I recall the wedding scenes in the Godfather. I thought of a White Unity Convention where the ZOGlings were all busy running about writing down license plate numbers. It made me laugh. White Unity!

The Arab countries have great ways dealing with thieves and druggies. Off with the offending part -- hands or head. In the case of rape, they make an exception. Off with the head. (I personally favor having his gonads lassoed and then using the same rope, hung from a branch. Onlookers could then use him for dart practice. The one tossing the last dart, before he died, would be given a years pay.) "But no," said my police Captain friend, "that's too cruel." I told him that if all viewed the problem as he did, then we'd have to live with crime running wild. Bribes, education, "understanding", and all of that is pure unadulterated cat crap. NOTHING teaches lessons better than PAIN. Laws are worthless unless people have the power to punish. Teachers used to be able to punish but that privilege was removed. Now they cannot control a classroom. Dad has had his parental authority cut out from under him and what remains is only a motel atmosphere where related people say hello once in a while.

I remember Mr. Randall, a teacher who took a job at a black zoo, miscalled a school. John was built like smiling Arnold and he always introduced himself to new classes in the same way. When all were focused on him, he'd say, "I am a nice guy except when someone yanks my chain." He'd then smash his fist into his desk, nearly to the point of breaking the wood, and then pick up a horse shoe and forcefully bend it. With raised voice, "I don't think anyone here would really like to see me when I am pissed off!"  Needless to say, John never had a discipline problem and when the word got around, a bevy of cackling hens was sent down from Albany to witness his "secret". The next day, when asked, an ugly crow responded with alarm, "He's an intolerant lunatic who should be removed immediately!" You see, the feminine attitude has nothing to do with what works. It's all about everything being run like a happy, happy, birthday party -- with tea and biscuits, of course.

What's done is done. It's over. It's Humpty-Dumpty. However, if one repeats whatever it was he secretly confessed to, then one can accept the 'revelation' as a mere excuse for one who is little more than a pile of useless protoplasm.

I know many WW II -- the Second World War to Kill White People, SWATKWIP -- vets. Most now realize that they were duped by that very skillful Zionist liar, F. D. Roosevelt. Some of those also realize that the war served the judeo-communist cause only. Some vets, battle ribbons neatly displayed, march in the parades often arranged throughout the year. I was in Valley Forge (military) Hospital for a short while and often saw dismembered, and horribly scarred, vets being wheeled about. "How could they," I asked myself, "ever come to believe that they lost their limbs; their eyesight, for naught?"  The years have proved that we are now receiving, in spades, exactly what our supposed enemy Hitler, sought to prevent from over-running Europe -- the evil bolshevik disease. In less than one year, the populace went from being anti-Communist to accepting the sinister, ex bank robber, Stalin as "kindly Uncle Joe."

The Russians were no smarter than the Americans or British, in this matter, since all were being lied to by the same degenerate coterie. Of all the participants in that gigantic, and costly folly, only the Germans knew what the issue really was. For that alone, we owe them an unpayable debt and never-ending gratitude. The logic is very simple. Being anti-anti-Communist, as America was, is the same as being Communist. Two negatives makes a positive, as our algebra teacher reminded. ZOG is not America for Americans in 1939 (90 percent) were opposed to intervention in Europe. But crowds can be easily manipulated once a crisis -- Oklahoma City or Pearl Harbor -- is created. Make no mistake, I firmly believe both were arranged to benefit ZOG. So the same jingoism which got millions of honest young men to sing the jew tune "Over there...", also led them to willingly offer themselves for slaughter while they simultaneously slaughtered some of the finest people on earth. Only one question has to be asked relative to those two great wars. Cui bono? To whose benefit?

I never had, nor do now, hold any personal hatred for jews. However, I have no reason to seek their friendship. I certainly would not object to their presence anywhere as long as they did not try and remake this country to suit whatever they deem best FOR THEM. This is no longer America and the young certainly could not know this since their age precludes sufficient knowledge. America is a Zionist state with many aspects resembling the most severe tyranny. One can blaspheme Christianity all one wishes but the hammer will be dropped if one gets too energetic in questioning their now absurdly religious "holocaust". If one cannot oppose, or question, jews in a supposedly "free country" then it should be obvious to the very dense, that they are living in a jewish state where it is forbidden to remark on what the king is wearing. The near-total jew-dominated media is not something which would arise out of a society where all had an equal shot at things. Hasn't anyone ever asked themselves why ONLY jews run Hollywood and TV? Talent? No my friends, it's a case of using the 'jew shut-out' to have absolute monopoly.  Why doesn't ZOG, with its present laws against that, do something? Simple. It's the same gang. As Dr. Oliver reminded us, the jews present two versions of their side of anything and then tell us that it represents the 'whole truth'. ZOG is opposed to any religious tax except when it comes to the kosher food racket. It's all there if you care to open your eyes.
http://www.sweetliberty.org/wolves.htm

