Vanguard News Network

SAVITRI DEVI ARCHIVE UPDATED

Dear Reader,

The Savitri Devi Archive will now be regularly updated again, as I have returned from my holiday.

Newly posted is the fifth and final installment of selected correspondence between Savitri Devi and George Lincoln Rockwell:

http://www.savitridevi.org/rockwell_correspondence_5.html

I am also pleased to announce that one of Savitri’s French friends, who has the manuscripts of her unpublished books, has sent the Archive a copy of the manuscript of For Ever and Ever, a collection of 16 “prose poems” written in 1952-53. Or, to be more precise, he has sent us the manuscript of the front matter and the first 15 poems. The final poem, “1953” (“And Time Rolls On . . . “) has, however, already been published:

http://www.savitridevi.org/rockwell_correspondence_5.html

It turns out the “1953” is the only real poem in the volume, the rest being more on the order of prose reflections and rhapsodies.

Savitri’s 101st birthday is approaching on September 30th, and in honor of the event, I will place For Ever and Ever online, in installments, poem by poem, culminating on the 30th.

Thank you for your continued interest in the Achive.

R.G. Fowler
Archivist

STILL PLENTY OF JEWS WILLING TO WASTE GOYIM IN IRAN

9-5-06

Iraq War Outcome

Sol Silvergoldbergwitzfeld, an analyst with the Center for Pushing the Selfish, Zionist Interests of Israel Using American Tax Dollars, a Washington, D.C. think tank:

“No – it can’t be! The Iraq War can’t be over! We neoconservatives had such plans for Iraq. After the war, Iraq was going to become a “base camp” for Zionist operations. From that base camp, we — meaning Israel and America — were going to wage all sorts of wars in the Middle East, all for Israel’s benefit and all for phony reasons, such as ‘spreading democracy.’ Of course, we Jews wouldn’t actually fight any of those wars ourselves. The Americans would fight for us, just like they did during the Gulf War and during the latest war. Heck, we neocons even coined a new name for Iraq: “Iraqrael.” Has a nice ring to it, huh? But now…”

http://www.antiwar.com/roberts/?articleid=9649

FRENCH NATIONALIST NEWS

BLOC IDENTITAIRE
—————-

Communiqué du 6 septembre 2006

:: Soutien aux médecins français ::

Le Bloc Identitaire apporte son soutien à M. Guy-Marie Cousin, président du Syndicat national des gynécologues et obstétriciens de France, qui dans une interview à l’AFP a récemment déclaré : « si cette mesure (dépassement d’honoraires) ne convient pas aux patients, il faut qu’ils aillent à l’hôpital se faire soigner par des praticiens à diplôme étranger”.

Ces déclarations ont suffi pour susciter les habituelles dénonciations des habituelles pleureuses de l’antiracisme. Un syndicat de médecins étrangers s’est déclaré, pour sa part, “scandalisé” par ces propos “offensants” et “tendancieux”, “reflets de préjugés à fond raciste, hérités d’une période révolue”.

Naturellement, ce syndicat de médecins étrangers “se réserve le droit d’engager les procédures juridiques pour demander réparation du préjudice porté à la dignité”.

Le Bloc Identitaire observe que les propos de M. Cousin ne sont en rien offensants mais seulement lucides sur la réalité du secteur hospitalier public. Quiconque a fréquenté les urgences d’un hôpital en France préfère, s’il en a la possibilité, se tourner vers le privé.

La plupart des Français peuvent, en effet, s’interroger sur la qualité de diplômes passés dans certains pays, notamment non européens. Mais le « politiquement correct », véritable pathologie de l’intellect qui règne dans certains milieux de gauche, interdit toute liberté de parole sur ce sujet comme sur bien d’autres.

On ne guérit pas un malade en lui disant qu’il est bien portant. On ne dissimule pas la vérité en portant plainte devant la justice. Sur ce sujet, comme sur tous les autres, la France doit redevenir un pays de liberté.

