From: "Charles David Prescott, III"
To: Subject: American Dissident Voices: Destroying Order Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 12:49:03 -0500 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 > > American Dissident Voices Broadcast of November 24, 2001 > > Destroying Order > By Dr. William Pierce > > Hello! > > George Bush had his wife on television last Saturday drumming up public > support for his war. The basic theme of her message was that the Taliban > -- and fundamentalist Muslims generally -- don't treat their women the > way Politically Correct Americans believe they should be treated. The > Muslims make them wear head-to-toe covering in public, won't let them > drive cars or hang out in shopping malls, and there's hell to pay if one > of them is caught flirting with a man who isn't her husband. Worst of > all from Laura Bush's point of view, the women under Taliban control > aren't permitted to work in factories or offices but instead must stay > home and take care of the kids. The message was that it's our duty to > make the folks in Afghanistan treat their women the way Mrs. Bush thinks > they should be treated. If they won't do things her way voluntarily, > then it's our duty to use cruise missiles and B-52s to force them to do > it her way. > > Another theme of Mrs. Bush's message was that the aim of terrorists is > to oppress women. Osama bin Laden's Sepember 11 attack didn't have > anything to do with Israel or the U.S. government's long-term support of > Israel's aggression against her Muslim neighbors; his aim was to oppress > women. He hates us because American women are permitted to wear shorts > and to hang around shopping malls instead of staying home with the kids. > He wants to use terrorism to force us to make American women behave like > Afghan women. The nutcase feminists over here may have believed that, > but it sounded just as silly to me as Mr. Bush's claim that the > September 11 attack was unprovoked: that we were attacked just because > the fundamentalist Muslims hate our freedom and democracy. > > Well, I am sure that fundamentalist Muslims do look on American behavior > with disgust. I am sure that they are shocked by the way many of our > women dress in public, they are shocked by the effeminate behavior of > many of our men, they are shocked by the morally and socially > destructive propaganda we permit Hollywood and New York to pour into our > homes through television. But I am equally sure that their disapproval > of our behavior here in America was not the reason for the September 11 > attack. And I am sure that they have no intention of trying to oppress > American women or to make Americans change their behavior over here. > Their concern is only with what we do in their part of the world. > > One other thing I'm quite sure about is that George Bush didn't put his > wife on the air last Saturday to talk about the oppression of women in > Afghanistan because he really cares about that or because he really > believes that Osama bin Laden wants to force American women to wear > burqas. His aim was strictly to drum up support for his ongoing war > against Israel's enemies in the Middle East. Actually, the Jewish > brainwashing machine in Hollywood was churning out hate propaganda > against Afghanistan even before the Taliban government refused the Bush > government's demand that it turn over Osama bin Laden. There was a > special program about Afghanistan on CNN instead of the standard news > programming; it was clearly aimed at persuading American liberals and > feminists that Muslim fundamentalists -- especially those in Afghanistan > -- are a bad bunch. When I saw the program I said to myself, somebody is > getting ready to wage war against Afghanistan whether the Taliban > government turns over Osama bin Laden or not, and this program is > designed to build up war sentiment among Americans. > > I've been seeing a lot of news reports about events in Afghanistan that > most Americans don't have a chance to see. For example, I have a very > disturbing set of photographs from Ananova, a news agency in the United > Kingdom. The photos were taken last week, just after George Bush's > buddies in the Northern Alliance moved into Kabul. A Taliban soldier who > had stayed behind tried to surrender. The Northern Alliance soldiers > beat him up, and then they pulled down his pants and castrated him, and > while he was writhing in agony on the ground they began using him for > target practice. I never will forget the look of wide-eyed terror on the > man's face just before he was castrated. The last photograph in the > series shows two Northern Alliance soldiers with big grins on their > faces pumping bullets from their AK-47s into the poor bastard while > other Northern Alliance people, also grinning, stand around watching the > spectacle. > > I was surprised to see a few photographs of the same incident in this > week's issue of Time magazine: surprised because Time magazine and its > boss Gerald Levin are solidly on George Bush's team, and they want us to > think well of Mr. Bush's Northern Alliance buddies. Of course, Time did > sanitize its account of this Taliban soldier's fate by neglecting to > mention the castration -- although elsewhere in this week's