Our government won't protect us. It isn't even going to try. The politicians have begun looking upon their own electorates as the primary threat to their safety. When the crash happens, people will understand that they were misled and betrayed. The new security measures, including the closure of Pennsylvania Avenue and the concrete bunkering of the British Parliament aren't wards against terrorists. They're wards against you. A great deal of the changes in the national security practices of Western countries, lately, has been made in anticipation of defending the national betrayers from the national population. And as the economic situation worsens, the government elites will provide themselves with more of that kind of "national security" (all for them, none for us) while stridently directing your attention at supposed foreign threats.
Now it is clear why the government has been so strongly in favor of the stinking drunk stupid policies of diversity and multiculturalism. To the Jews, multiculturalism is their method for divide-and-rule. (An irony encountered repeatedly in Jewish public rhetoric is that they move to bring about the opposite of what they say they intend. In this case, the Jews preach "harmony" and "unity" while promoting multicultural policies that ensure hostility and division.) But to the governing elite, to the White political race-traitors, there's an even darker motive for mixing the races. Their aim is to ensure that Whites will be so pressed by racial enemies, after the Industrial Age closes, that they will be unable to punish the Betrayers.
There are two ways to explain the die-off.
The strong conspiracy theory goes that the Betrayers knew long ago that industrial development would eventually lead to a massive die-off of the human species, and they have worked hard to ensure that the extinction will be as complete as possible for everyone except themselves. That's why the Africans have been fed, with US food aid, until their populations are far beyond what they could support with their own agricultural endeavors. The farther the overshoot of the resource base, the more complete is the extinction which follows it.
For a similar reason, the strong theory also explains why American farmland has been so greatly abused with industrial processes that it won't even support the American population when the physical prerequisites for carrying out those processes are no longer available.
In the strong theory, the objective of the Betrayers is to gain the whole world, such as it will remain, for themselves to repopulate at their leisure. The humanitarian rhetoric about "feeding the hungry," when it was obvious that the major result would be larger numbers of hungry people in the future, was a cynical pandering to public sentiment.
The weak conspiracy theory says that the crash will be so hard on humanity because corporate greed and governmental apathy just happened to coincide in favor of simultaneous abrupt collapses of mechanized agriculture and global trade and with a very overextended human population. Hence, no deliberate plan to magnify the shock and completeness of the starvation need be posited to account for the circumstances that will soon exist.
Because we have seen that governments can act with determined vigor on matters of importance to those in power, as with war and punitive sanctions, it seems unlikely that government was unable to intervene in the course of history while a correction was possible. But judge between the explanations for yourself.
Police officers and soldiers are often among the best of people. You'd think they could do something better than fight to impose the will of the worst of people on everybody else through laws and wars. But soldiering and law enforcement are two professions that have had the patriots weeded out of them. Most of the police and soldiers who are left are really mercenaries, at least in the sense that they are "paycheck loyalists." If ordered to shoot Americans, or herd Americans into concentration camps, they will obey.
There are already federal laws that allow the government to steal from Americans all that they have - including all your money, your cars, your house, the clothes you're wearing - split up families, and dispose of people as if they were cattle. Those laws have not yet been used, but the president could declare martial law upon any pretext and authorize FEMA (the Federal Emergency Management Agency) to start enslaving everybody.
Of the two coercive arms of our government, soldiers and police, the soldiers probably will have the greater reluctance to turn arms against the American people. The police are being heavily conditioned, at present, to viewing Americans as "terrorists" and, hence, as criminals whom they have the moral authority to shoot. Who says which Americans are terrorists? Their bosses do. And those bosses take their orders from the higher-ups in the executive branch of government, such as governors, presidents, and whoever is running FEMA. That might be part of the reason our military forces are continually sent off to be engaged in foreign lands. If American soldiers are in Iraq or Iran, they obviously can't be here in the United States defending their families and friends from corrupt police agencies.
The Deniers.
A verbose group of die-off deniers make arguments of the sort that you can read at Discovering Infinity, by Rolf. A. F. Witzsche, Vol. 5, "Scientific Government and Self-Government." Such arguments as these are malicious. Their purpose is to provide governments with a seemingly intellectual justification for permitting capitalism to continue with business as usual for a while longer, and to permit the governing elites the necessary time to ward themselves more completely against the wrath of a betrayed and vengeful population, too late awakened to their peril.
