Next-level TRS: Michael ‘Enoch’ Peinovich is actually Michael ‘Enoch’ ENOCKSON Peinovich-Sippel.

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Saturday, 21 January 2017 08:00.

It's a Minolta SR-T 101!
I’m staying on this story until every last detail is known.

Enter the next level

This article is Part 2 of an ongoing series about the TRS scandal. See also: Part 1.

Kind of like some kind of political equivalent of a K-R&B song about how a man just keeps lying so much that there is always another layer of lies beneath his first layer of lies, Michael ‘Enoch’ Peinovich of The Right Stuff has been lying on a whole different level beneath the presently-existing lies.

However, rather than contemplating the fun concept of trolling with musical metaphors, I want you to instead follow me on a journey into the other barrel beneath the barrel that TRS had already sunk to the bottom of.

Welcome to Part 2 of the ongoing drama.

The present situation

So far, Michael ‘Enoch’ Peinovich and his supporters have been frantically trying to channel all the discussions about his standing in the western ethno-nationalist scene toward his Jewish wife, Ames Friedman, as though the problem is confined only to her and as though the perniciousness and hypocrisies of these revelations can be mitigated by simply removing her from the situation through divorce. They have been resolutely ignoring the manifest high likelihood of Peinovich himself being Jewish, at least through his father’s side.

In a recent Rebel Yell podcast, Peinovich subtly referred to himself as a person of ‘mixed Jewish ancestry’. At 01:19:06 of that podcast, he said:

Rebel Shoah 18 Jan 2017, at 01h19m06s

But while people were grappling with that revelation, there is another secret lurking behind that.

As it turns out, Peinovich is additionally Jewish through his mother’s side. Seriously. This is actual reality. This is really happening. Read that sentence again, and consider the implications of it.

Peinovich is around and about 75% Jewish at least.

What we now know

Utilising the information that the first doxxing was able to dredge up, we were able to use that information to pivot across various branches of his family, including his siblings, but the most important link is that of his birth-mother.

Michael ‘Enoch’ Peinovich’s father is Michael P. Peinovich. Peinovich senior is married to Billie Gleissner, but we have not taken the time to deeply examine Gleissner, because Gleissner is not Michael ‘Enoch’ Peinovich’s birth-mother. Rather, Gleissner is his step-mother.

Michael ‘Enoch’ Peinovich’s father and his step-mother Billie Gleissner married each other in 1983. So who then, is Peinovich’s birth-mother?

We discovered that Michael ‘Enoch’ Peinovich’s birth-mother is Paula Sippel. Prior to 1983 she was known as Paula Enockson Peinovich-Sippel, her surname through her mother’s side is Enockson. That is the maternal name, which is likely the source of the nickname ‘Enoch’ which Michael ‘Enoch’ Peinovich is using literally in plain view.

Sometimes it’s the thing which is in plain view which paradoxically garners the least attention.

Two plus two is four

We know that Michael ‘Enoch’ Peinovich’s father gets the name Peinovich from a Russified and Americanised variant of the Croatian name Pejnovic, and that the name is associated with Jewish demographies in Croatia.

We also know that Peinovich’s father married twice, and that in both cases he married women with Jewish surnames: Paula Enockson Peinovich-Sippel, and Billie Gleissner.

Additionally, we know that Peinovich’s mother carries the name Enockson through her own mother’s side of their family.

And then, to top it all off, Michael ‘Enoch’ Peinovich ‘accidentally’ married a Jewish woman himself, Ames Friedman, the woman who is now at the centre of this recent Alt-Right scandal along with Michael ‘Enoch’ Peinovich.

Even the most sceptical people, in their heart of hearts, in their intuition, they know that there must be something there. There’s something. But they won’t admit it to themselves. Is it because of a cult of personality?

“How dare you speak the truth!?”

The most popular narrative among the sobbing defenders of Peinovich is that the people who are most viciously attacking TRS in the wake of this scandal, are people who have something to gain from bringing down TRS. Okay, sure.

Let’s be real here. TRS, the ‘inner party’, and the Alt-Right leadership core all got caught covering up a massive den of hypocrisy and money-grubbing deception at TRS, and they piled lies on top of lies within lies.

Michael ‘Enoch’ Peinovich had absolutely laughably ineffective OpSec, and as such it was possible to get his personal information and to discover everything about the fraud he was perpetrating. It was also possible to pivot across his family tree because his whole family maintained an ostentatious social media presence which could be easily dredged in the aftermath of the doxxing.

If you get caught doing something that you’re not supposed to be doing, and there is a good strategic reason for me to amplify the exposure of that scandal, then I will amplify it.

The ‘purity spiral’ meme

The TRS crowd desperately wants to call all of this ‘purity spiralling’ and thereby they hope to place a lid on the ongoing scandal.

I don’t call it ‘purity spiralling’. I call it ‘actually tackling the problem of Jewish subversion’.

Does this sound extreme? Some people are saying that the stance taken by the anti-TRS people such as myself, is ‘more extreme than Adolf Hitler’. Nothing could be further from the truth. Even someone such as George H.W. Bush would have purged someone like Michael ‘Enoch’ Enockson Peinovich-Sippel just as fast, if Bush had been able to have his way.

Don’t believe me? Here are the Zionists complaining about George H.W. Bush:

Commentary Magazine / Tevi Troy, ‘How the GOP went Zionist’, 01 Dec 2015 (emphasis added):

[...] For the first 45 years of Israel’s existence, the Republican Party was deeply divided when it came to the Middle East. Powerful forces inside the GOP had long been at best uncomfortable with Israel and at worst openly hostile. Those forces included big businessmen and oilmen with deep connections and interests in Arab lands and so-called foreign-policy realists who did not see why the U.S. should maintain a special relationship with a tiny, economically negligible country surrounded by 22 Arab nations that wished it would disappear.

[...]

Following Reagan’s lead and influenced by the neoconservatives who had gravitated to the GOP, pro-Israel voices became more confident in expressing their view of the ties that bound the United States and the Jewish state—the same monotheistic roots, which disposed them to an appreciation for human dignity and self-determination, and a shared belief in a covenantal founding of both nations. This view helped the GOP establish an ideological framework for foreign policy beyond the binary question of Communist versus anti-Communist.

None of this was seamless. Reagan was succeeded by George H.W. Bush, himself quite literally a Country Club Republican and oilman by birth and occupation and a foreign-policy realist by disposition. He famously complained about the Israel lobby, saying ludicrously that he, the president, was “one lonely guy” up against “some powerful political forces” made up of “a thousand lobbyists on the Hill.” His secretary of state, James Baker, was even worse, earning the wrong kind of immortality with his line, “F— the Jews, they don’t vote for us anyway.” Even as these attacks were going on, there were signs that Bush had already become an anachronism in a rapidly changing world—most notably the fact that the Baker line was leaked to the press by his disgusted fellow cabinet secretary Jack Kemp, a key figure in remaking the party as pro-Israel.

Also, objectively speaking, George H.W. Bush was better on trade issues than Donald Trump ever will be, and you will also find that unlike Donald Trump, George H.W. Bush was closer to a coherent global ethno-nationalist position, as seen in Bush’s stance on the Jewish Question, and in Bush’s stance on the defence of Eastern Europe and Central Asia from Russian colonial aggression.

Really makes you think, doesn’t it? Maybe someone should clone Bush senior and bring him back to power? I’m just raising it as an interesting point so that people can consider the present situation in context.

Shekel farmers

But hey, no, people like Mike Cernovich, Milo Yiannopolous, Paul Gottfried, Lauren Cherie Southern and Michael ‘Enoch’ Enockson Peinovich-Sippel bandied around some fashy-looking memes on Twitter and told people to give up on searching for their own candidates or building their own parties, and instead rallied people to throw in their lot with Donald Trump under various stylistic guises – ranging from one extreme which is ‘Gorilla Mindset book’, to the other extreme which is ‘favicon.ico is an open oven which is really edgy’ – and as a result the Alt-Right in the United States became incapable of identifying the very same Jews that they professed to be on guard against.

The Alt-Right did however become very proficient at: (a.) supporting stupid protectionist trade policies to spite Asian manufacturers and prop up American oligarchical cronies, (b.) crafting insults that were calibrated to really annoy Hispanics, and (c.) supporting the slashing of (c, i.) their own health care provisions and (c, ii.) their own social security benefits, (d.) re-enabling the potential for a pointless future American war against Iran, and (e.) just as an extra bonus present for Israel they even managed to elevate Jared Kushner to the position of being literally the most powerful Jew to have ever inhaled oxygen in the universe.

For an encore, performed live from the front deck of the Lusitania, the Alt-Right will probably next declare an undying support for Michael ‘Enoch’ Enockson Peinovich-Sippel, with some stupid excuse like “no punching to the right”, whatever that even means. Watch and see, that will happen!


Related Articles:




Comments:


1

Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 22 Jan 2017 06:21 | #

I wonder what wise words the late, great Fred Scrooby would have uttered about Mr Peinovich (or, indeed, about the AltRight in general, which he would surely have found curious).


2

Posted by Dr_Eigenvector on Sun, 22 Jan 2017 07:54 | #

This is my website.

My picture and gif collection.

http://testblog1912.blogspot.co.uk/


3

Posted by uh on Sun, 22 Jan 2017 11:56 | #

I wonder what wise words the late, great Fred Scrooby would have uttered about Mr Peinovich (or, indeed, about the AltRight in general, which he would surely have found curious).

Whatever the words, they’d be in red, bold, and capitals.


4

Posted by Hugh Jampton on Sun, 22 Jan 2017 12:23 | #

The Enocksons are Lutherans. Paula’s parents were Farrell Enockson and Katherine Gorman


5

Posted by Hugh Jampton on Sun, 22 Jan 2017 12:28 | #

Katherine Gorman’s mother, Gena,  was born in Minnesota in 1892 of Norwegian born parents.


6

Posted by uh on Sun, 22 Jan 2017 12:40 | #

Well, Kumiko is reaching - as usual for this site. Mike was likely referring to Slavic ancestry. I don’t hear any reference to “mixed Jewish ancestry”, although that was, of course, the context. If he meant Jewish ancestry, fine, but it isn’t a direct quote and should not be presented as such. That is conflation.

More importantly, all the names in question are far from categorically Jewish, as we all know, at bottom. Enockson, Sippel, Peinovich are names likely none of us ever encountered before this, even studying Jews as we have for over a decade. There’s nothing about any of those names that even suggests Jewishness beyond Enockson’s and Peinovich’s ending, while Sippel could be German or Scottish. By the bye, I would guess it stems from the good old Germanic *sib in either case.

But -son and -ovich (also “son”) are so common in European nomenclature as to make mention of it silly. Every time there’s some question of a perceived enemy’s ancestry, however, either ending, or any German-sounding name, is forthwith “proof” of being a Jew. That isn’t sleuthing, it’s paranoia.

That said, I wouldn’t be surprised, and equally wouldn’t care, if he did turn out to be partially Jewish, and the burden was still on him to reveal such things to the audience of a podcast called “The Daily Shoah”.  For now, though, it seems it’s still only his wife who is partially Jewish.


