Thursday, 30 December 2010
But Portland had a terrible dark secret that threatened to spoil everything: It was – peer anxiously over shoulder- not ‘diverse’, you see. Almost all of the citizens were, shudder, white. If only, if only, we had more diversity, they whispered… for instance large numbers of blacks, Muslims and Hispanics……..the mind boggled at how wonderful it would then be.
Portland is a green city too of course, but envy would make them go a deeper shade of that colour if they knew about Jos, a ‘vibrant’ city in central Nigeria. This splendid metropolis luxuriates in the kind of diversity calculated to give Oregonians wet dreams. Black, brown, Arabic, Lebanese, Christians, Religion of Peaceniks, animists……….you name it, they’re there.
And as you’d imagine, they’ve all been enthusiastically celebrating diversity like mad for years. This has lead to literally thousands of deaths over the last ten years, with vast stretches of the city burnt to the ground in the process. The police do their best – one video on Yutube shows them lining up suspects and then, to the great amusement of the onlookers, machine-gunning them to death.
But there's only so much they can do - people just want to celebrate diversity. And what better time to kick it off again than the Season Of Good Will? Yes indeed, and it duly began about two weeks ago. A Muslim man, Al Hadji, had started to rebuild a house burned down during the last inter-cummunity celebrations. Some local ‘Christians’ questioned his entitlement to do this. Not wishing to spend the required time or money on the services of a conveyancing lawyer, the Christians resolved this contractual impasse through the simple expedient of hacking old Al to death.
Before you could say ‘diversity is our strength’, the Religion Of Peace responded, lead by a radical Muslim sect known as Boko Haram (not to be confused with Procul Harum, of Whiter Shade Of Pale fame). Anyway, Boko decided to ‘reach out’ to their fellow diversocrats and, well, here’s how one report described it. “Dozens of armed men attacked the church, dragging the pastor out of his home and shooting him to death. Two young men from the choir rehearsing for a late-night carol service also were slain. The group of about 30 attackers armed with guns and knives even killed two people passing by Victory Baptist Church.”
Soon the whole vibrant city was celebrating diversity with gusto. By the end of it witnesses reported dozens of bodies piled up. ‘Most of the bodies appeared to be women and children killed by blows from machetes. Mr. Kosoko said the dead lined the streets of Dogo Nahawa, a village about three miles south of the city of Jos.’
The Portlanders are clearly missing out, although they did get something to whet their appetites recently in the form of Somali ‘refugee’ Mohammed Mohammed (wonder what religion he is?), who apparently “fled chaos in Somalia for new life in America.”
Indeed he did.
And part of this new life involved trying to blow up his fellow Portlanders over Christmas. As one does.
But Portlanders understand.
Here’s Jeanne Faulkner of The Oregonian: “Let's show the world how Oregonians really feel about our immigrants, refugees and people in desperate, impoverished countries like Somalia. Let's show them we really care about them.”
Clearly Jeanne is a smart lady with a keen practical understanding of the whole situation. That being the case she’ll be pleased with this news: Jeanne, there are lots and lots and lots and lots of new Mohammed Mohammeds on their way to you for their ‘new life in America’.
Tuesday, 28 December 2010
On June 26, 1997, teacher Roland Pierre, then 62, was arrested on felony sex-abuse charges after he allegedly called one of his students into an empty classroom, closed the door and molested her. Officials would not explain what happened since, but sources said the criminal charges were apparently dismissed, and a DOE disciplinary case was "dropped on a technicality."
Dat be racis’, I imagine.
Did I mention that NY is virtually bankrupt?
Saturday, 25 December 2010
I was beside myself with excitement. I still am!
And some curmudgeons insist that this is just another stupid bandwagon that the conniving idiot has leapt onto, as his popularity plunges to low single figures.
But I don't agree. I see it as a thrilling development. In fact I'm so enthused that I've taken down and dusted off my old English/Irish dictionary and came up with a few phrases myself which I believe will prove invaluable in the years ahead.
We must all do our bit, you know.
Here’s my contribution so far. Note: I will continue this work into the future.
Cá bhfuil an brú is gaire Arm an tSlánaithe? (Where is the nearest Salvation Army hostel?)
Beidh mé ag dhíol mo thóin le haghaidh bia (I will sell my ass for food)
Cá bhfaighidh mé duine bán in Éirinn? (Where can I find a white person in Ireland?)
An féidir liom mo chuid Béarla ar ais le do thoil? (Can I have my English language back please?)
Friday, 17 December 2010
The primary objective of this blog is to catalogue, and hopefully in some small way repel, the relentless attack on western civilization. This attack, which has been and continues to be spectacularly successful, has a number of key components:
Demonisation of whites as the source of all the world’s ills - the corollary being the deification of non-whites, especially blacks.
Mass immigration of Third World immigrants (black, Muslim, Hispanic) to western – i.e. white – lands:
Forced integration of neighbourhoods and schools.
Multiculturalism and cultural relativism
Affirmative Action (AA) in its various forms whereby gentile whites are disadvantaged at every turn
Relentless media propagandizing of black/white miscegenation
Feminism – primarily directed at emasculating the white male (the oppressor) and the legitimising (encouraging?) of homosexuality, same-sex marriages etc.
The undermining of traditional patriarchal Western institutions (church, ‘traditional’ family etc.)
