DebateGate

I really don't blame the Europeans at all. Did their grandfathers lay down their lives to defeat Hitler so that their "enlightened" politicians could give away their countries to foreigners right out from under their feet? When the fascists are the only parties standing up for the interests of the citizenry, it's no surprise they're winning elections. Fascists are the least of their worries. If the so-called "legitimate" political parties don't like it, maybe they need to start responding to the needs of their own citizens. If they don't, somebody will.

Fred Throws Sombrero in Ring
The Only Thing We Have to be A-Fred of is Fred Hisself
October 25, 2012
I see that I shall have to take over the helm of the country to save it from the impending collapse. It has come to this. I have always said that I would undertake the presidency only under an assumed name?who would want that on his resum???but noblesse oblges. What could be nobler than this column?

You may say, ?But Fred, how can you be so bloody arrogant as to think you can run the country?? To which I reply, ?We know that the incumbents cannot. I may be able to. In any event, I couldn?t be worse: I have not that talent. Which do you prefer, assured disaster or a sporting chance??

Apparently the key to a successful campaign is a bumper sticker of supernal stupidity and irrelevance. I can play that game. How about ?A Fred in Every Pot.? Or Tippecanoe and Frederick Too.? Or ?Better Fred than Dead.? Or "Fred...Ahhhh." Or, most pertinently, ?Well, Have You Got a Better Idea??

It is my understanding that as a candidate, I need a platform. I think this means a pack of rhythmically mendacious platitudes that would put a crank freak to sleep.  I shall try to do better. The following appear to me serviceable:

?Defense? policy: We don?t have one. The last time the military defended the United States was 1945?the United States, remember,  being that place between Canada and Mexico, a region that does not include (recent graduates, check your atlas) Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, Albania, Yugoslavia, Panama, Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia, Iran, Nigeria, or Yemen.

Do not misunderstand me. I am as patriotic as the next guy, and consequently happy to kill remote strangers for no reason, and their wives, children, dogs, and flcoks. Unfortunately, we can no longer afford it. Do you know what bombs cost these days? Thus we must either find a cheaper means of terminating Afghan children, perhaps by poisoning, or else, on purely economic grounds, we must restrain the Pentagon?s appetites.

Therefore, under my administration all military officers will be required to wear pink tutus, toe shoes, and brassieres with expandable boob compartments. This will discourage history majors in arrested development from becoming  lieutenants and strutting around like Genghis Kahn simulacra. An army of ballerinas will be much less troublesome.

With each promotion officers will get larger inserts of high-density silicone, so that they get back trouble and retire. David Petraeus will be instantly issued an udder.

Is this not genius?

Further, all pilots of military helicopters will be required to go into combat with their children strapped to the skids. This will calm martial enthusiasm. (I was going to use the pilots? wives, but on reflection realized that this might lead to an insatiable thirst for war.)

Education policy: I will institute schools. This will be a novel concept in a nation accustomed to day-care centers intended to keep the young off the labor market, introduce them to drugs the purchase of which sustains the Mexican economy, and, so as to prepare them for jobs in odious bureaucracies, inure them to levels of boredom that would cause a stone post to crumble.

To this end I will put a bounty on education theorists, offer taxidermy at public expense, and convert teachers colleges into repositories for radioactive waste (Wait: They might mutate. The consequences could be incalculable. I?ll have to think this over carefully). The schools will teach reading (phonetically) writing (grammatically) and arithmetic (without calculators). Otherwise  their entire staffs will be fed to colonies of army ants. Brazil has lots.

I am replete with ideas for scholarly progress and social improvement. For example, any student who curses or assaults a teacher will be expelled, instantly and forever. (?But Fred,? you say, ?The poor things, they will end up in prison.? Exactly. They would anyway. Let?s get them started. Think of it as advanced placement. We could call it Head Start.)

Next, I will end affirmative action, specifically to include the admission to Ivy schools of dull-witted white legacies. This admirable policy would have protected us from Bush II, who on his merits couldn?t have gotten into Yale with burglar tools. It will make the federal bureaucracy functional again. Everything will be done without regard for race, creed, color, sex, or national origin, except cheese-cake photography. The underlying principle is the recognition that if you hire people because they can?t do a job, they won?t.

