Jews shutting down debate.
A recent article in the JEWISHJOURNAL.COM entitled “The Professor the anti-Semites love,” is about the published works of Kevin MacDonald and is a good example of the techniques Jews use to ridicule and demean any publications they do not agree with.
I won’t comment on most of the psuedoscientific objections as we have seen them all before. But I will make note of some of the most egregious errors and omissions that they surely are aware of when this was written. Foremost, as always, they are quite upset with MacDonald’s assertion that Jews have, innately, very high mental abilities. However, Steven Pinker a couple of years ago was giving lectures on how Ashkenazi Jews were genetically superior to all other races/ethnies and how proud Jews should be of this fact. Steven Pinker is a darling of the Jewish community and highly regarded.
Second, the paper published last year by Harpending, et al., discussed how Jews became so smart, and some of the recessive genes that correlate with Jewish intelligence. That paper did not seem to generate the hysteria that MacDonald’s publications have, but it does vindicate what MacDonald has asserted.
They make assertions about his scholarship, including selecting only material that supports his bias, and yet most of his data is based on Jewish publications. When trashing an author, the Jews invariably claim that material was left out; too much material was not relevant, etc. It is a constant accusation that cannot be resolved because every book published has to select to some extent what is included and what must be left behind or the work would never be completed.
I do know that in many books that I read, I will compare what MacDonald has written, and he is invariably vindicated. His work grows stronger as time goes on—remembering that culture does change. MacDonald shows how the Jews pushed for open immigration from about 1924 and leading to the 1965 immigration act, opening up the floodgates. Since then of course business and numerous other advocates for open immigration have come to support the program for various reasons other than the original intent of the Jews.
The Jews lament how MacDonald’s works are finding a place on the neo-Nazis’ bookcases. That’s strange—I thought most neo-Nazis were mentally perverted illiterates! But his work is most assuredly finding its way into the elite’s bookcases, as the works are scholarly and easily defendable as solid science.
Posted by Matt Nuenke on Saturday, May 17, 2008 at 12:45 PM in
Comments (139) | Tell a friend
Comments:
Posted by Darren on May 17, 2008, 05:08 PM | #
One of the things that always strikes me is the hypocrisy of the Jewish community. They will stand behind all other people except normal and healthy gentile whites. They’ll rally behind minorities that are perceived to be oppressed. They’re already shouting “hurrah!” at the recent court decision in CA legalizing gay marriage.
When is the last time the ADL, SPLC, or any other group of organized and self-identified activist Jews have stood up for normal and healthy whites? Never.
Jews refuse to be criticized. When people like MacDonald cite factual historical data about Jewish group behavior, it is anti-Semitism. When a Jewish professor of sociology talks about “white skin privilege”, it is scholarly! When you call them out on this double standard, again you’re called an anti-Semite.
Posted by Gregory on May 17, 2008, 05:20 PM | #
Matt—thanks for posting more information on the trials of Dr. MacDonald.
For readers interested in the techniques used in this “war”, listen to the radio shows of Peter Schaenk found at http://www.reasonradionetwork.com. His shows on 5/8/08 and 5/9/08 are particularly good. Peter delves deeply into the structure of what he calls the “war of perception”.
Hoping it’s not considered tasteless here to plug such stuff. Thanks.
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on May 17, 2008, 07:30 PM | #
It is a constant accusation that cannot be resolved
I resolve it as a logical fallacy, essentially a claim that McDonald’s work is bad because it isn’t about something else; essentially, it’s bad because it’s about “the wrong subject.”
Am I wrong?
Posted by Skeptikos Examiner on May 17, 2008, 08:56 PM | #
I do neither trust nor like McDonald. Keyword controlled opposition! His claims on Jewish intellectual superiority are rather groundless and based on a very incomplete view of what intelligence really is. Taken out critical and abstract thinking Jews maybe rank at the top and the difference between females and males appears to be only tiny, but include critical and abstract thinking into the equation and things look quite differently. IQ” tests, since the Jew David Wechsler ("the beloved changer” - that’s the meaning of his name!) trowed out everything related to abstract and critical thinking in order to arrive at roughly gender and racial equality, do only measure raw intelligence at best, not the actual capacity to think. I call them “post-Wechsler tests”. Jews also have a better than average memory which makes them excel in the “education” we have today, the education they created, which is basically focused on memorizing huge amounts of, more often than not, not related information. When ever critical and abstract thinking are taking into account, European on average excel over Jews and males over females.
Also he goes a long with a lot of Jewish myths, puts out many half truths, and by this combination of myths and half-truths often arrives at wrong conclusions.
Posted by Guessedworker on May 17, 2008, 10:34 PM | #
Skeptikos Examiner,
Those are very interesting observations, particularly about the test performance variability by inclusion of critical and abstract thinking. Can you point me to the arguments, pro and contra if possible, for the inclusion of these facilities in IQ testing?
Posted by Darren on May 17, 2008, 11:28 PM | #
MacDonald is on our side, regardless of whether or not you want to “like” him or not.
Posted by 123 on May 18, 2008, 08:49 AM | #
Skeptikos Examiner,
excellent post, and it confirms my first hand experiences with jews at school, and explains the disconnect to their supposedly high IQ. Without thinking much and deep about it, my opinion had been, that the much touted high IQ of jews was one of their myths spread around due to their control of the media, thus your post makes a lot of sense to me.
Posted by Captainchaos on May 18, 2008, 04:19 PM | #
Wasn’t Pinker one of the guys who stepped up to put the kibosh on Dr. James Watson? Typical jewish bigwig, racial nationalism for them but mongrelization for us.
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 18, 2008, 06:13 PM | #
I for one am totally unimpressed with Pinker who long ago should’ve acknowledged the full range of race-reality but stubbornly refuses. It’s transparent dishonesty based on personal political and likely ethnic motivations. I have no respect for this man. Zero.
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 18, 2008, 06:18 PM | #
This is, in essence, another Jared Diamond, Steven Rose, Richard Lewontin, Leon Kamin, Stephen Jay Gould, Ashley Montagu, and Franz Boaz. I think this is where I came in, guys — been there, seen that, am looking for something new from this academic bunch. (Fat chance we’ll get it ...)
Posted by DavidL on May 19, 2008, 12:02 AM | #
Skeptikos and 123
Good thinking.
“Jews also have a better than average memory which makes them excel in the “education” we have today, the education they created, which is basically focused on memorizing huge amounts of, more often than not, not related information.”
Correct - if you Goyim play “our” game we’ll beat you most every time - it’s rigged in our favor
“it confirms my first hand experiences with jews at school, and explains the disconnect to their supposedly high IQ.”
Mine too. They’re brilliant middlemen - taking a “cut” for practically no effort expended - but original ideas...nada.
Again, thanks for your comments.
Posted by j on May 19, 2008, 05:04 PM | #
Prof. Macdonald writes that Jews are “hostile elites” in European societies, collectively working for the destruction of the same societies (he says) they basically rule. He collects anecdotes from 2000 years of anti-Jewish literature to build his case, and then he leads the reader to extract the operational conclusions.
I am a Jew and have read his work. Coming from the bona-fide and capable scholar he is, I conclude that, intellectually, he is dishonest and evil.
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 19, 2008, 05:28 PM | #
Here is commenter “j’s” own log entry on Prof. MacDonald.
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 19, 2008, 05:58 PM | #
The discussion in the MacDonald thread at “j’s” blog, which is between “j” and another Jewish guy, is of course an instantiation of my comment here: they don’t see it, they ain’t gonna see it no matter what you way, you can’t do anything about that, so just forget it and don’t fret over it which would a pure waste of time and energy — yours. You have better things to devote your time and energy to — making money for example, as “j” I think said last time he visited, if memory serves. Don’t sweat the small stuff. That’s small stuff. The big stuff is what you do, not what they say. David ben Gurion once said, in response to Jewish Israeli critics in regard to something or other he was doing, something they feared would look bad in the eyes of “World Opinion”: “It makes no difference what the goys say, it only makes a difference what the Jews do!” We goys can surely apply that piece of profound wisdom in reverse.
Posted by 357 on May 19, 2008, 06:32 PM | #
From “j’s” own log entry on Prof. MacDonald. He said: “ I for one know that no one of the hippy scene ever imagined the future as it developed.”
What a load of bull-capital-S-with-a-hit! Anyone around at the time who was over the age of six knew very well that the hippy scene was leading the white-race’s culture right down the tubes. Everyone (including the most uneducated Negroes) could plainly see what was coming. Even the drugged out hippies themselves, consciously, or at least intuitively, knew they were flushing traditional Western values down the toilet. Most of them did it anyway in order to be seen as “hip.” They were willing dupes led into a self destructive mindset by the leftist malcontents. So who are you trying to fool, j?
Posted by torgrim on May 19, 2008, 08:00 PM | #
From “j’s” web site;
“The movement was therefore initiated and led by an elite, but it was not aimed at advancing the interests of the unionized middle class. Indeed, the New Left regarded the working class as.....(from Prof. MacDonald)
“j"..."if I remember well, the word was *PIGS*, the movement, Prof. MacDonald, was anti-establishment, and union middle class was, at least then, establishment. Fat, well paid, secure, satisfied, *ESTABLISHMENT*.”
Yes, the hippy-New Left-anarcho nut jobs hated the white working man. I too was around and working at this time. NO, not in some university, or bagel shop. I was one of those, as you say, “fat, well paid, secure, satisfied, establishment types”....this just tells me, that you are one, or come from one, of the elite, that have no comprehension of what the white male worker is about. You sound like one of those that shouted, PIG..!
Your ignorance of the middle class white man is apparent.
Rubin, Hoffman, SDS, all of it was sick, it was a cancer on the body politic of my Nation! They shouted, ........
“Bring it all down man!” They did and they took their bows, now take the responsibility for the results!
Posted by vo on May 19, 2008, 08:02 PM | #
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/17/AR2008051702474_pf.html
This article on an immigration raid at a beef factory in the midwest U.S. is interesting. The company is the nation’s largest supplier of kosher beef. Aaron Rubashkin apparently runs a company with horrible business ethics, as well as disregard for environmental standards and child labor laws. The story will probably go ignored, aside from being a footnote in the immigration debate. To echo Fred’s attitude toward the ____, any criticism will be squashed and redirected to another aspect. I commented re: the kosher beef story on our locally ___ controlled news blog yesterday - it got no response -, but today there are no less than 5 lengthy diatribes on recent evilness being exhibited by American Christians.
Posted by James Bowery on May 19, 2008, 10:07 PM | #
Paraphrasing my response to the blog run by “j”—a response that has not yet appeared for some reason:
It is pretty hard to deny that Jews are parasites when virtually all of the proposals for separation come from non-Jews.
How much territory per capita would you “betters” be willing to cede to what the Founders of the US called “our posterity” in the Preamble to their Constitution?
Posted by melba peachtoast on May 20, 2008, 12:02 AM | #
I for one am totally unimpressed with Pinker...
Freddy, your opinion of him would not improve any if you saw how he dresses. Unless he’s improved recently.
