THE CHART FORGERS
The affairs of a great nation are often described as the "Ship of State." It is an apt analogy.
A nation has a "captain," officers, crew and navigator, who must sail it through endless storms, rocks, shoals and dangers to stay afloat.
In a so-called "free" country, the people are the "navigators."
You, the citizen, are supposed to steer the American ship of state. You are supposed to elect a captain who does what YOU want done. Above all, you are supposed to set the policies of the state by majority rule.
And to do the steering of the American "ship of state," you need charts.
No matter how wise he may be, the navigator of a great ship cannot steer the vessel safely through rocks and dangers without accurate charts.
And you cannot make wise decisions on the policies for the American ship of state, without accurate facts and information - the "charts" of dangers surrounding America.
Can there be any doubt about what would happen if somebody managed to give the navigator of a ship PHONY CHARTS - charts showing rocks where the channel really was - and showing a clear channel where the jagged rocks lurked to rip out the ship's bottom?
And whose fault would it be if a ship piled up on the rocks because the navigator had been given falsified charts? The navigator's? Of course not! The fault would be entirely that of whomever forged the charts and sneaked them over on the honest navigator.
The navigator would THINK, however, that he must have done something terribly wrong, because who would imagine anyone would be low and vile enough to substitute forged charts? The thought would never OCCUR to most honest navigators.
That's just what's happening to America. That's why we keep piling up on the rocks of Communism, crime, corruption and degeneracy.
The good people of this great nation have been supplied with NOTHING BUT false charts, charts which show a ''safe channel'' precisely where lie the deadliest rocks, and which pretend that the only possible safe channel is the path to destruction.
Trusting and believing in these forged ''charts'' - the phony "facts" and rigged "news" they are given - our people have innocently driven the once great American ship of state onto just about every shoal and rock there is, producing the kind of wreckage and despair we saw in chapters One and Two.
Our people have been taught that their real heroes and leaders are ''haters," "bigots" and ''fascists," while the real haters and bigots are exalted by our phony charts - our press - as "statesmen" and "world leaders."
We have been FORCED onto the rocks of Communism and degeneracy by the press, TV, books, etc., which have praised every kind of rottenness and filth as "love," "brotherhood," etc., thus insuring that our people will sail unsuspectingly down the channel onto the rocks. And even when they keep piling up on the rocks, the people still do not suspect that anybody has palmed off forged charts on them. Rather, they naively believe that they simply didn't try hard enough, so that next time, they smash up even harder.
When integration, for instance, produces some of the horrors shown in Chapter I, our poor, swindled people are taught to believe it is because we need MORE integration. While the liars and forgers are driving our unwitting people up the rock-studded fake ''channels," they are also removing all the light houses and buoys which once guided mankind into safe and quiet harbors in the storms.
They have ripped up the light houses of religion, family, old-fashioned disciplined education, moral standards, authoritarian fathers and teachers, loving and motherly women, and that precious love of home and country called "patriotism" without which a people looses its bearings - as have out's.
The chart forgers have been so successful in driving our people onto the rocks time after time, over a period of forty years, that millions have given up, thrown away all charts, abandoned any effort to steer at all, and are just drifting. Others, more aggressive but equally frustrated, grow beards, wear filthy clothes, mount motorcycles, and race around attacking almost anything in sight.
Still others, the ''liberals,'' have made a cult of shipwreck, They have seen their own lives ruined under the impossible spiritual and intellectual frustrations of the "liberal" lies of the chart-forgers. They haven't got the guts to face the facts of their own mistakes and so they have convinced themselves that no matter how many rocks they hit sailing by the false charts, their charts and lies are right and true, and the fault lies in "extremists," "haters" and "fascists" who are secretly putting rocks in the channel.
Confirmed and rotten old whores and drunkards get a certain relief from their conscience pangs by seducing young innocents into their own rotten ways of life. And in the same way, the liberal victims of the chart forgers, who have had their own lives spoiled and "ship-wrecked" by the lies of the chart-forgers, get a depraved satisfaction out of seducing other young innocents, by spreading the same lies and fake charts which wrecked their own miserable lives and are wrecking the life of our young people.
The chart-forgers and their "liberal" army of victims begin their attack on the minds of our people when the child is still in kindergarten. Subtly, the tots are infused with unconscious doubts about the wisdom and methods of their own fathers and mothers. The tiny minds are led to believe that any discipline and order imposed at home is old-fashioned and "tyranny," - although the kids never hear such words.
On through the grades, the process of misleading our new citizens proceeds. American heroes, Washington, Patrick Henry, etc., were not real heroes at all, but greedy little men out for gain or glory. The Constitution is "out-dated." Religion is an "opium." Morals are "square."
I didn't notice this subtle forging and distortion of our national heritage and degrading of our heroes and traditions imposed on me at first.
It was not until I was a young undergraduate of Brown University in 1938 that I finally made direct contact with these chart forgers, whose identification and overthrow would later become my life work. But I didn't know or even suspect them then. I don't remember even thinking about such a thing, any more than I did Thugee-ism in India. I was still blissfully and totally ignorant of Communism, Jews, Negroes and the assault of the colored masses of the world against the White Race and its elite.
In a way, I am glad of this long maintained ignorance, because today, when I meet young college men and women who are full of conceit because of their "liberalism" and "understanding" of our social problems, I can be patient with them. I can imagine my own reaction if I had been told as a college-boy, that there was a Jewish or any other kind of world conspiracy. I was sure, at that time, that my "deep" studies into the profundities of knowledge would have long ago revealed any such monstrous conspiracy -and even if not, that my professors and men of learning would surely have known it. I would have been angry at such effrontery, just as most young college kids I meet today are, at first, angry because they've heard only one side.
In 1939, I sat in "Sociology I" class at Brown University and tried my best to make some sense out of it all. I had been happy at the chance to study sociology, as it appeared to me logical that there must be some fundamental principles of the development of the social relationships of life as I had discovered simple basic principles of other affairs I had looked into. I was most eager to learn these basic principles of the operation of human society so that I could understand the events around me, and perhaps even predict sociological occurrences in accordance with the principles I would be taught. I have since learned that there are such principles, as will be shown later.
But it would be many, many years before I would fight my way to the simple, fundamental and logical facts of social life. In Prof. Bucklin's classroom on society at Brown University, all was the most depressing darkness and confusion. It all sounded most enlightening, of course. There were lots of brave new words, "ethnic groups," etc., but try as I might, I could not get to the bottom of it all to find any idea, nor could I get hold of any principle. Muddiness of mind was not deplored, but glorified. I buried myself in my sociology books, absolutely determined to find why I was missing the kernel of the thing.
The best I could come up with in sociology was that human beings are all helpless tools of environment; that we are all born as rigidly equal lumps, and the disparity of our achievements and stations was entirely and 100% the result of the forces of environment that everybody, therefore, could theoretically be master-geniuses and kings if only we could sufficiently improve everybody's environment.
I was bold enough to ask Prof. Bucklin if this were the idea. He turned red with anger. I was told it was "impossible" to make any generalizations, although all I was asking was for the fundamental idea, if any, of Sociology.
I began to see that Sociology was different from any other course I had ever taken. Certain ideas produced apoplexy in the teacher, particularly the suggestion that perhaps some people were no-good, biological slobs from the day they were born. Certain other ideas, although they were never, never formulated and stated frankly, were fostered and encouraged - and these were always ideas revolving around the total power of environment.
Slowly, I got the idea. At first I just used it to get better grades. When I wrote my essay answers in examinations, I poured it on heavily that all hands in the civilization in question were potential Leonardo da Vinci's, no matter how black they were or how they ate their best friends for thousands of years - and that with a quick change in environment, these cannibals, too, would be writing arias, building Parthenons and painting masterpieces.
But then I began to wonder "how come"? Certainly environment was important. Anybody could see that. But it was obviously negative. You can make a helpless boob out of a born genius by raising him locked in a dark closet. But you can't make a genius out of a drooling idiot, even by sending him to Brown. Was it just old man Bucklin who was insane with environment? Or was it the whole subject?
I went to the library and read more sociology books. They were universally pushing the same idea. I began to make fun of Sociology in the college paper in my column, and got into more trouble. Some of the columns were "killed" before seeing the light. I was still too ignorant to know that I was fighting Lysenko and Marx and the whole Soviet theory of environmentalism, which has captured and hypnotized or terrorized all our intellectuals. I imagined I was battling just one foolish college course.
