Fame of a Dead Man's Deeds: An Up-Close Portrait of White Nationalist William Pierce was unique among books about pro-white figures because it dared to portray Pierce fairly instead of framing him in the cross-hairs of yet another tired, templated hit piece. Robert S. Griffin proved himself a man of integrity and an author worthy of white attention when his excellent book The Fame of a Dead Man's Deeds: An Up-Close Portrait of White Nationalist William Pierce was published in 2000. Griffin Robert S. Griffin's excellent Fame of a Dead Man's Deeds: An Up-Close Portrait of White Nationalist William Pierce was unique among books about pro-white figures because it dared to portray Pierce fairly Robert S. Griffin's excellent Fame of a Dead Man's Deeds: An Up-Close Portrait of White Nationalist William Pierce was unique among books about pro-white figures because it dared to portray Pierce fairly instead of framing him in the cross-hairs of yet another tired, templated hit piece. Put another way, Fame was unique because it wasn't jewed. Griffin did not rely on terror terms and lazy moralizing The terror terms and lazy moralizing It is easy, The "terror terms" and lazy moralizing America has been jewed for so long that anything Put another way, Fame was unique because it wasn't jewed. Instead of adding more shovels full of "terror terms" and Instead of burying adding to the barrage of obfuscating "terror terms" and lazy moralizing his subject It didn't bury Pierce under obfuscating "terror terms" and lazy moralizing while purporting to reveal him. Instead of regurgitating Instead of adding to urying Pierce under a barrage of "terror terms" and lazy morality Put another way, Fame was unique because it wasn't jewed. It didn't purport didn't add to the clutter of "terror terms" Put another way, Fame was unique because it wasn't properly jewed. Properly jewed,bury Pierce under obfuscating "terror terms" and lazy moralizing Instead of purporting to present Pierce while actually burying him under a barrage of "terror terms" and lazy moralizing (aka "jewing"), Griffin's Put another way, Fame was unique because it wasn't jewed. A jewed book on Pierce would burying Pierce under "terror terms" and lazy moralizing Instead of burying Pierce under "terror terms" and lazy moralizing while purporting to present A hallmark of jew infestation is jewed journalism is purporting to reveal your subject while Instead of further burying Pierce under a barrage of "terror terms" and lazy moralizing, Griffin Robert S. Griffin's excellent book on the late William Pierce, Fame of a Dead Man's Deeds, was unique for portraying the white nationalist leader fairly proved himself excellent book The Fame of a Dead Man's Deeds: An Up-Close Portrait of White Nationalist William Pierce was extraordinary for its willingness to present its semitically subject matter fairly. An unwritten rule understood (and almost universally obeyed) by intelligentsia in the "land of the free" is that intellectual freedom stops at the foot of jewish interests, and the only permissable frame for a book on white nationalism is the crosshairs of a hit piece. *************** Robert S. Griffin proved himself a rare man of courage in the world of letters when he wrote The Fame of a Dead Man's Deeds: An Up-Close Portrait of White Nationalist William Pierce, an excellent book extraordinary for its willingness to present its semitically incorrect subject matter fairly. Use as footnote: Perhaps compare to Schopenhauer statement on truth. Semitically incorrect phenomena (men, ideas, events) are to be ignored, blithely dismissed as absurd, or demonized and destroyed with "terror terms." with jewish interests semitically incorrect men and ideas must be either ignored or framed in the crosshairs of a pre-templated hit piece. [link to River's fill-in the blank news report]. Hatred of whites is such an intrinsic part of contemporary culture that pervasive today that Like a phenomenologist Griffin dared to break Robert S. Griffin appeared on white nationalist radar in 2000 when his book The Fame of a Dead Man's Deeds: An Up-Close Portrait of White Nationalist William Pierce was published. Fame was excellent. Comprehensive, insightful, a great read. But what made it a unique contribution to literature on white nationalism was its unprecedented lack of bias. One of the most villified men in America, Pierce was presented to the mainstream public often, but always buried beneath hysterical shrieks or dire warnings. There were as many versions of Pierce as there were writers in need of a springboard for lazy moralizing. Griffin's Fame, on the other hand, sought to reveal the thing itself, the man around whom there was so much ideological clutter and interpretive dance. Griffin engaged a Pierce's pro-white perspective with an open mind and present it objectively, fairly, instead of forcing new details into the same old semitically correct, pre-templated hit piece. the unwritten rule of respectable scholarship that white activism is to be either ignored or courageously defied the unwritten rule that white activism is to courageously dared to defy did not subordinate his research Griffin proved himself a man of courage as well as letters when showed himself to be a man of courage Though not a white nationalist himself, Griffin earned the respect of the white community for having the courage to engage a pro-white perspective with an open mind and present it objectively, fairly, instead of forcing new details into the same old semitically correct, pre-templated hit piece. One Sheaf, One Vine is Robert Griffin's highly anticipated follow up to The Fame of a Dead Man's Deeds, his insightful, in-depth and uniquely unbiased "up-close portrait" of William Pierce, who was, until his death in 2002, America's leading white nationalist.














AMERICAN PRESS: Sort of like free, but more like the exact opposite

--on the heels of swain
--swain's bullshit book gets royal treatment while authors like griffin and macdonald get the royal shaft (use linder quote from jan 15 reader mail ed note)
--when is the white perspective "respectable"? when it's presented by a negress and prefaced with "83 pages, fully thirty percent of the book . . . telling the reader why the interviewees are not only wrong, but dangerous" (Louis Andrews TOQ review of Swain's book). Why is that? Because "respectable" is . . . (use Linder quote for this -- see Classic Linder)



Great for Longtimers and Frustrated But Fearful Newbies

--for longtimers, it's like reading about your friends and neighbors --for newbies it clearly presents the reality beneath phony media-forged monster PULLED PUNCH VICTIMS:
While the high profile, "respectable" racialists who refuse to name the jew are rarely criticized (except by VNN) and generally applauded for providing "gateway" material, the "XXXXXX" chapter of One Sheaf inadvertantly shows how sadly deformed this kind of amputated awareness looks in the real world, off the pages of AmCon and AmRen and in the words of ordinary white Americans frustrated white folks who adopt it and -- because it is by the force of its respectability, see it as



Robert S. Griffin
1st Books, 2004
Softcover, 162 pages
VICTOR WOLZEK