What is at Stake?

By Nicholas Stix
Updated at 2:27 p.m., on December 30, 2008.
With a New Year's P.S.

“Wir haben nichts gewußt.” “We didn’t know anything.” The speaker is an attractive German lady in her early sixties, the year 1984, the place, her business in Garmisch-Partenkirchen, in the Bavarian Alps. What they “didn’t know” about, was what the Nazis were up to, during her youth.

Why was she defending herself? I hadn’t berated her, hadn’t played the Holocaust card, the way so many Jews did after the war with the Gerries, er, Germans. I hadn’t even told her I was a Jew. She just knew. (And I spoke German like a native.)

Hitler had announced his intention to kill off the Jews, long before President Paul von Hindenburg had appointed him chancellor in 1933. And when the Jews started disappearing, in 1938, Germans more or less knew what was going on.

* * *

That man, pictured below, whatever he’s calling himself at the moment, long ago revealed himself to harbor a racism of metaphysical dimensions. He has no plans of ever giving up power, and returning to civilian life. He is his African father's son, and his racial socialist plan is to dispossess and disenfranchise America’s founding people, and turn mankind’s last, best hope into a blood-drenched, Mugabe-style kleptocracy and dictatorship.



Who do you think will fight him? John McCain? The Republican National Committee? Those quislings, and those like them, have already surrendered, and made a separate peace.

Who will join the fight to save America? VDARE, founded by Peter Brimelow, the wandering Englishman who became an American patriot without peer, has been fighting for America for nine years. The quislings have jumped on the bandwagon, and if one day the wheels should come off, they will have their “We didn’t know anything” speeches at the ready.

But it doesn’t have to come to that. The President-select and usurper-in-chief can be stopped, but the fight must begin now, before he has criminalized dissent and jailed his critics, before he has gutted what is left of the Constitution, and before he has swamped the country with scores of millions of instantly naturalized African Bantu.

It was another native Briton, Shakespeare, who penned the most eloquent speech of all on the necessity of fighting the good fight, allies or no. In Henry V, on the eve of the Battle of Agincourt in France, King Harry responds to the timidity of his cousin and advisor, Westmoreland.

If we are mark'd to die, we are enow
To do our country loss; and if to live,
The fewer men, the greater share of honour.
God's will! I pray thee, wish not one man more....

Rather proclaim it, Westmoreland, through my host,
That he which hath no stomach to this fight,
Let him depart; his passport shall be made
And crowns for convoy put into his purse:
We would not die in that man's company
That fears his fellowship to die with us.
This day is called the feast of Crispian....

This story shall the good man teach his son;
And Crispin Crispian shall ne'er go by,
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be remember'd;
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition:
And gentlemen in England now a-bed
Shall think themselves accursed they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day.

And yet, on October 25, 1415, Harry and his band of brothers would prevail against the French, despite being outnumbered four-to-one.

P.S. The man in the picture is not wearing a Nation of Islam bow tie, it just seems that way, because the way he is gesticulating, and even the way he is wearing his mouth while making a point, are pure NOI. This is yet more of "Barack Obama's" racial subtexting, like the way he says "folks," to sound folksy, when he really means "blacks," or the way he says "working families," as he did during his DNC acceptance speech, to make it sound like he's talking about the working class, when he's really talking about blacks and Hispanics.

Let me explain the last part, which will not be clear to most people outside of New York City. New York State has a NYC-based "Working Families Party." The WFP, however, is not a party of the working class, rather it is an anti-white, racist party, whose name is a code phrase for "black and Hispanic." "Obama" ran on their line in 2008.
* * *
Please generously support VDARE.

VDARE is sponsored by the VDARE Foundation, a 501(c)(3) charity; your contributions are tax-deductible.

Thank you for your support.

Are TV Personality-Ex-Con Danny Bonaduce and Internet Personality-Wikipedia Co-Founder Jimmy Wales the Same Person?

By Nicholas Stix

 

Is it Jimmy before the diet and workout regimen, or Danny?

Is it Danny, or Jimmy with a tan, after the diet and workout regimen?

American Renaissance on the Liberal Mind

Opening Fire

Another debate in which the facts don’t matter.

reviewed by Thomas Jackson

More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun-Control Laws John R. Lott, Jr. University of Chicago 1998, 225 pp. $23.00

How strange it must be to be a liberal. Driven by slogans, blinded by superstitions, dazzled by fantasies, the liberal stumbles through life oblivious to facts. There is almost nothing the liberal thinks he knows about race, social policy, sex roles, individual differences, and even history that is not some combination of slogan, superstition, and fantasy. John Lott’s soberly brilliant More Guns, Less Crime could not possibly be a more convincing demonstration that what liberals think they know about guns is fantasy, too.

The liberal view, of course, is that private citizens should not have guns and that gun control will stop violence. Prof. Lott, who teaches law and economics at the University of Chicago, makes an air-tight case for the opposite view: that when citizens carry concealed weapons criminals are afraid to attack and violence declines. Prof. Lott’s approach is to track violent crime rates over time in those parts of the country that have liberalized gun laws as opposed to places that have not.

* * *

The above excerpt is from Thomas Jackson’s review of More Guns, Less Crime, in the June, 2000 issue of American Renaissance, which issue can be read in its entirety for free at AmRen’s Web site.

The issue is up to AmRen’s usual high standards, with a cover story on how whites are being pushed out of Africa, and shorter stories on, among other subjects, African racism, university hate crime hoaxes committed by blacks, and whites who had been railroaded on phony “hate crime” charges.

For over 18 years, AmRen’s brilliant editor-publisher, Jared Taylor, has gotten every monthly issue out on time. But while you can read the June, 2000 issue, and over 200 other back issues for free, they cost real money to publish. As I have said before, AmRen is the gold standard, when it comes to the science and politics of race, with not just journalism but social science articles in its issues, and independent reports, such as The Color of Crime: Race, Crime, and Justice in America and Hispanics: A Statistical Portrait, which may also be downloaded for free at its Web site. I recommend, in particular, The Color of Crime, whose 2005 edition remains the state of the art in the criminology of race. I realize that tenured racial socialists (aka multiculturalists) will laugh at the preceding statement, but all an honest person needs to do is read The Color of Crime and the Department of Justice statistics on which it is based (and which are cited in its footnotes), and then read the tenured racial socialists’ alleged scholarship, to see who the laughing stock is.

While Jared Taylor eschews all luxuries to publish the magazine and reports on a shoestring; writers, editors, researchers, printers and the Post Office must all be paid. And I am proud to say that I am one of those writer-researchers. That’s why I’m asking you to please generously support American Renaissance with a subscription, and with a tax-deductible donation to its sponsor, The New Century Foundation, a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization. Through December 31, any donations you make to The New Century Foundation can be written off of your 2008 taxes.

And while you’re at the site, please visit the AmRen bookstore, where you can purchase, at reasonable, and in some cases remarkably low prices, some of the most important books ever written on race, by authors such as Jared Taylor, Michael Levin, Richard Lynn, Sam Francis, Carleton Putnam, Frank Salter and J. Philippe Rushton.

Thank you.

Nicholas Stix

What is a “Set of Eight”? How Does One Celebrate Christmas, Mexican-Style?

