Majorityrights Central > Category: That Question Again

A couple of days ago the BBC News website informed us that a “Romanian mayor has been strongly criticised by Jewish groups after appearing dressed in a Nazi uniform at a local fashion show.”  Radu Mazare is mayor of Constan?a, the Black Sea port and the oldest living city in Romania (having been founded around 600 BC).  He was, he explained, inspired to wear the costume by the film Valkyrie.  But it’s not an explanation that the “offended party” requires:

Dr Efraim Zuroff, a Holocaust historian and the director of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre in Jerusalem, expressed “insult and outrage” at the mayor’s appearance.

In a letter to Mr Mazare, he wrote: “It would be hard to adequately describe the depth of the pain that your appearance caused, not only to Jews and other victims of Nazism, but to any person of moral integrity who knows the history of World War II.

“Today it is well-known that the Wehrmacht played an active role in the mass murder of European Jewry and many other innocent victims.

“By dressing in a Wehrmacht uniform, you are expressing totally unwarranted support and nostalgia for an army which committed the most terrible war acts of genocide.”

Dr Zuroff suggested Mr Mazare could make amends for his “incredible lack of judgement” by bringing an exhibition on the crimes of the German army to Romania.

So, is this the speech of a beautiful but tortured Jewish soul lying flayed and bleeding on the ice-cold alter of German history?  Is he making manifest that great testament to human evil which is the G-d-given lot of all Jews?  Or does he merely have a practical mind?  Never mind the insult and outrage, and even the “pain” of a depth “it would be hard to adequately describe”, is all he really wants to keep Christian Europe’s head-down in the moral mire?  Might one conclude that, far from being a Chosen vessel of Man’s redemption from evil, Dr Zuroff is a ruthlessly opportunistic race huckster ... the kind of man who might not be above employing that indescribable Jewish “pain” in a trick:

(Thanks to reader KD who sent me the link to this video.)

We saw something very like opportunistic trickery with Prince Harry’s fancy dress back in January 2005:

READ MORE...

John de Nugent has circularised this LA Times article, published yesterday, about the incarceration and legal processing of Simon Sheppard and Stephen Whittle.  Dana Parsons did a fair job with it, one has to say.  He resisted the very tiresome temptation to demonise them.  Instead, he treated them with some sympathy as people who naively thought America was “the beacon of free speech in the Western world”.

Men bedeviled in bid for sanctuary

... Sheppard and Whittle were convicted in England for a string of essays and other published material on Sheppard’s heretical.com website, which uses a server based in Torrance. Sheppard was convicted on 11 counts, Whittle on five. In January, Sheppard was retried in absentia and convicted on five more charges.

Their online entries follow the well-traveled path of other nationalist polemicists, with particular emphasis on decrying the influence and power of Jews in the world.

“People are entitled to hold racist and extreme opinions which others may find unpleasant and obnoxious,” Mari Reid, a lawyer for the Crown Prosecution Service’s Counter Terrorism Division in England said in a prepared statement earlier this year about the case.

“What they are not allowed to do is to publish or distribute those opinions to the public in a threatening, abusive or insulting manner either intending to stir up racial hatred or in circumstances where it is likely racial hatred will be stirred up.”

The vast majority of the material in this case concerned Jewish people, Reid said, “but there was also material relating to black, Asian and non-white people generally, all described in derogatory terms using offensive language.”

... In denying asylum, Peters ruled that the men hadn’t shown they had been persecuted in the past or likely to face future persecution.

Sheppard and Whittle had hoped their story would attract media attention, but that never materialized.

“I think it has very wide ramifications,” Leichty says of their convictions. “I don’t share their views or the way they communicate their views, but I certainly don’t think we should be incarcerating people for what they did.”

Sheppard said he and Whittle are merely waiting for a middle-of-the-night wake-up and a quick trip to the airport.

“We’re not cowed and we’re not repentant,” Sheppard says. “We have the right even to make mistakes. We could be wrong, it’s not inconceivable. We have a right to be wrong. All we’re doing is speaking our minds.”

Whittle says he isn’t keen on making a career out of being a political prisoner in England. “Simon is from Yorkshire,” he says. “People from Yorkshire are strong-willed. I’m not from Yorkshire. He sticks to his guns. I don’t have his willpower and tenacity.”

