[Secure-testing-commits] The Jewish Led Alien Invasion

Lawrence Auster
2009-02-19T21:13:05Z

Give me your tired, your huddled masses,
Yearning to breathe free.
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
? Emma Lazarus

The influx of Europeans into North America led the Indian populations to
displacement and eventually to consignation on reservations. Similarly,
relentless Jewish immigration into Palestine was against the interests of the
Palestinian people, but it was necessary for the Jewish takeover of the region.
It laid the foundation for the Zionist State.Any tribe, race or nation desiring
to preserve its culture, group interests and sovereignty must preserve its
predominant status in the geographic region in which it dwells. Most nations
have had a fundamental understanding of that fact from the time of the earliest
civilizations, and every modern nation has sought strict control of its borders
and immigration.

Most Americans view the Indian historical record of resistance to European
colonization as morally justifiable, but in the skewed ethics of today, some
find European-American attempts to preserve our unique genes and culture from
non-European immigration - morally reprehensible. Nevertheless, despite
pervasive propaganda promoting multiculturalism and the media-touted joys of
diversity, opinion surveys in America show overwhelming opposition to
unrestricted immigration. Similar public sentiment holds true in every European
nation.

It was not until the 1965 Immigration Act that the U.S. Congress ignored the
majority?s wishes and began a policy that discriminated against potential
European immigrants, and encouraged massive non-European immigration. From that
time forward, the federal government also showed less willingness to enforce our
immigration laws and police our borders. These policies resulted in a flood of
non-White immigrants, legal and illegal. Immigration and higher non-White
birthrates have transformed the American population from almost 90 percent
European in the early 1960s to less than 70 percent at the end of the century.
The U.S. Census Bureau has predicted that by the middle of the 21st century,
well within the lifetime of many reading these words, European Americans will be
a minority in the United States. We are already a minority in most of America?s
major cities and will soon be outnumbered in California and Texas. Policies
similar to those enacted in the U.S. have introduced large numbers of
non-Europeans into Canada; Negroes into Britain; North Africans and Asians into
France; Turks into Germany; and a potpourri of alien races into Scandinavia,
Spain, and Italy.

As I grew racially aware, it was certainly obvious to me that the new
immigration policies of the United States and Europe would greatly damage
Western societies. Only a short time after the change in immigration policy,
crime problems escalated in all the affected nations. The quality of education
suffered and social welfare problems increased. As this planned racial
transformation accelerates, these ills will reach catastrophic proportions.

What groups had anything to gain from this demographic Armageddon? The
individual foreigners who could benefit from the economic opportunities afforded
by the Western societies had little political or economic clout while outside
the Western nations. As I looked into the American fight over immigration laws
during the last 100 years, the driving force behind opening America?s borders
became evident: It was organized Jewry, personified by the poet Emma Lazarus
whose lines I quoted to begin the chapter.

By the time I was a junior in high school, I had become convinced that massive
non-European immigration poised the greatest short and long-term threat to the
America that I loved. I saw that the Immigration Act of 1965, unless repealed,
would eventually sound the death knell for my country. Much of the material I
read pointed to a long history of organized Jewish efforts to radically change
America?s immigration laws. I contacted Drew Smith, an elderly New Orleans
attorney who had authored The Legacy of the Melting Pot, and who had already
taught me a lot about the immigration issue.[869]

Smith and I met one rainy day after school at the Citizens Council offices. He
explained the history of American immigration law. After quoting the Lazarus
lines from the base of the Statue of Liberty, he asked me, ?Whose interest could
have been served in having America flooded with ?wretched refuse??? He quickly
answered his own question. ?It was in the perceived interest of a cohesive
people who use racial solidarity like a weapon, a weapon they want only for
themselves. The efforts to change the American immigration law and ultimately
displace the European majority has been led almost exclusively by Jews.?

Smith explained that Emma Lazarus ? like many other immigration activists ? was
a Jewish partisan who supported the creation of an exclusively Jewish Zionist
state in Palestine, but who supported ?diversity? for America. He pointed out to
me how Jews such as Lazarus have even changed the modern meaning of the Statue
of Liberty. The beautiful jade-colored colossus had no original connection with
immigration and predated the Ellis Island immigration center. It was a gift from
France to commemorate the American Revolution, not to honor the arrival of
?wretched refuse? on America?s shores. It is instructive to note that this
beautiful statue of European Womanhood faces not to Africa, Asia or South
America, but the land where she was born, France and Europe itself.