TSA: I am told that in Africa there are enormous silver-backed gorillas that can crush a coconut one-handed. I will station one of these at every airport gate in the country after suitable training. After an employee of TSA gropes a passenger, the gorilla will grope the TSA employee. This will doubtless result in a degree of attrition and, one hopes, frequent emasculation. Those who stay on the job will work naked to promote a sense of oneness with the public.

Moreover, I intend to institute the National Sausage Act, requiring that all other officials of Homeland Security be passed through a large industrial grinder. They will then be packed into sausage skins before being fed to undiscriminating sharks. This promise alone should result in my election by a grateful nation.

The first into the hopper will be that awful woman who records the airport warnings in that condescending almost gurgling elocution-major voice that sounds as if she wants to suck the microphone. There are limits to what we can bear. Well, there ought to be.

Next, I will have members of Congress officially designated as ducks by the National Park Service. States vary as to when duck season opens, but this is a matter of States rights. For a small license fee in the capital itself, citizens will be permitted to erect duck blinds along Pennsylvania Avenue. I imagine the use of duck calls which will squawk, ?Quaaack Pork, graft, corruption, little boys awwwk!?

God I?m good.

Next, marriage. We now have a situation in which heterosexuals believe that marriage exists to produce children, while homosexuals pursue their own ends. (Actually they pursue each other?s ends, but never mind.) As president of all Americans, I cannot discriminate. It seems to me that I must either outlaw all marriage entirely by executive order, or allow to all citizens the creativity that has made this country great.

I will thus allow same-sex marriage, as well as polygamy, on the principle that the state has no place in the bedroom. Combining same-sex marriage with polygamy, I imagine whole matrimonial platoons, with a sense of community and perhaps ID cards. In fact, I see no constitutional barrier to marriage between species. Why should a man not marry Fido? It is a question of individual conscience. We could introduce children to non-judgemental attitudes with books called ?Mommy Says Moooo.?

Ha. I cannot lose. See you in November.

http://www.fredoneverything.net/President_Fred.shtml

Madonna strips for Obama, offers profanity-laced endorsement
By Emily Goodin    - 09/25/12 09:21 AM ET

Madonna offered a profanity-laced endorsement of President Obama at her concert Monday night, which involved the singer stripping down to her underwear to reveal the president's name written on her body.

?You all better vote for f---ing Obama okay,? she told the crowd at Washington's Verizon center.

Later in the show, Madonna took off her shirt and pulled down her pants to show she had ?OBAMA? written in all capital letters across her lower back.
?When Obama is in the White House for a second term I'll take it all off,? she said to cheers and whistles from the audience.

She then began singing a slow, seductive version of ?Like a Virgin? while rolling around on a piano top.

Madonna first revealed her body art in early September, during her performance at Yankee stadium in New York.


The outspoken, controversial singer was on the second night of her Washington, D.C. stop in her ?MDNA? tour.

Between performing fan favorites such as ?Express Yourself? and ?Vogue,? she paused twice to discuss politics.

In her endorsement, Madonna touted Obama's support of gay rights in a profanity-filled monologue about the president.

She also spoke of the assassinations of Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King Jr., noting ?and now it's amazing to think we have an African-American in the White House.?

She added: ?So they didn't die for nothing.?

She ended her speech by shouting of Obama: ?So vote for him, OK godd---it!?

Later in the show she admitted: ?I get a little worked up about some subjects.?

http://thehill.com/capital-living/in-the-know/258491-madonna-strips-for-obama-offers-profanity-laced-endorsement

Murderous Equality
By Andy Nowicki

?Equality? is one of the hoariest cliches and most pernicious slogans of modern times. Said to derive from a supposedly common-sense notion of fairness, the mad clamor underway to equalize the human race in fact has no basis whatsoever in justice or reality, human or otherwise. Ironically, the idea of equality is almost inevitably deeply debasing to a culture; pushing for greater ?equality? does nothing to make the dumb smart, the ugly beautiful, or the poor rich; instead, it only makes nearly everything? be it fashion, the arts, language, commerce, or general human interaction-- duller, less pleasant, less orderly, less desirable, and infinitely more tacky, tawdry, and loathsome. More crucially, the ramming of equality down our collective gullet requires the construction of a hateful bureaucracy to monitor, control, and altogether enslave the very people it supposedly wishes to uplift and empower. The imposition of equality, that is, requires the self-appointment of a vanguard elite who arrogate to themselves the task of being the equalizers. Thus the attempt to construct a society of ?equals? invariably leads to perpetual exercise of tyranny.

