Majorityrights Central > Category: World Affairs

Times of Israel, ‘Ties with Israel have never been closer, says Russian chief rabbi’, 08 Jun 2016 (emphasis added):

Russian President Vladimir Putin speaks with Russia’s Chief Rabbi Berel Lazar in the Jewish Museum in Moscow, Thursday, June 13, 2013. (AP Photo/Alexander Zemlianichenko)

MOSCOW – Israeli-Russian relations are reaching unprecedented heights, Russia’s chief rabbi said Tuesday, positing that the countries are rapidly improving ties because they are each “snubbed” by the international community.

“There’s never been a time when the ties were so close,” Rabbi Berel Lazar told The Times of Israel. “There’s no question that if you think back 40, 50 years — even 25 years ago when the relations started, it was still very cold. Israel was taboo. I remember those days when we dreamed of the Russian president visiting Israel; it was something nobody thought would be possible.”

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visited Moscow this week for his fourth meeting with President Vladimir Putin in less than 12 months. The Israeli leader was received with many official honors, a welcome he called “exceptional.”

Lazar, who was born in Italy, received his rabbinic ordination in the US and has been serving as Russia’s chief rabbi since 2000, is scheduled to meet Netanyahu Wednesday morning together with other senior leaders of the local Jewish community.

The improving ties between Moscow and Jerusalem can, in part, be attributed to the common experience of terrorism but also to shared cultural and economic goals, Lazar said.

“It’s also because today Russia is being snubbed by others, and Israel is more or less in same situation, they found each other,” he said. “Some countries in the world like to feel they’re the policemen of the world. They’re the ones to tell Russia and Israel what they should do. I think the time has come for world leaders to sit around the table and understand we’re all equal. There shouldn’t be different standards for different countries. You can’t expect from Israel more than from any other country.”

Said to be close to Putin, Lazar — who belongs to the Chabad Lubavitch Hasidic movement — is sometimes criticized as too uncritical of the Kremlin’s policies.

While Moscow does not seek to replace the United States’ as Jerusalem’s most important ally, Netanyahu is taking a “risk” by getting closer to Putin, the chief rabbi surmised.

“Israel has a simple message: we don’t put all our eggs in one basket. We don’t rely only on America. There are a lot of other countries in the world, Russia is one of them, and we’re going to build a relationship with as many countries as possible,” he said.

“In past years, Israel was much closer to the US than to Russia, but that was when America listened to Israel more. And today when America is not listening to Israel and is not realistic about the problems Israel is facing, I think that Israel has all the right to turn to other countries, find more friends and supporters, including Russia.” he added.

“In past years, Israel was much closer to the US than to Russia, but that was when America listened to Israel more. And today when America is not listening to Israel and is not realistic about the problems Israel is facing, I think that Israel has all the right to turn to other countries, find more friends and supporters, including Russia.” he added.

Some countries will not be thrilled about Israel getting closer to Russia and therefore Netanyahu “is taking a risk by coming here” so regularly, he said, adding that he has only been in Washington once in the last year.

The last time an Israeli leader was received in the Russian capital with such honors is over a decade ago, Lazar said.

“It’s really showing the world how much Israel is viewed in a positive way in Russia today. Look at the press in Europe; look at the press in Russia. Look at anti-Semitism in Europe; look at anti-Semitism in Russia. Look at how the president [Putin] is really involved in what’s going on in the Jewish community and how in other places in the world, [the leaders] don’t care about the Jews.”

Despite his lavish praise for Putin, Lazar did not deny that Russia often votes against Israel in international forums and sells weapons to Israel’s enemies in the region.

However, he argued that Moscow considers Israel’s security as “of utmost importance.”

“After every meeting they [Putin and Netanyahu] had in the past, Prime Minister Netanyahu walks out and says, ‘I got enough assurances, I have nothing serious to worry about; we feel Russia really understands our issues and cooperates with us,’” said Lazar.

