Senator Jacob Javits played a prominent role in the Senate hearings for the 1965 bill. Javits authored an article entitled “Let’s Open the Gates” which proposed immigration levels of 500,000 people per year for 20 years, with no restrictions on national origin.
Congressman Emanuel Celler, who had fought for unrestricted immigration since the 1920s in the House of Representatives, was the main writer of the legislation.
Leo Pfeffer, who wrote many treatises and books that acted as softening propaganda for open immigration, also co-conceived the legislated material.
Norman Podhoretz was a former Comintern sympathizer turned “Neo-Con” who became a close associate of the aforementioned men; he wrote numerous articles promoting open immigration.
And Jewish organizations such as the American Jewish Congress, The Jewish Federation, the ACLU, and B’nai B’rith, all filed briefs in support of open immigration before the Senate Subcommittee during the hearings prior to the Hart-Celler Act.
The Migration Act (Australia, 1966)
Walter Lippmann played a crucial role in pressuring the Holt government to do away with racial profiling against non-White immigration; he was president of the Australian Jewish Welfare Society which, among other services, offered financial support and housing to non-White immigrants to Australia.
John Malcolm Fraser was a cabinet member during the Holt government who went on to become Prime Minister of Australia (1975-83). His mother’s maiden name was Woolf, born of a South African Jew who emigrated to Australia. Despite being minister of the War Cabinet, his Liberal Party values did not stop him from advising on an “easing” of immigration restrictions. This sympathy no doubt gave him a leg up on his competitors when he campaigned for Prime Minister a decade later.
The British Nationality Act (The United Kingdom, 1981)
The Labour Party, true to its Marxist roots, began a series of Nationality Acts from 1948 onward that established the rule of jus soli, whereby citizens of the British Commonwealth could now migrate to Britain.
Ralph Miliband was born in the Jewish Quarter of Warsaw. He emigrated to England in 1940. After the war, he joined the Labour Party, despite his hatred for English culture, and proceeded to become an intellectual proponent of the New Left. His writings and lectures proved influential in the reworking of several British Nationality Acts over the decades, as they became increasingly more open to non-White immigration.
Maurice Edelman was a lifelong Member of British Parliament. He was a francophile and admirer of David Ben Gurion. His efforts over the years as a Labour Party MP included a number of published works, several of which sought to influence how Britons saw themselves. Like many of his ilk, he considered the peoples of Britain to be the ancestors of migrants.
Canada, Germany, Sweden, France, Denmark, Belgium, the Netherlands, and so many others, also had major overhauls to their National Immigration policies during the same period. The mainstream narrative explained this phenomenon as a development of lower birthrates among natural Europeans; then there was a financial reasoning behind the influx, one which argued the fallacy that Western countries had a desperate shortage of low-skilled workers; and now the latest explanation for mass immigration has been given: that Europeans need to become more diverse—despite the demonstrable fact that about 97% of all hair colours, and 96% of all eye colours attributed to human beings belong exclusively to the European haplogroup.
The explanation that we are never given is simply this: that an internationalist cartel, operating within Western nations, has designs on governing the planet at some point in the future. They have shared this common goal since the Age of Revolution; and this, in part, helps explain why their long term plans always go unnoticed—because they think in terms of centuries, while Europeans can only see from one generation to the next. And it matters not what one calls them: Liberal, Globalist, Socialist, Communist, Cultural Marxist, or Jewry—in toto they are one and the same. They desire a one world cultural order, ruled by a centrally controlled government, with all of humanity under its thumb. And for them, European nationalism, since 1848, has been a barrier to that goal…
Therefore, Europeans must be replaced.
This philosophical point is essential to understanding their religion, or Globalism. Much of the world already operates in some manner like it, but conditionally, on a micro level—a subsistence version of it, a pseudo-communism if you will—due to poverty (Africa), culture (China), or caste (India). However, the individuality and free-spirited nature of Europeans and their ability to organize and express these traits through cultural celebration (nationalism) is a roadblock to world government. Even when given various forms of socialism to live by, many European cultures could just not adapt collectively or metaphysically to it. And once it becomes understood that the purest form of this doctrine, Communism, was simply a Jewish-designed belief system to persuade Gentiles to abandon the notion of property rights, relinquish their free will to an authority that ruled over them, and divorce themselves from the values of their culture and kindred inasmuch as they related to the state, then it makes perfect sense why the Europeans have stubbornly held their ground through dozens of the world’s greatest social cataclysms, of which the Bolshevik Revolution and World Wars were only a part.
And now the final push looms large. An army of culturally alien, hostile peoples have been brought into our midst. Many are males of military age. They want to pair up and breed with native European women, which our elected governments offer up to them; they want their own laws and cultural norms to be dominant; they defile our religious and historical spaces while waiting for the day when Western governments finally say to them: now go, kill the White menace. And to think that it all began with just a few modest initiatives, some cosmetic changes to our immigration policies only a few short decades ago, when a man like Enoch Powell could deliver a speech that still meant something…
Yes, there will be rivers of blood…