WendyGirl33

BNP TV Launches New “Muslim Sex Grooming” Video Series http://bnp.org.uk/files/2009/06/grooming-video.jpg British National Party television has completed a three part series on Muslim grooming of young white girls, featuring interviews with three victim families who have for the first time been prepared to come on camera and warn the rest of the country about what is really going on as a result of mass immigration to this country. Introduced by BNP leader Nick Griffin, the harrowing videos provide an insight into the torment suffered by the families of this insidious crime. Mr Griffin points out that anger should not be directed against the immigrants, but at the police and authorities who have created the problem in the first place, and simply cover up and lie about its existence. “These crimes make it all the more important that the BNP gets elected to the European Parliament on Thursday’s elections, as only then will we be able to force the police and authorities to take this issue seriously and address its root causes,” Mr Griffin said. Videos can be viewed here: http://tv.bnp.org.uk/ http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/2009/06/02/bnp-tv-launches-new-%E2%80%9Cmuslim-sex-grooming%E2%80%9D-video-series/

The Rooted and the Rootless by Patrick J. Buchanan Most Americans have grown to love America long before they read the Constitution, or the Federalist Papers. There are heroes in Arlington who never learned to read. A true nation is an extended family. If fathers or sons do not defend it, it is their conduct that is indefensible. Does Barack Obama understand the people he leads? Do his aides? These may seem cheeky questions to ask of a team that just won the presidency. But there is something in their cool, insouciant, blasé demeanor, in the face of insults to their country, that suggests there yet exists a chasm—between them and us. Now, the change since the 1960s in the character of the nation has been great. The moral and social sappers spawned by that decade have done their work well. But Middle America yet remains a blood-and-soil, family-and-faith, God-and-country kind of nation. We are not Europe—yet. Most Americans remain visceral patriots. It’s in the DNA. What almost cost Bill Clinton the presidency in 1992 was not that he had opposed the Vietnam War, but that, it was said, he marched against his country while in a foreign country. When Barack confided to friends in San Francisco that he was having trouble in Pennsylvania because these folks “get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them … as a way to explain their frustrations,” he revealed that he does not really understand a part of the nation he now leads. It is this part of America that does not comprehend how the president could sit in Trinidad and listen to the scrub stock of the hemisphere trash our country—and say nothing. http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/2009/04/26/the-rooted-and-the-rootless-by-patrick-j-buchanan/

The National Policy Institute: Reclaiming Our History, Our Heritage, Our Culture [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3PJmQBW7_-o]YouTube - The National Policy Institute: Reclaiming Our History, Our Heritage, Our Culture[/ame] NPI Main Page: http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/ NPI Daily News Blog: http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/blog/ NPI Facebook Group: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=32263479006&ref=ts

The National Policy Institute: Reclaiming Our History, Our Heritage, Our Culture [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-QBYUanOis]YouTube - The National Policy Institute: Reclaiming Our History, Our Heritage, Our Culture[/ame] http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/

More Evidence That Intelligence Is Largely Inherited: Researchers Find That Genes Determine Brain’s Processing Speed ScienceDaily (Mar. 18, 2009) — They say a picture tells a thousand stories, but can it also tell how smart you are? Actually, say UCLA researchers, it can. In a study published recently in the Journal of Neuroscience, UCLA neurology professor Paul Thompson and colleagues used a new type of brain-imaging scanner to show that intelligence is strongly influenced by the quality of the brain’s axons, or wiring that sends signals throughout the brain. The faster the signaling, the faster the brain processes information. And since the integrity of the brain’s wiring is influenced by genes, the genes we inherit play a far greater role in intelligence than was previously thought. Genes appear to influence intelligence by determining how well nerve axons are encased in myelin — the fatty sheath of “insulation” that coats our axons and allows for fast signaling bursts in our brains. The thicker the myelin, the faster the nerve impulses. http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/2009/03/19/more-evidence-that-intelligence-is-largely-inherited-researchers-find-that-genes-determine-brains-processing-speed/