So-called ‘hate’ legislation and the closing down of all contrary opinion on the desirability of the foregoing objectives.
I could literally write a book on just the previous paragraph, but readers of this blog, supporters and opponents alike, hardly need more detail. The interesting thing is that the proponents of this agenda are now so confident they don't even try to deny these developments. And why should they? They’ve been successful beyond their wildest expectations in The Long March Through The Institutions.
Net effect, the civilization of the white race, which created modern society, freedom of conscience, the rule of law, individual rights, as well as virtually everything that’s worthwhile in the arts and sciences, is reeling under the onslaught, and its forthcoming demise is unashamedly celebrated.
The big questions we must answer:
This post has a specific focus, and one of what I believe to be unparalleled importance. It asks, and tries to answer, the following questions:
Have Jews been the main instigators of this assault?
If so, why?
What proportion of Jews have been involved?
Are these developments in the real interests of the majority of Jews?
And finally, can, and, should, white gentiles seek common ground with Jewish interests to combat this collapse of Western society?
Did/do Jews mastermind this assault?
Well, there’s a compelling case to say they did.
The 20th Century intellectual and academic world kicked the process off and did the heavy lifting in terms of providing an intellectual framework and toolsets applicable to deconstructing white power and validity. It took many forms. Jewish intellectuals led the battle against the idea that races even exist and against the idea that there are biologically-based differences in intelligence or cultural achievement. In fact this form of thinking can be traced back as far as Spinoza, and of course Marx provided a toolset to undermine the economic underpinnings of society and for the attack on nationalism and religion.
Franz Boaz was immensely influential in propagating the theory that there were no genetic differences between races, or at least none that determined intelligence and other key characteristics. The scale of his achievement has been phenomenal, and he’s really the creator of the cognitive dissonance we see today in relation to race. In other words everyone professes to believe that there are no racially-based differences in characteristics or innate intelligence, despite being simultaneously overwhelmed with evidence to the contrary. This cognitive dissonance, in believing what your eyes and ears tell you is untrue, has proven to be an invaluable tool in hastening the destruction of European-based culture. Reminds me of the old Groucho Marx quip ‘are you going to believe me …… or the evidence of your own eyes?’
Freud proposed the theory of a universal human nature (”the common basis of human life”) and then theorised that all individual differences resulted from environmental influences. These influences in turn (he postulated) derived from a repressive, inhumane society, traditional institutions and the socio-religious categorizations of gentile society. Anti-Semitism could thus be explained as a form of gentile psychopathology resulting from projections, repressions, and reaction formations stemming ultimately from a pathology-inducing society. In other words if you disagreed you were a nutcase!
Lévi-Strauss created a whole new school of thought devoted to cultural relativism (which is a nice was of saying the West bad, everyone else good). In particular he fostered the concept that Third World cultures, irrespective of how awful they were, (see my post here) had to be not alone preserved but treasured. This naturally undermined European universal ideas such as reason, religious tolerance, science, progress and liberal democracy. Lévi-Strauss’ concepts eventually lead to an academic ‘industry’ that today not only thrives, but thrives as never before. Every academic curriculum today is infested with ‘Black Studies’ and ‘White Studies’ and increasingly, courses related to Islam. All needless to say, focus on the same objective, demonising white Christian culture and extolling the virtues of its opposites.
The so-called Frankfurt School consolidated and built on these intellectual foundations into a programme geared to abolishing cohesive and nationalistic gentile groups and their associated group norms. Using Freud they presented them as manifestations of psychopathology, and where membership of Christian religions and close family relationships indicated psychiatric disorder.
The impact of this intellectual warfare has been successful to a degree its originators could scarcely have imagined, and can be said to be embodied in multiculturalism. Here is where the most serious, fundamental and intractable damage to the west has occurred. I say this because while you can argue with ideas and intellectual frameworks, mass Third World immigration to the west (the fundamental prerequisite for multiculturalism) and the consequent diluting of the white gene pool, cannot be undone.
For instance the US, Britain and France, arguably the most powerful and influential western nations, have been fundamentally, and irredeemably, changed over the last fifty years or so. If you’re a regular reader of this blog you’ll realise the catastrophic impact this has had in terms of increased crime, racial and ethnic strife, welfare dependence, compounded by a general dumbing down and an overall degeneration of social cohesion.
Mass immigration means borders have to be opened up. Again, Jewish groups lead this particular war. They still do. I might add that it’s only the west’s borders that have to be opened. Asia, Africa and the Middle East were all happily, for them, exempted from this requirement. And they still are. There’s no point in going over all the details. Suffice to say that Jewish politicians of every hue, academics, business leaders, and even some trade unionists, relentlessly championed mass immigration from non-European sources.
S. M. Neuringer (himself Jewish) informs us that “In order to sway immigration in a liberal direction, Jewish spokespersons and organizations demonstrated a degree of energy unsurpassed by any other interested pressure group. Immigration had constituted a prime object of concern for practically every major Jewish defence and community relations organization. Over the years, their spokespersons had assiduously attended congressional hearings, and the Jewish effort was of the utmost importance in establishing and financing such non-sectarian groups as the National Liberal Immigration League and the Citizens Committee for Displaced Persons.”
He could have added that this enthusiasm was confined entirely to immigrants from the Third World.
Dominance of “minority rights” groups such as the ACLU, NAACP and the SPLC in the US also provided invaluable platforms to further these ends and to exacerbate their impact by undermining segregation.
