Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old August 2nd, 2010 #1
Rounder
Senior Member
 
Rounder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Missouri
Posts: 12,684
Rounder
Default Will Williams on Jim Giles Radio Talk Show (audio)

Will is on for about 25 minutes. And "Hadding" also chimes in at length. Both make excellent exposes of Big Lie Master Harold Covington.

http://www.radiofreemississippi.net/...php?119-audio&
__________________
“To learn who rules over you simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize” —–Voltaire




 
Old August 4th, 2010 #2
Rounder
Senior Member
 
Rounder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Missouri
Posts: 12,684
Rounder
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rounder View Post
Will is on for about 25 minutes. And "Hadding" also chimes in at length. Both make excellent exposes of Big Lie Master Harold Covington.

http://www.radiofreemississippi.net/...php?119-audio&
And here's the audio of Tom Metzger's comments about Harold Covington. Tom has known about Weird Harold's Big Lie techniques for over 30 years.

http://67.76.185.229:7555/content/Me..._Covington.pls
__________________
“To learn who rules over you simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize” —–Voltaire




 
Old August 5th, 2010 #3
MP
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 141
MP
Default

Is this show supposed to be a joke?

With his profanity and yelling, Giles comes off like a fool.

"Will! Will! Will!"
 
Old August 5th, 2010 #4
Warlord
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 636
Default

I read "A Brief History of the White Nationalist Movement" that the show was discussing. It was written by Harold Covington. I remember him posting sections of it on the triangle news group back when he was living in North Carolina. Also, it praises Harold to the ends of the earth, another of his writing traits. On his NW web site he claims it is not his, which is a bald face lie. Why he would deny it, I don't know, especially if the old news group postings are still available. As for the truth of the document, I don't know. Someone more involved with the movement may be able to shed some light on it.

The Warlord

Last edited by Warlord; August 5th, 2010 at 05:12 PM. Reason: Spelling
 
Old August 9th, 2010 #5
WhiteGirl
Junior Member
 
WhiteGirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: wNC
Posts: 55
WhiteGirl
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Warlord View Post
...Why he would deny it, I don't know, especially if the old news group postings are still available. As for the truth of the document, I don't know. Someone more involved with the movement may be able to shed some light on it.
The Warlord
Covington's always followed that pattern. He'll post the same thing repeatedly from various sockpuppet accounts, and deny that he wrote it or is posting it. Why? Who knows, he's either mentally ill or just thinks everyone else is extremely stupid. As for the truth, it's about as true as his other writings on movement events and personalities, ie you'd do better reading an ADL paraphrase of a National Enquirer article than expecting to find any truth or unbiased opinions of other white leaders.
 
Old September 27th, 2010 #6
Vic
Junior Member
 
Vic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 9
Vic
Default Murders that Never Happened

Murders that Never Happened

Part 1. "Barry Edwards"

Harold Covington would have us believe that Ben Klassen, founder of the Church of the Creator and author of Nature's Eternal Religion, was responsible for many unpunished crimes, including a number of murders, and that although he, Covington, knew this, somehow Klassen was never charged. There is the case of "Barry Edwards," which appears in Covington's vicious obituary of Klassen in 1993 (visible online and reproduced in several of Jeffrey Kaplan's books about White Nationalism) which is recounted in A Brief History of the White Nationalist Movement as follows:


1978 - Klassen business manager Barry Edwards is murdered in what police call a “gangland style execution.” Edwards’s body is found on June 12th, 1978 in the trunk of a car parked at a public beach in West Palm Beach.

This seems to be total fiction. In a Google News Archive search through the whole decade of the 1970s you will not find reference to a murdered Barry Edwards in West Palm Beach. An inquiry was sent to the West Palm Beach Police Department as to whether any Barry Edwards was murdered in that city in 1978. On 31 August 2010 Sergeant Jim Cink of the homicide unit gave this response:

Regarding your inquiry into the death/murder of a Mr. Barry Edwards, our records show a Barry Edwards alive as of April 1984. Without any other details such as his date of birth, social security number, etc., we may not be talking about the same person. I can tell you we don't have, according to our records, a Barry Edwards murdered in the City of West Palm Beach after 1967.

Part 2. "Dennis Witherspoon"


This is from the section of A Brief History of the White Nationalist Movement called "The Strange Tale of Benny Klassen," which contains stories long peddled by Harold Covington:

1990 - On October 12th, 20 year-old former Skinhead Dennis Witherspoon is found dead in a rural area of Dade County, Florida. He has been bound with duct tape and shot several times in the head with a .22-caliber revolver. Witherspoon was known to have been a former COTC “Reverend” who claimed that in the summer of 1989, a year previously, he arrived in the Otto, N.C. compound and was invited to Klassen’s basement rec room for a private showing of Leni Riefenstahl’ s Triumph of the Will. He was given drugged liquor and passed out. Witherspoon then claims he suddenly awoke on the floor, doubled up nude with sofa pillows under him, while Klassen was in the act of sodomizing him, with the movie still playing. Witherspoon jumped up and assaulted Klassen, beating him very badly and extorting a promise of money. Witherspoon claims he was given $10,000 in cash next day and a used car, with which he drove to Florida. The only comment Klassen ever makes about this incident is that Witherspoon was attempting to blackmail him. Florida police write off Witherspoon’s death as a drug-related killing, which may be correct.

The details given here imply that Klassen was a suspect in this "murder" and was questioned about it, but you will find nothing about it in a Google News Archive search. "The Old Order Passeth," an article written by Harold Covington under the pen name Luther Williams, which Covington sent out to readers of his Resistance newsletter in the 1990s, has 1987, not 1989, as the date of the alleged anal rape: obviously, dates can be flexible in a story that was never based on fact anyway. According to Will Williams there was never a Dennis Witherspoon in the COTC.

For absolute verification, an inquiry was sent to the Miami-Dade Police Department:


Is there any record of a Dennis Witherspoon being found dead in rural Dade County? The claim is that he had been shot several times in the head with a .22-caliber revolver. This is alleged to have happened on 12 October 1990.

On 2 September 2010 Major Rey Valdes of the homicide bureau gave this response:

Thank you for your recent email requesting information related to the death of Dennis Witherspoon, which occurred in Miami-Dade County, on October 12, 1990.

We have researched our records and were unable to locate a homicide case involving Mr. Witherspoon, or matching the description you provided. In abundance of caution, we also contacted the Medical Examiner Department, with similar results.

This means that they could find neither any record of a homicide involving a Dennis Witherspoon, nor any killing of a similar description on or about the specified date.

Major Valdes says that further information, if anybody has any, or further inquiries about the alleged Witherspoon homicide (which evidently never occurred) should be directed to Sergeant Miguel Tabernero of the Homicide Bureau, Miami-Dade Police Department.

The examples given above are typical of the stories that Harold Covington was peddling about Ben Klassen and the Church of the Creator in 1989-1993.
 
Old September 27th, 2010 #7
Vic
Junior Member
 
Vic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 9
Vic
Default Covington's Attack on David Duke

Presumed Author Harold Covington Plagiarized Most of "The Self-Promotion of David Duke" from the SPLC


On the discussion page of the Wikipedia article bearing his name, Harold Covington has complained bitterly about the fact that the SPLC is used as a source of information about himself:


Nor can anything whatsoever from the Southern Poverty Law Center, a private organization which raises millions of dollars by assaulting and destroying the civil rights and liberties of Americans of European descent, be considered in any way a legitimate source of information or validation. Trashing people like me is how Morris Dees makes his millions.

