, Davis' legal argument could be neutralized.

Elman's first hurdle at the Justice Department was to overcome the fact that the new administration would have been happier if the Supreme Court's special invitation to the attorney general had been lost in the mail.... Rogers expressed the prevailing attitude: "Jesus, do we really have to file a brief. Aren't we better off staying out of it?" Elman, one of the two Truman holdovers to attend the meeting, said, "When the Supreme Court invites you, that's the equivalent of a royal command. An invitation from the Supreme Court just can't be rejected. Besides, if you turn it down, how are you going to explain it to the press?" [= "How are you going to explain it to the jewsmedia?"--L.D.]

Elman won his point. At the beginning of August, Assistant Attorney General J. Lee Rankin called Elman into his office and assigned him the task of leading the Justice Department's research effort and drafting its brief.

The first thing Elman did was to convince Attorney General Brownell to ask the Supreme Court to delay the reargument.... Unsurprisingly, when the government's 600-page brief was hand-delivered to the Supreme Court in November, it contained the same conclusion that Bickel had provided for Frankfurter: The elasticity of the 14th Amendment's language, read in the light of changing times, rendered its original intent ambiguous.

Frankfurter and Elman were aided ... by the death of Chief Justice Vinson in September. To filll the vacancy, President Eisenhower appointed California Governor Earl Warren....

... the reargument was essentially a repeat performance from the year before. Justice Jackson ... asked Thurgood Marshall whether it was right for the Supreme Court to do what Congress had not done after the passage of so many years, namely to abolish segregation.... [Justice] Reed noted that section five of the Fourteenth Amendment states that "Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article." John Davis, making his last of 140 appearances before the Court, reminded the Justices that under the Constitution's allocation of powers, "Your Honors do not sit, and cannot sit, as a glorified Board of Education for the State of South Carolina or any other state. Neither can the District Court."

Just before the reargument, Frankfurter had copies of Bickel's research memo, specially typeset in the Court's printing office, distributed to his colleagues. Frankfurter's cover memo endorsed Bickel's conclusion that the Fourteenth Amendment's elasticity of language made its original intent inconclusive. With Elman's Justice Department brief taking the same line, Davis' victory over Marshall's legal argument was neutralized. The question was pushed outside the realm of law into one where sociological arguments could carry the day.

This ploy would have failed under Chief Justice Vinson, who did not believe that the judiciary should remake the law, but Earl Warren had no such inhibitions. Warren and Frankfurter worked together to persuade their colleagues to speak with a unanimous voice to end segregation. As a politician, Warren had the interpersonal skills to promote the goal that Frankfurter's pedantic manner impeded. Frankfurter wrote his colleagues long memos rationalizing the result he wanted. He urged that law must respond to the "transformation of views" and the "changes in men's feelings for what is right and just." Yet, as spring approached ... Justices Reed and Jackson still held out.

Jackson continued to view segregation as a question of politics and ... believed that it could not be abolished as a judicial act. Reed asked his clerk to draft a dissent. When his clerk, John Fasset, balked and said that he thought the other side had reached the right decision, Reed asked him whether he favored a "kritarchy." ... Fasset soon learned the definition of the phenomenon whose inception he was witnessing – government by judges.

At the end of March 1954, Jackson suffered a nonfatal heart attack. Warren seized the opportunity... Taking advantage of Jackson's weakened state, Warren successfully pressured him to join the opinion ... With Jackson's vote in his pocket, Warren told Reed, "Stan, you're all by yourself in this now...." Isolated, Reed caved in to Warren's pressure, but reportedly never agreed with the decision.

On May 17, 1954, Frankfurter's strategy triumphed when Warren read the unanimous opinion from the bench. Chief Justice Earl Warren kept the opinion brief so that it would fit into newspapers without having to be excerpted. As legal reasoning played no role, brevity was not a problem. The gist of the opinion was captured by a New York Times headline on May 18, 1954: "A Sociological Decision: Court Founded Its Segregation Ruling On Hearts and Minds Rather Than Laws." James Reston commented that "the Court's opinion reads more like an expert paper on sociology."

