The Increasing Ignorance of Hate-based environmentalist's and their evil cause

[whitemajikman]

Hate Speach on the Internet :

The movement,counter movement and future.

http://sitemaker.umich.edu/iokwuje/files/esa_2001.pdf

[whitemajikman]

Nazi Greens an enemy of democracy, government decrees
By Margo Kingston
October 29, 2003

"I intend to continue to call to the attention of the Australian people the extremely alarming, frightening similarities between the methods employed by contemporary green politics and the methods and the values of the Nazis." Liberal Senator George Brandis launches a government campaign to destroy the Greens as a political force.

George Brandis is a Queensland Liberal Senator. The Government chose him to conduct the tactics for and lead a front-on Parliamentary attack on the Greens which asserted that the party was an enemy of the State. The speech responds to a Greens' motion for an inquiry into procedures for joint sittings of Parliament. Senator Brandis's political biography is at the end of his speech.

***

28 October, 2003; Senate Hansard

Senator BRANDIS (Queensland) (3.59 p.m.)

I move:

Omit all words after That, substitute the Senate:

(a) condemns the behaviour of Senators Brown and Nettle during the address to the joint meeting by the President of the United States of America (the Honourable George W Bush) on 23 October 2003, in defying the order of the chair and the proper direction of the Serjeant-at-Arms;

(b) considers the behaviour of Senators Brown and Nettle to have been grossly inappropriate, discourteous, lacking in good manners and reflecting poorly upon the Parliament and Australia; and

(c) in light of the behaviour of Senators Brown and Nettle, asks the Procedure Committee to consider what steps should be taken to ensure the proper conduct of joint meetings to welcome foreign heads of state.

Copies of the amendment have been circulated at least to party leaders and have been given to the attendants.

When the people of Australia last Thursday saw the antics and the predetermined sideshow of Senator Brown and Senator Nettle during the course of President Bush's address, I think most people - I dare say more than 90 per cent of the people of this country - thought that Senator Brown and Senator Nettle were responsible for an insult to the President of the United States and to the American people. Of course they were, but they were guilty of much more than that: they were guilty of a contempt of this parliament.

In the name of free speech, Senator Brown and Senator Nettle sought to deny the freedom of speech of the invited guest of the Australian people - sought to prevent the Australian people hearing what President Bush had to say. In the name of parliamentary democracy, Senator Brown and Senator Nettle sought to suborn parliamentary democracy.

And now they come to this chamber, bleating, awash with crocodile tears and pretending to be the custodians of free speech - pretending to be the custodians of this institution. Their own conduct last Thursday in belittling this institution - in denying the freedom of a foreign head of state to be heard by the Australian people and by the representatives of the Australian people - demonstrates the hypocrisy of their position.

Let us remember what it was in this premeditated, preordained and orchestrated stunt that Senator Brown and Senator Nettle contrived to do. First of all, they interrupted the President three times. Then, in response to a lawful direction by the Presiding Officer, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, operating under standing orders that this chamber had agreed to, they refused to abide the lawful direction of the Speaker of the House of Representatives. Thirdly, when the Speaker of the House of Representatives lawfully and properly directed the Serjeant-at-Arms to escort Senator Brown and then Senator Nettle from the chamber, they refused to obey that lawful direction. So it is not merely a question of bad manners, Senator Brown. That is offensive enough, but it is the least of your offences. It is the premeditated contempt shown by you and your colleague Senator Nettle for the procedures and the standing orders of this chamber, as agreed to by this chamber; the defiance of its presiding officer; and the defiance of its officer the Serjeant-at-Arms. To this day, you have not had the decency to apologiseto purge your contempt of this parliament.

I think until fairly recently the Australian people tended to divide the Greens party into two camps. There seemed to be two points of view about the Greens party. There were those Australians who thought that the Greens were a collection of well-meaning oddballs - and there was certainly a degree of evidence to give comfort to that view.

There were others, I think, in Australia who regarded the Greens not so much as well-meaning oddballs but as a mob of scruffy ratbags. There was certainly plenty of evidence to give comfort to that point of view. But, as their behaviour last Thursday demonstrated, the Greens are not well-meaning oddballs and they are not scruffy ratbags; they are something much more sinister than that. They have introduced into our democracy - one of the world's greatest and most successful democracies - a new and sinister element. The journalist Andrew Bolt, in a very perceptive piece published in the -

Senator Brown: Mr Acting Deputy President, I rise on a point of order. I have been listening carefully to what the member has said, but I would ask you to be careful to defend the standing order which states that he shall not reflect on a member and to be very careful about the quotation he is about to make, whether or not it is made.

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Senator Lightfoot): Which standing order are you basing your point of order on, Senator Brown?

Senator Brown: The standing order which says that he shall not reflect on a member.

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT There is no point of order.