But how did we get to the point where this obviously insane concept came to be enshrined as an ideal? And why, after the untold carnage, horror, and heartbreak it has caused, do we still view equality as a thing worth pursuing, worth sacrificing for, a patriotic duty even?

The term ?equality,? of course, isn?t exactly new; it first sprung up as a vogue among the Western intellectual elite over two centuries ago. It in large part inspired two major political upheavals, one in America and the other in France. Upon deciding to be unencumbered states, representatives of the thirteen former English colonies in the New World signed the Declaration of Independence, which holds it to be ?self-evident? that ?all men are created equal?; meanwhile, those guillotine-happy men of Gaul made ?egalite? one of their watchwords of revolution.

Far be it from me to mock and deride America?s founding fathers?they were in many ways an impressive lot. Still, their collective signing on to the concept of mankind?s equality was an astoundingly stupid gesture, which has ushered in all kinds of ideological mischief. Whatever Thomas Jefferson?s reason for including the phrase in the Declaration of Independence, this ill-defined assertion of men?s equality is vexingly vague.　?All men are equal,? how exactly? Equal under the law? Equal in the eyes of God? Equal, as in ?deserving the same level of income as everyone else?? TJ doesn?t say. And the matter is complicated, since?as has often been pointed out in our selectively iconoclastic age?this supposed believer in the self-evidence of human equality was also an owner of slaves.

The French revolutionaries, for their part, weren?t content merely to cozy up to abstractions. Their tireless quest was to make society much more equal by bringing the mighty low: specifically, to cut the ?one percent? of their time down to size by rendering them a whole head shorter. Thousands perished in this orchestrated reign of terror, whose main aim was to promote and promulgate equality.

Once the Bolsheviks seized power in 20th century Russia, joined later by the Maoist regime in China and the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, the stakes were magnified. Now millions, and tens of millions, would be put to death for the singular crime of not being properly ?equal? with their fellow men. Across the world, the quest for equality has led to carnage unequalled by any previous era in history. One would have thought, by now, that demagogic demands to ?level the playing field,? as the sinister euphemism goes, would be utterly rejected as gauche and tasteless, given the moldering mound of corpses whose pitiful and poignant stink reminds us that equalitarian rhetoric seems inextricably tied with state-sanctioned mass murder. We live in a time, after all, when any criticism of Jews is treated, in respectable circles, with extreme reflexive suspicion, if not outright hostility. Because of the bloody Shoah of recent history, one who calls Jews to task for anything in any manner or context is punished with banishment from polite society and the imputation of being complicit in genocide; such a one might as well wear a scarlet swastika sewn across his chest, like a post-modern day Hester Prynne.

But of course, not all of history?s victims are held to be equal in stature; as George Orwell famously observed, some are indeed much ?more equal? than others. Thus it seems to make no difference how many tens of millions have been beheaded by the guillotine, executed in the killing fields, or sent to Siberia to starve, all for the offense of seeming to be more prosperous or of a higher social strata than the average citizen, and thus rousing the ire of a murderous revolutionary regime demanding that the high be brought low (or, as the Hutus in Rwanda broadcast their genocidal designs prior to indulging in a luridly nightmarish three weeks of unfathomably promiscuous slaughter, that the ?tall trees? be cut down)? No, it seems clear that no matter how many have been ground into dust under the tyranny of enforced ?equalization,? demands to make things more ?equal? will continue to be not only tolerated, but approved. Those who agitate for equality are still viewed as righteous crusaders for justice, rather than properly judged as shrieking nuisances spitefully waging a campaign of terror against tradition, logic, and reality.

It was, I suppose, only a matter of time before the relentless clamoring for ?gay marriage??that is, the demand that a millennia-old institution to be suddenly redefined based on a decade-old whim of the ruling class?got reframed as a matter of ?equality.? The fact that a man and a woman can get married but not two men or two women, means that things aren?t ?equal? on the marriage front (so it is asserted); therefore the law must be changed to accommodate those who feel left out (or at least those among the ?left out? whose cause is favored by the hive-mind of the Zeitgeist-upholders; polygamists, having as they do the flavor and complexion of ultra-conservative patriarchy, are TSOL in the new dispensation, while incestuous couples are just seen as icky and are reflexively dismissed, though in truth no legitimate reason exists to reject either innovation under the new rules, given that everyone involved is a consenting adult).