During my second year at Brown, my picture of the world darkened, as I discovered more and more the intellectual dishonesty in this university which had at first seemed almost heaven itself to me. I still knew little or nothing about Communism or its pimping little sister, "liberalism." But I could not avoid the steady pressure, everywhere in the university, to accept the idea of massive human equality, and the supremacy of environment. In every course I was repulsed by the intellectual cowardice of the faculty in standing up for any doctrine whatsoever.
I majored in philosophy, and, while I admired the intellectual brilliance of my professors, particularly Professor Ducasse, I was hugely disappointed in the headlong retreat of all the faculty whenever they were asked their own opinion as to the objective truth in any matter. I was told that "eternal seeking" is the way to knowledge. (And there is no denying that.) But lively discussion is also vital to any advance and you cannot have any lively discussion where the opposition either doesn't exist or melts away like a wraith when you seek to take hold of it.
I was running into the social disease of our modern life-cowardice and pathological fear of a strong personality or strong ideas. Dale Carnegie has codified and commercialized this creeping disease as "how to win friends and influence people," which boils down, in essence, to the principle of having no personality or strong feelings or ideas and becoming passive and empty so that the "other fellow" can display HIS ideas and personality. But he, too, is trying to get "popular" by being passive and dispassionate, so that the result is like two dead batteries -no current. Such human robots are suited to enslavement by a 1984-type society, but not to a bold, free society of men.
I found the same wishy-washy approach in every subject except in the sciences and for these last, I was very grateful. Here, in geology and psychology, I could find a few principles and laws, which stayed there when I reached out to grasp them. And so I reveled in these subjects, and rebelled to the limit of my capacity in the others.
In sociology, I went so far as to write an insolent examination paper, which almost got me thrown out of Brown. We were asked to write an essay on the factors leading to criminality and delinquency.
I wrote a fable about a crew of scientific geniuses who set out for Africa to see what made ants act like ants, searched around until they found a lot of ant-hills, observed them for many years, and finally came up with the discovery that when eggs were hatched in tunnels in a certain kind of hill in Africa, and grew up among six-legged creatures called "ants," they themselves were so affected by this strong environment that they became, themselves, ants, and waved their antennae like ants, scurried around like ants, looked like ants, and WERE ants.
I was hauled up before the administration for this impudence, and almost thrown out. Instead, I was given another opportunity to write the exam. And for the sake of my dear good Grandmother and my patient, loving Aunt Margie, I sat down and wrote what I knew they wanted -a piece showing how unfortunate and most excellent Negro babies were invariably driven to stealing from their parents, relatives and friends, robbing strangers at the point of a gun, looting, and finally axing somebody in sheer desperation at their nasty environment.
Meanwhile, I was learning mightily from my endless "bull-sessions" with Vic Hlillery and Bob Grabb, my constant companions. Both of them were soused to the ears with the prevailing "liberalism," although I still did not know what it was. I simply discovered that almost all my ideas clashed violently with theirs. My ideas that socially-significant novels were dangerous (because they allowed ideas to sneak into the mind while it was hypnotized by an illusion of "reality") was especially aggravating to them both, as we all aspired to creative careers, they as novelists and writers. My attack on the very social novels they were aiming to write was painful. And their reactions, particularly Hillery's, were most passionate. Far into the night we would battle over this matter, with the usual results - no progress. But in the process, I learned the art of controversy.
At first, I was too sincere and naive to do anything but try to make my opponent see the truth of my position with the utmost force and honesty. But then I found that I would fall victim of the dirtiest kind of sly tricks. My position would be enormously and ridiculously exaggerated, and then it would be flung in my face in triumph, to the great laughter of the audience of listeners or participants. I could not understand when even my beloved and revered friends did this to me. I was more than once too hurt by such 'liberal" tactics to defend myself.
But, as with everything else in my life, when I discovered the inevitability of such illogical skullduggery. I schooled myself in it and one day turned the tables on my "liberal" friends.
More and more, at Brown, I came into basic conflict with the prevailing super-liberalism - still without ever realizing what it was all about. My companions, my courses, my professors, and the latest erudite books - everything seemed to me to be touched with madness. I fought it fiercely and, for my ignorance, powerfully, but mostly by instinct. I simply had never heard of Communism as anything but a doctrine held by a few fanatics someplace overseas. That the campus, dorms, fraternity houses and class rooms of Brown University were crawling with the filthy thing, I would never have believed. I would have laughed to scorn anybody who had tried to tell me such a "Fantastic" thing - then!
Since this environmental "equality" idea of liberals Is literally insane (a delusion, substituted for reality); since men are also creatures who differ by breed just as much as dogs, horses, birds or any other living creatures; since some breeds of men are brighter than others (and some are infinitely stupider than others), it is inevitable that the attempt to organize any useful body of organized facts about human behavior, starting from the insane premise that they are all hereditarily equal, must wind up full of obvious contradictions and insanities. And this is exactly what happens!
If you try to argue with the guy in the nut house who thinks he is Napoleon, he will not only prove it to you, but he will hate you for doubting his "sacred, holy truth," and believe you are out to "get" him. But if he tries to write his "proofs" that he is Napoleon into a learned "scientific" paper, if he Is a "lucid" type nut, he will see that his "proofs" don't look too well In writing. And so he will resort to 'gobbledygook" writing of profound phrases and sixty-four dollar words to becloud what would be obviously insane if it were clear.
That's precisely what I found going on in "Sociology," only I didn't know it then. I didn't know what was wrong. I only knew that there was no way to get my feet on the ground in "Sociology." no way to come to grips with one, single, sure fact. Everything was, "by and large," "on the one hand - but then on the other hand," "Blatner and Fink say so-and-so, but then Fiddler and Fud say it's the other way around." etc., etc., ad nauseum.
I had stumbled head-on into one of the fundamental symptoms of our times, a very literal insanity - a desperate, frantic, pitiful effort by men who pretend to be the most enlightened of all humanity, to cling to the delusion that the only difference between Shakespeare and a savage is environment; that if we only manage to improve the environment enough, every cannibal can be a Chopin, every pygmy a Lord Nelson, every Bantu a Beethoven, and even' East Indian ragamuffin a Voltaire, History, biology, political science, economies - every organized body of knowledge must be twisted and wrenched to any extreme to maintain this insane and obvious delusion.
The way those afflicted with this modern Insanity cover up their madness from others - and mostly from themselves - is this process of pious scientific muddying of everything about the "sacred" doctrine. It is for this reason we are forever told things are always "grey" in this world, that there are "no simple solutions," that there are "no black and whites."
The fact that many things do exist as "shades of grey" rather than black and white does not mean that there is no such thing as black and white. Yet that is what the modern mad-men of "equality" keep trying to put out, precisely because they don't want any ordinary guy with common horse sense pointing out that they are full of beans.
Put simply, the "equality" theories of these witch-doctors of "modern science" would be laughed out of countenance by any school boy if they were in plain black and white, simple language. They are idiotic and dishonest, on their face! But in pages of witch-doctor "gobbledygook" they intimidate and impress many of our supposedly highly-trained minds, and produce "liberal" fanatics.
Sociology was an endless sea of grey mud. The only thing I could get clearly was that environment was everything, while heredity was a myth concocted by Southern brutes trying to re-enslave the Negroes.
By nature, I am a rebel. So I rebelled at this insanity. I wasn't sure what it was, or why they were doing it, but I did know for sure that it was crazy.
While at Brown I never did learn why the obviously intelligent and learned men all around me at the college were so all-fired "hung-up" on what seemed to me to be such obvious madness.
Now, more than twenty years and three wars later, I know what was going on, and why. I was surrounded by the most basic of all the lies of the chart-forgers the lie denying RACE, denying that there is any such thing as BREED among men, as there is breed among all other species.
In order for the chart-forgers' scheme to work, (as will be shown later) they must first pull down and destroy the resistance of the captain of civilization, the elite White Race. They must destroy its spirit and its ability to fight. They must fill it full of guilt feelings and degeneracy. Then, and then only, can chart-forgers and their army of mongrels overwhelm the White champion of civilization by sheer numbers.
So the chart-forgers have brilliantly exploited one of mankind's most ancient and deadly failings to produce a mass intoxication with what is actually mankind's last and most dangerous superstition - "humanitarianism." The White Race has been disarmed and poisoned with this clever lie. To get at the truth of the swindle, we have to "unthink" a lot that we have carelessly or, more often wishfully, assumed.
My own youthful experience with a drinking glass in the dish water is a perfect example of the frequent need to "un-think" a misconception.
As a boy, I was assigned "chores" around the home. One of them was the dishes.