In a very perceptive column syndicated throughout Australia in last Sunday's newspapers, the journalist Andrew Bolt pointed out the striking and very dangerous antecedents of the fanaticism of contemporary green politics in this country, and its commonality and common source with the views that inspired the Nazis in prewar Germany.

In an earlier piece, published in July, Mr Bolt directed our attention to two studies that have been written of contemporary green politics - and I have read them in the last day or so; they make chilling reading - which go all the way to explaining the modus operandi of the Greens last Thursday. The first, by an American scholar, Professor Raymond Dominick, examined the common source of the fanaticism of contemporary greens with the nature worship practised by the Nazis in the 1930s. The book is called The Environmental Movement in Germany.


the rest of this article is here

http://www.smh.com.au/cgi-bin/common/popupPrintArticle.pl?path=/articles/2003/10/29/1067233222840.html

[whitemajikman]

Nazi Greens

Judson Cox, June 13, 2003

During the 2000 elections, I was enrolled at the University Of Georgia. A large university campus is a fascinating place to be during a presidential election; it is a microcosm of political views ranging from the mainstream to the absurd. I was involved with both Republican and Libertarian club events, but the colorful activities of other political ideologies did not escape my attention. The daily panorama of politics ranged from the banality one would expect to be a reflection of the Gore/Lieberman ticket, to the playfully politically incorrect witticisms that have come to be expected from College Republicans. But the fun did not stop there. We were treated to Libertarian gun raffles which were hugely successful in numbers attracted, media attention and funds raised. There were parades of Greens with their usual macabre signs and costumes, decrying capitalism, environmental destruction and the military, with their ever present drums and threats of violence. The smaller organizations ranged from racial identity groups (who seemed very serious), hard core communists and hold-out supporters of Jell-O Biafra, Frank Zappa For President boosters (surely a boon for the running mate, as Zappa had recently expired), and even a loose-knit cadre of anarchists and Marxists who leafleted and graffitied the campus with "Pigasus For President" messages. I can only assume that this was not the same pig that the Yippies ran against President Nixon, but given that many in this group identified themselves as witches, I will not rule out reanimation. After all, the Democrats tried it in 2002, with former Senator Fritz Mondale and former Senator Frank Lautenburg.

It was just before this bewildering time that I met a girl who would give me insight into the Left that I otherwise might not have. When I met her (she will remain unnamed), she was not committed to any political ideology. She was an unusually bright girl; attractive and well humored, with a scathing wit. We spent a good deal of time together. At some point, she began a strange transformation. Gradually, her mood darkened, her humor became far more negative and surfaced less frequently, and she began avoiding discussions of politics with me. Eventually, she admitted that she had become a Nazi (yes, an actual Hitler-quoting Nazi). Of course, I tried to talk her out of it. I tried my best to explain the failures of socialism to her, and to defend the Jewish people. I attempted both reason and emotion. I debunked the "Protocols Of The Wise Men Of Zion," as Czarist propaganda, and countered the conspiracy theories concerning the Rothchilds and Israel. I listed the great accomplishments of famous Jews, and even convinced her that science, philosophy, religion, art, economics and literature have been greatly furthered by Jewish accomplishments. It was all for naught. She had surrounded herself with charismatic Nazis, and had been completely taken in by their lies. It was the end of our friendship.

Time passed and as we were traveling in different circles, our paths did not cross. It was during the election that I next became aware of her. I spotted her among the Green Party mobs, agitating in support of Ralph Nader being allowed on the ballot. I will admit that I always hoped Nader would be a bit of a Ross Perot to Al Gore, so I approached her and offered to sign her petition. "Hey, ____," I said, "I thought you were a Nazi; what are you doing supporting Nader?" "I am a Nazi," she replied, "That's why I'm supporting Nader." I must have looked a bit puzzled, because she continued, "What do you think Nazism is? It's national socialism. Only we don't support any one nation. We want an end to all capitalist governments, and the environmental destruction they entail. Also, we're all against the Jews. The Jews run everything; they are responsible for capitalist exploitation and environmental destruction. They are responsible for poverty, war, and global warming. What they are doing to Palestine they will do to all of us if we let them." "So," I asked in disbelief, "the Green Party is anti-Semitic?" "Most of us are," she replied, "Some of us even call ourselves Nazi Greens, especially in Europe." "You are insane," I told her, as I walked away, feeling nauseous.

This exchange helped me understand what would otherwise be a puzzling phenomenon. An honest appraisal of the Left over the past few years will show that it is growing increasingly anti-Semitic. On its face, this just does not make sense. Jews are generally associated with liberal causes, but modern liberalism is growing less accepting of Jews. Perhaps Edward Said's continuous parroting of Palestinian condemnations of "Zionism" is at the root, but the tree has grown far beyond the Palestinian cause. What began with Israeli divestment campaigns on college campuses, that equated Israel to Apartheid South Africa, has grown to the point that the phrase "Zionist conspiracy" has become a virtual shibboleth (if you will pardon the metaphor) of not merely Timothy McVeighs, but of increasingly mainstream liberals.