issue a > reporter describes how he was invited to watch while a prisoner's eyes > were gouged out with a knife. These people doing the castrating and > eye-gouging are the nice folks Mr. Bush has been paying with our tax > dollars to fight the Taliban. These are the people Laura Bush would have > us believe will end the oppression of women in Afghanistan. > > I doubt it. In fact, Mr. Bush's Northern Alliance buddies would about as > soon gang rape women in Taliban territory and then hack off their > breasts as they would castrate and murder Taliban POWs. They get a big > kick out of that sort of thing, and that's what they used to do pretty > regularly before the Taliban took over and forced them into their > enclave in northern Afghanistan a few years ago. > > I'm not saying that the Taliban's supporters are nice people, but they > certainly are no worse than George Bush's buddies, and they did impose > law and order on their country: law and order that no longer exist, > thanks entirely to George Bush. The Taliban had forced a certain code of > behavior on Afghan women -- and on Afghan men too, I should add -- out > of religious conviction. The Northern Alliance people don't care as much > about religion. They don't care whether women wear burqas or not; they > just like to gang rape and mutilate them. And they've done a lot of > raping and castrating in the past few days, courtesy of the U.S. > government. In addition to raping and castrating and gouging out eyes, > they like to impale prisoners on sharpened stakes and watch them > wriggle. > > Most Americans don't get to see any of this because the small portion of > it reported by the media here is sanitized and minimized in order to > keep the people who are doing the dirty work for the New World Order > gang in Afghanistan from looking too bad. The consequence of this > one-sided news coverage is that a substantial fraction of Americans > believe Mrs. Bush when she announces that we are turning Afghanistan > over to the Northern Alliance in order to end the oppression of women > there, and they believe Mr. Bush when he assures them that we are > helping the good guys in Afghanistan beat the bad guys in order to end > terrorism. > > As I said last week, what Mr. Bush really is trying to do is replace the > Taliban with a more corrupt government that can be bribed and threatened > more easily than the Taliban could. He wants a puppet government that > will not be a threat to Israel. > > George Bush knows how to end terrorism against America from that part of > the world. He doesn't have to start a war or bomb anyone or overthrow > anyone else's government. All he has to do is quit letting Israel use > America, to quit helping the Israelis kill Palestinian women and > children with weapons and money supplied by the United States. He knows > that as well as I do, but he pretends that he doesn't, and that's one of > the reasons I know he is a crook. > > And his wife is a crook too. If she were really concerned about the > plight of women in that part of the world, she would speak out about > what the Jews in Israel are doing to Palestinian women and children. She > would protest the White slave trade that is flourishing in Israel, with > tens of thousands of White women lured or kidnapped to Israel from > eastern Europe and forced to work as sex slaves there in appalling > conditions. She would not stand beside her husband and give a big smile > and a hug to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, the Butcher of Beirut, > the Jewish leader who engineered the murder of thousands of Palestinian > women and children in Lebanon in 1982, whenever he comes to Washington. > > The Bush family is a family of liars and traitors: corrupt people > flourishing in an increasingly corrupt period for America. It is too bad > that they cannot be made now to experience the things that they force > men and women in Afghanistan and Palestine to experience. Perhaps the > time for that will come later. Meanwhile they are riding high on the hog > and are convinced that they're pretty smart for selling out our people > and doing the will of the Jews, in return for Jewish political support. > They believe that they can bring the whole world under Jewish rule and > benefit themselves at the expense of all the rest of us. They believe > that they can bring about the New World Order, as George Bush's father > used to brag when he was President, by waging war after war against > countries that refuse to knuckle under -- Iraq, Serbia, Afghanistan -- > using our unlimited supply of cluster bombs and cruise missiles to > terrify dissident countries into submission and topple stubborn > governments so that they can be replaced with compliant ones. > > George Bush and his colleagues are willing to risk more foreign > terrorist attacks along the way to their New World Order; in fact, in > some ways foreign terrorist attacks are useful to them. They are much > more concerned about domestic resistance to their New World Order scheme > than they are about foreign terrorism. And when I say "domestic > resistance," I'm not thinking primarily about domestic terrorism. The > government-and-media crowd are not terribly concerned about domestic > terrorism unless it is waged on a scale