Again, one would have thought, given the equality-brigade?s altogether crummy human-rights track record throughout recent history, that those stridently demanding what is now called ?marriage equality? would be looked at askance for employing such rhetoric. Indeed, if the merest whiff of sanity prevailed among the fetid fumes of our brain-dead Zeitgeist and its uncritical adherents who man our opinion-shaping institutions, then the invocation of ?equality? would set off the same warning bells that ?hate? now does among the highly-placed and powerful and their eager lapdogs and water-carriers. In such a world, an outfit called ?equality-watch? would be keeping a wary eye on equality-agitators. As it stands, the SPLC?s ?hate watch? has conniptions whenever any skinhead with an iron cross tattoo on his neck appears to sneer threateningly at an illegal immigrant, and it completely flips its lid anytime a small group of clean-cut, suit-and-tied white activists want to hold a weekend seminar in a medium-sized hotel ballroom somewhere in the United States. But far-greater malefactions are excused, or even defended, if left-leaning equalitarians commit them. (A semi-famous Hollywood actress can even wish catastrophic death upon a group of convention-goers who don?t meet her definition of ?enlightened,? and nobody important seems to care, since even if her words were imprudent at least she?s on the side of the angels.

Again, as we see, the legacy of genocide, terror, and tyranny that the push for equality has engendered makes absolutely no difference; equality will remain perversely sacrosanct among our cultural betters; it will continue to be trumpeted as a good in itself, an end unquestionably worthy of fulfillment, and its conspicuous historical dark side will be downplayed, if not completely ignored. In Europe and North America, the wish to impose ?equality? now carries a more and more pronounced anti-white subtext; its advocates tend to be deracinated white liberals (or SWPLs, as they are now called) who have imbibed poisonous cultural Marxism like mother?s milk, and who flatter themselves as being the vanguard of the ongoing societal revolution, ridiculously romanticizing the cultures of urban blacks, barrio Latinos, and other ethnic minorities, while viewing their conservative Middle American racial brethren with an unhinged, embittered hostility worthy of an Ellen Barkin Twitter hissy-fit.

But the truth is a mighty ally, and those of us who know better than to believe what we?re told should never hesitate to point out that our would-be vanguard are naught but a bunch of smug, self-serving, and generally ignorant brainwashed clowns. And it is a grim irony not untinged with Shadenfreude that, should a real, brutal, balls-to-the-wall, no-bullshit revolution ever actually gain momentum, these useful idiots will no doubt be the first to face the firing squad.

http://www.alternativeright.com/main/blogs/zeitgeist/murderous-equality/

Democrats: Let's Ban Profits!

(Reuters) - Former U.S. astronaut, Neil Armstrong, the first man on the moon, has died at the age of 82, U.S. media reported on Saturday.

Armstrong underwent a heart-bypass surgery earlier this month, just two days after his birthday on August 5, to relieve blocked coronary arteries.

As commander of the Apollo 11 mission, Armstrong became the first human to set foot on the moon on July 20, 1969. As he stepped on the moon's dusty surface, Armstrong said: "That's one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind."

The Apollo 11 moon mission turned out to be Armstrong's last space flight. The following year he was appointed to a desk job, being named NASA's deputy associate administrator for aeronautics in the office of advanced research and technology.

He left NASA a year later to become a professor of engineering at the University of Cincinnati.

The former astronaut lived in the Cincinnati area with his wife, Carol.

(Reporting by Sandra Maler; Editing by Philip Barbara)

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/25/us-usa-neilarmstrong-idUSBRE87O0B020120825

GENOCIDE LOOMS FOR WHITE FARMERS

WND EXCLUSIVE

South Africa's black president sings killing songs as thousands massacred

Published: 2 days ago

By Alex Newman

STOCKHOLM, Sweden ? The eyes of the world were on South Africa two decades ago as the apartheid era came to an end and Western governments helped bring the communist-backed African National Congress to power.

Last month, however, when Genocide Watch chief Gregory Stanton declared that white South African farmers were facing a genocidal onslaught and that communist forces were taking over the nation, virtually nobody noticed.

Few outside of South Africa paid attention either when, earlier this year, the president of South Africa began publicly singing songs advocating the murder of whites.

The silence is so deafening that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton didn?t even publicly mention the problems when she was there last week. Instead, she was busy dancing, pledging billions of dollars and praising the ruling government.

