Category: Popular Culture

Oy-limpics, prothink network under attack again

Miscellaneous news.

1. Crude commentary on the London Olympics opening ceremony, but it hits the bull’s eye. The games ought to be called Oy-lympics. You know who it is gloating over and showcasing what they’ve done to England.

2. Not even a month has passed and the prothink network is again being given the boot; Delaney explains it, ZCF comments and JP chimes in. Previously godaddy was made to have them leave. Under Bob Parsons, godaddy respected freedom of speech, but it was bought by venture capitalist firms KKR & Co. L.P. (Kohlberg Kravis Roberts) and Silver Lake Partners, undoubtedly motivated in part to do something about the free speech problem. The prothink network switched to 1&1 hosting, a branch of a publicly-traded corporation, which by its nature is controlled by financial corporations, and the second booting happened following this bad choice.

If they’re into game, prothink folks should switch to companies that host one of several prominent websites that are clear or suspected phony opposition, spreading out their websites over these companies instead of bringing them all under the same company. This is a win-win situation, gaming better than the oylimpics on Talmud-Vision. If they get booted while the fake opposition remains, the suspicions are confirmed. If they’re allowed to remain to protect the fake opposition, they get to keep swelling the ranks of the awakened while the owners or overseers of the web-hosting companies grumble in private.

Posted by R-news on Saturday, July 28, 2012 at 11:04 PM in Blogs & Blogging,  European culture,  Marxism & Culture War,  Media,  Oh Tempora, Oh Mores,  Popular Culture,  That Question Again,  World Affairs
Comments (20) | Tell-a-Friend

First anniversary of the Norway commemoration of the King David Hotel bombing

On 22 July, 2011, Israel commemorated the 65th anniversary of the King David Hotel’s bombing in Palestine, by exploding bombs in Oslo, killing 8, and shooting dead 69 on Utøya Island. Israelis picked Norway for the celebrations because she had increasingly become sympathetic toward Muslims and in favor of a Palestinian State. Professor Ola Tunander concurred that only a State-level entity equivalent has the capability of pulling off such an operation, and this wouldn’t be the Norwegian administration slaughtering relatives on Utøya Island. Tunander knows Israel did it, but to avoid the heat, hinted at it, saying that some have suggested it was Israel’s handiwork. Given Tunander’s academic credentials, the mainstream media decided to keep Tunander’s analysis and the Israeli condemnation of it out of the Anglosphere.

At first it wasn’t clear whether the mysterious individual blamed for the attacks, Anders Behring Breivik, was a scapegoat or patsy. But the cues were there though overlooked by many. One clue was Anders Breivik’s amazing beard, capable of changing within seconds.

Source of these pictures. You know it’s not lighting. Breivik was all smiles for the cameras, in sharp contrast to his being camera shy on 22 July, 2011, when he evaded being filmed on CCTV all the way through his hours-long drive to the seat of the government and then to Utøya Island, and he also managed to avoid being captured on any of the hundreds of cell phones on Utøya Island.

Continued...

Posted by R-news on Sunday, July 22, 2012 at 01:35 PM in European Nationalism,  Far Right,  Global Elitism,  Liberalism & the Left,  Marxism & Culture War,  Media,  New Right,  Political analysis,  Popular Culture,  Psychology,  Social liberalism,  That Question Again,  White Nationalism,  World Affairs
Comments (18) | Tell-a-Friend

A thread for Serbia

The publicity machine for Angelina Jolie’s directorial debut, In the Land of Blood and Honey, has cranked into gear.  The line is that this love story across the ethnic and religious divide of the Bosnian war is stirring passions among those who lived through its three pitiless years.

Murat Tahirovic, who heads an association of ex-prisoners of war, added: “This film is deeply moving for the victims who experienced all of these things.

“It is completely objective and it really tells the facts of what happened during the war. She succeeded in telling the story of the whole war in her film and to show… situations that detainees faced - mass executions, rapes, [being used as] human shields and all the other horrors.”

But Branislav Djukic, who heads the Bosnian Serb Association of Camp Prisoners, had a very different reaction after seeing a trailer. He said that the film “is showing lies” as it depicts only Serbs as rapists during the war and called for it to be barred from cinemas in the autonomous Serbian half of Bosnia. “We’ll do our best to ban the film,” he said.

