Advice for Maria Fekter from Presidential Candidate Pat Buchannan and Fox News

Spindelegger und Fekter mit Hillary Clinton gegen Osterreich und Arizona ?

Spindelegger With Hillary Clinton 

California Woman files Genocide Complaint At UN because government Destroys White Christians

“In the face of Hillary Clinton’s filing a UN Complaint seeking the UN High
Commissioner for Human Rights to rule that AZ’s new immigration law violates
“human rights”, I have filed a complaint (registered mail 9/3/10) with that
same High Commissioner charging the US Federal Government with GENOCIDE of
European-American Christians.  I ask you to publicize this in any ways that
you can.  It truly is a powerful response that can be used to bring Clinton,
Obama et al. into at least an interesting dilemma.


The act of GENOCIDE trumps all international and human rights laws (and US
Public Law and the US Constitution (see attached filing), and if the UN
Commissioner Pillay dares to rule favorably on Hillary’s complaint, she must
*MUST* rule that the intentional destruction of Euro-American Christians
preempts and nullifies Clinton’s lesser complaint, and all efforts that
coddle Third World immigration, legal and illegal.  Such a UN ruling also
would stop all challenges to AZ law, and force the Feds to immediately halt
all efforts to maintain open borders, and begin legal reparations to restore
the majority Euro-Am Christian population.  If UN Commissioner Pillay
upholds Clinton’s complaint, but refuses to act on this GENOCIDE complaint,
she is ruling that human rights and international laws, including the 1948
UN Convention on Genocide are no longer binding on the U.S. government or
that European-American Christians, alone, are not protected by those laws.
That said, I ask all of you to publicize this complaint, and ask others to
use it to file their own complaints.  I believe that actions of Clinton, AG
Holder’s DOJ, Congress, the Supreme Court and the entire Obama
Administration — having taken steps to subvert our Constitution and laws,
both of which in fact SUPPORT the UN Convention on Genocide — must be met
with a superseding complaint in the UN.


A California woman has filed a formal complaint with the UN High
Commissioner for Human Rights charging the US federal government with
genocide of European-American Christians through its immigration policies.
Terry Graham sent the eight-page complaint to UN High Commissioner
Navanethem Pillay on Sept. 3, after Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s
filed a report with Pillay’s office claiming that the federal government’s
legal challenge to Arizona’s new immigration law will protect “human
rights”.


In July, the US Dept. of Justice filed a lawsuit in federal district court
seeking to nullify and prevent enforcement of Arizona’s immigration law,
asserting the federal government alone has authority over immigration.
Earlier, President Obama attacked Arizona’s law, saying it was “unfair” and
potentially violated the civil rights of Hispanic citizens.


“The US Constitution, and US federal and international laws against genocide
preempt and nullify all laws, policies and procedures – including those
advanced illegally last month by the Executive, Legislative and Judicial
branches of our federal government that result in the destruction of
European-Americans,” says Graham.


Graham’s complaint cites the UN Genocide Convention of 1948, international
and human rights laws, US Public Law 95-435 and the US Constitution, Article
I, Section 8, which gives the US Congress the power to “define and punish…
offences against the Law of Nations.”


The UN Genocide Convention defines genocide” as “deliberately inflicting
upon [a group] conditions of life calculated to bring about the physical
destruction in whole or in part.” Article II further defines genocide as
“causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group” and
“imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group”, which can
include job losses and taxation policies that cause stress and lower
birthrates.  Under the Convention, which Congress adopted under US Public
Law 95-435, “group” is defined by nation, race, ethnicity, or religion.
Graham noted that in 1960, Euro-American Christians comprised 89% percent of
the nation’s population, but now are minorities in many parts of the United
States solely due to federal actions that promote massive Third world
immigration.


In 1998, Hillary Clinton’s husband, Pres. Bill Clinton, publicly
acknowledged that the destruction of White Christian Americans was
intentional when he said, “In a little more than 50 years, there will be no
majority race in the United States.”


In her complaint, Graham asks the UN Human Rights Commissioner to promptly
investigate her charges and “make an immediate, formal request of the US
federal government to place a judicial stay on all US laws, policies,
procedures, lawsuits and legal actions that advance this genocide.”  She is
also seeking reparations as defined by the UN Genocide Convention that “must
wipe out all the consequences of the illegal act and to re-establish the
situation which would, in all probability, have existed if that act had not
been committed.”


Graham is urging others to file their own complaints with the UN High
Commissioner for Human Rights via mail or email as soon as possible.  She
also asks that lawsuits be filed charging the US federal government with
genocide of European-American Christians in US and courts in nations who are
signatories to the UN Convention on Genocide.


“If the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights refuses or fails to
investigate and rule on my complaint that the U.S. federal government’s
laws, policies, procedures and other actions are an act of genocide against
U.S. European-American Christians, we must conclude that ”human rights and
international law are no longer binding on the U.S. government or that
European-American Christians, alone, are not protected by those laws, Graham
said.”

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Was kann Spindelegger nach USA 2010 Wahl sagen  ? Hillary wird kein Arbeit haben. LOL

 

Spindelegger Tries to Escape Reality in Canada

Idiot Spindelegger Shakes hands with a White Canadian immigrant as example of success to start 3rd world immigration into Austria

http://kurier.at/nachrichten/2047447.php

Quebec

After the war, the French separatist issue once again came to the fore, with a number of compromises being put forward: all of which, essentially, entailed the province of Quebec staying in the union but acquiring special status. By 1970, the main Quebec separatist party, the Party Quebecois (PQ), had won nearly a quarter of the votes in its' home province.