7

Posted by Hugh Jampton on Sun, 22 Jan 2017 12:40 | #

Farrell Enockson’s father, Hans , was born in Norway in 1886, his mother Regina Gartner born in Iowa in 1889 og German parents


8

Posted by uh on Sun, 22 Jan 2017 12:47 | #

Incidentally, I found this:

Pejnović families are often Croats and they are mostly from Gospic , less frequently Serbs. In the past century, relatively most of Croatian residents bearing this family name were born in Zagreb and Gospic. In Klenovac in Gospic area every seventh inhabitant had the family name Pejnović.

About 400 people with faimily name Pejnović live in Croatia today, in 200 households. There were 530 of them in the middle of the past century, and their number decreased by 20 percent. They are located in the most of Croatian counties, in 36 cities and 29 other places, mostly in Zagreb (110), Gospic (45), Sisak (20), Slavonski Brod (20), and in Rijeka (15).

At least ten families with this surname emigrated from Croatia to: the United States (6), Germany (2), Canada (1), and to the United Kingdom (1). Family name Pejnović (including: Pejnovic , Peinovich , Pejnovich , Peynovich and Pelynovich ) is present in 20 countries worldwide. The family name “Pejnovic ” is used by some 100 people in Peru , about 80 in the United States , and small number of people in Russian Federation. “Pejnovich ” is used by small number of people in the United States. “Peinovich ” is used by some 90 people in the United States and small number in Argentina.

The lovely Gospić was home of both Nikola Tesla and Ante Starčević himself.


9

Posted by Hugh Jampton on Sun, 22 Jan 2017 12:59 | #

Katherine Gorman’s father, Archie,  born SD in 1892 to parents born in Indiana, married Gena Peterson in 1917


10

Posted by uh on Sun, 22 Jan 2017 13:00 | #

The picture is gotten, Hugh.


11

Posted by Hugh Jampton on Sun, 22 Jan 2017 13:52 | #

Michael P Peinovich b1944, son of Michael Peinovich b 1919 Arizona and Mary Garberg.

Michael snr. son of Isaac b1885 Austria/Yugoslavia and Martha Stokich also born Yugoslavia.
Mary Garberg daughter of Peter Garberg and Sophia Borgen, her g/parents all born in Norway.


12

Posted by Captainchaos on Sun, 22 Jan 2017 14:38 | #

“Mike Enoch” looks like a fat, hook-nosed swarthoid but we are given to believe he is “Norwegian”.  Go and peddle your wares elsewhere, you fucking kike.


13

Posted by DanielS on Sun, 22 Jan 2017 15:34 | #

Kumiko is taking the lead on this issue.

From my perspective, it has clearly been the case that Peinovich is giving horrendous misdirection to White interests and acting in a way smacking of Jewish strategy.  I will have more to say about that shortly - but suffice it to say, from my perspective, I don’t need to place emphasis on the matter of whether he is Jewish or not. He may as well be. The circumstantial evidence of his complicity is mounting, his being complicit with Jewish interests in the orchestration of Whites is already massive.

But before I move onto my first correction of a statement from Uh, I need to firstly address the fact that Uh has persistently argued that Jews should be included in White nationalism - he has persistently argued here that “The Truth Will Live” (Ruth) should be able to participate in White Nationalism and in definition of its friend/enemy distinctions. He also got banned from Counter-Currents for making a protracted argument as to why Jews should be included in White nationalism.

Recently Uh has been allowed to comment at Counter-Currents again while Greg Johnson defends Peinovich and his platform (at the same time, Colin Liddell and Captainchaos have been banished from Counter-Currents for minor to more keen skepticism of Peinovich respectively). That is to say, Uh’s opinion is hardly impartial but suddenly, nevertheless, has dubious support as such.

Uh: “The picture is gotten, Hugh.”

The general picture of Peinovich is gotten indeed. It wreaks Jewy and right-wing sell out, both of its motivation directly for Jews and of the role Jews would like Whites to adopt - what’s good for the Jews in terms of how the goyim are to be orchestrated.

Now, let me address a few contentions raised by Uh:

As for the name Peinovich - it is unusual for Slavic people to phoneticize the endings of their names - a name like Pejnović. It is much more common for Jewish people to do that. Perhaps it could be an Ellis Island spelling given to a Croatian goyim, but it would more typically be a Jewish spelling of the name.

As for Gospić, Jews have been known to make their way through there as well.

There is more to say in regard to his father’s name and relations, and we’ll come back to that.

But I’d like to move on quickly to this fallacious claim by Uh:

Uh: I don’t hear any reference to “mixed Jewish ancestry”, although that was, of course, the context. If he meant Jewish ancestry, fine, but it isn’t a direct quote and should not be presented as such. That is conflation.

Not true. It is absolutely a direct quote and is NOT a conflation.

It may not be a notarized confession and absolute proof of itself, it could be argued that it is some sort of mis-statement, but other “mis-statements” and circumstantial evidence lend mounting weight to the likelihood that, at best, Peinovich is orchestrating misdirection for Jewish interests - and that is the most important issue, by far  - while it is quite possible that he is at least partly Jewish himself.

Let me provide an exact transcript with its fuller context - that anyone can listen to and verify - starting just a few seconds before the part quoted in the post:

118:25 - Mencken’s Ghost: “Yeah, uh, I don’t wanna address any of those issues with your relationship, because I, it’s not really any more of our business. At this point I think you’ve laid it bare. I don’t think that’s any of our business.”

118:34 - Musonius Rufus: “Yeah, I think you’ve done a good job of laying it bare, uh.”

118:36 - Mencken’s Ghost: “And its not any more of our business. 118:39 - The uh, one of the issues that was brought up is that we’ve had people who have been removed from the forums because they were Jewish or partial Jewish ancestry, who had renounced their ancestry, in the past; and that’s something that’s been brought-up on the show before; and, that’s an obvious conflict. I mean is that something that can be addressed?”

118:59 - Mike Peinovich: “uhm, you know I didn’t, I actually had never heard that before. Uhm, I think that in, in these cases, in cases like this its really like, you gotta, you gotta just you know, I mean, there’s an absolute purist stance which is like, they’re simply not allowed, in which case I have to go.”


14

Posted by uh on Sun, 22 Jan 2017 16:47 | #

Thank you for the transcript. Not needed, as my hearing is one of the few aspects of my health not in decline, but it actually opens up a new possibility: that he simply meant that if the so-called movement rejects partial Jews, then as a man married to a partial Jew, he’d have to recuse himself out of loyalty to his spouse. His statement does not necessarily imply that he himself is partially Jewish. I am using “necessarily” here in the strictest logical sense, that would obtain, for example, in a legal document, i.e. that his words do not constitute explicit identification as partially Jewish, and that the context is open to other interpretations - which a thinking man would not reject merely to satisfy their confirmation bias.

You admit this above, and conclude that “he may as well be” Jewish. Sorry - nor is that proof, but smugness on top of somewhat wild speculation.

Rehearsing my stance on individual Jews would be helpful if you weren’t preaching to the choir. My stance in this case is in fact that Mike should have disclosed his marriage and tried to weave it into the greater parody that is TDS, whose toadies would surely have rationalized it away anyhow. Far worse than not disclosing it, moreover, he dissimulated when Salon confronted him about being Mike Enoch, and copped out as being libertarian. Nothing more damning than that, in my opinion.

Not that you deserve it, but let me offer as evidence of bona fides the following anecdote. I had some money to spare for once, and currently residing in an arch-liberal city, decided to provoke the natives by purchasing a shirt related to Fash The Nation. I placed the order and forgot about it, remembering only a month later. I hadn’t received it nor heard from the seller, so naturally I sent an e-mail. The name on the response was about as categorically Jewish as one could expect short of ending in -stein, -witz, or - berg. The seller attempted to equivocate about the order even existing, and as I usually do, I raised the stakes, forcing him to back down and issue a refund.

So ... that was very odd, and there’s clearly some shit in the closet with many of these guys. My point is that I’m not trying to exonerate Mike from possible Jewish ancestry because I have a hard-on for Jews (my flirtation with TTWL excepted!) or because I care about his fate (I view the whole crowd as rather creepy). There’s just a paucity of evidence that you can’t twist into concrete proof, no matter how much you’d like it to be so.

One last note: it’s pretty clear that Mike felt embarrassed not only by his attachment, but also his ancestry and appearance, hence the Pepe face covering his own in photos from NPI conferences. He probably knows he looks like a shlub, in a way that monomaniacal types wouldn’t hesitate to call “Jewish”, and just didn’t want any shit about it - much as the stuckment mainstay, Hunter Wallace, felt before he cleaned up his act. Point here is that the man feels ashamed of his own appearance and lacks the lightheartedness of Matt Parrott in coming to terms with it. Trying to bury him even further is a bit like kicking a man already on the ground. In other words, pat yourselves on the back for being so vicious.


15

Posted by Tommy on Sun, 22 Jan 2017 17:23 | #

In this video, Mike Delaney cites 3 instances taken from Enoch’s podcasts in which Enoch reveals that he’s Jewish. No non-Jewish person would ever speak of himself and his background in this way:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZaE-1iUkrb4


16

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Sun, 22 Jan 2017 18:59 | #

I’ll address some of this now, and the rest later. This one is the most unintentionally hilarious attempt:

Hugh Jampton on Sun, 22 Jan 2017 18:52, wrote:
Michael P Peinovich b1944, son of Michael Peinovich b 1919 Arizona and Mary Garberg.

Michael snr. son of Isaac b1885 Austria/Yugoslavia and Martha Stokich also born Yugoslavia.
Mary Garberg daughter of Peter Garberg and Sophia Borgen, her g/parents all born in Norway.

Ever since the TRS doxxing started, certain sections of the Alt-Right have basically been huddling up like this:

Too bad for them that the council is not even competent.

Hugh Jampton‘s attempt to transform Peinovich’s ancestors into non-Jews is pretty funny, as—assuming that he is getting those names correct—he only managed to deepen the problem. Can anyone explain why the name Garberg appears to be allocated to an awful lot of Jewish people, and why it appears in the Jewish directory of Buenos Aires?

What ‘picture’ are people supposed to be ‘getting’ here, when all you are doing is further enhancing the Jewishness of this story?

What are the odds that all of this ornamentation surrounds one person and that person still manages to be somehow ‘not Jewish’? Come on.

I’ll also address a portion of UH‘s response:

uh on Sun, 22 Jan 2017 21:47, wrote:
One last note: it’s pretty clear that Mike felt embarrassed not only by his attachment, but also his ancestry and appearance, hence the Pepe face covering his own in photos from NPI conferences. He probably knows he looks like a shlub, in a way that monomaniacal types wouldn’t hesitate to call “Jewish”, and just didn’t want any shit about it

Oh, seriously? Empathetic excuse-making narrative-creation like this is why Europe gets fucked-over hard by the Jews so often to begin with. You have absolutely zero proof that any of that was Michael’s inner thought process. Literally zero.

