During World War II, Townsville, Queensland, Australia was a crucial base for American and Australian campaigns in the Pacific, including the Battle of the Coral Sea. It remains an Australian military base today.
Though never reported to or by the American press, in May 1942 Townsville was also the site of one of the biggest troop uprising within the US military. The shootings and rioting were by American Negro soldiers.
And it was not the first or last such racial and armed conflict in Australia.
In April 1942 a large contingent of American Negro troops arrived in Townsville. These Negroes had been trained very minimally in military discipline or behavior. They were basically American laborers brought in to help build airfields around Townsville. As per strict US military order, all officers were White, although there were Negro non-commissioned officers. Negro troops were very rarely committed to actual combat. These soldiers were from the 96th Battalion, US Army Corps of Engineers and were stationed at a base on the western outskirts of Townsville. This base was known as "Kelso".
Shortly after arrival, 100 Negro troops created a racial conflict near their base and had to be rounded up by the US Marines using bayonets and loaded rifles.
In May 1942, racial tensions between the White officers and Negro troops escalated to the point where several Negro ringleaders decided to machine gun the tents of the White officers. Thousands of rounds were fired, the White officers returned fire and estimates up to 19 personnel were killed and dozens more seriously wounded. Negro soldiers rampaged from the camp, terrorizing surrounding Australian homes and at least one rape was reported. The overall siege lasted over 8 hours.
Fully armed Australian troops along with the Queensland Police and the Townsville Police were called in to roadblock the rioters from entering the city. The official accounts of these incidents are still in police archives.
The violence was subdued and many of the Negro rioters packed off to New Guinea.
Though kept completely secret by the Roosevelt administration, the whole affair was severe enough that in 1942, US Congressman Lyndon B. Johnson went to Australia and spent 3 days in Townsville. Johnson was given and examined official US and Australian military accounts of the Negro rioting and also the eyewitness report of a US journalist who was stationed at Kelso. But despite this, the rebellion was never reported by the US press but instead filed away in the national archives. President Roosevelt did not want any details of this racial incident to ever come out and, in fact, in 1943 Eleanor Roosevelt herself was dispatched to visit a newly established "Negro Only" service club in Townsville.
There were about 10,000 American Negro servicemen sent to Australia during the war. Australia had a very strict racial segregation. In 1942 there were also other clashes involving Negro GIs at Torrens Creek, Ingham, and Mt Isa, in Australia.
Later in 1944 in another part of the Pacific there was one of the most serious racial incident between Negro navy personnel and US Marines.
In July 1944 the 3rd Marine Division retook Guam from the Japanese at the cost of 1,600 Marine lives. Guam was turned into a base for allied operations. Five large airfields were constructed by the SeaBeas. B-29 super bombers could fly as far a mainland Japan.
In late August 1944, just a few weeks after already battle worn Marines had been exposed to the most vicious fighting and hand-to-hand combat with Japanese defenders, the all Negro 25th Depot Company of the US Navy started landing operations at the Naval Supply Depot. There sparked immediate tensions and minor incidents between the White Marines and the Negro naval personnel.
On Christmas Eve 1944, nine Negro Marines from the 25th Depot Company were on pass and went into Agana. There was a confrontation between the Negroes and White Marines, supposedly shots were fired at the Negroes who were forced to flee back to the base. Eight were OK, one Negro Marine was missing.
In re-action, 40 Negro enlisted men piled into two trucks and started off toward Agana to find the missing man. However the MPs in Agana were informed and the MPs proceeded to erect barricades across all roads leading into Agana. The two trucks were stopped, there was a brief standoff but when the Negroes were told that the missing man had been found and was OK, they returned to their base.
On Christmas Day 1944, a Negro enlisted man walking back to camp from Agana was shot dead by two White Marines. Shortly thereafter another Negro enlisted man was shot and killed in Agana.
On December 26 1944, a vehicle driven by White Marines opened gunfire on the Negro depot. Camp guards returned fire and a White officer was wounded. The vehicle fled toward Agana; behind them a number of armed Negro personnel. All vehicles were stopped by White MPs at a roadblock outside of Agana. All participants White or Negro were arrested and charged with attempted murder, rioting, unlawful assembly, and theft of government property.
