Last week, we began to look at the supreme question of what we must do to save America. We saw that it is decisively important to recognize why the things that are destroying America happen, to recognize that the reason they happen is not impersonal forces we can do nothing about, but because men with names and addresses conspire to commit them. They don’t “just happen” for “no reason.”
We called these men who conspire to destroy America conspirators who are conducting a conspiracy, but remember that the word “conspiracy” is simply a shorthand way of saying that such things don’t happen by accident but only because someone concocts and commits them deliberately.
We chose an issue to demonstrate how differently victims respond when they learn someone has been victimizing them deliberately, and the timely issue we chose for the purpose is the present, nationwide explosion of sodomy. It is no doubt fair to say that most normal victims today think it is “just happening.” How differently would they feel were they to know that the present, disgusting extrusion of buggery is the work of a minutely orchestrated plan. That is what our little experiment is designed to demonstrate.
Let’s look at a couple of books. First, let’s look at The Trouble with Harry Hay: Founder of the Modern Gay Movement (Boston, Alyson Publications, 1990) by Stuart Timmons. Harry himself was a longtime member of the Communist Party. He was the preeminent founder of the Mattachine Society. Timmons speaks of “the Marxist background of the five Mattachine founders. . . .” (P. 150) Indeed: “. . . The group experience of the ex-C.P. members provided a vital blueprint for the shape that Mattachine was to take. . . .” (Loc. Cit.)
So, the founders of the “modern gay movement” were Communists. They weren’t “ex”-Communists because they had broken with the Party. As “ex”-Communists, they were just as Communist as they had been. The difference was that as “ex”-Communists, they would not embarrass the Party for what they had been assigned to do.
Stuart Timmons also says this: “. . . Harry followed the Masonic model so carefully that he designed a series of lapel pins . . . .” Also, “Harry had found his model, the Freemasons of the eighteenth century . . . .” (P. 152) He is talking of course about the Illuminati who had fled Bavaria ahead of the police, went to Paris, infiltrated the Grand Orient Masonic Lodges and inspired the Communist French Revolution of 1789.
How conspiratorial could this be if it was published in a book? Well, it was the job of the media, the Prostitute National Press, to report this. Had you ever heard of it before you read it here? How many normal people of your acquaintance would browse through a book about the “modern gay movement?”
The other book is After The Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the ‘90s (New York, Doubleday, 1989), by Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen, Ph.D. Needless to say, both these authors are homosexuals. After The Ball is sodomy’s version of the Communist Manifesto combined with the teachings of Lenin.
Why are the American people presently being deluged with sodomite propaganda? The authors explain that “to desensitize straights to gays and gayness, inundate them in a continuous flood of gay-related advertising presented in the least offensive fashion possible. If straights can’t shut off the shower, they may at least eventually get used to being wet.” (P. 149)
So the present inundation is part of the Plan. Desensitization is one of the techniques. “Jamming” is another: “The trick is to get the bigot into the position of feeling a conflicting twinge of shame, along with his reward, whenever his homohatred surfaces, so that his reward will be diluted or spoiled. . . . Thus, propagandistic advertisement can depict homophobic and homohating bigots as crude loudmouths and assholes – people who say not only ‘faggot’ but ‘nigger,’ ‘kike,’ and other shameful epithets – who are ‘not Christian.’ It can show them being criticized, hated, shunned. It can depict gays experiencing horrific suffering as the direct result of homohatred . . . .” (P. 151)
So you are not getting “wet” by accident, but because sodomites behind the scenes planned it that way. Notice what happens these days to people who speak up. They are viciously excoriated by the sissies who put their pants on backwards at the New York Times. Remember John Rocker? He was not the first man to be rockered, but I have named the technique after him. Indeed, desensitization and jamming are carefully designed to lead to phase three, conversion.