A commenter on the (at present, very short) thread writes:

A Croatian friend said something that made me think when I was over in Zagreb this summer, whilst discussing the conflicts he said “There are no good guys in this region.”

There is a sense in which the appreciation of the Serb role in the conflict as “no-good guys” but also as victims marks the break-down of the Establishment narrative.  Jolie is still telling it, of course, and she will win all the usual plaudits and probably an Oscar or two.  Coincidentally, another false narrative had an airing on BBC2 this evening.  But the “evil Serb” may not prove as enduring as the “evil Nazi”, and one small light on that may be thrown by the Telegraph comment thread.  So far, it’s hearteningly balanced.  I shall watch it with interest.

Posted by Guessedworker on Saturday, December 17, 2011 at 08:23 PM in Popular Culture,  The Arts & Design
Comments (28) | Tell-a-Friend

Just a silly German ditty

by Potential Frolic

There is this silly german song that conveys in its lyrics something which I think is interesting to think about.  In listening to it I’m reminded of attempts by both sides to trap our people, or our Folk, into various boxes they have set up for the purpose.

There’s the left which condemns us to be the passive principle in our own lands, beholden to whatever groups allowed to “act” as such should choose to do with or to us, and holding onto “us” as a kind of historical memory from which one takes unwilling leave as one goes into the future.  There could hardly be a more consistently conveyed message of 90s media, as I recall it, than the idea that we belonged to some sort of inescapable passing away, that our dwindling was inevitably foreseen but impossible to disagree with.  We were relics, waiting to be retired to our final resting spot.  Having pure ancestry was forecast as being something “quaint” in future times.

And in reaction to that, in rejection of that, there is the furious attempt at rediscovery in forms sometimes militarist - the insistence upon our heroism, our glory, our grandeur - sometimes cultural: Shakespeare, Milton, and whatnot.  Sometimes the literary pantheon is brought in as being a source of glory, other times it is left out, as it is in the most hardcore redoubts of germanocentric militarist religion because people clearly perceive that the soul-hardening which occurs in this pursuit of weaponization is antithetical to the demands of flowering literary culture.  One is reminded here of the difficulties felt by Frederick the Great and Heinrich von Kleist in reconciling their “higher faculties” with the subordination and borishness endemic to their culture.

There is a pious belief in military glory which will argue that this circle can be squared, that after enough soul-hardening “glory”, one also achieves heights of poetic splendor unknowable to others. Yet my reading of poetry and literature dissuades me of this personally.  I think Prussian literature is at its best when its tortured philosophers are wracking their brains to understand how best to fulfill their “duty”, as with Kant, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, and for anything touching inwardness of another quality one is left with an empty roster.

Anyway, the words are as follows:

Come to the window, come here to me
Do you see over there behind the iron fence
Over there in front of the store
They graved our image into stone.

Come out in the street, come here to me
Everywhere flowers and garlands, half rumpelled up
It appears that they took our monument tonight
and unveiled it without us.

Go fetch the sledge-hammer!

They raised a monument to us
and every sane person knows
how that destroys real love.

I’ll call the worst graffitti artists of this town together
At night we’ll spray slogans on the rubble that remains.

After another refrain, there is a haunting part which reminds me always of the enforced obsolescence which Anglo-Saxons accept as their role in American society, and apparently also in Britain; the slow waiting game, waiting on our own death, which is the only action which is supposedly morally allowable to us:

Do you see the inscription down there, by the shoes?
It says in golden letters, that we should rest in eternal peace.

Go fetch the sledge-hammer!

The band is called, pertinently enough, “We are heroes”!

Posted by Guest Blogger on Monday, February 15, 2010 at 06:41 PM in Popular Culture
Comments (5) | Tell-a-Friend

State-sponsored attack on the German immune system

The man coming towards the camera is Günter Wallraff, German investigative reporter and creator of the new film ‘Black on White’, set to open tonight in Germany.  His black face is about as unconvincing as Ms. Stone’s.  The Negro in the movie’s trailer is impressed, though, agreeing emphatically that Wallraff looks better. 

