'Face Crime' & Anthrax

Dr. William Pierce

American Dissident Voices Broadcast of Oct. 13, 2001


Some novels are worth reading just because they're entertaining or
exciting. Others are worth reading because we can learn something
worthwhile from them. Occasionally a novel may even be prophetic: we can
learn something about the future from reading it. It is a rare novel
indeed that is both entertaining and prophetic. Such is the novel 1984,
written in 1948 by the Englishman Eric Arthur Blair using the pen name
George Orwell.

I first read 1984 in 1955 when I was a graduate student and found it so
fascinating that I reread it at least three times in subsequent years.
What fascinated me about the novel was the feeling I had while reading
it each time that it not only was prescient, that it not only was
telling me things about the future which I felt likely to come about,
but it also was revealing to me very fundamental things about the nature
of people and governments: things that I had not been taught elsewhere
because they were Politically Incorrect -- although the term
"Politically Incorrect" had not yet been coined.

Here's an example: Orwell talks about the ideological regimentation of
the English public by the government. People were punished not only for
doing or writing or saying something Politically Incorrect; they were
punished for thinking Politically Incorrect thoughts: "thought crime,"
it was called. The Thought Police were the all-powerful enforcers of
Political Correctness. In 1984 there also was another type of crime for
which people were punished: it was called "face crime," and a person
committed a "face crime" if he had a Politically Incorrect expression on
his face at any time. For example, if a person smiled when he should
have frowned, or showed distaste or disapproval when he should have
shown admiration, he had committed a "face crime" and could be severely

Well, that's only fiction, but in the real world a little over a decade
ago Jewish organizations and the media began their big push to have all
sorts of "hate crime" legislation enacted in America. "Hate crime," of
course, is essentially "thought crime." "Hate crime" legislation
punishes a person for what he supposedly was thinking at the time he
committed some act. The politicians, of course, put up practically no
resistance. The Jews demanded it, so the politicians went along with it
and began passing the laws the Jews wanted. The Sally Soccer Moms and
the Joe Sixpacks also thought "hate crime" laws were a good thing. Who
wants to be in favor of hate? Outlaw it, get rid of it.

I've spoken often in these broadcasts about the Orwellian nature of the
program to enact more "hate crime" laws. It was largely in connection
with the mindless willingness of the public to go along with this
trashing of their most fundamental freedoms that I began using the term
"lemming" to describe people who believe whatever they are told to
believe by their television screens and who then adjust their attitudes
and opinions accordingly. Orwell also clearly understood this aspect of
human nature. He understood that most people are susceptible to thought
control by the media and the government. He understood that no matter
how repressive a government becomes, most people will never think of
rebelling or even want to rebel, as long as they believe that other
people around them approve of the government.

I found this aspect of Orwell's book most interesting and also most
profoundly depressing: his portrayal of the ease with which the thinking
of the public can be controlled by the government and the media. Prior
to absorbing the message of Orwell's 1984 I had had a rather idealistic
view of people -- that is, of my people, my fellow White men and women.
I had thought of the White public as being comprised of a mass of
individuals, each able to think for himself and make his own decisions
about the world around him. I had thought that if it were clear to me
that the government is corrupt and is not serving the interests of our
people, then all I had to do to persuade other people that the
government does not deserve their support is show them the evidence. I
thought that most other people could reach rational decisions about such
matters. But when I read 1984 I had the nagging conviction that Orwell
was right about the nature of most people, and I was wrong. Orwell's
portrayal of people had the ring of truth.

For a long time, however, I resisted accepting Orwell's view of the
nature of the public because I didn't want to accept it. I wanted to
keep my idealistic view of my fellow men. But eventually my own
observations and my reason convinced me that Orwell was right, and that
most people are, in fact, not individuals at all but are lemmings.

I thought about the implications of that quite a bit, and I finally
decided that it wasn't necessarily a bad thing. If the race had evolved
that way, it must have been for a reason. It must have survival value.
And, of course, it does. We are able to have stable societies only
because most people are lemmings: only because most people think and act
only as members of the mass, not as individuals. In a time of war, for
example, it is essential for a community or a nation to be united in its
thinking. That's one of the reasons that multiculturalism weakens a
nation. That's one of the reasons I've condemned as traitors the people
trying to keep America's borders open to the Third World, trying to
bring more "diversity" to America. They are weakening America, damaging

Anyway, lemminglike behavior was one thing before the age of television;
it's something with quite different consequences when the powerful tool
of television is in the hands of an alien minority with its own agenda,
with its own interests, which in many cases are diametrically opposed to
the interests of our own people. My own concern, all of my work, has not
been to change the nature or the behavior of our people; it has been to
liberate them from the destructive influences that take advantage of our
people and manipulate them in ways opposed to their own interests.
That's why I've focused so much on the all-important fact of Jewish
media control.

