March 30, 2009

US Mint Short on Gold and Silver?

Below is the message received on the US Mint Website ( when opening the Gold or Silver Bullion purchase page:

American Eagle Gold Uncirculated Coins

Production of United States Mint American Eagle Gold Proof and Uncirculated Coins has been temporarily suspended because of unprecedented demand for American Eagle Gold Bullion Coins. Currently, all available 22-karat gold blanks are being allocated to the American Eagle Gold Bullion Coin Program, as the United States Mint is required by Public Law 99-185 to produce these coins “in quantities sufficient to meet public demand . . . .”

The United States Mint will resume the American Eagle Gold Proof and Uncirculated Coin Programs once sufficient inventories of gold bullion blanks can be acquired to meet market demand for all three American Eagle Gold Coin products. Additionally, as a result of the recent numismatic product portfolio analysis, fractional sizes of American Eagle Gold Uncirculated Coins will no longer be produced.

March 24, 2009

Ann Coulter Fans Didn’t Murder Anne Pressly—It Was The "Usual Suspect". But No One's Apologizing

By Nicholas Stix

While reporting interracial murders and attempted murders carried out by black men against white women, I have noted a pattern involving certain aspects of the crime, the official response or lack thereof, and responses by different elements of the public.

The murder typically is extreme in its brutality, with the killer inflicting the maximum in pain and humiliation on his victim. The authorities stonewall the public—unlike their reactions to deaths or assaults committed against blacks by whites, when they strive for a maximum in publicity and transparency. When they do speak, it is often to lie, adamantly denying that the crime was “racially motivated”—even though they have no problem calling (statistically rare) white-on-black murders “racially motivated”—and claiming either that the motive was "robbery" or that they can’t imagine what the motive might have been etc. etc.

Meanwhile, the mainstream media and their blogosphere comrades will mock and denounce any whites who state the obvious as "racists," "white nationalists," "Nazis," etc.

Black-on-white torture murders of females invariably follow the rape and/or sodomy of the victim: The Wichita Massacre; the Knoxville Horror; the Columbia University rape-torture-attempted murder; the Winchester Atrocity (in which the gang-rape victim was the black wife of a white man). The sexual humiliation doubles the murderer’s pleasure.

Of course, black felons often rape black women they find in homes they are burgling, but they rarely torture and murder them. White felons act similarly with white women. White-on-black rape is virtually non-existent, and I can’t remember the last white-on-black rape-torture-murder. But black-on-white rape-torture-murder, burglary-rape-murder, and simple rape-murder are all the rage.

Last fall, twenty-six-year-old Anne Pressly, the anchor on ABC affiliate KATV’s Daybreak show, was assaulted and mortally injured in her home in Little Rock’s affluent Pulaski Heights area, four blocks from the Little Rock Country Club. She was found unconscious on the morning of October 20th by her mother, Patti Cannady, and succumbed on October 25th.

According to one press report:

"Patti Cannady, visiting from out of town, went to her daughter's Little Rock home because she didn't answer a wake-up call and found the 26-year-old woman had been beaten beyond recognition. Every bone in her face had been broken, Cannady said.

“'Her jaw, pulverized so badly that the bone had come out of it. I actually thought that her throat, it possibly been cut, but that was possibly the first knockout punch. Her entire skull had numerous fractures from which she suffered a massive stroke.'

“Pressly died in a hospital five days later without regaining consciousness. Her left hand was broken, her mother said.

“'She fought for her life, she fought her attacker,' Patti Cannady said."

[Parents: Slain anchorwoman was sexually assaulted, by Jon Gambrell, Associated Press/AT&T, December 1, 2008,]

In a December 1 interview with Today Show host Matt Lauer, Pressly’s father, "Guy Cannady, said that while the police theory is that Pressly interrupted a random robbery, he isn't convinced of that." He argued, "It’s just unbelievable that a random robbery like this would involve the brutal slaying of Anne in this way. There just seems to be a lot more to the whole story than just a robbery gone bad."

On the December 5 edition of ABC’s 20/20, Mrs. Cannady told reporter Jim Avila that when she found her daughter, “There was blood on the ceiling”.

Mrs. Cannady led 20/20’s news crew through her daughter’s small house, saying that circa 3 a.m., the rapist-killer had broken in through the back door into the kitchen, surprising her daughter in her bed.

Pressly’s killer “took her laptop computer, a credit card and little else.”

In lieu of identifying the crime’s interracial character, many media outlets, after having earlier published pictures of Anne Pressly, published pictures of black, 28-year-old defendant, Curtis Lavelle Vance.

But when the New York Times reported on Vance’s arrest in an unsigned article, it went beyond its 62-year-old tradition of shielding black criminals. It not only left out any mention or running any photographs indicating that Vance was black, but (in a display of the compassion for which it is so justly famous) positively gloated about the crime:

"The beating startled much of the state and horrified Ms. Pressly’s neighbors in the prestigious Pulaski Heights neighborhood, an enclave of old houses, and where residents considered themselves essentially exempt from violent crime. " [Arrest in Killing of a TV Anchor, by "The New York Times," November 27, 2008.]

Bring the war home.

According to Little Rock PD Detective Tommy Hudson, the cause of death was "blunt force trauma". According to AP’s Gambrell, Detective Hudson wrote in a court affidavit: "It was confirmed with all scientific certainty that Mr. Vance is the DNA contributor of the suspect in Ms. Pressly's murder."

Vance became a suspect in the murder when his girlfriend was allegedly caught selling numerous items stolen in a series of area burglaries to a pawnbroker. He then submitted to a DNA saliva swab test. It matched DNA found at the murder scene.

Vance has denied he was in Little Rock on the day of the attack. He was initially charged with capital murder. His girlfriend has been charged with theft.

Following Vance’s arrest in the Pressly case, Little Rock PD spokesman, Lt. Terry Hastings, refused to confirm or deny whether she had been raped and/or sodomized. I left a message for Lt. Hastings’ unit November 28 but received no response. Even AP’s Gambrell had nothing to report on December 1.

The Little Rock PD’s reticence forced the victim’s parents to take matters into their own hands. On December 1, during their aforementioned Today Show interview, Guy and Patti Cannady announced that their daughter had indeed been raped prior to being murdered:

"They said there was evidence of sexual assault.

"‘This monster stole my daughter's innocence,’ Patti Cannady said. ‘He took her life. He took her identity. He took our lives. Our lives have radically changed as a result of what's happened to Anne.’" [Parents: Slain anchorwoman was sexually assaulted, USA Today, December 1, 2008]

The next day, December 2, Little Rock Police Chief Stuart Thomas provided a non-response statement to all media inquiries. Chief Thomas "said that the department would not be addressing any rumors that have been cropping up about Pressly."

Since Vance’s arrest, he has also been named as the suspect in the April rape of a school teacher in East Arkansas, and in several burglaries in Marianna, the predominantly 74.1 percent) black(town of 4,425 residents where he resides, approximately 90 miles east of Little Rock.

Media reports about the April rape in Marianna would say only that the victim was a schoolteacher, while suppressing her race and ethnicity. But that victim revealed herself, speaking to 20/20’s Jim Avila on the aforementioned show, as Kristen Edwards. She has pale white skin, and strawberry blonde or red hair.

Miss Edwards reported that as she was getting ready to go to work before dawn, her attacker, who had already broken in, was hiding in her living room. He jumped her from behind, forcing her face first into her couch, raping her from behind, so that she could not see his face, all the while threatening to kill her if she cried out, or tried to look at him.