Charles Freeman’s disloyalty allegations by Kevin MacDonald Charles Freeman’s withdrawal from his appointment as head of the National Intelligence Council has attracted a great deal of comment. But the most amazing parts of his statement are the least commented on. To wit: I do not believe the National Intelligence Council could function effectively while its chair was under constant attack by unscrupulous people with a passionate attachment to the views of a political faction in a foreign country. This is a rather unvarnished statement of disloyalty. Indeed, Freeman’s comment bears more than a passing resemblance to Pat Buchanan’s famous comments on the neoconservatives who engineered the US invasion of Iraq on behalf of Israel: They charge us with anti-Semitism—i.e., a hatred of Jews for their faith, heritage, or ancestry. False. The truth is, those hurling these charges harbor a “passionate attachment” to a nation not our own that causes them to subordinate the interests of their own country and to act on an assumption that, somehow, what’s good for Israel is good for America. And in case anyone missed it, Freeman made the accusation of disloyalty twice more: There is a special irony in having been accused of improper regard for the opinions of foreign governments and societies by a group so clearly intent on enforcing adherence to the policies of a foreign government — in this case, the government of Israel. … I regret that my willingness to serve the new administration has ended by casting doubt on its ability to consider, let alone decide what policies might best serve the interests of the United States rather than those of a Lobby intent on enforcing the will and interests of a foreign government. And yet, coverage of the Freeman withdrawal in the mainstream media has ignored these allegations. (In fact, as Andrew Sullivan noted, the MSM basically ignored the issue entirely.) The Washington Post article (posted also at the Los Angeles Times website) summarized the situation by saying only that “Freeman had come under fire for statements he had made criticizing Israeli policies and for his past connections to Saudi and Chinese interests.” It quoted Freeman’s statement that he did not believe that the NIC “could function effectively while its chair was under constant attack" but left out the rest of Freeman’s sentence: “by unscrupulous people with a passionate attachment to the views of a political faction in a foreign country.” The Post’s editorial on the subject bordered on the bizarre, claiming that any suggestion that the Lobby was behind the failed appointment was nothing more than a “conspiracy theory.” Please! http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/articles/MacDonald-Freeman.html

Remembering The Alamo By Chuck Baldwin Today, however, our national leaders are in the process of turning America over to the very forces that the Alamo defenders gave their lives resisting. On second thought, do they look foolish, or do we? March 6 marks the anniversary of the fall of the Alamo back in 1836. For more than 13 days, 186 brave and determined patriots withstood Santa Anna’s seasoned army of over 4,000 troops. To a man, the defenders of that mission fort knew they would never leave those ramparts alive. They had several opportunities to leave and live. Yet, they chose to fight and die. How foolish they must look to this generation of spoiled Americans. It is difficult to recall that stouthearted men such as Davy Crockett (a nationally known frontiersman and former Congressman), Will Travis (only 23 years old with a little baby at home), and Jim Bowie (a wealthy landowner with properties on both sides of the Rio Grande) really existed. These were real men with real dreams and real desires. Real blood flowed through their veins. They loved their families and enjoyed life as much as any of us. There was something different about them, however. They possessed a commitment to liberty that transcended personal safety and comfort. Liberty is an easy word to say, but it is a hard word to live up to. Freedom has little to do with financial gain or personal pleasure. Accompanying Freedom is her constant and unattractive companion, Responsibility. Neither is she an only child. Patriotism and Morality are her sisters. They are inseparable; destroy one and all will die. Early in the siege, Travis wrote these words to the people of Texas: “Fellow Citizens & Compatriots: I am besieged by a thousand or more of the Mexicans under Santa Anna. . . . The enemy has demanded a surrender at discretion, otherwise the garrison are to be put to the sword . . . I have answered the demand with a cannon shot & our flag still waves proudly from the walls. I shall never surrender or retreat. . . . VICTORY OR DEATH! P.S. The Lord is on our side. . . .” http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/2009/03/12/remembering-the-alamo-by-chuck-baldwin/

