No one said it would be easy
As many readers of this site may know by now a political group in the European Parliament known as ITS (Identity, Tradition, Sovereignty) has recently collapsed. Often described as “right wing” or “far right” by those who long ago have forgotten what patriotism is, its supporting lease was signed on 9 January 2007, little more than ten months ago. Following remarks made by ITS member Alessandra Mussolini that Romanian ITS members found insulting, the Greater Romania Party withdrew from the group disqualifying it as an official group. Consequently, it officially ceased to exist on Wednesday 14 November 2007.
The group's founding charter has typically been described by its politically correct enemies as "broadly anti-immigration, anti-EU constitution and anti-Turkish EU membership," while ITS participants have always emphasized that the group will function somewhat loosely. At the bloc’s creation Alessandra Mussolini described it as "more a technical than a political group... We are mainly getting together out of necessity. Survival is only possible in a political group.” With Romania now a member of the EU, Italy found itself a target of mostly Indian descended Romanian Gypsies who targeted Italians for criminal activity and a general reduction in the quality of life. Mussolini, however, told the Romanian newspaper Cotidianul on Nov. 2 that law-breaking had become "a way of life for (ethnic) Romanians going to Italy who cannot make a living by honest work." After days of bad blood it was announced to applause in the European Parliament in Strasbourg, that the group had dissolved because it no longer met membership criterion.
This is a truly unfortunate, though not terminal, turn of events since EU coalitions have been known to breakdown from time to time. While the original members of the ITS are still in place in Strasbourg the unity they had at first accomplished under a withering storm of protest from the usual suspects has, for the foreseeable future, been stymied. Their only hope at this point is carte blanch reconciliation between the Romanians and Italians or another group (or groups) of allies steps into the vacant positions.
As mentioned earlier, the dissolution of ITS was met with applause, vindictive applause. British Green MEP Jean Lambert added, "This collection of unsavory European politicians were united only by hatred -- be it of other races, nationalities, sexualities or, ironically, the EU. It was only a matter of time before they succumbed to a hatred of each other as well." Indeed, what many political activists have noted --and attempted to resist-- during the course of the EU’s nation killing existence has been its insolent bigotry in regards to national sovereignty and the designation of the entire European population as economic units, born to serve the elite crown, rather than allow them to flourish as sovereign peoples. Even more “unsavory” is the EU’s propensity to crush speech they deem as dangerous, imprison people for questioning certain historical occurrences, giving wide latitude to openly dangerous Muslims (and other Third World “guests”), promoting miscegenation, and telling the same lies over and over again to attain these patently globalist ambitions. Patriotic men and women such as ITS saw the writing on the wall and attempted to challenge these and other abnormal conditions such as open borders, common currency, and political correctness run amok. However, due to a social technique known as Dynamic Silence* and boycotts by other groups, ethnic and national preservationists never managed to gain the influence needed to preserve true European diversity by way of mutual voluntary cohesion. Theoretically, it may even have been possible for the ITS to survive such an ugly internal squabble had they not been terminally marginalized but allowed to work on behalf of their racial and cultural objectives. Unfortunately, the hostile environment in which they worked was by all accounts a stifling Orwellian setting.
Rank and file members of European Americans United – and other groups - ought to take heed of this occurrence. The day is coming sooner than we’d like before our own version of a European Union is thrust upon our national consciousness. We have right now in Texas a project that is underway, a massive project to build a 12-lane highway heading north, it would seem funded largely by private funds, which will head north toward Oklahoma. And the understanding that many have by looking at the statements made by the Security and Prosperity Partnership, is that this is part of an overall plan to develop a corridor between Mexico and Canada transiting the U.S. In fact America’s ambassador to Canada, Paul Cellucci, has “recommended” the borders between Canada, the United States and Mexico be dismantled with the plan of achieving a more fully integrated economy. Of course, since substantial trends of immigration normally go from Third World to First World, that can only mean almost the entire southern hemisphere will take this as a green light and literally flood the United States (and possibly Canada) as never seen before.
America’s founding fathers served our nation in order to protect its posterity and the preservation of “one people”—not some borderless muddle or hyper corporate pipe dream, which is exactly what the European Union represents. But certain powers in America and Europe have decreed that Caucasian man cannot be left with free choice if they do not exercise it in a way that brings the races together in licentious contact. The elites in America and Europe have decided that we must be assigned to a borderless world not on the basis of “peace”, but on the false belief that race and culture are interchangeable for the economic good of humanity. But you see now, with the unfortunate dissolution of the ITS, how imperative it is to maintain superior relations with those you consider your allies; as you struggle for the education --and ultimately-- the continuation of your people.
*Dynamic Silence was invented by Rabbi Feinberg of the American Jewish Committee in 1947 as a method of closing off all access to the public media - and thus the larger culture - for people or organizations deemed to have an unacceptable point of view. In spite of minor changes and adaptations, it can still be understood as being comprised of two parts. In the first part, unfavored individuals are denied unmediated exposure to the public. In the second part, only negative aspects of the unfavored individuals are reported. This starts a downward spiral of de-legitimization in the public eye in which the harder unfavored individuals try to get public exposure, the more negative and unflattering that exposure becomes until, finally, nobody wants to be associated with the ideas of beliefs of the unfavored individuals.