It is easy to understand the Court's preference for sociology. Segregation was supported by more than a half century of precedent ... Chief Justice Warren shrugged off the legal issues with the statement that "we cannot turn the clock back to 1868 when the Amendment was adopted, or even to 1896 when Plessy v. Ferguson was written." The relevant question, he said, is whether "segregation of children in public schools solely on the basis of race, even though the physical facilities and other 'tangible' factors may be equal, deprive the children of the minority group of equal educational opportunities?" The Court's answer was, "We believe that it does."

The Plessy decision, he reasoned, was based on inadequate psychological knowledg
e, and its continued use as precedent was inconsistent with modern authority. At this point he attached a paragraph-long footnote listing social science references beginning with Kenneth Clark's doll experiments and ending: "And see generally Myrdal, An American Dilemma (1944)." Warren concluded, "Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal." He limited this ruling to "the field of public education."
...
__________________

How is the faithful city become an harlot! It was full of judgment: righteousness lodged in it, but now murderers. Thy silver is become dross, thy wine mixed with water. Thy princes are rebellious, and companions of thieves: every one loveth gifts, and followeth after rewards.

Xian WN!

"The Jew can only be understood if it is known what he strives for: ... the destruction of the world.... [it is] the tragedy of Lucifer."

Holy-Hoax Exposed, Hollow-Cost Examined, How Low Cost? (toons)
 
Old September 29th, 2005 #7
lawrence dennis
Anti-anti-antisemite
 
lawrence dennis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Rocky Mountains
Posts: 1,265
lawrence dennis
Default Jared Taylor on the 'unconstitutionality' of Brown vs. Board of Education (1954)

I give here an excerpt from this excellent article. Of course, Mr. Taylor does not tell his readers what he knows, that the conspirators involved in overturning constitional precedent by 'making law' were all three of them jews: Justice Felix Frankfurter, his clerk Alexander Bickel, and his former clerk Philip Elman in the Justice Department.

Quote:
published in the July 2004 issue of "American Renaissance" -- ... If the Court had decided the case immediately after oral arguments, Brown might have been decided the other way or at best, with a five-to-four majority that would have given it little authority in the South. It was at this point that Justice Felix Frankfurter, who was desperate to end segregation, assumed a key role. Faced with a bad legal case and justices who did not want to abuse their power, his strategy was to delay. He argued strongly that a decision on Brown should be put off to allow time for an investigation of the original intent of the 14th Amendment and to let the new Eisenhower administration take a position. In the meantime, without telling the other justices, he told his clerk, Alexander Bickel, to ransack the history of the Amendment in the hope of finding something that would justify striking down segregation.

In June 1953, the Court put Brown back on the docket and invited the new administration to file a brief. Eisenhower’s people wanted to stay out of the controversy entirely, but unbeknownst to them an agent for Felix Frankfurter was working at a high level in the Justice Department. Philip Elman had clerked for Frankfurter, and was in constant communication with his old boss about Brown. He told the Solicitor General that a Supreme Court invitation to comment on a case was like a command performance, and he offered to handle the case.

Elman and Frankfurter both knew that back-channel communication was wrong. A party to a case is never permitted to have secret discussions with a judge who will decide his case. In a long 1987 article in the Harvard Law Review, in which he described in detail the collusion that went into the Brown ruling, Elman conceded that what he did “probably went beyond the pale” but, he added, “I considered it a cause that transcended ordinary notions about propriety in a litigation.” He wrote that he and Frankfurter kept an appropriate professional distance on all other cases, but made an exception for Brown. To them, ending school segregation was so important it justified unscrupulous maneuvering.

They talked at length over the phone and in person, referring to the other justices by code. William Douglas was Yak because he was from Yakima, Washington. Stanley Reed was Chamer, because it means dolt or mule in Hebrew, and Reed thought desegregation was a political and not a judicial matter.

