Barbarians & Greed – Revilo P. Oliver

by Revilo P. Oliver – Liberty Bell, October 1989

circumcision-of-jesus-800x445

In the August and September issues I commented rather sardonically on the recent appearance of two periodicals, each of which claims to be the legitimate continuation of the Truth Seeker while repudiating the principles on which its editorial policy was long based. I therefore hasten to report that the Truth Seeker which is published from P.O. Box 2832 in San Diego, California, has given proof of a rational courage that deserves recognition and sincere commendation.

Its issue for July-August 1989 is entirely devoted to “crimes of genital mutilation,” and it has dared to offend the aliens who now control the United States. The crime which concerns us is, of course, the barbaric and disgusting rite of circumcision, which is ably discussed in Nicholas Carter’s Routine Circumcision, the Tragic Myth (London, Londinium Press, 1979).

A section of the periodical is devoted to the circumcision of females (clitoridectomy and even more drastic forms of sexual mutilation), which is practised by the savage Congoids and Australoids and some Semitic tribes as a counterpart of male circumcision.(1) The details, which are often suppressed by pudibund ethnologists, will shock many naive readers, but are interesting to us only as evidence of the irremediable savagery of savages, although “do-gooders” will doubtless feel their morbid itch to filch part of the income of the stupid tax-payers to waste on sentimental folly.

(footnote 1. Although the Christians’ venerated Jew-Book, of which the oldest portions were written in the late sixth century B.C., contains no certain reference to the sexual mutilation of females, it was probably practised by the barbarians earlier and may have been practised as late as the Tenth Century A.D., when it was denounced by a rabbi because it scandalized the goyim (although it is now argued that he cannot have meant what he said). Cf. Edward Masters, Erotica Judaica (New York, Julian Press, 1967), pp. 27-29. It evidently is not part of the degradation routinely inflicted on Jewesses today.)

Several articles deal with the sexual mutilation of males by barbarians and Christians. I note especially the one by Gerald A. Larue; it is a pleasure to read an article by a man who knows when the text of the Septuagint is to be preferred to the Hebrew text, which was revised by the Masoretes, and who sees that while the early Christians naturally insisted on circumcision, Paul and Jews like him realized that their poisonous superstition could not be peddled to even the dregs of the population of the Roman Empire so long as it required a sexual mutilation to which no sane man of the less barbarous races would submit.

The practice of sexual and other mutilations (e.g., deformation of skulls by strapping the heads of infants between boards) doubtless arose in the fetid mass of the innately savage races, whence it spread, for reasons no sane man can imagine, to Hamitic and some Semitic peoples. As everyone knows, it had become normal among the mongrelized Egyptians when Herodotus observed them, late in the long history of that country. If we can rely on the tales incorporated in the “Old Testament” when it was put together, the Jews derived it (like their tribal god, the Yah whom they took from a Canaanite tribe) from other barbarians. What is noteworthy is that the two races that are capable of high civilization, the Aryans and the Mongolians, must have felt an instinctive repulsion from the obscenely insane custom, for there is no slightest trace of it in their oldest records.

When Aryans became infatuated by the cleverly adapted Jewish superstition, their natural abhorrence of the disgusting practice was checked by the notion that it was practised by the barbarians who had been, and perhaps still were, the pets of the ferocious deity they worshipped. They thus reluctantly tolerated the odious barbarians in their midst, but it is significant that although the Jews have long had great, though partly surreptitious, power in Europe and now control it, it is only in the United States that they found Aryans so culturally (and perhaps biologically) depleted that they could be persuaded to mutilate their own children and thus made it easy for Jews to conceal their race, whenever that is expedient.

Several articles deal with the psychic malformation of infants who have been subjected to the sadistic cruelty of circumcision, and add a little to Chapters VIII and X of Mr. Carter’s book. Infants are not fully conscious, since only the lembic part of their brain is operating and the neo-cortex will develop only slowly in the following years, but it is surely obvious from the effects of painful abuse on other mammals that the savage mutilation of infants must produce a shock from which the victim will never recover, although he will have no conscious recollection of it.

