Apr 18, 2010

Re: The Speech the Polish President Never Gave


Response to Carolyn

19 Apr 10


I applaud Carolyn's expressed intention of exposing the unspoken truth. Sadly, though, she has overlooked a whole throng of 800-pound gorillas. Allow me to point them out.


Uncovering the mass graves at Katyn was **hugely** advantageous for the Germans in the spring of 1943. It generated tremendous stresses in the Allied camp, as the German propaganda ministry well understood and gleefully anticipated. It was over this affair that Stalin broke off diplomatic relations with the Polish government in London, already deeply strained because the entire Polish officer corps captured by the Soviets in 1939 had long been conspicuously and unaccountably missing.


Yes, the Germans allowed a Red Cross mission, including independent Polish forensic experts, to investigate the site. Their motivations were entirely political, as noted above.


The notion of German "concern for humanity," which Carolyn refers to here, is breathtaking in its falsity. It would be laughable if it weren't so troublingly common and characteristic.


Like the Soviets, and in full partnership with them for almost two years, Nazi Germany slaughtered Polish elites by the tens upon tens of thousands. It was Hitler's explicitly stated intention to enslave and eventually exterminate the Polish nation in order to acquire precious Lebensraum (living space) for the great master race of German folk. Can your readers possibly be ignorant of this fact? Can readers who are exercised about the abuse of Palestinians today be totally indifferent to – or, perhaps, quietly enthusiastic about – the annihilation of Polish people, on a much grander scale, seventy years ago?  The quintessentially Hitlerian concept of untermenschen, "subhumans," was applied to no other nation more hatefully than it was against the Poles. Is this a formulation that "truth-tellers" and "patriots" in the USA ought to find acceptable?


It's hardly surprising that the Germans defeated the Polish army in 1939. Why is Carolyn so proud of this fact? I detect vainglory and triumphalism in the way she mentions it. These are not the kind of emotions we ought to be indulging; they are not the hallmark of a spiritually mature person.


Germany was far stronger, more populous, more developed, and less hampered with liabilities than Poland. Poland's strategic and geographical position was militarily hopeless. The intervention by the USSR, in the third week of fighting, without question hastened the inevitable outcome. The Germans used up more than 80% of their ammunition in a few weeks, and they sustained greater losses against Poland than they did in a vastly more equal (and equally brief) contest against France, the Low Countries and Britain some eight months later.


To their eternal disgrace, France and England did not honor their treaty obligations to support Poland. If they had, the war would have ended soon, as Germany's vital industrial heartland in the west was undefended and could have been easily captured by the French. Hitler had to throw the whole weight of his war machine at Poland to achieve a quick victory, even with the Soviets fighting on his side.


For a deeper understanding of what was really going on here, we must note that big bankers and industrialists had built up the military establishments of **both** Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia. Arguably, they were aiming at a conflagration that would devastate all parties without much discrimination. Poland resisted intense pressure to collaborate with either of the two totalitarian superpowers against the other. Polish independence was the last, fragile barrier that held back the gathering impetus to a second, major European war. Once Poland was destroyed, Germany and Russia had a common border, and the way was open for them to tear each other's guts out. Who gained by this? Can we detect a parallel today, in how the Moslem and the Christian worlds have been set up to war against each other? When we take sides in the Nazi-Soviet conflict, when we interpret WW II from this beguiling angle – i.e., the good and noble Germans against the wicked Jewish commies – we are only getting suckered, once again, into an old, Hegelian dialectic snare. We ought to know better than this by now.


Carolyn's praise for German "thoroughness" is absolutely right and proper. Please note how well this quality is expressed in the ability of polemicists like Carolyn to avoid any reference to German aggression and bestiality, or to evince any trace of compassion or remorse.


Auschwitz is indeed – by some – exploited in the most disgraceful fashion. The poisoning of souls with hatred, especially young ones, is among the most distressing phenomena of our times; the damage is so hard to undo, and the long-term consequences are so dire. Alexander Solzhenitsyn, a death-camp survivor in his own right, someplace in his writings framed the essence of the matter perfectly: "The line between good and evil runs through every human heart." We are so deeply inclined to point the finger of blame at others, and there will never be any shortage of reasons to support this view – whatever the particularity of our partisanship. Yet the key we are all looking for, the answer to our tragic, human dilemma – like the Kingdom of God itself – lies within each one of us.


When we examine Polish responses to the colossal and unprovoked assault that Poland sustained, the perception of heroism and victimhood, about which Carolyn so ardently complains, is anything but misplaced. Of course, one can always point to exceptions, but overwhelmingly, the broad characterization of hero/victim versus villain/perpetrator could scarcely appear more fitting to a fair-minded observer than it does with reference to Poles and Germans in the context of WW II. But that's only to the extent that we're looking for heroes and villains, that we're stuck on feeding a victim-and-victor mentality. As I've just noted, this does not take us where we need to go; it's not really what the present world crisis requires that we become.


Regarding Carolyn's attack on the Polish character and her allusion to the festering of Polish resentment against Germany, my own extensive, if necessarily subjective observations do not support this view. I find Polish people remarkably magnanimous, forgiving, and able to leave the hurts and wrongs of the past behind – without, however, consigning them to oblivion or surrendering them to dishonorable and malevolent revision.


If there is anyone who walks around with a chip on their shoulder, it's German chauvinists like Carolyn, as witnessed so eloquently in the callous, contentious, myopic and one-sided statement she has posted here. Carolyn has every right to be as she is and to express her views. What concerns me is why anyone finds them worth posting and passing along.