The rise of anti-Semitism on the left seems to have come to a head following the September 11th terrorist attacks. With the appearance of books claiming to prove that Israel was behind the terrorist attacks, the Zionist conspiracy became common currency. Liberal websites and leaders spread this message, until blatant anti-Semitism became common place at every war protest. Filthy, French style, protesters held signs blaming the world's ills on Jews, while their French counterparts defaced synagogues and graves, and attacked Jews on the streets.

This tide of sentiment is not limited to the dirty and the youthful. Indeed, a veritable cottage industry has been formed of lawyers, led by the ACLU, who make a living defending those who seek to, or who actively encourage killing Jews in Israel and abroad. More and more, the Left makes it clear that the only religion they approve of is the one that preaches the killing of Jews (and Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, etc.) - Islam. Even among mainstream democrats, anti-Semitism is not condemned. When Jesse Jackson used the slur, "hymie town," he was not denounced by a single liberal, nor was Al Sharpton rebuked when he said he would not tolerate a Hadassah (Lieberman's wife) in the White House. Even Hillary Clinton is forgiven for reportedly calling Dick Morris a "Jew bastard." The "Zionist conspiracy" is even being leveled against the Bush administration as the term "neoconservative" has resurfaced as synonymous with Jewish conservative. From the radical fringe to the democratic party proper, the Left claims that the Bush administration is merely a pawn of Israel.

I do not pretend that my experience with a Nazi turned Green is evidence that all Greens are Nazis; I am sure many are not. I also do not believe that all liberals are anti-Semitic, nor that all liberals are tolerant of such. However, evidence proves that anti-Semitism is increasingly common on the left. What was formerly agreed upon as the greatest evil of the twentieth century is being embraced and tolerated by many of the most influential leaders and constituencies of the Left. As an active Republican, and committed conservative, I can attest that neither this kind of rhetoric, nor ideology, is tolerated on the Right. Any Republican who espoused such racist nonsense would be roundly condemned, and forced out of any leadership position.

This is what makes so much of the Left's rhetoric so maddening. After all, the Left frequently likens Republicans to Nazis, from the protesters carrying signs depicting President Bush with a Hitler mustache, to Janet Reno's Nazi reference at a group of Jewish voters in Florida just last week. The Left simply can't have it both ways. If a leader were to arise-a man who was a vegetarian, a radical environmentalist, a tea-drinking, nature worshipping, anti-smoking fanatic, a socialist, a proponent of abortion and of medical research utilizing fetal tissue, who would outlaw speech and ideas that he didn't approve of, an animal rights activist, a controversial artist and writer, a pagan who's harshest rhetoric was directed against Jews and Christians - he could rise quickly to the leadership of the Green Party. Indeed, such a man would find few critics among democrats, and would be welcomed by the faculty of most colleges. Such a man did once exist, and did become the leader of a modern nation only a few decades ago. That man was Adolph Hitler.

Copyright © 2003 Judson Cox

[whitemajikman]

A NAZI GREEN Forum

http://www.nazi.org/current/forum/YaBB.cgi?board=Action

[whitemajikman]

Fascist Ecology:
The "Green Wing" of the Nazi Party and its Historical Antecedents
Peter Staudenmaier
"We recognize that separating humanity from nature, from the whole of life, leads to humankind’s own destruction and to the death of nations. Only through a re-integration of humanity into the whole of nature can our people be made stronger. That is the fundamental point of the biological tasks of our age. Humankind alone is no longer the focus of thought, but rather life as a whole . . . This striving toward connectedness with the totality of life, with nature itself, a nature into which we are born, this is the deepest meaning and the true essence of National Socialist thought." 1

In our zeal to condemn the status quo, radicals often carelessly toss about epithets like "fascist" and "ecofascist," thus contributing to a sort of conceptual inflation that in no way furthers effective social critique. In such a situation, it is easy to overlook the fact that there are still virulent strains of fascism in our political culture which, however marginal, demand our attention. One of the least recognized or understood of these strains is the phenomenon one might call "actually existing ecofascism," that is, the preoccupation of authentically fascist movements with environmentalist concerns. In order to grasp the peculiar intensity and endurance of this affiliation, we would do well to examine more closely its most notorious historical incarnation, the so-called "green wing" of German National Socialism.