Several articles expose the foolish pretenses by which even educated men have tried to justify the atrocious custom as medically or morally justified. It is likely that in the Nineteenth Century the fictitious claims were partly motivated by a reluctance to recognize the barbarity of the disgusting rite to which, according to the “New Testament,” one-third of the Christians’ god was subjected in his terrestrial infancy.(2)

(footnote 2. Cf. the insane Jewish boast that “Great is circumcision, since but for it heaven and earth would not endure…. So great is circumcision that but for it the Holy One [i.e., Yahweh]…would not have created the universe,” quoted from the Talmud by Masters, loc. cit.)

Americans began to mutilate their male children only after the medical profession had been Judaized by Fishbein, who may have been sent to this country for that purpose, where his success was virtually guaranteed by the Americans’ cherished social disease, “democracy,” which reduces all social values to money or the current substitute for it. Medical men could not doubt the indisputable benefits of a rite by which they could make fifty bucks with a single clip. They talked, of course, about hygiene or repression of precocious sexuality or whatever the boobs were ready to believe, since it would have been tactless to mention the transcendental therapy of fifty bucks. And, no doubt, the assiduous propaganda carried on by their medical associations convinced many of them that there must be some physiological justification of the quickie surgery. Of course, a few infants do not survive the operation or are permanently crippled by its consequences (many instances cited and illustrated in the Truth Seeker), but the certain benefits outweighed the occasional risks–or did so until juries began to return large verdicts in malpractice suits.

Most readers will be astonished to discover, on page 51 of the periodical, that the California Medical Association, doubtless dominated by Sheenies, has become so brazen in its malice and greed that it officially claims that the sexual mutilation of male children serves to prevent syphilis, gonorrhoea, and other diseases of which the aetiology is well-known even to persons who have no medical knowledge at all.

The rabbi of a “Humanistic Jewish Congregation,” quoted on page 18 of the Truth Seeker, opines that the mutilation of male infants serves as a prophylactic against “AIDS,” and I think that Dr. Martin S. Alschul is right when he predicts (p.45) that this absurd claim will be taken up by Jews and venal physicians of other races who have a vested interest in perpetuating outrageous cruelty to newborn children. It will be particularly absurd because there is considerable evidence that a greatly disproportionate number of Jews have died and are dying from the African Plague, for which they evidently have a strong diathesis.

What makes this issue of the Truth Seeker so very remarkable is that the periodical is sponsoring (p.54) petitions for legislation by the various state legislatures that would make the barbaric rite a crime, a felony punishable by imprisonment and a fixed fine of $100,000, to be put in trust for the benefit of the mutilated child. An exception is made for the rare instances in which children are born with malformation that makes surgery necessary, but there is no exception on religious grounds. The protection of the law is extended to Jewish children.

I wonder whether the editors can have been fully aware of the risk they have taken. It is true that it would not be feasible to dynamite a post-office box, but they have an office and residences that can be discovered by the terrorists who destroyed the offices of the Institute for Historical Review by arson and dynamited the homes of several insubordinate goyim.

Aryans have in the past tried to suppress the revolting practices of the barbarians, but without success. In the second century B.C., the Seleucid monarch, Antiochus IV Epiphanes, forbade the sexual mutilation of children, but the Kikes in Palestine revolted and the colonies they had planted in all the nations of the civilized world abetted their fellow tribesmen, making particular use of the Romans whom they had cozened with professions of friendship and mutual interests, and Antiochus, who had intended to deal effectively with the infestation of his territory, turned eastward to deal with revolts in that part of his empire, leaving his civilizing work unfinished.

Although the Roman Emperor, Hadrian, tried hard to conciliate the Jews in the early part of his reign, he finally realized that nothing could abate the malice of the barbarians. He made no exception for them when he forbade castration and circumcision throughout the Empire. After his legions, in A.D. 135, suppressed the revolt let by a Jewish christ who called himself Bar-Kokhba, he converted Jerusalem into a civilized town, Colonia Aelia Capitolina, and forbade Jews to reside in it (though not, of course, in the rest of Palestine). When he died, three years later, his successor, the mild Antoninus Pius, relaxed the wholesome legislation, vainly hoping to conciliate the unappeasable hostes generis humani, but, of course, they conspired against him and he had to deal with another revolt.