Above: A pro Quebec separatist vote bus during the 1969 election in that province. Despite gaining much popular support, the Quebec separatists never quite achieved a majority support base in Canada. The influx of non-Whites into Quebec in the last  part of the 20th Century will have now made a Quebec separatist victory even more unlikely, as the non-Whites perceive the Quebec separatists to be racially based. This in turn has led to the non-Whites voting overwhelmingly against the Quebec separatists in the 1995 referendum on the issue.

In 1976, the PQ was elected as the provincial government of Quebec and after introducing some pro-French language measures, called a referendum on whether to proceed with further separatist actions. The vote was 60 percent against and the PQ was forced to place its separatist agenda on the back burner.

In 1995, the PQ managed to hold a second referendum on the separatist issue: this time it was defeated by less than one percent of the vote (no votes : 50.4 percent; yes votes : 49.6 percent) indicating that ethnic divisions within Canada between White French and White English speakers were far from over.

The French Canadian separatists were accused of racism when one of their leaders made public note that the non-White minorities in Quebec were, virtually to the last voter, opposed to French Canadian separatism.

Black Immigration

The first Blacks to enter Canada did so as slaves: the importation of Black slaves into French Canada from the West Indies was authorized by the French government in 1689. Slavery was abolished about one hundred years later, with Nova Scotia being the first colony to abolish the practice in 1787, followed by Ontario six years later.

When British troops burned Washington, the U.S. capital, in the War of 1812 (1812-1815), they brought back to Halifax many slaves who had sought refuge with them. Escape to Canada meant freedom, and thus it was a major destination of the so-called Underground Railroad, a network of secret routes by which U.S. abolitionists spirited slaves out of the American South.

Despite the apparent freedom offered to Blacks in British Canada, Nova Scotia and Ontario had legally-, racially-segregated public-schools until the 1960s. In that decade, Canada opened immigration to new areas, and significant numbers of Blacks (mainly from the Caribbean) and Asians started entering the country.

In 1971 the government started funding non-White ethnic organizations, festivals and second language instruction in schools within Canada itself.

The rise in Black immigration during the last twenty years of the 20th century from the Caribbean and Africa was not accompanied by any great rise in social status: Blacks remain the poorest and worst educated Canadians, being far outstripped by the much more recent Asian immigrants on all fields. 

Roots of conflict date to French and Indian war 

Amerind Territorial claims

Amerind territorial claims also resurfaced in the 1960's, spurred on by the climate created by the broader civil rights movements. In the 1960s, the city of Ottawa introduced a policy to end the special rights and status of Amerinds - but this policy was never implemented, being sabotaged by a Supreme Court decision following a case brought by an Amerind tribe, the Nisga'a of British Columbia.

This court decision held that Amerind rights to the land had been in place at the time of colonization, but the court was divided on whether those rights had been ended by White settlement.

Several treaties were subsequently concluded with Amerind tribes: in terms of one in 1984, the Inuit of the Mackenzie Delta, settled their title to 242,000 square kilometers; and another in 1992, settled the right of the Inuit of the eastern Arctic to 350,000 square kilometers of land and 36,000 square kilometers of subsurface mineral rights.

Further negotiations have sought separate agreements for virtually all the other major Amerind tribes, all of which confirmed their rights to large areas of land. However, not all disputes have been settled peacefully: in more than one case armed standoffs have ensued, with one of the most famous being the Mohawk blockade of Oka in Quebec in 1990. 

I don't know what he is preaching now, but priminister Harper (atleast in 1988) would not get along with Spindelegger.

Racial Consequences of the Settlement of Canada

The racial clashes which accompanied the settlement of Canada were not nearly as marked as those which accompanied the birth of the United States of America. This was because the numbers of Whites settling the area increased at a slower pace than in America, and the change in the demographic makeup was not as quick as it was to the south.

From this a valuable lesson can be learned: the history of Canada proves that armed conflict and violent dispossession is not always needed to engender the change in a territory's demographic makeup: it is possible also to achieve the same end by means of relatively peaceful immigration.

The last quarter of the 20th century has seen Canada become the focus for a large wave of Third World immigration: the extent and consequences of this are discussed in the last two chapters of this book.

http://www.white-history.com/hwr55.htm

More facts about Canada for nut case Spindelegger:

~ like 80 Austrias can fit into canada so there is room for the different groups to live separate from eachother and they generally do.

~More Canadians are against mass immigration of third nations that for at present according to polls. And the majority of White Canadians are against it. I just had a long conversation with my canadian friend about this recently.

~The Asian immigrants tend to congregate in cities

~Majority of ethnic French Quebecois want independence.

~multi kult was enshrined into canadian constitution partially to appease Quebec

~the canadian government used tricks and distortions to start mass immigration just like the 1965 immigration act supporters and  you yourself now

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why do you push relentlessy for mass immigration despite the evidence against it ?

How will Austria be an immigration nation when you have a right wing party like the FPO already ready to legislate against them and resist you ? And people who will never accept them ? And the most recent Vienna election results ?

Why do you ignore the evidence against you and your devious plans ?


Mass Immigration Opposed in Canada:
1
http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2010/09/reform_group_ar.php

 2

http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2010/09/canadian_view_o.php

Largest Republican Victory in History: Marxists Driven Out of Washington !

