A Closer Look at the Enemy

by Dr. William L. Pierce (pictured)

YOU KNOW, this world we live in is a complicated place. Behind every phenomenon we observe there are many forces at work, some of them obvious and some not so obvious. Trying to separate what's important from what's not important can be a confusing task. Every week when we discuss on this program what's happening in the world around us, and I try to explain events so that listeners can have a clear understanding of them, I must simplify the world. Clarity requires simplification. Understanding demands simplification. A useful explanation requires separating the important things from those which are less important and focusing first on the former. If I tried to explain every phenomenon in the world in complete detail, leaving out nothing, I would succeed only in confusing everyone, especially myself.

So if we want to understand the world we must simplify it. But we must be careful not to oversimplify, or our explanations lose their value. Occasionally my listeners accuse me of oversimplifying, or they are aware of some factor which I have not discussed in detail, and they suspect that I have left it out deliberately because it would contradict some theory of mine.

Here's an old example of the way oversimplification can lead to confusion: After the Bolshevik takeover of Russia early in this century, many anti-communists in America spread the word that a majority of the Bolshevik leaders were not Russians but were Jews, and they warned Americans that there also were many Jewish communists in America who posed a danger of subversion. This was back in the days before the exposure of the Rosenbergs and other communist-Jewish spies and conspirators in America. The Jewish media countered this warning with a deliberate campaign of confusion. They said, "Oh, you used to accuse of us being international bankers and capitalists and of subverting nations with our money. Now you accuse us of being international communists and of being a threat to capitalism. So which is it? Are we capitalists or are we communists? It can't be both, so make up your mind." This response was supposed to make their accusers look foolish, and with much of the public the trick worked.

Of course, the truth of the matter is that Jews are both capitalists and communists -- and neither. They are, first and last, Jews, and that really says it all, if one understands what a Jew is. The average Gentile thinks that a communist must be someone who is a believer in communist ideology, and a capitalist must be someone who is a believer in the ideology of free enterprise. It doesn't occur to him that for many Jews ideology is not something that one actually believes; it is simply a tool which one uses for deceiving non-Jews. The aim always is to acquire wealth and power, and whether one uses capitalist methods and ideology or communist methods and ideology for this purpose depends upon the situation. Regardless of the methods one uses, one remains a Jew. That's what is important.

And of course, most of the people who were trying to warn their fellow Americans about the dangers represented by the Jews in their midst didn't try to explain that, because most Americans simply wouldn't have understood; it would have been too complicated for them. So the anti-communists simply said: "Watch out! The Jews are communists or are sympathetic to the communists." And that was an oversimplification of the truth.

Here's a more recent example: I have warned Americans that Bill Clinton is a puppet of the Jews, an obedient tool of the Jews, and I have pointed out the fact that most of the important appointments he has made as President have gone to Jews: two Supreme Court justices, his entire foreign policy and national security team, and so on. And I have stated that the Jewish media got him elected in 1992 and then reelected in 1996.

The Saga of Yahweh ben Yahweh

by Dr. William L. Pierce (pictured)

AN Associated Press news story recently caught my attention. The story was about the release from prison this week of a Black religious leader, who calls himself Yahweh ben Yahweh. His name actually is Hulon Mitchell. He's a former Black Muslim, and, in fact, he ran a Black Muslim mosque in Atlanta for a while in the early 1970s, until he was accused of sexual improprieties with underaged Muslim girls and dipping into the collection plate. He dropped out of the Nation of Islam, where he was known as Hulon X, and in 1978 founded his own church, the so-called Nation of Yahweh, with a religion based on Judaism. He calls his followers "Black Hebrew Israelites" and tells them that they, rather than the Jews, are the "chosen people" ordained by God to rule the world, as described in the Old Testament. He took for himself the name Yahweh ben Yahweh -- that's Hebrew for "God, the son of God."

