Hitlary's House Pet, BET Founder Ben Johnson, Apologizes a Week Late for Smearing Buckwheat

[Patriot Games]

http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/BET_johnson_clinton/2008/01/17/65397.html

BET Founder Apologizes for Obama Remarks

Thursday, January 17, 2008

Hillary Rodham Clinton and her campaign tried to mend ties to black voters
Thursday when a key supporter apologized to her chief rival, Barack Obama,
for comments that hinted at Obama's drug use as a teenager. The candidate
herself, meanwhile, praised the Rev. Martin Luther King and promised to
assist with the rebirth of this troubled, largely black city.

Bob Johnson, the founder of Black Entertainment Television, apologized for
comments he made at a Clinton campaign rally in South Carolina on Sunday
that hinted at Obama's use of drugs as a teenager.

Johnson initially denied he was talking about Obama's drug use, saying he
was referring to the Illinois senator's days as a community organizer.

Johnson backed away from that explanation Thursday, two days after Hillary
Clinton said during a nationally televised debate that she considered his
comments "out of bounds."

"In my zeal to support Senator Clinton, I made some very inappropriate
remarks for which I am truly sorry," Johnson said in a written statement. "I
hope that you will accept this apology. Good luck on the campaign trail."

Johnson's comments and remarks by both Clintons before the New Hampshire
primary last week had alarmed several black leaders and drew a rebuke from
Obama and his top aides.

It began when Hillary Clinton gave an interview in which she seemed to
discount King's role in the civil rights movement. Later, former President
Clinton cast aspects of Obama's candidacy as a "fairy tale."

Obama and Clinton later called a truce in the controversy.

Johnson's apology and Clinton's visit to Compton was her latest effort to
reconnect with the black community after she and Obama engaged in a bitter
exchange of words over the issue of race.

In Compton, Clinton praised King and promised to assist with this city's
rebirth.

"'Those who say it can't be done are usually interrupted by those who are
doing it,'" she said during an appearance at a church, quoting noted black
novelist James Baldwin.

Clinton pledged to help Mayor Eric Perrodin with his goal of "birthing" a
new Compton, which has struggled with crime and poverty.

"I know something about birthing," Clinton said. "You need a president who
will be a partner. Who says, 'What is it I can do to make sure this birth is
easy and successful?'"

Among other things, the New York senator said she would open opportunities
for young black men in the so-called "green collar" jobs program she has
said she'll create to help develop alternative sources of energy. She also
pledged to commit $200 million over five years to help ex-offenders
transition from prison.

"A lot of our young people, disproportionately young people of color, are in
our prison system and they don't belong there. They are non-violent
offenders," she said to applause. "I believe strongly that when someone has
served his or her time - her debt or his debt to society - then they ought
to have the slate wiped clean."

It was the first of several campaign stops for Clinton in California, which
holds its primary on "Mega Tuesday," Feb. 5. She was set to hold voter
roundtables on the economy later Thursday in Northridge and Santa Barbara.

The campaign also began airing its first ad in California on Thursday, a
spot called Voice that first aired in Nevada this week. Clinton talks about
the ailing economy, home foreclosures and the rising cost of health care and
gasoline.

Obama was the first Democratic hopeful to go on television with a commercial
that began running in the Bay area last weekend.

A large number of the state's Democratic voters reside in the San Francisco
Bay area and Sacramento, as well as in Chico and Eureka.

Clinton planned a final day of campaigning Friday in Nevada, which holds
presidential precinct caucuses Saturday.

 

[Topaz]

Goebbels speech on March 18, 1933:
"German women, German men !
It is a happy accident that my first speech since taking charge of the
Ministry for Propaganda and People's Enlightenment is to German women.
Although I agree with Treitschke that men make history, I do not
forget that women raise boys to manhood. You know that the National
Socialist movement is the only party that keeps women out of daily
politics. This arouses bitter criticism and hostility, all of it very
unjustified. We have kept women out of the parliamentary-democratic
intrigues of the past fourteen years in Germany not because we do not
respect them, but because we respect them too much. We do not see the
woman as inferior, rather as having a different mission, a different
value, than that of the man. Therefore we believed that the German
woman, who more than any other in the world is a woman in the best
sense of the word, should use her strength and abilities in other
areas than the man.

