From alt.conspiracy
From: vincent@dreamon.com (The Bok)
Subject: The History and Significance of the New World Order
Date: Sun, 09 Feb 1997 03:30:54 GMT
Message-ID: <32fd2942.367248603@news.gte.net>

---------------------------------------------------------------
American Dissident Voices is a world wide radio program which 
deals with topics of interest that concern people of European
descent. We hope that these weekly articles will offer the reader 
an opposing viewpoint to the major news media. 

If you would like to subscribe to this service, please e-mail
advinfo@dreamon.com. 
--------------------------------------------------------------- 

American Dissident Voices Online Radio
http://www.natvan.com/radio/radio.html

The History and Significance of the New World Order 

by Scott Spencer 

The author of this series, Scott Spencer, is a writer and researcher
who lives in Toronto, Canada. 

Introduction 

The concept and the reality of the New World Order are widely
misunderstood, even by most patriots; or perhaps I should
say, especially by most patriots. Some of this misunderstanding is
caused by the shortcomings of the patriots, but there is also
disinformation deliberately inserted by our enemies. We need an
accurate understanding of what -- and who -- we are
fighting to insure our victory. 

The self-styled "patriots," the coin-sellers and quack-cure salesmen,
if given the reins of power in the United States tomorrow morning,
would either be shot dead trying to flee the country, or would be
dancing to an internationalist Jewish tune by nightfall. Most of them
want only to hawk their questionable wares. Even if they know what the
New World Order really is, they would rather have their bank
statements published than oppose it. 

The Old World Order 

The United States is, itself, a product of the fall of the Old World
Order. The Old World Order, as far as government is concerned, was
comprised of the Christian monarchies which ruled by "divine right"
after the fall of the Western Roman Empire in the sixth century. The
term "New World Order" pertained to an ideal world which was allegedly
to develop on the ashes of the Old Order after no powerful monarchs
ruled in Europe. The American Revolution was a relatively benign
manifestation of a revolutionary movement against that Old Order. This
movement bore its most bitter fruit in the 19th and 20th centuries.
This revolutionary movement, whatever its merits once were, has been
hijacked by the enemies of our race and nation. 

The increase of chaos in 19th century Europe, brought about by the
undermining of monarchies, was offset by the growth of national
consciousness among the peoples of Europe. 

The idea that the overthrow of a monarchy would always lead to
self-government of "the people" was transparently fraudulent. Powerful
Jews were often ideally positioned when the monarch fell. The Jews
were, then as now, a people unto themselves. They had their own
interests, and these interests were often antithetical to the
interests of the peoples among whom they lived. 

Self-government of a people leads to nationalism and a sensitivity to
alien control of government. Consequently there was a healthy,
although grossly inadequate, reaction against Jewish power.
Nationalism is inherently hostile toward organized Jewry, and
organized Jewry is inherently hostile toward nationalism. 

The French Revolution 

An early milestone of the New World Order was the French Revolution.
The French monarchy, and the causes of its downfall, have been widely
and deliberately misrepresented. The truth about the French monarchy
was stated by the Scottish philosopher David Hume in 1742: 

     Though all kinds of government be improved in modern times, yet
     monarchical government seems to have made the greatest advance to
     perfection. It may now be affirmed of civilized monarchies, what
     was formerly said of republics alone, that they are a government
     of laws, not of men. They are susceptible of order, method, and
     constancy, to a surprising degree. Property is there secure;
     industry is encouraged; the arts flourish; and the prince lives
     among his subjects like a father among his children. 

Hume added that he saw more "sources of degeneracy" in representative
republics like that of England than in France, which he called "the
most perfect model of pure monarchy." 

It is generally conceded that a conspiracy orchestrated the French
Revolution. The moderate members of the conspiracy, such as Lafayette,
were appalled at the outcome of the process they had helped to start.
Lafayette and many others had merely wanted to establish a
constitutional monarchy, but as in all revolutions, the moderates did
not determine the outcome. 

But in spite of any conspiracy, Louis XVI could not have been
overthrown unless he allowed himself to be overthrown. 

This may seem a peculiar thing to say, that Louis XVI allowed himself
to be overthrown, allowed his kingdom to be ruined, and subjected
himself and many others to the whim of filthy degenerates, but Louis
XVI was a liberal, much like the liberals we encounter today. He was
an enemy to his friends and a friend to his enemies. The entire French
Revolution could have been stifled on several occasions if only the
King had allowed his bodyguards and his troops to deal with the gangs
of hired ruffians in the manner they so richly deserved. But no, Louis
was a "humanitarian." In the Siege of the Tuileries the King's
own Swiss guards were brutally murdered simply because he had
forbidden them to raise their weapons, even in self-defense, against
those hired thugs whom the King naively regarded as "the people." 

Louis was not a congenitally stupid man, but from childhood his head
had been filled with wrong ideas, the same kind of wrong ideas which
public schools and the mass-media impress upon us and our children
today. 

The fate of Louis XVI should be a cautionary tale about the deadliness
of wrong ideas. Some wrong ideas, the "brotherhood of man," for
example, are highly infectious because they appeal to wishful
thinking; it is soothing and pleasant to think that violence,
conflict, and death are mere vestiges of an unenlightened past, and
that all unpleasantness can be avoided simply by being nice to
everyone. This mode of thinking is a deadly form of self-indulgence. 

Louis XVI had far more armed forces than were needed to crush the
Revolution, but he chose not to crush it. Over one million Frenchmen,
many of whom were the best in the nation, were murdered -- as a
consequence of his "humanitarianism." 

The Bolshevik Revolution 

Czarist Russia was naturally a prime target of Jewish malice and
defamation, since it was the last absolute monarchy in Europe. In
addition, the government of the Czar (Czar is the Russian equivalent
of Kaiser or Caesar), more than any other government, had taken steps
to protect its people from Jewish exploitation. The Japanese victory
over Czarist Russia in 1905 was the first great blow to the confidence
of the White world; it was brought about with the financial assistance
of Jewish bankers. Czarist Russia's defeat in 1905 was part of a long
pattern of events, including numerous assassinations, attempted
assassinations, and bombings. In the end there was the bloody ritual
murder of Czar Nicholas II and most of his family. 

It should be noted, however, that the Czar, like Louis XVI,
essentially permitted his own rule to be replaced. At first, it was
replaced by a republic. The republic was weak and dissolute and ended
up paving the way for a reign of terror. As in France, the better
racial elements were murdered. 

