Peter Schaenk 5/19/08

May 19, 2008


15 Responses to “Peter Schaenk 5/19/08”

  1. LipSync on May 19th, 2008 10:19 pm

    Excellent show today Mr. Schaenk! I enjoy the fact that you keep it simple. This helps a wider audience understand what is going on in simple terms. At the same time, anybody new to this can comprehend it a little easier, even if they have not gone back to the start to learn about it all.

    People really should be sure to download Peters past shows on the VOR network at very least. You can learn a lot about Edward Bernays. The more we know, the better equipped we are, to bring down the Jew World Order.

    Knowledge is power.

  2. Maurice on May 19th, 2008 11:09 pm

    The file to download is html, not mp3.

  3. Suzette on May 19th, 2008 11:14 pm

    The download is working now.

  4. Bob in DC on May 20th, 2008 3:06 pm


    The people, and organizations, who hire the illegals (and they ALL know they’re illegal!) are the greatest problem !!

    These ‘people’ must be the primary target if the most useful effect is desired.

    Illegal aliens just follow the laws of survival. The ‘businessmen’ who hire them are driven by GREED and, most being WHITE — NOT JEWISH — are race traitors!

    That is the enigma … and the trap!

    The ‘right wing’ concentrates on the beaners and blacks while ‘the rich get richer’.

    14 Bob

  5. whodareswings on May 20th, 2008 11:03 pm

    During the war Hollywood screen writer Ben Hecht and Irgun operative Hillel Kook (aka Peter Bergson) cook up grisly holocaust propaganda for American mass consumption in magazines like the Reader’s Digest. Using Freudian based mind control techniques, first put into play by Edward “The Father of Spin” Bernays , the “Bergson Boys” inoculate the English speaking world with the sacred 6,000,000 number before the war ends and the camps are liberated. Bernays is the wildly successful nephew of Sigmund Freud and the man who introduced Freudianism to the USA. Like Bernard Baruch, he’s is a “king maker” and personal friend of presidents Wilson, Hoover and Roosevelt with whom he’s consulted and globe trotted. Joseph Goebbles acknowledges his debt to Bernays in his diaries.

    “The Bergson Boys” was a Zionist cell working out of Washington DC with access to inner circles of media power and politics. “Having energized politicians, gangsters, Hollywood moguls, and ultra- Orthodox rabbis, the handful of young men taught other Zionist and American- Jewish groups not only how the media was the message but how it could and should be used. A guiding force behind the creation of the War Refugee Board, the group served as a beacon for contemporary Zionist militancy while ultimately laying the groundwork for other organizations to utilize the media in future political campaigns”:

    During and after the war master Soviet propagandist Ilya Ehrenberg and the Anti-Fascist League (Soviet Jewish writers later executed after show trials), crunch the numbers of Jewish losses and population transfers and gin up the general extent of depredations against Jews in East Europe. Commissars and partisans (a disproportionate number of which were Jewish) had been severely dealt with on the Eastern Front by the defeated and collectively demonized Germans. Their treatment was harsh, but Ehrenberg and co. insure that history will make it appear even harsher.

    Immediately after VE Day (but also throughout the war) “The Ritchie Boys,” (up to 10,000 German speaking refugees trained in interrogation and psy ops at Fort Ritchie Maryland) are sent into Allied occupied Europe to interrogate high ranking Nazi POWs and spread disinformation. This is a chapter in US army intelligence history that remains curiously obscure. Less than a dozen out of all the Ritchey Boys have been identified. They have been put forward as avuncular reluctant heroes not spies and torturers. All the ones we know of are Jews:

    In l944 Raphael Lemkin, overseeing a team collating data on German atrocities for the WJC (World Jewish Congress) and The Carnegie Foundation in New York almost inadvertently comes up with the concept of ‘genocide,” a word he invents and introduces in his book AXIS RULE IN OCCUPIED EUROPE. The book is not about genocide per se, and Lemkin doesn’t quite realize what he’s stumbled onto until…

