Page 1 of 1

How To (or rather, how not to) Respond to Jew Attacks

PostPosted: Tue Jul 12, 2016 3:18 pm
by Helmut Stuka
Quoting the strategic insight of the only man in history to have ever designed a media strategy which successfully overcame the Jew and the Jewish lie-papers in an uphill political struggle, Dr. Goebbels:

Quickly he turns the attacker’s charges back on him and the attacker becomes the liar, the troublemaker, the terrorist. Nothing could be more mistaken than to defend oneself. That is just what the Jew wants. He can invent a new lie every day for the enemy to respond to, and the result is that the enemy spends so much time defending himself that he has no time to do what the Jew really fears: to attack. The accused has become the accuser, and loudly he shoves the accuser into the dock. So it always was in the past when a person or a movement fought the Jew. That is what would happen to us as well were we not fully aware of his nature...

Emphasis and boldface supplied. Sorry it looks ugly that way; but those parts should be treated as catechism.

  • Originally published in Der Angriff, 21. January 1929.
  • Source: “Der Jude,” Der Angriff. Aufsätze aus der Kampfzeit (Munich: Zentralverlag der NSDAP., 1935), pp. 322–324.
  • Via: A source of which I am mildly suspicious. Caveat lector

Since the NSDAP actually succeeded, Dr. Goebbels personally suffered Jew attacks much worse even than anybody here. He never defended himself against their base calumnies and false accusations; for the most part he just ignored them, although there is an interesting story he once related about how an SS man (on his own initiative) walked into a newspaper office and horsewhipped to bloody unconsciousness someone who had defamed Frau Magda Goebbels. (It was a more civilized era, when most people understood that wives were not appropriate targets. English language mangling Jew Walter Winchell took great delight in ending that era in the United States.)

Dr. Goebbels did only one thing: Attack! He founded a newspaper which was the original Attack! (I am sure he would have smiled at Dr. Pierce’s homage, Attack! half a world away.) Otherwise, to paraphrase the Führer, he just let the Jewish vipers hiss while he attacked.

You can tell this strategy was successful, not only because the NSDAP attained power but also because, in the Jewish history books, Dr. Goebbels is number-two most hated and most lied about after the Führer himself. Though admittedly it is a close race, so to speak. They hate him because he knew how to fight them, starting with not bothering to defend himself from Jew lie campaigns.

Quoted here because anybody suffering a Jew attack must heed this advice. Ignore it to your detriment! Please discuss amongst yourselves, gracious Aryans.

[Edit: Change of tense. The Jews still hate him.]

Re: How To (or rather, how not to) Respond to Jew Attacks

PostPosted: Tue Jul 12, 2016 5:41 pm
by Will Williams
These days in the U.S. defamation lawsuits are apparently a lot different than they were in Germany 85 years ago. Now, if sued, the worst thing one can do is nothing. And should a defendant lose, he doesn't bounce back 59 more times, not against some big city's top cop, he doesn't. Lawsuits and criminal charges must be defended (see "lawfare").

Try to imagine the Internet we know today being available in Germany in 1930, or television for that matter, or social media. It's a new day and we can't get away with what Goebbels got away with back then.

A jew looks at Isadore Weiss, Goebbel's foil: ... -gangsters

Izzy Weiss, Berlin top cop,
won 60 of 60 defamation suits
he brought against Josef Goebbels

...In the early 1930s, with unemployment skyrocketing and political radicalism spiraling out of control, Weiss used the police to put down rioting units of brown-shirted storm troopers, throwing many in jail. Until the creation of the State of Israel it proved to be the one time a Jew would wield state power against Nazis. And it brought Weiss into direct conflict with the leader of the National Socialists in Berlin, a young firebrand named Joseph Goebbels. Their highly personal confrontation provided a tragic template for the fate of Germany’s Jews.