At the Court of Inquiry, 45 Negro military personnel were court martialed and sent to prison.
Saturday, February 11, 2012
Tuesday, February 7, 2012
Remember Rhodesia
Is the past our future? The lesson of Southern Rhodesia.
In 1980, a flourishing, stable, free, democratic republic was murdered and hung out to decay by Great Britain, the United States and the West in the equalitarian name of "anti-racism" and "African-democracy". This civilization was once the proud British colony of Rhodesia.
On November 11, 1965 Southern Rhodesia, which had experienced the highest casualty count of any of the British colonies in World War II, faced with the terrifying prospect of Negro majority rule, unilaterally declared independence from the British Empire. The Rhodesians were determined to avoid the disaster of a "one man, one vote" Negro majority rule.
Rhodesia had been denied independence because of the politically correct "NIMBAR policy" of Great Britain. This unjust policy was enforced by Prime Minister, Harold Wilson, and utterly discounted the proven success or stability of a colony and instead evaluated its commitment to universal manhood sufferage. NIMBAR stood for "No Independence Before African Rule".
After self-declared independence, Rhodesia faced endless economic sanctions imposed by the United Nations in the utopian aim to topple the new government of Ian Smith. Ian Smith had been an ace pilot for the Royal Air Force in World War II and was the duly elected leader of the Rhodesians. No foreign government, including the United States, recognized the new Rhodesia or welcomed it into the family of free republics.
But Rhodesia was not defeated. It carried on honorably and successfully until about 1975 when South Africa withdrew its support and Marxist (Negro) terrorists renewed guerrilla war against Rhodesia. When Angola and Mozambique fell to Marxist majority rule, the United States under Secretary of State Henry Kissinger increased its pressure on Rhodesia to accept majority Negro rule.
In 1980, the freed, Marxist terrorist prisoner, Robert Mugabe, became the President of the Republic of Zimbabwe, once Rhodesia, through African-style "democratic" elections. Under Mugabe's tyrannical and erratic rule Zimbabwe became a culture being murdered one White farm family at a time. The murder weapon being the West's own suicidal, liberal ideology applied to a totally unsuitable Negro racial context.
The lesson from the world's treatment of Rhodesia is this:
Political inclusion of Negroes in a liberal democracy inevitably transforms a society from a promised multi-racial utopia into a barbaric democracy; rule by the long knife. This is now demonstrated in Zimbabwe, a nation in poverty, where Negroes are 98.5 percent of the population.
In 1980, a flourishing, stable, free, democratic republic was murdered and hung out to decay by Great Britain, the United States and the West in the equalitarian name of "anti-racism" and "African-democracy". This civilization was once the proud British colony of Rhodesia.
On November 11, 1965 Southern Rhodesia, which had experienced the highest casualty count of any of the British colonies in World War II, faced with the terrifying prospect of Negro majority rule, unilaterally declared independence from the British Empire. The Rhodesians were determined to avoid the disaster of a "one man, one vote" Negro majority rule.
Rhodesia had been denied independence because of the politically correct "NIMBAR policy" of Great Britain. This unjust policy was enforced by Prime Minister, Harold Wilson, and utterly discounted the proven success or stability of a colony and instead evaluated its commitment to universal manhood sufferage. NIMBAR stood for "No Independence Before African Rule".
After self-declared independence, Rhodesia faced endless economic sanctions imposed by the United Nations in the utopian aim to topple the new government of Ian Smith. Ian Smith had been an ace pilot for the Royal Air Force in World War II and was the duly elected leader of the Rhodesians. No foreign government, including the United States, recognized the new Rhodesia or welcomed it into the family of free republics.
But Rhodesia was not defeated. It carried on honorably and successfully until about 1975 when South Africa withdrew its support and Marxist (Negro) terrorists renewed guerrilla war against Rhodesia. When Angola and Mozambique fell to Marxist majority rule, the United States under Secretary of State Henry Kissinger increased its pressure on Rhodesia to accept majority Negro rule.
In 1980, the freed, Marxist terrorist prisoner, Robert Mugabe, became the President of the Republic of Zimbabwe, once Rhodesia, through African-style "democratic" elections. Under Mugabe's tyrannical and erratic rule Zimbabwe became a culture being murdered one White farm family at a time. The murder weapon being the West's own suicidal, liberal ideology applied to a totally unsuitable Negro racial context.