As opposed to the US and Europe, Russia has friendly relations with some Arab states and Iran, the chief rabbi said. “And sometimes because of these relations [the Russians] have leverage that other countries don’t have. They feel it’s important for them to keep a certain kind of balance.”

The implications of this should be fairly obvious to everyone, and needs no long elaboration. All of this captures the essence of what we at Majorityrights have been trying to warn the pro-Russia crowd about all along.

The Jewish lobby doesn’t place all their eggs in one basket, and Russia’s economic and military connections to the Arab world can always be used as leverage to produce outcomes that are favourable to Israel.

One memorable example of this can be found during the earlier stages of the Syrian conflict in 2013, when John Kerry demanded that the government of Syria must come to the table and agree to surrender its chemical weapons and dissolve its chemical weapons battalions, thus ceding all of the strategic gains against Israel that had been secured through the development and enhancement of those weapons.

People were sceptical as to the enforceability of this demand. After all, couldn’t Syria simply go to Russia and ask to be supplied with the S-300 and some Su-30s, and thus severely decrease the ability of the United States to threaten them?

That was not to be, as Vladimir Putin and Sergei Lavrov would ‘rise’ to Kerry’s challenge of ridding Syria of weapons within a week, by turning around and using their leverage over Syria to force them into accepting the challenge, by refusing to supply Syria with the S-300, and then brokering the handover of all Syria’s chemical weapons to the international community.

Absolutely classic.

          The Sermon on The Mount Ensconces The Golden Rule of Altruism

Majorityrights prefers to deal with verifiable reality as opposed to speculative theory and faith based systems of rules as we look after the interests of our people. We are looking after genetic groupings and genetic interests as key criteria, even if these are not the only important verifiable criteria to keep track of our peoplehood and that of others. Rationale and rule structures are another criteria for that purpose.

While existence is of course equiprimordial to genetic interests, to secure it for any span and legacy requires rationale and varying degrees of sophistication to negotiate complex rule structures of interaction. “Rules” (1) are the term of common currency that we will use for the logics of meaning and action that people use to negotiate interaction and these complex, protracted exchanges beyond episode, close personal relationships in yield to maturity of their full social system; and its relation to other social systems.

For those of us who are coming from this kind of perspective, where we perceive ourselves as rationally and empirically grounded, it is difficult to understand someone like pastor David Blackburn, his love of Jesus that would have him not only forgive, but want to share his love of Jesus with the men who raped and murdered his wife and unborn child; but to my knowledge, he is at least not hoping to get them released from prison.

It is even more difficult to understand European peoples allowing, even welcoming foreign incursions into The U.K., Sweden, France and Germany - it is difficult to fathom the mindset of a Merkel, who would destroy our European peoples in service to non-Europeans. But there is one rule, convoluted rule, that they have in common and makes their position intelligible to us despite their apparent irrationality.

The Golden Rule is a part of the Sermon on the Mount, which is a central text in the Christian faith. It states: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”. There are similar instructions in many other cultures.

Despite receiving high respect and wide popularity, the rule raises critical questions. What is the recommendation more exactly, and is it good advice?

This post will prepare a discussion of the work of Jan Tullberg - viz., the difference between the golden rule of benevolence as opposed to the silver rule of reciprocity - as it applies to assist in the reconstruction of a necessary consensus of moral rules among European peoples and for coordinating our relations to others.
____________

There is a consensus among advocates of European peoples that in essence we seek to secure the existence of our people. There is much dispute over how that is to be done…

READ MORE...

                   
              The worship of the Silk Mother is about 4,000 years old and still continues…

READ MORE...

Sometimes I notice stories that are so awful that I almost think it’s some kind of joke, before I realise that it’s actually serious.

Here’s one such example of this:

Daily Mail, ‘Militant teachers demand schools stop promoting ‘British values’ as it makes children from other cultures feel inferior’, 28 Mar 2016:

That moment when memes meet reality.