Emma Lazarus had been best known for her fulminations against Russia?s pogroms
following the assassination of Czar Alexander II in 1881. The irony is rich: A
Jewish supremacist dedicated to the creation of an elite Jewish State in
Palestine was anxious to turn America into a refuge for the castoffs of the
world. Drew Smith owned many books on the immigration issue, including some by
Jews, in which he had underlined important passages. I borrowed them and
passionately delved into them.

Jewish organizations such as the American Jewish Congress led (and still lead)
the effort to liberalize American immigration and defeat restrictionist
legislation. In 1921, 1924, and 1952, Congress passed legislation that simply
attempted to maintain the racial status quo in America. Interestingly enough,
even though Anglo Americans were in a vast majority of the American population
as well as in Congress, they did not attempt to increase their own percentage of
the American population, but simply sought to fairly maintain each group?s
status quo. In the early legislative battles, Jews were the leading advocates of
open immigration and vehemently opposed legislation that would maintain America
as an ethnically European, Christian nation. In the House of Representatives,
Adolph Sabath, Samuel Dickstein, and Emanuel Celler led the fight for
unrestricted immigration, while in the Senate, Herbert Lehman and in later years
Jacob Javits coordinated the effort.

In the early struggles, Representative Leavitt clearly outlined the Jewish
involvement in remarks before Congress.

    The instinct for national and race preservation is not one to be condemned?.
No one should be better able to understand the desire of Americans to keep
America American than the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Sabath], who is leading
the attack on this measure, or the gentlemen from New York, Mr. Dickstein, Mr.
Jacobstein, Mr. Celler, and Mr. Perlman.

    They are of the one great historic people who have maintained the identity
of their race throughout the centuries because they believe sincerely that they
are a chosen people, with certain ideals to maintain, and knowing that the loss
of racial identity means a change of ideals. That fact should make it easy for
them and the majority of the most active opponents of this measure in the spoken
debate to recognize and sympathize with our viewpoint, which is not so extreme
as that of their own race, but only demands that the admixture of other peoples
shall be only of such kind and proportions and in such quantities as will not
alter racial characteristics more rapidly than there can be assimilation as to
ideas of government as well as of blood. (Congressional Record, April 12,
1924.)[870]

Sociologist Edward A. Ross, in his influential 1914 book The Old World and the
New: The Significance of Past and Present Immigration to the American People,
quotes the famous pro-immigration leader Israel Zangwill as suggesting that
America is an ideal place to achieve Jewish interests. Ross then bluntly writes
about the Jewish influence.

    Jews therefore have a powerful interest in immigration policy: Hence the
endeavor of the Jews to control the immigration policy of the United States.
Although theirs is but a seventh of our net immigration, they led the fight on
the Immigration Commission?s bill?. The systematic campaign in newspapers and
magazines to break down all arguments for restriction and to calm nativist fears
is waged by and for one race. Hebrew money is behind the National Liberal
Immigration League and its numerous publications.[871]

In 1924 Congressman Knud Wefald pointed out the Communist ties of many of the
Jewish immigrants and stated that many Jews have no sympathy with our old-time
American ideals.?

    The leadership of our intellectual life in many of its phases has come into
the hands of these clever newcomers who have no sympathy with our old-time
American ideals ? who detect our weaknesses and pander to them and get wealthy
through the disservices they render us.

    Our whole system of amusements has been taken over by men who came here on
the crest of the south and east European immigration. They produce our horrible
film stories [and] they write many of the books we read, and edit our magazines
and newspapers. (Congressional Record, April 12, 1924.[872]

The last important congressional legislation passed to protect the status quo of
America was the Walter-McCarran act of 1952. Congressional opposition was led by
the Jewish troika of Celler, Javits, and Lehman. Every major Jewish organization
(as well as the Communist Party USA) also lined up to oppose it, including the
American Jewish Congress, American Jewish Committee, the ADL, National Council
of Jewish Women, and dozens of others. During congressional debate, Francis
Walter noted that the only civic organization that opposed the entire bill was
the American Jewish Congress. Representative Celler noted that Walter ?should
not have overemphasized as he did the people of one particular faith who are
opposing the bills.? (Congressional Record, April 23, 1952.)[873]

When Jewish Judge Simon Rifkind testified against the bill in joint hearings, he
emphasized that in supporting breaking down U.S. immigration law, he represented
?the entire body of religious and lay opinion within the Jewish group,
religiously speaking, from the extreme right and extreme left.?[874]

It thrilled me to read the courageous remarks of Mississippi Congressman John
Rankin during the debate. Today such truthful comments by any elected official
would bring a torrent of abuse that few could withstand.

    They whine about discrimination. Do you know who is being discriminated
against? The white Christian people of America, the ones who created this
nation?. I am talking about the white Christian people of the North as well as
the South. . . .

    Communism is racial. A racial minority seized control in Russia and in all
her satellite countries, such as Poland, Czechoslovakia and many other countries
I could name.

    They have been run out of practically every country in Europe in the years
gone by, and if they keep stirring race trouble in this country and trying to
force their Communistic program on the Christian people of America, there is no
telling what will happen to them here. (Congressional Record, April 23,
1952.)[875]

Finally, in 1965, the goal first advanced by Jewish organizations in the 1880s
came to fruition when Congress passed the Immigration Act. It has resulted in
immigration becoming 90 percent non-European. America went from an immigration
program meant to be proportionately representative to all groups in the United
States to one that discriminated against Europeans. As with earlier legislation,
Jewish representatives and senators as well as powerful Jewish lobbying
organizations led the assault. It succeeded because during the 41 years since
1924, Jewish power had increased dramatically in virtually all spheres of
American life.

In 1951 Senator Jacob Javits authored an article called ?Let?s Open Our
Gates.?[876] that called for massive unrestricted immigration. Javits and
Representative Celler figured prominently in the passage of the bill in 1965.
Nine years before passage of the 1965 Immigration Act, the American Jewish
Congress initially proposed the essential elements of the bill and praised
President Eisenhower for his ?unequivocal opposition to the national quota
system.? In a 1956 editorial they praised him for ?courageously taking a stand
in advance of even many advocates of liberal immigration policy and embraced a
position which had at first been urged by the American Jewish Congress and other
Jewish agencies.?[877]


Jewish Motivation Behind Immigration

It would have been stupid and counterproductive for the Jewish organizations
that pushed for open borders to admit that they were motivated by interests that
conflicted with those of non-Jewish Europeans. They promoted open immigration as
?patriotic.? From the early days of the century, they made public pronouncements
that multiculturalism and diversity would be beneficial to the United States,
cleverly masking their strategic motivations.After the passage of the open
immigration statutes of 1965, Jewish authors such as Naomi W. Cohen felt much
safer in revealing some of the real Jewish reasons for promoting such policies.
She wrote that, beginning with the persecutions in Russia in the 1880s through
the Nazi occupation of Europe and into the Cold War tribulations in Eastern
Europe, open immigration in Western nations served Jewish interests because
?survival often dictated that Jews seek refuge in other lands.?[878] Cohen also
wrote that a U.S. internationalist foreign policy serves Jewish interests
because ?an internationally minded America was likely to be more sensitive to
the problems of foreign Jewries?[879] Perhaps even more important, Cohen
intimated that Jews saw open immigration policies as breaking down the
homogeneity and unity of America, creating a pluralistic society in which Jews
could thrive.In his monumental book A History of Jews in America, Howard Sachar
notes that pluralism supports ?legitimizing the preservation of a minority
culture in the midst of a majority?s host society.?[880] So, in effect, by
breaking down the integrity and cohesion of America, Jews could increase their
integrity and cohesion. Sachar goes on to explicitly show how pluralism
intensifies Jewish solidarity:

    But Kallen?s influence extended really to all educated Jews: Legitimizing
the preservation of a minority culture in the midst of a majority?s host
society, pluralism functioned as intellectual anchorage for an educated Jewish
second generation, sustained its cohesiveness and its most tenacious communal
endeavors through the rigors of the Depression and revived anti-Semitism,
through the shock of Nazism and the Holocaust, until the emergence of Zionism in
the post-World War II years swept through American Jewry with a climactic
redemptionist fervor of its own.[881]

Social psychologist Kevin MacDonald pointed out in A People That Shall Dwell
Alone that major anti-Semitic movements are usually found in ethnically
homogeneous nations and that ?ethnic and religious pluralism serves external
Jewish interests because Jews become just one of many ethnic groups? and it
becomes difficult or impossible to develop unified, cohesive groups of Gentiles
united in their opposition of Judaism.?[882] [883]

In his 1985 book A Certain People: American Jews and Their Lives Today, Charles
Silberman writes that

    American Jews are committed to cultural tolerance because of their belief,
one firmly rooted in history, that Jews are safe only in a society acceptant of
a wide range of attitudes and behaviors, as well as a diversity of religious and
ethnic groups. It is this belief, for example, not approval of homosexuality,
that leads an overwhelming majority of American Jews to endorse ?gay rights? and
to take a liberal stance on most other so-called ?social issues.? [884]

John Higham, in his book Send These to Me: Immigrants in Urban America, states
in clear terms that Jewish-sponsored changes in immigration law were a defeat of
the political and cultural representation of ?the common people of the South and
West.?[885]

During the decades leading up to opening the borders in 1965, Jewish groups had
piously stated that there should be no discrimination against any group in
immigration and that such could only be good for America. But, Richard Arens,
staff director of the Senate subcommittee that produced the Walter-McCarran Act,
pointed out that the same Jewish forces which were the most avid promoters of
open immigration, hypocritically opposed ethnic immigration they deemed
unfavorable to their own interests.

    One of the curious things about those who most loudly claim that the 1952
act is ?discriminatory? and that it does not make allowance for a sufficient
number of alleged refugees, is that they oppose admission of any of the
approximately one million Arab refugees in camps where they are living in
pitiful circumstances after having been driven out of Israel.[886]

Organized Jewry not only wants to prevent Arab refugees from returning to their
homes in Israel, they also oppose their coming to the United States. Do they see
the displaced Palestinians as potential political opponents? Jewish groups
clearly promote forms of multiculturalism that destroy Gentile cohesion, but not
those which could threaten their own group power. So clearly, their dedication
to multiculturalism is purely a strategic one; they want groups coming into the
nation which can further pluralize American society and destroy its cohesion,
but not those groups whom they see as political threat.

Jewish-dominated political and media institutions have long promoted the
demographic invasion and dissolution of America. While the Jewish media demonize
as ?racists? those who oppose the flood of non-White immigration into America,
Canada and all the European nations, Israel?s immigration policy that excludes
non-Jews is condoned. A million Palestinians fled their homes in the wake of the
Israeli blitzkrieg takeover of Palestine. They cannot return to their ancestral
homeland, and many are forced to live in refugee camps that are little more than
concentration camps of want and squalor.

A. M. Rosenthal is the long-time editor of perhaps the most influential
newspaper in America, the Jewish-owned New York Times. A hawkish supporter of
Israel, he only complains about the Zionist state when it is not Zionist enough
for his taste. Yet, in a 1992 editorial Rosenthal feels obligated to criticize
another country which desires to preserve its racial integrity and cultural
heritage:

    They would do better to set a quota on immigrants and nurture a more
pluralist society by adopting a formula for citizenship based on residence than
blood ties.

    Equally distressing is Bonn?s failure to revise an outdated naturalization
law rooted in ethnicity. Under the existing system, a Turkish guest worker who
has lived in Germany for 30 years and speaks German fluently is denied the
citizenship automatically granted a Russian-speaking immigrant who can prove
German ancestry. [887]

Rosenthal likens current German immigration policies to that of the Nazis. Yet,
is Israeli immigration law so different?

Not only Germany, but every White nation is a target of Rosenthal?s open
immigration advocacy. Only Israel?s immigration policy ? the most draconian of
all ? is immune from criticism. In America, Rosenthal identifies himself as the
offspring of an illegal immigrant (his father) and even lauds the immigration of
Haitians, many of whom are drug users and HIV-positive.