In September 1953, something happened that completely changed the complexion of the Court: Chief Justice Frederick Vinson, a strong opponent of judicial activism, suddenly died. As Elman reports in the 1987 article, Frankfurter met him soon after in high spirits. “I’m in mourning,” he said with a huge grin. “Phil, this is the first solid piece of evidence I’ve ever had that there really is a God.” Elman writes that “God takes care of drunks, little children, and the American people” and showed His concern for America “by taking Fred Vinson when He did.” The new Chief Justice was Earl Warren, an ambitious former governor of California, who saw his job not as interpreting the Constitution but as a chance to exercise power.

In the meantime, Frankfurter’s clerk Bickel could find nothing in the history or intent of the 14th Amendment that could be used to order desegregation, so Frankfurter changed tack. He began to urge that original intent did not matter, and that the Amendment’s language should be reinterpreted according to the needs of the time. He reported to Elman that Warren and some of the other justices were sympathetic to this view, so not surprisingly, when the Justice Department filed Elman’s 600-page brief in December 1953, it too argued that the language of the Amendment was broad enough to be reinterpreted.

The reargument covered the same ground as before. Marshall trotted out the bogus doll studies again, while the Justice Department echoed Bickel’s view that the original intent of the 14th Amendment could be ignored. Frankfurter wrote long memos to the other justices insisting that the law must respond to “changes in men’s feelings for what is right and just.” This combination of arguments overcame the scruples of most of the justices who were reluctant to go beyond what they considered to be the limits of their authority. Jackson and Reed were the only holdouts. The former Nuremburg prosecutor refused to dabble in what he thought was a political rather than a judicial matter, and Reed, the chamer, argued that judicial activism was the beginning of “kritarchy,” or rule by judges.

At the end of March 1954, Jackson suffered a serious heart attack. Warren rushed to the hospital and got the weakened justice to agree to the opinion he had drafted. Then he cornered Reed, telling him he would be all alone if he did not go along. Reed, who never agreed with the ruling, bowed to pressure and joined the majority.

On May 17, Warren read the decision from the bench. Since there was no legal reasoning involved in it, he could keep it short enough to make the entire ruling fit into a newspaper article. The most often quoted passage is the following:

“To separate [black children] from others of similar age and qualifications solely because of their race generates a feeling of inferiority as to their status in the community that may affect their hearts and minds in a way unlikely to ever be undone. . . . We conclude that in the field of public education the doctrine of ‘separate but equal’ has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.”

Warren admitted that he was interpreting the Constitution differently from every Supreme Court that had gone before:

“[W]e cannot turn the clock back to 1868 when the [14th] Amendment was adopted, or even to 1896 when Plessy v. Ferguson was written,” he argued. The point to be addressed was whether “segregation of children in public schools solely on the basis of race, even though the physical facilities and other ‘tangible’ factors may be equal, deprives the children of the minority group of equal educational opportunities.” His conclusion: “We believe it does.” As evidence, he cited Clark’s doll studies.

It should not require pointing out that whether segregation makes blacks feel inferior is not a Constitutional issue. Even if the evidence that segregation did have that effect had been solid—and it was not—it did not justify reinterpreting the Constitution.

Even liberals recognized that the Court was practicing sociology and not law. The New York Times, which welcomed the ruling, nevertheless gave its May 18 article the following sub-headline: “A Sociological Decision: Court Founded Its Segregation Ruling On Hearts and Minds Rather Than Laws.” The dean of the Yale Law School, Wesley Sturges, put it more bluntly. For the justices to rule as they did, he noted, “the Court had to make the law.”

Nor was Philip Elman’s behind-the-scenes role in the matter finished. The Constitution has been consistently interpreted to mean that the rights it grants are personal and require immediate relief. If segregation was unconstitutional it meant black students were entitled to integration right away. Frankfurter had explained to Elman that if this were what a desegregation ruling required, he could not be sure of getting unanimity, perhaps not even a majority. The prospect of the chaos such a ruling would cause would have pushed many justices into opposition.

