Friday, 30 October 2009

Friday Night

David Gray is Welsh?

Friday night I'm going nowhere
All the lights are changing green to red
Turning over TV stations
Situations running through my head
Well looking back through time
You know it's clear that I've been blind
I've been a fool
To ever open up my heart
To all that jealousy, that bitterness, that ridicule

Saturday I'm running wild
And all the lights are changing red to green
Moving through the crowd I'm pushing
Chemicals all rushing through my bloodstream
Only wish that you were here
You know I'm seeing it so clear

If you want it
Come and get it

Wikipedia says
David Gray (born 13 June 1968, Sale, Greater Manchester, England) is an English singer-songwriter.

Gray was born and raised in Altrincham, Manchester before moving with his family to Wales at the age of nine, where he grew up in the small coastal town of Solva in Pembrokeshire and went on to attend the Carmarthenshire College of Art. He later moved back to the north-west of England to attend the University of Liverpool.
Crikey. I must have been at the same college at the same time. I would have been in Liverpool at the same time too.

Atta boy, boyo! I love David Gray. I didn't realise we had so much common experience.

Thursday, 22 October 2009

The BNP at the BBC

Just a thought

Why does the American "patriot" movement tend to regard Israel as such a pariah, when it might reasonably be expected Israeli indominability would appeal to the American revolutionary spirit of independence?

Americans had to kill people to become "Americans". To throw off external domination, imperialism, subjugation.

I'd have thought Israel's position and actions would thus appeal to that particular pride of Americans, especially amongst the "patriot movement".

I guess it's the attendant American Nationalism that makes the difference.....the fear that Israel/Jews are compromising American independence, and yankee nationalism takes absolute precedence over other nationalisms, even if they reflect america's own.

Rivero - Idiot

Oct 05 13:20
Terrorists could seize nuclear weapons if we fail in Afghanistan, warns Army chief

Rivero comments:
Okay, how does letting the Taliban have Afghanistan back link to terrorists getting nuclear weapons, since there are none in Afghanistan?
Rivero's never heard of Pakistan? Well, yes he has, because earlier he published a report saying
A tribal Jirga of North Waziristan on Sunday threatened to support the Afghanistan-based anti-US groups, including the Taliban, if the US drone attacks were not stopped.
Rivero seems trapped by his nationalism - the notion that national borders delineate people. They don't - at least not always, and certainly not in tribal regions where borders are bureaucratic rather than rational and historic remnants of different nations.

Whatever one thinks of the policy of the Afghan war and its encroachment into Pakistan, there is a definite rationale behind it - the fear is Pakistan's nuclear capability, exacerbated by the potential collapse of Pakistan state: Taliban-isation. How realistic is the threat of Taliban-isation of Pakistan? I don't know. Who does? I don't think Rivero does.

And does Rivero actually seek nuclear proliferation? Like many in the conspiracist world, and even wider circles, Rivero can appear to delight in Iranian acquisition of nuclear capabilities. For Rivero, seemingly anything which threatens Israel is worth supporting.....even if it is an Iranian (and therefore radical islamic) nuclear program. I don't see why Iranian nuclear capability is something to be encouraged, even accepting the obvious hypocrisy of nuclear-armed USA/UK (and maybe Israel.)

Rivero suggests USA should not support Israel in any anticipated action against Iranian nuclear program. Rivero refers to close Russian relations with Iran thus:
a war between Israel and Russia over Iran; that would be something to see!
He seems positively delighted at the prospect. I don't understand why Rivero endorses Russian protection of its ally Iran but insists American alliance with Israel is so inexplicable, dangerous, and perverse.

But, hey - maybe the Iranians performed a bloodless coup and now a cabal of Iranians are running Russian foreign policy?

What other reason could there possibly be for a superpower supporting a minor and insignificant ally with military aid? Russia and Iran know it might lead to a major conflagration with an ally of a Russian behaviour can only be explained by a cabal of Iranians running Russian foreign policy? That's the argument Rivero uses for Israeli and America alliance - but strangely not for Iranian and Russian alliance.

Likewise there's a difference in how Rivero treats the states which are not members of the NNPT (nuclear non-proliferation treaty). The non-signatories of the NNPT are India, Israel, Pakistan and North Korea. Isreal is the only one of the four without an acknowledged nuclear weapons capability - though it seems near-certain that she does possess such capability.