• Guidelines want to encourage children to appreciate British values
• But teachers reject the move, which they say is linked to colonialism
• Critics have accused teaching unions of waging ‘ideological war’

Teachers are demanding that schools stop promoting ‘fundamental British values’ over claims it could make children think other cultures are inferior.

The National Union of Teachers said telling children about the country’s democracy, law and traditions could encourage ‘cultural supremacy’ and urged a new focus on ‘international human rights’ instead.

Under government guidelines, which are aimed at tackling extremism in the wake of the Trojan Horse scandal, children must be taught about being a British citizen as well as tolerance other faiths and lifestyles.

However, union leaders said the term was demeaning to other cultures ‘particularly in the context of multicultural schools and the wider picture of migration’.

Delegates passed a motion in favour of campaigning to scrap it during the NUT annual conference in Brighton today.

Christopher Denson, an NUT representative from Coventry, said: ‘We need to fight to reject this notion of British values, to fight for notions of human values and human rights.

‘We have to stand together across communities to bring down barriers, bring down borders, to say no to Islamophobia, no to anti-Semitism, no to fascism and any form of racism.’

The motion said that migrants make a ‘huge economic, political and social contribution’ to the country and that public services and businesses would ‘face severe difficulties’ without them.

It criticised the government for only taking in a ‘minute fraction’ of refugees and vowed to campaign for ‘policies that welcome’ them to the country.

The union agreed to ‘gather and collate’ teaching materials on migrants and refugees for members to use in classrooms from now on.

Mr Denson said he disliked using the term ‘fundamental British values’ in his classroom when many of his pupils had ancestry in countries which had encountered British colonialism.

He said: ‘The inherent cultural supremacism in that term is both unnecessary and unacceptable.

‘And seen with the Prevent agenda, it belies the most thinly veiled racism and a conscious effort to divide communities.’

He added: ‘It’s our duty to push real anti-racist work in all schools. And that doesn’t mean talk of tolerating other’s views, but genuine, inclusive anti-racist work.’

He said he had requested a week of themed assemblies every year in his school, with topics including apartheid and the rise of Islamophobia ‘in the context of anti-Semitism in the 1930s’.

‘This year we focussed on the migrant crisis in Calais, the Mediterranean and beyond,’ he added.

‘We organised a politics day for Year 8s [aged 12 to 13] in the week before Easter.

‘They had a day to form a political party in their tutor groups to come up with a manifesto, film a broadcast, and make banners and take part in a debate.

‘Apart from the quality of the work, the other thing that really made my proud was that every single tutor group had as a policy, ‘refugees welcome, open the borders’.

‘We need to be pushing at every level for anti-racism to be in the core curriculum for every child.’

Many of the activists at the conference said they had been to migrant camps over the channel to take food and provisions.

Christine Blower, general secretary of the NUT said: ‘Schools and teachers play a key role in welcoming migrant and refugee children and young people to this country, and supporting their progress within schools.

‘The NUT condemns the Government’s inadequate response to the current migrant situation, which has exacerbated the suffering for so many, including school-age children and young people.

‘The NUT has produced a guide to Welcoming Refugee Children to your School and has a dedicated section on its website for teaching resources which have been provided by teachers for teachers, on the issue.

‘The NUT will continue to work with Show Racism the Red Card, Hope Not Hate and others, to campaign for Government policies that welcome migrants and refugees to this country. The NUT will also continue to press for anti-racism work to be enshrined within the curriculum of all schools.’

The requirement on schools to teach fundamental British values was introduced in 2014 in a bid to crack down on extremism in schools.

It followed the Trojan Horse scandal, in which state schools in Birmingham were infiltrated by hardliners who tried to impose an Islamic agenda.

Ofsted, the schools regulator, has been penalising schools which do not sufficiently show that they are promoting British values.