I really wasn't upset since I have had material lifted from me all my life -- even the formulation for the now common 'waterless
hand cleaner'. It's just one of those things... as the song goes. Anyway, I knew a very efficient snoop who had a nose for this
sort of stuff, and he did a little homework. "Dr. Ian Richardson" was a nom de plume of Willis Carto. That was all I needed to
forever relegate this man to my private garbage can. I no longer cared how much others thought he "contributed to the cause".
He was a piece of shit. Period.

Years later, I had a chance to observe this man on a personal level. His disgusting treatment of Hans Schmitt really didn't
surprise me but only revived my disgust.

When the shining 'white hope' Pat Buchanan appeared on the political scene, I wondered how this could be since Larry King
always smiled at him and Pat was host on Crossfire for years. I held to my premiss that anyone continuously treated well on the
TV circuit certainly would be little more than a distraction and very likely, a 'safety valve' for an angry populace. Millions
support these Peter Pans and it probably will always be so since the average Joe really isn't interested in much past the moment
and certainly can be expected to avoid anything unpleasant. Wishful thinking has been the bane of most men over the centuries.

Secondly, I get much mail suggesting that I refrain from directing my anger (sorry, but I have very little of that) towards "those on our side" to the "real enemy." No one, of course, ever bothers to define those terms but blindly assume that anyone who complains about jews, blacks, or whatever is "one of us". True, that all are doing their little thing ostensibly directed at positive matters relative to the white race. Often we deceive ourselves by focusing on the enemy without, when the enemy within is doing us the most damage. How effective is an infantry company when the cook is pissing in the C-rations? Or the supply sergeant charging money for blankets? Or an observer relaying false information about the enemy strength. After all, they are "on our side"! The blightwing is full of these types and it has been for 50 years. Why should we be willing to accept as comrades those who have lied and cheated, in the past, simply because they can yelp "Da juice is da enemy."? One apparently discounts character -- a very, very common American response -- when he gets desperate, as many concerned people are today. Is that any reason to let a thief into your home simply because he voices an opinion which agrees with yours and you need help counting the silverware? We are talking comrades here, not associates. I am in agreement with Eric on this -- if there were an organization which we thought worthy, we'd join it.

When I encounter anyone whom I believe is talking out of both sides of his mouth, I'll tell you. I am not in some sort of popularity contest nor does my next sandwich depend upon the selling of a diamond-studded swastika, or a subscription to something. I gain nothing from "going with the flow", nor from "wrecking the cause", as some believe. I tell it like I see it. What you do with that information is your business. 

Suggestion:  Run the "Who Rules America" essay link for a week and announce you'll discuss it in your opening monolog and with callers on your short-wave show a week from Monday.  I guarantee your ratings will zoom in a very few periods.  Your short-wave spot might be canceled, too.  But you'll still have your netcast show and higher ratings either way.  The "Who Rules
America" data was researched by Dr. Robert DeMarais, a professor of business who belongs to the N.A.

I will warn you in advance that this topic isn't Klan comedy time, going nowhere in a hurry, like your "Portable Nigger Lyncher" routine.  This subject is strictly OFF LIMITS and never discussed in the media.  This is the same monolithic ethnic control you claim to be skeptical about when callers raise the subject.  So far it's not seriously discussed on your wavelength either.

By the way, Dr. Pierce, his wife and his associates all have to pack iron on their own compound 24 hours a day.  So please spare me the playground taunts.  No sale here with that kid stuff.

As one ponders the relevance of this 'hit' popularity, he must necessarily ask himself if it makes any difference at all. Unlike Mr. Covington, who feels the internet is sterile relative to the white cause, I do feel that it has its purpose and that purpose is information peppered with shock verbiage and uncommon facts, so that a few people actually do get stirred to THINKING. That's the whole purpose of FAEM -- from day #1.