Presumably Israel has as much right to opt-out of the NNPT as India, NK and Pakistan? And presumably the nuclear capabilities of each and all of these countries are of concern? Obviously not, as whilst Rivero mocks the idea that "failure" in Afghanistan could lead to a greater threat from Pakistan's nuclear capability -- doubtless a huge concern for India -- it is Israel about whom he writes:
The real problem with the Middle Easy (sic) is that Israel refuses to abide by the same rules as all other nations.
All other nations? Like Pakistan, India and North Korea?

Where's the concern about these other nuclear-armed non-signatories of the NNPT? Where the concern about increasing Iranian nuclear capability? Rivero's concern is skin-deep and reveals he is more interested in condemning Israel than threats of nuclear proliferation.

Surely we can all understand why a nation would seek nuclear weapons capability - as self defence? It would be stupid to imagine Iran has absolutely no interest in such a capability. We understand the point perfectly readily over Pakistan and Indian acquisition of nukes, especially with regard to Kashmir.

The stand-off between nuclear-armed, NNPT non-signatories India and Pakistan over Kashmir is hardly something to be welcomed. Why shouldn't we be equally concerned over a potential similar stand-off developing between Iran and Israel? Too much of the discussion about Iranian nuclear development omits this. It is a reasonable cause for concern. Just as nuclear-Pakistan's fragile and combustible society falling prey to radical Islam - Talibanisation - is a reasonable concern.

Good Marketing - The Paranoid Style

Maybe it was this that "the hackers" didn't want anyone to read?
Mike Rivero: "...the US Government was hoping to ignite a new major war [with Iran], one which would distract Americans from the already failed wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, not to mention the economy destroyed by failed US Government policy."
How ridiculous is that? War with Iran to distract from the war in Iraq, the economy, etc? Serious international crises explained by a desire to divert attention? Ridiculous.
Mike Rivero: "....the United States and Israel are in serious trouble. They had wanted war with Iran to distract the world from their various domestic problems, and now that is not likely to happen." distract the world from American and Israeli domestic problems! The USA and Israel want war with Iran to distract myself and others from American and Israeli domestic problems? Yeah - I can see them really caring about distracting me from their domestic issues. But that must be how the world works - Mike Rivero says so. Amazing. Who'd have known I had such an influence?

New Order - Elegia

Saturday, 10 October 2009

Prisonplanet Claims "friends on the left"! Attacks suggestions of anti-semitism.

Alex Jones has fans on both the left and right of the political spectrum
So claims Prisonplanet! Amazing. Even though Alex Jones insists the "left/right paradigm is false"!!!!!!!!!

Wow - I'm stunned to read Prisonplanet lay claim to having "friends on the left".

Do they mean Willis Carto? Eustace Mullins? Jerome Corsi? Ron Paul? Mike Rivero?

Alex Jones thinks "wealth distribution" is "communist trash". He believes the NWO is "socialist" - E.V.I.L.

Now he brags about having "friends on the left"! Listen up, Alex? "FUCK OFF YOU DO!!!"

Prisonplanet brags about its 'friends on the left' as it derides its target for being "ultra-elite" Bilderbergers.
In a hit piece that appears in The New Republic magazine, a publication owned by the ultra-rich Asper Bilderberg family, author Michelle Goldberg has trouble comprehending why Alex Jones has fans on both the left and right of the political spectrum, ascribing it not to the fact that Jones is interested in pursuing truth over partisanship, but to the claim that he is a “purveyor of paranoia”.
That'd be the same Bilderbergers popularised by Willis Carto's longtime friend and colleague, Big Jim Tucker, right? The same Jim Tucker of Carto's far-right talking box AFP that Alex Jones employs whenever he needs a rent-a-quote about "the Boilderbergs", RIGHT?
Michelle Goldberg wastes little time in attacking Alex Jones for taking on….you guessed it…..Bilderberg and Israel!
Like there's a connection between these things......Bilderbergs and Israelis? (I always thought it was Jews, not Israelis) And errr......has Alex Jones really "taken on the Israelis"? He's always tried to avoid being overtly anti-semitic........but now he's claiming he's "taken on the Israelis"? Does this mark a shift in Jones' and Prisonplanet's views? (They used to claim Poplawski the cop-killer opposed Alex's views -- because Poplawski thought Jones didn't "go after" Israelis/Joooos sufficiently.)

Prisonplanet criticise Michelle Goldberg's attack on Prisonplanet's anti-semitism because:
her paymasters are servants of Bilderberg and Israel
Ahhhhh. Of course!

