Posted by Maguire on Sun, 09 Dec 2007 14:03 | #

James,

By the low standard of the LA Times this was a great article.  Lots of plain speaking based on observed reality.  Fraser of course is still trying to promote the phony two party racket of Judeo Federal Reserve Republicans vs Judeo Federal Reserve Democrats.

The Jews’ media will always do this until it goes out of business itself.  It will never headline “White People Win”.  The only victory notice will be a small advertisement in other media of a going out of business liquidation auction.  Articles like this will always be infrequent in the Jewsmedia.  If they were more common too many people would begin to uptrace all the corrupt “finance” to debt-backed paper money.

“The signs are pointing to a crisis—and a crash for the GOP.”

This is the best possible news for white people.  The prerequisite for further political progress is the destruction of this Jew-infected and shabbas goy ridden false flag operation.  The present two-party system is used to control North American Euroman the same way two circus handlers control a tiger with chains from either side attached to a collar.

(Note to GW: the identification of the GOP with “Conservatism” in the white North American public mind is why this word is a non-starter here for Euroman.  So far from rehabilitating this word, the political task is to complete the demonization of it.)

There’s a proverb the non-white rabble of the Democratic Party can profit from:  “Be careful what you wish for, you might get it.”  It’s only necessary for one chain to fail for the tiger to escape. 

Oops.

Maguire

Posted by VLC on Sun, 09 Dec 2007 15:24 | #

OFF TOPIC

Why is there a link to Eric Hufschmid website ? He calls everyone a ‘zionist’ or a ‘zionist agent’ even Michael Collins Piper the author of a book on the JFK assassination who argues Israel and its jewish allies in america (i.e. Jacob Rubinstein/Jack Ruby) killed him. I can give you links to Piper’s radio shows in which he demonstrates how much of a sloppy researcher Hufschmid is

You can’t trust a guy who isn’t able to say JEW. The media isn’t run by ‘zionists’ it’s run by jews. J-E-W-S

“So don’t be fooled into thinking that standing up to Zionist crime gangs is anti-Semitic! “

er, yes it is antisemitic and there’s nothing wrong with antisemitism

Posted by danielj on Sun, 09 Dec 2007 15:29 | #

You’re smart enough to sort through what is good and bad in Hufschimd and hopefully the rest of the readers of Majority Rights are as well.

It is the same thing with Judicial Inc.

I think we have all had this argument before already.

Posted by VLC on Sun, 09 Dec 2007 16:20 | #

yeah, just like Von Hoffmeiswhatver ?

Posted by Maguire on Sun, 09 Dec 2007 16:27 | #

“Why is there a link to Eric Hufschmid website ? He calls everyone a ‘zionist’ or a ‘zionist agent’ even Michael Collins Piper the author of a book on the JFK assassination who argues Israel and its jewish allies in america (i.e. Jacob Rubinstein/Jack Ruby) killed him.”

As - presumably - white men we have to purge all usufructs of Jewthink from our spirits.  One of these is the Jew religious sanction of ritual uncleanliness.  This mentality has been extended into the modern intellectual sphere.  It only serves to trap us in the mental gulag the lying, murdering, Satanic Antichrist Jews have prepared for us.

“sort through what is good and bad in Hufschimd”

And not only Hufschmid.  For instance, the excellent writer Martin Hutchinson. 

Just be aware he’s a Judeo paper money capitalist, a kahnservantive and is probably fronting for the Bank of England and The City of London in an intramural spat with the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and Wall Street.  That part doesn’t matter so long as you understand it. 

At some level Martin intuits the true problem is not sub-prime mortgages but sub-prime money managers dealing in sub-prime money.  The dead Jew Seth Tobias is a contemporary example.  Tobias made a permanent career move in September to being a cocaine laced corpse found at the bottom of his Palm Beach swimming pool.  Prior to this Tobias was a Goldman Sachs hedge fund trader, a CNBC talking head financial guru dispensing advice to the world at large, and a gay prostitute patron.  I think he used to come on right after the Britney Spears Parenting Hour.

Posted by danielj on Sun, 09 Dec 2007 16:35 | #

Where do you stand on the economics side of the equation Maguire?

I don’t trust any of the gold standard bastards either. It is just another form of jew-elry in my opinion.

Bartering for goods and services seems a little bit complex and anachronistic. I, no friend or advocate of technology and progress, still think we can come up with some kind of system to ease trade and facilitate commerce.

Posted by danielj on Sun, 09 Dec 2007 16:39 | #

yeah, just like Von Hoffmeiswhatver ?

http://www.revisionisthistory.org/

Michael A. Hoffman II?

I’m not sure who you mean.

Many have said that even Zundel himself his compromised.