Why is Wallraff doing this?  As he would have us believe, it’s to expose the unacceptable racism that still exists in Germany.  But he gets closer to the real reason in an interview he gave at a recent book fair in Frankfurt.  Wallraff describes one of the scenes in the movie where he tries to rent an apartment in Cologne.  The old lady who is renting the place is very friendly to him, but will not rent it.  When someone else from the film crew comes by later to try renting it, she tells them about how shockingly black the last person was and how she won’t allow it, due to their lifestyle, the spices they use, etc.  This expression of freedom of association, illegal in Germany, is considered by Wallraff to be an example of terrible racism (so terrible that it survived the cut from his 600+ hours of footage).  But this isn’t the worst of it:

What was more appalling…  We had to take legal precautions.  Afterwards, we went to people to get permission so it could be shown.  With some, it didn’t work, so we had to blur their faces.  With this woman, as with some others, though, she stood by it.  She had no problem whatsoever with it…Within her circles she felt this would make her appreciated…It wasn’t something said without thinking…

The goal of the film is to shame people, to serve as a lesson to anyone who would dare resist, or merely question, state-sponsored race-replacement.  The German racial immune system is in bad shape after decades of Holocaust and war guilt propaganda.  Herr Wallraff was outraged to find a healthy, if somewhat aged, T cell.  I’m sure he’ll be pleased if his film has a radiative effect.  To what extent it does will of course depend on who sees the film.  Most of those who see it tonight in the Hackesche Höfe Kino (Berlin) will likely have already made up their minds that race-replacement is a good thing, not to be resisted.  The targetted dosage will be delivered later, when the film is broadcast (the German equivalent, ausstrahlen, fittingly is based on ‘to radiate’) on ARD, one of Germany’s public stations, which anyone who owns a TV or radio is legally required to finance.  The film has been sponsored by one of these public stations (WDR).  I don’t know when exactly it will be broadcast, but I won’t be seeing it in the theater.  Being asked to pay twice for genocidal propaganda is too much, even in the BRD.

Posted by Dasein on Thursday, October 22, 2009 at 05:54 AM in European culture,  Media,  Popular Culture
Comments (26) | Tell-a-Friend

Still not en vogue

According to Hannah Pool at The Guardian, this is an example of offensive black face intended to equate black skin with ‘exotic otherness’.

Continued...

Posted by Dasein on Thursday, October 15, 2009 at 05:35 PM in Humour,  Popular Culture
Comments (51) | Tell-a-Friend

Xenophobia Vindicated: a movie review

By The Narrator

Note: as this is the middle of summer and with so much heavy political subject matter on the table I thought I’d offer something a little lighter yet still relevant. It’s a review of a twenty-year-old film. Actually, as I lay out the entire plot below, it’s more than just a spoiler free review.

It’s, admittedly, a bit of an oddball film, but after viewing it again recently for the first time in years -as well as reading some reviews of it, (plus the fact that I’ve not seen it mentioned on other pro-Western sites) - I went ahead with a write up of it as it struck me as just how pro-nativist the film actually is.

THE BURBS (1989)

‘The Burbs’, a somewhat obscure 1980’s oddball comedy staring Tom Hanks and Carrie Fisher met with mixed reviews and mediocre box office success upon its release twenty years ago, yet its theme is hardly abstract or uncommon.  The story is set in the Midwestern, middle-class (all White), cul-de-sac of Mayfield Place.  Its residents consist of the “rational” straight-man Ray Peterson (Hanks) and his wife Carol (Fischer), pudgy gossiper Art Weingartner, gung-ho war veteran/gardner Mark Rumsfield and his scantly clad wife Bonnie, cantankerous “old guy” Walter Seznick and (of the featured neighbors) nosy teen, Ricky Butler.

It’s the kind of traditional neighborhood where everyone is local and they all know one anothers quirks (such as Ray walking the dog as an excuse to smoke cigars as his wife won’t let him smoke in the house. But all the neighbors know better anyway). It is thoroughly modern, yet quaint and safe in its familiarness.  Into this scene of middle American homogeneity come the new neighbors, the Klopeks.

Little is known of them, accept for their name, yet most seem to have heard, and gladly exchange in, disturbing rumors about them. These rumors are exacerbated by the strange noises coming from the Klopek home at night, and the fact that they are only seen coming and going after dark. The exception to the gossiping is Ray, who consciously works not to notice anything out of the ordinary, as he “vacations” around the house for a week in the world he chooses to perceive.

Continued...