Despite an extensive documentary record, the subject remains an elusive one, underappreciated by professional historians and environmental activists alike. In English-speaking countries as well as in Germany itself, the very existence of a "green wing" in the Nazi movement, much less its inspiration, goals, and consequences, has yet to be adequately researched and analyzed. Most of the handful of available interpretations succumb to either an alarming intellectual affinity with their subject." 2 or a naive refusal to examine the full extent of the "ideological overlap between nature conservation and National Socialism." 3 This article presents a brief and necessarily schematic overview of the ecological components of Nazism, emphasizing both their central role in Nazi ideology and their practical implementation during the Third Reich. A preliminary survey of nineteenth and twentieth century precursors to classical ecofascism should serve to illuminate the conceptual underpinnings common to all forms of reactionary ecology.

Two initial clarifications are in order. First, the terms "environmental" and "ecological" are here used more or less interchangeably to denote ideas, attitudes, and practices commonly associated with the contemporary environmental movement. This is not an anachronism; it simply indicates an interpretive approach which highlights connections to present-day concerns. Second, this approach is not meant to endorse the historiographically discredited notion that pre-1933 historical data can or should be read as "leading inexorably" to the Nazi calamity. Rather, our concern here is with discerning ideological continuities and tracing political genealogies, in an attempt to understand the past in light of our current situation -- to make history relevant to the present social and ecological crisis.

The Roots of the Blood and Soil Mystique
Germany is not only the birthplace of the science of ecology and the site of Green politics' rise to prominence; it has also been home to a peculiar synthesis of naturalism and nationalism forged under the influence of the Romantic tradition's anti-Enlightenment irrationalism. Two nineteenth century figures exemplify this ominous conjunction: Ernst Moritz Arndt and Wilhelm Heinrich Riehl.

While best known in Germany for his fanatical nationalism, Arndt was also dedicated to the cause of the peasantry, which lead him to a concern for the welfare of the land itself. Historians of German environmentalism mention him as the earliest example of 'ecological' thinking in the modern sense. 4 His remarkable 1815 article On the Care and Conservation of Forests, written at the dawn of industrialization in Central Europe, rails against shortsighted exploitation of woodlands and soil, condemning deforestation and its economic causes. At times he wrote in terms strikingly similar to those of contemporary biocentrism: "When one sees nature in a necessary connectedness and interrelationship, then all things are equally important -- shrub, worm, plant, human, stone, nothing first or last, but all one single unity." 5

Arndt's environmentalism, however, was inextricably bound up with virulently xenophobic nationalism. His eloquent and prescient appeals for ecological sensitivity were couched always in terms of the well-being of the German soil and the German people, and his repeated lunatic polemics against miscegenation, demands for teutonic racial purity, and epithets against the French, Slavs, and Jews marked every aspect of his thought. At the very outset of the nineteenth century the deadly connection between love of land and militant racist nationalism was firmly set in place.

Riehl, a student of Arndt, further developed this sinister tradition. In some respects his 'green' streak went significantly deeper than Arndt's; presaging certain tendencies in recent environmental activism, his 1853 essay Field and Forest ended with a call to fight for "the rights of wilderness." But even here nationalist pathos set the tone: "We must save the forest, not only so that our ovens do not become cold in winter, but also so that the pulse of life of the people continues to beat warm and joyfully, so that Germany remains German." 6 Riehl was an implacable opponent of the rise of industrialism and urbanization; his overtly antisemitic glorification of rural peasant values and undifferentiated condemnation of modernity established him as the "founder of agrarian romanticism and anti-urbanism." 7

These latter two fixations matured in the second half of the nineteenth century in the context of the völkisch movement, a powerful cultural disposition and social tendency which united ethnocentric populism with nature mysticism. At the heart of the völkisch temptation was a pathological response to modernity. In the face of the very real dislocations brought on by the triumph of industrial capitalism and national unification, völkisch thinkers preached a return to the land, to the simplicity and wholeness of a life attuned to nature's purity. The mystical effusiveness of this perverted utopianism was matched by its political vulgarity. While "the Volkish movement aspired to reconstruct the society that was sanctioned by history, rooted in nature, and in communion with the cosmic life spirit," 8 it pointedly refused to locate the sources of alienation, rootlessness and environmental destruction in social structures, laying the blame instead to rationalism, cosmopolitanism, and urban civilization. The stand-in for all of these was the age-old object of peasant hatred and middle-class resentment: the Jews. "The Germans were in search of a mysterious wholeness that would restore them to primeval happiness, destroying the hostile milieu of urban industrial civilization that the Jewish conspiracy had foisted on them." 9

Reformulating traditional German antisemitism into nature-friendly terms, the völkisch movement carried a volatile amalgam of nineteenth century cultural prejudices, Romantic obsessions with purity, and anti-Enlightenment sentiment into twentieth century political discourse. The emergence of modern ecology forged the final link in the fateful chain which bound together aggressive nationalism, mystically charged racism, and environmentalist predilections. In 1867 the German zoologist Ernst Haeckel coined the term 'ecology' and began to establish it as a scientific discipline dedicated to studying the interactions between organism and environment. Haeckel was also the chief popularizer of Darwin and evolutionary theory for the German-speaking world, and developed a peculiar sort of social darwinist philosophy he called 'monism.' The German Monist League he founded combined scientifically based ecological holism with völkisch social views. Haeckel believed in nordic racial superiority, strenuously opposed race mixing and enthusiastically supported racial eugenics. His fervent nationalism became fanatical with the onset of World War I, and he fulminated in antisemitic tones against the post-war Council Republic in Bavaria.

