Sunday, April 30, 2006

Immigration Statistics

1. 40% of all workers in L.A. County (L.A. County has 10 million people) are working for cash and not paying taxes. This was because they are predominantly illegal immigrants, working without a green card.

2. 95% of warrants for murder in Los Angeles are for illegal aliens.

3. 75% of people on the most wanted list in Los Angeles are illegal aliens.

4. Over 2/3's of all births in Los Angeles County are to illegal alien Mexicans on Medi-Cal whose births were paid for by taxpayers.

5. Nearly 25% of all inmates in California detention centers are Mexican nationals here illegally.

6. Over 300,000 illegal aliens in Los Angeles County are living in garages.

7. The FBI reports half of all gang members in Los Angeles are most likely illegal aliens from south of the border.

8. Nearly 60% of all occupants of HUD properties are illegal.

9. 21 radio stations in L.A. are Spanish speaking.

10. In L.A.County 5.1 million people speak English. 3.9 million speak Spanish (10.2 million people in L.A.County). (All 10 from the Los Angeles Times)

Less than 2% of illegal aliens are picking our crops but 29%
are on welfare.

Over 70% of the United States annual population growth (and
over 90% of California, Florida, and New York) results from immigration.

The cost of immigration to the American taxpayer in 1997 was a NET (after subtracting taxes immigrants pay) $70 billion a year, [Professor Donald Huddle, Rice University].

The lifetime fiscal impact (taxes paid minus services used) for the average adult Mexican immigrant is a negative.

29% of inmates in federal prisons are illegal aliens.

Friday, April 28, 2006


Judaism is not a race, or a religion. Judaism is a state of mind. Some of the worst Jews you'll ever meet will not have a drop of Hebrew blood in their veins.

Thursday, April 27, 2006

Northwest Independence Web Sites

Web sites:


Yahoo Groups:

Northwest Tricolor Merchandise for Tricolor flags.

Contact the above address for sizes and prices; hand made flags, very high quality. Some day Comrade S's handmade Tricolors are going to be prized historical artifacts and treasured family heirlooms. Get one now while he's still sewing 'em!

Wednesday, April 26, 2006

Mark Twain on the Jews

Mark Twain pulled his punches at times about the Jews - since he knew of their awesome power - but there is no denying the tone of Twain quotes such as these:

"In the cotton States, after the war, the simple and ignorant negroes made the crops for the white planter on shares. The Jew came down in force, set up shop on the plantation, supplied all the negro's wants on credit, and at the end of the season was proprietor of the negro's share of the present crop and of part of his share of the next one. Before long, the whites detested the Jew, and it is doubtful if the negro loved him." concerningjews.htm

Tuesday, April 25, 2006

Fire and Rain Caveat

[F & R looks about to experience a bit of a revival. - HAC]

Disclaimer and Caveat - Please Retain and Pass On With Your Copy

To All Movement Readers of "Fire and Rain"

Dear Racial Comrades:

I am enclosing a copy of my novel Fire and Rain. I hope you find it an entertaining and enjoyable read. However, before you begin the book, I’d like a quick word.

Fire and Rain was written with the intention of submitting it for publication through the existing publishing establishment, which consists for all practical purposes entirely of Jews, feminists, and the six or seven multi-national corporations who control the industry. The manuscript would have had to pass muster first by a literary agent who, whatever his personal political views, knows full well what the industry will publish and what it will not.

Secondly, it would have to pass through a succession of readers, mostly leftist women and homosexuals. Then it would have to be accepted by an editor who would submit it to a board of other editors and market analysts, who would decide not only if the book was Politically Correct, but whether it would make any money. As you will see, the chances of Fire and Rain passing any such process of literary kashruth is slim indeed.

But I was determined to try, and so I included in Fire and Rain a number of elements of Political Correctness which you, as an Aryan racial nationalist, will find disturbing and displeasing. I also deliberately included a couple of raunchy sex scenes. These are known in the publishing trade as "commercial dirt." It is now virtually impossible to publish any work of fiction without them, and I had to include something of the kind were I to have any hope at all of getting the book past the Politically Correct gatekeepers of contemporary fiction, such as it is.

Unlike its sequel Slow Coming Dark, Fire and Rain was not intended primarily for Movement readers. It was frankly an attempt to slip some Political Incorrectness past the System and make some money while doing so. In fact, it failed. Fire and Rain was rejected out of hand by every literary agent I submitted it to, including one who had attempted to sell several of my other novels and who sent the manuscript back with a note which read in part, "Harold, you know better than this. I like your work but I’m not going to commit professional suicide for you."

Comrades, the racial and political message is there in Fire and Rain. Read between the lines, recognize my Politically Correct interpolations as the clearly intended camouflage which they are, and understand the deeper meaning of the novel. Despite its many imperfections, I think you will find it worthy of a place on your bookshelf.

Monday, April 24, 2006

On Northwest Migration

Remember--Northwest Migration is not running away from anything.

Northwest Migration is running to something--struggle, glory, and a new nation for our people.

Sunday, April 23, 2006

Feds Monitoring Calls and E-Mails Sans Warrant

The Federal government has finally admitted that something is going on, which anyone involved in White dissident political activity already knows perfectly well. We know that the droids in the silk suits have been listening in on us whenever they feel like it for years, tapping our phones and planting electronic bugs in our homes, without any legal restraint whatsoever. Whenever they want to use something against us in court that they pick up on an illegal wiretap, they simply take a back-dated paper toa judge and legalize it. For all practical purposes, where White racial nationalists are concerned, there has never been any protection at all against unrestricted wiretapping and eavedropping by the secret police.

E-mail is even simpler to monitor, dating back to the DCS-100 (Carnivore)boxes which were installed at every American internet service provider the week after 9/11. White dissident Matt Hale was sentenced to forty years in prison for typing a single sentence in an AOL Instant Message chat. ("I cannot be involved in this" was somehow translated for a black jury as "Go kill a Federal judge.")

Nonetheless, it's interesting to hear the Feds own up to the fact that right after 9/11 Jug-Ears secretly authorized American law enforcement agencies to eavesdrop electronically on American citizens inside the United States without even the fig-leaf of a secret warrant from one of the System's corrupt judges. Now faceless men in silk suits can wiretap and eavesdrop whoever they way, whenever they want, and however they want, and none shall say them nay.

One wonders why Bush even bothered with the usual 9/11 mantra this time?Even before 9/11, has anyone ever heard of a single request from the Feds for a wiretap warrant being refused by one of the tyrants in the black robes? They just rubber-stamp anything the FBI sets in front of them anyway. If there were ever any problem, they FBI could always go to the secret FISA court in Washington DC, which has never turned down a single warrant request in the 28 years of its existence. But under a presidential order signed in 2002, intelligence agencies have monitored the international telephone calls and international e-mail messages of hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people inside the United States without warrants.

The big difference in this latest practice is that unauthorized spying on American citizens is now allowed not only to the United States government's usual domestic terrorism agencies (i.e. agencies that terrorize ordinary Americans), the FBI and ATF, but now the CIA and National Security Agencycan also spy on ordinary Americans with no supervision whatsoever. From there it's only a step to allowing such outfits as the Israeli Mossad access to wiretap information or other spying facilities, as if they don't do it unofficially already. For all practical purposes, anyone can wiretap you, monitor your e-mail, and spy on you in any way they please.

Some years ago, the Supreme Court mysteriously discovered a previously non-existent "right to privacy" when they were looking for an excuse to legalize infanticide. One wonders whether or not this wonderful "right to privacy" will have any effect on the kind of unlimited Federal government spying which has gone on for years, but which the neo-con regime in Washington now no longer even bothers to conceal.