It was Elman, therefore, who proposed the very unusual solution of separating enforcement from constitutionality. After the famous May 17 ruling, the Supreme Court sent the case back for further argument on how the decision should be implemented. It waited nearly a year, until May 1, 1955, to let the 1954 ruling sink in, before issuing another ruling on how to do what the Court ordered. It is here that we find the famous linguistic fudge: desegregation was to be accomplished with “all deliberate speed.” The South was going to have to abide by the Constitution, but it could drag its feet. “It was entirely unprincipled,” Elman wrote in 1987; “it was just plain wrong as a matter of constitutional law, to suggest that someone whose personal constitutional rights were being violated should be denied relief.” “. . . I was simply counting votes in the Supreme Court,” he added. Elman proposed a solution he concedes was “entirely unprincipled” because that was what it would take to get the ruling he and Frankfurter wanted.

In his article Elman also showed considerable contempt for Thurgood Marshall, who later became the first black appointed to the Supreme Court. He wrote that Marshall made bad, ineffective arguments, but that Elman’s collusion with Frankfurter had so rigged the Court in favor of desegregation, it made no difference: “Thurgood Marshall could have stood up there and recited ‘Mary had a little lamb,’ and the result would have been exactly the same.” ...
__________________

How is the faithful city become an harlot! It was full of judgment: righteousness lodged in it, but now murderers. Thy silver is become dross, thy wine mixed with water. Thy princes are rebellious, and companions of thieves: every one loveth gifts, and followeth after rewards.

Xian WN!

"The Jew can only be understood if it is known what he strives for: ... the destruction of the world.... [it is] the tragedy of Lucifer."

Holy-Hoax Exposed, Hollow-Cost Examined, How Low Cost? (toons)
 
Old October 27th, 2005 #8
Agis
biocultural Realpolitik
 
Agis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: ZooSA
Posts: 697
Agis
Default

Mentioned on GoyFire #17:



Quote:
Like other Jewish CEOs, Time Warner's Mr. Levin began as an outsider, subject to the slights and barriers of discrimination. In the 1940s, his father, a successful grocer, tried to move his family to a better neighborhood near Philadelphia's Main Line. They were turned away from buying a house because of their religion, he has told interviewers.

Politically, Mr. Levin is more liberal than Mr. Golub. He grew up in a Reform Jewish home, where religion was mixed with a strong bent toward social justice; he then attended Haverford College, a college founded by Quakers near Philadelphia. Mr. Levin's son Jonathan, before his murder last year, taught poor black children at a high school in the Bronx; another son is studying to be a rabbi. Under pressure to identify a No. 2, Mr. Levin in 1994 named Mr. Parsons, a prominent New York lawyer and bank president who was on the Time Warner board.

"I think Jerry gets an enormous amount of satisfaction from having Dick Parsons there," says a friend who has known Mr. Levin for 20 years. "He likes telling the rest of the organization, 'You learn to relate to him. This is the new reality.' These guys believe the country can be different and they like being the people who make it different."

Many of the black executives working with Jews share traits, too. Like Mr. Chenault, they often grew up in homes with more social status than their mentors. Mr. Johnson, the lawyer, his father was an architect. The blacks also often attended school with Jews.
http://www.careerjournal.com/myc/div...0-kaufman.html
__________________
.
.
CREATIVITY NOW! http://tinyurl.com/6buj85
 
Old November 15th, 2005 #9
Agis
biocultural Realpolitik
 
Agis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: ZooSA
Posts: 697
Agis
Default

Mentioned during GoyFire #20

"Virginia Beach has benefited from its wider strip of sand, courtesy of a $125 million beach-widening project several years ago. Virginia Beach fought long and hard to remake its image as a Southern beach town with little to offer travelers desiring ritzier hotels, restaurants and shops. In addition, the infamous 1989 Greekfest riots during an annual gathering of black college students left the city grappling with accusations of racism and police brutality. For years, many black tourists promised not to return."

http://www.freep.com/features/travel...e_20051002.htm


"Many outsiders portrayed the situation as a racial confrontation. Perhaps the students saw it that way as they vandalized stores, loaded their cars with stolen goods and chanted "fight the power." Perhaps they felt somehow justified because of the deeply-ingrained racist attitudes many in the area hold. But the reality is that the only ones who can truly be blamed for the riot are the blacks. What gives anyone the right to pillage on a wanton rampage?"

http://www-tech.mit.edu/V109/N36/atkins.36o.html

"1989: "Greekfest" riots
Over the Labor Day weekend in 1989, Virginia Beach experienced the worst civil disturbance in its history, which resulted in over 500 arrests and citations and millions in property damage, not to mention the damage to the city's reputation, which lingered for years afterward.