From Meccania to Atlantis - Part 9: Goodbye To All That Territory is identity. Body Snatchers who pump into any territory under their domain an unceasing stream of racially and culturally unrelated immigrants, rob the autochthon inhabitants of a part of their identity. It’s one of the gravest forms of aggression possible. When in the Course of human events The title of Chapter 9 is borrowed from Robert Graves. Graves (1895 -1985) was one of those people one could find only in Europe: an Anglo-Irish-German, he was an intellectual son and grandson of intellectuals, a poet, classicist and translator from Greek and Latin, Oxford University professor, novelist and author of 140 books, most remembered nowadays for his I, Claudius, made in 1976 into a hit BBC-Television series with Derek Jacobi in the title role. But Graves was more than that. He was a champion pugilist and a heroic soldier. He served during World War 1 as an officer in the Royal Welsh Fusiliers and was so severely wounded in the Battle of the Somme that he was given up for dead. The horrors of the Great War and the imbecility of the British upper classes and military command that led to Great Britain’s hecatomb in that war caused Graves’s great disillusionment with his country. He left Great Britain in 1929 for Majorca, rarely to return for the next 56 years. Prior to leaving, Graves published an autobiography, entitled Good Bye to All That. Known as one of the fiercest, most acerbic personal memoirs of the Great War, Graves’s book “seethes with contempt for his country, his social class, his military superiors, and the civilians who cheered the carnage from the safety of home. His portrait of the stupidity and petty cruelties endemic in England’s elite schools is almost as scathing as his depiction of trench warfare [snip], litany of meaningless death, horrific encounters with gruesomely decaying corpses, and even more appalling confrontations with the callousness and arrogance of the military command.” What Robert Graves felt towards the ruling elite of his country after the Great War, some in the West feel toward the ruling elites of their countries after the Great Meltdown. http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/2009/03/08/from-meccania-to-atlantis-part-9-goodbye-to-all-that/

Pitchfork Time By Patrick J. Buchanan Pitchfork Time By Patrick J. Buchanan Any wonder native-born Californians are fleeing the Golden Land? In his campaign and inaugural address, Barack Obama cast himself as a moderate man seeking common ground with conservatives. Yet, his budget calls for the radical restructuring of the U.S. economy, a sweeping redistribution of power and wealth to government and Democratic constituencies. It is a declaration of war on the Right. The real Obama has stood up, and lived up to his ranking as the most left-wing member of the United States Senate. Barack has no mandate for this. He was even behind McCain when the decisive event that gave him the presidency occurred—the September collapse of Lehman Brothers and the market crash. Republicans are under no obligation to render bipartisan support to this statist coup d’etat. For what is going down is a leftist power grab that is anathema to their principles and philosophy. Where the U.S. government usually consumes 21 percent of gross domestic product, this Obama budget spends 28 percent in 2009 and runs a deficit of $1.75 trillion, or 12.7 percent of GDP. That is four times the largest deficit of George W. Bush and twice as large a share of the economy as any deficit run since World War II. Add that 28 percent of GDP spent by the U.S. government to the 12 percent spent by states, counties and cities, and government will consume 40 percent of the economy in 2009. We are not “headed down the road to socialism.” We are there. http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/2009/03/03/pitchfork-time-by-patrick-j-buchanan/

What's wrong with white men? In search of an explanation by Kevin MacDonald In my previous column, I attempted to analyze two important sex differences in political behavior: Women’s tendency to be attracted to wealthy, powerful men, and women’s relatively greater attraction to close relationships, empathy, and nurturance. These differences make women less likely to be attracted to white racialist movements given the current political context. But these differences are not the main cause of our malaise. A correspondent writing to me about my last column said that I should ask why white men are such wimps that they are basically lying down and allowing themselves to be displaced. It’s a good question. How could a race of people that conquered the world suddenly lose confidence and voluntarily cede power? What explains the culture of Western suicide? White men have to look in the mirror when thinking about our ongoing dispossession. After all, even though there is a preponderance of men in societies of people who explicitly advocate the interests of European-Americans, these men represent a miniscule percentage of the European-American male population. One such society, the Charles Martel Society, is named for Charles Martel, a man who stood up for his people by leading an army against invading Muslims. This is what one should expect from men. But such men — and people willing to follow such a man into battle to preserve their people and culture — are vanishingly rare among contemporary Europeans, whether in Europe or the European Diaspora. Consider again the evolutionary theory of sex. In my last column, I sketched out how it explains the general contours of female behavior. Here I draw out the implications for male behavior. Females are the sex with a high investment in reproduction — pregnancy, lactation, and child care. Since the act of reproduction costs little for men, a general rule of nature is that males must compete with other males for access to females. This results in the prediction that males will be more aggressive than females and that the main targets of their aggression will be other males. Male aggression over access to females is common in nature. Males fight each other, and the winner gets to mate with the females. For example, a coalition of male lions taking over a pride drives off or kills the resident males and then commits infanticide on the offspring of the males they displaced. They then mate with the females. In nature, males who were not aggressive and didn't try to control territory did not leave offspring. The cowardly lion is a literary invention, nothing more. http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/articles/MacDonald-Men.html