In this way "Haeckel contributed to that special variety of German thought which served as the seed bed for National Socialism. He became one of Germany's major ideologists for racism, nationalism and imperialism." 10 Near the end of his life he joined the Thule Society, "a secret, radically right-wing organization which played a key role in the establishment of the Nazi movement." 11 But more than merely personal continuities are at stake here. The pioneer of scientific ecology, along with his disciples Willibald Hentschel, Wilhelm Bölsche and Bruno Wille, profoundly shaped the thinking of subsequent generations of environmentalists by embedding concern for the natural world in a tightly woven web of regressive social themes. From its very beginnings, then, ecology was bound up in an intensely reactionary political framework.


http://www.spunk.org/library/places/germany/sp001630/peter.html

[whitemajikman]

PAINT THEIR SWASTIKA GREEN
by Brien Bartels

Whenever a group of enviro-lefties get together a lot of clumsy comparisons get thrown around concerning Republicans, free-marketeers, businessmen, and their alleged resemblance to fascists and Nazis. Which is odd because those groups, however much you like or loathe them, are of various Christian denominations or even Jewish, don’t advocate street violence or eugenics, don’t tend to subjugate individuals to abstractions like racial purity, etc. In fact the list of dissimilarities goes on and on.
But, when you look at the political wing of the environmental/socialist movement, the various Green Parties of the world, you see the following ominous parallels.
The Green Party is led by a bunch of pagan, vegetarian dropouts. So were the Nazis. Hitler was a failed artist and vegetarian. The leader of the SS, Himmler (another soy-sucker), wanted his Black Corps to be the vanguard of a pre-Christian back-to-the-land movement. The rituals and symbols he devised to replace Christian services looked like really bad art direction of a performance of Wagner’s Ring Cycle .
The Green Party claims to stand for workers’ rights. "Nazi" is short for National Socialist German Workers’ Party.
Sometimes the Greens wear animal costumes to political functions. The Nazis went to their rallies in drag as well.
The Greens stand up for farmers and peasants, foreign and domestic. The Nazis were wonderfully agrarian, even advocating organizing farming. They just wanted the farms to be in the Ukraine, tended by the untermench .
The Greens advocate "decentralization." The Nazis practiced decentralization by giving their colonial governments life and death power over the organic farmers in their jurisdiction.
The Greens wage a defensive war of sabotage and propaganda for the oppressed peasants of the world. The Nazis waged a defensive war for the oppressed Aryans of Central Europe.
Greens occasionally smash shop windows to get their point across. One word: Kristalnacht.
I’m not sure, but I imagine the Greens disapprove of smoking tobacco. The Nazi regime tried to ban smoking in public places, forcing its soldiers to set an example of abstinence.
The Greens hate guns, especially private ownership of guns. The Nazis inflicted on the world groundbreaking "gun-control" laws, which they tested by confiscating the arms of German Jews.
The Greens are big tree planters. Seven years ago, an aerial survey of the former East Germany revealed a stand of larch in a forest of pine. These trees, planted by an early and flamboyant supporter of Hitler, formed a huge bright green swastika for a few weeks in spring and a flaming yellow one in the fall. (Ironically, the Germans, those engineers, fooled around for five years before removing the swastika, because they thought cutting down only the larches would just leave a swastika shaped hole in the forest. I guess they eventually got permission to flatten even de-Nazi-fied trees.)
The Greens want investment in alternative energy. The Nazis pioneered not only synthetic oil from coal (to cope with the small problem of a hopeless war) they also invested a ton of Reich marks in an alternative energy system exploiting an until-then useless substance called uranium.

And of course, there is the whole fetish for Volkswagen Mini-buses.
_________________
©2002 Brien Bartels
Brien Bartels is a free-lance writer, humorist, entrepreneur and political activist who lives in Washington state. An edited version of this more-or-less tongue-in-cheek column has been published in the June, 2002 issue of Liberty. It is republished here by permission of the author, to whom the copyright has reverted.

[whitemajikman]

Green bigots versus human beings

http://www.jewishworldreview.com -- THE red-legged frog is only the latest of many supposedly endangered species whose habitats may be kept off-limits to human beings, even if that means stopping the building of much-needed housing. We have grown so used to having the interests of millions of human beings sacrificed for some allegedly endangered species that we no longer stop and think about how outrageous that is.


