Archive for November, 2008

Bill White pleads not guilty to making juror threats

We’ve covered Bill White before, as well as how our government is suppressing (not “oppressing”) radicals from far left to far right as a means of maintaining order. Here’s more information about Bill White:

Neo-Nazi William “Bill” White pleaded not guilty this morning to soliciting harm against a juror who presided in the trial of white supremacist Matt Hale.

The FBI shut down the Web site shortly before arresting White in late October. White, 31, of Roanoke, Va. is accused of using the Web site to solicit another person to injure the foreperson of the jury that convicted Hale in 2004.

White posted the home address and phone numbers for the juror on Sept. 11.

“This case is going to be the United States versus the First Amendment,” White’s lawyer Nishay Shanan said today. “This case is all about this First Amendment rights” and the government’s efforts to quiet White.

Sun Times

It will be interesting to see what happens to Bill White, Sherman Austin and Pamely Ferdin shake out. Is the government acknowledging our civilization’s decline by sitting down hard on dissenters who might enact change, instead of the usual moonbats and boneheads?

Comments

Texian Republic Urges Texas Secession from USA

There’s been a lot of interest in secession since this election. After 2004, liberal places like Vermont and New Hampshire wanted to pull away. After 2008, conservative places are wanting to secede. It’s as if the recognition that liberal and conservative are incompatible has come home to roost, and the result is a desire for states to have autonomy under a confederacy that provides for their defense.

Texas was placed into dormancy not lawfully annexed. The Nation has always been there and has ?never ceded to any foreign Nation. Therefore since it never ceded itself it cannot un-secede. It does not need to because anything after 1845 was fraud anyway. “Texan” is a
Corporate State Citizen without any rights they only have privileges. “Texians,” however, are citizens with full rights and are citizens of a Nation. See attached article explaining the difference. For example a Canadian is a citizen of Canada a foreign Nation. When you add the “i” in the word it is signifying an international individual of a certain Nation.

We need to get the word out to as many Texians as possible. The republic of Texas Congress has already served our Charter to the Texas Secretary of State in Austin and are in the process of serving other documents, effectively taking control of our Nation of Texas again. As the article explains, we do not have to go through the process of secession because we were never legally annexed.

Our next Congressional Meeting will be held on December 13th. We always announce the date, time and place on our website. All Texian citizens are welcome to attend our meetings.

Texas Republic

The following documents were included:

What is a Texian?

Annexation of Texas

Self-Responsibility

Comments

The Case of Sherman Austin

As reported here about Bill White and Pamelyn Ferdin, we’ve seen an increase in government shutting down loud voices publishing useful information that can be employed against people responsible for certain decisions.

This is interesting to us at Extreme Politics because it’s both smart politics and potentially a sign of instability. It’s good politics because power waits for no one; if you do not act against troublemakers, they will get bolder with each generation and soon present a real threat. On the other hand, if your nation has too many people pulling in too many directions, all of those directions will manifest as extreme movements at some point.

Though only a teenager, Sherman Austin was still quite capable of communicating his politically progressive ideas. After all, he was raised in Los Angeles by his mother, Jennifer, to feel free to speak his mind about any issues of the day. In January 2002, about 25 heavily armed FBI agents raided the Austin home, ransacking it while interrogating the terrified teenager for over five hours. The FBI seized the whiz kid’s network of computers in order to take down his rabble-rousing website, accusing him of disseminating bomb-making information.

{ snip }

Austin was prosecuted under a 1997 law sponsored by Senator Dianne Feinstein that makes it illegal to distribute information related to explosives with the intent to use that information in a “federal crime of violence.”

{ snip }

And when he gets out of prison next year, he will be banned from associating with anyone who wants to “change the government in any way.” Sherman Austin was arrested over 18 months ago. Federal officials charged that Austin had illegally distributed information about how to build Molotov cocktails and “Drano bombs” on his web site.

