THE ROBERT W. WHITAKER ARCHIVE

JOHN KERRY | 2004-08-07

In his speech at the Democratic Convention Bill Clinton hinted at what I have already said.

See June 19, 2004 -- Kerry's Two Fatal Problems.

In that article I predicted that Bill and Hillary would be right up there on the podium backing Kerry all the way. That has come to pass.

I also predicted that, if Kerry picked Edwards as his vice presidential running mate, Bill and Hillary would sabotage him.

Sure enough, in his speech Clinton talked about how young and optimistic and charismatic John Edwards is. Then he joked, "I'm kind of jealous." It is perfectly obvious to everybody that John Edwards is a young Bill Clinton.

Whether or not Kerry wins this year, John Edwards has the inside track to be the next Democratic presidential nominee after him. The next race will be between a young Bill Clinton and the wife of the old Bill Clinton, whether it takes place in 2008 or 2012.

So Kerry can lose in 2004 and Edwards could lose in 2008, which would give the nomination to Hillary in 2012.

Or Kerry could win in 2004 and not win reelection, which would put Edwards on the inside track for the 2012 nomination, the one Hillary needs. That would give Edwards four years of national exposure as Vice President. A young Bill Clinton would be running for the 2012 presidential nomination with four years under his belt as Vice President. By then, the Clintons will be past history.

If Kerry wins in 2004 and in 2008, Edwards will have the 2012 nomination sewn up.

In other words, if Kerry wins in the election, Hillary will be in the position of Teddy Kennedy after Chappaquiddick. Until Chappaquiddick, Teddy Kennedy had the next Democratic nomination sewn up. After Chappaquiddick, Kennedy became a Senate lifer and has-been on the national political stage. That is where Hillary will be if Kerry wins the election.

The Clintons cannot let Kerry win in 2004.

BACKBAYGROUCH | 2008-01-28

The Obama candidacy is creating White awareness which must precede White solidarity. The jewish media is hyping the inclusiveness of his appeal, but the practitioners, the Clintons, are singing a different tune. A respectable conservative condemns the Billary bile, but the practical conservative smiles quietly and lets them do his dirty work. But the danger is that the Clintons are not really conservatives. They hope to be Trojan horses, a la the neocons. They must be rejected while their tactics must be accepted. Their only function should be to be disposable third party tools. (By third party I do not refer to a political organization, but to a useful idiot, one who advances your cause while thinking otherwise or a covert agent.)

Not since St. Paul has anyone taken the road to Damascus. All converts are fifth columnists. Think neocons. By treating them as pariahs, White solidarity will be enhanced by creating a penalty for race treason. Fear enhances solidarity as well as devotion. A draft is implemented when recruitment falls off. But with a good officer corps in place you still get a functioning army however reluctant the troops. Think W.W.II, Most of those guys did not want to go. The country was isolationist. It did not become internationalist until tens of millions were systematically brainwashed in boot camp and a ruthlessly controlled press worked over the civilian population. Open-mindedness and freedom did not get us to our present predicament as much as the phalanx mentality of our opponents. It should be emulated.

BUGS, CONGRATULATE YOURSELF! | 2008-08-07

Lead SF banner on Stormfront Radio:

Genocide Of White People Video by David Duke

This is a major win for the Mantra.

I have seen these major wins for each of my separate pieces of lone strategy through the years, but I had no one to explain it to. It would a gratuitous insult to David Duke, who has spent his left out there fighting for our racial survival, to say I taught him about white genocide. I didn't.

In the same way it would be a hideous insult to Confederate leaders to say that General Lee taught them to fight the Yankees. Lee would be the first to say that his soldiers and his fellow leaders came equipped with their loyalty and courage and their knowing who was right and their willingness to die for it.

So what was LEE'S special contribution? He was one of the great military STRATEGISTS in history.

The people who hired me in politics were already IN office. I didn't put them in office. They hired me and put me at THEIR level. They said I was a special strategist and put their money behind that judgment.

If you understand why I had to put the above four paragraphs in, it is easy to see why I cannot explain to people when I see a MONUMENTAL step forward. You and I have devoted enormous effort to putting the Mantra to center stage, and it is a reason for celebration. But the moment we try to explain what we did, the attacks will begin.

We will be told we are taking credit for David Duke's being interested in the disappearance of his race. I get tired just thinking about it.

I did not make John Ashbrook an anti-Communist. I did not make Bill Rusher a leader in the battle to unite the Wallace vote — now the Reagan Democrats – with the regular conservative vote.

What I got paid for is an aspect of politics totally unknown to people in general. In the 1980 presidential campaign, Reagan made a crucial campaign change specifically because of my recommendation through Rusher. I did not make Ronald Reagan what he was, but I was CRUCIAL.

I did not invent the Hubble Telescope. But it would not be up there without me.

Because I had a STRATEGY.

You are now going with me through ONE of my strategic moves. It took YEARS to get SF to START talking about white genocide EFFECTIVELY instead of Zionist interests.

But that is the LAST thing anybody wants to hear about. They want to know what the Great Conspiracy had to do with the main headlines. They want to know how I am INSULTING leaders by presuming to advise them.

People want to know how often I SAW Ronald Reagan not how I was instrumental in the strategy that elected him. They want to see me in Crisis Mode in the Oval Room rather than typing out Memos at two in the morning in my apartment to people who would influence Reagan by a few words.

It took a thousand repetition of the Mantra on our start to get those two words, "White Genocide." On the SF banner, the way it is on ours.

And I guarantee you, if you try to show how important it is, the discussion will immediately go to what the NEXT SF banner will say.

How often did I SEE Ronald Reagan? As little as I possibly could. To me, the general attitude toward power and strategy is like a person thinking that power is represented by an Eagle Scout getting his hundredth merit badge from the President Himself.

It was major step forward for me when I saw Pain and Simmons having a MUTUAL, INDEPENDENT discussion of their JOINT action in the field. To me it was a major step forward when the words "White Genocide" hit the banner of SF.

I am not insulting David Duke. I am not claiming we are the first people to ever MENTION genocide against our race.

It is ONE MORE evidence of our STRATEGIC breakthrough.

But we cannot explain it to others as long as they do not bother to understand the specific nature of STRATEGY.

But if everybody DID understand it, I would not be comfortably retired now.

SAYING EVERYBODY IS JUST HUMAN IS SAYING GENOCIDE IS IMPOSSIBLE | 2012-07-18

No matter how they say, "Race does not exist" or some sickening smile with "Racism will end when everybody realizes we all just human," you are saying that genocide is impossible.

Genocide is not destroying humans. Genocide is destroying a PARTICULAR KIND of human.

Mao Tse Tung is estimated to have starved and murdered about fifty million Chinese. But no one objects to China having his smiling picture as its symbol, because those were Chinese, not Jews, Gypsies or any other IDENTIFIABLE group.

They were just a few million of these "humans."

So call them on it when they use this "humans" crap, just as you do when they use the "no such thing as race" crap.