Posted by Guest Blogger on Saturday, July 25, 2009 at 04:12 PM in Popular Culture
Comments (41) | Tell-a-Friend

What, then, is The Susan Effect?

This is a bit of a lightweight post that takes me into a world I rarely enter.  But you’d have to live in a faraway galaxy not to have heard this week about Susan Boyle.  Todate, sentimentally-minded YouTubers everywhere have fought back the tears at least 40 million times as overnight this stout and frumpy 47 year old spinster, an unemployed church volunteer, has become Scotland’s least likely superstar.

Since the age of twelve Miss Boyle has hoped to do justice to the gift of a wonderful voice.  The high-point of her efforts was a track she recorded for a charity CD in 1999.  Her chance finally arrived in January at an audition for Simon Cowell’s Britain‘s Got Talent, and this was the show that aired on ITV last Saturday.  Now she has a huge fan base, a fansite, a Sony contract in the offing, and this commendation from Les Miserables producer Cameron Mackintosh, commenting on her rendition of I dreamed a dream:

“Vocally it is one of the best versions of the song I’ve ever heard.  Touching, thrilling and uplifting.  I do hope she gets to sing it for the Queen.”

Singing in front of Her Majesty the Queen, it should be said, is the reward for the winner of BGT every year.  The chances this year of that not being Miss Boyle are negligible to non-existent, and probably less than that.

Well, a lot of clever folks have wiseacred in the world’s press about why this curious little episode has wrought such an enormous emotional impact, particularly in America.  Of course, it’s never enough to say the obvious: that it’s simply a heart-warming and uplifting story, which it plainly is.  No, we’ve been treated to everything from a new anti-capitalist sensibility in these recessionary times to protest against the cult of celebrity to the love of the underdog to the fulfilment of the American Dream.  A particularly viperous Jewish feminist in the Guardian even took the opportunity to berate “us” (in whom it is not at all clear that she included herself) for judging women by appearances.

So I thought I’d also reject the heart-warming and uplifting scenario, and join this motley throng with a few observations of my own.

Continued...

Posted by Guessedworker on Friday, April 17, 2009 at 07:50 PM in Popular Culture
Comments (25) | Tell-a-Friend

Of rough riders and Roughback Mountains

The Economist ‘World in 2007’ anthology has kvetched a little about internet media (that’s us, folks) and the damage sustained by the stodgy, old TV stations, and especially the advertisers that profit from them, from these new Huns at the gates of Rome. Here’s what it had to say:

Indeed, the only thing keeping TV programmers off the sills of their skyscrapers is the fact that the source of their income, marketers, have not embraced web video as quickly as have the viewers. Each year advertisers collectively pay more and more for a smaller and smaller audience. This phenomenon has defied economic gravity for so many years now that few even comment on the absurdity of the whole thing (to say nothing of the risible model of interruption-based TV advertising itself: annoying 90% of the audience for the sake of reaching 10% who might care about your product makes sense only when you’ve got a captive audience, which is no longer true).

Of course, the recent plaints about the adman’s slightly too intrusive hold on the latest James Bond film are all examples of the last point made. The reason we resent adverts is that they are ultimately nothing beyond commercial propaganda, an attempt to make us believe, via psychological tricks rather than rational arguments, that we need some fadish gimmick or other. The principle is the same as election posters or grandiose military rallies.

Continued...

Posted by Alex Zeka on Wednesday, January 3, 2007 at 11:27 AM in Popular Culture,  Science & Technology
Comments (3) | Tell-a-Friend

Nasty, Racist, Islamophobic, Militaristic video game set to be Christmas bestseller

There’s some fight in the old faith yet:

A video game that depicts a crusade of violence by Christians could be heading for the bestseller charts this Christmas, even though it has been condemned by Muslims and secularists.

The game Left Behind: Eternal Forces is set in post-apocalyptic New York and features God’s army battling the Antichrist.

Based on the bestselling Christian fantasy Left Behind series created by Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins, it puts players in command of brainwashed legions fighting the “good fight” for Christianity.

Gamers are ordered to convert or kill in order to re-model America as a Christian-controlled state, and establish its world vision of Christ’s dominion over all aspects of life.

Gamers pit battles between the paramilitary Christian Tribulation Force and the grey, faceless Global Community forces of the Antichrist, said to be modelled on the United Nations.