Even anti-Semitic immigrants are encouraged
We know that there’s been a sharp increase in anti-Semitism in Europe in recent years. We also know that it’s entirely down to the mass influx of Muslim cultural enrichers. You’d imagine then that Jewish organisations here would strongly advocate the prohibition of further Islamic immigration. But intriguingly the opposite is the case.
Political parties that oppose Muslim immigration and by extension the anti-Semitism of those immigrants are denounced by Jewish groups as neo-Nazis throughout Europe. For example The Dutch daily paper ‘De Pers’ (04-06-2010) pointed out that only 2% of Dutch Jews votes for Gerd Wilders compared to 25% of the native Dutch
The same Jewish groups seem to do everything possible to play down Muslim involvement and encourage further immigration. We can see a good example of this in Sweden, where Jews have been virtually driven out of Malmo by Religion Of Peaceniks. Yet listen to Barbara Spectre, who set up and runs an Institute of Jewish learning in Stockholm explaining things perfectly:
“I think that there is a resurgence of anti-Semitism because at this point in time Europe has not yet learned how to be multicultural. Europe is not going to be the monolithic societies that they once were in the last century. Jews are going to be at the center of that; it’s a huge transformation to make they are now going into a multicultural mode and Jews will be resented because of our leading role, but without that leading role and without that transformation Europe will not survive.”
In effect she’s saying that Jews will put up with attacks from Muslims, and unpopularity with Europeans due to Jewish support of mass immigration, but that the eventual multiculti nirvana will make it worthwhile.
Or is it? All will shortly be revealed.
The pivotal role of ‘hate’ legislation
How has the anti-white, multiculti project been so successful? Successful to the extent that today certain places and institutions in the west, created exclusively by and for white people, can be described as ‘hideously white’ by some dusky-skinned interloper from the arse-end of nowhere? Whereby any attempt at even implicit white separatism (clubs, schools, residential areas etc.) is vigorously pursued and countered by forced integration via school bussing, Section 8 housing measures and a panoply of big stick legislation.
And therein lies one of the cornerstones of the agenda’s success. A virtual tsunami of ‘human rights’ and ‘hate’ legislation. Ostensibly aimed at curtailing speech advocating violence against ethnic or religious minorities, this has morphed into a catch-all for prohibiting anything that conflicts with the multi-cult, PC, mass immigration agenda. In practice it’s worked out so that white gentiles, and only white gentiles, are prosecuted under its terms. In the US the usual suspects, the Anti-Defamation League, Southern Poverty Law Center, the Center for Democratic Renewal and the American Civil Liberties Union – all either fully Jewish or controlled by Jews – have been its main drivers and enforcers.
And it’s not only in America. For example in Australia also Jewish organisations have been leading the push to criminalise unacceptable speech. Andrew Fraser, a former professor of public law at Macquarie University in Sydney, landed in severe legal trouble for suggesting that “once black African colonies in Australia grow in size and in confidence, one can reasonably expect a number of social problems and rising levels of crime and violence.”
This should have been as controversial as saying the sun rises in the east, yet an African immigrant saw fit to institute charges against him. In fact Fraser noted that the process had actually been instigated by “several organized Jewish groups that boast openly of the campaign they have organized against me” citing articles in Jewish newspapers. Fraser wrote that Jewish individuals and organisations had acted “to further their shared ethnic interest in the growth of a multi-racial society in Australia.”
The effect of such legislation and practice has been to define a whole range of topics as outside the scope of normal discourse. Offenders in business, academia or the media transgress at their peril. At best your career can be ruined, at worst you could face criminal charges capable of sending you to jail and/or bankrupting you.
Hollywood creates a new fantasy world
For better or worse, well, worse actually, Hollywood, the TV networks and the major advertising agencies represent the de facto arbiters of contemporary western culture. These institutions are dominated by Jews, allied to a cohort of like-minded left liberal gentiles. From them has emanated, over the last fifty years or so, a relentless unending brainwashing exercise hardly seen on this side of what was the Iron Curtain.
And if you have any doubt as to Jewish control, consider this extract from an article from the LA Times in December 2008. “I have never been so upset by a poll in my life. Only 22% of Americans now believe "the movie and television industries are pretty much run by Jews," down from nearly 50% in 1964. The Anti-Defamation League, which released the poll results last month, sees in these numbers a victory against stereotyping. Actually, it just shows how dumb America has gotten. Jews totally run Hollywood.”
The writer then went on to demonstrate, in devastating detail, just how deep and wide this control really is.
All of this has lead to the creation of a new fantasy world, as divorced from reality as the world of Harry Potter. Everywhere we look we see blacks and other non-whites portrayed in a favourable light, whites the opposite. Blacks are judges, scientists, professors, and honest policemen fighting crooked whites. They’re even loyal family men, for Chissake! The ‘Nobel Savage’ is portrayed as just that – pure and noble until corrupted by the whites. We’ve even had a number of security-related ads which portrayed white burglars breaking into black homes!