Edwards said: “When I found out there was a connection between my case and Anne Pressly’s case … I just broke down…. Knowing that the person who attacked me was capable of so much more. As bad as it was, it could have been so much worse.”

Pressly’s mother’s revelations eventually broke through the stonewall. Lt. Terry Hastings suddenly found his tongue, though he is still clinging to the robbery theory. On December 5 he acknowledged to 20/20 :

"There was sexual assault in both cases, so it’s similar in crime. We believe that this individual’s goal probably was robbery. That’s what he had in mind. "

It’s “similar in crime”, alright. It now looks as though the Pressly case was no fluke.

The Little Rock PD says that while Vance denies having harmed Edwards or Pressly, “he did admit to being at Pressly’s home”.

Lt. Hastings told 20/20: “We believe he probably saw her in the neighborhood, maybe getting gas, maybe doing something else, and followed her, and attacked her. He denied being involved in it in any way, but his DNA told us otherwise.”

Detectives working the Pressly case recovered Vance’s “sperm, blood and his skin, taken from beneath Pressly's fingernails,” and were able to match it with the rapist’s DNA from the Edwards case.

Once the media released Vance’s photograph, other people from Marianna, where Vance had allegedly raped Kristen Edwards, came forward to tell 20/20 of Vance’s stalking of other local white women, though they never put it in such blunt terms. Faith Stiles told of twice seeing him stalking her outside of her house.

Faith Stiles: “My neighbor across the street called me and said, ‘You’ve got to get downstairs now. That guy’s back in your yard, and we’ve called the police.’”

Jim Avila: “Her husband faced him down in their carport.”

Rob Stiles: “And this is where I saw him. And I had the set of keys in my hand, so I pushed the alarm on the trunk, and set the alarm off, scared him, and he ran and opened the neighbor’s gate right there.”

Lori Garner, a personal trainer at the Pro Fitness club in Pressly’s Pulaski Heights neighborhood, reported seeing a man whom she and a client are now sure was Vance stalking the gym three times during the pre-dawn hours. Twice, Garner was accompanied by the client. The last time, in September, the man was crouching outside of the gym exposing himself. But they never called the police.

If the reports are true and the charges hold up, my conclusion is that Curtis Lavelle Vance apparently is only interested in raping and murdering white women, with robbery an afterthought.

In an earlier time, such bravado on the part of black felons in white neighborhoods was the exception. But after some 45 years of authorities and the MSM terrorizing whites in the name of “civil rights,” it is the rule. No matter how many white females are raped and/or murdered, whites fear being treated like "racists” by police and reporters if they demand action against black strangers acting suspiciously in neighborhoods where they have no legitimate business.

Early this year, prosecutors made Chief Thomas’ stonewalling moot. On January 15, they charged Curtis Lavelle Vance with rape and capital murder. Vance pleaded not guilty, insisted that the authorities had the wrong man, and that they had illegally obtained his DNA. (But if the former is true, the latter should be a moot point, no?). [Defendant in death of TV anchor contests DNA evidence, By Jon Gambrell, The Associated Press, January 18, 2009]

Of course, by then, the national media had moved on.

Back when newspapers thrived, one of the reasons they did was their thorough coverage of crime—particularly gruesome murders and sex crimes. PC journalists’ decision that the public has no right to know about interracial crime has played a large role in the decline of the American newspaper.

Of course, we now have the internet afterword. Political Correctness didn’t stop people from speculating at blogs, Web sites, and through e-mails.

Racial realists have few illusions about race and crime. But in what is developing into a conservative cliché, early on I received rumors (unconfirmed) claiming that Miss Pressly had been genitally mutilated.

The other side of the aisle had their own obsessions. Leftwing bloggers and commenters refused to state the obvious, and condemned anyone who did, but they had no compunctions about other speculations. The number one suspect cited by Daily Kos blogger "relikx" and by commenters there and elsewhere: fans of conservative writer-humorist, Ann Coulter.

Thus spake "relikx,"

"Police have no motive and think the ABC morning newswoman may have been attacked during a 'robbery attempt,' but the political climate and her role as the conservative columnist in the controversial movie raises many questions about whether Anne was purposely targeted.

“I'm sorry for the short diary but there really isn't too much more to add to this except that I hope everyone keeps Anne in their thoughts and prayers.

“It is far too early to speculate as to why this senseless violence occurred. It would be inappropriate to connect conspiratorial dots but then again there's something that seems strange about this. "[W's "Ann Coulter" actress beaten in home attack, by "relikx," Daily Kos, October 20, 2008.]

It seems that Pressly had a 30-second role playing Ann Coulter (though not using Coulter’s name) in Oliver Stone’s recent propaganda vehicle, W , that supposedly made Coulter look bad. The phrase, "the political climate" refers, as commenters made explicit, to (imaginary) hate crimes committed by Republicans.

At True Crime Report, leftist commenters discussing the Pressley murder argued that fans of Coulter or Rush Limbaugh might have done it, seeing as how right-wingers—emphasizing Republican milquetoast Sean Hannity—all sound like "Nazis", and are constantly inciting their followers to commit "hate crimes".

Note that this was already these people’s state of mind before the presidential election. Their fevered rantings recall the way Bill Clinton blamed "division” on the airwaves—i.e. conservative talk radio—for Timothy McVeigh’s bombing of the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City.

Note too that these posters are people who support stealing elections through massive voter fraud, yet who sought to railroad Ann Coulter on phony "voting fraud" charges.

Since Curtis Lavelle Vance’s arrest, the leftwing bloggers have not seen fit to revisit or regret their speculations about Ann Coulter.

That’s "old news," it’s "time to move on".

And besides, why regret having smeared Coulter, when that was the whole point of their blogs?

After all, what do they care about Anne Pressly?

(A tip ‘o’ the hat to Larry Auster, who does care.)

March 20, 2009

Preparing for Civil Unrest in America

Legislation to Establish Internment Camps on US Military Bases

The Economic and Social Crisis

The financial meltdown has unleashed a latent and emergent social crisis across the United States.

What is at stake is the fraudulent confiscation of lifelong savings and pension funds, the appropriation of tax revenues to finance the trillion dollar "bank bailouts", which ultimately serve to line the pockets of the richest people in America.

This economic crisis is in large part the result of financial manipulation and outright fraud to the detriment of entire populations, leading to a renewed wave of corporate bankruptcies, mass unemployment and poverty.

The criminalization of the global financial system, characterized by a "Shadow Banking" network has resulted in the centralization of bank power and an unprecedented concentration of private wealth.

Obama's "economic stimulus" package and budget proposals contribute to a further process of concentration and centralization of bank power, the cumulative effects of which will eventually resul in large scale corporate, bankruptcies, a new wave of foreclosures not to mention fiscal collapse and the downfall of State social programs. (For further details see Michel Chossudovsky, America's Fiscal Collapse, Global Research, March 2, 2009).

The cumulative decline of real economic activity backlashes on employment and wages, which in turn leads to a collapse in purchaisng power. The proposed "solution" under the Obama administration contributes to exacerbating rather than alleviating social inequalities and the process of wealth concentration.

The Protest Movement

When people across America, whose lives have been shattered and destroyed, come to realize the true face of the global "free market" system, the legitimacy of Wall Street, the Federal Reserve and the US administration will be challenged.

A latent protest movement directed against the seat of economic and political power is unfolding.