Why on earth would you think that such a convoluted story would be more likely than the facts that are staring you in the face? Pathological altruism? The Americans have literally got a crypto-Jew prancing around as the leader of TRS, and now the response is to empathise with him, and to develop stories to exonerate him?

uh on Sun, 22 Jan 2017 21:47, wrote:
Trying to bury him even further is a bit like kicking a man already on the ground. In other words, pat yourselves on the back for being so vicious.

We have to keep kicking him while he is on the ground. If we don’t keep kicking him, you and rest of the “movement’s” pathological altruists will show up, pick him up off the floor, cart him to the nearest metaphorical reputation hospital, rehabilitate him, and set him nicely on his feet again despite everything.


17

Posted by DanielS on Sun, 22 Jan 2017 21:51 | #

Posted by uh on Sun, 22 Jan 2017 16:47 | # 14

Thank you for the transcript. Not needed, as my hearing is one of the few aspects of my health not in decline, but it actually opens up a new possibility: that he simply meant that if the so-called movement rejects partial Jews, then as a man married to a partial Jew, he’d have to recuse himself out of loyalty to his spouse.

Your pllpul is failing you, Uh. The discussion had transitioned from the questions about his wife into the issue of whether or not to allow the participation of Jews or partial Jews -

118:25 - Mencken’s Ghost: “Yeah, uh, I don’t wanna address any of those issues with your relationship, because I, it’s not really any more of our business. At this point I think you’ve laid it bare. I don’t think that’s any of our business.”

118:34 - Musonius Rufus: “Yeah, I think you’ve done a good job of laying it bare, uh.”

118:36 - Mencken’s Ghost: “And its not any more of our business. 118:39 - The uh, one of the issues that was brought up is that we’ve had people who have been removed from the forums because they were Jewish or partial Jewish ancestry, who had renounced their ancestry, in the past; and that’s something that’s been brought-up ...

Peinovich responded knowing that the issue had now transitioned and he turned to address it specifically.

118:59 - Mike Peinovich: “uhm, you know I didn’t, I actually had never heard that before. Uhm, I think that in, in these cases, in cases like this..

Is it possible that he turned to address a new issue explicitly answering “cases like this” - meaning he’d heard both Mencken’s Ghost and Musonius Rufus clear and keen wish to transition from the issue of his family to have him address a new issue, of whether or not Jews or mixed Jews should be excluded - and then slipped back into the previous topic of his relationship to his wife? Possible, but in the context, it is apparent that he was quite consciously addressing the new issue - “you know, I didn’t, I actually had never heard that before, Uhm, I think that in, in cases like this its really like ...in which case I have to go.”


18

Posted by TRUTH on Sun, 22 Jan 2017 22:22 | #

I didn’t follow TRS, don’t have time for stuff like that, but now I will make time to find out what they were selling and have a closer look at all asscociated with them,and who is still making excuses for them, everything you needed to know was known on day one. It is not just his 1/4 Jewish wife, it gets better. Mike Delaney video on this is good. Apparently they are steering their followers and mocking them. 9/11 was mocked and there are screens shots of twitter to prove this. Delaney is also trying to be nice to certain people, he is right about what he is saying, I have seen it myself and been a part of it, SF actually banned dozens of paid supporters in fall of 2010 over 9/11, wholesale bans, I was one of them, when they banned the strong 9/11 posters they banned the posters that knew the Jews and Neocons the best. They even banned lifetime accounts and highly respected people like The Old Man. There is a huge thread on VNN on this, mods quit and spilled some info too.


19

Posted by DanielS on Sun, 22 Jan 2017 22:31 | #

“TRUTH”, don’t steer this into 9-11 conspiracy theory land.

This would steer us where the Jews want us, into right-wing nut job land and we will have none of it. I am leaving your comment up as an example of where Jewish strategy would have us go.


Another aspect of the strategy is to “concede” that his wife is “1/4 Jewish”...creating a story that she is only 1/4 Jewish so that she would be ostensibly acceptable by Nurenberg laws.


20

Posted by DanielS on Sun, 22 Jan 2017 23:00 | #

Uh: I am using “necessarily” here in the strictest logical sense, that would obtain, for example, in a legal document, i.e. that his words do not constitute explicit identification as partially Jewish, and that the context is open to other interpretations - which a thinking man would not reject merely to satisfy their confirmation bias.

You admit this above, and conclude that “he may as well be” Jewish. Sorry - nor is that proof, but smugness on top of somewhat wild speculation.

You address me with the “burden of proof” of his Jewish ancestry, while ignoring what I’ve said here:

DanielS:

Kumiko is taking the lead on this issue.

From my perspective, it has clearly been the case that Peinovich is giving horrendous misdirection to White interests and acting in a way smacking of Jewish strategy.  I will have more to say about that shortly - but suffice it to say, from my perspective, I don’t need to place emphasis on the matter of whether he is Jewish or not.

...adding: at best, Peinovich is orchestrating misdirection for Jewish interests - and that is the most important issue, by far  - while it is quite possible that he is at least partly Jewish himself.


21

Posted by uh on Mon, 23 Jan 2017 00:52 | #

Daniel,

Fair enough. You prefer the angle that his behavior is “Jewish”, therefore it doesn’t even matter whether he’s partially Jewish or not, and leave that accusation to Kumiko. It’s actually enough for me that you admit what I’m saying is “possible” - if not, you know, probable - because as much as we disagree and disdain each other, you can be counted on for levelheadedness, if not magnanimity in responding to friendly overtures such as this one.

Kumiko,

Obviously I don’t care about these matters as much you do, so I’m already pretending that Mike being partially Jewish or not is relevant.

You have absolutely zero proof that any of that was Michael’s inner thought process. Literally zero.

You’re right - I am inferring that he was embarrassed: precisely as you are inferring that he is partially Jewish. I merely pointed out that your inference is flawed; specifically, that the excerpt can very easily, and I think obviously, be interpreted another way. After all, he was speaking off-the-cuff in an interview, not measuring his words so that the Jew-hunting club wouldn’t find him out. Is it possible that he tripped himself up in suggesting that he was involved in a compromising relationship? Of course the answer - logically - is yes, and voila, we have reasonable doubt.

Moreover, wouldn’t you suppose - Jews being as crafty and nefarious as I have no doubt you believe them to be - that if he were partially Jewish, he would be rather more careful about it, as opposed to being only casually guarded about the identity of his wife? Is it possible that if he were partially Jewish, he wouldn’t let the “goys” at Rebel Yell, whose podcast owes its existence to his website, post such an incriminating slip of the tongue? Of course the answer, logically, again, is yes, and again we have reasonable doubt poked into your - in my opinion - hysterical accusation.

We have to keep kicking him while he is on the ground. If we don’t keep kicking him, you and rest of the “movement’s” pathological altruists will show up, pick him up off the floor, cart him to the nearest metaphorical reputation hospital, rehabilitate him, and set him nicely on his feet again despite everything.

You’re pretty unhinged. However, “metaphorical reputation hospital” is one of the most far-our phrases in the English language I’ve ever read, so respect for that.

Anyway, that’s all I got. I don’t think he’s a Jew, and all this is far from evidence. It is a) an interpretation of unscripted conversation, b) the usual deliberate taking of any Germanic or Slavic name to be “Jewish” when it serves your narrative, and c) a lot of frantic posturing.


22

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Mon, 23 Jan 2017 03:33 | #

I think that DanielS is assuming a mal-intent from you that doesn’t necessarily exist, TRUTH, so my response is a little different:

TRUTH on Mon, 23 Jan 2017 03:22, wrote:
I didn’t follow TRS, don’t have time for stuff like that, but now I will make time to find out what they were selling and have a closer look at all asscociated with them,and who is still making excuses for them, everything you needed to know was known on day one.

If you turn up anything interesting then make sure to tell us about it.

TRUTH on Mon, 23 Jan 2017 03:22, wrote:
It is not just his 1/4 Jewish wife, it gets better. Mike Delaney video on this is good. Apparently they are steering their followers and mocking them.

Regarding his wife, the TRS people keep saying that she is “one-quarter Jewish”, but they have never provided anything to demonstrate this. She is likely much more than that, but they are trying to downplay it. Counter-Currents later claimed that Peinovich’s wife is “half Jewish”, so who knows how long it will take before they revise their story again to say “fully Jewish”?

TRUTH on Mon, 23 Jan 2017 03:22, wrote:
9/11 was mocked and there are screens shots of twitter to prove this.

I guess I’ll have to give my view on this. I’ll try to keep it short.

The 9/11 thing

Regarding 9/11, I don’t necessarily see the relevance of that to this. Also, the conspiracy theories are false.

Nevertheless I will point out again that the story began like this:

Kumiko Oumae / Majorityrights.com, ‘North Atlantic: You Have Spread Your Dreams Under Their Feet’, 11 July 2015 (emphasis added):

[...] As it would turn out - to use game theory terminology - it was the Islamists who defected first. Going back to the early 1990s, there was an imperative in the United States and United Kingdom to develop the energy supplies that would give the world market a greater diversity of supply and reduce the level of dependence on the Middle East. This would afford the market a buffer against oil shocks that tended historically to be trigged by political problems in that region.

Part of the solution to this, was a collection of plans to move oil across pipelines in Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan, through Afghanistan, into Pakistan, with the exit being at the port of Gwadar. These plans were proposed by Unocal Corporation, and supported by Delta Oil, Crescent Group and Gazprom. The problem they were having was that Afghanistan was in turmoil because of a civil war that was being waged in the country. Pakistan had previously been supporting the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan during the Cold War, and after the end of the Cold War they had been persuaded that they should actually go as far as to support the Taliban, as a type of ‘pipeline police’.

The Taliban were to be tolerated as ‘pipeline police’ because there was the view that the Northern Alliance was supported by India and Iran, and that if they built the pipeline with the Northern Alliance still in Kabul, they’d obstruct the construction process or destroy that section of the pipeline. For this reason, the consortium of oil companies along with the North Atlantic and Pakistan, more or less publicly supported Mullah Omar and the Taliban, against Ahmad Shah Masood who led the Northern Alliance.

Within the Islamic world, this had consequences that the Taliban reacted to in a way that was entirely treacherous and not without precedent. After the Taliban was enjoying more or less cordial relations with the developed world in 1996 after they had seized Kabul, Mullah Omar found himself exposed to something that all politicians are exposed to, namely journalism and public opinion. Pakistani journalist Hamid Mir visited and asked him questions about what was happening. When Mir met Mullah Omar in Kandahar, it is said that Omar asked Mir “why is it that you are writing against me?” And Mir responded that he did so because Omar “was supporting the Americans”.

Mullah Omar then responded, “If I fix your meeting with a big enemy of America, then will you write that I am not an American agent?”

Hamid Mir asked who that enemy was.

“Osama bin Laden.” was Mullah Omar’s response.

[...]