So far as I can recall at the moment, Septimius Severus, who was not even a Roman but was of Punic or Berber stock from North Africa, was the last Roman Emperor (193-211) who tried to prohibit the obscene rite by which Jews were made “sons of the Covenant” with old Yahweh, who would help them take possession of the whole world.

No one has succeeded in solving the Jewish problem, not even prudent Roman Emperors, who had virtually unlimited authority and loyal legions to enforce it. It will be interesting to see what happens to the audacious editors who have now challenged the world’s wily and triumphant parasites.

Revilo P. Oliver quote about the Middle Ages

Another great hoax is the endless whining by the Jews that they were “persecuted” during the Middle Ages, when the Church gave them a virtual monopoly of usury, sorcery, and international trade; when they spun financial webs about kings and noblemen and most rulers were attended by skilled Jewish physicians, always spies and potentially executioners; when the Jews exercised such political, intellectual, and economic power that, as Bernard S. Bachrach has shown in his Early Medieval Jewish Policy in Western Europe (University of Minnesota, 1977), out of the 98 rulers whose policies he examines in detail, 88 (including Charlemagne) had to pursue pro-Jewish policies, while the ten who attempted to oppose the aliens in their domains went down to failure in one way or another; when the Jews could usually count on royal or ecclesiastical protection whenever their depredations excited local resentment so strong that it became violent; when even the famous and belated expulsion of Jews from England and Spain overlooked those who thought it worth while to have themselves sprinkled with holy water; and when the Church itself was a great ladder by which marranos climbed to power and wealth.

– REVILO P. OLIVER, ‘WESTERN MAN MUST ASSERT HIMSELF OR PERISH’, 1979

Man a Meat-Eater – William Pierce

by William Luther Pierce [from Attack! Issue No. 3, 1971]

dailybread

Ancient man, according to [recent studies by U.C.L.A. anthropologist R.D.] McCracken, was a healthier animal than modern man — at least where his eating habits are concerned. Before the advent of agriculture, a bare 10 millennia ago, man lived on a diet of fish, game, edible roots and berries, and fruit. This was his diet during a period of millions of years-many thousands of millennia — as he evolved from his subhuman primate ancestors.

Thus, his body chemistry had ample opportunity, through the slow process of mutation and natural selection, to adapt itself perfectly to this diet.

Then, almost overnight on the evolutionary time scale, man’s diet underwent a radical change. Instead of meat and fruit, cereal grains — the produce of agriculture — became his staple.

And this change, says McCracken, played havoc with man’s body chemistry: “The carbohydrates, or starches, are an unnatural diet for him.”

McCracken traced the rise in prevalence of a long list of degenerative diseases, including heart disease, stroke, schizophrenia, alcoholism, and some forms of diabetes and cancer, to man’s increasing ingestion of grains and other high-carbohydrate foods — such as sugar.

“Two hundred years ago the per-capita consumption of sugar in England was about 7 1/2 pounds a year,” he said. “Today it is 120 pounds.”

He pointed out that it is precisely during the last century or so that almost all the degenerative diseases have assumed such devastating importance in the morbidity and mortality statistics.

It is comforting to think that we now have scientific backing for our vague and undefined feeling that the highly artificial nature of modern man’s selection of edibles is somehow “wrong.”

Revilo P. Oliver on Islam

by Revilo P. Oliver [excerpts from Liberty Bell, 1979-1998]

ReviloOliver2ISLAM, LIKE CHRISTIANITY, is essentially a Jewish cult for goyim. Most of the Koran (Qur’án, “the statements” (i.e., of God to Mahomet) probably was composed by Mahomet after his Hegira, which took place in 622. The Babylonian Talmud was probably first collected in the Sixth Century and much of that heap of ordure is of a much later date, although naturally with forged pretension to great antiquity. It sprang, of course, out of the festering mentality of the Jews, and while it is most unlikely that any part of the Talmud as such could have been known to the Jews in Arabia who influenced Mahomet, they naturally had the mentality of their race, so it is not remarkable that there are two or three passages in the Koran that correspond more or less closely to passages in the Talmud.

