Schaenk: War of Perception, Fri. 10/10

October 10, 2008

VoR radio host Peter Schaenk discusses “affirmative action” policies and how they contributed to the financial meltdown. Also on the show:

  • The role of Black Americans in this social engineering scheme that they have profited from for the last 50 years.
  • An email from Marc Krieger to Peter regarding the impending financial collapse.
  • The latest news.
  • “This Day In History”.

1 hour 23 min.


33 Responses to “Schaenk: War of Perception, Fri. 10/10”

  1. roscoe on October 11th, 2008 3:09 am

    Hitler was a Judaic!!

  2. Z.O.G. on October 11th, 2008 4:09 am


    roscoe, you’ve got a one track mind.

  3. Howdy Doody on October 11th, 2008 12:58 pm

    IMO Rosco is perhaps 12, or a NKVD troll mental case, or just a collaborator who watches FLOX News perhaps? take that to the bank

  4. David Holloway on October 11th, 2008 7:34 pm

    Catholic Austrian Chancellor Dolfuss was a Turk

  5. roscoe on October 11th, 2008 9:26 pm

    What is the source on the Dolfuss info???

  6. roscoe on October 11th, 2008 9:33 pm

    Tammy Bruce is on KABC LA at this time saying that Lynn Forester De Rothschild is one of the good rich who is on our(Mc Cain) side. Jerome Corsi will be up in a couple of minutes( Obomba birth cert)

  7. K-Sensor on October 12th, 2008 5:38 am

    Off topic, slightly, I personally think the Globalists will need another terror-attack/false-flag to bring a war on Iran/Syria and make Americans want revenge.

    I’d be on the alert to record tv broadcasts and take a camera with you where ever you go.

    We need the proof on any attack on America.

  8. K-Sensor on October 12th, 2008 5:39 am

    Something is brewing.

  9. K-Sensor on October 12th, 2008 7:32 am

    DBS has a good host on his latest show. Guest Lady Michèle Renouf on free speech/Fredrick Toben.

  10. roscoe on October 12th, 2008 1:07 pm

    I would like to wish those here at VOR a Happy Columbus Day.

  11. katman on October 12th, 2008 3:29 pm

    Off topic, slightly, I personally think the Globalists will need another terror-attack/false-flag to bring a war on Iran/Syria and make Americans want revenge<<<<<

    I have been looking for that for over a year now. I think they will try something like this even though a lot of people are watching for it now.

  12. katman on October 12th, 2008 3:35 pm

    roscoe, the spanish jew, Cristóbal Colón wasn’t the first person to discover the new world. not even the vikings were the first to discover this new world.

    But the jews of the ancient Israeli kingdom’s of old, did long before any of these people ever thought about it.

  13. Zelea on October 12th, 2008 3:45 pm

    katman, what do you reckon they will do? An atrocity on US soil or perhaps an attack on a US ship in the Persian Gulf? It’ll have to be more audacious that 9/11 to have the desired psychological impact.

  14. Zelea on October 12th, 2008 3:46 pm

    Correction- audacious than 911

  15. maurice on October 12th, 2008 7:22 pm

    Cristoforo Colombo was italian.
    Is he jew? Where we can find about it?
    Which are the sources about “the ancient Israeli kingdom’s of old” that “discover the new world”?

  16. roscoe on October 12th, 2008 8:07 pm

    If anyone has been duped into thinking Columbus was a judaic, I would suggest reading Isabella Of Spain by Walsh.

  17. roscoe on October 12th, 2008 9:04 pm

    I hope people are paying attention to the incredible amount of racially oriented stories that are present on the major websites– CNN, FOX, Drudge, Podblanc, Newsnet14 etc.

    And OJ has been framed by an all white jury and the white man has been persecuting us with ‘hate’ speech etc. I believe there was a story the other day about how someone at a McCain rally yelled ‘kill him’ in a reference to Obomba.

    I have not seen one story about how nigerians hate white people.

  18. maurice on October 13th, 2008 2:14 am

    Mark Krieger asks for a revolution – I hope only that it will not be brought by the revolutionaries of ever…

  19. roscoe on October 13th, 2008 6:31 pm

    Quoth the Raven…nevermore!!!

  20. David Holloway on October 13th, 2008 11:08 pm

    Just when I thought I’d seen the limit of roscoe’s madness he comes out with two more insane “gems”

    “Alex Linder is a Judaic”

    “Martin Luther was a Judaic”

  21. Dietrich on October 14th, 2008 12:15 pm

    Srsly. Martin Luther clearly was not a Jew.

  22. roscoe on October 14th, 2008 1:42 pm

    And Alex????

  23. katman on October 14th, 2008 8:07 pm

    I always thought Mrs Bing Crosby was hot…………

  24. Dietrich on October 14th, 2008 8:32 pm

    pics or she didn’t exist!