By Nicholas Stix

To get the answer, read my VDARE blog.

If there’s one thing John McCain and the President-select now calling himself “Barack Hussein Obama” agree on, it’s the need to abolish the border and meld with Mexico, even though anyone explicitly stating the idea is hooted down as a “nativist,” “xenophobe,” booger-eater, etc….

* * *
Please generously support VDARE.

VDARE is sponsored by the VDARE Foundation, a 501(c)(3) charity; your contributions are tax-deductible.

Thank you for your support.

Merry Belated Christmas Wishes to My Christian Readers!

NS

Happy Belated Chanukah Wishes to All of My Fellow Jews!

And now I must run out, and buy more Chanukah and Christmas presents for my little prince. (I already took care of the Queen.)

NS

“The Immigration Encyclopedia” Needs Your Support

By Nicholas Stix

(As part of my annual, Christmas fundraising drive for VDARE.com, it has become my custom to re-run classic fundraising pitches of yore, going all the way back to the Dark Ages of 2004. This was my 2007 fundraising letter, first published on December 18 of last year.)

Bewildered former Arkansas governor and GOP presidential candidate, Mike Huckabee, recently told the New Yorker’s Ryan Lizza that everywhere he goes, voters’ number one concern is immigration.

It does appear to be the issue out here wherever we are. Nobody’s asked about Iraq—doesn’t ever come up. The first question out of the box, everywhere I go—Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Florida, Texas, it doesn’t matter—is immigration. It’s just red hot, and I don’t fully understand it.

Welcome to America, Mike!

Here’s the problem. With the help of the MSM, Huckabee has conned millions of voters into thinking that he supports enforcing America’s immigration laws, when in fact he is a confirmed supporter of abolishing America through open borders.

What if I told you that there is an online encyclopedia – though its editor/publisher doesn’t use that term – devoted (though not limited) to immigration, which is vastly superior in factual reliability (unlike the New York Times, it has its own house fact-checker) to any daily newspaper, but which at the same time has more scholarly rigor than you’ll find from tenured professors? (With the notable exception of immigration economist George Borjas.) And what if I told you it has an archive of eight years’ worth of thousands of such articles? And what if I told you it’s free?

Readers of The Immigration Encyclopedia know all about Mike Huckabee’s chameleon routine, because TIE’s dogged researcher-writers have scrutinized the Governor every step of the way.

Keeping track of presidential aspirants’ flip-flops is just one of the many services that TIE provides on a daily basis through its articles and blogs.

And while it costs nothing to read TIE, it does cost money to produce and maintain it. Not just due to Web servers and bandwidth, but because TIE pays its writers and its fact-checker, which is how it can provide you such top-notch reporting, scholarship, and commentary. (Full disclosure: I am proud to say that I am one of those writers.)

The site isn’t actually known as The Immigration Encyclopedia. I gave it that title, because it is the most encyclopedic source on legal and illegal immigration into America on the Web, and to mock a certain pretend Web encyclopedia that has just collected so many millions of dollars in donations that it is embarrassed to even cite the figures. The pretend encyclopedia pays contributors nothing, and nothing is what it provides—but at a cost of millions! By contrast, The Immigration Encyclopedia is a priceless resource that is run for mere tens of thousands of dollars per year in tax-deductible donations. But that relatively small sum is essential.

TIE’s official name is VDARE.com. The reason I didn’t name it earlier was to be coy, to stress what I believe is VDARE’s true character, and to fool Google. Since this is my third fundraising post this month, had I stated its purpose at the top, Google’s blogsearch would have seen this as a repetitious post, and not listed it.

Please hit this link to support VDARE with a tax-deductible donation. (Did I mention that your contribution is tax-deductible?)

Thank you.

With best holiday wishes,

Nicholas Stix

Bill O’Reilly: Friend or Enemy of Christmas?

By Nicholas Stix

According to First Amendment jurisprudence, the state must be neutral as to different religions. That is what passes for procedural fairness, democracy, and egalitarianism. The way to hell is paved with procedural fairness, democracy, and egalitarianism. Fighting the Christmas Wars, Bill O’Reilly recently unwittingly gave the devil’s own defense of Christmas.

This is what happens when one confuses means with ends, and principles with presuppositions.

Procedural fairness, democracy, and egalitarianism are not worthy principles; indeed, proceduralism is not a principle at all; America was founded as a republic, not a democracy; and egalitarianism is at best, a judicial practice that at best prevents the legal system from degenerating into a tyrannical caste system. As it is widely understood today, as both political principle and empirical reality, egalitarianism is variously a form of deception and of mass delusion. Thoughtful political observers have often recognized in democracy the rule of the mob. It is the Bill of Rights, which protects the citizen from the predations of the state, that is pre-eminent in our system, when it works; not democracy, which is the state’s instrument for preying on citizens. And Thomas Jefferson’s rhetorical hubris notwithstanding, in early America, egalitarianism meant procedural fairness and the refusal to recognize dynastic rights. (Sorry, Caroline, but as a great American once said, “Life is unfair.”) Unfortunately, although there has never been more talk of “equality,” its two positive senses have all but been lost.

America was founded as a Christian, English nation. Her Christianity is uniquely American, whence her tolerance springs; thus, Christianity may not be treated as no better than, say, Islam.

The rule of law is in America based on at least three pillars: The tradition of the Rights of Englishmen, Christianity, and cultural coherence. Remove any one pillar, and the other two become, at the very least, shaky. You lose trust, and with it, the rule of law.

The Supreme Court has, over time, removed all three.

One could argue for religious neutrality at the dawn of 19th or even of 20th century America. In 1800, religious neutrality would have meant neutrality as between Baptists, Congregationalists, Episcopalians, etc. In 1900, it would have meant neutrality as between Protestants and Catholics. (What about the Jews? The Jews were tolerated under the Washingtonian dispensation.) But there cannot possibly be religious neutrality as between Christianity and
other religions.

When you permit, nay, encourage, millions of foreign hostiles who have contempt for the Rights of Englishmen, cultural coherence, and American (and in the case of Moslems, any kind of) Christianity; Christmas, Christianity, the rule of law, and thus, America become the hostages of political fashion and of the state. The history of hostages is not a sunny one.

There are very good demographic reasons why the rule of law, religious tolerance, and trust are so rare among the peoples of the world. Genetically and culturally speaking, most peoples simply do not have “the right stuff,” and do not even recognize it as such.

It is commonly said that demography is destiny, but what is unfortunately not said is what makes demography what it is, that a free people chooses its own demography, and that making mischief with demography is the devil’s own playground.

“Mercer sets O’Reilly Straight on the War against Christmas,” by Peter Brimelow.

“O'Reilly won the battle – but lost the debate,” by Ilana Mercer.

* * *
Please generously support VDARE.

VDARE is sponsored by the VDARE Foundation, a 501(c)(3) charity; your contributions are tax-deductible.

Thank you for your support.

Mark Potok and the Southern Poverty Law Center Want the Whole World to Know about Nicholas Stix and VDARE!

By Nicholas Stix













Mark Potok


On December 5, the The Baltimore Sun ran the following letter from the SPLC’s Mark Potok about me and my work for VDARE. Potok and the SPLC consider it crucial that the public know about our vital work, and I thank them for their PR efforts. (Mark, the check’s in the mail.)