    Almost always now, when I read about Haitians who risk the seas to get to
this country but wind up behind barbed wire, I think of an illegal immigrant I
happen to know myself, and of his daughters and his son [himself]?.

    Even reluctantly recognizing some economic limitations, this country should
have the moral elegance to accept neighbors who flee countries where their life
is terror and hunger, and are run by murderous gangs?.

    If that were a qualification for entry into our Golden land, the Haitians
should be welcomed with song, embrace and memories.[888]

As a chronic reader of The New York Times, I have yet to read a Rosenthal
editorial calling for the acceptance into Israel of the million or more
Palestinians who are forced by Israel to live in the dire poverty of the refugee
camps. Nor has Rosenthal ever called upon Jews to welcome Palestinian refugees
into Israel with ?song and embrace.? Rosenthal is not stupid, but he is
profoundly hypocritical. He knows that making full citizens of all the
Palestinians currently in Israel and all those in refugee camps outside its
borders would quickly sweep away the Zionist political state in the same way
that non-European immigration erodes the America of our forefathers.

On the other side of the coin, Rosenthal knows that Israel could not have been
created but for their emigration-invasion of Palestine. Looking at the
historical record, should Palestinians have welcomed the Jewish immigrants with
song and embrace? Rosenthal has no more regard for traditional Americans anymore
than he has for the original Palestinian inhabitants of what is now called
Israel. He has only one overwhelming concern: Jewish Supreamcism.

Rosenthal is proud of what he and many other Jews are: aliens as much as the
wetbacks with whom he identifies. He lives here, partaking of all the advantages
of American citizenship, but he will not ? and cannot ? become a real American
who places the interests of America above those of the Zionist agenda.

As the Jews become more brazen in their exercise of power, some now boast of
their role in dispossessing the European-Gentile American. Earl Raab, executive
director emeritus of the Perlmutter Institute of Jewish Advocacy, an associate
of the ADL (Anti-Defamation League of B?nai B?rith) and writer for the San
Francisco Jewish Bulletin, wrote:

    It was only after World War II that immigration law was drastically changed
to eliminate such discrimination. In one of the first pieces of evidence of its
political coming-of-age, the Jewish community has a leadership role in effecting
those changes.[889]

Raab goes on to celebrate the coming minority status of Whites in America. Once
that has happened, he looks forward to ?constitutional constraints? (restriction
of freedom of speech?):

    The Census Bureau has just reported that about half of the American
population will soon be non-white or non-European. And they will all be American
citizens. We have tipped beyond the point where a Nazi-Aryan party will be able
to prevail in this country.

    We have been nourishing the American climate of opposition to ethnic bigotry
for about half a century. That climate has not yet been perfected, but the
heterogeneous nature of our population tends to make it irreversible and makes
our constitutional constraints against bigotry more practical than ever. [890]

As Raab says, Zionist Jewish activists who have supported an exclusively
Jewish-run national state have been nourishing massive nontraditional
immigration into America, and they look forward to the time when the voting
demographics of the United States reflect that transformation.

I wonder if Zionist Israel Zangwill ? who coined the term ?melting pot? ?
envisioned his Jewish state as a melting pot of Jew and Arab; of Islam and
Judaism. Given the ethnocentrism of Zionism, I rather doubt it. One American
cartoonist wrote that the problem with a melting pot is that ?The bottom always
gets burned, and the scum rises to the top.? It is true that America has seen a
melting of the different nationalities of Europe into a traditional American
majority, but in spite of the pervasive race-mixing propaganda of the Jewish
media, there has been no great melting of the White and Black, and only marginal
melting of the Mestizo and Anglo elements. However, what these Zionists have not
yet been able to accomplish through their advocacy of miscegenation, they are in
the process of achieving through massive immigration and differential
birthrates.

Jews have also promoted, through ?zero-population? advocates such as Paul
Ehrlich, smaller families among the natural leaders of the American majority.
Jewish promotion of the women?s liberation movement and abortion on demand has
lowered the birthrate of America?s most productive and educated classes. Their
blunt desire is the dissolution of the European race in the West by any means
necessary. Continued massive non-European immigration satisfies
these aims.

