Siege

by James Mason

"The accused Cleveland State campus killer, Frank C. Spisak, Jr., shuffled into a Justice Center visiting room yesterday. In a voice without boast or remorse, he stated, 'I guess my aim was pretty good.'

  "He was active in White Supremacist groups and obsessed with Adolf Hitler. Spisak wore Swastikas, played Nazi records and collected hundreds of Nazi books. 'When I was fourteen, I began reading books and things about Nazis', he said. 'The violent philosophy appealed to me in the deep recesses of my mind.'

  "'You're a pretty mixed-up guy', Spisak was told. He shook his head, 'Right now they're holding me in a psycho ward. I don't know what's going to happen. They said if I don't have any trouble, it will be all-right.'"

  Excerpt from a letter by Spisak, dated February 25th, 1983:

  "I have long been a student of American Nazism and because I not only believed in the righteousness of our Cause but loved my people and hated the vile enemies who are daily attacking our womenfolk and elderly, I got 'involved' and became a casualty of the racial warfare. It does give me a great sense of satisfaction knowing I went down with my guns blazing and took out several of the Enemy before they got me."

  Excerpt from the CLEVELAND PLAIN DEALER, July 16th, 1983 :

  "Frank C. Spisak was found guilty yesterday of aggravated murder in the slayings of three people at Cleveland State University. Now he faces the possibility of his own death in the electric chair.

  "Spisak told the jury he was fighting a war against Blacks and Jews, and that he was not a criminal, but a prisoner of war. The first casualty was on February 1st and the war ended when Spisak was arrested on September 6th cowering in a basement crawlspace of a friend's house."

  Excerpt from letter by Spisak, dated February 17th, 1984:

  "I don't know what you heard or read about me in the papers in your area but it was probably mostly all lies. The Cleveland papers said I'm a criminal and a pervert and a faker and the worst person in Cleveland's history. They said nobody deserves to die more than me. Coming from the Jew, I take these insults to my integrity as compliments of the highest honor but some people in our Movement are terrified of all the 'bad publicity' I've got and are doing their best to run a hundred miles an hour in the opposite direction from me and saying, 'No, no! Don't connect us with Spisak!' That's what the Jews want. The name of their strategy is called Divide and Conquer."

  Excerpt from the CLEVELAND PLAIN DEALER, June 30th, 1983:

  "Shaughnessy told the panel that to sit in judgment of someone whose philosophy was completely alien to theirs was a tough job. 'Part of the job that you've undertaken is going to be sitting in judgment of a sick and demented mind that spews forth a philosophy that will offend each and every one of you', said Shaughnessy. 'Make no mistake about that, you will be offended.'"

  "There are several ways to consider my case and situation. #1- You can accept the Jews' official newsmedia version that I am some kind of nut, kook, weirdo, lunatic, criminal, pervert, swine, thug, robber, pimp, etc. #2- You can accept me as a misguided idealist and somewhat schizophrenic personality who meant well but nevertheless only did evil. #3- You can view my actions and motivations as truly revolutionary and motivated by the purest idealism and the politics of despair."

  Excerpt from the CLEVELAND GAZETTE, Jan. 26th, 1984 :

  "This guy is crazy, right? Another lunatic killer taunting the public with a pretended belief in some hideous philosophy, right? After all, what else can we say about a man that crows about killing three men, then tries to vault into the electric chair, then announces his intention to fight his death sentence for his family's sake? "Frank Spisak, with all of his fractured posing and his demented exaltation of murder as a Final Solution, troubles any thought of a swift, simple execution of justice."

  Excerpt from a letter by Spisak, dated March 17th, 1983 :

  "Just between you and me, I think our people are 'through'. The Enemy has got so many of us convinced we are each others' worst enemy we can't get it together for a big push against the real power! But that's no secret: White people haven't been able to stick together for years, and the Jews keep making sure we don't. Movement people keep telling each other and trying to convince the rest that the press is controlled and is feeding us misinformation. But let something like what happened to me happen to any one of us and the whole pack of them go barking off and running in the same direction as the Jewsmedia like a bunch of hounds on a leash. If they could only see themselves and what they are doing."