The lesson from the world's treatment of Rhodesia is this:
Political inclusion of Negroes in a liberal democracy inevitably transforms a society from a promised multi-racial utopia into a barbaric democracy; rule by the long knife. This is now demonstrated in Zimbabwe, a nation in poverty, where Negroes are 98.5 percent of the population.
Leftists Shalt Not Covet
A serious flaw in even the most intelligent critics of equalitarianism/socialism/communism is accepting that the more hard-core a progressive is, the deeper is his comprehension and conviction as to the equalitarian agendas. And that this pureness of motivation differs the hard- core socialist from the brain-washed or opportunist fringe adherents, paternally referred to by N. Lenin as the "useful idiots".
Simply, and less dramatically put, it is far more likely that the driving motivation behind the hard-core leftist is truly just envy. Envy hides in a multitude of forms and expressions. Envy is a basic human emotion, it is not a validity of pure intellectual motivation.
There is the envy of our Anglo-American civilization or Western Culture and especially of the innate qualities of mind and character which built it. This envy morphs into a strong drive to denigrate its sources and to believe that its wealth and benefits must be dispensed to those less fortunate.
There is the envy among academicians and intellectuals who instinctively resent the rewards and recognition of successful industrial, private enterprise. They are well aware that the qualities of leadership, courage and the ability to face reality in dealing with things are quite rare among them. They envy, thus denigrate, the man who is responsible for getting things done in spite of ruthless economic and natural obstacles. And yet they must begrudgingly accept that his achievements are the only source from which the leftist can "share the wealth" with others.
There are very few men in the hard-core left who have built their own fortunes. However even these individuals can be blinded into becoming useful idiots and even more likely are those whose fortunes are inherited. And if the society is a rich one with large accumulations of wealth from past accomplishments, the leftist is unfettered. His dispensing of seemingly endless funds of wealth allows him unbridled popularity and following with the masses. More and more useful idiots join the leftist ranks as they intellectualize discarding of the previous morality and truths.
Slowly, by degrees, the irreversible damage of the leftist trend becomes apparent to some. The national heritage, built upon ideals and principles and experience of many years of building and controlling a free society, slowly erodes away. Only at the last gasp of freedom and stability is it discovered that a civilization has been destroyed.
Simply, and less dramatically put, it is far more likely that the driving motivation behind the hard-core leftist is truly just envy. Envy hides in a multitude of forms and expressions. Envy is a basic human emotion, it is not a validity of pure intellectual motivation.
There is the envy of our Anglo-American civilization or Western Culture and especially of the innate qualities of mind and character which built it. This envy morphs into a strong drive to denigrate its sources and to believe that its wealth and benefits must be dispensed to those less fortunate.
There is the envy among academicians and intellectuals who instinctively resent the rewards and recognition of successful industrial, private enterprise. They are well aware that the qualities of leadership, courage and the ability to face reality in dealing with things are quite rare among them. They envy, thus denigrate, the man who is responsible for getting things done in spite of ruthless economic and natural obstacles. And yet they must begrudgingly accept that his achievements are the only source from which the leftist can "share the wealth" with others.
There are very few men in the hard-core left who have built their own fortunes. However even these individuals can be blinded into becoming useful idiots and even more likely are those whose fortunes are inherited. And if the society is a rich one with large accumulations of wealth from past accomplishments, the leftist is unfettered. His dispensing of seemingly endless funds of wealth allows him unbridled popularity and following with the masses. More and more useful idiots join the leftist ranks as they intellectualize discarding of the previous morality and truths.
Slowly, by degrees, the irreversible damage of the leftist trend becomes apparent to some. The national heritage, built upon ideals and principles and experience of many years of building and controlling a free society, slowly erodes away. Only at the last gasp of freedom and stability is it discovered that a civilization has been destroyed.
Monday, February 6, 2012
The Racial Gap
Material wealth is not the only thing that can be coveted or stolen. It also is possible to steal a nation's culture, or better stated, debase it. There exists no surer way of debasing or destroying a culture than integrating it with a race that is without the capacity to sustain it.