How this process will occur is hard to predict. All sectors of American society are potentially affected: wage earners, small, medium and even large businesses, farmers, professionals, federal, State and municipal employees, students, teachers, health workers, and unemployed. Protests will initially emerge from these various sectors. There is, however, at this stage, no organized national resistance movement directed against the administration's economic and financial agenda.

Obama's populist rhetoric conceals the true nature of macro-economic policy. Acting on behalf of Wall Street, the administration's economic package, which includes close to a trillion dollar "aid" package for the financial services industry, coupled with massive austerity measures, contributes to precipitating America into a bottomless crisis.

"Orwellian Solution" to the Great Depression: Curbing Civil Unrest

At this particular juncture, there is no economic recovery program in sight. The Washington-Wall Street consensus prevails. There are no policies, no alternatives formulated from within the political and economic system. .

What is the way out? How will the US government face an impending social catastrophe?

The solution is to curb social unrest. The chosen avenue, inherited from the outgoing Bush administration is the reinforcement of the Homeland Security apparatus and the militarization of civilian State institutions.

The outgoing administration has laid the groundwork. Various pieces of "anti-terrorist" legislation (including the Patriot Acts) and presidential directives have been put in place since 2001, largely using the pretext of the "Global War on Terrorism."

Homeland Security's Internment Camps

Directly related to the issue of curbing social unrest, cohesive system of detention camps is also envisaged, under the jurisdiction of the Department of Homeland Security and the Pentagon.

A bill entitled the National Emergency Centers Establishment Act (HR 645) was introduced in the US Congress in January. It calls for the establishment of six national emergency centers in major regions in the US to be located on existing military installations.

The stated purpose of the "national emergency centers" is to provide "temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance to individuals and families dislocated due to an emergency or major disaster." In actuality, what we are dealing with are FEMA internment camps. HR 645 states that the camps can be used to "meet other appropriate needs, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security."

There has been virtually no press coverage of HR 645.

These "civilian facilities" on US military bases are to be established in cooperation with the US Military. Modeled on Guantanamo, what we are dealing with is the militarization of FEMA internment facilities.

Once a person is arrested and interned in a FEMA camp located on a military base, that person would in all likelihood, under a national emergency, fall under the de facto jurisdiction of the Military: civilian justice and law enforcement including habeas corpus would no longer apply.

HR 645 bears a direct relationship to the economic crisis and the likelihood of mass protests across America. It constitutes a further move to militarize civilian law enforcement, repealing the Posse Comitatus Act.

In the words of Rep. Ron Paul:

"...the fusion centers, militarized police, surveillance cameras and a domestic military command is not enough... Even though we know that detention facilities are already in place, they now want to legalize the construction of FEMA camps on military installations using the ever popular excuse that the facilities are for the purposes of a national emergency. With the phony debt-based economy getting worse and worse by the day, the possibility of civil unrest is becoming a greater threat to the establishment. One need only look at Iceland, Greece and other nations for what might happen in the United States next." (Daily Paul, September 2008, emphasis added)

The proposed internment camps should be seen in relation to the broader process of militarization of civilian institutions. The construction of internment camps predates the introduction of HR 645 (Establishment of Emergency Centers) in January 2009. There are, according to various (unconfirmed) reports, some 800 FEMA prison camps in different regions of the U.S. Moreover, since the 1980s, the US military has developed "tactics, techniques and procedures" to suppress civilian dissent, to be used in the eventuality of mass protests (United States Army Field Manual 19-15 under Operation Garden Plot, entitled "Civil Disturbances" was issued in 1985)

In early 2006, tax revenues were allocated to building modern internment camp facilities. In January 2006, Kellogg Brown and Roots, which at the time was a subsidiary of Halliburton, received a $385 million contract from the Department of Homeland Security's Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE):

"The contract, which is effective immediately [January 2006], provides for establishing temporary detention and processing capabilities to augment existing ICE Detention and Removal Operations (DRO) Program facilities in the event of an emergency influx of immigrants into the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs...

The contract may also provide migrant detention support to other U.S. Government organizations in the event of an immigration emergency, as well as the development of a plan to react to a national emergency, such as a natural disaster. (KBR, 24 January 2006, emphasis added)

The stated objectives of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) are to:

"protect national security and uphold public safety by targeting criminal networks and terrorist organizations that seek to exploit vulnerabilities in our immigration system, in our financial networks, along our border, at federal facilities and elsewhere in order to do harm to the United States. The end result is a safer, more secure America" (ICE homepage)

The US media is mum on the issue of the internment camps on US soil. While casually acknowledging the multimillion dollar contract granted to Halliburton's subsidiary, the news reports largely focused their attention on possible "cost overruns" (similar to those which occurred with KBR in Iraq).

What is the political intent and purpose of these camps? The potential use of these internment facilities to detain American citizens under a martial law situation are not an object of media debate or discussion.

Combat Units Assigned to the Homeland

In the last months of the Bush administration, prior to the November 2008 presidential elections, the Department of Defense ordered the recall of the 3rd Infantry’s 1st Brigade Combat Team from Iraq. The relocation of a combat unit from the war theater to domestic front is an integral part of the Homeland Security agenda. The BCT was assigned to assist in law enforcement activities within the US.

The BCT combat unit was attached to US Army North, the Army's component of US Northern Command (USNORTHCOM). The 1st BCT and other combat units would be called upon to perform specific military functions in the case of civil unrest:

The 1st BCT’s soldiers also will learn how to use “the first ever nonlethal package that the Army has fielded,” 1st BCT commander Col. Roger Cloutier said, referring to crowd and traffic control equipment and nonlethal weapons designed to subdue unruly or dangerous individuals without killing them.(

(See Gina Cavallaro, Brigade homeland tours start Oct. 1, Army Times, September 8, 2008).

Under the proposed withdrawal of US forces from Iraq under the Obama administration, one expects that other combat units will be brought home from the war theater and reassigned in the United States.

The evolving national security scenario is characterized by a mesh of civilian and military institutions:

-Army combat units working with civilian law enforcement, with the stated mission to curb "social unrest".

- the establishment of new internment camps under civilian jurisdiction located on US military facilities.

The FEMA internment camps are part of the Continuity of Government (COG), which would be put in place in the case of martial law.

The internment camps are intended to "protect the government" against its citizens, by locking up protesters as well as political activists who might challenge the legitimacy of the Administration's national security, economic or military agenda.

Spying on Americans: The Big Brother Data Bank

Related to the issue of internment and mass protests, how will data on American citizens be collected?

How will individuals across America be categorized?

What are the criteria of the Department of Homeland Security?

In a 2004 report of the Homeland Security Council entitled Planning Scenarios, pertaining to the defense of the Homeland, the following categories of potential "conspirators" were identified:

"foreign [Islamic] terrorists" ,

"domestic radical groups", [antiwar and civil rights groups]

"state sponsored adversaries" ["rogue states", "unstable nations"]

"disgruntled employees" [labor and union activists].

In June of last year, the Bush administration issued a National Security Presidential Directive (NSPD 59- HSPD 24) entitled Biometrics for Identification and Screening to Enhance National Security (For Further details see Michel Chossudovsky, "Big Brother" Presidential Directive: "Biometrics for Identification and Screening to Enhance National Security", Global Research, June 2008)

Adopted without public debate or Congressional approval, its relevant procedures are far-reaching. They are related to the issue of civil unrest. They are also part of the logic behind the establishment of FEMA internment camps under HR 645. .