How unfair, then, that the section of A Brief History of the White Nationalist Movement titled "The Self-Promotion of David Duke" is mostly copied from the SPLC (Martin A. Lee, "Insatiable", Intelligence Report, Spring 2003).

There are, however, a few noteworthy differences.

The most memorable addition by Anonymous is the twice-stated claim that Duke had liposuction to his buttocks, a claim which appears nowhere in the SPLC's report and does not seem to be in any other source that I can find. It seems to be an invented detail. The closest thing that I could find was a rumor from 1991 that, as part of his facial improvement, Duke had undergone liposuction to his lower lip (People, 18 November 1991). Duke denied it.

The anonymous compiler of the Brief History redacts sections from the SPLC's article that refer to the SPLC (thus concealing the source of the plagiarism) and sections that would be, from a White Nationalist perspective, complimentary to Duke. For example, the SPLC's reference to Duke as "a neo-nazi true believer" is omitted.

In place of that omitted paragraph that gives Duke credit for appearing as a true believer with his book, My Awakening, this appears:


The book, which Duke enthusiastically predicted would “change the course of history,” did nothing of the kind One reviewer said of My Awakening, “It’s all right, the political and racial parts of it, although it’s all been said before and better by others. Large sections of it are basically just narcissistic bullshit with Duke breaking his arm patting himself on the back. It certainly doesn’t justify or ameliorate the harm Duke has done to the Movement with his constant financial and sexual misbehavior. ”


And who is that "one reviewer"? Well, that review of Duke's book appears on a site offering free book downloads, and that site just happens to have Harold Covington's fingerprints all over it. Note the blue, white, and green flag from the cover of one of Covington's novels. Note the nw (northwest) in the address. Note the reference to the webmaster as "the Old Man" and above all note the typically covingtonesque defamation of Ben Klassen that passes for a review of Klassen's On the Brink of a Bloody Racial War.

In addition to quoting from Covington's review of Duke's book, the anonymous author adds two mentions of Harold Covington by name to the SPLC's short biography of Duke, in a passage about the 1981 White racialist plot to invade Dominica. Covington is mentioned first because members of his NSPA unit allegedly participated in the plot, and again by way of contrast to the "shameful and treacherous" conduct of David Duke during the ensuing trial:



Duke slithered out of this one by co-operating fully with federal prosecutors and testifying fully and extensively before a grand jury, spilling his guts under a grant of immunity.

[...]

(Conversely Covington, who was only peripherally implicated and who had advised strongly against the whole hare-brained thing from the beginning, took a far more honorable course when he refused immunity, took the Fifth Amendment on all questions, and at a good deal of personal risk to himself refused to testify even to his own name when he was subpoenaed by the New Orleans grand jury.)



This gratuitous praise of a relatively obscure person such as Harold Covington, extraneous to the narrative about David Duke, would really be hard to understand if Covington were not the author of this Brief History.

With this awareness that the author almost certainly is Harold Covington and that therefore I should be on the alert for outrageous lies, on 10 August 2010 I contacted David Duke to ask for his side of the story. I asked if he had been involved in the 1981 Dominica caper and he said, "No." I further asked, "What was the nature of your involvement in the ensuing legal process?" Duke answered as follows:


Since I did know the principals, specifically Don Black, I was called before the Grand Jury and refused to say anything, using the provisions of the 5th Amendment. Didn't make them too happy obviously but I think that is the only course that true activists should take in these kinds of matters. Say nothing, because anything you say could harm others or yourself.

Duke's answer is validated by Tyler Bridges, The Rise of David Duke (1994), page 99. According to Bridges Duke escaped indictment, not as Covington alleges "by cooperating fully," but because he refused to testify.
 
Old September 27th, 2010 #8
Vic
Junior Member
 
Vic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 9
Vic
Default Harold Covington Calls Ben Klassen a Jew

Harold Covington Calls Ben Klassen a Jew

Ben Klassen was a former Florida legislator who founded the Church of the Creator in 1973 and is the author of The White Man's Bible, Nature's Eternal Religion, and other books.

The section about Klassen in A Brief History of the White Nationalist Movement is called "The Strange Case of Benny Klassen." It is essentially a very heavily re-worked version of an article from the SPLC's Intelligence Report, Summer 1999, titled "A History." "The Strange Case of Benny Klassen" retains that article's format and much of its text but incorporates smears that had been published in Harold Covington's Resistance newsletter in the early1990s.

While the SPLC's "A History" concerns itself little with Klassen's life before the COTC, Covington's Brief History contains material, all of it defamatory, for the years 1948, 1966, and 1968. This material from the prehistory of the COTC was added to portray Klassen as a man with hidden Jewish origins. (This seems to be an adaptation of the true story of Harold Covington's own former associate, Frank Collin.)

The most noteworthy fact about Klassen prior to founding the Church of the Creator, that in 1955 he had invented an improved form of electric can-opener, marketed as Canolectric, is not even mentioned in this so-called history. It is not an obscure fact! There are several references to Klassen's can opener in online news archives. The Hartford Courant of 8 December 1957 mentions that Canolectric was developed by Klassen Enterprises, Inc. The Miami News of 28 July 1958 contains the following note about the product:


A new entry in the field of electric can openers is the Canolectric, made by Robbins & Myers, Inc., Memphis, Tenn., which claims that it is the only fully automatic can opener. It requires no manual piercing of the can lid or manual release of the cutting blade. You just push the button, says the firm, and that's all.

Instead of presenting verifiable information like this about Klassen's life before the COTC, the author of the Brief History confines himself to innuendos that Klassen was a Jew and had been prosecuted for fraud, none of which is documentable. The five claims and their refutations are as follows:

1. that Ben Klassen's country of birth is a great mystery, and that he has stated different dates and locations of his own birth on different occasions. No examples are given to support that claim. I found a newspaper item that somewhat addresses this alleged confusion about Klassen's country of origin:


Klassen, former Republican state representative from Pompano Beach, protested vigorously when the board denied his application to register for sale Palms and Pines Ranchos, a Collier County development.

[...]

"I don't want to appear contentious," said Klassen. "But I have lived in four countries and I am a refugee from communism and the only nation I chose to live in was the United States. Jabbing his finger at his Constitution he continued, "I contend that when I can't sell my land due to some bureaucratic edict, my constitutional rights under the 14th Amendment have been abridge." ("Board Eyes All Isolated Land Sales," from the St. Petersburg Times, 2 November 1968.)


This is consistent with what Klassen later wrote in his autobiography, Against the Evil Tide, as is evident even from the table of contents. A reporter for the Los Angeles Times had no difficulty putting the pieces together:

Ben Klassen was born in Ukraine to German-speaking Mennonite parents. His family, described in his books as "early victims of Jewish Communism," lived briefly in Mexico and then moved to Canada, where he earned a degree in electrical engineering and a bachelor of arts. In 1945, Klassen settled in the United States and became a citizen three years later. (Sarah Henry, "Marketing Hate", Los Angeles Times, 12 December 1993.)

2. that Klassen was indicted in 1948 along with several others (with Jewish names) for "mail fraud, bankruptcy fraud, and theft from interstate commerce by a Federal grand jury in New Orleans." The author admits however that he really knows of no such indictment when he says, "Details are sketchy." Grand jury indictments are a matter of public record, and it would have been reported in newspapers. A news archive search for 1947-1949 turns up nothing relevant.

3. that there was a "bankruptcy fraud probe" circa 1966 involving Klassen and two partners with Jewish names in an alleged Palm Beach real estate firm. If you do a Google News Archive search on the terms Klassen and Shapiro and Weinleben you will find absolutely nothing. Likewise for "SKW Realty" in the 1950s and 60s.

