germanvictims.com - …The Negro Is Hyperaggressive. One function of the Negro’s lack of self-control is his hyperaggressivity. Urban dwellers know all about this, especially clerks at liquor stores and all-night gas stations, not to mention white prison inmates and white women in general. One of the striking things about the Negro the world over is the offensive, threatening aggression of young Negro males (the females can be just as nasty, but as in the case in all bipeds, the male is more aggressive)…
Ruminations on Racial Differences
N.B. FORREST
It has been said that money spent on travel is never wasted. Travelers expand their knowledge of the world, acquire memories that last a lifetime, broaden their minds and, if lucky, have fun. Since I have the good fortune to work in a field that allows me to travel frequently to many parts of the world, I can attest to the truthful ness of the above precepts.
As an Instaurationist, I look upon travel as an opportunity
to observe the people and cultures of the countries I happen to visit. It goes without saying that the Instaurationist view of humankind is basically correct. With few exceptions, I have found the majority of the foreigners I’ve gotten to know, including nonwhites, to be decent enough. Many are as warm and kind as anyone you would ever want to meet. It is a curious fact that men and women of all races, tribes and nations are in certain ways alike. An honest, hardworking, honorable man stands out in any society, as does a knave, criminal or fool.
It is indisputable that all humans share many traits. How could it be otherwise, considering that we have to face many of the same ancient trials and tribulations. In evolutionary terms it would make sense for human behavior to respond to some of our challenges in roughly the same way.
This far I am willing to go. But there are limits, stark unbridgeable limits to the “We are all the same” ideology. Yes, we are all (or mostly all) the same in some ways. But as races, nations and tribes, we are also vastly different. And the differences will never disappear, no matter how much federal money is thrown at them, no matter how many Charlie Roses and Oprah Winfreys attempt to deny the obvious.
The reader will notice that I use the word “different,” not “superior.” The white race is different from the Negro race, the Asiatic races and all of their sub-groups. The question of “superiority,” however, brings up another train of thought. I happen to believe that the white race is the most highly evolved of all human groups. If one wishes to call this “superiority,” so be it. As for supremacy, I do in deed believe in “white supremacy” in all primarily white countries and that the status and conduct of nonwhites in such countries must be determined only by whites. I do not necessarily believe that the white race should hold an exalted position in Botswana, though there is no doubt in my mind that a handful of whites is perfectly capable of ruling all Botswanans, to the immense benefit of both groups.
What I’m saying is that “superiority” lies in the eye of the beholder. It disturbs me not a whit when some American Negro or mulatto stridently claims that the Negroes are a master race, responsible for all world civilization and that whites would be helpless without them. A Negro has every right to believe such nonsense if he wishes. I only draw the line when some guilt-ridden white liberal seeks to shove this bilge down the throats of my children in their classrooms. I say let the “market” set the value of the different races of mankind. I am smugly confident which race will come out on top. I’m also certain that practically all nonwhites share my view, though many would die rather than admit it.
I further believe that whites are different from nonwhites and always will be. The end result of these “differences” is that the white race is uniquely prepared to serve as the engine of human progress and the engineer of the modern world.
I hasten to add that every race contains outstanding individuals, as well as a thick, biological layer of sludge. I reject the idea that “intelligence” alone is an adequate gauge of “superiority.” Surely IQ is the bedrock upon which much else is built, but the truly superior human has many other qualities: physical strength and beauty, moral courage, honor, simple decency, generosity, altruism and imagination-the list is endless. Every person has at least one or two of these attributes. The proportion is what counts.
Take the Jews. By any standard they are clever people. Some are brilliant. Does this make them a “superior” people? In their own eyes the answer is unquestionably “yes.” Skeptical non-Jews do not necessarily see it that way, even accepting that there are Jews who combine both the sharp minds associated with the Chosen and the more elevated characteristics which are often not associated with them.
Of Pure and Impure Blacks
Politically correct twaddle aside, Negroes are not and never have been noted for even normal intelligence. But that is just the most obvious difference between them and most whites. If Negroes were merely dull, the problem could be easily managed simply by ensuring that they were funneled in positions suited for their talents: monotonous industrial tasks, menial jobs, shoe shining and the like.
Many years of observing Negroes have taught me a few things about them. First of all they lack self-control. The average black simply does not have the emotional and mental stability of the average white. Unless they are under firm control, they will quickly make a shambles of whatever they touch. The propensity of the Negro for violent crime is a consequence of this. It is a truism among detectives that the white man will plan a murder, whereas the Negro will commit murder in the heat of the moment. Negroes are well aware of this lack of control among their own people. It is not for nothing that they fear the so-called “crazy Nigger.” By the time he has reached adult hood the Negro will have seen enough evidence of this dangerous trait to teach him caution and prudence while in the company of fellow blacks.