(Notice that Hal starts his show with nigger thump and has 'copyright' is plastered all about. Are these clues? RF)

"Read your appraisal of the new internet-only version of my radio show. I apologize for the erratic volume levels and other technical troubles;  call them "start-up" pains.

As to your assertion of me not openly declaring myself a "racist" what difference would that make?  Every one of my critics is already hurling that smear at me, and no one would believe me if I said I wasn't.  Put simply, to my mind, the word is meaningless.

But I was most intrigued by your request for people to call me and challenge me.  Nice of you to sit back and stir up shit while hoping other people throw it for you!  Why don't YOU call,  HMMMMM?  Afraid?"  :-)

Comment from Robert: Hal, we've been giving you so much publicity that we ought to send you a bill.

You have a great gift for side-stepping issues when they reflect upon yourself. The fact that others call you a racist has no connection whatsoever with what you know, or feel, about yourself. As a further reptilian slithery slip, you stack the deck in your favor by declaring that "racist" has no meaning. If that is true, then what do you say about the Genocide Convention? The rest of the world has no problem in believing that "racist" means something. Young white males are in the slammer because some judge thought "racist" meant something. It's far deeper than a mere "smear". It's a term used to TERRORIZE any white person who is glad he doesn't smell like a musk ox, or have slits for eyes.

I'll admit a certain ignorance of this web business, so I'll ask how one manages to use their phone line to call your show while still having that line connected to the internet. I am using equipment which, in part, was built in 1988. I am not up to date in that department. My keyboard is of 1984 vintage and the monitor, 1992. I use an out-of-date 28.8 modem and my processor farts along at 133MHz. Maybe there's a way to do this, but I sure as hell am not about to spend money on new equipment just to be faddish. Moreover, why would anyone be "afraid" of a phone call? Isn't that what the internet is all about anyway? Make your views known without fear of retaliation as one would find in a face-to-face at the local bar?

I suggested that others call you, not so I could avoid what you imply in the "throw your own mud", but as a response to a myriad of questions such as "What can we do?".  And since when were QUESTIONS 'throwing mud'? The next time you advise, or allude to, a breaking of the law, I fully expect that you will be the first in line -- blazing away. Perhaps the audience would be interested in any event where you were the first to step forward and kick the shit out of someone who was molesting another. And kindly refrain from using the term "negro beast" as it defames all of the wonderful critters God gave to this planet, from horses to cheetahs.

Since "racist" is meaningless to you, you are obviously out-of-touch since the term has been defined in dictionaries over the centuries. Be that as it may, a racist is a person who believes that the race to which he belongs, is superior to the other races. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ASSAULTING, OR HATING, OTHER RACES AS THE JEWS ARE NOW TRYING IN INCULCATE. He who defines, controls! As I have mentioned, it is perhaps axiomatic that species superiority under the genus Homo, be defined relative to the usurpation of Nature, or use thereof, by technology. Only the white race exhibits this in astounding proportion unless you are of the jewish mind set where a rocket to the moon is equated with a Bantu's spear -- Freudian phallic symbols -- and termite mounds examples of Gothic architecture. If you can indeed accept that white people, as a group, are technically superior to all other peoples -- technology defines humans and not the ability to play niggerball or screech at a drug/rock concert -- AND that you are a white man, then you fit the definition of a white racist. You belong to the race which is deemed superior. I repeat: if you believe that whites are superior and that you are white, then you are a racist. It's that simple. The only way you can weasel out of this is by either (1) declaring you are not a white man or (2) accept that the white race is inferior to other races, or 'equality' is present straight across the board. (In this case, other questions come to mind such as your ability to tell a tomato from prune.)

Given the above, are you a white racist? Yes or no? That's a question. It's not throwing mud. I don't give two f---s who calls you what. Let me hear it from YOUR mouth -- without the jewish sleaze.

Continuing, I noticed that when a NA member queried you about Dr. Pierce's excellent Who Controls the Media?, you feigned ignorance of such things. This also appears to be another of your favorite waltzing steps since I find it hard to believe that you are that naive, or simple minded. I suggest that your slipperiness might be caused, in part, by the fact that WBCQ is owned by the 'chosenite' Allan H. Weiner.