At first, in its widest sense, race can be separated into three broad subdivisions of the human species, the White, the Yellow and the Black. Anthropologists go deeper and to the point of five subdivisions being Caucasoid (White), Mongoloid (Yellow), Congoid (pure Black), Capoid (Yellow-Black) and Australoid (Yellow-Brown).
All of these racial divisions represent some degree of difference in innate characteristics, distinctive by observation of physical form. In very significant other words, the racial differences are genetic and indicate the presence of characteristic genes.
In a comparison of the American White man (Caucasoid) and the American Negro (West African Congoid) the results reflect the opposite poles of the human racial spectrum. These are not merely differences between sub-stocks inside one of the broader divisions -- these are differences between two of the largest human racial categories. And just as significant they indicate differences of position on the evolutionary scale as well. This means that if the typical Congoid Negro is the genetic essence of the Black and the European Caucasian an example of the White then we are coming as close to comparing the greatest gap possible between human beings, between American Negroes and American Whites.
At first, in its widest sense, race can be separated into three broad subdivisions of the human species, the White, the Yellow and the Black. Anthropologists go deeper and to the point of five subdivisions being Caucasoid (White), Mongoloid (Yellow), Congoid (pure Black), Capoid (Yellow-Black) and Australoid (Yellow-Brown).
All of these racial divisions represent some degree of difference in innate characteristics, distinctive by observation of physical form. In very significant other words, the racial differences are genetic and indicate the presence of characteristic genes.
In a comparison of the American White man (Caucasoid) and the American Negro (West African Congoid) the results reflect the opposite poles of the human racial spectrum. These are not merely differences between sub-stocks inside one of the broader divisions -- these are differences between two of the largest human racial categories. And just as significant they indicate differences of position on the evolutionary scale as well. This means that if the typical Congoid Negro is the genetic essence of the Black and the European Caucasian an example of the White then we are coming as close to comparing the greatest gap possible between human beings, between American Negroes and American Whites.
Sunday, February 5, 2012
Know Your Enemy
The real enemy of the American people is not centralized government by either political party but rather captive government by minority groups leading a New Orleans style Negro parade. A ludicrous spectacle followed by a motley gang of equalitarian fanatics, self-serving politicians and reverse discrimination by White traitors.
The present American Negro has the confused White populace on the run. It is a disgusting state of affairs. Why?
The American White race possesses the greatest technology on earth and enjoys the rewards of an advanced evolutionary status not only in self-government, standards of living and heritage but also in the power to enforce its will. Yet the White race cowers before the threats of a race far, far behind in evolutionary grade and with no weapons other than unproven equalitarian gibberish. It wrings its hands in frustration and is willing to be blackmailed for unlimited White-earned money and public degradation to placate and appease the violence prone Negro. There is no possible explanation for this boot licking other than it is a form of hypnosis, a trance brought on by an assumption of White guilt based on a totally erroneous conception of the facts.
All governments throughout history have been infected by varying degrees of financial dishonesty. But there is no known instance in which intellectual dishonesty has been so widespread and condoned and damaging as is today in the area of race in America. It is corrupting the integrity of otherwise decent citizens to an extent never witnessed before. And it is allowing the already corrupted, anti-American traitors to rise as far as the Presidency itself.
The present American Negro has the confused White populace on the run. It is a disgusting state of affairs. Why?
The American White race possesses the greatest technology on earth and enjoys the rewards of an advanced evolutionary status not only in self-government, standards of living and heritage but also in the power to enforce its will. Yet the White race cowers before the threats of a race far, far behind in evolutionary grade and with no weapons other than unproven equalitarian gibberish. It wrings its hands in frustration and is willing to be blackmailed for unlimited White-earned money and public degradation to placate and appease the violence prone Negro. There is no possible explanation for this boot licking other than it is a form of hypnosis, a trance brought on by an assumption of White guilt based on a totally erroneous conception of the facts.
All governments throughout history have been infected by varying degrees of financial dishonesty. But there is no known instance in which intellectual dishonesty has been so widespread and condoned and damaging as is today in the area of race in America. It is corrupting the integrity of otherwise decent citizens to an extent never witnessed before. And it is allowing the already corrupted, anti-American traitors to rise as far as the Presidency itself.