4. that Klassen's "religious affiliation is listed in the 1968 Florida State Government Who’s Who as Jewish." There is no book called the Florida State Government Who's Who. There is Who's Who in Government, and there is Florida Lives: The Sunshine State Who's Who. The title that Covington gives is one that nobody will be able to find on the reference shelf of any library.

5. that in 1968 Klassen was a member of “Jews for Wallace.”

Here is an article about a dispute between two factions of Wallace supporters, about who was really in charge of the Florida campaign. On one side, Miami realtor Thomas H. Hart, on the other side Dr. William Campbell Douglass and Ben Klassen. Douglass and Klassen were both members of the John Birch Society, which Hart apparently regarded as political poison. Since this article discusses the character and connections of the men on both sides of this dispute, you might expect "Jews for Wallace" to be mentioned, but it is not.


Vice-chairman of Dr. Douglass' Wallace organization is Ben Klassen, a Palm Beach Republican, the only member of the Florida Legislature to identify himself as a member of the John Birch Society. ("Wallace Men Feud in Florida," by Charles F. Hesser, from The Miami News, 7 December 1967.)

There is plenty of mention in old newspapers of Ben Klassen's involvement in the 1968 Wallace for President campaign, but no mention of "Jews for Wallace" anywhere.

The only curve in the state's new election law is that no more than 2458 signatures can come from any one county. And there must be petitions from at least 34 different counties in the state with a minimum of 61 signatures on them. But Broward County's Wallace chairman, Ben Klassen, has said this requirement can be easily met and will actually be an aide to Wallace workers in stimulating voter action. ( Wallace Builds Election Machine in Kirk County," from the St. Petersburg Times, 18 January 1968.)


NO. 2 man on the Wallace-For-President Committee is former Rep. Ben Klassen, a Palm Beach Republican who lost out in an attempt to move from the House to the Senate. ("Wallace Supporters In State Gear For January," St. Petersburg Times, 6 December 1967.)


So far as I can tell, not only is there no mention in the online newspaper archives of any connection between Ben Klassen and Jews for Wallace: the organization may have never existed. It certainly doesn't turn up in a newspaper archive search for the 1960s. In a Google Web search, it only appears in the context of this smear of Ben Klassen. Anybody can prove that to himself by doing a search on this term:


"Jews for Wallace" -Klassen


From all the books, all the newspapers, all the articles online, you will get zero results, which implies that "Jews for Wallace" probably never existed except as a fictional element in this attack on Ben Klassen.

Strong evidence that Covington himself invented "Jews for Wallace" can be derived through examination of how the Brief History differs from the SPLC's article. The first entry in the SPLC's chronology of the Church of the Creator, from which "The Strange Case of Benny Klassen" was rewritten, is dated 1973 and reads as follows:


1973 Be[r]nhardt "Ben" Klassen, a former Florida state legislator and state chairman of George Wallace's 1968 presidential campaign, announces the formation of the Church of the Creator (COTC) in Lighthouse Point, Fla.

(That happens to be slightly incorrect; Klassen was the vice-chairman for Florida and the chairman for Broward County.) In his COTC chronology, Harold Anonymous Covington has changed SPLC's sentence to this:

1973 - Benny Klassen, a former Florida state legislator and state chairman of "Jews for Wallace" during Wallace's 1968 presidential campaign, announces the formation of the Church of the Creator (COTC) in Lighthouse Point, Fla.

Covington, rewriting the SPLC's article, simply replaced "George" with "Jews for Wallace during" and replaced the respectful form of Klassen's name with the insulting diminutive, "Benny."* Since "Jews for Wallace" was not in Covington's source material, it is obvious that he invented it.


Origin of the Conflict

Klassen had a few words to say about Covington too while he was alive, although nothing so bizarre as what Covington has been promulgating about him. "Anatomy of a Hypocrite" from the March 1989 issue of Racial Loyalty can easily be found online.

From that essay one gets a hint of the basis of this conflict: Covington had tried to discourage Klassen from relocating to North Carolina because that was his own home state and he didn't want competition. This interpretation is confirmed in a letter written by Covington on 5 November 1992 wherein he complained that Will Williams was "trying to deliver the entire racialist movement in North Carolina to Old Benny Buttf-ck on a silver platter."

Following publication of "Anatomy of a Hypocrite," Covington retaliated by publishing highly imaginative libels against Ben Klassen and his right-hand man of the time, Will Williams, and subsequently against anybody (e.g., William Pierce, Tom Metzger) that seemed to be other than hostile toward them.

Calling somebody that stands up for the White race a Jew is a traditional method of trying to undermine that person's support. They did it to Adolf Hitler. It wasn't true in Hitler's case (as DNA testing now confirms) and Harold Covington pretty clearly didn't have any evidence that it was true in Klassen's. It was just an unscrupulous way of attacking him.

____________________________________
*Covington also does this to his younger brother Benjamin Covington for whom he seems to have considerable disdain, referring to him as Benjie.
 
Old September 27th, 2010 #9
Vic
Junior Member
 
Vic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 9
Vic
Default Rick Cooper's Brief History and the Defamation of Matt Koehl

Rick Cooper's Brief History and the Defamation of Matt Koehl


Generally when I use the term Brief History here I am referring to an anonymous work.

However, before this anonymous work titled A Brief History of the White Nationalist Movement (2007), there was another, much shorter work, with a very similar title, A Brief History of White Nationalism, written by Rick Cooper. Cooper at one time had been a member of Rockwell's National-Socialist White People's Party, and had some acquaintance with most of the people that his history attacks. Cooper was the NSWPP Business Manager from 12 August 1978 to 5 February 1980, under Matt Koehl.

When was it written? Cooper's reference to the former Church of the Creator property "recently sold" by Dr. William Pierce (in 1994) suggests that his Brief History was composed mainly in the mid-1990s. The final section called "Current State of the Movement" may have been written later. Cooper died in November 2006.


Cooper's Thesis

Rick Cooper in his Brief History describes a transition from the Old to the New Movement. He sees this as progress and he wants to caution newcomers against being influenced by figures from the Old Movement.

The Old Movement, according to Cooper -- especially its uniform-wearing "nazi" aspect -- had started with financial support fr0m Jews and was laden with homosexuals. Cooper alleged that Jews were able to control the Old Movement (after the death of Rockwell) because it was led by immoral people with skeletons in their closets.

Cooper sees 1979-1984 as a transitional period, beginning with the Greensboro Incident and ending with the death of Bob Mathews. This was a period of financial difficulty for the existing White Nationalist organizations, but it was also a period in which more radical elements appeared.

During this 5-year period, most of the White Nationalist Movement activity was done by five groups, and most of the Movement activists were active with one of these five groups - the National Socialist White People's Party (NSWPP) under Matt Koehl, the National States Rights Party (NSRP) under J. B. Stoner and Dr. Edward R. Fields, the National Alliance under Dr. William Pierce, the New Christian Crusade Church (NCCC) under James K. Warner, and the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan (KKKK) under David E. Duke.

[...]

All of the above group leaders know each other, and each of these, except for Dr. Pierce, has something to hide in his personal life and/or background about which he is very sensitive and fears exposure to his supporters and general public as he knows such would cause him to lose his current relative position of prestige within the Movement - not to mention a significant decrease in financial support.

Only Dr. William Pierce, among the five members of the "clique" of "dinosaurs" left over from the Old Movement, had no such skeleton in his closet, but Cooper dismissed Dr. Pierce's activities as of little value.