Posted by Chestertonian on May 20, 2008, 01:15 AM | #
As a group, Jews are incapable of accepting responsibility for their actions. They seek power without culpability. They yearn to rule over others, yet despise those they would govern. They are incapable of putting themselves in other peoples shoes, and conversely, expect others to have empathy for them. They are sore losers and self pitying. They are sore winners and self aggrandizing. They are misers, yet squanders of the inheritance of nations. They have no sense of aesthetics. They are small minded and leave no great monuments. Their literature consists of curses of other peoples, criticisms of other’s cultures, and jealous bigotry of differing religions. They slander, defame, and antagonize as a child would for attention. They fight without honor, lose without grace, and plead without dignity. They live in fear, and fill the world with their ugly paranoia. They are a twisted people who’s fitting punishment would be to live and compete among other antisocial peoples (i.e. Gypsys, low-IQ inmates, etc).
Jews have nothing in common with the Western mindset. The sooner they go, the sooner we live.
Posted by Fr. John on May 20, 2008, 01:21 AM | #
“He collects anecdotes from 2000 years of anti-Jewish literature to build his case, and then he leads the reader to extract the operational conclusions.”
And the comments from the Church catholic, either eastern or western, over those last 2000 years are invalid, Why? Nice try, but NO.
For example: Blood Libel.
Jews have denied it, until the son of the Chief Rabbi in Italy published THE definitive book that clearly states it DID happen!
Bada-bing!
Then, the Jews backpeddle and take it off the presses. But an English translation is there, and has already been downloaded to thousands of computers, to REFUTE such slander (for all time!) of an honest academic, and to heap hot coals on your head for your dissembling and duplicitousness, ‘j’. [http://www.bloodpassover.com/]
The Church was correct, and real Hierarchs (before the Vatican II Council capitulated to the Deicides) have only corroborated this, and other valid criticisms of the evil that is Jewry. [i.e. Sergein Nilus, and the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion -http://www.roca.org/OA/89/89g.htm]
And even when Jewish journalists can twist history to their whim, and make a holy man such as Nilus no more than a lecher, (while they have Sarah Silverstein!) yet still the ‘truth’ is still ‘out there.’ Very much the same as, oh, like, say, Wilkomirski’s fraudulent ‘memoir,’ “Fragments”?
It’s gone beneath the radar now, but it was a book which Jews lauded as an ‘authentic holocaust memoir,’ until it was discovered that Wilkomirski was a)neither Jewish, nor had b)ever been at Auschitz!
But still, the jews had the audacity to state that ‘it must be true, for it resonated with them.’
Well, the same holds true for the West, and Christendom with Blessed Sergi Nilus. The ‘Protocols’ may be a forgery, but it says more truth about Jewry than anything else, and therefore it is true.
“A Count du Chayla testified that the Protocols were originally written in poor French, that Sergei Nilus seemed to doubt their authenticity but remarked: “What of it? Christ said wisdom came from an ass; why cannot truth come from a forgery?” [http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,748094-3,00.html]
“I am a Jew and have read his work. Coming from the bona-fide and capable scholar he is, I conclude that, intellectually, he is dishonest and evil.”
Pot calling kettle, come in kettle.
Until and unless they acknowledge that they KILLED God, ‘his blood be on us and on our children,’ is still the ‘watchword of OUR faith.’ Sh’ma!
End of story.
Posted by Darren on May 20, 2008, 05:41 AM | #
Prof. Macdonald writes that Jews are “hostile elites” in European societies, collectively working for the destruction of the same societies (he says)
How else do you frame the fact that Jews are, as a group, undermining the demographic integrity of white nations?
He collects anecdotes from 2000 years of anti-Jewish literature to build his case
No, he collects facts from a diverse array of factual - and often times Jewish - sources.
I am a Jew and have read his work. Coming from the bona-fide and capable scholar he is, I conclude that, intellectually, he is dishonest and evil.
On one hand, you accuse MacDonald of picking from anti-Jewish literature, but on the other you say he’s a bona fide scholar. Which is it?
Posted by the Narrator... on May 20, 2008, 02:44 PM | #
At the end of the article MacDonald states, ‘White people have legitimate ethnic interests. To the extent that that is all they believe, then we are on the same page...I don’t like to use words like white supremacists. You could say that Koreans in Korea are Korean supremacists if they want to maintain their culture. It is kind of a loaded word; it is a politically charged word of the left, basically, to pathologize any sense of having an ethnicity and culture by people like me. I reject that....to the extent that David Duke is trying to advance a white ethnic interest and so on, I don’t have any problem with that.’
This is a respectable and rather bold statement for a Professor, who is already under attack, to make in the JEWISH JOURNAL of all places.
He is wisely and articulately using this which hunt to further propound upon his beliefs.
This is a rather rare thing among academia; defending European-Americans and non PC research on Jewish Tribalism.
No one is ever going to say all the things each one of us will like or agree with, but Prof. MacDonald is showing considerable backbone in a place where others have crumbled under the persecution.
For that alone, he has, thus far, proved himself a Defender of The West.
How many of those do we have in academia?…
Posted by j on May 20, 2008, 03:23 PM | #
Darren,
Prof. Macdonald has a legitimate Ph.D. and publications, and his credentials are not in dispute. I come from math and engineering, so his methodology based anecdotes seems suspect to me, but then, this critique is not mine nor personal, but is shared by many numbers people regarding contemporary American social science. Answering your comment, since Macdonald uses the methodology of his academic branch, he must be considered a bona-fide academic scholar.
However, that is not much, since American universities are chock-full of academic branches (such as alternative medicine, Chinese medicine, psychoanalysis, even astrology, black studies, gender studies, etc.) which are not, in my view, science.
I find some of Prof. Macdonald’s insights valuable, like his explanation what Fr.John wants to express saying of people living today “They Killed God”. Other insights are weak and obviously false, like American Jews causing the flood of Third World immigration in the United States. We can start saying that the same phenomenon is happening in places where American Jews have no influence at all, like say Switzerland (about 1/3 foreign born), Spain, Australia, South Africa (millions of illegal immigrants from other, more miserable, African “countries"), Saudi Arabia, you name it. On the contrary, the efforts by Jewish organizations to open up the USA to Jewish immigration (who cares about the rest?) was a tragic failure, an absolute failure, and when open borders were needed, USA’s borders were hermetically sealed and thousands of Jewish refugees were sent back to be killed in Germany. Moreover, America did influence American colonies (in Latin America for example) to close their own borders to Jewish refugees. MacDonald magically transforms this terrible defeat in ... a powerful conspiration to destroy America.
Another weak insight is his analysis of the Gomulka period in Poland. Jews were very much opressed and discriminated against during the thousand years of Polish history. Not once Jews attained any political power, on the contrary, they were absolutely powerless and barely “tolerated”. Only once, in a short period under Soviet occupation, did a group of apostate Communist ethnic Jews attain political power in Poland. This short period, of about eight years, ended disastrously to the members of this group (they ended in jail or in exile), and then, it also caused the end of one thousand years of Jewish presence in Poland. The jewish community was basically expelled and Poland became Judenfrei. It was, in my eyes, a passing episode, but extreemely disastrous for Polish Jewry. Once agains, Prof. Macdonald’s magical mind transforms this short and failed phenomenon into an emblematic conspiracy of those powerful Jews.
therefore I feel Prof. Macdonald is an antisemite which means that he is not objective nor scientific, and has no place in legitimate academic debate.
Posted by the Narrator... on May 20, 2008, 04:47 PM | #
We can start saying that the same phenomenon is happening in places where American Jews have no influence at all, like say Switzerland (about 1/3 foreign born), Spain, Australia, South Africa (millions of illegal immigrants from other, more miserable, African “countries"), Saudi Arabia, you name it.
-j
So there are no Jews in Europe?
Also the extent of American Jewish influence is rather significant across the globe.
“It’s a list of “the world’s most powerful people,” 100 of the bankers and media moguls, publishers and image makers who shape the lives of billions. It’s an exclusive, insular club, one whose influence stretches around the globe but is concentrated strategically in the highest corridors of power.
More than half its members, at least by one count, are Jewish.”
-The Jerusalem Post October 12 2007
And it was a Jew, Emma Lazarus, who gave us the “Give us your wretched refuse” diatribe, and it was a Jew, Israel Zangwill, who introduced the phrase “Melting Pot” into the American vocabulary.
As for Jews being restricted in immigration numbers during WWII, that is thanks to the efforts of Racialists who pushed for the 1924 Immigration Act, which was vehemently opposed by Jews, who, in the person of Emmanuel Celler, overthrew it in 1965 leading to the flooding of America from the Third World.
Yes Whites cooperated with them, but the percentage of Jewish involvement in every anti-Western, anti-American movement, speaks volumes for a group who makes up no more than 2% of our population.
Kevin MacDonald’s research on this subject is rather good. Chapter 7 from his book, ‘Culture of Critique’ entitled ‘Jewish Involvement In Shaping US Immigration Policy’ can be seen in full at his website.
Is Prof. MacDonald anti-semitic?
Considering that Jewish Zealots and their defenders consider truth itself to be anti-Semitic, I suppose so…
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 20, 2008, 04:59 PM | #
I just googled him, Melba, and didn’t see anything too terrible — there was this, for example, at what appears to be a “Stuff White People Like” convention
http://www.hbes.com/Hbes/photos.05/photos-05.htm
and there were other photos of him in ordinary jackets and ties but nothing outrageous that I saw. Have you got a link?
(Here’s the web-site for those convention attendees by the way — their group is called “Stuff White People Like,” and they all look, act, think, and dress the same:
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 20, 2008, 05:13 PM | #
I won’t be replying to j by the way, who seems to be in the Jewish “just brazenly deny the obvious” mode, and replying to them when they’re in that mode is a time-waster if ever there was one: they’ll argue two-plus-two, they’ll argue the sun will rise tomorrow, they’ll argue water is wet. He’s read MacDonald who explains it better than anyone in this thread can: if that doesn’t suffice nothing will because either he’s determined not to open his eyes or he lacks certain synapses. Seems like a nice guy though.
Posted by James Bowery on May 20, 2008, 05:14 PM | #
Virtually all of the immigration flood into various, primarily Euroman, territories has occurred after the Post-WW II rise of US’s world influence, and after the US’s 1965 passage of the Immigration and Nationality Act, opening US territory to occupation by exploding world populations.
Moreover, the stated intent by Jews in supporting this act was to render the US so multicultural that it would be incapable of an ethnically-based political movement like that seen in National Socialist Germany.
Such paranoia invites the realization of its own fears.
We want our territory, that you politically hijacked and then “hocked” for your own purposes, back.
Posted by Darren on May 20, 2008, 06:07 PM | #
I come from math and engineering, so his methodology based anecdotes seems suspect to me, but then, this critique is not mine nor personal, but is shared by many numbers people regarding contemporary American social scienc
Be specific. Nobody cares about your academic credentials. Substantiate your argument.