December 5, 2008

On Wednesday, The Baltimore Sun published an attack by Ron Smith on the Southern Poverty Law Center, a civil rights organization known nationally for its lawsuits against and investigations of white supremacist hate groups in America (“The truth about ‘hate crimes’ and the racial justice racket,” Commentary, Dec. 3).

Aside from a great deal of unsubstantiated name-calling, Mr. Smith mentions
an essay written by Nicholas Stix, a man Mr. Smith sparely describes as a “columnist and blogger.”

What Mr. Smith declines to say is that Mr. Stix is a well-known white nationalist who recently prepared a lengthy introduction to an article,* published by the National Policy Institute, that paints “a statistical and narrative portrait of the war on white America.”

In it, Mr. Stix concludes that the Brown v. Board of Education ruling outlawing school segregation was “arguably the worst decision” in the Supreme Court’s history. “Integration and the civil rights movement,” Mr. Stix continues, “led directly to the destruction of great cities.”

Many of Mr. Stix’s articles, which dwell heavily on what he sees as a huge wave of anti-white hate crime committed by black people, are archived at the VDARE Web site.

With Mr. Stix, Mr. Smith claims that the October murder of an interracial couple in Winchester, Calif., allegedly by four black men, was motivated by race hate - despite the statements of police that the motive was robbery.

Mr. Smith goes on to describe hate crime legislation as a “questionable legal construct used almost exclusively against whites.”

Actually, the concept has been ratified by the Supreme Court in a case in which the defendant was a black man who had attacked whites because of their race. Yet that doesn’t stop Mr. Smith from claiming that “the truth is one thing and the liberal agenda is another.”

Mark Potok, Montgomery, Ala.
The writer is director of the Intelligence Project for the Southern Poverty Law Center.

*Actually, my good friend Mark erred, in describing me as having written “a lengthy introduction to an article.” In fact, I wrote the introduction to an over 45,000-word NPI report, The State of White America – 2007, which I edited and co-wrote, and which can be downloaded for free at NPI.

I have a feeling that Mark neglected to read more than the introduction. I’m immensely proud of that report, which two brilliant social scientists, statistician Ed Rubinstein and historian Robert J. Stove, together wrote with me, and want everyone to read it.

I realize that Mark is terribly busy, what with phoning in race hoaxes all the time, cashing supporters’ checks, and having meetings, but mightn’t it be a good thing for the director of an alleged “Intelligence Project” to spend a wee bit of time collecting … intelligence?

I appreciate that Mark incorporated the correction I had made of his misquotation of me as having called Brown, “arguably the worse [sic] decision” in the history of the U.S. Supreme Court.

As for my being a “white nationalist,” which is a leftist code phrase for “neo-Nazi,” that description will give those familiar with me and my work a hearty belly laugh. For those not yet in on the joke, the only way to “get it” is to read my work, which you can do for free! My work is accessible at archives for VDARE.com’s “front page” and blog; on my blogs, Nicholas Stix, Uncensored, The Critical Critic, Wikipedia Follies, The Zebra Project, and Schuyleriana: The Work and Life of George Schuyler; at my Web site, A Different Drummer, and oh, about a dozen other places on the Web, give or take.

My friend Mark Potok often simply makes things up, and ignores or misrepresents as non-racial, real racial crimes such as the Wichita Massacre, Knoxville Horror, Columbia University rape-torture-attempted murder case , Kirkwood Massacre, Winchester Atrocity (and also here) and the Nation of Islam's 1970s’ mass murder campaign.

Conversely, in the case of the racist, Jena, LA attempted murder committed against white student Justin Barker by from eight to ten black students, the SPLC not only refused to tell the truth about Barker’s ordeal, but in one propaganda release after another, turned his attackers into victims (see, for instance, here, here, here and here), and used the Jena Hoax as a means with which to defraud the American public out of millions of dollars in fundraising.

In contrast to Potok & Co., I spend thousands of hours per year researching my articles, reading books, articles and reports on the Web, and interviewing people. The books (not to mention, bookcases!) are a major expense, as are things like computers (I just bought a new one in May, and already, it’s crapping out on me) and printers, and I have less dramatic but continuing expenses for my ISP, telephone, toner, paper, etc.

But at over 60 hours per week, my biggest expense is time. I need to make money from my work. While the SPLC has shown itself willing to increase my name recognition and readership, neither Mark Potok nor the SPLC’s boss of all bosses, Morris Dees, has been willing, so far, to publish or pay me for my work. The New York Times has shown a similar reticence.

That’s where VDARE comes in. VDARE founder Peter Brimelow has been one of my biggest boosters, publishing eleven of my front-pagers and approximately 30 of my blog essays. But Peter needs your help, in order to be able to pay me. Please generously support VDARE.

VDARE is sponsored by the VDARE Foundation, a 501(c)(3) charity; your contributions are tax-deductible.

Thank you for your support.

Are “Rod Blagojevich” and “George Stephanopolous” the Same Man?

By Nicholas Stix

Have these “two” men ever been seen together in the same room, in real time? Look at the pictures, and decide for yourself.

“Rod”



“George”

Join Max Blumenthal and Keith Olbermann, in Having a Very VDARE Christmas!

By Nicholas Stix


Maxie


Herr Olbermann

Max Blumenthal and Keith Olbermann have done everything in their power, of late, to publicize VDARE.com. Granted, Blumenthal’s PR work has consisted of pronouncing a political death sentence against VDARE editor-publisher Peter Brimelow as a “white nationalist,” a code phrase for neo-Nazi, but you know what they say: There's no such thing as bad publicity. (Don’t worry, Peter, more prominent gauleiters than Max Blumenthal call me the same thing, and I’m sure Max’ll eventually get around to me, as well). Blumenthal has variously misrepresented, or plum screwed up in his descriptions of what VDARE contributors like Tom Piatak have written, and Olbermann has been content largely to parrot him, but what do you expect? It’s not like they’re journalists. So, they quote Piatak as saying “Jews,” when he really said, “multiculturalists”? Same difference, right?

Blumenthal is the purported son of former Clinton administration employee, Sidney Blumenthal, then affectionately referred to as “Sid Vicious.” During the 1996 presidential campaign, Sid was stationed at the DNC’s New Yorker Division, from where he would call Bob Dole (Viagra-KS) Campaign HQ, posing as a journalist. The Dole folks would tell Blumenthal things they wouldn’t have told a known Democratic Party operative (no wonder Dole lost the election!). Sid would then immediately call Clinton Re-election HQ, and pass on whatever he had just learned.

(But that’s the least of Sid’s viciousness. Read Michael Isikoff’s note at the bottom of this review of Sid’s apparently unreadable and uninformative, 802-page book, for how Vicious, er, Blumenthal, lied to the media about both the grand jury’s questions and his testimony in the matter of Bill Clinton’s perjury, in order to make himself look good, and to libel Kenneth Starr.)

Max is also employed by the Party, at its Daily Beast Division, another project by Democratic serial magazine killer, Tina Brown, who was busy wrecking the New Yorker Division’s finances, when she and Sid were both there. Like purported father, like purported son.