But I don't think I did the dishes like other kids.
I experimented and wondered and tried to figure out the "why" of everything. I puzzled for hours why water stayed in a tumbler when you lifted it, upside down, almost out of the dish water. I got in endless trouble over experiments with soap suds. What made them? What were they? Would they be bigger if you added various items? I tried talcum powder, mustard everything I could get my hands on. The usual result was that somebody got their hands on me for my trouble. I got a licking.
But the investigative turn of mind, which often fetched me out to the woodshed for "experimenting" with the dish water, has stayed with me. One of the dominant passions of my life is and always has been, the effort to discover the natural laws behind what appear, at first, to be a thousand disconnected "wonders" - like the water in the tumbler and the soap suds.
I began to discover that there were truly beautiful laws behind these things - that things in this universe are magnificently organized if only we are bright, unprejudiced and persistent enough to find the laws and the organization. I fell in "love" with the business of discovering and using the laws of the Universe.
I soon discovered, of course, that I was not the original discoverer of this organization of the universe or the methods of learning its laws and system. In high school I learned that the whole delightful business was called "science," and that a lot of very wonderful men hundreds of years before me had been looking into the dish water too and the heavens, and the seas, and into everything else in the universe. I fell upon such knowledge like a starving man and devoured it. Every new morsel was a delight. Even hard-to-digest items were delicacies, once I could intellectually "swallow'' them.
That air pressure held the water in the tumbler in the dish water by pressing on all the water outside the tumbler, and thus PUSHING IT UP inside the glass, instead of the vacuum inside ''sucking" it in was a big and tough lump for me to digest. But I got it down, and it was great! This taught me not to be prejudiced, not to be a "bigot,' not to jump at easy conclusions.
What seemed was often simply not true, even though the truth seemed less likely at first. The whole history of man's scientific progress, I learned has been his struggle to get rid of ideas which, at first seemed right and were therefore pre-judged to BE right In primitive societies, any suggestion that the gods did not exist when everybody KNEW they made the earth, the heavens, the sea and people, etc. got one promptly burned or sacrificed. Everybody knew for thousands of years that the earth was flat you could see it for yourself. And the first few half-wits who suggested it was round were not only laughed out of countenance, but some of them were burned at the stake for such "insanity."
The whole history of humanity is tragically soiled with a million repetitions of the burning of people who dared to suggest the wrongness of a precious prejudice of the times. Each generation in the last few centuries has looked with horror on this history of stupidity and insanity and then gone about the ruthless business of exterminating the men of its own times who dared to question the popular superstitions of the day.
The bigots of each era have dutifully shaken their heads in disbelief and horror at the witch-doctors of other eras, and then hunted down and destroyed anybody who dared to question the witch-doctors of their own era.
Why do I write this sort of stuff? Is this not the very essence of the arguments of the other side? Is this not "liberalism" at its worst? And the very words "prejudice," "bigotry," etc., not the chief weapons in the arsenal of the Communists and the rest of the enemy apparatus?
Yes, of course.
The enemy does inveigh endlessly against the "bigotry" of "racists" and "anti-Communists," etc. I am supposed to be the biggest bigot of them all. I "hate" nice Negroes and Jews, "just because of the color of their skins" or because of their "religion." This is the propaganda spread by the enemy. Somehow, goes the superstition of our times, I have developed an unreasoning hate of innocent and equal people who have dark skins or who go to a synagogue instead of a church.
Well, let's examine this idea, as I once examined the soapsuds and the dish water inside the tumbler. It would be a mark of the utmost stupidity to hate something or a person because you didn't like the color of his skin or hair, if there were no other differences. This would be as silly and stupid as hating chocolate ice-cream because it is dark.
I would shrivel up and die of shame before I would participate in any such stupidity and madness. Then why do I head a Nazi Party, and cuss out Negroes and talk about gassing Communist-Jew traitors?
Is this not the worst sort of "bigotry," "hate" and "prejudice?"
For thousands of years, people suffered from the delusion that the earth was flat. Those who dared to question the idea got burned or crucified.
And for more thousands of years - even now, people are getting burned and crucified for questioning the idea that 'man" is somehow the "center of the universe" and therefore above natural law.
That is the whole source of our ideological trouble today, the "liberal" idea that men can disobey natural law.
Corpernicus and Galileo fought and suffered for preaching that the earth was not the center of the universe. Had not God Himself said the earth was the center of the universe, and Man its crowning glory, the Master of Creation? Of course! Therefore, Copernicus and Galileo were a couple of evil "haters" for suggesting otherwise. Had the word existed, they would doubtless have been called "fascists."
Since these two gentlemen got "crucified" for their insistence on Natural Law instead of conceited man-made law, facts have piled up to prove they were right. Only nuts, today, dare question that the earth is round or that it is only a small planet circling a very small sun in a minor galaxy in a very big universe. The battle against that prejudice is all over.
We are too "enlightened" today to fall victim to any such stupid prejudice.
Every time I speak to a university group, there are super-"intellectual" professors there, and the university students are super-enlightened, as is usual at such institutions. No witchcraft or superstition for them. No, sir! They wear beards and beatnik hair-dos to show their contempt for ordinary, stupid, unenlightened, prejudiced and bigoted dolts like me and other racists.
Their attitudes are precisely those of the ecclesiastical courts which condemned Messrs. Copernicus and Galileo; i. e., they are all conforming slavishly to the prejudice of our times (that every two-legged creature somehow has "dignity" and "rights," and has some mystical "value" just because he can squirm under the wire as "Man").
I am portrayed as a wild, raving lunatic, a "nut" and a heretic! Not one of the "enlightened" is able to see that what they are doing to "racists" today is just what the bigots who condemned Copernicus did. Like all bigots, they are right - and tell me so.
One professor at the University of New Hampshire went so far as to admit he was a "bigot," when it came to the possibility that he could ever see things my way.
"Never!" he gasped, for all the world like the gentlemen of the cloth examining Copernicus and his heretical ideas. I pointed out that anybody could be wrong, and might change - even I. He stuck by his guns. He hated racism, always would, and was proud of it! And there is the point.
Today's liberal intellectuals, who pride themselves on scientific method and being "broadminded," are the most narrow-minded, self-righteous and hate-filled bigots in the history of humanity. No primitive tribe worshiping with its witch-doctor was ever more vicious in its hatred and suppression of heretics than today's Marxist intellectuals, anti-racists and liberals.
Their intellectual position is pure, unadulterated superstition and prejudice, and they burn us heretics in the hottest fires of their hate and lies!
That, of course, they will deny, puffing and blowing and gasping with utter outrage.
But let's examine it. Let's do as science does with the tumbler full of dish water and see what their position IS.
Let's start out by exempting from combat the devoutly religious Christians. If you say to me, "God made all humanity in His own image, including savage black cannibals," then I cannot argue with you, because there is no way of proving you are wrong.
(However, to me, it is hard to imagine a good God purposely and knowingly dumping into the world, in all innocence, such of his own "Images" as the Australian aborigines and animal-like Congo cannibals. If all "humans" are indeed the "children" of a good God, and were all "created in His image" - then I do not really see how to escape the conclusion that we are all equal and "brothers." Because I can see no fair or honest reason why God would have given the White Man all the brains, good looks and energy which he has exhibited in history, while He gave seven times as many Blacks all the stupidity, laziness, ugliness, etc., which they have exhibited for thousands of years.)
Nevertheless, if you postulate God as the "Father of Humanity," then you can go from there to argue that God wants all His "children" to be "equal" and that we racists are mean, "un-Christian" and "prejudiced" if we "discriminate" against some of His children and claim we are superior.
(I am not saying, of course, that Christians have to argue that all men are equal. Many of them claim that God designed some to be inferior from birth as part of His plan. I personally cannot believe that a good God would do this to more that 6/7th of humanity. It is impossible for me to believe that God wanted to create a half-animal Congo cannibal when He could have made an intelligent, energetic and fine-looking White Man, instead - especially when He made at least seven times as many of these colored "Images" of Himself as White Men.)
But it is possible to argue such a position logically from the postulate of a Special Creation of Man as the Image of God just as it is also logically possible to argue the absolute "equality" and "brotherhood" of all men as "Children of God" - from the same postulate. Those who postulate a personal God reserve the right to make their own rules, and I cannot argue with them.
BUT THE LIBERALS I HAVE MET DO NOT POSTULATE "GOD."
Most of them are arrogant, sneering Atheists. And the open Marxists and Communists, as everybody knows, are all militant Atheists! * Thus, their belief in equality among men, when it exists nowhere else in nature, is pure superstition.