Dr. David Yeagley’s Letter to the National Policy Institute "What's Up with White Women." From: David Yeagley To: [email protected] Sent: Friday, February 13, 2009 3:56 PM Subject: re: “White Women” Gentlemen, I am David Yeagley, the author of “What’s Up with White Women,” an article I originally wrote in 2001. I was shortly dismissed from my position at Oklahoma State University-OKC. I was actively lobbying the OK legislature (with Gov. Keating’s support) to have mandatory patriotism taught in OK public schools. I am quite impressed with your NPI web site. When I first became a name in patriotism (appearing on Hannity & Colmes, Bill O’Reilly, C-Span, etc.), I was contacted by two different Southern “national” organizations. They wanted my membership. One was national and the other was out of Texas. I must say, they were a bit elite, comprising wealthy businessmen. I am a very poor Indian living in Oklahoma City. I was not able to respond as I would have liked to. In any case, I wish you the success. My position is simple: the best future for American Indians lies in the success of America. The country was created by White Anglo-Saxon Protestants. Anything other than this, at the helm, is a threat to American Indian future–and a grave insult to my pride as an Indian. My web site is http://www.badeagle.com. Here is the page with a curriculum vitae. I appreciate your interest, and thank you for posting my VDARE.com article. No race or ethnicity wants to see its womenfolk running after foreigners. It is the most base betrayal. David Yeagley Oklahoma City, OK http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/2009/02/15/dr-david-yeagleys-letter-to-the-national-policy-institute/

Got Heroes? Walt Disney and Dr. Kevin Macdonald [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C53WlvzPmv0]YouTube - Got Heroes? Walt Disney and Dr. Kevin Macdonald[/ame]

Youtube: NPI Population Study Video Now Available in 35 Languages Language Barrier Broken Report: The Youtube video: [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6pzPp1Q2ew]~ NPI: Global White Population to Plummet to a Single Digit[/ame] can now be seen in closed caption translation into 35 different languages. This National Policy Institute video can now reach our European friends who don’t speak English. You can read the story of the technology here. Get a Free copy of NPI’s e-book: Global White Population to Plummet here. (Please note that the embedded video does not have the closed caption/translator feature. Please double click on video to open new window.) [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6pzPp1Q2ew]YouTube - ~ NPI: Global White Population to Plummet to a Single Digit[/ame] To view captions/subtitles in your language on youtube, click the button that looks like a triangle in the lower right hand corner of the video player. From there, click the button just above it that says “CC” if captions are not showing. If they are, to change language, float over the arrow next to “CC” and click Translate. A box will pop up in the middle of the video with 2 selections. The top one does not need to be changed, but you can select a language you want to translate into in the bottom list. Then click Translate, which is below the language you selected. And now you can see the text in the language of your choice. http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/2009/02/03/youtube-npi-population-study-video-now-available-in-35-languages/

Obama’s Bill Hands ACORN $5.2 Billion Bailout Regarding the Neighborhood Stabilization Program, Vadum writes in American Spectator: “Although ACORN operatives usually get their hands on such funds only after they have first passed through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development or state and local governments, the new spending bill largely eliminates these dawdling middle men, making it easier to get Uncle Sam's largess directly into the hands of the same people who run ACORN's various vote fraud and extortion rackets. And the legislative package provides these funds without the usual prohibition on using government money for lobbying or political activities.” A rising chorus of GOP leaders are protesting that the blockbuster Democratic stimulus package would provide up to a whopping $5.2 billion for ACORN, the left-leaning nonprofit group under federal investigation for massive voter fraud. Most of the money is secreted away under an item in the now $836 billion package titled “Neighborhood Stabilization Programs.” Ordinarily, neighborhood stabilization funds are distributed to local governments. But revised language in the stimulus bill would make the funds available directly to non-profit entities such as ACORN, the low-income housing organization whose pro-Democrat voter-registration activities have been blasted by Republicans. ACORN is cited by some for tipping the scales in the Democrats’ favor in November. According to Fox news, Sen. David Vitter, R-La., could appear to be a “payoff” for community groups’ partisan political activities in the last election cycle. http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/2009/01/29/obama%E2%80%99s-bill-hands-acorn-52-billion-bailout/