Alex Jones seems like a hack and fear monger.

Hufschmid and Daryl Bradford Smith have flipped out and forgot out Bollyn.

The whole damned thing stinks to Holy Heaven.

(Hell, I wouldn’t trust Maguire till I stepped foot on his land, met his family and then some)

Posted by Maguire on Sun, 09 Dec 2007 17:06 | #

GT,

See?  Distance learning is possible.  Danielj is proof of it.

“(Hell, I wouldn’t trust Maguire till I stepped foot on his land, met his family and then some).”

Precisely.  White families are created by a white man screwing a white woman’s brains out.  Sperm meets ova and another white human being starts.  ‘White economics’ is feeding and nurturing these children.  National security is protecting this little nation and its necessary resources from external attack.

Having defined these basics we can instantly recognize the current regime is an enemy force bent on genocide.

All of this starts ‘locally’.

The most the internet can do is serve as an ultra-low cost information publishing, storage and retrieval system.

Maguire

ps The white woman gets hot to trot when she sees the prerequisites of feeding, nuturing and securing are in place.  This is the short translation of the tedious essay that race-mixing Amelia broad just gave us. 

(A short digression.  “Amelia” shows the scientific case for universal human female sentience is not yet conclusive.  All of her nominal education and literacy merely went into verbalizing the same instincts and emotions zoologists have long observed in female chimpanzees).

Posted by zusammen on Sun, 09 Dec 2007 19:47 | #

Alex Jones seems like a hack and fear monger.

I had that impression myself up until recently. On one of his recent radio shows he was discussing illegal immigration and openly asking why LaRaza’s race pride promotion was okay with the mainstream but why he as a European American was forbidden by mainstream suppression from having pride in his own people.

Remember that recent No Wars For Israel conference? Jones seems to hold many similar views to those given by John deNugent speech. Maybe the one should interview the other.

As a matter of fact, this disconnected isolation of so many think tanks, large and tiny, holding mostly all the same values isn’t helping anyone. Together, this represents many dozens or hundreds of bright thinkers, thousands of people in total who regularly heed these people, an order of magnitude more would agree and get involved if only they knew.

I have been trying to act as a conduit between smarter nationalist type groups and occasionally also the anti-globalist left. I tried to direct the Archdruid http://thearchdruidreport.blogspot.com/ simultaneously to one of the Empty the Cities blogs here, to a certain female libertarian PhD academic/author and also to the corrupt.org anti-globalism website. You people that run these groups at the top might consider ignoring the modern political dichotomy and its silly taboos designed exactly to divide and paralyze and get in touch with one another.

Why doesn’t Mr. Bowery share his experiences on the Alex Jones show in an interview? Why doesn’t Soren interview Alex Birch at corrupt.org?

Posted by danielj on Sun, 09 Dec 2007 20:06 | #

It is easier to subvert one big organization and anyone that refuses to recognize that very real possibility is scary.

Posted by zusammen on Sun, 09 Dec 2007 20:23 | #

It isn’t about eliminating all to form a giant whole. It is about for the first time creating dialogue between all these people who have the ear (or eye) of so many for the purpose of establishing a general consensus. Furthermore, the NWO/ZOG or whatever you want to call it is not immune to its own subversion from within. Most people are not control freak psychopaths, but actually have the qualities of fairness and conscientiousness about them. Consensus for the first time would help such people feel generally supported against what they see as wrongs perpetrated by a tiny few malicious actors. These actors need their administrative, advisory and logistic support base taken away or working against them.

Posted by DavidL on Sun, 09 Dec 2007 20:52 | #

Maguire

You’re a character ! I love this place - I can laugh & learn at the same time.

Zusammen

Anyone who had “useful” info about the Elites wouldn’t be breathing.
Many of these talking heads ( Jones etc.) are being used Talmudically
as a part of ” the revelation of the method”.  Izzy lets you know he’s going
to act criminally towards you, you ignore it, Izzy commits crime under Talmudic law,
Izzy clear & free.

Alan Greenspan says there’s “irrational exuberence”, whiteman you are warned,
market tanks, Izzy not to blame.

Apply this to our current mess(es) and you see where headed- white folks that is.

Posted by danielj on Sun, 09 Dec 2007 21:03 | #

I had that impression myself up until recently. On one of his recent radio shows he was discussing illegal immigration and openly asking why LaRaza’s race pride promotion was okay with the mainstream but why he as a European American was forbidden by mainstream suppression from having pride in his own people.

Remember that recent No Wars For Israel conference? Jones seems to hold many similar views to those given by John deNugent speech. Maybe the one should interview the other.