Years ago, George L. Rockwell was invited to Tel Aviv-on-the-Hudson for a radio talk show. They were laying in wait for him -- physically. He narrowly escaped being thrashed to a pulp and so it is perhaps understandable that admitted racists are somewhat hesitant to accept an invitation to be physically present at your studio. The enemies of white people are not nice fellows. They are evil in the full meaning of the word. (I accepted such an invitation years ago -- not radio, but to simply speak before a group -- and was rewarded by having my car's windows smashed, its 2 doors kicked in and the top slashed to ribbons.) Again, my ignorance of technical matters in this regard might negate my belief that a "shot waif", or internet conference, could be arranged to utilize the telephone.

Don't just make noises Hal, declare yourself. Otherwise you are nothing but a Rush Limpblow blowing a conservative/liberal fart flute only with a different vocabulary.

Hal,

Right website, wrong address.  Robert wrote that appraisal.  And also the response to your letter which just appeared.  For your information 99% of my  pieces are signed "Maguire" including anything lengthy.  When a long unsigned piece appears on the front page, it's always Robert, as was that one and today's.

Understand up front that we credit you with some good intelligence.  Neither one of us considers you stupid.  OK?

So, please say 'thank you' and mean it.  Robert's now put you back 'above the fold' on the main page.  Personally I think this was your major anxiety when you wrote.  I forwarded your email to him with the simple comment, "Cat's scratching at the door."  Want me to send you the email I wrote Robert early this week predicting you would do exactly this after several days of being ignored?

Put simply, to my mind, the word (racist) is meaningless.

Then let's redefine it.

Are you in favor of:

(1)  Geographical separation of the races into separate polities?

Yes/no?  If you oppose this, will you at least support re-segregating schools, military units and neighborhoods?  Yes/no?

(2)  Political disenfranchisement of any non-white races inside white polities?

Yes/no?  A no vote means that ON A PRACTICAL BASIS non-whites ruling whites is a-ok with you.

(3)  Reenacting the laws against miscegenation?  They existed in this country until the late 1960s.

Yes/no? A no means miscegenation is a-ok with you.

Why don't YOU call,  HMMMMM?  Afraid?  :-)

Once a general was besieging a fortress.  He shouted to his enemy, "If you are a great general, come down and fight me."  His opponent replied, "If you are a great general, make me fight against my will."

In my case it's mostly just growing boredom with your current approach. Plus a quantitative assessment that I'd just be preaching to the choir.  Let's talk hard numbers here for a bit.  Not dollar numbers.  That's your game, not ours.  People numbers.

Our internet Alexa ranking right now is about 62,000.  Yours is in their basement category, sub <100,000.  They don't give detailed rankings that low.  Robert meant what he said about "We ought to bill you for publicity". (That's not bad for FAEM which has one of the lowest link counts in the category - 49. Word of mouth is still the best advertising.)

I've researched your archives in depth and have listened to recent live  netcasts.  I paid particular attention to your November post election  coverage.

You were right in there with the rest of ZOG media saying white civilization  would end if Bush wasn't elected or Gore was allowed to 'steal' Florida.   Before the election, and at times when Bush was trailing Gore in the public  polls, I said it would be Bush by a nose and that the fix was in.  Go read  our archives in Ad Libitum.

I don't consider that analytic prediction was very insightful, either.  All  it took was the correct analytic lens, which you refuse to use or refuse to  acquire.  I agree with you the Clintons are 100% unregenerate scum.  But  they are intelligent scum who know how to manage elections.  Elian Gonzalez  2000 in Miami Florida (a key swing state) is not a show an administration  that was really trying to elect Al Gore would have staged.   It was obvious  to me when it went down.  Hillary and her lesbian mafia threw a series of banana peels like that in front of Al Gore.  But you were signed up for the whole show as being real and pushed the 'what a hoss race' line just like the rest of the Judeo-Marxist media.

Then there was Pat Buchanan and Reform.  Texas based Perot (did a ten watt bulb come on yet?) lured Buchanan out of the GOP (and its primaries) into Reform.  Then right before the party convention Perot had his servant Russ Verney split the Reform Party by backing John Hegelin, an NEA member who believes he can levitate himself.  Perot finished up by endorsing Bush, who meanwhile had a clear run in the primaries. (The ugly dwarf, slime bag Perot was the big oil/drug money tool used to elect both Zionist-Democrat Clinton and Zionist-Republican Bush. This unprincipled bastard deceived millions of honest hard-working Americans who had faith in him. It would do my heart well to see him turned over to an outraged mob, but alas, the typical voter apparently enjoys having the purple shaft crammed up his rear. RF)

You really think there's real differences in those two parties' elites?   You just haven't been paying attention.  Back when Duke was gathering momentum in Louisiana, the Republican National Committee joined right in with the Democrats to drive him out.  There's your REAL two party system, Hal.  They're just two sides of the same counterfeit coin.  They reveal themselves as being one any time a REAL outside challenge to their regime appears.