much larger than it has been in > the past and is sustained long enough to have a destabilizing effect. In > fact, occasional acts of domestic terrorism are useful to them, just as > acts of foreign terrorism are, but in a different way. > > Foreign terrorist attacks are useful in that they provide a pretext for > wars needed to force unwilling countries into submission to the New > World Order, as in the case of the current war against Afghanistan and > the planned war against Iraq. Of course, when there is no threat of > terrorism the New World Order planners generally can use some other > pretext. That was the case with the Clinton government's war against > Serbia, for example. The excuse there was that the Serbs were > mistreating the Albanian minority in Serbia's Kosovo province, and so we > had to bomb Belgrade in order to force the Serbs to see the error of > their ways, but an excuse that flimsy often won't hold up under stress. > If the Serbs had had any kind of decent air defense system and had taken > out a dozen or so U.S. bombers over Belgrade, or if they had been able > to sink one of our ships in the Adriatic which was firing cruise > missiles into Serbia, the American public would have lost its stomach > for the war in a hurry. Much better for sustaining a war of that sort is > a foreign terrorist attack, so that the war can be portrayed as > necessary for America's security or as retaliation for an attack against > Americans. > > Foreign terrorist attacks also provide a pretext for suppressing > domestic resistance, which as I said is a matter of greater concern to > the government anyway. A foreign attack gives the media an opportunity > to whip the lemmings into a flag-waving, > we-all-must-support-our-President mood, in which there is no tolerance > for dissent, and it gives the government an opportunity to enact > repressive legislation that can be used to stifle domestic resistance to > a certain degree. We are seeing both these consequences of the September > 11 attack now. The downside of the September 11 attack for the > government and the media is the rise in anti-foreigner and > anti-immigration sentiment among the public. It's a downside for the > government and the media because keeping America's borders open is an > important element of the New World Order scheme. > > I also suspect that the government would prefer that the next foreign > terrorist attack against the United States not be quite as damaging to > the U.S. economy as the September 11 attack. A few more like that could > destabilize the economy and generate a lot of public unrest. > > Except when they really need a good excuse to start another war, the > government and media schemers can make much better use of domestic > terrorism, especially if it can be blamed on anyone who seriously > opposes their schemes. The media bosses and other Jewish leaders really > were reaching after the Oklahoma City bombing in an effort to blame that > on me, just because I wrote a novel 25 years ago in which there is a > truck-bomb attack on a U.S. government building. They're really hoping > now that it will turn out that the anthrax letters are being mailed by a > heterosexual White male who doesn't like Jews and is connected to an > organization of similar heterosexual White males, so that the government > will have an excuse for shutting down the organization and enacting even > more restrictive legislation. > > I'll guarantee you this: if it is a White American who eventually is > charged with the anthrax letters, you'll hear a lot more about it from > the media than you will if it turns out to be some Muslim immigrant from > the Middle East. And of course, if it turns out to be a Jew just trying > to stir up anti-Muslim sentiment by signing the letters "Allah is > great," you won't hear about it at all, unless you're a news junkie like > me. > > People like George Bush, John Ashcroft, and all the other politicians > who are committed to the Jewish New World Order really are determined to > abolish our Bill of Rights. They want to bring U.S. law into line with > that in Canada, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and most of the > rest of Europe, where anyone who speaks out against Jewish control or > Jewish influence can be imprisoned by the government. And I must tell > you, this government and media program of curtailing our civil liberties > worries me much more than the prospect of more hijacked airliners or > truck bombs. > > At the moment the program the government and media people are pushing is > military court-martials and summary executions for suspected terrorists: > secret evidence, no right to confront one's accuser, no jury; just a > military officer who decides whether or not to have you shot as a > suspect. But don't worry, they tell us, this is only for suspected > terrorists who aren't U.S. citizens. If you're a citizen, the new rule > doesn't apply to you. > > Well, let me tell you, I worry anyway. I worry when the media Jews and > the FBI both begin talking about how convenient it would be if they > could torture suspects to extract information and Attorney General John > Ashcroft praises a new law which provides for summary executions for > suspected terrorists who aren't citizens. I worry