Other insights are weak and obviously false, like American Jews causing the flood of Third World immigration in the United States.
This isn’t MacDonald’s argument. MacDonald argues that Jews have influenced society through their network of interest groups and manipulation of public opinion to cause support for such policies. He does not claim that Jews clandestinely overthrew the government and will of the people.
Indeed, MacDonald has a book looking at the historical nature of anti-Semitism looking at the periods of time where Jews were either in favor or out of favor and how they gained power while they were in favor, and vice verse.
Anyway, are you trying to deny the role of prominent Jewish congressmen and well-documented role of Jewish ethnic lobbying groups who wanted to open the borders to non-Whites because they feared rising anti-Semitism if the demographic proportion of Whites were not reduced?
You may not believe this argument, but it is a fact that is stated by many Jews. This is a good place to start: http://www.kevinmacdonald.net/ReplyHistory-2.htm
You can’t accuse MacDonald of cherry-picking from anti-Semitic or anti-Jewish sources because, well, the sources were often from Jews themselves!
We can start saying that the same phenomenon is happening in places where American Jews have no influence at all, like say Switzerland (about 1/3 foreign born)
You mean to say that American foreign policy has absolutely no effect in Europe, or that European Jewry has no influence on Swiss politics? LMAO! On the contrary, Europeans resent American cultural imperialism and the presence of Jews in the European political elite is rather well known (except to you).
On the contrary, the efforts by Jewish organizations to open up the USA to Jewish immigration (who cares about the rest?) was a tragic failure
Indeed, it was not until after WWII ended were Jewish groups able to use their holocaust fantasy stories upon the masses to gain emotional support for the opening of floodgates to more Jews (consequently opening the floodgates for Jewish Bolsheviks too) and other non-Whites. World War II was a giant “good vs. evil” marketing ploy that, in the end, put an end to ethnonationalist movements and allowed Jews to flourish on this basis.
Moreover, America did influence American colonies (in Latin America for example) to close their own borders to Jewish refugees. MacDonald magically transforms this terrible defeat in ... a powerful conspiration to destroy America.
Please cite where he does such a thing.
I feel Prof. Macdonald is an antisemite
Anyone who does not have glowing feelings for all Jews is an anti-Semite, right? We have a word for people like you: loxists.
Look, I don’t hate Jews and I don’t even have any ill will towards them.
However, the facts about ethnic interests are what they are. We all struggle for power and implement different strategies to achieve it. It boggles me that Jews will organize themselves in the way they do and support the policies they do and then go out and try to deny the very things they are doing as a group.
which means that he is not objective nor scientific, and has no place in legitimate academic debate
Anyone who criticizes Jews has no academic legitimacy to you? But its OK to bash gentile whites like your brothers in the Frankfurt School are doing right? You just called him a bona fide scholar and now you say he isn’t. Which is it J? You keep contradicting yourself!
Posted by Darren on May 20, 2008, 06:27 PM | #
There are two methodologies at play in Kevin MacDonald’s research.
First, in historical research, he does what everyone else does: he researches a wide body of historical sources and generates a claim that can be attributed back to the works he has studied. The only way you can attack him on this basis is to (1) attack the things he has referenced for being inaccurate, biased, incorrect, etc. (you accused him of only going to sources biased against Jews, which is patently false) or (2) find a better body of evidence that contradicts what he has used (which I doubt you can nor have you even tried), leaving it up to objective analysis of people to interpret which one is more honest
In his role as an evolutionary psychologist, the research tends to be more observational. Can we take average of the Jewish population and compare it to the average of the white Gentile population and determine any behavioral differences?
If we note that, throughout history, that whites have had a strain of individualism whereas Jews, being a people with significant genetic contribution from the East are more collective and ethnocentric, can we correlate those observations to behaviors today? I realize that the research here is a bit more subjectively interpreted, however, would it be beyond the pale to suggest that Jews may very well be hyperethnocentric as MacDonald claims?
Posted by Darren on May 20, 2008, 06:34 PM | #
I also want to know how that, in light of even a quick examination of both the ADL and SPLC’s websites, one cannot come to the conclusion that two of our most prominent Jewish ethnic interest groups cannot possibly be working to undermine the traditional healthy values of European America and aren’t actively supporting race-dilution policies via immigration policies, multiculturalism, miscegenation propaganda, and such.
I really want you to just tell that to me with a straight face, J.
Oh I don’t just blame the Jews for this, but the facts are that Jews were the ones out there instigating the attacks on White America and promoting the neo-bolshevik policies of racial integration and third world immigration in such a total disproportion.
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on May 20, 2008, 08:06 PM | #
We can start saying that the same phenomenon is happening in places where American Jews have no influence at all, like say Switzerland (about 1/3 foreign born), Spain, Australia, South Africa (millions of illegal immigrants from other, more miserable, African “countries"), Saudi Arabia, you name it.j
(Paraphrasing from memory):
Colonel Sanders: “Don’t you have the Schwartz, too?”
Dark Helmet: Nah, he got the upside, I got the downside.
See, there’s two sides to every Schwartz...
You got the downside, eh j?
I mean really, this passes for logic in your world? I wonder if that would work at a murder trial. “Your honor, it’s obvious that I didn’t kill Mr. Croaked - someone was just murdered two towns over in Springfield and I was in court at the time!”
MacDonald magically transforms this terrible defeat in ... a powerful conspiration to destroy America.
That’s a lie. You might want to stick to “arguing” with people who haven’t read MacDonald’s work.
(Conspiration? The very downside I guess!)
Another weak insight is his analysis of the Gomulka period in Poland. Jews were very much opressed and discriminated against during the thousand years of Polish history. Not once Jews attained any political power, on the contrary, they were absolutely powerless and barely “tolerated”.
If this is so, please show us the scholars who have taken MacDonald to task and made it stick. I.e., present MacDonald’s counterarguments. If you just criticize or quote criticism, and then we dig up where MacDonald has replied effectively (which is always the case in my experience), you’re just going to look like everyone else we’ve read on the subject with a jewish dog in the fight.
Only once, in a short period under Soviet occupation, did a group of apostate Communist ethnic Jews attain political power in Poland.
I love this lying, sneaky, underhanded, typically dishonest Jewish argument (is all of that redundant?); they weren’t really Jews! That is your implication, right? Otherwise it’d be “jews,” not “a group of apostate Communist ethnic Jews.” Yes? Why are the “good” jews just “jews,” but the “bad” jews are always “not representative not-really-jewish, jewish-in-name-only, disavowed-by-jews-everywhere jews?”
Do whites get to do this too? Disown all whites, past and present, who don’t serve our purposes?
This short period, of about eight years, ended disastrously to the members of this group (they ended in jail or in exile), and then, it also caused the end of one thousand years of Jewish presence in Poland.
I find it hard to believe that the Soviet Union was so very, very awful for jews, when the fall of the Iron Curtain unleashed the “Russian” oligarchs onto the world...and they all turned out to be jews. Something just doesn’t add up there.
Once agains, Prof. Macdonald’s magical mind transforms this short and failed phenomenon into an emblematic conspiracy of those powerful Jews.
Really? Cite a passage, please.
therefore I feel Prof. Macdonald is an antisemite which means that he is not objective nor scientific, and has no place in legitimate academic debate.
Lol. One need not be objective to present good science, or make effective arguments. The suggestion one does is ridiculous. Who’s objective? Show me Dr. Objective, please.
Tell me, with all jewry has to lose should MacDonald’s arguments become widely read and accepted, and all the brain power at her disposal, why hasn’t she responded in kind? Where are the teams of jewish brainiacs eviscerating his research? There’d be no need to draw much attention; just quietly publish a rigorous destruction of his work. Yet all the king’s horses and all the king’s men have yet to put Humpty together again.
Why?
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on May 20, 2008, 08:14 PM | #
Well I’ll be hornswoggled! Conspiration is a word! My mistake. Learn something new every day…
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on May 20, 2008, 08:20 PM | #
On the thousand years of jewish servitude in Poland:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=poland+jewish+bailiffs&btnG=Search
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 20, 2008, 08:41 PM | #
J, what’s better for Eurosphere countries, relative Euro racial homogeneity and Euro racial predominance (along with one of the Euro national cultures for each country) or the Jewish ideal for Eurosphere nations, the set-up 99.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% of Jews with any power or influence strongly prefer, namely government-enforced majority demographic status for non-whites?
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 20, 2008, 08:43 PM | #
J, which do you prefer for the U.S., the 1924 law or the 1965 law? (You used to be an American, right? Answer as if you still were.)
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 20, 2008, 08:57 PM | #
If J answers my second question you’re going to see him prefer the 1965 law or hem-and-haw so much, attempting to obfuscate so much, you won’t be able to say which one he prefers (which will mean, of course, he prefers the 1965 law). Not in a million years will a Jew, with something like half-a-dozen excpetions worldwide, come out against the “It’s Soooooooooooooo Good for the Jews!” 1965 Guaranteed-Slow-Genocide-of-Euros Celler-Hart-Kennedy Finally-A-Little-Jewish-Pay-Back Immigration Be-Done-With-Those-Euro-Goys-Forever Law.
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 20, 2008, 09:21 PM | #
Yesterday I read an entry in one of the French blogs about a group in France that’s hit upon the realization that race-replacement of the French might not penetrate as deeply if only the cities are race-replaced, so to really get rid of the idea that “whatever happens to the cities, Frenchmen in the countryside are still white,” North-African mulattoes and Sub-Saharans have to be resettled no longer exclusively in the cities but more and more in the rural towns and villages as well. This group say that, so far, the program is off to a very good start: they’re getting a lot of mulattoes settled in France’s rural areas.
Today’s quiz: The name of that group’s advisor, as it appears in the log entry, is (choose one) what-sounding?
___ Catholic-sounding
___ Protestant-sounding
___ Greek Orthodox-sounding
___ Shinto-sounding
___ Ba-hai-sounding
___ Mormon-sounding
___ Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints Seventh-Day Adventist Christ-Scientist-sounding (did I get that one right? I always get some of these names mixed up)
___ The one everyone’s afraid to put because even to mention it gets you prosecuted for hate-speech and next thing you know you have Abe Foxman on your neck-sounding
______________________
(I’ll post the group’s advisor’s name later, and Prof. MacDonald has kindly agreed to donate a personally autographed leather-bound, gilt-edged set of his complete works to J if he turns out to be the winner!)
Posted by Bo on May 20, 2008, 09:24 PM | #
“j” says on 5/20/08 at 3:23 PM, “Prof. Macdonald is an antisemite which means that he is not objective nor scientific, and has no place in legitimate academic debate.”
But the label “anti-Semite” has already been analyzed and found to be a defamatory label. Here is the definition of “anti-Semite” from our list of slurs:
“Anti-Semite - A claim to supremacy over diverse white Americans by claiming a right to name and label them; an expression of contempt akin to that shown by shiksa, shabbas goy, goyim, and gentile; an attempt to smother white American diversity and nationality. [Anti-Jewish activities can obviously take place, but labeling a person with this name is over the line. It is like saying an alien present in the US without papers is an ‘illegal alien.’] “
Conclusion: “j” is a supremacist by claiming the right to name the other, he shows contempt, and he wants to smother our diversity and nationality. His arguments have no validity given the hateful state of his mind and heart.