The New Movement, as Cooper saw it, consisted of skinheads* and generally more adventurous people, who, he thought, could not be controlled by the Jews.

The vast majority of Movement activists today are Skinheads and other young people who know nothing about the con-artists who await them. It is unfortunate that many of our new activists and various supporters will learn about these dinosaurs (because they are outdated) and mossbacks (because they accomplish little) through bitter experiences. We hope to save a lot of people a lot of trouble.

To keep things in perspective, we must give credit where due. The Clique all contributed to the earlier stages of the Movement in their own ways. In fact, many of us entered the Movement through The Clique's organizations. Today, some of The Clique still contribute to the Movement and are worthy of support in some ways. We will not tell you whom to support, but we advise that you carefully weigh the pros and cons of those whom you plan to support before you make a final decision.

Cooper portrays the Old Movement as a rude beginning that should be surpassed with new leaders. In his addendum, "Current State of the Movement," Cooper identifies as "outstanding" figures Pastor Richard Butler, Tom Metzger, Gerhard Lauck, and George Dietz.


Cooper's Bias

One might disagree with Cooper as to the worthlessness of Dr. Pierce's work in the 1990s. Many people were brought into White Nationalism through Dr. Pierce's weekly radio broadcasts. The SPLC's Mark Potok has acknowledged that at the time of Dr. Pierce's death in 2002 the National Alliance was by far the most significant force in White Nationalism.

Cooper's disenchantment with Dr. Pierce may have been due to the fact that he refused to be drawn into any conflict with Matt Koehl. Cooper seems to have felt as if he were an outsider looking in on an old boys' club, which he resented and called "the Clique."

Some of Cooper's contentions, particularly the alleged homosexuality of Matt Koehl, seem to be beyond reason. Cooper maintains that contention even though he could find none of the documentation that he sought and even in spite of testimony to the contrary.

Cooper's main stated reason for believing that Koehl was a homosexual (apart from rumors about alleged incidents that Cooper could never confirm) is that Koehl, in spite of his high intelligence, was (in Cooper's opinion) a weak leader who avoided dealing with problems. Since anybody who is intelligent should be a good leader, Cooper explained Koehl's ineffectiveness as due to blackmail from Jews about his closeted perversion. Obviously this is quite a leap.

The Old Rumor

The rumor about Koehl, however, apparently had already existed.

Early in his Brief History, Cooper presents us with an alleged case of forced sodomy of a minor from 1955 where the alleged evil-doers were the three leaders of the Free Ezra Pound Committee: Matt Koehl, Eustace Mullins, and attorney Edward Fleckenstein, allegedly a Jew. That horrific incident sets the stage for Cooper's tale of progress.

But did it even happen?

That egregious crime, if we are to take the story at face value, was never prosecuted despite the arrest of the three culprits. Cooper could find no documentation even about the arrest despite visiting the police department where the arrest supposedly occurred and being allowed to view their arrest files. One of the three alleged homosexual rapists, Fleckenstein, is a well known attorney who was never disbarred.

I checked Google News Archives and found nothing. You can find news items from the 1950s mentioning Eustace Mullins, Matt Koehl, and Edward Fleckenstein, but nothing about this alleged incident. No news report about a homosexual rape by three "nazis"? I think that would have been reported in the New York Times. In 1955 they would have been lucky not to be lynched for such a crime.

This all seems highly unlikely.

Then Cooper recounts this rumor about something that allegedly happened in 1960:
Years later, Crommelin told former deputy commander of the American Nazi Party (ANP), Karl Allen, that Mullins and Koehl were queers. Karl Allen later told former ANP member Christopher Bailey, and Chris then told Director Cooper in the early 1980s.

That story lacks credibility on its face simply because it is several generations removed from the source. Cooper was never able to verify that this incident occurred. Neither Admiral Crommelin nor Karl Allen responded to Cooper's registered letters about the matter in the early 1980s, nor was he able to find any court record of a restraining order that Crommelin had allegedly filed against Koehl and Mullins. Cooper left no stone unturned, and still came up empty-handed. J.B. Stoner also did not answer. Ed Fields did answer, but the answer that he gave wasn't what Cooper wanted to hear:

Director Cooper wrote to Ed Fields on February 28, 1982, asking specific questions about what happened to cause Admiral Crommelin to boot Eustace Mullins and Matt Koehl off his Wetumpka farm in late 1959 and 1960, as well as what he knew about Koehl's homosexual background.

At least Fields answered the letter, but his statement that he had heard nothing bad about Koehl is not believable - these guys all know each other going back at least 2 decades!

At some point you have to face the fact that what "everybody knows" might not be true. It might just be a rumor! People love their rumors.

Furthermore, the propagation of rumors as a means of fragmenting and demoralizing dissident groups had been standard practice for the FBI under COINTELPRO, 1956-1971.

The bottom line about Cooper's Brief History is that it is an expression of personal opinion, and Cooper really makes no secret that it is a biased opinion. Cooper says that Matt Koehl had "double-crossed" him 14 years earlier, although he does not explain how. We can infer from the fact that Cooper only quit working for Koehl in 1980 that he probably had ignored any rumors about Koehl until then.

While Cooper's history is biased and impeachable in its own way, the man at least took responsibility for what he wrote. Cooper specifically disapproved of anonymous rumormongering:

This report is not a continuation of Deguello, which is an anonymous 54-page report published in the 1970s and which contained a mixture of truth and lies about many prominent people in the White Nationalist Movement at the time. There is nothing sneaky or anonymous in this report.


Cooper vs. Covington

Behind Cooper's stated benevolent purpose of cautioning newcomers lurked a vendetta against Matt Koehl, and to a smaller degree against others like William Pierce and David Duke who didn't support that vendetta. From this personal motive he derived the generalization that the Old Movement was essentially bad. (The basic concept of the Old Movement, New Movement distinction probably comes from Richard Butler, who made some statement about the new, more radical generation of racial activists in the early 1980s.)

Covington (making use of Cooper's material in 2007) had gripes against Koehl too. Covington attacked Koehl under the pseudonym "Luther Williams" circa 1994 (and probably on other occasions too); thereafter Koehl supplied a packet of information to Will White Williams for his successful libel suit against Covington. Covington also had grudges against some of the other people that Cooper criticized, because some of the same people that had not cooperated with Cooper's vendetta also supported Ben Klassen and W.W. Williams in their conflict with Covington.

Moreover, it is a major theme in Covington's rhetoric that practically all White Nationalist leaders are unspeakably rotten (with the noteworthy exception of Covington himself). Cooper's generalization about the corrupt old guard vs. the idealistic newcomers therefore appears to support some but certainly not all of Covington's position.

Cooper's complaints thus provided convenient material for Covington. Large parts of Cooper's Brief History were incorporated into Harold Covington's anonymous Brief History without credit. Some parts were rewritten or augmented with commentary that twists the meaning. As usual, the changes made by Covington to his source material are almost entirely on the side of making it more defamatory. Covington also removes the indications of questionability that Cooper left in.

Since Cooper was recently deceased, nobody could consult him about the accuracy of these expanded attacks. We hear the protest that Rick Cooper wrote a lot of the material in the anonymous Brief History, and the similarity of titles between Cooper's work and the anonymous work adds to the confusion. Some careful reading will show that there are very significant differences between Cooper's work and what Covington did with it.