It is true that Mahomet claimed to be the successor of the Jewish Jesus, whom he, like the Christians, regarded as not having been a christ in the strict sense of that word (i.e., a divinely appointed king to lead the Jews to dominion over the whole world), but as a Saviour who, like Zarathustra, could bestow a pleasant immortality on anyone, regardless of race, who believed the right dogmas while keeping his reason in abeyance.

Direct influence of the Talmud on the Koran is excluded because the Talmud throughout shows a hostility to the Jesus of the “New Testament” and to his successors, including Bar-Kokhba, because those christs didn’t get any effective butchering of Aryans under way. Islam is strictly comparable to the many Christian sects, e.g., the Huggletonians, the Shakers, the Mormons, the Anabaptists of Leyden, the Elect of Shiloh (followers of Joanna Southcott), et al., which gave their Jesus a divinely appointed successor or coadjutor. The story of Mahomet was modelled on the Christian legend: a virgin birth is, of course, de rigeur for all Saviours, but much less common is a claim that the Saviour’s mother remained a virgin after parturition, as is claimed for Mary in the Gospel of James and other Christian gospels and is claimed for Fatimah (Mahomet’s mother) in the Moslem tradition.

It is highly probable (see, e.g., H. W. F. Saggs, Babylonian Civilisation, London, 1962; reprinted as The Greatness that was Babylon, New York, 1968) that in the first part of the sixth century B.C. the Jews were established in possession of the strategic oases that controlled the trade-routes in the Arabian Peninsula by the last king of Babylon, Nabonidus, whom, in keeping with their racial instincts, they repaid by stabbing him in the back, exciting subversion in his kingdom and finally betraying Babylon to the armies of Cyrus the Great. Cyrus was the only goy whom they tried to cozen by saluting him as their christ, and it was probably through such flattery as much as from the bargain they doubtless struck with Cyrus before betraying the Babylonians to him that they were given privileged status in the Persian Empire. The Bible and Josephus tell us how a caravan of rich Jews, their chariots laden with gold and silver while their hundreds of goy slaves trudged along behind, set out from Babylon to take possession of Jerusalem and start exploiting the natives and kicking them around, while the majority of the ‘chosen’ stayed in Babylon to continue eating on the Babylonians whom they had betrayed. When the Persians took Egypt, their protection was extended to the hordes of Jews who were parasites on the Egyptian natives.

The Arabian Peninsula was lousy with Jews in the time of Mahomet; they fostered his new religion at first, just as they promoted Christianity in the decaying Roman Empire, and they doubtless made suggestions that Mahomet adopted, but they conspired against him when they found that he was less than docile. There is a succinct account in Sir Richard Burton’s Narrative of a Pilgrimage to Al-Medinah & Meccah, which is now available in a Dover reprint. The Moslems, like some Christian sects, were more or less hostile to Jews in theory, though not in practice, and there were almost no professed Jews left in the Holy Cities when Burton visited them (although there doubtless were Jews who had taken Arabic names and professed Islam to disguise themselves, just as among us they take Aryan names and simulate our culture in public), but in general, Islam, like Christianity, guaranteed the Jews immunity in return for small contributions as tax.

Most Christian sects, however, are overtly proletarian and “peace-loving,” deprecating violence except when they run amok in a holy war and enjoy butchering “heretics” for the profit of the Jews. Islam, however, was less hypocritical and a holy war (jihád) is one of the cardinal articles of its faith (except in a few minor and “heretical” sects that arose long after the time of Mahomet). That was the secret of its success. The new religion was a means of uniting the reciprocally hostile tribes of Arabia and launching them on a programme of world conquest that was phenomenally successful so long as the Arabs retained their racial vitality. For example, they virtually owned almost all of India after 1000 A.D. and until the British conquest, and they conquered Spain and the southern part of France, although they were gradually driven out of Europe, since at that time our race was less degenerate and had not lost its will to live.

Islam, like Christianity, served the Jews’ purposes by inculcating superstitions about the equality of races, teaching that all anthropoids that believed in a religious rigmarole as an article of faith and avoided rational thought were equal and vastly superior to persons, whatever their race, who held other superstitions or, what was much worse, did not have delusions about the real world. The poor Arabs took that nonsense seriously (God had said it, hadn’t he, in a confab with Mahomet?), and were so thoroughly mongrelized that today the only real Arabs, indeed, the only real Semites, are to be found in Saudi Arabia, where some of the tribes stayed home and thus escaped much of the hybridization that destroyed the Arabs in the lands they conquered. It is possible, of course, that an Arab could be found here and there in the Islamic countries that the press calls “Arab” because one or another dialect of Arabic is spoken there (Egypt, Iraq, Syria, etc.), but the population of those countries is a mass of mongrels.