Too often we even buy the notion that the shrill and self-righteous people who push this stuff are some kind of noble crusaders, thinking only of the higher things, instead of as the selfish and arrogant bigots and bullies that they are.


The essence of bigotry is claiming for yourself rights that you would deny to others. The green bigots who call themselves environmentalists do this all the time. They also lie a lot, as self-anointed idealists often do.


Some species that have been said to be endangered have turned out to be very abundant and other creatures that may in fact be endangered are not species. Frogs are a species, but every conceivable variant of a frog is not a species.


How many people have ever seen a red-legged frog? Or even want to see a red-legged frog? The green bigots may be horrified that there are people who don't have the slightest interest in red-legged frogs. But those people are just as much American citizens as any life-long member of the Sierra Club and are entitled to equal rights under the Constitution. There is neither a legal nor a moral reason to over-ride what they want because the green bigots want something else.


Like others who seek special privileges, the green bigots claim to be speaking for others -- "future generations," for example. But this is just shifting the argument to a different venue, without changing it in the slightest. Those people who don't give a darn about red-legged frogs are going to have future descendants, just as much as the environmental extremists will. What the green bigots really want is for future generations of green bigots to be able to over-ride future generations of other people who do not share their views.


Fuzzy words and apocalyptic visions are stock in trade for the green bigots, who are forever referring to "fragile" environments -- but with no definition of "fragile," much less any evidence to fit a definition. I should be so "fragile" that I could survive thousands of years of earthquakes, forest fires and mountainous glaciers rolling over me.


What some consider to be idealism could more accurately be called self-exaltation. What could be more exalting than to take on the God-like role of adjudicating between animals and people? You cannot be a judge handing down edicts for others unless you are placing yourself above those others. We know how judges are appointed or elected. But who elected the green bigots to play G-d?


Election is the last thing they have in mind. Instead, they infiltrate coastal commissions, zoning boards and other federal, state and local bureaucracies, from which they can impose their edicts on others, without being accountable for the consequences. A large part of the blame for California's electricity crisis is due to green bigots who have conducted a scorched earth policy against anyone trying to build power-generating plants there.


A new cult of pagan nature worship has sprung up, in which the slightest inconvenience to any toad or bug is enough to call a halt to even the most urgent human needs. A new mythology has been created, in which wildlife can only survive in their original habitats. Spotted owls supposedly can live only in "old growth" forests, though there must have been a time when the old growth trees were new growth trees. Surely they have not been there since the dawn of time or even throughout the whole history of spotted owls.


When you see birds nesting in metropolitan skyscrapers, you have to acknowledge that wild creatures do have some adaptability -- unless you think these are "old growth" skyscrapers. Species could not have survived the evolutionary changes of the earth if they didn't have some adaptability. But now, everything is to be frozen where it is by the green bigots -- and at unlimited costs to others.


Nature worship is fine for those who want it. I have nothing against faith-based organizations. But a theocracy imposing its will on others is something else, even when it is a theocracy of nature-worshippers.

[whitemajikman]

The New American Fascism:
The Green Party and Its Parallels with National Socialism

The Nazi party of depression-era Germany is uncannily similar to the emerging Green Party in America. In ideology, political agenda and economic policy, it is almost frightening to review the implications on Americans should the Green Party ever come to a position of political influence.
Green Domestic Policy
In domestic politics, the Green party is strongly socialist. The ideology set forth by its foremost leaders detail a powerful government and an end to property rights. Like the far left of the Great Depression, Green spokesmen advocate full government control of all economic activity in the country. Industry would be controlled by government so that full employment could be achieved, even if it meant wage control and elimination of all profit.

In other words, Green industrial policies advocate an end to producer-driven market economics and a return to a Soviet-style command economy, where goods are not produced based upon their market demand, but upon government whims and the desires of those in power. This would most likely result in a return to a steel-and-coal economy, since these are some of the most labor-intensive industries, and would provide the highest number of "jobs".

Greens also advocate a type of economic isolationism, even in domestic policy, by means of "bioregionalism". This would mean an end to water reclamation projects and mass interregional transportation of goods. Greens insist that specific regions in the country become self-sufficient, even if the local resource base is insufficient for the market it serves, Greens insist that this points to a need to vacate the region, rather than increase interregional trade.

The human results of these policies are obvious: a slowing of economic activity, an end to consumer- and producer-driven markets, a surplus of overproduced goods which cannot be purchased by an increasingly impoverished society. Regions such as the American southwest would experience mass emigrations, and the Pacific Northwest would receive a fast influx from this migration. It's no wonder that most Greens originate from the Pacific Northwest.

The possibility is immense, however, that this potential mass migration would not be permitted by Green government, in which case import-dependent regions such as California and other populous and fast-growing states would experience social chaos and mass starvation as trade restrictions created empty supermarket shelves and a string of bankruptcies.