 

‘Grey, faceless Global Community’! As in, what we might have once the distinct races and nations of the West are subsumed into a toffee-coloured global mass!

And just wait until you hear what Terry Sanderson, President of the National Secular Society* (read:National Society for the eradication of Christianity) and author of such uplifting and edifying works as these, has to say:

Fundamentalists on both the Christian and the Muslim side are creating this kind of nasty, extreme propaganda and aiming it at young people.

Translation: “This is precisely the sort of extreme propaganda that Muslims have been using to encourage their young to make war on Christians. This, however, is an example of Christians - Whites - doing the same, which can’t be allowed. Don’t you remember that you’re supposed to be a helot, not to fight back?”

Now, why would a campaigning homosexualist, in other words somebody who campaigns for the benefit of those whose interests do not extend past this generation, be so hostile to a reaffirmation, however vulgar, of the fighting Christian faith, which is apt to make life uncomfortable for the near future but is nigh on essential if we are to survive in the long run? That’s easy enough to answer. Now, why does the Times choose to quote him without mentioning any of these highly salient details? That’s the more interesting question.

We don’t have to agree with the sentiments, fundamentalist, totalitarian and genocidal ones, endorsed by Left Behind to welcome the arrival of this video-game. It will act purely as what The Revolutionary Conservative once called ‘a totalitarian onslaught of mind-numbing extremity against Political Correctness’. It’ll be a way of confronting Cultural Marxism with its dialectical opposite, and seeing it flinch in sheer terror at the spectacle. After all, they, not we, first decreed that the public celebration of Christmas was but a lesser variant of the same crime that the Holocaust represented, the crime of racism. Those behind this game simply agree, although they are also unwilling to give up Christmas.

*Here‘s a rather interesting website. Scroll down and count the number of National Secular Society members you can find.

Posted by Alex Zeka on Tuesday, December 5, 2006 at 02:43 PM in Christianity,  Popular Culture
Comments (19) | Tell-a-Friend

WARNING: WHAT YOU ARE ABOUT TO SEE IS A PROFANE HERESY

“Kramer’s” Racist Tirade—Caught on Tape

Michael Richards exploded in anger as he performed at a famous L.A. comedy club last Friday, hurling racial epithets that left the crowd gasping, and TMZ has obtained exclusive video of the ugly incident.

Richards, who played the wacky Cosmo Kramer on the hit TV show “Seinfeld,” appeared onstage at the Laugh Factory in West Hollywood. Kyle Doss, an African-American, told TMZ he and some friends were in the cheap seats and he was playfully heckling Richards when suddenly, the comedian lost it.

The camera started rolling just as Richards began his attack, screaming at one of the men, “Fifty years ago we’d have you upside down with a f***ing fork up your ass.”

Richards continued, “You can talk, you can talk, you’re brave now motherf**ker. Throw his ass out. He’s a nigger! He’s a nigger! He’s a nigger! A nigger, look, there’s a nigger!”

The crowd is visibly and audibly confused and upset. Richards responds by saying, “They’re going to arrest me for calling a black man a nigger.”

I haven’t seen the video yet.  I’ll update this post as I get new info.  (I’ve yet to confirm rumors that Richards was responding to being called a cracker, or that he told the negros “that’s what happens when you interrupt a white man”)

Update: Richards is a Jew:
Richards apologizes, hires crisis expert

Michael Richards is taking his contriteness to the next level: he’s hired a public relations expert with deep contacts in the black community.

New York publicist Howard Rubenstein took on Richards as a client Wednesday after being contacted by the actor-comedian. He then arranged for Richards to call the Revs.
Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.

As for reports that Richards shouted out anti-Semitic remarks during another standup comedy routine in April, Rubenstein confirmed his client did, but that he was only role-playing.

“He’s Jewish. He’s not anti-Semitic at all. He was role-playing, he was playing a part. He did use inappropriate language, but he doesn’t have any anti-Semitic feelings whatsoever,” Rubenstein said.

Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on Monday, November 20, 2006 at 06:33 PM in Humour,  Popular Culture
Comments (42) | Tell-a-Friend

Bono: typical limousine liberal hypocrite

It isn’t just Bono’s U2 who are talking through their hat about tax avoidance

What is surprising is that the rest of the world continues to take Bono seriously. I would have thought that after the revelation that U2 moved their music publishing company to the Netherlands to cut their tax bill in half, he wouldn’t have dared stepped out of his mansion for fear of being laughed to scorn.

