Posted by Dr Manhattan on January 15, 2001 at 12:56:42:
In Reply to: Re: interracial dating??? posted by Mihalis on November 07, 2000 at 15:29:09:
The Wichita Massacre
Chaim Amalek writes: Luke, I've been to one world's fair, a picnic, and a rodeo, and the current parshat shavout at www.natvan.com is the most effective bit of antisemiti propaganda I have ever seen. Effective because of its use of facts that jews, in fact, seek to suppress for unspoken and nefarious reasons. What do YOU make of it? PS Check out the big four hour special on "hate crimes" on MTV. Who runs this outfit?
Luke: Isn't owned by Viacom, which is principally owned and operated by secular Jews?
Dr. William Pierce, a white supremacist and the leader of the most dangerous hate organization (Natvan.com) in America according to the Anti Defamation League, writes:
Two weeks ago I told you about the atrocious murders of four young White men and women in Wichita, Kansas, last month by two Blacks. Two of my reasons for telling you about these murders were, first, the fact that the controlled news media in America had imposed a total blackout, outside the Wichita area, on the news of these atrocious crimes; and second, the fact that the Whites who were murdered didn't resist the Blacks who murdered them, and I wanted to draw a lesson from this failure to resist.
Well, another two weeks have passed, and the national Jewish news media have maintained their total blackout on the murders -- and during this time I have learned a few more details about the crimes which accentuate both points I made two weeks ago. What I told you in my earlier broadcast was that two Black brothers, 20-year-old Jonathan Carr and 23-year-old Reginald Carr, invaded a White home in Wichita on the evening of December 14, kidnapped the three White men and two White women in the home, all of them in their 20s, forced them to withdraw money from several ATM machines, then drove to a snow-covered soccer field on the outskirts of Wichita. There the Blacks raped the two White women, then told all five of the Whites to kneel in the snow and shot them in the back of the head, one at a time. After that the two Blacks returned to the Whites' home, burglarized it, and killed a pet dog they found there: a small, gray terrier.
One of the young White women they shot in the head didn't die however. She regained consciousness, ran naked and bleeding through the snow for a mile, and summoned police, who arrested the Blacks a few hours later. That's what the Jewish media bosses decided we didn't need to hear about, and they clamped a complete blackout on the story on December 15. In eager collaboration with the Jewish media, local authorities -- local politicians -- also imposed an embargo on all news about the affair. The local female district attorney, Nola Foulston, repeatedly asserted that race was not a factor, and that the rapes and murders would not be treated as "hate crimes."
What I have learned recently is that after the two Blacks drove the five Whites to the soccer field, they not only forced the White women to strip and then raped them, but they also forced all of the Whites to put on a sex show for the amusement of the Blacks. On that snowy soccer field they forced the White men to engage in homosexual acts; they forced the White women to have sex with each other; and they forced the White men to have sex with the White women before shooting all of them. After the Blacks forced the Whites to kneel naked in the snow and shot them in the back of the head, they deliberately ran over them with one of the vehicles they were driving. This additional information was leaked from the grand jury which heard the evidence in the case, despite the official news embargo. Furthermore, three days earlier the same two Blacks murdered another White woman, Ann Walenta, a cellist in the Wichita Symphony Orchestra, while she was sitting in her car outside her home. And four days before that, on December 7, they kidnapped, robbed, and pistol-whipped a White man, 23-year-old Andrew Schreiber, the manager of a Wichita convenience store.
Nothing racial about any of that, right? And certainly nothing that the White public should be told about, right? I mean, it's certainly not as newsworthy as the dragging death of a Black ex-convict in Jasper, Texas, in 1998 by three White ex-convicts, is it? I mean, the Jasper killing was given top billing by all of the controlled news media in America -- and in Europe as well -- for two years, and the racial angle was emphasized over and over and over again: hardened White racists drag innocent Black man to death. So obviously the murders and rapes of five White people in Wichita by a couple of underprivileged and misguided Black youths doesn't need any news coverage. Enough news already about interracial crime, right? No need to exacerbate racial tensions, right? Well, that's one of the points I wanted to accentuate.