  25. katman on October 15th, 2008 12:57 am

    jewish catholic teaching catholics how to be good jews……..

    ha ha ha

  26. maurice on October 15th, 2008 1:04 am

    As the Holy Inquisition is over, unfortunately, we have those “conversos” everywhere. And Katman that hear to them…

  27. Peter Schaenk on October 15th, 2008 1:14 am

    “Peter, master theologian…”


    Thank you for the compliment, but I never claimed to be a master theologian. I merely stated an obvious fact. You know nothing about Christianity, and yet you go on and on about it like an Anti-Christ Jew.

    I don’t mean to offend you, but you post much more anti-Christian rants compared to your anti-Zionist / Jew rants.

    I am not suggesting you are a Jew, but you come off sounding like one.

    In addition, you don’t pay much attention to my “talking points”, for lack of a better phrase.

    World Vision is a Judeo-Christian organization. They are not a legitimate Christian sect, they are a front for the NWO and Israel.

    I appreciate your comments, but I wish you could temper your posts with a little respect for the religion of Western Civilization and the White race.

  28. Z.O.G. on October 15th, 2008 1:55 am

    Wow, this site attracts a lot of nutjob Catholic zealots. What’s up with that?

  29. maurice on October 15th, 2008 7:43 pm

    Logic and truth is attractive.
    And is the best radio broadcast I ever heard.

  30. maurice on October 15th, 2008 7:45 pm

    But attract especially the Traditional Catholics (and not “nutjob zealots”).

  31. Jew-Dar on October 31st, 2008 7:46 pm

    @ Peter– things about race you might not have know

    The Reality of Race – A Summary of John R. Baker’s book: “Race”by Thomas Jackson

    From American Renaissance magazine November, 1993


    “Race is a veritable mountain of evidence, all of which can lead only to the conclusion that the races differ in ability. Nevertheless, Dr. Baker is strictly the scientist. He draws no further conclusions and makes no suggestions about social policy. There is no doubt in his mind that current orthodoxy on this subject is absurd, but he limits his exegesis to the interpretation of data.”

    John R. Baker, Race, Foundation for Human Understanding (original publisher: Oxford Univ. Press), 1974

    * Introduction

    * The Proper Study of Mankind

    * Race and Color

    * Equal or Unequal?

    * A Mountain of Evidence

    Race, by John Baker, is a remarkable book. There is probably no other treatment of the biology and physical anthropology of race that approaches it in breadth, detail, erudition or style. Even more remarkable is the book’s point of view. Far from evading the issue of racial differences in ability, it was written for the very purpose of investigating and clarifying those differences.

    Dr. Baker, now deceased, was the ideal author for this book. He was professor emeritus of cytology at Oxford University, a Fellow of the Royal Society, and president of the Royal Microscopical Society. To these professional qualifications he added an abiding interest in what he called the “ethnic question,” that is to say, the entire range of ways in which the races differ.

    Written late in life, Race is Dr. Baker’s definitive statement on what he considered one of the most important issues of our time. From start to finish the book is stuffed with little-known, eye-opening facts, and it is fascinating, even essential reading for anyone with a serious interest in race. It is supplemented with more than 80 illustrations, and some of the simpler line drawings are reproduced here.

    Race is organized in four parts. The first is a summary of what was thought and freely written about racial differences up through the end of the 1920s when, as Dr. Baker puts it, “the curtain came down” on open discussion. The second is an introduction to the biology of taxonomy or classification, including a thorough treatment of how races and species are identified. The third is a detailed inventory of the biological differences that distinguish the major races and subraces. In this section Dr. Baker makes a particular study of whites, or Europids as he calls them, and of Africans (Negrids), Bushmen (Sanids), Australian aborigines (Australids), Celts, and Jews. In the final section, Dr. Baker sets out what he considers to be the essential criteria for determining what he bluntly calls superiority and inferiority. Not surprisingly, his conclusions are at odds with current dogma.

    Dr. Baker’s historical account of what has been written about ethnic differences includes introductions to a number of people one might well expect, such as the Comte de Gobineau, Houston Stewart Chamberlain, Nietzsche, Francis Galton, and even Hitler. Dr. Baker also describes the pioneering but no longer recognized work of men like Johann Blumenbach (1752-1840) and Samuel Sommerring (1755-1830).

    Other famous men have pronounced themselves on the question of racial differences and, until recently, few have had any sympathy for the notion of equality. Rousseau, for example, thought the chimpanzee was a primitive form of human being, and Kant, Voltaire, and Hume thought the Negro vastly inferior to the European. Dr. Baker reminds us that even the Bible is hardly silent on the ethnic problem. The Children of Israel routinely exterminated enemies, whom they considered inferior, and in the tenth book of Joshua, they enslaved the entire Hivite people.

    The Proper Study of Mankind

    In the more technical sections that follow, Dr. Baker draws on his scientific training to treat homo sapiens as just one more member of the animal kingdom. “No one knows man who knows only man,” he observes, and adds: “One might almost go so far as to say, in relation to the ethnic problem, that the proper study of mankind is animals.” By this he means that without a thorough grounding in biology and taxonomy it is impossible to view man with the detachment that science requires. Dr. Baker writes, he explains, in the spirit that inspired T.H. Huxley to conclude that “Anthropology is a section of zoology [and] . . . the problems of ethnology are simply those which are presented to the zoologist by every widely distributed animal he studies.” In this, Dr. Baker is out of step with many contemporary social scientists who seem to believe that humans are uniquely exempt from the laws of heredity and from the kind of scrutiny to which all other animals are subject.

