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

Old December 30th, 2008 #1
William Hyde
Someday Never Comes
William Hyde's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Racing Against Time
Posts: 2,300
Blog Entries: 3
William Hyde
Woodpecker Jews Destroy White Society with Lies

American Dissident Voices Broadcast of January 19, 2002

The Culture of Lies
By Dr. William Pierce


A time-honored saying is , "All is fair in love and war." Certainly, it
seems a reasonable saying and one in accord with Nature. It expresses
the fact that when at war even otherwise honorable men resort to
trickery, deceit, and outright lying. In a strictly personal conflict a
man may feel obliged by his sense of honor to be truthful; at least, it
used to be that way before we got so much democracy and
multiculturalism, and we still had some understanding of the concept of
personal honor. But when a nation or a race is at war, and survival
depends upon victory -- or at least, upon avoiding defeat -- a man must
think of more than his personal honor; he must put the survival of his
people above all else, and he must do whatever is necessary to win.

It's stretching things a bit, however, when we lie in order to make our
job of beating up someone much smaller and weaker a little easier for
us. When our government lies not because it's a matter of national
survival but just for the sake of convenience, that should be troubling
for all of us. That's the case of our propaganda war in Afghanistan, for
example. We drop leaflets with doctored photographs and lies all over
the place, in order to turn the people against their former Taliban
leaders and Osama bin Laden. We should be saying simply, "We're coming
for you, Osama bin Laden, and we'll get you." Instead, we try to make
our job easier by lying outrageously.

Well, lying is the way of democrats and multiculturalists -- and that
includes Republicans -- but I question whether or not it really makes
our job easier. We air-dropped leaflets on Afghanistan with a phony
photograph of Osama bin Laden wearing a Western suit and with his beard
shaved and his hair cut short and announced that he had given up the
fight so that he could escape to a life of luxury and ease in the West.
That really didn't fool anyone, and it was a completely unnecessary lie.
Then a little later Mr. Bush produced a video tape that he claimed had
been found in an al-Quaida hideout and showed Osama bin Laden
confessing, in effect, to the September 11 attack. Should we be
surprised when Muslims all over the Middle East don't believe Bush and
denounce the video tape as phony?

Actually, I believe it very likely that Osama bin Laden was behind the
September 11 attack, and I think most Muslims believe that too. But I
and a lot of other people are very skeptical about Mr. Bush's very
convenient video tape. Perhaps it's genuine, but I'm not inclined to
believe that just because George Bush or Donald Rumsfeld or any other
lying politician says it is.

The fact is that politicians are so accustomed to lying about everything
that they don't even stop to consider the consequences of their lies. If
a lie seems more convenient than the truth at any moment, they lie --
and not just to little people they're beating up at the moment. American
politicians will lie just as readily to their fellow Americans as they
will to Afghans or Pakistanis. And one can hardly blame them, because
the American people have come to expect it of them and don't seem to
hold it against them. Teddy Kennedy murdered his girlfriend Mary Jo
Kopechne and lied outrageously about it, and yet he's still in the U.S.
Senate today. Bill Clinton lied outrageously about nearly everything,
and the voters reelected him.

And as I said, it's not just Democratic politicians. George Bush may not
be as skillful a liar as Bill Clinton, but he's just as much a liar.
That's the democratic way -- with a small "d." We live in a culture of
lies, a culture shaped for us by the controlled mass media, in which
lying not only is acceptable, it is required whenever it helps the cause
of Political Correctness. Consider the current twittering in New York
about the 19-foot bronze statue being erected in honor of the city's
firemen. The statue is based on a news photograph of three New York
firemen raising an American flag, Iwo Jima style, on a mound of rubble
at the site of the former World Trade Center. The three firemen who
raised the flag are all White men, as are 94 per cent of New York City's
firemen, and the Whiteness of the firemen raising the flag can be seen
quite clearly in the news photograph.

Well, that's a Politically Inconvenient fact, and so the 19-foot statue
based on the photograph will show one Negro fireman, one mestizo
fireman, and one White fireman raising the flag. Naturally, the White
firemen who actually raised the flag on the rubble were not happy when
they saw the multicultural model for the statue, and neither were many
of their fellow White firemen.

Tough luck. I suspect that the media bosses, the politicians, and the
Jewish businessmen who favor the multicultural statue will have their
way, and groups of schoolchildren who are shown the statue will be told
that it's an actual depiction of the flag-raising. I'm surprised they
didn't include a female fireman and an Asian fireman helping to raise
the flag and show a couple of gay firemen fondling each other in the

Perhaps it's unfair of me to put too much blame on politicians and
Jewish businessmen for this sort of lying and distortion of reality for
the sake of Political Correctness. Gentile businessmen seem about as
willing to lie as Jewish businessmen. Jesse Jackson, the Black rabble
rouser, con man, and extortionist whose empire seems to be collapsing
now, made a very good living for many years by persuading businessmen --
most of them Gentiles -- to lie about race for him. With the Jewish
media backing him, Jackson would threaten White businessmen with Black
boycotts unless they multiculturalized their operations to his
satisfaction -- and kicked in a nice, big payoff to Jesse himself. Jesse
would demand that the White businessmen hire Black executives, picture
Blacks in their advertising, and subcontract to Black-owned businesses.