It's disturbing that this forum and others like it are propagating messages which not only express interethnic antipathy, but do so in a manner that's as unbalanced and uncalled for as Carolyn's letter. Evidently, the demagogues are stepping up their activities on every front.


What I wish for Carolyn, personally, is that she will be able to transcend these narrow and destructive mental paradigms and someday soon experience the radiant tenderness that bathes our hearts in grace when we learn to let go, to forgive, and to love those who have injured us (even if we don't always like them). The lesson is difficult, but it's profound: paradoxically, the lowly are uplifted. We're told that our Maker "hates a proud and haughty spirit," so surely in the end no good can come to us from living out of such modalities.


One last observation: in a forum that focuses on Jewish abuses, that challenges the notion of a "Chosen People," that exposes Jewish hypocrisy, and that decries the indifference of Jewish criminals to the suffering they've caused, it's quite bizarre to find these same propensities being fostered and exalted in the German psyche.


One could survey the entire planet and be hard pressed to find a nation that has not in some way, at some time, been in conflict with and suffered injury at the hands of its neighbors. The Japanese were set up by the Americans, provoked, and lured into a trap at Pearl Harbor. We inflicted a catastrophic defeat on them at Midway because we could read their secret codes. It's questionable whether, man to man, we could have beaten them in a fairer fight. We dropped atomic bombs on them and incinerated Tokyo. I've known many Japanese over many years in my personal and professional life, yet I have never sensed that they bear a grudge against us. They mourn their losses in dignified privacy, and in their memory they honor the victims of our atrocities; but they don't hate us, nor do they plot revenge. Many examples like this could be cited from world history.


"Never forgive; never forget." Where have we heard this before? Of all the peoples in the world, I can think of only two that harbor so jealously a sense of their own uniquely aggrieved status and who are so utterly callous about, and unwilling to acknowledge or regret, the grief they've brought to other nations. Correct me if I'm wrong about this. But I find it curious and perplexing.




I judged the Poles by their enemies. And I found it was an almost unfailing truth that their enemies were the enemies of magnanimity and manhood. If a man loved slavery, if he loved usury, if he loved terrorism and all the trampled mire of materialistic politics, I have always found that he added to these affections the passion of a hatred of Poland. She could be judged in the light of that hatred; and the judgment has proved to be right.

Attributed to Gilbert K. Chesterton, British writer


--- On Sun, 4/18/10, ReporterNotebook <> wrote:

From: ReporterNotebook <>
Subject: The Speech the Polish President Never Gave
To: "reportersnotebook" <>
Date: Sunday, April 18, 2010, 11:42 AM


April 18, 2010

Comment from a reader:

Mr. Kaczynski had an opportunity to tell the whole truth about the Katyn affair, but it appears from this speech draft that was released that he was going to behave in the usual Polish fashion and only tell the part that fit the Polish preferred version of history. In Polish history (and in their school books, I'm sure), Poles are either heroes or victims.
I'm referring to his failure to mention that they only learned of the fate of their fellow citizens because the German Wehrmacht uncovered the hidden graves and then the Hitler governement organized a commission of international experts to examine and come to conclusions as to the cause and determine the perpetrators of the crime. Without this German thoroughness and concern for humanity, Poland would probably never have known the fate of these fellow citizens; the mass graves would never have been found.
But true to the Polish character, with it's historic resentment toward Germans, he couldn't bring himself to include the German contribution to the unravelling of the fate of these men.
And after all, there is Auschwitz ... the biggest tourist attraction in all Poland. He wouldn't have wanted to compromise that in any way, would he? It thrives on hatred of Germans, Nazis, even the Wehrmacht ... hatred than never ends.
And then, Germany defeated Poland ... in only 17 days. Russia did not, even though they took it over. Polish nationalism and fragile self-esteem can live with Russia, but not with Germany. They cannot rise to the level of honorableness and truthfullness that is required.
I'm sorry, I cannot feel badly for this man, or for any of them. I call it ausgleichende gerechtigkeit (a word I just learned) ... it means something like "balancing justice."

(Prepared for Delivery April 10, 2010)

Dear Representatives of the Katyn families! Dear Ladies and Gentlemen!

In April 1940 more that 21 thousand of Polish prisoners from NKVD cages and prisons were murdered. That genocide crime was committed of Stalin's will, by order of the supreme authorities of the Soviet Union.

The alliance of the Third Reich and the USSR, Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact and the aggression against Poland on September 17, 1939 found its astonishing culmination in the Katyn massacre.

Not only in the forests of Katyn but also in Twer, Kharkov and other known and still unknown tragic places the citizens of II Rzeczpospolita (the Second Polish republic) were killed. These were people who were creating the foundations of our statehood, who were relentless in the service to our Motherland.

At the same time the families of the killed and the thousands of pre-war borderland citizens were deported to the depth of the Soviet Union where their silent sufferings were marking the way of Polish Eastern Golgotha. Katyn was the most tragic station on this way. Polish officers, clergymen, civil servants, policemen, border guard and prison service officials were exterminated without legal proceedings and court sentences. They became the victims of the war that had not been announced. They were murdered with the humiliation of the rights and conventions of the civilized world. Their dignity as the soldiers, Poles and human beings was trampled.

Death caves were supposed to hide the bodies and the truth about the genocide forever. The world was never supposed to learn.(in Polish text) The families of the victims were unvested of rights for public mourning, sorrow and dignified commemoration of the closest. The soil had covered the traces of the crime and the lie was supposed to erase it from peoples' memory.