So why should we be interested in yet another megalomaniac religious cult based on Judaism? Well, the thing of interest to us about the Nation of Yahweh is the initiation requirement Hulon Mitchell established for the elite, inner circle of his church, the so-called "Brotherhood." The requirement was the murder of a White person, and the bringing to Mitchell of some evidence of the murder, such as an ear or even the head of the victim. In fact, Mitchell preached to his whole congregation that the killing of White people -- of "blue-eyed devils" -- is pleasing to Yahweh.

"Yahweh ben Yahweh"

By the time the police finally wound up Mitchell's race-murder cult in November 1990 and packed Mitchell off to prison, his followers had butchered and mutilated at least 23 men, women, and children, 14 of them in Miami alone. Some of the victims were recalcitrant members of his own church, and the Associated Press story doesn't give a racial breakdown, but the figure I've seen elsewhere puts the number of White victims at 16. Mitchell spent a little over 10 years in prison. That works out to about eight months for the murder of each "blue-eyed devil." He was released on parole earlier this week.

You didn't hear about it? You didn't see anything about it on CNN or network television? You shouldn't be surprised. It's not the sort of news that the bosses of the controlled media want you to know about. There was a story about it last Saturday in the Washington Post, but the entire thrust of that story is the infringement of Mitchell's civil rights by the conditions imposed on him by the parole board that released him. The Washington Post article is not headed "Black Cult Leader Who Ordered Ritual Murder of Whites to Be Released." Oh, no! A headline like that would be considered "racist" by the people who run the Post; they are afraid it might make White readers wary of Blacks. It might even lead some readers to ask questions, such as, "Why has this nutcase Black murderer been turned loose?" -- although I myself am not so optimistic about the ability of White Americans to figure out who their enemies are and react appropriately.

Toward a Healthy Society

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kybN4dlBA5c

By Dr. William L. Pierce

I'VE SPOKEN BEFORE about the deliberately destructive role of the mass media in American society. I've talked about the psychology of liberalism, about what makes liberals do the crazy and destructive things they do. Today, though, instead of talking about the enemies of our society, the enemies of our people, let's just talk about our people and the sort of society that we need.

You know, a society is a very complex thing: it is like a living organism. It responds to selective environmental forces, and it evolves. In past ages it was the struggle of our people to survive, the competition of our people against other peoples, other races, which determined the nature of our society. Societies which functioned well survived. Societies which didn't function well perished. Historically, if some crazy liberal came along and were able to change all of the rules and structures in a society to suit some egalitarian fantasy of his, the society would sink like a rock, and its people would perish. And that's what's happening to our society today, although it may not be apparent to us because of the time scale. After the experimenters finish their deadly work, it may take a society 200 years to disintegrate completely and sink out of sight. That's not long from a historical viewpoint, but it's long enough so that most of the people involved never realize what's happening to them.

The society we had in Europe up until the end of the 18th century — or one may say, the various national societies there, which really were very much alike when compared with any non-European society — this European society had evolved over a period of many, many generations of our people, and it had fine-tuned itself to our special nature; it had developed its institutions and its ways of doing things which suited us as a people and allowed us to form viable, efficient communities. And when we colonized North America and other parts of the world, we brought the essential elements of our society with us.

The Holocaust Problem

by Dr. William L. Pierce

A LOS ANGELES COUNTY Superior Court judge ruled last month that the so-called “Holocaust” — the alleged extermination of six million Jews by Germany’s National Socialist government during the Second World War — is a historical fact and “is not reasonably subject to dispute.” The ruling was the outcome of a lawsuit by a Jewish concentration camp “survivor,” Mel Mermelstein, now a successful Long Beach, Calif., businessman, against the publishers of a “revisionist” historical periodical, The Journal of Historical Review. (ILLUSTRATION: Buchenwald concentration camp, May 1945: Why were there so many “survivors,” if the German plan was to exterminate all Jews? Jews were put behind barbed wire in Germany during the Second World War for exactly the same reason Japanese were locked up in the United States: because they could not be trusted. Many American “liberators” of Germany’s concentration camp eventually reached the conclusion that the world would have been better off, however, if there had been no survivors, but few had the moral courage to say it. General George Patton was an exception. After becoming well acquainted with the nature of the people [officially called “Displaced Persons”] his troops freed from Germany’s concentration camps, he noted in his diary in September 1945: “Harrison [a U.S. State Department official] and his ilk believe that the Displaced Person is a human being, which he is not, and this applies particularly to the Jews, who are lower than animals.”)