The rest is broadly known to all. Al-Qaeda moved on the planning the ‘Bojinka plot’, which looked like this:

Wikipedia, ‘Bojinka Plot: Targeted Flights’:

Targeted flights

- Dennis Piszkiewicz, author of Terrorism’s War with America: A History, said that “Zyed” was probably the codename of Ramzi Yousef. “Zyed” was to attack a Northwest Airlines Manila-Seoul-Los Angeles flight, then a United Airlines Seoul-Taipei-Honolulu flight, and then a United Taipei-Bangkok-San Francisco flight. Zyed would then flee to Karachi, Pakistan after disembarking in Bangkok.[15]

- “Majbos” was to attack a United Airlines Taipei-Tokyo-Los Angeles flight, with him disembarking in Tokyo, and then proceed to a United Tokyo-Hong Kong-New York flight. After disembarking in Hong Kong, he would have fled to Karachi, Pakistan.[15]

- “Maroka” was to attack a Northwest Airlines Manila-Tokyo-Chicago flight, with him disembarking in Tokyo, and then proceed to a Northwest Tokyo-Hong Kong-New York flight. After disembarking in Hong Kong he would have escaped to Karachi.[15]

- “Mirqas” was to attack a United Airlines Manila-Seoul-San Francisco flight, with him disembarking in Seoul, and then proceed to a Delta Air Lines Seoul-Taipei-Bangkok flight. After disembarking in Taipei he would have escaped to Karachi.[16]

- “Obaida” was to attack a United Singapore-Hong Kong-Los Angeles flight and a United Los Angeles-Hong Kong-Singapore flight which would become a Singapore-Hong Kong-San Francisco flight. After arriving in Singapore, Obaida was to flee to Pakistan.[15]

That was all too complex for them to carry out though, so they opted to scale it down later.

See here:

New York Times, ‘Portrait of 9/11 ‘Jackal’ Emerges as He Awaits Trial’, 14 November 2009 (emphasis added):

[...] It was not until the mid-1990s that American counterterrorism experts began to understand Mr. Mohammed’s significance to the cause of global jihad, after a thwarted plot to blow up 12 American commercial aircraft in midair. The so-called Bojinka plot, hatched in a Manila apartment with his nephew, the World Trade Center bomber Ramzi Yousef, was Mr. Mohammed’s first inspiration for using airliners as ballistic missiles against civilian targets, according to the 9/11 commission report and recently declassified C.I.A. documents.

In 1996, Mr. Mohammed traveled to Afghanistan to sell Mr. bin Laden on an idea: simultaneously hijacking 10 aircraft and flying them into different prominent civilian targets in the United States. He would be on the one plane not to crash, and after the plane landed would emerge and deliver a speech condemning American policy on Israel.

Mr. bin Laden dismissed the idea as impractical, but three years later he changed his mind and summoned Mr. Mohammed to Kandahar to begin planning a scaled-down version of the plot, which would eventually become the Sept. 11 attacks.

[...]

And then some time passed, and the people who were to become the 11 September 2001 hijackers migrated into the United States, repeatedly gamed the weakly enforced American visa system, and began preparing for the attacks that were going to take place.

And then on 11 September 2001, the event happened, and that event basically looked like this:

Wikipedia, ‘September 11 attacks’:

The September 11 attacks (also referred to as 9/11)[nb 1] were a series of four coordinated terrorist attacks by the Islamic terrorist group al-Qaeda on the United States on the morning of Tuesday, September 11, 2001. The attacks killed 2,996 people, injured over 6,000 others, and caused at least $10 billion in property and infrastructure damage[2][3] and $3 trillion in total costs.[4]

Four passenger airliners operated by two major U.S. passenger air carriers (United Airlines and American Airlines) — all of which departed from airports on the northeastern United States bound for California — were hijacked by 19 al-Qaeda terrorists. Two of the planes, American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175, were crashed into the North and South towers, respectively, of the World Trade Center complex in New York City. Within an hour and 42 minutes, both 110-story towers collapsed, with debris and the resulting fires causing partial or complete collapse of all other buildings in the World Trade Center complex, including the 47-story 7 World Trade Center tower, as well as significant damage to ten other large surrounding structures. A third plane, American Airlines Flight 77, was crashed into the Pentagon (the headquarters of the United States Department of Defense) in Arlington County, Virginia, leading to a partial collapse of the building’s western side. The fourth plane, United Airlines Flight 93, initially was steered toward Washington, D.C., but crashed into a field in Stonycreek Township near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, after its passengers tried to overcome the hijackers.

Why am I quoting from Wikipedia? Because everything contained in that quotation is true. That’s basically what happened on the day of the event.

Shaping the response

Where things get interesting is in the aftermath of the attack, which is where the tussle for influence over the way in which the response to the attack would be formulated, was to take place.

The War in Afghanistan was an expected response, and does not need to be covered here. The War in Iraq was the wildcard.

In 2003, we know that Israel did attempt to shape the response of the United States to the attacks, in a way that would complement its interests in the region.

Saudi Arabia also had an interest in shaping the response, so as to cover over their apparent role in facilitating the operation of the Islamist clearing-houses that gave rise to the attacks.

There are of course other countries who also wanted to ‘stay close to America’ for the purpose of influencing its behaviour, but I don’t want to unnecessarily widen the scope here, in what is only intended to be a short post, so I’ll leave them aside for now.

In terms of the mechanics of how Israel’s influence was actuated, it would be completely wrong to say that they staged the operation. That is simply a conspiracy theory stemming from overly-simplistic thinking. The world has to be seen through the mental framework of an interlocking set of relationship matrices, association matrices, activities matrices, and time event charts (examples of what those tend to look like are embedded as links).

A failure to include everything may lead to people arriving at silly conclusions. The reality is that just because Israel was able to shape the response at key intervals that led to the Iraq War becoming possible, does not mean that everything that happened prior to that moment was somehow ‘faked’.

A key moment

In fact, if you look at the PBS piece titled “A Secret History of ISIS, they actually reveal the precise moment at which Israel injected itself into the decision-making process in the lead up to the Iraq War in 2003, and thus shaped the outcome to their advantage.

From 11min 40sec onward in that video, the transcript:

COLIN POWELL: The speech, supposedly, had been prepared in the White House and in the NSC. But when we were given what had been prepared, it was totally inadequate and we couldn’t track anything in it. And when I asked Condi Rice, the National Security Advisor, “Where did this come from?”, it turns out the Vice-President’s office had written it.

NARRATOR: Powell would turn to the CIA to vet the speech.

NADA BAKOS: We [the CIA] had a copy of the speech that was sent over from the White House that Powell was preparing, and one of our senior analysts was working on it, editing, working on the language to ensure that it reflected our analysis.

NARRATOR: Just days later, Powell arrived at the United Nations.

POWELL: Walking into that room is always a daunting experience, but I had been there before. And we had projectors and all sorts of technology to help us make the case.

KAREN DEYOUNG: Powell was very nervous. Powell doesn’t like to read speeches; he likes to have a few note cards and then do his Powell thing. But this one he read from the text, every word.

NARRATOR: At the Counterterrorism Centre, Bakos was watching carefully to see what Powell would say about Zarqawi, bin Laden, and Saddam Hussein.

BAKOS: We’re sitting in our room at CTC watching the television with a copy of the speech in our hand. When he got to our portion, it went off our script fairly quickly. And we were looking around at each other saying, “Where’s he at, where’s he at?” We’re flipping through pages. And so, you know, right away, we could tell that this wasn’t reflecting the language that we had used.

NARRATOR: Powell used Zarqawi to make the connection between bin Laden and Saddam Hussein.

BAKOS: It drew conclusions in language that we would not use. So we were very, very, very careful about describing the relationship as we saw it, and it seemed to overinflate and not reflect our analysis.

INTERVIEWER: How did that happen, Nada?

BAKOS: Within the process of how it went, you know, where it went back to the White House and who worked on it after that, I don’t know how it was changed, or by who.

If anyone should want to know what happened at that crucial point, and how, the place to look would be at the office of the Chief of the Staff to the Vice President of the United States, who at the time was Scooter Libby.

If you understand that Scooter Libby was to Dick Cheney as Dick Cheney was to George W. Bush, then suddenly you become capable of seeing how it could be possible for the changes that Bakos is referring to, to have been made in the Vice-President’s office by Scooter Libby and his network of very Zionist associates.

In summary

There is no need for any kind of 9/11 conspiracy theory to explain what happened in Iraq.

The explanation has been right in front of everyone’s face from day one. The office of the Chief of the Staff to the Vice President of the United States was compromised by Israel, and as such, all decision-making processes that flowed through there were subject to having Israeli policy preferences injected into them.

It is not the only node that was compromised, but it is the most pivotal and significant one in this situation. I hope that clears up all possible questions and that everyone can draw a line under that issue and call it a closed case now.


23

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Mon, 23 Jan 2017 04:26 | #

And now I have to pull UH‘s post apart, because it just contains too many inaccuracies!

uh on Mon, 23 Jan 2017 05:52, wrote:
You’re right - I am inferring that he [Mike Enoch] was embarrassed

And from where are you drawing that inference? From basically nowhere. Listen to his speaking patterns on the shows that he’s been on since he has been back. Listen to the way he narrates the story, even from his own perspective. That explanation is simply not there, it’s probably the least likely conclusion that anyone could reasonably arrive at.

uh on Mon, 23 Jan 2017 05:52, wrote:
precisely as you are inferring that he is partially Jewish.

I’m not inferring anything, I’m building a case, and it’s a pretty strong one.

uh on Mon, 23 Jan 2017 05:52, wrote:
I merely pointed out that your inference is flawed; specifically, that the excerpt can very easily, and I think obviously, be interpreted another way. After all, he was speaking off-the-cuff in an interview, not measuring his words so that the Jew-hunting club wouldn’t find him out.

And I’m pointing out to you, that this is not how it works. It is likely that he knows that he has to balance the strategy of just ploughing through the doxxing, with the fact that each time he appears in an interview in the unprofessional and unscripted way that he does, that he will basically have to avoid Freudian slips and that there can be no ‘take backs’, because his interlocutors comprise some people who he is also having to try to deceive, and so when he makes an error, he cannot say, “Okay, can we excise that from the audio because the goyim will deduce things from it otherwise?” Because that would only deepen the problem by escalating it into the inner circle of TRS which may still contain some people who are not fully committed to him (from what I have become aware of, two of their inner circle members are not fully committed—and no I cannot tell you what the source of that knowledge is).

This means that when he makes a ‘mistake’ on air, he has to let it go into the final cut, and then he has to basically rely on people like yourself to inject yourselves into the process in comments sections after the stories propagate, in which people like yourself will hunt for alternative narratives to explain the ‘mistakes’.

However, these ambiguities start to evaporate as more errors are committed and as other streams of evidence-collection become available, such as social media accounts of his family members, the information gained through doxxing his surname and pivoting around his family tree, and the force of all these different vectors of evidence starts to push toward a single resultant:

Mike Enoch is Jewish.

That’s pretty much the reality, and you can either accept it or not accept it, but it’s the reality.

uh on Mon, 23 Jan 2017 05:52, wrote:
Moreover, wouldn’t you suppose - Jews being as crafty and nefarious as I have no doubt you believe them to be - that if he were partially Jewish, he would be rather more careful about it, as opposed to being only casually guarded about the identity of his wife?