The hiding of the truth about Katyn - the effect of the decision of those who led to the crime, became one of the communist policy fundamentals in the after-war Poland: it became the founding lie of PRL (Polish People's Republic). That was the time when for the memory and the truth about Katyn one could pay a very high price. Nevertheless, the families of the murdered and other brave people were true to that memory, they were defending it and were passing it to the next generations of Polish people. They carried it through the times of the communist governments and confided to the fellow-citizens of free and independent Poland. That is why we owe respect and gratitude to all of them and especially to Katyn Families. On behalf of the Republic of Poland I am offering thanks to you as by defending the memory of your closest you have saved so important dimension of our Polish consciousness and identity.

Katyn became the painful wound of Polish history, it also has been poisoning relations between Poles and Russians for long decades. Let us make the Katyn would to finally heal and scar over. We are already on this way. We, the Polish people do appreciate the activities of the Russians during the last years. We have to follow the way that brings our peoples closer to each other. We cannot stop or turn back.

All the circumstances regarding the Katyn crime must be fully investigated and clarified. It is important that guiltlessness of the victims becomes legally confirmed and all the documents regarding the crime are disclosed, so that the lie about Katyn disappears forever from the public sphere. We demand for these steps primarily in memory of the victims and for the respect of the sufferings of their families. We also demand for these activities in the name of common values that must create the foundations of trust and partnership between the neighboring peoples in the whole Europe.

Let us together pay homage to the murdered and let us pray for them. Praise to the heroes! Honour to their memory!



Michael Santomauro
Editorial Director
Call anytime: 917-974-6367

http://www.Debating TheHolocaust. com

Amazon's: DEBATING THE HOLOCAUST: A New Look At Both Sides by Thomas Dalton

Recent Activity:

Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.

Welcome to Mom Connection! Share stories, news and more with moms like you.

Hobbies & Activities Zone: Find others who share your passions! Explore new interests.



NYT Teaching Guide notes Faurisson, Smith, Irving and the IHR--AMAZING!


December 13, 2006, 12:00 am

Denial on Trial

Note: This lesson was originally published on an older version of The Learning Network; the link to the related Times article will take you to a page on the old site.

Teaching ideas based on New York Times content.

Overview of Lesson Plan: In this lesson, students learn about the December, 2006, conference in Tehran, Iran, to "debate" the events of the Holocaust. They then research and present some of the key claims, figures, events, and organizations associated with the notion of "Holocaust revisionism" at a teach-in.

Activities / Procedures:

1. WARM-UP/DO-NOW: Before class, write the following statement on the board: "Contrary to popular belief, when Europeans settled North America, there were no other people living there."

When students enter the classroom, ask them to respond to this "statement of fact" in their journals. Allow students a few minutes to write, and then ask them to share their responses. What do they think of the new "version" of this event? Did it cause them to question the facts they already believed to be true? Did it confuse them? Anger them? Were most students in accord with responses or did some vary? Why?

2. As a class, read and discuss "Israel Fading, Iran's Leader Tells Deniers of Holocaust" ( focusing on the following questions:

a. According to the article, why did the Holocaust conference in Iran "provoke outrage"?
b. What are some examples of opinions regarding the Holocaust voiced by conference participants?
c. How did world leaders react to the conference?
d. Who were some of the speakers at the conference?
e. Who is David Duke, and what do you think he meant when he said that "Israel feared an inquiry into the Holocaust more than it did the prospect of Iranian nuclear weapons"?

f. What is your understanding of the Holocaust "debate" now that you have read this article?

g. What voices do you think are missing in this news story? Why?

3. [NOTE TO TEACHER: As this lesson focuses on a sensitive topic, you may wish to spend a few minutes with students establishing guidelines for a respectful, open dialogue in the classroom, and responsible research on the Internet. Students who choose not to share opinions or ideas at any point in the lesson should not be penalized.]

Announce to students that, in order to better understand the context of the Tehran conference in which, as the article notes, "Holocaust deniers, discredited scholars and white supremacists from around the world" gathered, they will be investigating some of the key claims, figures, events, and organizations associated with so-called "Holocaust revisionism." Explain that the term "revisionism" typically refers to the legitimate re-visiting of historical events in light of new academic research or findings, or from the perspective of those whose views have been marginalized or silenced. Holocaust deniers have co-opted the word "revisionism" to describe their assertions, and the term has since come to encompass both legitimate/scholarly and pejorative/controversial meanings.

They will present their findings at a teach-in, or a forum in which various people present information that inspires discussion regarding an important issue. The goal of this teach-in will be to inform and enlighten others on the topic of Holocaust denial.

Divide students into the following four groups, with corresponding sub-groups and suggested online resources (copied onto handouts and distributed to groups):

GROUP 1- Key Holocaust Deniers and their Claims

A. Contemporary international politicians, such as David Duke, Jean Marie Le Pen, and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, have all been known to deny the facts of the Holocaust. Who are they, and how do their theories on the Holocaust both reflect and influence their politics?

B. What are some of the claims of "Holocaust revisionists"? Why do they prefer to be called "revisionists" rather than "deniers"?
Suggested Online Resource: "Holocaust Denial," at (
GROUP 2- The Faurisson Affair (1979)

A. Who is Robert Faurisson, and what are his specific (i.e., published) views on the Holocaust?

B. What was the controversy known as the "Faurisson Affair"? Whom did it involve, and what were the main issues of contention?

Suggestion Online Resource: "Faurisson Affair," at (
GROUP 3- The Case of David Irving v. Deborah Lipstadt (2000)

A. Who are David Irving and Deborah Lipstadt? What are their specific (i.e., published) views on the Holocaust?

B. Why did David Irving sue Deborah Lipstadt and her publisher, Penguin Books, and what was the final verdict?
Suggestion Online Resources: "The Holocaust Denial on Trial" at, and the BBC's "Irving Tests Europe's Free Speech" at
GROUP 4-"Holocaust Revisionist" Organizations

A. What is the "Institute for Historical Review," when was it founded, and what are its goals?

B. What is the "Committee on Open Debate on the Holocaust," when was it founded, and what are its goals?

Suggestion Online Resource: "Holocaust Denial," at (, the Institute for Historical Review Web site (, and the Committee on Open Debate on the Holocaust Web site (
[Note: The last two Web sites should be visited with teacher supervision.]