Goebbels, a brilliant agent provocateur, seized upon Weiss as a symbol of all that was wrong with the Weimar Republic—a Jew put into a position of power in the wake of the 1918 defeat, a “foreigner” shoving liberal democratic ideas down the throats of legitimate (aryan) Germans. In his newspaper Der Angriff, (The Attack) Goebbels began a relentless campaign to delegitimize the popular Deputy President of Police, depicting him in cartoons as a big-nosed monkey, a jackass, a snake, and ridiculing him by continuously referring to Weiss with the supposedly humiliating “Jew-name” Isidore.

Weiss didn’t take it lying down. He fought back in the courts, suing Goebbels for defamation, and winning. But it didn’t silence the future propaganda minister of the Third Reich. Like a pit bull Goebbels only chomped harder, mysteriously managing to come up with money to pay the fines and then launching another round of attacks. Weiss sued again, and won. Sixty times Weiss sued Goebbels, and sixty times he won. In the end it didn’t matter. Weiss could not hold back the rising tide of Nazism. In early 1933 shortly after Hitler was named chancellor, Bernhard Weiss was stripped of his German citizenship and fled his homeland, never to return. Goebbels, a top player in perhaps the greatest gangster regime in history, had bested the great officer of the law. But the story is not without an epilogue.

In the final hours of World War Two, of course, Goebbels killed himself along with his wife and six children in the Fuhrer Bunker. By contrast, before he died in London in 1951, Bernhard Weiss was honored by the [occupied] post-war government of West Germany, which gave him back his citizenship. Today he is rightfully acknowledged as one of the founding fathers of modern German law enforcement.

Goebbels’s propaganda assault against Weiss, in particular his use of the stigmatizing name “Isidore,” is studied today as a classic example of how negative stereotypes can be used to marginalize and demonize others.

Re: How To (or rather, how not to) Respond to Jew Attacks

PostPosted: Tue Jul 12, 2016 6:40 pm
by Helmut Stuka
Will Williams wrote:Now, if sued, the worst thing one can do is nothing.... Lawsuits and criminal charges must be defended (see "lawfare").

I want to emphasize, I am primarily referring to media attacks and loud shouting: Don’t argue with Jews. Don’t reply to SPLC out-of-court lies (as Dr. Goebbels says, they can make up a new one every day). Don’t try to correct that deliberately botched misquote printed on the front page of the newspaper. Above all, don’t argue on the Internet. Instead, Attack!

If you are faced with criminal charges, you are literally forced at the point of a gun to answer the charges and defend yourself. It will not help your greater cause to be a martyr for the principle that a Jew court lacks any legitimate authority. Meaning, don’t be stupid. And unless you have no assets and no income (and never expect to have any), you also must defend yourself against civil suits. Thus I am not suggesting that you ignore the courts (unless you are „underground“ like some in Europe); for unlike the Jewpapers, the courts have overwhelming physical violence directly and immediately at their disposal. The ultimate answer of tyrants!

Dr. Goebbels also defended himself when made necessary as such; although not always with actual court defenses. When the NSDAP was on the brink of power, there was an instance in which some serious criminal charge was trumped up. It was caused by political pressure, and disposed of the exact same way; for by that time, the NSDAP already had many members in the Reichstag and could throw some weight around. Given that the charge was politically motivated and flatly absurd, I think that is fair. Sorry I don’t remember all the details off the top of my head. Dr. Goebbels mentions these happenings in My Part in Germany’s Fight (also the above-described horsewhipping of a „journalist“). The book starts in 1932, so you can tell how late in the struggle these events were.

I myself would suggest approaching such matters with pure pragmatism. If you are threatened with jail time or the seizure of immovable property valuable to the cause, defend in court (while ignoring the SPLC media blitz about it, and counterattacking them). Otherwise, always attack and almost never defend. My point was to ignore defamation of you, not to ignore lawsuits falsely accusing you of defamation. I thought that was clear.

(Footnote: Of course the above-quoted article makes Weiss out to be a hero. He was scum. And when you speak of „lawfare“, I am not entirely ignorant on that subject. Nowadays, I am so terribly lucky as to be direly impoverished and without immovable assets. Nobody will bother suing me. That means that if somebody really wants to get me, they will try worse.)