The woman has always been not only the man's sexual companion, but
also his fellow worker. Long ago, she did heavy labor with the man in
the field. She moved with him into the cities, entering the offices
and factories, doing her share of the work for which she was best
suited. She did this with all her abilities, her loyalty, her selfless
devotion, her readiness to sacrifice.

The woman in public life today is no different than the women of the
past. No one who understands the modern age would have the crazy idea
of driving women from public life, from work, profession, and bread
winning. But it must also be said that those things that belong to the
man must remain his. That includes politics and the military. That is
not to disparage women, only a recognition of how she can best use her
talents and abilities.
Looking back over the past year's of Germany's decline, we come to the
frightening, nearly terrifying conclusion, that the less German men
were willing to act as men in public life, the more women succumbed to
the temptation to fill the role of the man. The feminization of men
always leads to the masculinization of women. An age in which all
great idea of virtue, of steadfastness, of hardness and determination
have been forgotten should not be surprised that the man gradually
loses his leading role in life and politics and government to the
woman.

It may be unpopular to say this to an audience of women, but it must
be said, because it is true and because it will help make clear our
attitude toward women.

The modern age, with all its vast revolutionary transformations in
government, politics, economics and social relations has not left
women and their role in public life untouched. Things we thought
impossible several years or decades ago are now everyday reality. Some
good, noble and commendable things have happened. But also things that
are contemptible and humiliating. These revolutionary transformations
have largely taken from women their proper tasks. Their eyes were set
in directions that were not appropriate for them. The result was a
distorted public view of German womanhood that had nothing to do with
former ideals.

A fundamental change is necessary. At the risk of sounding reactionary
and outdated, let me say this clearly: The first, best, and most
suitable place for the women is in the family, and her most glorious
duty is to give children to her people and nation, children who can
continue the line of generations and who guarantee the immortality of
the nation. The woman is the teacher of the youth, and therefore the
builder of the foundation of the future. If the family is the nation's
source of strength, the woman is its core and center. The best place
for the woman to serve her people is in her marriage, in the family,
in motherhood. This is her highest mission. That does not mean that
those women who are employed or who have no children have no role in
the motherhood of the German people. They use their strength, their
abilities, their sense of responsibility for the nation, in other
ways. We are convinced, however, that the first task of a socially
reformed nation must be to again give the woman the possibility to
fulfill her real task, her mission in the family and as a mother.

The national revolutionary government is everything but reactionary.
It does not want to stop the pace of our rapidly moving age. It has no
intention of lagging behind the times. It wants to be the flag bearer
and pathfinder of the future. We know the demands of the modern age.
But that does not stop us from seeing that every age has its roots in
motherhood, that there is nothing of greater importance than the
living mother of a family who gives the state children.

German women have been transformed in recent years. They are beginning
to see that they are not happier as a result of being given more
rights but fewer duties. They now realize that the right to be elected
to public office at the expense of the right to life, motherhood and
her daily bread is not a good trade.

A characteristic of the modern era is a rapidly declining birthrate in
our big cities. In 1900 two million babies were born in Germany. Now
the number has fallen to one million. This drastic decline is most
evident in the national capital. In the last fourteen years, Berlin's
birthrate has become the lowest of any European city. By 1955, without
emigration, it will have only about three million inhabitants. The
government is determined to halt this decline of the family and the
resulting impoverishment of our blood. There must be a fundamental
change. The liberal attitude toward the family and the child is
responsible for Germany's rapid decline. We today must begin worrying
about an aging population. In 1900 there were seven children for each
elderly person, today it is only four. If current trends continue, by
1988 the ratio will be 1 : 1. These statistics say it all. They are
the best proof that if Germany continues along its current path, it
will end in an abyss with breathtaking speed. We can almost determine
the decade when Germany collapses because of depopulation.