The mean IQ in the state of Israel is only 89, so no.

When you say Jews are ‘crafty and nefarious’, that’s not very precise language at all. In what areas do you mean? Perhaps when it comes to nepotism and their strategic interests they are adept at organising people. This does not make them super-intelligent and it does not make every single Jewish person into some kind of invincible god.

They are actually people, and people make mistakes. You are seeing Michael ‘Enoch’ Peinovich making mistakes.

uh on Mon, 23 Jan 2017 05:52, wrote:
Is it possible that if he were partially Jewish, he wouldn’t let the “goys” at Rebel Yell, whose podcast owes its existence to his website, post such an incriminating slip of the tongue?

As I said earlier—regarding the possibly two persons who are not 100% loyal to him—the possibility that some of the inner circle at TRS who are not 100% loyal to him would become more suspicious of him if he started requesting convenient edits all over the place (as this is not the first time he’s had a slip of the tongue), may be a factor in why he would decide not to demand that they cut these slips out at the editing process, so that they will go out and then he can spin it as “I didn’t even think it was controversial to say that, there is an innocent interpretation to this, obviously!”

That would be the best way for him to balance the tasks of not alerting his inner circle to the fact that he is making mistakes, and also managing the response to those mistakes externally.

It’s not working of course, because he’s losing on the external front pretty badly, but I would say that this is his logic. And it makes sense in a way because for him right now, the most crucial task for him is that he should maintain the loyalty of his own inner circle.

When Enoch makes a ‘slip’ or a ‘mistake’, he will prioritise maintaining this narrative: Any reaction from outside is a ‘misinterpretation’. And he will keep doing that, rather than revealing to his insiders that it was actually a serious thing which needed to be redacted from the audio.

These things are not clear-cut and simplistic, human beings are complex, and people who are actively engaged in deception while also not being very good at it, apply post-mistake gaming to their mistakes, in the hopes that they can be covered over through ambiguous interpretations.

uh on Mon, 23 Jan 2017 05:52, wrote:
You’re pretty unhinged. However, “metaphorical reputation hospital” is one of the most far-our phrases in the English language I’ve ever read, so respect for that.

More like I’m completely calm, because I know you’ll eventually be admitting that I am right.

uh on Mon, 23 Jan 2017 05:52, wrote:
b) the usual deliberate taking of any Germanic or Slavic name to be “Jewish” when it serves your narrative,

I’m definitely not doing that. Generally speaking, I always actually go and look the names up and correlate them to a geographical location and a story.

Unlike many people associated with ‘the movement’, I do not see all German and Slavic surnames as ‘Jewish’, because I do not have any cultural anchor through which to know what is a ‘normal’ or ‘abnormal’-sounding European surname in the first place.

Remember, I am Asian. Your European style names all sound ‘foreign’ to me, it’s just a matter of figuring out which kind of ‘foreign’ it is, and surprise surprise, Michael ‘Enoch’ Enockson Peinovich-Sippel happens to be pretty Jewish in various ways, despite the fact that to the eye it would appear that those are a cascade of Northwestern, Central and Eastern European names.

There is no name that can inherently ‘sound Jewish’, because no one knows what a Jewish name ‘sounds like’.

Either it is actually Jewish in reality, or it isn’t.

Have you got any more strawmen for me to set fire to today?


24

Posted by uh on Mon, 23 Jan 2017 11:11 | #

There is no name that can inherently ‘sound Jewish’, because no one knows what a Jewish name ‘sounds like’.

Is this the same “Kumiko Oumae” who, above, launched into Mike’s genealogy with the stated intent of holding up several names as being Jewish?

I hope not. Because then you’re not only nuts, but arguing in totally bad faith. So, as it isn’t my aim to get mixed up in anyone’s personality disorder, I’ll leave it here.

GW - you keep some strange company, man.


25

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Mon, 23 Jan 2017 17:53 | #

uh on Mon, 23 Jan 2017 16:11, wrote:
Is this the same “Kumiko Oumae” who, above, launched into Mike’s genealogy with the stated intent of holding up several names as being Jewish?

Yes. And that was in no way based on how they ‘sound’.

uh on Mon, 23 Jan 2017 16:11, wrote:
I hope not. Because then you’re not only nuts, but arguing in totally bad faith. So, as it isn’t my aim to get mixed up in anyone’s personality disorder, I’ll leave it here.

Bye! See you later!


26

Posted by DanielS on Mon, 23 Jan 2017 18:07 | #

This is coming from Uh, the man who has come clean on WN forums for the past year or so that he is here to argue that Jews should be included in White advocacy. Before Uh had been forced into the open in his Jewish advocacy, he was abusively trolling White advocates for years, apparently for his latent motive of their being “too purist.”

He came here with Hugh Jampton, a tag team troll from New York City with a whole cloth argument to defend Enoch… and saying Kumiko comes across as “deranged.”

Uh says:

Posted by uh on Mon, 23 Jan 2017 11:11 | #

There is no name that can inherently ‘sound Jewish’, because no one knows what a Jewish name ‘sounds like’.

Is this the same “Kumiko Oumae” who, above, launched into Mike’s genealogy with the stated intent of holding up several names as being Jewish?

I hope not. Because then you’re not only nuts, but arguing in totally bad faith. So, as it isn’t my aim to get mixed up in anyone’s personality disorder, I’ll leave it here.

GW - you keep some strange company, man.

Uh is not a little disordered in his application of the DSM, is he?

While his Jewish trolling advocacy has only been openly manifest for maybe a year, it has been expressed for years in trolling those who want to maintain White National boundaries.

Captainchaos remarked on Uh’s trolling here:

on Mon, 28 May 2012 19:40 | # 46

The irony of Uh berating daniel for being “beta” is too delicious to avoid commenting on.  Uh, you see, has no job, no wife, no girlfriend, no children and lives on the public dole because of his mental illness.  Uh is not even “beta”, he’s certifiably “omega”

Now, this is what CC has said as of two days ago:

Posted by Captainchaos on Sat, 21 Jan 2017 05:49 | # 3

GW, do you support your Germanic Northern European blood maintaining the upper Midwest exclusively for their own propagation in the form of an ethnostate?  If not, why not?  What go-weak-the-knees, all-too-British reason would you concoct to the contrary?

and one day ago:

Posted by Captainchaos on Sun, 22 Jan 2017 14:47 | # 5

GW’s advice to the overwhelmingly Nordic denizens of the upper Midwest: turn over your land to muds and go breed with swarthoids.  Lulz.  What a crock of shit.

Here Uh chimed into the argument… not a little “motivated” is he? on behalf of mixed Jews is he, and perhaps a little “nuts” in expecting Captainchaos to go along with this?:

Posted by uh on Mon, 23 Jan 2017 01:16 # 11

Well, as you all know, I don’t believe any sort of reconstruction is even remotely possible, and not even logically coherent given certain variables always conveniently left out of the imagining.

I have a friend at work who is from Wisconsin. He is of Bavarian and Jewish descent (3:1), but looks and acts totally Nordic,  apart from being bohemian in his personal habits. (Truth is, his mother might even have made up the Jewish part: you know how women love to do that.)

He also says the same thing as Captainchaos about the Germans and Northern Europeans of his part of the country, and deeply rues the passing of their unique German-American culture. If I had to vote for any group as the “racial upper crust of America”, it would be those people, if he is representative. And he would find the suggestion that Austrians, southern Germans, and Swiss should be excluded from the fantasy Reich too absurd to be laughable.

Then again, they are descendants of the Achtundvierziger who created cities like Madison and men like Paul Ryan: too orderly and freedom-loving for their own ultimate good.

So what you’re asking is whether Captainchaos, whose precise ancestry I don’t even know, would accept my uber-industrious and highly intelligent Catholic German buddy as a member of his new American Reich. And I believe not even Captainchaos would be so obtuse as to turn such stock down. Thus, while I agree with Captainchaos that that is or was a real culture unto itself, I also agree with you that trying to parse it, and not keep on mixing, would be - if anything were possible - would of course be the worse strategy. We’re not in age where we have the luxury of choosing who’s “really white” or not.

Which is why I like Jews who are pro-white and feel they ought to be welcome and encouraged. Here the litmus test for me isn’t racial but ideological: Can they handle skepticism about the Holocaust? If not, they’re useless. If they retain the Holocaust dogma, they’ve retained Jewish tribal neuroticism, and obviously that is what we are truly struggling against.

Doubting the essence of the holocaust, Operation Reinhard, now that’s a true test of sanity.

If Uh is so determined to defend mixed Jews that he would try to presume that even Captainchaos can be persuaded to accept them, then he is not just a little motivated on their behalf, he is not completely in touch with reality. Yet, he proposes to assess the reality testing of others.

Captainchaos had said emphatically against the position that Uh is defending:

Posted by Captainchaos on Thu, 19 Jan 2017 03:02 | # 29

All of this pissing in our faces and telling us it’s raining just to protect a network of faggots and Jews?  What the fuck is wrong with these people

...and Uh says:

I have a friend at work who is from Wisconsin. He is of Bavarian and Jewish descent (3:1), but looks and acts totally Nordic,  apart from being bohemian in his personal habits. (Truth is, his mother might even have made up the Jewish part: you know how women love to do that.)

He also says the same thing as Captainchaos about the Germans and Northern Europeans…

And I believe not even Captainchaos would be so obtuse as to turn such stock down. Thus, while I agree with Captainchaos that that is or was a real culture unto itself, I also agree with you that trying to parse it, and not keep on mixing, would be - if anything were possible - would of course be the worse strategy. We’re not in age where we have the luxury of choosing who’s “really white” or not.

So what you’re asking is whether Captainchaos, whose precise ancestry I don’t even know, would accept my uber-industrious and highly intelligent Catholic German buddy as a member of his new American Reich. And I believe not even Captainchaos would be so obtuse as to turn such stock down. Thus, while I agree with Captainchaos that that is or was a real culture unto itself, I also agree with you that trying to parse it, and not keep on mixing, would be - if anything were possible - would of course be the worse strategy. We’re not in age where we have the luxury of choosing who’s “really white” or not.

Which is why I like Jews who are pro-white and feel they ought to be welcome and encouraged.

Who is nuts? Who is more irrationally motivated on behalf of his bias than understanding of what he, himself is doing, where he is and who he is talking to? to make an argument like that with WN and people like Captainchaos? Who is dishonest? That we cannot “choose” who is White or not…in this day and age when we have DNA testing (for one strong example)?

 


27

Posted by uh on Mon, 23 Jan 2017 19:13 | #

You’re both monomaniacal dweebs, of course, carefully curating a version of reality that suits your obsession as you go along; and the more you blather on about others, the more apparent it is to anyone unwittingly slumming it here. Very sad!


28

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Mon, 23 Jan 2017 19:32 | #

Yes, I do think there is one reality and one truth. If you disagree, then you are wrong.