Although Max looks like a soccer hooligan, I know nothing about his demeanor, or whether he is prone to violence. For all I know, he may well limit his thuggery to his typing.

Keith Olbermann is a retired sportscaster, who is presently employed by the Party’s MSNBC Division. His chief talent resides in having a very loud voice, with which to shout his talking points.

For all that Max and Keith said, in publicizing VDARE, there is, however, one thing that they forgot to say: Please support VDARE!

VDARE is sponsored by the VDARE Foundation, a 501(c)(3) charity; your contributions are tax-deductible.

Thank You, Peter! Brimelow Puts in Kind Word for Young Freelancer

By Nicholas Stix

Peter Brimelow just posted the following words at the top of VDARE.com’s temporary home page, for its ongoing fundraising drive:

Last night, I was attacked by Keith Olbermann on his MSNBC TV show Countdown for starting the War Against Christmas on VDARE.COM and thereby corrupting Bill O'Reilly! (We respond on our blog). Of course, we think Olbermann is a fool. But with the Main Stream Media and the political Establishment, there's no doubt his smears are effective. They don't deter us, but I worry for our younger writers, with careers to make, and families to feed.

Writing for VDARE.COM is a risk - but it's the only place where the truth about the immigration disaster and the political correctness plague can be told. PLEASE help us obviate Olbermann! Scroll down to the bottom of the page and DONATE before entering the site for tonight's postings.

Get it? “Our younger writers.” He’s got to be referring to me! VDARE can’t have anyone younger than me writing for it.

How old am I, you ask? I’ll give you the same answer I give The Boss, whenever she asks: 21. And if she complains, I just say, “Prove otherwise!” (And next year, I plan on turning 21 … again!)

Since I have yet to win a Pulitzer or the Nobel Peace Prize, or get written up in Time magazine, what’s the point of aging?)

Why is it so important that you support VDARE? Glad you asked. Peter pays me to write for him. The more money you give him, the more can pay me. Thus, if you think my work is worth supporting, please give generously. And if you think my work isn’t worth supporting, please give generously. (Well, what did you expect me to say?)

That may sound like a selfish rationale, but if you want VDARE to continue to be the finest political site on the Web, Peter has to be able to continue to pay writers.

I can see someone saying, “What’s the big deal? You write, he pays. That’s the way all writing works.”

Not exactly. Although the Internet has proved to be the greatest technology ever invented, as far as writers being able to publish and promote their work, that very same function (flooding the market) has caused it to be the worst thing that ever happened to the economics of writing. Since there is an unlimited supply of writers (i.e., no scarcity), there is total downward pressure on the price for freelance work. No one has to pay anything, in order to get copy to place between the ads on his Website. Thus, only about 0.1 percent of Web sites actually pay for work, and they pay badly.

How badly? In 2001, I wrote a 1216-word essay on legendary journalist-satirist George S. Schuyler for National Review Online, that in the meantime has probably been read by over 100,000 people. My fee: The grand sum of $50, courtesy of the late neoconservative, William F. Buckley Jr. (not that WFB knew me from Adam).

I made maybe $2 an hour for that job. What with a wife and infant, not to mention having to pay the electric company and my ISP, just to use my pc, the fee didn’t stretch very far.

Back in 1999, I had published an essay in the fat Christmas issue of the profitable, neocon freebie, The NYPress, for which I received no byline, but for which then editor-publisher Russ Smith (aka Mugger) paid me the princely sum of $16.67. Fortunately for me, The Boss was three months away from giving birth to the Boss’s Boss (forgive me, Harry), so we were able to live it up.

In order for my family to subsist in New York City back then, I would have had to sell at least 2,000 NYPress columns per year.

Back in the early 1990s, I had occasionally freelanced for the daily, New York Newsday, which gave me a byline, and once even put my picture inside of Page One, with a flattering promo for my op-ed piece inside. (I wasn’t crazy about the picture part; how can a journalist buzz around town and do his job, if people are id’ing him on the street? A journalist is supposed to observe, not be observed. And if you really do your job, those people may be hostiles.) And they paid “a buck-fifty” ($150) per piece. The only problem was that the editors somehow “forgot” to pay me for my third piece, and I ended up having to sue them in Small Claims Court, in order to get my fee.

Newsday went belly up in 1995, after only ten years in business and $100 million in losses (est. 170 million 2008 dollars). I don’t know how the outfit went broke, but it sure as hell wasn’t from overpaying freelancers.

Although today’s news media are a multibillion-dollar business, quality journalists are few and far between. I know of only a handful of excellent journalists who are able to support themselves through writing, as opposed to the tens of thousands of worthless, lying hacks who do alright.

At least three of the finest journalists I know can only survive by working day jobs in public relations. One of them is always in danger of losing his day job, due to the repercussions from his investigative freelance work, and another one had to give up writing altogether, because leftists had gotten him fired from his day job.

Although Peter has yet to pay me Malcolm Gladwell money—we’ll have to talk about that—he pays me much better than any other cyber-publication, and even better than some newspapers and magazines I worked for, way back when.

So, to make a short story long, please support VDARE!

VDARE is sponsored by the VDARE Foundation, a 501(c)(3) charity; your contributions are tax-deductible.

Please Support VDARE

By Nicholas Stix

(As part of my contribution to the Christmas fundraising drive this year, like last year, I am replaying my "greatest hits" fundraising letters. This one is from 2006.)

Last updated at 2:50 a.m., 25 December 2006.

It’s that time of year again. You are bound to be inundated with telephone calls from the “National Police Officers’ Association,” or some such scam, which will claim to helping out the widows and children of police officers slain in the line of duty, organizations which virtually never contribute one dime to the welfare of police officers or their families. But one organization, which does not engage in cold calling, in order to fleece the unwary good-hearted, and which, in fact, is indispensable, is VDARE.

Not only is VDARE (those mysterious typos, notwithstanding) the best-written Web site that I know of, it is the indispensable Web site, which has had more of a positive effect than any 200 GOP talking points sites (some of which are edited by would-be political consultants) combined.

VDARE is devoted to the National Question. As in, shall the United States of America endure, and what is necessary to do, in order to ensure that it does? Since presently, the greatest threat to the continued existence of these United States is mass immigration, legal and illegal, immigration is VDARE’s preoccupation.

How important is VDARE? Pat Buchanan’s just released work, State of Emergency, is easily the most important immigration book written since Michelle Malkin’s Invasion, four years ago. (It may be the most important book since VDARE founder Peter Brimelow’s 1995 work, Alien Nation.) The impeccable statistical research Buchanan cites in State of Emergency was provided by statistician Edwin Rubinstein, a regular VDARE columnist. And when the standard-setting report on race in America, The State of White America, appears later this month, it too will have statistical foundations provided by Ed Rubinstein.

[2008 P.S.: You can download The State of White America-2007 for free, along with other, meticulously researched reports, at the National Policy Institute.]

But that’s not all, folks.

Steve Sailer, another regular VDARE columnist, may well be the most brilliant intellectual-journalist working in the English language today.

[2008 P.S.: You can purchase Steve's just-published book, America's Half Blood Prince: Barack Obama's "Story of Race and Inheritance", by hitting this link.]