Election 2010—A Grinding Trench Warfare Advance For Immigration Patriots

[Peter Brimelow] @ 3:00 am

Election 2010 turns out to be a grinding trench warfare advance for the cause of patriotic immigration reform, but it was an absolute triumph for Roy Beck at NumbersUSA who has been talking ebulliently for nearly ten hours straight on his organization’s webcast as I write. (Who needs the networks?) Roy argues in detail that the balance of power in both the House and the Senate has shifted significantly in the direction of patriotic immigration reform and it’s well worth looking at his pie charts.
Among key immigration patriots, there are losers (Tancredo, alas; Angle) and winners (Barletta, Brewer, Deal). We know from experience that nothing short of victory will get the political Establishment’s attention—but it’s important to note that we also know even victory (Proposition 187, Proposition 200) would simply be flushed straight down the memory hole.
It’s a new Congress. And new immigration patriot leaders will emerge. The long war goes on

http://blog.vdare.com/archives/2010/11/03/election-2010-a-grinding-trench-warfare-advance-for-immigration-patriots/

Amongst the other good news and highlights of the mid term race in my opinion:

~ Arizona bans"Affirmative Action" and quotas with Proposition 107

~ White Nationalist Jim Russell gets  40% or almost 55,000 votes (this guy is farther right than Strache supposedly) and the FPO only gets afew hundred thousand votes in Austria LOL (Jim actually knew Jared Taylor rumor has it)

~Rick Scott wins Florida Governorship and wants to bring tough "Arizona Style" laws to Florida as well as almost 25 new anti-immigration governors in states Throughout the country. 

~ Right-winger Michele Bachmann (ALIPAC endorsed)  who called for McCarthy like investigations of other politicians for communist ties wins comfortably and her state MN flips from Dem to GOP for the most part.Which is good because illegal immigration is making the predominantly Northern European descended people of MN a minority.

~Son of Cuban Exile GOP  candidate warns of the danger from marxism in victory speech.

~ Rand Paul, Son of non interventionist foreign policy advocate and lightning rod Ron Paul wins comfortably in Kentucky.(he opposed Iraq war and made controversial statements about forced racial integration of the 1960's)

~many candidates with strong NUMBERSUSA and ALIPAC ratings were elected

There are many more important victories to discuss but this may suffice for now.


Inspiration Speech from Lou Barletta: "You have put your children and grandchildren First".. "Thank you all"


And here is an election analysis of some key races from a more demographic perspective and bad or mixed news:

California: GOP meg Whitman loses to old man Jerry Brown despite spending 150 million or so dollars and pandering spanish TV ads. The reason for this may be the fact that Latinos and 3rd country immigrants (mexicans) generally are highly dependent on social services and have their own unique interests which differ from the general majority amongst other things. In an ironic and symbolic twist of fate as Austria is about to go under with immigration, an Austrian descended person may be the last GOP governor of a now minority majority state which was once the Reagan Dream in better times but is now the quintessence of the negative impact of changing demographics caused by mass immigration from 3rd countries.

Nevada: Sharon angle loses to Harry Reid by a small margin. Angle carried all of Nevada except the two big liberal cities of Reno and Las Vegas. She was projected to win in all of the polls. Contrary to popular belief the ads she made did not decrease her support but increased it as her poll numbers increased after the controversial ads. I suspect voter fraud and may she yet run again.

Harry Reid and Fraud:
http://www.aolnews.com/surge-desk-elections/article/claims-that-harry-reid-stole-nevada-senate-election-resurface/19701816
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/01/sarah-palin-endorses-tom-_1_n_777364.html
Colorado: Anti-immigration enthusiast and Tea Party favorite Tom Tancredo comes on strong and would have carried the day if it was not for Dan Maes refusing to drop out. Dan Maes divided the GOP and may have even dragged down the entire party by refusing to withdraw from the race. Once again all of Colorado except soon to be minority majority Denver supported Tancredo and Buck en masse.I am also quite certain of leftist voter fraud.Recounts are underway all over the state.

Palin Endorses Tancredo
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/01/sarah-palin-endorses-tom-_1_n_777364.html
There are similar trends in comparison to these two states across the nation.A a general rule the GOP also did better in the House elections than the senate, because the house districts are rural and local elections where most Whites live. In contrast the senate is state wide and includes big cities which are very leftists and predominantly minority.Obama alienated Whites with mass immigration support, and affirmative action and drove them away to the GOP. In contrast the Dems have almost 91% of Blacks and 70% of Mexicans backing them. The election results are obviously good for right-wingers, but at the same time they reveal a stratified society and torn country in the shadow of what was once a greater nation before massive third world immigration. It is certainly possible atleast for some states that Whites have become dispossessed in their own nation.

Furthermore, although the races in usa are generally divided along political lines in the usa, the GOP is not a WN movement and there are some minority Republicans just like there are zealous Marxist White democrats. And racism  does not divide the races politically, but competing innate community interests do. But in this case the objectives are important.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is a good article from RealClearPolitics which confirms my previous statements and observations by Paul Kuhn (Cohen ?)

Exit Polls: Unprecedented White Flight from Democrats

By David Paul Kuhn
Democrats performed worse with whites on Tuesday than in any other congressional election since the Second World War.

Democratic problems with whites stretch back nearly a half-century. Political white flight changed course with the implosion of George W. Bush's presidency, the Republican Party and the economy in September 2008.

It's now as if the chasm between whites and Democrats never narrowed. Democrats' bad old days are back.