    Dr. Baker leads us firmly back to biology with an account of how evolution gave rise to different species, how species are classified, the nature of hybridity, and the circumstances under which animals can be made to mate with differing species. Anthropology indeed becomes a branch of zoology. However, in this discussion it becomes clear that man differs from animals in at least one important way: humans are exceedingly unselective in their mating habits and will copulate with individuals–across racial lines, for example–from whom they are physically very different.

    The contrast with the seven kinds of European mosquito, for example, could not be greater. Their eggs can be distinguished because of slight differences, but adults are so similar that not even experts can tell them apart under a microscope. What experts cannot do, the mosquitoes do without fail; they never interbreed.

    Dr. Baker likewise reports that Grant’s gazelle and Thompson’s gazelle live together in mixed herds and are so similar in appearance that it takes a trained eye to tell them apart. They, too, never interbreed. It is only under domestication that animals can be made to overcome their repugnance for mates unlike themselves and thus produce mules or leopons (a cross between tiger and leopard). Domesticated dogs breed indiscriminately with widely different types but wild dogs like wolves, foxes, and coyotes breed only with their own kind.

    Man is the most domesticated of animals and the least exclusive in his amours–but his promiscuity varies enormously by group and individual. As Dr. Baker points out, the Indian caste system successfully prevented interbreeding even among racially similar people. At the same time, there are individuals whose lust for animals is so great that bestiality has had to be specifically forbidden ever since Biblical times.

    The races and sub-races of man have evolved largely because of geographical separation, but Dr. Baker also refers to what he calls “ecological races” that evolved to fill different but overlapping niches. The small stature of African pygmies, for example, fits them to forest life while the larger Negrids live in clearings.

    If humans had continued to evolve in isolation or if they were as discriminating as animals in their choice of mates, racial differences would eventually lead to mutually infertile species. This would be diversity of a truly remarkable kind.

    Domestication and travel have led to increasing miscegenation, but Dr. Baker speculates about another possible reason. The skulls of our remote ancestors show that their olfactory organs were much better developed than ours. It is also likely that ancient man had stronger odors than does modern man, and since our ancestors’ mating habits were probably governed by smell just like those of animals, this discouraged mating with unfamiliar peoples. Even today the races have different odors.

    Dr. Baker notes drily that although modern man is scrupulous in selecting only the most promising breeding couples among his domestic animals, he almost never gives the same attention to his own reproduction. “It follows,” he adds, “that we cannot look for any advance in inborn intelligence . . . .”

    Race and Color

    Dr. Baker writes at some length about skin color, but only because race and color are sometimes confused. He himself thinks the subject is trivial and, in fact, since at least Darwin’s time scientists have recognized that color is unimportant in distinguishing biological forms. Dr. Baker points out that to make color the touch stone of race is as stupid as to think that a red rose is more closely related to a red petunia than to a white rose.

    Australian aborigines are similar in color to Bushmen, for example, but it would be difficult to think of two racial groups that are more dissimilar biologically. Likewise, Dr. Baker explains that some of the inhabitants of northern India have relatively dark skin but are racially very close to Europids.

    Skin color is affected by the color of blood that may be visible through it, but the main reason for variations in skin color is the presence of different amounts of the pigment melanin. All humans make the same melanin and have much the same number of melanocytes–the difference is in how much melanin is produced. The darkest Africans have visible concentrations of melanin even in the whites of their eyes and on their tongues. Melanin colors hair as well as skin, though it is the presence of a slightly different substance, called phaeomelanin, that causes “red” hair.

    Dr. Baker explains that blue eyes are not caused by a blue pigment but by the absence of pigment. Eyes appear to be blue for the same reason the edges of a snow bank may appear blue: red light and other long wave lengths pass through but shorter, bluer wave lengths are refracted and scattered, and some are reflected back towards the viewer.

    Light-skinned people are probably descended from dark-skinned people who migrated from the tropics. The skin of Europeans transmits three and a half times as much sunlight as the skin of Africans, and the ultraviolet rays convert ergosterol in the body into vitamin D. Dark-skinned people, whose skins are adapted to sunnier latitudes, may therefore get rickets–caused by vitamin D deficiency–if they live in cold climates.

    The third section of Race, in which Dr. Baker describes the myriad ways in which the races differ from each other physically is the most technical. It includes general descriptions of blood chemistry, physiology and skeletal structure, with a special emphasis on the characteristics of the skull. It introduces concepts like brachycephaly, paedomorphism, and the cranial index.

    It is useful for the reader to have had some training in physiology but it is not necessary. Even the most technical passages can usually be understood by a non-specialist who has paid close attention to earlier explanations, and Dr. Baker has set his most abstruse observations in smaller type as a signal to laymen that they may skip over them without much loss.