BLOC IDENTITAIRE
http://www.bloc-identitaire.com
Contact : [email protected]

STEVE IRWIN VIDEO GETS OUT?

Both the family and co-workers of Steve Irwin have expressed the desire that the video of his fatal accident never be shown (that it be destroyed actually).

Let’s start a betting pool to see how long it takes a Jew to obtain a copy and sell it to the tabloids.

THE TREADWELL VIDEO IS FAR MORE DRAMATIC AND IT HAS NEVER GOTTEN OUT.

LIBERAL REASONING

WHITE WOMAN ATTACKED BY ANOTHER WHITE WOMAN SHOULD DEFEND HERSELF. WHITE WOMAN ATTACKED BY GANG OF NIGGERS — DAY AFTER DAY AFTER DAY — SHOULD CHECK INTO EYE REPROCESSING CENTER.

Dear Cary,

About a year ago I started dating a wonderful man who went to college nearby. A lot of his college friends still live here, including an ex-girlfriend whom he broke things off with a couple of years ago. Until he started dating me I think she always held out hope that they would get back together, despite the fact that he broke it off because he did not see a future with her. We are on friendly terms with her and tend to see her socially as we all move within the same group of friends, but they are no longer close at all.

While this woman is not someone I would necessarily ever be close with, I can acknowledge that she is attractive, intelligent, interesting and by all accounts a pretty good person. That is what makes what I am feeling so hard, because I find that often when we are in groups of people she finds small ways to put me down and I’m tired of it. She generally does it when my boyfriend isn’t around, but last week even he noticed her small jabs. To his credit, he stuck up for me, put his arm around me and gave me a squeeze of solidarity. The thing is, why do we women do this to each other? Her comments generally tend to insult my tastes in books or movies while at the same time pointing out how intellectual or highbrow hers are. I can’t figure out if this is some sort of competition because we have dated the same guy or if she just doesn’t know she is doing it, but I am finding it increasingly frustrating to hang out with her. My boyfriend is more than willing to just not attend parties or other functions that she throws, but I don’t want her behavior to dictate my actions.

I’ve tried just letting her comments roll off of me to minimal success. I know part of the problem is my own competitive spirit. I attended a top college on a large merit scholarship, graduated with honors, have a good job and have generally done well at whatever I’ve tried. However, this woman — and, in fact, most people I meet — doesn’t know this about me because I don’t talk about it. So it hurts when she tries to make me out to be less intelligent or really lesser in any way. I’ve been hesitant to come out and say it’s jealousy because it seems like we women are forever comforting ourselves that people who don’t like us are “just jealous,” but I’m running out of explanations. Can two women who have loved the same guy really not ever get along? I know that sometimes it’s hard to get along if you were both incredibly serious with the same man, but their relationship was for a space of time in college and was never completely intimate.

There is a college reunion coming up a couple of hours away, and now she wants to carpool with us. I knew she was coming and I don’t mind hanging around her in a large group, but trapped in a car for hours? My boyfriend has already offered to just say no, but I don’t see how to do that without coming across as a jerk. The thing is, I want to like her and I feel like I’m failing. I don’t like what that says about me as a person or as a girlfriend, but I also don’t like having to smile in the face of her comments. Is there a way to defuse the situation? I’m worried that if I try to sit down and talk with her, she will say I’m making it up and she has no problem with me. However, I think it’s pretty clear that there is some sort of tension and I’ve love to let it go. Any thoughts?

Fed Up

Dear Fed Up,

A person can be “attractive, intelligent, interesting and by all accounts a pretty good person” and still be your enemy. I would focus not so much on understanding her but on defending yourself.

It’s hard to defend yourself openly against subtle hostility. Sometimes, rather than trying to ignore it or rise above it, the best way is to be a little outrageous — quickly, and then let it go. You need to make some kind of public gesture that reasserts your dignity and lets everyone know that you know what’s going on and won’t stand for it.