We are not willing to stand aside and watch the collapse of our
national life and the destruction of the blood we have inherited. The
national revolutionary government has the duty to rebuilt the nation
on its original foundations, to transform the life and work of the
woman so that it once again best serves the national good. It intends
to eliminate the social inequalities so that once again the life of
our people and the future of our people and the immortality of our
blood is assured..."


http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com

http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.nsm88.com/

http://wsi.matriots.com/jews.html

 

[AnAmericanCitizen]

After watching Ben Johnson and hearing what he had to say in this incident and how he
said it, I couldn't help but think if it was him and not Obama in the race, it would
now be only between Hillary and Edwards. I thought he came across as a
caricature....AAC



On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 06:40:29 -0500, "Patriot Games" <Patriot@America.com> wrote:

>http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/BET_johnson_clinton/2008/01/17/65397.html
>
>BET Founder Apologizes for Obama Remarks
>
>Thursday, January 17, 2008
>
>Hillary Rodham Clinton and her campaign tried to mend ties to black voters
>Thursday when a key supporter apologized to her chief rival, Barack Obama,
>for comments that hinted at Obama's drug use as a teenager. The candidate
>herself, meanwhile, praised the Rev. Martin Luther King and promised to
>assist with the rebirth of this troubled, largely black city.
>
>Bob Johnson, the founder of Black Entertainment Television, apologized for
>comments he made at a Clinton campaign rally in South Carolina on Sunday
>that hinted at Obama's use of drugs as a teenager.
>
>Johnson initially denied he was talking about Obama's drug use, saying he
>was referring to the Illinois senator's days as a community organizer.
>
>Johnson backed away from that explanation Thursday, two days after Hillary
>Clinton said during a nationally televised debate that she considered his
>comments "out of bounds."
>
>"In my zeal to support Senator Clinton, I made some very inappropriate
>remarks for which I am truly sorry," Johnson said in a written statement. "I
>hope that you will accept this apology. Good luck on the campaign trail."
>
>Johnson's comments and remarks by both Clintons before the New Hampshire
>primary last week had alarmed several black leaders and drew a rebuke from
>Obama and his top aides.
>
>It began when Hillary Clinton gave an interview in which she seemed to
>discount King's role in the civil rights movement. Later, former President
>Clinton cast aspects of Obama's candidacy as a "fairy tale."
>
>Obama and Clinton later called a truce in the controversy.
>
>Johnson's apology and Clinton's visit to Compton was her latest effort to
>reconnect with the black community after she and Obama engaged in a bitter
>exchange of words over the issue of race.
>
>In Compton, Clinton praised King and promised to assist with this city's
>rebirth.
>
>"'Those who say it can't be done are usually interrupted by those who are
>doing it,'" she said during an appearance at a church, quoting noted black
>novelist James Baldwin.
>
>Clinton pledged to help Mayor Eric Perrodin with his goal of "birthing" a
>new Compton, which has struggled with crime and poverty.
>
>"I know something about birthing," Clinton said. "You need a president who
>will be a partner. Who says, 'What is it I can do to make sure this birth is
>easy and successful?'"
>
>Among other things, the New York senator said she would open opportunities
>for young black men in the so-called "green collar" jobs program she has
>said she'll create to help develop alternative sources of energy. She also
>pledged to commit $200 million over five years to help ex-offenders
>transition from prison.
>
>"A lot of our young people, disproportionately young people of color, are in
>our prison system and they don't belong there. They are non-violent
>offenders," she said to applause. "I believe strongly that when someone has
>served his or her time - her debt or his debt to society - then they ought
>to have the slate wiped clean."
>
>It was the first of several campaign stops for Clinton in California, which
>holds its primary on "Mega Tuesday," Feb. 5. She was set to hold voter
>roundtables on the economy later Thursday in Northridge and Santa Barbara.
>
>The campaign also began airing its first ad in California on Thursday, a
>spot called Voice that first aired in Nevada this week. Clinton talks about
>the ailing economy, home foreclosures and the rising cost of health care and
>gasoline.
>
>Obama was the first Democratic hopeful to go on television with a commercial
>that began running in the Bay area last weekend.
>
>A large number of the state's Democratic voters reside in the San Francisco
>Bay area and Sacramento, as well as in Chico and Eureka.
>
>Clinton planned a final day of campaigning Friday in Nevada, which holds
>presidential precinct caucuses Saturday.