All we've seen is Limbaughism.  Instead of black you shout 'nigger'. Instead of gay or homosexual you say 'filthy sodomite pervert....'  Big deal.  Any white can tell there's something terminally wrong with their society.  What is wrong is the question.  You said yesterday you notice a consistent bias in the media.  Random action does not generate non-random outcomes.

I'm going to test you out.  I'll tell you up front I'm not a member of the  National Alliance and I don't get one penny from any of them.  A caller discussed this with you last night.

Headline this link on your main page starting now until your Monday night call-in show and then discuss what you think about the thesis:

http://www.natall.com/who-rules-america/

Now I'll add one detail for you Dr. Pierce hasn't added yet.  Colin Powell's sonny boy was sitting on the FCC when it approved the Time Warner-AOL merger.  Colin Powell himself was sitting on AOL's Board of Directors at the time.  Did you hear one squawk about 'conflict of interest' in the biased-by-randomness media you discuss?  No.  Because there wasn't any
conflict.  Colin and his boy were doing what the Judeo-Masonic system wanted them to do.

"Maguire"

Who but a jackass would tell us, as he did on July 23, that THERE ARE millions of citizens who -- meaning the gun-totin' bunch, and he DID NOT include himself -- have the government OUT-GUNNED and that "people" can thus force their intentions. When was the last time you went up against a flame-throwing tank with a 12 gauge shotgun? Or pop off an incoming Napalm squadron with your 22? Have you forgotten Waco already? Since when did ZOG agree that it would be a one-to-one, with six-shooters, at the NOT OK Corral? You are talking armed rebellion here and you can quote the Declaration all you want, but that won't change the fact that NO government, law or no law, is going to let this happen without an all out war. I have had many sorry experiences with blow-hards who huff and puff but when the chips fell, I stood alone holding onto my tools. A man who WILL NOT DO AS HE SAYS has no business giving directions to anyone. When I see pal Hal kick Bill Clinton square in the nuts, then I'll be the first to applaud when he tells others to do the same. Until then.... see this finger? Rotate.

Rockwell was often the first to swing in his many street battles for which he usually ended up looking like the victim of a gang rape. If a bomb scare ever hit Rockefeller Square, where I believe Hal's studio is, he'd probably be out the door before the women and children. (During the Manson/Tate murders years ago, when the Hollywood gang thought someone was trying to kill movie people, the macho dicks, like off-key moaning, 4F WWII drop-out, idol Frank Sinatra, blew town. Steve McQueen bought a pistol, kept it on the seat of his car, and went to work as usual.) I have noticed that our really brave men, like Audie Murphy and Roger Young of WW II, and Alvin York of WW I, were quiet, unassuming men. I have never met one blow hard, in my lifetime, who wasn't the first to cut and run when the shit started to fly.

Years ago, a salesman knocked on my door selling a set of encyclopedias. He introduced himself and then said he'd be privileged to sell me the set because I would be a good advertisement. He then related how the neighbors all agreed that I was the most intelligent man on the block. When I asked him which neighbors, he sputtered, hesitated and forgot his memorized sales pitch.

Ruth once told me I was the greatest lover in the world. If that were an objective statement, then she indicted herself as a very, very, loose, loose female, otherwise she'd be in no position to judge.

You see my friends, flattery disarms us all and we are inclined to view the flatterer in an excellent light, since we often have an INNER NEED to believe the flattery. This is exactly what pal Hal does. He let's YOU blow off steam and then you give HIM credit for being an OK fellow with your interests at heart. It is also flattering to know that others -- out there in that vast arena of vibrating vacuums -- ARE LISTENING. This is more ego fertilizing than shouting "nigger beasts", "the juice are ruining us", "beaners are pissing in our water fountains" or "some bastard put sand in my spermicide", to your dog Humper.