* (Just for the record, I am NOT an Atheist. I think Atheism is just as much superstition as some religion. The religionist says, "I have examined the universe, and discovered 'God,' and 'God' is such-and-such and all who disagree are heretics and wicked. I alone have the 'truth' in the matter." The Atheist says, "I have examined the universe and there is nothing I cannot eventually know and there is no 'super-human-power' who could qualify as a 'God'." To me, the latter statement is just as conceited as the statement of the religious fanatic, maybe worse, because it tries to prove a negative proposition. I don't think either one of them knows a thing. Both are guessing from insufficient data. What I have been able to observe indicates to me that there are many things, which happen which could be (anti probably are) the work of a super-human agency, which could be called God. In fact, I believe the preponderance of evidence indicates there IS some Unknowable Agency at work, and I "believe in" this agency, which I call "Des tiny" or "Providence." In this sense, I believe in a God. But I ac no bigot on the subject, and seek all scientific data one-way or the other. Technically, I am thus a pro-Christian "Agnostic." My answer to the riddle of the universe, which I think is answered with unwarranted certainty by both the religious person and the Atheist, is simply "I do not know." My job is not to be a preacher, but soldier in the service of my people, Since most of my people an overwhelmingly Christian, I will fight for their right to keep this White, Christian country, as long as that is the majority will.)
When we examine the common nature of all superstitions and error from which men have suffered down through the ages, it will be found in every case that the supernatural beliefs of every group of men, from the gloom of the tropical rain-forests of the Congo up to and including some modern religions, contain one constant, permanent factor: egocentrism. They all start from the presumption that the believers are something special, and there are super-natural beings who has a special interest in them, am that if they perform the proper rites and avoid the proper taboos, they will gain special ascendancy in this world, am total ascendancy in the next.
The road-block to progress in science has always been human conceit - the belief that humans are something special. The earth was the center of the universe, and for anybody to question that was to hurt men's ego, so such heretics had to die. Man had to be a special creation of special god. And he who questioned that must also die because if that is not true, then Man was just "homo sapien," an intelligent and communicating form of higher animal who was part of animal nature, and must obey Nature's laws.
It is natural for men to love and admire themselves, and their false beliefs and superstitions have always partaken of this enormous self-love.
And this infinite capacity for self-love has always blinded man to scientific truth.
For scientific truth reveals that man is mighty near to nothing in the scales of this universe.
The struggle for science has been a constant battle within man himself to see himself AS HE IS, not as he likes to imagine himself to be.
And that battle is still going on.
The last battle in the long struggle is taking place now.
At New Hampshire University, I faced the high priests and cultists of the liberal (and ancient) "Man-is-something-sacred" superstition, and suffered their hatred and scorn for making them look at themselves.
But I also found the "Achilles' Heel" of these Marxists and liberals!
Marxists and most liberals are thoroughly UN-religious. They boastfully and arrogantly deny God. They are their own gods. "Humanity" (themselves) has become their "god." They deny any supernatural agency. So they cannot claim, as humanity has for eons, that God made "Man" as something special. No! The Marxists and liberals are, by and large, materialists - and cannot claim any such thing.
This puts them in an absolutely impossible situation - if we will only take advantage of it and press it without mercy.
If man is merely an intelligent animal and thus part of all the rest of nature - which the Marxists and liberals assert, then man is also subject to all the laws of biology and evolution, the same as all other animals.
The religious man can and does draw a line between man and the rest of living creation. "God created Man as something special," he says. "And everything above that line can be called 'Man,' and is holy, sacred and special.
THE MARXIST AND LIBERAL CAN DO NO SUCH THING. HE CAN DRAW NO LINE WHATSOEVER. He preaches, as the very essence of his doctrine, that everything exists in "shades of greys," not black and white - that there are no arbitrary lines of demarcation between things.
So if we ask the Atheist Marxist or liberal about "Man's Natural Rights," or the "Human Dignity" which is so fondly preached by Martin Luther King, we have our opponents in a corner. If there is no God, then where did man get any ''rights'' which are not also the rights of horses, or apes - or worms? What ''right'' have we to murder cows and eat them, any more than cows have "rights" to murder us and eat us? And what, indeed, is "man?"
Phenomena do exist in this world in degrees, not as absolutes. There is an old story about the man who tried to wade across a stream which averaged two feet deep, and fell in a twenty-foot hole in the middle and drowned. Who is a "tall" man? When does a man become a "fat" man? How many stones in a "pile"? Two? Three? Five? How old is an "old" man? When does a "baby" cease to be a baby? Which year? Which month? Which week? Which day, hour, minute, second, etc.?
Any scientific examination of the animal world shows that there are no lines between one set of phenomena and another set. There are certainly recognizable groups, but the groups shade into each other at the edges, without hard sharp lines.
Now, without postulating "God," just how do the Marxists, etc., explain the concept of "Man" - as an absolutely homogeneous and "equal" mass of creatures, completely separate and above the laws of the rest of Nature, A NATURE WHERE ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING ELSE ALIVE EXISTS IN DEGREES OF CAPACITY, BOTH BY INDIVIDUALS AND GROUPS.
In every other specie of living creature, animal and vegetable, there are groups of recognizable varieties, which vary from other groups of the same species in hardihood, longevity, ability to adapt, sensitivity, etc.
Among plants, horses, dogs, monkeys, snakes, pigs, flowers, birds and cats there are breeds.
Some breeds are tough. Some are delicate and nervous. Some are stupid but strong. Some are weak but clever. There are draft horses and racehorses, sled dogs arid clever trained poodles, Greyhounds and Newfoundlands, Humming-birds and Penguins.
Nobody in his right mind would say "all birds are equal," or "all breeds of dogs are equal" or "all monkeys are equal." Every zoologist knows that chimpanzees are the most intelligent, while baboons are more stupid - although all of them are of the basic family. The same can be said of every single animal type in the world. In every specie the breeds vary by quality.
Yet, when it comes to what he claims is an intelligent kind of primate, which walks upon two legs and can think and talk better than a chimpanzee - the Marxist suddenly becomes religious, he talks of "human rights," "human dignity," etc.! WHAT "human dignity"? If there is such a thing as "human dignity" for one animal then why in the name of reason is there not "chimpanzee dignity" and "ape's rights" and even "snakes rights"?
The liberals and Atheists have no answer to this question. The typical egalitarian will trot out miles of statistics to show that some Congo cannibal once learned to play chess or run the hundred-yard dash or went to Harvard.
Such "argument" is precisely the same as if I were to try to "prove" that race and draft horses were the same, by training a race horse to pull a cart, or a draft horse to run a race. It would still be an un-typical draft horse running the race, and an un-typical race horse pulling the cart, Even if some odd fluke produced a fast draft horse who could beat some race horses it would not mean that there is no such thing as breeds of horses. Only an idiot would try to maintain such a mad argument.
If you want a racehorse, you breed for a racehorse; you do not try to train and beat a poor old plug draft horse into becoming a racehorse.
Above all, you do not spend all your money feeding a million heavy old plugs while you cut down on the oats and the breeding of the finest stock you have, hoping to teach one heavy plug to win a race!
Yet this is precisely the superstition - the "religion" if you will, of our times! - and exactly what we are doing all over the world. This is the irrational, crazy, egotistical fanaticism which I experience at the universities every time I speak at a college.
There is no reason for it. It is UNreasonable in the extreme. There is no logic behind it. It violates all logic. There is no excuse for it. It is the crazy "faith" of those who pretend to worship science and facts.
And it has been consciously; cunningly foisted on us the chart-forgers who KNOW it is a LIE!
The truly enlightened men of every age have had to struggle and often die because of the stupidity and ugly prejudice of those who truly believed themselves the very guardians of truth. Every "decent" person knew the world was flat and the center of the universe, and applauded the saintly men who persecuted Galileo for preaching the ugly story that the world was not the center of the universe.
Today, every "decent" liberal believes that "humanity has "dignity". Some religious people base their belief on an edict of God, and can find some excuse for their belief in equality. So our preachers and priests are fighting fanatically against the new "heresy" of belief in human breeds.
And the Marxists and liberals are fighting just as fanatically right along with the preachers they scorn for the same thing!
The scientific fact is that man is super-intelligent but also a kind of animal and, like all the rest of life, differs by breeds or "races"!
This scientific fact is just as world-shaking as was the fact that the earth is not the center of the universe, in its day. And this fact is meeting with the same frantic struggle against it by the same bigots who have been crucifying bearers of truth for ten thousand years.