The preponderance of Jewish influence in the Bolshevik Revolution is
thoroughly documented. Additionally, Zionism played a part. Zionism
is, and was, an integral aspect of the largely Jewish New World Order.
Rabbi Moses Hess, one of the primary instigators of Zionism, was a
mentor of Karl Marx. 

The Destruction of Britain 

Zionism contributed to the destruction of Britain as a world power.
Zionism helped to dismantle the White-dominated world of our
grandfathers, ushering in the Jews' New World Order of multiracialism,
the absolute rule of money, and cultural chaos.

In 1914 the greatest power in the White world was the British Empire.
After the First World War the alleged "victor," Great Britain, was a
second-rate power. After the Second World War, which Britain also
supposedly "won," she was a third-rate power and quickly stripped of
almost all her possessions. How was this great empire destroyed? 

As a consequence of the First World War, the international Jewish
bankers raked in a huge debt. Britain in particular was ruinously
indebted. Britain's plight would not have been so grievous had the
Jewish bankers not succeeded in prolonging the war by involving the
United States. Even Winston Churchill later stated that it would have
been better if the United States had stayed out of World War I. 

However, it was the moral weakness of Britain's leaders which allowed
Britain to suffer usury and to participate in that fratricidal war.
One can blame the people of Britain for having elected such leaders,
and it is the British people who have suffered because of it, but it
is an inherent feature of every democratic republic that the people
can only vote on the basis of information the controlled media give
them. It is only in retrospect that a voter can know whether he has
made a mistake. Britain has gone to its ruin quietly and obediently,
lacking a national leadership with the will to preserve the nation. 

The First World War 

The American people have likewise been saddled with treacherous
leadership. Neither of the World Wars, and perhaps no foreign war in
this century, has served the interests of the American people. 

Jewish bankers, many of whom were influential Zionists, extorted the
Balfour Declaration from Britain. Organized Jewry promised Britain to
bring the United States into the war against Germany if, after the
war, they would be given Palestine. How were the Jews able to bring
the United States into the war? Firstly, even at that time, they owned
many newspapers in the United States which they used for pro-war
propaganda. And secondly, through Woodrow Wilson. Wilson was a
weak-willed and self-indulgent man. He was the first U.S. president to
be surrounded by Jewish "advisors" and to be thoroughly beholden to
Jewish interests. 

The German Kaiser, William II, had been a great friend of the Jews and
had many Jews in his government. Jewish gratitude manifested itself
just as it always has historically -- as a stab in the back. Germany
was deserted by World Jewry the moment Britain offered the Jews a
sweeter deal: the Balfour Declaration. 

The "war to make the world safe for democracy," as it was called, was
the first war explicitly propagandized as a struggle for a New World
Order. In November 1918, on the eve of the German surrender, the
"League to Enforce Peace" published a pamphlet entitled The
Foundations of a New World Order. The nominal president of the League
was former U.S. President William Howard Taft. Evidence suggests the
"League to Enforce Peace" was largely a Jewish creation. And its
Orwellian-sounding title carries the mark of one of their operations. 

The New World Order and Egalitarianism 

World War I was the first of the many wars in which young White men
were required to shed their blood and end their lives, not to defend
their borders from invaders, not to gain an increase in the territory
controlled by their people, and not even to enrich their national
treasury, but for abstract and allegedly "moral" purposes crafted to
increase the suckers' enthusiasm for slaughter. Thus, we had the war
"to end war" or the war "to make the world safe for democracy." In
recent times we have had a war to "restore democracy" in Kuwait and
U.S. intervention to "restore democracy" to Haiti. The pattern was set
in 1917. 

The Pyrrhic victors of the First World War could not disregard the
egalitarian New World Order propaganda which they had spouted. Lothrop
Stoddard, a widely read political and social commentator in the
post-war period, wrote in The Rising Tide of Color in 1920: 

     During the war years the allied statesmen had officially
     proclaimed times without number that the war was being fought to
     establish a new world order based on such principles as the
     rights of small nations, and the liberty of all peoples. These
     pronouncements had been treasured and memorized throughout the
     East. When, therefore, the East saw a peace settlement based,
     not upon those high professions, but upon the imperialistic
     secret treaties, it was fired with a moral indignation and sense
     of outraged justice never known before. 

The European powers, while they displayed an unlimited capacity for
treachery toward defeated Germany, whose people were certainly not
granted self-determination, did abide by their foolish feel-good
propaganda of a "New World Order" when it came to the non-White world.
Unrest by non-Whites in British and French colonies was met with
concessions, and the European empires were gradually dissolved. 

It is ironic that Britain was a leading promoter of the League of
Nations and the New World Order; it perhaps lost more than
any other nation because of it. It seems less ironic if one considers
that British foreign policy was under the control of Jewish
bankers, who did not give a hoot about Britain's destiny. Once the
Britons had developed and pacified the dark continent
sufficiently for safe operation of Jewish-owned gold, copper, and
diamond mines, they were disposable. Beyond this
trail-blazing function, all those White colonists were just in the
way. And the destruction of White political power in Africa
was an explicit part of the New World Order agenda. 

A collection of essays entitled "The New World Order" was published by
Oxford University Press in 1932. In the essay entitled Race Problems
in Industry and Culture, F. S. Marvin states: 

     Until South Africa can not only contemplate, but insist on
     having, a Bantu as one of its delegation to Geneva, it has not
     recognized the principle. 

Marvin also advocated the admission of the non-White hordes into White
homelands. He wrote: 

     But there does exist a teeming population in Japan, pressing for
     outlets, and hundreds of millions of Chinese . . . . India, too, 
     constantly increases her needy but industrious and
     naturally skillful peasantry. Meanwhile the white man in
     Australia, South Africa, and on the Pacific Coast [of the United
     States] is maintaining in his own supposed interest the strictest
     exclusion that he can arrange against the settlement of these
     people in lands which he controls, and they could happily and
     profitably inhabit. It is a policy untenable in the long run,
     condemned alike by considerations of industry, biology, and
     humanity. Let us be thankful that a League of Nations stands in
     the breach, not yet to take active steps, for other more urgent
     tasks are at hand, but to keep steadily before the
     eyes of all parties the hopes and duties of cooperating mankind. 