[The most astonishing thing about criticising people for anti-semitism is that one is guaranteed to be "accused" of being either an Israeli, or a jew (or working for them) LOL The same as if you criticise racism - you get accused of being black, supporting the government of errr.....Congo..... Sure. Nobody says that.]
[Goldberg] actually implies that Jones hates Jews because he states that Obama is just the front man for an international cabal of global elitists.
Gee - how could Michelle Goldberg possibly think that! Of course AJ is misrepresenting what Goldberg thinks, no doubt (I haven't checked - but it's always the case with Jones). And funnily enough it seems Goldberg and I are in agreement - that Jones' attack of "NWO global elites" is a transparent effort to attack "joooos".

It is up to Jones to be specific enough to prove he isn't attacking "joooos". He never is. If his defence of his definitions is such that he claims "I'm not attacking jews - I could mean anyone"........then his definitions are so slack as to be useless.

And. criticially - his audience knows what he means. Look through the comments sections at Prisonplanet and the audience has a very clear anti-semitic core. Also look where Prisonplanet articles are posted........there is a deluge of anti-semitism.
Of course, by making everything about Jews and anti-Semitism, Goldberg is dutifully playing her role as the race pimp in an effort to try and invoke the age-old cliched stereotype of the right-wing extremist and portray Jones as a white supremacist hatemonger, when in reality we spend half our time trying to avoid race and are routinely chastised for doing so by white supremacists themselves.
That reads like a confession to me. They spend half their time trying to avoid race!? WTF does that mean? And see how they make the point that they are criticised by white supremacists? Who cares that white supremacists criticise them? Who would even be aware of it? WHO WOULD BE AWARE OF IT??

I've written earlier that Prisonplanet made a big deal of having "opposing views" to those of white-supremacist Poplawski, the cop killer. I suggested (and showed)that the real issue Poplawski had with Prisonplanet was that Poplawski was unsure as to the degree which Alex Jones saw "the jew" as the problem. Poplawski was unsure of Jones' anti-semitism.

Now we have Alex Jones' Prisonplanet defending itself by drawing attention to the fact that white supremacists criticise them......for their apparent ambivalence over anti-semitism. That's what Poplawski said.........and that's what Prisonplanet had claimed showed they held "opposing views" to Poplawski.

I had suggested that the entire reason Poplawski and white supremacists/fascists were ambivalent about Alex Jones was precisely because Jones was so careful to not appear anti-semitic. That's his whole not appear to be anti-semitic whilst indulging anti-semitic conspiracy theories through use of euphemisms about "NWO", "global elites", "media monopolies", NEOCON cabal, etc.

And now here's Jones and Prisonplanet defending themselves from accusations of anti-semitism by claiming they get criticism from the far-right/white-supremacism/fascism for not going "far enough", for not being "anti-semitic enough".

That's exactly what I suggested was Jones' ploy. Uncanny.
Prisonplanet: we spend half our time trying to avoid race

It was linked to from Rivero's WRH too. Nuff said?

Some of what Goldberg actually wrote:
Jones’s roots are very much on the far right. He represents an old strain of American conservatism--isolationist, anti-Wall Street, paranoid about elite conspiracies--that last flowered during the John Birch Society’s heyday. He began his radio broadcasting career in 1996, in his early twenties, with the Austin-based show "The Final Edition," which promulgated all sorts of black-helicopter theories about Bill Clinton. Steeped in the rhetoric of the militia movement, he’s long been a champion of Randy Weaver, the white supremacist whose wife and son were killed in 1992 by federal agents at Ruby Ridge, Idaho. (He’s asserted that the people behind Ruby Ridge and Waco were also behind the 1993 World Trade Center bombings--"Clinton’s Reichstag.")
Bloody hell! She's accurate!

She makes a very important point, imo:
it’s really only since Barack Obama’s election, when Jones turned the full force of his apocalyptic imagination toward the new president, that his ideas have found purchase in the conservative mainstream.
Right! And that's what Jones is about.
[The Obama Deception - Jones' film about Obama] is like The Protocols of the Elders of Zion stripped of any reference to Jews.

Goldberg mentions that FOX News has been promoting and echoing Jones. Surprised? Then this little blockbuster:
In late July, Republican Congressman Louie Gohmert of Texas appeared on Jones’s show to discuss the "nation-ending" potential of Obama’s policies and the country’s incipient march toward eugenics and fascism.