The curse of "liberal", "humanitarian" mankind is egocentrism, conceit. And the chart-forgers have learned to use this human failing to destroy humanity.
It simply kills the modern liberal that there are millions and millions and millions of his kind who are worthless scum (compared to the finest breeds of his kind). So he believes the chart-forgers and denies it -- denies it and makes a religion of that denial-- the religion of "liberalism" and finally Marxism. There is no reason or logic to it only the same old "if you don't agree with us, we will silence and destroy you" which has been the unhappy lot of every fighter for truth against bigotry, for thousands of years.
There is one difference, though.
Humanity could believe the earth was the center of the universe - and flourish in its error. Nature took care that humans keep evolving, by eliminating the unfit and breeding the race ever upward, in spite of human egotism.
The present egocentric "equalism" of "enlightened" humanity is DESTROYING HUMANITY ITSELF.
The chart-forgers know all this very well, and are cynically going ahead anyway, spreading the atrocious, suicidal LIE that men do not differ by breed and quality, as does all the rest of creation.
This is the kernel of the chart-forgery, which is driving our people and our country onto the rocks of final and total shipwreck.
The scientific facts of RACE, today are being smeared and suppressed just as the facts about the round world were a few hundred years ago.
But note that the process of going from superstition to science is not going in the natural direction this time.
The "flat world" error came first and existed for untold thousands of years before men became courageous and self disciplined enough to THINK instead of feel and thus learned they were not the center of the universe, but only specks on a tiny round globe, circling a very small sun in a minor galaxy. Once they knew that fact, they did not regress BACK to the belief in the flat world again.
But with the facts of race, there is a new and sinister pattern, which emerges before our eyes.
For millions of years, men lived close to Nature and nobody could get away with saying, "all cows are equal", "all hens are equal", "all dogs are equal" or even "all corn is equal". The constant and eternal FACT of ALL life was the INequality of all living things, both among individuals, and VARIETIES of individuals. No farmer could survive pretending all corn was equal, and he needed no scientist to tell him that certain breeds of dog, such as the shepherd, were more intelligent and capable in handling sheep, while other dogs might be less intelligent, but, like the husky, better by Nature at pulling. Nor did he give his daughter to inferior humanity.
Then, as men began to get away from Nature and live artificially in urban, mechanized complexes called "cities", they stopped seeing the lessons of Nature before them, and the chart-forgers found their opportunity.
No farmer, who bred chickens, cows, dogs, etc., and saw the natural inequalities in all the rest of Nature could be convinced of the crazy lie that breeding means everything in all the rest of creation but nothing among humans.
But the man born under anesthetics in a hospital, nursed out of a glass bottle, raised on cement and asphalt instead of grass and forests, fed out of cans and packages, and "educated" 100% out of books with no contact with the hard realities of Nature, could be and has been led to believe that "there are no such things as breeds of men".
The forgers set about their endless repetitions of this LIE, which they now press upon us as such an "accepted fact" that any questioning of that "fact" is prima facie evidence that the questioner is himself a "bigot", "hater" and finally a ''Nazi''.
From this equality lie stems all the other forgeries of natural fact, which have been imposed upon our helpless people. From the basic false idea that humans are born biologically equal they derive the Marxist basic principle that therefore every human is ENTITLED to equal shares in the good things of this world. And from this, stems their further lie that all should and must share equally in government regardless of ability or qualification - the basic premise of their beloved "democracy" - and Marxism.
But it is not just this one basic lie about race, which is killing our people and our Nation; from the basic "equality" lie, they have spread out and built a vast lying machine which includes our press, TV, radio, magazines, books, movies and even religious publications, to lie about everything.
To show you just how powerful this network of poisonous lies has become, let me present just ONE example of how it works to keep the American people utterly helpless and ignorant of what is really going on in the world around us.
Let me ask the reader to try to imagine what would have happened just thirty years ago, if I, George Lincoln Rockwell well, had defected from the United States to Nazi Germany, denounced America, became an ardent Nazi citizen of Germany, then came back here to America and assassinated Franklin D. Roosevelt.
Does anyone imagine that our government and every organ of our press would have been insisting, over and over, that the assassination of Roosevelt was the act of just one man, me, - and had nothing to do with the Nazis? - as they keep insisting that Oswald was a "loner" and had nothing at all to do with the world communist movement, although there is plenty of evidence that communism makes a BUSINESS of assassinations, - and that Oswald was a most vital part of the international communist apparatus?
To give the reader an inside peek into just how false is our whole information network, when it comes to anything involving race, or communism, - let me set forth the KNOWN facts behind the assassination of President Kennedy, and YOU judge how the lie-machine has misled America.
In the Jew-dominated Bronx, New York, when he was an adolescent youth, Lee Harvey Oswald admitted that his dark journey into Communist terrorism began. He was handed a pro-Communist leaflet on behalf of the two convicted Jewish Communist spies, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, who were finally electrocuted for treason at Sing Sing Prison.
After reading the Communist pamphlet on behalf of the Jew Communist Rosenbergs, Oswald was inspired to obtain and read the works of Marx and Lenin. Later, in Dallas, Oswald boasted that "Das Kapital" became his "bible".
Instead of enjoying normal American pursuits and interests, young Oswald began to soak his mind in the fanatic class hatred of Communism. All millionaires were "enemies of the people", "tyrants" who should be killed.
The juggernaut that would, on November 22, 1963, blast out the brains of an American president - (a millionaire) was launched in New York's Bronx from the pages of the "Communist Manifesto", Rosenberg literature and "Das Kapital".
Continually soaking himself in this poisonous Communist hatred, Oswald became a typical young, liberal pseudointellectual.
In the Marine Corps, his Commanding Officer, First Lt. John E. Donovan, has told how Oswald, just like the young leftist college students I meet all the time, was full of liberal, Marxist and "intellectual" conceit, and arrogant attitude of superiority to all non-Marxist humanity.
In October 1959, full of hatred for the "capitalist" United States, Oswald traveled to the Soviet Union, turned his passport in to the U. S. Embassy, denounced his native America and applied for Soviet citizenship. In a press conference in Moscow, he heaped abuse on the United States of America, said its people were "bigots" and "exploiters" and scorned everything American.
Getting a work assignment is difficult in Russia. Oswald, however, had no trouble, once he made friends with Soviet factory boss, Alexander Zeger, whom Oswald describes in his diary, (January 13, 1960) as a "Polish Jew". This Jew gets Oswald a top job in his factory. Believe it or not, Oswald also gets a regular payment from the "Red Cross" while in Russia! (Portrait of the Assassin, Gerald Ford. page 51.)
In Kiev, Russia, the Soviets maintain a school for terrorists and assassins. While ostensibly living in Minsk, Russia, Oswald made frequent trips of long duration to Kiev! Oswald, strangely enough, in the Soviet Union, was granted a most extraordinary privilege, especially for a non-citizen. He was allowed to use a rifle and practiced to target shooting!
In Oswald's Diary, October 18, 1960, Oswald records that he is in love with a Jewess, Ella Germain. He becomes infatuated with her, while running around with the Jews with whom he works and their Jewish friends, but she will have none of him. He winds up carrying a "torch" for this Jewess, and soon resorts to the traditional method of ''rebounding''. On April 13, Oswald married an attractive Russian woman, Marina Pruskova, and had a child. After 2½ years in the Soviet Union, Oswald suddenly asked the Soviet Government for a favor almost never granted he wanted to get an exit visa for his Soviet wife and child to return to the U.S.A.!
Amazingly, he had no difficulty whatsoever in getting this rare permission. He then wrote to Senator John Tower, demanding help in returning to the United States.
There is a man who committed naked treason, denounced his native land, turned in his passport and still was openly contemptuous of the United States, its people, its government and its ideals.
Nevertheless, tremendous forces went to work and the U.S. Embassy in Russia gave Soviet-loving Oswald his passport back!
As if this were not enough, Oswald thereupon asked for, and got, from the very government he had denounced and betrayed $435.00 to return to the United States of America.
The State Department of the United States Government then issued a special non-quota immigration permit for Oswald to bring his wife, Marina, into the United States.
(Just for purposes of comparison, let the reader note the way I was hunted down and thrown out of England in 1962 by the British Government, although I am no criminal, nor in any way disloyal, while American Jewish traitor Soblen was pampered in every way while I was there and England refused to turn him over for deportation to the United States, even while I was being shipped out!)
Traitor Oswald and his wife arrived in the United States on June 13, 1962 and proceeded to Dallas.