Republicans won whites in Tuesday's national House vote by a 22-percentage point margin (60 to 38 percent) according to exit polls. In 2006, Republicans won whites by a mere 4 points. Whites shifted at three-fold the rate of Hispanics between the two midterms, while the black vote remained steady. Democrats faired even worse than in 1994, when Republicans won whites by 16 points (58 to 42 percent) and with them, a landslide.
Lyndon Johnson's domestic programs lost the majority by 1966, because he lost whites. Obama has done the same in much the same way. Only about a third of white men and white women approved of Obama's signature domestic legislation, healthcare, at the time of its passage. Whites similarly opposed the stimulus. It's no accident that over the summer of 2009, when healthcare dominated the debate, Obama first lost the majority of whites and independents.

In other words we never had a real choice with the 1965 non western immigration act and most people were and are against it, along with "great society" and the entire LBJ legacy. But at the same time Fekter pushes the "Rot weiss rot card" as if it were something to emulate and the elections today generally affirm my previous observations and statements.


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/11/03/exit_polls_unprecedented_white_flight_from_democrats__107824.html


Why has the OVP-SPO been strangely silent about what happened today ? Will they continue to push immigration, globalism and anti-family based on failed dreams and ideas ? Or will reality hit them on the Head ? This election seems to be a rejection of mass immigration, Hillary Clinton, cultural marxism and Obama etc..

Thank You for the Help in USA elections FPO !

Neubauer as an OSCE observer in Midterm Elections

"Als OSZE-Wahlbeobachter nimmt FPÖ-NAbg. As an OSCE election observer takes FPÖ NAbg. Werner Neubauer derzeit an den Kongress- und Gouverneurswahlen in den USA teil. Werner Neubauer present to Congress and gubernatorial elections in the U.S. part. Bisher liege die Wahlbeteiligung bei rund 15 Prozent und es seien keinerlei Vorfälle beziehungsweise Unregelmäßigkeiten zu erwähnen, gab Neubauer bekannt. So far the turnout be around 15 percent, and there were no incidents or irregularities to mention, announced Neubauer.
Nach einer kurzen Einführung in das US-amerikanische Wahlsystem konnte sich Neubauer direkt in den Wahllokalen von der Funktionstüchtigkeit der neuen Touch-Screen Wahlmaschinen samt Scanner überzeugen. After a brief introduction to the American electoral system was able to convince Neubauer directly at the polling stations of the functionality of the new touch-screen voting machines, including scanners. "Das System der elektronischen Wahlen wird auch in Österreich nicht aufzuhalten sein", so Neubauer. "Be the system of electronic voting will not reside in Austria," said Neubauer.
Derzeit befindet sich der österreichische OSZE-Vertreter Neubauer in Washington DC und wird sich noch heute nach Virginia begeben. Currently, there is the Austrian OSCE representatives Neubauer in Washington DC and will go today to Virginia."

http://www.fpoe.at/news/detail/news/neubauer-als-osze-beobachter-b/?cHash=d7306c46310166e2b8a18796e312752f

I understand you have acted as an observer in the American elections. This is good because  here in the USA the New Black Panther party intimidates voters like in the last election. Furthermore there is a large risk of voter fraud mainly from the left. Many people needed increased numbers of observers and more hands helps.

NBP does it again and blocks White voters:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/11/02/new-black-panther-spotted-philadelphia-polling-place/

Democrats hate election observers:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/dem-congressman-objects-to-voter-fraud-crackdown/

The trip itself is telling. First of all you have gone to Washington DC. If you travel to the wrong area of Washington DC you are likely to get hurt as it is a "murder capital". Many naive European tourists don't know this and get hurt unfortunately . Secondly, the fact that in today's age there must be election observers in the USA is disturbing and shows the negative impact of mass immigration and multi-culti. All the more reason to stop immigration in your own country before it is too late. If Fekter & Co can't take a hint from this, then I don't know what will stop the insanity.

 The possibilities electorally look good LOL Maybe Hillary Clinton could lose her job LOL

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/generic_congressional_ballot

Even if the right-wing here wins. I will still be sad because I worry that Austria would be destroyed and I don't think there is anything I could do to help other than write essays on here, try and "wake people up" and  show that Americans are tired of the left wing crap and set an example for the OVP-SPO harbingers of Austria's doom with their crazy ideas of immigration and anti-family :-(

Fekter and Spindelegger sending a Horrible Message to the world !?!

I remember in 2008 when Jorg Haider and the freedom party won a huge earth shattering victory. It appeared on various news outlets, although often with misleading or deceptive titles. At the time I was a young man and had seen through the media propaganda for Obama and the anti-austrian propaganda (thanks to careful internet research) I cast my first votes for the Republicans. I was not happy about Obama's victory, however I was optomistic and hopeful about the Freedom Party victory. I thought to myself, although my country has made a bad decision, atleast the Austrians have made a right one and was inspired. I even believed Austria would be the second Denmark type government as far as immigration and social policy was concerned. However two years later my optomism has faded and now although Americans have now "woken up", I see Austria itself under grave threat and democracy itself is threatened (not by the Haider or the FPO) but the OVP and SPO, which could have negative implications for here and the globe as people in other nations, especially as newly arising nationalist movements watch carefully.


The OVP in a very totolitarian manner has ignored the rule of law and foundations of democracy itself with their new budget and "ideas". They have completely left out the will of the Austrian people in not desiring further immigration and wanting financial expenditures which are fair to the general Austrian people. Instead the Austrian budget favors primarily the socialists and ultra wealthy and is detrimental to the future of Austria and society by assaulting the building block of society and the best future for Austria: the family. The OVP role in the budget fiasco is most disturbing as the OVP is traditionally  supposed to be on a non-marxist party and center right party. But in this instance they have abandoned years of wisdom tradition and sound judgement in favor of avarice and ideas which contradict their very principles and traditions.