The other point is the total lack of resistance of the White victims. It now seems that the two Blacks were armed only with a .380 caliber semiautomatic pistol. All of the killings were done with that same gun, and the police are still looking for it. Now, you certainly can be killed with a .380, especially if you're shot in the back of the head at close range, but it's not much of a man-stopper. It's a pretty anemic caliber, and it's only used because it's small and can be carried concealed easily. It's a ladies' gun. And yet three able-bodied White men let two Blacks armed only with a .380 pistol force them to stand and watch their women being raped and degraded and even to participate in the degradation themselves. And then they knelt obediently in the snow and let themselves and their women be slaughtered, one at a time.
That's really embarrassing. One expects more of a White man. This sort of sheep-like behavior reminds me of a scene in one of my novels, Hunter, in which a group of White office workers kneel obediently on the floor and let a Black with a straight razor go down the line and slit their throats, one at a time. In my novel the Whites submit because they have been conditioned by the Jewish mass media not to resist Blacks. They have been conditioned to regard any resistance to Blacks as "racist."
When I wrote Hunter 12 years ago, I was concerned that perhaps I was getting a bit ahead of myself, and that to portray Whites as so strongly conditioned by the Jewish media that they would meekly let themselves be butchered by Blacks would not be credible to my readers. I asked myself, will most Americans believe that Jewish media propaganda can have that strong an effect on people? Well, I worried about it at the time, but I left the scene in the book, and what happened in Wichita last month suggests that I really wasn't getting too far ahead of myself after all. That's a real shame.
Now let's talk about Jewish media propaganda for a while. Is it fair of me to describe it as deliberate, calculated psychological conditioning designed to demoralize White people -- and to emasculate White men in particular? Am I imagining things in believing that the mass media are slanted deliberately by the people who control them, with the aim of weakening White people and softening them up for the slaughter?
Do I believe such things only because I don't like Jews and am therefore too ready to attribute bad motives to them? Some listeners think that is the case. Some people suggest to me that the attitudes portrayed by the Jews in the entertainment they produce for White people simply reflects their prejudices, but that there's no purpose behind it to corrupt or weaken us. Nearly all Jews are liberals, they tell me, and so it is natural that they produce films and television shows that portray liberal attitudes. And I suppose, following that line of reasoning, that the way in which they cover the news for us also is simply an unconscious reflection of Jewish likes and dislikes, with no ulterior motives behind it.
Other listeners suggest to me that I am putting the cart before the horse to blame Jewish media propaganda for changing public attitudes and opinions. What the Jews put into their Hollywood films and television programming is simply a reflection of life in America, they tell me. Americans have become more liberal, they tell me, and the Jews of Hollywood and Madison Avenue simply are following that trend, not leading it. After all, they say, the Jews are businessmen, and they're just giving the American people what they want. And the same thing applies to the news. If the American public really wanted to know what happened in Wichita last month, then the Jewish media bosses certainly would have told them. But Americans don't want to hear that kind of news, they tell me. That sort of news has a racist flavor to it, and it makes Americans uncomfortable. That's the only reason the Wichita story wasn't covered; Americans didn't want to hear about it.
On the other hand, they were interested in the Jasper, Texas, dragging story. Americans felt that sort of story needed to be told in order to help fight racism. That's why the Jewish media told it . . . and told it . . . and told it. Anyway, that's what some people tell me in order to explain why the Jewish media do what they do: why they suppress some news and exaggerate other news. Personally, I don't believe it.
I believe that the Jewish media lead the trends instead of following them. I believe that the Jewish media bosses have a propaganda agenda. I believe that they use their control of the news and entertainment media in a calculated way to shape public attitudes and influence public behavior in America deliberately in order to achieve goals of their own. And I believe that those Jewish goals are inimical to our people. But you know, you should decide that for yourself. You shouldn't just take my word for it. Yesterday a new Jewish film premiered. The name is Save the Last Dance.
The film was made jointly by Paramount Pictures and MTV Films, both of which are subsidiaries of the Viacom Corporation. The Viacom Corporation is run by -- and largely owned by -- Jewish media boss Sumner Redstone, who was known to his parents as Murray Rothstein. And Redstone also acquired CBS recently, making him one of the top three media bosses in America -- all three of them Jews, of course. Redstone has staffed his media empire with Jews from top to bottom. He has put in a Jewess, Sherry Lansing, as president of Paramount Pictures, for example. And Viacom's MTV division, which specializes in interracial entertainment for trendy young White people, is well represented by the executive there who has handled the Save the Last Dance project, David Gale. Gale, a Jew, is senior vice-president of MTV Films.