Finally, Subprime Foreclosure Rates by Race Many people can't believe that minorities could account for so much of mortgage meltdown, but there are now over 100 million minorities in the U.S. Furthermore, their mortgages tended to be relatively larger than one might expect because they tend to live in fairly expensive urban areas rather than in dirt cheap rural areas. A variety of evidence has long pointed toward minorities accounting for a disproportionate fraction of the defaulted subprime mortgage losses that set off the economic crash. This would hardly be surprising since the government pushed hard to increase lending to minorities of marginal creditworthiness in the name of increasing minority homeownership. The Clinton Administration teamed up with leftist groups like Obama’s colleagues at ACORN to push for more lending to minorities. The Bush Administration stepped up the pace, denouncing down payments as barriers holding minorities back from the American Dream, in part to convert the growing Hispanic population into homeowning Republicans. But, like the guns of Singapore in 1941, the government’s statistics-collecting apparatus is designed only to make sure that minorities are getting enough loans, not to count how often they default on their mortgages. So, we’ve been lacking direct data on foreclosure rates in the current Housing Bubble. Back in October, my reader Tino calculated from the federal Home Mortgage Disclosure Act database that minorities got half the subprime cash (for home purchases and refinancings) handed out in the big years of 2004-2007. Mortgage dollars (prime and subprime) for home purchases leant to Hispanics went up 691% from 1999 to 2006 and 397% for blacks (but only 218% for Asians and about 100% for whites). In other words, mortgage lending to Hispanics almost octupled from 1999 to the peak of the Housing Bubble in 2006. Thus, a sizable majority of defaulted dollars lost are in just four heavily Hispanic states: California, Arizona, Nevada, and Florida (what Wall Street called the “Sand States”). But, what about foreclosure rates by race? http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/2009/01/22/finally-subprime-foreclosure-rates-by-race/

Finally, Subprime Foreclosure Rates by Race ...

The problem with intellectually insecure whites Kevin MacDonald January 19, 2009 America will soon have a white minority. This is a much desired state of affairs for the hostile elites who hold political power and shape public opinion. But it certainly creates some management issues — at least in the long run. After all, it’s difficult to come up with an historical example of a nation with a solid ethnic majority (90% white in 1950) that has voluntarily decided to cede political and cultural power. Such transformations are typically accomplished by military invasions, great battles, and untold suffering. And it’s not as if everyone is doing it. Only Western nations view their own demographic and cultural eclipse as a moral imperative. Indeed, as I have noted previously, it is striking that racial nationalism has triumphed in Israel at the same time that the Jewish intellectual and political movements and the organized Jewish community have been the most active and effective force for a non-white America. Indeed, a poll in 2008 found that Avigdor Lieberman was the second most popular politician in Israel. Lieberman has advocated expulsion of Arabs from Israel and has declared himself a follower of Vladimir Jabotinsky, the leading pioneer of racial Zionism. The most popular politician in the poll was Benjamin Netanyahu — another admirer of Jabotinsky. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni are also Jabotinskyists. The racial Zionists are now carrying out yet another orgy of mass murder after a starvation-inducing blockade and the usual triggering assault designed to provoke Palestinian retaliation — which then becomes the cover for claims that Israel is merely defending itself against terrorism. This monstrosity was approved by overwhelming majorities of both Houses of Congress. The craven Bush administration did its part by abstaining from a UN resolution designed by the US Secretary of State as a result of a personal appeal by the Israeli Prime Minister. This is yet another accomplishment of the Israel Lobby, but one they would rather not have discussed in public. People might get the impression that the Lobby really does dictate US foreign policy in the Mideast. Obviously, such thoughts are only entertained by anti-Semites. But I digress. In managing the eclipse of white America, one strategy of the mainstream media is to simply ignore the issue. Christopher Donovan (“For the media, the less whites think about their coming minority status, the better”) has noted that the media, and in particular, the New York Times, are quite uninterested in doing stories that discuss what white people think about this state of affairs. It’s not surprising that the New York Times — the Jewish-owned flagship of anti-white, pro-multicultural media — ignores the issue. The issue is also missing from so-called conservative media even though one would think that conservatives would find the eclipse of white America to be an important issue. Certainly, their audiences would find it interesting. [...] http://theoccidentalobserver.net/articles/MacDonald-Hsu.html