Back to Orwell's 1984 and its all too prophetic descriptions of a
government enforcing laws against "thought crime," and the people going
along with this sort of ideological regimentation without complaint.
Remember Orwell's description of "face crime"? I have on my desk a news
report from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch last week. It's about an
11-year-old fifth grader at a St. Louis-area school who was suspended
from school last week for smiling inappropriately. The news story is
headed, and I quote, "School suspends boy who drew picture of attack,
then grinned while showing it."

The boy's class had been given the assignment of writing about the
September 11 attack. The boy drew a sketch of the twin towers of the
World Trade Center with flames and smoke coming from the upper floors.
The principal of the boy's school asked to see the drawing. The boy,
Paul Volz, showed it to the principal and smiled. The principal
suspended Paul form school and sent him home with a note. The note to
Paul's father from the principal, Jeff Boyer, read, and I quote: "When I
asked him why he did this, he just looked at me and smiled. This is
totally inappropriate, and Paul's behavior has to change." -- end of
quote --

Paul's father complained to the newspaper, and a reporter tried to
contact the principal, but the principal refused to return his call. The
reporter then contacted a spokesman for the school district, Ben Heit.
Heit told the reporter that it was Paul's smile, not the drawing itself,
that brought the suspension. All of this is in the St. Louis
Post-Dispatch of October 4.

Think about this story for a minute. I believe that most of us think of
the attack on the World Trade Center as a very serious matter.
Certainly, 6,000 people being killed is not a laughing matter for most
of us. Paul Volz's smiling about the picture he drew may very well have
indicated that the 11-year-old boy didn't take the attack seriously. But
you know, in America, we used to be free to make up our own minds about
what we would take seriously and what we wouldn't. When a neighbor -- or
an 11-year-old kid -- didn't agree with us about what should be smiled
at and what shouldn't, that was nobody's business but his. We couldn't
sic the FBI on him -- or suspend him from school. It's clear that Paul's
principal believes that that view of things is old-fashioned. He
believes that the time has come when it is appropriate to punish people
for "face crimes."

My concern is that many Sally Soccer Moms and Joe Sixpacks feel the same
way about it that Principal Jeff Boyer does. In this case I suspect that
the war hysteria being drummed up by the media emboldened the principal
to act as he did. I'm concerned that before this war is over, people
like Principal Boyer, with an Orwellian Thought Police mentality, will
use the war to justify many more 1984-style curtailments of our freedom.
The media bosses have been preaching for years that the First Amendment
was never meant to protect "offensive speech" or speech that hurts other
people's feelings: "hate speech" they call it. And there are literally
millions of American voters who have let themselves be persuaded to go
along with that view. Who needs "hate speech"? they think. It just hurts
people's feelings and stirs people up against other people. Who wants to
be in favor of speech that hurts people's feelings? Outlaw it, get rid
of it. And what better time for the media bosses and their political
lackeys in the government to push for new "speech crime" laws than when
America is at war? All Americans need to be united now, they say. We
need to pull together. We must not have people saying things that divide
us. That only serves the purpose of the enemy. So let's outlaw "hate
speech" now. And at the same time they carry on this campaign to destroy
our most basic freedoms they tell us we need to wage war against the
enemies of our "freedom and democracy" in the Middle East. I'll bet
they're really laughing up their sleeves about that.

And really, don't they have a right to laugh at us, to feel contempt for
us? They use our democracy -- that is, our electoral system, in which
the lemmings whose opinions they control through their television are
used to put their approved politicians into public office -- they use
our democracy to take away our freedom, and they use our people to help
them do it. And they facilitate the whole process by getting us to fight
a war against their enemies in the Middle East, telling us that it's a
war to safeguard our "freedom and democracy." Wise men, such as George
Orwell, warned us about this sort of thing more than 50 years ago, but
if we judge by people like Principal Jeff Boyer and school board
official Ben Heit, the warnings haven't helped much.