 

[Topaz]

Here is part of a speech by Dr. Joseph Goebbels, delivered in
Nuernberg on September 13th, 1935 at the Seventh National-Socialist
Party Congress:

"Almost without exception, the intellectual leaders of Marxist atheism
in Germany were Jews, among them being Erich Weinert, Felix Abraham,
Dr. Levy-Lenz and others. At regular meetings, held in the presence of
a notary public, members were requested to register their declaration
of withdrawal from their church for a fee of 2 Marks. And this the
fight for atheism was carried on. Between 1918 and 1933 the
withdrawals from the German Evangelical Churches alone amounted to
two-and-a-half million persons in Germany. The programme which these
atheistic societies laid down in regard to sexual matters is amply
charcterized in the following demands publicly expressed at meetings
and distributed in leaflet form:

1) The complete abrogation of the paragraphs of the law dealing with
the crime of abortion, and the right to have abortion procured free of
charge in State Hospitals.

2) Non-interference with prostitution.

3) The abrogation of all bourgeois-capitalistic regulations in regard
to marriage and divorce.

4) Official registration to be optional and the children to be
educated by the community.

5) Abrogation of all penalties for sexual perversities and amnesty to
be granted to all persons condemned as 'sexual criminals'.

"Truly a case of methodical insanity, which has for its aim the
wilful destruction of the nations and their civilization and the
substitute of barbarism as a fundamental principle of public life.

"Where are the men behind the scenes of this virulent world
movement? Who are the inventors of all this madness? Who transplanted
this ensemble into Russia and is today making the attempt to have it
prevail in other countries? The answer to these question discloses the
actual secret of our anti-Jewish policy and our uncomromising fight
against Jewry; for the Bolshevic International is in reality nothing
less than a Jewish International."

http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com

http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.nsm88.com/

http://wsi.matriots.com/jews.html

 

[Patriot Games]

"AnAmericanCitizen" <NoAmnesty@earthlink.net> wrote in message
newscq5p3598mpeog755nup0637llr81fs12r@4ax.com...
> After watching Ben Johnson and hearing what he had to say in this incident
> and how he
> said it, I couldn't help but think if it was him and not Obama in the
> race, it would
> now be only between Hillary and Edwards. I thought he came across as a
> caricature....AAC

Yeah, he sure did. He was pathetic.

Please, please, please I hope there really are a few tens of millions of
educated black people who can see through this Hitlary/Johnson trick.....

But if I'm wrong do not tell me. I don't wanna know. I'm trying really
hard to be nice!

 

[Topaz]

Disney and the Jews:
Eisner and His Kind Must Stop Harming Our Children
by William L. Pierce