Here was a man who incited audiences to condemn Western politicians for not sending enough of their taxpayers’ money to the wretched of the earth, avoiding tax himself. The Edge, U2’s guitarist, sounded as edgy as a plump accountant in the 19th hole when he explained the move offshore by saying: ‘Our business is a very complex business. Of course we’re trying to be tax-efficient. Who doesn’t want to be tax-efficient?’

The practical consequences of being ‘tax-efficient’ are many. If you say you care about Africa, why are you paying fees to international money movers who encourage Africa’s ‘tax-efficient’ kleptomaniacs to hide their loot in tax havens? You are also forcing fellow citizens, who didn’t make U2’s estimated $110m in 2005, to pick up the bill, not only for foreign aid, but for education, health, law and order and defence.

And all the time while others suffer on your behalf, you maintain that you are behaving reasonably. (‘Who doesn’t want to be tax-efficient?’ as the Edge said.) The members of U2 aren’t the only humbugs. Less noticed than the legal arguments over the ownership of Bono’s hat was a loud assault on Labour’s attempts to make the wealthy pay their taxes. The press, most notably the Times, spent the week insisting that Gordon Brown must listen to the City or pay the price. The CBI said the relationship between the Revenue and Customs and the financial sector has ‘deteriorated’ because of ‘attacks on previously accepted tax practices on the pretext of clamping down on anti-avoidance measures’.

Bono, Tax Avoider

A familiar paradox about leftist celebrities in the entertainment industry is that their embrace of progressivism almost never includes a wholehearted embrace of progressive taxation, i.e., the principle that the richer you get, the larger the percentage of your income you ought to pay in taxes. The latest example is U2’s Bono, a committed and unusually sophisticated anti-poverty crusader who is taking surprisingly little heat for the decision by his band, U2, to relocate its music-publishing business from Ireland to the Netherlands in order to shelter its songwriting royalties from taxation.

The only thing I can add is my schadenfreude at seeing the Great Irishman cut off at the knees by two Nice White Fellows.

Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on Friday, November 10, 2006 at 12:37 AM in Liberalism & the Left,  Media,  Popular Culture
Tell-a-Friend

War on Terror on film

Mel Gibson’s latest

Sacrificing American boys on the altar of the great modern god, Global Democracy:

In describing its portrait of a civilization in decline, Gibson said, “The precursors to a civilization that’s going under are the same, time and time again,” drawing parallels between the Mayan civilization on the brink of collapse and America’s present situation. “What’s human sacrifice,” he asked, “if not sending guys off to Iraq for no reason?”

Fidel and his Hollywood enablers

Does liberal self-hatred get any more hilarious than this:

Chavez might have taken a cue from the Cuban Maestro’s own visit in 1995 to New York (a city he twice tried to incinerate. See full documentation in Fidel; Hollywood’s Favorite Tyrant) for the U.N.‘s 50th anniversary festivities. “The Toast of Manhattan!” crowed Time magazine about Castro’s reception by the General Assembly and later by Manhattan’s Beautiful People.

Speaking of Hollywood…

...they don’t seem to mind if you’re Cuban or American. Just provided you’re a mass murderer:

In Operation Hollywood, filmmaker Emilio Pacull follows up an investigative study by film industry journalist Dave Robb on the help producers have sought from the military over the years. Robb, who worked for Variety and The Hollywood Reporter, says he found himself obsessed with the minutiae of these negotiations with the boys with ships, tanks, materiel, information, bases, access to land, troops and some very real-looking fireworks.

Mel, oh, Mel. Shame on you, you awful anti-semite who probably fantasize about committing genocide. How dare you try to conceal it by refusing to kowtow to warmongers the way everyone else does, darlink’? Don’t you know that a shrivelled skull is the fashion accessory to have?

PS: It might be thought that the expected roles in the above are reversed. Mel Gibson, the archetypical tough guy, is filming anti-war polemics, whilst the ‘sensitive’ Hollywood types are siddling up to all sorts of military-industrial complexes. There’s nothing odd about this however: eunuchs, and their modern equivalents homo/metrosexuals, have always been used as executioners and the most ruthless soldiers, as their inability to start a family leaves them more likely to not much care if millions of young men are sent of to die. At the same time, their short-termism also comes in useful for many despots, who too prefer not to think about the conseqeunces their actions will have after their death. Hollywood fashionistas are just the modern equivalents of Ottoman janissaries, both racially different from those they command and without any of the paternal compassion which comes from knowing that one day your own children might be sent to fight under just such circumstances.