    A certain level of scientific detail is necessary here not merely because physiological differences between the races require a certain vocabulary. In this section Dr. Baker is at pains to explain the extent to which some races show the traits of primitiveness–the retention into the modern era of features possessed by our remote ancestors–and paedomorphy–the retention as adults of traits commonly associated with children.

    For example, it is indisputable that Australids are more primitive than other races. Like Pithecanthropus, their teeth and lower jaws are strikingly large, and their skulls are twice as thick as those of any other race. The forehead recedes sharply, and the brow ridges are so well developed as to be reminiscent of Pithecanthropus and of the larger apes. The brain is only about 85 percent the size of that of Europids and the back part has lunate folds not found in other races but similar to those in the brains of orang-utans. Likewise, the nasal aperture is similar, in some respects, to that of the orang-utan.

    The Bushmen, or Sanids, show equally remarkable evidence of paedomorphy. Their very small size–males are often no taller than 4’7″ or 4’9″–is the most obviously juvenile characteristic retained by adults. Their skulls are notably short and squat like those of a Europid infant and their eyes are set wide apart like a new-born’s. The facial and body hair of both sexes is very weakly developed and reminiscent of children. Among males, the scrotum is like that of a pre-adolescent: so small and tightly drawn up that one might think only one testicle had descended.

    As for Negrids, aside from a brain that is very slightly smaller than that of Europids and Sinids (North Asians), Dr. Baker finds no characteristics that could be called either primitive or paedomorphous. Negrids differ in blood chemistry from other races, and have broader shoulders and thinner calves. Certain tribes, such as the Hottentot, show extreme steatopygia or enlarged buttocks. In some cases the posterior extends horizontally, almost like a shelf.

    Francis Galton, who travelled among the Hottentot in 1850 and 1851, wrote of one such woman that he was “perfectly aghast at her development.” He wanted to measure her dimensions but could not bring himself to ask her permission to do so. Instead, he took observations through his sextant and, he says, “worked out the results by trigonometry and logarithms.”

    Equal or Unequal?

    The question of whether Africans are, on average, equal in intelligence to whites is important both in the United States and in Britain. Dr. Baker therefore devotes considerable space to 19th-century accounts of African societies before they came into sustained contact with foreigners. This is the only sure way to know how far they had been able to advance without outside influence.

    Every explorer found a remarkable poverty of development. No black African society had a written language or a calendar. None used the wheel or practiced joinery or built multi-story buildings. Iron smelting was common but no black Africans built what could be called a mechanical device, even one so simple as a hinge. Africans apparently tamed no animals themselves but received already-domesticated dogs and cattle from north of the Sahara. None used any beast of burden, despite the presence of large mammals that could have been tamed.

    Although African societies are today described as having rich oral histories, this was by no means universal. A few tribes did have men who could recite the histories of their kings, but many were completely ignorant of the past. The Ovaherero tribe, for example, kept no count of years at all.

    Slavery and polygamy were widespread. Arbitrary execution of subjects by rulers or wives by husbands was common. A few tribes ate human flesh though even some of their own members seem to have rejected this custom. Some coastal natives, seeing slaves being fed before being loaded onto ships for export, believed that Europeans intended to eat them.

    Some people have argued that the reason Africans showed such poor development was that the effort to maintain life was too great to permit the leisure for advancement. On the contrary, the missionary and explorer, David Livingstone, found that some parts of the continent were a veritable paradise:

    “To one who has observed the hard toil of the poor in old civilized countries, the state in which the inhabitants here live is one of glorious ease. . . . Food abounds, and very little labour is required for its cultivation; the soil is so rich that no manure is required.”

    Although Dr. Baker does not pursue this idea very far, he suggests that it was the very ease of life in Africa that kept high intelligence from being as necessary for survival as it was in harsher climates.

    In the concluding section of Race, Dr. Baker draws the only conclusions that the data will permit: Just as they differ in biology, the races differ in their mental traits. They are not equally intelligent or capable of building civilized societies. Dr. Baker reviews the literature on mental testing and on the heritability of intelligence and finds that it only confirms his conclusions.

    After setting out an interesting set of criteria for genuine civilization he finds that the first people to achieve it were the Sumerians of the fourth millennium B.C. Physically, it is likely that they were more closely related to the Kurds than to any other present people. Europids and Sinids have also created genuine civilizations, but Negrids and Australids have not.

    Dr. Baker puts the Maya of Central America in a category of their own. Their astronomy and mathematics were extremely advanced and were at one time the most sophisticated in the world. They built great cities and administered large territories. However, Dr. Baker hesitates to call them genuinely civilized for several reasons: they did not use the wheel or use commercial weights, their written language was poorly developed and their religion was a mass of superstitions that were often the basis for torture, human sacrifice, and mass slaughter.

    A Mountain of Evidence

    Race is a veritable mountain of evidence, all of which can lead only to the conclusion that the races differ in ability. Nevertheless, Dr. Baker is strictly the scientist. He draws no further conclusions and makes no suggestions about social policy. There is no doubt in his mind that current orthodoxy on this subject is absurd, but he limits his exegesis to the interpretation of data.