The only real purpose of the periodical — the claims of its publishers notwithstanding — was to cast doubt on Jewish Holocaust claims, and that purpose has been reflected in the pages of each issue. As a promotional stunt The Journal of Historical Review rashly offered a $50,000 reward to anyone who could prove that a single Jew was killed in a gas chamber by the German government during the Second World War. Mermelstein accepted the challenge; sued when, he alleged, the publishers reneged on their $50,000 offer; and won his case.

Anne Frank Hoax Exposed

Clever Jew Made Millions from Dead Daughter

by Dr. William L. Pierce

TUCKED AWAY ON pages 119 and 122 of the October 6 issue of Der Spiegel, a weekly German news magazine comparable to Time or Newsweek, was a news item of considerable significance: A scientific analysis of the manuscript purported to be the original diary of Anne Frank, a Jewish girl who died in a German concentration camp during the Second World War, has revealed that the manuscript could not have been written before 1951, six years after the end of the war. (ILLUSTRATION: Anne Frank. She died of typhus in 1945 — but she didn’t write a diary.)

The significance of Der Spiegel’s revelation of this fraud is twofold. First, the printing of the story in a mass-circulation publication constitutes a major break with past treatments of similar news. The German news media, though not under the Jewish monopoly control which blights the media in this country, generally follow a pro-Jewish line, a heritage from the immediate postwar years when the Allied occupation forces gave publishing licenses only to those Germans who had proved their disloyalty to their country during the war. Consequently, most news tending to cast doubt on Jewish stories about gas chambers and the like from the World War II era has either been blacked out altogether or downplayed and given very unsympathetic treatment. The present article, though accompanied by copious apologies and held back for six months after it became news, would not have been printed at all a year or two ago.

What Is to Be Done?

by Dr. William L. Pierce (pictured)

IN THE FACE OF treason and criminal irresponsibility on the part of the politicians, of apathy and ignorance on the part of the White masses, and of cowardice and selfishness on the part of most intelligent Whites, what is to be done to save our race, in spite of itself?

The answer is not difficult to state, although a bit of argument is required to present a convincing case that it is the only answer.

The answer, in brief, is that an organization must be built which satisfies the following requirements:

It must be, first of all, not an ad hoc organization, but an organization based on fundamental principles, an organization with a world view, essentially religious in nature, shared by every member of the organization.

It must be, in structure, a hierarchical organization, like an army — or a religious order — with the degree of understanding, of commitment, and of discipline increasing with the level of responsibility in the organization.

It must be, in scope, an all-encompassing organization, an organization which not only generates propaganda and which recruits and trains new members, but which becomes eventually a community unto itself, self-sufficient spiritually and materially, providing all the functions and capabilities needed for carrying out its task — ultimately a separate state within the state.

The Task of the National Alliance

An Editorial by Dr. William Pierce

IN THREE EARLIER ISSUES (National Vanguard, nos. 64, 65, 66) we examined some of the social factors relevant to a racially oriented revolution in America and stated several general criteria for any organizational basis of such a revolution. In this issue we will look more specifically at the factors which govern the priorities of the National Alliance and determine the nature of its task. We will attempt to understand, on the basis of present conditions in America, what can be done now and what cannot be done, so that we can see better how to concentrate our energies on those organizational objectives we can realistically hope to achieve. (ILLUSTRATION: "A lion might be fair or just... but the possibility does not even exist for a sheep." -- WLP)

One fact of overriding importance should be kept in mind throughout what follows: the situation faced today by the National Alliance is historically unique. Very few of the “classical” conditions for revolution exist in America today, and therefore, the classical expositions of revolutionary theory are largely irrelevant to an understanding of our task.