The record shows that Oswald told a public stenographer that in 1962 an "engineer" in the area offered to publish a book about the Soviet Union to be written by Oswald. It just happens that a man named Michael Paine is an engineer who claims that he did not meet or know Oswald until a left-wing pro-Castro party in 1963. Oswald, having recently returned from the Soviet Union, was invited to a Russia-loving Castroite party, and all the local lefties, proCommunists and other Unitarians, Quakers and "peace" workers (leftists) attended to meet Oswald and his Russian wife. A Mrs. Ruth Paine, who attended that Castroite party, had been a super-leftist liberal at Antioch College in Yellow Springs, Ohio and the University of Pennsylvania, and had studied Russian in line with the usual "liberal" magnetic attraction to everything Russian and Soviet. (Her folks were Unitarians). At this party, we are supposed to believe, the Paines became so entranced with this traitor Oswald that they began to subsidize him and his family and Mrs. Oswald actually moved in with them!
During this time, with Mrs. Paine and Marina Oswald amiably chatting every day, (in Russian only), Oswald obtained and lost several jobs and traveled to New Orleans, the city with the largest port and concentration of Communists in the South. Here Oswald contacted the Communist Party and "Fair Play for Cuba Committee" at 799 Broadway, New York City.
The "Fair Play for Cuba Committee" now claims that Oswald's activities in New Orleans were in no way authorized by the Committee. Yet there are six lengthy letters from Oswald to the Committee, which were published in the New York Times of December 9, 1963, p. 38, which make it perfectly obvious to anyone of normal intelligence that Oswald was working hand-in-glove with the "Fair Play for Cuba Committee". The head of the "Fair Play for Cuba Committee," Mr. V. T. Lee," (Jewish name, Tappin,) has announced that he "lost" or "mislaid" the carbon copies of the answers which he wrote to all these letters of Oswald's.
During this period, Oswald had his photograph taken holding up a rifle and his favorite newspaper, "The Miltant". "The Militant" is the newspaper of the Trotskyite Communist "Socialist Workers Party" and its title is clear enough indication of its nature. The Trotskyite Communist members of the "Socialist Workers Party", about 90% Jews and Negroes, are violently "militant" and scorn the more subtle activities of the regular Communist Party and Soviet Russia as "too slow". They are passionate adherents of Trotsky's doctrine of "international violent revolution". The Chinese Communists, the African Communists (100% Negro) and Castro (50% Negro) are also violent adherents of the bloody Trotsky doctrines of bloodshed, murder and assassination.
I went to the Library of Congress and obtained a copy of "The Militant", the Communist newspaper with which Oswald proudly had his picture taken with his assassination rifle. Here is a quotation from that filthy Communist rag. (Judge for yourself what kind of "hate" killed President Kennedy - and will kill all of us if we don't put an immediate and complete stop to this sort of incitement.)
"WHAT CASTRO WOULD DO ABOUT RACISM IF HE WERE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES"
"May I draw a word-picture of what we are really talking about when we say 'Decolonize America now'. Let us imagine that in November 1960, Fidel Castro, instead of John F. Kennedy had been elected president of the U. S. On the basis of his clear record of eliminating all racial barriers in Cuba and stopping police brutality, about 95% of the cops in this country, Black and White, North and South, would catch the first planes out to escape persecution. Many of them would wind up in South Africa as "refugees". There they would find a political and racial climate wholly compatible and congenial.
If 'Bull' Conner were caught and arrested before fleeing, Fidel Castro would not permit anyone to lynch him. He would be given a fair trial. In open court, evidence would be presented of 30 years of his tyranny and terror as Birmingham police commissioner. Old 'Bull' would have full opportunity to testify in his own defense. His attorneys could cross-examine all the prosecution's witnesses, many of who would be Negroes. And then, since it is inconceivable that any court would find him innocent, he would be taken out and shot.
"Meanwhile, on his first day in office, Fidel would have occupied the entire South with Federal troops without bureaucratic delays, the jails would be emptied of all Freedom Fighters and other victims of the Jim Crow system. Fidel's new cabinet would decree the immediate desegregation of all public facilities. Thenceforth, all persons who continued to discriminate would go to jail or to humanely operated rehabilitation centers (Communist euphemism for "concentration camp" -G.L.R.) in an effort to cure them of their racist insanity. All jobs, all housing, all opportunities would be made available to everyone without discrimination.
"Most beautiful of all, Fidel would disband the entire repressive F.B.I. apparatus and would burn all the secret police garbage and intimate gossip that thousands of psychopathic F.B.I. agents have assembled over the years. He would put J. Edgar Hoover in an integrated cell in an Atlanta penitentiary as punishment for four decades of criminal neglect of duty. Hoover has never protected the Constitutional rights of Negroes.
"Sadly, but realistically, even a Pacifist has to make a prediction that will scare and alarm many persons. The prediction is that it is going to take drastic, Castro-type revolution before this problem of the racists will be resolved. North and South, the twisted White Man in the U. S. has no more intention of giving up his Jim Crow system than do the fanatics in the Union of South Africa."
In the voluminous records of testimony about the assassination, the wife of Lee Oswald, Marina, admits Oswald used the name "A. Hidell" in sending for the rifle he used to kill Kennedy, because "Hidell" sounds like "Fidel"-- (Castro!)
While living with the Paines, Oswald practiced sharp shooting with the rifle he kept in the Paine's garage. He took a pot shot at General Walker, ran home and boasted of the fact to his wife in Russian, explaining that Walker needed to be wiped out for his "extremist", right-wing, anti-Communist and "Fascist" views. Mrs. Oswald, with complete naiveté, has told this to the Federal Bureau of investigation. But we are sup- posed to believe that she never mentioned this to Mrs. Paine, her protectress and only confidante, the only person in America who regularly talked with her in Russian, the only language she understood.
In September it is announced that President Kennedy will visit Dallas.
Three weeks later, Mrs. Paine calls
up Mr. Truly, the manager of the Texas school book depository and gets
Oswald a job working there.
Within a matter of only an hour or two after Mrs. Paine contacted Mr. Truly to get Oswald the job at the ideal assassination spot on the Presidential parade route, Oswald appeared at a rooming house at 1026 N. Beckley Street, using the name "O.H.Lee"!!!! The room was far smaller than the one he already had and cost him $1 per week more! Also, why the phony name? (See New York Post, Dec. 10, 1963, page 22). Can any reasonable person doubt that there was a criminal intention present, at least in the mind of Oswald, when he got the job at the Book Depository, and that Mrs. Paine's involvement is, at the very least, highly suspicious?
Meanwhile, Bernard Weissman and another New York Jew drive all the way down to Dallas to place a full-page advertisement in the Dallas papers for publication the precise date of the President's assassination. Printed with a black border, the advertisement attacks Kennedy in a most extreme manner.
Consider: Dallas, supposedly a hot bed of right-wing extremism could apparently produce no "extremists" willing to put up the money for or write such an "extreme" anti-Kennedy ad. Two Jews had to come all the way down from New York to print this "extremist" ad in Dallas. Why?
Later, it turns out that Weissman's partner in this 1500mile extremist excursion to Dallas from New York City to put a hate-Kennedy ad in the Dallas paper is a top leader of "Young Americans for Freedom" - an organization put together and master-minded from 79 Madison Avenue, by Jew Marvin Liebman - "ex"-Communist! (Mentioned in Chapter VI).
During his period in Dallas, at the request of a local "engineer" (Mr. Paine was an "engineer"), Oswald began writing a Marxist, pro-Communist, pro-Trotskyite, pro-Castro - (but anti-Soviet) book. (It should be pointed out here that vast numbers of American Communists, particularly Trotskyites and Reds in our State Department, feel that the Soviets have "betrayed" the Communist Revolution by re-creating the necessary institutions of society - authority, the family, marriage, discipline, etc. - which these Marxist fanatics consider to be "Fascist" perversions of "pure Communism". The Trotskyite Communists, which include most of the Jew Communists, are becoming racist Communists like the yellow Chinese Communists, the all Negro Black Communists in Africa, and the mongrel Negro Communists like Castro and the Cubans. These are the "way-out", "leftist" Communists who favor Jewish Trotsky's bloody doctrines against the more moderate policies of Russia.) (It is also interesting to note that, right after the assassination, in a printed report, I called attention to the fact, in connection with the fight between the Trotskyites and Red Chinese on one side, and Russians on the other, that "White, Gentile Khrushchev is finding himself more and more at odds with the dark, racial Communists of the World and the Jew Trotskyites who lead them". - Within months after I wrote this, Khrushchev was dumped.)