because I know that > one thing leads to another. I know these bastards who run our government > and own our mass media. I know that they regard each new encroachment on > our freedom as just another step toward their ultimate goal, which is no > freedom at all for us. Today a law giving them a license to shoot > suspected terrorists who aren't citizens; tomorrow a law extending the > shooting license to include citizens. George Bush and John Ashcroft and > all the rest of the New World Order enthusiasts around them are evil > men. > > They are evil men, and they also are dangerous men because they have the > support of the mass media. And because they have the support of the mass > media they also have the support of the great mass of Americans who > don't have a thought in their heads that didn't come from their > television screens. The yahoos with the little flags tied to their car > antennas believe that being patriotic means not criticizing the > government. It means doing what the government tells you to do. It means > believing what the government tells you to believe. If the government > tells you that a law permitting the shooting of suspected terrorists > will make us all safer, then the flag-wavers are all for it. If another > law permits the secret police to break into your house while you are > away and search through your personal belongings and private papers to > find evidence against you without telling you about it, then that must > be a good thing too, otherwise the government wouldn't do it, right? > > Laws are essential for order, and a government also is essential to > administer and enforce the laws. The type of government and the system > of laws suitable for one people might not be suitable at all for another > people, another nation. I certainly would not want to live in a society > ruled by the Taliban. But the Taliban at least gave the Afghans law and > order, and my belief is that it is not a good thing for us to tell other > nations how they should conduct their internal affairs or what sort of > laws they should have. It is not our business to decide whether or not > Afghan women should be required to wear burqas. > > I wonder if the flag-waving Americans who are cheering what George Bush > has done to Afghanistan by destroying law and order there have any idea > what life would be like in America without law and order. > > I often encounter really foolish people who believe that if we're > tolerant and respect other people's rights they'll respect ours; that if > we share what we have with others, so that no one is really deprived of > what he needs, then we can all live together in our wonderfully diverse, > multicultural society even without a government and laws. These people > don't understand that without fear of the police to keep our > multicultural elements in line, America quickly would devolve into > savagery. Without order, the flower-child types who preach tolerance > would be hunted down for meat and eaten alive on our city streets. > > Even if we had an all-White society, we would need laws respected by our > people. Without laws there is no order, and without order there is only > savagery. Every gang boss, every religious nut with a few followers, > every cult leader would be fighting with others for turf, for followers, > for resources, for power. For most people life would be hell. Our people > spent a long time -- thousands of years -- developing a system of laws > and government to provide order for our societies so that we could live > useful and productive lives. George Bush and the media bosses who are so > eager now to abolish the hard-won laws that provide for our rights, our > liberties, and to make new laws giving more and more control of our > lives to the government undermine respect for the laws and for the > government. They may retain the support of the yahoos, but it wasn't > yahoos who established our rights and built our system of laws in the > first place. The yahoos always just went along for the ride. The > government, by becoming more repressive and more intrusive, > delegitimizes itself and provides a prerequisite for its overthrow. > > When that happens we'll all be in peril until something new and > healthier is formed from the chaos. But I cannot help but wish that > George Bush is still around during the chaos, so that he can experience > some of the things the Taliban prisoners in Afghanistan are experiencing > now at the hands of his Northern Alliance pals. > > Thanks for being with me again today. > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= > The text above is based on a broadcast of the American Dissident > Voices radio program sponsored by National Vanguard Books. > It is distributed by e-mail each Saturday to subscribers of ADVlist. > > To subscribe to ADVlist send an e-mail message to: > ADVlist-on@NatVan.com (The subject and body of the message don't > matter.) > > For more information about National Vanguard Books or the > National Alliance see our web site at http://www.natvan.com or > http://www.natall.com > --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.282 / Virus Database: 150 - Release Date: 09/25/2001
How much more do we pay for gasoline by letting them stop IRAQI OIL from reaching the world market?