Sociobiology: The Truth at Last

by Dr. William L. Pierce

THE AUGUST 1 issue of Time magazine carried a six-page cover story on sociobiology, which is just a fancy name for the biological study of groups of interacting organisms — including human societies. (ILLUSTRATION: Charles Darwin demolished one Jewish myth, and his successors are now finding the courage to tackle another: that of the infinite malleability of human nature.)

The Time story has many flaws. In addition to its inevitable bias, it treats its subject in the typically jazzy, junky style we have come to expect whenever one of the controlled media gets its grubby paws on something of real value. Yet, the Time editors left enough solid truth in their story that the intelligent reader must scratch his head and wonder whether they have suddenly developed suicidal tendencies; the article is a loaded and cocked revolver pointed straight at their black hearts.

Two Minutes Hate

From Attack! No. 39, 1975:

Two Minutes Hate

 by Dr. William Pierce

WASHINGTON POST story tells of Nathan Cohen decision compelling Federal workers to submit to sensitivity-training sessions. Applying many of the same techniques which were used to brainwash American POW’s in communist prison camps in Korea and Vietnam, Federal psychologists are able to control attitudes and opinions with a high degree of success. These techniques are also being used in high schools now to “adjust” White students to a multiracial environment.

In 1984, the well-known political horror-fantasy by George Orwell, it was called the Two Minutes Hate. At eleven o’clock each morning the workers in all government offices assembled in front of television screens for a sensitivity-training session in which they released their pent-up hostilities and became, thereby, better-adjusted subjects of Big Brother.

In 1975 they don’t call it the Two Minutes Hate, but it amounts to exactly the same thing. Federal employees are increasingly being forced to submit to mind-bending group-therapy sessions designed to suppress “undesirable” attitudes — primarily attitudes toward members of racial-minority groups — and mold their psyches in directions deemed more suitable by the clever people who plan the therapy sessions.



Beginning (appropriately) in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare and the now-defunct Office of Economic Opportunity a few years ago, the government’s sensitivity-training program is gradually being extended to other Federal agencies, both in Washington and in the boondocks.

Many government workers are complaining about this not-very-subtle program of thought control, but a recent decision in the case of an employee at the Watervliet (NY) Arsenal indicates that Big Brother is determined to press on.

Backed by his union, the American Federation of Government Employees, the Watervliet Arsenal employee argued that the government unjustly suspended him from his job without pay when he refused to attend sensitivity-training sessions which had been scheduled for workers at the arsenal.

A Federal labor arbitrator, Nathan Cohen, ruled against the union and the employee, saying the government has the right to enforce attendance and punish employees who do not go to the sessions. Cohen’s ruling will not halt all employee resistance to compulsory sensitivity training, but it will give the government an advantage in being able to threaten with dismissal all Federal workers who balk.

The Federal thought-control program is most solidly established in the Department of Defense. Under Secretary of Defense James Schlesinger sensitivity training has been institutionalized in each of the armed services as a mandatory part of the training of all personnel.

Some of the “shock techniques” used in earlier military sensitivity-training sessions are primarily responsible for the notoriety the program has received. Stripped of all insignia of rank, officers and enlisted personnel, Black and White, male and female, were herded into classrooms and subjected to various experiences designed to rub their noses collectively in the filth of racemixing.

In some sessions Black instructors would scream obscenities at White participants and encourage them to reciprocate: “You White honky motherfucker, call me a nigger! Come on, you honky bastard, you’re thinking ‘nigger’; now say it! ” The idea was to bring latent racial hostility to the surface, so that it could be dissipated.

In one Navy program at Charleston, S.C., a Black instructor took a White female assistant to the front of the class and fondled and kissed her, after a series of obscene “bedroom” remarks. The Navy received such strenuous objections to this program that it was temporarily halted.

But Federal psychologists have found that they are able to achieve their purpose just as well with more subtle techniques. One “final exam” devised by the mind-controllers, for example, simply involves passing a soft drink around the sensitivity-training classroom. Anyone in the racially mixed group who declines to take a drink from the common bottle is considered to have flunked.