NSPD 59 (Biometrics for Identification and Screening to Enhance National Security) goes far beyond the narrow issue of biometric identification, it recommends the collection and storage of "associated biographic" information, meaning information on the private lives of US citizens, in minute detail, all of which will be "accomplished within the law":

"The contextual data that accompanies biometric data includes information on date and place of birth, citizenship, current address and address history, current employment and employment history, current phone numbers and phone number history, use of government services and tax filings. Other contextual data may include bank account and credit card histories, plus criminal database records on a local, state and federal level. The database also could include legal judgments or other public records documenting involvement in legal disputes, child custody records and marriage or divorce records."(See Jerome Corsi, June 2008)

The directive uses 9/11 and the "Global War on Terrorism" as an all encompassing justification to wage a witch hunt against dissenting citizens, establishing at the same time an atmosphere of fear and intimidation across the land.

It also calls for the integration of various data banks as well as inter-agency cooperation in the sharing of information, with a view to eventually centralizing the information on American citizens.

In a carefully worded text, NSPD 59 "establishes a framework" to enable the Federal government and its various police and intelligence agencies to:

"use mutually compatible methods and procedures in the collection, storage, use, analysis, and sharing of biometric and associated biographic and contextual information of individuals in a lawful and appropriate manner, while respecting their information privacy and other legal rights under United States law."

The NSPD 59 Directive recommends: "actions and associated timelines for enhancing the existing terrorist-oriented identification and screening processes by expanding the use of biometrics".

The procedures under NSPD 59 are consistent with an earlier June 2005 decision which consisted in creating a "domestic spy service", under the auspices of the FBI. (For further details see Michel Chossudovsky, Bush Administration creates "Secret State Police", June 30, 2005)

Working hand in glove with Homeland Security (DHS), the proposed "domestic intelligence department" would combine FBI counterterrorism, intelligence and espionage operations into a single service.

The new department operating under the auspices of the FBI would have the authority to "seize the property of people deemed to be helping the spread of WMD": They would be able to "spy on people in America suspected of terrorism or having critical intelligence information, even if they are not suspected of committing a crime." (NBC Tonight, 29 June 2005).\


Text of H.R. 645: National Emergency Centers Establishment Act

This version: Introduced in House.

This is the original text of the bill as it was written by its sponsor and submitted to the House for consideration. This is the latest version of the bill available on this website.


HR 645 IH


1st Session

H. R. 645

To direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish national emergency centers on military installations.


January 22, 2009

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned



To direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish national emergency centers on military installations.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,


This Act may be cited as the ‘National Emergency Centers Establishment Act’.


(a) In General- In accordance with the requirements of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish not fewer than 6 national emergency centers on military installations.

(b) Purpose of National Emergency Centers- The purpose of a national emergency center shall be to use existing infrastructure--

(1) to provide temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance to individuals and families dislocated due to an emergency or major disaster;

(2) to provide centralized locations for the purposes of training and ensuring the coordination of Federal, State, and local first responders;

(3) to provide centralized locations to improve the coordination of preparedness, response, and recovery efforts of government, private, and not-for-profit entities and faith-based organizations; and

(4) to meet other appropriate needs, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security.


(a) In General- Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall designate not fewer than 6 military installations as sites for the establishment of national emergency centers.

(b) Minimum Requirements- A site designated as a national emergency center shall be--

(1) capable of meeting for an extended period of time the housing, health, transportation, education, public works, humanitarian and other transition needs of a large number of individuals affected by an emergency or major disaster;

(2) environmentally safe and shall not pose a health risk to individuals who may use the center;

(3) capable of being scaled up or down to accommodate major disaster preparedness and response drills, operations, and procedures;

(4) capable of housing existing permanent structures necessary to meet training and first responders coordination requirements during nondisaster periods;

(5) capable of hosting the infrastructure necessary to rapidly adjust to temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance needs;

(6) required to consist of a complete operations command center, including 2 state-of-the art command and control centers that will comprise a 24/7 operations watch center as follows:

(A) one of the command and control centers shall be in full ready mode; and

(B) the other shall be used daily for training; and

(7) easily accessible at all times and be able to facilitate handicapped and medical facilities, including during an emergency or major disaster.

(c) Location of National Emergency Centers- There shall be established not fewer than one national emergency center in each of the following areas:

(1) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions I, II, and III.

(2) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region IV.

(3) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions V and VII.

(4) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region VI.

(5) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions VIII and X.

(6) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region IX.

(d) Preference for Designation of Closed Military Installations- Wherever possible, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall designate a closed military installation as a site for a national emergency center. If the Secretaries of Homeland Security and Defense jointly determine that there is not a sufficient number of closed military installations that meet the requirements of subsections (b) and (c), the Secretaries shall jointly designate portions of existing military installations other than closed military installations as national emergency centers.

(e) Transfer of Control of Closed Military Installations- If a closed military installation is designated as a national emergency center, not later than 180 days after the date of designation, the Secretary of Defense shall transfer to the Secretary of Homeland Security administrative jurisdiction over such closed military installation.

(f) Cooperative Agreement for Joint Use of Existing Military Installations- If an existing military installation other than a closed military installation is designated as a national emergency center, not later than 180 days after the date of designation, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Defense shall enter into a cooperative agreement to provide for the establishment of the national emergency center.

(g) Reports-

(1) PRELIMINARY REPORT- Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site--

(A) an outline of the reasons why the site was selected;

(B) an outline of the need to construct, repair, or update any existing infrastructure at the site;

(C) an outline of the need to conduct any necessary environmental clean-up at the site;

(D) an outline of preliminary plans for the transfer of control of the site from the Secretary of Defense to the Secretary of Homeland Security, if necessary under subsection (e); and

(E) an outline of preliminary plans for entering into a cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f).

(2) UPDATE REPORT- Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site--

(A) an update on the information contained in the report as required by paragraph (1);

(B) an outline of the progress made toward the transfer of control of the site, if necessary under subsection (e);

(C) an outline of the progress made toward entering a cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f); and

(D) recommendations regarding any authorizations and appropriations that may be necessary to provide for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site.

(3) FINAL REPORT- Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site--

(A) finalized information detailing the transfer of control of the site, if necessary under subsection (e);

(B) the finalized cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f); and

(C) any additional information pertinent to the establishment of a national emergency center at the site.

(4) ADDITIONAL REPORTS- The Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, may submit to Congress additional reports as necessary to provide updates on steps being taken to meet the requirements of this Act.


This Act does not affect--

(1) the authority of the Federal Government to provide emergency or major disaster assistance or to implement any disaster mitigation and response program, including any program authorized by the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.); or

(2) the authority of a State or local government to respond to an emergency.


There is authorized to be appropriated $180,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2009 and 2010 to carry out this Act. Such funds shall remain available until expended.


In this Act, the following definitions apply:

(1) CLOSED MILITARY INSTALLATION- The term ‘closed military installation’ means a military installation, or portion thereof, approved for closure or realignment under the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note) that meet all, or 2 out of the 3 following requirements:

(A) Is located in close proximity to a transportation corridor.

(B) Is located in a State with a high level or threat of disaster related activities.

(C) Is located near a major metropolitan center.

(2) EMERGENCY- The term ‘emergency’ has the meaning given such term in section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122).

(3) MAJOR DISASTER- The term ‘major disaster’ has the meaning given such term in section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122).

(4) MILITARY INSTALLATION- The term ‘military installation’ has the meaning given such term in section 2910 of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note).