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 20, 2008, 09:32 PM | #
As good a piece of proof as any is if the log entry’s title were “Jews Permitting Debate” it would set a record for internet hits in no time flat, as everyone descended on it to devour it in disbelief and hope against hope. “Jews Shutting Down Debate” probably elicits a ho-hum from everyone: “Oh is that all? Call us when something new happens.”
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on May 20, 2008, 09:42 PM | #
J’s quite the fast and loose player with the truth. I won’t even bother going into his post. But, one comment violated one of my myriad pet peeves:
Jews are prominent everywhere they live
Jews are not prominent amongst those seeking to preserve and promote European Ethnic Genetic Interests.
There’s prominent, and then there’s prominent. They’re not prominent in paleoconservatism. They’re not prominent in anti-Zionism. They’re not prominent in proxies for European Ethnic Genetic Interests (fighting Affirmative Action, fighting the anti-freedom “anti-discrimination” laws, fighting mass 3rd world immigration, fighting the ethnic cleansing of European populations throughout the world, etc.).
In practical terms, the only political arenas in which Jews are prominent are those which harm me and my Ethnic Genetic Interests at worst, or are neutral to same at best.
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 20, 2008, 09:55 PM | #
Excellent point in that last comment by Svy. Diaspora Jews are extremely prominent in nation-destruction and not only totally absent from nation-destruction-reversal, they fight tooth-and-nail to ensure that those trying to reverse Jewish-wrought nation-destruction (trying to reverse open borders, for example) fail.
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 20, 2008, 10:08 PM | #
Jews like J act like they’re wearing a special kind of glasses that block out bad things Jews do, or make it impossible to see when they do them as Jews, not merely as generic liberals/leftists. You put these glasses on, you don’t see any bad stuff that Jews do — it just doesn’t register. You’re blind to it. You could mistake the Jews for the Amish in fact, they seem so apolitical and innocent. “Wow, with these glasses on the Jews look just like the Amish! I can’t tell them apart! Amazing!” (They’re called ©Jew-blockers™, available through the morning-time-slot TV infomercials!)
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on May 20, 2008, 10:18 PM | #
Ah, an Israeli. That makes it easier, doesn’t it guys?
J, we just want for ourselves what you jews have for yourselves in Israel. ‘Nuff said.
(P.S., please take off your jew-colored glasses and look at yourself from our perspective. Do this for about five years, or ten if you don’t have much free time. Then get back to us. The Jewish refusal to even attempt to see yourselves through others’ eyes is unbecoming in grown men)
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 20, 2008, 10:58 PM | #
Inverted World, http://inverted-world.com/ , may be the site for you, J — the same things get them hopping mad as do us, with this difference, that they steadfastly refuse to apportion a greater share of blame to the Jews than to others — here’s their take on MacDonald for example:
http://inverted-world.com/index.php/articles/articles/did_the_jews_do_it/
(plus I think their web-stats are a little anemic lately, so they might appreciate the business … tell ‘em I sent ya)
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 20, 2008, 11:20 PM | #
OK OK OK MacDonald was wrong, the Jews didn’t play the role he claims in giving us that gift that keeps on giving, the 1965 “It’s Good for the Jews” “It’s Great for the Euros, Really Just Incredibly Fantastic for Them!” Immigration bill. OK forget that.
Who’s the biggest obstacle right now — right now — to getting that horror undone and the equivalent of the 1924 set-up restored?
(I’ve just learned that Prof. MacDonald will kindly donate a second gold-embossed leather-bound set of his complete works together with signed copies of selected works by Prof. Virginia Abernethy, Prof. J. Philippe Rushton, and Prof. Linda Gottfredson to be awarded to the winner! All entries due in by next Cinco de Mayo; employees of www.MajorityRights.com and their families are not eligible; the first-prize winner will be announced over the internet at this web-site.)
Posted by 357 on May 20, 2008, 11:36 PM | #
I don’t for one second beleive the Jews are blind to the harm they’ve done or are doing to white nations; however, can we blame the Jews for the gross naivete of whites as evidenced by this? :-
Posted by anonymous on May 21, 2008, 01:46 AM | #
This is just the way many Jews/ADL/etc.... acted when Mel Gibson’s film was released, shit, even before it was released. They were upset because the film used actual lines from the Gospels regarding Jewish guilt for the murder of Christ, among other things. There were fears of pogroms, anti-semitic attacks and other bullshit. Mnay people did in fact have an emotional reaction, but it was reaffirming their Christianity if anything. Freedom of speech and all that except if some or any Jews at all, even some who lived 200 years ago, are criticized. Meanwhile Jews want to import people who are not only hostile to regualr whites and the West, but actually hate Jews. Go fidgure. They bitch about a movie and a university professor, yet fail to remember Crown Heights. Maybe some skinheads were orchestrating that whole affair. Cross them and they’ll try and ruin you. They did go after Mel Gibson.
Posted by Gregory on May 21, 2008, 03:57 AM | #
--- and now for a tasty channel-change to some GOOD news, and it’s happing sans (fill in the blank)s.
Mamma Mia, Pass the Linguini
by Dymphna
The way to a country’s soul is through its stomach. And European nations (there are still such things, for a while) are fed up to here with having multi-culti menus shoved on their children at school.
That nasty rule of the p.c. world is about to have its table turned over - napkins, falafel, and all - by the new government in Italy:
Ethnic food may be removed from government schools in the Italian capital, Rome, in the latest gesture by the city’s new centre-right government to target multiculturalism.
Laura Marsilio, city councillor for schools in Rome, said the local government would re-evaluate the ethnic menus of public schools, and replace it with what she called “Italian regional dishes as well as typical Mediterranean cuisine.”
Marsilio spoke to the media on Monday and said that the ‘ethnic menus’, introduced by the previous centre-left government of Romano Prodi “gave insufficient results.”
Marsilio reportedly also plans to look at centres where parents of immigrant children and their relatives are taught Italian, the laws of the country and computer classes.
“We need to see if they are really effective for integration,” Marsilio said.
The councillor also plans to ensure laws are respected with regards to the number of Italian and immigrant children in schools, because in some cases, immigrant children outnumber Italian children.
The 40-year-old Marsilio is a member of the post-fascist National Alliance party, a member of prime minister Silvio Berlusconi’s conservative coalition.
However, that’s not the only heresy being committed by the Italian government:
- - - - - - - - -
In an interview with Italian daily Il Nuovo in 2002, Marsilio, a city council member at the time said “To give housing to nomads (Roma Gypsies) would be a social injustice” and that they should live in “isolated camps under police surveillance.”
“They have to learn to respect the rules. They steal and mistreat minors, I don’t like them. Not because I am racist, but because they don’t obey the rules,” said Marsilio.
Now there’s a new meme for you: dislike based upon a culture of law-breaking. How novel after so many years of 1984 silence.
Theodore Dalrymple would approve, but the multi-cults must be gnashing their teeth in the outer (and unelected ) darkness.
Posted by EA (European American) Steve on May 21, 2008, 05:45 AM | #
In response to J:
I see Jews as one of us; we are White Caucasians. (for clarification, Arabs are not; some Iraqis, some Iranians, and even some Turks are border-line). There is a genetic distance between Jews and most Europeans, but there is a very close proximity. Technically, it could probably be argued either way, whether the Jews are the same as the Europeans. However, the same eyes that make me sexually and genetically (through miscegenation) repulsed by non-Whites, have open arms for the Jews (as one of us). I wouldn’t want the Jews to absorb the White Gentile genepool, but I wouldn’t want France to absorb Slovakia, either. Biologically, I have no qualm with the Jews.
Unfortunately, what many posters have claimed (even myself), is true: many establishment Jews are trying to exterminate White Gentiles. And they have disowned us, pro-White White Gentiles and Jews, through their actions. Also, multi-national corporations and even some White Gentiles are harming our race. It’s more about the individual than the group as a whole!
I believe the anti-White Gentile Jews should be dealt with.
Even though some Jews are leading our destruction, just as Ted Kennedy is (who claims to be the Irish version of these mentioned Jews!), I think it’s more of an economic/establishment matter. It’s not mostly about the Jews, even in general. But rather, it’s monopolists who want to control the World!
Now, on to Dr. MacDonald, I don’t know enough about him to determine whether he is anti-Semitic or not (and I am pro-Jewish). However, I believe he is very intelligent, and I believe has provided great literature about non-Jewish related issues. I think (though am not certain) he provided a piece about “feminazis” manipulating the divorce system, to devastate White males, in America.
Posted by me on May 21, 2008, 05:48 AM | #
I don’t get it...how come when jews do studies to support racist ummm i mean nationalist views all the sources are biased, but when you guys post it the sources are assumed to be fine? I mean I think both of them are wrong, but isn’t this a double standard?
Posted by me on May 21, 2008, 05:54 AM | #
I love this lying, sneaky, underhanded, typically dishonest Jewish argument (is all of that redundant?); they weren’t really Jews! That is your implication, right? Otherwise it’d be “jews,” not “a group of apostate Communist ethnic Jews.” Yes? Why are the “good” jews just “jews,” but the “bad” jews are always “not representative not-really-jewish, jewish-in-name-only, disavowed-by-jews-everywhere jews?”
Do whites get to do this too? Disown all whites, past and present, who don’t serve our purposes?
more wonderful double standards. There are white jews. You can’t usually tell a jew from a gentile. Yet you disown them. You find any excuse to prove they are not white.
Posted by Lurker on May 21, 2008, 08:35 AM | #
me - “You can’t usually tell a jew from a gentile.”
Ah, maybe you can’t but you will find many people can and you know what - I’ll bet Jews know almost every single time. Now how could they do that or even want to do that, I mean we are all white arent we?
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 21, 2008, 12:03 PM | #
“EA Steve,” you need to tighten up the quality of your posts. They ramble into incoherence. I’m sure mine have done it but yours seem to every time. Can you re-read them before posting, to tighten up the quality? As for your point above in regard to the exceptions: everyone is aware of those. Some cats have six toes and maybe some giraffes short necks but but we still say “giraffes have long necks” and “cats have five toes” and that’s OK to say. Everyone knows about Chaim ben Pesach and the other fine Americans of the Jewish Task Force (jtf.org), how they’re on our side on immigration and race-replacement and are the exact diametrical polar opposites of every other Jew any of us has ever dealt with, seen, or heard about in his life in regard to these matters. Their existence is absolutely amazing but they’re real, they’re out there, and they’re working as hard as they can to undo and reverse race-replacement of the U.S.’s traditional Euro population. If all the Jews were like them it would be simple — I’d kick all the WASP élites out of the country and race-replace them, the whole lot of them, with the Jews. Unfortunately the reality is ... otherwise ... (But the present WASP élite criminals need to get get kicked out anyway of course.)