  Revolution in Reality

  No one said it would be pretty. No one said it would be easy. Quite a few imagined it would be "by the book" which is, probably, the greatest misconception of all. The Movement has the facts and theories down pat but it always has appeared to be badly hung-up on reality when it happens. Many times - most times - reality, that is, the ACTUAL PRACTICE OF SOMETHING, varies widely from the carefully thought-out ideal. That's life. In revolution as in any war, actual accomplishment of it primarily involves KILLING and the consequences of that. The sooner the Movement accepts all this as merely par-for-the-course, the sooner things will begin going more in our direction.

  The above quotes illustrate nothing more, nothing less than a focus on one instance of Revolution put into practice and the resultant - the predictable consequences. It can't really be expected to be any other way, not in the insane mess that American society has long since become. The excerpts and the news clips presented here may be somewhat incomplete but they accurately paint the picture as seen from opposing sides. The actual truth is somewhere in the middle: the fact that a life/death struggle must break out into the wide-open lest death win out by default.

  [Vol. XIII, #5 -May, 1984]

  One of Us

  Most, if not all, of us remember the news story which broke last summer about the shootings in San Diego . I recall that I was riding in my car and heard the story first over the car radio. From the details given at that time over the radio, it was clear that one man had done the shooting, that twenty-one were dead, that the killings took place at a McDonald's in San Diego and that the killer himself was dead also. It didn't state whether the killer was Black or White not did it indicate the racial make-up of the victims (though I surmised at the time that the majority of them probably were Mexican).

  "An encouraging little incident.", I told my companion at the time. Regardless whether Black or White, someone at least had stepped well outside Master's rules and more power to 'em! And regardless of who or what may have comprised the twenty-one dead, this had been one hell of a day's work toward "heightening the contradictions" and toward sinking this rotten ship rather than just rocking it. And what a deliciously poetic setting... a McDonald's! I really didn't let myself dare to hope that the killer had been White or that the majority of dead had indeed been colored. That would be asking for too much, I felt at the time, and I gave it no further thought until a news item from a Southern California newspaper reached me in September.

  In the science that is established thus far into the most convulsive revolution this hemisphere has ever seen, it could have been assumed that the killer himself was colored. In that event, the happening would still have been a highly positive thing - even had the majority of the victims been White - because it would have caused one more crack in the phony facade of the multi-racial, Big Brother society progressing in total harmony along the road to hell. The world would have known for sure that SOMEBODY was not a damned bit happy with it! Had the killer been colored and the victims any color combination at all, the event would have been a par-for-the-course occurrence in the decline and demise of this System's structure. A pleasant break in the day-to-day boredom but nothing remarkable at all. Since the killer was White and the victims mainly non-White, it must stand as a stunning victory and a landmark in itself simply by virtue of the LACK of any other really revolutionary action at present.

  As it turns out, this man, Huberty, was one of us. Despite no revelation of any formal political affiliation (and how much more meaningless that is
becoming all the time), and despite no "obvious racial motivation" according to police, you and I can unmistakably tell from what has been reported that this man was definitely one of us. You can be sure that had there been a Nazi or Klan connection, the press would have latched onto it in order to further downgrade both Huberty and whatever group he may have belonged to (i.e.- "Look what kind of nut joins these groups.", or "Look what joining a group like that does to a person.") You can be sure, by that omission, that there was no direct Movement connection. Still, he was one of us. This glaringly raises the ultimate questions of what is a Movement and which is THE Movement?

