Two Pro-Enforcement Democratic Incumbents Handily Defeat Primary Challenges

By Roy Beck

We have good results from Primary elections for two Democratic incumbent congressmen who bucked their Party leadership on immigration. Both faced vigorous Primary challenges from candidates backed by Democrats who said the incumbents were too centrist. We are well aware that Democrats who stand for reduced immigration levels will do better in the General elections, but we are particularly gratified to see that standing for sensible immigration also is a good political sell in Democratic Primaries.

And in the other Party, the Republican freshman who has earned the second best immigration grade of the entire 535-Member Congress beat back a Primary challenge from his District’s Party and business establishment. (More on Paul Broun below.)

SAVE Act Hero, Rep. Barrow, Wins In Georgia

I was especially excited to see Rep. John Barrow (D-Ga.) win his Savannah District Primary. Having narrowly been elected to Congress in 2004, he had immediately established himself on immigration issues as a friend of the common working man and woman and the middle-class taxpayers.

He has earned the 11th best immigration-reduction grade among all Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Barrow is one of only a dozen Democrats brave enough to buck House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and sign the Discharge Petition to force a vote on the SAVE Act (sponsored by another freshman Democrat Heath Shuler of North Carolina).

At a NumbersUSA event this spring, Barrow gave a stirring speech about the importance of standing up for true Democratic Party values in protecting the most vulnerable workers in society. He said if the Democratic leadership won’t stand for the principles of protecting American workers from unfair foreign labor importation, he will always be willing to oppose his Party for the sake of the voters of his District.

 
Continue at NumbersUSA

Israel’s War with Iran and the Zionist Power Configuration in America

Zionists and their allies in Congress authored, implemented and enforced sanctions against Iran, which hinder the ambitions of the world’s biggest oil and gas companies

By Dr. James Petras

“My strong preference here is to handle all this (US conflict with Iran) diplomatically with the other powers of government, ours and many others as opposed to any kind of strike occurring… From the US perspective, from the United States military perspective in particular, opening up a third front (Israeli and/or US act of war against Iran) would be extremely stressful to us”
Testimony of Admiral Michael Mulligan, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. July 2, 2008.

“If Iran continues its nuclear arms program – we will attack it. The sanctions aren’t effective. There will be no choice but to attack Iran to halt the Iranian nuclear program.”
Shaul Mofaz, Israeli Minister of Transportation in Yediot Ahronot , June 6, 2008.

“The present economic sanctions on Iran have exhausted themselves. Iranian businesspeople who would not be able to land anywhere in the world would pressure the regime.”
Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, speaking to US House Speaker, Senator Nancy Pelosi in favor of a unilateral, pre-emptive US naval blockade of Iran. (Haaretz May 21, 2008.)

“It was a triumphalist conference. Even this powerful organization (AIPAC), the most powerful group in the US Israel lobby, had never seen anything like. Seven thousand Jewish functionaries from all over the United States came together to accept the obeisance of the entire Washington elite. The three presidential hopefuls (Hillary went too) made speeches, trying to outdo each other in flattery. Three hundred senators and members of Congress crowded the hallways. Everybody who wanted to be elected or re-elected to any office came to see and be seen.”
Uri Avnery, London Review of Books, July 3, 2008. page 18

House Resolution 362 received unanimous support from all the Presidents of the Major American Jewish Organizations including the 7,000 delegation attending the AIPAC Conference in Washington DC on June 2-4, 2008.

“Resolution 362 became our chief legislative priority”, according to AIPAC’s website, June 4, 2008.

“The President should prohibit the export to Iran of all refined petroleum products imposing stringent inspection requirements in all persons, vehicles, ships, planes, trains and cargo ships enters and departing Iran.”
US House Resolution 362 introduced May 22, 2008.

Resolution 362 gained 170 co-sponsors or nearly 40% of the House and 19 co-sponsors in the Senate in less than a month.

