On the Power of the Letter, Movies, and More
10 March 2005
The letter is such a proven means by which to clear men's minds that right now the USPS is busy coming up with a method by which to control the mailing of letters. I could provide the postal "authorities" with the perfect method right here, but far be it from me to cut some honest Jewish management consultant out of his share of the take.
Our older brothers and sisters, as the pope likes to call them, love the letter. A letter to them is like a lager to us. Sending one down the (mail) hatch relieves their stress and leaves them feeling refreshed.
To you, a letter may simply be a poor man's email. But to them a letter is the power to get a cop fired, the power to have a television program taken off the air, the power to frighten a politician. Letters rock!
Sure, they're going up to 41 cents plus a sheet of paper and an envelope. But what self-respecting Gentile would leave a bartender a measly 41 cents, even on a Tuesday night?
The real problem with writing a letter is that it requires one to think. And that's asking a lot, I know. It's much easier to yell and scream. But yelling and screaming is not going to help when they knock on the door. It will only make things work.
I have to wonder just how many peole realize that when CBS -- or CVS -- receives a letter from one of us telling them that Single with Cats is a disgusting show or that Tiger Brite has definitely made our teeth whiter, they treat our letter as having come from 10,000 consumers, 9,999 of whom were too lazy to put pen to paper. This is the kind of power you'll never feel, even behind the wheel of a Dodge Durango. King Kong himself would get arthritis before he had thrown 10,000 people out the window.
There are, of course, all kinds of letters. There's the typewritten letter and the handwritten letter (very authentic). There is the signed letter and the anonymous letter ("A Holocaust Survivor who will never vote for you again"). There's the long letter and the short letter ("I just want to say that your sermon about the importance of the father in the home even had the attention of my eight-year-old daughter.") There's the polite letter and the vulgar letter (not such a good idea). There's the negative letter and the positive letter ("It's probably over a year now that we have our present [White] meter reader. He has such a nice manner [not to say that the African he replaced did not] that I thought I should write and tell you.")
Then there's the question of to whom does one write. Well, we've already seen examples of letters to th emedia, large retailers, politicians, utility companies, and even the local clergyman. It's really tough to give specific advice here. Probably the best advice is not to be stingy with your letters. Trying to decide who the best recipients would be can be a waste of your time. Just write and write and then write some more. Your writing will get better and better and better, and your influence will extend further and further and further.
While there is much more to be said about the letter, until then why not sit right down and write someone a letter. You'll still be able to write letters after they control the mail, but the talent that you develop now will make those controls largely irrelevant for us White Nationals.
* * *
The New York Times Propaganda Machine
On February 28, a William C. Rhoden wrote an article in The New York Times sports section headlined Chaney Deserves to Be Punished, Not Forced Out. I had been awaiting this article, knowing that Chaney would be no Bobby Knight or Woody Hayes in the eyes of the Jew bastards at The Times.
The article begins with a major omission of fact. "A few years ago, Chaney threatened John Calipari after a heated game when Calipari was at UMass." Omission: Chaney threatened to murder ("kill") Calipari; and that was twelve years ago, not a few years ago.
Then the article seems to slowly go after Chaney. First, the writer says only that "(St. Joseph's player John) Bryant had his arm shattered." Shattered? This I hadn't even read about elsewhere. Shattered is more than broken.
Later on, we read: "The governor of Pennsylvania, Edward G. Rendell, made the silliest statement. He said that if Chaney were Bob Knight, people would have called for his head." After which, Rhoden writes: "People are calling for his head, and beyond that." Beyond his head? Please. [But I will admit The New York Times isn't people. It's Jews.]
Then Rhodes excuses Black Chaney's thuggish behavior in sending a goon into a game to injure someone by saying, in effect, that it's OK for Chaney to be thuggish but not Knight, because Knight hadn't been discriminated against as a young man playing basketball. In other words, let violent negroes like Chaney loose on White society as payback for segregation.
Finally, Rhoden write: "Chaney should not be fired. He should never be fired." After all that crap, finally the bottom line.
Speaking of never, the Jews never miss an opportunity to advance their agenda. They are slow, persistent, seemingly fair, and very thorough. Read all about it in your local newspaper.
* * *
Looking Back at a Few Old Jewvies
"George M. Cohan" (1942)
Starring Jimmy Cagney as Irish-American songwriter George M. Cohan, this biography was basically an enlistment propaganda tool that came out right after America's entry into (jewish) WW II.
Cohan apparently had written "Over There" during (jewish) WWI. This song, for those who haven't heard it, is th esecular version of "Onward Christian Soldiers," both of which have been sung by pied pipers leading White boys to their deaths. "Over There" was employed again during WWI and Korea and is featured in this movie.
I didn't spot any specific references to jews, except that Cohan's partner had been Jewish. It's heavy on the martial stuff and not really bad entertainment.
"Father of the Bride" (1950)
A good film (although certainly not a great one), it starred Spencer Tracy as "Pops" and Elizabeth Taylor as his beautiful spoiled brat who has decided to marry a perfectly nice young White man of a day gone by. For any White father with a single daughter, the movie will either prepare him for the girl's wedding (even in 2005) or scare him into deserting the family before the great day ever arrives.
The only jew reference [they can hardly avoid at least one] that I caught was when Tracy says to his wife that Taylor's description of her intended makes him sound like "a combination of Moses, Einstein and (unintelligible)."
The father of the bride is pretty much the butt of the whole joke, but Spencer Tracy's natural manliness brings him out on top, as does his spoiled daughter's telephone call to him as she and her perhaps over-accommodating bridegroom head off on their honeymoon.
The Sunshine Boys (1975)
Well, as time went on, the movies seemed to get jewier and jewier. At least they couldn't get any jewier than this 1975 clunker starring George Burns and Walter Matthau as two retired vaudevillian partners (Lewis and Clark).
At the behest of Clark's nephew, Ben (actually, I believe his name really is Benjamin -- first or last), these two guys in their seventies get back together, or at least try to (I came in late and left early). Since the movie was made in 1975 and there was no attempt to set it in the 1940s, the film's an anachronism: Vaudeville was long gone by the 1950s and '60s when these two old guys were still supposedly in their heyday.
The whole object of this pointless farce seems to have been to make two harmless but thoroughly obnoxious old jews acceptable and funny. But the only audiences they could have entertained would have been other old jews.
In a single half-hour of a two-hour show, there was one "Son of a bitch. Bastard." and two "For Christ's sake." To which I say, fuck you.
* * *
Ronald Reagan, Sandra Day O'Connor, and Alex Linder
When the Great Communicator, Ronald "Dutch" Reagan, was president, he brought a meaure of civility to conservatism. He appointed the first female Supreme Court justice, Sandra Day O'Connor. Just this past week, O'Connor gave her blessing to the rape of White prisoners by nonwhite savages in the California prison system.
You know, many of us (me included) find it difficult to accept Alex Linder's dictum that so-called conservatives are -- or at least can be -- our worst enemy. Men like Sam Francis and Pat Buchanan.
Pat worked in Reagan's White House. Didn't he have anything to say about appointing O'Connor? What the hell good did it do us to go the liberals one better?
I believe Buchanan also worked in Nixon's White House. And it was Nixon who opened China to the world. Opened the world to China, might be more like it. Or how about, opened China to the Jews? Again, who needs this kind of conservatism?
I'll always have a soft spot in my heart for both Francis and Buchanan. But soft spots are places through which a knife can penetrate a vital organ.