Removing Cooper's Expressions of Doubt

Covington plagiarizes Cooper's repetition of the rumor that Admiral John Crommelin had caught Matt Koehl and Eustace Mullins doing perverted acts in his basement in 1960, but he redacts Cooper's honest admission that he was never able to get confirmation and replaces it with this vague declaration:

Crommelin never made any secret of this incident and willingly discussed it with whoever was interested, and yet it stands as yet another example of the odd veil of secrecy which seems to shelter these early Movement figures such as Koehl, Mullins, and Benny Klassen when it comes to their perverse sexual predilections. Anyone who discusses these things, or attempts to discuss them, can never seem to get any traction on the issue and is usually silenced or victimized shortly thereafter in some odd way or another. Harold Covington has been subjected to years of vicious persecution, slander, and vilification because of his constant refusal to maintain a discreet and respectful silence over acts of perversion and skullduggery within the Movement, and his demands for the imposition of some kind or moral standards or code of conduct on the Movement’s self-appointed “leaders.”

Thus the fact that the whole account is questionable, which Cooper was sufficiently conscientious to let us see, is hidden from us by Covington, who furthermore cannot resist injecting a swipe at his favorite target, Ben Klassen, and an ironic promotion of himself as the only virtuous man in the movement.


Unreasonable Elaboration and Addition of Fictitious Confirmatory Details

Cooper very briefly, with a single subordinate clause, insinuated that there might be something questionable about Koehl's lineage.

Whether Koehl's actions are based on genetic background (His father is Rumanian and his mother's maiden name is Bierbaum) ...

That is the full extent of Cooper's speculation about Koehl's racial heritage. Covington took that one tin drum and built a whole marching band around it. The paragraph below is clearly an expansion of Cooper's brief comment because the parenthetical clause from Cooper reappears in pieces, and the rest of the paragraph is an attempt to answer the question "Whether Koehl's actions are based on genetic background" with a yea that will seem credible due to the large amount of verbiage devoted to it.

In the mid-1980s Rick Cooper was able to get hold of a copy of Matt Koehl’s birth certificate, and he discovered that while his father was Romanian, probably of German descent (there are many Saxon Germans in Romania) his mother’s maiden name was Ruth Bierbaum, which is about as Jewish-sounding a name as it’s possible for a woman to have. Since Ruth Bierbaum was presumably born in Romania as well, at a time when the country was almost one third Jewish, it has been impossible to establish Koehl’s actual racial antecedents, but his swarthy skin and greasy hair were always noteworthy within the Movement. There is an excellent probability that Koehl’s mother was Jewish, which would make him Jewish under rabbinic law, since descent is determined on the female side because “no one can truly know the father save the mother.” (A fancy Talmudic way of saying that Jewish women are such sluts that the mother is the only parent who can be reliably determined.) Plus there was the strong suspicion, never completely dissipated, that Koehl was somehow involved in Rockwell’s murder, as well as the constantly hovering rumors about the 1955 New York buggery case, and the well-known fact of Koehl’s open aversion to women.

Note that Cooper did not say that Koehl's mother's name was Ruth; he only gave her surname, Bierbaum, which is quite German. Covington added the Hebrew given name Ruth. Even if that is accurate (which it is probably not, given Covington's general recklessness) there is no reason why a woman named either Ruth or Bierbaum must be Jewish, and the other allegations to which Covington refers as forming a coherent picture with this allegation of Jewishness are not proven either. This is a lot of nothing being made to look like something simply by talking it up.

As for the alleged "open aversion to women" (offered as evidence for Koehl's being a Jew) it seems that Koehl enforced a rather old-fashioned moral code within the NSWPP that brought him into conflict with members (e.g. Joe Tomassi) who had embraced the looser morals of the 1970s, and who may have made some extravant accusations in response. Koehl has been married for several decades to the NSWPP's former office secretary, Barbara von Goetz.


Disagreement about Rockwell's Death and Why Koehl Succeeded Him

Regarding how and why Matt Koehl came to succeed George Lincoln Rockwell as leader of the NSWPP, Cooper writes this:

On August 25, 1967, George Lincoln Rockwell, Commander of the NSWPP, was assassinated in a laundromat parking lot in Arlington, Virginia, by John Patler [Patsalos].

The NSWPP members went through the protocol of selecting a new leader. The majority of the members present selected Major Matthias Koehl, Jr., to succeed as the new NSWPP leader.

[...]

Some of you people may wonder why anybody supported Matt Koehl at all but you must consider that many of these dedicated people were faced with the choice of NSWPP under Koehl or no NSWPP at all so, since there was no "proof" of Koehl's homosexuality or background, they backed Koehl.

Considering the other high ranking NSWPP members at the time, Dr. William Pierce, the NSWPP National Secretary, told Director Cooper personally that he often viewed Koehl as an "island of sanity amid a sea of insanity."

Compare the corresponding passage from the anonymous Brief History, which is not from Cooper but is an elaboration of a passage from Covington's 1998 A Brief History of National Socialism in North America. The first sentence quoted below is verbatim from Covington's acknowledged work, except for the insertion of the name Matthias Koehl.** Note the rumor-mongering and conspiracy-theorizing that is not found in Cooper:

Commander George Lincoln Rockwell was murdered in Arlington on Friday, August 25th, 1967, under circumstances which have never been satisfactorily cleared up, but which point to at least peripheral involvement on the part of Matthias Koehl, the man who succeeded him as leader of the Party.

[...]

The whole murder case has been buried for years, and several journalistic and literary attempts to re-open it have been met with a stonewalling and in some cases with outright threats and intimidation from official sources, which have frightened the would-be authors into silence.

[...]

The events immediately surrounding the death of Commander Rockwell are very murky. The NSWPP members allegedly went through the protocol of selecting a new leader, but many key members were not consulted.

[...]

There have been persistent rumors down through the years that on the night of Commander Rockwell’s murder, Captain Robert Lloyd and Dr. William Pierce broke into Commander Rockwell’s safe and destroyed his political testament.

Although Cooper hated Koehl, he represents the process whereby Koehl became the leader of the NSWPP as honest, and he admits that in some ways Koehl may have been the best man available for the job. Cooper does not insinuate that Koehl and some accomplices were involved in Rockwell's assassination. Those are embellishments that appear in Covington's anonymous Brief History but not in Cooper.

Cooper does give vent to a suspicion that there was more to the Rockwell assassination than just the lone nut "Patler," but he thinks that it was a Jewish conspiracy that put Patler up to it and not a conspiracy among leading members of the NSWPP.

The anonymous Brief History augments and twists Cooper's account of how Koehl succeeded Rockwell in order to convert it into a broad and lurid innuendo of conspiracy within the movement. Based on what? Based on completely vague claims and "persistent rumors" conveyed to us from an anonymous source who doesn't even say where he got it. We can say however that he didn't get it from Rick Cooper.


Cooper's View of Covington as a Source

Using the Wayback Machine I found this passage attributed to Rick Cooper. It was posted on Harold Covington's late 1990s "NSWPP" site by somebody calling himself John Hammer:

For a number of years now, our associates have questioned Harold Covington's sincerity in the Movement versus his psychiatric status after reading his allegations against other people and groups. Any investigation into this area would be merely academic. The important thing to understand is that Harold Covington, for whatever reason, is neither a reliable source of information nor competent to critique the Movement. (Rick Cooper, Editor, NSV Quarterly, Vol. 13, January-March 1995)

_____________________
* The anonymous Brief History differs with Cooper's Brief History about the auspiciousness of the skinhead phenomenon, dismissing it as "an urban gang culture." Harold Covington just happened to use exactly those words in a 2004 essay, "The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Honky": "The one exception to the Protocols is Skinhead, which has wandered away from its origins and mutated into an urban gang culture, and now operates under those anthropological canons." Cooper's Brief History and the anonymous Brief History are also 180 degrees apart in their view of Tom Metzger.