The undemocratic and totolitarian nature of the OVP decision is most disturbing. Not only have they ignored their principles popular will and traditions, but they have set a horrible precendent. The OVP in their actions is showing the world and emerging nationalist movements literally that democracy does not work and the rule of law is flexible. A country with a traditionally strong Nationalist movement where such a party was able to get almost 30% of the vote instead of being included is excluded from the budget process and even from preventing further immigration. The message it sends to nationalists in other nations is terrible and clear, that no matter how much a nationalists participates in the democratic process and respects the rule of law and reaps political sucess that they will not be able to save their nations from mass immigration and cultural and physical destruction. If there is literally no sucessful role model and story of sucess to aspire to, then what are the Nationalists in other nations observing supposed to do and think ? How could they remain democratic and respect the rule of law and proper adressment of grievances ?


Will the OVP continue down their destructive course or would they relent and realize the error of their ways in the face of hard evidence and harsh realities ? I hope they will capitulate and do the right and intelligent thing rather than continue their self destructive and undemocratic behavior. The eyes of the newly emerging movements are watching.


Finnish Nationalists Poll 14%
http://blog.vdare.com/archives/2010/10/31/peasant-uprising-in-finland/

Sarrazin Exposes Maria Fekter as Fraud in Austrian News (Updated) x3

"Sarrazin recognize the root of the problem and thus punishes all those lies that speak of skilled immigration and then - as in Austria with the Red-White-Red Card - want to import rags: lower skilled immigration fall for Sarrazin namely "especially top executives such as engineers, chemists and doctors but not specialists or even cheap labor."

Austrian immigration Law already has a provision for immigration of high earners and doctors and what not. The "Rot Weiss Rot Card" is the death of Austria and cheap labor card that will turn a beautiful country into multi-cult chaos for no reason other than marxist political aspirations combined with pure greed bound together with unwarranted self loathing and based on politician's lies. 


http://www.unzensuriert.at/002493-sarrazin-will-keine-rechtspartei

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Related IQ knowledge:

Country/Region	IQ (2002)[2]	IQ (2006)[1]	PPP-GNI per capita 2002[1]	QHC[1]
Hong Kong	107	108	27,490	60.8
Singapore	103	108	23,730	60.7
North Korea	105*	106*	1,000	38
South Korea	106	106	16,960	75.4
Japan	105	105	27,380	71.4
Taiwan	104	105	23,400	79.4
China	100	105	4,520	39.7
Italy	102	102	26,170	78.9
Iceland	98*	101	29,240	80
Mongolia	98*	101*	1,710	48.1
Switzerland	101	101	31,840	82.2
Austria	102	100	28,910	80.7

# This chart is from wikipedia and shows the very top of the national averagae IQ chart as I have cut off all nations below Austria. (Note: although israel is lower than Austria on the IQ chart as Sarrazin said Ashkenazi (European) Jews are generally really extremely intelligent and have unique genes.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ_and_Global_Inequality

 There are vary few nations with higher average IQ's than Austrians. And IQ is what generally defines trainabilty skill, cognitive ability and quality of work. Many professors also indicate IQ is completely hereditary. So where will maria fekter's "skilled immigrants" come from ? The moon ? I also found it interesting that between 2002 and 2006 Austrian IQ decreased. I theorize that this in part due to greater numbers of immigrants from East Europe, other European Nations with lower average IQ, and third nations. It may be that when the indigenous Austrians are isolated from other groups their IQ is higher than all nations in the chart.

The nations with higher average IQ's than Austria offer little promise for importing "higher skilled labor" en masse. Korea and Japan, nations with higher average IQ's than Austria also have death bead demographics and are presently trying to boost their birth rate with natalist policies and not rely on immigration. Meanwhile China is a unique case. China is a giant communist country that incorporates many nations into one by force of arms and coercion such as Tibet and Machuria. These many nations have varying levels of IQ. There is also evidence from National Geographic to suggest that ancient caucasians played a large role in creating ancient chinese civilization from the recent discovery of the caucasian mummies of Tarim. And as for India the skilled people are mainly confined to the upper castes of society which were created by the ancient migrations of caucasians many years ago.

Isn't the easier answer just to preserve ones self and bring the national birth rate from 1.6 to 2.0 rather than rely on a card which gives away Austria's future ? Austria must follow Denmark. I do believe such a clever people can offer the world something great if they would only let themselves.Furthermore, when we analyze the chart we find that although Austria may not have the highest IQ, the cultural and intellectual contributions of the Austrians are disproportionately high and Austria contributes more to the world as an isolated nation rather than it would as a self destructing immigration importation nation.

Here is the video from national geographic about the ancient migrations of Caucasians to Asia. The mummies and facial features look surprisingly similar to many people found in Austria today.


 Here is also a video of the Caste system which is a remnant of the ancient Caucasian migrations. The caste system is a system of religious inspired racial segregation based on how caucasian one is.

Furthermore I am not surprised by these migrations as I can think of the most recent migration from Austria and Germany which created the largest ethnic group in the United States and people like me who's relatives were specially chosen for their ethnicity to come here with the 1790 immigration act.  :-)


I will have more research on this subject stay tuned. I will also produce spread sheets with statistics. And please remember no race is necessarily superior to one another although we do have unique differences which must be preserved. I think the reality is that Fekter threatens to destroy Austria and the indigenous Austrians so we must talk about these controversial issues.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sarrazin gets Mentioned on American Website. Lessons For All

Habermas's Huff About Thilo Sarrazin


By Steve Sailer



The continuing success of the German high wage economy relative to the Anglo-American low wage / high finance system is raising worries among the global great and good that a newly confident German public might start thinking for itself on…immigration!