Instead of standing up to Jackson and calling him an extortionist,
virtually all of the White businessmen decided it would be cheaper to
pay him off, make the changes in personnel and advertising and
subcontracting he demanded, and pretend that they liked it. They paid
for advertising showing White women cuddling up to Black men in order to
please Jesse and pretended that they were doing this of their own free
will. They wanted everyone to know that they were on the multicultural
bandwagon. To me, this is at least as bad as the sort of lying the
politicians do.

And the Gentile academics and publicists are just as crooked these days.
There was a bit of nervous twittering among academic historians last
month when a supposedly scholarly study of firearms ownership in
18th-century America by an Emory University history professor, Michael
Bellesiles, turned out to be fraudulent. Bellesiles claimed to have
studied thousands of 18th-century probate records and found that very
few American families -- fewer than 10 per cent -- actually owned
firearms in the 18th century; therefore, the legislators who wrote the
Second Amendment obviously didn't intend to guarantee the right of
individuals to keep and bear arms, just militias. Well, that pleased the
nutcase feminist gun-control crowd, but as it turned out, Bellesiles had
faked it. Professional historians professed embarrassment and outrage
over Bellesiles' chicanery, but what Bellesiles did in trying to scuttle
the Second Amendment is quite innocuous compared to the fraud committed
by thousands of other professional historians, who don't have to worry
about being called to account for their deceit.

I'm talking about the historians of the Second World War and related
subjects, such as the so-called "Holocaust." Every academic historian
worth his salt understands that nearly all the histories of the Second
World War are fraudulent through commission, omission, or both, yet
almost none of these historians will challenge the fraud in the way
Bellesiles' work has been challenged. Why is that?

The reason is that Jews as a whole have a vested interest in the
fraudulent version of the war and of the "Holocaust." Anyone who
questions even the smallest detail of the fraud is attacked viciously as
a -- quote -- "Holocaust denier" or a -- quote -- "Nazi sympathizer." In
the case of gun control, nearly all Jews are for it, but they don't have
the vested interest in it that they have in the "Holocaust" and a number
of other myths about the Second World War. So it is still permissible to
be objective in writing about the history of firearms ownership in
America -- but it is not permissible to write or teach anything contrary
to revealed dogma about the Second World War. Even the historians who
aren't partisans of the Jews and who don't want to lie don't have the
courage to be truthful.

Imagine that a history professor is teaching his students 20th-century
history, and to avoid violating any taboos he teaches the approved,
"kosher" version. He teaches that in the years prior to the Second World
War the Germans wanted the Jews out of Germany, but he doesn't explain
why. He doesn't talk about what the Jewish commissars were doing to
Russians and Ukrainians in the Soviet death camps. He doesn't mention
the murder of millions of kulaks by the communists, and he doesn't
mention the extraordinarily high percentage of Jews in the Soviet
bureaucracy and in the Soviet secret police and among the administrators
of the Soviet death camps. He doesn't tell his students that while these
things were kept quiet by the media in the United States, the media in
Germany talked openly about them, and the German people were aware of
how the Jews had turned on the helpless Gentiles under communist rule
and butchered them by the millions. He leaves his students with the
impression that the German desire to get the Jews out of Germany was
entirely irrational or was based on jealousy of Jewish wealth and

When he talks about the year preceding Pearl Harbor, he is not likely to
mention that the Roosevelt government was so hot to get the United
States involved in the war against Germany at the behest of the Jews
that the United States was waging undeclared war against Germany in the
Atlantic, hoping for an "incident" that could be used as a pretext for
full-scale hostilities, but that the German Navy was under strict orders
not to respond to U.S. provocations, or that when the Pearl Harbor
attack came it was more of a surprise to the Germans than it was to the
war party in the Roosevelt government, which previously had broken the
Japanese naval code. He leaves his students with the impression that the
United States wanted only peace, and the Germans wanted only to wage war
against us in their mad campaign to conquer the world.