But there’s more. VDARE also showcases work written exclusively for it by columnists Bryanna Bevens, Allan Wall, James Fulford, Joe Guzzardi, Juan Mann, Donald A. Collins, Brenda Walker and Athena Kerry.

A listing of just a few of its exposés (including two from yours truly) follows:

S. 2611 Amnesty/Open Borders/Immigration Acceleration Bill – VDARE helped galvanize opposition that shelved the bill for now, and exposed the Pence Plan by Cong. Mike Pence (R-Indiana), that sought to backdoor amnesty, while claiming to be a “rational middle ground.”

Misrepresenting the Hispanic Vote: Steve Sailer has for several years continually exposed the myths whereby not only the socialist MSM, but their Republican counterparts, not to mention politicians from both major parties have proceeded as if Hispanics’ votes somehow counted for more than whites’ votes.

Naming Open Border Lobby names: VDARE writers have shown how low the OBL will sink, in order to defend the indefensible, such as in Patrick Cleburne’s exposé of Colorado horse farm owner Helen Krieble’s agitations for amnesty, whereby Krieble seeks to depress the wages she has to pay her workers.

VDAWDI: With his VDARE American Worker Displacement Index, Edwin S. Rubenstein has kept a monthly tab on the rise of “immigrant” employment, and concurrent decline in the employment of Americans.

EOIR: In what he should have turned into a book by now, immigration attorney and VDARE columnist Juan Mann has shown how the Executive Office of Immigration Review has undermined the enforcement of immigration law.

America’s Worst Immigration Journalist: VDARE columnist Joe Guzzardi presides over one of the fiercest journalism competitions in existence: determining who, of all the shamelessly dishonest open borders shills, is the worst.

God & Girl at a Catholic University: Athena Kerry’s series showed the decline into multicultural nihilism of one once proudly Catholic institution.

Diversity is Strength! It’s Also … Police Corruption: In 1995, the New York City Police Department hired illegal alien Martin Peters. When Peters came under suspicion in the murder of the mother of his child, and the NYPD showed reticence about promoting him to sergeant, Peters who played the race card, and got his promotion. Sgt. Peters is now under indictment for Murder in the Second Degree, Assault in the First Degree, Intimidating a Witness in the Third Degree, Menacing in the Second Degree, three counts of Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Second Degree, defrauding HUD out of $38,724 in rent subsidies, bankruptcy fraud and last, but not least, immigration fraud.

“Disappearing” Urban Crime: shows the methods of statistical fraud the NYPD employs to make New York “America’s Safest Big City.”

The VDARE Blog: VDARE has one of the best blogs on the Web, with steady contributions from its regular columnists, plus bloggers Patrick Cleburne and Randall Burns.

If you doubt me, try for yourself!

Syndicated columnists: VDARE also runs and archives the columns of Pat Buchanan and Michelle Malkin. So, what’s the big deal about running columns you can read anywhere? The big deal is that nowhere else can you read these columns with the encyclopedic links that VDARE’s editors weave into the text.

Sam Francis: Over the past twenty or so years, Sam Francis was one of America's most important political thinkers, and one of her few honest writers on race. Francis died on February 15, 2005 of complications following heart surgery, at the age of 57. But during his brief stay in this vale of tears, Francis was as prolific as he was insightful. And all of the approximately 400 columns he wrote for VDARE are still available at his VDARE archive, which also contains links to obituaries honoring him, to his work for Chronicles magazine and townhall.com, and to the newly published collection of some of his work. This archive is a treasure trove.

Donate: Please give to VDARE. If you do so by December 31, you can write your contribution off your 2006 taxes. And tax write-offs aside, giving to VDARE is, in the words of one of my favorite ex-convicts, A good thing.

Instant Revisionism: Will Blagojevich Soon be Cropped Out of All “Obama” Pics?

By Nicholas Stix

When Illinois’ Gov. Blago was indicted by the federales yesterday, the MSM went into instant protection-revision mode for the world's most famous person, running, as Bill Quick at The Daily Pundit shows in “The Whitewash Begins,” a photo suggesting that the man calling himself “Barack Obama” had little or nothing to do with Blago:

Notice how Obama seems to be not just aloof from the governor, but actually smelling something bad.

Quick helpfully runs a contrasting photo showing the Governor, Chicago Mayor Richie Daley, and “Obama” as thick as thieves, if you’ll pardon the literalism.

A Proud Illinois Tradition: Another Governor Under Arrest

By Nicholas Stix

This just in from the Chicago Tribune of the bankrupt Tribune Company:

“A source says Gov. Rod Blagojevich has been taken into federal custody at his North Side home. Latest developments:”

This link came with the news flash, but Trib links have a very short shelf life.

"Gov. Blago's" predecessor, George Ryan, is already enjoying the federal taxpayers' hospitality for his scheme, as Illinois' secretary of state, of selling driver's licenses to people who couldn't earn them the old-fashioned way, in order to fill the coffers for his gubernatorial campaign.

According to Sen. Dick Durbin (Race-IL), Ryan, who entered the Oxford, Wisconsin Club Fed 13 months ago, has suffered enough, even though he was sentenced to 6 1/2 years inside.

Gov. Blago then joined the Ryan Pardon Singers. Perhaps Durbin and Blago saw what was coming, and felt that it would be unbecoming to have two consecutive governors in jail at the same time. Perhaps Blago, taking a page from Ryan's own book, hoped that unfairly advantaging a felon would redound to his own benefit, down the road.

The Trib's John Kass responded to Durbin's hearfelt entreaties by republishing a letter from Janet Willis, whose six children were burned alive in an accident caused by one of the remorseless Ryan's illegal drivers.

I don't think Ryan ever expected to serve a day inside. Three years ago, almost to the day, I wrote,

... then-Gov. Ryan, facing prosecution for alleged earlier corruption on his part as Illinois Secretary of State, in 2003 granted clemency to everyone on Illinois’ Death Row, in order to enhance his image with the public and the media, and hopefully earn himself some clemency from jurors in his own trial.

The monsters whom Ryan granted clemency included a couple who wanted to steal a woman's baby, and so waited until she was nine months pregnant, murdered her, and cut her baby out of her belly. The next thing you know, they'll be getting out on paroled.

Mercy for monsters? I call it just another kind of bribe. Fortunately, at Ryan's trial, the jurors were incorruptible. And now that Blago is under arrest, he will also be handcuffed from politicking for a Ryan pardon. If George W. Bush grants one to Ryan, the latter will be remembered as his "Marc Rich."

December 7, 1941-December 7, 2008: From Pearl Harbor to 9/11 to the Selection of “Barack Obama”

 
By Nicholas Stix

How did America get from the patriotic nation it was on December 7, 1941, to the nation in moral collapse that it is today, in which a racial socialist, who had once made no secret of his hostility towards her, and has since given many hints of his plans to destroy her, is about to take the oath of office as the nation’s chief executive?

To answer the above question would take a book, but one way of answering it is to look at America, as it responded to 1941, and as a particular segment of people, who would soon be fanatical supporters of the man who calls himself “Barack Obama,” would respond to the Moslem terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Thus am I republishing, in the section following FDR’s Pearl Harbor speech, an essay I wrote, “Anti-American Anthems: Singing Songs of Solidarity—for the Enemy,” about a watershed moment that millions of Americans will have since forgotten, while many more millions will have never known about it, in the first place. That was when a certain group of communists rallied less than one month after the bloodiest attack ever committed on American soil, for the purpose of aiding and abetting the enemy.