In sum, the Green domestic agenda would result in little more than a repeat of depression-era decline as seen throughout totalitarian Europe. Like the Nazi party, a scapegoat would be sought out. Based upon their priorities, it is easy to se who the Greens would choose in place of Germany's Jews: businessmen.

The Green party has an immense loathing of productive individualists. Businessmen are the last true legacy of this type in America today. Like the Jews of depression-era Germany, they are our most wealthy citizens, and they control the motors on which our economy depends. Thus they are an appropriate target for the party that wishes to usurp that motor for their own political agenda. Most likely, Greens would institute criminal penalties for profiting from a business transaction, or forbid businessmen from entering political office. In all likelihood, business owners and CEOs would be required to register as such, and as "profiteers", they would lose many of their privelages and rights as citizens. They would be seen as little more than pieces of factory machinery, designed to run the economic motors of the country, and not protest that they are being treated as lifeless, rightless machines. And if they protest, they'll be interned.

Green Foreign Policy
Like its domestic policy, the Green foreign policy is based upon isolationist political economy. Ralph Nader, the long-time Green presidential candidate, once remarked that he admired the foreign policy proposals of right-wing isolationist Pat Buchanan. His own detailing of his potential foreign policy matches that statement well.

Greens would insist on increased social spending, and would most likely strip the military of most of its budget to finance this - even if the money dried us as America's foreign interests were taken away undefended. A Green military would be entirely withdrawn from all overseas posts, destroying our security in such economically-vital hotspots as the Middle East and Asia, where many of the resources which drive our economy originate, as well as in Europe and Latin America, our foremost trading partners.

The goal of this military isolationism would relate to the Green agenda of economic isolationism. As our security abroad became more and more dubious, the Green desire to isolate American industry and economics would intensify. Nader has made clear that he desires a return to a depression-style tariff wall around the United States, which would encourage a macro-sized version of the Green policy of bioregionalism. Necessary foreign goods that could not be produced or acquired within the United States would become scarce, and the country would become riddled with black markets in things such as fossil fuels, precious stones, and computer chips.

Like Nazi Germany, an inevitable outcome of this summary economic decline would be eventual economic imperialism. Unfortunately, the Greens in this line of thought rely upon the assumption of America's powerful finances and military. In the dark days after their policies have come into effect, America would be far too weak to withstand an assault from freer economies should we attempt a Nazi-style expansion of our "resource base".

Green National Decline
The decline of America and the end of freedom is the only long-term guarantee of any Green control of American politics. Any free country which is usurped by irrational leaders will be destroyed, as has been shown in Nazi Germany, New Deal America, or most of the modern Middle East. The parallels between the Green political agenda and that of the National Socialist Party in Germany cannot be ignored. Would that Americans more readily saw them, and would that American businessmen more quickly fought them.

American businessmen are our last great hope against the spread of Green power and the rise of a Green political victory. If businessmen ignore the threat, as German Jews did in the 1920s, they do so at their own peril. It is a life or death battle.

[whitemajikman]

Enviro-Nazi tactics of the Idiot Left

Back to the Freedom Page

Enviro-Nazis, Greenies, "environmentalists", Earth Firsts, Sierra Clubbers; enviro-freaks one and all. The idiot left has been more destructive to the Earth than the people, businesses, and government projects they claim are damaging "their" land. They are clandestinely bent on enforcing Socialism and the destruction of Free Enterprise through the use of corrupt money hungry lawyers. They cost the U.S. population hundreds of millions of dollars a year. Their claims are based on junk science, half truths, and outright lies. Yet, colluding bureaucrats roll over and let them continue to sue because it is public money they are spending and they are never held accountable for the money they give these Socialists.

The enviro-nazis are at war with energy. Energy means Freedom. Turn on your microwave, air conditioner, drive your car, use your battery powered drill. None of these are possible without energy. Yet these all-knowing ILLITERATE ASSES, legally represented with YOUR TAX DOLLARS ARE SET TO DESTROY YOUR FREEDOM.

For 30 years they have stopped all oil pipelines, all transmission lines, all nuclear power plants, all oil refinery plants, all hydro-electric dams, and what have they offered to replace these things you need to be Free? NOTHING. NOT A DAMN THING!

Most of these enviro-nazis know nothing about real science or how an economy works. All they know is the propaganda fanaticism spewed forth by the attorneys who lead and control the organizations they pledge their lives to.

None of these people have any solution on how to provide power to the average skyscraper, car manufacturing plant, or computer chip maker. All they offer is pedal powered LED blinker lights for their bicycle bumpers.

They have NO solutions but they want to stop YOU from creating solutions.