My view is Jews and Euros would ideally live in separate countries because what one hates the other loves and vice-versa. Why live in the same country if that’s the case? Makes no sense and leads to lots of destruction, even wars and untold misery. Living in the same country as Euros, the Jews are perpetually using their money and brainpower to, among other things, force/brainwash/bribe the Euros into stopping doing what they, the Jews, hate, and since the Euros derive happiness from doing what the Jews hate (for the simple reason that what the Jews hate is Euros being normal — stuff like Euros celebrating Christmas communitywide, which the Jews can’t stand; not letting the seven billion non-white Third Worlders come flooding into your country and race-replace you, which the Jews love; not giving the Negroes and Mexicans the whip hand over the Euros, which the Jews love; not educating Euro schoolgirls and women to hate Euro men, which the Jews love because they covet the Euro women for themselves; and so on) Euros end up miserable and ruled over by a totalitarian Euro-hating Jewish hegemony and forced to put up with abnormal conditions which Jews love but are unpleasant and unhealthy in the extreme for Euros, and actually genocidal for them (race-replacement immigration; non-Euros being given the whip hand over Euros by government; girls and women being taught to loathe Euro men and to consider only Jewish or non-white men acceptable; and so on — everyone with internet access knows by this stage of the game that’s what’s going on, I don’t have to recite the litany).
There’s plenty of land in North America to 1) give a big chunk back to the North American Red Man for his own country so he won’t go extinct as a race; 2) let the Quebeckers have their own separate country; 3) let the Jews have the Southern half of California for theirs (they broke it, they’ve bought it) and what the hell, throw in the southern half of Florida for them too: Jews are more of a tropical race than Euros; 4) reserve the rest for Euros exclusively: no Jews. I happen to like Jews and like living with them but not at the price of the Euro race being genocided by them, the price inevitably paid, sooner or later, by Euros who let lots of Jews settle among them.
Posted by Darren on May 21, 2008, 12:16 PM | #
I don’t get it...how come when jews do studies to support racist ummm i mean nationalist views all the sources are biased, but when you guys post it the sources are assumed to be fine? I mean I think both of them are wrong, but isn’t this a double standard?
Not all of us have a problem with Jewish ethnonationalism. My only problem is when we’re asked to fight and die for Israel and instigate wars in the middle east on their behalf.
We don’t ask Jews to fight for our wars for us, why should we fight theirs?
Remember this website has people of different viewpoints! Heck, we even let a left-leaning philo-Semite post oddball articles on the front page.
more wonderful double standards. There are white jews. You can’t usually tell a jew from a gentile. Yet you disown them. You find any excuse to prove they are not white.
Well, it depends. Ashkenazi Jews are an interesting bunch, often times with a significant dose of white DNA. However, more often than not, its easy to pick out a Jew. Jews are a mixture of several racial groups, too.
What is definitely true, however, is that Jews are a separate ethnicity, for they have largely kept themselves in genetic isolation and (perhaps until recently, where its starting to break down) tried to keep from intermarrying.
To EA:
Also, multi-national corporations and even some White Gentiles are harming our race. It’s more about the individual than the group as a whole!
Well, to blame every Jew is not fair, but you are explicitly denying the role of Jewish ethnic activist groups as well as groups of individual Jews who share the same ideology who act out in ways that are benefical for Jews as a whole but harmful to us.
Its not just one or two bad Jews in high places ruining the name of all of them, its large numbers of them who share the same ideologies. Its good for them and they know it. I don’t really think its some sort of conspiratorial plot to attack Whites, its just an example of hyperethnocentrism; Jews acting out for mutual benefit by supporting policies that will bring them prosperity and safety.
Now, on to Dr. MacDonald, I don’t know enough about him to determine whether he is anti-Semitic or not
The problem with the phrase “anti-Semitic” is that it is generally a tool used to shut down debate. Its never “anti-Goyish” to talk about white skin privilege or other things like that (such sociological topics that are popular among Jewish professors of sociology). But, providing documentable facts about Jewish group behavior is to many people. Doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to me.
I don’t hate Jews nor do I wish them any harm, so I shy away from calling myself an anti-Semite, but at the same time, I believe there are some significant cultural differences that would forever keep ourselves in conflict and/or result in harm to one or the other.
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 21, 2008, 12:44 PM | #
Does the fact that the Jews manage to drive the Euros to sickness, misery, and finally extinction every time they settle among them in large numbers mean we’re seeing the Darwinian survival of the fittest, the Euros deserving to go extinct and the Jews come out on top? No, we’re seeing the same thing you’re seeing with the Japanese beetle accidentally introduced from Japan to the U.S. and inflicting much damage here unlike over there in its native environment where it’s insignificant as a pest and kept under control by its own native ecology, predators, and so on; or the zebra mussel invasion in the Great Lakes, taking over the place, clogging industrial intake pipes, and so on; or that plant that got introduced into South Florida, I forget the name, some kind of tree or shrub introduced from Australia, and now is taking over, crowding out the native plants which it didn’t do in its native habitat because of the balance of ecological forces there which don’t exist in South Florida; or the duckweed I think it’s called, doing similar things; or the European rabbit that got introduced into Australia and is now running wild, exploding in population and causing lots of habitat destruction and crowding out of local species because the forces that kept it in check where it came from aren’t present the same way in Australia: the Jews are an example of that, a species that’s gotten out of its native environment where it was held in check by certain forces native to that ecology (that ecology being the Arab/Semitic world of Western Asia, also known as the Near- and Middle-East), and into an alien one (Europe) where those specific forces are absent and it’s able to gain advantage more easily than ever it could back home. Euros don’t think or act the same way Jews do so Jews can pull all kinds of crap on them which they weren’t expecting and don’t know how to counter till it’s too late and they’ve already lost the upper hand. Jews don’t have such success when pitted against their racial cousins the Arab Semites because the two think alike and are natural ecological checks and balances on one another. The Jews are just another Semitic race in the Middle East, nothing special, like the zebra mussel back home wherever it originated: it’s nothing special. In Europe the Jews become like the zebra mussel in the Great Lakes: they take over. The counterbalancing checks and forces that acted on them and everyone else back home are suddenly gone and they run rampant in the new environment that has a different set of checks and balances that aren’t tuned to keeping them controled.
Posted by Fr. John on May 21, 2008, 01:57 PM | #
“The [Jews] were upset because the film [Passion of Christ] used actual lines from the Gospels regarding Jewish guilt for the murder of Christ, among other things. There were fears of pogroms, anti-semitic attacks and other bullshit. Mnay people did in fact have an emotional reaction, but it was reaffirming their Christianity if anything. Freedom of speech and all that except if some or any Jews at all, even some who lived 200 years ago, are criticized. Meanwhile Jews want to import people who are not only hostile to regualr whites and the West, but actually hate Jews.”
This is why I continue to post theological points to shore up the philosophical/’scientific’; not because I am trying to ‘convert’ y’all. But because there is a point to be made when talking with/of/against the Deicides.
The Jew- whether atheist, marxist, sodomite, or just plain obnoxious ethnic interloper, ALL operate on a framework derived from the Talmud. They themselves have said it, time and time and time again. This means that, even when they are most in a river in Egypt (De Nial) about their religious identity, they STILL are operating from a RELIGIOUS framework- even the most atheist among them.
While I allow Whites the option to turn their back on the religion that sprang up, was formed, and guided European civilization until recently (say, the last 150 years or so in Europe, and the last 75 in the USA) - i.e, Christianity; (though I wonder, ‘in my artless japanese fashion,’ why...)
I want all White men (and women) to know that Jews - as JEWS- as ‘sons of the covenant’ (oops, see, there’s that ‘religious framework’ again!) ALL operate on a THEOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK, even when they deny it. As Gary North said, “There is no such thing as neutrality.”
That it (this Framework of the Jews) is not valid, true, Biblical, or especially God-pleasing, is beside the point.
THEY STILL OPERATE FROM IT. This is also why they are so clearly, (as a race, and as an ethnos) so totally SCHIZOPHRENIC. As Dr. MacDonald has pointed out, their ability to get around what ‘is’ is, (remember Clinton’s legal team?) comes from centuries of analyzing the conflicting and often contradictory ‘commentary’ of the TALMUD. They [Jews] want to be “Somebody’s ‘Chosen People,’” (but it certainly ain’t YHWH God’s!), while at the same time denying that YHWH God (or His Son, Jesus Christ) have any rule or authority over them!!!
Thus, “J” put in quotes (to minimize and offset from his person) the fact that the Jews have historically been called ‘Deicides’ or ‘God-killers.’ The recent denial of that moniker (by the late traitor Pope, J2P2) still does not remove the anathema that was freely chosen by them. The TALMUD (the operating methodology of them all) has the most blasphemous things to state AGAINST the Messiah (I choose my words to infuriate the maximum, those who ‘say they are Jews, and are not.’) [Rev. 2:8,9] for their hatred of YHWH God, and His Son, Jesus Christ, is THAT GREAT.
It does not matter if YOU, (as white Europeans) don’t believe the Christian Story. THE JEWS DO, and that’s what drives them crazy! This is the greatest antidote to the poison of Judaism, Talmudism, Bolshevism, and Zionism… the Authentic, ‘Chosen-People’ denying faith of historic Christendom! (That the Jews have sought, above all, to infiltrate, and dilute this teaching, both in protestant and Catholic camps, is proof of my thesis)
You are correct, all of you, when you say that you cannot argue with ‘one of them.’ They are like eels in the water, ready to slip out of your philosophical grasp, and then, when you finally ‘get them in a corner’ will turn and bite you with poison in their fangs. the Church long ago was correct in refusing them seats in government, finance, commerce, universities, etc. It’s time we began the restoration of that ‘beyond the pale’ scenario again, and speedily. Even if it means adopting Christendom as our model once again.
Posted by 357 on May 21, 2008, 02:03 PM | #
We as whites should ‘hate’ anyone or any group that is intentionally working towards eradicating the white-race’s genotype. To hate the very people that are out to eliminate the genetic posterity of our kith and kin epitomizes NORMALITY. To aid and abet the people that are engaged in policies intended to wipe your own race off the planet is perversion in its most degenerate form.
A major problem we whites must overcome is: too many whites care more about other races’ well being than their own. This self defeating mindset is going to be VERY hard to change. Whites, in general, are consumed by a guilt complex that is reinforced with an almost impregnable ignorance. Every other race detects our fatal weakness, and they sure take full advantage of it.
Bottom line, we have our work cut out for us.
Posted by Rusty Mason on May 21, 2008, 06:22 PM | #
I think it’s helpful when sorting friends and foes to remember that in some languages there are two separate words for “enemy.” In Latin, for example, a personal enemy is an Inimicus and an enemy of a people, state,nation, or tribe is a Hostes, and that usually in the plural. Jesus admonished us to love our Inimicus, not the Hostes (that would be insane/JewDayO!Christian). I think confusion is introduced during English discussions of the JQ and similar because English speakers commonly only use one word for enemy. I propose a simple solution to this problem: that we all communicate in Latin. Sententia magna, nonne? 