A Conversation About Race: A Film By Craig Bodeker Review By John Ingram, Special to the National Policy Institute We can imagine that when he called for yet another “conversation on race” in his much-lauded speech in Philadelphia, then-candidate Barack Obama had in mind the usual format for “conversations on race” in America: First, non-whites vent. Then, whites apologize, self-excoriate, and generally grovel on the floor in a contest to see who can contort themselves into the most exquisite knot of multicultural contrition. As Craig Bodeker tells it, he was once balled up on the floor like this. As a fifth-grader in Minnesota, a demonstration by two teachers on the “racism” of his white classroom burned into his mind the messages all of society has come to accept: whites are bad. Everyone else is good. End of story. But Bodeker, a first-time filmmaker from Colorado with musician-cool shoulder-length hair, must have tired of the floor contortions. And when yet another call for “conversation” went out, he answered. But be warned. Bodeker’s “Conversation on Race,” an hour-long black-and-white documentary shot in Denver, is surely not what now-President Obama – or most other Americans — wanted to hear. Bodeker speaks to the audience as a white man who has grown suspicious of the terms “racist” and “racism,” and frustrated by the way in which the double standard on race is used to hammer whites. His formula is simple. He simply puts the “believers” in racism, as he calls them, on camera, and asks simple questions. What is racism? Can you give an example? Bodeker ran an ad on Craigslist under the heading “Ending Racism Now” for some interview subjects; others are interviewed on the street. Aside from the basic qualification that they agree “racism” is rampant, they are all races and ages. The answers are as amazing as they are commonplace. Subjects are hard-pressed to provide concrete examples of racism. One black subject reported that being complimented on his dancing by a white man was “racism.” Bodeker’s treatment of his subjects is as gentle as could be: his questions are either open-ended, or present a contradiction. The reactions to questions on why Asians outscore whites on standardized tests — after the subjects have all confidently explained that whites outscore blacks because whites wrote the tests — are amusing. Some subjects come across as silly (one white woman tells us that racial distinctions are unnecessary because of the continuum of the universe, and that “I am the rock, the wall, the tree…”), but most offer the mouthings on race we hear everyday. “Race is a social construct,” one white male says, slowly, as if he’d thought of it himself. Which is doubtful, given that I’ve been hearing whites tell me that, using that exact phrase, for years — and all of them deliver it as if they, too, had come to this conclusion themselves, after lengthy study and thought. But what’s refreshing about this film is that these everyday mouthings on race are presented against a backdrop of Mr. Bodeker’s critical observations – as opposed to their usual presentation: unquestioned and celebrated, Emperor’s New Clothes-style. “A Conversation on Race” is smartly produced: the editing paces well, it is not overlong, and the camera work is nicely varied. The soundtrack is especially good, with the occasional “Law and Order”-style “donk donk” for punctuative effect. At my screening of the film, the opinion of one woman (who is not, as the phrase sometimes goes, “pro-white”) was that Bodeker came on a little too strong — she wanted more documentary, less documentarist. And yes, he does get a little worked up at times. But to my mind, it was always within bounds, and sincere. (It could be yet another sign of anti-white bias that a white man can’t get even a little insistent about race without being branded as a white supremacist.) It is a final observation from Bodeker that underscores my own frustration: on the subject of race, whites are “allowed” only two positions: complete indifference, or “white supremacy.” As they slip further toward minority status in the United States, room must be made for the sensible white advocate who does not seek the oppression and domination of other groups, but self-direction and self-protection for whites. In “A Conversation on Race,” the stage is set. http://www.aconversationaboutrace.com/_graphics/dvd_cover.jpg You can order A Conversation about Race for $20, including postage in the US, at http://www.aconversationaboutrace.com. The website also contains excerpts from the film, reviews, and interviews with Craig Bodeker. John Ingram is the pen name of an attorney in Washington, D.C. http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/2009/01/08/a-conversation-about-race-a-film-by-craig-bodeker/