Saturday, April 22, 2006

Democracy Sucks

Has anyone besides me noticed that "democracy" seems designed to ensure that good people lose with good grace to the wealthy and dishonest assholes who have stacked the whole deck from square one?

Thursday, April 20, 2006

Adolf Hitler (1889 - )

He was born into humble circumstances, the son of an obscure civil servant in a remote corner of a crumbling empire, yet his name resounds throughout the world to this day.

He was rejected by the universities of his time for formal enrollment in art and in architecture, and yet he erected mighty buildings and monuments, and today a simple postcard that he drew in ink or charcoal fetches staggering sums at auction.

He never achieved more than a public school education, yet he wrote a book which has outsold every other book in history except for the Bible.

He fought as a front line soldier through all four years of the greatest war in history up to that time, never rising above the rank of corporal, but he won both of his country's highest decorations for bravery under fire and rose to command the mightiest armies on earth.

Almost unique in the history of his century, he was not a lawyer or an aristocrat or a man of inherited wealth and privilege, but a man who once earned his daily bread with the labor of his hands, and yet he conquered politics and rose to the leadership of the most brilliant and creative nation on earth.

So that his people might travel across the land he loved quickly and cheaply, he created a simple and sturdy automobile still in use today, and a network of highways that still spans Germany.

His game and forestry laws are still in force, and are praised by ecologists as a model of environmental protection.

His economic program received the sincerest form of flattery from the loathsome Roosevelt, who stole it and copied it into the context of the American Depression as his own.

Every man who ever met him personally, even those who became his bitterest enemies, spoke of him forever afterwards with awe and admiration.

His courtesy and his gallantry toward women were legendary. With his power and his prestige he could have had any woman he wanted, but the woman he chose as his life's partner, and who eventually died by his side, was a simple and humble daughter of the people.

He did not drink. He did not smoke. He was a lifelong lover of animals and children and was happiest in the company of toddlers rather than statesmen and soldiers, and no one ever overheard him use a profane word or tell a smutty joke. He lifted his people up from the mud of defeat and despair and alien domination, and he died trying to do the same for all of us.

To this day, his memory is kept green by the Aryan peoples of Germany and the world, even though it means prison, and in some countries death, to honor him or his legacy within the sight or hearing of the tyrant.

He has been slandered, vilified, lied about, cursed, distorted, and damned every day since his death by the most powerful and evil tyranny mankind has ever known, and yet his name and his Symbol cannot be suppressed by force or by propaganda. As we begin this new Millennium, his book is read and his name is on more lips than ever before and his image and his strength fills the hearts of a whole new generation of young Aryan men and women. He is invincible and immortal, and Victory shall one day be his.

He holds out his hand to us all. He offers us his strength and his wisdom, at a time when we so badly need both. Let us keep him always in our hearts and our minds and our souls, until the day comes when once more we may speak his name aloud and raise on high the sacred Banner for which he and so many millions more lived and died.

Tuesday, April 18, 2006

Whites Headed For Extinction

Sometimes, I can't help but feel pessimistic. I know that I shouldn't and that, rather, I should be out there saying, "Go team!" to my fellow whites. But I'm not so sure that that would do much good, judging by our present situation.
America has been overrun with invaders, and its leaders don't give a damn and won't do anything about it. And the "home team" isn't doing too much about it either.

We (whites, that is) know that there are somewhere between 11 and 20 million illegal alien Mexicans in the U.S. The keyword here is "illegal," just in case you hadn't picked that up. They have invaded our country.

Some of them say that they plan on taking it back, reminding us of how many whites were ruthlessly massacred at the Alamo many years ago.
Others say that we robbed this continent from them--or, as they say in their posters, written in Espanol as they walk down our American streets, "Continente Robado!"

Some also say "Revolucion es la Solucion!" I'm going to let you guesswhat that means translated into English.

They have marches of 500,000 people in our cities, demanding that they be made citizens.

Of course, let's not forget that they'll all instantly qualify for anti-white discrimination masquerading under the euphemism of affirmative action, if allowed citizenship. Won't that be great--up to 20 million more folks who will instantly qualify for affirmative action?

Where are the white folks in response to this?

Well, we talk among each other in hushed tones.

Most of us go to work, you know--supporting with our tax dollars the asinine policies of our so-called leaders. Still, other "leaders" salivate over the potential millions of voters.

Take, for example, the Republicans who probably smoked too much dope in their younger days and think that they'll get some votes for their political pandering, just as they enjoy the cheap labor. And let's not forget the Democrats who think of ways of getting anti-white discrimination lawsuits and, of course, the real vote. Both parties suck--no matter how you look at it.

Meanwhile, we whites are too busy fighting, working, and whining to make a stand--that is, those who aren't too busy shivering in corners, worried about some sobriquet such as "racist" being tossed their way. And isn't it comforting to know that we pay for it all with our tax dollars?

One gentleman, Olaf Childress, editor of the paper The First Freedom, has been working valiantly to get some so-called pro-white groups--and your average American who is just fed up with it all--to make a stand with him, protesting the mass insanity that he and his fellow American whites face. Yet most seem to ignore him.

Why? They didn't think of it first. They don't go bowling together on Sundays. Maybe, he's a different branch of Christianity, or maybe there are some who don't like Christians. Maybe, he asked another pro-white group, and this other pro-white group refuses to be cordial to others due to spilt milk long since gone sour. Perhaps he parts his hair off to the wrong side. I don't know. I really don't. But that's all I can figure.

I made an online video to help promote this event, because I think it would be nice, if for once--just one time--white folks somehow got rid of their pride and back-stabbing and came together to make a stand. You can see the video promo here:

I guess that's wishful thinking on my part, however, to think that whites could temporarily overcome their differences and stand together. The most number of white folks I've seen mustered together was at Dukefest--a worthwhile meeting but one that should have had tens of thousands, not mere hundreds of people, in participation.

Meanwhile, we've got anti-white discrimination in every facet of American civilization as the result of so-called civil rights rallies of long ago--rallies that resulted in asinine laws that openly discriminate against whites--laws that even prevent blind testing that require such simple concepts as math and English (you know, that language that all Americans were once virtually required to speak in public).

And soon, if things continue on their present trend--with few whites willing to make a stand--20 million illegal aliens will qualify for affirmative action. 20 million more Mexicans might very well get precedence over whites in hiring, loans, testing, etc., ad nauseam. Meanwhile, most whites squabble among themselves.

I wonder what Mexicans would do if 20 million whites walked across their borders with signs that said we were taking Mexico back, and also required affirmative action for whites? The fact is--whites are the only ones so gullible to allow this--in all predominantly white nations across the globe.
Meanwhile, most average whites take some antacid and continue with business as usual, as our leaders graciously tell the invaders, "Sure, we'll give anything you want, and give ourselves a raise while we're at it."

Who cares--at least not enough to make a stand? Or so it seems. I really don't know.

Whites are a distinct minority in the world. There are less than 1 billion whites in a world of 5 billion people, in which it seems all others feel that they must move in to a predominantly white country. Where was our affirmative action? The whites in Santo Domingo were massacred when they became a distinct minority--now known as the ever-so lovely Haiti. Many whites in Rhodesia were massacred when they handed over power--now known as the beautiful Zimbabwe. Currently, while the news conveniently neglects the issue, countless tens of thousands of whites are being brutalized and massacred in South Africa, which also has some new name to it. Perhaps, it's time for America to follow the trend, since most whites won't even stand up for their rights?