Many people predicted a riot weeks in advance, and this came to pass. Casual observers suggested that the city went out of its way to make the students feel unwelcome; that the students rioted not out of anger, but out of a simple desire for the clothing displayed in the shops along the Boardwalk; and that the police were out of control, attacking anyone who was black, looter or not. It took M-16 toting National Guard troops to restore order after two days of rioting. Property damage took several years to repair; some small businesses were destroyed and were unable to reopen.

The incident brought widespread publicity and public outcry from many factions. Two slogans commonly heard in the following weeks were: "It's a black thing; you wouldn't understand" and "It's a cop thing; we'll make you understand." The incident was immortalized by Public Enemy in their song "Welcome to the Terrordome " from their album Fear of a Black Planet (1990).

One tourist recalls "I was there that weekend attempting to enjoy the long weekend. We met with belligerent attitudes and observed several incidents of inappropriate behavior and language. Many of those in our group were over 60 years of age. I, with my two-year son in his stroller, was forced off the sidewalk several times."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Beach,_Virginia
__________________
.
.
CREATIVITY NOW! http://tinyurl.com/6buj85
 
Old November 15th, 2005 #10
Geoff Beck
Hammer
 
Geoff Beck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Harz Mountains
Posts: 1,551
Geoff Beck
Default References to Weimar

Hello:

Goyfire repeatedly make references to Weimar, Germany, in regards to Jewish predominance in institutional power.

It is very difficult to find studies of Jewish predominance in Weimar (No surprise there, since the Jews control the book publishing industry and academic choke points), but I've run across a few sources, including "Separation and Its Discontents", by Kevin MacDonald.

I also discovered the nugget written by the Weimar era chancellor Bruning:

Quote:
The scale of Germany’s Jewish problem is revealed by an unpublished
manuscript by Hitler’s predecessor as chancellor, Dr. Heinrich Brüning.
Writing in American exile in 1943 he stated that after the inflation there
was only one major German bank not controlled by Jews, some of them
‘utterly corrupt.’ In 1931 he had brought the banks under government
supervision, and had had to keep the government’s findings of dishonesty in
the banks secret ‘for fear of provoking antisemitic riots.’
David Irving
Hitler’s War
 
Old November 16th, 2005 #11
Geoff Beck
Hammer
 
Geoff Beck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Harz Mountains
Posts: 1,551
Geoff Beck
Default Additional Weimar References

I post these (this) references for the benefit of the group.

Understanding the Jewish menace in Weimar, Germany, is crucial to our own awakening:


"The owners of three of Germany's greatest newspaper publishing
houses; the editors of the Vossische Zeitung and the Berliner
Tageblatt; most book publishers; the owners and editors of the Neue
Rundschau and other distinguished literary magazines; the owners
of Germany.s greatest art galleries were all Jews. Jews played a
major part in theater and in the film industry as producers, directors,
and actors. Many of Germany.s best composers, musicians, artists,
sculptors, and architects were Jews. Their participation in literary
criticism and in literature was enormous: practically all the great
critics and many novelists, poets, dramatists, essayists of Weimar
Germany were Jews. A recent American study has shown that
thirty-one of the sixty-five leading German "expressionists" and
neo-objectivists" were Jews" .31 (Deak 1968, 28)

As sited in Kevin MacDonald's "Separation and its Discontents."
 