29

Posted by Captainchaos on Mon, 23 Jan 2017 21:38 | #

Uh more or less admitted at Chateau Heartiste that he likes to troll by sowing the seeds of demoralization because he is cynically embittered about his own poor life prospects.  His own case is hopeless, you see, so why shouldn’t everyone else share in his misery?  Uh said something to the effect of “that’s all I’ve got left.”  He is an amusing and occasionally insightful character, but he’ll take you on a mind-fucking, emotional roller coaster if you let him.  He is much like the personality disorder riddled women he rails against in that way.


30

Posted by D'ward on Tue, 24 Jan 2017 15:25 | #

If ‘Mike Enoch’ wanted to demonstrate his racial standing, then in the US organizations like 23&Me; and extremely cheap <$100 a sample of which given to a neutral party would clear up the background.


31

Posted by Captainchaos on Tue, 24 Jan 2017 18:09 | #

There is another test that needs to be performed.  One which will confirm or disconfirm the rumor that Greg Johnson is HIV positive due to his frequenting gay bathhouses in San Fagcisco.


32

Posted by Compulsory Diversity News on Tue, 24 Jan 2017 21:58 | #

Hi Adrean,

You are missing out on the fun.

   
The very creator of the ((()))

This is another one that you could lampoon to oblivion.

Best Regards, DanielS

Hello Daniel,

Oh, I am still lurking about. I found Kumiko’s articles on this absurd spectacle to be quite enlightening. Every Alt-Right stone turned over will reveal a kike or someone in bed with kikes, I am certain of it. They’re hu-White just like us, don’tcha know! Even the Alt-Right presbidemf has his mischling grandkids at his elbow while signing his first executive orders at the Capitol. Well played, Satan.

       

My problem is that there is no point lampooning absurd people when objective reality ceases to function! These assholes are stealing my punchlines and living them. For fuck’s sake, a guy who looks like Jared from Subway increased his “I’m a pedophile” quotient +25% by growing out his rabbinical beard, was a leader of the evil anti-Semitic Alt-Right, and there are still White Whateverist nitwits defending him! Last year when I was first warning where this Alt-Kike movement was headed, I actually got a comment that I was wrong, and needed to get out more among der Movement and listen to all the great pro-White shitlording coming from TRS. Oh, Irony.

Thank you for your e-mail! As always, I wish you much success in your struggle.

A-drey-drey


33

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Wed, 25 Jan 2017 01:45 | #

D’ward on Tue, 24 Jan 2017 20:25, wrote:
If ‘Mike Enoch’ wanted to demonstrate his racial standing, then in the US organizations like 23&Me; and extremely cheap <$100 a sample of which given to a neutral party would clear up the background.

Exactly. The fact that the scandal is ongoing and Mike Enoch has chosen not to do this, shows again that there’s something he has to hide. He knows what’s going to show up in there, and he doesn’t want to reveal it.


34

Posted by daniel carval on Mon, 30 Jan 2017 00:09 | #

Mike Enoch was the one who ran to the front of the stage at the NPI conference and did a “Heil Hitler” for The Atlantic’s cameras, which was then featured in the Jewish media, edited purposefully to make the entire event seem as close to a “Nazi rally” as possible. While Mike Enoch had his identity protected by NPI, The Atlantic, and the Jewish media – other people involved – the ones that did NOT pose in front of the cameras and “Heil Hitler” – were not so lucky, and many have lost their jobs and been slandered by the media for simply attending a conference – a conference that, up until that point, never engaged in anything close to “Nazi LARPing.”


35

Posted by Bill Brasky on Tue, 31 Jan 2017 23:25 | #

Did this author actually post a Wikipedia article as evidence that the official 9/11 story is true?

Did she believe the jew box when it told her about Atta’s intact passport?

Another shill covering for the Israelis, I see.

Some obvious truth about Kike Enoch + “Ignore those dancing Israelis, goy!”


36

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Wed, 01 Feb 2017 01:37 | #

Bill Brasky got his comment marked as spam initially, but I’ve brought it back out so that I can respond to it. This is just an example of the kind of nonsense that people say to me sometimes:

Bill Brasky on Wed, 01 Feb 2017 04:25, wrote:
Did this author actually post a Wikipedia article as evidence that the official 9/11 story is true?

Yes, that is exactly what I did. I posted a quote from the events of the day of 11 Sept 2001, and then I said that I agree with the content thereof. I don’t need to even talk about the events of the day itself, because I agree with the story.

Bill Brasky on Wed, 01 Feb 2017 04:25, wrote:
Did she believe the jew box when it told her about Atta’s intact passport?

Yes. Passports and other light paper items frequently do in fact survive air incidents. It’s not beyond possibility that a person’s passport could be blown across the street somewhat intact while a plane is crashing into a building.

Bill Brasky on Wed, 01 Feb 2017 04:25, wrote:
Another shill covering for the Israelis, I see.

Are you serious? Did you actually read the comment that you are responding to?

Let me quote myself for you again now:

Kumiko Oumae on Mon, 23 Jan 2017 08:33, wrote:
In summary

There is no need for any kind of 9/11 conspiracy theory to explain what happened in Iraq.

The explanation has been right in front of everyone’s face from day one. The office of the Chief of the Staff to the Vice President of the United States was compromised by Israel, and as such, all decision-making processes that flowed through there were subject to having Israeli policy preferences injected into them.

It’s slightly amazing that you think I’m ‘covering for the Israelis’ by blasting them at every opportunity. The very comment that you are criticising me for making, is the one in which I am in fact illustrating how Israel got into the inside track of the American decision-making process!

Bill Brasky on Wed, 01 Feb 2017 04:25, wrote:
Some obvious truth about Kike Enoch + “Ignore those dancing Israelis, goy!”

Some obvious truth? If it was so ‘obvious’, then why do all stories in the WN-sphere that have this narrative basically use the template and informational layout of my article, and why are they are posted on a date after Part One of my article was posted?

I can tell you the reason. It’s because, I was the first person and this was the first site to carry the story in this way and drawing that conclusion. The ‘obvious’ truth was not ‘obvious’ until I made it ‘obvious’ for you. The Alt-Right sucked their own thumbs and kissed Mike Enoch’s ass for five full years, until finally someone decided to doxx him because he picked a fight with 8chan. At the very least, I was lurking there when it happened, naturally. Even after he was doxxed, for a full 36 hours the whole of the Alt-Right internet sphere was stupidly geared up to write stupid posts in defence of Mike Enoch even as he was being doxxed.

It was only after I decided to post an easy-to-understand timeline of events and propagate the narrative that Mike Enoch is an actual Jew, that the tide began to change, as surreptitiously injecting the narrative of my articles with a reputable URL into the social media domain meant that an incestuous cycle of people using and re-using the story-telling style that I used, or linking directly back to Majorityrights, helped to propel the anti-TRS narrative (one of many vectors!) beyond 8chan and 4chan and into the mainstream of the WN-sphere.

And yet here you are acting like I’m covering this story in this way because I ‘have to’. No, I originated the narrative of ‘starting the story by talking about the Paypal button hidden field from the 2014 archive’. I consciously and deliberately chose to amplify elements of the anti-TRS memeplex.

If you don’t like it, respond back here and challenge me and we’ll actually make time to put you on the podcast as a dissenting view. Seriously. I will invite you onto the podcast, so step up if you dare. You can attack me directly in any way you like, and we’ll find out who is a ‘shill’. I am just open to almost all challengers from now on.

On a related note, I once asked someone “Is it possible to compare Kendo to Memetic Warfare?”

The response? “Yes. In the case of the latter, your reach is not constrained as much by time or space, and the wounds you inflict don’t heal.”

It’s a good answer, and TRS is learning that first hand, in these very days and hours.


37

Posted by Bill Brasky on Wed, 01 Feb 2017 08:51 | #

Did you see the giant fireball created by the plane impacts?  You honestly think a paper passport could survive that, and be found in the feet of dust and rubble immediately for the cameras?
I just stumbled on this article and have never read this site before.

Are you actually an Asian woman?
I don’t argue with children, liberals, or women - all for the same reasons.

I knew TRS, Enoch at least, was a fraud ever since I heard his take on 9/11.  Other clues: (((Trump))) worship, believing every bullshit hoax (Sandy Hook, etc.), over the top Hollywood Nazi violent “jokes”, etc.

As for 9/11, I have a really hard time believing any honest and intelligent person hasn’t come across the mountain of evidence, but here’s a chunk:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nfM0cwouTE

Trump is personal friends with the whole cast of characters.

You will have to deal with MLK references, etc., because thanks to “Its dah muslims durr” retardation on the right, this obvious truth has largely been leftist territory.

By the way, the idea that Zog simply took advantage of the attacks is extremely weak sauce, for WN propaganda purposes, versus the truth - that is, they FUCKING DID IT.


38

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Fri, 03 Feb 2017 03:40 | #

Bill Brasky on Wed, 01 Feb 2017 13:51, wrote:
Did you see the giant fireball created by the plane impacts?  You honestly think a paper passport could survive that, and be found in the feet of dust and rubble immediately for the cameras?

Yes. The passport you are referring to, by the way, was not actually Mohammad Atta’s passport, but rather, it is Satam Al-Suqami’s passport. Flight 11’s debris was mostly contained within the North Tower and was completely destroyed when it collapsed, but some parts of Flight 11 traversed the building and emerged from the other side. For example, components of the landing gear were found five blocks to the south of the WTC complex, and life jackets and pieces of seats and other debris were found on top of the Bankers Trust Building.

Bill Brasky on Wed, 01 Feb 2017 13:51, wrote:
I just stumbled on this article and have never read this site before.

So you chose to make a sweeping criticism of me because I disagree with you about this, even though you had not even read anything that I’ve written in the past?

Bill Brasky on Wed, 01 Feb 2017 13:51, wrote:
Are you actually an Asian woman?

Yes. Obviously.

Bill Brasky on Wed, 01 Feb 2017 13:51, wrote:
I don’t argue with children, liberals, or women - all for the same reasons.

I’ve heard that one plenty of times from two groups of people:
1. The people from Daily Stormer
2. Salafist-Jihadists

You might want to reconsider your approach when you are basically running interference for Al-Qaeda while you are simultaneously sounding like you have the same values as Al-Qaeda.

Bill Brasky on Wed, 01 Feb 2017 13:51, wrote:
As for 9/11, I have a really hard time believing any honest and intelligent person hasn’t come across the mountain of evidence, but here’s a chunk:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nfM0cwouTE

Okay, despite the fact that you do not argue with women, I’ll break this absurd Paul Craig Roberts video down to its component parts and give my responses anyway, by timestamp. That way, people can watch the video and read my scathing remarks alongside it.

0. 0:00: Some stupid Martin Luther King quote. I can see they are already off to a bad start.

1. 00:59: The image of the comparison building used, is not the same kind of construction as that used in the construction of the WTC towers. The way in which they collapse would look different, as anyone who looks at the plans of the WTC buildings would instantly understand.

