John de Nugent’s Blog

Vote fraud denied de Nugent 1990 primary victory?

From the Wikipedia “John de Nugent” article:

* * *

1990 Tennessee Republican primary for US Congress

In July-August 1990, de Nugent, using the campaign name “Jack Nugent” (respecting a Southern political usage of nicknames, such as “Bill” Clinton or “Jimmy” Carter) ran in the Republican primary for Congress in the Sixth District of Tennessee, south and east of Nashville, on a platform that he consistently designated as “pro-white.” He was officially awarded 26.7 percent of the vote in the primary election held on August 2, 1990 (the same day as the Invasion of Kuwait by Saddam Hussein), albeit de Nugent suspects that massive electronic vote fraud^[48] denied him an outright victory on primary day, August 2, 1990. WSMV-TV (Channel 4) coverage shows anchor Jeff McAtee (photo)^[49] saying during the news show “Scene at Six”[p.m.] that “voter turnout is light in the Sixth Congressional District…. Reporter Steve Linn says the light voter turnout is expected to hurt Nugent.”

McAtee

Yet that same evening, on the same station, WSMV, during “The Scene at Ten” the same anchor, Jeff McAtee (jumbling his words several times, and referring to the race as “the Sixth State Senate race”) says “Here is what the results show so far” — and then the wrong race results are shown. (In fact, they are for Sheriff of Davidson County, which contains Nashville, with 161 of 164 precincts reporting, i.e. 98%).

A political analyst, Lee Smith (1996 photo),^[50] then comes on to say “[Nugent] was running a fairly credible race in the earlier election results that I saw” and the news anchor, McAtee, agreed that it was credible “for very much a newcomer!” (Nugent was not only a newcomer to the state but was a New England “Yankee” running in a Southern state as well.) The analyst, sweating visibly in the air-conditioned television studio, then editorialized: “It would be an acute embarrassment in this day and time if he won.” By then the voting machines already had stopped counting Jack Nugent’s race at 6% of the vote tallied.

Finally, reporter Steve Linn of WSMV (photo)^[51]

says the exact opposite of what his station had reported at 6 pm: “Heavy voting and minor problems have delayed the vote tally” and..[..]..there is no clear winner.” The voting machine tally had been stopped by then since 8 p.m., for two hours, but not for the other election races in Tennessee. The WTVF-TV “Ten O’Clock Report” reporter lists “Gregory Cochran [later deemed the winner] at 37%, Wallace Embry at 33% and Jack Nugent at 30%; that’s pretty close…” and the screen says “Precincts Reporting: 6%.” (See photo of TV screen and primary results.)^[52]

(Source: DVD of television coverage, in the possession of John de Nugent and available to all serious researchers.) The candidate received extensive local publicity, and allusions (not using his name) to his campaign were made by Time magazine and on the op-ed page of the New York Times (referring to a “Middle Tennessee” race).

Only white POLITICS, Professor James Adovasio, can raise Solutré consciousness

I recently wrote an email of thanks and admiration to the author of a superb 2002 book:

The First Americans: In Pursuit of Archaeology’s Greatest Mystery (Modern Library Paperbacks)

http://www.amazon.com/First-Americans-Archaeologys-Greatest-Paperbacks/dp/037575704X

You can buy it here at Amazon, and you SHOULD. It is one of the most interestingly books I have ever read – rich in content and uniquely engaging style — and indirectly it proves there were people here before the supposedly Amerindian Clovis culture. (Other courageous researchers such as Dennis Stanford and Bruce Bradley now say that even the Clovis culture was NOT Amerindian, but Solutrean,  white and European.)

This page-turner of a book not only gives a gripping education in the life and travails of being an archeologist, especially one who advances controversial findings, but it also supports — not openly, but by all its implications — the truth about Solutré, that we whites are the true Native Americans.

When we put together Adovasio’s findings and those of Stanford and Bradley, we realize that it was the Mongoloid “Indians” coming from Siberia who were invaders of white territory. They marched southward from Alaska, passing  between the glaciers of the Canadian Rockies to the west and the glaciers of the Canadian plains to the east. And  with primitive technology but vastly superior numbers to the Solutrean whites, they came down into what is now the USA — and for thousands of years thoroughly genocided the first American whites!

See the Wikipedia article on this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solutrean

Books such as Adovasio’s can help end the white guilt trip about how we whites supposedly ” stole the Indians’ land.” As the French would say, au contraire. They not only stole ours, but they mass-murdered our people, sparing only our women and girls to forcibly breed with them!

I do not expect any answer at all from Dr. Adovasio (due certainly at least to the fear factor, and for all I know this brave researcher may personally be a racial liberal as well), but I felt impelled by my admiration to write Professor Adovasio the following:

Dear Dr. Adovasio:

I have been following your career and courage over the Meadowcroft “heresy” — and the latest news I read was that your university appointed you provost as of March 2008.( I was a “Provost’s Fellow”  at the U. Of Maryland in 1983, btw, as a grad student.)

YOUR 2002 BOOK. I would like to first, praise you for your wonderfully written 2002 book The First Americans. Perhaps it is that Italian panache, but YOUR book had no Sominex effect on me; I felt alive and fascinated in every page. I also perceive that you have a Robert Frostian sense of the flavor of the words themselves, such as in your word choice early on of “land-gouging torrents.”  Those words themselves, by their very sound in the mouth, suggest vividly what such torrents do: they, gouge and rip and flow.

(I did find one page with a minor faux pas, the word “being” used twice in the same sentence ["human being being...."] but otherwise, your book was marvelous both in content and in style.