That is what this is about. It isn’t about you sitting down with her and finding out what her problem is. We know what her problem is. She is a hurt, jealous woman who won’t admit to herself that she was wounded and so lashes out in subtle ways. It would be OK if she just didn’t like you and knew that she just didn’t like you. We can be perfectly nice to people we don’t particularly like. But I’m betting she also blames you. She’s got it in for you. You’re a bad presence in her head. She sees you as someone who caused her unhappiness. You are the reason she is not with that guy. So she must demonize you. She cannot allow herself to believe that you were simply more attractive to him and a better match. You must instead be cast in her mind as a person worthy of contempt — “a prissy, shallow, passive-aggressive bitch,” perhaps. I know that sounds ugly, but I’ll bet that’s the kind of garbage that is running through her head.

And because you are not fighting back, she has no reason to reconsider her behavior.

I don’t know what kind of language is appropriate in your circle, so I can’t tell you exactly what would do the trick. What you want to convey is that you know she’s needling you, you think it sucks, but at the same time it doesn’t hurt you — it’s just stupid and ineffective and makes her look bad. Some people could just say, “Fuck you” and walk away, and it would be understood, in all its unsubtle glory, not as a hateful provocation but as a legitimate acknowledgment that she is indeed fucking with you and you don’t care for it. It alludes to a genuine tension but doesn’t linger on it. It is both expressive and dismissive.

If done skillfully such a pushing of linguistic boundaries can clear the air and everyone can shrug it off. You need to find the words, body language and facial expression that will say unequivocally, “Back off.”

Apparently, instead, you are trying to take the high road. You wonder, “Why do we women do this to each other?” I would say women do this to each other because women are people and people are nasty. People hurt each other on purpose. They do it because it feels good! They do it because it makes their own pain go away!

She’s hurting you because she’s hurt. But that doesn’t mean she deserves your sympathy and understanding. You are struggling in a self-defeating manner against your own natural impulses to defend yourself.

She’s beating you up verbal-ninja style. She’s ripping you to shreds with razor blades of icy sisterhood.

You have to do something about it.

Send her a signal. Don’t be subtle, but do it quickly and move on.

GETTING GOYIM THROUGH THE ‘GROIN: THE ULTIMATE JEWISH FOREIGN POLICY

Beyoncé Knowles, freedom fighter

Why “booty popping” will do to Islamic fundamentalism what rock ‘n’ roll did to Stalinism.

By Thaddeus Russell

Aug. 31, 2006 | Soviet soldiers returning home from the western front after World War II brought the virus with them. Within a few years, it had infected large portions of the Soviet and Soviet bloc populations. By the late 1940s, the Communist Party leadership feared it would destroy the socialist fatherland from within. But it was not a biological disease that threatened communism. Joseph Stalin and his commissars called it an “amoral infection” in the minds of Soviet youth. It was “American primitivism,” “capitalist cultural imperialism” and “bourgeois cosmopolitanism.” But it was really African-American culture. It was the same infection that today is spreading underneath the police, the laws and the censors of Islamic regimes.

This month, Beyoncé and Jay-Z’s “Déjà vu” is No. 1 on the top 40 of the biggest Muslim nation in the world, Indonesia. Nine of the top 10 songs on the United Arab Emirates singles chart are hip-hop or R&B. Earlier this year Egyptian rappers MTM — whose hit song “Ummi Musafra” (“My Mother’s Away”) is about a teenager who holds a dance party while his mother is away on holiday — were voted best modern Arab act at the first Arabian Music Awards. Several journalists have reported on the vast Iranian black market in Western music and movies of all sorts. And everyone seems to agree that youth in Iran are engaged in widespread rebellion against Islamic sharia law. Tattoos, sneakers, platform shoes, belly rings, and public displays of affection are ubiquitous in the most militantly Islamic republic.