Countering The Marxist Critical Theory We need to defy Political Correctness at every level. We need to hold PC institutions such as the media responsible for obscuring the truth about the origins of violent crime and those responsible for it in our countries. We need to point out those unproductive members of our society who sponge on the tax and sweat of others; those who keep on having babies when they can hardly look after themselves. We should point out the illegal immigrants, drug dealers and organised criminals in our societies and not be scared to call a spade a spade “Out of the dominant characteristics of both belligerents a certain center of gravity develops, the hub of all power and movement, on which everything depends. That is the point against which all our energies should be directed.” – Carl von Clausewitz It was the seventies and I was a young lad growing up in South Africa when I first encountered Political Correctness. Of course I did not know it was called “Political Correctness” at the time. I remember hearing the grownups talking about a new law that came out prohibiting Whites from referring to Blacks as “Kaffirs”, Cape Coloureds as “Hotnots” and Indians as “Coolies”. Even then I found it a ridiculous law and could not believe the grownups actually taking it seriously. Today we see the results of this Marxist brainwashing in the behavior of our people. White people in South Africa are so fearful of offending others, they constantly look over their shoulders, making sure the door is closed and lowering their voices before they say anything that could be remotely considered derogatory towards Blacks. Even then they tone it down, irrespective of the other person being a close friend or family member. One is never sure how the other person is going to react. Nobody wants to be branded a racist, sexist, or homophobe. Where did it all come from, all this Multiculturalism, Political Correctness, Affirmative Action, Media control, Control of our education system, etc…? More importantly, how do we turn the tide on it? The previous National Party government in South Africa called it “The Total Onslaught of Communism”, but what is it exactly and who is behind this Communist onslaught on Western Civilization? We have to remember that if we fight Marxist terrorists in the bush or townships; we are merely hacking away at the branches. What we need to do is go after the roots, but where do the roots of Marxist Ideology lie? Moscow? Beijing? No… It is in Frankfurt, Germany and it is called, “The Institute for Social Research” (Institut für Sozialforschung) and was found in 1924, better known today as the Frankfurt School; a Think-tank of Marxist Scientific ideology. http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/2009/01/09/countering-the-marxist-critical-theory

This is not intended to push sales other than to anyone interested. THe link is provided as a service to those.

Video: The Mass Rape of White Women in America http://www.wntube.net/play.php?vid=1273 Buy the DVD here: http://www.aconversationaboutrace.com/

Video: Was America Ever a White Nation? In his groundbreaking new documentary; A Conversation About Race, filmmaker Craig Bodeker redefines the conventional wisdom on Race and Racism Americans are being slandered as “RACISTS” more than ever before! Yet I don’t know of ANY nation that has done more for it’s “minorities” than the USA has. There’s no other nation on Earth that has created so many “minority” millionaires, yet so many of these “minorities” still hate America for her “racism?” We hear that “White European Culture” is overpowering and dominant. We hear that we need exclusively African American, Hispanic, and even Asian TV networks just to offset the “oppressive influences” of white culture! But have you turned on a TV lately? Just how much “White Culture” is featured in American Broadcasting today? There’s rarely any program or ad that doesn’t feature at the least, an EVEN distribution of races or ethnic groups, even though two out of every three Americans are white! This is just one of the many “disconnects” I see in my daily life on matters of race. A Conversation About Race is just the starting point. Watch the film, and then have your own conversation about race. You’ll be surprised at what you discover! http://www.aconversationaboutrace.com/ Youtube video excerpt from the film: [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ouFm9Vj1PMY]YouTube - Was America Ever a White Nation?[/ame] http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/2008/12/07/video-was-america-ever-a-white-nation/

White Ethnocentrism: Can Americans Really Be Brainwashed? Most Republicans are not rich white oligarchs. The fact is that the Republican base is really about the Sarah Palin phenomenon—white Christians—many with small town roots in the South and West—who yearn for the America they are rapidly losing: a white America One of the great intellectual divides is the venerable nature/nurture dichotomy. Conservatives tend to be on the side of nature: "Race exists as a biological reality; there are race differences in socially important traits like IQ; people’s brains are wired to prefer people like themselves; they are more likely to contribute to public goods like health care and education if the beneficiaries are of the same ethnic group; people trust others more if they live in homogeneous societies." The left takes the opposite tack: "Race doesn’t exist; the idea that it does exist is a fantasy of moral reprobates. To the extent that differences in traits like IQ are interesting at all, they are the result of capitalism, discrimination, or general evil. If it weren’t for white people behaving badly, we could easily build a strong, racially diverse multicultural society where all people can live happily ever after." I am not going to try to convince you of the merits of either side of this debate. Over the years, VDARE.COM has certainly published some of the premier writers on the nature side. But if you pick up the New York Times, you’ll get a very different version of these issues. It’s a version which, sad to say, has a lot more influence. So what makes culture so powerful and how does it work at the psychological level? Article Source (May be easier to read at source because of hyperlinks): http://vdare.com/macdonald/081125_ethnocentrism.htm http://www.theoccidentalobserver.com/

Equal Justice Under Law! End Affirmative Action. [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMXSzCO5iMI]YouTube - Equal Justice Under Law! End Affirmative Action.[/ame] http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/petition http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/

Bump for November 5th