Obama and the Destruction of Freedom World Wide

Note: This article is not intended to be "absorbed"- in a single sitting. I would recommend you digest this article in a number of steps. First read the article itself. Next access the articles and video links that I have provided within the article. Finally decide how you are going to get involved in order to avert the destruction of our freedoms being promulgated by the current Obama administration. Personally I believe that the immediate Re-Legalization of Marijuana and a moratorium on home foreclosures would be the best initial course of action.

I consider myself to be philosophically in line with the freedoms that our Founding Fathers--Washington, Jefferson and Franklin--held to be so very important. And among those freedoms there are two that I hold not only important, but absolutely sacred: Freedom of speech and Freedom of religion. And of course Freedom of Religion necessitates an absolute separation between Church and State in order to remain effective.

As a secularist I can assure you that I'm not about to go all "religious"- on you in this article. But these two freedoms are the very keystones to any free society: for without them a free society will invariably collapse into totalitarianism. And that is exactly what we see happening throughout the planet as we bare witness to the ascendency of Islamic Sharia Laws in the Middle East and Fascist Corporatism in the United States and Europe.

It is important to understand that these things are not happening by accident, but rather by design. In a nutshell the various global elites are attempting to impose their unique varieties of "Shock Doctrine"- on the planet's working class because the massive Ponzi scheme of credit debt and derivatives is in the process of collapse. So they, with the tacit support of Obama and other "world leaders,"- are spinning bailout schemes so that when the economic tsunami hits, the elite will be holding all the wealth and the working class will be absolutely penniless. There is actually a recent colloquialism that describes this phenomenon: the privatization of wealth and the socialization of debt. In other words the elite gets to horde wealth while the working class becomes homeless and burdened with unbearable debt.

In order to make the "working class"- accept this medicine they know that they must first build an infrastructure to impose totalitarian martial law. And of course part of that infrastructure includes the corporate control of mainstream media in order to "dumb down"- the citizenry and effectively manage the manufacture of consent. Because without such infrastructure these scoundrels could be faced with a nightmare that would make the Bastille look like a Sunday picnic. I should make abundantly clear that I am not advocating violent revolution, rather merely noting that such revolutions become inevitable when the majority has little else to loose.

So to protect themselves from an increasingly disposed people, our government corpocracy have already built 800 prison camps, assembled thousands of plastic coffins and for the first time in US history and are deploying tens of thousands of US Military to quell civil unrest when the economic tsunami finally hits. Of course to get away with all of this they know they will have to eviscerate our freedoms. And that is exactly what I fear is happening right now.

The other day I was emailed an 8-page document from an extension of the Department of Homeland Security, known as MIAC. If you believe in freedom then owe it to yourself to read through the entire document which can be accessed through the following link:

Is Martial Law Coming to the United States
click here />
The document was leaked by some very patriotic members of law enforcement that were presented with the documents at a seminar put on by this "branch of homeland security"- known as MIAC. What is most disturbing about the 8-page document is that it profiles Americans that they believe could become "terrorists"- and, inexplicably, they are not Islamic extremists but rather Americans that are smart enough to understand that something awful is in the works. And here are some of the profile characteristics of the "terrorists"- that they would like to track and add to their "terrorist"- database:

* Bumper stickers for third-party candidates like Ron Paul
* Talk against granting Amnesty to 12-20 Million Illegal Aliens
* Talk about putting a stop to Legal or Illegal Immigration
* Talk of "New World Order"- conspiracy theories
* Opposition to the Federal Reserve and support of the gold standard
* Opposition to US Army takeover of Homeland Security
* Opposition to the North American Union
* Opposition to universal military service
* Tax resistance
* Possession of subversive literature: "pictures, cartoons, bumper stickers that contain anti-government rhetoric. Most of this material will depict the FRS, IRS, FBI, ATF, CIA, UN, Law Enforcement, and "-New World Order' in a derogatory manner."-
click here />
Since these are all things the Obama opposes we must assume that he supports this MIAC program that is already busy developing these "terrorists"- lists. And it does not take much imagination to understand that Obama will use these lists to round up these "terrorists"- (e.g., American Citizens) when the tsunami finally hits.

Now lets take a little trip to Pakistan where Pakistani journalist Sharmeen Obaid-Chinoy reports on how Obama has allowed the people of the Swat Valley to be sacrificed to the whims of Islamic Fundamentalists. I highly recommend that you go to the following link so you can fully understand how Obama is allowing these good people to be forced into a state of Islamic totalitarianism:

Taliban Children
click here />
And if that doesn't make your stomach turn then you might want to consider that Obama is considering doing the same thing throughout Afghanistan. Consider the following excerpt from a article published on February 21st, 2009:

Swat pact exposes chinks in Obama administration

Islamabad: Can a pact between the Pakistani government and the Taliban, aimed at restoring peace in the nation's troubled Swat valley, be the forerunner of a similar deal in Afghanistan? It would seem so from the remarks of US Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

At the same time, the Swat pact has exposed the sharp differences in the Barack Obama administration, with the president's special envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke bitterly opposed to the peace deal.

Asked whether the US would accept a similar deal in Afghanistan if the Swat pact succeeded, Gates said Friday: "If there is a reconciliation, if insurgents are willing to put down their arms, if the reconciliation is essentially on the terms being offered by the government, then I think we would be very open to that.
click here />
Taliban support in Pakistan's Swat Valley - 11 Nov 07
Taliban in control of Pakistan's Swat Valley - 02 Feb 09

Once again I encourage you to access these links in order to read the full article and accompanying video. As an American it is imperative that you begin to understand the difference between what Obama says and what he is actually doing. Because what he is doing is setting the stage for totalitarianism world wide. You might also want to watch this 2 hour film by Alex Jones, to fully grasp the dimensions of Obama's grand betrayal:

The Obama Deception
click here />
I first became suspicious of Obama's intentions in the Fall of 2008 before his vast war chest of corporate money assured his ascendency to the Presidency in November 2008:

Curious Obama, Globalist Traitor?
click here />
At that time I still wanted to believe that Obama would transcend his attachment to the global elite. But unless you are as blind as a glass eye in a dogs ass, there is but one conclusion: Obama has sided with the global elite.

We now find ourselves in the same position the German's found themselves when Hitler began to rise to power. But we must not make the same mistake and merely wait for the inevitable. We must act. And we must begin right now.

To this end we must have an alternative solution. I have tried to outline part of that solution in my 10-plank "New Agenda for America."- You can read about it and watch videos relating to it at the following link:

The New Agenda for America
I would also begin to consider the ideas of others that have alternatives to Obama's "Totalitarian Solution."- Some of the most thoughtful solutions include a "basic income guarantee"- (BIG) as proposed to Richard Cook; a national pension as proposed by William Grieder, debt forgiveness as proposed by economist Michael Hudson and finally, the Zeitgeist Project. Here are a few links to help you further explore these programs:

Bailout for the People: "The Cook Plan"- by Richard C. Cook
by Richard C. Cook
click here />
Riding into the Sunset
By William Grieder
click here />
Rescue for the Few, Debt Slavery for the Many
Michael Hudson, Counterpunch Monday, Oct 13, 2008
click here />
Six Minutes with the Renegade Economist - Michael Hudson
Zeitgeist - The Movie

I want to make it clear that I don't necessarily support everything that these sources suggest. But what I share with these sources (above) is a belief that the current socio-economic model of laissez faire capitalism is no longer sustainable. And if we are to avoid a descent into totalitarianism we must come up with sustainable alternatives, right now, that fully recognize the theft and deceit of President Obama and the Global Elite that he appears to represent. And currently Obama is playing a major role in that very deceit.