  [Unknown]

  Yourself in His Place

  We've all considered it and quite often too. We've all got the means and the capability of doing it and a few of us might even have plans laid. Can you see YOUR picture there in place of Huberty's and can you see a thumbnail sketch - a la Jewish System media - of your life in place of his? They are going to go all-out to "get" you on paper, just as a matter of course. Would you look as good as Huberty? Would your life's story read as well as his (in spite of all the twisting and dirt-dredging as well as pure speculation and fabrication) should they ever go after you in this manner? What real dirt might they turn up on you? If it's there, they'll find it.

  Still, please note that no-one - at least not to my knowledge - in the Movement has even mentioned Huberty and his fight, favorably or unfavorably. Why not? Is it because he was a "kook" and an "oddball"? Do they not know the press can make daylight out to be night? That face is not the face of a derelict or a defective and their worst try at character assassination turns up nothing deep and dark about this man. Therefore, we can safely assume that he was an outstanding Aryan specimen and solid White American. (Yet never forget that a non-descript type with a "mass" mentality and persuasion can never in any case be one of us, so never look for or expect perfection.) The Movement didn't mention Huberty even though his action on that day far surpassed all of their combined efforts for the entire year! What does this indicate? Are there TWO Movements? Or is there only ONE Movement and one society of impotent fakers? Remember always that, historically, movements are natural, organic things, completely in tune with the times no matter how sick or apparently hopeless those times may seem - and they are NEVER something hoked up for fun and profit.

  But at least I didn't see any of them CURSING Huberty or loudly denying and disowning him. They've been well-known for this sort of vile, cowardly behavior in the past whenever someone has taken it upon themselves to make the supreme sacrifice and go outside not only Master's rules but those very same rules of the fakers themselves. As far as you or I are concerned, take a look at yourself, as only you know yourself, and first ask whether you'd ever be able to muster the guts to act in this manner, to relinquish forever the comforts and pleasures that this Big Brother society provides you with and, quite likely, to give up your very life itself for the Cause you purport to believe in. Second, ask yourself what they'd say about you and how your family, friends and, most of all, your "compatriots" in the Movement would react and handle the situation in the wake of your action.

  If you're honest with yourself, you'll know then that Huberty was a HERO of the first magnitude and beyond any reproach whatsoever. Give us more men like this and victory will be assured!

  [Vol. XIII, #10 -Oct., 1984]

  Vigilante

  There have been a number of questions as to why no mention so far in these newsletters about the New York subway vigilante. Well, I was just hesitant to use up space in saying the obvious, like "hooray" or "it's about time".

  But beyond the reaction and the frustration of it, was there something in the incident that we can use or learn from as revolutionaries? Yes, there was. The experience was a practical application of one of the oldest Right Wing theories, to wit, if you push the White Man hard enough, long enough, eventually he'll strike back. Even more interesting is that the Jews surely had something like this in the back of their minds when they produced the film entitled "Death Wish", starring the Polish Jew, Charles Bronson. We predicted it and they, as it were, dramatized it for all the world to see. But that film was produced almost twenty years ago.

  Does the action of Mr. Goetz signal cause for hope or despair? Almost two hundred million Whites in this country, the majority of which are compressed into New York City-style situations, facing the same crime, terror and brutalization for an entire generation, and then, lo and behold, in 1985 one man pulls out a gun and shoots a few Blacks. Lots of cheers, lots of curses, lots of commentary and comparisons with the film. But is this the "White Backlash" that was hoped for after years of intolerable provocation? If so, we appear to be in deep trouble.

  By actual rights, Blacks, etc., should be turning up dead at a rate that would render a body count impossible. The police would be befuddled (and supportive) to a point where detection would be a joke. Fence-straddlers of all stripes would receive the clear message to choose, keep silent or die. A reawakening would be underway and a massive Jewish emigration would commence. And all of it would be unorganized, unofficial, just like the subway vigilante. It would be, in fact, relatively painless (for Whites). But one man in twenty or thirty years bringing life to one of the keystone Rightist views for the future? How do we interpret that?