After 11 months in custody, Whittle is not sure anymore that he and Sheppard would have remained free even if they had quietly gone through customs, left LAX and found a lawyer to handle their asylum request. “Once they became aware of who we were and that we came to the U.S. to flee,” Whittle says, “we would have ended up in detention.”

That is how it played out. Coming to America has been a bust.

“We’ve never seen California but through bars,” Whittle says.

READ MORE...

By Happy Cracker

Once in a while a document is published, which puts the human soul so nakedly on display, that one cannot help but stare at it, one’s mouth obscenely gaping, at a lack for words; one is held transfixed for a moment by a mixture of emotions: fascination, repulsion, disbelief tinged with the feeling of having one’s deepest suspicions finally confirmed. That cold rush of adrenaline - a feeling different from the hot rush that comes from racing cars or chatting up girls or getting in fights or soccer - the cold rush grips one, the eery visitor, slithers down one’s back and coils in a knot at the base of the spine.

That’s the feeling I had when famous internet commentator “Spengler” outed himself, and finally, at long last, cast aside the trappings of internet pseudonymity, the oblique angles of attack permitted a detached voice in cyberspace, and finally told the true story of who he is and where he is coming from. He sets the stage thus:

During the too-brief run of the Asia Times print edition in the 1990s, the newspaper asked me to write a humor column, and I chose the name “Spengler” as a joke - a columnist for an Asian daily using the name of the author of The Decline of the West.

Half-way into the story of his pseudonymous origins, he cuts to the chase and presents us with his vision of our death scene:

The old and angry cultures of the world, fighting for room to breath against the onset of globalization, would not go quietly into the homogenizer. Many of them would fight to survive, but fight in vain, for the tide of modernity could not be rolled back.

(That’s us, in case you missed it.)

In the next breath, Goldman aka Spengler points the way to our resurrection - as Jews! :

READ MORE...

Our sturdy Danish colleague Balder has posted what he calls “a tribute” to Kevin MacDonald’s Occidental Observer piece from 29th January, The Global Anti-Semitism Report: The organized Jewish community opposes free speech.  Balder’s piece is titled Strange bedfellows - Protests against the Durban II conference.  He has circularised me with it, and I am pleased to post it in full below.

GW

————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Censorship promotors behind the Durban II protests

On April 20-24, 2009, in Geneva, Switzerland, the United Nations will host the “Durban Review Conference,” – a follow-up to the 2001 UN World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia, and Related Intolerance (WCAR).

The debate goes on whether we should participate in this conference or not

The allegation is that Islamic countries, that apparently form a majority in this UN forum, are trying to use the conference to promote banning criticism of religion, especially Islam. Another concern from many parties, is that it will be used to one sided criticize the policies of the state of Israel.

Many voices, not least from the side of anti-immigrationalists, and adversaries of islamization, are speaking for a boycott of this conference.

This is a rather unique development.

Tens, if not hundreds of such conferences have been held the later years, not least under the auspices of the European Union. Never before have these conferences drawn anywhere near as much criticism, although they all basically have the same aim: restricting freedom of speech in order to silence anti-immigration, traditionalist, Christian, and nationalist voices.

In the context of the European Union such conferences have resulted, in amongst other things, the passing of new laws, most notably the: Council Framework Decision on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law (PDF), which if fully implemented, will be the end of free speech as we still know it in Denmark.

Together with the similarly vicious European Arrest Warrant, we are one step closer to complete dictatorship and loss of traditional civil rights.

READ MORE...

My thanks to Bo Sears for this link to Larry - and, of course for that post he gave us on Michael Hart’s enormously Judeo-Christian, civilisation-saving and all-round Nazi-free conference

And whaddyaknow ... it was a success!  No one mentioned Jews or Israel.  No evil anti-Semites pressured the management of the Baltimore Sheraton to cancel on our heroes at the last minute.  No one complained that pork wasn’t on the menu at the Saturday night thrash.  No one mentioned that, actually, it isn’t about civilisation - sorry - it’s about European genes.

So now the big push to replace liberalism with Judeo-Christian tradition and give us poor European folks some racial confidence, damnit, can begin.

Oh yes, and here’s what Larry had to say about that - just his first thoughts, mind you.