Posted by Old Guy on May 21, 2008, 06:44 PM | #
Fred & 357— you guys have both hit on essential things regarding the “conflict”, at least at this stage of my thinking on the topics.
Fred has isolated the idea that it’s the CONTEXT in which incompatible things are placed that’s at least as important as the “nature” of each thing. By putting incompatibles into a common bio-cultural “space”, bad stuff is inevitable, for both “sides”. The activity of “getting on in the world” of each (their original “nature”?) messes stuff up for the other, as subjectively viewed/understood by each.
The problem is ... and MacDonald has made this quite clear: it’s sometimes to the ADVANTAGE of one group to evolve a group strategy of “getting on in the world” which leverages their strengths to take advantage of being a “subgroup” in a larger “host group”. Many here have noted that this is a parasite-host strategy, and I think this is correct.
357 is correct regarding “hate”. Once a host group realizes it has a sub-group whose way “getting on in the world” is sucking strength and causing damage to the host, the host wants to shake off the parasite. Part of the process of parasite elimination is identifying the parasite and isolating it—in the minds of all members of the host group. This process includes what is called “hate”.
Thanks for your insights!
Posted by Old Guy on May 21, 2008, 06:52 PM | #
Rusty—have you been reading Carl Schmitt’s “The Concept of the Political”? He breaks things out in almost the exact same way. Great man and great theoretician! You’re so right that the language “we” use, when not accurately pointing at the correct “things”, aids and abets confusion. What to do?
Posted by Rusty Mason on May 21, 2008, 06:58 PM | #
Hey, Old Guy,
No, have not had the pleasure. I’ve just been studying Latin and Greek languages and literature. Thanks for the complimentary comparison, though. What to do? Learn and read Latin and Greek, of course!
Vale!
Posted by 123 on May 21, 2008, 07:42 PM | #
357
“We as whites should ‘hate’ anyone or any group that is intentionally working towards eradicating the white-race’s genotype.”
Precisely, and that’s why the jewish-invented christianity demands the exact opposite.
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on May 21, 2008, 08:55 PM | #
I don’t for one second beleive the Jews are blind to the harm they’ve done or are doing to white nations; however, can we blame the Jews for the gross naivete of whites as evidenced by this?
Self-Deception is rooted right down to the core of jewish identity. It’s probably hardwired at this point. When they do recognize the harm, they don’t see it as harm. In the limited sense in which they do recognize harm, it’s like the harm of cutting someone open during a surgery to save his life. They avoid debate the way Superman avoids kryptonite, to protect the tangled mass of self-deception and rationalization at the core of their identity.
If there’s a gene for “the other guy has a point of view,” it’s absent or recessive in jews.
Freedom of speech and all that except if some or any Jews at all, even some who lived 200 years ago, are criticized.
Yes, and separation of Church and State as long as it serves their purposes (like having more Jewish holidays than Christian holidays in the U.S. Congress)
I don’t get it...how come when jews do studies to support racist ummm i mean nationalist views all the sources are biased, but when you guys post it the sources are assumed to be fine? I mean I think both of them are wrong, but isn’t this a double standard?
I don’t get it either. WTF are you on about?
I love this lying, sneaky, underhanded, typically dishonest Jewish argument (is all of that redundant?); they weren’t really Jews! That is your implication, right? Otherwise it’d be “jews,” not “a group of apostate Communist ethnic Jews.” Yes? Why are the “good” jews just “jews,” but the “bad” jews are always “not representative not-really-jewish, jewish-in-name-only, disavowed-by-jews-everywhere jews?”
Do whites get to do this too? Disown all whites, past and present, who don’t serve our purposes?
more wonderful double standards.
What double standard? Not that I see any problem with dual morality (double standards), mind.
There are white jews.
Not vis-a-vis my definition of white (or Euro, or what have you).
No You can’t usually tell a jew from a gentile.
Speak for yourself. My jewdar’s pretty reliable. But, even if I couldn’t tell at a glance - so what?
Yet you disown them. You find any excuse to prove they are not white.
They practically scream it at the top of their lungs. Mike Wallace practically came right out and stated “jewish != white” on national television.
They may look like ducks. But they do not walk like ducks, quack like ducks, eat like ducks, fly like ducks, etc.
Rusty:
I think it’s helpful when sorting friends and foes to remember that in some languages there are two separate words for “enemy.” In Latin, for example, a personal enemy is an Inimicus and an enemy of a people, state,nation, or tribe is a Hostes, and that usually in the plural. Jesus admonished us to love our Inimicus, not the Hostes (that would be insane/JewDayO!Christian). I think confusion is introduced during English discussions of the JQ and similar because English speakers commonly only use one word for enemy. I propose a simple solution to this problem: that we all communicate in Latin. Sententia magna, nonne?
I love stuff like this. We need to rehabilitate Christianity insofar as is possible, with every bit of stuff like this we can muster.
Posted by 357 on May 21, 2008, 09:06 PM | #
123
“Precisely, and that’s why the jewish-invented christianity demands the exact opposite.”
With all due respect 123, I think you’re referring to the cultural-Marxist version of Christianity. The traditional Church’s teachings are contrary to what you assume. A couple of verses that come to mind will hopefully provide some clarification. There are many more, of course. I’m sure Fr. John can provide dozens.
1- Psalm 139:21-2221
Do I not hate those who hate you, O Lord?
And do I not loathe those who rise up against you?
22 I hate them with complete hatred;
I count them my enemies.
and,
2-John 8:44
Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
If the Jews invented Christianity for their own purposes, why would they incorporate such anti-Jewish passages within the text?
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 21, 2008, 10:13 PM | #
“They avoid debate the way Superman avoids kryptonite”
Well put.
“If there’s a gene for ‘the other guy has a point of view,’ it’s absent or recessive in jews.”
Absent. They don’t have it.
As for the reply we always hear, to the effect that:
“Such-and-such race-replacement advocate, radical ‘feminist,’ communist, etc., whom you’re calling ‘Jewish’ isn’t Jewish but a self-hating atheist secularist Jew who never goes to temple on High Holy Days, who spits on the Jewish religion, makes fun of Jews, and supports the Palestinians”
-- this reply is like saying Saddam Hussein (who was widely known as, personally, a non-believer in Islam, a secularist, a modernizer who supported advanced education for girls, entry of women into every profession, draconian suppression of the veil, chador, burkha, honor killings and other aspects of Islam which he considered intolerably backward, and so on) — this reply is like saying “Saddam Hussein whom you’re trying to call a ‘Moslem’ was no Moslem but a personal non-believer in Islam and a radical secularist. He could not be considered a Moslem.” In each case, the case referring to the secularist Jew as no Jew and the one referring to the secularist Saddam as no Moslem, that pretend response ("pretend" because it’s disingenuous) fails to take into account the fundamental ways in which a tribe’s members aren’t any less members for not adhering to various rules and regulations of the tribe’s “official religion.” We’re talking about belonging to and being profoundly shaped by an ethnoculture, about blood ties, sense of identity, etc. Secularist Jews are certainly Jews for the political purposes we’re talking about in these sorts of discussions whether or not they support Israel, keep kosher, light a menorah, send their kids to schul, or go to temple on Yom Kippur.
Posted by 357 on May 21, 2008, 10:42 PM | #
“Self-Deception is rooted right down to the core of jewish identity. It’s probably hardwired at this point. When they do recognize the harm, they don’t see it as harm. In the limited sense in which they do recognize harm, it’s like the harm of cutting someone open during a surgery to save his life. They avoid debate the way Superman avoids kryptonite, to protect the tangled mass of self-deception and rationalization at the core of their identity.”—Svyatoslav Igorevich
That sounds like the description of a race of sociopaths. Oh well, as they say: If the shoe fits ......
Posted by Desmond jones on May 21, 2008, 11:07 PM | #
Does the fact that the Jews manage to drive the Euros to sickness, misery, and finally extinction every time they settle among them in large numbers mean we’re seeing the Darwinian survival of the fittest, the Euros deserving to go extinct and the Jews come out on top?
Fred misses the point, apparent in Mr. Igorevich ‘s links above. Evolution works on an individual as well as a group level. Competition within a group produces an elite, for lack of a better term, that uses, in Svyatoslav Igorevich’s example, Jewish bailiffs, tax men etc. to extract from their co-ethnics a greater bounty, which then in turn enhances their fitness. It is when Jews pose a threat to the elite group, that a backlash, like the Magna Charta produced, occurs. However, as long as the action of the Hasidim in Postville (are these not the Crown Heights Jews?) increase profits at Tyson or Western Union, GM or Coca-Cola, then little will change.
The virus, theoretically, must also evolve or perish. To use Mr. Igorevich ‘s example again, Jews in the middle ages, probably resembled the Postville Hasidim, more so than say Phillip Weiss. The viral example is syphilis. When it initially appeared it was a vicious killer. However, that meant the more virulent form died with the host. Thus the surviving element is more benign. It enables the host to survive longer and increases the chances of transmission. However, the virus does not discriminate. Jews are discriminating. The Talmud allows exceptions for aristocratic goyim, that would not be extended to the common folk. For instance a Jewish physician, treating the goy on the Sabbath. An exception was made for the King et al. And of course, in the modern Jewish community at large, that caveat has little impact anymore. The elite strategy also allows elite Jews to punish those Jews not conforming, more or less, to the system. Thus the Postville Hasidim gets whacked by ICE, at, apparently, Chertoff’s behest.
The basic conflict is intra-group rather than inter-group; class rather than race. Those wealthy white liberal Oregonians are quite happy to vote for a black man. However, white, working class Kentuckians or West Virginians are loathe to do so. Elites will close the immigrant pipeline if they or their capital are threatened, for example, as it was in the twenties, when immigration was restricted because of the threat of insurrection/Bolshevism. Otherwise nothing will change.
Posted by DavidL on May 21, 2008, 11:16 PM | #
357
Over at the website greatreddragon.com, the site host refers to the “banksters” as psycho/sociopaths.
He avoids, as many do out of misunderstanding or fear, laying out their ethnicity - Jewish.
The old book the website name is taken from does not disguise the Jewish influence behind the financial
disasters starting in the 19th century.
I have not read the book yet but it’s interesting you mention their twisted frame of mind.
As I once heard, if Jews ran Heaven there would be pictures of Hell hanging on the walls.
Thanks.
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 22, 2008, 12:58 AM | #
“Fred misses the point”
Forgive me, I read Desmond’s comment to see what point I missed but found the comment very hard to comprehend — after reading it for the fifth time and really concentrating, I found myself still unable to crack it and wished he’d used a less impenetrable style — came away scratching my head and wondering, “Wot’d he say????????”
Nevertheless I think, please correct me, the gist was:
“The basic conflict is intra-group rather than inter-group; class rather than race.”
In other words, we Euros are being tormented and literally eradicated not by the Jews but by our own Euro élites who warmly approve of Jewish misbehavior or at least smile distractedly on it without paying it too much attention as long as it doesn’t bother them directly, and if it ever does, Watch out, Jews!
