Posted by NomoreH!b on Sat, 28 Apr 2007 22:57 | #

Looks like long term, the US faces a square off in which mormons, hispanics and hasids are the big groups. Now, there are some high reproducing groups like the Hutterites that just don’t form towns—so they wouldn’t show up in this measure. Still, if present trends continue, the US of the future will be much more Hispanic, Hasid and Mormon.

Now, I wonder how Mormons will like continuing in their subordinate role like they have in Las Vegas?

Posted by Spawn Central on Sun, 29 Apr 2007 02:44 | #

The Hasids form the most hardcore, true-believer Jewish supremacist group on the planet…  Hasids in New York City neighborhoods won’t even make eye contact with gentiles to avoid “spiritual contamination”.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 29 Apr 2007 04:32 | #

It’s almost a tautology that women’s lib cannot have gained a firm foothold among any group that is increasing in number, since women’s lib forbids women to get pregnant( * ), marry( * ), or have positive feelings for babies, children, or men( * ).  Hasidic Jews absolutely reject women’s lib for example, and their numbers are growing nicely.  Mormons ditto though no group in the table rejects women’s lib so decisively as the Hasids.  Hispanic Catholics and Orthodox Jews probably reject it to the same degree as each other, both less than the Hasids and Mormons (some Orthodox Jews endorse women’s lib:  think of Senator Joe Lieberman, who describes himself as an Orthodox Jew but enthusiastically embraces the entire range of degenerate women’s lib insanity).  I would imagine Red Indian tribes living on reservations aren’t big into women’s lib but that would seem more because they don’t have a choice in the matter, lacking the material wherewithal to indulge.
______

( *  Women’s lib allows exceptions if the woman is white and the pregnancy by a Negro man, the marriage to a Negro man, or the men, children, or babies the woman has warm feelings for are Negro, Mexican, Oriental, Papua-New-Guinean, or Australian Aborigine — or Subcons in certain cases, meaning as long as they’re NOT light-skinned and high-caste)

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 29 Apr 2007 04:57 | #

“The Hasids form the most hardcore, true-believer Jewish supremacist group on the planet… Hasids in New York City neighborhoods won’t even make eye contact with gentiles to avoid ‘spiritual contamination.’ “  (—Spawn Central)

The Hasids don’t bother anybody and aren’t the ones doing all the “Jewish damage” to society (open borders, etc.).  As for their exclusivity, a Hasid would consider his son or daughter equally “dead” if they married either a non-Hasidic Jew or a gentile.  The Hasids who don’t make eye contact with gentiles don’t make it with non-Hasidic Jews either and some don’t make it with members of rival Hasid sects.  The Hasids are like the Amish except their religion is in some ways weirder, their wrap-around sideburns look weirder, they accept electricity and cars, and they’re things like diamond traders and kosher butchers instead of farmers and buggy makers.  Amish and Hasid parents would be equally shocked if their children talked to your children and they’d call them back into the house immediately and tell them to keep away from your kind.  I like people like that.  I like people who preserve themselves instead of letting themselves be murdered by their racial/ethnic/class enemies.  There’s nothing whatsoever wrong with the Hasids.  I certainly wouldn’t want to be one, as I wouldn’t want to be an Amishman.  If I had to pick one I’d pick Amish because I’d rather be out in the fresh air in the countryside doing farm work than cooped up in an office trading diamonds and living in a neighborhood surrounded by Negroes on all sides, and the dangling sidelocks of the Hasidic men are unesthetic in the extreme.  But it’s a mistake to dislike the Hasids on account of the Jews:  they’ve not harmed anyone.  They strictly mind their own business, keep to themselves, and are upright folk.

Posted by Spawn Central on Sun, 29 Apr 2007 05:35 | #

The Hasids are like the Amish except their religion is in some ways weirder, their wrap-around sideburns look weirder, they accept electricity and cars, and they’re things like diamond traders and kosher butchers instead of farmers and buggy makers.

I question the sanity of “Fred Scrooby”. No two groups could be more different from a national security perspective.

Amish are a productive people that do not predate upon other ethnies. No nation is endangered by the presence of Amish, a community of well-groomed, genteel pacifists. 