2. 1:04: Khalid Sheikh Mohammad was waterboarded 183 times and his children were threatened. As someone who happens to know a bit about enhanced interrogation, I think that Khalid Sheikh Mohammad should have counted himself lucky that his genitals weren’t literally electrocuted with car jumper cables hooked up to a plug-in transformer, because goodness knows he certainly deserved it. Heard of the song ‘Gangnam Style’? When they were done with him, that’d probably be the only dance he’d ever be able to do.

3. 1:43: This part is not an argument, but rather, is some bleating about “How could KSM manage to outwit everyone and get the attack done?” That question has been answered from just about every angle imaginable at this point, it is a question which every security service on planet earth has considered and implemented some kind of response to since 11 September 2001. You may have noticed some of these responses, ranging from more inter-services information sharing, to the banning of certain items on passenger aircraft, to the creation of a massive surveillance system which is dumping data into massive repositories such as MARINA, which can then be queried and filtered by applications like X-KEYSCORE. You may also have noticed the fact that CCTV is everywhere, and that vetting in the banking sector and in the processing of Visas and other travel-related information, has been tightened.

4. 1:54: NORAD’s response was unfortunately incorrect on the day, because when it swung into motion it had just been in the middle of training exercise, and so across the screens were artificially generated contacts, as well as the contacts representing all the actual planes in flight over the United States, and then amongst them were a few planes that were hijacked, but they had difficulty finding them. Furthermore, when interceptors were scrambled, they followed the old Cold War pattern of flying toward the sea, which was the wrong direction because the threat was actually originating from inland.

5. 2:11: They show an image of Flight 77’s profile overlaid over the Pentagon, with the wings, tail, and engine in red. Obviously the body of the plane sliced into the building, the wings, tail and so on were sheared off, and then the facade partially collapsed during the ensuing explosion. Flight 77’s body was shredded and destroyed in the duration of time that it took to traverse the distance that it went into the building.

6. 2:23: A BBC story from 23 Sep 2001 is shown on screen in which they find a person with the name of the one of the hijackers alive. This is simply silly, as it is entirely possible that two different people can have the same name. For example, “Walid Al-Shehri” might as well be “John Williams”, for all the lack of distinctiveness that name has in the Arab world. Obviously it is not infeasible that someone else has that name, it’s common as dirt, or common as sand, if you will. It is obviously not the same person though.

7. 2:48: Thermite material ‘studies’? Consider what would be needed for this absurd conspiracy theory to make sense. Let’s look at the case of the area above the impact zone of Flight 175 of the South Tower, which was basically Fuji Bank, where the footage of molten steel flowing from 79th to 82nd floor is often looked at by conspiracy theorists.

Tons of molten metal were flowing from there.

A mole of Fe weighs 54 g. For every mole of Fe produced by thermite, one mole of Al and 0.5 mole of Fe2O3 is needed.

2Al + Fe2O3 = Al2O3 + 2Fe

One mole of Al weighs 27 g. 0.5 mole of Fe2O3 weighs 80 g.

Therefore, (27 + 80) g = 107 g of Al and Fe2O3 is needed to produce 54 g of Fe.

That means the mass of the reactants to that of Fe produced is a ratio of 107/54 = 2. The mass of thermite reactants (Al, Fe2O3) is twice that of the molten iron produced.

Comparing the weight of molten aluminium droplets compared with iron:

Iron is 7.9 g/cc. Aluminium is 2.64 g/cc. Fe is denser than Al by a factor of 3. For the same volume of droplets, Fe would have three times the mass as Al.

To produce the iron from thermite requires a reactant mass that is a factor of 2 more than the iron produced. Also, Fe is 3 times as dense as Al. So, it would take 2*3 = 6 times as much mass to produce the same volume of molten iron droplets from thermite compared with molten aluminium droplets.

Let’s say that as little as 20 tons of molten aluminium flowed out of that window, which is only 25% of that which would be found in the fuselage of Flight 175 alone, much less the metal in the actual impact zone itself.

In such a scenario, this would mean that Paul Craig Roberts is claiming that at least 120 motherfucking tons of thermite reactants were somehow stored inside of the Fuji Bank floors of the South Tower. A PERSON WOULD HAVE TO BE MENTALLY RETARDED TO BELIEVE THAT.

Now consider that on top of that, somehow the conspiracy theorists are also arguing that tons of thermite in canisters survived a 1100 degrees Celsius explosion without the primary charge going off, and then somehow magically it went off later, magically cutting the columns neatly? Besides that, thermite cannot even be used to cut in a straight line, because it combusts chaotically.

The entire theory is RETARDED.

8. 03:22: The video advertises that Paul Craig Roberts was ‘Assistant Secretary to the Treasury under President Ronald Reagan’. Is that supposed to enhance his credibility? He exists to channel your dissent in the most absurd directions imaginable. He’s really good at it, it seems.

9. 04:11: The ‘whataboutism’ begins. Roberts alleges that since the US Government has killed Americans before, that somehow magically means that he can just make any claims he wants about anything now.

10. 5:40: Operation Northwoods is dredged back up again. Yes, that was a real plan. However, 11 September 2001 is not Operation Northwoods.

11. 5:57: The moment of John F. Kennedy’s assassination is shown on screen. Perhaps this has an immense psychological effect on ‘patriotic’ American viewers. I on the other hand am presently playing the smallest of small violins.

12. 6:00: Emotional manipulation attempts continue. The Alfred P. Murrah Building Bombing is invoked for no apparent reason. Will they ever get back to 11 September 2001?

13. 7:49: “What has become of truth? It’s simply disappeared!” Yes, I can’t find anything resembling truth in this video.

14. 9:30: Oh, hey, is that Alan Sabrosky? Oh, wow, it literally is. He claims that since the USS Liberty attack was done by Israel to try to entice the United States into a war against Egypt (which is true), therefore somehow magically the 11 September 2001 attacks were “done by Mossad” (non-sequitur, to say the least). It is almost like Sabrosky exists to send people on wild goose chases so that they can discredit themselves. More recently he is Russia’s favourite loudmouthed dissident because he’ll say just about anything so long as it happens to be in vogue in the counter-culture at the time. Standing with him on anything guarantees that you’ll get discredited later on.

If anything, Mossad would probably like you to claim that the 11 September 2001 attacks were done by them. That way, you would be immediately called “a nutcase” and relegated to the sidelines.

Bill Brasky on Wed, 01 Feb 2017 13:51, wrote:
By the way, the idea that Zog simply took advantage of the attacks is extremely weak sauce, for WN propaganda purposes, versus the truth - that is, they FUCKING DID IT.

In other words, you are upset with me because I choose to say that Israel injected its policy preferences into the response to the attacks, through its influence over the office of the Chief of Staff of the Vice President of the United States, because that simple, clean and entirely provable explanation is just too unexciting for your tastes.

You want the adrenaline rush that comes from jumping up and down like Alex Jones on steroids screaming “inside job”, because you think that is better for ‘WN propaganda purposes’. That would only be ‘better’ if you happened to enjoy being wrong about facts in the most absurd way possible.

Also, I’m not sure when anyone nominated you to be the departmental head of Information Operations at the non-existent ‘WN’ headquarters.


39

Posted by DanielS on Fri, 03 Feb 2017 04:19 | #

Phenomenal take-down, Kumiko.

However, I don’t think the guy, “Bill Brasky”, is a WN, but rather a troll trying to discredit WN by associating it with ridiculous conspiracy theories.

 


40

Posted by Bill Brasky on Sun, 05 Feb 2017 17:01 | #

Yes Daniel (do hebew names even require the ((()))?), go with someone (A WN??) claiming to be a gook female who has lots of experience with “advanced interrogation techniques”.  That really doesn’t raise any eybrows…

This was an advanced bit of word salad/squid ink.

Norad “just happened to be disposed of”, etc.  What a bunch of bullshit.

Im not even going to get into it, lady.  Anyone who uses the CIA coined and poisoned disinfo term “conspiracy theorist” as a pejorative is either in on it or a retard.

It looks like a combo of conventional explosives and thermite, anyway (hence the explosions recorded, reported by many first responders, etc.). 

Do you even know about the Project for a New American Century, etc.?  They practically spelled out the plan before and after, but thanks to disinfo agents like you (and Alex Jones, that reference alone shows your depth of knowledge) they will get away with it and the next one.

Did you actually accuse me of being Al Queda?  Do you understand that’s a creation of ZOG, along with ISIS?

You are either an agent or a lightweight with a lot of time on her dainty little hands.


41

Posted by Bill Brasky on Sun, 05 Feb 2017 17:07 | #

Also, funny how you don’t address the infamous “dancing isaeli” Mossad agents arrested by NYPD and sent back to your, I mean their homeland free of any charges?


42

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Mon, 06 Feb 2017 07:05 | #

Some observers may be wondering why I’m even allowing Bill Brasky to continue this plainly ridiculous conversation. I allow it because I’ve always stated that it’s important to see what kind of messaging and signalling our ideological opponents try to engage in, and because my first post here was to describe Majorityrights as “freedom of speech’s front porch”, a view I intend to maintain.

With that said, I’ll now address the whole of Brasky’s post, just as before:

Bill Brasky on Sun, 05 Feb 2017 22:01, wrote:
Yes Daniel (do hebew names even require the ((()))?),

Right out of the gate you manage to get something blatantly wrong.

DanielS is an ethno-nationalist who has been active on the scene in the United States and in Poland for more than 25 years. Additionally, I’ve seen Daniel’s National Geographic Society Genographic Project (Geno 2.0) results with my own eyes. It shows that Daniel’s ancestry is 100% European, he is 36% Northern European and 43% Southern European. This is entirely logical, given that his mother’s side is Polish and his father’s side is Italian.

People from Catholic families are given Christian names, and those names tend to come from the Christian holy book. You may be already aware of that, though.

His mtDNA Group is U5b1e1, which is indigenous to Northern Europe.

Bill Brasky on Sun, 05 Feb 2017 22:01, wrote:
go with someone (A WN??)

Obviously, I can’t be a White Nationalist, because I’m Asian and therefore the adjective ‘White’, does not apply to me.

Bill Brasky on Sun, 05 Feb 2017 22:01, wrote:
a gook female

Trying to dehumanise me with the word ‘gook’ is so 1970—1980s. You do realise that the psychological effectiveness of that word was diminished significantly after the Vietnam War, right?

Also, do you really think that DanielS is going to respond to you like, “Oh, right, Miss Oumae is an evil gook who cannot be trusted, why did I not think of that before?! You are now my new best friend, Bill!” Do you really think that’s going to be his response to you?

Seriously?

Bill Brasky on Sun, 05 Feb 2017 22:01, wrote:
who has lots of experience with “advanced interrogation techniques”.  That really doesn’t raise any eybrows…

I did not say the word ‘experience’, you chose to insert that word yourself. The actual language I used was “happens to know a bit about enhanced interrogation”.

Anyway, yeah. East and South Asian state actors literally invented half the human resource exploitation techniques that are presently in use in the Global War on Terror, and the other half was knowledge transmission from the British Empire’s Northern Ireland troubles. So, it would be pretty normal to know about that, yes. Hence why I said it.