Particularly agitating to transnational elites is that Social Democratic central banker Thilo Sarrazin published an immigration restrictionist book, Germany Abolishes Itself. (Here’s Rafael Koski’s informative review of Sarrazin’s book in VDARE.com.) Since August, it has sold a million copies. (Trust me when I tell you that’s an astonishing total for a statistics-heavy social science work.)



Germany’s economic model requires, on average, a highly productive population with strong human capital. Germans deeply value extensive technical education or demanding apprenticeships in the skilled crafts. But high investment parenting means that, especially in a crowded country like Germany, children are expensive. Thus, the main long-term threat to Germany’s high investment / high wage model is the below-replacement birthrate among Germans.



Sarrazin advocates policies to boost the birthrate so that Germany won’t abolish itself. Yet there’s an obvious problem: incentives to reproduce would tend to appeal more to parents who don’t invest as much in their children’s human capital, especially Germany’s Muslim immigrants.



Germany is now into its third generation of Muslims. As Sarrazin documents, they tend to lag behind in achievement, much as Mexicans do on average here in the U.S., even after four generations.



What are the causes of these gaps? Genes? Culture? Or whatever?



We’ll eventually find out for sure. But meanwhile, this is the pragmatic take-home message: these disparities have been long enduring. Therefore, they can’t just be assumed away when discussing immigration policy.



Conclusion: immigration restriction is a logical necessity.



This is especially true in welfare state Germany. There, immigration from the Muslim world since the abolition of guest worker programs in the 1970s has been more or less an elaborate form of welfare fraud carried out through marriages arranged to obtain “family reunification” visas. As Christopher Caldwell pointed out in Reflections upon the Revolution in Europe, Reflections upon the Revolution in Europe, from 1971 to 2000, the number of foreign-born people in Germany rose by 150 percent—but the number of foreign-born workers didn’t go up at all.



Neighboring Denmark, the epitome of a civilized country, has had an immigration-restrictionist party in the ruling coalition since 2001.The Danish government has actually cracked down to some extent on arranged marriage immigration scams by not accepting foreign spouses under 24.



Like American scientist James Watson in 2007, Sarrazin was quickly forced to resign his post. Here, when somebody gets fired for political incorrectness, the general assumption is that he must have had it coming. Yet the German people have responded by assuming that if the ruling elite is desperate to silence Sarrazin, he must have something important to say.



Elite efforts to dissuade anyone from listening to Sarrazin’s analysis have now spread to America.



Godwin’s Law famously states: "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.” A corollary is: Whoever mentions Hitler first loses the debate.

http://www.vdare.com/sailer/101101_habermas.htm


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


September 29, 2010

Thilo Sarrazin, "Gushing Philosemitism", And The German National Question

By Rafael Koski

[Previously by Rafael Koski The Sweden Democrats—Alone Against Establishment Extremists]

It all began on a warm August day. Thilo Sarrazin, a former Social Democratic Party elected official and a board member of the Bundesbank, the German central bank, had been causing increasing controversy with statements on Muslim immigrants in Germany. Then, in an interview, he used the words "Jew" and "gene" in the same sentence. This led to not just an ordinary anti-racist witch-hunt, but one more like exorcising the Devil himself: denunciations from Chancellor Angela Merkel and other politicians and by the Central Council for Jews in Germany.

All summer, Sarrazin had been giving interviews to various German newspapers to promote his new book, Deutschland Schafft Sich Ab ("Germany Abolishes Itself"), in which he discusses the breakdown of German society and the threat from immigration. The public denunciations and his dismissal from the Bundesbank seemed like a concentrated effort by the powers-to-be to shut him up.

But it hasn't worked. Sarrazin has forced himself back into public debate by his book sales. Deutschland Schafft Sich Ab sold out its first print run, over 200,000 copies, the week it was published. (I had to buy the downloadable version). Sales are now reported to be over 650,000—in a country of 82 million.

So the treatment of Sarrazin moved to the next phase, familiar from many European countries where opposition to mass immigration has grown so large that the elite can no longer pretend it doesn’t exist: the call to "open up a debate on integration without taboos" (Merkel in Der Spiegel). Suddenly, all journalists talk like the problems have been discussed for years.

But the main theme of this "official" debate: Germans must look into themselves to find what has gone wrong with the "integration" of Muslims. It’s blatantly an attempt to control the damage caused by Sarrazin by turning the discussion to favorite liberal themes like education—instead of asking whether Middle Eastern and North African peoples have the capacity to support a prosperous industrial society.

Indeed, perhaps the single most politically explosive claim in Sarrazin’s book is that the immigration of Turks into Germany (there are now about 3-4 million) has economically been only negative for Germany. The first Turkish Gastarbeiter came to work in German factories—but their progeny have been drawing in welfare benefits much more that what the original "cheap labor" was worth.

Economic matters are taken very seriously in Germany. After World War II, Germany has had no other (positive) national identity than being a prosperous, tidy country that produces the best cars in the world. If the economy does badly—like now—Germany faces an existential question.

The German political elite has already experienced one popular uprising this year. Despite explicit provisions in the Treaty of Rome, Germany and the governments of the European Union decided to create a huge 950 billion dollar rescue plan to bail out member states that had adopted the Euro and now faced bankruptcy. This bail-out was hugely unpopular in Germany. German citizens questioned, quite rightly, if their politicians were cared about Germany’s national interest at all or were just trying to keep their beloved EU from dissolving. Many Germans decided to just bail out of the Euro themselves and buy gold.