Herd instinct — the drive to conform to group standards — is very powerful, and Big Brother’s experts have learned how to manipulate it in such a way that they can modify the opinions and attitudes of their subjects. The basic method used is to strip the individual’s personality naked, to deprive him of his privacy, to make him bare his innermost thoughts and feelings—and then to apply overwhelming pressure to him to make those thoughts and feelings conform to those of the others in the group. In the context of the sensitivity-training class, to be non-conforming is equivalent to being anti-social.

And the method works. Only persons of extraordinarily strong will and personality are immune to its effects.

Unfortunately, employees of the Federal government are not the only persons being subjected to the new thought-control program; workers in some industrial plants with Federal contracts are also being required to attend therapy sessions. Worse, pilot programs have been established in a number of the nation’s high schools.

Whereas the program for adults aims primarily at keeping natural racial hostilities in check, the high school programs are more ambitious. Their purpose is to utterly destroy any sense of racial identity in young Whites, to nip in the bud any incipient feeling of racial pride and replace it instead with self-hatred and guilt. The sensitivity trainers want to produce a new generation of racially castrated Whites — raceless White zombies who will blend unobtrusively into the multi-racial future they are planning for America.

In most cases the high school programs have adopted formats rather similar to the adult program, except that they have taken full advantage of the greater impressionability of their participants. But the thought-controllers are always experimenting, attempting to improve their craft.

One of their newer inventions is a “White studies” course for the White minority at the mostly Black Berkeley (CA) High School. It is called “What Is White?”

As proudly reported in the June 30 issue of Newsweek, the course complements “Black studies” courses in which Black students are taught that the only reason their race has a record of failure and lack of achievement throughout history is that the wicked and greedy Whites have held them back. Berkeley’s new “White studies” course teaches young Whites that they must accept the guilt for White repression of non-White races and try to make it up to them.

“After exploring such topics as prejudice and white culture,” reports Newsweek, the White students “come around to the view that the white man’s burden of guilt for America’s imperfections is really an opportunity and that there is much whites can do to help because of their position in society.”

One student who took the course, 17-year-old Anthony Cody, said: “I feel better about being white now. The course gave me the ability to deal with it.”

When the time comes to settle scores in America, there will be no place in hell hot enough for the depraved creatures responsible for destroying the racial consciousness of these White boys and girls. Meanwhile, however, the thought-controllers are going ahead as fast as prudence allows, and the number of young people being subjected to their program is growing at an alarming rate.

Unless Americans who still have the capacity to think for themselves act soon, that capacity may be taken from them; certainly it will be taken from their children. Unless we upset Big Brother’s plans, 1984 may be here in less than nine years.

* * *

Transcribed by Vanessa Neubauer from the book The Best of Attack! and National Vanguard, edited by Kevin Alfred Strom -- source: http://whitebiocentrism.com/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=1225

The Nature of the Beast

From Attack! tabloid, Issue No. 2, 1970:

The Nature of the Beast

By Dr. William Pierce

What is the Establishment? Why, that's easy, you say: the Establishment is those persons, taken collectively, who run the System. But who are "those persons"? What are their names? What, if anything, do they have in common? How did they get into the Establishment in the first place? Is one born into it? Is it something like a fraternity or a secret society? Is great wealth a prerequisite for admission? Or is membership in the Establishment a prerequisite for owning great wealth in America?

There is a great deal of confusion on these questions because of the sloppy but prevalent tendency to equate prestige and status -- i.e., social rank -- with power in our society. Things don't necessarily work that way. It is clear that the one meaningful criterion for distinguishing members of the Establishment from non-members is power -- power to make independent decisions which directly affect the operation of the System. In applying this criterion, however, it is essential to distinguish between apparent power, or power of a purely formal sort, and real power.