Save the Last Dance is a film aimed at 13- to 17-year-old White girls. Its message to these teenaged White girls is that sex with Black boys is "cool." Very briefly, the story line is this: Sara is a White high school girl who lives in a very White small town in Illinois with her mother. Sara loves to dance, and her ambition is to become a ballet dancer. Then Sara's mother is killed in an accident, and Sara moves to Chicago to live with her father. In Chicago she attends a mostly Black high school, meets a Black boy who is into hip hop, and the two of them are drawn together by their shared interest in dancing -- although their dance styles are as different as . . . black and white. And so, of course, they end up in bed together, despite the objections of Sara's "racist" father.
I might not have mentioned this film to you if it were simply another piece of the race-mixing filth the Jews of Hollywood have been churning out during the last few years. All of this filth has the same aim, but with most of it the people who don't want to see the truth about what the Jews are up to could argue that it is simply typically low-grade Hollywood entertainment which uses interracial sex for spice, for titillation, but that there's no evil motive behind it, no intent to encourage interracial sex. Well, they can't argue that about Save the Last Dance.
This is a film which is aimed squarely at teenaged White girls, by far the most impressionable and susceptible segment of the White population, and its intent is to make them more receptive to the idea of interracial sex. All sorts of advertising promotions have been launched for this film, and they're all aimed at teenaged White girls. If you want to know what's on the minds of the people who made this film, go to their very own web site, savethelastdance.com, and read what they say. Clearly, encouraging interracial sex was the thing most on their minds.
The film's Jewish producer, Robert Cort, discusses his motivation with his co-producer, David Madden. They say that they and others at Paramount wanted to produce a film about -- quote -- "interracial romance and the social impact created by such a subject. We felt a movie could explore what those obstacles were for people involved in such relationships, particularly young people in high school." -- end quote --
So the Jews at Paramount Pictures turned to a Black director who has a fixation on interracial sex, Thomas Carter. According to the movie's official web site, savethelastdance.com, Carter -- quote -- "had been looking for a story about interracial relationships that he could bring to the screen. Carter says the film positively reinforces the possibilities for people to love and understand each other, even when they are from different backgrounds and races." -- end quote --
Well, that's just a small sampling. Look at some of the film clips from Save the Last Dance that you can view free on the Internet. Look at some of the promotions that are so obviously intended to persuade teenaged White girls to see the film and to imitate Sara's behavior. The clear message of the film to these teenaged White viewers is, "Go thou now and do likewise." The last thing I want to do is put more money into Sumner Redstone's pockets, but I recommend that you see the film for yourself, so that it will stick in your mind and you still will remember it when the time for the cleansing of America comes. I don't want to give you the impression that there's something special about Redstone or the other Jews at Viacom.
Some Jewish media push interracial sex more blatantly than others, but they're all behind it: all of the Jewish newspapers and magazines from the New York Times and Newsweek magazine on down, all of the Jewish film and television producers, all of the Jewish advertising agencies. It's not just a Redstone thing or a Viacom thing or a Paramount Pictures thing; it's a Jewish thing.
I'll give you another example. The Miramax division of Disney also has a new film promoting sex between teenaged White girls and Black boys. The name of the Disney film is O. Although it hasn't been released yet, there's plenty of information available about it. It's been finished for more than a year, but the release has been postponed several times, reportedly because the Jewish bosses at Miramax, Bob and Harvey Weinstein, were nervous about some of the sex and violence in the film. There's a horrific scene in the film where the Black "hero" brutally rapes his pretty, blonde, teenaged girlfriend.
The Weinstein brothers are very close to both Al Gore and Hillary and Bill Clinton, and it has been rumored that they were concerned that controversy over the film might hurt Gore's chances in the recent presidential election. Perhaps Michael Eisner, the Jewish boss of Disney, Miramax's parent company, was worried too. And maybe the film's Jewish executive producer, Michael Levy, also expressed concern. Unless there's another postponement, however, O finally should be released sometime in the first half of this year. You should see that one too, in order to steel yourself for the hard and bloody things we will need to do in the future.