All in flagrant defiance of reality, needless to say. But this is where the institutionalising of the cognitive dissonance I referred to earlier comes into play. Whites have now to a greater or lesser degree internalised these fantasies. Which in turn facilitates the acceptance of their ‘guilt’ and their accommodating to an agenda for what is in effect their destruction as a distinct ethnie. A critical outcome of this is their accepting the normalising of black/white sexuality. We are bombarded, relentlessly, unceasingly with miscegenation propaganda in film, the MSM and the advertising realm. And have been for fifty years. Even the US Army now has a ‘safe sex’ ad featuring, quelle surprise? a black male and a blonde female. More than anything else this normalisation, added to the mass immigration of blacks into white countries, sows the seeds of white destruction. Because it cannot be reversed.
The Soros agenda
Which brings me to a more sinister possibility via the remarkable George Soros. Now full disclosure here: George and I are friends. He emails me regularly and refers to me as his friend. Ok, so there are about 12 million other recipients of these emails, but….. Now I admit that George’s Open Society Initiatives does have a few good elements.
And some not so good elements.
I have in mind particularly his Public Health Program in Eastern Europe where ‘health’ manifests itself in strange forms. These include reducing the ‘unhealthy’ role of family and church on students, which “still carries an imprint of nationalist, sexist, racist, and homophobic prejudices rampant in the society at large.” There was a time when I'd have agreed 100% with this, but, well, what’s it actually got to do with health?
Maybe this becomes clearer if we look at his “Women’s Health” programs in Central and South-Eastern Europe. George’s main goal here is “to improve the quality of abortion services.” Wha??? Yes, he has focused on the introduction of easily available abortion all over the region, and manual vacuum aspiration (MVA) abortion in Macedonia, Moldova, and Russia.
Now why would he want to encourage abortion in countries where the white population is actually declining precipitously, even without his, er, help? Why not focus entirely on the teeming hell holes of the Third World where they breed like lemmings, and once old enough to rob the travel costs, hightail it to the west?
A good question, I think you’ll agree, and one that I’ll return to shortly, if you’ll bear with me.
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury
So that's my ‘case for the prosecution’, as it were. In case you thing I'm partial, in conclusion I’ll hand over to a couple of Jewish sources to support it.
Leading activist Ben Wattenberg, for example, has said that “The non-Europeanization of America is heartening news of an almost transcendental quality.”
Going back a bit further we have Rabbi Rabbinovitch, stating at a special meeting of the emergency council of European Rabbis in Budapest on January 12th 1952: ‘Our control commission, in the interests of peace and wiping out interracial tension, will forbid the whites to cohabit with whites. The white women must cohabit with members of the dark races, the white men with black women. Thus the white race will disappear, for mixing the dark with the white means the end of the white man and our most dangerous enemy will become only a memory.’
I could cite a hundred such examples.
A question of motivation
Now I come to the third question: Why did Jews do what I've just found them guilty of?
Kevin McDonald claims that Jewish intellectual and political movements “are attempts to alter Western societies in a manner that would neutralize or end anti-Semitism and enhance the prospects for Jewish group continuity.” In other words to lessen the power of the European-derived majority in ‘western’ countries in order to prevent the development of an ethnically homogenous anti-Jewish movement.
Earl Raab, a prominent Jewish activist explained why Jews have led immigration "reform” movements that favour non-whites. “We [Jews] have been nourishing the American climate of opposition to bigotry for about half a century. The Census Bureau has just reported that about half of the American population will soon be non-white or non-European. We have tipped beyond the point where a Nazi-Aryan party will be able to prevail in this country”
And indeed common sense, and reputable research, support this view. Research by Triandis (1990, 1991) on cross-cultural differences in individualism and collectivism indicates that anti-Semitism would be lowest in individualist societies rather than societies that are collectivist and homogeneous Levinson also notes that individuals who themselves belong to groups with a strong in-group ideology, such as sororities, are more likely to be more anti-Semitic.
A less charitable interpretation
But then there’s also a less charitable interpretation,, succinctly presented in an earlier comment about a year ago by "Ezra" to this blog which I noted at the time. He (she?) said “Jews believe that once the rest of the world has fallen far enough, they will reign by default because they are racist, cohesive, disciplined and clever enough remain intact and standing whereas everyone else has been dumbed down, indoctrinated, isolated and atomized through utilization of Government, mass media and culture to impose the corrosive Judeo-fascist design upon society.”
But that might ring a bell with Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, “spiritual” mentor of the fundamentalist Shas party, a key member of the ruling coalition in Israel. He reportedly said during a Sabbath homily that "the sole purpose of non-Jews is to serve Jews."
Thomas Sowell ascribes part of the explanation to the fact that “Jews emerged from the ghetto with hostility toward the culture around them” and “Jewish hostility toward the culture of non-Jews has been a constant threat throughout Jewish history”
We can also see a similar and consistent theme running through Soros’s beliefs: that all countries are basically social arrangements, artificial, temporary and potentially dangerous. A plethora of quotes from his writings will make it clear that he thinks that owing allegiance to any of them is inherently irrational, and attaching one’s personal loyalty to it is absurd. Like Marx’s proletarian, or Stalin’s rootless cosmopolitans, Soros knows of no loyalty to a concrete country.
As we saw earlier, Freud believed that by undermining gentiles’ pride in themselves, psychoanalysis would weaken anti-Semitism. Freud also spoke of the “many dark emotional powers” that bonded Jews together. MacDonald finds similar motivations in the work of Franz Boas and in that of the Frankfurt school.