The state of Alaska is nearly half as big as all of the rest of the United States. If you put it where Texas is it would reach the Atlantic Ocean! It may contain nearly as much oil and natural gas as some of the middle east kingdoms.

Yet the ANWR, the Alaskan National Wildlife Reserve, according to the leftist enviro-nazis is off limits to drilling. They don't tell you that the total area proposed for ALL THE DRILLING IN ALASKA is just 3,000 acres. That is smaller than the Dallas/Fort Worth airport! An area that small on an area that big simply couldn't be located without a map.

The area concerned is flat featureless frozen tundra. It supports literally no herds of caribou it is so desolate. There are NO endangered species there.

If oil were to spill there it couldn't penetrate the permafrost 1 foot below the surface. The oil would simply freeze in place and be easy to clean up. And less than 500 people outside the energy industry, namely the enviro-wackos have ever even visited the place.

More people in the USA were killed by Teddy Kennedy than in all the nuclear power accidents we've experienced. My closest childhood friend is a nuclear power engineer at San Onofre nuclear power plant south of Los Angeles. All his children look pretty normal except they are smarter than average.

All of the waste produced in the United States since nuclear energy was invented would fit inside a large high school gym. Or let's put it another way. To provide power for the average family for 20 years: using fossil fuels produces THOUSANDS OF TONS OF POLLUTION.

But using clean, safe nuclear energy ALL THE WASTE WOULD FIT IN THE AVERAGE SHOEBOX!

AND IF THE WASTE IS REPROCESSED LIKE THEY DO ALL OVER THE WORLD TO USE TO PRODUCE MORE ENERGY AGAIN THE TOTAL WASTE FOR 20 YEARS WOULD FIT IN A PILL BOTTLE! And the waste's half life is about 40 years. It degrades to lead eventually.

So what is the big deal? THIS IS THE BIG DEAL:

CONTROL OVER YOUR LIFE BY DESTROYING YOUR FREEDOM TO CHOOSE!

The enviro-nazis have never criticized the worst environmental offenders in the world.

These places are at the center of their hearts, China and Russia and any other dictatorship.

There are areas as big as midwestern states that were rendered uninhabitable by dictatorships. The Volga river is a sewer in Russia and in China their irreplacable national scenic river and its classic mountains are being submerged by a huge dam project. Do you hear a peep from the enviro-nazis?

The Soviet Union fouled the North Atlantic by dumping submarine nuclear reactors for decades off the coast of Norway. But you never heard about radioactive herring.

When the lousy Communist built Chernobyl reactor blew up did you see ANY PROTESTS ANYWHERE BY ENVIRO-NAZIS? None!

But the Lapland Eskimos who made their living herding Reindeer had to stop eating the meat and spinning the fur because of nuclear pollution. But there were NO PROTESTS!

As you'll read below, China has decimated forests bigger than California. Its own Panda is severely endangered and may go extinct. In Mongolia there are subterranian coal mine fires that have burned for 30 years! Think of the incredible amount of greenhouse gasses China has released with just this one enviro-insult!

But no enviro-nazis protest China as they allow farmers using lousy third world slash and burn methods destroy the habitat of the Pandas.

Just think about it. These enviro-assholes think that destroying the environment is just fine if it's done in dictatorships where protesters like them are routinely executed.

But if a tire pile is set on fire by lightning in Florida you immediately call a lawyer to sue the victim of the natural accident. Think I'm joking, it happened a couple years ago. Think about it.

Oh yes, just one more thing to think about. Our enemies, the ones that the enviro-nazis would love to have the US imitate in government style: all government controlling all of society, want the USA to die.

One way to do it....starve it of energy and then when a war is launched the US will lose because the enviro-nazis have plugged up all the energy resources.

I think that the dictatorships have been helping fund these "useful idiots" (Hitler's term) to accomplish this goal. And you know what, it's worked pretty well too!

[whitemajikman]

AND NOW THAT YOU ALL WHO WATCH HAVE SOME BACKGROUND ON THE GROWING PROBLEM OF HATE-BASED ENVIRONMENTALIST'S WE SHALL START TO DELVE INTO SOME OF THE PLAYER'S AND PURVEYOR'S OF ECO/FASCISM..........STARTING WITH THE ONES ON THIS SITE.



WMM

[gaiacomm]

It already has begun!

[whitemajikman]

It already has begun!

Your Right It has Begun.......

Your days of bullshit and hoaxing are almost over.......

so are your days of spreading hate under the guise of environmentalism......

WMM

[gaiacomm]

Your Right It has Begun.......

Your days of bullshit and hoaxing are almost over.......

so are your days of spreading hate under the guise of environmentalism......

WMM


What size orange jump suit do you wear?

[gaiacomm]

Your Right It has Begun.......

Your days of bullshit and hoaxing are almost over.......

so are your days of spreading hate under the guise of environmentalism......

WMM


I will waiting and LOL!