We've spoken about the Jewish control of the news and entertainment
media before, but it's a matter of such urgency that we need to talk
about it again and again. It is absolutely essential for us to
understand who controls our mass media and how they use their control
to undermine America.
Very recently a major rearrangement in the media world took place when
the Walt Disney company paid $19 billion to take control of Capital
Cities/ABC, the company that owns the ABC television network. That
makes the Disney company the biggest of the media conglomerates. And
it makes the man who controls Disney, Michael Eisner, the most
powerful media boss in the world.
What does this mean for the future of our people? Should we be
concerned that the company which brought us Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck,
and Snow White will in the future be playing a much bigger role in
forming the opinions of American television viewers and setting the
moral and cultural standards of our nation?
I'll answer that question: Yes, we certainly should be concerned,
because the Walt Disney company is not what it used to be. It has been
transformed from a wholesome producer of children's entertainment into
a malign instrument of subversion.
To understand how this happened, let's go back to the beginning. Walt
Disney was born in 1901 in a working-class, Midwestern American
family. He spent his early years on the family farm in Missouri. As a
teenager he helped support his family by delivering newspapers. He
later attributed his ability to overcome obstacles and achieve success
to the work discipline that he developed as a boy with the newspaper
route.
Although young Walt came from a typical American background, with no
advantages or privileges, he was a person of exceptional talent and
drive. He felt a strong artistic urge while he was still in grade
school, and he took a correspondence course in drawing. He continued
to develop his drawing skills in high school as a cartoonist for his
school paper. He dropped out of school at 16 and served in the First
World War. After the war, instead of finishing high school, he and
another young artist began experimenting with animated films in a tiny
studio of their own in Kansas City. Using very primitive equipment,
they made short, animated cartoons based on fairy tales. They tried to
market their films through a New York film distributor, but the New
Yorker took advantage of the struggling, young filmmakers: he stole
their work and left them destitute.
In 1922, at the ripe age of 20, Walt Disney decided to make a fresh
start in Hollywood. He sold his camera to raise enough money to make
the trip to California. There he enlisted the support of his brother
Roy as a business manager, and he persuaded his fellow artist in
Kansas City to come join him. With Walt's drive and determination,
they opened a new film studio. They invented a film character they
called Oswald the Rabbit, and a series of animated cartoons featuring
Oswald enabled the small studio to gain a foothold in the film
business.
Later, when sound films were introduced in 1927, Walt invented Mickey
Mouse. Walt himself provided Mickey's voice. Mickey Mouse was an
enormous success and helped Walt Disney Productions prosper and grow.
Over the years Walt Disney's fertile imagination gave us Donald Duck,
Goofy and Pluto, Dumbo the elephant, and a score of other animal
characters which have fascinated children all over the world for more
than 60 years. In 1937 Disney produced his great masterpiece, Snow
White and the Seven Dwarfs. This beautifully animated fairy tale
appealed to adults as well as to children. Like many fairy tales its
roots lie deep in the consciousness of our people.
After Snow White came Pinnochio, Fantasia, and Bambi. Walt Disney
Productions became a major power in the American film industry. And it
was unique, in that it was the only major film producer in Hollywood
not owned or controlled by Jews. The fact that Walt Disney was not a
Jew caused problems for him, however. He was surrounded by Jews who
resented his influence on American culture. A whispering campaign was
organized against him. Stories were spread that he was a fascist. He
began having labor problems.
The real problem, of course, was that Walt Disney's vision of the
world, as reflected in the films he produced, was wholly different
from that of the Jewish film producers around him. As long as Walt was
making Mickey Mouse or Donald Duck cartoons, this problem could be
overlooked. When he began animating feature-length fairy tales like
Snow White and Cinderella, the Jews in Hollywood became increasingly
nervous. The world of Snow White was an entirely White world, a
European world. It stirred deep feelings in European Americans, and
the aim of the Jewish media bosses then as now was to make White
Americans forget their roots. They wanted to begin promoting
multiculturalism as soon as the Second World War was over, and Walt
was in their way. They couldn't push racial mixing in their films and
have someone as popular as Walt Disney refuse to go along: the
contrast would be obvious to the public. Even Disney's extremely
popular Nature films were resented by the rest of Hollywood. Films
which promoted a love for animals and the natural world were viewed
with suspicion by men whose view of life was entirely economic and
metropolitan.
These may seem like subtle differences, and in fact most people
outside of Hollywood were oblivious to the ideological and cultural
conflict between Walt Disney and the other film producers. The closest
that the conflict came to attracting public attention was during the
1940s and early 1950s, when Walt Disney's total lack of sympathy for