Note to the informed amongst us: Expect a lot, lot, lot of people to come out opposed to massive immigration and suddenly become “vocal” about their opposition to Israel.

They (whoever they are) are scared of what is on the internet and will give us White males a release. Don’t fall for it.

Anti-Isreal does not = Pro-White Euro.

Anti-Immigration does not = Pro-White Euro.

Exclusionism is what I’m looking for and that is the only Pro-White Euro philosophy that has an merit. Somebody who is completely and 100% preoccupied with the salvation of the descendants of European Christendom and providing them with the ability to homestead.

For instance, I’m not opposed to immigration if they come over here as slaves. (In theory, obviously it doesn’t work in practice.) Secondly, plenty of jews are anti-Israel and I don’t care if some Kosher Gentile has the balls to join hands with them and criticize a government that murdered many of our citizens in the Liberty attack and 9/11. However, criticizing the jewish people, that takes real guts.

Posted by danielj on Sun, 09 Dec 2007 21:05 | #

Most people are not control freak psychopaths, but actually have the qualities of fairness and conscientiousness about them.

That is extremely idealistic and naive.

I’ve lived in Oakland and yeah ain’t foolin this Hombre.

Posted by James Bowery on Sun, 09 Dec 2007 21:15 | #

Obviously this “link to Eric Hufschmid website” is a hot topic.  Too bad there is no way of relocating threads to more appropriate locations.  Where, exactly, did this “link to Eric Hufschmid website” occur and why respond to it here rather than there?

Posted by zusammen on Sun, 09 Dec 2007 21:20 | #

I’ve lived in Oakland and yeah ain’t foolin this Hombre.

How does the character of the general population of Oakland stack up to the character of normal professional people who everywhere have their hand in system support? You have been flailing one strawman after another but have yet to tell us why some of the various great blog and article writers should not exchange ideas, interview one another and share new insight with their readers and listeners. Why should they not support one another? Ron Paul will never, ever work toward an exclusive whiteman’s continent, yet he shares a few critical ideas that would help whiteman survive a little longer. Your all-or-nothing demand is ineffective consensus destroying bullshit that has got none of us anywhere and the Jew ZOG/ good old boy NWO everywhere since the war of northern aggression between states.

Posted by danielj on Sun, 09 Dec 2007 22:10 | #

Sorry James.

OFF TOPIC:

I’ve lived in Boston. I’ve lived in South Carolina.

People are retards that love their slavery and NASCAR.

Walk into a WalMart.

As for the tiny minority of people with good ideas writing on blogs banding together…

More power to yeah/us. Be my guest trying to unite the disparate crowds under one banner. We have a hard time here agreeing on anything. Multiple blogs “on our side” already share ideas.

Go to News From the West and you will find shit sourced from Prison Planet. You will find stuff from Hufschmid here.

What position exactly, are you advancing?

Your all-or-nothing demand is ineffective consensus destroying bullshit that has got none of us anywhere and the Jew ZOG/ good old boy NWO everywhere since the war of northern aggression between states.

I’m not a purist. I’m willing to compromise and do. Even my small presence here is just that. In fact, what do you think MR is if not consensus building? (By the way, it goes back a whole lot further than the war of Northern Aggression to at least the French Revolution).

I’m done posting off topic now, plus I think we are being hostile to each other when we are essentially in agreement. Apologies for the misunderstanding.

E-mail me to continue the discussion.

Posted by danielj on Sun, 09 Dec 2007 22:12 | #

James the link was above the MR radio button at the top left of the page for an amount of time today.

Posted by James Bowery on Sun, 09 Dec 2007 22:20 | #

Thanks, danielj.  That explains it.

Posted by soren renner on Sun, 09 Dec 2007 23:15 | #

“ the revelation of the method”

Thank you, DavidL.

Posted by VLC on Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:59 | #

James Bowery:
“Obviously this “link to Eric Hufschmid website” is a hot topic.  Too bad there is no way of relocating threads to more appropriate locations.  Where, exactly, did this “link to Eric Hufschmid website” occur and why respond to it here rather than there?”

because a big icon appeared on the left (two towers + 9-11 + star of david) under the “Important Issues” menu yesterday (it was there when I left a comment at December 9, 02:24 PM). It’s gone but I thought it was weird because

A) Hufschmid is a ‘9-11 truth’ patriotard who rails against zionism but never criticizes jews, which is typical patriotard BS and this website seems above PC euphemisms

B) ‘9-11 truth’ isn’t an important topic as some people think it is, we know the government exploited the attacks and that’s enough, speculating about their role in the attacks is a waste of time when we’ve got more important things to do or think about.

I don’t see the relevance of ‘9/11 truth’ to our cause, especially for non-americans.