And while we ponder the long term alternatives, I think that we must force Obama, through massive public pressure, to institute the following steps immediately. And by immediately I mean in the next month:

(1) Impose an immediate 10-year moratorium on any further foreclosures and evictions of Legal American Citizens.
(2) Immediately Re-Legalize Marijuana, under the MERP Model, in order to crush the Mexican Drug Cartels without the dispensation of any further blood or treasure.

You can learn much more about MERP at the following link:

MERP Headquarters
The Marijuana Re-Legalization Policy Project (MRPP)

And as soon as these measures are implemented the following measures need to follow within the next 6 months:

(1) Consider a massive bailout for Legal American Citizens that will absolve them of their outstanding debt. I'm thinking in terms of $150,000 for each Legal American Citizen.
(2) An immediate moratorium on all further Legal and Illegal Immigration into the United States.
(3) Universal application of E-Verify, to every job holder in the US, in order to send all Illegal Immigrants and Visa overstays back home. This should immediately create between 12 and 20 million jobs for Legal American Citizens. Obama has only promised the creation of 3 million jobs over the next 2 years despite the fact we are hemorrhaging nearly 600,00 jobs each month.
(4) Forbid the ownership of any American homes by non-citizens and force all such properties to be immediately put back on the market.
(7) Institute Richard Cooks "Basic Income Guarantee."-
(8) Replace the Federal Reserve with a Peoples reserve so the globalists no longer benefit from putting Americans in a perpetual state of debt.
(9) Full implementation of all remaining planks of the "New Agenda for America.
(10) A constitutional rebuke to all corporations that have led patents to any DNA-based product. Patents on all DNA-based structures and life forms must ultimately be ruled as unconstitutional.
(11) An immediate phasing out of all Genetically Modified crops and a restoration to the practice of seed gathering and time honored practices of sustainable farming practices.

The Future of Food--Introduction
click here />
And finally I think we should begin to consider William Grieder's idea for a "universal pension"- as the current system of pensions covers increasingly fewer Americans and is doomed to failure as the derivatives tsunami finally hits in the next year.

To understand the dimensions of this ultimate "bubble"- I suggest reading the following article:

The Size of Derivatives Bubble = $190K Per Person on Planet
By Tom Foremski - October 16, 2008

As far as I'm concerned this "Peaceful 2nd American Revolution"- needs to begin right now. I am hopeful that Obama can be persuaded to accept this challenge. But what I will not accept is his current agenda which will most definitely leave most Americans without either freedom, or property. That is simply not acceptable.

March 19, 2009

Ron Paul on Bloomberg "I see no Purpose for the Federal Reserve..." 03-17-09

Memories Of Madison—My Life In The New Left

By Kevin MacDonald

The first time I became aware of leftist Jews was when, as a reporter for The Daily Cardinal, the student newspaper, at the University of Wisconsin, I was assigned to cover a meeting of the Committee Against the War in Vietnam. This was around 1965, just after the war started heating up. In my short career as a reporter I had also covered a meeting of the Young Republicans, and the contrast couldn’t have been more striking. The Young Republicans were all dressed up—men in suits and ties, women in dresses—and looked like they were attending a business meeting at the country club.

Even though the Young Republicans were all white and most of them came from Wisconsin, I can’t say that I related to them much. But I felt even more alien at the meeting of the antiwar committee. The attendees were dressed in a much more Bohemian style and there was a lot of intense talk about politics. And they were Jewish.

I wasn’t the only one to notice the Jewish flavor of radical politics at Wisconsin. In their academic study of the New Left Roots of Radicalism: Jews, Christians and the Left, Stanley Rothman and S. Robert Lichter quote an observer of the New Left scene at the University of Wisconsin: "I am struck by the lack of Wisconsin-born people and the massive preponderance of New York Jews. The situation at the University of Minnesota is similar." His correspondent replied: "As you perceived, the Madison left is built on New York Jews."

Things changed for me when I moved in with two Jewish roommates and suddenly became immersed in the radical Jewish subculture of Madison. Living in an environment where radical politics was an unquestioned assumption, I soon became a radical myself. A social psychologist would probably explain it as conforming to a new set of social norms—when in Rome, do as the Romans do. In some ways I was probably prepared for the plunge into radicalism. I had been politically liberal, a Democrat, and a strong supporter of the Civil Rights Movements. But there was a very large gap between being a liberal and being a radical, especially in those days.

Shortly thereafter, I remember telling someone from my hometown that I had become "alienated" from the culture. And now that I recall that incident, it calls to mind a passage from Chapter 6 of my study of Jewish involvement in 20th Century intellectual and political movements, The Culture of Critique:

"[The New York Intellectuals] conceived themselves as alienated, marginalized figures—a modern version of traditional Jewish separateness and alienation from [non-Jewish] culture. [As Norman Podhoretz described them,] "They did not feel that they belonged to America or that America belonged to them." … Indeed, Podhoretz … was asked by a New Yorker editor in the 1950s "whether there was a special typewriter key at Partisan Review with the word ‘alienation’ on a single key."

Without really realizing the ramifications, I had been acculturated into a Jewish intellectual and political milieu of alienation—and antipathy to the small-town Wisconsin milieu (Irish and German, Catholic, lower middle class) in which I grew up. My attitudes toward pretty much everything changed dramatically. I viewed the people and culture that I grew up in with disdain if not hatred.

The University of Wisconsin was a hotbed of the counterculture during the 1960s. Two buildings were bombed, several were occupied, and the Wisconsin National Guard was called in to restore order. There was also a substantial hippie subculture—relatively less political and less Jewish, and more preoccupied with drugs, sex, and rock-n’-roll.

At the center of intellectual life for radicals at Wisconsin were Harvey Goldberg and the History Department. One of the themes of The Culture of Critique is the tendency for Jewish intellectual movements to become centered around highly charismatic Jewish figures. At Wisconsin the student movement idolized historically important Jewish leftists such as Leon Trotsky, Rosa Luxemburg, and Herbert Marcuse. But there was a special place in their hearts for the charismatic social historian Harvey Goldberg. Goldberg’s lectures presenting his Marxist view of European social history enthralled a very large following on campus. He commanded overflow crowds at the largest lecture hall on campus, Agriculture Hall, which holds 600 students. Going there was a commitment because it was not located near the social science buildings.

Goldberg’s lectures were an unforgettable experience of performance art. Beginning in a low key but intense style, he built up the volume and intensity level gradually to a frenzied climax. The lectures usually ended 5–10 minutes after the class was scheduled to end, but everyone remained glued to their seats. The conclusion typically elicited a rousing standing ovation from the students.

By the end of the lecture, Goldberg, who was rather gaunt and frail looking, was sweating profusely, seemingly drained and exhausted. Throughout the lecture, students would react by laughing at his jokes and applauding his condemnations of the capitalists and other oppressors in European history. Great fun, and doubtless quite influential. As a newspaper article put it, "His lectures, delivered in a voice that seemed to resonate from the depths of his soul, were a transforming experience for generations of students, stirring their minds and consciences."

Goldberg died in 1989, but his legacy lives on. Quite a few of his lectures were recorded and are available from the Harvey Goldberg Center for Contemporary History at Wisconsin. Besides the Goldberg Center at the University of Wisconsin, he has also been immortalized by a Program for Excellence in Teaching at Ohio State (his first teaching position), and with a classroom at the Brecht Forum, a Marxist cultural center in New York.

Probably because of Goldberg, the History Department achieved pride of place in terms of academic majors for radicals. (Sociology was also fashionable; I was in philosophy, which was also at least moderately acceptable for a radical.) Being accepted as a graduate student by Goldberg was very prestigious even though Goldberg was not particularly productive as a scholar.