Cultural Revolution in America
In the equalitarian/socialist cultural revolution of the 1960s, a very prophetic threat was issued against White American culture. This threat and communist tactic was "we will take your children from you". And they did.
How did the activists of the cultural revolution succeed in doing this?
The first World War was an eye-opener for the communist followers of Marx and Engels. In every nation, on every side the common people rejected communist ploys to revolt against the respective national governments and cultures. The armies remained loyal to the existing leader of the nation.
This effectively ended the credibility of the old communist theories on "worker" rebellion. A new brand of communist theory and activism came into being: "cultural revolution". These communists realized that the only possible revolution of any nation had to start in the conversion of the individual citizen. This meant the long and subversive destroying of the beliefs and dependency of the individual upon the existing culture.
And what were the obstacles to be removed in a culture?
First, the family; second, the religion, third, the heritage of the nation, fourth, the restrictive personal moral codes of the people, fifth, the respect for authority and laws and then as the designer of this new cultural revolution (Gramsci) boasted "the citizenry will fall into our hands like ripe fruit". He was right on the money.
The family is to be portrayed as paternal tyranny, maternal psychosis, boring, stifling, and prone to sexual abuse.
Religion is to be dismissed as myth, no better than any other faith, suppression of women's and sexual rights.
The history and heritage of the culture is to be diminished in education, deemed to have violated minority rights, presented as no better than any other's past and to be hopelessly out-dated (determined by long dead White men) or (a Constitution out of touch with the present).
The moral standards of the people that resulted from national and religious precedents must be corrupted into a "do your own thing" loss of any morality at all. One of the prime goals of the communists was the acceptance of divorce as a natural and justifiable act of personal liberation.
The breakdown of respect and understanding of law and order unleashed the most violent, beastly manifestations of communist strategy. Suddenly the respected police officer on the beat was "a pig" and the youth vilifying him was "a freak". The breakdown went both ways.
The center for the gathering of the early cultural revolutionists (all Jews) was in Frankfurt, Germany, later to be referred to as "the Frankfurt School". In 1940, the Nazi plan to restrict the activities of German Jews forced the institution to re-locate to space provided for it at Columbia University in New York city.
From that liberal and Jewish haven, the cultural communists spread like cancer into the anthropology and social science departments of the major American universities. Their goal of cultural revolution never wavered.
They infiltrated the movie industry, the main stream press, the book publishing industry and especially in the television broadcasting industry.
By the end of the 1960s "hippie" or "flower child" cultural upheaval, the communists did indeed take a generation of American youths away from their parents and their heritage. The result of which is the incompetent, narcissistic, affirmative-action mulatto, Barack Hussein Obama.
How did the activists of the cultural revolution succeed in doing this?
The first World War was an eye-opener for the communist followers of Marx and Engels. In every nation, on every side the common people rejected communist ploys to revolt against the respective national governments and cultures. The armies remained loyal to the existing leader of the nation.
This effectively ended the credibility of the old communist theories on "worker" rebellion. A new brand of communist theory and activism came into being: "cultural revolution". These communists realized that the only possible revolution of any nation had to start in the conversion of the individual citizen. This meant the long and subversive destroying of the beliefs and dependency of the individual upon the existing culture.
And what were the obstacles to be removed in a culture?
First, the family; second, the religion, third, the heritage of the nation, fourth, the restrictive personal moral codes of the people, fifth, the respect for authority and laws and then as the designer of this new cultural revolution (Gramsci) boasted "the citizenry will fall into our hands like ripe fruit". He was right on the money.
The family is to be portrayed as paternal tyranny, maternal psychosis, boring, stifling, and prone to sexual abuse.
Religion is to be dismissed as myth, no better than any other faith, suppression of women's and sexual rights.
The history and heritage of the culture is to be diminished in education, deemed to have violated minority rights, presented as no better than any other's past and to be hopelessly out-dated (determined by long dead White men) or (a Constitution out of touch with the present).
The moral standards of the people that resulted from national and religious precedents must be corrupted into a "do your own thing" loss of any morality at all. One of the prime goals of the communists was the acceptance of divorce as a natural and justifiable act of personal liberation.