But the most significant and startling thing about Oswald's episode is the public stenographer's story of what happened when Oswald began to give her sections of the book mentioning Kiev, where the Soviets maintain their school of assassination and terror.
The stenographer reports that when Oswald reached the Kiev episodes, he became highly agitated snatched away the entire manuscript, notes and carbons leaving only $10 in payment!
The Paines took Oswald to a meeting of the American Civil Liberties Union, which has defended literally thousands of Communists, murderers and saboteurs, and helped Oswald to apply for membership. He was told the ACLU "defends radicals" - which it does.
Shortly before the assassination, Fidel Castro held a "Hate America" parade in Havana, Cuba. He had Castroite mobs carry a casket, labeled "John F. Kennedy", through the streets to the jeers and hoots of the red Cubans. On top of that casket, Castro had placed a huge sign reading, "Here lies Kennedy, killed by the Cuban Revolution!" (See Y. A. F. New Guard, Nov. 1966, page 13).
Robert Williams, the American Negro who publishes the Crusader boasted to the mob, "Kennedy has persecuted American Negroes long enough! Soon we will be avenged!" (New Guard, Nov. 1966).
Three days before the assassination of President Kennedy, the F.B.I. seized three Castroite terrorists in New York, precisely like Castroite Oswald. The Federal Bureau of Investigation revealed that had these three Castroite terrorists not been caught, they planned to bomb Wall Street, blow up oil refineries in New Jersey and spread a wave of assassinations and terror throughout New York!
This would have occurred about November 22, - the day the President was shot!!
Here is a quote from the "New York Journal American", November 18, 1963:
"If the F. B. I. had failed to smash a Cuban plot geared to spread death, terror and destruction in the metropolitan area, Government sources said the three arrested saboteurs planned to destroy national defense material sites and utilities in New York City; blow up gasoline and oil refineries - the expected result: 100 million dollars worth of damage; plant incendiary bombs in New York City's largest department stores; train ten other pro-Castroites in the art of sabotage. These ten were already undergoing training clandestinely. The expected result: a stepped-up program of sabotage that in time might completely paralyze the City. The blowing up of bridges and subway facilities for example, might have been part of the plot for the future."
One day before the assassination, on November 21, Havana Radio boasted that Castro Communism would "export" bloody terrorism to all the nations in the Western Hemisphere - including the United States! (Washington Post, Dec. 8, 1963).
Meanwhile, inexplicably, Oswald slips over to Mexico to the Cuban and Soviet Embassies and is seen by witnesses in a station wagon! The border guard remembers there were two women and a man with Oswald - (Mr. and Mrs. Paine and Mrs. Oswald?) (Toronto Telegram) (Mrs. Paine had a station wagon and used it to transport the Oswalds several times, including from New Orleans to Dallas.) Oswald talked at the Communist Embassy in Mexico City just before he went to Dallas for the assassination.
Simultaneously, Castro, as a matter of historical fact, is spreading murder and terror in Venezuela, where U.S. citizens were beaten, kidnapped and killed by the Castroite terrorists. On November 7, 1963, United States Congressman Kirsten wrote an official warning to President Kennedy that the Communists were training "professional assassins for action in the United States"! (Northern Virginia Sun, Nov. 27, 1963, Page 1).
Exactly fifteen days after this official warning, President Kennedy was killed by a Communist assassin. And now we are told it was only the act of a "loner", and we mustn't get mad at the Communists, Soviets or Cuba!!!
On November 22, 1963, Lee Oswald killed the President by shooting out of one of the windows of the building where Russian-loving Mrs. Paine had gotten him a job! (A "coincidence" of course.) Within a matter of minutes after the assassin turned out to be a Communist, the United States State Department sent out a top-priority demand to leading U.S. news agencies to minimize any connection between Oswald and world Communism "in order to avoid distributing relations with the Soviet countries and Cuba". (Washington Daily News, Dec. 4, 1963, P. 5). We get hardened to the redness of our own State Department. Perhaps it will help the reader to see the red reality here if we reverse the situation Suppose Hitler's Germany were still going strong, and I shot the President. Can you imagine the State Department sending out a plea to the press not to mention that I am a "Nazi" to avoid disturbing relations with Mr. Hitler?
Any normal American cannot help asking himself how it was that a notorious traitor and defector to Russia could calmly sit in the window of a building on a Presidential parade route with a rifle and shoot the President, in spite of the FBI, the Secret Service and the Dallas Police Department, and walk away from the building.
The answer is absurdly simple. Tragically simple! Because of the intense anti-right-wing-"extremist" propaganda led by the President himself, all the security forces were watching anti-Communists. There was nobody left to pay any attention to the real deadly danger, the Communists! Within moments of the shooting, five harmless ANTI-Communists were seized by the Dallas Police by the officers right on their tails in the crowd. These five were held four days because of the crazy hysteria whipped up against anti-Communists, even though the Police, while they were holding these anti-Communists, caught the real culprit, a Red, allowed him to be shot in the basement of the Police Station by a Jew, and then locked up the assassin's assassin.
The President was shot because he, along with the Jews and the rest of the left wing, had blinded America to the deadly menace of the Reds, calling it "witch-hunting" "hate", etc., and set all our Security forces on a phony "witch-hunt" after Rightists, the D.A.R., etc. -while -trained and deadly Communist killer Oswald was allowed to run around free of surveillance - just like hundreds of thousands more like him who are running around America today, right now!
The American Nazi Party was damned by Attorney General Kennedy as unAmerican." But if the American Nazi Party had had its way, the Attorney General's brother never would have been shot, because Lee Oswald would have been in his grave, where traitors belong, according to the Constitution. And dead Communists can't shoot people or overthrow governments.
There is no "middle ground" with the Communists, no "moderate" position. You either kill them, or they kill you - as they did kill our President.
After Oswald had gotten clear of the building from which he shot the President, the whole plan of the Jews and the reds to wipe out the Right wing and jam through the enabling legislation for a Soviet America, was in the clear. If Oswald had not been caught, there would not have been one voice raised to suggest that a Communist might have done it, and just as with the Birmingham church bombing, where the bomber is unknown, the anti-Communist Right wing would have been violently "lynched," "for shooting our beloved President"! - although, just as in Birmingham, there was no "fair trial" - just a newspaper "lynching."
I believe Destiny took a hand at this point and threw a monkey-wrench into the Jew-Communist machinery. By the most improbable of chances, a Dallas Policeman heard the barest possible description of the suspect, - height, weight, age, etc., - and saw a man who might fit. When he tried to stop this man, the man shot him. - And all the plans of the reds went up in smoke! Oswald was only blocks from Rubenstein's apartment, probably on his way to hide out. But the shooting of heroic officer Tippit "loused up" the plans. He ran for a movie house in panic and was caught.
It is impossible to overemphasize to the thoughtful reader the history-changing magnitude of this event!
Had Oswald "disappeared", like the "Birmingham hate bombers", -the assassination of the President by the "dangerous" right-Wing "extremists" and "fascists" would have been used with deadly effect to hammer in the last links of Communist slavery in America! In the emotional atmosphere, which would have prevailed, nothing could have stopped the passage of the most extreme gun-control laws, the disarming of all Americans, and the complete liquidation of all anti-communist "extremists."
To accomplish this, the red Castroite terrorists were willing to shoot a President!
Destiny put Officer Tippit in the path of these fiends. Tippit died doing his duty. But his death saved America from the immediate threat of the Communist Revolution! I must admit that I could not believe the reds would be insane enough to shoot the President, but as I dug up more and more of the deadly facts, I became thoroughly convinced that November 22nd was "Revolution Day" on the Red calendar. We could never have resisted nor survived the raging lynch mob they would have whipped up, had Officer Tippit not stopped Oswald and thus led to the immediate capture and identification of the killer as a red!
But there is more!
While the President was driving through Dallas, an ex-Chicago Jew named Jacob Rubenstein was pointedly in the advertising offices of the Dallas newspaper going over his display ad, which promoted his degenerate strip tease burlesque club. As the President was driving by outside, Rubenstein refused to join others in the office in going to the windows to glimpse his "idol"!
