I dimly recall quite a fuss back in 1959 (I was quite young then) about Jack Kennedy and the question of "dual loyalty". The media declared loudly and publicly that many people questioned whether Kennedy owed his first allegiance to the United States, or to the Vatican.

Even at the tender age of 12, this descendant of Cromwell's round- heads thought concern about loyalty to the Pope a bit overblown.

The Pope seemed a "lord spiritual" in every respect, lacking any of the normal appurtenances of a "lord temporal", such as a standing army. Indeed, if one listened to the Pope or any of his Bishops, it was awfully hard to discern any worldly objective which a president of that faith might entertain that conflict with the worldly interests of the United States.

After all, the Vatican did not receive $5 billions per year in aid from the U.S. Treasury.

Indeed, it was hard to understand why a Catholic should be treated differently from a Methodist or Presbyterian. Kennedy's religion (or lack thereof) seemed far more relevant to the question of his character and the kinds of moral values that might weigh in his decisions. The temporal interests of Rome seemed a bit distant.

Further, conspiracies cannot be concealed for long, and there was no hard evidence of any such thing by the Catholic Church.

Not so with the Jews!

There clearly is at least one international conspiracy, and it is run directly by the State of Israel.

Here is a short quote from the book "By Way of Deception" by Victor Ostrovsky (St. Martin's, 1990), formerly a Colonel in the Israeli intelligence service "Mossad."

Beginning on page 86:

Continuing on page 87

And on page 88:

On page 221, Ostrovsky gives an example of what a Sayan can be expected to do for Israel's Mossad:

It is a crime, a felony, for a civilian to participate in spying operations in this manner.

Israel's Mossad is exposing tens of thousands of Jews around the world to considerable legal risk, and the sayanim, being sophisticated business people, surely know this. If that is so, then why does this system work? Why is the risk acceptable?

Here is Ostrovsky's answer from Page 87:

Now one might suggest that, for example, Great Britain could use a similar system and recruit among WASPS around the world. But they don't, because they can't. It takes an extraordinary degree of racial solidarity and racial motivation for such a "non-risk recruitment system" to work properly. Remember, all of these activities are spying, with long prison terms if caught. Americans of English, Irish and Italian ancestry may have some residual loyalties to the old "mother country." But this residue is nothing like the racial solidarity of the Jews. Such racial feelings are so strong and so pervasive among Jews that the Mossad knew in advance that their recruitment system was "non-risk." Britain, Ireland, Italy and the Vatican know better than to try.

While it may be true that Americans of English, Irish and Italian ancestry have dual loyalties, these white gentile dual loyalties are nothing like the degree of race-based loyalty possessed by the overwhelming majority of Jews. You have it on the authority of Mossad!

Ostrovsky explains, beginning at the bottom of page 122:

The problem is that Jews _do not_ have dual loyalties!

90% of Jews have a single loyalty. The loyalty is not necessarily to Israel, but to the welfare and power of Jews generally. That is the only thing that matters. The only question that ever gets asked is; "How will this affect Jews?" No other interests are taken into account at all!

Indeed a corollary of "dual loyalty" is the goyish notion that if you sacrifice to help others, they will reciprocate. If someone helps Jews, there should be a reward.

European gentiles assume that comity and reciprocity are inherent in the psychological makeup of all humanity. Not so, according to Ostrovsky (page 231):

No matter what you do for Jews and no matter how assiduously you toady to their interests, they will never respect yours.

That explains why destructive welfare state policies thrive despite 40 years of soaring black illegitimacy rates and the deepening destruction of the black family and community in America. Does the policy harm blacks! Of course! But that is irrelevant. Welfare dependence has created a block that votes 90% for candidates friendly to the welfare state and to Israel. Would blacks be better off as tradesmen and entrepreneurs with stable families? Of course, but then there would be no easy way to control their votes. The hopeless dependency of most blacks increases the political power of Jews. That is why the policy continues.

There is no comity, reciprocity or sense of obligation (dual loyalty) that causes Jews to moderate their attack on America's blacks. Now you might ask why Clinton, the "best friend Israel has ever had at the White House", would sign welfare reform. The answer is the same. The white illegitimacy rate has reached 25%. Millions of white girls in suburban and rural areas are going on AFDC while their skin-head boyfriends camp with them at night. There is no way our masters are going to use the tax dollars at their disposal to finance the creation of Dr. Pierce's 10 million man army 20 years from now!

It is one thing to fool 40% of Euro-Americans who have jobs and pay taxes into believing they can get something out of the system. It is quite another to subsidize the creation of a dangerous subculture with real dollars. Jews just don't make those kinds of mistakes. Ways can be found within the bureaucracy to continue welfare to blacks. Hence Hillary Clinton's campaign to "fix" welfare reform.

