Nathan Bedford Forrest
by H. Millard (c) 2001

European-Americans--white people--are used to being demonized these days as racists and bigots whenever they speak out truthfully about the increasing attacks on their people and their culture. Recently, we've seen those who sometimes secretly hate white people broaden their attacks to include immigration activists. One such immigration activist group called Numbers U.S.A. has come under fire for its rolling billboards giving Census Department statistics about immigration. No kidding. The group has been called racist for displaying numbers. Racist numbers? Yep. At least according to some of the crackpots who have been criticizing the outfit. The whole thing would be laughable except for the fact that these crackpots who so readily fling hate terms at others, are actually considered, by some, to be serious and responsible people in our society instead of the nut cases that they so often are.

There is something in human psychology that causes far too many people to simply believe the name callers instead of using critical thinking skills to intelligently think through an issue. Maybe it's a little like the psychology at work where a person who criticizes food in a restaurant is often thought to be more intelligent than the people who don't criticize the food. At any rate, when a person calls another person or group, "racist," the focus of most eyes and ears seems to go to the person or group that has been called the name instead of to the person who does the name calling, which is where the focus should often be.

I was reminded of the way this evil name calling game (and more) goes, by "Shaman and Freedom-Fighter Led Indians' Mission Revolt," a column by Cecilia Rasmussen that appeared in the Los Angeles Times on June 10. Given the fact that this column, as already mentioned, appeared in the Times, with its fairly well known "anything and anyone but white people" bias, I wasn't surprised to read that a racist Indian named Toypurina is gushed over as a freedom fighter.

If you have access to the Times, please read the column for yourself, but for those who may be reading this without such access, the story of Toypurina, in its simplest terms, is about this Gabrielino Indian woman who helped lead a revolt against the San Gabriel Mission in the California of the late 1700's. In the column, we read that after the failed revolt and her capture, Toypurina told the judges hearing her case that: "I hate the padres and all of you [white people], for living here on my native soil, for trespassing upon the land of my forefathers and despoiling our tribal domains...." She also called the judges and other white people, "white invaders."

Turn the words and situation around a little bit and you'll see the Times' bias. Suppose Toypurina were a white woman who recently led a revolt against the present Third World invaders of California--the illegal aliens--mostly from Mexico. Suppose she had said "I hate all of you (brown people), for coming here to my native soil, for trespassing upon the land of my forefathers and despoiling our culture." Suppose further that she had called brown people, "brown invaders." What do you suppose the tone of the Times' column would be if all these suppositions were reality? Let me answer it for you. It is doubtful that the Times would be running a PR puff piece calling the white woman a freedom fighter. Instead, we'd probably be treated to a piece about racism, white supremacy, intolerance, bigotry, (ho, hum). You know it, and I know it.

But, the Times would probably go even further. After writing about the hate and bigotry of the white Toypurina, we'd be treated to a whole series of columns as the different editors and writers at the Times each wrote about a piece of the story from their perspectives. Thus, we might see the food section baking up some "Tolerance Cookies." We might see the editorial writers telling readers that "we're all people, and we all bleed red blood." We might see the science writers telling us that people are almost all the same genetically.

And so it goes, dear friends, when the media sets out to brainwash a population into oblivion. And, many people believe that's what's happening in California and the rest of this nation right now. European-Americans are being driven out of this country. But, you may be saying, "Oh, come on Millard, that's too alarmist, European-Americans aren't being driven out. There's no massive wave of European-Americans heading back to Europe."

Ahh, but if you think this, then you're wrong. European-Americans are being driven out through assimilation and attrition. The European-American birth rate isn't very high, and there is little incentive to birth more European-American babies to help on the family farm or to help support the family, as once was the case. Now, instead of an incentive to supply needed workers through the internal growth of this nation by births of European-Americans, the needed workers are being imported to the country. So, why have babies? "Hey, there are too many people on the planet, and it would interfere with my life style," seems to be the cry from many European-Americans. So, many European-Americans don't have children or have below replacement levels of children.

Meanwhile, massive waves of illegal aliens are pouring across our borders to fill the need for entry level workers that aren't being filled by the internal births. And, when the childless European-Americans die, their niche often isn't filled by other European-Americans, but by the children of the illegal aliens. And, as this continues, the complexion of America is changing. Even now there are far fewer whites in proportion to the population than ever before. And, that, dear friends, is an indication that whites are being driven out and replaced. However, if you say this, or talk about the genocide of white people through assimilation and other factors, don't expect the Times to call you a "freedom fighter." That term is reserved for those who hate white people.

#  #  #