There is one conspicuous difference between Islam and Christianity in their dysgenic effects, equally pleasing to Jews. With the exception of some early Christian sects that were exterminated when the Fathers of the Church wormed their way to power and could start killing their competitors, Christianity, during the greater part of its history, enforced celibacy and homosexuality on a fairly large part of our race, including some of its most intelligent members, through the priesthood and monasticism, and broke up families and family property by prohibiting marriages between even fairly distant relatives. Islam, on the other hand, ordained polygyny and encouraged Moslems to fill their harems, and engender children by women of all different races; that is why the Arabic stock was diluted and liquidated so much more quickly than our own.

There is a considerable tendency toward what is called ‘ghazism,’ i.e., the faith that True Believers must exterminate the adherents of other cults, who are the damnable and damned servants of Iblis [see: Satan in Islam].

There is a sect of the Shí‘a (the Ismá‘íliyah) that holds that the seventh Imám was the last; they naturally split into sub-sects, and are now represented by various scattered groups, including, I am told, some now active in Lebanon. In their prime, in the Ninth and Tenth Centuries, however, they were a major power in Islam, having been organized as one of the world’s greatest secret conspiratorial societies by a certain ‘Abdulláh, the son of Maymún al-Qaddáh, an occultist who practiced in Jerusalem and is said to have been a “converted” Jew. ‘Abdulláh and his coadjutor, Qarmat, who gave his name to the sect, made the secret society, which much after served as a model for Weishaupt’s Illuminati, a conspiracy that aimed at the establishment of out-and-out Bolshevism and One World in which there would be no discrimination, since all races and all religions were equal, and all mankind should enjoy perfect brotherhood and equality (in servitude to the hidden Masters of the Conspiracy, of course). Being extremely righteous, they naturally promoted social goods with secret assassinations and open terrorism. They organized niggers to revolt against White people and massacre them for social justice. The Qarmathians were temporarily brought under control, except in Egypt, but their conspiracy, with its twin techniques of underground subversion and terrorism, was revived in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries, when it was known to the Western world as the Order of Assassins.

The exponential growth of the Black Muslims was the work of a talented mulatto named Elijah Poole, who gave himself half a dozen new names before 1930, when he settled on “Elijah Muhammed, Messenger of Allah, and Divine Leader of the Lost-Found Nation of Islam,” and took over the cult. He moved his holy household, including his twenty servants and his assortment of Cadillacs, from Detroit to Chicago, and began to train tough young niggers in paramilitary tactics. Here is a concise summary of the official cosmogonic doctrine:

I chiefly rely on the work of two educated mulattos who penetrated the “Lost-Found Nation” and reported their observations: Professor C. Eric Lincoln, The Black Muslims in America (Boston, Beacon Press, 1961); and Professor E.U. Essien-Udom, Black Nationalism (University of Chicago Press, 1962). See also the article by E.D. Benyon, “The Voodoo Cult….in Detroit,” in the American Journal of Sociology for 1937-38. I do not know how much of the official doctrine was already contained in the Supreme Ruler of the Universe’s enchiridion for niggers, which was entitled Teaching for the Lost-Found Nation of Islam in a Mathematical Way.

When, in accordance with the will of Allah, the earth was separated from the moon by an explosion in year 65,999,999,998,062 B.C., there appeared on the planet the Black Race, as black and perfect as God Himself. For almost sixty-six trillion years those perfect beings dwelt in perfect happiness, speaking Arabic and evidently leading the joyous and unfettered life now to be found in the jungles of the Congo.

The universal bliss was troubled, however, in 4707 B.C., when a “Black scientist” named Yakub determined to create, artificially, a race of debased and inferior creatures. He worked steadily for six hundred years, and finally, by “grafting” and “rigid birth control,” he produced the “blue-eyed devils,” i.e., White men, who are physically weak and totally evil. Note that Nordics are instinctively identified as the most hated race.