In the future, we can all say, "United, we stood; divided, we fell. Adios, amigos." Or we can say, "At least I tried to make a difference, for the betterment of my country."

You choose how the story ends.

-Mark Farrell

[Dear Mark - There is a solution. We have to understand that the Titanic is sinking, the whole ship cannot be saved any longer because we pissed away too much time, and we have to take to the lifeboats. We have to seize a portion of land in the Pacific Northwest and make our own country. We either do that or we perish from the face of the earth. Your choice, guys. - HAC]

Monday, April 17, 2006

The Lady of Forli (1463-1509)

The Weird Aryan History Series - Lesson #7

[You know, there WERE a few real warrior princesses. They didn't wear armored bikinis like Xena, either, and they were definitely NOT politically correct feminists. This one is for Sue Enders. A REAL strong womyn for you. - HAC]

Caterina Sforza
Duchess of Forlì and Imola (1463-1509)

Fifteenth-century Italy was a battleground of warring city-states and competing families. The city-state of Milan ranked high in wealth and power. And its rulers, the Sforza family, were as brilliant and ambitious as any of their rivals.

In 1462, the Duke of Milan, Galeazzo Maria Sforza, fathered an illegitimate child. The baby's mother was the wife of a friend and follower of the duke. But the birth of little Caterina neither surprised nor shocked the Milanese court. (Note that the portrait shown here may or may not be that of Caterina. Experts disagree.) Galeazzo Maria would eventually have four children born in wedlock and six out of wedlock. Nevertheless, Caterina's birth had broken a social rule. This baby girl would grow up to break many other rules in the course of her eventful life. [I might also add that Galeazzo Maria is one of my favorite Renaissance princes--brilliant in every way and mad as a hatter. - HAC]

As a duke's daughter in Renaissance Italy, Caterina was offered an excellent education. In her view, however, this education was not the special privilege it would have been for other girls. From the beginning, Caterina was bored by literature, philosophy, Latin, history and the other subjects her tutors tried to teach her. She much preferred dancing, horseback riding, hunting, and other vigorous activities.

Caterina learned more from observing people and events than from reading books. Italian politics were in a perpetual state of turmoil. There was no king who ruled all of Italy, as there were kings in Spain, France, and England. Instead, almost every city, large or small, had its own duke, count, or lord; and each city was trying to gain territory, economic advantages, or protection from its neighbors. From Rome, the pope also played a major role in politics, because he ruled many city-states as well as the Catholic Church. Caterina watched the complex and often violent political moves that made Milan one of Italy's great powers along with Florence, Venice, the Kingdom of Naples, and the states owned by the pope. Young Caterina was ambitious, active, and pleasure-loving. She intended to achieve both fame and fortune--right away, if possible.

By the time she was 15, Caterina's childhood had ended. Her family married her to Girolamo Riario, a grown man in his twenties. The Riario family had risen to sudden prominence when Girolamo's uncle was elected Pope Sixtus the Fourth. As wife to the pope's nephew, Caterina could expect to gain great wealth. The world would have been amazed if Sixtus had not used his position to advance his family's fortunes.

From 1477 to 1484, Caterina and Girolamo spent most of their time in Rome, where Caterina was much admired for her blond beauty. During these years, she also bore four children: Bianca, Ottaviano, Cesare, and Giovanni Livio. Caterina and her husband prospered because of their family ties. The pope gave the young couple title to the cities of Forlì and Imola, located northeast of Rome beyond the mountains that run up the spine of Italy. These cities had once belonged to other families, of course. But this fact posed little problem for the Riarios, whose wealth and security seemed assured.

Then everything changed. In 1484, Pope Sixtus died. Caterina and Girolamo worked hard to control the election of the next pope. In a show of force, Caterina belted on a curved sword and led a group of soldiers to take over Castel Sant Angelo, one of Rome's greatest fortresses. Girolamo, however, acted much less decisively, and the Riarios' candidate lost the election. The new pope was Innocent the Eighth, who was no friend of the Riarios. From now on, Girolamo and Caterina would have to struggle just to keep what they had.

Caterina and Girolamo withdrew to their cities, Forlì and Imola. Even there, the numerous enemies of the Riario family repeatedly tried to overthrow them. In 1488, the Orsi family succeeded or so they thought. They murdered Girolamo and captured Caterina and her children. Caterina knew very well that she and the children might be the killers' next victims. She showed cool courage in her desperate situation. She managed to escape her jailers through trickery, saying she was going to parley when in fact she was seeking protection. The result was that she recaptured an important fortress that overlooked Forlì. Then she threatened to level the city with her cannon. Her enemies fled, and Caterina emerged firmly in control of the two cities.

The next years of Caterina's life were fairly happy ones. She had not loved Girolamo, although they had shared an interest in advancing the family fortunes. Now independent and still youthful at 28, Caterina fell exuberantly in love with Giacomo Feo, the 19-year-old younger brother of one of her loyal military commanders. Caterina was a passionate person. For a while, she reveled in her new love and also in her other enthusiasms. She avidly collected herbal recipes, especially those that might preserve her health and beauty. Also, she still enjoyed dancing, hunting, and all forms of activity.

Yet there were problems, too. Giacomo became demanding and arrogant, making enemies for himself and Caterina among the cities' noble families. Furthermore, the couple was always short of money. Their own way of life was expensive, as "making a good show" was a way of asserting status in relation to other cities. Also costly were the troops they needed to defend the cities in dangerous times. But as soon as Caterina decreed a new tax, the wily citizens of Forlì and Imola found a way around it. Thus both the citizens and the great families were unhappy, whether over taxes or from fear of Giacomo's influence. There were frequent little wars and rebellions, characterized by poisonings, stabbings, secret meetings, and letters fastened to arrows.

In 1495, as Giacomo and Caterina rode through the streets of Forlì, assassins stabbed Giacomo to death. Caterina was personally devastated, but instead of collapsing in grief, she took swift action. She vented her fury on the killers and their families, executing or torturing many and imprisoning more. Then, to stave off her sorrow, she turned to work. She enriched her cities with building projects, creating beautiful gardens and public works.

The next year, the grain harvest was poor in the lands around Florence. The Florentines sent an envoy to buy grain – 130,000 bushels of it – from Forlì and Imola. The envoy was the handsome, charming, and intelligent Giovanni de' Medici. He was also a nobleman, born into a minor branch of the great Medici family that ruled Florence. Soon Caterina was in love again, and Giovanni loved her in return. But the marriage of two people from such powerful families was likely to arouse opposition, so they were wed in secret.

Then, at 36, Caterina bore Giovanni a son, the last and best loved of her children. (Caterina’s eldest son, Ottaviano Riario had grown into a lazy, self-indulgent, young man with much ambition and few abilities.)

Sadly for Caterina, Giovanni died of an illness in 1498. The timing was unfortunate. His death left Caterina alone to face one of the most ruthless, ambitious, and implacable families in Europe, the Borgias.

Pope Innocent had died and been replaced in 1492 by Rodrigo Borgia, who took the name Alexander the Sixth. The new pope's son Cesare set out to increase his family's power by brutally seizing control of central Italy, one small city-state at a time. Cesare was a bad fellow, even by the standards of the time. He poisoned his sister's husband so that he could make a more profitable match for her. On another occasion, he hosted a lavish dinner for a group of his captains whom he suspected of disloyalty, then locked the doors and had them all strangled. With the pope's power and money behind him, Cesare now took aim at Forlì and Imola.