Goldberg’s rival for intellectual guruship at Wisconsin was George L. Mosse whose course on European intellectual history was also a magnet for campus radicals. Mosse was the grandson of the founder of the liberal Berlin newspaper Der Tageblatt—a prototype of Jewish-owned liberal media that drew the special ire of Hitler and his movement. Der Tageblatt was seized by the government when Hitler came to power, and Mosse and his family were forced to leave Germany.

The radicals I knew viewed Mosse as insufficiently radical. His main sin was that he was an intellectual historian. Serious Marxists view intellectual history as mere superstructure overlaying the economic basis of the class struggle.

I took Mosse’s course and later came to read several of Mosse’s books as background to my chapter on National Socialism [PDF] in Separation and Its Discontents. In his book The Crisis of German Ideology, Mosse stressed that an important ingredient in the rise of Nazism was völkisch ideology—the ideology that Germans had a unique folk spirit as a result of their evolutionary past. Incidentally, although unmentioned by Mosse, such racially charged views found mirror images in the writings of 19th-century Jewish proto-Zionists like Moses Hess [PDF] and became a cornerstone of the racial Zionist movement that dominates the politics of Israel today.

Unlike Goldberg, Mosse’s Jewish interests and identification were quite overt. His lectures, like his books, showed a strong interest in Jewish issues, particularly the Holocaust and the ideologoical basis of Nazism. Like Goldberg, Mosse has left behind a legacy at the UW History Department, endowing it with a bequest made possible by the restoration of his family’s property after World War II. Mosse also taught at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem; his Jewish interests can also be seen by perusing the catalog of the book series published by the institute established in his name.

Although Goldberg never discussed Jewish issues in his lectures to my knowledge, the Jewishness of both of these campus gurus was apparent to everyone. Attending the lectures and discussing them with others was an important component of the Jewish-dominated radical subculture of Madison.

I was not alone as a non-Jew adopting the attitudes of the radical Jewish subculture. The anti-war movement spread beyond its predominantly East Coast Jewish origins to a very large swathe of the university and the city of Madison.

A lot of this was brought to mind while viewing the 1979 documentary The War at Home which chronicles the period from around 1964–1970 in Madison. The only people I recognize in the film are Paul Soglin and Evan Stark—two highly visible Jewish antiwar activists during that period. (Soglin parlayed his career as an activist into 6 terms as mayor of Madison, while Stark became a tenured radical at Rutgers University.) But, besides leaders like Soglin and Stark, the protests and demonstrations—some of which I participated in—showed a preponderance of non-Jews. The protest against the war—and to a great extent the values of the radical counterculture as a whole—had become mainstream.

Memories about Madison radicals in the 1960s came up again while reading Mark Rudd’s memoir (Why were there so many Jews in SDS (Or the ordeal of civility). Rudd, who is Jewish, became well known as a student activist at Columbia University during the 1960s. After being expelled from Columbia, he became an SDS organizer and (along with Bill Ayers) was one of the founders of the Weather Underground whose mission was, as quoted by Rudd, "the violent overthrow of the government of the US in solidarity with the struggles of the people of the world."

Rudd describes the SDS at Columbia during the late 1960s as a "Jewish fraternity." The Jewish radicals described by Rudd seem more like Harvey Goldberg than George Mosse. Their Jewish identification was never discussed among themselves: "I don’t remember one single conversation in which we discussed the fact that so many of us were Jewish." Rudd suggests that "by being radicals we thought we could escape our Jewishness."

The late Paul Lyons [PDF], an academic historian of the American left (Philadelphia Communists 1936-56), makes the interesting comment about the Jewish Old Left that

"…most Jewish Communists wear their Jewishness very casually but experience it deeply. It is not a religious or even an institutional Jewishness for most; nevertheless, it is rooted in a subculture of identity, style, language, and social network. . . . In fact, this second-generation Jewishness was antiethnic and yet the height of ethnicity. The emperor believed that he was clothed in transethnic, American garb, but [non-Jews] saw the nuances and details of his naked ethnicity."

It was the same with their chidren who became the Jewish New Left. The topic of why there were so many radical Jews was never discussed, at least around me. But the Jewishness of these radicals was obvious to non-Jews like me who were suddently exposed to a very different subculture. The ethnic networking among Jews was obvious, as were the East Coast accents with sprinklings of Yiddish. Their taste in clothing was different, and they liked to talk about movies a lot, especially European movies by directors like Ingmar Bergman and François Trauffaut—sort of a 1960s intellectual version of Seinfeld. They had a whole set of (Jewish) idols (Trotsky, Marcuse, Luxemburg) that were initially quite foreign to me. Rudd recalls that the frame of reference for Jewish radicals at Columbia was the Holocaust and the need not to be a "good German". I don’t recall mention of the Holocaust, but it is certainly true that World War II and the evils of Nazism were much on the mind of Jewish radicals at Wisconsin.

Several authors have pointed out that radical Jews saw themselves as participating in a universalist movement to establish a classless society for all people; and because of this universalist veneer, they thought that their Jewishness would be invisible to others, or at least irrelevant. Obviously, it wasn’t invisible, nor was it irrelevant.

The radical Jews I knew seemed to realize that non-Jews saw them as Jews. In fact, one thing that struck me was that they were proud of being Jews and had very negative attitudes toward Christianity. At least around me, they did not condemn Christianity because of anti-Semitism. (The only allusion to historical anti-Semitism that I remember was when my roommate said something to the effect that "Do you realize that at one time or another Jews have been expelled from every country of Europe?" At that time, I did not know that.)

Rather, they were proud of the fact that Judaism represented enlightened views on sexuality, while Chistianity was prudish and sexually repressive. Their theoretical framework for this (there always has to be a theoretical framework!) was, of course, psychoanalysis which by then had become another bedrock ideology among Jewish intellectuals. In line with Freudian thinking, they attributed various forms of psychopathology and even white racial consciousness and capitalism to Christian sexual attitudes—an analysis that stemmed from their reading of Marcuse’s synthesis of Marx and Freud.

Other things about radical Jews at Wisconsin only struck me after becoming more familiar with Judaism 25 years later. The intellectual atmosphere of the movement closely resembled the atmosphere of other Jewish subcultures—intensely verbal discussions in which one’s reputation as a leftist was related to one’s ability in Marxist intellectual analysis and familiarity with Marxist scholarship. All of this required a great deal of study, but it was worth it because being a Marxist scholar, like being a rabbi in traditional Jewish society, carried a great deal of prestige. It was also attractive to the ladies.

There was also a great deal of hostility to Western cultural institutions as politically and sexually oppressive combined with an ever-present sense of danger and imminent destruction by the forces of repression. The overwhelming forces of the fascist capitialist state led by J. Edgar Hoover’s FBI were about to round up all the radicals and do away with them. This ingroup bunker mentality—which I document A People That Shall Dwell Alone—I came to realize as a fundamental characteristic of Jewish society.

Incidentally, this is a very useful thing to know about Jews. It explains how the ADL and the SPLC—the $PLC as calls it—makes their money: Create the feeling of imminent destruction by the forces of white racism and bigotry as a way of prodding Jews to donate.