F.S. Marvin was a professor of history and a member of the Royal
Historical Society. It is absolutely terrifying that there have been,
and are, men who hold positions of respect who speak such idiocy.
Similarly, in more recent times, the Queen of England, in her
Christmas address of 1994, praised the recent introduction of
"democracy" to South Africa. F.S. Marvin's prescription was a
toned-down version of the tirades of lunatic abolitionists one hundred
years earlier. They said the same things because they suffered from
the same syndrome: sadomasochistic race-treason clothed in the
sanctimonious pretension of Judaic otherworldliness. 

The conspiracy theorists who make so much noise about Cecil Rhodes and
say the New World Order is a British conspiracy are trafficking
information that is not only incomplete and misleading, but grossly
out of date. One of these groups is the Lyndon Larouche organization
whose leading figures appear to be mostly Jews. Similarly, it is a lie
that the New World Order -- even Communism -- is a "Russian"
phenomena. The biggest lie, however, is that the New World Order is
some sort of German or "Nazi" plot. It is primarily Jewish in origin.
"Patriots" who tell you otherwise are ill-informed or liars. 

Hitler's New European Order 

Perhaps the biggest lie on the God, country, and gold coin circuit is
that the National Socialist German government was a progenitor of
today's New World Order. 

Bolshevism was viewed with great alarm by Russia's neighbor, Germany,
which now found itself flanked on one side by the Soviet Union, and on
the other by Judeo-democratic France. In the economic ruin
deliberately foisted upon Germany at the end of the First World War,
Bolshevism was a serious menace. A Judeo-Communist regime even seized
power briefly in Bavaria shortly after the war. 

The liberal Weimar constitution imposed on Germany after the war was
written by Hugo Preuss, a Jew. The dominant political party of the
Weimar period was the Social Democratic Party, founded by Ferdinand
Lasalle, also a Jew. 

The economic devastation of Germany under the Weimar government was
extreme. The currency became worthless. Workers were paid with
wheelbarrows full of money -- twice a day, because the depreciation
was so rapid that your money would lose half its value by nightfall.
Eventually, billion-mark postage stamps were printed, and
trillion-mark bank notes, but all had the same ultimate value: zero.
German workers and soldiers saw their savings and their future turn
into nothingness. German children starved. Jewish businessmen, during
the same period, bought ancient German estates for pocket change in
foreign currency. 

The Weimar regime was a sink-pit of degeneracy, corruption, and
ugliness. Nihilistic creeds of self-destruction were made popular by
the mostly Jewish-controlled magazines and newspapers. Drug use
skyrocketed. Homosexuality suddenly became "fashionable." Modern "art"
replaced the beautiful images of the pre-1918 period. Pornography of
the grossest and most indecent kind was popularized. Marxism was
preached from university lecterns and even many church pulpits. Sound
familiar? 

This was what it meant to implement the New World Order in Germany.
What followed was a powerful reaction against the New World Order. But
it was not merely a reaction. Nor was it an impractical attempt to
reinstate the Old Order, although it did preserve much of what was
good in the Old Order. 

The Old Order had been based on monarchy and Christianity. Even in the
anti-monarchical United States, Christian baptism was a widespread
qualification for holding public office until the middle of 19th
century. This reliance on religion alone as the official basis of
society had made the Old Order vulnerable. Belief in Christianity had
declined, especially among more educated Europeans. Some of the best
minds of our race were resentful of the Old Order. And the reliance on
Christianity meant any racial alien could become part of the nation
simply by undergoing the ritual of baptism. For many Jews, this ritual
was meaningless. It was simply submitted to as a means to achieve
power. 

In opposition to the New World Order, Hitler erected his New Order of
Europe. It had some of the characteristics of the Old Order; for
example, it preserved the nation-state and traditional morality. It
also preserved many of Old Order's trappings, such as the customary
Roman salute. But it was different from the Old Order in that it was
primarily based, not on religion, but on race. 

Misinformation about National Socialist Germany 

A tremendous amount of malicious dishonesty has been directed against
the memory of Hitler's New European Order. For example, there has been
an effort to manipulate Christians with the lie that Adolf Hitler was
a scourge of Christianity. In fact, Adolf Hitler received a great deal
of support from Christian clergymen, Catholic and Lutheran. Among the
smaller sects, the Seventh Day Adventist and New Apostolic churches
were among the most ardent supporters of National Socialism, long
before the party actually came to power. 

Another lie is that Hitler was a member of the Thule Society. Such a
society did exist, but Hitler regarded it as an embarrassment. You may
read his opinion of its freakish "occult" characters in the last
chapter of Book I of Mein Kampf. 

It is also a lie that Hitler took away the guns from the German
people. The promoters of this falsehood usually make the insinuation
by means of a verbal shell-game, in which they distort the actual
disarming of non-citizen, non-German, Jewish deportees during the war
into a fictitious disarming of the German people -- an event which
never took place under National Socialism. 

The National Socialists actually relaxed the gun laws in Germany. In
fact, private ownership of guns persisted in Germany until the New
World Order forces of the Allies rolled in and confiscated guns, and
converted Germany into a brainwashed province of the New World Order. 

This myth of Hitler the gun-grabber has been promoted most
vociferously by an organization calling itself "Jews for the
Preservation of Firearms Ownership." It should be clear that Jews in
general are a very biased source of information about
Hitler. 

Why Is Hitler Demonized? 

Hitler is accused of many things he did not do, but there is one thing
he did do. He broke the Jews' grip on Germany and restored Germany to
the German people. This fact is reflected in his popularity; during
most of his administration, Adolf Hitler was favorably regarded by
more than 90% of the German people -- a popularity which no American
President has ever matched. 

Because Hitler put the interests of his own people first, and freed
them from the New World Order, World Jewry declared war on Germany in
1933. They revived essentially the same propaganda they had used
against the Kaiser. With appropriate changes, the same kind of
propaganda is used to rouse us against whoever the current enemy of
the New World Order happens to be. 

Heaven forbid that our people should ever have a strong leader who
cares for our survival as a people, as Hitler cared for
Germany. That would not suit the New World Order at all! 

And that is why the obsession with the democratic republic as a form
of government is a grievous error in the American patriot movement.
When the New World Order was implemented in Germany, it included the
establishment of a republican constitution in place of the monarchy.
Our political tradition in the U.S. and our public school education
lead us automatically to regard this as progress. Really, we ought not
to be so smug. 

Those who make "democracy" their political ideal are, whether they
realize it or not, helping the New World Order. Our main concern about
government should not be whether it is a "big government" or a
"democratic" government, but whether it is a government which serves
us -- or serves our enemies. 