Once before when she had been in danger, Caterina had said, "If I have to die, I want to die like a man!" Now, she seemed likely to do just that. A poet/spy that she employed warned her that Cesare had 15,000 troops and 17 cannons. Still Caterina refused to flee and give up her cities. She announced her determination to withstand Cesare Borgia's siege. Annoyed at being defied by a woman, Cesare offered 10,000 ducats for Caterina, dead or alive.

Caterina fought as she had always fought "like a tiger." She put on armor herself and encouraged her men from the city walls. Still, the superior Borgia forces advanced, first to the city, then to its fortress. Caterina and her troops made their last stand in the fortress's great tower. Borgia captured two of her children and displayed them before the walls, threatening to kill them if Caterina did not surrender. In response Caterina pulled up her dress and shouted down, "In this belly I can make more children, but my city you will not have!"

Finally, the inevitable happened, and the Borgia large army captured the tower. Luckily for Caterina, she was taken prisoner not by one of Cesare's men but by a French captain who admired her beauty and courage. In the end, this French connection saved her life, because the French code of chivalry said that women could not be considered prisoners of war. Still, Caterina suffered greatly before the Frenchman persuaded the pope to release her. While she was a prisoner, Cesare Borgia brutally raped her and then locked her in a filthy cell in Castel Sant Angelo, the same Roman fortress she had once captured. To gain her freedom, Caterina was forced at last to give up her claims to Forlì and Imola.

By the time the pope allowed her to go free in 1501, Caterina was in poor health, but she was by no means crushed in spirit. To the many people who hated the Borgias, she was a heroine. A Venetian commentator said she was "Without doubt at that time the first lady of Italy." (As for Cesare, within a few years he lost power, fled from Italy, and died in a minor battle in Spain.)

Though she tried, Caterina never regained control of her cities. She did have one great pleasure, however. Her young son by Giovanni de' Medici proved to be a child after her own heart, fascinated by horses, swordplay, and military activities. She devoted her last years to raising and training him. Caterina died in 1509, just a little too soon to see her favorite son, known as Giovanni dalle Bande Nere, become a brilliant soldier and a national hero. It would have pleased her enormously to know that Giovanni's son, her grandson, became Cosimo the First, Grand Duke of Tuscany.

Sunday, April 16, 2006

Israel: The Dead Roach In America's Salad

[Charley is my darling...]

The Israeli lobby and the neoconservatives are beating the drums for war with Iran. I hope the president is not that dangerously stupid. The betting on whether he is that stupid is about even.

The neocons – who, being self-centered, seemingly have no concept of human nature – are advancing the premise that a military attack on Iran will cause the people to lose faith in their government and result in regime change.

A military attack on Iran will have the opposite effect. The people will rally to their government, and any hope of regime change will be dead. That people will rally around their existing leaders in the face of an attack by a foreign power is as certain as sunrise. Neither Israel nor the U.S. could do a greater favor for the ruling mullahs and Iran's president than to launch an attack. It would cement their hold on power.

The neocons' fallacious premise has already been disproved. In the first Gulf War, the first Bush administration confidently incited the Shi'ites and the Kurds to rebel after Saddam Hussein's forces were expelled from Kuwait. The administration thought that Saddam, embarrassed by a crushing military defeat, would fall from power in Iraq easily. Instead, he rallied his forces and crushed both the Shi'ites in the south and the Kurds in the north. Oops.

In the first place, it is not embarrassing for a Third World country with obsolete equipment to be defeated by the world's No. 1 military superpower. In the second place, the Sunnis, however much they might have disliked Saddam, disliked even more the thought of being ruled by Kurds or Shi'ites. In the third place, by President George H. W. Bush's decision to not go to Baghdad, Saddam could say he duked it out with the world's superpower and was still standing after the fight. That, in most eyes, could be counted as a victory.

Some months ago, an Iranian human-rights advocate pleaded with the current Bush administration to cease its rhetorical attacks on the Iranian government. She said, quite accurately, that such attacks make life impossible for Iranian reformers. Needless to say, the blockheads in Washington ignored her.

What did we do when the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were attacked? We rallied behind George W. Bush – Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives. That's the natural reaction of normal human beings, and the Iranians are normal human beings. Attack their country and they will rally round the flag.

The Iranians still insist they are not seeking nuclear weapons, and there's not a scrap of evidence to contradict that claim. They still adhere to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. They have often called for a nuclear-free Middle East.

Once again, the dead roach in America's salad is Israel. The U.S. hypocritically opposes a nuclear-free Middle East because Israel has nuclear weapons. We hypocritically claim the Iranians are in violation of international law when, in fact, it is Israel that refuses to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and refuses international inspections. Given our craven obedience to Israel, we have exactly zero credibility in the Arab and Muslim world.

As I have said before, I don't care if the Iranians do develop nuclear weapons. My whole adult life was lived with 30,000 Soviet nuclear weapons aimed at me. I can certainly live with the six or seven Iran might be able to scrape together in the next five to 10 years. In the meantime, the U.S. government should kick the Israeli lobby out of the country and support Iran and the Arab League in pushing for a nuclear-free Middle East.

The Israeli lobby pushing America to fight yet another war for Israel reminds me of what the French ambassador to Great Britain said at a party: "Why does the world allow this (expletive deleted) little country to cause so much trouble?"

Why indeed? You should ask your politicians that question.

-Charley Reese

Saturday, April 15, 2006

H. A. Cassandra

Hello Harold,

I'm plodding through A Distant Thunder. Don't get much time to read these days. Once more, your gift of prophecy seems to be becoming apparent.

I've come across the part where Shane tells the interviewer about the anti-poster and stickering laws that put many NVA people in prison. I don't know when you first wrote that, [2004 - HAC] but here in England something called the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act came into force this April.

Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act covers everything from noisy burglar alarms to abandoned shopping trolleys and the perennial problem of litter. Some other powers that came in force Thursday 6th April were restrictions on the distribution of flyers, pamphlets and handouts.

Fly-posting: on the spot fines raised to a maximum of £80 for those caught fly-posting. Fines and clean-up charges can be issued to the beneficiary of the poster.


[So much for "standing for civilization," eh? The land where the whole concept of freedom of speech began has now effectively abolished it with their anti-leaflet laws, "race relations" laws, and "anti-social behavior" court orders. Britain grows to resemble George Orwell's Airstrip One more and more every day. - HAC]

Friday, April 14, 2006

Surf's Up!

The Chief Rabbi of Great Britain, Sir Jonathan Sacks, has warned in a public statement that there is a "tsunami of anti-Semitic hatred" on its way in Europe and America. Well, one can only hope.

Anti-Semitism is society's natural response to the presence of Jews. It is an anti-body to a spiritual infection, and a sign of a society's basic health. A healthy and skeptical anti-Semitism is a sign that a society has not become too stupid to survive.

"Globalization has led some people to see Israel as the cause of all the world's conflicts," Rabbi Sacks told BBC Radio 4's Sunday Programme. Apparently Sir Jonathan shares the common Jewish view that all non-Jews are brainless morons who are incapable of seeing what is right in front of them, specifically the Israeli butchery and innumerable crimes against humanity perpetrated in Israel's name against a defenseless nation.

In point of fact, globalization has nothing to do with it. Many people do see Israel as the cause of most of the world's conflicts--and quite rightly so. Most of the conflict in the world today has largely to do with the attempt of the Jewish people, spanning three generations, to seize a strip of land on the eastern seaboard of the Mediterranean which does not belong to them, and to dispossess the rightful owners of that land through murder, expulsion, and genocide.