Groups should divide research among members by sub-topic. As they research, using all available classroom resources, each student compiles the information on index cards in outline or bullet-point format. Toward the end of the class (or in a future class period, if time is limited), invite another class to attend a teach-in, in which each group presents its research. This exercise may also be extended into a semester-long or yearlong project in which several different classes alternate presentations on various teach-in topics.

4. WRAP-UP/HOMEWORK: For homework, students write letters to the editor of The New York Times, expressing their reactions to the Tehran Conference.
Letters may be submitted directly to The New York Times Learning Network at

Further Questions for Discussion:
-The leaders of Iran's Jewish community made the following statement regarding the conference in Tehran, "We have condemned similar events in the past, and see no reason to condemn it again." Why do you think they chose not to speak out against the events of December, 2006?
-Do you think the spoken or written denial of the Holocaust should be protected under "free speech"? Why or why not?
-In your opinion, is the conference in Iran representative of greater social and political trends, or should it be considered an isolated event? Why or why not?

Evaluation / Assessment:
Students will be evaluated based on their written responses to the opening exercise, in-class research and presentations, and thoughtfully written letters to the editor.

annihilation, exterminate, affront, supremacists, lampooned, indicative, extremist, revulsion, sectarianism, convened, repugnant

Extension Activities:
1. The article mentions the European Commission's proposed "Framework Decision on Combating Racism and Xenophobia." Research this legal document and summarize it in a presentation to your class. To whom would it apply? Which types of crimes or offenses would it cover? How does it define "racist" and "xenophobic"? Visit the European Union's "Summaries of Legislation" page on the proposal, found online at

2. Read a memoir by a Holocaust survivor, such as Elie Wiesel's "Night," Primo Levi's "The Drowned and the Saved," or Heinz Heger's "Men with the Pink Triangle." How did each of these writers come to terms with his past? Write a book review of the memoir.

3. Jews were not the only targets of Nazi annihilation programs. Make a chart of all the different populations affected by Nazi policy, including how many in these populations perished in the Holocaust.

4. The article notes that in several European countries, denial of the Holocaust is a crime. Where, then, does Holocaust denial fit within the context of "freedom of speech?" Examine the parliamentary laws that forbid this type of speech in Germany, France, or Belgium. When were they created, on what grounds are they based, and what are the legal consequences or punishments?

5. Compile first-person accounts of the Holocaust. Try to find a variety of oral histories from different sources, from survivors to camp guards and soldiers. Write a position paper in which you confront the notion of Holocaust denial based on these personal accounts.



Michael Santomauro
Editorial Director
Call anytime: 917-974-6367

Amazon's: DEBATING THE HOLOCAUST: A New Look At Both Sides by Thomas Dalton

Recent Activity:

Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.

Welcome to Mom Connection! Share stories, news and more with moms like you.

Hobbies & Activities Zone: Find others who share your passions! Explore new interests.



HOLOCAUST REINCARNATION --A thread for the last 2 days...


HOLOCAUST REINCARNATION - A safe and supportive place for those who had past lives in which they were victims of the Holocaust. You do not have to be Jewish (in this life or the past) to join, but the general slant of the group will be Jewish in nature. No discussions of politics, no proselytizing, and any disagreements must be respectful of others. All new members must be approved by the moderator. Above all we want this to be a safe place for traumatized people to come, to share, to learn, to unburden themselves, or just to lurk awhile. Please join us!

"All beginnings require that you unlock a new door."- Rabbi Nachman of Breslov

(picture: "Sunrise" by Nancy Harding)
April 18, 2010

A thread for the last 2 days:


I took my kids to an indoor public pool today. The weather is warming up, the grass is turning green (I am so happy), and the kids wanted to go swimming with some friends. The friends are young (7-12 years old) and the mom was willing to let them go without her but I don't like sending my kids off without adult supervision (even though my oldest is a young teen), so I went. When we arrived the kids had to wait to go into the pool about 5 minutes. A little kid had pooped in the pool and so they had to do clean up, which they were just finishing with. This same ordeal happened again later, this time they had to sit out for 1/2 hour while they not only sucked out the offending biological product, but to pour chlorine into the pool's system. I started to feel bothered by it, and then thought about this group. I know that chlorine is poisonous, but some people seem to not be bothered by it.

To those of you here who remember being gassed in the PLife, just curious if you avoid public pools because of the higher concentration of chlorine in the water?

(danceof) Miriam

never thought about it,
but I hate all pools because of the chlorine.
i feel suffocated.
suffocated ?
yes, weird. never thought about it


Shalom Miriam and Gavriela,

What's really amazing about the reactions that both of you have is that it
is not an expected reaction. Most people wouldn't make that connection.
Which makes it all the more a test of memory. You see, the gas used had no
smell at all (at least not one that most people can discern). The Germans
had instructed the factory that produces it to ship it without the 'marker
smell' that would normally be added as a safety measure.

So where does the chlorine come in? Well, the walls, floor -- and yes, even
the ceiling -- of that place where hosed down and sprayed with chlorine
bleach after each use. The smell permeated the whole room. Hundreds of
thousands went to their death with the smell of chlorine bleach in their
nostrils. It's interesting that both of you have such a strong reaction,
because the cleaning up process isn't usually the sort of thing featuring in
documentaries. And of course, those who passed through weren't in a position
tell their experiences. But you are.