** Covington avoided all mention of Koehl's name in A Brief History of National Socialism in North America, which is rather like avoiding any mention of Goering or Goebbels in a history of the NSDAP. That work was openly connected to Harold Covington, unlike A Brief History of the White Nationalist Movement, wherein Covington libels Koehl from behind a thin camouflage of anonymity.
 
Old September 27th, 2010 #10
Vic
Junior Member
 
Vic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 9
Vic
Default The National Alliance Incorporate

On "The National Alliance, Incorporated"


"The National Alliance, Incorporated: A ZOG False-Flag Combat Cell" appeared on Thomas Chittum's now defunct "Firebase Skull" site on 6 October 2003 billed as "Unconfirmed info about National Alliance sent in by emailer." You can still view the original post through the Internet Wayback Machine. There is an indication that the piece appeared on OriginalDissent.com earlier, on 11 August 2003, and it also appeared on VNN around that time. The year 2003 is mentioned in the text, which means that the attribution of 2002 as the date of publication in A Brief History of the White Nationalist Movement is wrong.

The author uses the pseudonym Maguire. The prevalent speculation when this item appeared was that Maguire was some member of the Gliebe faction which was at that time trying to wrest control of the National Alliance away from the Board of Directors, since naming the directors was a way to pressure the last one appointed by Dr. Pierce who hadn't yet resigned, but had a sensitive job and didn't want public attention, to step down. It is perplexing, though, that a faction trying to take over an organization would propagate the view that the organization itself is not worthwhile.

Some people thought Maguire was Harold Covington, since he was the best-known source of scurrilous attacks against White Nationalists. The style of the writing though would be unusually spare for Covington. Furthermore, Covington seems to know the difference between principle and principal, which Maguire as of 2003 did not: principle is misused twice. On the other hand, already by 4 August 2003 in "Covington on the Gliebe Coup," Covington was referring pointedly to the National Alliance as a "for-profit, Virginia corporation," an inaccurate description lifted from Maguire's silly essay, and roughly contemporary with its debut. So, if not the author, Covington was at least an early enthusiast for this work.

Covington finds it to be flawless, as part of the anonymous Brief History which he lauds (and posts in propria persona on fora and sends out to people via email in six parts). Covington proclaims: "What I will say about the document is that its unknown author or authors know their beeswax and have done their homework. I cannot find a single significant error in fact...." * (Northwest Front, 7 February 2010)

Maguire states what he regards as the premise of his argument at the beginning:

The key to understanding the National Alliance (NA) is understanding the real structure of the NA. The National Alliance is a private for-profit corporation chartered by the Commonwealth of Virginia (not West Virginia).
The NA has stockholders, officers, directors and customers.

With these claims Maguire has established a foundation that already points toward the cynical conclusion that the National Alliance under Dr. William Pierce was really all about making money. In the highly judaized United States of America, where motives other than sex and money are not widely understood, such cynical accusations are readily believed. "Follow the money-trail," is a popular axiom.

On 2 August 2010 Jim Giles, after I told him that Maguire's premises were wrong, telephoned Virginia's State Corporation Commission to learn the truth of the matter.

Hear the essential part of the interview by clicking here.

Giles reached a woman named Ruth. First he asked Ruth to look up "(The) National Alliance, Incorporated." This is the name given in the title and throughout Maguire's essay. Ruth said, "I have a National Alliance. It doesn't have Incorporated at the end. So that would indicate that it's a non-stock corporation...."

This was not what Giles expected to hear. He asked again. Giles: "You say it's non-stockholding, so there are no stockholders? Ruth: "Right, it's like a non-profit. This is like a foundation or a non-profit."

Giles probed Ruth for the possibility that the National Alliance's corporate status had changed since Maguire wrote his piece in 2003 but according to Ruth the National Alliance had always been a non-stock corporation at least since 1982.

Dr. Pierce had chartered the National Alliance in the form of a nonprofit educational foundation because he had intended that it should get Federal tax-exempt status. An application for 501(c)(3) status was submitted to the IRS in 1977. A legal battle ensued, ending with an adverse decision of the D. C. Circuit United States Court of Appeals in 1982.

Who was this Maguire person and what did he really know about the National Alliance? The title itself was blatantly wrong insofar as there was no such entity as "The National Alliance, Incorporated." If he had known that, then with his pretended expertise Maguire should also have known that it was not a for-profit corporation and that it could not have had stockholders. Despite an ostentatious pretense of expert knowledge, this author seems to have known next to nothing about his topic.

As for the "false-flag combat cell" part of the accusation -- a description absurd on its face to anybody that was a member of the National Alliance under William Pierce -- all Maguire has to offer is surmise based on the false premise that the National Alliance was known to be a "dangerous terrorist organization." Anybody who wants a fair representation of the flavor of the National Alliance under William Pierce would do well to consult the works of Professor Robert Griffin.
_______________________
* On 3 August 2010 Covington admitted having found "one major error" in A Brief History of the White Nationalist Movement, but not in the section under discussion here.
 
Old October 31st, 2010 #11
banjo_billy
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: San Jose, California
Posts: 3,032
Default

Jim Giles is a mealey-mouthed, hypocritical, self-serving, self-described "suck up" who is on his own radio talk show in the back room of his trailer in order to slander WNs so that he can weasel his way into their places. Thinking that his big mouth is all he needs, his ambition is to supplant WN leaders by slandering and stepping on everybody who is better and more intelligent than he is. Instead of educating himself, what he is doing is picking everybody's brains for ideas that he can steal. But he has no real beliefs or philosophies of his own.

Jim Giles has that Southern charm that he uses to siddle up to his victims like a slow-movin' snake, softening them up so he can eat them.

Tom Metzger got that loud-mouthed Southern jack-off to admit that he's impotent, doesn't have any girl friends and needs viagra so he can get it up.

Jim Giles is no better than a big-mouthed termite eatting away at White Nationalists. Giving him an interview is no better than telling an enemy all of your weaknesses and giving him the very ammunition for him to use against you. He's like a traitor who smiles in your face so he can stab you in the back.

To hell with Jim Giles. Jim Giles is a hypocritical piece of shit.

Don't talk with him.
 
Old October 31st, 2010 #12
America First
Senior Member
 
America First's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Earth
Posts: 3,699
America First
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by banjo_billy View Post
Jim Giles is a mealey-mouthed, hypocritical, self-serving, self-described "suck up" who is on his own radio talk show in the back room of his trailer in order to slander WNs so that he can weasel his way into their places. Thinking that his big mouth is all he needs, his ambition is to supplant WN leaders by slandering and stepping on everybody who is better and more intelligent than he is. Instead of educating himself, what he is doing is picking everybody's brains for ideas that he can steal. But he has no real beliefs or philosophies of his own.

Jim Giles has that Southern charm that he uses to siddle up to his victims like a slow-movin' snake, softening them up so he can eat them.

Tom Metzger got that loud-mouthed Southern jack-off to admit that he's impotent, doesn't have any girl friends and needs viagra so he can get it up.

Jim Giles is no better than a big-mouthed termite eatting away at White Nationalists. Giving him an interview is no better than telling an enemy all of your weaknesses and giving him the very ammunition for him to use against you. He's like a traitor who smiles in your face so he can stab you in the back.

To hell with Jim Giles. Jim Giles is a hypocritical piece of shit.