For ordinary Germans, this was a unifying experience. Everybody in Germany knew that everybody else was mad as hell about the bankster-bailout of 2010.

Now, thanks to Thilo Sarrazin, everybody also knows that everybody else knows that many neighborhoods in big German cities are uninhabitable for Germans—because of immigrant gangs.

Sarrazin's message could spark an awakening of the German right. The major themes of his book—national dumbing-down due to immigration; the natural inequality of man; the alien character of Islam; the sexual behavior of the underclass; German national self-hatred; the fatal influence of the "Class of '68" radical generation—are themes that could be used to launch a new nationalist party. According to a recent poll, a Sarrazin party could gather 18 % of the national vote. (Most Germans also told the pollsters that Arabs are Turks are "not willing and not capable of integrating" into German society.) This would only bring politics in Germany closer to those of other European countries, where anti-immigration parties of the right have blossomed everywhere.

So what is in Deutschland Schafft Sich Ab? The first thing to know about Thilo Sarrazin is that he is in no way a radical. Like any normal person who has lived a prosperous life, he presumes the society he grew up in is good and worth preserving. But he is a conservative only in a relative sense. He was, after all, a member of the center-left Social Democratic Party.

In his introduction, Sarrazin speaks of Germany’s "golden years" after WWII, where a national pride grew based on the continuing rise of the standard of living, the industriousness of the people, and the successful welfare state. His book should be seen as an attempt to wake the ruling elite to desperate problems in the wake of those Golden Years.

Germany is still a very successful society, with beautiful cities and world-class industry. But the Germans are not reproducing themselves. The numbers of births has sunk from 1.3 million in 1965 to just 650,000 in 2009. Further generations will likely be even smaller. At present trends, Germans will become a minority in their own country during this century. For Sarrazin, the national question is whether in 100 years Germany will exist at all.

Deutschland Schafft Sich Ab is very personal. Sarrazin is an economist and loves numbers and analysis, but he is also a man with an axe to grind. He has been known for many years in Germany because of his outspoken comments on the moral hazard and cost of welfare. (Like the Charles Murray of Losing Ground rather than The Bell Curve.)  He gained international attention when he was interviewed on immigration and answered in the same frank manner as he had on welfare. His book shows that he refuses to be intimidated by the resulting controversy, but wants to prove in 400 pages that he has the facts to back up everything he has said.

After his introduction, Sarrazin reviews the development of societies in history. He looks for some way to measure which society is better and why, irrespective of climate, some countries are more agreeable to live in than others.

Sarrazin argues that various political orders can be successful, but that all require not merely economic security but also something beyond the individual, whether a religion or ideology. Here Sarrazin shows some kind of rudimentary conservatism, understanding that political order based on pure self-interest tends to chaos or tyranny, and that "human rights" as a rallying cry is hopelessly vague.

The success of West has spread itself to all parts of the world, leading to higher living standards and an explosion in global population. The big question for Germans, and Europeans: will the social systems that have been built on Western prosperity now endanger that prosperity? Sarrazin is worried about economic competition with Asia. He sees the German demographic trends in Germany as the biggest problem.

Sarrazin doesn't even think Germany is doing that well right now. German household incomes have stagnated and even sunk over the last 20 years. German worker productivity and living standards are now below neighboring countries.

Sarrazin also argues that German innovation in mathematics, physics and engineering will probably wane in the future. The younger generations of students will be smaller, there won't be enough talent around. German students show a decreasing interest in the hard sciences.

Sarrazin doesn't see a bright future for German education. His main point: diversity is weakness. He notes the recent worldwide PISA study, which was a national shock for Germany. Three of the test winners, South Korea, Japan and Finland are ethnically very homogeneous. Canada also did well, but it is known for its skill-oriented immigration policy which favors high-achieving Asians. Sarrazin says that Germany is not ethnically homogeneous anymore and it cannot expect immigration of high achievers: Eastern or Southern Europe do not produce children, and Indians or Chinese won't come because of the language. All that Germany gets are immigrants who come mainly to live on welfare.

The immigrants that cost the most, do the worst in school and cause the biggest social problems are also those that proliferate the most. This means that Germany will in the future be less competitive in science and technology. It will also develop a permanent underclass. Its meritocratic education system will pick the high performers from all social classes, leaving the working class poor with less intellectual capacity in the next generation. The underclass will lose faith in social mobility and be more inclined to cause problems.

This leads Sarrazin to the topic of the dysgenic dynamic of modern societies. Differential birth rates cause either eugenic or dysgenic effects, as intelligence is between 50 and 80 percent hereditary. Currently, conditions in Germany are dysgenic.  German educated women are well known to have fewer children than the rest of the population. The biggest families are also the poorest.

Sarrazin notes the case of Protestant clergymen breeding the German scientific elite of the 19^th century. He also notes the scientific achievements of German Jews. At 0.8 percent of the population, they received 10 of the 32 scientific Nobel prizes granted to German citizens until 1931. Contrary to his media image, Sarrazin’s book is marked by what Paul Gottfried has called "gushing Philosemitism" and urges more Jewish immigration to Germany.

Sarrazin also feels obliged to show that inheriting intelligence is not a Nazi idea. He cites the Berlin-born Jew Wilhelm Stern as the inventor of the concept of Intelligence Quotient. He notes it was disparaged at the 1938 Congress of the German Society of Psychology as a "Jewish intelligence test" that was "made according to an intelligence type strongly present among Jews". And he points out that that the Soviet doctrine of Lysenkoism proscribed any discussion on hereditary traits in the Soviet empire until the 1970s.