Hasids as a denomination believe gentiles are “supernal refuse” above and beyond acceptance of the racist Talmudic scribblings. They’re basically Mossad-linked from bottom-to-top and serve as the shock troops of their race in every nation, offering up a committed body of Satyanim. Hasids are not at all like Amish who whilst keeping to themselves in marriage and society treat the rest of humanity with a basic decency.

Posted by Spawn Central, the Younger on Sun, 29 Apr 2007 05:45 | #

Hasids as a denomination believe gentiles are “supernal refuse” above and beyond acceptance of the racist Talmudic scribblings. They’re basically Mossad-linked from bottom-to-top and serve as the shock troops of their race in every nation, offering up a committed body of Satyanim.

That’s exactly right. See the following as a photographic illustration.

http://www.vanguardnewsnetwork.com/?p=1573

Posted by Spawn Central, the Senior on Sun, 29 Apr 2007 05:59 | #

Damn, son, those sinister-looking black-hatters look straight out of the Protocols of Learned Elders.

Seems they have a council in every nation.

Posted by anon on Sun, 29 Apr 2007 06:05 | #

http://www.nypress.com/print.cfm?content_id=14575
Hasidim did it quietly but produced visible results, doubling their population over the last 20 years.

Posted by doodlebug on Mon, 30 Apr 2007 05:25 | #

Fred S. wrote: The Hasids don’t bother anybody and aren’t the ones doing all the “Jewish damage” to society (open borders, etc.).  As for their exclusivity, a Hasid would consider his son or daughter equally “dead” if they married either a non-Hasidic Jew or a gentile. [end quote]

You are right that it is secular Jews who do the vast bulk of damage. But I would bet $ the Hasids are pro-open borders just like the other Jews. Very simply, it is in their interest as an internationally dispersed minority whose primary, almost only, loyalty is to their own group.

Also, there was a case a few months ago where some Jews had managed to get Christian symbols censored from public display; I have forgotten the details of the case, but a newspaper photo of the Jews celebrating their victory was a crowd of male Hasidim.

Also, Hasidim are probably more likely to cheat or exploit you as an individual than secular Jews are. They can rationalize it by appealing to the Talmud. Don’t forget that the Jews who troubled Europe in the Middle Ages and early modern times were scarcely different from today’s Haredim.

Also, I don’t think a Hasid would consider his child “as dead” for marrying a Mitnagdi, although he wouldn’t like it.

Welfare: the Amish are steadfastly against receiving welfare, even social security. It is a religious objection. In contrast, the Hasidim have no qualms about “looting the Egyptians.”

Someone mentioned Lieberman. He is one of the “Modern Orthodox” (motto: dress British, think Yiddish).  They are basically a half-way house between fundamentalism and modernism. Their children have a tendency to go one way or the other, eliciting fears that their “best of both worlds” movement may not be viable in the long run.

I do agree the Haredim (both branches) are much less of a problem than secular Jews, and that we could even collaborate for limited political objectives of mutual interest.  But they are hardly as neutral or innocuous as Fred paints them. Especially on immigration, they have a vested interest in open borders.

Posted by tigerbay on Mon, 30 Apr 2007 15:00 | #

The question is always not whether there’s a lot of harm, but how there’s a lot of harm:

London Jews embarrassed by Orthodox vote fraud

Isaac Leibowitz of the Conservative Party was given a six-month jail sentence; Zev Lieberman, a Liberal Democrat, was sentenced to four months. The two fervently Orthodox defendants were convicted in March of fraudulently adding names to London electoral rolls. The investigating officer called the case “the largest attempt to subvert the democratic process that I am aware of.” The case has embarrassed Britain’s Jewish community.  “Wider society tends to look at us as a homogenous group,” said a representative of one community organization.

But Samuel Heilman, author of “Defenders of the Faith: Inside Ultra-Orthodox Jewry,” said the lifestyle of fervently Orthodox communities makes it particularly important for them to have political influence. “They have huge financial needs,” said Heilman, a professor at Queens College, which is part of the City University of New York. Fervently Orthodox communities often do not have a “large number of people who are gainfully employed,” he said. “There is a growing tendency to study Torah as a full-time profession. Yeshivas have to provide stipends not only for students, but for their families.”