Muslim leaders are — rightly — up in arms over all this. Even the relatively liberal cable channel Al-Jazeera has run several denunciations of rap in particular and of Western cultural penetration in general. Iranian authorities have removed hundreds of illicit satellite dishes that constantly reappear. Earlier this year, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad banned Western music and the “social corruption” it caused, but was recently forced to call off his crackdown. Meanwhile, according to a memoir just published by Osama bin Laden’s former paramour, the al-Qaida leader might have lusted after Whitney Houston, but he considered her music to be the work of the devil.

It’s all very familiar. In 1946, soon after Stalin’s chief aide warned that jazz would “poison the consciousness of the masses,” the Central Committee of the Communist Party ordered all state orchestras to stop playing the music. Also banned were saxophones, wah-wah trumpet mutes, the plucking of bass strings, the deliberate lowering of tones to create “blue notes,” and the playing of drums with too much rhythm. Brigades of music patrols monitored theaters and dance halls to ensure that nothing jazzy was being played. Couples caught dancing anything other than the waltz, the polka, or Russian folk dances were subject to arrest. Members of jazz bands were rounded up and sent to Siberian prisons.

Soviet authorities were right to fear jazz, but they could not stop it. Bootleg recordings were sold by the millions on the black market. Stiliagi, or “style hunters,” appeared on the streets of all the major cities in the Soviet bloc, wearing zoot suits and ducktails if they were male or tight dresses and bouffant hairdos if they were female. They refused to work and loved to drink, “hang out” and listen to black music. Swing and boogie-woogie were early favorites, then bebop and rhythm and blues.

Unfortunately for the Communist leadership, the emergence of jazz fans in the Soviet bloc was only the beginning of a process that ended in 1991. The historian Julia Hessler has written that, “in a real sense, the stiliagi heralded the advent of an individualistic, self-expressive approach to consumption characteristic of the consumer societies of the postwar West.” Not only did this “vulgar” and “decadent” culture continue to spread, but as the ’50s ended it mutated into something even worse — rock ‘n’ roll.

The introduction of reel-to-reel tape recorders in the 1960s helped create a vast underground culture of fans of rock, rhythm and blues, and later disco and hip-hop. In 1968 the newspaper Sovetskaia Rossia warned: “The epidemic of bawdy and vulgar songs copied from tape recorders is spreading faster than a flu virus.” By far the biggest dance during the Khrushchev era was the twist, which had been introduced in the United States by the black rocker Chubby Checker. In Czechoslovakia alone, there were an estimated 200 “twist ensembles” that performed the dance in underground theaters. Increasingly, however, Soviet bloc youth listened to native musicians who made the music their own.

Though they avoided the explicit racism of their capitalist rivals, Communist authorities clearly understood the source of the corruption. A Bulgarian newspaper called young rockers “arrogant monkeys, dropped into our midst as if from a foreign zoo.” Soviet cultural magazines referred to jazz and rock as “mud music” produced by an “ape culture.” East German Communists more frankly dismissed it as “Negermusik.” But the youth in those countries apparently took the association with African-Americans as a compliment. The first rock band in Poland, formed in 1958, was originally named Rhythm and Blues and subsequently changed its name to the Reds and Blacks.

By the 1970s, desire for music frequently turned to hatred for the USSR. Riots broke out at several rock concerts, where the targets were usually authorities who attempted to stop the performances. Then disco swept the Soviet bloc, soon after it was created in black gay New York City nightclubs. It was particularly popular in the Baltic republics, where dance clubs were the sites of several uprisings against the police. A Latvian newspaper called the country’s 300 discos the “incubators of violence.”

The Kremlin was forced to acknowledge that popular music could no longer be contained. Instead, as one historian has put it, it became “the soundtrack of glasnost.” In the 1980s, performance spaces were opened with official approval from Moscow and Leningrad, the censorship of recordings was eased, giant rock concerts were staged all over Eastern Europe, and by the end of the decade major American and British pop acts were allowed to perform behind the iron curtain. Polls of Soviet youth showed that they had far greater knowledge of rock stars than of Marx, Lenin or Stalin. When the Berlin Wall came down in 1989, East Germans flooded West Berlin record shops.