So, in summarising motivation we can say that their past persecution has given Jews not only a negative attitude toward white gentiles, but a desire to protect themselves from further persecution. And, some would say, driven by their ‘eye for an eye’ and ‘never forgive, never forget’ mentality, a taste for revenge. The destruction of white gentiles and our culture ostensibly serves both these purposes.
And why single us out? Well, first we’re the ones who caused almost all of their historical grief, and, as we’ve demonstrated time and again, the only ones intelligent and resourceful enough to do it again on a massive scale.
Do as I say, not as I do.
Before leaving this section I'd like to provide a few morsels for those of you who like irony, as most Jews see no problem in openly identifying with Israel and Jewish civilization generally. Here’s an egregious example from Isi Leibler, a long-standing and staunch defender of Australian multiculturalism. He’s fought tooth and nail for mass immigration from the Third World. He has bitterly opposed any mention of resurrecting the ‘white Australia’ policy and was one of those attacking Professor Fraser.
Yet here’s what Isi says about Israel: “This is a country which was set up and created as a Jewish country for the Jews”. Interestingly, this was told to a Jerusalem newspaper, not an Australian one. Only last month Netenyahu proclaimed “We must stop the mass entry of illegal migrant workers because of the very serious threat to the character and future to the state of Israel,” Just this week I read that Israel is building a ‘detention facility’ in the desert to hold illegal immigrants. Netenhayu explains that letting these into Israel proper would have “very harsh repercussions on the character and future of the state of Israel” Such attitudes are widespread, and new Israeli legislation will deny citizenship even to the spouses of Jews if such were non-Jewish. Even without this of course Israel’s Law of Return is blatantly based on race and religion determinants (based on tracing descent to a Jewish mother) – the ultimate bugbears if practiced in the west.
Again, miscegenation, marrying outside the race or group, is viewed in the most serious terms by Jews, even secular ones. I remember as a kid the ceremonial ‘burying’ in the case of the Goldberg family here in Cork when one of them married out. But any white daft enough to proclaim he’d never marry a Jew or a black would also be buried - under an avalanche of PC bullshit.
However Affirmative Action (AA) is the arena where Jews have contrived the ultimate ‘and with a bound our hero was free’ manoeuvre. (I've also written about it here). Being the proponent of AA would seem to be an act of extreme altruism on the part of Jews. After all, as a white cognitive elite they’d be the first to bite the dust under the stampede of the worthy but underprivileged masses. Wouldn’t they? Well no, actually. As that post shows, AA, which has had such a catastrophic impact of on gentile whites, appears to have miraculously passed them by!
AA involves elite universities and major corporations actively recruiting minorities, always at the expense of better qualified whites. Yet for the most part, law schools, medical schools and other arenas of Jewish fiefdom have been left untouched by these quotas, for the simple fact that bringing a slew of minorities into these places would upset the applecart of Jewish monopoly in these fields.
Here’s just one example from taken from Harvard admission statistics.
Ron Unz, in an article in the Wall Street Journal provided us with the following chart which shows the full extent of Jewish over-representation and gentile white under-representation. Due to a highly active AA policy at the university, blacks and Hispanics are over-represented based on IQ, although under-represented given their ratio of the overall population. Gentile whites on the other hand are vastly under-represented – by orders of magnitude, as the chart shows. However, the real gem is the Jewish figure. They’re over-represented by a factor of nearly ten!
Unz concluded his article by pointing out the uncomfortable fact: “Thus, it appears that Jews and Asians (Asians not represented on the chart) constitute approximately half of Harvard’s student body, leaving the other half for the remaining 95% of America.” If you want to know, additional analysis showed that the big, big losers were low-income gentile whites.
So congratulations guys (and tough luck goys!) for pulling off such a stunt.
Is all of this really in Jews’ ongoing interests?
The previous section showed us that there’s a massive double standard prevailing under which Jews as an ethnic group, and Israel as a Jewish ethno-state, benefit hugely. We’ve also seen how the overall undermining of traditional white gentile society has been unimaginably successful.
But here I posit the question, are these developments ultimately in the interests of Jews?
If things continue as they are, within a few decades the US will be like Brazil while most of western/northern Europe will be the way Blackburn, Malmo – or even Johannesburg – are today. A white (gentile and Jewish) cognitive elite will control the wealth and power, and will reside in comfort (if not in safety) while a vast, violent, poverty-stricken and crime-ridden underclass seethes in teeming slums.
Take a step back. Even when wealthy and relatively – I emphasise relatively - safe physically, I believe living in a violent, seriously unequal, crime-ridden balkanized society takes its toll on the elites of those societies, if only morally and psychologically. Are their ethnic and commercial interests optimised in such an environment? Will black, Hispanic and Muslim mobs quietly acquiesce to their dispossession the way white gentiles have done?
Already Religion of Peaceniks are behind the rise of violent anti-Semitism in many parts of Europe. As their numbers and confidence grow, so will their aggression. The ‘Zionists’ (read Jews) will be the primary target for their guns, bombs and knives. Have no doubt about that. “Kankerjood” (“cancer Jew”) has become a favorite insult among the Dutch Muslim community; some Swedish friends tell me that Muslims have begun greeting one another with the simple phrase ‘Kill Jews’ (as in, ‘Hey, kill Jews. How’s it going?’) Dutch and Belgian rap groups recorded ‘kankerjood’ songs with lyrics like ‘F--- the Jews, cancer Jews, the allochtonenwil come and kill you…’”
The bluff can last only so long
And Jews are also subject, by a form of osmosis, to the same miscegenation brainwashing as are gentile whites. While not succumbing so far at anything like the same rate. they cannot remain immune indefinitely. Anecdotal evidence suggests that in fact such out-breeding with darker races is increasing in recent years.