The Negro has a grossly exaggerated sense of his own worth and abilities. His meager ability to engage in abstract thought limits his ability to accurately assess his true potential. This is a grave and worrisome situation. Recent research has shown that one of the worst spurs to violence is the unjustified inflation of a person’s self-esteem. In this country we have a whole generation of Negroes who are genetically predisposed to violence, who were probably born with a primitive “will to power” stronger than that of the average reflective and contemplative white. These Negroes have been preached to and bombarded with the idea that they are equal to or superior to whites in every way that really counts. The reality is that the average Negro is woefully underprepared to compete. Never or seldom told this, when he collides with the harsh realities of the real world, he is confused, angered and finally en raged. It’s easy to imagine whom he blames for his trouble.
The Negro Is Hyperaggressive.
One function of the Negro’s lack of self-control is his hyperaggressivity. Urban dwellers know all about this, especially clerks at liquor stores and all-night gas stations, not to mention white prison inmates and white women in general. One of the striking things about the Negro the world over is the offensive, threatening aggression of young Negro males (the females can be just as nasty, but as in the case in all bipeds, the male is more aggressive). You see it in New York, in Los Angeles, on the streets of Paris, in the cities of Latin America and, most telling, in Africa itself. This is not “learned behavior,” a legacy of the rage generated by slavery. This is bred in the bone. Fortunately the Negro is usually only brave when he outnumbers his opponent in most cases-or his victim is unarmed. Armed, determined whites have repeatedly beaten Negroes in one encounter after another, under all kinds of conditions. The superior self-discipline, intelligence and toughness of whites almost always triumph over the savage courage of even the “fightingest” blacks.
It is really amazing how Negro traits extend across space and time. Take a Negro street hustler from New York or Chicago and set him next to a pure African street hustler on the streets of Paris or Madrid. You can hardly tell them apart. It is absolutely uncanny. The same expressions on the face, the same body movements, the same pushiness and arrogance. It has to be seen to be believed. It is eerie how the race clings to its mannerisms.
The best test for racial determinism in behavior is pro vided by an examination of mulattos. Almost all American Negroes have at least a dollop of white blood. The Anglo Saxon technique to ensure racial purity did not aim at an impossible ban on intimate contacts. It simply insisted that
anybody with any Negro blood whatsoever was considered a 100% Negro, regardless of any superficial white appearance. While effective, this technique had the side effect of engendering a white hot rage in all American mulattos. Unlike their Latin-American brethren, who with enough money and enough luck could crawl up out of the ranks of simple Negroes into a quasi-white status, American mulattos were stuck in the same pit with the coal black field hand and the blubbery Mammy figure. The rage is understandable, though the process was entirely necessary to ensure white racial purity.
The Negro abolitionist, Frederick Douglass, is a tragic example of a half-white doomed to Negrohood. A glance at his writings is sufficient to show that his real concern was not the black slave. It was the mulatto Frederick Douglass, who wanted desperately to be white. Unable to achieve his impossible goal, he wished to destroy the race of his own father. The phenomenon is familiar to any who ‘ have studied the lives of prominent mulattos.
The danger of the mulatto is that he tends to combine traits of each race into an explosive cocktail. The intelligence and cunning of the white married to the violently unstable Negro temperament is a true recipe for disaster. The most grotesque example of this currently on the U.S. scene is Louis Farrakhan, the leader of the Nation of Isla
Farrakhan, who must be at least three-quarters white, is a Jamaican immigrant, ironically from a social group known as the “Jamaica whites.” The mulattoes have traditionally played the role of a middle class in Jamaica. To
be honest, though they haven’t done it quite success fully, compared to the mostly pure African J amaicans who make up the bulk of the population, the Jamaica whites are easily able to maintain their superior position over their darker cousins. General Colin Powell is the son of such parents.
Farrakhan is a brooding mulatto. Farrakhan is, by any standard, a bizarre figure. He is not, however, a fool or off his rocker. Insane? Possibly by Western clinical standards. His “flying saucer” speech at the Million Man March was as chilling as it was astounding. Farrakhan is a born leader among blacks. What we hear as the foam-speckled ravings of a nut or hear as typical Negro mumbo-jumbo is serious business to his followers. The hatred Farrakhan has for whites is very real. The light tint of his skin is closely connected with the emotion that dominates his life and those of his followers. In strategic terms Farrakhan is an ally and should be encouraged. He is a strong, polarizing force for racial separation. On the other hand, it behooves Majority leaders to never for get that Farrakhan and his acolytes would like nothing better than to roast each and every one of us over a slow fire, topping off the ceremony by eating our livers.
Look around at the mulattos who are so prominent in the American Negro community. Both Andrew Young and the pathetic Julian Bond are nearly white, yet their hatred of whites is far worse than that of more melanized black leaders. The sneering comment made by Young about the Rev. Hosiah Williams (“He’s nothing but a turd-tapping Nigger”) came from deep inside his psyche.