"Holocaust denial and hatred of Jews is circulating widely in best-selling books and prime time TV," he warned. Excellent. So it should be. The truth about the despicable Holocaust fraud needs to be shouted from the rooftops.

"Islamic militants have used Israel's treatment of Palestinians to rally support for their violent campaigns." Uh--yeah, so? Why shouldn't they, rabbi? If Israel doesn't want their mistreatment of Palestinians to be used against them, have they ever considered maybe not mistreating Palestinians? Or is that concept too revolutionary for them to grasp?

The chief rabbi pointed out that wars in Chechnya, the Philippines and Indonesia would be happening even if Israel did not exist. He said nothing, however, about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which certainly would not be occurring if Israel did not exist. Sir Jonathan also pointedly failed to mention the six wars in the Middle East which have occurred over the past sixty years since Israel's founding, none of which would have taken place if Israel did not exist. Nor did he mention the Gulf War, or the 9/11 attack, or the Munich affair, or any one of the 1001 other bloody events which would not have occurred had Israel not existed.

Rabbi Sacks said "Conflicts around the globe have begun to have uncomfortable repercussions for some Jewish communities in Europe. This is all a kind of tsunami of anti-Semitism which is taking place a long way from this country but (of) which Europe seems unaware."

Oh, I think we're aware of you people, rabbi. And one of these days someone is going to take the Jews down a peg and find out what happens to those who raise their hands against these tyrants, oppressors, and murderers--nothing.

You see, Jewish power isn't anywhere near what it was fifty, or even twenty years ago. We are fast approaching the time when direct and exuberant protest against the Jews and their spiritual poison will once more become possible. Then we'll see how Rabbi Sacks can dance like a Yiddler on the Roof. With the roof on fire.

Thursday, April 13, 2006

Benvenuto Cellini (1527)


[Okay, now here's one for the Italians. Benvenuto Cellini was one of the greatest goldmiths and metalworkers of any age, and his works in gold and silver plate today fetch stunning prices at auctions and are proudly displayed in museums across the world. He also wrote an autobiography which is one of the most interesting and funny I have ever read. - HAC]

Benvenuto Cellini, Artist and Murderer
by Edward J. Lowell

After the siege, [of Rome, 1527] when things had got back to their normal conditions of irregular ruffianism, Benvenuto resumed the practice of his art.

He had a younger brother, a soldier in the service of Duke Alessandro de Medici. This brother was killed in a scuffle with the city guard, by an arquebusier whom he was attacking with his sword. The young man's death filled Benvenuto with grief, so that the pope noticed it, and remonstrated with him on his want of philosophy.

"I took," says Cellini, "To watching the arquebusier as though he had been a girl I was in love with. The man had formerly been in the light cavalry, but afterward had joined the arquebusiers as one of the Bargello's corporals; and what increased my rage was that he had used these boastful words: 'If it had not been for me, who killed that brave young man, the least trifle of delay would have resulted in his putting us all to flight with great disaster.'

"When I saw that the fever caused by always seeing him about was depriving me of sleep and appetite, and was bringing me by degrees to sorry plight, I overcame my repugnance to so low and not quite praiseworthy an enterprise, and made my mind up one evening to rid myself of the torment.

"The fellow lived in a house near a place called Torre Sanguigna, next door to the lodging of one of the most fashionable courtesans in Rome, named Signora Antea. It had just struck twenty-four, and he was standing at the house-door, with his sword in hand, having risen from supper. With great address I stole up to him, holding a large Pistoian dagger, and dealt him a back-handed stroke, with which I meant to cut his head clean off; but as he turned round very suddenly, the blow fell upon the point of his left shoulder and broke the bone. He sprang up, dropped his sword, half-stunned with the great pain, and took flight. I followed after, and in four steps caught him up, when I lifted my dagger above his head, which he was holding very low, and hit him in the back exactly at the junction of the nape-bone and the neck. The poniard entered this point so deep into the bone that, though I used all my strength to pull it out, I was not able.

"For just at that moment four soldiers sprang out from Antea's lodging, and obliged me to set hand to my own sword to defend my life. Leaving the poniard, then, I made off, and fearing I might be recognized, took refuge in the palace of Duke Alessandro, which was between Piazza Navona and the Rotunda. On my arrival I asked to see the duke; who told me that, if I was alone, I need only keep quiet and have no further anxiety, but go on working at the jewel which the pope had set his heart on, and stay eight days indoors.

"He gave this advice the more securely, because the soldiers had now arrived who interrupted the completion of my deed; they held the dagger in their hand, and were relating how the matter happened, and the great trouble they had to pull the weapon from the neck and head-bone of the man, whose name they did not know. Just then Giovan Bandini came up, and said to them: 'That poniard is mine, and I lent it to Benvenuto, who was bent on revenging his brother.' The soldiers were profuse in their expressions of regret at having interrupted me, although my vengeance had been amply satisfied."

"More than eight days elapsed, and the pope did not send for me according to his custom. Afterwards he summoned me through his chamberlain, the Bolognese nobleman I have already mentioned, who let me, in his own modest manner, understand that his Holiness knew all, but was very well inclined toward me, and that I had only to mind my work and keep quiet. When we reached the presence, the pope cast so menacing a glance toward me that the mere look of his eyes made me tremble. Afterward, upon examining my work, his countenance cleared, and he began to praise me beyond measure, saying that I had done a vast amount in a short time. Then, looking me straight in the face, he added: 'Now that you are cured, Benvenuto, take heed how you live.' I, who understood his meaning, promised that I would. Immediately upon this I opened a very fine shop in the Banchi, opposite Raffaello, and there I finished the jewel after the lapse of four months."

This way of treating murder on the part of the pope did not tend to discourage murderers. Benvenuto's second successful exploit in that line, however, took place in the season of anarchy between the death of Clement VII and the election of Paul III.

The chronic turbulence of the times became acute on such occasions as this. Pompeo, a rival goldsmith, took the opportunity of the general confusion to come with ten armed men and try to pick a quarrel with Cellini. The latter controlled himself for a time, being unwilling to have his own friends drawn into the difficulty. Shortly afterward, however, he followed and came up with Pompeo, broke through the line of his defenders, and stabbed him twice with a dagger. He says he had not meant to kill him.

Pompeo's bravi ran up to the corpse, but took no steps to avenge their master; the whole flower of the young men of the neighborhood, except the Milanese, who were townsmen of Pompeo, came crowding in to help to save the murderer at the risk of their lives; a cardinal offered his palace as a place of refuge; and the new pope, when appealed to by friends of the murdered man, calmly assured them that the provocation was great, and that "men like Benvenuto, unique in their profession, stand above the law."

Wednesday, April 12, 2006

Constitutional Commentary #12

Subject: Democracy

Dear HAC:

In answer to those who bitch and moan about the one-party state thing, I have looked over the Constitutional Draft and it appears to me that the system your people are designing for the Northwest, with its two institutionalized factions of Government and Opposition, is just as "democratic" as anything that actually exists in the United States Congress or any state legislature today. Possibly more so, since we don't really have even a genuine two party system in this country. You've got your two parties, you just don't call the Democrats and Republicans.

-Joe Czanek


Subject: Unitary State

Greetings, HAC:

I imagine you're going to be getting some flak over the one-party state aspect of government in our new Constitution. Don't worry about it. The United States is effectively a one-party state right now, run by corporate and Jewish interests. The only choice we have is to vote for whichever wealthy, metrosexual individual male or female we choose, either Republican or Democratic. If you don't believe this, you've never tried to get a third party on the ballot in America.