Allah, for purposes of his own, and intending the ultimate exaltation of his Chosen People, who are the only true human beings, permitted the white devils to interfere with nature and set up the nasty thing called civilization. (Note the adaptation of the Talmudic doctrine that only Yids are human.) He even permitted the vile “spooks” to dominate and enslave the Chosen People by devising the “devil-doctrine” called Christianity. He decreed, however, that the white swine were to rule the world for exactly six thousand years. Their time was up in 1914. But there are now enjoying a few “years of grace” until the Black Man can rise and exterminate them from the face of the earth and come into his own again.

Although this doctrine may seem implausible, even to well-trained American boobs, there can be no doubt about its inspirational message: exterminate the stupid white swine! Since the middle 1960s the Black Muslims have avoided publicity, although I seem to remember that one of them was chosen to open with prayer a fairly recent session of the Den of Thieves in the Capitol in Washington. For decades, the jewspapers have suppressed mention of the Muslims’ ideals, aspirations, and preparations to ride the Wave of the Future.

Adolf Hitler on feminism

[excerpts from Hitler’s Table Talk, 1941-1944]

I detest women who dabble in politics. And if their dabbling extends to military matters, it becomes utterly unendurable. Everything that entails combat is exclusively men’s business. There are so many other fields in which one must rely upon women. Organising a house, for example.

A girl’s object is, and should be, to get married. Rather than die as an old maid, it’s better for her to have a child without more ado! Nature doesn’t care the least bit whether, as a preliminary, the people concerned have paid a visit to the registrar. Nature wants a woman to be fertile. Many women go slightly off their heads when they don’t bear children. Everybody says, of a childless woman: “What a hysterical creature!” It’s a thousand times preferable that she should have a natural child, and thus a reason for existence.

Intelligence, in a woman, is not an essential thing. My mother, for example, would have cut a poor figure in the society of our cultivated women. She lived strictly for her husband and children. They were her entire universe. But she gave a son to Germany.

Satanism & overcoming addiction

Image result for drugs christianity

Addiction (to legal drugs) is the number one killer of modern man. Therefore any religion capable of looking modernity in the face and overcoming it must address the drug question more than adequately.

The bottom line is that when you have a lethal addiction to drugs, you aren’t actually doing what you want to. The libertarian argument simply holds no weight when applied to an addict’s “right to choose”.

That’s not to say we must necessarily support a drug war. The modern drug war is a Zionist / communist program from top to bottom. And I certainly don’t support waging war against people consuming the Satanic sacraments that have been used by our people for thousands of years. But we must internalize the fact that addiction to pharmaceuticals, alcohol, and tobacco is our number one killer.

People who constantly talk about their need to quit alcohol, quit smoking tobacco, quit taking pills, and yet the next day can be seen indulging their addiction are obviously not doing exactly as they please. But doing exactly as we please (as white males) is what Satanism is all about.

The reason the modern post-Christian white man struggles with addiction so is because he is robbed of the opportunity to dedicate himself to his own survival. He is told that dedicating himself to this world, to his own race, and to his own well-being, is a sin. Instead of surrounding himself with white comrades who expect him to be able to raise a kid and raise his fists, he surrounds himself with nihilists who have never given thought to having to raise a kid let alone hold their own in a racial war.

Addiction is an extension of the retreat from worldliness that began with our Christian upbringing. A Christian clergyman has just as many kids as a post-Christian nihilist does: none at all. A Christian clergyman is just as prepared for race war as a post-Christian nihilist is: not at all.

And so while superstitious Semitic authoritarianism may be enough to keep some people off drugs, they aren’t intelligent people. And the smarter among us deserve better answers to our questions about a rational approach to drugs.

1943 Nazi pamphlet ‘The Merry Hemp Primer’ explores the many uses of cannabis

I have already mentioned, on this blog, the fact that the Third Reich had no laws against marijuana whatsoever. What remained unknown to me until recently, however, was the fact that the Third Reich also produced a propaganda pamphlet in 1943 called  ‘Die Lustige Hanffibel‘ (‘The Merry Hemp Primer‘) filled with nothing but positive things to say about the plant. Reproduced below is the original pamphlet: