Ted Kennedy's Legacy: Genocidal Immigrationist

I wrote about Ted Kennedy's Legacy when his brain cancer was first announced in May of 2008. My opinion has only soured since. Please indulge me as I summarize his shameful legacy one more time, especially as our enemies at this moment are producing geysers of grief and love for their fallen hero.

From Wikipedia's Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 (AKA Hart-Celler Act):

During debate on the Senate floor, Kennedy, speaking of the effects of the act, said, "First, our cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually. Under the proposed bill, the present level of immigration remains substantially the same.... Secondly, the ethnic mix of this country will not be upset.... Contrary to the charges in some quarters, [the bill] will not inundate America with immigrants from any one country or area, or the most populated and deprived nations of Africa and Asia.... In the final analysis, the ethnic pattern of immigration under the proposed measure is not expected to change as sharply as the critics seem to think.... The bill will not flood our cities with immigrants. It will not upset the ethnic mix of our society. It will not relax the standards of admission. It will not cause American workers to lose their jobs."[2] The act's supporters not only claimed the law would not change America's ethnic makeup, but that such a change was not desirable.[1]

By equalizing immigration policies, the Act resulted in a flood of new immigration from non-European nations that changed the ethnic make-up of the United States.[3] Immigration doubled between 1965 and 1970 and doubled again between 1970 and 1990.[1]

From George Borjas' The Bush-Kennedy-McCain Sham(nesty):

Regarding the 1986 Immigration and Reform Control Act (the first amnesty of illegal immigrants), Senator Kennedy predicted: "This amnesty will give citizenship to only 1.1 to 1.3 million illegal aliens. We will secure the borders henceforth. We will never again bring forward another amnesty bill like this." The 1986 legislation, by the way, ended up granting amnesty to around 3 million illegal immigrants.

What follows now are amongst Kennedy's final, and in my opinion most significant, words on the subject of immigration, offered just over two years ago in the wake of the failure of the comprehensive amnesty bill he had worked hard to enact. This intemperate and deeply cynical outburst has been all but memory-holed by the press. From BizzyBlog's Bias in Coverage of Immigration-Bill Failure Extends to Protecting Ted ‘Gestapo’ Kennedy:

We know what they’re against, we don’t know what they’re for. Time and time again they tell us “We don’t like this provision, we don’t like that provision, we don’t want that part. Well they ought to be able to explain to the American people what they are for.

What are they going to do with the twelve and a half million who are undocumented here? Send them back? Send them back to countries around the world? More than $250 billion dollars, buses that would go from Los Angeles to New York and back again. Try and find them, develop a type of Gestapo here to seek out these people that are in the shadows. That’s their alternative?

HotAir provides video.

During the long arc of Kennedy's career as a rich, famous and increasingly powerful senator-for-life he dedicated a sizable portion of his fame and power to advocating nation-wrecking levels of legal immigration, though his good will extended even to tens of millions of illegal aliens who violated the liberal immigration laws he sponsored. A notable and consistent feature of his support for immigration was mendacity. It began with a denial of the negative impact immigration would likely have on us, the citizenry whose interests he was sworn to defend. His triumphant words in 1965 were in hindsight more prophesy than denial, for the future did unfold just as he promised it would not. The mendacity continued in 1986, two decades on, when he downplayed the horrible impact even though it was by then clear for all to see. It was in fact under the pretense of addressing this impact that he again made assertions later proven false. He again mouthed promises he made no effort to keep. The mendacity continued in 2007, another two decades on, the consequences of his handiwork now an order of magnitude larger than what he had promised would never happen again. His lies now concerned the impossibility of remedy and the negative impact any such remedy would have on the aliens. The interests of the citizenry no longer even rated lip service. He openly opposed us and cast aspersions on us.

For leaving a young woman to drown Kennedy appeared on nationwide television and apologized. For sinking our once orderly and prosperous nation, trapping 200 million Whites (and slipping) with 100 million non-Whites (and exploding), he never apologized. He went to the grave hating us.

If Kennedy had pursued medicine instead of politics we can imagine what might have happened. He might have shot his neighbor right after saying it was crazy for them to imagine he would do so. Then he might berate them for complaining about their pain while being wheeled into surgery, telling them not to worry, he'll fix it. Finally he might let them die on the operating table because, in his expert estimation, to remove the bullet would simply cause too much harm. No sorries and no worries. The next of kin will get the bill.

Then he'd go out and find another neighbor to "help". And another. And another. It would have been much better for most of us if Kennedy had gone this route. After only a few neighbors some cop or reporter would have started asking questions and his crime wave would have been stopped. What we got instead is far worse.

The next time you read about a crime committed by an alien, or the anchor baby of an alien, think about that. Remember Ted Kennedy. It's on his head. He did his best to open the door for them and keep them here.

Ted's brother Jack once called on America to put men on the moon, a quarter million miles away. Just because. And lo, with plenty of money and brainstorming and elbow grease men were there, less than a decade later. Playing golf. Ted in his turn, given an opportunity to right a wrong he helped create, argued instead that Americans should simply surrender and accept colonization by hostile, impoverished, uneducated aliens, because, we're to believe, he couldn't stomach the effort required to stop it.

In comparison to the trillions our corrupt politicians have since rushed to transfer from taxpayers to international financiers, Ted's scary $250B for deportation seems positively puny. Beside that, it would be spread broadly and domestically in pursuit of a goal the citizenry has actually expressed an interest in. It would be an investment which would pay large dividends in the form of savings on unemployment, healthcare, law enforcement, education, utilities and infrastructure, and much more. In contrast, the trillions dropped in financier laps have simply vanished. The credit that absolutely positively had to loosen? It didn't. Beyond preserving some undeserved bonuses it seems those trillions just got sucked right into the vacuum created by a decade or more of financial fraud and false profits. Plan B seems to be to give the country, and all of us, to China.

To hell with the money. It pales next to the genocide. Given the choice I would gladly put myself and my children on the hook for any amount to stop the immigration invasion, to send the ones already here home. As it happens I'm sure doing so would actually save money, which only makes the pain inflicted on us - the crowding, the crime, the violence, the political correctness - all the more senseless. Except it's not. It's genocide. We have what others want. We're in their way. That's the dynamic. You can see it in their furtive glare. At some point, as our numbers dwindle, order will break down. Look to Zimbabwe or South Africa to see where we're heading.

You may not think of immigration as genocide. I never used to. Even now I don't think it always was, or that it has to be. But recently I decided that the senseless flood being forced down our throats definitely is genocidal. It's obliterating who and what we are. Fast and forever.

Allow me to offer a few of the stepping stones that brought me to this conclusion.

"Whether you declare war or not, we are in a societal conflict" excerpts a report, published in December of 2007, less than six months after Kennedy's "gestapo" meltdown, on the hundreds of thousands of violent, criminal gangbangers fanning out across the US. Ted Kennedy was on their side. He wanted to make them citizens.

Pew Something Stinks describes how immigration has transformed the ethnic mix of this country. Anyone who knows anything about immigration knows this. Our corrupt politicians know we know it. In 1965 altering the mix was acknowledged, even by Kennedy, to be a bad idea. Today we're supposed to pretend it's a good thing, that we always wanted it to happen, otherwise we're evil "racists".

Genocidal Immigrationists is my first use of the phrase, prompted by the increasingly blatant sickening enthusiasm for nation-wrecking immigration in media and self-righteous jewish organizations, lobbying more zealously than ever for their immigrant friends. What seems insane is in truth only anti-White. It's time to wake up. Smell the genocide.

- - -

On Tuesday, 25 August 2009, Senator Edward Kennedy died, escaping the justice he so richly deserved. It is Kennedy's advocacy for genocidal immigration, especially after its ghastly impact was obvious, for which he should always be remembered. In ignominy. In infamy. Good riddance.

What Anti-Migrant Anti-Hornet Racism Tells Us

Yet another case of non-human biology providing a headline highlighting a similar, but suppressed, human reality.

Tourists warned as Asian hornets terrorise French:

Tourists are being warned to steer clear of Asian hornets that are colonising France, after swarms of the aggressive predators attacked seven people.

That's odd. The threat pales in comparison to the swarms of aggressive predatory alien muslim youths who have been permitted to colonize France and who pose a far more deadly threat, yet neither the authorities nor the media have issued correspondingly omnious warnings about that.

Odd also that even though all of the trouble-making Asian hornets were born and raised in France nobody has started calling them French hornets, nor do they pretend they can't or shouldn't notice any difference from the indigenous hornets. Curiously, the article also fails to emphasize that not all of the Asian hornets are trouble-makers. Nor does it assert that they are France's greatest strength, that France is a nation of insects, or that the undocumented migrant hornets are just coming to do the jobs French honeybees won't do.

Very, very strange.

"Never attempt to destroy an Asian hornet nest yourself but call on specialist organisations, as this species charges in a group as soon as it feels its nest is threatened."

Whoops. Another uncomfortable similarity, and another contrast. The human invaders also attack in groups, stirred to murderous riot by the flimsiest pretexts. But "specialist organisations" will only answer calls to destroy the nests of hornets.

As a knock-on effect of the invasive species, the European hornet has become more aggressive, due to a lack of food.

When European people, as opposed to hornets, respond similarly, the "knock-on effect" is that the government openly militates against the indigenous species, not the invasive species. In Britain, there's even an Asian human in charge of doing it. Labour says they will ease up on Muslim fanatics:

We shall be putting a renewed focus on resisting right-wing racist extremism. We cannot dismiss or underestimate the threat.

This typifies the genocidal official response all across the Eurosphere. For those of us who see this, we shall resist the reality-inverting "racist extremism" rhetoric used to pathologize our perfectly natural reactions to violent colonization. We cannot dismiss or underestimate the threat it poses.

More Fraud Hiding Behind Religion and Philanthropy

The news and commentary below could easily have been appended to Jewish Supremacists Bribing Politicians and Laundering Proceeds of Criminal Activity or Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them. Two weeks ago I really had no idea how common jewish fraud was. Now I find a simple news search for "rabbi" regularly turns up more.

Money-Laundering Rabbi Case in Los Angeles Echoes N.J. Scandal - Bloomberg.com:

In Los Angeles, U.S. prosecutors charged Naftali Tzi Weisz, grand rabbi of a Brooklyn-based Orthodox Jewish group, seven other people and five charities with a scheme to evade taxes through use of phony donations. Weisz and four other defendants are scheduled to plead guilty today.

The case may prove a window onto New Jersey’s scandal. Defendants in California were charged with tax fraud, an accusation not yet made in New Jersey, and prosecutors in Los Angeles have targeted 100 more co-conspirators. Later indictments in California also provided enhanced details of illegal methods and of people and banks involved.

“The 2007 charges were the beginning of a much larger case we’re investigating,” said Assistant U.S. Attorney Daniel O’Brien, who is overseeing the Los Angeles case.

The organization charged has worked with related religious groups “to move money internationally,” he said.

The window this scandal provides is onto the tip of an iceberg of jewish fraud. Here's how a jewish charity facilitated tax evasion:

Even after paying Spinka a 20 percent commission, a donor in a 30 percent tax bracket would come out ahead, keeping $80,000 of a $100,000 donation in cash and getting $30,000 because of the offset of the tax deduction.

NY-based rabbi pleads guilty in LA fraud case - San Jose Mercury News:

Naftali Tzi Weisz, 61, entered his plea to one count of conspiracy and could face up to five years in prison at his scheduled sentencing on Nov. 16.

Others who pleaded guilty to conspiracy charges were Yaacov Zeivald, 44; Yosef Nachum Naiman, 57; Alan Jay Friedman, 45; and Moshe Arie Lazar, 62, all of Los Angeles. They are scheduled to be sentenced in November.

Spinker Tzadick – Here is one of the best articles w/pictures! « Heimisheh Scandals, dated 18 months ago, has more details about the Spinka rabbi-criminal cabal:

While [assistant U.S. attorney in the major frauds section Daniel J.] O’Brien said he has documentation that the Spinka institutions took in about $750,000 through the scheme — then writing receipts for $8.7 million — in 2007 alone, the assistant U.S. attorney believes the fraud has been going on for decades: “I believe this goes on beyond living memory,” possibly for generations.

This is certainly not the first time an ultra-Orthodox sect has been accused of attempting to break the laws of the secular government — aramos, or schemes, were perpetrated over the centuries in the shtetls of Europe. In the last decade, arrests have occurred in religious communities in Brooklyn, Lakewood, N.J., and upstate New York.

However, this particular case has shocked Los Angeles’ ultra-Orthodox community, not only because Los Angeles had largely been exempt from such cases in the past, but also because some of the city’s prominent members have been charged as being at the center of the scheme.

As a result, the case has sparked a fierce debate about the type of behavior that is acceptable for observant people and what type of religious community Los Angeles would like to be. But there’s also debate about the laws of a moser, an informant, because one person who was not charged was the primary source of information for the federal case — though he allegedly started out as one of the perpetrators.

The article offers some samples of this "fierce debate" (my emphasis toward the end):

CRIME IS NOT SO BAD

“There are a million ways that religious institutions defraud the government,” said one Brooklyn accountant who asked that his name be withheld. However, it’s not just the Jews, he claimed, “churches do the same thing.” Churches and synagogues are exempt from filing tax returns — although many do — and the government usually does not audit unless it has probable cause. As a result, this can make fraud easier.

In the last decade or so, a number of Chasidic institutions on the East Coast have been charged with such crimes, including the 1997 case against the Skverer Hasidim in Rockland County, N.Y., where four men were found guilty of defrauding the government of millions of dollars in federal Pell Grants. But in the Orthodox community, many defended them, despite the crime, because the money was used to support needy yeshiva students.

“Nobody here owns a yacht,” a resident reportedly said, and the feeling then — as with many such institutional fraud cases — that if the money is used to help the community and not line someone’s pockets, it’s not so bad.

That, in fact, is a pervasive attitude these days in Brooklyn, where the Spinka case raised fewer eyebrows than in Los Angeles, because the attitude is everyone does something. This kind of discussion has been a hot topic on many Internet blogs that discuss the ultra-Orthodox community.

“The government are thieves, what gives them the right to take 40 percent to 50 percent of someone’s income? Anyone who can save yiddishe gelt from going down that toilet is doing a mitzvah,” one contributor wrote on the Vosizneias (Yiddish for “What Is News?”) blog.

The blog comments, though, seem to be about evenly divided between two camps: On one hand are those castigating the government or the bloggers posting the news for spreading gossip; on the other are those demanding that the community finally put a stop to criminal behavior.

One particularly poignant plea came from New York white-collar defense attorney Joel Cohen, in an essay published in 2006 titled, “Jewish Felons: The Problem of Criminality in Observant Communities.” Cohen described witnessing a disturbing rise in crime among Orthodox and Chasidic Jews.

“The problem in the observant community, however, is not merely occasional, nor does it often make headlines. Daily, in metropolises around the country, yarmulka-wearing criminal defendants appear before the bar of justice,” he wrote.

Some prisons — especially in New York, Los Angeles and Miami — have daily minyans, visiting rabbis, kosher food, classes and Shabbat meals, Cohen wrote. “The most common charge is fraud: against businessmen and run-of-the-mill citizens alike, most frequently involving victims outside of the Jewish community, against the government, against insurance carriers, against banking institutions, health care fraud, money-laundering and stock-swindling.”

Here's another criminal rabbi. Ex-Chicago rabbi indicted in tax-fraud case arrested in Israel -- chicagotribune.com:

A former Chicago rabbi and nine of his family members and associates have been indicted in connection with a tax-fraud ring that allegedly used the stolen identities of thousands of federal prisoners to file bogus tax returns.

Marvin Berkowitz, 62, who fled to Israel to avoid a tax fraud case in 2003, was arrested in Jerusalem on Sunday night, federal authorities said. Berkowitz allegedly recruited members of the conspiracy to travel to federal courthouses to gather information about prisoners to use in the scheme.

The ring, broken up by the IRS Criminal Investigation Division, submitted fraudulent documents using the stolen identities seeking $35 million, and caused $4 million in refunds to be issued to bank accounts it controlled, authorities said. Berkowitz then allegedly directed $800,000 to be paid to his family members.

It was unclear when Berkowitz might be returned to Chicago, where in the late 1980s he also was convicted of stealing documents from the U.S. attorney's office in yet another fraud case. He eventually was sentenced to 5 years in prison for that crime.

More criminal rabbis. Unorthodox-Jew A Critical View of Orthodox Judaism: Jewish Felons: The Problem of Criminality in Observant Communities:

There is no shortage of high-profile Jewish crime. Take the infamous New Square scandal, in which four Hassidim were convicted for defrauding the government of $11 million by setting up a fictitious yeshiva to receive federal student aid money. Or the case in Williamsburg, New York, in which the rabbi of a Jewish day school stole 6 million dollars from the Board of Education over several years by falsely identifying more than eighty individuals as school employees.

Here's some classic anti-anti-semitic apologia for jewish fraud. Z Magazine - Bernard Madoff - Wall Street swindler inadvertently strikes powerful blows for social justice? James Petras turns reality on its head in two separate ways:

Point number nine is that Madoff struck a severe blow against anti-Semites who claim that there is a "close-knit Jewish conspiracy to defraud the Gentiles," laying that canard to rest once and for all. Among Madoff's principle victims were his closest Jewish friends and colleagues, people who shared Seder meals and frequented the same upscale temples in Long Island and Palm Beach.

Madoff was discriminating in accepting clients, but it was on the basis of their wealth, not their national origin, race, religion, or sexual preference. He was very ecumenical and a strong backer of globalization as he defrauded the Anglo-Chinese bank HSBC of $1 billion, the Dutch arm of the Belgian bank Fortes of several billion, the Royal Bank of Scotland, the French bank BNP Paribas, the Spanish bank Banco Santander, and the Japanese Nomura of a total of $1.4 billion—not to mention hedge funds in London and the U.S., which have admitted holdings in Bernard Madoff Investment Securities.

Can't you just see Petras smiling smugly to himself and wiping his hands after writing "once and for all"?

First is the typical anti-anti-semitic canard that the long list of indictments and convictions of close-knit jewish conspiracies to defraud non-jews is a "canard" concocted by "anti-semites". Why would somebody attempt to so blatantly not just deny reality but invert it? For one thing it justifies seeing the prosecution and reporting of jewish crimes as "anti-semitic", which in turn allows talmudic scholars to rationalize that jewish crime is not really criminal.

Second is the patently false kneejerk assertion that the fraud of close-knit jewish conspiracies has nothing to do with jewishness. With the criminal rabbi cases I've cited the central role of jewish networking is crystal clear. In Madoff's case, his closest jewish friends and colleagues were generally the earliest ones in on the pyramid scheme, the contributions were relatively small and their payouts relatively early. Many knew or suspected what was going on, which is why they called it The Jewish Bond. The big international funds came later, bringing in largely non-jewish money (as opposed to "yiddishe gelt") which was paid out largely to earlier "investors", like Madoff and his closest jewish friends and colleagues. In the end Madoff kept his mouth shut and went to jail claiming only he knew. I'm sure the jews who lost money have names for what Madoff did. Moser isn't one of them. Madoff's real crime, according to the many very vocal jews who obviously don't think jewishness is irrelevant, is the supposed damage he did to jewish "philanthropy". There are similar laments from extremely self-conscious and thoroughly self-interested jews concerning their ever more numerous criminal rabbis.