    In its realm, however, Race is a magisterial work to which justice cannot be done in a review. It is probably the single most ambitious and comprehensive volume on the subject ever attempted, and is surely without peer in its treatment of the physical differences that distinguish races. It is not an easy book — Dr. Baker does not address himself to dullards or dilettantes — but in these blighted times it is a stroke of astonishing good fortune that a man of his immense learning and ability should have chosen to take up a position on the unpopular but truthful side of “the ethnic problem.”

  32. Jew-Dar on October 31st, 2008 7:46 pm

    The Black Man’s Gift to Portugal
    By: Ray Smith

    We have all heard racial integration defended and advocated on the grounds that we have deprived our country of the benefit of the talents and abilities of the Negroes – that the Negroes have a positive contribution to make and we have failed to take advantage of it. Because of our irrational prejudice against the Negroes, we have excluded them from full participation in American society and, we are told, this is America’s loss.

    The Lesson of History

    In view of the fact that we are now being forced to integrate with the Negroes and grant them equal participation, it might be instructive to look at other countries which have integrated with Negroes in the past to see what the Negroes gave them. What is the historical evidence?

    There is a wealth of material here for study in such places as Haiti, Cuba, Puerto Rico, Brazil, etc., but the nearest parallel to the United States today is Portugal in the 16th century.

    It may come as a surprise to hear of the Negroes’ role in the history of Portugal, for in spite of all the emphasis on “Black studies” in our schools, no one seems to talk about the Blacks’ contribution to Portugal – neither the Portuguese, the Blacks, nor our modern historians who are rewriting our history books to make the Negroes look good. It takes considerable digging in books written before our modern era of forced integration to uncover the story of Portugal.

    Poets and Explorers

    By the middle of the 16th century, Portugal had risen to a position analogous to that of the United States today. Portugal was the wealthiest, most powerful country in the world, with a large empire and colonies in Asia, Africa and America. The Portuguese people were, like the Elizabethans in England, poets and explorers, a race of highly civilized, imaginative, intelligent, and daring people. They showed great potential and had already made important contributions to the Renaissance. But, unlike England and other European countries, Portugal had a large and rapidly growing Negro population and, at the same time, its white population was declining.

    Portugal began the Negro slave trade after encountering Negroes in its explorations and forays into Africa. Portugal brought the first Black slaves to Lisbon in 1441, and they continued to be imported in such numbers that by 1550, the population of Portugal was 10 percent Negro (the U.S. is 13-14 percent Negro today).

    Defilement of the Blood

    There was no taboo or injunction against sexual relations with the Negroes, and the Negroes blood soon became assimilated into the general population through miscegenation, so that today there are no Negroes, as such, in Portugal. The present-day population of Portugal is described by the New York Times Encyclopedic Almanac, 1971, as follows: “Ethnic Composition: The people are a mixture of various ethnic strains, including Celtic, Arab, Berber, Phoenician, Carthaginian, Lusitanian, and other racial influences. The present population is one of the most homogeneous in Europe, with no national minorities.” (Note that the Negro strain is not listed by the New York Times).

    What you can see in Portugal today is the product of uniform, non-selective mixing of the 10 percent Negroes and 90 percent Whites into one homogeneous whole. In effect, it is a new race – a race that has stagnated in apathy and produced virtually nothing in the last 400 years.

    The Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th ed., 1911, in its article on Portugal states, “The Portuguese intermarried freely with their slaves, and this infusion of alien blood profoundly modified the character and physique of the nation. It may be said without exaggeration that the Portuguese of the ‘age of discoveries’ and the Portuguese of the 17th and later centuries were two different races.”

    People Without a Future

    The contribution of this new race to civilization in terms of literature, art, music, philosophy, science, etc. has been practically nothing. Portugal today is the most backwards country in Europe. The illiteracy rate is 38 percent (in the U.S., 2.2 percent, Japan, 1.0 percent). The infant mortality rate in Portugal is 59.2 per 1000 births (in Sweden, 12.9 percent, U.S., 20.7 percent, France, 20.4 percent). The workers wages are the lowest in Western Europe, the equivalent of a little more than $2.00 a day.

    Portugal is a forgotten land – bypassed by the tourists and shunned by the scholars. It is a sad country, known mainly for its plaintive, mournful fado music – nostalgic music that looks to the past and sees no future.

    Portugal and America

    In spite of the close similarity between the situation of Portugal in the 1550′s and the United States today, we cannot predict that the outcome of our racial integration with Negroes will be exactly the same. The historical significance, however, is that any country, society, or group which has integrated to any appreciable extent with the Negroes has suffered drastically in its ability to maintain a civilized standard of living and its ability to compete with others. There is no evidence that any other country ever gained anything from integration with Negroes.