It is absurd to moralize against Adolf Hitler for setting up a strong
government to preserve his people from the New World Order. It is
absurd to criticize him for not acting like a typical American
conservative -- for not using approaches that have always failed.
Conservatives always compromise; they use half-measures and try to be
nice to everyone. It is to Hitler's credit that he saw clearly what
had to be done and did it, with very little compromise. Let us no
longer make virtues of irresolution and weakness; let us no longer
moralize against success. 

The New World Order Is Here Now 

All of those so called "patriots," with their flag-waving and their
knee-jerk tendency to link everything bad to Hitler -- including, most
ironically, the New World Order -- have built their house on
quicksand, for it is the United States of America since 1933 which has
been the enforcer of the New World Order, and it was Germany and her
allies in World War II which defended our civilization against it. 

It is customary for "patriotic" commentators to wail endlessly about
the threat of the New World Order "taking over the United States." The
New World Order is not some future threat. It rules now. 

The New World Order crowd has been at the levers of power in the
United States during most of this century. They experienced a
temporary setback in the 1920s, during the Harding and Coolidge
administrations, when popular sentiment recognized that the First
World War had been a grievous error. During the 1920s immigration was
drastically reduced, and a number of Jewish subversives were even
deported. But since the Great Depression swept Franklin Roosevelt and
his retinue of Jews and Communists into power, the New World Order has
had uninterrupted control of the United States Government.
The McCarthy era marked the last important attempt to regain control
of the United States government for the American people. McCarthyism
failed because the full depth and racial nature of the problem were
not recognized and faced in a forthright manner. Most of the patriotic
efforts since McCarthy have been far more timid, far less inclined to
call a spade a spade and, as a consequence, have failed utterly. 

The Scare Word "Nazi" 

For telling the truth about Germany, World War II, and the New World
Order, some of the coin salesmen will no doubt call me a "nazi." Let
me say this: There has never been a government on planet Earth that
could receive unqualified endorsement from me, or probably from any
reasonable man. 

Learning from history is important, and it is interesting to study
various regimes from as objective an outlook as possible. This
becomes very difficult when a government, its leader, or its people
have become demonized and turned into a metaphor for
"evil." 

Another heavily-demonized regime is the Old America, which I would
define roughly as pre-1965 America, or European-America. Hardly a day
goes by that the networks or the lie-papers don't torment us with a
documentary "proving" the evil "racism" and "oppression" that were
omnipresent in the Old America. However, anyone over 40 can remember
America was freer, safer, more cultured, more prosperous, and more
optimistic then than now. Exempt from demonization, of course, are New
World Order change agents like the Marxist profligate "Martin Luther"
King and the unspeakable Franklin Roosevelt, who were doing their best
to destroy the Old America and everything it stood for. They are not
demonized, but are regarded as heroes, if not saints! 

The National Socialist regime in Germany between 1933 and 1945 has
been demonized even more than the Old America. It has become a
metaphor for "evil" used by almost all political factions in the
insane asylum that still goes by the name "America." 

We have the loony left accusing militias of being dangerous "nazis,"
while some right-wing "patriot" groups accuse the Clintonistas and
their enforcers of being "nazis," "fascists," "stormtroopers," etc.
"Nazi" has become a word that one attaches to any form of government
power, or rebellion against government power, that one disapproves of.
For all practical purposes, the word has ceased to have any actual
meaning. 

Like the word "witch" in the 16th century, the word "nazi" still has
the power to instill fear of ostracism or punishment, so cowards of
many political stripes do all sorts of mental and verbal gymnastics to
avoid the feared appellation. 

The really interesting thing to note is that National Socialist
Germany is not demonized by the establishment for its possible
faults -- but rather for one of its virtues. After all, many regimes
of yesterday -- and today -- have far less personal freedom
than was allowed citizens there. They have far less press freedom, far
more regimentation, far higher taxation, far more government
regulation, far more hostility toward their own citizens, and all the
rest of it. 

The real reason, and in fact the only reason, National Socialist
Germany is demonized is the same reason that pre-1965
America is demonized: Both favored the survival of the White race.
This is a crime that the New World Order cannot forgive. 

Resistance to the New World Order 

The modern resistance to the New World Order may be regarded as having
begun early in this century, when alarm over the blood soaked
Bolshevik Revolution -- and its adherents in this country -- began to
grow. 

Literally hundreds of nationalist, anti-Communist, and patriotic
societies and organizations have arisen, prospered, and fallen
in the past 80 years. Some of them achieved national recognition and
had many thousands of members and supporters. Some names you would
recognize, such as the America First Committee and the John Birch
Society. Some may be familiar to you from their current shortwave and
satellite radio broadcasts. While some of these organizations have
made small fortunes, both by selling quack cures (for disease and for
subversion) and by selling overpriced precious metals; they have all
failed to halt the advance of the New World Order. 

Why Opposition Has Failed 

This failure can be attributed to the fact that the "patriots"
themselves accept a large part of New World Order doctrine.
They accept the idea of "rights" inherent in all beings arguably
human, regardless of race, creed, color, sexual preference,
etc., etc. -- until you gag. As long as such nonsense is enshrined as
"sacred truth," the failure will continue. 

The doctrine "all men are created equal" is one such sacred cow. It
must be repudiated by patriots, for in five short words it exemplifies
New World Order ideology. 

Its origin lies in the 18th century philosophy of the Enlightenment,
which first enshrined the ideas of 1) basic human equality, and 2)
rights which inhere in every human being equally regardless of the
worth or attainments of that human being. 

The American Revolution may have merely adopted some of the notions of
the Enlightenment, such as "all men are created equal," simply because
these were fashionable ideas at the time which were conducive to
revolution. 

The Declaration of Independence incorporates the very unfortunate
statement, the only statement from that document which the public
schools and the Jewish-controlled media have made sure that we know by
heart: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are
created equal . . ." Now, it is obvious to almost everyone that
individual human beings are not born equal to each other. On the face
of it, Thomas Jefferson's statement is blatantly, and even
embarrassingly, untrue. Jefferson himself later advocated repatriation
of Blacks to Africa. This may give us some insight into his more
mature and considered views. Unfortunately however, he did write that
phrase. 