To this day, I associate the smell of chlorine bleach with corpses. Needless
to say, I can't have it in the house.


I can relate , although not to the chlorine as I was not gassed.

But it reminds me of the hard time I had with having to take vitamins. I got really angry for having to take supplements which keep me living.. Last year it hit me that I had been forced to eat vitamins for that noma experiment Mengele put me and my twin through.>

Upon realising this and with some sharing and major praying I was released from this fear..


Are you also a twin in this life? I just ask out of curiosity...


Let me add that I believe someone I work with was also Recycled from the Holocaust. She has COPD. I have had allergies since I was 11.

Be sure and get some rest this weekend.  Love - Liz

In reply to both your recent posts..

Sorry you and your daughter and family had to go through that.

I remember my twin sister coming to me in 1952 when I was born. It was her who got through to me in my ghostly state..I did not want to move on since my horrible lives in the holocaust.

So we were born as twins this life.. THen she aborted at one month while still intero.. 

In a psychic reading someone told me of my twin sister who was still with me in spirit.. I later remembered meeting her in my near death experience and assume this is when she attached to me'

I had just had experience with a ghost in my apartment , gotten comfy with the thought of souls in spirit when I found out about my twin.. I did a meditation and prayer around her.. I felt her near me and told her to move on to her next life.. that I forgave her and loved her.. I really felt her presence and I felt her leaving..

So it well could be your daughter is still with you. 

I found it important to look deeper into other lives and it was not until I remembered her being my mother in one life where I was able to get over my guilt/frustration with her..and break my dependence and the karmic bond between us.

If you have any questions please let me know..


Thank you for providing this insight, this is so helpful. 

I never go into chlorinated pools. Ironically, I live in a part of the 
world where every home has a swimming pool in the backyard. I wish I didn't 
have a pool, but they're as much a part of homes here as are trees and lawns. 

Also, when I buy bleach for laundry, I always get the highly perfumed type 
(i.e., lavender smell, etc.). Now I know why

Since I never go into the pool because of the chlorine smell, I had the 
pool converted to salt water. But it still smells like chlorine because of 
the sodium chloride that they use in the pool. So I still don't use it, and 
would like to cover it up and make it a patio area instead. Unfortunately, 
that would lower the resale value of my home if I ever decide to sell it. 
Well, at least the pool is pretty to look at. 

Thank you for helping me to understand my aversion to chlorine. I remember 
going into and dying in the showers, but I didn't remember this part. --MB


Thank you again,

I was 5 years old in my last life when I was gassed. And I have always loved swimming and never been bothered by chlorine. So in my case no, it never put me off, but it could also be that I was too young to remember much of the gas chamber too. 

I avoid bleach because of the chemical fumes.. There is a bleach alternative.. called oxybleach in powdered form.. hydrogen peroxide in liquid form.

Has no smell, and gets things nice and white in the wash..and down the toilet and drains does not cause the same damage to the environment.. Wonder if it causes any??


Wow, Yael, thanks for the information, and thank you to everyone else who put in their comments on the topic!

(danceof) Miriam


To join study group:

Recent Activity:

Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.

Welcome to Mom Connection! Share stories, news and more with moms like you.

Hobbies & Activities Zone: Find others who share your passions! Explore new interests.



Kevin MacDonald: The Violent Anti-White Left Puts On a Show

Kevin MacDonald: The Violent Anti-White Left Puts On a Show

Sunday, April 18th, 2010

Kevin MacDonald: You really have to wonder what's going on when a bunch of White guys carrying Nazi banners decides to hold a protest on the lawn of the LA City Hall. The LA Times article mentions  "a bare-chested middle-aged man with Nazi insignias tattooed on his chest and back." The counter-protesters beat the hell out of him:

Surrounded, the man mockingly bobbed his head to the rhythm of demonstrators chanting "Nazi scum." About a dozen protesters suddenly began pelting the man with punches and kicks. He fell and was struck on the back with the wooden handle of a protester's sign, which snapped in two. Police eventually reached the man and pulled him from the melee, as blood poured from the back of his neck.

Another man was rushed by a mob on Spring Street. He was punched in the face and kicked for about 20 seconds before police made it to the scene. After that beating was broken up, the man began running south on Spring Street, only to be chased down by a protester and slugged in the face. He collapsed and his face slammed to the curb as protesters began pummeling him again.

The bloodied man was then escorted away by police. Both victims were treated and released, police said.

His sign, unclear in its intended meaning, read "Christianity=Paganism=Heathen$" with an arrow pointing at a swastika.

The protest was carried out by the  National Socialist Movement, a group that has been credibly said to be controlled by the FBI. ("Prefabricated Fascists: The FBI's Assembly-Line Provocateurs" by William Norman Grigg). As Grigg notes, "the FBI has no problem staging white supremacist rallies and protest marches that help 'local' police departments rack up overtime." If these guys are FBI agents, I assume they are getting combat pay.

Actually, the NSM is "all show, no go" – it's more of a federally controlled traveling roadshow, sort of a Third Reich tribute band. Its cadres exude all of the raw menace of the hapless Illinois Nazis from The Blues Brothers, and possess all of the street-fighting chops of thebumbling Black Widow biker gang from Clinton Eastwood's Philo Beddoe films.

The real point is that the anti-White left feels no compunctions about perpetrating violence against such people. (The counter-protesters, who outnumbered the NSM folks by at least 10 to 1,  are described as "a wide assortment of African American, Jewish, Latino, immigrants-rights and anarchist groups.") Not only were the NSM people beaten up, "dozens of [the counter-protesters]  hurled rocks and glass bottles at the neo-Nazis and their police escorts." Despite all of this very public violence directed at the NSM, the police arrested no one — further lending credibility that the whole thing was a stage show.