Still not convinced? Why not call in and ASK HIS OPINION of the jews and their stranglehold on the media? Ask him what HE'D do in all of those cases where he says "the people should". Ask him for HIS definitive position on all issues of your concern. Ask him where he gets the money to be on the air and live as he does. Ask him. I just did via these pages which he reads! As I told you about the recent shooting star, FOX's Bill O'Reilly, he's noisy but listen carefully for he'll soon reveal that he is nothing but another system whore, as was the ugly millionaire dwarf Perot -- another 'savior' of the white race. (He was dragged in to split the vote and insure that "cigar" Bill got the prize. How soon we forget.) THEY REMAIN ONLY ENTERTAINMENT and often do, as does Hal, provide a source of information. So does the library but that doesn't mean that the library would make a great leader or save your bacon. You, my young friends, and those of kindred spirit, are the ones who will save your own asses for those of my generation, the one which got this country into this mess, and the generation after mine, who offered no help whatsoever other than get stoned on drugs and screw everything within reach, are not going to do one damned thing about it. Somewhere among you IS a leader and he won't be shouting "nigger" over the airwaves, or selling you books, or asking for dues to some sterile organization. He will be one who SACRIFICES on YOUR BEHALF, as does any worthwhile parent, and not some patriotism-for-profit fellow who thinks HE SHOULD BE PAID for helping his race. When this man comes along, you must be prepared to JOIN HIM and sacrifice as he did. In the meantime, I still recommend that people listen to Hal Turner, but send him no money. When Hal decides to promote OUR PEOPLE, and our websites, as a freebie, instead of offering free speech (advertising) for a price, then I'll change my mind. What's the deal anyway? Nearly all web hosts will allow you to post nearly anything, for a price, but that doesn't make them one of us. Before you blow up at my remarks, think about them. If you think I am in error, let me know. My views are not carved in stone.

It is nothing personal. In fact, I might enjoy having a kosher beer with Hal. What does concern me is that many people will place FALSE HOPE in the man and worse yet, some people might take his advice and end up in the slammer. I want no one to ever suffer that. I am getting damned tired of those who are using the good intentions of others to fill their wallets and subtly provoke them into committing crimes. They are like the TV evangelists whom I despise with a passion, a white man's passion!

I have to admit I've been thinking about this guy (Hal) a little too much the last few days.  I have noticed a lot of inconsistent behavior and contradictions:

1.  He claims to be a direct descendant of, if I remember correctly, "John Turner" who came over on the Mayflower.  For this to be true he would have to be English; the photographs of Hal on the site do not look like someone with very much Anglo-Saxon blood.  He looks mediterranean or semitic to me.  How could his bloodline have been so diminished if he is still carrying the surname?  Does he look like an ex-Marine to you?

2.  He claims to be Roman Catholic.  Mayflower "John Turner" would not have been Catholic.  Maryland was where all the Catholics went.  I find it hard to believe, although it is certainly possible, that one of his male forebears would convert to accommodate a wife.

3.  He has played an ad for the "Turner Diaries Video Game" yet claims he never read the book! (On 27 July, he claimed to have read it. Would he be willing to take a quiz? RF)

4.  While talking to someone on the net he referred to the "business model" of his show failing due to lack of advertising support, which requires his solicitation of funds from listeners.  Business model? I thought this was about free speech?

Ad Infinitum...

I doubt he's doing intelligence work, though. Despite the inconsistencies, I think he is simply a smalltime hack "patriot for profit" with an ego larger than his talents.  Aside from one appearance by Jared Taylor, the only "expert" I've heard is Hal himself.  I think he is playing to his audience with "savage negro beast", etc.  Now I see he is also going after "white trash".  Perhaps the word "racist" is proving too difficult a burden for him.

I read the Commander Rockwell story the other day.  Those seemed like very bizarre times (I was born in 1962).  I never heard of this man until I was 35 and on the internet.  Considering the Playboy interview and his intentions for 1972, certainly he'd be at least a small footnote to history.  I guess THEY only tell you history that they want you to know.  I have a degree in Economics and never even heard of the Austrian School until after I graduated.  I was constantly barraged with a litany of "Deficit Spending = Good; Gold backed currency = Bad".  I still managed to play the game well enough to get out with honors but my God, the propaganda!  I guess the moral is: in a world of relative truth, absolute truth must not be given a voice of dissent.

Note from Robert: As far as appearing on his "shot waif" show, what good would it really do? FAEM's views can be found on this site for all to read. No one needs to hear Eric read his own essays. If you want OUR views on race, then read them. No matter what their merit, AT LEAST WE DO DEFINE OUR TERMS and that leaves most other "patriots" frozen at the starting gate.