It will be objected that the group I described was atypical of Americans. While true, the objection carries no weight, for it is not only just such people, but many of them specifically, who in 2008 would impose the choice of McCain vs. “Obama” on the American people, about which the American people had little say.


FDR’s December 8, 1941 Speech Following the Japanese Sneak Attack on Pearl Harbor

(Hit this link to hear President Roosevelt give his famous speech.)

President Franklin D. Roosevelt:

Yesterday, December 7, 1941—a date which will live in infamy—the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan.

The United States was at peace with that nation, and, at the solicitation of Japan, was still in conversation with its government and its emperor looking toward the maintenance of peace in the Pacific. Indeed, one hour after Japanese air squadrons had commenced bombing in the American island of Oahu, the Japanese ambassador to the United States and his colleague delivered to our secretary of state a formal reply to a recent American message. While this reply stated that it seemed useless to continue the existing diplomatic negotiations, it contained no threat or hint of war or armed attack.

It will be recorded that the distance of Hawaii from Japan makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks ago. During the intervening time the Japanese government has deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.

The attack yesterday on the Hawaiian Islands has caused severe damage to American naval and military forces. I regret to tell you that very many American lives have been lost. In addition, American ships have been reported torpedoed on the high seas between San Francisco and Honolulu.

Yesterday the Japanese government also launched as attack against Malaya.

Last night Japanese forces attacked Hong Kong.

Last night Japanese forces attacked Guam.

Last night Japanese forces attacked the Philippine Islands.

Last night Japanese forces attacked Wake Island.

And this morning the Japanese attacked Midway Island.

Japan has, therefore, undertaken a surprise offensive extending throughout the Pacific area. The facts of yesterday and today speak for themselves. The people of the United States have already formed their opinions and well understand the implications to the very life and safety of our nation.

As commander in chief of the Army and Navy I have directed that all measures be taken for our defense. But always will our whole nation remember the character of the onslaught against us. . .

Source: Courtesy of the Franklin D. Roosevelt Library, Hyde Park, New York.

See Also: The "Man in the Street" Reacts to Pearl Harbor

"This Is No Joke: This Is War": A Live Radio Broadcast of the Attack on Pearl Harbor

Read some of the speech’s historical background here.

(The following section was originally published by Toogood Reports on October 19, 2001 as “Anti-American Anthems: Singing Songs of Solidarity—for the Enemy.”)


Anti-American Anthems

So viewing the issue, no choice was left but to call out the war power of the Government; and so to resist force, employed for its destruction, by force, for its preservation.”

Abraham Lincoln addressing Congress on July 4, 1861.

“All we are saying, is give peace a chance.”

The singer on the stage of the Brooklyn Academy of Music (BAM), was performing not in August, 1939 ... or 1963 ... or even on September 10, 2001. He was singing on October 8, 2001.

I could see someone singing that song thousands of miles away, to Osama bin Laden and the Taliban. Or to the Hezbollah. Or Islamic Jihad. Or Hamas. Or Yasser Arafat. But in all such cases, the singer would be killed. Perhaps, out of respect for Islamic law, first his tongue would be cut out.

But the singer chose New York, of all places, to sing. New York, where Islam’s war against America was declared with September 11th’s surprise, terrorist attack to end all terrorist attacks.

There was but one reason why a man would be so foolish, and so wicked, as to sing such a song in a nation that was still digging out unidentifiable body parts, and will still be doing so six months from now. Because he can.

He received a thunderous ovation.

The performance was part of a charity concert given for the victims of “the unfortunate events of September 11,” as an organizer working the aisles announced, while seeking additional, cash donations. I stumbled onto the benefit, on left-of-Clinton WNYC-FM 93.9.

A woman read the multicultural doggerel of omniscient census taker laureate, Maya Angelou. Angelou’s um, poem, sounded more like a rebuke than a rallying call to a nation under attack:

Each of you a bordered country,
Delicate and strangely made proud,
Yet thrusting perpetually undersiege
Your armed struggles for profit
Have left collars of waste upon
My shore, currents of debris upon my breast.
Yet, today I call you to my riverside,
If you will study war no more. Come,
Clad in peace and I will sing the songs
The Creator gave to me when I and the
Tree and the Rock were one.
Before cynicism was a bloody sear across your
Brow and when you yet knew you still
Knew nothing.
The River sings and sings on.

There is a true yearning to respond to
The singing River and the wise Rock.
So say the Asian, the Hispanic, the Jew
The African, the Native American, the Sioux,
The Catholic, the Muslim, the French, the Greek
The Irish, the Rabbi, the Priest, the Sheikh,
The Gay, the Straight, the Preacher,
The privileged, the homeless, the Teacher.
They all hear
The speaking of the Tree....

Lift up your faces, you have a piercing need
For this bright morning dawning for you.
History, despite its wrenching pain,
Cannot be unlived, but if faced
With courage, need not be lived again.”

If you will study war no more.

In spring 1980, I helped organize a rally against re-instituting the draft at the State University of New York at Stony Brook. (The Soviet Union had invaded Afghanistan, and war drums were beating here, too.) I did so for purely personal reasons. I had offered my services to my nation’s military only five years earlier, been rebuffed (flat feet), and did not desire to be called to duty when it was convenient for the government. (My mother warned me, “Don’t worry. If they need you, they’ll take you.”) And I was one of a few people at Stony Brook, who, when something needed to be organized, did the organizing. I wasn’t a socialist or a vegetarian, either, yet I ran the campus’ vegetarian co-operative restaurant, Harkness East.

A long-haired, bearded fellow, who was counseling people about declaring for “conscientious objector” status, told me, “I couldn’t counsel you on being a conscientious objector, because you’re not a pacifist.”

The fellow was speaking in code: NONE of the people he was counseling was a pacifist. Nor was he. This fellow was just another Marxist who supported those who warred AGAINST America. He knew that I wasn’t a Marxist; that’s why he couldn’t “counsel” me.

The high point of the BAM benefit, was a performance of Aaron Copland’s Lincoln Portrait. In the Lincoln Portrait, which enjoyed its inaugural performance in 1943, the first two, purely musical parts evoke Lincoln’s early years, and the clash of Union and Confederate forces. The third part is dominated by words about and by Lincoln.

Abraham Lincoln was born in Kentucky, raised in Indiana, and lived in Illinois.

The words are set up by a beautiful musical and philosophical conceit that is equal parts Copland and Lincoln. In Lincoln’s “Gettysburg Address,” he called for a “new birth of freedom.” And in his “Second Inaugural,” he called for the peace, then within sight, to be one in which the North would not simply impose its will upon the South. This was as beautiful a thought as it was a political impossibility. But Copland realized it, musically.

With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation’s wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan -- to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace, among ourselves, and with all nations.

In A Lincoln Portrait, one section of the orchestra plays point -- an arrangement of Stephen Foster’s “Camptown Races,” to evoke the Army of the Confederacy. Another section follows, as counterpoint, evoking a cavalry charge by the Army of the Potomac. The two sections then merge into one indistinguishable (and unstoppable) host.