A natural and healthy response from a secular government to the revelation of this pattern of fraud posing as religious philanthropy would be to subject all jewish charities to extra regulation and scrutiny. Such a response would undoubtedly be crimped if not completely stymied by the older, even stronger pattern of jews uniting to decry, pathologize and punish such normal, healthy responses as irrational jew-hate.

By continuing to treat each incident of jewish financial fraud as an independent case of religious philanthropy gone bad media and government both commit their own fraud. Whether motivated by sympathy, fealty, or fear the behavior is inexcusable, but not inexplicable. The government's duty to prosecute crime conflicts with it's special self-appointed "need to combat anti-Semitism". The government's drive to defend jewish interests is so strong that it manifests as anti-Whitism. This arises in part from the canard-inverting propaganda discussed above, in part from jewish lobbying, and as a result of jewish political contributions. It is reasonable to also suspect the kind of graft the syrian criminal rabbis are accused of using. When philanthropist-plutocrats talk, politicians listen.

The bottom line is that the more jews are convicted of grubbing too much too blatantly, the louder and more urgent the cries to criminalize "anti-semitism" become. Meanwhile, in contrast, jewish "philanthropy" continues unmolested. This is not at all a coincidence.

Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them

In The Culture of Deceit Edmund Connelly connects the dots, or more accurately, discusses the pointillist pattern arising from an abundance of dots: the syrian jewish rabbi-criminals, Goldman Sachs, Bernie Madoff, Simon Wiesenthal, Marc Rich, Ivan Boesky, Michael Milken, the Union Générale scandal in 1882, the Comptoire d’Escompte scandal in 1889, the Panama Canal scandal - "an immense labyrinth of financial manipulation and fraud, with [Jewish] Baron Jacques de Reinach right at the middle of it.", Hirsch Strousberg, and on and on, all the way back to Esther and Abraham.

Connelly writes:

In any case, my aim is to buttress my argument that deceit is a common aspect of Jewish behavior, and we should be mature enough to accept this, even without passing moral judgment.

To the extent there is a problem, it ultimately rests with us. After all, why do we again and again accept fraudulent Jewish behavior or stories that are obviously ludicrous? Consider those junk bonds scandals of twenty years ago, where Lindemann noted “an overwhelming preponderance of Jews — at least ninety percent was a widely accepted figure . . .” I now complete his quote by noting that the “clear correlation [between Jews and financial scandal] seemed to interest the broad American public scarcely at all, or at least it elicited few public expressions of anti-Semitic indignation, and overwhelmingly non-Jewish journalists and politicians skirted the issue.” Why? Fear of the Jews alone? My experience is that American non-Jews mostly willed themselves not to think about it.

He concludes:

I think the point is clear: Western man has been facing this kind of deception and manipulation for hundreds of years now. Yet today, unlike so often in the past, most Whites freeze like deer in the headlights of a car when confronted with evidence.

My accounts of Jewish perfidy do not constitute revelation; this information has been available since Biblical times and can be found now with no effort at all. Never before, however, did it seem to represent such a genocidal threat to Western man. Perhaps the only good news, as a blogger notes, is that “There is a tiny percentage of white people who have not inherited, and therefore do not possess, this maladaptive trait. The survival of the white race is now entirely dependent upon these few righteous Gentiles."

Connelly's indictment is thorough and well-founded. I find fault only in his willingness to blame the victim. The breadth and depth of jewish involvement in the scandals he mentions most certainly would constitute revelation to the vast majority of Whites - were we to ever hear the naked totality. Instead, as Connelley himself acknowledges, those confronted with evidence often freeze with fear. They never hear the totality. Why they react this way is no mystery - the consequences for "anti-semites" are well understood, even if only unconsciously. Nor is it their fault - the blame goes to our traitors and repressors.

Whites today face enemies as ruthless as they are powerful as they are numerous. Indeed we face a genocidal reality, not merely a threat. My guess is that more than a tiny percentage of Whites have inherited the "resist your own genocide" gene. What we lack isn't genetic, it's widespread exposure and recognition of our genocide.