I just read the articles below, which present viewpoints to which most Americans have never been exposed. Is either worth reading by intelligent people who are capable of thinking for themselves?
ARTICLE #1
SOURCE OF THE EXCERPTS BELOW: http://www.ateney.ru/frans/fr001.htm - a full English translation is at http:://www.nationalvanguard.org/story.php?id=8078
by Guillaume Faye (a Frenchman speaking in Moscow on May 17, 2005)
Not since the fall of the Roman Empire has Europe experienced such a dramatic situation. It faces a danger unparalleled in its history and doesn't even know it -- or rather refuses to see it.
It's been invaded, occupied, and colonized by peoples from the South and by Islam. It's dominated by the United States, which wages a merciless economic war on it. It's collapsing demographically, as its population ages and it ceases to reproduce itself. It's been emasculated by decadent, nihilist ideologies cloaked in a facile optimism, and it's been subjected to an unprecedented regression of culture and education, to primitivism and materialism. Europe is the sick man of the world. And its political classes, along with its intellectual elites, are actively collaborating in this race suicide. The argument I'm making is not, though, just about immigration, but also about a colonization and an invasion that is transforming Europe's biological and ethno-cultural stock; it's about not giving way to despair; about seeing that the struggle is only just beginning; and knowing that the closely related peoples of Europe have no alternative but to unite in their common defense.
The demographics of the non-White invasion of France and Europe is terrifying. In a recent work, "France africaine" (African France), a well known demographer predicts that if present trends continue, more than 40 percent of the French population will be Black or Arab by 2040. Twenty-five percent of school children in France and Belgium today and more than 30 percent of infants are already of non-European origin. Of France's present population of 61 million, more than 10 million are non-European and have a far higher birth rate than Whites. Every year 100,000 non-Europeans are naturalized as French citizens and another 300,000, most illegal, cross our undefended borders. The situation is not much different in the rest of Europe and signals the virtual end of our civilization, though the political classes have apparently yet to notice it.
Worldwide, including the United States, the White race is in steep numerical decline. It's often said that our technological superiority will compensate for this disparity, but I don't think so: The only meaningful forms of wealth and power are in human beings. For a civilization is based primarily on what the Romans called "germen," that is, on the ethno-biological stock, the roots, that nourish a civilization and culture.
The non-European invasion of Europe that began in the 1960s was largely self-engendered, provoked: By left and right-wing politicians contaminated with Marxist and Trotskyist ideas; by an employer class greedy for cheap labor; by Jewish intellectuals demanding a multiracial society; by the ideology of human rights that had sprung from the secularization of certain Christian principles.
In France and in Europe, the collaborators abetting the invasion have established a system of preferences for the invaders that native Whites are obliged to pay for. Illegal immigrants are thus not only rarely repatriated when caught, they continue to receive the lavish social welfare benefits handed out to them by the anti-White forces in control of the state. At the same time, "anti-racists" have introduced a host of discriminatory laws that protect immigrants from normal social restraints, even though they are largely responsible for the on-going explosion of criminality (more than a thousand percent in the last 50 years).
The invasion is taking place as much in the maternity wards as it is along our porous borders. Combined with the demographic decline of the White population, immigration has become an economic disaster for Western Europe. It's estimated to cost $180 billion per year (if the growing insecurity, as well as the innumerable forms of social assistance benefiting immigrants, including illegals, is figured in). This, in turn, creates new lures for the invaders: It is simply far more interesting to be unemployed in Europe than to work in the Third World. While the educated and creative segments of our population are beginning to flee, mainly to the United States, they are being replaced by Africa's refuse, which has to be fed and supported by us and hasn't anything in the way of skills or intelligence to offer.
All these facts suggest that the 21st-century European economy will be a depressed, Third-World one.
In addition to this mass, non-White invasion, Islam is again on the offensive. With single-minded persistence, its totalitarian and aggressive religion/ideology seeks the conquest of Europe. We've already suffered three great assaults by Islam, which today stretches from Gibraltar to Indonesia. The first of these offensives was halted at Portiers in 732 by Charles Martel; the second in 1683, during the Ottoman siege of Vienna; the third [in the form of the present invasion and colonization] is now underway [and virtually unopposed]. Islam has a long memory and its objective is to establish on our continent what [the leader of Iran's Islamic Revolution, the ayattolla] Khomeiny called the "universal Caliphate."
The invasion of Europe has begun and the figures [testifying to its extent] are alarming. The continent, including Russia, is now occupied by 55 million Muslims, a number that increases at a 6 percent annual rate. In France, there are at least 6 million. Like those in Belgium and Britain, these French Muslims are starting to demand a share of political power. The government, for its part, simply refuses to take seriously their objective of transforming France into an Islamic Republic by the year 2020, when the demographic weight of the Arab/Muslim population will have become determinant. Meanwhile, it is financing the construction of Mosques throughout the country in the hope of buying social peace; there are already more than 2,000 in France, nearly double the number in Morocco. Islam is at present the second largest religion in France, behind Catholicism, but the largest in the numbers of practitioners. [The republic's president] Jacques Chirac has even declared that "France is now an Islamic power." Everywhere in the West there prevails the unfounded belief that there's a difference between Islam and "Islamism," and that a Western, secularized, that is, moderate, Islam is possible. There's no such thing. Every Muslim is potentially a jihadist. For Islam is a theocracy that confuses the spiritual with the temporal, faith with law, and seeks to impose its Shari'a [Islamic law] on a Europe whose civilizational precepts are absolutely incompatible with it.
The criminality and delinquency in Western Europe caused by mass immigration and the collapse of civic values have reached insupportable levels. In France in 2004, more than a 100,00 cars were torched and 80 policemen killed. Every week race riots erupt in the banlieues [the "suburbs" housing the immigrants masses]. In the public schools, violence is endemic and educational levels have almost collapsed. Among youth under 20, nearly 20 percent are illiterate. While racist assaults on Whites are steadily rising, they are routinely ignored in the name of the anti-racist vulgate, which holds that only Whites can be racists. At the same time, an arsenal of repressive legislation, worthy of Soviet communism, has imposed "laws" whose purely ideological and subjective intent make no pretence to fairness, let alone objectivity. All criticism of immigration or Islam is prohibited. I myself have been tried several time and levied with an enormous fine for having written "La colonisation de l'Europe" [The Colonization of Europe].
A race war is foreseeable now in several European countries, a subterranean war that will be far more destructive than "terrorism." The White population is being displaced, a sort of genocide is being carried out against it with the complicity or the abstention of the ruling class, the media, and the politicians, for the ideology these collaborating elites uphold is infused with a pathological hatred of their own people and a morbid passion for miscegenation.
The state's utopian plan for "republican integration" has nevertheless failed because it assumed peaceful coexistence between foreigners and natives, non-Whites and Whites, was possible in a single territory. Our rulers haven't read Aristotle, who taught that no city can possibly be democratic and orderly if it isn't ethnically homogenous... European societies today are devolving into an unmanageable ethnic chaos.
I'm a native of Southwest France, of the area along the Atlantic coast [a Gascon?], and speak not a word of Russian, but I feel infinitely closer to a Russian than to a French-speaking Arab or African, even if they happen to be "French" citizens.
The present situation can be explained, almost clinically, as a sort of "mental AIDS." Our present afflictions come from the virus of nihilism, which Nietzsche foresaw, and which has weakened all our natural defenses. Thus infected, Europeans have succumbed to a feverish self-extinction. They have voluntarily opened the city gates.
The primary symptom of this disease is "xenophilia:" a systematic preference for the Other rather than for the Same. A second symptom is "ethnomasochism," a hatred of one's own civilization and origins. A third is emasculation [dévirilisation], or what might be called the cult of weakness and a preference for male homosexuality. Historically proven values associated with the use of force and a people's survival -- values associated with honor, loyalty, family, fertility, patriotism, the will to survive, etc. -- are treated today as ridiculous shortcomings. This sort of decadence owes a good deal to the secularization of Christian charity and its egalitarian offshoot, human rights.
Europeans may take inspiration from certain values still upheld in Russia: For example, the consciousness of belonging to a superior civilization and of maintaining a "right to distance" from other peoples. We need to break with all forms of "ethnopluralism," which is simply another kind of egalitarianism, and reclaim the right to "ethnocentrism," the right to live in our own lands without the Other. We also have to reclaim the principle: "To each his own." Besides, only Westerners believe race-mixing is a virtue or envisage the future as a melting pot. They alone believe in cosmopolitanism. But the 21st century will be dominated by a resurgence of ethno-religious blocs, especially in the South and the East. Francis Fukuyama's "end of history" will never happen. Instead, we're going to experience an acceleration of history with the "clash of civilizations." Europeans also need to break with the "presentism" in which they are sunk and learn to see themselves again (as do Muslims, Chinese, and Indians) as a "long-living people," bearers of a future. The mental revolution needed to bring about this change in European attitudes is, though, only possible through a gigantic crisis, a violent shock, which is already on its way and which I will say a few words about below...
Fatalism is never appropriate. History is always open-ended and presents innumerable unexpected caprices and turns. Let's not forget the formula of William of Orange: "Where there's a will, there's a way." ...
ARTICLE #2
SOURCE: http://www.israelshamir.net/English/ForWhom.htm
David Irving was sent to jail for denying Jewish superiority. His doom seals the reign of freedom that began with the fall of the Bastille.
By Israel Shamir (a Christianized Israeli Jew)
“Do not ask for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee,” said the English poet, John Donne. A shameful Austrian verdict bodes ill not only for the English historian David Irving (sentenced to three years of gaol) but for our freedom as well. Never has our feeling of justice been insulted like this! When an occasional dissident was jailed in Brezhnev’s Russia or Ne Win’s Burma, there was always an uproar of protest. Now the only response to the Irving verdict is stunned silence. When they sent innocent Muslims to the living hell of Guantanamo, we could think: they are people of the Third World -- different rules apply. A Batista policeman in Graham Greene’s Our Man in Havana had said: some people can be tortured, and some can not. When Ernst Zundel was kidnapped in the US and brought to trial in Germany, we could think: it is a German internal affair. Now an eminent man of letters, an author of widely read and acclaimed books, a recognized European figure was snatched from a civilised country and jailed for irreverence to the Jews.
Technically, David Irving was sentenced for so-called “holocaust denial”. But the concept of Jewish holocaust being the only enforced dogma of supposedly secular Europe has little to do with the Second World War and its atrocities. It has everything to do with the Jewish claim of superiority and exclusivity. There is a Jewish prayer saying: “Bless you, Lord, that you created me a Jew, that you separated between Jews and the earth folks, like you separated between the Holy and Profane, that our fate is not like their fate”. The Holocaust concept is just another form of this prayer. They say that even their death is not like the death of anybody else. We must deny the concept of Holocaust without doubt and hesitation, even if every story of Holocaust down to the most fantastic invention of Wiesel were absolutely true. Therefore the technical discussions of Jewish mortality are perfectly legitimate but superfluous, like the argument whether a whale could swallow Jonah is superfluous for an atheist.
The legal enforcers of the Holocaust want us to bow down to the idol of Jewish superiority, or else! They won’t jail Deborah Lipstadt for denial of the Holocaust of Dresden, or Guenter Lewy who penned a lengthy piece entitled Were American Indians the Victims of Genocide? denying the genocide of native Americans. The Jews produced and published these denials for the same reason they published the Satanic Pictures - in order to emphasise the difference between a goy and a Jew. They want you to remember: you may profane Islam and Christianity, but not Judaism. You may discount the suffering of anybody but the Jews.
Thus we should say: David Irving was sentenced for denial of Jewish superiority. His doom seals the reign of (albeit limited) freedom that began with the fall of Bastille. European history went full circle: from rejecting the rule of Church and embracing free thought, to the new Jewish mind-control on a world scale. Not only is Western Christian civilisation dead, but even its successor, secular European civilisation, has met its demise only a few days after its proud and last celebration by the Danish scribes. It was short-lived: about two hundred years from beginning to the end, the Europeans may once have had the illusion that they can live without an ideological supremacy. Now this illusion is over; and the Jews came in the stead of the old and tired See of St Peter to rule over the minds and souls of Europeans.
In 1962, Look magazine invited founder of the Jewish state David Ben-Gurion to picture the world 25 years into the future. He predicted that World Government would already be in place by 1987, with the Supreme Court for Mankind (the higher ecclesiastic body) would be established in Jerusalem, along with a shrine there commemorating the Jewish role in the bringing-together of mankind. He was mistaken by only a few years. The world is not fully subdued yet, but it already knows its new master.
In the 19th century, Europeans could not fully colonise China. But there was an obvious mark of their supremacy: the Settlement System. It divided the residents of China into two categories: the supreme human beings (the Europeans) and the lowly natives. A native who raised his hand against a superior European was tried by European colonial law, a European whose misdeed caused harm to a native was out of bounds of native justice. This system of “settlements” was dismantled by Chairman Mao after the Communist victory of 1949. Similar systems of colonial justice went down with the colonial empires that employed them, and for a short while afterwards, every country was sovereign over its land.
Some time ago, the Knesset of the Jewish State revived the Settlement System for the non-yet-fully-colonised world: an offender against the Jews, wherever he lives, wherever he commits his offence, can be brought to the Jewish court. The offended Jew may have no connection whatsoever to the Jewish State, the offence may be not considered an offence by the local native law, but he still can be brought to Jewish justice in Jerusalem. This law claimed supreme sovereignty of the Jews over the rest of mankind. This law denied the sovereignty of all nations save one. Such a claim had to be treated as any hostile attempt of the nation’s sovereignty: as an act of war. But it passed in silence due to a marvellous Jewish invention: gradualness.
This method was explained by Amira Hass, the Haaretz correspondent in colonised Palestine. She wrote: “If you throw a frog into boiling water, it will jump out and save its life. But a frog swimming in room temperature water that is gradually heated will grow used to the heat; by the time the water boils, it's too late and the frog dies. In the development of the Israeli system of control over the Palestinian people and their land, the Israeli occupation has raised to the level of genius the use of gradualness as a means of making people grow used to something.” This gradualness was used by the Jews – not only in regard to the Palestinians.
The Settlement System started small: the Long Arm of the Jews snatched Adolf Eichmann in Argentina and brought him to Jewish justice in Jerusalem. Adolf Eichmann was a bad guy who did a lot of harm to Jews in a big way, so many countries chose to disregard this grievous infringement of Argentine sovereignty. And it was just the beginning:
A few years later, the Polish court demanded the extradition of a Jewish mass murderer, Solomon Morel. This Morel tortured and killed with his own hands hundreds of ethnic Germans in a concentration camp in postwar Poland. His crimes were exposed by the late American journalist John Sack. Morel escaped to Tel Aviv, and the Jewish state replied to the Polish demand with imperial haughtiness: “What Chutzpah! These natives do not know their place!” Probably, Queen Victoria would reply like that if a native African chief were to demand the surrender of one of her officials to his justice.
Since then, every country, big and small, has accepted the notion of the Jews being above the law. The wealthy Russian Jewish crook Nevzlin escaped Russia and lives peacefully in Tel Aviv, next to Flatto-Sharon, a French-Jewish crook, not far from a murderer of a Canadian child, within a reach from many other killers and crooks. A powerful Jewish organisation called Khabad wrote in its charter: there should be no Jews in goys’ jails. By bribes and persuasion they release Jewish criminals from jails and ship them to the Jewish state. The Khabad founder, Lubawitsch Rebbe’s birthday is celebrated as a holiday, “Education Day,” in the USA.
In property cases Jews are also above the law. Jewish property is sacrosanct. They have demanded and received back all property that once belonged to Jews in Germany, Austria, France, Baltic states. If a Jew had no heirs, his property went to World Jewry. But 90% of goys’ property was confiscated by the Jewish state in 1948, and since then 50% of the lands conquered in 1967. Even last year thousands of dunams of goys’ lands were taken over in Jerusalem area, for a goy has no real title to property, according to Jewish law.
A taste of Jewish justice is provided in the case of an Israeli captain who murdered a schoolgirl, 13, in full sight of his soldiers. He emptied his gun unto her body and was found not guilty by the Jewish court. Actually, none of the non-Jewish children’ murderers (two hundred in the last three years) was ever punished by a Jewish court. Not many of them were even brought to justice, but whoever was got off lightly. The settler Nachum Korman murdered a 10-year-old boy, Hilmi Shusha, in the village of Hussan. He was apprehended, taken to the court and forensic evidence against him was brought by the highest Israeli forensic institution, but the judge dismissed the evidence and sentenced the murderer to six months of social work. On mere suspicion of having committed such a crime against a Jewish child, a goy gets a life sentence.
Jewish justice makes us look back at the Inquisition trials with some nostalgia. When Galileo repented, he was allowed to continue his studies unhindered. The repentance of Irving did not help him a bit. The judge said: “The regret he showed was considered to be mere lip service to the law.” And “independent expert” Dina Porat, head of Tel Aviv University's Institute for the Study of Contemporary Anti-Semitism and Racism, said that “Irving's purported repentance is motivated by his fear of a verdict that could amount to 10 years' imprisonment.”
Now, Jewish justice is being enforced on a global scale. The European Jewish Congress is set to file a complaint in the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague against Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for “incitement to genocide”, but all attempts to bring Ariel Sharon to justice predictably failed. The greater Jewish state, the US, also adopted its smaller sister’s idea of unlimited supreme sovereignty. An offence against an American citizen can be brought to an American court wherever it occurred. Surprisingly, this Imperial claim, akin to the Settlement system of old, was also utilised mainly in the Jewish interests. Whenever Jewish settlers -- American citizens -- were killed in the course of the Middle Eastern conflict, American judges ruled against the Palestinian National Authority, Iran, Hamas and the whole world, and granted the victims’ survivors multimillion dollar damages. But nobody can sue the Jews: whether they kill Rachel Corrie, the American peace activist, with a bulldozer in Gaza, or they strafe American sailors on board USS Liberty or kill and maim American Palestinians.
With the Austrian verdict, Jewish supremacy ceased to be a paranoid’s nightmare, and became a fact bound in law, like the Viking supremacy in Danelaw, in East Anglia of old, with this one difference: the Jewish supremacy has religious overtones while the Vikings relied upon their swords and their dogs.
This is openly discussed in the Jewish world. “We live in the full blossom of Messiah Days, free from our political adversaries and soon to be freed from the satanic goys”, Uriel Tal wrote.[1] While Christians believe that the Second Coming of Christ will usher a completely new world of miracles, the Jewish view expressed by Maimonides is that the world in the Days of Messiah will not differ much from the world we knew, except for triumph of Jewish supremacy, Gedulath Israel (Hilchoth Teshuva 9:2). Based on this understanding, the Sanhedrin, the Jewish supreme religious court, was established a year ago to judge the world. It is led by Rabbi Adin Steinzaltz, and the goyim who observe the Noahide commandments made their obeisance to him.
Some months ago I was brought to the police station in my Jaffa and asked to answer the complaint of the French Jewish organisation, LICRA.
- “Did you write about Jewish supremacy and world dominion?” a policeman asked.
- “So what if I did?” I replied. “Every second Rabbi has expressed this view.”
- “Yes, but they see it in a positive light!” said the policeman.
Thus there is no argument about the fact of Jewish supremacy, only about its assessment. If you think it is good, you may even be a US president -- if you think it is bad, your place is in jail! Meanwhile, Jewish supremacy is hard on those who challenge it as Irving did. Gradually -- oh ever so gradually, so as not to frighten the frog from heating water -- the screw will tighten.
Eventually it may become unpleasant: Jewish justice can give a handsome handicap to its nearest competitor in ruthlessness, Genghis Khan. It is partial, and proud of it. By Jewish law, a Jew vs. a Goy is always right, even if he is wrong. The Europeans will feel the tender mercy of the Jews, until now the exclusive privilege of Palestinians. There may well be poetic justice in this turn of events.
Ordinary Jews aren’t going to enjoy the new-old order of things. If there is something Jewish justice likes even less than a goy, it’s a stray Jew. Apostates, that is Jews who turned to Christ, should be killed, according to Maimonides. The extremely clement Rabbi Asher tore off the noses of Jewish women who had intercourse with a goy, while Jewish men were normally flogged for this transgression. Well, some obligations coming with superior status.
Christianity will probably dwindle; only its Jew-worshipping sects, similar to the US Christian Zionists, will survive. Others will be prosecuted for their antisemitism and will be disbanded. The churches will be destroyed, in accordance with the Jewish commandment. They should not be allowed to compete with the Temple in Jerusalem which will be rebuilt on the ruins of the al Aqsa Mosque. The rebuilding will be quite painless: after the forthcoming attack on Iran, Muslims will have other things to worry about -- for instance, their physical survival! This can’t be guaranteed, as they were proclaimed “Amalek”, and their mass annihilation is a religious duty of the Jews. The road to this future is opened by the fateful ruling of the Austrians.
Always looking for the bright side of things: now the Europeans do not have to worry about the dark prophecy of the Protocols. The rule of the Elders of Zion is already upon us, and egad! -- it is not half as bad as we feared. At least, not yet.
[1] Haaretz (a Jewish newspaper), 26 September 1984
FUTURE.htm
index.html