InfoShop

You might also want to visit Sherman’s Website, Raise the Fist

We’re mostly posting about Sherman Austin to show that indeed, the federal government appears to be applying this dictum uniformly: if you post information about decision-makers, especially in conjunction with exhorts to act and/or information about means to do so, they’re going to come down on you hard, because they don’t want dissidents of any stripe to think the ground is soft enough to plant those seeds.

It will be interesting to watch as government increasingly tries to restrict these types of extremists, since as pluralism increases, so does a tendency toward extremism.

Comments (1)

Animal Activist Arrested For Publishing Personal Info

A judge Thursday found that Pamelyn Ferdin violated an injunction barring the harassment of University of California, Los Angeles faculty members who do research on animals.

She demonstrated outside the researchers’ homes and distributed fliers that included their photographs, home addresses and phone numbers.

Ferdin faces up to five days in jail and a $1,000 fine. She says she has “every right to hand out the leaflets” and plans to appeal.

AP

Reminds me of what happened to a far-right activist.

Could it be a crackdown on dissent in general? More likely, it’s a fear of dissenters who publish personal information. There’s too many citizens for law enforcement to keep up, and they’re terrified of people they aren’t watching who might do something.

Comments

Post-Racial Politics and the Left

The recent passage of California’s Proposition 8 has exposed some of the latent racism of many within the LGBT community—instigated in part by many in the e-telligentsia such as revisionist Andrew Sullivan and sex advisor turned sociologist Dan Savage. Unfortunately the “blame the blacks” meme is being commonly accepted by some so-called “progressive” gay activists. A number of Rod 2.0 and Jasmyne Cannick readers report being subjected to taunts, threats and racist abuse at last night’s marriage equality rally in Los Angeles.

Geoffrey, a student at UCLA and regular Rod 2.0 reader, joined the massive protest outside the Temple of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Westwood. Geoffrey was called the n-word at least twice.

It was like being at a klan rally except the klansmen were wearing Abercrombie polos and Birkenstocks. YOU NIGGER, one man shouted at men. If your people want to call me a FAGGOT, I will call you a nigger. Someone else said same thing to me on the next block near the temple…me and my friend were walking, he is also gay but Korean, and a young WeHo clone said after last night the niggers better not come to West Hollywood if they knew what was BEST for them.

{ snip }

A young lesbian couple with mohawks and Obama buttons joined the shouting and said there were “very disappointed with black people” and “how could we” after the Obama victory. This was stupid for them to single us out because we were carrying those blue NO ON PROP 8 signs! I pointed that out and the one of the older men said it didn’t matter because “most black people hated gays” and he was “wrong” to think we had compassion.

Rod 2.0 via Pam’s House Blend via Gateway Pundit

Pam’s comment sticks with me:

You could see this coming, and this is what I’m talking about when you ignore the elephant in the room.

No nation in history has been able to ignore ethnicity, and we haven’t yet come across a case of successful pluralism/multiculturalism/multiethnicism.

Americans want to vote this problem away, which contributes to the successes of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama in the polls. It will be interesting to see how this develops.

As an observer, I hope that politics does not decline into racial epithets, because that obscures discussion of the real issues.

Comments

British Unions Want to Ban Nationalists

Trade unions want the right under UK law to expel British National Party activists – and deny them membership – as part of Labour plans to check the electoral advance of the far right.

Labour backbenchers, supported by all the biggest unions, will unveil the plan on Tuesday when they put forward an amendment to the Employment Bill that would allow them to ban racists. The proposal – labelled ‘Stalinist’ by the BNP – comes amid concern that it could win as many as three seats in next year’s European Parliament elections and make strong gains in council elections.

Labour MPs, many of whom feel threatened by the BNP’s advances in their constituencies, are concerned that the party is encouraging activists to infiltrate unions in order to spread subversive, racist messages in the workplace.

The Guardian

Looks like the far right is stirring up the UK, which wouldn’t happen unless there was some appeal to the electorate.