Military-Industrial Complex

As an example, consider the oft-mentioned "military-industrial complex." The standard rhetoric on the subject would lead one to the conclusion that the brass hats -- the generals and the admirals who make up the military side of the complex -- are powerful men and, hence, part of the Establishment. But, as a matter of fact, this conclusion is false. Most generals and admirals exercise virtually no influence on the System. The average general may have a lot of tanks and guns to play with. An admiral may command a mighty aircraft carrier or a whole fleet of secretaries and typists in the Pentagon. But one thing these men may not do is make independent decisions.

All their gold braid does not change the fact that they are mere pawns in the game -- and rather rigidly restricted pawns, at that. Being allowed to decide whether next Tuesday's mission will be to blow up village "A" instead of village "B" in Viet-Nam does not constitute real power, in the System sense. Neither does having the authority to write a purchase order for one million mess kits, aluminum, collapsible. This is not to say that there is no truth in the Colonel Blimp caricatures of the military bureaucrat or that much of what's wrong in public life today is not exemplified in the Pentagon hierarchy. But the example of Douglas MacArthur should serve to illustrate what can happen when a general begins to get ideas too big for his brass hat.

Similar considerations apply to much of the industrial side of the military-industrial complex -- although the industrialists, because they have money, must be scrutinized more carefully than the generals. There is no denying the fact that any man with $500 million in the bank -- provided he is also moderately clever -- has a definite potential for calling the tune. Nevertheless, it is surprising how little correlation there is between personal wealth and real power -- in most cases.

In the first place, the manufacturer who owns a $100 million dollar tire factory by no means necessarily has $100 million in financial weight to throw around. His liquid assets, available for buying politicians, silencing critics, influencing elections, etc., will generally be much smaller than his fixed assets, such as land, buildings, and machinery. He may find himself hard pressed just keeping his employees' union bought off, the IRS off his back, and his yacht afloat.

The average Industrialist makes his contribution to the System not so much by pulling the strings as merely by playing along with it through his own money-grubbing self-interest. His control over our lives is largely mechanical -- the filth his factories pour into the air we breath and the water we drink, the honking, flashing, screeching asphalt and neon jungle he has built for us to live in.

The control exercised over our lives by the System -- and, thus, by the men of the Establishment -- is much more profound. It reaches into our minds and our souls and twists our wills to its own ends; it manipulates us and subtly persuades us; it corrupts us and robs us of our strength and our virtue; and, when its purpose is so served, it coldly snuffs out our lives by the millions.

The War-Makers

The military-industrial complex may glory in wars and it may profit from them, but it is the Establishment -- not the generals and the factory owners -- which makes the basic decisions as to whether there shall be a war and when and against whom. American involvement in both World Wars gives us an excellent example of how the Establishment works.

Neither in World War I nor in World War II were the interests of the American people served by intervention in European conflicts. Yet, in 1917 Wilson dragged a reluctant America into a European war, and 24 years later Roosevelt managed the same thing. In both cases the principal actors had been re-elected to the Presidency immediately beforehand on a platform of pacifism and nonintervention. And in both cases the mass media -- principally the press, in that pre-TV era -- had played the vital role of swinging public opinion into line behind the newly elected instant warriors.

But neither Wilson nor Roosevelt were the ultimate decision-makers. Nor was it the generals or the industrialists. In both cases the decision-makers -- the men of the Establishment -- worked behind the scenes to further their own vital interests at the expense of the American people. And they exercised the necessary control over the System to prevail.

In World War I those whose interests were served were the Zionists, who received England's pledge, as later expressed in the Balfour Declaration, to deliver Palestine to them. In return they brought about U.S. intervention in the war on the side of England. Their agents in this were Louis Brandeis, the Zionist Supreme Court justice, who exerted his influence directly on Wilson, and a number of Jewish newspaper publishers who controlled a substantial portion of the American press. 