I believe that it is absolutely essential to break the two-party system, and if we can't do that by having many parties like some European countries, then let's just admit we have no intention of allowing anyone other than our own kind to rule and have done with it. At least that we get rid of the hypocrisy which is just about the worst part of our present corrupt and criminal system. Having a so-called multi-party democracy is pointless if you don't actually have multiple parties.

At least under the new Northwest system there is an institutionalized opposition that will (hopefully) actually OPPOSE, whereas one of the main reasons we're in the shitty mess we're in right now is that we have no bona fide opposition party. Whichever one of the clones is in power, Republican or Democrat, the other one hunkers down and cowers like scared rabbits and lets them do whatever the hell they want. The only reason that Bill Clinton was impeached was because he was so personally loathsome that it got to the point where even his own kind couldn't stomach him any more, and even then, they blinked and refused to kick his stanky ass out.

-Bob Summers


Subject: Felony in the Republic To Come

Hmmm. I guess it depends of the felony. Something like a felony assault conviction stemming from a bar fight would be one thing. However, I have no problem with revoking the citizenship of a rapist - not to mention his balls.


Subject: Felony in the Republic To Come

Dear HAC:

A possible solution to help the situation is instead of revoking citizenship, why not just "demote" felons to the lowest rank. This might miss the mark that Rad had in mind but I think there's a need to revoke voting privileges on a criminal basis. And what is more serious than a felon that would leave you capable to revoke? (Assuming treason is still punishable by death)



Subject: Northwest Looking More and More Like It

Dear HAC:

A year ago, I have to admit I was still dubious that the Northwest idea was workable and the way to go. Now I have to admit, it's looking like the only hope we've got left. You're right. There just isn't anything else.

-K. L.


Subject: Kill All The Lawyers?

Dear HAC:

I just thought of something. I believe by not having any professional lawyers or any judiciary/supreme court, we are being over reactive against today's American paradigms. If we create a new nation-state that absolutely excludes nonwhites and Jews, we've really pretty much already eliminated the aforementioned problems.

On a different note, I'd create a very powerful and authoritarian Immigration/Customs/Race and Resettlement agency.

At the top, I'd have an agency called the Bureau for Racial Hygiene, it'd be made up of medical/physical anthropologist (not "cultural anthologists" like all those egalitarian kikes like Franz Boas, Ashley Montagu born Israel Ehrenberg, Gene Weltfisch, etc.) I'd throw in a few historians and linguists too. If we did it right, the border patrol would not need to be so strong since we'd be known (infamous) for being a whites-only, racist place.

-Ken Doig


Subject: Wimmin in the Republic

Dear HAC:

Thanks for printing this [on the Lebensborn.] As a white English speaking South African, it makes me mad when the un-learned public swallow all the propaganda about Hitler and the Germans and their bad beliefs! I only know of all the good ones.



Subject: Long Time No Hear

Dear HAC:

Thanks for putting me back on the list. Also for sending the link to the proposed constitution. Will read it, & then give some input. Have gotten letters (e & regular) from people who have looked it over, some are excited (pleasant sense), not a bit excited (unpleasant sense), depending on what they're looking like. But, I would guess this is the point of asking people to read it & then give their responses. Hopefully most--positive & negative-- will be intelligent discussion.

-John Gerhardt

Monday, April 10, 2006

A Dying Breed

[This is from December, but the subject of Rhodesia came up in another context elsewhere on the Net. I didn't know Don well, and it was many years ago, but I remember that he was a good man and a good soldier, a reminder of all that was good in a land I once called my own. - HAC]

One of Zimbabwe's last remaining white farmers, a 68 year-old man, was strangled and burned to death in an attack inside his home on November 27th. Don Stewart was set attacked before dawn in the bedroom of his fortified homestead near Norton, 25 miles west of Harare (proper name Salisbury.) He was one of the last 300 white farmers left in Zimbabwe. There were 4,000 five years ago.

A gang of kaffirs broke through the roof of the house with axes and crowbars and strangled Mr Stewart in his bed. Then they poured gasoline all over his body and set him on fire.

Don Stewart was a native-born White Rhodesian who knew no other home than the once proud, prosperous, and peaceful land which has been turned into a black-ruled slice of hell by the deranged Marxist Robert Mugabe and his gang of sub-human thugs from the ZANU-PF party. Deranged is a word I use advisedly; the private opinion of most of the international diplomatic community is that Mugabe has indeed gone insane, possibly suffering from tertiary syphilis.

After five years of continuous violence, threats, and intimidation directed against him and his family, Stewart sent his British-born wife Margaret back to England, but remained himself to try to carry on the farm alone. His son, David, worked alongside him on Ingwerati farm and lived a mile away in a cottage. He has also been the target of threats from the ZANU murderers and has been ordered to leave his land.

Zimbabwe's summer rains finally started last week, but few crops have been planted because the kaffirs have murdered, terrorized, and driven all the White farmers off their lands, and native African agriculture is so primitive that it is incapable of feeding the starving nation. In addition to driving the farmers off their land, almost all of the seed grain, ivestock, and agricultural equipment on Zimbabwe's farms have been stolen, in many cases by the police.

Saturday, April 08, 2006

Gotz von Berlichingen (1502)



[Now, just to show I'm even-handed, here's a forgotten hero for you from Germany. - HAC]

The famous Gotz von Berlichingen, who died on July 23, 1562, was a typical Raubritter, a petty aristocrat making a living serving less petty aristocrats in wars and feuds, and getting family finances in order by kidnapping and robbing merchants and burghers. After losing his hand in combat in 1504 (a missile from a "field snake," or small cannon, hit his sword hilt, which, along with his arm greaves, ripped his lower arm to shreds) he had a mechanical hand made for him, which resulted in his cognomen Von der Eiserne Hand--Gotz of the Iron Hand.

His memoir is aimed mainly at justifying his role during the Peasant Wars of 1525, when, as he claims, he was coerced into leading a fraction of rebels. His brief stint among the Bundschuh, and his subsequent incarceration as a sympathizer of the abortive revolt made him somewhat of a folk hero...a reputation cemented by Johann Wolfgang Goethe's in his Sturm und Drang drama "Gotz von Berlichingen."



The action and battle for Nuremberg having taken place on the Sunday after Valentine's Day, it happened soon afterwards, around Michaelmas, that I rode down from Sodenberg with Neidhardt von Thüringen, under whom I was serving at the time. As we moved along, we became aware of two horsemen near a small patch of woods, in the vicinity of a village called Ober-Eschenbach, and these men were Endris von Gemund, bailiff of Solleck, and his servant, whom people called The Ape.

Now, preceding these events, when I had joined up with Lord Neidhardt, there had been a meeting at Hammelburg, and Neidhardt was there with Count Wilhelm von Henneberg and Count Michael von Wertheim, who had lots of strife because of an enemy who was the aforementioned Count Michael's enemy whom they had called to that meeting. And the proceedings were administered and arbitrated.

But as I went to join Lord Neidhardt at the inn and walked over to his servants--who by now were drunk for the most part--the aforementioned Ape was so far gone and with so much wind in his nose [i.e. garrulous] that he launched into much odd talk. And he said to me: "So, Junker, are you come to join us?" and some such sarcastic nonsense with which he intended to provoke me.

Peeved, I told him, "I can do without you calling me Junker, and without your derision and your gluttony. Because once we happen to meet out in the field, we'll see who is the Junker and who is the serving man."