Racial differences are real. They cannot be wished away. Every day brings a new announcement from the medical establishment or the scientific world concerning yet another human trait associated with race. A few years ago a handful of liberal nitwits and Jewish “social scientists” tried to run a scam on anthropology and sociology by simply denying that there are any races. As preposterous as this sounds, the theory gained wide attention for a while. As the long list of race-related traits grows ever larger with the progress of the human genome project, the voices of these knuckleheads grew more and more quiet and then were silenced.
Race exists. Race matters. Deal with it.
* * *
Instauration December 1998
* * *
The hideous death of Donna Lynn Vetter
Open Housing Spells Murder
On the night of September 3, 1986, the Democratic controlled U.S. Congress committed murder. I mean that quite literally. The Congress in question was
the inheritor of LBJ’s hyper-liberal 1968 collection of leftists and libertines. Pandering to blacks in the wake of the King assassination a few months earlier, this motley collection had passed what they loved to call a “Fair Housing Act.” It was anything but “fair” to whites and particularly unfair to a young white woman who had recently moved into integrated lodging on the north side of San Antonio. These minority-pandering Congressmen murdered her, just as surely as if each had taken part in the killing him self.
The young lady who was brutally butchered was Donna Lynn Vetter. Not long before her death she moved from her residence in the German-founded community of New Braunfels to be closer to her secretarial job at the San Antonio FBI office. The 23-year-old took up residence in an area which, before open housing, had been 100% white. No Negro had ever resided there prior to 1968. With the advent of open housing blacks and Hispanics poured into the white turf with all the fervor that integrating coloreds are so fond of exhibiting. Before long the sight of these mud people became quite common where once only whites had strolled. Before the late 60s these folks would have stood out like skunk cabbage in a sweet pea bed. Any nonwhite would have been closely monitored. With integration, however, the nonwhite “belonged.” He could drift through the predominantly white neighborhood coming and going as he pleased. That’s how it was and is with integration. Once our neighborhoods become “their” neighborhoods, white senses are dulled to the alien presence.
On that fateful night in September, a prowling Negro was little noticed as he “checked out” the apartment complex where Donna Lynn Vetter resided. Selecting his victim, he watched her park her car and walk to her door. The Negro was not in any hurry; he had done this before. On this particular night he had been out on parole for one year after serving a short sentence for rape, attempted murder and burglary.
Miss Vetter had lasted six months in minority-ridden San Antonio. Had she remained in her German-American community, where the mostly white populace is civilized and cohesive and the crime rate minimal, she would have been spared her blood-drenched fate. But in multiracial San Antonio the U.S. Congress had already precluded her safety. It had ensured that her life would be short and unsweet.
About midnight a creature bearing not one redeeming virtue to connect him to mankind broke into Donna’s apartment. What happened there was so horrendous,it is best not to dwell upon it. The nearest I can come to describing what took place is to refer the reader to Poe’s macabre short story, “The Murders in the Rue Morgue,” in which a berserk orangutan wielding a straight razor carves Karl Hammond up two defenseless women in a locked chamber. When Donna’s nude body was found the next morning, there wasn’t much left. She had been raped, her clothes had been “cut off her along with her skin” and she had been stabbed repeatedly in the throat, chest and abdomen. Her flesh was little more than pulp. In some places her skele ton was exposed. Something primeval from the primordial savagery of the Dark Continent had slithered through a half-opened window in her apartment and transformed her into a special effects job from a Vincent Price movie.
The killer who slipped through the shadows that night, blade in hand, to commit his unspeakable acts, had left a few things behind-fingerprints, a bloody footprint and a great deal of semen.
Eleven days later another white woman,30,was raped at gunpoint in her San Antonio apartment. Miraculously surviving the attack, she would identify her assailant a week later as one Karl Hammond, a 22-year-old black.
Only six days after this second attack Hammond struck again, raping a 23-year-old white woman at gunpoint. She too narrowly escaped death, being saved by the timely arrival of friends. She also identified Hammond as her at tacker. All three attacks had taken place in an area of the city which prior to open housing had been all-white. Meanwhile the liberal South Texas media assured every one who would listen that this was not a racial thing, that all three victims had been white was just a “coincidence.” Donna was killed in 1986. Hammond’s original sentence for conviction of rape, burglary and attempted murder-his initial crime-was to have carried well into the 90s. Had a liberal parole board not set him loose to prey again upon white society, Donna would still be among the living.
Early on the morning of June 21, 1995, in the execution chamber at Huntsville State Prison, a tiny splinter of steel inserted in his vein took care of Karl Hammond. He died quietly, peacefully, even “gently.” Not exactly the kind of exit he gave Donna.
Every last one of Hammond’s cohorts in crime, including the liberal congressmen who voted for open housing in 1968, should have been with him on his early morning journey into the sulfurous nether regions.
Instauration December 1998