    It should be pointed out that the Negro-White ratio, 1:9, in Portugal in the 1550′s does not represent the final percentage of Negro genes, for the Negro element was rapidly increasing while the White element was declining. The male Whites were leaving Portugal in large numbers – sailing, settling in the colonies, and marrying native women (the government encouraged this). Most of the Negro slaves brought to Portugal were adult males. The population was thus unbalanced – an excess of White women and Negro males, and a shortage of White men. Chronicles of the era relate that Portuguese women kept Negro slaves as “pets”. They also married them.

    The situation in the U.S. today is not too different. The radical-chic Whites have their Black pets.

    Our percentage of the Negro element today does not represent the final amalgam. The Negro birth rate is almost twice as high as that of the Whites. There is no White population explosion in America, or anywhere in the world. It is all colored. The colored woman has the children; the White women are on the pill or have abortions.

    What the final amalgam in America will be we can not say, but if the present trends continue, the Negro element will be much more than 14 percent.

    Why Did Portugal Integrate?

    The British, French, Dutch, Spanish, and Portuguese all engaged in the Negro slave trade, but only Portugal brought them to their own country. The question arises – why did Portugal so willingly accept racial integration with Negroes while other European countries kept the Negroes out and maintained their racial integrity? What was the climate of opinion, the current ideology, teaching, or propaganda that led the Portuguese to depart from the behavior of the other countries? What was the difference about Portugal?

    You will not find the answer to these questions in our modern history books and recently published encyclopedias, for the whole subject of the decline has become taboo. You will have to dig into older sources and discover your own answers.

    You might also ask yourself why America is accepting racial integration while most of the rest of the world is “racist.” Why are we different?

    The Role of the Jew

    One significant difference in Portugal before its fall in the 16th century was that it had become a haven for Jews. For several centuries, the Jews had more wealth, influence, and more power in Portugal than in any other European country. In 1497, at Spain’s request, the Jews were asked to leave Portugal or be converted. Most of them became normal Christians and remained.

    However, by 1550 many of the Jews were voluntarily leaving. They saw the writing on the wall. The Encyclopedia Britannica (edition of 1885) notes that “even observers like the Dutchman Cleynarts saw that, in spite of all its wealth and seeming prosperity, the kingdom of Portugal was rotten at the core and could not last.”

    America has also served as a haven for the Jews. The Jews in America today have risen to a greater position of power, wealth, and influence than they have ever had in any other country. They dominate the newspapers, book publishing, television and radio, movies, universities – all of the educational media, as well as the commercial life of the country.

    The Jews have always proselytized for racial integration – in Portugal, America, or in whatever country they have been, for without such a climate of tolerance of alien races, they themselves, would not be accepted. It has, therefore, been in the Jews’ interest to suppress evidence which would lead people to reject alien races.

    History Rewritten

    Our encyclopedias and history books have been purged and rewritten. If you look up Portugal in the 1970 edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica, you will not find anything about the role of the Negroes and Jews in the history of Portugal, or anything about the decline and fall of Portugal.

    The Jews are briefly mentioned among others who “exerted various influences over the territory which in the 13th century acquired the frontiers of modern Portugal.” There is no elaboration of what this influence was.

    The Negroes have been eliminated entirely. They are not listed with the other ethnic groups in the ancestry of the Portuguese people. In the entire 15-page article, there is no clue that Negroes were ever present in Portugal or that they had any role or influence in Portuguese history.

    The 1970 edition of the Encyclopedia Americana also makes no mention of the presence of Negroes in Portugal.

    In all these sources you find “facts,” i.e., names and dates, but with no meaning and no indication of what actually happened or why. However, if you can manage to find some older sources, you can learn a great deal about the history of Portugal.

    The article on Portugal in the 1911 edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica contains more real information than you can get in reading a hundred history books of more recent vintage. From our modern point of view, this article would probably be called “racist,” but the point is that the presence and activities of the Negroes and Jews are recorded. The information is there, and you can draw your own conclusions. The article is actually pro-Jewish. There is also a scholarly analysis of the factors in the decline and fall of Portugal, with the author tending to blame the Inquisition, the Jesuits, and anti-Semitism. However, neither his conclusions nor his bias prevents him from including factors or information which might lead the reader to a different conclusion.

    Our modern scholars and authorities eliminate information which might lead the reader to the “wrong” conclusion.

    Suppressing the Evidence

    The 1964 edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica still briefly lists the Negroes and Jews, along with others, as Portuguese racial elements, but with no details or elaborations. By 1966, the Negroes have vanished completely.

    Now, what has happened between 1911 and 1966 that makes us purge and rewrite history in such a way? Have we decided that race no longer is, or ever was, a factor in history? This cannot be, since “Black Studies” are flourishing at our universities. Historians are supposedly trying hard to discover all they can about the role of the Negroes in history.

    In a trial, a lawyer tries to suppress evidence that would be damaging to his client. He tries to prevent this evidence from reaching the jury. Our modern historians and scholars are trying to suppress evidence. The Negro is their client. We are the jury – and we must not reach the “wrong” verdict.

    This, of course, reveals what the liberal establishment really thinks of Negroes – that they are inferior and must be protected. The evidence must be suppressed. The New York Times, et al., is a lawyer, well paid, who knows his client “did it,” but tried to get him off.