Chris McGovern, of the Campaign for Real Education, said: ‘Teachers should not be playing the role of fifth columnists in the ideological war currently being fought over our national identity and our national sovereignty.

‘Teaching children that British values are part of “cultural supremacism” will, at best, make them feel guilty about being British and, at worst, radicalise them in order to ‘make up’ for the sins of their fathers.

‘If one wishes to destroy a nation and build a “brave new world” you begin by indoctrinating and brainwashing the children.

‘This process of ‘re-education’ has started some years ago in our schools and we are, now, seeing its consequences in the suppression of free speech on our university campuses.

‘The notion of ‘value relativism’ - that all views are equally valid - has reached saturation point in our schools.

‘In many classrooms this has led to the views of terrorists being given equal weigh to those of the victim of terrorism. Against this background the latest motions from the NUT come as no surprise, at all.’

The Department for Education has been contacted for comment.

I’m sure that the Department for Education will be just as speechless as I am right now.

Dugin/Stark interview: Beginning concession to White Post Modernity

Whereas he used to have a completely botched notion of post modernity - mixing-up what should be the antidote to modernity and liberalism with liberalism itself - it now appears that we are improving Dugin’s understanding - viz., that modernity is the problem and the essence of liberalism.

His ideas in this talk are largely amenable and well considered.

His proposition that the state is a bit too much of an artifice to suffice by itself and that there needs to be a hypothesized realm, as we would say, beyond the physically verified moment, which girds and orients a people, is also well considered.

However, now that we are getting him to a better understanding of “post moderntiy”, viz. White post modernity, we need to get him to a better understanding of biological reality and “racism.”

Anti-racism is the quintessential modernist liberal notion; it is a Cartesian farce: It has been proposed as innocent but it is not -

Anti-racism is prejudiced, it is not innocent, it is hurting and it is killing people.

For “racism” is a necessary concept in a benign form, which is not supremacism nor a singular conclusion to aggrandizement and annihilation of an opposing people (as YKW propose and liberals might accept as a definition). It is in fact, a practical concept that is practiced by ordinary people everyday of necessity, as a non-Cartesian requirement of the human condition, of being in the world - one must discriminate in human-sized categories, including social classification - of one’s own people and of other peoples - to form a coherent basis of ones own and to form a basis of human ecologies for our systemic coherence, social accountability, warrant and agency.

These classifications are “hermeneutic”, that is to say that they are not absolutely empirically based in every moment, as the taken-for-granted and the state of partial knowledge - faith, if you will - must subsist behind the working hypothesis.

Call it a working hypothesis, call it faith, call it rules, call it narrative, call it taken for granted, call it the partly unknown, call it a mystery, a quest, an adventure, some of that as you must, some of it you might, as it has practical function to ensconce the under-determining facts of the empirical; but I have believed and continue to believe that a sacred overlay, in orientation and guidance of a people is a good idea.

I believe that it is a hermeneutic notion nevertheless, which is itself accountable to deal concretely with biology, sex and genetics, mediating toward fairness and justice in regards to this social capital - otherwise, without this empirical accountability, this “spiritual” realm will be the realm of evil charlatans.

“Third Worlders”, “Non-Whites”,  “Asians”... There are DIFFERENCES THAT MAKE A DIFFERENCE

                      “Third World immigration is the real culprit” - TNO

               
                tari-huli images from this site.

               
               
                Photo: Dabiq/Corbis

  Observe the DIFFERENCES, they are NOT TOO COMPLICATED TO DISCERN
               
                   

Press Start

In the run up to the speech that Donald Trump was going to make at AIPAC, lots of ‘prominent white nationalist movement figures’ started making extremely arrogant statements about how they believe that Donald Trump is only pretending to support the Jews by deliberately attending a place where politicians go to be lobbied by Jews while being supported by Jews at every turn.

At Majorityrights we have done everything to try to highlight the fact that placing stock in Donald Trump is completely irrational and continues to be irrational.