Don't talk with him.
Banjo Billy is exactly on target IMO.

----------------------------------------

Live Not By Lie's. Alexander Solzhenitsyn 1974
__________________
Isn't it strange that we talk least about the things we think about most?

We cannot allow the natural passions and prejudices of other peoples
to lead our country to destruction.

-Charles A. Lindbergh
http://www.fff.org/freedom/0495c.asp

Last edited by America First; October 31st, 2010 at 07:39 PM. Reason: Clarity
 
Old October 31st, 2010 #13
banjo_billy
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: San Jose, California
Posts: 3,032
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by America First View Post
Live Not By Lie's. Alexander Solzhenitsyn 1974
So, you think that my opinion of him is a lie? Well, that's my opinion after listening to him snake around a goodly number of prominent WNs. He's a mealy mouthed, two-faced Southern cotton mouth snake.
 
Old October 31st, 2010 #14
Tim
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 851
Tim
Default

Jim Giles is an informant.

 
Old October 31st, 2010 #15
banjo_billy
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: San Jose, California
Posts: 3,032
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim View Post
Whether he's an informant or not doesn't matter. None of the WN people he interviews is stupid enough to admit to any illegal stuff over the air.

What he is doing is getting people to tell all sorts of things over the air that isn't illegal but which that hypocritical asshole uses to tear down the best leaders we've got. He's causing us harm with his slandering vitriol. And that upstart fake, pretends to be better than all those folks who have put decades into the WN cause. He sweet talks people into trusting him, then he uses their trust to screw them over as well as harm the people whom they have talked about.

Jim Giles is a con artist.
 
Old November 1st, 2010 #16
Toecutter
Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 603
Toecutter
Default re

First of all, Mr BB, I read everything You write with attention. Let us establish that.

On Mr Giles I have a different take from Yours.

Since I have cut myself off all, and I mean ALL of the obvious mind machine operations, I do listen to his broadcasts religiously.

He, as can be expected, is far, far from perfect, but I can identify with the man.

Yes, I know of him as much as can be deciphered through his radio, he is what he is, nothing more and nothing less, and there are shortcomings, but I can honestly say to You, that I can deeply, deeply identify with this seriously disturbed doode.

I am also deeply, seriously and unapologetically disturbed by the state of our affairs.

Now, let us look at his major point of attention:

1: our "leadership" - if You feel like calling them that, is not effective.

Sure, there is a propaganda arm, with all the usual suspects, but it does NOT qualify a leadership. It is simply a propaganda arm.

----thus...the leadership, we would like to call our own, does simply NOT EXIST.
What he is doing is hoping against hope, that it is not him, that has to take that role...

...but that...in itself is so characteristic in what he is describing as 'us' - isn't it?

2: What else is there to say?

I read You, I think I definitely read You and the man has his faults, oodles of them, but when the push come to shove, he -to me - seems to represent me so much better, than 'our' propaganda arm, that there is absolutely no comparison...especially if You consider all, that he is unable to say publicly to us and I am unable to say to You here.

What I hear, when I listen to his narrative is the frustration with our present approach - and in this regard at least - he is undeniably right. Even You can not deny that fact. And I do not care about the reasons and the excuses - just as I do not care about poverty and crime and drug abuse and violence - and all the rest of the arsenal/excuse of the bleeding hearts. It has to stop.

STOP now!

Now, if You seek perfection...I say, with the utmost respect:

Don't seek it from others - be it.

Do it!

But than again, I am also looking to break that omnipresent cycle of the "culture of critique"...but how do You do it?

I guess I'll shut up and get back to work...

Your humble servant.
__________________
From the corruption of women, proceeds the confusion of races - from the confusion of races, the loss of memory - from the loss of memory, all understanding - and from this - all evil.
 
Old November 1st, 2010 #17
banjo_billy
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: San Jose, California
Posts: 3,032
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toecutter View Post
First of all, Mr BB, I read everything You write with attention. Let us establish that.

On Mr Giles I have a different take from Yours.

Since I have cut myself off all, and I mean ALL of the obvious mind machine operations, I do listen to his broadcasts religiously.

He, as can be expected, is far, far from perfect, but I can identify with the man.

Yes, I know of him as much as can be deciphered through his radio, he is what he is, nothing more and nothing less, and there are shortcomings, but I can honestly say to You, that I can deeply, deeply identify with this seriously disturbed doode.

I am also deeply, seriously and unapologetically disturbed by the state of our affairs.

Now, let us look at his major point of attention:

1: our "leadership" - if You feel like calling them that, is not effective.

Sure, there is a propaganda arm, with all the usual suspects, but it does NOT qualify a leadership. It is simply a propaganda arm.

----thus...the leadership, we would like to call our own, does simply NOT EXIST.
What he is doing is hoping against hope, that it is not him, that has to take that role...

...but that...in itself is so characteristic in what he is describing as 'us' - isn't it?

2: What else is there to say?

I read You, I think I definitely read You and the man has his faults, oodles of them, but when the push come to shove, he -to me - seems to represent me so much better, than 'our' propaganda arm, that there is absolutely no comparison...especially if You consider all, that he is unable to say publicly to us and I am unable to say to You here.

What I hear, when I listen to his narrative is the frustration with our present approach - and in this regard at least - he is undeniably right. Even You can not deny that fact. And I do not care about the reasons and the excuses - just as I do not care about poverty and crime and drug abuse and violence - and all the rest of the arsenal/excuse of the bleeding hearts. It has to stop.

STOP now!

Now, if You seek perfection...I say, with the utmost respect:

Don't seek it from others - be it.

Do it!

But than again, I am also looking to break that omnipresent cycle of the "culture of critique"...but how do You do it?

I guess I'll shut up and get back to work...

Your humble servant.
Well, you are certainly a more qualified representative of white people than is Jim Giles.

Sure, there are plenty of flaws in what we have for our leaders. Nobody is perfect so why do we all insist that our leaders have to be perfect?

But regardless of their real or imagined flaws, they are each and every one of them (Covington excepted) trying their best to make things better. No matter what, they are trying to make things better.

Jim Giles is, however, undercutting everybody so that only he appears to be a viable "leader".

Leadership shines on its own. And it appears out of both the variety of leaders that we have now as well as out of the people who are not presently in a leadership position.

You have stated your case clearly and without trying to back stab or destroy anybody around you. That is certainly a leadership quality right there within your own self, showing your leadership abilities.

Jim Giles is, however, as he stated himself, "sucking up" to his interviewees, so that he can wiggle some stuff out of them. He is searching out piss and shit that he can fling on the various leaders and simultaneously denigrating any leader who is also seeking money for the fight. What a fraud!

Politics is impossible without money. So, anyone who is in politics knows that he can't be effective without help from the people who follow his lead. So, in that respect, Jim Giles is trying to undermine the political power of our present leaders by making their need for money into some sort of negative attribute or some sort of "shameful sin". That asshole wants to slander us by calling White Nationalism the "Money Movement". That's a Jewish technique that he is using.

I have listened to every one of his broadcasts that features WN leaders because I am interested in hearing what these people have to say. So, in that respect, the interviews have been great. To be able to hear all of those great people tell their stories was wonderful. It's just Jim Giles whom I object to.

I listened to a few additional others when he interviewed various Jews. I listened to that Potak Jew-freak from the ADL interview and Giles told him that he really really likes to kissy-ups to Jews.

To hell with Jim Giles. He is just a wannebe "leader" who is trying to make a political career for himself by tearing down every WN leader around himself so that he, alone, stands tall. That's another Jewish method. Jim Giles is a howling dog. No better than that at all.