When he talks about the behavior of the various combatants during the
war, he is likely to follow the Jewish party line and paint the Germans
as barbarians who committed more atrocities than anyone else, and to
paint the Jews as the principal victims of the war. He may not feel
obliged to repeat all of the more fanciful Jewish lies, such as Jews
being skinned by the Germans to make lampshades and then boiled down to
make soap, but he certainly will not describe these lies for what they
are, and he will not challenge the central myth of "six million"
innocent, blameless Jews killed in "gas ovens" by the wicked Nazis. He
will skim lightly over the genocide committed by the Soviets against the
Germans, the Poles, the Balts, and other nationalities during and after
the war, and he will not even hint at the leading role played by the
Jews in this genocide. He is likely to leave his students believing the
oft-repeated lie that the so-called "Holocaust" was the greatest crime
ever committed.

Is such a history professor less culpable than the most mendacious
politician? I think not. And what about the professor of biology or
anthropology who, knowing of the profound differences in mentality, in
psychology, in inborn behavioral patterns that separate the races, lets
his students use a textbook that asserts the sameness of the races and
fails to point out this lie? Should he be forgiven for betraying the
trust placed in him simply because he wants to keep his job?

As I said, we live in a culture of lies. It's not just the politicians
and the businessmen and the teachers and the news reporters who lie to
us: it's everyone to whom the Jews have a string tied, and that means
most people involved in shaping the popular culture: advertisers and
entertainers and editors and publishers and writers and the rest. Here's
an example: the February issue of Playboy magazine has been on the
newsstands for a couple of weeks now. There's an article in the magazine
titled "Virtual Reich," with a subhead that reads, and I quote: "Fascism
is back, featuring a strange cast of Islamic fundamentalists, skinheads,
and homegrown terrorists. Here's the sinister part: they're all talking
to one another." -- end of quote --

It's a trashy article in a trashy magazine, but It mentions me at
length, and that was my reason for choosing it as an example. And with a
circulation of more than 3 million copies each month and probably half
again that many readers, Playboy does have a significant role in the
popular culture. The article is almost entirely make-believe. It has a
few quotations from things I've written, a few quotations from other
people, most of whom I've never met or even corresponded with, and then
it throws us all into one pot and stirs us up as if we're part of a
giant, worldwide, terrorist conspiracy: me along with Muslim
fundamentalists, German and English nationalists, anti-abortionists, Tim
McVeigh and Ted Kaczynski, nutcase Christian millennialists,
environmental activists, and elderly SS veterans -- just about everyone
the Jews don't like. It's not only the basic theme of the article that
is wrong -- claiming one giant conspiracy where there is none -- but the
details are chock full of errors too. It's clear that no one bothered to
check the article for accuracy.

But of course, no one really cared about truthfulness or accuracy in
this article: certainly not the publisher or any of Playboy's editors or
the author, Mike Reynolds, who used to write for the Southern Poverty
Law Center, the ultra-sleazy Jewish propaganda outfit run by direct-mail
fundraising huckster Morris Dees. The purpose of the article was to
frighten America's Joe Sixpacks and Sally Soccermoms, to send a cold
shiver down their spines with the specter of all the bad guys who want
to throw a crimp into their mall shopping and ballgame watching, ganging
up on them. If you can scare them more easily by lying, then lie. That's
the American spirit these days. The politicians lie, the teachers and
professors lie, the media people lie, the businessmen lie, the magazine
writers lie, and for the most part the American people don't care. Just
keep those shopping malls well stocked and keep plenty of ball games on
TV, and they don't care. It's the acquiescence of the American people in
all of this lying, rather than the liars themselves, that convinces me
that the end times are near. At least, I hope so.

You know, a few minutes ago I mentioned that before the Second World War
the Germans wanted to get the Jews out of their country, and I told you
part of the reason for that. The Germans saw what the Jews were doing to
the Russians and the Ukrainians, and they didn't want to give the Jews a
chance to do the same thing to them. From the end of the First World War
in 1918 until 1933, there was combat in the streets of Germany's cities
between the communists, whose leadership was heavily Jewish, and the
Nazis. There was a real danger that the communists would win and take
over Germany the way they had taken over Russia. And the German people
also knew the role the Jews had had in bringing the United States into
the First World War, causing Germany's defeat, and leaving the country
open to the possibility of a communist takeover.

But these weren't the only reasons the Germans wanted to be rid of the
Jews. The Jews were very influential in Germany after the First World
War. They were strongly entrenched in the legal profession, in banking,
in advertising and merchandising, in show business, in organized vice,
in publishing and other media. They were trying hard to change the
spirit of Germany. They were pushing modernism in art, music, and
literature. They were pushing for "diversity" and "tolerance." They were
ridiculing German tradition and culture and morality and the German
sense of personal honor, trying hard to make young Germans believe that
it was "cool" to be rootless and cosmopolitan. They were promoting the
same culture of lies that they have been promoting here.