  For one thing, predictions for the future when speaking of great social crises, as I have already said, are a highly risky business. Two of the best - H.G. Wells and George Orwell - were wrong most of the time. It gets worse when you get overanxious. In fact, by and large, most of even the sharpest observers among us are almost completely blinded due to being caught up in events rather than being detached from them. Twenty years after we THOUGHT that it SHOULD HAVE begun on a widespread scale, one man in New York does it. It has to be taken as a tiny ray of hope.

  Undoubtedly, a large part of being stable and professional about anything is not being in a hurry. Kids, you'll note, are always in a big hurry to get with whatever promises action and fun. So it has been with the Right Wing. Kids also let themselves in for a lot of disappointments as a direct result of being so overly anxious about things that require seasoning and preparation. It never occurs to them that maybe not everyone else's mind is focused on the same thing as theirs. Most people are "serious" about dull and mundane things like making a daily living, not shooting Blacks on subways. I get anxious too but this pot is definitely on a slow boil.

  Had this subway incident occurred during Commander Rockwell's lifetime, for example, it would have been far more sensational, like a thunderclap. They did sensationalize it at the time but look how it's died down now. It's so far overdue that it's almost anti-climactic. In trying to discover unknowns using what is known, it's nearly a certainty that the course of any revolution in this country will happen just this same way... running on what seems like a very late schedule but, actually, running according to its own schedule - its own unique schedule in history.

  [Vol. XIV, #3 -Mar., 1985]

  Splinters

  The System media referred to the actions involving Comrades Mathews, Yarbrough and others [i.e., "The Order"] as violence on the part of "Neo-Nazis".

  But to the very best of my own knowledge there were absolutely no Nazi affiliates involved in any of that. This is an interesting peek into the mind of the media and, hence, the public. It should also be a lesson to some of the more backward-thinking types in the Movement. As Commander Rockwell said in the 1960's, if you're racialist and aware of the role of the Jews and are willing to discuss it, then they're going to brand you a "Nazi" regardless of what you may call yourself or your group. You can even try cursing the Nazis and they'll STILL call you a "Nazi". The Commander said that he took the name "American Nazi Party" for that reason (though we know it was for far more than just that: he was a National Socialist and a believer in Adolf Hitler).

  The men involved in the actions referred to above never represented themselves as Nazis but neither did they deny or denounce the historic r
ole of Hitler or the worth and truth of National Socialism. This is good. It is as it should be. Maybe we are, after all, the "Neo-Nazis" they call us. For we are not, any of us, like the original NSDAP of Germany and none of us are functioning with the program of same. We may swear allegiance and we may use the Swastika as our symbol; we may even wear the brownshirt uniform. But it's all very superficial and really brings us no closer to BEING Hitler-style National Socialists than Mathews, Yarbrough, or any really good and revolutionary KKK type, etc. If this sounds confusing, it shouldn't. It's evolution at work. And the good news is that it is working toward our favor; it is welding a Movement together. A Movement that's neither funky Right Wing nor orthodox, cultist Nazi. Rather, something alive and working in the here-and-now. Something that will live on its own and grow, something that can WIN in the end, here, in this place, in this time. It hasn't got a name yet but is that important? The fact is that it's here and the System knows it. A few of us even know it.

  With all the formality, the organizations, the corporations, the two-bit "leaders", the manifestos, the flashy uniforms and titles, etc., of the 1960's, we had but ONE true leader - George Lincoln Rockwell - and, once he was gone, we had none. All the outward symbolisms continued to persist under lesser types and had begun to threaten the life and success of the Movement itself. Then came the first major splinters. I've said quite often that the situation in the nation went from conservative to revolutionary during the Seventies. Was it by accident that during the Seventies the period of greatest splintering within the Movement also took place? It was the Movement trying to free itself and find itself so as to be able to keep its appointment with destiny. It was an agonizing, destructive process but look what has developed. No Nazi Party and yet a Nazi Party EVERYWHERE, and with TEETH! And no pompous, tin-horn buffoons to hold it down or hold it back!!