Anyway......what is there in the article to get Jones and Prisonplanet so annoyed? Where are the accusations of anti-semitism? Jones's ouevre IS the protocols stripped of references to jews - as Michelle Goldberg says.......that's what makes Jones such an ambivalent figure amongst white supremacists......they recognise his perspective is essentially the protocols stripped of jewish references.......they're just unsure WHY he has stripped them of the same way Poplawski was unsure.

So.....when Alex Jones' Prisonplanet claims white supremacists criticise them for "avoiding race"......we can see it really means criticism for dropping the jews from the Protocols.

So how (AND WHY!!) are Jones and Prisonplanet aware that white supremacists criticise them for "avoiding race" ie for omitting the jews from the protocols?

Friday, 9 October 2009

Funny - Troofers Never Mentioned This......

June 16, 2009

911 NanoTech Thermite Publisher Accepts Fake Paper, Editors quit

By John R Moffett

The 911 Truth Movement has been highly vocal about the publication of an article entitled “Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe” that was published in “The Open Chemical Physics Journal”, which is part of the Bentham Open Science Publishers group of journals


The subgroup of 911 Truthers who are advocating this particular theory of the WTC collapse have declared victory over those advocating the controlled demolition theory, or the missiles disguised as planes theory, or the directed energy weapons theory, or even the secret nuclear reactors in the WTC basements theory, because they now have a “scientific paper published in a peer reviewed journal” to buttress their claims.

It is not surprising that the public is not aware of the fact that the so-called Bentham Open Science publishing group is basically a vanity publication where anyone can publish a “peer reviewed scientific journal article” which is not actually peer reviewed.

This embarrassing fact became all too clear recently when another Bentham “peer reviewed” journal was caught publishing a fake paper submitted by Philip Davis, a PhD student in scientific communications at Cornell University.

Davis used a well known computer program that was designed specifically to generate nonsense science articles which would be spotted as such by any legitimate peer review process. The fake article entitled “Deconstructing Access Points” contained wonderfully nonsensical statements such as “Note that vacuum tubes have less jagged effective floppy disk throughput curves than do autogenerated robots”.

Despite making no sense whatsoever, the paper was accepted at the Bentham Publishing Groups journal “The Open Information Science Journal” as though it was peer reviewed, despite the fact that the author, Davis, never received any reviewer comments, which is a universal part of the peer review process. Instead, Davis simply received a bill for an $800 fee which was to be sent to a post office box in the United Arab Emirates.

Following the disclosure of the fake nature of the article (and withdrawal of the manuscript) by Davis, the chief editor at the journal, Bambang Parmanto, resigned. "I didn't like what happened," Parmanto told reporters for The Scientist Magazine. "If this is true, I don't have full control of the content that is accepted to this journal." Following this, Marc Williams, an immunologist and stem cell researcher at the University of Rochester School of Medicine & Dentistry who served on the editorial advisory board of The Open Stem Cell Journal also resigned his position with the Bentham Group.

Previously, the chief editor of the Bentham journal that the Thermite article was published in resigned, and denounced the journal with this statement: “I cannot accept that this topic is published in my journal. The article has nothing to do with physical chemistry or chemical physics, and I could well believe that there is a political viewpoint behind its publication. If anyone had asked me, I would say that the article should never have been published in this journal. Period.” Despite supposedly being the chief editor, she had not been informed that the thermite article was going to be published in her journal.

The advocates for the nanotech thermite theory of the WTC collapse will never accept the fact that the Bentham Group journals are not actual peer reviewed scientific publications, but scientists all around the world are now convinced of the fact.

Thursday, 8 October 2009

Velvetrevolution - a confession?

I thought this was strange to see at VelvetRevolution, considering what I'd previously wondered about - whether a far-right organisation could pose as a critic of the election system to clandestinely undermine faith in the democratic process. Rather than serve as a critic of election fraud to defend the principle of democracy - as they purport - it is easily possible to imagine a critic seeking to promote election fraud as a means of undermining faith in "liberal democracy". It could be done to create a sense of illegitimacy of government, and also to create the space for a demand for "something different".......possibly even something not based upon democracy (following the example of Weimar, and Nazism)

Stop Domestic Terror

Recently, there has been an explosion in threats and acts of domestic terrorism. The majority of these can be traced to groups and individuals who do not accept the results of our recent election or the laws enacted or proposed by those who have been elected. They seek to undermine the democratic process through threats, intimidation, and even outright murder. They can't accept the legitimacy of the President, or a woman's legal right to make choices about her own medical care, or an immigrant's right to be treated humanely under the law, so they carry out acts that are antithetical to American democracy, American values, and both civil and human rights.