Being anti-White means there are no consequences for your illegal actions — another example of Sam Francis's concept of anarcho-tyranny. The LAPD spokesman said ""We allowed both sides to exercise their 1st Amendment rights." Apparently violence perpetrated against racially conscious Whites is a free speech right. You can bet that violence directed against non-Whites would lead to long prison sentences.

But this stage show has real world consequences. This type of demonstration is exactly the way the media wants to portray opposition to immigration. It will definitely produce big bucks in donations for the $PLC and similar organizations.LA TImes readers (who have been treated to harrowing articles and editorials on the Arizona anti-illegal immigration law every day since it passed) will be predictably outraged. And it energizes the very large anti-White community of LA in advance of the coming battle on immigration amnesty. Indeed, on May 1 the counter-protesters will have their day: A rally to promote immigration, both legal and especially illegal. You can bet there will be no violent counter-demonstrations.

Presumably, the NSM will take their traveling road show to other cities to inflame public opinion there as well.

Kevin MacDonald: Edmund Connelly on Faux Conservatives

Sunday, April 18th, 2010

Kevin MacDonald: Edmund Connelly's current TOO article explores the topic of faux conservatives. Particularly interesting is Michael Savage's question "Who assaulted the White race? Who set out to destroy the White people?" This is a huge improvement on other MSM conservatives. I have never heard anything like that from the likes of Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter, or your average neocon. Even if his analysis of why this happened is puerile (although it does finger some prominent Jewish names in the 1960s counterculture), just having his audience think in those terms is a breakthrough. Listeners inevitably get the message that the White race is under attack and likely to go extinct in the foreseeable future. He inserts a gloomy report on White birthrates in Europe that concludes that it would take decades for Whites to get back on track demographically.

Certainly White listeners are going to feel threatened and under attack — quite a different message from the harmonious future envisioned by the current media and intellectual elites and on the verge of being enforced by the impending multicultural police state. It necessarily implies that  White people identify as White and start looking for ways to reverse their decline — the nightmare of the current regime. And it doesn't take much imagination to plug into a really powerful analysis of what went wrong in the 1960s and how the events of that decade continue to reverberate in our culture.

The other thing that struck me is the complex character of Andrew Breitbart, whose picture lounging in a bathtub graces the TOO front page. One can only imagine the mixed messages he must have had growing up as an ethnically Irish boy being raised with his Hispanic sister by a Jewish man and his formerly Protestant wife. Then he goes to Tulane for college — a bastion of White southern culture. The $64 question is, what did Breitbart mean when he said, "You've gone to Hebrew school, you've gone to Auschwitz, you go, Never again, Never again. Then you go to Tulane and you go, Maybe never again"? Suggestions appreciated.

Kevin MacDonald: More on Dual Loyalty — Dr. Lani Kass and Gen. Norton Schwartz

Friday, April 16th, 2010

Kevin MacDonald: Dual loyalty issues have once again arisen, this time in conjunction with Philip Giraldi's astonishing essay on Giraldi discusses the curious career of Dr. Lani Kass — formerly a senior military officer in the Israeli Defense Force, and now the  senior Special Assistant to the Chief of Staff of the United States Air Force General Norton A. Schwartz. "Kass appears to have close and continuing ties to her country of birth, frequently spicing her public statements with comments about life in Israel while parroting simplistic views of the nature of the Islamic threat that might have been scripted in Tel Aviv's Foreign Ministry."

Giraldi notes that her appointment raises a host of issues, including the possibility that she is an Israeli spy and exactly how she managed to get security clearance. Given that the official policy of the Israeli government is to advocate a war with Iran, it is more than interesting that she has an important influence on US policy and that she is involved in Project CHECKMATE responsible for drawing up war plans. She is quoted as having what Giraldi characterizes as a "dismissive" comment on a possible war with Iran, and has the views on the Islamic threat usually associated with neocons.

The role of Kass in the Defense Department is at least as questionable as the role of Dennis Ross in the State Department. In fact, it would seem to be an even more clear-cut case because Kass was actually born and raised in Israel and rose to the rank of major in the IDF. Although she is a naturalized US citizen, she has doubtless retained her Israeli citizenship. It would more than a bit surprising if she did not retain an allegiance to Israel. And is there any evidence at all that she has allegiance to the US? When asked about possible war with Iran, she responded, "We can defeat Iran, but are Americans willing to pay the price?" — as if she is not an American.

By Stephen Walt's criteria, therefore, Kass should not have any policy-making role on any issue that relates to Israel. A more difficult case is that of her boss, Gen. Norton Schwartz. Schwartz is also Jewish, although does not have the close ties to Jewish activist organizations like Ross or the strong connections to Israel like Kass. As reported in the Forward,

Schwartz's Jewish identity did not go unnoticed after his appointment, particularly given the current military tensions with Iran. Press TV, an Iranian English language media outlet, wrote an article last week, titled "U.S. Names Jewish [sic — presumably an intentionally awkward translation] as Air Force Chief."

There have long been rumors that Schwartz's predecessor, Michael Moseley, was opposed to a military attack on Iran. The appointment of Schwartz has prompted speculation in the Iranian press and on some blogs that the Bush administration is yet again seriously considering the military option to thwart Tehran's nuclear ambitions.

Unlike the vast majority of Americans, the Iranians assume that Schwartz's ethnic identity would make a difference, and I must agree that it should raise red flags. The vast majority of American Jews have a very strong emotional commitment to Israel that may bias their judgment even if they are not consciously aware of their biases.