When we were riding down from Sodenberg, I thought to myself that this just might be him riding with his Junker. And I drove my horse up a high, steep mountain, bringing up my crossbow while moving. Next, I moved straight at them. But the Junker was fleeing toward the village, so that I feared he would start inciting the peasants. The Ape also was armed with a crossbow, and took to flight just like his master. As I closed in with him, he was forced to enter a deep hollow path. I let him and shot at him over his back. Now I wanted to draw the crossbow again, but thought it unlikely that he would wait around for me, since he, too, had a bolt on his crossbow. And I had no-one with me, thus didn't bother with my weapon.

I followed him into the hollow path, and since he saw that I did not reload, he waited for me at the gate until I had closed in. Then he shot at me, and hit me right into my breastplate so that the bolt burst into splinters that flew up all over my head. I threw my crossbow at his neck (since I had no bolt on it anyway) and drew my sword.

I ran him to the ground so that his nag hit its nose into the dirt. But he came up again, all the while yelling at the peasants they should come to his aid. And as I was running around with him inside the village, there was a peasant holding a crossbow, with a bolt already loaded. I charged at him before he could shoot and knocked the bolt from the bow. And then, I remained with him, sheathing my sword, and identifying myself, saying that I was serving under Neidhardt von Thurigen and thus was a staunch member of the Bishop of Fulda's party.

Meanwhile, a whole gang of peasants had arrived and surrounded me, armed with boar spears, hand axes, throwing axes, wood axes, and rocks. If you don't dare, you won't win, if you don't hit, you won't score--so consequently the axes and rocks were flying past my head that I thought they'd dent my helmet, when a peasant was running at me with a boar spear. I launched myself at him, and as I was clearing my sword, the peasant struck at me, hitting my arm so that I thought he had broken it. And as I thrust at him, he fell under my horse, and I didn't have enough space to lean over to get at him.

Finally, I broke through, but then a peasant was running after me who was wielding a wood cutting ax. Him I gave a blow that he fell next to the stockade. At that moment my horse gave out, since I had ridden him hard, and I became afraid that I might not be able to make it out of the gate. And as I was rushing toward it, someone immediately appeared who wanted to slam it shut. I made it out before he succeeded. A short distance from the gate, I again ran into the Ape, and he had a bolt on his crossbow and four peasants with him, yelling "Hither! Hither!" He shot at me so that I saw the bolt reflect off the soil.

And again, I attacked them with my sword drawn and chased all five of them back into the village when the peasants rang storm over me.

I, however, rode off toward Lord Neidhardt who kept himself far out in the field. We looked back at the peasants, but nobody was about to follow me. As I came close to Neidhardt, a peasant, alerted by his compatriots ringing storm, came running along with his plow. I caught him and forced him to swear to bring my crossbow back out to me, which I had thrown at the Ape and failed to pick up again.


From Pistorius, Wilhelm Friedrich. Lebens-Beschreibung Herrn Gozens von Berlichingen, zugenannt mit der Eisern Hand, Eines zu Zeiten Kaysers Maximilian I und Caroli V kuhnen und tapfern Reichs-Cavaliers, Nurnberg: Adam Jonathan FeBecker, 1731; p. 52f., in Leitzmann, Albert (ed.). Lebensbeschreibung Herrn Gotzens von Berlichingen, nach der Ausgabe von 1731, Halle an der Saale: Verlag von Max Niemeyer, 1916.

Friday, April 07, 2006

King Kong Faces Racism Charge

[How did I end up doing movie reviews? - HAC]

A movie about a big black ape abducting a White girl and going on a berserk spree of crime and violence? What could be racist about that? Surely it's just the latest in the Stanley "Tookie" Williams saga? No, wait--it's the liberal reaction to the latest re-make of the classic 1930s flick King Kong.

"Lots of people say it's racist," writes left-wing columnist and movie reviewer Jim Pinkerton. "And, if it is, why does the film keep getting remade? What does it say about us if the new Kong is a huge hit? Any movie that features white people sailing off to the Third World to capture a giant ape and carry it back to the West for exploitation is going to be seen as a metaphor for colonialism and racism That was true for the original in 1933 and for the two remakes: the campy one in 1976, and the latest, directed by Peter Jackson. (In addition, a Kong wannabe, Mighty Joe Young, has been made twice.)"

Uh, yes. That's right. This geek apparently really does want us all to go off on a deep philosophical ponder about the profound cultural significance and inner psycho-sexual symbolism of a giant monkey.

Actually, this isn't the first time the liberal psychobabble crowd has gotten their hooks into King Kong. In 1976, when the Dino de Laurentis re-make starring Jessica Lange was released, there was all kinds of "sophisticated" commentary on why the gigantic ape figure had no large genitalia like actual male gorillas in the wild do. This was supposed to be some kind of deep and dark psychological need to "emasculate the black man." (I am not making this up, dammit!)

De Laurentis was asked for comment and supposedly replied, "Is-a too expensive for de balls. Dino no spenda million dollars on monkey balls."

The question of "Why does King Kong keep getting re-made?" is in fact mildly interesting, because it's a silly movie with a plot that could have been conceived by a kindergarten class. And yet apparently there are millions of people willing to lay down good cash to see a childish picture that one would think loses its appeal to viewers much past age six. The answer has nothing to do with racism. It's just that Americans are silly people who pay good money to see silly movies.

Jewish movie reviewer David Edelstein, writing in SLATE, notes the "implicit racism of King Kong - the implication that Kong stands for the black man brought in chains from a dark island (full of murderous primitive pagans) and with a penchant for skinny white blondes."

Comparing the new film with the original, the Washington Post's Stephen Hunter observed, "It remains a parable of exploitation, cultural self-importance, the arrogance of the West, all issues that were obvious in the original but unexamined; they remain unexamined here, if more vivid."

That proves it conclusively, folks. The American news media is now proven beyond all doubt to be full of reviewers who have far too little to do. (This is probably the same crowd who came up with the insane notion that the character of Jar Jar Binks in Star Wars was a "racist stereotype." Racist against what, for Pete's sake? Tall pink frog creatures who sound like Bob Marley on speed? Oh, by the way, the famous interplanetary bar scene in the first Star Wars was supposed to be racist as well because "it depicts diversity as ugly and threatening.")

Folks--if you'll pardon me for quoting a Jew, Sigmund Freud once said that "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar." Sometimes a silly movie is just a silly movie.

Wednesday, April 05, 2006

V For Vendetta

Another, more recent movie recommendation. Go see V for Vendetta. It's not perfect--some crude and silly anti-NS stuff in it, and Natalie Portman I can always leave home without. But hey, it's Hollywood, and you're just not going to get perfection out of Hollywood, although sometimes they come amazingly close to something actually watchable. This is one of those times.

The basic message, one of a lone hero striking against a tyrannical neo-con regime, is one we need to absorb and promote. Remember: terrorism is the weapon of the weak against the strong. Every Roman slave who rose up with Spartacus was a "terrorist." Every medieval peasant who picked up a hoe to strike down the baron's tax collector who was raping his daughter was a "terrorist." The Minute Men who stood on the bridge at Lexington were "terrorists" who were resisting King George's gun control laws.

There is nothing "cowardly" about about pitting flesh and bone and a few inconsequential small arms against the might of an empire, replete with heavy armor, nuclear weapons, nerve gas, jet bombers, all the money in the world, courts and police and prisons and media networks and secret tribunals. Palestinians defy Zion's American-made missiles and tanks, and Iraqis defy Abu Ghraib every day. The repression over there is brutal beyond the comprehension of anyone living in the Western world--and we see how much good it's doing.

V for Vendetta presents the most profoudly subversive idea of all: that the Belly of the Beast itself is not immune. No wonder the blow-dried neo-cons and rite wing cable show hosts hate it.