A Lincoln Portrait wasn’t really about Honest Abe; it was about FDR. Copland was rallying support for FDR’s crusade against Hitler, Mussolini, and Tojo. Since Lincoln had already been deified, but FDR was then yet a man, it made perfect sense, politically, to use the Great Emancipator to front for the Great Welfare Statist.

In my recording, Henry Fonda reads the text in that flat prairie delivery of his that I learned as a youngster to identify with Lincoln, with being presidential, with telling the truth.

It is the eternal struggle between these two principles -- right and wrong -- throughout the world.... It is the same spirit that says, ‘You work and toil and earn bread, and I’ll eat it.’ No matter in what shape it comes, whether from the mouth of a king who seeks to bestride the people of his own nation and live by the fruit of their labor, or from one race of men as an apology for enslaving another race, it is the same tyrannical principle.”

From the October 15, 1858 Lincoln-Douglas Debate at Alton.

But the performance at BAM had no Fonda -- he died in 1983. Hell, the folks at BAM didn’t even stick to Copland’s text. The actor who read the text was declaiming; it made him sound like he had something to sell. And the words were themselves deceitful. Mixed in with some of the Lincoln statements from the Lincoln Portrait, the penultimate statement was one about not restricting civil liberties in time of war.

I had never heard such a statement attributed to Lincoln, and never heard anything remotely like it in other performances of the Lincoln Portrait. While Abe Lincoln may have done much good in his life, he was no friend of civil liberties. During his prosecution of the Civil War/War Between the States, he handcuffed the U.S. Constitution, shut down all opposition newspapers, jailed his critics, and suspended what German constitutional theorist Martin Kriele has called the most basic of rights, habeas corpus. Habeas corpus means that you cannot be jailed without being charged with a crime. No American president ever prosecuted a war more ruthlessly than Lincoln did.

It is possible to honestly debate the legitimacy of suspending freedoms during wartime, but it is not possible to portray Abe Lincoln as a defender of civil liberties.

Indeed, since it was BAM, an institution devoted to defining, for New York, the content of political correctness, the audience was full of people who had devoted their lives to the destruction of the U.S. Constitution, and the suppression of liberty. BAM’s customers absolutely support gun control -- except for the bodyguards of famous gun control advocates. They absolutely support the “wall between church and state” -- except for Muslim public school children, for whom they set up special rooms to pray in New York City public schools during Ramadan. And they absolutely support freedom of speech -- except for those who are “intolerant” -- meaning those who would attack affirmative action, oppose gay rights, or “verbally assault” (criticize) feminists. And they absolutely support equality before the law -- for blacks, women, gays, immigrants ... and Muslims. Now, like our Canadian neighbor, Peter Jennings, these good people have suddenly discovered the U.S. Constitution.

Out of LOYALTY to the Union, which he would go to any length to preserve, Abe Lincoln was willing to temporarily sacrifice the rule of law, and permanently sacrifice 650,000 American boys and men.

Out of DISLOYALTY to the Union, the folks at BAM, and those demonstrating elsewhere in America for “peace” -- many of whom glory in the title, “race traitors” -- seek to permanently sacrifice the rule of law, and any number of their fellow citizens. They continue to support those whom they consider America’s violent enemies at home and abroad, while seeking ever, through the schools and universities and media, to silence the “mystic chords of memory” that remind us of our patriotic past, with the goal of rending the Union.

For whom would the American Left now use Abe Lincoln as a front man?

Support VDARE!

By Nicholas Stix

(Sixteen days ago, in what has become an annual ritual, I published my 2008 VDARE fundraising appeal. In what has also developed into an annual ritual, I am reprinting my earlier fundraising appeals, beginning with the first one, from 2005. Note that as of this writing, Peter Brimelow has published 11 of my articles and exposés on VDARE’s front page, and 30 of my blog essays.)

In this holiday season, you are being deluged by scam artists seeking to fleece you for what they claim are “charities.” Have you gotten your yearly call, for instance, from the guy who claims to be collecting donations to give to the widows and orphans of policemen murdered in the line of duty? Ha! The guy on the phone is a low-paid flunky; over 90 percent of the money you donate goes to his boss, who is a crook and a creep who should be hunted down by real policemen and put out of business. (Our state and federal legislators are so busy passing pork barrel legislation, that it has not occurred to them to pass laws criminalizing phony charities. And so, crooks like the above-mentioned type continue to fleece the big-hearted.)

But one legitimate, truly worthy organization that desperately needs your support is VDARE. This Web site, founded six years ago by the brilliant social critic, Peter Brimelow (author of, among other works, Alien Nation on immigration and The Worm in the Apple on the teachers’ unions), is the site par excellence for news, analysis, and commentary on immigration into these United States. And it ain’t too shabby on race, either.

Why should you support VDARE? Glad you asked. For several years, VDARE was alone among major Web sites in banging the drum for immigration restriction. And it is still the best source for information on the attempt by President Bush and America’s elites of the Right and the Left, to smuggle into law a stealth amnesty (aka “guest worker plan”). And it is the best source for information about the immigration bureacracy and the many de facto amnesty programs already in existence.

VDARE is also one of the only sites on the Internet whose publisher actually pays his writers. And one of those writers is yours truly. So, if you think that my work is deserving of support, please hit this link to give to VDARE. Thanks in advance.

One of the reasons why most of the material you read on the Internet is so godawful is that almost no one pays for material. And so, the typical Web “pundit” sits down in front of his pc and pounds out his “insights” in about ten minutes—even less, if he’s a fast typist. And who needs spell-check? (That begs the question: Why is most of the material one reads in newspapers and magazines that pay writers so bad?)

But work that demands to be read takes time to research and write. Hours, days, weeks, even months. It takes Web searches; it requires buying and poring over sometimes expensive, out-of-print books; sometimes it takes costly Lexis-Nexis searches; and it may take calls to lawyers, flacks, politicians and victims.

Very few people can afford to devote that sort of time and money to writing, and those who are independently wealthy generally demand, and get payment. (They’re the ones writing the drivel published in newspapers and magazines.) And very few “professional writers” are willing to buck the conventional wisdom, Left or Right. Thus are we saddled with the likes of Tamar Jacoby and Jonah Goldberg from the Republican side, and Ellen Goodman and Frank Rich from the socialist side. None of the aforementioned writers will give you the truth about ... anything. Jacoby, in particular, has been lying about immigration and the possibility of immigration enforcement for years, in order to prevent Americans from doing anything to reassert American sovereignty and American law. Her goal in life is apparently to ensure that every upper-middle-class American family’s “civil right” to illegal immigrant nannies, gardeners, and cooks; and every American corporation’s “right” to low-wage Indian computer programmers remains inviolate.

Some formerly orthodox neoconservative writers such as Heather MacDonald have in recent years come around to understand that illegal immigration is destroying America, but they might never have, had it not been for VDARE alone banging the drum for immigration restriction lo these many years.

Peter Brimelow has published two of my articles since May 2004, and they were two of my most important exposes on policing and multiculturalism (“‘Disappearing’ Crime” and “Diversity is Strength! It’s Also ... Police Corruption”).