Professor James Adovasio, Provost of Mercyhurst College near Erie, Pa. and director of the Mercyhurst Archaeological Institute. Since 1972 he has fought for the truth, the WHITE truth, about the Meadowcroft Rock Shelter: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_M._Adovasio

CHARACTER. You have most likely never heard my name before, Dr. Adovasio, but you may in the future, and so regardless of whether or not I have the good fortune of contact with you, or with others who support you on the pre-Clovis issue, I wanted to let you know how much I respect your scholarship, writing gifts, and your integrity under fire.

“CLOUT.” The denigration of the pre-Clovis experts “just goes on and on and on” — as this Texas professor says (time 0:15-17) in the 2002 BBC documentary — http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0NsdLXaQ9o — about the theory of Solutrean North American settlement .

The reason that the pre-Clovis theory, or shall we say the carbon-dating-proved fact of pre-Clovis, is still rejected is now primarily non-archeological; it is ego-psychological, yes, but also political, economic and ethnic. There can be no denying that there are many “Laurence Strausses” out there who hold sway in many areas of American academia and across American life. They have clout. This is reflected also in our American foreign policy, for example, as denounced by Nobel Laureate Jimmy Carter in his book Palestine: Peace, not Apartheid. Walt of Harvard and Mearsheimer of Princeton/Chicago also wrote of this “lobby.” These honest critics are hardly “haters’ — but rather making an accurate factual perception. There is an agenda in America and you too, via Meadowcroft, clash with it.

As Dr. James Chatters found out when his own wife (an Amerindian) left him, the so-designated “Native American” community and their ethnic allies grasped from your work at Meadowcroft, and from Kennewick Man, the political, economic and ethnic implications of the Solutrean theory  for their entire profitable undertaking: “white guilt for taking the poor Indians’ land” — and its effect on their gold-lined casinos!

[There is an informative March 5, 2008 interview with Adovasio here: http://www.archaeological.org/webinfo.php?page=10464]

There is also a ramification to Meadowcroft on our whole open-doors immigration policy: Those who say we need amnesty for all illegal aliens say ‘the white man himself is an illegal alien on stolen Amerindian land. America is thus for all races.”

Hispanic militants, largely of Amerindian descent, claim whites are illegal aliens on Indian land.

But the implications of your work, Dennis Stanford’s and  Bruce Bradley’s on that PR agenda are all too well understood. Your facts threaten a geopolitical structure of guilt whereby European-Americans gradually, demographically cede America — “back,” they say, “back” — to the peoples of color, and in most of the United States this means back to the Mexican mestizos of largely Amerindian admixture, and as the Canadians say, back to the “first nations,” to the Siberians. And the guilty white invader cedes it also to anyone else who comes into the USA — in the triumphant confidence that this land was never a primeval white homeland, but it always belonged to the peoples of color, until the white racist nightmare of 1492.

It is this clout and this implication that means your lifetime of work is not addressed in school textbooks and has almost no impact on the general public consciousness. How many whites still blither “We stole the Indians’ land.“?

I will be addressing this pernicious clout that opposes all academic freedom. And I would like you to know that your wonderful book The First Americans had a powerful impact on at least one single reader of some potential significance.

If you will look here at Microsoft’s rather nifty new search engine, “Bing,” under my name, you will see this: 2,580,000 hits:

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22John+de+Nugent%22&first=21&FORM=PERE2

Under your own, sir, one finds — very, very outrageously and unjustly!!! — 3,470 hits.

Why is this?

Because you, sir, are an academician, and I, sir, am a political radical with an understanding of the mass media. And I use it to dare to take on the issue of who has the real clout in America, and I ask the question: Is freedom dying out? Is the European-American community dying out?

Here, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_de_Nugent, if you scroll down about 1/4, you will see a very brief summary of my championing of what I call “Solutreanism” in its archeological and political implications.

On this webpage on my website (about to be revised, btw) I go into Solutré again:

http://www.johndenugent.com/tes.html

You, Professor, have taken on the nearly thankless task of being a heretic speaking truth to power in your field, and it was YOUR courage, and that of Jim Chatters and Dennis Stanford, and others, that gave ME the courage to step forward and do what I feel that I must, because someone must. I must address the issue of who controls America. Either that issue is broached and effectively, or all trends indicate that there will be a second mass extinction of the people of R1 haplogroup in North America. As a man with children, I fear America will become almost unlivable for them if it becomes entirely Third World.

And it will — unless we understand that WE are the native Americans. And that our Solutrean cousins were genocided because they lacked the sheer numbers to resist. That our guilt trip must end.

I do not expect any reply; I know how my email must cause concern to you. But I must follow my mission to the end. And your courage inspired me — to shatter pernicious taboos.

Allow me to express finally my highest respect for you, Professor, and to wish you the very best. If I succeed, “Meadowcroft and Adovasio” someday will be known to every American child. And our children will have a future.

John de Nugent

Forget Ponzi, it’s a “Madoff Scheme”

I received today this powerful email from European-American civil rights worker Stan Hess of Idaho.

It is time to expunge the term Ponzi scheme from the popular culture. Carlo Ponzi was an Italian immigrant whose crimes pale in comparison to those of Bernard Lawrence”Bernie” Madoff . Mr. Ponzi was of the 20^th century. Bernie is of the 21^st century.

It is time to call financial schemes of animus “Madoff schemes.” These crimes of financial extermination must never be forgotten.

Bernie’s scheme of financial hatred has created a wall of pain between European Americans and Financial Americans. The only cure is to prosecute more financial predators and bring them to justice.

Kudos to Chinese American United States District judge Denny Chin for handing down a just sentence of 150 years.

Stan Hess

Hate Crime Survivor