During the Enlightenment, leading philosophers such as John Locke and
Jean Jacques Rousseau seriously argued that everyone was born mentally
identical. Locke's term for the condition of the mind at birth was
tabula rasa, Latin for "blank slate." Racial differences were thought
to be due to environmental influence over the course of just a few
generations. These fallacies, part of the intellectual universe in
which Thomas Jefferson lived, were overturned in the nineteenth
century. Many scientists, including Charles Darwin, began making
discoveries that showed human equality was a myth. Darwin dealt a
death blow to the superstitions of the Enlightenment by providing
evidence that man was part of the animal kingdom in which all are
clearly not created equal. 

Darwin wrote that men are not tabulae rasae; human motivations and
emotions are based on instincts. These are at least partially
hereditary, and differ from one race to another. More recently,
mainstream psychology has largely acknowledged that the
characteristics of the mind are largely hereditary, although the
Politically Correct adherents of the Boas school still
argue the point. 

Science should have utterly dispelled the belief that all men are
created equal, but unfortunately, because it is a piece of cant
which has been enshrined on a holy relic of the United States it has
continued to distort thinking. The Declaration of Independence was not
regarded as a holy relic until about the 1840s, when it was put on
display in the National Portrait Gallery, at the urging of Daniel
Webster. 

When "Martin Luther" King Jr. spoke in Washington, DC, in 1963, he
used the words in the Declaration as if they were a debt instrument.
He said, 'you claim to believe this; you must act accordingly.'
(Perhaps his Jewish and Communist associate, Stanley Levison, had
something to do with it.) It is a dramatic illustration of the latent
destructive power of wrong ideas. 

The Declaration of Independence, with enthronement of Judaic
egalitarian dogma, has been a millstone around the neck of
the American people. It has provided powerful rhetorical ammunition
for egalitarian dogmatists. Yet, since it is one of the founding
documents of the United States, the average American does not feel
that it would be safe to say that the words of the Declaration are
obviously not literally true -- although he may know this perfectly
well. Thus the average American is intimidated into endorsing the
fundamental premise of the New World Order, "all men are created
equal." 

The Constitution of the United States is on an altogether higher
level. We are indeed fortunate to have the rights which the
Constitution expresses, but that piece of paper did not create them.
These rights are part of the Anglo Saxon tradition and spring from the
soul of our branch of the White race. The republican form of
government has hardly existed outside of the White world (except in
name) because it presupposes a self-discipline and independence of
thought which are characteristic primarily of our race. When the
republican form is transplanted to Africa or Asia, it simply does not
work the same way. Witness Liberia. Witness the Philippines. 

Secret Societies, etc. 

It is not without some trepidation that I set out to discuss obscure
conspiratorial aspects of the New World Order; it is a
subject on which our enemies do not mind having patriots focus. The
very obscurity of the subject makes misrepresentation
easy, and the distance of such conspiracies from everyday life
suggests that there is nothing that an ordinary person can do to
resist. Some people who call themselves patriots have become so
wrapped up in fantasies that the most obvious facts have
escaped their notice: the fact, for example, that multiracialism is
the centerpiece of the New World Order. 

Many secret societies have been heavily influenced by Cabalism -- a
system of esoteric theory and "magic" developed by rabbis from the 7th
to 13th centuries. "Illumination" is an important term in Cabalism,
hence the series of Jewish-led organizations calling themselves
Illuminati or Illuminated Ones. The Freemasons are one of the secret
societies which have been influenced both by Jews and by Cabalism.
With Illuminism and Freemasonry, the Jews essentially resumed the
ancient Jewish practice of multiplying their own power by
proselytizing Gentiles. 

We may note in passing the continuing Jewish involvement in New Age
cults, all of which, for some reason or other, seem to have "equality"
and "brotherhood" and "One World" as central themes. The credulous
followers of these cults are thus hoodwinked, like the Masons, into
advancing the Jewish agenda in the name of a spurious humanitarianism
with a small, or large, helping of "spiritual" gobbledygook thrown in.


It is customary among patriot commentators, eager to stay marginally
on the Jews' good side, to point to some Gentile stooge as an excuse
to avoid implicating the Jews. The so-called Jewish "patriots" can
also be counted on to do this. The fact that these essentially Jewish
organizations try to ensnare Gentile stooges is not at all surprising
in light of Isaiah 61, which states: 

     Aliens shall stand and feed your flocks, foreigners shall be your
     plowmen and vine dressers; but you shall be called the priests of
     the Lord, men shall speak of you as the ministers of our God; you
     shall eat the wealth of nations, and in their riches you shall
     glory. 

Jews often recruit Gentiles to be their "plowmen and vine dressers,"
or some equivalent thereof. 

Grand Orient Freemasonry and quasi-Masonic secret societies such as
Adam Weishaupt's Order of Illuminati had an important role in inciting
the French Revolution. The Grand Orient Lodge of Freemasonry,
notorious for being Jewish-controlled, horrified Europe by ordering
that Louis XVI be executed. 

Jewish writer Max Dimont states in Jews, God, and History that there
was an addition to Cabalism in the 16th century, which has significant
implications: 

     A new metaphysical philosophy was injected into Cabalism in the
     sixteenth century by one of the great Cabalistic scholars, Isaac
     Luria (1534-1572), known as Ari, 'the lion.' Luria held that all
     matter and thought evolved through a three stage cycle: tzimtzum,
     literally 'contraction' or thesis; shevirat hakeilim, literally
     'breaking of the vessels' or antithesis; and tikkun, literally
     'restoration' or synthesis. 

That last Hebrew term, tikkun, you have heard before: It is the name
of Rabbi Michael Lerner's Jewish magazine. It was Rabbi Lerner who was
the spiritual advisor of First Lady Hillary Clinton. It was Rabbi
Lerner who put the words "politics of meaning" into her mouth. 

Also notable is Jacob Frank, a Jew and the leader of the Frankists.
They also called themselves the "Illuminated." This group
was part of what is called the "Jewish Reformation," which also
included Hasidic Judaism. Jewish writer, Norman F. Cantor,
states in The Sacred Chain: the History of the Jews: 

     Central to Frank's doctrine, and practiced by him and some of his
     followers, was the legitimacy of sexual promiscuity based on the
     assumption, from Cabalistic derivation, that sexual activity was
     a form of cosmic healing, unifying the spiritual and material
     realms. 

The "free love" advocated and practiced by Jacob Frank and his ilk was
echoed in the French Revolution, in the Bolshevik Revolution, in the
radical abolitionist movement of the American Civil War era, and in
the hippie movement of the 60s. 