Clear indications of the contempt they feel for us and of their
confidence in their ability to continue manipulating us for their own
purposes are visible in many places, but probably nowhere more than in
Israel itself. There's been a lot of discussion among the Israeli
politicians in the Knesset during recent weeks about how to take the
best advantage of the September 11 attack on New York and Washington.
The Israeli prime minister, Ariel Sharon, is all in favor of carrying
out a massive program of ethnic cleansing against the Palestinians while
the Americans are preoccupied with annihilating the Jews' other enemies
in the Middle East. Simon Perez, a former prime minister and currently
Israel's foreign minister, favors a more cautious policy -- at least, in
public he favors caution.

The discussion between Sharon and Perez is almost like a bad cop, good
cop routine. Sharon is a certified war criminal, a professional
terrorist with a record much longer than that of Osama bin Laden, and a
mass murderer, who is currently defying the efforts of an international
war crimes tribunal in Brussels to put him on trial for organizing the
butchery of Palestinian women and children in the Sabra and Chatila
refugee camps in Lebanon in 1982. His principal constituency among
Israeli Jews is the raving-mad Orthodox element and the Jewish settlers
in the so-called "occupied territories." Perez, a member of the Labor
Party, appeals more to the rootless, cosmopolitan, pseudo-liberal Jewish
element and pretends to be in favor of the badly misnamed "peace

Deception, of course, characterizes everything the Israelis do publicly.
Privately, the Jews in both the Sharon and the Perez camps are
enormously pleased by the September 11 attack on New York and Washington
and by the Bush government's declaration of war against Israel's enemies
in the Middle East. Sharon, however, pretends to be angry about the
American efforts to build a coalition of so-called "moderate" Arab
states to help in the war against Afghanistan and Iraq. Sharon blusters
that the Bush government is trying to "sell Israel out" by making
agreements with Arab states. These agreements may later turn out to be
disadvantageous to Israel, Sharon complains.

Sharon is a master of what the Jews proudly call "chutzpah," which is a
combination of incredible arrogance and spectacular brazenness mixed
with a breathtaking degree of bald-faced deceit. American long-term
support for Israel's aggression led to the attack of September 11 in
which 6,000 Americans were killed; America then launched a war to
destroy Israel's enemies in the Middle East under the guise of "fighting
terrorism" and protecting America's "freedom and democracy," and Sharon
complains that we're doing it at Israel's expense! It's the old Jewish
trick of never being satisfied, no matter how much is given to them: of
always complaining that they don't have enough and demanding more, as if
we owe it to them! If we remind them of how much we already have done
for them, of how many sacrifices we already have made for them, the
response is an expression of injured innocence and, "Yes, but vot haff
you done for us today?"

Really, one hardly can blame them. I don't know who coined the saying,
"Never give a sucker an even break," but the Jews certainly have taken
it to heart. That is quite evident to anyone monitoring these Knesset
discussions. Most of the discussions can be found in Jewish Telegraphic
Agency or Reuters news reports, but some of the most lurid discussions
are not reported in print. The week before last the Hebrew-language
Jerusalem radio station Kol Yisrael -- that's Hebrew for "all Israel" --
reported one debate that I have not found in print anywhere. According
to Kol Yisrael, Sharon and Perez were discussing the Israeli
government's actions against the Palestinians. Perez was arguing that
the Israelis should at least maintain the pretense of seeking an end to
the violence in order to keep the Americans happy. Sharon turned angrily
to Perez and shouted, and I quote: "Every time we do something, you warn
me that America will do this or America will do that. I will tell you
something very clearly: don't worry about American pressure on Israel.
We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it." --
end of quote --

This outburst from Sharon was followed by another warning from Perez
that Sharon should be careful not to say such things. Clearly, when
Sharon said that the Americans know that the Jews control their country,
he wasn't talking about the Sally Soccer Moms and the Joe Sixpacks, who
don't know anything they aren't told by television. He was talking about
the politicians and the bureaucrats: about George Bush and Bill Clinton
and the rest of the crowd that always has done Israel's bidding.