 This Andy Warhol advertisement for a Jewish nose job, titled "Before and After"
was auctioned off in New York last month. An "art" collector paid $21,000 for it

[More about this painting here: http://williamlutherpierce.blogspot.com/2012/04/andy-warhols-jewish-nose-job.html]

In World War II world Jewry was faced with its most serious crisis in centuries as National Socialist Germany moved to destroy Jewish power and influence in Europe. Again, the media played an enormously important role in conditioning the American people to accept the necessity of a European war. In the war hysteria generated after the fortuitous -- but not unforeseen -- Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, Roosevelt and the press were able to sweep the public along on a monumentally destructive and murderous "Crusade in Europe." We can again see the same process at work where the Middle Eastern war is concerned today.

The Omnipotent Media

It is not the generals and it is not the industrialists who are responsible for the U.S. backing Israel. Between them they couldn't begin to talk the American people into another war now. But the media could -- and are. The generals and the munitions makers have clearly recognizable spheres of self-interest. Thus, even the most credulous elements of the public immediately discount anything they say.

Unfortunately, the same is not true of the media. First, most people do not recognize that the media also, because of the tightly knit nature of the group which controls them, have a definite sphere of self-interest. Second, the media are truly (and inherently) Oriental in their subtlety. The average American thinks "propaganda" is what a plainly labeled spokesman for the System tells the people in order to keep them happy, win their support for a new government program, etc. He simply doesn't think anyone would be devious enough to try to accomplish the same thing with the Wednesday Night Movie, or the Six O'Clock News, or an Associated Press release, or the Sunday supplement in his morning paper.

The pride of the media is their ability to create the illusion of a marketplace of diverse ideas and opinions, while in reality always representing only their own interests. Consider, for example, the spectrum of views presented by the media on the Middle East conflict. Some editorial writers are hot for all-out U.S. military support of Israel, while others feel a little less commitment would be more appropriate. Most commentators refer to the fedayeen as "terrorists", while some use the more neutral term "guerrillas." And while some columnists rage about "Arab aggression," others gently remind us of the miserable conditions in the Palestinian refugee camps. But can you name a single major newspaper in America which advocates that we back the Arabs rather than the Jews? And when was the last time you heard David Brinkley refer to Israeli commandos as "terrorists"?

No Choice

Indeed, we never get both sides of an issue from the media, but only various views of the same side. We are given the same sort of "choice" in forming our opinions that the Democrats and Republicans present to us every four years. In today's world many things are important and represent power: money, the military... but the most important and powerful of all in a modern democracy is the mechanism for creating and controlling public opinion. The group which has this mechanism in its hands wields the ultimate authority.

That group is the Establishment -- or, at least, the vital core of the Establishment. And, in 20th-century America, that group is predominantly Jewish. This may be hard to accept for those who have convinced themselves that the Establishment is Standard Oil and the Pentagon. In the world of 100 years ago that would have been the case. But today Mr. Rockefeller, despite all his millions and all his talent for deceit and all his conniving, grasping, unprincipled ambition, wields less power than say, Sam Newhouse, of whom most Americans have never heard.

Mr. Newhouse, the publicity-shunning son of Jewish immigrants from Russia, doesn't own Standard Oil. But he does own 28 big-city daily newspapers, with a combined circulation of more than five million. The slanted news in one day's printing of the Washington Post or the New York Times carries more weight than all the memoranda ever issued by all the generals in the Pentagon. Needless to say, both these papers are in the hands of Jewish families. If one considers not only direct ownership but also indirect control through advertising revenue -- which is the lifeblood of any newspaper -- virtually every major daily newspaper in America is subject to the dictates of the Jewish Establishment.

"Minitru"

We are living in the age of the mass media. It is an age in which new rules apply. No longer is it necessary, in order to control a nation, for a ruling clique to have a monopoly on the capital assets and the firepower of that nation. These days control is exercised more subtly, but all the more surely, by manipulating the thoughts and the opinions of the populace. Universal literacy, which makes every American a newspaper reader, and unprecedented prosperity, which has put a TV receiver in every home, insure that the control will be all-pervasive. There is only one way to fight it, and that is to understand what it is and who exercises it - and then to go after them tooth and nail.

SMASH THE SYSTEM!

DEATH TO THE

ESTABLISHMENT!