That was the so-called "Weimar" period, because right after the First
World War some important government business, including the ratification
of a new German constitution, took place in the city of Weimar. The Jews
loved the Weimar period, but it was, in fact, the most degenerate period
in Germany's history. The Jews, of course, didn't think of it as
degenerate. They thought of it as "modern" and "progressive" and "cool."
Really, it was a very Jewish period, where lying was considered a
virtue. The Jews were riding high. Many books have been written by Jews
in America about Weimar Germany, all praising it to the skies and
looking back on it with nostalgia. Even without the so-called
"Holocaust," they never have forgiven the Nazis for bringing an end to
the Weimar period.

There was a Hollywood film made 30 years ago, in 1972, about Weimar
Germany. The film was called Cabaret, and it starred Liza Minelli. It
depicted Berlin night life, with all its degeneracy, including the
flourishing of homosexuality, and also depicted the fight between the
communists and the Jews and the other proponents of modernism on the one
hand and the Nazis on the other hand. The Hollywood filmmakers, of
course, were solidly on the side of the degenerates and portrayed the
Nazis as the bad guys, but this film is another example of the Jews
outsmarting themselves. The Jews who made the film saw everything from
their viewpoint, through their own eyes, and the degenerate Gentiles
under their spell also saw things from the Jewish viewpoint, but the
Jews apparently didn't stop to think -- or didn't care -- that a normal,
healthy White person would view things differently. Check it out for
yourself. Cabaret is still available in video stores.

The point I am making is this: In the 1920s, after the First World War,
the Jews were trying to do to Germany what they began doing to America
after the Second World War, in the 1960s. Many Germans, the healthiest
elements in Germany, resisted the Jews' efforts, just as many Americans
have resisted the Jews' efforts in America. In Germany the Jews were a
bit premature. Although they had much of the media under their control,
they didn't control all of the media. They tried to move too fast. The
healthiest Germans resisted and beat them.

In America, in the 1960s, the Jews had almost total media control before
they began their big push, and they proceeded more carefully. In America
they are winning. The culture of lies has prevailed in America. It's
still possible for Americans to win, but it's going to be a lot tougher
this time. We'd better get started. The first step is to regain at least
partial control of our media, so that we can begin contradicting the
lies. This American Dissident Voices broadcast is a part of that first

Thanks for being with me again today.

The text below is based on a broadcast of the American Dissident
Voices radio program sponsored by National Vanguard Books.
It is distributed by e-mail each Saturday to subscribers of ADV-list.

==> To subscribe send an e-mail message to: [email protected]
The subject of the message should be: Subscribe

==> TO BE REMOVED send an e-mail message to:
[email protected]
The subject of the message should be: Unsubscribe

==> The National Alliance has a strict anti-spamming policy. This
information is intended for interested parties only and is not to be
indiscriminately distributed via mass e-mailing or newsgroup posting.

E-mail: [email protected] with comments about the broadcast. Please
tell us if we can post your comments and, if so, whether you want your
name or e-mail address given.

To report typos and technical errors in ADV-list or our web site, please
write to: [email protected]

To contact us via "snail mail," write to:
National Vanguard Books
Attention: ADVlist
P.O. Box 330
Hillsboro, WV 24946

For more information on ours ideas and organization, visit:

(c) 2002 National Vanguard Books
“We’re the slaves of the phony leaders - Breathe the air we have blown you!”
Old December 9th, 2012 #2
Bruce Rideout
Flight Instructor
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Above You, Look up, Behind You, , Too Late
Posts: 231
Bruce Rideout

Tell me again, why Canada got a new Flag, In the middle 60's?
Just look at Bloody Beach Towel waving Pig-Parade now, #9 in Corruption.
Decent Folks squished through the Cracks, left and right.
Old April 18th, 2013 #3
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,048
Default Sirota and Wise Define the New Normal -- 'White Privilege' as a Jewish Construct

David Sirota is a jew. Tim Wise is a jew. It matters.

The narrative of oppression is, after all, the jewish narrative. This is a narrative in which Whites and jews are polar opposites - where jews and other people of non-Whiteness are innocent victims of unjustified oppression by Whites.

Wise and Sirota, as hypersensitive as they are about race and identity, are well aware of this.
The hypocrisy of their anti-"racist" screeds against Whites and the dishonesty of their "White like me" anti-White guilt-trip schtick can only spring from an unfathomable hatred for Whites.
Old June 16th, 2013 #4
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,048
jewsign Trudy Rubin : "Mandela Should Be Cloned"

Listening to reports of Nelson Mandela's failing health, I can't help thinking how different the world would be if the former South African leader could have been cloned.

So many times, in countries plagued by sectarian conflicts and bloodshed, I've heard people say: "If only we had a Mandela."

Mandela's genius was his ability to forgive former enemies, along with a charisma that persuaded his black countrymen to do likewise — and convinced his white countrymen that he meant what he said.
Read more here:


Display Modes

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:14 AM.
Page generated in 0.17493 seconds.