Something quite similar is happening in the Muslim world, where the proliferation of satellite television and online music has had much the same effect that tape recorders had in the Soviet bloc.

In January of this year, Billboard reported on the enormous popularity of American hip-hop in the “under-the-radar market” of the United Arab Emirates. The Black Eyed Peas, 50 Cent, Mariah Carey, Destiny’s Child, Alicia Keys and Sean Paul have all performed there, and a recent concert by Missy Elliott and Busta Rhymes in Dubai drew 10,000 fans. A music promoter in the UAE told Billboard that “the young adult population in Dubai has shown a significant growing appreciation for American R&B and hip-hop music.”

Most dangerously, Middle Eastern fans of American music fuse it with their own cultures. Ruby, the biggest pop star in Egypt, sings with traditional Arabic intonations and belly dances, but clearly has taken a page or two from R&B divas. Her music is rooted in a disco-funk beat and in videos she wears tight, hip-riding jeans that were brought back into fashion by black and Latina women in the United States. Soon after her first video aired in 2003, Hamdi Hassan of the Muslim Brotherhood complained to Egypt’s parliament that Ruby’s performance “went against the morals of Muslim society.” She was subsequently banned from an Arab music television channel and from holding concerts in Kuwait. But perhaps the single most important fact about contemporary Middle East politics is that according to a study conducted by the pan-Arab newspaper Al-Hayat, Ruby is more popular than any political or religious figure in Egypt. Even worse for the future of Islamism, a Cairo newspaper survey showed that, by a wide margin, Egyptian youth considered Ruby to be “the most interesting person in Egypt.”

Islamism is facing an even graver challenge in Indonesia, with a special assist from Beyoncé Knowles. In 2003, a 24-year-old singer from East Java named Inul Daratista unleashed a sexual revolution simply by rotating her lower body onstage in such a way as to cause millions of men to worship her and millions of women to emulate her. Inul’s dance style, which she calls “drilling,” is indistinguishable from a move that has been ubiquitous in hip-hop clubs and videos for years, and which Beyoncé recently brought to the mainstream, called “booty popping.” Islamic authorities in several Indonesian provinces have banned the dance, Muslim clerics have called for a national boycott of Inul’s performances and pray for rain to keep fans away from her shows. She is also frequently cited as a reason to pass the hotly debated national anti-pornography bill. Nonetheless, Inul regularly draws audiences of more than 10,000, and millions of pirated VCDs of her performances have been sold in Indonesia. The singer-dancer, whose name means “the girl with breasts,” dresses much like her pop counterparts in the Middle East, but she also has diamonds embedded in her teeth, a fashion statement made famous by American rappers.

And who is the most popular singer in Iraq? “That’s easy,” said ABC Baghdad correspondent John Berman in a “Nightline” segment. “Lionel Richie.” “Grown Iraqi men get misty-eyed by the mere mention of his name. ‘I love Lionel Richie,’ they say. Iraqis who do not understand a word of English can sing an entire Lionel Richie song.” Asked to explain this phenomenon, Richie, who has performed in Morocco, Dubai, Qatar, and Libya, could not: “The answer is, I’m huge, huge in the Arab world. The answer as to why is, I don’t have the slightest idea.”

Why, then, does black music get so little praise from the would-be evangelists of democracy? If African-American music helped bring down the Soviet Union and is a mortal enemy of Islamic fundamentalism, why has it not been promoted by American political leaders as a beacon of freedom? The answer might be that, by necessity, leaders of all political varieties share a devotion to social order. This may explain why no less a liberal than Franklin Roosevelt banned jazz in concerts sponsored by his Works Progress Administration, or why rock ‘n’ roll was denounced by both Democrats and Republicans for causing juvenile delinquency in the 1950s. It could help us understand why civil rights leaders such as W.E.B. DuBois, Martin Luther King Jr., and Al Sharpton, who have all sought a share of responsibility for the nation, have collectively attacked every form of black popular music from jazz to rap, or why Tipper Gore and Susan Baker, the wife of Ronald Reagan’s treasury secretary James Baker, could find common cause as co-chairs of the Parents Music Resource Center, which called for censoring rap, R&B and rock lyrics.