    Lt. Col Murray C. Bernays (the brother-in-law of Edward L. Bernays) latches onto Lemkin’s new word “genocide” and tailors the Nuremburg Trial around the idea of collective Nazi guilt and “crimes against humanity.” The latter is the Lemkin based forerunner to the UN Genocide Conventions, which will come later. Genocide isn’t the issue at Nuremburg, but “crimes against humanity” is the legal gambit Bernays uses to hold all Nazis collectively responsible for starting WWII. Using this corkscrew logic, eventually three generations of Germans are held responsible for the holocaust. Americans and ultimately all Christendom starting with Pope Pius XII get blamed, too, and Jews born after l945 in Brooklyn morph into “second generation survivors.”

    In his l958 book THE WORLD CONQUERORS refugee Hungarian playwright, poet and journalist Louis Marschalko, who covered the Nuremburg Trial, writes. “Of the 3000 persons on the trial staff, 2400 were Jews. Many of them wore uniforms to which they had no entitlement.” Marschalko, a nationalist, surveyed the worldwide advance of Communism from a decidedly Catholic perspective. The author’s argument is that Communism is a worldwide movement, promoted everywhere by the same transnational force. Prof. Joel Hayward disagrees- “On page 44 I described Louis Marschalko’s claims that Jews fabricated their Holocaust suffering as “unscholarly … weak, racist arguments”. Two pages later I described them as “nonsense”. A further two pages later I called the same views “too polemical and biased against Jews”. On page 54 I bluntly wrote that, to state that Jewish frauds “have occurred on a `horrendous scale’ [as one particularly nasty writer said] and as the result of a Jewish conspiracy to defraud the German government, is preposterous and totally insupportable.” On the same page I criticized that author’s “biases and prejudices”, while on the next page I condemned his claims of a Jewish conspiracy as “totally unsustainable”.

    In Sept. 2008 US presidential candidate Christopher Dodd publishes his father Thomas Dodd’s letters home to his wife from Nuremburg where he was a star prosecutor. There were too many Jews there, he concurred, “Jews should stay away from this trial – for their own sake,” Dodd explains. He doesn’t want them to supply anti-Semites and isolationists with ammunition – afraid of a possible growing sentiment to describe the war as a”war for the Jews.” or

    Senator Chris Dodd doesn’t have the decency to admit that his grandstanding dad presented false evidence at Nuremburg so he lets the legend of the phony Polish shrunken heads found at Buchenwald (quite possibly supplied by one or more ” Ritchie Boys”) stand:

    Then there’s the Polish Government-in-exile and The British War Executive. Jan Karski, Rudolph Vrba, Sefton Delmer, Cavendish-Bentinck and all that. Those who believed Tony Blair when he told them he had it from his spymasters that missiles launched from Bhagdad could reach London in 45 minutes will enjoy this:


  6. roscoe on May 21st, 2008 2:34 pm

    Shankus; it is not proper English to say–quote unquote leader. The correct form is quote-leader- unquote( or close quote)

  7. Wolf on May 21st, 2008 8:07 pm

    Ellen deGenerus is a slot licker and I always thought she looked degenerate.

    As for the proper use of English… If you have a lengthy quotation, you need to know where both ends are. So we say unquote at the end. However, if you are making quick impact quotes in speech, keeping in mind the listener’s short-term memory, chances are you’re targeting only one word or phrase and you don’t really need to mark the end; So “quote-unquote” becomes a compound prefixal particle. Besides, it sounds insufferably pedantic to insist on quote ‘word’ unquote; you would never write it, because you could use real quotes. So the “proper” written usage is therefore irrelevant, because there isn’t any.

  8. roscoe on May 21st, 2008 8:13 pm

    It is not correct sequencing to say quote unquote and it technically does not make sense. Just like it is not correct sequencing to say aks instead of ask. Ciao

  9. Peter Schaenk on May 22nd, 2008 5:42 am


    Re Mark’s comments:

    I understand where you are coming from Mark and I don’t disagree with your feelings re racial miscegenation. However, the answer is not to bludgeon people over the head or hang people from telephone poles. In my opinion, the answer is to make life as difficult as possible for these non-Whites coming to America.

    By ignoring their behavior and refusal to speak English, we allow them to invade this country with little or no resistance from the White race.

    If the shoe were on the other foot; would the Jews let us off the hook so easily? Don’t they make our lives as difficult as they possibly can?

    This isn’t about assimilation, this is about resistance to the Jew inspired non-White invasion.

    There are many opportunities to use this invasion to our advantage. Why no White groups have taken the “Open Borders” issue and used it as a lightening rod to garner national attention, is beyond belief.

    Would the Jews allow such a PR bonanza to escape their exploitation? Not in a million years.

    Lastly, we are faced with the fact that of non-Whites will be the majority in our lifetime. We don’t have to breed with them, but it is certainly in our best interest that they become decent citizens. For the safety of our children and their future.

    Every future Spanish speaking gangbanger is one more soldier in the JWO. It would be to our advantage to take them out of the game one way or the other. Since we don’t have any standing army that can eliminate the menace, we have to assimilate as many as possible, to at least neutralize the danger and lessen the numbers of future criminals in our midst.

    The old adage; “One bad apple spoils the barrel.” would apply here.

    If we don’t make them speak English, they will make us speak Spanish. There is no third option in the culture war.

    We should take this opportunity to bring national attention to this issue with the hope of creating a groundswell of support for English as the official language of the U.S..

    It’s a beginning and it will lead White people to the realization that they have a culture and race to defend.

  10. Peter Schaenk on May 22nd, 2008 5:46 am

    With re to Wolf and Roscoe:

    I never said I was perfect.

    I’m glad you guys haven’t changed.

    Forward With Intensity,
    Peter Schaenk

  11. Peter Schaenk on May 22nd, 2008 5:48 am

    I meant to say (quote-unquote) perfect.


  12. Maurice on May 22nd, 2008 11:29 pm

    About what to do:
    1- Speak English
    2- Convince catholic invaders that they wrong, showing catholic doctrine, encyclicals, etc. (but as you said most are not really catholic…)
    3- Convince catholic foreigners that cannot be expelled, that they have to respect the culture on the country that accepted him and also naturally accept some discrimination. Showing catholic doctrine, encyclicals, pre Vat2 writings, etc.
    (…) In addition we must bring to mind that a condemnation of racial discrimination is very dangerous for the Catholic Church itself; for there exist orders of his Holiness Paul IV and other Popes that forbid admittance to the honorary offices of the Church to Catholics of Jewish origin, or which confirmed this ban. We will study this order later on. Therefore a condemnation of racial discrimination will be the evil-willed occasion for asserting that Holy Church contradicts itself, and, what is still more weighty, it tacitly condemns several of its most famous Popes who recognised and confirmed the natural rules of the purity of blood. (…)

    4- let’s do a list of possible things nowadays

  13. Maurice on May 23rd, 2008 3:47 am

    Sorry for so many errors, next time I will try to be more carefull.

    For “catholic invaders” I mean the “latinos” and I believe the majority call themselves “catholic”. If they are real catholic they should respect the hierarchy and when you get in someone else’s land the first in hierarchy is the original inhabitant, the original culture and language. They have to avoid those false “priests” and start reading at least the Pope’s Encyclicals pre-Vatican2.
    And if they are so proud of their culture they have to go back to their country and start with their “Speak Spanish”.

  14. Wolf on May 23rd, 2008 4:35 am

    If these alien Mestizos and central American Indians were real Catholics they would respect this country’s laws and not break in uninvited.

    I can think of at least two of the 10 Commandments that are violated when they do that:

    Thou shall not steal…


    Thou shall not covet thy neighbour’s house or field…

    Furthermore, I have seen footage of so called Mexican Indian “Catholic” ceremonies and to me they resemble a form of African voodoo with heavy emphasis on alter worship. A far cry from what St. Thomas Aquinas had in mind I’m sure.

  15. Maurice on May 23rd, 2008 7:12 am

    yes, is syncrethism, mixing pagan gods and catholic saints…