I don’t know about that: I think the Jews, after seeing their power steadily build over eighty years (I’m talking about the U.S. here, not Canada), finally around the mid-’60s became too strong for the Euro élites (as they, the Euro élites, were then constituted) and overpowered them, since which we live under genuine Jewish hegemony. The Euro hegemony was overthrown in the mid-’60s and those years-long ‘60s public spectacles were sort of a Jewish victory dance. Desmond seems to be saying we’re living under a continuation of the old Euro (WASP) hegemony “but by Jewish proxy,” the Jews only appearing to rule while the Euros hold them on a leash ready to jerk their chain the minute the Jews displease them. I think the problem is far bigger: the Jews have wrested control of certain key aspects of our societal functioning and on their own, without needing to please any class of Euros or ask any class of Euros’ permission, are insisting on arranging those aspects they now control to their benefit as they see it and our dire detriment, our mortal peril even.
Above, I added “as they, the Euro élites, were then constituted,” because a stronger Euro élite class than the one that caved in the mid-’60s — caved apparently without very much of a fight — was and is certainly theoretically possible, one that wouldn’t have caved then and that will start taking steps now to recover the forfeited Euro position. So, with the advent of a new Euro élite, displacing the failed one, recapture of the former Euro position would seem inevitable.
I didn’t understand, from Desmond’s comment, in what way the Postville Hasids incurred Chertoff’s wrath by “not conforming, more or less, to the system,” as Desmond put it. What did they do that got Chertoff mad at them? I can’t see why selling fraudulent work visas should have bothered him as long as no one found out, which no one would had he not raided them. Same goes for using the factory premises as an illegal street-drug (methamphetamine) lab: what does he care about that? Does anyone here believe his class — Chertoff’s and Bush’s class — doesn’t get its cut, via whatever indirect money-laundering schemes, of yearly drug trade profits in return for allowing the drug trade to flourish? Anyone here not believe they get their cut?
Posted by Desmond Jones on May 22, 2008, 02:04 AM | #
Let’s use the example of the HRCs in Canada (Human Rights Commissions). They are largely maintained and fed by the membership of the CJC (Canadian Jewish Congress). The federal Tories are able, at this very moment, despite their minority position, to strike down, at least Section 13(1) the “hate speech” clause. Politically, they will be unopposed. The opposition Liberals are loathe to force an election, virtually under any circumstances, because they fear further devastation at the polls. However, the Tories don’t act. In fact, they submit a 50 page document, (probably largely written by Irwin Cotler’s group when he was AG) supporting the legislation. There are whispers, that in a free vote opposing Liberals will support the motion, based simply on the fundamental belief in freedom of speech. It’s unlikely the Jews at the National Post will abandon them because the Tories are big supporters of Israel.
In summary, there appears no downside. Jewish support will largely be maintained. There is little threat of defeat, even as a minority government and a big boost from a populist campaign to save fundamental Canadian freedoms stretching as far back as the Magna Charta. But they won’t do it. Why? It must serve their constituency.
The point Fred misses is that evolution occurs not just at the group level, but at the individual level as well. Dog eat dog...crabs in a bucket...all that stuff. Individuals in the same group will clamber over each other to get ahead. And in some groups they’ll use whatever means possible to do it. Use the South African example again. Elite Afrikaaners and SA Jews chose apartheid to preserve the benefit of cheap labour for the mines and agri-business instead of establishing a separate nation for earch racial group. Once apartheid appeared dysgenic for South African capital the governing class abandoned it, along with their co-ethnics to the viccissitudes of fate.
Posted by 357 on May 22, 2008, 02:34 AM | #
“Does anyone here believe his class — Chertoff’s and Bush’s class — doesn’t get its cut, via whatever indirect money-laundering schemes, of yearly drug trade profits in return for allowing the drug trade to flourish? Anyone here not believe they get their cut?”
Maxine Waters or Louis Farrakhan couldn’t have stated it better! LOL
Posted by EA Steve on May 22, 2008, 02:55 AM | #
In response to Fred Scooby:
I will concede, I did digress on my post. There is much input I like to provide; and I try to include clarifications, to prevent misunderstandings. I will keep note of your reply, and try to be as precise as possible; but I can’t always keep it short, without leaving key information out.
I have realized we view the Jews, a little differently; and I am willing to ‘agree to disagree’ on the Jewish question. Whatever the case is, hopefully we will find a way, for our race to survive.
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 22, 2008, 03:29 AM | #
I don’t get all of Desmond’s point. Evolution itself of course does not occur at the individual level, only the level of the group when the group’s less apt members have fewer offspring. This leaves the group more apt. The group has changed; none of its members has — they remain as apt or as inapt as ever. So, the group can change or “evolve,” not individuals. These individuals are stuck their whole lives with the way they are. The number of offspring they produce can affect evolution.
Posted by EA Steve on May 22, 2008, 04:18 AM | #
Correction: In response to Fred Scrooby:
Sorry about the ‘typo.’
Posted by j on May 22, 2008, 04:31 AM | #
To Igorevich:
A thousand years of history in Poland has many different aspects, including those mentioned by you. But you will agree that Jews never possessed political power, and their influence, when they had it, was mostly of individuals and always depending on the sufferance of the king, nobles or landowners. The only time they had a large measure of raw political power was in the immediate post war period, under foreign (Russian) occupation. That historically very short period ended disastrously for the Jews involved (they were all jailed and expulsed) and for the Jewish community itself, which was forced to emigrate en masse. Thus ended one thousand years of Jewish presence in Poland. In the last 50 years there are no Jews in Poland. If you allow me a comment, I dont see that the Polish people are better for it.
The liquidation of the other jewish communities in Russia for example is proceeding ahead very fast. There are less than 100,000 Jews left in Russia, and mostly they are in the capital and Saint Petersburg. Most have left to Israel.
Regarding American Jews, it is also diminishing. Their fate will be similar to the South African Jews, which are leaving that country. I dont understand why some of the commenters seem to think that when a rich and well run country like South Africa or Rhodesia becomes degraded, that is good for the Jews. It is a tragedy for everybody.
Posted by John on May 22, 2008, 07:49 AM | #
“Does anyone here believe his class — Chertoff’s and Bush’s class — doesn’t get its cut, via whatever indirect money-laundering schemes, of yearly drug trade profits in return for allowing the drug trade to flourish? Anyone here not believe they get their cut?”
Maxine Waters or Louis Farrakhan couldn’t have stated it better! LOL
If Mr. Farrakhan said that the earth revolves around the sun, I’d be inclined to believe him.
Posted by Darren on May 22, 2008, 09:18 AM | #
Regarding American Jews, it is also diminishing. Their fate will be similar to the South African Jews, which are leaving that country. I dont understand why some of the commenters seem to think that when a rich and well run country like South Africa or Rhodesia becomes degraded, that is good for the Jews. It is a tragedy for everybody.
It may not be “good for the Jews” but the actions that perpetuated the downfall of those two nations were disporportionately Jewish in character.
Don’t most of the reactionary things Jews do end up being their demise? USSR, anybody?
BTW, I replied to your previous post.
Posted by 123 on May 22, 2008, 11:52 AM | #
“Regarding American Jews, it is also diminishing. Their fate will be similar to the South African Jews, which are leaving that country. I dont understand why some of the commenters seem to think that when a rich and well run country like South Africa or Rhodesia becomes degraded, that is good for the Jews. It is a tragedy for everybody.”
I was studying at the Unversity of Witwatersrand in Johannesburg in South Africa during the apartheid era. There were plenty of jews studying there at the time, too. To my memory all without exception were in favour of abolishing apartheid and pro “one man one vote” (a synonym for tranfer of political leadership to the blacks). Apart from my observation this is also a known fact. Since I was young and unpolitical at the time I did not think much about it, never took it serious as it would have been lunacy to implement it, couldn’t comprehend it. For me it was very clear, that these demands were potentially detrimental for us whites and therefore for my fellow jewish students, too. I was really puzzled, but neverthelss, these were the facts.
Nowadays I find, that practically all those jews, which I have known personally, due to the prevailing conditions have left (had to leave?) South Africa for many places worldwide ranging from New Zealand via Israel to Canada. So, yes it was certainly not directly to the jews advantage ,but perhaps indirectly insofar, that the benefits of the destruction of a white society outweigh the disadvantages experienced by the jews (one must not forget, that jews have a nomadic background, thus being very mobile is part of their heritage). If not so, then it is just completely irrational, perhaps instinctive behaviour of the jews, but then apparently that’s how they are. In either case, their behaviour then and there is identical to their behaviour here and now. I am afraid, that unless a miracle happens, the end result will be the same as well, the only difference being, that then it was a local event, whereas this time it will be world wide whereever there are whites.
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 22, 2008, 11:53 AM | #
U.S. Jews were happy and thriving in 1965. Then they, the U.S. Jews, pried the U.S. borders open, something they had given themselves, as a community, top priority since 1924 to accomplish. They worked their fingers to the bone on all conceivable fronts, spent fortunes lobbying and bribing, devoted literally their lives to accomplishing it, many of them. They believed in it like they believed in communism, and boy did Jews back then believe in communism, they were all reds! — like communism, open borders and race-mixing of the goys was supposed to usher in a Jewish Golden Age.
A place like today’s Detroit in other words, which for any non-Americans out there is the same as today’s Durban, South Africa, is supposed to be a Jewish Golden Age. Riiiiiiiiiight.
Ever hear of the Diversity Lottery, J? That was a Jewish brainchild too: the U.S. Jews were scared maybe the non-whites weren’t pouring into the U.S. fast enough through the borders they had pried open so they came up with this Jewish scheme to assign residency visas to tens of thousands of non-whites chosen purely at random every year. Imagine someone doing that to Israel. The Jews did it to the U.S. Maybe they thought no one was watching them, no one would hate them for it.
OK, mistakes were made, it’s not too late to fix them. Why isn’t the U.S. fixing them?
Why isn’t the U.S. fixing them? Ever hear of THE JEWS? That’s the biggest reason why, J.
Now that they’ve accomplished their longtime goal of prying the U.S. borders open they’re diminishing as a community and on the way to extinction according to J.
Then why in hell did they pry the borders open, J? Can you as a Jew explain that?
You live in Israel. Can you imagine what it would be like for Israelis if someone came along and pried Israel’s borders open, completely open, to the non-white Third World? And the non-white Third World came pouring in, as it’s come pouring into the United States?
Of course J will say the Jews didn’t do it, the WASP establishment did and the Jews are innocent victims of open borders. Go re-read MacDonald, J:
THE JEWS PRIED THE BORDERS OPEN. THE JEWS ARE RIGHT NOW THE BIGGEST OBSTACLE BY FAR, BOTH IN THE U.S. AND IN EUROPE, TO ANYONE CLOSING THEM AGAIN. Does the Jew York Times support closing the borders again, J? Does Abe Foxman? Does Morris Disease? Who are the Jews, and who are the Jewish organizations who wouldn’t fight against closing the borders again as fiercely as if their lives depended on it? Who? Name them.