The fringe element that makes up those who commit these acts of terror is frequently exploited by a continuous wave of rightwing media advocating violence, either directly or indirectly, and by commentators amplifying the talking points of extremist religious leaders and extremist political leaders. This fringe is incited on our public airwaves, and urged to take matters into their own hands, with the underlying belief that the Bible and/or U.S. Constitution justify using ‘whatever means’ are necessary to oppose what they believe to be immoral laws.

That seems to reveal an uncannily accurate rejection of what I suggested. Yes - it's a rejection - but that's the point. They're saying they reject exactly the sort of thing I had been on about - for the exact same reasons.

But this is coming from people who work to promote the notion of "election fraud" -- which they just asserted has been a major driving force behind "domestic terrorism".

ETA: Their campaign features this note:
We are supporting the efforts of other organizations that are addressing various aspects of this campaign, such as,,,,,,,,,,,,
Hey - VelvetRevolution founder member Brad Friedman should look closer to home? As if the moderator of his website (BradBlog) appreciates SPLC and ADL as allies? Hmmmm. Very odd.

Elsewhere in their campaign, VR call for a few things......which because of my experience of the people around the VelvetRevolution/BradBlog group make me immediately think they are targeting "joooos":
review whether any media groups are violating antitrust laws by monopolizing media or media markets
If that was written by BradBlog's moderator, it would be perfectly reasonable to conclude they meant to target "joooos". Big Dan's Blog, populated by BradBlog commentators, including the moderator, indulge a long-running theme that the media is "joooish controlled".

At one moment the commentariat and moderator of BradBlog are espousing "jooooish media control" at BigDan'sBigBlog - "google Hitler's last testament!" - whilst over at BradBlog's associated website, VelvetRevolution, people are calling for investigation of media monopolies - alongside the ADL and SPLC!!

Pardon me, but how the fucking hell does that make sense?

Bradblog's Plunger saying "Media = ALL LIES = Jewish owned and complicit".......BradBlog's Z saying "Media is Jewish Controlled".......BradBlog's VelvetRevolution saying "let's work with the SPLC and ADL to work against 'monopoly media'"


VR say:
The campaign urges .....federal legislation to require more diversity in the media, and congressional hearings on media monopolies and the responsibilities of media to act in the public interest.
They mean "reduce jooooish media control"? What else can they mean when considering the same website proprietor (Brad Friedman) indulges the anti-semitism of plunger, Z, BigDan, Agent99 (Brad's moderator!)

For example - at BigDan's, Z - a commentator at BradBlog - and friend of BradBlog's moderator and others - wrote:
They [Jews] only control 96 % of the world media - propaganda machine.

The power of lies, deceptions and disinformation as Americans pay the price of collective stupidity.

Should any minority be allowed to wield such awesome power?

Facts of Jewish Media Control
Plunger - another BradBlog regular - and friend of BradBlog meoderator Agent99 - wrote:
ALL LIES. Media = Jewish-owned and complicit.
Yet Brad's VelvetRevolution seeks to work with ADL and SPLC!? Against racism? (And (joooish) media monopolies.....very clever)

When I posted at BradBlog previously to ask about his apparent indulgence of such anti-semitism, it was deleted, I was denounced as insane.....etc.

Now they're campaigning with the ADL against racism? (and jooooish media monopolies, of course.....)

Only in America

Only in America

Collapse started at plane impact sites

Impossible to explain by "controlled demolition". How could pre-concealed explosives survive such a fire? Impossible. How could the perps know where the planes would hit? Impossible.

Controlled demolition hypothesis cannot explain the indisputable facts that both tower-collapses started at the imapact sites where it was impossible for the explosives required for demolition to survive intact and functional.

WTC Towers : Definitely not free-fall

Sunday, 4 October 2009

Rivero, WRH, Chris Bollyn, 911 and LIES

Under a heading "911 Smoking Gun", Mike Rivero at WRH writes about the major fire in the Madrid tower:
The core of the structurally similar Windsor Building in Madrid withstood an 800°C inferno for more than 18 hours without failing....