And really, that's what this is all about. As important as it is for White Americans to be informed about the criminality of Blacks and the hatred that Blacks have for us, as important as it is for us to be informed about atrocities such as those in Wichita last month, what is far more important is that we understand the systematic and deliberate distortion and suppression of the news by the Jewish bosses of the news media.
The Wichita rapes and murders are more important as evidence of Jewish intent than of Black criminality. And as important as it is for decent White Americans to be aware of the sort of destructive filth coming out of Hollywood which is targeting our children, what is far more important is for us to understand the systematic nature of this destructive filth, to understand that there is a purpose behind it, and to understand what that purpose is and whose purpose it is.
On these broadcasts I believe it's fair to say that I try harder than anything else to make myself clear. I try to state things as simply and unambiguously as I can. I try to find the most compelling evidence I can and to present it accurately and in a way that makes its meaning easy to grasp. Whenever I can, I use evidence that listeners can check for themselves if I tell them where to look. Certainly, that's true of the things of which I've spoken on this broadcast: both the Wichita rapes and murders and the Jewish films promoting miscegenation. And I try to draw my conclusions from the evidence in a way that makes those conclusions unavoidable for any reasonable listener.
The principal conclusion I have drawn in this broadcast is that the Jews who dominate our news and entertainment media are not simply businessmen trying to maximize their profits, like any other businessmen. They are men who also have a political, social, cultural, and racial agenda. They report the news selectively in order to advance their agenda, and they produce entertainment for the public designed to advance their agenda. Among other things on their agenda are the moral disarmament of the White public, the destruction of any sense of White identity or White pride, the inculcation of a sense of White guilt, and the paralysis of our will to resist the total Jewish domination of our society, the paralysis of our will to survive.
Now, that's a strong conclusion to draw just from the evidence I've presented in this broadcast. But I've presented corroborating evidence in more than two hundred other broadcasts. The selective reporting of the news in a way designed to make Whites feel guilty and the production of Hollywood films which attempt to persuade teenaged White girls that they should look favorably on sex with Blacks fit in perfectly with the Jews' support for open borders, the Jews' tireless work for "diversity" and multiculturalism, the Jews' advocacy of more and more "hate crime" legislation, the Jews' campaign against the Second Amendment, the Jews' efforts to censor the Internet and obtain legislation against "speech crime." Look at Jewish motives and activities in the light of history. Look at the way in which America has changed demographically, culturally, and morally during the past half-century under the impact of Jewish propaganda and Jewish policies.
These changes did not come about by accident. They are the result of design. The biggest and most important single factor in the Jewish campaign against White America is the Jewish control of the mass media of news and entertainment. Most Jews, of course, are not media bosses. Most Jews are not in a position to plan the selective reporting of the news or produce films designed to encourage interracial sex, the way Sumner Redstone and Michael Eisner and the Weinstein brothers are. But all of them -- or nearly all of them -- support the same things these Jewish leaders do. What is happening to America is not simply the consequence of having a small number of powerful and evil Jews in the media. It is happening as a consequence of having six million Jews in America. A small number of them control our mass media. The rest provide the Jewish tribal infrastructure which makes that control possible.
Luke says: Read my essay on Jews in porn and the Homo Mafia. Incidentally, Sumner Redstone's real name is Shlomo Rothstein.
Chaim Amalek writes: I suggest you forward that email to Sumner Redstone (or is it Murry Rothstein? Howd he get a monker like "Sumner Redstone" anyway? Perhaps I should call myself Prometheus Skyhope) along with a request that he provide you with the means with with to rebut Pierce. At the very least you should hear from his apoplectic lawyers. Now THAT should be interesting.
I always get a kick out of jews who try to hide their ancestry behind the most goyishe sounding names ("Ralf Lauren") their yiddishe kups can think of. Never mind that the goyim who want to know always figure the truth out, just so long as the masses don't know and won't learn the truth from watching the Larry King (or is it the Larry Ziegler?) show.
Luke, I just had a VERY inspired idea! Write a letter to Shlomo Rothstein, care of Sumner Redstone at Viacom, and let us know what happens!
PS You disappoint me in that it seems you never do stuff like this. Get your head out of the gutter of porn and do something interesting and useful with your life!