In summary, massive non-White immigration has been one of the most effective
weapons of organized Jewry in its cultural and ethnic war against the European
American. We cannot win this life and death struggle until our people realize
that we are in the midst of a war ? and our side is suffering great losses. To
lose this war would mean the destruction of our American culture, heritage, and
freedoms. It would mean nothing less than the destruction of the very genes that
have made possible all the social, cultural and spiritual creations that
distinguish our civilization. Our voices are muted by mass media that are in the
hands of our enemies. Too many of us are silently witnessing the genocide of our
people. The time is late. We must speak out now and defend ourselves. We must
fight for the continuation of the magnificent culture bequeathed to us by our
forefathers. We must take whatever action necessary to insure the future of our
children and our generations to come. As is true for all living things, we must
fight for our right to live.

America is in many ways already occupied similarly to the Israeli occupation of
Palestine. Jewish Supremacists control the news, publishing and entertainment
media, they control our elections and politicians, and now they are
orchestrating a massive immigration into our land that will make us a
politically and culturally impotent minority in the same way that the people of
Palestine have suffered that fate. They seek to make our country into a tower of
Babel in which they will occupy the top floors.

Not only are Americans on the road to oblivion from immigration, but so are our
brethren across Europe. Indeed, many nations are under the Jewish Supremacist
drive toward globalization, and the destruction of any sort of ethnic or
national pride and cohesiveness that could pose a threat to their hegemony. They
seek to remake the world into an unremarkable mass of atomistic, deracinated
individuals incapable of collective resistance.

If we remain silent in this critical time in our people?s history, our people
will be extinguished and silent forever.

This maxim is not only true for Europeans and Americans, but for all the peoples
of the Earth.


References

869. Smith, Drew L. (1971). The Legacy Of The Melting Pot. North Quincy,
Massachusetts. Christopher Publishing House
870. Congressional Record, April 12, 1924. 6,265-6,266.
871. Ross, E. A. (1914). The Old World And The New: The Significance Of Past And
Present Immigration To The American People. New York: The Century Co. p.144..
872. Congressional Record, April 12, 1924. 6,272.
873. Congressional Record, April 23, 1952. 2,285.
874. Joint Hearings Before The Subcommittees Of The Committees On The Judiciary,
82nd Congress, First Session,
On S. 716, H. R. 2379, And H. R. 2816. March 6April 9, 1951. 563
875. Congressional Record, April 23, 1952. 4,320.
876. Javits, J (1951) Let?s Open Our Gates New York Times Magazine July 8. p.8,
33.
877. Congress Weekly. (1956). Editorial of February 20. p.3
878. Cohen, N. W. (1972). Not Free To Desist: The American Jewish Committee
1906-1966. Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society Of America.
879. Ibid. p.342.
880. Sachar, H. (1992). A History Of Jews In America. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
881. Ibid. p.427.
882. MacDonald, K. B. (1994). A People That Shall Dwell Alone: Judaism As A
Group Evolutionary Strategy. Westport, Connecticut: Praeger.
883. MacDonald, K. B. (1998). Separation And Its Discontents: Toward An
Evolutionary Theory Of Anti-Semitism. Westport, Connecticut: Praeger.
884. Silberman, C. E. (1985). A Certain people: American Jews and Their Lives
Today. New York: Summit Books.
885. Higham , J. (1984). Send These To Me: Immigrants In Urban America.
Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
886. Bennett, M. T. (1963). American Immigration Policies: A History.
Washington, DC: Public Affairs Press. p.181.
887. A. M. Rosenthal. (1992). New York Times. December 9.
888. A. M. Rosenthal. (1992). New York Times. December 9.
889. Jewish Bulletin. (1993). July. 23.
890. Jewish Bulletin. (1993). Feb. 19.

Source :
http://www.davidduke.com/general/my-awakening-chapter-24-the-jewish-role-in-immigration_2518.html

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

You or someone using your email adress is currently subscribed to Lawrence
Auster''s
Newletter. If you wish to unsubscribe from our mailing list, please let us know
by calling to 1 212 865 1284

Thanks,

Lawrence Auster,
238 W 101 St Apt. 3B
New York, NY  10025
Contact : lawrence.auster at att.net
-------------------------------------