The link provided to backup this claim is to A Christopher Bollyn article, published at Rivero's site, It says:
As an intense fire consumed the 32-story Windsor Building in Madrid's business district, the press reports all began with the words "fear
of collapse." After 24 hours, however, the tower, which was a similar construction to the twin towers of the World Trade Center, remained standing.

A smoking gun, huh?

But can we draw that conclusion? That rests upon the claim that the Madrid Tower and the WTC were "similar".

They were not similar. The WIndsor Tower had a concrete core, concrete throughout its main structure and concrete "strong" floors to provide additional strength. The parts of the MAdrid Tower that were not concrete-reinforced and heat-protected actually DID collapse.

This is from The Concrete Centre:
The Madrid Windsor Tower Building Fire, 14-15 February 2005

* Landmark 29-floor tower on Madrid skyline remained standing despite a 26-hour, multiple-floor fire.

* Despite a complete burn-out, the strength provided by a technical concrete floor, plus the passive fire resistance of the building's concrete core and frame, prevented the building from collapse.

* The only part of the building to collapse was the network of steel perimeter columns supporting the slab on the upper floors.

* the Madrid Windsor Building's strong points were its two concrete 'technical' floors and the concrete core system enabling the building to survive complete burnout.

* This case study is an example of the excellent performance of a concrete frame designed using traditional methods and subjected to an intense fire. It also highlights the risks when active fire protection measures fail or are not included in steel frame construction.


The building totalled 32 storeys, with 29 floors above ground and three below. A concrete core and concrete frame supported the first 16 floors. Above that was a central support system of concrete columns, supporting concrete floors with steel perimeter columns. An additional feature was the presence of two 'technical floors' - concrete floors designed to give the building more strength. One was just above the ground level and the other at the 17th floor.

Here's a picture of the Madrid Tower's unprotected steel portions collapsing - analogous to the WTC collapsing.

And here's a picture of the burnt-out remains......showing the collapsed (melted) steel.....and the remaining INTACT concrete reinforced structure and core. NOT similar at all to the WTC - and in fact illustrates why the WTC did collapse, and Madrid did not. If the whole Madrid Tower had been made of only steel, it surely would have collapsed too because the parts of it that were not concrete reinforced and heat protected DID collapse.

This is an example of dishonest treatment of evidence.

Why do Rivero and Bollyn claim the buildings were similar? They're either lying, or plain wrong. Likely they know they are lying - because their wrong claims serve their agenda.

Regardless of their intent - their claims are empty. But nevertheless, people still accept the claims - and they add such "knowledge" to what they believe is "the truth". Similar buildings? No. Steel can't melt and collapse? Madrid proves it can, does, and will again.

WTC1 Core

Is this really a sidewall of WTC1? It looks like the core.

The following picture (that I used previously) now has an inset - it's a view from more towards the South of the same artifact of the collapse - the 'spire'. The view for the inset has been mirrored because the view is from (somewhere near) the opposite direction. Uncannily similar? It's the same artifact, undoubtedly - and it looks like the core. It does not look like the WTC wall.


Here's the picture from which fig1 above was taken.


And here's the mirror image from the picture directly above. This is the image that appears in fig1 above.


Friday, 2 October 2009

WTC Collapses - Cores Visible

wtc core

It is difficult to see properly, but these pictures appear to show the remnants of WTC2's core still standing for a little while, after the rest of the towers had collapsed. It's obscured by dust, of course.

Showing the core was still present after the collapses, shows that the core was not demolished to initiate collapse, as conspiracy theorists argue. So....are these the cores?

Here's the video:

And here's WTC1 core - image first - then the video from which the stills were taken:
core wtc 1

This is what Big Dan's Big Blog deletes

Please forward widely

Anti-Racist Action-LA/People Against Racist Terror recently called for a counter-demonstration and picket against a rally by the Institute for Historical Review (IHR). The IHR, founded by the racist anti-Jewish Willis Carto, a Hitler sympathizer, and now run by Mark Weber, a "former" member of the neo-nazi National Alliance, has called a demonstration for Friday July 29 at noon ..........

We cannot allow these forces to take the streets in Los Angeles without opposition.

Their true nature must be exposed and denounced.
That message was deleted from Big Dan's Big Blog.

Wasn't it, Dan?

Dan likes to call himself an anti-racist, and an anti-fascist.

But the self-acclaimed anti-racist Big Dan deletes the message above - and continues linking to Willis Carto......"a good source of information".

Enough said?