Government becomes the major source of funds for these communities, Heilman said. “There is less and less sympathy within the wider Jewish community to Orthodoxy, and therefore they are not willing to shell out money to support these folks,” he said. “The public sector is the last source of support. As a result, if these communities show that they can deliver votes, “political officials will give them what they want - subsidized housing, food stamps, education,” Heilman said.

http://www.jewishaz.com/jewishnews/010427/london.shtml

UK: Heroin Scandal Rocks London’s Devout Jewish Community

The Orthodox Jewish community has been shocked by a series of arrests of its members for alleged heroin smuggling.  Police and Customs inquiries are centering on a drugs link between Israel, Antwerp and London. A Talmudic scholar accused in Tel Aviv this month of laundering drugs money through his bank account. The north London Orthodox community is remaining tight-lipped about the arrests although it is thought to be severely embarrassed.

The Orthodox and ultra-orthodox communities of Stamford Hill and Golders Green in north London have a reputation for being largely crime-free.  While some members of the Orthodox community have been jailed in the past for large-scale VAT frauds and other white collar crime, it has never been associated with drugs or violent crime. The fact the arrests involve allegations of heroin has proved even more shocking.

http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v98.n624.a10.html

Posted by Spawn Central, the Senior on Mon, 30 Apr 2007 15:56 | #

Jewish political activism increases monotonically with religiosity, and this holds true for Hasids who are highly organized at the city, state, and national levels.

In keeping with their denomination’s racial fanaticism, Hasids truly believe they can do whatever the fuck they want to non-jews. (The males only—the womenfolk avoid the Book of Hate and keep house.) In contrast,  perhaps 80%-plus of secular Jews aren’t knowingly hostile to the majority populations and certainly would not approve of their leadership’s nation-destroying objectives if they were privy, which they’re probably not.

Posted by James Bowery on Mon, 30 Apr 2007 18:55 | #

I don’t think I recall any of the culprits listed within the Culture of Critique were these Hasids of which you speak.  “Political activism” isn’t necessarily virulent and it may be very necessary for the Hasids to accomplish, their within community, legitimate objectives such as control over their children’s education and removing the tax burden on family-owned residences—both being desirable objectives for any people.

Of course this doesn’t mean they are to be excused for vectorist practices where they arise—and in particular I object to the portion of their anti-Zionist practices that arise from Jewish supremacist beliefs documented by Richard Faussette in his recent article “Niche Theory, Population Transfer, and The Origin of the Anti-Semitic Cycle” Occidental Quarterly, Vol. 6 No. 4 - Winter 2006-2007.  If they insist on living in diaspora, they must do more than be neutral toward nation-destroying practices of Jews—they must obviously and effectively oppose such practices as Rabbi Mayer Schiller has done.

Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 02 May 2007 23:40 | #

Svi, what the heck does “scummy” mean?  Are Amish scummy because they look down their noses at “English”?  If not, are Hasids scummy simply because they are Jews and not Christians?

Fine by me if religious fanatics think I am unclean or some Middle-Eastern breed of cattle.  They want to live apart.  I want to live apart.  No problem ... until they initiate action against me or mine.  Then they have declared themselves to be my opponent, and scummy might be the kindest thing I have to say about them.

But in the absence of such action I really have nothing to say about them.

Posted by Spawn Central, the Younger on Thu, 03 May 2007 03:53 | #

It appears that few here have any more than superficial familiarity with Hasidics, which isn’t too surprising given their somewhat limited population. Nevertheless, this population is extremely important.

Hasidic Jews are NOT isolationist. They follow the standard Jewish model of one-way exploitation.

Don’t think Amish. Think Southern plantation owners socially and maritally exclusional of blacks while simultaneously “exploiting” the darkies, then subtract chivalry and add “scumminess”.

Posted by James Bowery on Thu, 03 May 2007 16:50 | #

There is a case particularly important to me, as I was born in Iowa and value that State’s demographic characteristics, of Postville.  This is a well documented case where Hasids were instrumental vectorists, transforming part of Iowa’s demography by importing Mexicans workers.

Whether they were any worse than the agribusiness land barons who have benefited from land ownership centralizing policies of the government, I’m not sure, but I am sure that they did not distinguish themselves morally from their less religious cousins.

The followers of Aaron Rubashkin did harm to my people.