It’s plainly obvious that white nationalists of any sort have exactly zero capability to influence Donald Trump’s campaign, because Donald Trump is not a white nationalist and does not accept campaign donations from white nationalist groups. Donald Trump is saying things that he thinks will convince the various contradictory segments of the Republican Party voting base to imagine that he empathises with them while they wait with bated breath to see what he’ll say next, so that they can write yet another breathless article on how the Trump train ‘cannot be stopped’. It should be obvious.

Attaching themselves to a political candidate like Donald Trump, and running articles that praise him for an entire electoral season, even though they know that they have no means through which they can control him, is a bad idea which yeilds predictably bad results.

You are pretty bad at this game

Various venues and groups, for example Radix Journal, The Occidental Observer, the Daily Stormer, David Duke dot com, The Right Stuff, and American Renaissance all refused to use Occam’s Razor, and instead have been continually coming up with ever more fanciful explanations about how all of this is supposedly Donald Trump’s cunning 57-dimensional chess game.

Yesterday, Trump went on CNN with Wolf Blitzer and once again disavowed those who he refers to as ‘the antisemites’, by saying that he “can’t imagine” why antisemites would want to support him, and that he has “always condemned” such persons. He also added that he is “the least racist person you’ll ever meet.”

Indeed, most sensible ethno-nationalists and antisemites should be unable to support a person who within 90 minutes of making those statements in the CNN interview with Wolf Blitzer, would go on to utter the following words in a room packed full of cheering Jews on international television:

TIME / Donald Trump, ‘Read Donald Trump’s Speech to AIPAC’, 21 Mar 2016:

I love the people in this room. I love Israel. I love Israel. I’ve been with Israel so long in terms of I’ve received some of my greatest honors from Israel, my father before me, incredible. My daughter, Ivanka, is about to have a beautiful Jewish baby.

(CHEERS, APPLAUSE)

In fact, it could be happening right now, which would be very nice as far as I’m concerned.

(LAUGHTER)

The Jewish baby’s head could’ve been exiting Ivanka Trump’s vagina in that very moment, and Donald Trump wanted to make sure that the audience understood the implications of that. That was just after Trump had quite predictably reversed his fake ‘neutrality’ position, voicing his true positon of total unwavering support for Israel.

But I know, I know, let me guess, Trump-fans. You all will say that everything that happened at AIPAC was ‘deep cover’, and that it is a ‘strategic deep cover’ Jewish baby that he’s getting all enthusiastic about, right?

No matter what Trump does, someone is always going to come out and implausibly claim that it’s either ‘a deep strategy’ or ‘an accident’.

Those bazookas that the red team is firing at your blue team tanks? I guess it’s part of a ‘deep strategy’, the red team is only pretending to destroy those units, they are only pretending to be the red team, right? Well, maybe, if you ignore the minor problem of those little blue units actually being destroyed in reality.

But blithely ignoring reality is obviously what being a Trump-fan is all about.

Here’s an example of the Trump-worshipping Daily Stormer trying to spin its way out of acknowledging reality:

Daily Stormer / Andrew Anglin, ‘Regarding Donald Trump’s AIPAC Speech’, 22 Mar 2016:

Okay, guys. Here’s the deal: in order to get elected, Donald Trump has to say nice things about Israel.

That is simply the fact of the matter. The Jews have created a situation where the overwhelming majority of Christians in this country believe in bizarre science fiction fantasy about the nature of the terrorist Jew state, and if they view someone as hostile to it, they won’t vote for them.

So the options are:

a) call out the Jews, have zero chance of winning, and

b) say nice things about Israel, and have a shot at getting in.

[...]

I cringed like you all cringed. But these are the facts of life. The Jews have put us down so deep, the climb back up involves a bit of unpleasantness.

Remember: these were just words.

They were just words, according to Anglin! How about a flesh and blood Jewish baby which is literally inside of Ivanka Trump’s womb? Is it really ‘just words’? Or is it words which are describing things which have occurred in actual reality?