Abolitionism 

Perhaps the most destructive movement in American history was radical
abolitionism. This movement was comprised of a tiny minority of
lunatics and degenerates, who somehow made enough noise that they
succeeded in having America's racial identity officially destroyed. 

Few of those involved were Jews themselves, but they represent an
example of the Jewish "ideals" of universal human equality, which are
vended to the gullible. 

The general character of the abolitionists is suggested by a memoir of
Henry B. Stanton, who attended a convention of abolitionists in
Boston: 

     There was a representative array on the front seats, near the
     platform. First was Garrison, his countenance calling to mind the
     pictures of the prophet Isaiah in a rapt mood; next was the fine
     Roman head of Wendell Phillips; at his right was Father Lampson,
     so called, a crazy loon -- his hair and flowing beard as white as
     the driven snow. He was the inventor of the valuable
     scythe-snath, and invariably carried a snath in his hand. His
     forte was selling his wares on secular days and disturbing
     religious meetings on Sunday. Next to Lampson sat
     Edmund Quincy, high born and wealthy, the son of the famous
     President Quincy [of Harvard]. Next to Quincy was Abigail Folsom,
    another lunatic, with a shock of unkempt hair reaching down to her
     waist. At her right was George W. Mellen, clad in the military
     costume of the Revolution, and fancying himself to be General
     Washington, because he was named after him. Poor Mellen died in
     an asylum. 

Another prominent figure in Radical Abolitionism was Victoria
Woodhull, who was also a feminist, an occultist, and a
Communist. Stanton continues: 

     As if her time did not pass spectacularly enough, Victoria
     Woodhull organized an American section of the International
     Workingmen's Association [the First Communist International]. In
     this endeavor her chief ally was William West . . . Their section
     of the International advocated woman's suffrage and sexual
     freedom as well as Stephen Pearl Andrews' pet theories of
     universal language and "pantarchical" order." 

These flakes were an embarrassment even to the Marxists. In the
interests of party orthodoxy, Victoria Woodhull's section was expelled
from the party when Marx relocated the center of World Communism from
London to New York City in 1872. 

In 1863 Henry C. Wright published The Self-Abnegationist, which was a
reaction against the findings of Charles Darwin vis a vis the
implications for man. Wright defined self-abnegation in these terms:
"Suffer rather than inflict suffering; die, rather than kill." 

He further explains: 

     Self-preservation, at the expense of others, is condemned by
     universal consciousness . . . . Let any man, whatever be his
     moral or intellectual development, fully understand the meaning
     of self-abnegation and then enter into the sacred and silent
     depths of his own soul, and he will find this to be an abiding
     law of his nature, to which he will find his heaven in being
     obedient. 

Mainstream historian Lewis Perry states that there was behind radical
abolitionism a religious movement called "Perfectionism," which is
"the quest for perfect holiness and the idea that such perfection
might be immediately possible." Perry further states: 

     Perfectionist ideas permeated the major denominations and
     inspired a variety of shockingly radical splinter movements. It
     was possible for those who deemed their personal sanctification
     to be perfect to attack the practices of institutional churches
     and hold themselves to new standards of morality. Rumors of
     sexual promiscuity particularly haunted the career of
     perfectionism in upstate New York. John Humphrey Noyes
     proceeded from the development of perfectionist religious
     theories to preach common marriage among the saints, a belief
     which, as practiced by Noyes and his followers at the Oneida
     Community, was popularly referred to as "free love." Though free
     love and the disruption of churches were of course widely
     condemned, it was difficult for the evangelical orthodoxy to
     distinguish its basic perfectionist beliefs from those of
     scandalous radicals. 

The combination of the term "perfectionism" with the advocacy of
sexual promiscuity is a suggestive parallel to Jewish Cabalism. Adam
Weishaupt's Order of the Illuminati was also known as the
Perfektibilisten. We return to Perry: 

     The most notorious perfectionist was John Humphrey Noyes. Noyes
     had been brought up as an orthodox New Englander and educated in
     the 'New Divinity' at Yale." After a meeting with abolitionist
     leader William Lloyd Garrison, Noyes announced that he had
     retracted his allegiance to the United States government and now
     championed the claim of Jesus Christ to the throne of the world.
     He depicted the government as a fat libertine flogging Negroes
     and torturing Indians. . . . "My hope of the millennium," he
     wrote, "begins where Dr. Beecher's expires -- viz, at the
     overthrow of this nation." 

James Russell Lowell, a prominent abolitionist, explicitly advocated
race-mixing, on the grounds that mulatto offspring would be more
submissive -- more "Christian" -- than the White race. He wrote: 

     We have never had any doubt that the African race was intended to
     introduce a new element of civilization, and that the Caucasian
     would be benefited greatly by an infusion of its gentler and less
     selfish qualities. The Caucasian mind, which always seeks to
     govern, at whatever cost, can never come to so beautiful or
     Christian a height of civilization, as with a mixture of those
     seemingly humble, but truly more noble, qualities which teach it
     to obey. 

Abolitionist Henry C. Wright stated in 1857 what would become the
actual agenda of the Reconstruction period: 

     A baptism of blood awaits the slave holder and his abettors. So
     be it. The retribution is just. Must the slave holders become the
     slaves of those whom they have enslaved? History answers "Yes."
     If slavery goes down in blood, the conquered will be the bondsmen
     and bondswomen of the conquerors; for the practical teaching of
     Church and State is, that might makes the right to enslave. Bid
     American slave holders beware! Their turn may come, will come,
     must come, to be bought and sold as brutes, and to have their
     wives and daughters consigned  to the Negro's harem, unless they
     willingly and penitently let their slaves go free. 

It should be noted that, aside from the grotesque dream of forced
miscegenation, Wright's vision is not essentially different
from that of Karl Marx; it was an axiom of Marxist anarchism that
workers were in fact slaves, who would one day change
places with their masters. 

Marxism: Illuminism Reincarnate 

Karl Marx, though he disclaimed the Jewish religion, was the
descendent of a long line of rabbis. Both his father and mother
were Jews. His father, Heinrich, a well-to-do lawyer who was a dutiful
follower of the Enlightenment philosophers, was faced with a choice of
being baptized or giving up his profession. He chose the former. 

Karl Marx had no mystical pretensions whatsoever; he called his
ideology "dialectical materialism," incorporating a semblance of the
Hegelian philosophy which was the popular, mainstream philosophy of
that time. 