Tuesday, April 04, 2006

Michael Collins

[from 2004]

Dear Racial Comrades:

I have been told on several occasions that a large part of my problem is that I am confronting a functionally illiterate people, in my e-mails and newsletters, with texts. With fixed words in black and white when they want color and motion to seize that short attention span.

I am asking them to read blocks of type, sometimes quite long ones, for content. This was the way it was done in Europe a hundred years ago, to be sure, but this is America in 2004 and the palefaces must see pictures containing a lot of action, physical motion, noise, explosions, etc. We no longer respond to print, we respond to Hollywood.

Okay, fine. I believe I have found a Hollywood movie that conveys to a large extent what I am trying to say.

A couple of weeks ago I finally got to see the movie Michael Collins on television, unfortunately a cut-down version interrupted by innumerable ads. I immediately went out the next day and searched the video stores until I located and purchased the DVD.

I cannot overemphasize the importance for our Northwest movement of seeing this movie and internalizing the two lessons it conveys from Irish history. First, the absolute necessity of physical struggle and physical courage as the only way to overthrow tyranny, and secondly the terrible price that a revolutionary movement can pay for personality conflicts between people who should be fighting together against a common enemy.

In this movie you will, for a very rare change, be confronted with the image of White men fighting for freedom with (more or less) modern weapons in their hands against a mighty empire. The image of the White rebel or of any kind of strong White male character is one that is very seldom seen on the silver screen, so seldom that the rare exceptions like Michael Collins and Braveheart are notable--and, significantly I think, they are always very good box office draws.

There are no nigger sidekicks in Michael Collins, no Mexican girlfriends, no smart-ass little Jews explaining it all to the big dumb blond hero, or anything like that. There is not a single black or brown or yellow face in the whole movie. That alone makes it worth it.

I personally would have preferred an Irish or British actress for the role of Kitty Kiernan to Julia Roberts, but I have to admit she does it very well. You would have to have lived in Ireland to fully appreciate Liam Neeson's magnificent and distinctive West Cork dialect; you can actually hear the differences between that and Belfast and Dublin.

Some people have recommended that Return of the King become our official Movement Flick. I haven't seen the third movie yet, since I can't afford a theater ticket (never mind the popcorn) and must wait for DVD, but I am told it's superb.

But I have one objection to that idea, and that is that Tolkien's epic is a fantasy--and white people live way, way too much in a fantasy world as it is. We need to get out of fantasy and back into the real world.

Some people have recommended Braveheart, which I think is a little closer to the mark and much more political, a truly mighty cinematic accomplishment, all the greater now that we have some idea of Mel Gibson's private political views. But the thirteenth century is a bit too far back. We're not trying to revive the Middle Ages.

Michael Collins is close enough in time. I remember seeing the old men on their canes wearing the Old IRA badge and beret on the streets of Dublin, and I've seen the bullet and shrapnel scars in Boland's Bakery and the Four Courts. It also deals with a colonial revolt by White males against a mighty world empire. The parallels are clear.

For our official Movement Flick, until Mel Gibson takes me up on my offer to film The Hill of the Ravens, I nominate Michael Collins.

The Chevalier Bayard (1473-1524)


The Chevalier Bayard

[An Aryan hero of old from France. - HAC]

Pierre Terrail, Seigneur de Bayard (1473 – 30 April, 1524)

A French soldier, generally known as the Chevalier de Bayard. He is considered to be the last true Knight in Shining Armor, the last flower of the Middle Ages before the modern world took over. Appropriately enough, he met his death at the hands of a peasant soldier with a matchlock musket in his hand, the firearm finally triumphing over the old chivalric ideal.

The descendant of a noble family, nearly every head of which for two centuries had fallen in battle, he was born at the Château Bayard, Dauphiné (near Pontcharra, Isère). He served as a page to Charles I of Savoy, until Charles VIII of France, promoted him to be one of the royal followers under the seigneur (count) de Ligry (1487). As a youth he was distinguished for his looks, charming manner, and skill in the tilt-yard.

In 1494 he accompanied Charles VIII into Italy, and was knighted after the Battle of Fornovo (1495), where he had captured a standard. Shortly afterwards, entering Milan alone in pursuit of the enemy, he was taken prisoner, but was set free without a ransom by Ludovico Sforza. In 1502 he was wounded at Canossa.

Bayard was the hero of a celebrated combat of thirteen French knights against an equal number of Germans, and his restless energy and valour were conspicuous throughout the Italian wars of this period. On one occasion it is said that he single-handedly defended the bridge of the Garigliano against 200 Spaniards, an exploit that brought him such renown that Pope Julius II tried unsuccessfully to entice him into the papal service. In 1508 he distinguished himself again at the siege of Genoa by Louis XII, and early in 1509 the king made him captain of a company of horse and foot.

At the siege of Padua Bayard won further distinction, by his courage and consummate skill. He continued to serve in the Italian wars until the siege of Brescia in 1512. Here his boldness in first mounting the rampart resulted in a severe wound, and his soldiers had to carry him into a neighbouring house, the residence of a nobleman, whose wife and daughters he protected from threatened insult. Before his wound was healed, he hurried to join Gaston de Foix, under whom he served in the Battle of Ravenna (1512).

In 1513, when Henry VIII of England routed the French at the Battle of the Spurs (Guinegate, where Bayard's father had received a lifelong injury in a battle of 1479), Bayard, trying to rally his countrymen, found his escape cut off. Unwilling to surrender, he rode suddenly up to an English officer who was resting unarmed, and summoned him to yield; the knight complying, Bayard in turn gave himself up to his prisoner. He was taken into the English camp, but his gallantry impressed Henry as it had impressed Ludovico, and the king released him without ransom, merely exacting his parole not to serve for six weeks.

On the accession of Francis I in 1515 Bayard was made lieutenant-general of Dauphiné; and after the victory of Marignan, to which his valour largely contributed, he had the honour of conferring knighthood on his youthful sovereign. When war again broke out between Francis I and Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor, Bayard, with 1000 men, held Mézières, which had been declared untenable, against an army of 35,000, and after six weeks compelled the imperial generals to raise the siege. This stubborn resistance saved central France from invasion, as the king had not then sufficient forces to withstand the imperialists.

All France celebrated the achievement, and Francis gained time to collect the royal army which drove out the invaders (1521). The parlement thanked Bayard as the saviour of his country; the king made him a knight of the order of St Michael, and commander in his own name of 100 gens d'armes, an honour till then reserved for princes of the blood.

Bayard was sent into Italy with Admiral Bonnivet, who, being defeated at Robecco and wounded in a combat during his retreat, implored Bayard to assume command and save the army. He repulsed the foremost pursuers, but in guarding the rear at the passage of the Sesia was mortally wounded by an arquebus ball (April 30, 1524) which pierced his armor. He died in the midst of the enemy, attended by Pescara, the Spanish commander, and by his old comrade, Charles, Duc de Bourbon. His body was restored to his friends and interred at Grenoble.

As a soldier, Bayard was considered the epitome of chivalry and one of the most skilful commanders of the age. He was noted for the exactitude and completeness of his information on the enemy's movements, which he obtained by careful reconnaissance and a well-arranged system of espionage. In the midst of mercenary armies Bayard remained absolutely disinterested, and to his contemporaries and his successors he was, with his romantic heroism, piety and magnanimity, the fearless and faultless knight, le chevalier sans peur et sans reproche. His gaiety and kindness won him, even more frequently, another name bestowed by his contemporaries, le bon chevalier.