?I find that quite disturbing, as if Afrikaner lives do not count for the Obama administration,? Dan Roodt of the Pro-Afrikaans Action Group, PRAAG, told WND.

He says the situation is rapidly deteriorating.

The tyranny of political correctness is out of control. Read Ilana Mercer?s ?Into The Cannibal?s Pot: Lessons for America from Post-Apartheid South Africa.?

Genocide Watch, a highly respected U.S.-based nonprofit organization led by arguably the world?s foremost expert on genocide, has been sounding the alarm on the genocidal onslaught facing South Africa for a decade. The world media, however, has barely uttered a word about it.

Over those 10 years, thousands of white South African farmers, known as Boers, have been massacred in the most horrific ways imaginable.

Experts say the ongoing slaughter constitutes a clear effort to exterminate the whites or at least drive the remaining ones ? now less than 10 percent of the population ? out of the country. In other words, South Africa is facing a genocide based on the United Nations? own definition.

More than 3,000 farm murders have been documented in that time period, representing a significant number considering the number of commercial white farmers is now estimated at less than 40,000.

Tens of thousands of whites have been murdered throughout South Africa, too, according to estimates.

Disemboweled, drowned in boiling water

Many more victims have been savagely tortured, raped, disemboweled, drowned in boiling water or worse. The horrifying evidence is available for the world to see on countless sites throughout the Internet: pictures of brutalized dead women and children ? even babies.

?We don?t know exactly who is planning them yet, but what we are calling for is an international investigation that will try and determine who is planning these murders,? Stanton said.

The ANC government downplays the problem, claiming it is mostly just ?regular? crime. Experts, however, know that is not true.

?Things of this sort are what I have seen before in other genocides,? Stanton, who also worked against apartheid, said of the murdered white farmers after a fact-finding mission to the ?Rainbow Nation? in June.

?This is what has happened in Burundi, it?s what happened in Rwanda,? he continued in a speech to the Transvaal Agricultural Union in Pretoria. ?It has happened in many other places in the world.?

The true scope of the problem is almost impossible to determine, because the ruling ANC refuses to properly track the figures.

Regular citizens are now working to compile the statistics and document the savagery themselves.

The government often classifies the brutal farm murders as simple ?robberies,? for example. Sometimes the crimes are not even reported.

South African exiles and family members of victims who spoke with WND said reporting the atrocities is often useless or even counter-productive.

In some cases, experts also say, authorities are actually involved in the brutal crimes. Police oftentimes participate in cover-ups, too.

The non-stop wave of grisly, racist murders in the Rainbow Nation ? new incidents are reported almost daily now ? has led Genocide Watch to conclude that South Africa is close to the final phases of the genocidal onslaught.

When ANC Youth League boss Julius Malema began singing ?Kill the Boer,? Genocide Watch moved up South Africa to stage six out of eight on the road to genocide ? the preparation and planning. The seventh phase is extermination of the target group. The final stage is denial.

?It became clear to us that the [(ANC) Youth League was this kind of organization ? it was planning this kind of genocidal massacre and also the forced displacement of whites from South Africa,? Stanton explained.

When a court declared the racist song ?hate speech? for inciting genocide against whites, the self-styled communist president of South Africa, Jacob Zuma, began singing it too.

Dehumanization

It is all part of a vicious campaign of dehumanization aimed at whites, according to experts. Demonizing the victims always precedes genocide.

Known as Boers or Afrikaners, the descendants of Northern Europeans, mostly Dutch, arrived in Southern Africa hundreds of years ago, in some cases as far back as the 1600s. Still, racists refer to them as ?settlers,? implying they do not belong there.

?Whenever you have that kind of dehumanization,? Stanton explained, ?you have the beginning of that downward spiral into genocide.?

The National Socialists (Nazis) did it in Germany, and the Islamists did it in Turkey before exterminating Armenian Christians, he added.

The government, meanwhile, has already launched a campaign to disarm Afrikaner farmers. As Genocide Watch observed in a recent report on South Africa, disarmament of the target group is one of the surest warning signs of impending genocide.

Whites have not been the only victims. Even before apartheid was dismantled, the ANC was notoriously brutal to its opponents, using some of the most barbaric tactics imaginable even against blacks who refused to bow down.

Necklacing, in which a tire filled with gasoline is placed around a victim?s neck and set on fire, for example, became a common form of punishment for dissenters and ANC opponents. Even Nelson Mandela?s wife endorsed the monstrous practice.