A classic illustration of this phenomenon comes from a book entitled "Special Tasks" (Little-Brown, 1994, 1995) written by Pavel Sudoplatov and his son Anatoly.

Lieutenant General Pavel Sudoplatov was Joseph Stalin's NKVD director in charge of stealing atomic secrets. He reported directly to Beria.

From page 172:

Robert Oppenheimer was the director in charge of the Manhattan project.

From page 186-87:

On page 188:

Beria understood the psychology of unitary loyalty perfectly!

Continuing on page 189:

Oppenheimer's rationale was "fear that the Germans might produce the first atomic bomb." But all he had to do to beat the Germans to the punch was to build the bomb for America. And indeed, that would have been the natural result of "dual loyalties." He could have helped Jews and remained loyal to America at the same time.

But then helping America was not in the calculus at all. As Beria understood perfectly, he was concerned only with one unitary question; "How does this affect Jews?" And the answer was that just as organizing the blacks and browns to vote their antagonistic racial interests is critical to maintaining Jewish power over whites in the 1990's, giving the atomic secrets to Russia was the one way to reduce the power of whites in America in the 1940s and 50s. Oppenheimer's naive view (prior to the creation of the Israeli State) was that a nuclear armed Russia would provide one more possible haven for Jews with the power to protect them.

The goyim in our OSS (the forerunner of the CIA) would have assumed "dual loyalty" and concluded that Oppenheimer presented no security risk.

They were dead wrong, as Beria clearly understood.

So now the question becomes: - How many sayanim does it take to "occupy America"?

Are these reasonable questions to ask?

In truth, of course, it is somewhat unlikely that these people, by far the most powerful group in the United States, would agree to spend their time schlepping TV sets for Mossad, or divulging secrets. They can do far more to serve Jewish interests by guiding U.S. economic, diplomatic and defense policies to serve Israel and Jewish interests than they ever could through risky behaviors like divulging classified data.

In fact, these people are in a far better position to put pressure on Israel than Israel is to put pressure them.

Are the people named above capable of articulating U.S. interests (as opposed to Jewish interests) on an intellectual level?

Of course! Quite skillfully, in fact!

Are they capable of _acting_ upon those interests (our interests)?

That is a much tougher question. For a majority, it appears that the answer is clearly "no" if Jewish insterests might also be involved. The psychological and emotional ties within the group are so strong, and they are so powerfully alienated from the white gentile majority that their decisions and actions will never match their words. Just as Oppenheimer's actions failed to square with his words.

Clinton's cabinet and the media moguls who control him are likely to have their own strong views on the question "Is it good for Jews, or not?" And they are not likely to take orders from Israel. Does that mean there is no "conspiracy'?

Other than the publicly documented spying and extortion operations run by the State of Israel, there probably isn't one. Rather, what we have is an obsessive concern for the interests of Jews and a psychological inability to represent the interests of others that is shared by such an overwhelming majority of Jews, that their uncoordinated actions appear pre-planned.

Colonel Ostrovsky notes in "By way of Deception" that Israel and its supporters have a concept of the relation between media and government that is powerfully at odds with our own Anglo-Saxon tradition that inspired the First Amendment.

From page 290:

The Jewish - SDS flirtation with "free speech" at Berkeley in the 1960's was a temporary romance of convenience. Culturally, they are more comfortable with a "Vaudat Orchim" and controlled news.

Do these people, and dozens more in similar positions meet to discuss how to manage the news? Again, the truth is probably not. Why?

Simple. They already know what messages must be censored and what events are newsworthy. They already know what to cover and what to leave on the cutting room floor. Except on rarest occasions, they do not need to be told what to do.

Each of these men will have his own passionately held convictions about what kinds of news and entertainment for goyim will best serve Jewish interests. These are not the type of men who would obediently follow instructions from Isreal. But then the deep racial paranoia and the intense loathing of Christianity that is taught to most Jews as children at the dinner table ensures that many Jews will pursue careers in media (such careers are "good for Jews") and will know what to do when they get to the top of a network. They generally do not need to be told!

And that, gentlemen, is the significance of "unitary racial loyalty" that exists among 90% of this world's Jews.

Pat Buchanan once referred to Capitol Hill as "Israeli Occupied Territory."

Can we justifiably say that we live in "Occupied America?"

No need to make up your minds yet. Might as well wait for parts two and three of the "Occupied America" series.

Then you can be the judge!


Back to Main Page

(c) 1996 Yggdrasil. All rights reserved. Distribute Freely.