As I noted elsewhere,

In my ideal world, Jonah Goldberg's op-eds and Paul Wolfowitz's advice to presidents and defense secretaries should be accompanied by a disclaimer: "You should be cautious in following my advice or even believing what I say about Israel. Deception and manipulation are very common tactics in ethnic conflict, so that my pose as an American patriot should be taken with a grain of salt. And even if I am entirely sincere in what I say, the fact is that I have a deep psychological and ethnic commitment to Israel and Judaism. Psychologists have shown that this sort of deep commitment is likely to bias my perceptions of any policy that could possibly affect Israel even though I am not aware of it."

We would certainly like to know the details of Schwartz's ties with Jewish organizations and activist groups, as well as any ties that he has with Israel. (For example, Paul Wolfowitz has family members living in Israel.) The fact that Schwartz has hired Kass as his senior Special Assistant suggests that the taboo against discussing Jewish loyalty issues is so strong that they feel free to be entirely public about it. (There might be some sensitivity, however, since the Pentagon has removed Kass's biography from its website.)

Nevertheless, a war with Iran would be very costly for the US and may well have huge long term implications for the region and the world. Surely if the government wanted to project the image that US policy was not being shaped by people with a strong personal ethnic attachment to Israel (as clearly happened in the war with Iraq), they would remove people like Ross, Kass, and Schwartz from any role in making policy.

Kevin MacDonald: Robert Satloff and the Jewish Culture of Deceit

Tuesday, April 13th, 2010

Kevin MacDonald: Stephen Walt had the audacity to suggestgiven Dennis Ross's close ties to WINEP, that Ross should not have a policy-making position on Middle East issues in the Obama Administration. Neocon Robert Satloff responded with outrage, claiming that Ross has been doing nothing but promoting "U.S. interests in peace and security for the past quarter-century." And he disingenuously asks, "To which country do we allegedly have a 'strong attachment'?  Our foreign-born scholars hail from virtually every country in the Middle East — Turkey, Iran, Israel, and at least a dozen different Arab countries."

The best response is by M. J. Rosenberg of the Israel Policy Forum, an organization that advocates a two-state solution to the conflict: 

Steve Rosen [who was acquited on charges of spying for Israel in 2009] … cleverly came up with the idea for an AIPAC controlled think-tank that would put forth the AIPAC line but in a way that would disguise its connections.

There was no question that WINEP was to be AIPAC's cutout. It was funded by AIPAC donors, staffed by AIPAC employees, and located one door away, down the hall, from AIPAC Headquarters (no more. It has its own digs). It would also hire all kinds of people not identified with Israel as a cover and would encourage them to write whatever they liked on matters not related to Israel. "Say what you want on Morocco, kid." But on Israel, never deviate more than a degree or two.

In other words, Satloff's claims that WINEP is not tied to any particular lobby or country are part of an ongoing subterfuge that fools no one except the mainstream media: "It matters because the media has totally fallen for this sleight of hand and WINEP spokespersons appear (especially on PBS) as if WINEP was not part of the Israel lobby. Some truth-in-labeling is warranted."

This sort of subterfuge is central to Jewish efforts at influencing policy in a wide range of areas. Because they are a small minority in the US and other Western societies, Jews must recruit support from the wider community. Their positions cannot be phrased as benefiting Jews, but as benefiting the interests of the society as a whole. As a result, these movements cannot tell their name.

A great example is the $PLC, an organization that we now know is funded by Jews and, apart from the sociopathic Morris Dees, is also largely staffed by Jews. Yet whenever there is a story about "immigrant rights" or angry White people, the SPLC is called on by the mainstream media as a "respected civil rights organization" rather than for what it is: A Jewish activist organization actively attempting to further the ethnic  interests of Jews, typically at the expense of White Americans.

This sort of subterfuge was true of all the Jewish intellectual and political movements discussed in The Culture of Critique. As I noted in Ch. 6:

It is thus not surprising that although these theories were directed at achieving specific Jewish interests in the manipulation of culture, they "could not tell their name"; that is, they were forced to minimize any overt indication that Jewish group identity or that Jewish group interests were involved …. Because of the need for invisibility, the theories and movements discussed here were forced to deemphasize Judaism as a social category—a form of crypsis discussed extensively in SAID (Ch. 6) as a common Jewish technique in combating anti-Semitism. In the case of the Frankfurt School, "What strikes the current observer is the intensity with which many of the Institute's members denied, and in some cases still deny, any meaning at all to their Jewish identities" (Jay 1973, 32). The originators and practitioners of these theories attempted to conceal their Jewish identities, as in the case of Freud, and to engage in massive self-deception, as appears to have been common among many Jewish political radicals. Recall the Jewish radicals who believed in their own invisibility as Jews while nevertheless appearing as the quintessential ethnics to outside observers and at the same time taking steps to ensure that [non-Jews] would have highly visible positions in the movement (pp. 91–93). The technique of having non-Jews] as highly visible exemplars of Jewish-dominated movements has been commonly used by Jewish groups attempting to appeal to gentiles on a wide range of Jewish issues (SAID, Ch. 6) and is apparent in the discussion of Jewish involvement in influencing immigration policy. …  [Chap. 7]: Beginning in the late nineteenth century, anti-restrictionist arguments [on immigration]  developed by Jews were typically couched in terms of universalist humanitarian ideals; as part of this universalizing effort, [non-Jews] from old-line Protestant families were recruited to act as window dressing for their efforts, and Jewish groups such as the AJCommittee funded pro-immigration groups composed of non-Jews (Neuringer 1971, 92).