I'm reminded of something that happened 25 years ago, when General
George Brown was the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. He was
showing an Israeli delegation some new, high-tech American weapons. The
Israelis said they wanted them. General Brown told them that they
weren't available for export, that the Congress hadn't approved them for
use by anyone except the United States. The Israelis replied arrogantly,
"Don't you worry about the Congress. We'll take care of the Congress."
And, of course, they did. They got the weapons they wanted. And General
Brown got in a lot of trouble and was even accused of "anti-Semitism"
for telling others about this incident.

You know, we have a big, big problem here in America. The problem is not
that people all over the world hate our guts and are willing to
sacrifice their own lives in order to inflict damage on us. The problem
is not that we are subjected to terrorist attacks with hijacked
airliners or with deadly biological warfare agents such as anthrax. We
could lose a lot of people to terrorist attacks and still survive as a

The problem is not terrorism. The problem is that we have lost control
of our own government. Our government no longer responds to our needs;
instead it responds to the demands of an alien minority and has done
this for a long time. It's even worse than that. The Jews' control of
our mass media of news and entertainment, which has enabled them to gain
control of the politicians and the government, has weakened -- really
sickened -- our whole people. In order to gain control of the government
they first had to subvert our people. They had to change our beliefs and
our attitudes. They had to distract our attention from the important
things and get us preoccupied with unimportant things. They had to make
us forget our values and traditions. They had to break down our pride
and independence. They had to change the way we raise our children. They
had to subvert our educational system and our churches and other
institutions, one at a time. They had to confuse us and make us feel
guilty for being what we were. They had to make us ashamed of our
forefathers. They had to make us afraid to say in public what we felt
about our own people and about others. They had to corrupt our political
system, the way we chose our leaders. And then they were able to take
control of our government and use us for their own purposes.

I've been preaching about this for more than 30 years -- about the
effects of Jewish television on our people. I've been writing about it
in books and pamphlets and leaflets. It was more than 25 years ago that
I wrote my book "The Turner Diaries," warning about what would happen to
America. I've been warning about it on the Internet. I've been talking
about it every week in these American Dissident Voices broadcasts. Many
people listened. Many people agreed with me.  But they thought they
didn't have to do anything. They thought they could sit it out. But
nobody can sit out what is happening to America now. We are beginning to
pay the price for allowing ourselves to be subverted, for giving up
control of our government, of our destiny.  We are beginning to pay the
price for letting ourselves, our nation, be used by an alien minority to
advance their own interests at the expense of ours.

We are beginning to pay the price, and before we have finished paying
the price we will discover that it is a heavy price indeed.  Bombing the
whole Middle East flat will not solve our problem.  Our problem is here,
not in Afghanistan or Iraq. What Osama bin Laden gave us on September 11
was just a wakeup call.  What the people mailing out anthrax-infected
letters are giving us is just a reminder that we can have no real
security -- in fact, no real future for our children and our
grandchildren -- until we regain control of our own government. You must
not believe the generals and the politicians who tell you confidently
from your television screens that if we just use enough cruise missiles
and smart bombs and kill enough of the Jews' enemies in the Middle East
we'll be safe again.  Americans will never again have real security or
real peace of mind until they have regained control of their government
and their media.

Let's get started!

Thanks for being with me again today.


The text above is based on a broadcast of the American Dissident
Voices radio program sponsored by National Vanguard Books.
It is distributed by e-mail each Saturday to subscribers of ADVlist.

To subscribe to ADVlist send an e-mail message to:
ADVlist-on@NatVan.com  (The subject and body of the message don't

For more information about National Vanguard Books or the
National Alliance see our web site at http://www.natvan.com or

==> The National Alliance has a strict anti-spamming policy.  This 
information is intended for interested parties only and is not to be 
indiscriminately distributed via mass e-mailing or newsgroup posting.

To contact us, write to:
     National Vanguard Books
     Attention:  ADVlist
     P.O. Box 330
     Hillsboro, WV  24946

or e-mail: national@NatVan.com please tell us if we can post your
comments and if so whether you want your name or e-mail address

-->  TO BE REMOVED from ADVlist, send an e-mail message to:  
ADVlist-off@NatVan.com  (The subject and body of the message don't

(c) 2001 National Vanguard Books



Back to The Thought 4 The Day
Back to Stuff I Wish I Wrote -- But Didn't
Back to Martin Lindstedt's Christian Israelite Church&State WWW Page.
Back to Patrick Henry On-Line