The breakdown of respect and understanding of law and order unleashed the most violent, beastly manifestations of communist strategy. Suddenly the respected police officer on the beat was "a pig" and the youth vilifying him was "a freak". The breakdown went both ways.
The center for the gathering of the early cultural revolutionists (all Jews) was in Frankfurt, Germany, later to be referred to as "the Frankfurt School". In 1940, the Nazi plan to restrict the activities of German Jews forced the institution to re-locate to space provided for it at Columbia University in New York city.
From that liberal and Jewish haven, the cultural communists spread like cancer into the anthropology and social science departments of the major American universities. Their goal of cultural revolution never wavered.
They infiltrated the movie industry, the main stream press, the book publishing industry and especially in the television broadcasting industry.
By the end of the 1960s "hippie" or "flower child" cultural upheaval, the communists did indeed take a generation of American youths away from their parents and their heritage. The result of which is the incompetent, narcissistic, affirmative-action mulatto, Barack Hussein Obama.
Thursday, February 2, 2012
Liberal Response or Lack Thereof
It has been very noticeable over 50 years of attempting to discuss racial or socialist matters with so-called liberal relatives or co-workers that any breakthrough of new facts or opinions at all contrary to their conformity is blindly rejected out of hand. And the liberal assumes a self-righteousness that vents hatred and scorn toward his opponent personally rather than ever feeling the moral duty to present facts, if any, regarding the subject at hand. And more delusional, to do so with a clear conscience.
In careful listening to these liberal people expound on equality or fairness, I find their motivations to be more dedicated to liberal conformity than ever dedicated to the truth. The roll of their eyes or their exasperated sighs are their only responses or expressions to being compelled to even listen to any point of view other than the stock liberal line. This also explains the inevitable, personal attack on anyone even close to threatening the liberal dogma on anything. The intensity of these personal attacks reach attempts to have the individual fired from his job even if the job itself had nothing to do with the matter, to instigate consumers to boycott a product or sponsorship, and to tie up opponents with needless legal suits or accusations.
I possess no credibility to judge these people's intelligence but there is a clue in their unfathomable persistence in defending discredited liberal political figures. One would imagine that the lies and deceptions of a Bill Clinton, the moral behavior of a Barney Frank and the obvious incompetence and disloyalty of a Barack Obama would convince a cretin to disown them but not so with the average liberal.
The answer is somewhere else and it is in the vast, uncontrollable entitlement programs which consume over a third of annual federal government spending. These programs are liberal "babies" and the left will elect even the most corrupt or mediocre politicians to protect them. And the Democrat politicians never object or call for any reductions in entitlements because those are guaranteed Democrat votes.
So when an Obama reveals that he has X million dollars for his 2012 re-election campaign, reality must add to that the X trillion dollars spent by his administration on entitlement programs and their guaranteed votes for the man. Very few recipients of entitlements are going to vote against the hand that feeds them.
In careful listening to these liberal people expound on equality or fairness, I find their motivations to be more dedicated to liberal conformity than ever dedicated to the truth. The roll of their eyes or their exasperated sighs are their only responses or expressions to being compelled to even listen to any point of view other than the stock liberal line. This also explains the inevitable, personal attack on anyone even close to threatening the liberal dogma on anything. The intensity of these personal attacks reach attempts to have the individual fired from his job even if the job itself had nothing to do with the matter, to instigate consumers to boycott a product or sponsorship, and to tie up opponents with needless legal suits or accusations.
I possess no credibility to judge these people's intelligence but there is a clue in their unfathomable persistence in defending discredited liberal political figures. One would imagine that the lies and deceptions of a Bill Clinton, the moral behavior of a Barney Frank and the obvious incompetence and disloyalty of a Barack Obama would convince a cretin to disown them but not so with the average liberal.
The answer is somewhere else and it is in the vast, uncontrollable entitlement programs which consume over a third of annual federal government spending. These programs are liberal "babies" and the left will elect even the most corrupt or mediocre politicians to protect them. And the Democrat politicians never object or call for any reductions in entitlements because those are guaranteed Democrat votes.
So when an Obama reveals that he has X million dollars for his 2012 re-election campaign, reality must add to that the X trillion dollars spent by his administration on entitlement programs and their guaranteed votes for the man. Very few recipients of entitlements are going to vote against the hand that feeds them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)