Comments

The Far Right in Japan

Japan was “snared in a trap that was very carefully laid by the United States in order to draw Japan into a war,” he writes. “Roosevelt had become president on his public pledge not to go to war, so in order to start a war between the United States and Japan, it had to appear that Japan took the first shot. Japan was caught in Roosevelt’s trap and carried out the attack on Pearl Harbor.”

Japan has struggled to convince Asian critics – and victims – of its contrition because of a strong nationalist presence in the Japanese government. Last year, a group of nationalist lawmakers from the ruling Liberal Democratic Party angered China by saying the death toll in the Rape of Nanking was grossly inflated.

Gen. Tamogami’s essay won a writing competition organized by a hotel and condominium developer, Apa Group, which published the article.

Globe and Mail

I did a little research and found that it’s not just far-right Japanese generals who think this:

In the late nineteenth century, Japan’s economy began to grow and to industrialize rapidly. Because Japan has few natural resources, many of the burgeoning industries had to rely on imported raw materials, such as coal, iron ore or steel scrap, tin, copper, bauxite, rubber, and petroleum. Without access to such imports, many of which came from the United States or from European colonies in southeast Asia, Japan’s industrial economy would have ground to a halt. By engaging in international trade, however, the Japanese had built a moderately advanced industrial economy by 1941.

{ snip }

When Franklin D. Roosevelt became president in 1933, the U.S. government fell under the control of a man who disliked the Japanese and harbored a romantic affection for the Chinese because, some writers have speculated, Roosevelt’s ancestors had made money in the China trade.[1] Roosevelt also disliked the Germans (and of course Adolf Hitler), and he tended to favor the British in his personal relations and in world affairs. He did not pay much attention to foreign policy, however, until his New Deal began to peter out in 1937.

{ snip }

When Germany began to rearm and to seek Lebensraum aggressively in the late 1930s, the Roosevelt administration cooperated closely with the British and the French in measures to oppose German expansion. After World War II commenced in 1939, this U.S. assistance grew ever greater and included such measures as the so-called destroyer deal and the deceptively named Lend-Lease program. In anticipation of U.S. entry into the war, British and U.S. military staffs secretly formulated plans for joint operations. U.S. forces sought to create a war-justifying incident by cooperating with the British navy in attacks on German U-boats in the north Atlantic, but Hitler refused to take the bait, thus denying Roosevelt the pretext he craved for making the United States a full-fledged, declared belligerent—an end that the great majority of Americans opposed.

{ snip }

Accordingly, the Roosevelt administration, while curtly dismissing Japanese diplomatic overtures to harmonize relations, imposed a series of increasingly stringent economic sanctions on Japan. In 1939 the United States terminated the 1911 commercial treaty with Japan. “On July 2, 1940, Roosevelt signed the Export Control Act, authorizing the President to license or prohibit the export of essential defense materials.” Under this authority, “[o]n July 31, exports of aviation motor fuels and lubricants and No. 1 heavy melting iron and steel scrap were restricted.” Next, in a move aimed at Japan, Roosevelt slapped an embargo, effective October 16, “on all exports of scrap iron and steel to destinations other than Britain and the nations of the Western Hemisphere.” Finally, on July 26, 1941, Roosevelt “froze Japanese assets in the United States, thus bringing commercial relations between the nations to an effective end. One week later Roosevelt embargoed the export of such grades of oil as still were in commercial flow to Japan.”[2] The British and the Dutch followed suit, embargoing exports to Japan from their colonies in southeast Asia.

{ snip }

Because American cryptographers had also broken the Japanese naval code, the leaders in Washington knew as well that Japan’s “measures” would include an attack on Pearl Harbor.[4] Yet they withheld this critical information from the commanders in Hawaii, who might have headed off the attack or prepared themselves to defend against it. That Roosevelt and his chieftains did not ring the tocsin makes perfect sense: after all, the impending attack constituted precisely what they had been seeking for a long time.

The Freeman

Economic warfare was used to provoke outright warfare, which allowed the USA to appear as the injured party even though its passive aggression had provoked the crisis.

Comments