If someone wants to make a point about jews’ single loyalty and their “treachery” and the american government’s subservience to them there’s at least the example of the USS Liberty, we don’t need to speculate about their role in the attacks on NY.

Posted by danielj on Wed, 12 Dec 2007 00:33 | #

I don’t see the relevance of ‘9/11 truth’ to our cause, especially for non-americans.

9-11 is infinitely worse than 9-11 and has the potential to cause real revolt and the killing of everyone in government by pissed off white citizens.

Its importance can not be overstated.

Former Italian president is starting to blow the issue open. In this article he admits that everyone knew 9-11 was an inside job by the C.I.A and Mossad!

http://www.nowpublic.com/crime/ex-italian-president-9-11-inside-job

Posted by danielj on Wed, 12 Dec 2007 00:34 | #

sorry…

9-11 was infinitely worse than the the Liberty

Posted by John Petty on Sat, 25 Oct 2008 00:17 | #

Here is an article about the fed chairman during the time of the Great Depression and what he thought caused it. The same thing is happening again for the same reasons. Please read:

In Review: America’s Most Egalitarian Banker
Marriner S. Eccles, Beckoning Frontiers: Public and Personal Recollections. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1951.
At the start of the Great Depression, Marriner Eccles hardly seemed someone who might lead a charge against the economic orthodoxies that justified grand hoards of private fortune. By the early 1930s, after all, the Utah-born Eccles had become the top banker in the Mountain West, the organizer of the first multibank holding company in the United States. 
But Eccles had also come to understand, after watching the great speculative bubbles of the 1920s pop into massive misery, that prosperity — to endure — needs to be shared. Eccles began speaking out on that theme, shortly after the Great Depression began, and soon caught the attention of the early New Dealers.
In 1933, Eccles would become an assistant secretary of the treasury. A year later, Franklin Roosevelt would appoint him to the Federal Reserve Board. He would become Board chair in 1935 and remain in that central position for the next 13 years. No one individual, over those years, had more of an impact on economic policy in the United States.
Looking back on those years, in his 1951 memoir Beckoning Frontiers, Eccles would do his best to explain the impact he set out to make. Mass production, he noted at the outset, demands mass consumption, but people can’t afford to consume if the wealth an economy generates is concentrating at the top.
In the years leading up to the Great Depression, that concentrating was accelerating. A “giant suction pump,” charged Eccles, “had by 1929-30 drawn into a few hands an increasing portion of currently produced wealth.”
“In consequence, as in a poker game where the chips were concentrated in fewer and fewer hands,” Eccles observed, “the other fellows could stay in the game only by borrowing. When their credit ran out, the game stopped.”
Sound familiar? The decade of the 1920s that Eccles describes in his 1951 memoir comes across today as eerily familiar. Then as now, the U.S. economy was floating on a sea of debt.
Then as now, inequality was hollowing out the nation. Eccles put the matter bluntly: “Had there been a better distribution of the current income from the national product — in other words, had there been less savings by business and the higher-income groups and more income in the lower groups — we should have had far greater stability in our economy.”
How would Eccles have reacted to our current debt-ridden, war-torn economy? We can’t, of course, know for sure what Eccles would do. But we do know what he did. In 1942, during World War II, a high-powered team of New Deal officials that included Eccles proposed to President Roosevelt that “a ceiling of fifty thousand dollars after taxes should be placed on individual incomes.”
In our current dollars, this $50,000 ceiling would equal about $700,000. What did FDR do with the Eccles proposal? He turned around and asked Congress to place a 100 percent tax on all individual income over $25,000.
Congress would eventually set the nation’s top tax rate at 94 percent on all income over $200,000, and that top tax rate would hover around 90 percent for the next two decades, years that would see the greatest period of middle class prosperity in U.S. economic history.
In 2005, the latest year with statistics available, America’s leading hedge fund managers and the rest of the nation’s top 400 income-earners faced a top tax rate of 35 percent. They actually paid, after loopholes, just 18.2 percent of their incomes in tax.
Marriner Eccles would not approve.
Stat of the Week
In the two decades between 1986 and 2005, America’s top 1 percent of taxpayers saw their share of the nation’s income jump from 11.3 to 21.2 percent. Over those same years, the federal income taxes the top 1 percent paid dropped by an equally stunning margin, from 33.13 percent of total personal income in 1986 to 23.13 percent in 2005, the most current year with IRS stats available. Taxpayers needed to report at least $364,657 in 2005 to enter the top 1 percent.
About Too Much
Too Much is published by the Council on International and Public Affairs, a nonprofit research and education group founded in 1954. Office: Suite 3C, 777 United Nations Plaza, New York, NY 10017. E-mail: .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)