Here’s another flesh and blood example, the flesh and blood of Michael Cohen:

Jewish Daily Forward, ‘Meet Michael Cohen, Donald Trump’s Jewish Wingman’, 20 Jul 2015:

[...]

Cohen, who is Jewish, has been Trump’s most loyal ally for nearly a decade, standing up for the real estate mogul in the media and filing lawsuits when Trump perceives he’s been wronged. A 2011 ABC News profile reported that within The Trump Organization he’s called the boss’s “pit bull.”

“If you do something wrong, I’m going to come at you, grab you by the neck and I’m not going to let you go until I’m finished,” Cohen, now 48, told the TV network.

To wit: When New York State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman filed a fraud suit against Trump’s for-profit college in 2013, Cohen threatened Trump’s vengeance: “The damage to the attorney general is going to be very significant,” Cohen told The New Yorker. “So significant that he will possibly have to resign.” (Schneiderman has not resigned. The case is ongoing.)

And in February 2011, when Trump was mulling a 2012 presidential run, Cohen twisted himself in knots to defend Trump’s newfound opposition to abortion, telling National Journal, “People change their positions all the time, the way they change their wives.” (Trump has changed his, twice.)

Cohen, who did not respond to requests to be interviewed for this story, has been tied to Trump since at least February 2007, when the New York Post reported that he had been snapping up apartments at Trump’s properties like a hoarder at a flea market. He owned two at the time, was buying two more, and had talked his parents and his wife’s parents into buying another four between them.

“Michael Cohen has a great insight into the real estate market,” Trump told the Post at the time. “In short, he’s a very smart person.”

Cohen was a partner at the law firm Phillips Nizer at the time of the Post story, but he joined The Trump Organization three months later as an executive vice president and as Trump’s special counsel, according to Cohen’s LinkedIn page. No word on whether he’s bought more Trump apartments since then.

Cohen himself is something of a cipher. We know from the 2011 ABC profile that he grew up on Long Island and that his father is a Holocaust survivor. A Democrat, Cohen voted for Barack Obama in 2008 and volunteered for former Massachusetts governor Michael Dukakis’s presidential campaign in 1988. (Cohen told ABC in 2011 that over time he grew disappointed with Obama.) He favors Dolce & Gabbana and Hermes, and once went sailing off Cape Cod with Ted Kennedy.

The real estate newspaper The Real Deal reported in February that Cohen had made a New York real estate play of his own, buying a $58 million rental apartment building on Manhattan’s Upper East Side from Israeli-born developer Ofer Yardeni.

Beyond those spare, if colorful, details, Cohen’s entire public profile is entangled in the Trump galaxy. He’s a member of the board of the Eric Trump Foundation, a children’s health charity named for Donald Trump’s 31-year-old son. He was chief operations officer of Affliction, a mixed martial arts promotion partially owned by Trump. And in 2011, during Trump’s last flirtation with presidential politics, it was Cohen who led the charge.

Along with Stewart Rahr, the 68-year-old Jewish drug distribution billionaire who calls himself “Stewie Rah Rah Number One King of All Fun,” Cohen created a website in early 2011 called “Should Trump Run?” and visited Iowa in a private jet with Trump’s name on the side to discuss a potential Trump candidacy. A Ron Paul backer charged that Cohen and Trump were breaking campaign finance laws by taking the trip without filing disclosures with the Federal Elections Commission. (The FEC eventually found that no law had been broken, as Trump never actually became a candidate.)

This time around, Cohen has fully embraced his attack dog role within the Trump apparatus. During the contentious morning interview with Chris Cuomo, Cohen was relentless in defending his boss.

“You’re making the same problem [Trump] is, which is odd, because you’re here to kind of clean it up for him,” Cuomo said. “He shouldn’t have said they’re rapists, they’re this, they’re drug dealers, and some are good people. He shouldn’t have said it. True or false?”