His interview with Will Williams is a classic Howard-Stern-Michael-Savage Jew rant, showing his bullying big mouth kike techniques and his hypocrisy of trying to cash in on Williams lawsuit against Covington and then calling Covington to leave a warning message on his answering machine. What a fake! Jim Giles is a piece of shit.

I respect your opinion. Thanks to your clear writing style, I understand your position. And I am very happy to know that there are such great people as yourself in the battle. But I still think not much of Jim Guiles.

Last edited by banjo_billy; November 1st, 2010 at 07:13 PM.
 
Old November 1st, 2010 #18
Toecutter
Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 603
Toecutter
Default re

Thanx for the prompt Answer Mr BB.

You know, back in the day, they, here, over on this side of the Iron Courtain, they used to call us(and You yourself may qualify as an honorary) "reactonaries"

They were fundamentally right.

We were - and still are - in essence - reactionaries. We react to the sudden or gradient changes in our immediate surroundings - we are not the ones stirring the revolutions of societies - just that of the soil. We are not the ones instigating genocides on account of a personal insults. We prefer to solve local issues locally - preferably even without the interference from the constabulary...like 'em rebs used to I reckon...

Good ol' boys, You didn't wanna mess with...but could always count on.

Now, I see Mr Giles as one of those boys, who has tried to play by the rules all his life and has suddenly(or not so) came to the realization, that the game is rigged - in effect is not even a game, but if it was - he'd be zugwanged.

You go and listen to his shows in order, and witness his progression. His shows are not all about smearing the "white money movement" - so to speak, but he undeniably harps on this theme.

You say, politics is money, and You are right this day and age. History is also on Your side, but my definition is somewhat more specific - if I may - Politics is control of the hearts and minds(which is again a question of money to a large extent)

So You claim, Mr Giles is denying funds from the propaganda arm of our operation - but in effect - he is not redirecting those funds for himself is he? He is trying, no doubt, but WTF? Doesn't he get his say? Sure, he is raising doubt. He is creating competition in a sense isn't he? Shouldn't that lead to a better product?

I mean, there was never unity or understanding between the fractions even before his appearance was there?

I myself do not doubt the usefulness of the media campaign, I just think, that those of us in full possession of our faculties and the widest possible outlook might conclude, that it is time to go for broke, 'cos we might be the last generation capable of resistance - for multiple reasons.

That is, why I appreciate Mr Giles - he is uncompromising.

So am I. We can do with better and harder people than him, but nothing less.

The day we could fight this onslaught on just the theoretical field are behind us, in a past millenia. That battle is lost. If we are going somewhere, there is not one stone left to be standing - so that we don't miss an other trojan - and that is where Mr Giles comes in.

Mr BB., with all due respect to those, who are even presently doing their best, doing all they know how, that there is a shift in the wind.

I honestly do not see Mr Giles as a malevolent presence - even if that is how he appears at first or even second glance.

I'll go even further.

Even if it would turn out, that he is employed by the dark side - he is doing me a great, great service - he is making me think about accepted axioms - with our duplicitous foe.

So here we are.
Gotta turn in, been a looong weekend.
Nice talkin' to You!
__________________
From the corruption of women, proceeds the confusion of races - from the confusion of races, the loss of memory - from the loss of memory, all understanding - and from this - all evil.
 
Old November 1st, 2010 #19
banjo_billy
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: San Jose, California
Posts: 3,032
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toecutter View Post
Thanx for the prompt Answer Mr BB.

You know, back in the day, they, here, over on this side of the Iron Courtain, they used to call us(and You yourself may qualify as an honorary) "reactonaries"

They were fundamentally right.

We were - and still are - in essence - reactionaries. We react to the sudden or gradient changes in our immediate surroundings - we are not the ones stirring the revolutions of societies - just that of the soil. We are not the ones instigating genocides on account of a personal insults. We prefer to solve local issues locally - preferably even without the interference from the constabulary...like 'em rebs used to I reckon...

Good ol' boys, You didn't wanna mess with...but could always count on.

Now, I see Mr Giles as one of those boys, who has tried to play by the rules all his life and has suddenly(or not so) came to the realization, that the game is rigged - in effect is not even a game, but if it was - he'd be zugwanged.

You go and listen to his shows in order, and witness his progression. His shows are not all about smearing the "white money movement" - so to speak, but he undeniably harps on this theme.

You say, politics is money, and You are right this day and age. History is also on Your side, but my definition is somewhat more specific - if I may - Politics is control of the hearts and minds(which is again a question of money to a large extent)

So You claim, Mr Giles is denying funds from the propaganda arm of our operation - but in effect - he is not redirecting those funds for himself is he? He is trying, no doubt, but WTF? Doesn't he get his say? Sure, he is raising doubt. He is creating competition in a sense isn't he? Shouldn't that lead to a better product?

I mean, there was never unity or understanding between the fractions even before his appearance was there?

I myself do not doubt the usefulness of the media campaign, I just think, that those of us in full possession of our faculties and the widest possible outlook might conclude, that it is time to go for broke, 'cos we might be the last generation capable of resistance - for multiple reasons.

That is, why I appreciate Mr Giles - he is uncompromising.

So am I. We can do with better and harder people than him, but nothing less.

The day we could fight this onslaught on just the theoretical field are behind us, in a past millenia. That battle is lost. If we are going somewhere, there is not one stone left to be standing - so that we don't miss an other trojan - and that is where Mr Giles comes in.

Mr BB., with all due respect to those, who are even presently doing their best, doing all they know how, that there is a shift in the wind.

I honestly do not see Mr Giles as a malevolent presence - even if that is how he appears at first or even second glance.

I'll go even further.

Even if it would turn out, that he is employed by the dark side - he is doing me a great, great service - he is making me think about accepted axioms - with our duplicitous foe.

So here we are.
Gotta turn in, been a looong weekend.
Nice talkin' to You!
Again, you explain yourself and your views very well. This is what our people need, positive explanations, not backbiting slanders. I don't appreciate Jim Giles tearing down people who are doing their best to promote White Nationalism. Why do so? Why throw shit on WN leaders especially without having anything of his own to offer?

Anyway, you've got your opinion of him and I have mine. Should you and I scream and yell and flame each other over our opinions? Trying to force the other to change his opinion through force of insults and smears? That's how too many WN react to each other. Sure, a good argument can be a lot of fun -- as long as the people keep the Big Picture in mind and not just argue out of egoistical desire to win an argument.

This is one thing I don't like about Jim Guiles. He isn't looking for the victory of white people; he is looking for his own victory by first walking over white leaders. And yet, he really doesn't have a program of his own to offer, just a lot of screaming and yelling over how frustrated he is. He's a whiner. Anyway, yes, it's getting late. Time to turn in and fight the battle again tomorrow.

Hail victory.
 
Old November 2nd, 2010 #20
8Man
"moderate" radical
 
8Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: 33 Thomas St NY 10007
Posts: 3,420
8Man
Default

Jim Giles

Jim Giles is sure Edgar Steel is guilty because of how he looked in his booking photo. Why bother with a trial? Good thing Jim Giles won't be on the jury.
__________________
FreedomSite "Israel's values are Canada's values" Canadian PM Paul Martin, Nov. 13 2005
ZundelSite "An attack on Israel is an attack on Canada" Canadian PM Stephen Harper, Feb. 16 2010

Last edited by 8Man; November 2nd, 2010 at 12:34 AM.
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:05 AM.
Page generated in 0.23063 seconds.