Old November 24th, 2005 #12
Agis
biocultural Realpolitik
 
Agis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: ZooSA
Posts: 697
Agis
Default GoyFire #22



Quote:
Tue, August 2, 2005
The man they love to...cyper hate
Ottawa lawyer Richard Warman in fight of lifetime against racists

By RANDY RICHMOND, Sun Media

http://www.ottawasun.com/News/Ottawa...55985-sun.html

Richard Warman exposes the beliefs of racists whenever he can, especially by taking them and their websites to the Human Rights Commission. (Geoff Robins SUN)

The first day he bought the bike, Richard Warman made it look like junk.

He wrapped the entire glittering bike, which cost him three weeks' pay, in black hockey tape.

Over the next 14 years, the tape faded to a putrid grey and the edges curled, the gears and other workings grew out of date and mechanics told him to buy a new bike instead of keeping this one on the road.

Warman, 35, still rides that bike every day to work in Ottawa. When he settles into a favourite pub, it is clear he and the old bike are well-suited to each other. Warman orders a vegetarian meal and insists on reusing his beer glass to save on dishwashing water.

When the interview continues in his apartment, he introduces cats -- abused or abandoned by previous owners -- that he rehabilitates for an animal shelter.

With a thin build, receding red hair shaved to the skull and glasses, he looks the part of the lefty, bicycle-obsessed lawyer he is.

But he's also as tough and scrappy as that bike. And he's smart enough now to keep much of his life under wraps.

Warman has incurred the wrath of North America's neo-Nazis, racists, skinheads, conspiracy theorists and supremacist leaders of all white-on-white stripes.

Death threats are posted on websites. He is called "an enemy of free speech, and enemy of freedom," the "high priest of censorship."

British conspiracy writer David Icke (www.davidicke.com) devotes entire pages in his books to attacking Warman. Skinheads protest outside his office. They post photographs of his parents on websites.

And recently, on a huge international white power website, someone posted maps to where Warman supposedly lives, photographs of him at hearings, and details of his family. At night, he gets calls from as far away as Texas.

Warman's crime? Exposing the beliefs of neo-Nazis whenever he can, and especially by taking white supremacists and their websites to the Canadian Human Rights Commission.

He has filed 10 human rights complaints, with one win, one case in an adjudicator's office awaiting a ruling, and the others either being investigated or heading to a hearing.

If they lose, the white supremacists have to pay tens of thousands of dollars in fines and compensation.

"Richard is bugging the pants off these people. They don't have money," says noted hate fighter Matt Lauder of Guelph.

'RUNNING SCARED'

"They are running scared."

Deep in the battle, perhaps deeper than he expected, Warman offers a grim sigh in response to all the hate he is getting by trying to fight Internet hate.

"What am I supposed to do? The stuff is there. Something has to be done about it, right?"

Then he adds: "It would nice if the system was going after it, not me."

Warman maintains a lack of action on the part of police, attorney s general and especially on the part of the Human Rights Commission, has forced him to fight the cyberspace battle by himself.

The scourge of those who celebrate all things Germanic, at least the dark side of German history, all things military, all things white and Christian, was himself born the son of a military officer in Lahr, West Germany.

The irony is not lost on Warman.

"Where did it all go horribly wrong?" he asks with a laugh.

When he was young, the family moved back to a small town in Ontario. His father left the army and became first an educator, then politician. His mother took on many jobs in the community. They were good, old-fashioned Bill Davis Tories in the Protestant heartland. No one got angry over politics or religion.

"There was definitely an awareness of politics and social discus- sions at home, But it wasn't, 'Let's all go to a rally this week.' "

Still, he had enough political acumen to get on student council every year of high school and as president his final year.

In high school, he balanced a love of drama with a love of rough-and-tumble sports such as rugby and hockey.

"I loved lacrosse. There's lot of running and lots of exercise and you get to wale on people with sticks. What could be better than that?" he says.

"It was a typical high school life in small town Ontario. You know, go to school dances, get drunk, throw up in the washrooms."

He signed up for politics at Queen's University but switched to drama because he found his politics professors too conservative for his liking.

Outside classes, he joined the Green Party, eventually running unsuccessfully as a candidate in two provincial and two federal elections.

He also grew interested in human rights issues, especially hate crime. In 1991, after graduation, he got a job working as warehouse manager for Toronto's Daily Bread Food Bank.