Yes there are other obstacles. Homosexuals. Clueless women voters. The capitalists like Bill Gates. The non-whites themselves, already entered, of course, exactly according to Jewish plan, obviously ("once they start pouring in it’ll become a politically irreversible fait accompli” was part of the plan from the beginning, as obviously goes without saying). BUT THE JEWS ARE THE BIGGEST.
Why???????????
I know why.
Posted by Rusty Mason on May 22, 2008, 11:55 AM | #
Fred Scrooby speculated, “ ... recapture of the former Euro position would seem inevitable. “ This is cheery.
Posted by 123 on May 22, 2008, 12:12 PM | #
357
“If the Jews invented Christianity for their own purposes, why would they incorporate such anti-Jewish passages within the text?”
It was not my intention to hurt anyone’s religous feelings, nor do I want to start a theological discussion, nor do I claim to be an expert on religion, especially the Christian one. However, that Christianity was started by jews is probably not disputed. That it evolved over time and experienced a lot of white influences and in the end was transformed into a European religion being at odds with jews is probably undoubted as well. Anyhow, that is my understanding of the Christian history, hence my remark.
What I was referring to specifically is the core belief of “offering the other cheek” or “loving your enemy”, etc. What better way to make your enemy defenseless by instilling this belief in him? And wouldn’t that be a virtually typical jewish strategy as well?
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 22, 2008, 01:59 PM | #
Erratum:
“or the duckweed I think it’s called, doing similar things;”
I couldn’t remember that name so looked it up afterward, and it’s not duckweed I was thinking of but either Eurasian watermilfoil or water hyacinth, one of those two.
But more importantly, look what I ran across in looking that information up: something having obvious applicability to the immigration/race-replacement crisis:
Biological species invasions alter ecological systems in a multitude of ways. Worldwide, an estimated 80% of endangered species could suffer losses due to competition with or predation by invasive species.[28] [...] As highly adaptable and generalized species are introduced to environments already impacted by human activities, some native species may be put at a disadvantage to survive while other species survival is enhanced. [Scroob note: When Jews settle in large numbers in Euro countries the native Euro species are put at a disadvantage to survive while non-white species survival is enhanced.]
[...]Invasive species that are closely related to rare native species have the potential to hybridize with native species. Harmful effects of hybridization have led to a decline and even extinction of native species.
Genetic pollution
Purebred naturally evolved region-specific wild species can be threatened with extinction in a big way[34] through the process of genetic pollution, i.e., uncontrolled hybridization, introgression and genetic swamping which leads to homogenization or replacement of local genotypes as a result of either a numerical and/or fitness advantage of introduced plant or animal[35]. [Scroob note: or deliberate hamstringing of the ability of the threatened native species to resist and repel the invader, hamstringing inflicted by government which has been captured by a rival species hostile to the threatened one and wishing its demise.] Nonnative species can bring about a form of extinction of native plants and animals by hybridization and introgression either through purposeful introduction by humans [Scroob note: Jewish prying open of the country’s borders.] or through habitat modification, bringing previously isolated species into contact. These phenomena can be especially detrimental for rare species coming into contact with more abundant ones where the abundant ones can interbreed with them swamping the entire rarer gene pool creating hybrids thus driving the entire original purebred native stock to complete extinction. [Scroob note: which was exactly the intent of opening the borders: driving Euros to extinction.] Attention has to be focused on the extent of this underappreciated problem that is not always apparent from morphological (outward appearance) observations alone. [Scroob note: As when Englishmen are forcibly hybridized with Poles for example, through ramming open borders down the unconsulted, unwilling Britishers’ throats.] Some degree of gene flow may be a normal, evolutionarily constructive process, and all constellations of genes and genotypes cannot be preserved; however, hybridization with or without introgression may nevertheless threaten a rare species’ existence[36][37].
[...]
Threat to global biodiversity
Biotic invasion is one of the five top drivers for global biodiversity loss [...]. Historically the deliberate introduction of non-native species has been done with little or no consideration of the impact outside of having a favored animal, fish, or plant available locally [Scroob note: or having exotic restaurants available locally, and ultra-low-wage garderners and house servants available locally, the Euro élites reason for doing it.] or perhaps an ill-conceived attempt to control a native pest. [Scroob note: right, the “native pest” being white workingmen who expect a wage they can live on and raise their white families on.] In areas with highly endemic, specialized and isolated flora and fauna such as Australia, New Zealand, Madagascar, the Hawaiian Archipelago, and the Galapagos Islands, introduced species that successfully establish themselves in habitats utilized by natives compete for limited resources or prey on the native species, some of which are unable to adapt to the more competitive environment and gradually die out. [Scroob note: as happens to native whites only when their own governments keep them from striking back and defending themselves, by jailing the white yobs who try to do it physically, for the crime of physical violence, and the intellectuals who try to do it verbally, for the Jewish-engineered “crime” of “hate speech,” and everyone else — landlords, shopkeepers, employers, real estate agents, etc., for the Jewish-concocted “crime” of “racial discrimination.”]
As more adaptable and generalized species are introduced to environments impacted adversely by human activities, some native species may be put at a disadvantage to survive while others thrive in the modified ecosystem. [Scroob note: Right, Jews always think they’re going to thrive in the modified ecosystem that results from opening the borders to the non-white Third World but always end up suffering along with the Euros, or fleeing to
greenerwhiter pastures, paradoxically since they’re the ones who always force the borders open in the first place, in the teeth of Euro unease and outright opposition which they always shout down, through the media they always control, as “racism, discrimination, prejudice, and exclusion,” then when they finally succeed in getting what they ask for, they decide they don’t want it, and they get the hell out, into a white country, where they start the process all over again. That’s the gene that makes moths fly repeatedly into candle flames: Jews have the exact same gene.] [...]Control
The control of invasive species can involve their eradication or their containment within a specified area. [Scroob note: Now, that’s what I like to hear!] In both cases, the goal is to prevent further spread to un-invaded systems. [God damn right!] This type of management can be implemented at several scales, from a homeowner working in his or her own backyard to large government agencies taking a national approach. [Hey just use your imagination!] The decision to eradicate a species versus contain it can depend on several factors, including, but not limited to, the type of habitat, characteristics of the organism, the spatial dimensions of the spread, time available to dedicate to control, and cost. [Cost is no obstacle! Let’s just DO IT!] These factors also play a role in determining which specific control technique(s) to utilize. [Just use your imaginations here, folks! You’ll figure it out — let your imaginations run wild!]
Mechanical control
Mechanical control involves the removal of invasive species by hand or with machines. [In Malaysia they whipped them down the streets with bamboo rods to the police stations whence were sent packing back where they came from.] Often, these methods are effective in controlling small populations and can be target-specific, minimizing harm to non-invasive plants and animals.[46] Mechanical control is labor intensive and requires a large time investment, as treatments must often be applied several times to ensure success.[46] [Hey I’ll do it as often as necessary, don’t worry about that!] Commonly implemented control methods for plants include hand pulling, mowing, girdling, and burning.[46] For invasive animal control, techniques such as hunting, trapping, and the construction of physical barriers like fences or nets, are used.[47]
You get the idea — this very interesting article continues quite a bit further, in the same vein. I’ve made my point, I trust, in regard to its entire applicability to the present crisis of excessive incompatible immigration in the human case. As one can see, the basic science has all been worked out and awaits only its proper applications to the human case.
Posted by 357 on May 22, 2008, 03:07 PM | #
“What I was referring to specifically is the core belief of “offering the other cheek” or “loving your enemy”, etc. What better way to make your enemy defenseless by instilling this belief in him? And wouldn’t that be a virtually typical jewish strategy as well?”—123
Of course you’re right in that context, but the doctrine of “turn the other cheek” has been misinterpreted and its meaning twisted for political purposes. The message of “turn the other cheek” comes into play only if there is an option to avoid an escalation of violence. If that option isn’t appropriate for a given situation, the doctrine of self defence comes into play. Keep in mind: to be a Christian doesn’t preclude oneself from smiting your enemy.
As far as “loving your enemy” is concerned, I think Rusty Mason gave a good explanation in his post on Wednesday, May 21, 2008 at 06:22 PM | #
IMHO, the philosophical disease that weakens our resolve to fight off the enemy isn’t traditional Christianity, it has more to do with secular-liberalism, postmodernism, and the like.
_______________________________________
“If Mr. Farrakhan said that the earth revolves around the sun, I’d be inclined to believe him.”— John
Then do you beleive Farrakhan when he says there’s a “Mothership hovering above the north pole with a fleet of vintage WWI aircraft armed with powerful bombs that will drill down into the earth when given the orders to do so which will result in wiping the white-man off the planet”? Of course you don’t.
All kidding aside, the truth is: the kingpins of the drug trade are almost entirely comprised of brown and yellow skinned people (and lately the Jewish mafia have made some inroads). It’s totally inconceivable to me that prominent government officials such as Bush or Chertoff would involve themselves in such base enterprises. Why should they when they can amass obscene fortunes by working within the legal framework of the free market system; e.g., for Halliburton, Citigroup, GE, Hedge funds, etc. Heck, the Clintons’ net worth in the last 8 years rose to 109 million simply by writing books and giving speeches. Need I say more?
Posted by j on May 22, 2008, 04:13 PM | #
I am glad that 123’s personal experience confirms 100% my comment on South Africa’s Jews. I am not glad about it at all. But what 123 says is true.
Then why in hell did they pry the borders open, J? Can you as a Jew explain that?
I dont know if it was the American Jewish community that did it, but I am sure of one thing, for good or for bad, Jewish organizations focus on Jewish issues and many American Jews or that generation could not sleep at night thinking at their failure to save even a few of the doomed European Jews.
Anyway, as a Zionist, my personal opinion is that all Jews should come and live in Israel, because the Diaspora is intrinsically bad for the Jews. Few American Jews will agree with me just now, but as things seem now, they will feel increasingly uneasy and leave. Just as South African Jews did. (123 - Did you know that even the daughter of Joe Slava is living in Israel?). Ultimately American Jews will continue to assimilate and cross-marry in their majority, rapidly becoming part of the great mass of the American people, a minority will come to Israel, and only a small introverted group of religious Jews will stay and be totally passive in the political arena. That is my optimistic scenario.
prof Macdonald´s first studies were erudite and objective, but lately he started to be obsessed with Jewish conspiracies. A pity.
Posted by Darren on May 22, 2008, 04:37 PM | #
J: MacDonald writes things that are based in well-documented historical fact. Its funny how you will not acknowledge me anymore to provide a through answer to how MacDonald has done anything to the contrary.
I dont know if it was the American Jewish community that did it, but I am sure of one thing, for good or for bad, Jewish organizations focus on Jewish issues and many American Jews or that generation could not sleep at night thinking at their failure to save even a few of the doomed European Jews.
You don’t know? You preach ignorance despite given reams and reams of historical account that proves it beyond a shadow of a doubt? Y