Of course, the form of black pop music currently ascendant, hip-hop, is attacked by American political figures across the spectrum for promoting sex, consumerism and “irresponsibility.” Ironically, these critics sound very much like their enemies in Tehran. Naturally, the Bush administration has nothing good to say about hip-hop, and American liberals are generally “disappointed” when Arabs are more interested in vulgar pop songs than in democracy. But if we are serious about promoting freedom — here or in the Middle East — there may be no better way than to promote Beyoncé.

KIKING ONLINE POLLS

Note the topic of the poll – this is one issue that Israel and world Jewry cannot afford to allow outside their scope of influence.

Pro-Israel lobby targets BBC online poll

By Chris Williams ([email protected])

Published Wednesday 6th September 2006 11:18 GMT

BBC History Magazine was forced to remove an online poll after it was targeted by a project aimed at influencing internet opinion in Israel’s favour.

The Give Israel Your United Support (GIYUS) website hosts a downloadable desktop tool called Megaphone. The program alerts users to opinion polls and “talkback” features on news sites so they can respond with pro-Israel views. In turn, users can alert GIYUS operators to any opinion polls they think should be
targeted.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/09/06/giyus_megaphone/


THE JOKE CALLED BUSHY

VIDEO | Keith Olbermann: “Have You No Sense of Decency, Sir?”

Keith Olbermann: “Mr. Bush, you are accomplishing in part what Osama bin Laden and others seek – a fearful American populace, easily manipulated, and willing to throw away any measure of restraint, any loyalty to our own ideals and freedoms, for the comforting illusion of safety.”

http://www.truthout.org/multimedia.htm

IF JEWS, THEN SMEARS

Please add this to the jew-led smear campaign,……the plan and rhetoric of the kikes is so f*cking obvious.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6210240/

WON’T YOU JOIN THE YOOMANITARIANS?

Dear Friend,

The situation in Darfur is spiraling out of control. Over the past three months tens of thousands of civilians have been displaced and violence against aid workers is at its highest level ever. As a result of the mounting insecurity, almost half a million innocent people are without aid.

It is our responsibility to stand up for those who are left vulnerable and without a voice. Please take action today.

Following unrelenting pressure by AJWS and Darfur activists around the world, the United Nations Security Council passed a Darfur resolution on August 31. This resolution calls for the deployment of a UN peacekeeping force to help curb the violence and implement the peace agreement signed earlier this year. But there are significant roadblocks to the deployment of such a force, including the Sudanese President who recently described any UN intervention as “illegal”.

With this adversity, and the slow pace of action, it is critical that you send a letter to President Bush asking him to use diplomacy to overcome objections from the Sudanese government to implementing this UN resolution. The UN must send peacekeepers to Darfur before the volatile situation erupts into all out war, leading to the forced withdrawal of humanitarian relief groups and the death and displacement of hundreds of thousands more Darfurians.

Since the conflict in Darfur began in 2003, it has claimed more than 450,000 civilian lives. Today, as you read this e-mail, the genocide continues while the world watches from a distance.

A small and poorly-equipped force of African Union troops has been unable to stop the violence. It is imperative that a UN peacekeeping force intervene as soon as possible to protect millions of Darfurians who are living in the line of fire. The situation is desperate, and it is time to act.

Thank you for standing up for the people of Darfur.

Sincerely,

American Jewish World Service

BLACK PHYSICISTS?

http://www.nsbporg/cgi-bin/nsbp.cgi?page=home