Later when Oswald was caught, Rubenstein rushed to the Police Station and managed to slip by all guards. For an entire day, while Oswald was in the Police Station, Rubenstein was running around in the middle of everything, participating in a press conference and even prompting the District Attorney with the answer to a question on local geography! Rubenstein was busily passing out his bawdy "calling-cards" for his burlesque show to police and reporters! As long as Oswald showed no signs of "breaking" under questioning by police, Rubenstein "joked with reporters" and simply hung around. Then it was announced that Oswald was "ready to talk", and appeared ready to expose the real set-up. Rubenstein suddenly became so "upset" over the President's death, and was so "touched at the thought of Mrs. Kennedy's sorrow", that he shot Oswald, sealing his lips forever! Consider the position of the conspirators!
If Oswald talked, the whole thing would blow wide open and, instead of a red victory, the atmosphere, (if Oswald admitted he was in on an international Jewish Communist plot) would have been Nazi. The Jew-Communists and traitors would have had to flee for their lives - as they should!
But even if Oswald didn't talk, the prolonged trial of this Communist assassin would have driven into American consciousness at last the deadly danger of tolerating this criminal conspiracy on our soil for one moment longer, and would have led to a great revival of the patriotism the reds call "McCarthyism" - and an impossible position for the Communists. The trial of Oswald just simply mustn't happen. All the day before the shooting of Oswald, it seems reasonable to me that the high councils of treason in America were desperately scrambling for the solution. And they found it, - the same solution they always find.
At the very last moment when Oswald could be reached by "Ruby", - as he was being transferred to secure quarters from the police station, the Jew Rubenstein rushed forward, was recognized by Oswald, (as slow motion movies have proven beyond doubt) - and shot the assassin dead. With Oswald's death, the worst of the crisis was over for the conspirators.
Consider some of the deadly facts, which would have come out of Oswald's trial.
Oswald was working for the "Fair Play for Cuba" Committee. We have met and fought this gang of swine personally, several times, - and can testify that they are the filthiest, vilest, most treasonable and vicious gang of reds in the Country. But more important, the Castroites are the nucleus of the ''civil rights" movement! On April 6, 1960, the "Committee" was launched by an ad in the New York Times, a full page, - paid for with Red Cuban money! At the top of the list of sponsors for this vile ad on behalf of treason is the name, "James Baldwin", the repulsive, black sexual-pervert "author". The rest of the list contains NAACP luminaries, and, perhaps even more important, big shots in the American Civil Liberties Union The head of the Fair Play Committee in L.A. and a national Co-chairman is Jew A. L. Wirin, - who is also the head of the L. A. ACLU! The head of the vile Castro committee was the Jew, V. T. "Lee" (Tappin), who also turns out to be the Secretary of the ACLU in Tampa, Florida!
A trial of Oswald would have driven into the consciousness of America the unspeakable treason of these people who keep pulling off the same old Communist trick of calling violent Communist terrorists "reformers" until these murderers have seized control of pro-American, Christian governments as Castro did to Batista and Mao Tse Tung did to Chiang Kai-shek - after which the filthy Red fakers in America moan and wring their hands at their "betrayal" by these hard-core Communists who always seem to "fool' these trusting 'lovers of "civil liberties" and "civil rights".
Just a few weeks before the President's assassination our government, with the help of these pro-Communists, civil libertarian creeps, snubbed and insulted pro-American, Christian Madame Nhu. Then the Viet Nam communist "reformers" brutally assassinated her husband and set the stage for the present crazy Viet-Nam war!
Daily exposure of all of this would have been inevitable in any trial of Oswald. And such daily exposures would have inevitably and finally aroused the American people to the deadly facts about Communism and the "civil rights" Black Horror which we of the right wing have been trying so hard to warn America.
In short, the trial of Oswald would have been a fatal blow to the Communist conspiracy in America. It would have been utterly impossible for Martin Luther King, Queer James Baldwin, A. Philip Randolph, Queer Bayard Rustin and the rest of the "liberal" and "civil rights" Jew and Negro leaders who have infiltrated even our churches to continue their deadly but creeping Communist revolution in America.
Oswald had to go.
And he went. He was gunned down in typical gangland fashion by a man typical of Jewish "Murder. Inc."
Immediately after the assassination, three honest groups were preparing to investigate: The Texas Attorney General, the F. B. I., and the U. S. Congress.
Such honest investigations were intolerable to the Reds. On December 9, 1963, only eleven days after the assassination, the Communist Worker newspaper had the gall to demand that these three honest investigations be forbidden, and the outrage investigated only by Earl Warren.
Three days later, the President of the United States obliged the Worker, did exactly as the Communists demanded, and, on December 12, 1963, called off the other three investigations, and ordered Earl Warren to "investigate", - even though Warren had rushed into print within moments after the shooting, with the pre-judged statement that "Hate killed Kennedy", - precisely the phrase used by the Communists, - and every red in America and all over the world!
Warren "investigates" by hiding much of the record for seventy-five years, and actually burns much critical evidence, (such as the autopsy report on the dead President's body!)
With unbelievable arrogance, almost the whole press and publishing industry is diligently helping to spread a gigantic smoke screen being thrown up around the assassination, with the eventual aim of shifting the blame on the anti-communist movement, the way it was originally planned.
Only two years after even the Communist Worker's choice for chief investigator, Earl Warren, had to admit that the assassination was the product of a COMMUNIST, four leftist authors, Mark Lane, Joachim Joesten, Harold Weissberg and Jay Epstein, (all four of them Jewish), are peddling books of the most sophist "reasoning", casting doubt on the inescapable fact that it was Oswald who shot the President. They have manufactured "extra bullets", "grassy knolls", "contradictory" testimony, etc., and very cleverly left out all the damning facts which leave NO doubt that Oswald did it. (And, unfortunately, there are many conspiracy-buffs in the anti-communist side who are actually cooperating with these Jewish smoke-screen operators).
But it is not the books of these men themselves, which are worthy of note in studying how our charts are forged. By themselves, the books would expire of their own weaknesses.
It is the constant top coverage given these books by book reviewers, TV interview shows, newsstand operators, etc., which have shoved them down the throat of the public. I have studied them carefully, and there are no two ways about it, - they are devilish, if slick, - lies. Any careful student of any one of them knows this immediately. Yet they are given enormous publicity and dignity by editors, interviewers and publishers.
What they are up to is a game they have played many times.
When a fact is impossible to get around or cover up, -the liars and chart-forgers help each other throw up an enormous smoke-screen. These assassination books are that smoke screen. They are given such dignity and publicity that before long, most Americans, WHO WILL NEVER READ THE BOOKS, - will begin to believe that the Oswald theory is thoroughly discredited. It's the same technique they used with the facts of RACE. Whenever anybody tries to bring the obvious inequality of human groups into question, the chart-forgers and liars chant, "the claim that there is any such a thing as 'race' has been thoroughly 'discredited'!" they intone together. "Nobody believes that race myth anymore." But they have never actually discredited it, - merely covered it with smoke and finally mud.
Now they are doing the same thing with the fact that a COMMUNIST shot the president, - they are promoting a great, manufactured hue and cry that there is a lot of doubt that Oswald did it. Before long, we will be told that, "There's so much doubt now, about the Oswald theory, that nobody believes that anymore." And the last step is to start referring to it as the "discredited Oswald theory".
They create an artificial bedlam all around the truth, then they point to their OWN bedlam and smoke screen to "prove" that nobody believes the truth anymore!
These arrogant chart-forgers are getting away with it, too, because too few people are willing to do the research homework to track down their massive lies.
As will be shown in later chapters, the chart-forgers have utterly blacked out of the minds of our people whole areas of human knowledge, (such as the fact of race), they have made "patriots" out of our outright enemies, and enemies out of patriots whom they have smeared as "extremists" and "bigots", they have filled the minds of our youth with such lies and madness that vast numbers of them have become LSD-crazed drug addicts and anti-social "hippies", reds and moral-degenerates. They have filled the minds of Negroes with the fanatic belief that Negroes have unlimited rights and no duties. They have turned millions of once-self-reliant Americans into Federal dependents sucking frantically on the public teat. They have poisoned American history with suspicions of the motives of our heroes, slyly implying that they were lechers, profiteers and "haters". They have made the great virtues of duty, faith, work and honor the butt of ridicule, especially among youth. They have actually gotten inside religion, and promoted endless outright lies as the "new Christianity". The list of the lies they have spread among us could fill the rest of the book, but this should be enough to show the deadly PATTERN.
Why has anybody gone to such trouble to build a lie machine and then peddle such enormous lies to million of us?
What has anybody to gain by piling Western Civilization and our American Republic up on the rocks?
Who wants to turn us into a race of brown, communized mongrels, with heads full of lies?
WHO seeks to do such evil things, and
for what evil purpose?