    Liberals in the United States often became very self-righteous and superior when the former Soviet Union purged and rewrote its encyclopedias, eliminating from its history current undesirables and making them “unpersons.” We ridicule their lack of objectivity and irrational scholarship.

    But we do exactly the same thing when we rewrite history of Portugal and make “unpersons” of the Negroes (and Jews). In terms of rewriting and deliberately falsifying history, we are much closer to Orwell’s 1984 than the Soviet Union ever was. Big Brother protects us from dangerous knowledge.

    Quo Vadis, Aryan Man

    There is a great need for the American people to know what happened in Portugal in the 16th century, for we are repeating their experience. We are in the same predicament, at the same juncture, at the same crossroads in history. There is an amazing similarity between our situation today and Portugal’s in the 1500′s. Shall we take the same road?

    Travelers from other European countries were amazed to see so many Negroes in 16th-century Lisbon, as are travelers today in Washington, D.C. Our own capital is a large percentage Black, and, as was the case in Lisbon, the Negroes do all the manual labor and service jobs. The 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica comments, “While the country was being drained of its best citizens, hordes of slaves were imported to fill the vacancies, especially into the southern provinces. Manual labor was thus discredited; the peasants sold their farms and emigrated or flocked to the towns; and small holdings were merged into vast estates.”

    Manual labor has been “discredited” for many White people these days, and Negroes fill these jobs. We are “too good” for it.

    Americans Alienated

    The American people are also leaving the land and flocking to the cities or metropolitan areas, and our small farms have been replaced by huge, mechanized farms.

    If we had any colonies, many American men would gladly emigrate to them. Many are leaving anyway for Canada, Australia, and Europe. Those who remain feel rootless and displaced – from their jobs, their country, and even their families. It is difficult to feel any sense of belonging to what America has become today.

    Stout Hearts – and Pure Blood

    In analyzing the catastrophe which befell Portugal, the historian H. Morse Stephens (in his book, Portugal, written in 1891) concludes:

    “they [the Portuguese] were to produce great captains and writers, and were able to become the wealthiest nation in Europe. But that same sixteenth century was to see the Portuguese power sink, and the independence, won by Alfonso Henriques and maintained by John the Great, vanish away; it was to see Portugal, which had been one of the greatest nations of its time, decline in fame, and become a mere province of Spain. Hand in hand with increased wealth came corruption and depopulation, and within a single century after the epoch-making voyage of Vasco da Gama, the Portuguese people, tamed by the Inquisition, were to show no sign of their former hardihood. This is the lesson that the story of Portugal in the sixteenth century teaches, that the greatness of a nation depends not upon its wealth and commercial prosperity, but upon the thews and sinews and the stout hearts of its people.”

    This is rather old-fashioned language, but what Stephens is saying is that, by the end of the 16th century, the quality of the people was lacking. Other European nations suffered military defeat, but continued to grow and develop. Portugal stopped dead in its tracks. It had nothing to build on. Portugal can now only look nostalgically to the past. We Americans must use this information as insight into our future. It is too late to save the White Aryan people of Portugal, but we must save ourselves.

    The Best of Attack and National Vanguard Tabloid
    Ref: Issue No. 6, 1971

  33. whodareswings on November 1st, 2008 12:31 am


    No Black Reparations without Black Repatriation
    by Gregory Krupey

    Reparations have already been paid to blacks in the blood of White soldiers, both Union and Confederate, killed in the Civil War, and an entire section of our country devastated and uprooted in that unnecessary war. No other country ever went to war with itself to free slaves of an alien race. None in Africa ever will.

    Reparations have been repeatedly paid since the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act that essentially made negroes wards of the state, a Federally-protected and favored minority, through such anti-White programs as welfare/workfare, affirmative action and set-asides, quotas, Headstart, school integration, housing laws, and innumerable other grants, loans, subsidies, perks, and preferential treatments aimed at moving negroes en masse (instead of as individuals, as was expected and demanded of Whites) into “equality” and prosperity. That the vast majority of negroes have failed is proof that even with an unfair advantage they are incapable of succeeding in a White society, and the reparations now being proposed would be a colossal waste of

    More African slaves were imported into, and died on plantations in
    Brazil than in the United States. There is no attempt to sue Brazil
    for reparations because the people directing this hoax know that you can’t squeeze blood from a turnip, only a golden goose.

    Most African slaves were literally sold down the river by other
    Africans, if not enemy tribesmen, then their own tribal chiefs and
    relatives. (Slavery is still practiced in many parts of Africa.) They
    were then sold to Europeans and Americans directly or through Arab intermediaries. Most slaves that were brought to the American colonies, and later the United States, came under the British, Dutch, or Portuguese flags. A significant number of the slave traders were Jews. Similarly, most White Americans did not own slaves, and the ancestors of many current White citizens of the USA were not even resident in the country until after the Civil War and the end of slavery. Why should the latter pay for the former’s actions?