I notice that week after week, you publish the racist rants of Dr. Pierce with nary a rebuttal. And when you do publish a rebuttal, it is in defense of the jews, and never in defense of the African Americans who Pierce portrays as violent savages. Clearly this is further evidence that there is far less difference between you and Pierce on the issue of race than you care to admit to.
Tomorrow is Dr. Martin Luther King Junior's birthday, a time when even white americans are invited to sing the praises of Dr. King, and a time for you to do some teshuva. So let's hear it Luke, tell us why you think Pierce is DEAD WRONG in his characterization of black people as violent thugs, as niggaz out to beat the white man like a drum in the Congo.
Chaim writes Vancouver Kendra: Kendra, I note that Mr. Ford is publishing savagely antisemitic/anti-black propaganda obtained from the National Alliance's web site, and without rebuttal. How does this make you feel? (No irony-ladden answers please, just the truth. Do you agree or disagree with the essay he published?)
Kendra writes Chaim: I don't understand why Luke would post that. It is embarrassing. I like to think that those people do not exist here, and that it is typically an American problem. They do exist here, albeit usually not so overtly. It is usually in relation to our Asian-Canadians, and First Nations people. Why would he give it yet another forum? Why does he not explain himself? I will ask him.
Kendra writes Luke: So Luke, why? Please do not say it is to expose this sort of thing. You know as well as I do, that the majority of people who frequent your site probably eat it up. Probably concur.
Have you no time to answer the one who may bear your offspring? Yet you have time to post.
XXX writes: the most disturbing thing about pierce's rants is how he lumps all the jews together. there are plenty of torah-observant individuals who don't know nor care what film is topping the box office--yet will wax eloquent on a torah portion to make it sound more relevant, fresh and exciting than any over-marketed flick. and those are the same jews who are holding ideals that don't clash with what pierce is writing--you can hear them in shuls every saturday morning. so, pierce continues to shoot himself in the foot by persistently ramming down the idea that the culpable parties are nothing more than a bunch of "jews" ... dig?
Fred writes: Pierce is an obsessed failure. From Pierce's point of view, from the end of the 1950s (presumably the start of Pierce's career) to today, everything in the world has gone down hill. From Pierce's perspective, he can only view himself as a complete, total and utter failure--a looney voice in the wilderness, generally despised by the entirety of the human race, with the exception of some high-school drop-out skinheads.
He spends all of his time obsessing about blacks and jews as if these people had some sort of impact on his life out there at his home in West Virginia--sputtering out and selling tracts to others who can most charitably be called failures or white trash. There is some sort of wierd bitterness at the root of all of this. I think his entire psyche is directed toward an effort to explain away his own failures in life.
Do you know when he started drifting off into the ether of extreme politics? Was his father a Nazi? Was he denied tenure somewhere at the same time a Jewish prof was given tenure? It would be interesting to investigate.
Chaim replies: Unfortunately, none of this constitutes rebuttal; it instead is merely an ad hominem attack on a man rather than a logical rebuttal to his arguments. We are supposed to believe that because the man is presumed to be a personal failure in life that his arguments cannot have any worth. (Similarly, we are often told to pay extra close attention to what our celebrity class has to say about the issues of the day, and for corresponding reasons.) Fred, you can do better.
The specific question that I have for Fred is this: why has the mainstream press not covered the Wichita massacre? What makes one sort of crime (e.g., the murder of a homosexual man by two heterosexual white men) worthy of blanket coverage and another sort of crime (the sexual torture of a young white boy by two homosexuals, or the slaughter of a group of young white people by two African Americans) not worthy of any mention whatsoever? Can you concede that burried in the hate, Pierce may in fact have a valid point, or must antisemitic losers like Pierce be considered to be wrong on every point lest they be viewed as correct on the things you fear most?
Continuing on the Wichita story, do you know what Pierce's characterization of the ease with which these white people were tortured and slaughtered sounds like? Well, maybe you do not, and maybe Luke does not, but every born jew on the planet knows the answer to that one. Right Luke?
Fred writes: You know who Pierce reminds me of? General Jack Ripper from Dr. Strangelove. The same sort of obsessive nut. In one case, it's fear of what the communists are going to do with our precious bodily fluids. In another case, it's blacks and Jews.
PS This didn't involve Mr. Marcus, and I want to make it clear that Mr. Marcus have nothing to do wi
Post a Followup