Posted by Alex Zeka on Wednesday, September 27, 2006 at 04:34 PM in Popular Culture,  War on Terror
Comments (11) | Tell-a-Friend

‘Crash’

The movie Crash, written and directed by Canadian Paul Haggis (non-Jewish, I believe) is nominated for a bunch of Academy Awards tonight. Mainstream media critics have been praising the film for the past year claiming it bravely takes on the issue of racism in American society. As you know that usually means anti-white propaganda. With that in mind I had no intention of seeing it, however, a guest brought the DVD last night so I felt obligated to watch it. Crash is far from a WN movie but I was pleasantly surprised by it.

There is, of course, plenty of political correctness with lip service being played to some anti-racist themes along with a scene in which a supposedly racist white cop (Matt Dillon) feels up a (light skinned) black woman. But the film is unusual in that it is not all black and white…so to speak. Surprisingly the Dillon character ends up being a hero but his liberal white partner ends up killing an unarmed black criminal.  White liberal elites are shown to have no feelings of solidarity for other whites as they and a black cop (Don Cheadle) frame a possibly innocent white man for political reasons.

Continued...

Posted by Matra on Sunday, March 5, 2006 at 12:37 PM in Popular Culture
Comments (18) | Tell-a-Friend

Feminism faltering

That’s what this feminist says:

O Survivor, Bootylicious and Independent Woman, you were sweet relief in an otherwise macho, misogynous music video scene.  So imagine my surprise last week when I heard the lyrics to their new single, Cater 2 U:

“My life would be purposeless without you. Do anything for my man. I got your slippers, your dinner, your dessert and so much more . . . anything you want just let me cater to you. I want to give you my breath, my strength, that’s the least I can do . . .”  The DC girls continue: “I’ll keep it tight, I’ll keep my figure right, I’ll keep my hair fixed, when you come home late, tap me on my shoulder, I’ll roll over, baby I’m here to serve you.”

Continued...

Posted by jonjayray on Sunday, July 10, 2005 at 04:14 AM in Popular Culture
Comments (5) | Tell-a-Friend

Sly Stallone, Rambo IV and why those white separatists have to die

I’ve never been a fan of Stallone, and the following doesn’t exactly further endear the man to me:-

Though he’s “assimilated into the tapestry of America,” workplace stress forces Rambo to leave the big city and moves his family to the boonies. Their lives are upended however by white supremacists unhappy about a part-Navajo man moving into the area.  When the racists take Rambo’s 10-year-old daughter hostage, dad is forced back into action to rescue her.

Yeah, sure … happens all the time.

It is more probable that the “white supremacists” themselves will have a tiny bit of Native American ancestry, but never mind.  Never mind as well that this is just another Hollywood smear-job on white separatists, who are constantly mislabelled as supremacists and who, perfectly obviously, do not engage in taking part-Navajo children hostage or any other illegal activities.

Continued...

Posted by JW Holliday on Thursday, June 2, 2005 at 12:36 PM in Popular Culture
Comments (116) | Tell-a-Friend

Some thoughts on “The Simpsons”

A possible countervailing influence to their cultural dominance that some Leftists are beginning to notice (Bates, 2001)  is the amazingly popular Homer Simpson.  There is rather a good wrap on The Simpsons here.  Excerpt:

“Conservatives and libertarians should appreciate The Simpsons for regularly showcasing much that they hold dear.

“There’s no ideological requirement to work here,” executive producer Al Jean says by phone. Though free marketeers and liberals write the show, Jean says they agree on this: “We mistrust authorities and people who try to hold people down. We believe more in individuals and families.”

The Simpsons are a nuclear family led by an atomic power-plant engineer and a stay-at-home mom. They regularly attend church and occasionally seek spiritual advice from their minister, Reverend Timothy Lovejoy. Marge Simpson even homeschools Bart when he is expelled for misbehavior.”

Continued...

Posted by jonjayray on Thursday, April 7, 2005 at 06:57 AM in Popular Culture
Comments (6) | Tell-a-Friend