At the close of the Preserving Western Civilization conference outside Baltimore which ended today, it suddenly occurred to me that the topics of Israel, Jews, and anti-Semitism had not come up at all during the two-day meeting, except perhaps for a passing reference to Islam’s attitude to the Jews, and Julia Gorin’s comedy performance at the banquet on Saturday evening. This, despite the fact that what had motivated Michael Hart to organize the conference in the first place was the desire to discuss the threats to Western civilization without having to deal with Israel-haters, anti-Semites, and Nazi types such as were predominant at the 2006 American Renaissance conference, where Mr. Hart, after a diatribe by David Duke, righteously told Duke that he was a Nazi who had disgraced the meeting, and then walked out. In the aftermath of that conference, and of Jared Taylor’s refusal to condemn the serious anti-Semitism that had been manifested there (which included standing applause, by between a third and a half of the attendees, for the prospective demise of Israel), Mr. Hart conceived the idea of bringing together speakers to address the related but distinct topics of immigration, Islam, and the suicidal white guilt that results from ignorance of race differences, at a meeting of Western patriots that would be welcoming to Jews and not welcoming to Jew haters.

But, as I said, despite the profound concern over anti-Semitism that had led to the conference, Jewish-related topics were not heard. Why? For the simple reason that the organizers and participants were focused, just as the conference title indicated, on the preservation of Western civilization. Their intention was not to explore specifically Jewish concerns or advance specifically Jewish interests, but to air the vital topics of immigration, Islam, and race differences in a civilized environment free of the vile poison of Israel hatred and anti-Semitism which so much of the paleocon and race-realist right tolerates, welcomes, and embraces.

No anti-Semites. Just right.

Well, let’s mark out a bit of territory here.

I don’t think of myself as a member of the race-realist right.  In fact, I don’t think there is a race-realist right.  Race-realism is, at best, a protest movement, not a philosophical and political position.

I am an ethno-nationalist.  I believe that my own ethnic group and, beyond them, my race share a commonweal of natural rights and interests, and these are completely and very intentionally excluded from the world of ideas in which we are presently immersed.  “Immigration, Islam, and race differences” are quite respectable subjects for discussion.  But relative to being and belonging, genetic conservation and national reclamation they are positively frivolous.  I ground my politics not in the importance of culture or civilisation or even faith, though all these have importance, naturally, but in an absolute and empirical certitude that my people are, as my family is, and these recepticles of my interests and my love must always be, for me, supreme.

Larry can’t get that because, whilst he is famously NOT A JEW, he is far too Jewish to admit of my people’s unimpeachable right to live sovereign and free in our own land, and our life-interest in doing so.  And that must extend to the right to live without Larry.

Defiance is a 2008 war film directed by Edward Zwick.  Set in the eastern regions of German Nazi-occupied Poland (now western Belarus) during World War II, the film is an adaptation of Nechama Tec’s Defiance: The Bielski Partisans, which is based on the true story of the Bielski partisans.  Tec’s book told how Polish Jews came together for common protection and to oppose the German occupation of their homeland.

That is how Wikipedia opens its entry on the Jewish action movie, Defiance.  It is pretty much the standard account of the film, which has appeared in media around the world.  The “true story of the Bielski brothers”, those heroic, admirable, justified Jews fighting for “the good” and for their lives against impossible odds and ultimate evil, is the only prism the world now has through which to view the motives and actions of these people. 

In response, a number of honourable and patriotic Poles have sought to provide another.  One such, a Polish-American reader of this blog, has thoroughly primed me on all this, and I am indebted to him.

I suppose it made a lot of sense to a director, basically, of action movies to secure for his lead in the most important film of his career the actor currently playing James Bond.  Could there be a more striking image of the alpha male at bay than Daniel Craig on a noble white stallion shot against a wintry backdrop of a deep and mysterious Lithuanian forest? 

Speaking of the film to the BBC, Craig said:-

“This came along, I read it and immediately said, ‘I want to make this movie. It’s a story I want to tell,’”

… The film does not shy from showing the brutal reality of what the group’s resistance involved - including in one instance the group murder of a German soldier.

And, suggests Craig, perhaps the difficulty of dealing with bloody memories has contributed to keeping the story buried.  “It was much more complicated than we can ever portray on screen. “They did commit gruesome acts and one of the reasons the story has not been told is because these people wanted to forget,” he says.

Perhaps the story was buried between Tuvia Bielski’s own account in 1947 and Tec’s in 1993 because, for the Bielski “survivors”, there was nothing but bloody memories, for which “the group murder of a German soldier“ can by no means stand in sole testimony.  Further, the “complicated” story to which Craig refers is, in fact, Polish history in all its terrible reality, and the version “we can … portray on screen” is nothing, nothing at all, but Jewish propaganda.