Sarrazin says he has to use the rhetorical trick of the denial of hereditary intelligence with totalitarian regimes because the prevailing egalitarianism is so emotionally resistant—it insists on looking for the causes of inequality in social and political conditions. He advocates policies to encourage academic achievers to breed more.

Deutschland Schafft Sich Ab also includes a thorough critique of the welfare state. Some of  Sarrazin's comments were ridiculed in the German media: now he shows with statistics that, for example, the German welfare recipient has easily a remarkable half of the purchasing power of the average German worker. Ironically, you get the impression that Sarrazin's main concern really is the welfare state and its unexpected consequences—just as Murray’s Bell Curve was really more about intelligence than race.

Egalitarianism in education is another topic that gets Sarrazin really excited. He criticizes of education optimists who think that human beings are malleable—that No Child should be Left Behind. These optimists believe that, by educating everyone, social problems will go away. They refuse to take into account that education might just be correlated with success—that the real reason for success was there already before education.

The education philosophy that became fashionable around 1968 is all about feel-good and egalitarianism. In contrast, Sarrazin says learning hard and requires a lot of practice and repetition. Not all have the capabilities to really learn. But egalitarianism in education means the temptation to relax standards so that even the weakest seem capable. Education should be much more discriminatory and competitive.

Education gives Sarrazin another reason to mention immigration. Turkey was one of the worst performers in the PISA test. Their Turkish presence might be why big northern cities in Germany did worse than Bavaria in the test. Sarrazin shows that the composition of school population explains the differences within Germany. He actually cites the work of Richard Lynn and Tatu Vanhanen on the correlation between average national intelligence and living standards.

As a good Social Democrat, Sarrazin still has some statist suggestions for education reform: special intervention in school or pre-school for at-risk children. But he also favors more competition between schools, with private schools offering an alternative.

After discussing all the various social problems in Germany and their immigration dimensions, Sarrazin has a separate chapter on immigration and integration. His argument is common sense: Man is a territorial and group-oriented being. Claims on territory are the greatest cause of large-scale violent conflicts. And loyalty to one group excludes loyalty to a competitor. Group loyalty is the basis of the ability to cooperate—which, together with intelligence, is the source of human flourishing.

Any serious country has to defend its borders against invaders, whether in large or small numbers. Sarrazin sees current European immigration policy as nonsensical. If overpopulation in the Middle East or Africa causes the inhabitants to migrate, Europeans will have to defend their territory—otherwise they will be overwhelmed.

Sarrazin notes that most of Germany's immigrants—some 14 million—have actually been Germans from the territories lost in 1945 and from Eastern European countries from which they were expelled. (Discussion on the treatment of the Germans by the Allies in WWII is heated in Germany, and some aspects of it are simply verboten. German nationalists generally deem it important to speak of the atrocities that were committed by the Allies—to point out that Germans are not the incarnation of Evil, as in anti-fascist propaganda. Significantly, Sarrazin doesn't delve really far into this divisive debate.)

After the fall of the Soviet Union, more people with German ancestry have moved to Germany from Eastern countries. They have become productive citizens. Sarrazin also thinks that Germany has some good experiences of Mediterranean and Eastern European gastarbeiter, who came to work and mostly went back home. But Muslims don't integrate, but just proliferate and create parallel societies.

Sarrazin shows that Islam, besides being a religion, is also a political ideology. This makes it incompatible with Western European Enlightenment values. In this respect, Sarrazin is very near to European critics of Islam like Geert Wilders.

Deutschland Schafft Sich Ab’s last chapter brings together all the various themes. Of demographic trends, Sarrazin says the most worrisome is the higher birthrate of people from Middle East and Africa. These immigrants have currently 13.5 percent of children in Germany. Although the number of births per woman falls in the second and third generation, this demographic effect is neutered by the practice of importing wives from the countries of origin. On current trends by 2100, there will be 20 million Germans and 35 million Turks living in what now is German territory. Sarrazin's dystopia is where affirmative action to empower Turks has destroyed what was left of education and science, where medieval cathedrals are being "leased" to be mosques by the Ministry of Culture, and where balkanization has gone so far that German isn't even the official language anymore.

In contrast, Sarrazin offers a positive political program that is quite short: ending immigration; instituting pro-family policies for the educated; and school reform to favor hard sciences. Cutting welfare benefits would eliminate the excessive fertility of the underclass, and Turkish and Arab neighborhoods would eventually dissolve.

Overall, it's a surprisingly moderate and relatively liberal policy to keep Germany as a serious nation-state.

Sarrazin could readily be criticized from the right for his whole-hearted acceptance of Enlightenment liberalism, and for his failure to discuss repatriation of immigrants. His solutions might not be effective enough to turn the tide. But that he is being castigated on such a scale for his moderate opinions means only that Europe’s multi-culti elites are on the path to the complete destruction of their own civilization.

It remains to be seen what will become of the Sarrazin scandal. He has currently resigned from the Bundesbank and there are threats that he might be kicked out of the Social Democratic party, although it hasn’t happened yet. He has said he doesn't want to leave the SPD, so it's unlikely that he will join get involved in a right-wing party, which anyway would take years to be effective.

But Thilo Sarrazin is the most interesting political figure in Germany right now. His book shows that he is not just a flake, but deadly serious in what he thinks and does. And its sales prove that, in Germany, he has the audience.

Rafael Koski (email him) is a Ph.D student living in Northern Europe.

http://www.vdare.com/koski/100929_sarrazin.htm