“Please don’t confuse Conversion with political Subversion. . . . Yet, ironically, by Conversion we actually mean something far more profoundly threatening to the American Way of Life, without which no truly sweeping social change can occur. We mean conversion of the average American’s emotions, mind, and will, through a planned psychological attack, in the form of propaganda fed to the nation via the media. We mean ‘subverting’ the mechanism of prejudice to our own ends – using the very processes that made America hate us to turn their hatred into warm regard – whether they like it or not.” (Pp. 153-54, emphasis added)
Please reread that paragraph a couple of times. You are under attack. The attack is planned; as you can see, it is meticulously planned, brilliantly planned. It is psychological. The last thing you could say about it is that it “just happened,” that it’s a bizarre fad; that it mysteriously erupted all by itself in the zeitgeist, etc.
There is a name for what we are talking about. That name is brainwashing. Yes, I know I keep repeating myself; learn to live with it because I will not let you up until you read Ed Hunter’s classic works on the subject: Brainwashing and Brainwashing in Red China. Ed is the journalist who coined the word, and that is what the Marxists are doing to us now. You will not understand the full horror of what is happening in America until you read them.
Notice that the purpose of the propaganda is to change your thinking, against your will, whether you like it or not, keeping you in ignorance of the process. Notice that the change would make a revolution; that it would utterly destroy what we mean by the American Way of Life.
Now remember Antonio Gramsci, founder of the Italian Communist Party. Gramsci taught that it would be impossible for the Communists to conquer America in a frontal attack, by seizing the government in a military strike, as they did in Russia. In America, he taught, the Communists need to reverse the traditional strategy. First, the Communists would utterly pervert our institutions; when they become sufficiently perverted, they will be too rotten to support the government, which then will collapse “like overripe fruit into our hands,” as Lenin is supposed to have said.
Isn’t that what is happening? Are we not collapsing into the hands of overripe fruit? Indeed, the authors of After The Ball speak of “conspiring with liberal elites within the legal and legislative systems.” They tell us that the goal “has been to forge a little entente or conspiracy with the power elite, to jump ahead of public sentiment or ignore it altogether.” They speak of using “executive orders (which sidestep the democratic process) . . . .” (P. 171)
Notice that the word “conspiracy” is theirs. They call it that themselves. Certainly no one could object if we too call it that. They speak of ignoring public sentiment altogether and of sidestepping the democratic process. Another name for doing those things is Fascism or Communism, some form of dictatorship, no surprise in the context of Gramscian strategy.
This breathtaking confession that the conspiracy is both illegal and totalitarian, recalls the old cliché: Would that my enemy had written a book! It is difficult to write a book and not give oneself away. After The Ball is full of what the lawyers call admissions against interest.
For instance, the sodomites mercilessly rocker anyone who dares to suggest publicly that buggery is behavior some individuals choose, because if you choose it you can be blamed for it. Instead, they insist, they were born that way. According to our authors, they “are victims of circumstance, . . . they no more chose their sexual orientation than they did, say, their height, skin color, talents, or limitations. . . .” (P. 184)
Really? But now get this: ” . . . (We argue that . . . gays should be considered to have been born gay – even though sexual orientation, for most humans, seems to be the product of a complex interaction between innate predispositions and environmental factors during childhood and early adolescence.) To suggest in public that homosexuality might be chosen is to open the can of worms labeled ‘moral choice and sin’ and give the religious Intransigents a stick to beat us with. Straights must be taught that it is as natural for some persons to be homosexual as it is for others to be heterosexual: wickedness and seduction have nothing to do with it. And since no choice is involved, gayness can be no more blameworthy than straightness. . . .” (Loc. Cit.)
In other words, they suggest, the truth that homosexuality is chosen during childhood and early adolescence because of seduction must be suppressed, because if straights understand that, the sodomites will be blamed. Consider that seduction of the vulnerable teenager must be – must be – a part of the sodomite cabal, for the obvious reason that since sodomites do not reproduce, they must recruit.
Okay, we have used up our allotted space, but we have given you enough to think about for a week. We’ll conclude our examination of this aspect of the conspiracy next week. Meanwhile, take a week to consider the following question: If you didn’t know any of this before, has your attitude toward it changed in any way now that you know it?
Related Article: Degenereate America… The Sodomite Plan (1)
“Published originally at EtherZone.com : republication allowed with this notice and hyperlink intact.”