“No, I disagree,” Cohen said, speaking in a voice that sounds like Trump’s, but with the volume turned down from 11 to around 7. “I really believe that Mr. Trump was making his voice heard.”

As Cuomo grew increasingly frustrated, Cohen refused to back off. “It was wrong, and you haven’t admitted that yet,” Cuomo said.

“And I will not,” Cohen said as the interview ended.

They could also say that ‘Cohen’ is ‘just a word’, but it’s a word that actually does have an ominous real-world meaning.

But I guess when reality becomes inconvenient for Trump’s movement fans, the words that are used to describe that reality also become inconvenient for Trump’s movement fans, and then those words are suddenly referred to as ‘mere words’ whose actual meaning they think should be disregarded and replaced with various fictions.

Let’s dispel these fictions

Both David Duke and Kevin MacDonald, among others, have been giving little open letter style warnings to Donald Trump about how it’s ‘useless’ for him to attend AIPAC and make speeches, and how he needs to beware of the Jewish lobby.

As though Donald Trump is even listening to them, and as though Donald Trump—a person who has spent his entire career in the company of Jews and whose presidential campaign is presently packed full of Jews—somehow doesn’t know what he’s doing.

Let’s dispel this fiction once and for all that Donald Trump ‘doesn’t know what he’s doing’. He knows exactly what he’s doing. He’s undertaking a systematic effort to harness the disparate strands of discontent among America’s white working class so that he can funnel all the resulting activism back into the Jewish-owned straitjacket which binds the Republican Party political apparatus.

(Photo: Joshua Roberts—Reuters)

With his address to AIPAC, Trump lost the characteristic equivocalness in his manner of speaking: he brought-out his trump card - unequivocal pandering to Israel ..as we knew he would.

From his talks to “the international press” regarding Jewish concerns prior to his speech and through his speech, he was unequivocal.

1) He was unequivocal in his denunciation of “racism and anti-Semitism.”

2) He was unequivocal in his prioritization for Israel’s security; their borders and identity as a Jewish state for Jewish people.

3) He was unequivocal not only in his denunciation of the Iran deal, but in saying that it must be reversed; and, in asserting that Iran’s nuclear weapon’s program must be stopped, he intimated that he is not averse to Israel’s coveted hawkish solution to dealings with Iran.

4) His unequivocal closer - for those familiar with salesmanship, the closing line of a pitch must “close” (confirm) the deal: Trump proudly asserted that he was “about to become a grandfather of a Jewish child.” Asserting his blood-ties in commitment to Jewish interests.

White Nationalists may be correct that he is the best option in buying them some time. At least he makes noises as if he is going to do something about closing U.S. borders and that he would sympathize with closing the borders of Europe as well.

But toward that end, we are having to take the word of a man who brags about his negotiating skills following these avowals to Israel and Jewish interests.

AIPAC might cooperate to some extent with our domestic issues, including our security, OUR WHITE BORDERS FOR OUR WHITE PEOPLES - U.S., Europe and elsewhere - but only to the extent that coincides with Israeli and Jewish interests more broadly; and to the extent that Trump’s and other regimes would (very incorrectly) treat Jews as if they are White; a specially protected White minority among our lands.

That is a highly suspect deal.

And in exchange for that deal come an array of foreign policies - our side, opponent side distinctions - even more suspect.

About the only consolation to be offered to those who favor Trump in the interest of European peoples is that at least in what she speaks and intends, viz. in her antagonism of Whites, Hillary is even worse. Her rhetoric is even more out of the liberal, P.C., anti-White mold: her disregard for White boundaries more brazen, her commitment to Israel as “rock solid, unwavering, enduring and forever” as ever (as emphatic, in fact), and her war-hawkishness even more flagrant. Every bit as much as Trump shored-up his pro-Israel, pro-Jewish-line..

   
Hillary shored-up her Neo-Con Credentials.

(AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)