Introduction

Zionists and their allies in Congress authored, implemented and enforced sanctions against Iran, which hinder the ambitions of the world’s biggest oil and gas companies. Israeli war exercises and public declarations threatening a massive air assault on Iran has pushed petroleum prices to world records. This spring 2008, the most powerful pro-Israel Jewish Lobby in the US, AIPAC held their annual conference and secured the support and commitment of both major US Presidential candidates and the majority of US members of Congress for an Israeli initiative to impose extreme economic sanctions on Iran with threats of a US/Israeli military attack. In early summer 2008, the AIPAC operatives, who wrote this US Congressional resolution, successfully rounded up Congressional leaders’ support of an air and naval blockade of all critical imports into Iran – a blatant act of war. (more…)

Barack Obama welcomes guests at the annual White Pride Convention - (Just Kidding)

By Jason Robb

I thought that would grab your attention. It’s almost funny to think that Barack Obama would actually attend and seek support or encourage White pride at any White Nationalist meeting. Well, why not, he received a warm welcome from the annual NAACP convention Monday night, and just recently spoke at the National Conference of La Raza (which means the Race), the national Mexican group that is attempting to break the Western states from the United States and reclaim it for Mexico. It is an organization that doesn’t want any border security on our Mexican border, a policy that would have dire consequences for America. McCain as well spoke at La Raza and is planning to speak at the NAACP convention this coming Wednesday. It seems that both of these Senators are actively trying to seek support from Mexicans, African Americans, Homosexuals, Chinese, Vietnamese, Indians, Mongs, Eskimos, Aborigines, etc. Hopefully, I haven’t left any group out. Oh, what about the Whites? They are no big deal. As you can tell, I’m hoping to show the irony here that “mainstream” candidates are trying to seek support from every group imaginable except the whites, the biggest racial group in the United States. Seems kind of crazy doesn’t it?  You don’t see these senators speaking at Council of Conservative Citizens or the Euro Conference with David Duke and Don Black. Why? Because they don’t care about the unique and precious culture of White-Europeans. They don’t care if it is destroyed. If they did, they would be making statements about it. Either way, Whites lose in November on election day. No matter who wins, this election will make it clear to White Americans that they must now support an uncompromising Movement for our European American Heritage and Freedom.

Source: Jason Robb Esq.

85 year old Paul Henss and his wife receive the news that they will uprooted from their country and family and be deported because as a twenty-one-year-old during the Second World War in the German military, he worked at a concentration camp and trained dogs. This while war criminals Bush and Blair, responsible for the death of over a million people in war based on lies, are honored by nations around the world!

Little Crimes Get Punished, Big Ones Don’t

War Crimes Paradox

By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

National Public Radio has been spending much news time on Darfur in Western Sudan where a great deal of human suffering and death are occurring. The military conflict has been brought on in part by climate change, according to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon. Drought is forcing nomads in search of water into areas occupied by other claimants. No doubt the conflict is tribal and racial as well. The entire catastrophe is overseen by a government with few resources other than bullets.

Now an International Criminal Court prosecutor wants to bring charges against Sudan’s president, Omar al-Bashir, for crimes against humanity and war crimes.

I have no sympathy for people who make others suffer. Nevertheless, I wonder at the International Criminal Court’s pick from the assortment of war criminals? Why al-Bashir?

Is it because Sudan is a powerless state, and the International Criminal Court hasn’t the courage to name George W. Bush and Tony Blair as war criminals?

Bush and Blair’s crimes against humanity in Iraq and Afghanistan dwarf, at least in the number of deaths and displaced persons, the terrible situation in Darfur. The highest estimate of Dar fur casualties is 400,000, one-third the number of Iraqis who have died as a result of Bush’s invasion. Moreover, the conflict in the Sudan is an internal one, whereas Bush illegally invaded two foreign countries, war crimes under the Nuremberg Standard. Bush’s war crimes were enabled by the political leaders of the UK, Spain, Canada, and Australia. The leaders of every member of the “coalition of the willing to commit war crimes” are candidates for the dock. (more…)

Popular radio talkshow host Dino Costa does a no-holds-barred interview with David Duke. Dino Costa disagrees with Dr. David Duke on a number of issues but he believes in freedom of speech and is courageous enough to let people judge for themselves the ideas and opinions of one of the world’s best known controversial political figures.

Hear Dino Costa Interview Dr. David Duke

Some people are quite surprised (and skeptical) at the information that Dr. Duke discusses. Everything he says is well-documented and proven. Here are some links to subjects David Duke covers in the program so you can verify their authenticity for yourself.

*  The Black Liberation Theology of Obama’s Church

*  Prof. Nathan Abrams’  (Jewish Professor) article, “Triple xxxthnics” — How Jewish pornographers are motivated by atavistic hatred of White Christians

*  How Jewish organizations have been the driving force behind the immigration invasion

*  37,460 White women victims of Black male rape or sexual assault in 2005 — less than 10 Black female victims of White rape or sexual assault

*  The new film Greta, promoting White teenage girls to date Black men, even with criminal records!

*  “Not Jewish enough to marry a Cohen,” How the Israeli government forbids Jewish Cohanim from marrying religious Jews who possess even a trace of Gentile blood in their genetic ancestry

Hear David Duke’s Broadcast on “The Death of a White Girl” or Download

Jana Shearer:
The Defilement and Death
of a White Girl

How Life Imitates Film

By David Duke

In Tyler Texas a pretty, young White woman, Jana Shearer, 21, met and started dating a Black man by the name of Christopher McCuin. She didn’t worry about the fact that he was a multiple felon or that he was Black, for during her entire life the media taught her that dating Blacks is a very desirable thing, even a fashionable thing to do, and like most young White girls today, she was saturated with the idea that resisting the social and sexual advances of Black males was tantamount to the greatest sin, that of racism. She gave into these converging forces and now she is dead.

With her natural defenses stripped away, the innocent girl was easy prey for the street wise McCuin. Ultimately, Jana paid for her media-induced naivety with her life, even her very flesh. To quote the Associated Press on January 9, 2008:

TYLER, Texas (AP) January 9, 2008 — A man killed his girlfriend, then filleted and cooked parts of her body before calling police to tell them what he was doing, authorities said Sunday.

Christopher Lee McCuin, 25, called 911 on Saturday and told an emergency dispatcher he had killed Jana Shearer, 21, and was boiling her body parts at his mother’s home, said Smith County Sheriff J.B. Smith.

When authorities arrived at the home, they found Shearer’s mutilated body, one ear boiling in a pot of water on the stove and a fork sticking out of some human flesh sitting on a plate on the kitchen table.

Before the long campaign of Hollywood movies and TV production to make race-mixing fashionable, quiet and decent young southern girls in Texas would not have considered having a relationship with a Black man, much less one with a criminal record. That was the time when love for your heritage, and loyalty to it was something carried, as they say, from generation to generation in the mother’s milk.

(more…)

Rev. Ted Pike of truthtellers.org

Hear David Duke’s Radio Broadcast Interview of Rev. Ted Pike: “How Hate Crime Laws Are Used to Advance the World’s Most Hateful Creed”

Obama preaching before his church of twenty years, a church that says it is true not to America, but to Africa, and one that publicly says it is founded on principles of a book dedicated to “the destruction of the White enemy.”

Obama’s Church dedicated to “the destruction of the White Enemy”

“black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy.”

The Washington Times has just released a story showing that Obama’s church publicly declares that its ministry is founded on a book that proposes “the destruction of the white enemy.” Here are some excerpts from the article:

By S.A. Miller, Washington Times
April 1, 2008

The church where Sen. Barack Obama has worshiped for two decades publicly declares that its ministry is founded on a 1960s book that espouses “the destruction of the white enemy.”

Trinity United Church of Christ’s Web site says its teachings are based on the black liberation theology of James H. Cone and his 1969 book “Black Theology and Black Power.”

“What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love,” Mr. Cone wrote in the book.

Mr. Cone, a professor at the Union Theological Seminary in New York, added that “black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy.”

…Mr. Obama has been a member of Trinity, on Chicago’s South Side, since finding religion there 20 years ago under Mr. Wright’s mentorship. Mr. Wright married the Obamas and baptized their children, and a sermon of his inspired Mr. Obama to title his book “The Audacity of Hope.”

Here are some more of the words of James Cone in Black Theology and Black Power.

Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill gods who do not belong to the black community

… Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love.

Of course, Obama and his professional campaign staff say that he does not share the explicit views expressed by his church and mentor, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Jr. The question is, of course, how could he not share them? These core views of Obama’s church are plastered all over its website, often repeated in its literature, and have been expounded on by Rev. Wright hundreds of times in public and private right in front of Barack Hussein Obama. Obama’s wife in her own senior thesis at Princeton said that rather than being dedicated to humanity, or even to America, that she is dedicated to the Black community first. Early in the campaign, Michelle Obama let the cat out of the bag when she said that in her entire adult life she had never felt any pride in America until Obama found popular support in the primaries. Learning about the American revolution, our Constitution and Bill of Rights, or even about Americans making the first footsteps on the moon couldn’t make Michelle Obama feel any pride in America, only her husband’s political success as a Black man could do that.

I am convinced that Barack Hussein Obama’s real views are exactly those that have been publicly declared by his church and his mentor for 20 years: “the destruction of the White enemy.” The most shocking thing about these revelations is not that Obama has these views, for they are shared by millions of other non-Whites and millions more Mexican illegals who seek Reconquista over the “White enemy” in America. The shocking thing is that the media and the political establishment give Obama a free pass for his anti-White racism and associations. What clearer evidence of America’s political sickness could there be than having a major candidate for President of the United States who is a leading member of a church that in its primary mission statement says it is true not to America, but to Africa?  –David Duke

With Don Black being out of town this past week there have been no recent Storm-Radio programs to listen to, luckily we have an interesting video broadcast with Dr. Duke to hold us over courtesy of Dr. Alfred Vierling! Here is part III of Alfred’s interview series titled ‘Europe: Between Americanisation and Islamisation’ featuring David Duke which was recently taped at the Euro-Rus convention. We have been updating our Euro-Rus page with some more photos that you can check out here also be sure to visit Alfred’s excellent website here. — admin

Mom Whose Children Kidnapped by Manitoba Child Protection Agency Hits Front Page of Globe

From Paul Fromm

Dear Free Speech Supporter:

We have to pinch ourselves to remind ourselves that this is Canada not communism at its very worst, where children were taken from their parents and the official ideology was that the children belonged to the state, not the parents. Yet, right here in Canada, in Winnipeg, Manitoba to be precise, two children were kidnapped from their White nationalist parents by meddling social workers ironically called the “Manitoba Child Protection Agency.”

The children were seized March 25. The 7-year old girl, of a White nationalist couple drew a swastika on her wrist. An easily offended priss of a teacher, in effect, assaulted the child and scrubbed the symbol off her arm. The mother helped the child draw the same symbol in magic marker on her arm that night and so she went to school the next day. Apparently. the school called the police and the child protection agency. The police started a “hate” investigation.

“’There were police officers there and I looked at them and said, ‘Is this because of the drawing on her arm?’ And they said yes, the mother recalled. She said she went home hysterical, terrified they would be coming for her two-year-old son as well. Sure enough, the knock at the door came quickly, and authorities plucked her son from her arms. ‘Apparently a swastika is an evil Nazi symbol and they felt the need to interfere in our lives and to interfere in how we raise our children,” she says.” (Globe and Mail, July 5, 2008)

“She says she is the victim of a state run amok, persecuted for holding political views that are outside the mainstream. Manitoba’s child and family services agency, although it can’t discuss the specifics of the case, says it is bound to intervene when a child’s physical or emotional well-being is at risk. Court documents say the parent’s conduct might endanger the emotional well-being of the children, and the children might be at risk because of the parent’s behaviour and associations.”

The social workers’ mandate for meddling is outrageous. Just what is the child’s “emotional well-being.” Many a parent is cold, aloof or neglectful or angers a child by punishing him or her. Do all these cases justify the snatching of the child from the parents. It’s clear that this is a case of outright political persecution. The parents are to lose their children because of their “associations.” (more…)

David Duke after a speech and book signing in Spain on July 5th

Hear David Duke’s Radio Broadcast “Questions to Prevent the Planned War in Iran!”

This is one of Dr. Duke’s most powerful broadcasts ever. We urge our friends to add some good graphics to this powerful speech and post it on youtube and other video sharing outlets. If you do so please let us know and be sure to send us the link here at www.davidduke.com. email Info45(at)davidduke.com –Thanks!

No More Blank Checks for War

By Pat Buchanan

After the assassination of the archduke in Sarajevo on June 28, 1914, Austria got from Kaiser Wilhelm a “blank cheque” to punish Serbia. Germany would follow whatever course its ally chose to take. Austria chose war on Serbia. And World War I resulted.

On March 31, 1939, Britain gave a blank check to Poland in its dispute with Germany over Danzig, a town of 350,000 Germans. Should war come, Britain would fight on Poland’s side.

Poland refused to negotiate, Adolf Hitler attacked, and Britain declared war. After six years, the British Empire collapsed. Germany was burnt to ashes. Poland entered the slave quarters of Joseph Stalin’s empire.

Lesson: No great power should ever give to a small ally or client state a blank check to drag it into war.

This raises the question: Has President Bush given Israel a blank check?

A year ago, Israel attacked and smashed an alleged nuclear reactor site in Syria. In April, Israel held a five-day civil defense drill. In June, Israel sent 100 F-15s and F-16s, with refueling tankers, toward Greece in a simulated attack. The planes flew 1,450 kilometers, the distance to Iran’s uranium enrichment facility at Natanz.

On June 6, Deputy Prime Minister Shaul Mofaz threatened, “If Iran continues its nuclear weapons program we will attack it.”

Ehud Olmert returned from a June meeting with Bush to tell Israelis, “George Bush understands the severity of the Iranian threat and the need to vanquish it, and intends to act on the matter before the end of his term.”

Is Israel bluffing, or in dead earnest?

For while Israel can do damage to Iran, she cannot defeat Iran without using nuclear weapons. But any attack Israel launched against Iran would require U.S. complicity, and any Israeli war with Iran would almost certainly require the United States to do most of the fighting to win or end it.

 
Continue at Buchanan.org

Looking Into the Lobby

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee’s annual conference is one of Washington’s most important—and least reported—events.

By Philip Weiss

For three days in the capital in early June, suspense built over the question of how the American Israel Public Affairs Committee conference would greet Barack Obama. There was a lot of grousing about Obama in the hallways of the Washington Convention Center, and AIPAC officials repeatedly warned the faithful to be respectful. “We are not a debate society or a protest movement. … our goal is to have a friend in the White House,” executive director Howard Kohr said in a strict tone. It wasn’t hard to imagine things going poorly: Obama gets booed on national television. He feels insulted. Conservative Jewish donors and voters turn off to Obama. He becomes president without their support. AIPAC has no friend in the Oval Office.

But of course, Obama complied. His speech became the annual example the conference provides of a powerful man truckling. Two years ago, it was Vice President Cheney’s red-meat speech attacking the Palestinians. Last year, it was Pastor John Hagee’s scary speech saying that giving the Arabs any part of Jerusalem was the same as giving it to the Taliban. Obama took a similar line. He suggested that he would use force to stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons, made no mention of Palestinian human rights, and said that Jerusalem “must remain undivided,” a statement so disastrous to the peace process that his staff rescinded it the next day. Big deal. The actual meeting had gone swimmingly.

This was my first AIPAC conference, and the first surprise was how blatant the business of wielding influence is. The conference makes no bones about this function, the most savage expression of which is the Tuesday dinner at which AIPAC performs its “roll call,” where the names of all the politicians who have come to the conference are read off from the stage by three barkers in near auctioneer fashion. The pols try to outdo one another in I-love-Israel encomia. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi surely won the day when she teared up while dangling the dogtags of three Israeli soldiers captured by Hezbollah and Hamas two years ago.

The second big surprise was that apart from coverage of the headline speakers, the AIPAC conference is a media no man’s land. It would be hard to imagine a more naked exhibition of political power: a convention of 7,000 mostly rich people, with more than half the Congress in attendance, as well as all the major presidential candidates, the prime minister of Israel, the minority leader, the majority leader, and the speaker of the House. Yet there is precious little journalism about the spectacle in full. The reason seems obvious: the press would have to write openly about a forbidden subject, Jewish influence. They would have to take on an unpleasant informative task that they have instead left to two international relations scholars in their 50s—Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer, authors of last year’s book The Israel Lobby.

 
Continue at The American Conservative

Save America and the world from another catastrophic war for Israel in the Mideast!

Before America goes to war against Iran, subjects thousands of Iranians and Americans to death or harm, spends billions of American dollars, skyrockets oil to over 300 dollars a barrel and over $10 a gallon, and plunges America and the world into depression and rampant terrorism, here are a few good questions! –David Duke

Which country in the Middle East actually possesses nuclear weapons?

Israel.

Which country in the Middle East refuses to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty?

Israel.

Which country in the Middle East refuses to allow international inspections of its nuclear facilities?

Israel.

Which countries in the Middle East have called for the region to be a nuclear-free zone?

The Arab countries and Iran.

Which country in the Middle East occupies land belonging to other people?

Israel, which occupies a piece of Lebanon, a larger piece of Syria, East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza.

Which country in the Middle East has for 60 years refused to allow refugees to return to their homes and refused to consider compensation to them for their lost property? (more…)

‘Iran does not intend to wipe out Israel’

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says Israel is disintegrating on its own and Iran will not take any act of aggression against it.

PRESS TV Report

“Israel is an illegal regime,” said President Ahmadinejad in a Tuesday press conference after a D8 summit in Kuala Lumpur.

“The regime will disintegrate on its own. Since Zionists can no longer sustain themselves, they have been forced to draw attention away from their present situation by blaming Iran,” he added.

President Ahmadinejad said that the Islamic Republic has never waged war against any nation and does not intend to do so, adding that Israel is not an exception to this policy.

“Iran has no plans to attack Israel,” he said in response to a question about whether the Islamic Republic intended to destroy Israel and to wipe out the Jewish people.

The Iranian president expounded that Jewish people amicably live in the Islamic Republic, are free to practice their religion, and despite being a small minority have a representative in the Iranian Parliament.

President Ahmadinejad asserted that the Israeli regime thrives on ‘invading and threatening’ regional countries. He reaffirmed that Iranians are fully prepared to defend their territorial integrity and will deliver a crushing response to invaders.

Israel accuses Iran of developing a military nuclear program and has threatened Tehran with the use of force should the Islamic Republic continue uranium enrichment.

According to a New York Times report, Israel staged a military maneuver in early June to prepare for a unilateral air strike on Iranian nuclear sites.

Tehran insists its nuclear program is directed at generating electricity and is in line with the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). (…Full Article)

[Video Link]