You'll find some deniers trying to distract you with irrelevant facts, such as, "More energy from the sun strikes Earth in one day than was obtained in all the fossil fuels ever burned." Oh? And where are the solar power arrays that can output enough electricity to replace fossil fuels? There is no such extensive array, and there isn't the means to build one. This denier argument and similar ones are nothing but a means of confusing the issue.
The Rolf Witzsche brand of arguments are even more wickedly deceptive. (Note the gratuitous slander of Adolf Hitler in the 2nd paragraph of his page.) The pivotal lie upon which most of the rest is based is this one: "Ortis, however, left out one important factor, namely, that the very population increases that he had observed, that he had based his calculations on, were themselves the result of scientific and technological advances which create new resources that do not exist naturally."
That's the Big Lie. Scientific and technological advances DO NOT create new resources. They merely improve the means of reaching and tapping resources that do exist naturally. Throughout human history, technical advances have always had a higher and denser energy resource to aim at tapping...until NOW! That's what's different about now.
Anyway, be aware that there are some cleverly deceptive denials of the now-unavoidable advance to the die-off.
Another type of denial.
Apart from the deliberate deceptions that would have us believe that the world's population can rise forever, or somehow find perpetual sustainability at the level of 11 billion people, there's another kind of denial. This form of denial is concerned with the causes of the die-off, rather than with the reality of the die-off itself. It asserts that there was no malice—i.e., no political conspiracy—involved in creating the circumstances that will lead to it. Prominent in this category of denial is the survivalist Kurt Saxon. You can read what he has to say on his page entitled You Can't Trust A Patriot.
Kurt Saxon gives excellent survivalist advice, and you should learn from it. And not everything he says about "the patriot movement" being a money-making market is wrong. Profiteering parasites who take unscrupulous advantage of the racial-patriotic feelings of White people do indeed exist. I know some of them. But the reason those parasites can make a buck is that, in a general sort of way, they're right. The patriot parasites aren't profiteers from false theories, but, rather, they are profiteers from true ones. And although they may be in business to make money, rather than to save their race as they pretend, they're right when they name the enemy—Jews, non-Whites, and White race traitors—and identify the danger: the destruction of the White race.
Saxon justifies the U.S. government's actions at Waco, and at Ruby Ridge, both times by putting the blame on the victims.
Randy Weaver should have sent his wife and children over to his enemies, he says, so that they would not get hurt. Saxon apparently forgot that little Sammy was shot in the back by a Federal Marshall before the standoff started, that Vicki Weaver was shot by an FBI sniper as she held her baby, that the Feds ruthlessly mocked and taunted Randy Weaver about the death of his wife, and that afterward the Feds tried to blame Randy Weaver for the murder of his own son, knowing that he'd been murdered by a federal agent. Does Saxon know that the FBI referred to their robotic messenger as a "Zogbot"?
According to Saxon, David Koresh was just an adulterous, child molesting religious nut who set his own church on fire so he could go out in a "blaze of glory." All the actions by the BATF and FBI, aside from a bit of carelessness in the beginning, were perfectly proper. If you don't know the details, Saxon's story sounds pretty good. But how do we know that these exceptionally lurid stories about David Koresh are factual? Is it at all likely that he could convince many other men to stand aside while he slept with their wives and daughters? The Bible does forbid adultery, you know, and it hardly seems probable that Bible-lored men would accept fornication and adultery on the part of a self-proclaimed reincarnation of Jesus Christ without becoming at least a little bit suspicious.
Remember that we did not hear anything about Koresh's alleged sexual sins until after the BATF fiasco that started the standoff at Waco. At first, Koresh was suspected only of federal gun-control laws violations. And one thing you can always count on a government, most definitely including the US government, doing whenever a conflict becomes high-profile, is manufacturing streams of false propaganda aimed at villifying its enemies. The U.S. government has less credibility at such times than a oft-convicted felon trying to sweet-talk his way to parole.