One often hears patriotic broadcasters refer vaguely to "the Hegelian
dialectic," as if Hegelianism itself were a tool of conspiracy. In
fact, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels both stated repeatedly that the
Hegelian dialectic, as espoused by Hegel, was not and could not be an
instrument of conspiracy. I consider it important to exonerate Hegel
because it appears as part of a general knee-jerk tendency to dump on
the Germans whenever possible so as to appease the real perpetrators
of the New World Order, the Jews. 

The Political Spectrum 

In recent years, when the term Conservative has been redefined to mean
laissez faire -- a meaning it never had before -- it has become the
fashion among the historically myopic to redefine the terms "right"
and "left" in politics. They claim that the left stands for "more
government" and that the right stands for "less government," that
Communism is the extreme of the left and Anarchy the extreme of the
right. This conception of the political spectrum is a false one.
Historically, Marxism has embraced both Communism and Anarchism. The
Anarchists of 100 years ago, such as Alexander Birkman and "Red Emma"
Goldman, were called "Reds," and they were indeed Marxists who used
the familiar Marxist slogans. On the ostensible premise that society
makes men bad, the Marxist ideal is precisely the elimination of all
government, and of all other social barriers -- the same ideal which
Adam Weishaupt espoused. The real motive behind this abhorrence of
social barriers is simply the Jews' desire to recreate our society in
their own image, so that they will have a free hand to engage in
power-seeking activities without the barriers that traditional White
societies imposed on them. They would like to freely engage in all the
abhorrent practices which emanate from the Jewish soul and are
condoned by their Jewish lawbook, the Talmud. 

Perhaps it is clear now why laissez faire is so widely touted by Jews
like Milton Friedman and Ayn Rand. Laissez faire and Marxism are not
the opposites that most of our people assume them to be. Marxism
actually goes farther than laissez faire, advocating a never-never
land in which there is no government whatsoever. 

The Captain of the Chicago Police, Michael J. Schaack, stated in his
1889 book Anarchy and Anarchists: a History of the Red Terror and the
Social Revolution in America and Europe: 

     It [anarchism] is founded upon the teachings of Karl Marx and his
    disciples, and it aims directly at the complete destruction of
    all forms of government and religion. It offers no solution of
    the problems which will arise when society, as we understand it,
    shall disappear, but contents itself with declaring that the duty
    at hand is tearing down; that the work of building up must come
    later. 

When one considers that anarchism is, in fact, laissez faire carried a
step farther, it becomes apparent that Marxism and the beloved laissez
faire doctrine of today's so-called Conservatives are intimately
related. The two philosophies are in fact striving toward the same
impossible goal: a world without any constraints or conflict, and with
plenty for everyone. The salient element in Marxism and laissez faire
is the drive to abolish the constraints and the order of healthy White
society. The bribe which these Jewish doctrines offer to their Gentile
adherents is a license for self-indulgence In the name of laissez
faire, our millionaires justify stabbing American workingmen in the
back by importing workers from the non-White world. And under Marxist
inspiration, the so-called "civil rights" movement was organized. Now,
it is obvious that the so-called "civil rights" movement resulted in
less freedom for White people, but it has on the whole, by its
destruction of communities and social norms, increased the level of
anarchy, in the sense of chaos, in our society. 

Furthermore, although it did produce an expansion of government, the
really significant thing is that the government has been perverted.
The big government we have today is distinctly anti-White and is
pernicious in ways that a pro-White government of equal proportions
would not be. Indeed if an equally powerful state had been organized
for the purpose of fighting off the enemies of our race, perhaps we
would not have been conquered by infiltration as we have been today. 

Big Government 

Any people which is at war will necessarily have a big government, and
that is true whether the enemy is internal or external. The reason why
our enemies, the enemies of our race, have built up a big government
is that they have marked us, racially conscious White men and women
(and really all White people) as enemies in our own land. Big
government has been built up to wage war against us. Should we ever
gain control of the seat of power, any scruples about using "big
government" against our enemies will be a disaster, a snatching of
defeat from the jaws of victory. The redefinition of "conservative" to
mean "laissez faire" would be crippling at the very brink of victory.
A government in the hands of White patriots will have to be a
powerful government if it is to correct all the damage that has been
done by the current anti-White regime. 

So the question of left and right is not a question of more or less
government. The original "rightists," were supporting the big
government (for its time) of Louis XVI, and the original "leftists"
like Weishaupt advocated anarchy. But anarchism is always
a transitional ideology; anarchy is a power-vacuum, and Nature abhors
a vacuum. Ultimately, the question is whether we will live in a
society ordered according to the character of our own race or
according to the demands of that vastly different Middle Eastern race.


This anti-government attitude among patriots is understandable,
because in the United States our experiences with big government are
almost all bad. Really big government in the U.S. began with Franklin
Roosevelt. In the U.S., more government has always meant more racially
destructive policies. This is simply because of the malevolent entity
which controls our government. A government that is truly of, by, and
for our people would not be of that nature, so the axiom that
big government is bad government would not necessarily apply. 

The crucial question about government is whether it is run by and for
our people, or whether it is run by and for the enemies of our people.


Recruiting America as a Partner in the New World Order 

Today in the United States both political parties are universalist,
and both see man as a mainly economic entity. They share
these characteristics with Marxism. The only valid alternative, the
only true antithesis to the New World Order, is a society based on
race. Only by establishing a race-based society can America and the
civilization of the West survive. Only by establishing a race-based
community can we begin to defeat the New World Order. 

The last time America was culturally healthy was in the 1920s.
Internationalism had been repudiated. The First World War had been
recognized as a grievous mistake, and America's leaders were committed
to keeping America out of any such future catastrophes. Eugenics as a
national policy seemed entirely possible for the United States of the
1920s. 

The last healthy epoch of America's existence was overturned by the
Great Depression. The abrupt stock-market crash which heralded the
Depression did not take the leaders of Jewry by surprise. Some have
argued that the Jews used their control of credit through the Federal
Reserve System, which they had in place from the days of their puppet
Woodrow Wilson, to engineer the stock-market crash. Regardless of
whether the Jews caused the crash, manipulated it, or merely had
inside knowledge of it; evidence suggests that Bernard Baruch (an
extremely wealthy Jewish speculator who had been one of the Jewish
string pullers behind Wilson and virtual economic czar during World
War I), knew exactly when the crash was coming. He abruptly pulled all
his money out of stocks only a few days before the stock market crash,
over the protests of his broker. After the crash, leading Jews were
able to buy up American industry for practically nothing. 