    Similarly, those White Americans who did own slaves were a small number concentrated in one section of the country, and augmented by both “Native American” and “free men of color” (mulattoes) who also owned African slaves. There were also, contrary to conventional wisdom, Whites who were slaves. Why not focus the demand for reparations on the heirs and descendants of the former group and include the heirs and descendants of the latter group in the share of the proposed booty?

    Contrary to negro mythology and the claims of reparations activists, America was not built on the whip-lashed back of African slave labor. The overwhelming majority of black slaves labored in the fields. They did not pioneer the land from wilderness into farms and towns, they did not build the roads, bridges, canals, railroads, and skyscrapers of our great cities. They did not mine the coal, gold, silver, copper, and other minerals. They did not smelt the ore and stoke the furnaces and pour the molten steel to create the infrastructure of America’s industrial base. They did not work in the factories and turn out the abundance of products that made this country’s economy the envy of the world. They did not invent the automobile, the electric light, the camera, the radio, the airplane, the television, the microscope, the computer, the rifle, the sewing machine, or anything else you care to mention with the exception of peanut butter. They did not win this country by blood and arms, striving with and defeating the British, the Indians, the Mexicans, and anyone else who stood in our way. They picked cotton! And where you can cite exceptions, this insignificant minority was paid for their time and trouble just like their White compatriots. White men built this country, not African slaves.

    Those negroes who have managed to become millionaires through their dubious “talents” would also receive reparations, making fat cats like Michael Jordan, Michael Jackson, Ophra Winfrey, Bill Cosby, Prince, Aretha Franklin, Whitney Houston, Colin Powell, Spike Lee, and any hip-hop thug you could mention even richer than the free enterprise system and the bad taste of millions of people, White as well as black, have already done.

    Blacks should actually pay reparations to Whites for all the damage their very presence in this country has caused. Black athletes, with their trashtalk, smashmouth, jiveass dancing fits have destroyed White standards of sportsmanship. Black styles of attire, deportment and “music” has caused a degeneration in the morals, taste, and self- identity of White youth, resulting in the pathetic creature known as the ‘wigger”. Black crime rates have sent the US crime rate above the national average of any other civilized (i.e., White) society, with the exception of South Africa (same problem, more of it). Interracial rape is almost entirely black male on white female, and contrary to the liberal media’s propaganda, interracial “hate crimes” are overwhelmingly a black-on-white phenomenon.

    Negroes have turned our once great cities into unlivable hellholes of poverty, crime, and decay. Example: downtown Detroit looks like downtown Beirut. No conventional war produced that disaster area, only the slow-motion guerilla race war that occurs wherever negroes move into any area. It is no coincidence that the gradual and general decay of American society in all areas, from manners to sexual morality to drug addiction to welfare statism to street violence to sadistic crimes to ever more vulgar “entertainment” and ever more cacophonous “music” has risen (rather, fallen) in tandem with the progress of civil rights legislation and the increasing negroization of American culture. If you think a civilization can be built and sustained on jazz, blues, bas’etball, and drive-by shootings, you can support reparations. If not, you must oppose them.

    Reparations are not a moral or ethical issue, they are power politics. Most White people sense this even if they haven’t given it much thought. Do you really think that those influential interests pushing for this legalized blackmail of White America don’t have an ulterior motive? Even Jesse Jackson knows that putting this vast amount of money in the hands of the black masses would be worse than useless if they are allowed to spend it without direction.

    The negro elite and their White liberal traitor allies have every
    intention of making sure this money will be directed into a specific
    agenda, to dispossess and undermine what remains of the White
    political base in this country. Reparations are but one weapon in the arsenal of that force that has long desired to transform the United States into a multiracial melting pot and Whites into a powerless, dwindling minority in their own country. This force, that controls the black elite and the White liberals, happily uses the negroes as the club with which to beat Whites senseless. Reparations are theft! Reparations are war!

    At least 80% of White Americans oppose reparations. How much longer do you think Whites will tolerate this madness? More and more of us are becoming fed up with negrophile politics. While Negro thugs kidnap, rape, rob, and murder Whites out of their own homes (Wichita), attacking Whites at random, just for fun (Seattle), or rampaging and looting an entire city as a form of “protest” (Cincinnati), fools have the audacity to prattle on about reparations.

    No justice, no peace? It cuts both ways. The attempt to enforce
    reparations for negroes could well prove the spark that finally
    ignites a race war, or an armed uprising. If reparations will be paid, we Whites will be compensated in return: all negroes who accept reparations must be required to surrender their American citizenship, and repatriated to the lands of their origin, without possibility of return. It is, after all, the logical outcome of African-American pride and the demands for reparations.

    If being torn away from Mother Africa to serve as slaves in a foreign land was the primal catastrophe that has crippled the black psyche for so long, as many Afrocentrics have claimed, then the only solution, the only possible healing is to return to the womb land. Marcus Garvey certainly thought so. A negro-free America will be the first giant step to reclaim our stolen heritage and the resumption of our interrupted journey to greatness. As the first American Revolution was sparked by the battle cry of “No taxation without representation!”, for these reasons I say, No Black Reparations without Black Repatriation.