It also seems unlikely that Jews, as a white cognitive elite, can keep getting away with pushing all the cost of AA on to white gentiles. Huge numbers of AA seeking immigrants will put increasing pressure on the system, which will turn the spotlight on Jews’ unique position, and may also drive white gentiles to the point of open rebellion. Again, there are some signs that this is already starting to happen.
Getting to the meat: What do we mean by ‘Jews’?
Increasing numbers of Jews are beginning to cotton on to these implications. Which brings me to another, and maybe the second most important question of this post: To what extent can we talk about ‘Jews’ in all of these developments, and even more important, in future developments? In other words, what proportion of Jews were, and much more importantly, are now, involved in the undermining of white gentile society?
If a sizeable ratio of Jews did not and does not subscribe to or support the destruction of gentile white society, we, as gentile whites, are faced with a rich opportunity. The opportunity is that it opens us up to gaining the active support of those very Jews in our efforts. And if I have a lot of Jews supporting my agenda I get a warm feeling. Because the very characteristics that contributed so much to the success of their assault can now be brought to bear on the problems caused by that assault. The kind of characteristics I have in mind are superior intelligence, diligence and hard work, strong ethnic networking skills and relentlessness in pursuit of goals.
God knows, we can do with some of that. But we won't get it as things stand, even if we assume that there’s latent support out there. It seems to me that any potentially sympathetic Jewish reader of a white nationalist (I’ll use that term for convenience) website, or book, or any medium, in fact, would eventually start to feel out of place, if not downright unwelcome. Invariably there will be a section which excoriates ‘the Jews’, and this Jewish reader would, in due course, feel uncomfortable about progressing further.
This creates a vicious cycle, whereby ‘we’ blame the Jews, who understandably see themselves cast as the enemy, and hence become one, or are at least unwilling to help.
So, to the question: What proportion of Jews was responsible for the current debacle? What proportion actively promoted mass immigration from the Third World, affirmative action, miscegenation and the whole white male guilt trip? And if we establish that, we must then ask whether this proportion is fixed our changing, and if changing, by how much and in what direction.
There are Jews and Jews
Reading the earlier sections of this post you could perhaps draw the conclusion that all Jews, and only Jews, were responsible for the current predicament. But that’s in fact very far from the truth. At all stages strong Jewish voices opposed the agenda, and crucially, this opposition seems to be growing strongly.
Go back to Ron Unz, who blew the whistle on the unfairness Harvard admission practices. Unz is Jewish! And George Soros, usually presented as our bete noir, is most definitely not Numero Uno with his fellow Jews either.
Rabbi Mayer Schiller is a prominent Jewish thinker who argues in favour of racial separatism and the preservation of European and European-American culture and identity. He clearly admits that “group identity is a fundamental need of all men” and “Europeans, White people and those attached to traditional faiths and lifestyles of the West are told by the powers-that-be that they alone among mankind's tribes are forbidden to have or even articulate a collective identity”
Robert Weissberg is Jewish and a former professor of political science at UI Champaign/Urbana. He explains that even though American Jews are largely intimidated, scared, and disgusted by blacks, so many of them support black (read: anti-white) causes because they have a compulsive and irrational – his word - fear of white Christians. He believes that these feelings are changing.
And remember the vital article in the LA Times that blew the gaff on Jewish control of Hollywood? Well, that was written by Joel Stein – who is Jewish.
Steven Steinlight, a senior policy analyst at the Center for Immigration Studies and a former staff member at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum and AJC believes that present immigration policy no longer serves Jewish interests. He believes the new immigrants are less likely to be sympathetic to Israel and because they are more likely to view Jews as the wealthiest and most powerful group in the U.S.—and thus a potential enemy—rather than as victims of the Holocaust. He is particularly worried about the consequences of Islamic fundamentalism among Muslim immigrants, especially for Israel, and he condemns the “savage hatred for America and American values” among the fundamentalists.
He also mentioned Hispanics. Far from being grateful to Jews for their immigration support, a number of polls, including one commissioned for the ADL (I love it!) showed a higher level of anti-Semitism among Latin American immigrants than for any other group of Americans.
Here’s another item: William J Robinson, a Jewish sociology professor at the University of California–Santa Barbara, sent an email to his students juxtaposing what he termed "parallel images of Nazis and Israelis" — Jews victimized during the Holocaust and Palestinians attacked by Israel during the recent Gaza invasion. And yes, I did say Jewish sociology professor!
Most Jews support the Arizona immigration law
Most significantly, despite the massive support for open borders in the US from Jewish organizations, Jews on average show far less support for these measures. In fact their support for Arizona’s new immigration law is not much different to that of the average gentile white. A recent survey by the American Jewish Committee showed that fifty-two percent of the respondents supported the law, while 46 percent were against.
“What we’ve found is a gigantic gulf between the pulpit and the pew [on the issue], and this is true of every religion in America, including Jews,” said Steven Steinlight. “Not only is it a slam dunk that Americans don’t support illegal immigration or amnesty, but Jews are no different.”