Not surprisingly, there was an attitude of moral and intellectual superiority as well as contempt toward traditional American culture, particularly rural America and most particularly the South. These attitudes are hallmarks of the other intellectual movements reviewed in The Culture of Critique. In Rudd’s case, his ire is directed at the genteel culture of Columbia:

"What outraged me and my comrades so much about Columbia, along with its hypocrisy, was the air of genteel civility. Or should I say gentile? Despite the presence of so many Jews in the faculty and among the students … the place was dripping with goyishness."

Ah, the stuffy white goyim at Columbia hadn’t abdicated quickly enough and still had the temerity to hang around past their time. We can all breathe a sigh of relief that those days are over. I suppose he would have had the same reaction to the Young Republicans at Wisconsin in 1965.

In my experience at Madison during the 1960s, there was also a strong desire for bloody, apocalyptic revenge against the entire social structure—perceived by them to be the goyish, fascist, capitalist, racist, anti-Semitic social structure. (Harvey Goldberg, whose lectures often celebrated bloody uprisings against the forces of oppression, probably fed into this.) This fits well with the set of interviews with New Left Jewish radicals in Percy Cohen’s Jewish Radicals and Radical Jews: many had destructive fantasies in which the revolution would result in "humiliation, dispossession, imprisonment or execution of the oppressors." These fantasies of destruction of the social order were combined with a belief in their own omnipotence and their ability to create a non-oppressive social order.

Finally, it was very striking to me that these anti–Vietnam War Jewish radicals were euphoric incongruously about Israel’s victory Six-Day War of 1967. This also struck’s Paul Gottfried as worthy of comment:

"All my Jewish colleagues in graduate school [at Yale], noisy anti-anti-Communists, opposed American capitalist imperialism, but then became enthusiastic warmongers during the Arab-Israeli War in 1967. One Jewish Marxist acquaintance went into a rage that the Israelis did not demand the entire Mideast at the end of that war. Another, though a feminist, lamented that the Israeli soldiers did not rape more Arab women. It would be no exaggeration to say that my graduate school days resounded with Jewish hysterics at an institution where Wasps seemed to count only for decoration." (Paul Gottfried, On "Being Jewish", Rothbard-Rockwell Report [April]:9–10, 1996.

I guess the old white genteel elite at Columbia weren’t the only ones capable of hypocrisy.

To his credit, Rudd does better than most Jews in trying to explain Jewish involvement in radicalism, citing John Murray Cuddihy’s classic The Ordeal of Civility: Freud, Marx, Levi-Strauss and the Jewish Struggle With Modernity. Here is the central quote from Cuddihy:

"With the advent of Jewish Emancipation, when ghetto walls crumble and the shtetlach begin to dissolve, Jewry—like some wide-eyed anthropologist—enters upon a strange world, to explore a strange people observing a strange halakah They examine this world in dismay, with wonder, anger, and punitive objectivity. This wonder, this anger, and the vindictive objectivity of the marginal nonmember are recidivist; they continue unabated into our own time because Jewish Emancipation continues into our own time."

Rudd comments:

"We Jews at Columbia—and I would guess at colleges throughout the country—brought the same outsider view to the campuses we had been allowed into. We were peasant children right out of the shtetls of New Jersey and Queens screaming, ‘You want to know the truth about Columbia University, they’re a bunch of liberal imperialists!’"

Rudd also cites Israel Shahak’s important book Jewish History, Jewish Religion —but Rudd twists Shahak’s thesis to state that

"…as a reaction to being the victims of racism throughout the centuries, we developed a religion which itself enshrined racism toward the other. This is especially true of the rabbinical commentaries developed in Eastern Europe over the almost one thousand years in which we occupied a middle position between the landlords, whom we served, and the peasants who despised us and whom we in turn despised. How could it have been otherwise? In my family, if you wanted to say somebody was stupid you said they had a ‘goyishe kup,’ a goyish head."

My view is that it’s the other way around: The Jewish concern with racial purity can be seen in the Old Testament and throughout Jewish history.

From time to time, Western societies have attacked or erected defenses against Jewish elites and their non-Jewish allies. Since the 19th century, important anti-Jewish movements have been racialist (National Socialism in Germany), but this racialism was not the basis of Christian anti-Jewish movements (Christianity in the 4th and 5th centuries and during the Inquisition in Spain and Portugal). As Shahak points out (p. 64), the general pattern throughout European history was for popular uprisings against Jews as components of oppressive elites—and for the non-Jewish elements of the elites to come to the aid of Jews.

Rudd sees Israel for what it is: A racialist, militarist, expansionist state:

"Israel is America’s future: militarized, racist, religio-nationalist, corporate, riven with so many internal splits and hatreds that only the existence of a perpetual enemy keeps the nation from exploding. If we don’t organize to stop the current direction in this country, thirty years from now we will be Israel."

Rudd is probably right that America of the future will be hopelessly "riven with … internal splits and hatreds". Such are the predictable results of the rise of multiculturalism and massive non-white immigration unleashed by the activism of the organized Jewish community [PDF].

What Rudd doesn’t discuss is that Jewish activism on behalf of non-white immigration can be directly traced back to Jewish activists on the left—people like Rudd. Massive non-white immigration into Western societies has been a project of the Jewish left for pretty much the entire last century. The Jewish left has been the most influential component of the organized Jewish community. And even when a significant number of Jews defected from the left, giving rise to the neoconservative movement, they retained the traditional Jewish attitudes on immigration.

That’s why I think the real explanation of Jewish involvement in the Left includes an additional component. It’s certainly true that, as Cuddihy wrote, Jews emerged from the ghetto with hostility toward the culture around them. This fits with modern psychological data on how people with a strong ingroup identity, like Jews, perceive outgroups. Jewish hostility toward the culture of non-Jews has been a constant throughout Jewish history. The difference was that, as Cuddihy notes, they and their preferences suddenly became part of mainstream Western culture, with a great deal of political influence and access to the media and the academic world.

But it was more than that. It’s about displacement and domination. The displacement of the genteel white Protestant culture at Columbia that Rudd hated is part of the general displacement of non-Jewish whites. Rudd doesn’t consider the fate of that other very influential group of leftist Jews—the Jewish radicals who fled the shtetls of Eastern Europe and, instead of going to Ellis Island, became dominant elite in the USSR after the success of the Bolshevik Revolution. These Jewish radicals were able to actually carry out in the USSR the fantasies the New Left Jewish radicals in the US—i.e., the "humiliation, dispossession, imprisonment or execution of the oppressors" mentioned above. Harvey Goldberg’s wet dream.

This group of Jewish radicals became an integral part of the machinery of mass murder and oppression in the USSR. In doing so, they displaced the older non-Jewish elites of Russians and Germans. (Doubtless, they were too genteel and had other faults that warranted their displacement.) At least through the 1950s, political radicalism was popular among American Jews in large part because the Bolshevik Revolution was good for Jews. Jews had risen to the heights in the USSR, and the USSR had crushed fascist Germany.

Even though the New Left rejected Stalinism, there is no doubt it was bent on a similar displacement of white elites. All of its policies led inexorably in that direction. To a considerable extent, the current malaise of whites in the US can be directly traced to the triumph of the attitudes of the New Left—especially non-white immigration, the rise of multiculturalism, and the steady erosion of whites as a percentage of the electorate. (The last Democratic president to get a majority of white votes was Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964.

I have a suggestion for Rudd: If you are really interested in stopping racism, become active in opposing Zionism and its influence in the US.

Otherwise, we get the impression that you tacitly approve Jewish ethnic chauvinism in Israel while favoring the displacment of whites in the US.

And if you want to quell the" "internal splits and hatreds" within the US, become active in the cause of reversing the effects of four decades of non-white immigration.