Beyond genocide against whites lurks another largely overlooked but related phenomenon: the efforts by communist forces to completely take over South Africa.

It is hardly a secret. The Communist Party of South Africa has always has been a firm ally of the ANC. Both of the last two presidents have been members of the Communist Party.

As in Zimbabwe after Marxist dictator Robert Mugabe seized power, the issue of land distribution is being used to advance the same dangerous agenda in South Africa.

?Whatever system of land tenure is adopted in South Africa, the communists ? in the long run ? have in mind to take away all private property. That should never be forgotten,? Stanton warned during his recent trip.

The idea, he said, is to crush all potential resistance.

?Every place you go where communists have taken over, they take away private ownership because private ownership gives people the power ? the economic power ? to oppose their government,? Stanton continued. ?Once you have taken that away, there is no basis on which you can have the economic power to oppose the government.?

While the outside world largely refuses to understand or even acknowledge what is really going on, white South Africans are keenly aware of what awaits the nation if the communist schemes are not stopped.

?The ANC regime has publicly stated that it wants to nationalize all land, in effect doing away with private property when it comes to agricultural land,? explained PRAAG?s Roodt.

?The Communist Party has always been the real intellectual home of the ANC, and even government ministers call each other ?comrade? in public,? he added.

Land redistribution

Since the end of Apartheid, the ANC government has been working to redistribute land ? much of which is still currently owned by the white minority ? to blacks and others.

As in neighboring Zimbabwe, once one of the wealthiest nations in Africa, the schemes have mostly resulted in failure. Under Mugabe, who gave the stolen land to his cronies, estimates suggest millions of people have died from starvation. Others fled, ironically, perhaps, to South Africa.

Now, the ANC wants to speed up the land reform process. Some elements within the government are even advocating forced expropriation without any compensation.

The farm murders, analysts say, are the early phases of what may be coming.

?More and more, the ANC regime?s supporters are turning to violence and revolution to achieve their aims of taking control over land and industry,? Roodt explained.

?Over the last few days there has been an increase in attacks on family owned farms with the intent of driving owners off their land,? he continued, echoing a widespread sentiment among South Africans that the situation is quickly spiraling out of control.

?Hit squads target specifically women and elderly farmers as they are seen as soft targets,? he added. The government also disbanded farmer self-defense groups known as ?commandos? that formerly protected rural areas.

According to Roodt, South Africa, like every country during a communist takeover, is being deliberately destabilized. Ethnic and racial tensions are being purposefully stirred up as part of the scheme as well, he said.

?The ANC regime has failed completely to create jobs for its mass of supporters,? Roodt told WND. ?So it is using the white minority as a scapegoat, blaming them for its own economic failures due to corruption, mismanagement, nationalization, racial preferences and so on.?

Roodt says the ?revolution? could drag on, slowly, with a lot of talk but little action. On the other hand, there could be a sudden, radical shift such as what happened in Zimbabwe, where white farmers who refused to be driven off their land were tortured or murdered.

There could even be a Rwanda-type situation in which whites would be targeted for wholesale slaughter, Roodt warned.

Sadists encouraging sadists

?Anything is possible,? he added, saying the ruling government was very similar to an organized criminal enterprise. ?What is going on in South Africa today with the rape and killing of children, torture or farmers and racial violence, is tantamount to a sadistic society. We are ruled by sadists who encourage other sadists to go out to rape and kill.?

No matter how bad it gets, however, Roodt and other South Africans fear that the world will shut its eyes and wash its hands.

?To many people in the West, especially liberals and leftists, I think it is seen as normal for blacks to hate whites and oppress them,? he explained. ?Because of their historical guilt associated with colonialism, whites are deemed to deserve punishment, even of the most extreme kind such as torture and mass murder.?

Even in South Africa, the press is largely silent about what is going on. Consider that after Stanton announced his preliminary findings in late June ? explosive by any measure ? just one newspaper covered it.

Many white South Africans believe that time may be running out. Some want their own country in Southern Africa to preserve the unique Afrikaner culture, language and civilization. Others are currently working with Western governments in an effort to raise awareness and hopefully allow especially vulnerable populations to escape as refugees before the festering tensions explode into a full-blown catastrophe. More than a few, though, have vowed to stay and fight back if and when the time comes.