Communism and his refusal to let Communist propaganda be introduced
into any of his productions set him apart from the rest of Hollywood.
While Walt was alive, however, there wasn't much that Hollywood could
do about him. He was too popular with the American people.
After Walt died in 1966, however, the situation changed. His company
had depended on his genius for its prosperity, and without him it had
a difficult time keeping up with the competition. After Disney company
profits had declined for several years, Jewish corporate raiders Saul
Steinberg and Irwin Jacobs moved in for the kill. In 1984, after
Steinberg had milked the company of $32 million, Disney family
shareholders were too weak to resist a takeover by Michael Eisner, the
Jewish boss of Paramount Pictures. Eisner in turn brought in as his
second in command another Jew, Jeffrey Katzenberg. The company that
Walt Disney built-the company that gave us Snow White and Fantasia --
has been in Jewish hands ever since.
During his first day as chairman of the Disney company-his first day,
believe it or not-Eisner ordered the production of an R-rated film,
about the kinky sexual misadventures of a typically neurotic Jewish
family in the Los Angeles area. This was the first R-rated film ever
produced by the Disney company-but certainly not the last.
Actually, what Michael Eisner has done to the Disney company is far
worse than cutting the soul out of it. He has transformed it into
another instrument in the Jewish campaign to multiculturalize America.
He has made it into a spiritually destructive propaganda instrument
aimed at our children.
There are no better examples of this than a couple of recent
children's films produced by the Disney company under Eisner: The
Jungle Book and Pocahontas. Actually, in 1967, the year after Walt
Disney's death, the original Disney company made an animated film
based on Kipling's Jungle Book stories of India. It was a film in the
Disney tradition, made to entertain children and not to brainwash
them. Last year Mr. Eisner produced a new, Politically Correct version
of The Jungle Book. The new version, which uses live characters
instead of animation, promotes interracial sex. In Mr. Eisner's
version, White males are portrayed as contemptible, cowardly, inept,
and disloyal. The White heroine rejects her British-officer fiancee',
and lets herself be wooed and won by an Indian jungle boy, played by a
Chinese actor. And, of course, it bears no resemblance at all to
anything written by Rudyard Kipling. I hardly need comment on the film
Pocahontas, which has received so much publicity recently, except to
say that its message is the same as that of Eisner 's version of The
Jungle Book: namely, that racial mixing is A-OK, that there's
absolutely no reason why a White man should not marry an Indian woman
or why a White woman should not have an affair with a Chinaman.
It took Mr. Eisner ten years to drag the Disney company down to the
Pocahontas level. He is a careful man. He knows that there is a lot at
stake. He certainly doesn't want to move too fast and cause a negative
reaction from the American public. He didn't want to alert the
American public to his intentions ten years ago. So he started with
R-rated sex films and gradually moved to films which tell White
children that miscegenation is fine and noble, and that non-Whites
really have much more character than Whites. But I believe that Mr.
Eisner had this outcome clearly in his mind from the first day that he
took over the Disney company and began degrading it.
And now Mr. Eisner will have the ABC television network under his
control too. I don't expect that to change the party line at ABC very
much. ABC, like the other TV networks, has been pretty solidly Jewish
from the beginning. It was headed by Jewish media boss Leonard
Goldenson for more than 30 years. The fact that Capital Cities
Communications, whose chairman is Thomas Murphy, a Gentile, merged
with Goldenson's ABC ten years ago didn't really have much influence
on programming. Goldenson's people remained in the policy-making
positions. Eisner's buyout of ABC just consolidates things in Jewish
hands a bit. It takes Murphy out of the picture and makes it easier
for ABC to become even more Politically Correct than it was. It means
that we will be seeing programs on the ABC television network
promoting miscegenation and undermining White self-confidence a little
more frequently than before. It speeds up the schedule a bit for
introducing even more destructive propaganda than before. It means
that our children will be subjected to somewhat more intense
brainwashing than before.
The situation with the rest of the mass media of news and
entertainment isn't really different, of course. Just as Jews took
over Hollywood in the 1930s, they also took over the other media, and
today they have such an overwhelming influence that even those who are
not Jews go along with their policies in order to get along.
Often when I point out this fact of Jewish media control to persons
who are Politically Correct, they will respond by saying that it makes
no difference who controls the media. Why does it bother me that Jews
run Hollywood, they ask in a sneering, condescending tone. I know that
people who respond in this way aren't being honest. They would
certainly think it made a difference if I controlled the media, for
example. And actually I'd be concerned if any group with an agenda of
its own had control of the media. I'd be concerned if all of the media
were in the hands of Southern Baptists, for example, or radical
vegetarians.
I am especially concerned about the Jewish control of the media,
however, for two reasons. First, the people who control the media also