He bought his bicycle and one day headed to the Canadian Human Rights' tribunal hearing against the Heritage Front telephone hateline.

"The human rights lawyer, Eddie Taylor, was kicking the Heritage Front all over the court."

The group was ordered to cease its telephone operation. Warman put that experience in his back pocket and embarked on a two-year adventure as a bit of a vagabond, working here and there, bicycling through Europe and travelling through Australia.

By the time he arrived back in Canada in 1995, Warman was ready to bear down and get his law degree in Windsor. He won a handful of awards for ethics and academic excellence, then got his master's at McGill University.

That led to several different positions with the federal court and government in Ottawa.

Meanwhile, in about 2000, Warman started looking more closely at white supremacist websites.

"No one else was doing it. It is a little esoteric," he acknowledges. "Not everyone stumbles across hate propaganda in their everyday lives."

And it is difficult for many to make the link between website hate and violence on the streets, Warman says.

HATRED NOT INSTANT

"Each generation removed from the horrors of the Second World War has a harder time relating propaganda to pogroms," he says.

"Hatred doesn't spring up overnight. People just don't wake up and go, 'You know what? I think I hate blacks today.' It is conditioned into them. It is done by means of propaganda."

Warman's first Internet target was Fred Kyburz of Coleman, Alta., and his website, patriotsonguard.org. Jews, Kyburz said, were murderers, child pornographers, pedophiles and sex slave traders.

In March 2003, a human rights tribunal ruled against Kyburz and ordered he pay $30,000 in fines to the government and compensation for the personal attacks on Warman.

By 2003, Warman was also working at the Human Rights Commission office as an investigator.

When white supremacists found out, they howled about a conflict of interest. How could a lawyer filing human rights complaints on his own time also work as an investigator of human rights complaints, they asked.

They protested outside the commission office. Security staff at the commission began opening all of Warman's mail.

The lawyer hardly smoothed the waters, pushing the commission to initiate its own complaints.

"Let's just say I was always poking them with a sharp stick."

When the commission decided to make cutbacks last year, Warman says he was the only investigator laid off.

He found new work easily enough but he remains frustrated with the commission's lack of initiative.

It shouldn't be up to individuals to tackle Internet hate at their own expense and danger, when an entire government body has the power and responsibility to do it, Warman says.

After Warman won against Kyburz, he realized the commission won't enforce rulings either. He had to hire a bailiff to see if Kyburz could pay and used a Federal Court order to have the site taken down, Warman says. He has yet to get a cent out of Kyburz.

Commission spokesperson Jean-Christophe Vlasiu acknowledges the commission has the power to initiate complaints about hate communication, "but has not done so in recent years."

The commission focuses more on preventing discrimination, he says. But, he adds, the commission is getting so many complaints now about Internet hate messages it's developing a long-term strategy to deal with the issue.

CONCERNED, PARANOID

Warman sticks by his claims.

"It's not as if the human rights commission doesn't take the lead on these cases. It doesn't take the lead and doesn't take the middle or the end, either."

Warman expected a strong reaction from white supremacists. His family is worried about the threats and Ottawa police have developed a security plan for him, which he will not discuss.

"You have to walk a fine line between being concerned and being paranoid."

The neo-Nazis alarm him, but not as much as the failure of the system to deal with the problem, Warman says.

He is waiting to see what happens with his first set of complaints before the commission. If the complaints are thrown out, if the system fails, he will have to re-evaluate his personal stake in the battle.
http://www.recomnetwork.org/articles.../2035239.shtml
__________________
.
.
CREATIVITY NOW! http://tinyurl.com/6buj85
 
Old November 25th, 2005 #13
VLC
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: in Canuckistan
Posts: 228
VLC
Default

this is WLP's broadcast about Katyn mentioned by Tom in GF-22

Katyn, by Dr. William Pierce

http://www.natall.com/internet-radio/ts/072002.mp3

(real audio)
http://www.natall.com/internet-radio/ts/072002.ram


Since the American Dissident Voices broadcast on the Wilhelm Gustloff was very popular with listeners, Dr. Pierce is doing another broadcast on World War II history.