For now, activists, exiles and human rights leaders told WND they hope Americans will help spread the word about the looming potential calamities facing South Africa. If the ANC gets its way, they say, it will be an unmitigated disaster for whites, blacks ? basically everyone except politically connected cronies.

http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/genocide-looms-for-white-farmers/

FLORIDA, July 3, 2012 ? It would be no small understatement to say that David Yeagley?s views are controversial.

From matters of partisan politics to social psychology, his writings never fail to attract a diverse array of supporters and detractors. Beyond this, however, he is also a noted composer, scholar, and historian; not to mention the great-great-grandson of Comanche dignitary Bad Eagle.

How did Dr. Yeagley become such a voice for Native American interests in the realm of public affairs? 

In this fourth and final part of our conversation, he explains.

****

Joseph F. Cotto: Now that our discussion is at its end, many readers are probably wondering exactly how it was that you came to be one of the foremost voices in Native American political commentary. Tell us a bit about your life and career.

Dr. David Yeagley: I am a classical composer, as well as an academic.  I have degrees from Oberlin Conservatory, Yale Divinity, Emory University, University of Hartford (Hartt School of Music), and the University of Arizona (Tucson).  I was also a graduate student at Harvard for a short time, but completed no degree or certificate.  I?ve been a Ford Fellow, a Kellogg Fellow, and in fact was the first Indian to enter Yale Divinity. 

I am the first American Indian composer to be commissioned to write a movie score.  The Oklahoma State Historical Society commissioned me to write the music score to a 1920 silent film, ?Daughter of Dawn,? the first all-Indian cast and the first full-length Indian drama on film.  It was premiered at the Dead Center Film Festival here in Oklahoma City, June 10. 

I taught college at Oklahoma State University (OKC campus), University of Central Oklahoma, and the University of Oklahoma.  While teaching ancient humanities at OSU-OKC, I developed some concepts of nationhood which led me to emphasize patriotism.  Unless the people love the country, that country is short-lived.  I took my complaints to the governor, and collaborated with Oklahoma Governor Frank Keating on the matter of teaching patriotism in public schools.  He wanted a mandatory course for high school seniors before graduation.  I provided a curriculum.  Unfortunately, Democrat senator Penny Williams killed the bill on her desk.

In the meantime, I began writing regular articles for David Horowitz? FrontPageMagazine, back when Richard Poe was the editor.  I was soon appearing on shows like Hannity & Colmes, Bill O?Reilly, and C-Span.  I also made a History Channel episode on ?Comanche Warriors.?  I was on many radio shows, beginning with Ken Hamblin, Scott Hennen, etc.  I was a regular speaker for Young America?s Foundation, and spoke at colleges and universities across the country.

In time, however, my specificities about race, ethnicity, and the fundamentals of nationhood led me to make statements that were too controversial for many.  I still speak occasionally, and publish articles from time to time.  For the most part, however, I have been concentrating on composing symphonies, chamber works, and choral works. 

I?ve always understood the American Indian to be the foundation of the United States.  I?ve employed metaphoric language to communicate this.  The white infant that washed up on our shores was the object of our charity and good will.  He was the seed of giants, little did we know (and little did he know).  We raised him.  He is our adopted son, our step son.  He grew to be a grand hero.  He was mighty, and we should be mighty proud.  Yes, he grew so big he pushed us out of our own house, but, I don?t think that was his plan.  That was just an unexpected inevitability.  I think the responsible thing for Indians to do is to continue our role as host, guide, and even savior.

I believe the Indian is the foundation of the American collective psyche.  We are the wild side, the side of nature.  We are the link to the land.  Without us, America is not America.  We have a profound responsibility for the preservation of this great nation.

****

The quintessentially American stories of our country?s native peoples are far too often marginalized, or simply ignored.

It is, in my opinion, our responsibility to learn about this nation?s history from a broad perspective. While even a cursory glance at the trials and tribulations of the United States is sure to include mentions of Sasquatch and Little Bighorn, far too much is left out.

Perhaps this information deficit can be attributed to the fact that Native Americans are badly underrepresented in the national media. From sitcoms to commentary programs, the rare mention of this crucial demographic usually boils down to sensationalist rhetoric at best, or crude stereotypes at worst.

Either way, the time has long since passed for a change. The pre-Founding Fathers deserve nothing less.

http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/conscience-realist/2012/jul/3/david-yeagley-man-his-own-words/