This distinction is described by James Petras, a strong critic of the American-Israeli nexus, as one in which an organized, active minority drives the major Zionist organizations and their billionaire camp followers. And it is always the organised, zealous and well-financed minority, which assumes 'legitimate' claim to speak 'for the community.’”
In other words, the guilty ones in the context of this post are not ordinary Jews, rather what Petras describes as the organized, active minority… and their billionaire camp followers.
I see this as a crucial distinction, and central to a proposition I’ll make shortly.
Some other perspectives
If you sampled the politics of gentile whites who have an average IQ of 115 I’ll bet you’d find they’d be disproportionably ‘liberal/progressive’. Why? Well, who knows? But I'd say a number of factors contribute. They’d share a patrician distaste for ‘white trash’ and their reactionary views, they can indulge their moral superiority in relation to minorities without having to live among them, and they can preen on their superior intelligence, as evidenced by those very views. Now it so happens that Ashkenazi Jews, on average, have IQs of 115 or so. Why then should they not evince similar views? In other words, the criticism I levelled earlier against Jews can be explained, at least in part, by their high IQs.
Their animus towards the majority is also surely replicated among other minorities, wherever they may be. Blacks in white society immediately spring to mind, but what about Muslims in the West, Hispanics in the US or gypsies, who truly loathe majority society? So if Jews do or did feel this animosity, as a minority they’re certainly not alone.
And a final thought: I mentioned how Ashkenazi Jews have average IQs of about 115. As a vast body of research shows, those with that level of intelligence are characterised by high levels of achievement. I think Jews are in addition more likely to be driven, ambitious and relentless. Is it any wonder then that they seem to take leading roles in everything? A bit like Europeans in Africa, come to think of it.
So here’s my position. Yes, Jews were the prime movers in the subversion of white gentile society. Yes, they need to be called out on that as I have done. However, as I hope I’ve shown, Jews are far from being a monolithic entity, and the evidence suggests that the majority of ‘ordinary’ Jews may in fact be receptive to the defence of white gentile society, if for no other reason than that it’s a lot more palatable than the alternatives.
The fact that they were able to achieve such destruction shows their power and capabilities. Would it not vastly enhance our cause had we a sizeable proportion, perhaps even a large majority, fighting on ‘our’ side? Yes, surely. But we’ll never know if they continue, en mass, to be demonised in almost every white gentile forum.
So my proposal is to hold out the hand of friendship to decent ordinary Jews who face pretty much the same challenges as we do. For a start the blanket condemnations of ‘the Jews’ for the collapse of white gentile society must stop, or at least become more nuanced. We racially conscious gentiles must accept that we are not innocent victims cruelly deceived and exploited by alien masters. Rather, the transformations that I, for one, so bitterly resent took place in our own countries, controlled by our own people, and we must accept responsibility for them.
We therefore should seek to convince ordinary Jews that they have more in common with us than with the “organized, active minority… and their billionaire camp followers.” We sure as hell won’t do that by constantly attacking Jews in general .Of course, we also need some more prominent Jewish figures (I've already mentioned a few) to publicly acknowledge the validity of ‘our’ concerns and that we’re not all closet Nazis secretly plotting a new Holocaust. Many of them too must be fed up of killing Nazism, digging it up, killing it again, ad nauseam.
I think this is, by a wide margin, the single most important challenge - and opportunity -facing us now. It seems crazy not to consider obtaining the support of the most effective operators on the planet.
Am I not correct?
And think of this: What would we have lost if – and I don’t think this will happen - we’re rebuffed?
In effect we’d have lost nothing.
Please, on all sides, consider this post with an open mind.
Wednesday, 15 December 2010
Tuesday, 14 December 2010
MSM coverage of the recent Swedish bombing underlines how deep into dhimmitude we’ve fallen. RTE, Ireland’s state broadcaster provided two bullet-point background information items like this:
* Perpetrator was of Iraqi origin, and a resident of Sweden
* Misunderstood meaning of Islam
No, your eyes are not deceiving you. This was the written information RTE sought to provide us with. One of the many questions that leapt to mind was who knew at so early a stage that he ‘misunderstood the meaning of Islam’? Second, what the hell was this doing representing 50% of the written background on the incident? What the hell has it got to do with anything? I could think of a dozen more pertinent issues. But obviously none are more important than brainwashing us into believing that Islam is a religion of peace.
And as I'm at it, I have a lovely bridge in London for sale…….
What we do know about the bomber is that old familiar refrain. I'm sure all the MSM do a copy and paste every time a terrorist is caught or blows himself up: ‘Ah sure he was a wonderful lad, loved girls, football, even took alcohol occasionally. But then he began to change…..’
Mysteriously, we’re lead to believe.
The remarkable thing is that this sudden change invariably occurs once the swell guy begins to take a greater interest in his religion. The more he learns about the Religion Of Peace, the more violent he becomes. And that's what happened in this case. The bomber got involved with the Islamic Centre in Luton. Now this particular establishment has form. Some of its members used to regularly protest at soldiers' homecoming parades, greeting the soldiers with placards saying "Anglian Soldiers: Butchers of Basra" and "Anglian Soldiers: cowards, killers, extremists". Naturally enough, even the mild-mannered Brits got a bit pissed off at this and set fire to the Center last year.