The US President and Attorney General at the time of the Waco Massacre were Bill Clinton and Janet Reno, respectively. What sort of people were they, behind their well-groomed public facades?
Bill Clinton was credibly accused of public malfeasance, including the use and sale of illegal drugs (while he was the governor of Arkansas) and at least one rape (while he was the Arkansas attorney general). Several interesting reports of the murders of people having information damaging to Bill and/or Hillary Clinton also seem creditable enough, at least, to have a grand jury investigation. Clinton was a seriously wicked man. And yet the media easily duped the American voters about the Clintons' character with "powderpuff and airbrush" public relations methods.
Janet Reno was an ambitious prosecutor who had innocent people tortured until they provided false confessions, in order to secure convictions that enhanced Reno's career. For example, after falsely accusing a Florida daycare center manager (Frank Furster) of child abuse, Reno arrested the manager's 18-year-old wife and kept her wet and naked in a cold prison cell for months, in full view of male and female prison guards. When the woman had her period, the guards would take her out, hose her down with cold water, and toss her back in the cell again. Reno kept this treatment going until the woman broke down and gave the false testimony by which her husband was convicted. There are other examples, but this ought to give you the picture of what sort of person Janet Reno is.
Such people are not flukes: they aren't statistical abberations that somehow evade the safeguards. The media are supposed to be that safeguard, and the media was corrupted as a means of making the corruption of the government possible. Bill Clinton and Janet Reno are despicable, but do you think George W. Bush and John Ashcroft are any better? Hardly. All (or almost all) candidates for public office in America are similarly corrupt persons. If ever there were an exception, the Jewish media would never let you hear his/her name.
Clinton could tell the most complex of lies well; Bush can hardly speak coherently. But insofar as Bush falls short in spinning falsehoods, he makes it up with sheer self-righteous arrogance. The arrogance might be emotional compensation for his being abjectly a puppet on the end of Zionist strings; perhaps, the president is trying to convince himself that he chose to attack Iraq to make the Middle East safer for Israel. Bush recently awarded four Medals of Freedom to bunglers who made the Iraq occupation the mess that it is, and at least three of the bunglers are Jews: Donald Rumsfeld, Tommy Franks, and George Tenet (Cohen). I don't know whether the fourth awardee is Jewish or not; he's Paul Bremer.
Why do the media favor such evil people in US elections? It's not hard to understand. The media have a proven ability to conceal the past of bad people and, further, make the vilest of creatures seem like great statesmen. But always there is an understanding between the Jewish media masters and the candidates to our public offices, that the media will run cover for them only for so long as these despicable people use their power in the ways that the Jews want them used. The office holder is to use no initiative of his own; he is never to question the Jews' orders; he is to say on television exactly what the Jews tell him to say. If he displeases the Jews, his past will suddenly be "discovered," and he might be stripped of his office and made subject to legal prosecution for his foul deeds. So the holders of public office in America have powerful incentives to toe the line.
Saxon's efforts to portray patriotic anti-Semitism as mere scapegoating likewise fails to consider so many historical facts that they'd take volumes to write out. The trail of Jewish power and Jewish conspiracy can be traced back to ancient times, through the Middle Ages, the rise of the Jewish banking houses in Europe and their meddling in the US during the Civil War, the establishment of the Federal Reserve System, the arrogant claim by Paul Warburg that "We shall have a world government whether or not we like it," and the capture of the American political process by Zionists. When you examine the evidence in detail, you can't help but wonder why none of it seems to have persuaded Kurt Saxon that, oh yes, there is indeed a Jewish Conspiracy, a highly successful one with a global reach that no single nation, ours included, can safely defy.
Take advantage of what Kurt Saxon offers by way of survivalist advice. But when it comes to politics, you should understand that the patriot's conspiracy theories account for a lot more history and significantly more of current events than his alternative explanations do.
The semblance of authority assumed by the patriot's critics is based on an unbridled license to parcel out credibility by name-calling; e.g. those who favor the idea that history-making events proceed from rational causes are labeled "conspiracy nuts." If the patriots' cause-and-effect school of history wanted to repay their critics, by trying their hand at this propaganda trick, they could mockingly label them "accidentalists."