In his current fundraising appeal, Brimelow writes, “help feed starving young writers in fiscal 2005!”
“It is amazing how little money it takes to get young people to take this risk—not a risk at all, really, but certain professional suicide, unless we can build VDARE.COM up as an alternative institution fast enough.”

[How nice to be referred to as “young” -- that hasn’t happened in years!]

“At various times this year, I’ve had to go slow paying writers—and also to turn aside the many new writers who want to appear on VDARE.COM. It’s deeply distressing, because just a little money means so much to them—and to their country.

“Tonight, we post Tom Piatak’s summary of the War Against Christmas, Michelle Malkin, plus, of course, the blog.

“Scroll down to the end, past Ms. Bevens’ picture—and when you pass the donate link, remember my starving young writers.”

There are only three business days left, and as Brimelow and the gang at VDARE point out, this year, due to the Katrina Bonus legislation, you get to deduct 100% of all charitable donations from your taxes. I thank you, and your nation will thank you—sometime down the road.

I Can’t Believe It’s Not Socialism!

All I can say is, hit this link at The Cantankerous Old White Guy.

To say more would ruin the joke.

“Occupation,” “Civil War,” “Domestic Terrorism,” or “Dirty War”: How to Define the Condition of Whites in the West?

By Nicholas Stix

Old Atlantic Lighthouse responded to my teaser, "Bombay (Mumbai), Islam, and the West," to my VDARE Blog essay, “Bombay (aka Mumbai), and the Convergence of Race and Religious War,” as follows:

And yet those who read this are still afraid to say,save the white people, stop non-white immigration and keep the West white majority and safe for whites. Those words are hostages to fortune to be used against me, and every white person reading them quakes with fear. These are the feelings of being occupied. Its lying to ourselves to call it anything else.

His language is very powerful, and yet I will stick to the phrase “civil war,” for the occupation was invited by the West’s elites, rather than being a military invasion. And I recall the phrase of German constitutional theorist Martin Kriele, of a government engaging in “partisanship in a civil war” (“Parteilichkeit im Bürgerkrieg”). Even the phrase “civil war” is imperfect, because it assumes two or more groups of citizens fighting each other, whereas in this conflict, a large chunk of the fighters are not citizens at all.

One thing I just realized I should have changed: Since not only do the attackers not wear uniforms (though they often carry flags!), and the government manipulates them against its own citizens, instead of “civil war,” I should have said “dirty war,” though this requires redefining the latter term as a combination of “civil war,” the previous definition of “dirty war,” and “terrorism.”

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/dirty+war

Noun 1. dirty war - an offensive conducted by secret police or the military of a regime against revolutionary and terrorist insurgents and marked by the use of kidnapping and torture and murder with civilians often being the victims; "thousands of people disappeared and were killed during Argentina's dirty war in the late 1970s"

act of terrorism, terrorism, terrorist act - the calculated use of violence (or the threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear

offence, offensive, offense - the action of attacking an enemy

Bombay (Mumbai), Islam, and the West

By Nicholas Stix

“[Lone captured Bombay terrorist Azam Amir Kasav, alias Ajmal Kasab] described how its mastermind briefed the group to ‘target whites, preferably Americans and British’.”

As James Fulford noted, the Moslem terrorists who murdered 188 people in Bombay (Mumbai) and wounded over 300, were not instructed to kill Christians or “Infidels” as such, but to kill whites (“target whites, preferably Americans and British”). (Since they went out of their way to find and kill Jews, the terrorists obviously had special instructions in that case, as well.)

Islam’s apologists tell us that it is a religion transcending race, but few Moslems seem to have gotten the memo. Whether in Australia, Scandinavia, or France, nowadays, a pretty, blonde, Christian girl walking down a street has the sickening realization that she is about to be gang-raped, when she hears a foreign-accented voice cry out, “White slut!” or “Australian slut!”

Not “Infidel slut!...”

Read the rest, in “Bombay (aka Mumbai), and the Convergence of Race and Religious War,” at VDARE.


Please support VDARE. Thank you.

Ron Smith & Nicholas Stix: A Conversation Today at 3:30 p.m. on the SPLC Election Hoax, VDARE, and the Winchester Atrocity

By Nicholas Stix

Ron Smith has invited me to be a guest on his popular, Baltimore talk radio show, on WBAL (if you are out of range for the radio station, you can listen in via live stream at WBAL.com (hit the “Listen Live” link in the upper left-hand corner).

We will be discussing the subjects of his column today, “The truth about 'hate crimes' and the racial justice racket”: The SPLC’s Election Hoax, whereby the organization got millions of readers around the world to believe that racist whites reacted to the selection as president of the man calling himself “Barack Obama” with hate crimes against blacks, and the Winchester Atrocity (see also here and here), the racially motivated robbery-torture-murder of the newlyweds, white Marine Sgt. Jan Pawel Pietrzak and his black bride of two months, Quiana Jenkins- Pietrzak, and the gang-rape of Mrs. Pietrzak, for which four black “Marines” have been charged.

Smith writes,

The Southern Poverty Law Center is a thriving business. The Alabama-based "nonprofit" firm has become a font of riches for founder Morris Dees and his associates. Its last tax return (2005) showed it took in nearly $111 million in donations the previous four years alone and reported assets of $189.4 million at the end of 2005.

To me and to other observant conservatives, the Southern Poverty Law Center is a clever scam, relentlessly cultivating for profit the fear that this nation is filled with Klansmen and rife with people eager to perpetrate genocide. If you're curious about this organization and its legitimacy, spend some time on the Internet and assess it for yourself, because I want to move on to something else related to the comment by Mr. Potok. He mentions cross-burnings on the lawns of interracial couples. If this is true, shame on those who do such things, but what you probably don't know about - and what the law center ignores - is the atrocity committed on an interracial couple in Winchester, Calif.: Marine Sgt. Jan Pawel Pietrzak, a Polish immigrant, and his African-American bride of two months, Quiana Jenkins Pietrzak. Four African-American Marines, two of them under Sergeant Pietrzak's command (including Emrys Justin John, 18, of Baltimore), are accused of breaking into the couple's home and killing them both (one is also charged with a sex crime). In the weeks since the brutal murders, the media have been largely silent about the grisly incident. Would that be the case had the alleged perpetrators been white? Don't be silly.

And as we have come to expect, the authorities won't attribute the Pietrzaks' deaths to "hate." The Riverside County prosecutor's office says the crime was motivated by robbery. But the mother of the murdered Marine, Henryka Pietrzak-Varga, wrote a letter to the president-elect about what happened to her son and daughter-in-law, wondering, "If it was a robbery, why didn't they come when nobody was home instead of in the dead of night, armed to the teeth? ... What was it about my son and daughter-in-law that inspired such hatred and loathing?" As columnist and blogger Nicholas Stix notes, "The questions are, of course, rhetorical. Mrs. Pietrzak-Varga obviously knows full well why her son and daughter-in-law were murdered.

Ron Smith is a long-time reader, dating back to my early 1990s' work for Chronicles, and a big fan of VDARE, where he read my columns devoted to the Winchester Atrocity.

Tune in; you won’t want to miss this broadcast.