So here's the situation: We have a regular non-strict Muslim who goes to a mosque/Islamic Center whose membership includes quite a few extremists. He himself then becomes an extremist. At this point may I withdraw Occam’s Razor from its sheath and apply it to this situation? The Razor would surely suggest that he became radicalised at the mosque, would it not?
But we now know that's not true. Not true at all.
And how do we know?
Well, because the head of the mosque told us! And that's good enough for me. I saw him myself, in an interview on Sky News. With a wide-eyed ‘reporter’, nodding like a parakeet, gratefully and unquestioningly relaying the mullah’s words. Not only did he not become radicalised at the mosque, apparently the gentle people there became alarmed at how radical he had become! They tried to talk him out of it! Given that he planned violent jihad against the west, could they not have gone a wee bit further and reported him to the police.
Well, no, actually.
‘It’s not our job to do the work of the police, and we wouldn’t betray a fellow Muslim’ the mullah acknowledged, forgetting momentarily, to keep up the taqqiya.
Then again, maybe he didn’t forget, he just didn’t bother. Britain has now become so dhimmified and sunk in self-abasement that he felt it wasn’t really necessary.
And he’d have been right.
Sunday, 12 December 2010
The right of return is being claimed by thirty-three founding petitioners who can trace their descent from five European nations: Netherlands, France Germany, UK, Switzerland. I'm delighted to support this effort in whatever way I can. Please pass on the details to any possible supporters and also log on and sign the petitions.
Here are the links
The African White Refugees Petition:
Saturday, 11 December 2010
In which case British working class life must never be dull. In the last few weeks alone - within a tiny community of a few dozen souls in a single small street - we’ve had teenage runaway lesbians, multiple adulteries, the local factory burned down, child abuse, domestic violence, kidnapping, murder, a huge gas explosion and a tram appearing from the skies and landing on top of everyone there. That's more excitement than I've seen in my town over the last half century.
But who am I to argue when the chattering classes assure us all of its authenticity? Which brings me back to the title of this post. You see, I was always under the impression that black people generally were not too bright, lazy, incompetent, violent, welfare-dependent and basically requiring whites to organise everything for them.
But Corrie’s proved me wrong!
Because this gritty authentic drama revealed all by the response to the combined disasters (explosion and the tram landing on everyone’s head). The lead rescuers, doctors, firemen, policemen, clergymen were all blacks, who took immediate and effective control, cool, calm, decisive, while their confused white underlings haplessly flapped about. And in case you're wondering, they didn't pilfer a thing nor commit a single rape between them.
Honestly, I felt a swelling of emotion and actually cried out to Lady Savant ‘where would we be without our blacks?’
I thought she gave me a somewhat strange look at that point, but it was, as they say, a learning experience. Now I must go back and rewrite all those earlier posts.
Friday, 10 December 2010
But it can be very significant. For instance it's the difference between helping your Uncle Jack off a horse and helping your uncle jack off a horse.
So be aware.
Wednesday, 8 December 2010
A period of formal hand-wringing appears to have been the official response and the situation has been described as “very worrying" no less, by Helén Ängmo, director of the Swedish National Agency for Education. What’s the cause of the spectacular decline? Well, it’s hard to determine from reading the reaction of the Swedish media.
Buried at the end of one report I see a comment, in tiny print, which provides a clue.
“For students with foreign backgrounds born in Sweden, 30 percent failed to meet basic reading levels. In terms of students of foreign origin who were born abroad, the figure was 48 percent, compared with Swedish students, at 14 percent. Although a lot of the differences can be explained by socio-economic backgrounds."
Well of course!
The same Helén Ängmo who found the results very worrying also found them "very surprising".
Well of course – again!
I mean, who could have guessed that flooding the country with waves of violent, illiterate, dehumanised, interbred one dimensional simpletons wasn’t a winning educational strategy?
Not me, that’s for sure
I also note that “Swedish” footballer Dulee Johnson has been cleared of rape charges, the court ruling that the evidence was ‘insufficient to convict’. I always believed him innocent. I mean, could you imagine a Liberian raping a white girl? Having said that, Dulee has form. He was convicted of drink driving on several occasions, as well as assaulting his then-girlfriend in 2005, receiving a sentence of 60 days community service.
In view of this record and the recent charges the Swedish authorities ordered him deported back to Liberia. Sorry, I got that wrong. In fact they’ve just given him full Swedish citizenship!
The Grand Guignol horror show that is Sweden’s self-destruction rolls on.
Monday, 6 December 2010
Wikileaks? There is an easy way to secure all government documents, and to prevent any further security leaks.
Keep all of America's classified documents in the same filing cabinet as President Obama's college transcripts, passport information, nationality documents and birth certificate(s).
Saturday, 4 December 2010
Play and enjoy.
But my joy was tempered with other news from Austria. Here a local man was fined €800 because his yodelling offended his next-door Muslim neighbours. The mad judges ruled he “could have tried to offend them and ridicule their belief.”
.I swear – I'm not making this up.
Still, I believe the balance from these two stories to be highly positive. First that a parliamentarian can say what he did and, far from being shouted down (the usual response) was actually applauded by his fellow legislators. As for the yodeling incident, exasperating in itself but I believe that in the long term this kind of thing will translate into a popular democratic revolt.
Friday, 3 December 2010
Jewish women are marrying for love.
The most highly-paid job is now jury duty
The Mafia is laying off judges.