control the political process in America: they control, in effect, the
policies of our government and the course taken by our society. That's
because the politicians, whether they're Democrats or Republicans,
will not stand up to the Jews. Instead they grovel at the Jews' feet.
Every politician knows that he must be portrayed favorably by the
media if he is to be elected, and every politician knows who controls
the media.
The second reason why Jewish control of the media is such a disaster
for us is based in the unique nature of the Jews. If Baptists
controlled the media perhaps they'd persuade the government to have a
law against making love on Sunday. If radical vegetarians controlled
the media, we might have to eat soyburgers instead of hamburgers.
But we can survive those things. We might not be happy, but we could
survive: our people could survive. Neither the Baptists nor the
vegetarians would be trying to corrupt us spiritually or to destroy
our race.
But corrupt and destroy are exactly what Mr. Eisner is doing. That's
the purpose of films like The Jungle Book and Pocahontas. They are
aimed, first, at the spiritual corruption of our children and,
ultimately, at the destruction of our people.
I know that statement sounds extreme to some people who are not
familiar with the facts of Jewish media control. They think that two
recent children's films from the Walt Disney company which promote
racial mixing aren't enough evidence to condemn all of the people who
control our news and entertainment media. And I must agree. One needs
much more evidence than that. But the evidence is there, for anyone
who is not afraid to look at it, for anyone who is not so determined
to be Politically Correct that he refuses to see it.
For example, consider what has happened to the popular music industry
in recent years. It's not just the "gangsta rap" that we've heard a
few Republican politicians complaining about because the media people
who've been pushing "gangsta rap" moved a little too fast and caused a
negative reaction from the American people. It's the whole trend of
popular music away from traditional White forms and toward non-White
forms. I don't have to tell you who controls the popular music
industry in America, but I will anyway. In particular, the biggest
music companies promoting Black "rap" music among White children-
companies like Time Warner and MTV-are solidly Jewish. A Jew named
Gerald Levin is to Time Warner what Michael Eisner is to Disney. And
MTV is owned by Sumner Redstone, another Jew, through his Viacom
Corporation. These three companies that I've just mentioned-Disney,
Viacom, and Time Warner-are America's three biggest producers of mass
entertainment-they're number one, number two, and number three,
respectively-and they're all controlled by Jews. Is that just a
coincidence? Think about it!
I could spend the next hour talking about the genealogy of the biggest
media bosses. What you really need to do to be convinced, however, is
to study the matter for yourself. I'll be happy to send you enough
facts to get you started. Just write to me.
The idea I want to leave you with today is this: In this era in which
the mass media have such a powerful influence over our people's ideas
and attitudes and values, it is essential that we take the control of
those media away from a group which is utterly alien to us. It's a
group whose primary aim is to deaden our sense of identity and kill
any sense of racial consciousness among us, so that we will not be
able to resist the poisonous doctrines which they're promoting. These
doctrines are multiculturalism and cosmopolitanism and egalitarianism
-- and, of course, "diversity"-all of the racially destructive "isms"
of Political Correctness.
In this era when the single most important influence on the
development of a child's self-image is television entertainment, it is
essential that people like Michael Eisner and Sumner Redstone not be
the ones setting the tone for that entertainment.
We all know that America has lost its sense of purpose and is
drifting. We all know that American society is coming apart. We all
know that our traditional values, our traditional life-style, our
traditional heroes and role models have been disparaged and ridiculed
by the controlled media. We all know that the idea of White racial
guilt, the idea of deferring to minorities, the idea that we should
tolerate perversion and accept it as "normal"-all of these ideas have
been pushed by the mass media. Alienation and delinquency among our
young people are increasing. The traditional American family is in
serious decline. Racial intermarriage is on the rise. Non-White
immigrants are pouring across our borders, and no serious effort is
being made to stop them. Our political system has become hopelessly
corrupt.
The only way that we can even begin to cure this illness is to regain
complete control of our mass media. Our media must be used to give our
people a sense of identity; a sense of racial community; a sense of
kinship, of belonging; a sense of racial and national purpose. We must
take control away from the people who are using the media now to
confuse and alienate and mislead us. Only when our own people are
setting the standards for the media, only when our own people are
deciding what attitudes and values should be taught to our children,
can we become strong and healthy again-and that means breaking the
Jewish control of the media. Let me hear from you on this most
important of all the issues facing our people.


http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com

http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.nsm88.com/

http://wsi.matriots.com/jews.html