READ MORE...

By Bo Sears

A conference with the title “Preserving Western Civilisation” takes place in Baltimore on February 6 to February 8.  It’s purpose is advertised on its website as follows:-

We believe that America’s Judeo-Christian heritage and European identity must be defended. Today, our glorious Western civilization is under assault from many directions. Three such threats will be discussed at this conference.

First, the massive influx to the United States and Europe of Third-World immigrants who do not share our fundamental political and cultural values.

Second, the threat from Islam, a militant ideology that is hostile to our society and, in principle, committed to destroying it.

Third, because of the persistent disappointing performance of blacks (which many whites mistakenly blame on themselves) many whites have guilt feelings that undermine Western morale and deter us from dealing sensibly with the other threats.

Are all the speakers sincere?

The lead speaker is Lawrence Auster. At other times and in other contexts, he has quite a different interpretation of Western civilization. Consider his remarks in FrontPageMagazine on June 22, 2004F. His subject was Jewish organizational opposition to immigration reduction.  He liberally sprinkled this piece with the word “gentile” to make clear what he thinks of Euro-Americans (plus one “goyim” if we were in any doubt). As weird as these remarks sound, they are perfectly typical Austerisms.

To seek to overturn entire societies [by Jewish organizations] in order to get rid of one’s own ethnic identity may seem a rather drastic approach to solving the Jewish problem, yet it reflects, in a uniquely exacerbated and destructive form, Jews’ recurrent pattern of forming some global ideology for reasons relating to their particular situation as Jews. (Let us note that this tendency, while it can take negative forms as in the current example, is natural for a people whose tribal history and beliefs became the basis for all of Western civilization.)

To label our heritage “Judeo-Christian” ...

“a term used to describe the body of concepts and values which are thought to be held in common by Judaism and Christianity”

... is already begging a very Jewish question.  But to assert that the entire cultural edifice of Western Civilisation is based on “the tribal history and beliefs” of Jews, and by implication Greece and Rome and the Nordic traditions, the Renaissance and the Enlightenment amount to nothing, is a remarkably narrow and exclusive view. But at least now we know what Auster thinks about our civilization, and about us and why we are nothing more than “gentiles”.

Such a view, of course, is at considerable odds with the matters to be discussed at the Baltimore conference in February.  It doesn’t sound as though he believes in anything remotely like a “European identity.”

Perhaps Auster will find time to discuss it with the second speaker listed for the conference, Peter Brimelow.  He has revealed over the past year that his immigration reduction efforts spring from a neocon philosophy, demonstrated by his frequent publishing at VDare of racist labels like the Spanish-language epithets “gringo” and “anglo”, as well as the artificial “WASP”.  The latter, by the way, is defined by Wikipedia as “a sociological and cultural pejorative ethnonym that originated in the United States”.

Maybe the comedian Julia Gorin or the junior BNP politician Pat Richardson, both also speakers at the conference, will be able to offer a pejorative-free way out of the impasse.  Or maybe not.  European identity is a subject best left to those of European descent.

At least Prof Phillipe Rushton is on hand to illuminate his audience about the “persistent disappointing performance of blacks”.  Personally, I’m not too disappointed, but maybe that’s just me.  To judge from the “Statement of Purpose” reproduced above, the meat of the discussion won’t be about black performance at all.  It will be about the “guilt feelings” that grip “many whites” and which apparently “undermine Western morale”.

Naming us, then, isn’t enough.  Our foolish gentile minds and our self-destructive gentile ways must stand exposed to the gimlet gaze of the conference organisers.  And why, precisely?  So that the “folly of the gentile ... no, make that the gringo” can explain the failure of our “Judeo-Christian heritage” ... and the “the massive influx of immigrants” ... and the “threat of Islam”.  No other explanation in sight.

And just who are these gimlet-eyed conference organisers?  Well, the chairman of the organizing committee is ... Michael Hart.

It will be interesting to see how the dominant media culture reports this conference, and whose voice they say was spoken during it.  Not a voice with a “European identity”, that’s for sure ... not the voice of the diverse white American peoples.

I can’t help but wonder what the “gentiles” slated to speak there actually understand about the conference’s real purpose ... Brimelow, Phil Rushton, Brenda Walker are intelligent people.  Sadly, they are also too trusting.

Bo Sears is a senior activist at ResistingDefamation.org.