The pretext for British involvement in World War II was the German invasion of Poland. Much was heard about the poor Poles and the evil Germans. However, the Soviet Union also invaded and occupied Poland. And when they occupied Poland, they killed thousands of the most talented men and women of the Polish nation: military officers, cultural leaders, business leaders, scientists, and writers. Did this cause the allies to consider that perhaps their plan to "save Poland" was not working. Of course not! The massacre was simply blamed on the Germans and the destructive war continued.
 
Old November 28th, 2006 #14
Agis
biocultural Realpolitik
 
Agis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: ZooSA
Posts: 697
Agis
Default mentioned in GF44


Haim Saban

Quote:
In August 2003, Saban Capital Group raised capital commitments and led a consortium with Quadrangle Capital Partners, Bain Capital Partners, Hellman & Friedman, Thomas H. Lee Partners, Providence Equity Partners and Alpine Capital to acquire control of ProSiebenSat.1 Media AG in a milestone transaction in European media. In a second acquisition, the consortium acquired additional interests of ProSiebenSat.1 in September 2004. ProSiebenSat.1 is one of Germany's largest television broadcasting companies, which owns four German TV channels, including ProSieben and SAT.1. Collectively, ProSiebenSat.1's channels represent approximately 45% of the German TV advertising market, one of the largest in the world. ProSiebenSat.1 is listed on the Frankfurt Stock Exchange.
http://www.saban.com/investments_prosiebensat1.htm



USA
Quote:
Meanwhile, Senator Hillary, running ever hard to be President Hillary, crossed the line between political twisting and political whoring when in Israel in recent days. Brought there for the 'Saban Forum' -- Haim Saban by the way a close friend of Ariel Sharon/Mossad, a dual citizen, and one of the leading multi-million financiers to the Democratic Party as well as to the Clintons and their many causes -- Hillary went way out of her way to go directly against the near unanimous ruling of the International Court of Justice and actually endorsed the building of the apartheid wall. It was a crass and blatant sell-out which caused a long-time Washington insider to sum it all up in one word - 'whore'.
http://blogwashington.com/!1.html

Saban gets Israel telecoms stake
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4531151.stm
__________________
.
.
CREATIVITY NOW! http://tinyurl.com/6buj85
 
Old January 4th, 2007 #15
Agis
biocultural Realpolitik
 
Agis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: ZooSA
Posts: 697
Agis
Default Miami vs. Ba



http://youtube.com/watch?v=K0vmi2Cs-4E



http://www.rampagethemovie.com/
__________________
.
.
CREATIVITY NOW! http://tinyurl.com/6buj85
 
Old January 4th, 2007 #16
Bolg
Senior Member
 
Bolg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Near
Posts: 949
Bolg
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff Beck
Hello:

Goyfire repeatedly make references to Weimar, Germany, in regards to Jewish predominance in institutional power.

It is very difficult to find studies of Jewish predominance in Weimar (No surprise there, since the Jews control the book publishing industry and academic choke points), but I've run across a few sources, including "Separation and Its Discontents", by Kevin MacDonald.

I also discovered the nugget written by the Weimar era chancellor Bruning:



David Irving
Hitler’s War
A very thorough list of jews in the judiciary, the medical profession, and politics in Weimar Germany can be found in a publication from 1938 (I think), called "The Jew As a Criminal". I read it on regmeister.net, but it is no longer online. It is extremely instructive and factual, but I can't find it anywhere. Does anyone have that?

EDIT:

Found the book. Posted the link here:

http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?p=480273#post480273
__________________
back home.
 
Old March 7th, 2008 #17
Owen D.
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 148
Owen D.
Default #52 Raphael Bergmann Doug Christie Letter

On Goyfire 52 a letter is featured about Straight written by free speech lawyer Doug Christie for Pride Raphael Bergmann. Can we have the text of that letter I can't find it online.
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:14 AM.
Page generated in 0.23665 seconds.