It is an old saw that money is the mother's milk of political
campaigns. With their vastly increased share of the American pie,
and with a smear campaign, the Jews were able to blame Herbert Hoover
for the depression and replace him with their puppet Roosevelt, who
had run as a Conservative but governed as a Marxist socialist and did
not let the Constitution get in his way. Roosevelt was also notorious
for stocking the executive branch with large numbers of Communists and
Jews; many of whom remained for decades. 

When Germany dispossessed the Jews, who had robbed them on a scale far
more massive than in the United States, the Jews wanted revenge. Along
the way, the Jews killed several birds with one stone. In order to
discredit the eugenics movement which still had proponents in the
United States, the Jews involved America in what amounted to a war
against eugenics. It is said that a war makes any cause sacred, and
the Second World War made the cause of doing the Jews'
bidding sacred in this country. This false religion remains in place
to this day. 

The Cold War Era 

At the end of the Second Fratricidal War in Europe, genuine patriotic
Americans like George S. Patton urged that Bolshevism be finished off
by military means. Several years later, Senator Joseph R. McCarthy
published America's Retreat from Victory, which argued that the reason
why the opportunity to destroy Bolshevism had not been grasped was
that the American government was controlled by Communist sympathizers
-- an obvious fact to anyone who takes the time to investigate the
matter. The division of the world into two enemy factions helped the
New World Order planners in many ways. By maintaining Communism and
capitalism as two ostensibly hostile brands of Jewish universalism,
Jewish bankers and arms merchants were able to create wars at leisure.
And by financing and selling arms to both sides in the various hot
wars and in the ongoing Cold War, they were able to vastly increase
their wealth and the debt-burden of the entire world. 

Furthermore, the Cold War, with its focus on foreign aggression,
diverted attention from subversion at home. Subversion in
America advanced most rapidly during the Cold War, especially during
the Vietnam War, when patriotic Americans were afraid to complain too
loudly lest the country appear further divided in the face of its
foreign foe. 

At the same time, the Cold War's constant focus on a foreign menace
caused people to overlook the treason in their own government. It was
the end of the Cold War that allowed America's racial consciousness to
spring back to life -- in time to survey all the damage that treason
had wrought in forty years. Not the least of this treason was the
media's gradual brainwashing of our people, many of whom had learned
to think of America only as the vehicle of a certain brand of
universalism -- the liberal capitalist brand. This brand of
universalism was then represented as the only alternative to
Communism. The liberal capitalist world view, this phony
neo-conservatism, was the rationale for NAFTA and for free trade
with China: In a purely materialistic and economic world view, whether
it be laissez faire or Communism, race and nation receive no
consideration. It is an encouraging sign, however, that in spite of
the brainwashing, the majority reaction was against NAFTA. This shows
that part of America still has some will to live. 

The "Civil Rights" Movement 

What damaged America more than anything else in recent times has been
the so-called "Civil Rights" movement. It is misnamed because it is
not about "rights" but about enforcing equality. This movement was
planned by the Jews after the Second World War and was carried out at
the tactical level by Jewish agitators and fellow travelers who held
positions of influence in the media and universities. This war against
the White race was also waged by Gentile stooges like Dwight David
Eisenhower, who appointed Earl Warren to the Supreme Court, then said
"Oops!" with a pretended look of surprise. Nevertheless, he did not
neglect to send paratroopers to Little Rock to enforce the Warren
Court's anti-White agenda. Eisenhower, the protege of Bernard Baruch,
had also been the first "supreme commander" of the Soviet-American
alliance that called itself the "United Nations" even before Communist
agent Alger Hiss chaired the nominal founding meeting of that
organization in San Francisco several years later. Eisenhower's mentor
Baruch was also a leader of the Jewish community in the Western
Hemisphere; at this point it is very clear how everything ties
together. 

Immigration 

What threatens America most today is immigration. The United States
government has for years been under-funding its border patrol and
refusing to take adequate measures to curb the illegal immigration of
fast-breeding mestizos. You will recall that non-White immigration was
part of the New World Order program described by F.S. Marvin in 1932.
In Canada this destructive immigration is part of official government
policy. Almost one-quarter of a million largely non-White immigrants
enter Canada legally every year, despite horrendous unemployment among
the White population. The U.S. government pursues by subterfuge the
very same New World Order policy which the Canadian government pursues
openly, and which the British government pursued by bringing Blacks
into Britain. 

One would have to be brain-dead to believe that the motive for
bringing these fast-breeding non-White populations into our
homelands is in any way charitable, since any relief afforded to
Mexico by emigration will quickly be cancelled by population
increase. The population of Mexico doubles every nineteen years!
Current policies will lead to the entire world being overpopulated
with brown men and women. 

As America becomes increasingly non-White, it will also become
increasingly unfree. A people united by common blood and common values
need few laws, few prisons, and few policemen to get along peaceably.
Multicultural empires are not known for their freedom. 

Non-White America, populated by mulattos and mestizos, will be easier
for our enemies to control and exploit, and whatever White minority
remains, if it adheres to the representative process, will be
perennially behind the eight-ball, always outvoted by racial aliens
being manipulated by our enemies. It seems to me that those
multiracial "Constitutional" patriots, who want us all to pretend that
race doesn't matter, are leading their adherents in precisely this
direction: toward a United States in which the Constitution is a
revered artifact with even less influence than it has today. 

We do not have to accept this fate, nor will the fight be impossible!
Louis XVI and Czar Nicholas II died because they lacked the will to
resist and didn't even really try. We understand what is happening. A
highly motivated and disciplined minority can change the course of
history. It has happened before. In fact, it has seldom happened any
other way. 

We have every reason to fight, and no incentive whatsoever to give up,
for the loss of our race means the loss of everything. The struggle
itself will make us strong! 

     Editor's Note: All five parts of the original radio broadcast are
    contained in this issue of Free Speech. Due to space limitations,
    and to avoid repetition, more editing than usual was required. The
    audio tapes of this series contain the complete shows as   
    originally broadcast. These tapes are available for the special
    price of $50.00 postpaid. 

   For further information write to National Vanguard Books, PO Box
330, Hillsboro WV 24946 USA. 

National Alliance Home Page
http://www,natvan.com