It's an old technique, arguably present (see also here)  from the origins of Judaism as a group evolutionary strategy. The sad thing is that people who should know better continue to be deceived.

Kevin MacDonald: Hype for Elena Kagan—Round Two

Sunday, April 11th, 2010

Kevin MacDonald: The last time we went through the Supreme Court nomination process, there was a veritable groundswell of hyperbole for Elena Kagan — so much so that I couldn't resist writing about it  here. The theme is ethnic networking. How else explain the fact that someone with a completely undistinguished scholarly record not only got tenure at the University of Chicago but was appointed dean of Harvard Law School?

She had exactly two publications in law review journals when she got tenure and has done very little since. A record like that would be a tough sell for tenure even in the nether regions of academia, never mind the most elite schools in the land. But now her lack of publications is seen by her supporters as an asset: She has no embarrassing paper trail on controversial issues.

Once again, the same people are hyping Kagan as absolutely brilliant. In a recent Huffington Post article ("Elena Kagan Emerging As Supreme Court Front-Runner"), Charles Fried says, "She is a supremely intelligent person, really one of the most intelligent people I have encountered, and I have met a lot of them, as one does in this business. She is very adroit politically. … She has quite a strong personality and a winning personality. I think she's an effective, powerful person and a very, very intelligent person, and a very hardworking and serious person." Presumably she can also walk on water.

Fried also praised Kagan effusively in the earlier round, along with Laurence Tribe, another Jewish Harvard Law professor. As I noted, "Kagan was appointed Dean of Harvard Law by Lawrence Summers — also Jewish and with a strong Jewish identity. Summers and Kagan covered for Laurence Tribe when he lifted a passage from another scholar's book without attribution. Ethnic networking is nothing if not reciprocal.

The religion/ethnicity issue rears its head only slightly: "There has been some superficial concern over Kagan's religion — not because she's Jewish but because without Stevens there will be no Protestants on the court." And Kagan would be the first open homosexual on the court.  (Actually, it's surprising we aren't hearing more about this, given how controversial sexual orientation and issues like homosexual marriage are these days.)  But not to worry: "These are distractions not speed bumps, strategists predict, if Obama chooses to go with Kagan."

No White Protestants on the Supreme Court in a country that in living memory thought of itself as WASP at its very core. But, with Kagan, there would be three Jews and no White Protestants. Who exactly are these "strategists" and what is the goal of their strategizing?

The really amazing thing is that Kagan is being framed as a conservative. But on the issues that really count — issues related to multiculturalism, executive power, and free speech, there is every reason to suppose that Kagan is on the left: Her record

strongly suggests that Kagan would be quite willing to fashion her legal arguments to attain her liberal/left policy goals, and that is exactly what her other writings show. Her 1993 article "Regulation of Hate Speech and Pornography After R.A.V," (60 University of Chicago Law Review 873; available on Lexis/Nexis) indicates someone who is entirely on board with seeking ways to circumscribe free speech in the interests of multicultural virtue: "I take it as a given that we live in a society marred by racial and gender inequality, that certain forms of speech perpetuate and promote this inequality, and that the uncoerced disappearance of such speech would be cause for great elation."

She acknowledges that the Supreme Court is unlikely to alter its stance that speech based on viewpoint is protected by the First Amendment, but she sees that as subject to change with a different majority: The Supreme Court "will not in the foreseeable future" adopt the view that "all governmental efforts to regulate such speech … accord with the Constitution." But in her view there is nothing to prevent it from doing so. Clearly, she does not see the protection of viewpoint-based speech as a principle worth preserving or set in stone. Rather, she believes that a new majority could rule that "all government efforts to regulate such speech" would be constitutional. All government efforts.

It's noteworthy that the organized Jewish community has a long record of opposing free speech related to multicultural issues not only in the US, but in a wide range of other countries. Kagan's views fit well with the views of the organized Jewish community: Every effort should be made to restrict "hate speech" within the current legal context, but to do whatever possible to change the context so that such speech is outlawed.

Further, as the HuffPo article notes,  "the praise from conservatives may sound damning to those who worry that the court is … too willing to accommodate the radical expansion of executive power. Kagan has been criticized by civil libertarians for her expansive stance on detainee policy."

The promotion of a strong executive branch and lack of concern for civil liberties is exactly the problem: The worst excesses of government power in the last century have come from the left. Knowing that Kagan advocates a powerful central government is hardly reassuring.

The picture that emerges is that of someone who would have no hesitation to expand the power of the federal government to end First Amendment freedoms and squelch any hope that a White racialist movement could achieve real power. Those ideas are entirely within the Jewish mainstream.

In summary, Kagan "sees her job as a legal scholar to find a way to ensure that these goals are achieved while paying lip service to the legal tradition of the First Amendment." And in the long run, she would just love it if the First Amendment would be jettisoned entirely.

So the hype for Kagan is dishonest on two counts: First, there is no evidence whatever that she is brilliant; all the evidence is that she has achieved far more in the academic world and in government than she deserves  based on her actual performance. Second, she is inaccurately presented as a conservative. Her meager paper trail of academic writing  clearly indicates that she would be a staunch warrior on the side of the multicultural left on critical issues like free speech.

And despite all the hyperbole from "conservatives" like Charles Fried, I suspect the people who are promoting her are well aware of that fact.



Michael Santomauro
Editorial Director
Call anytime: 917-974-6367

Amazon's: DEBATING THE HOLOCAUST: A New Look At Both Sides by Thomas Dalton

Recent Activity:

Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.

Welcome to Mom Connection! Share stories, news and more with moms like you.

Hobbies & Activities Zone: Find others who share your passions! Explore new interests.