Also, why do you care if Islamic fundamentalists get waterboarded or placed in stress positions while they are being asked questions about their plans? Why do you care about the welfare and psychological well-being of radically-conservative religiously-fervent Arab ‘’‘'refugees’‘’‘? Have you forgotten which side you are supposed to be on?

Bill Brasky on Sun, 05 Feb 2017 22:01, wrote:
This was an advanced bit of word salad/squid ink.

No, it wasn’t. I don’t do ‘word salad’, because I don’t have enough rhetorical flourish with which to make that kind of salad. I simply responded to each of your questions, and then I dismantled the video that you posted by responding to each piece of it with timestamps, and then you got upset.

Bill Brasky on Sun, 05 Feb 2017 22:01, wrote:
Norad “just happened to be disposed of”, etc.  What a bunch of bullshit.

Nowhere in my response do the words you’ve placed in quotations exist. NORAD failed to prevent the attacks for the reasons that I described in my previous comment to you, which you are simply not addressing. Instead you are trying to change the frame by seeing if you can induce me to engage your distorted rewordings of what I wrote.

Not going to engage that! Address what I actually said!

Bill Brasky on Sun, 05 Feb 2017 22:01, wrote:
Im not even going to get into it, lady.

Oh look, I’ve been rehumanised! When you began your comment, you used racially-derogatory language, calling me a ‘gook female’ when you were addressing DanielS, but now I’ve been elevated to ‘lady’ when you address me directly.

That divergence is one of those things that is harder to notice in speech, but it stands out clearly when it’s written down. I can believe that you really are an American WN now, since that is the kind of cognitive cowardice that they have historically had.

Bill Brasky on Sun, 05 Feb 2017 22:01, wrote:
Anyone who uses the CIA coined and poisoned disinfo term “conspiracy theorist” as a pejorative is either in on it or a retard.

You are seriously right now claiming that I, Kumiko Oumae, somehow participated in doing 9/11, because I used the term “conspiracy theory” to describe the conspiracy theories that you are propagating.

There are three problems with this other than the fact that you are being completely fucking delusional:
1. I have no connection to the United States.
2. On 11 September 2001, I was nowhere near the United States. Furthermore, I was not even in the Northern Hemisphere.
3. Your attempts to language-police me, are beyond Orwellian parody.

So, there’s that. Even leaving aside the absurdity of the claim on its face, there is practically no way that I could have been ‘in on 9/11’.

It has to be craziest part of your comment.

Bill Brasky on Sun, 05 Feb 2017 22:01, wrote:
It looks like a combo of conventional explosives and thermite, anyway

No it doesn’t. I explained in my previous comment how that is basically impossible. The entire floor plan of Fuji Bank inside the WTC would have had to have been nothing but boxes and canisters of thermite reactants and explosive charges, in order for your conspiracy theory to actually be possible.

Given that Fuji Bank really existed and actual business was being conducted there, and given that Fuji Bank’s office there wasn’t packed with explosives, your theory is nonsensical.

Bill Brasky on Sun, 05 Feb 2017 22:01, wrote:
(hence the explosions recorded, reported by many first responders, etc.)

What the first responders and the recordings heard and captured, were the ‘booming’ sounds of floors collapsing onto each other in progressive collapse.

Bill Brasky on Sun, 05 Feb 2017 22:01, wrote:
Do you even know about the Project for a New American Century, etc.?

Are you even reading the posts that I write before you waste my time with these questions? The very post which I wrote and which you are now criticising, contained a link to a 2002 Guardian article which refers to that very plan directly. So now I’m having to quote myself! Here:

Kumiko Oumae on Mon, 23 Jan 2017 08:33, wrote:
In 2003, we know that Israel did attempt to shape the response of the United States to the attacks, in a way that would complement its interests in the region.

If you click the link, and scroll, you will see that the Guardian article which I linked to blatantly contains the following paragraphs:

Guardian, ‘Playing skittles with Saddam’, 03 Sep 2002:
[...] The “skittles theory” of the Middle East - that one ball aimed at Iraq can knock down several regimes - has been around for some time on the wilder fringes of politics but has come to the fore in the United States on the back of the “war against terrorism”.

Its roots can be traced, at least in part, to a paper published in 1996 by an Israeli thinktank, the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies. Entitled “A clean break: a new strategy for securing the realm”, it was intended as a political blueprint for the incoming government of Binyamin Netanyahu. As the title indicates, it advised the right-wing Mr Netanyahu to make a complete break with the past by adopting a strategy “based on an entirely new intellectual foundation, one that restores strategic initiative and provides the nation the room to engage every possible energy on rebuilding Zionism ...” [...]

Of course, ‘Clean Break’ could not have been sold to the Americans under the blatantly Israeli packaging. To induce the Americans to take actions that would fulfil the objectives of Israeli commanders, the State of Israel had to explore every avenue of communications operations, and one of those avenues was to use their contacts in the United States to shape the contents of ‘Project for a New American Century’ so that it would complement the objectives of ‘Clean Break’.

To actuate it, required them to leverage their assets inside the political structure of the United States. They had many ways to do that, one of the most significant ones being the fact that they had Scooter Libby in the Office of the Chief of Staff to the Vice President of the United States.

Thus, Israel was able to get on the inside track of the decision-making process that was taking place in the United States and was able to shape the parts of the response to the 11 September 2001 attacks that they found to be of high priority to themselves.

For some reason you keep disagreeing with me whenever I point this out. This is the third time I’m revisiting this point now.

Bill Brasky on Sun, 05 Feb 2017 22:01, wrote:
thanks to disinfo agents like you [...] they will get away with it

No, I am not ‘disinfo’ and I’m not to blame for anything, because I’m not part of that structure. To blame Asians would be the most stupid possible thing you could do.

We are not the ones who have been enabling the Israelis. You’ve been the ones who are doing that. The reason that the State of Israel gets away with shaping the American decision-making process so often, is because Americans are retarded. Frankly.

Bill Brasky on Sun, 05 Feb 2017 22:01, wrote:
Did you actually accuse me of being Al Queda?

No. I said that you share the same apparent social values as them. My writing is pretty straightforward, it means what it says.

Bill Brasky on Sun, 05 Feb 2017 22:01, wrote:
Do you understand that’s a creation of ZOG, along with ISIS?

No, because that is not actually the case. At least not in the way that I suspect that you mean it. You have to be more specific in your language.

‘Create’ in what sense? In the case of the United States, the United States cultivated in the 1960s—1980s a series of Islamic networks with aim of building American foreign policy in the region as the United Kingdom was relaxing its engagement in the Middle East and South Asia after the Second World War. These networks served varied purposes, some were overtly pushed toward the Soviet Union, and others were cultivated for the purpose of undermining indigenous progressive movements in those regions so as to preserve economic structures and business contacts which American national power was enmeshed with.

Out of the lattice of those networks arose what is now known as ‘Al-Qaeda’, which was making a bid for power in its own right. The United States does not have operational control over Al-Qaeda, and in fact, the attacks of 11 September 2001 showed not only that there was no operational control, but that the Islamists had (obviously) not evaporated after the collapse of the Soviet Union in Central Asia in 1991. The core elements of Salafist-Jihadism pre-existed the modern 20th Century conflicts. It cannot be understood solely through the lens of the 80s War in Afghanistan, and it cannot be understood solely as some kind of culture war.

I could write at length about this subject, but in the interest of keeping this comment short, I won’t go further than that.

Bill Brasky on Sun, 05 Feb 2017 22:07, wrote:
Also, funny how you don’t address the infamous “dancing isaeli” Mossad agents arrested by NYPD

Funny how I didn’t address a thing that you didn’t actually ask me about. But I guess you are asking me about them now in a passive-aggressive way, so I’ll address it. They really did exist, by the way. These are their names:

1. Sivan Kurzberg
2. Paul Kurzberg
3. Yaron Shmuel
4. Oded Ellner
5. Omer Marmari

Those are the dancing Israelis that you are referring to. There’s a high certainty (note my use of language here again, I don’t over-extend my claims) that two of them were working for Mossad and that the others were the occupational furniture arranged around what is believed to be a monitoring campaign that the Israelis were engaged in.

All of them were arrested, and their case was transferred to the FBI under the Foreign Counterintelligence Section. The FBI investigated the company Urban Moving, based in Weehawken, New Jersey, as they believed that the whole company may have been a front for some kind of Mossad operation.

They also turned out to have been working in the US illegally because all of them had overstayed their visas. However, CIA officials then intervened to prevent them from being deported, because if they were deported to Israel then they would probably just vanish without any of the questions being answered.

It was later confirmed that Paul Kurzberg had previously worked for Israeli intelligence in another country, and that increases the likelihood that what the FBI had come across was indeed an Israeli intelligence front company.

The FBI sifted through all the documents at the Urban Moving company and held the five Israelis for 71 days in detention, and subjected them to polygraph tests and all the rest of what accompanies being detained and interrogated.

Ultimately, the FBI determined that these people did not have foreknowledge of the 11 September 2001 attacks. What remained unanswered was why they were smiling and dancing.

It could be said that the reason that they were in such a good mood, was that from their perception an attack against the United States had just afforded them the ability to influence the response to those attacks, and in the crisis they were already seeing an opportunity for themselves.

After that point, the US government and the Israeli government agreed to a deal to give them their operatives back, and so American officials bundled all five of them onto a plane and deported them to Israel.

Bill Brasky on Sun, 05 Feb 2017 22:01, wrote:
You are either an agent or a lightweight with a lot of time on her dainty little hands.

Whatever that even means. The first response I wrote to you consumed in total 20 minutes of my time. This time I used up 15 minutes. I’m not sure what your definition of ‘a lot of time’ is, but you would have to come up with some better and more substantive criticisms if you want to make me really put in time arguing with you.

So far, all you’ve done is accuse me of not knowing about things that I transparently and obviously know about, you’ve engaged in posturing and feigned outrage, and you’ve accused me of various random things. All because I won’t agree with your conspiracy theory. None of that can work on me.

I’ll leave it to the other onlookers to decide whether I responded to your questions in a satisfactory way.


43

Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 06 Feb 2017 11:21 | #

Pretty darned satisfactorily, I would say.  But what’s all this about you being a gook who cannot be trusted?  Daniel told me you were a mail order bride from Birobidzhan who said she’d show him how to get an Israeli passport.


44

Posted by "We got a lot of killers [too]" on Mon, 06 Feb 2017 12:49 | #

Vice News, “We got a lot of killers,” 5 Feb 2017:

Trump faces wrath of Republican hawks after defending Putin.

Republican hawks took to Twitter and the Sunday political shows to attack President Donald Trump for his latest comments defending Russian President Vladimir Putin’s brutal regime.

Pressed by Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly about how Trump could respect a “killer” like Putin, Trump said, “We got a lot of killers [too]. What, you think our country is so innocent?”

“I don’t know of any government leaders that are killers in America,” O’Reilly retorted.

“Well, take a look at what we’ve done too,” Trump said. “We’ve made a lot of mistakes. I’ve been against the war in Iraq from the beginning.”

First released Saturday in a preview of O’Reilly’s interview that premiered on Fox’s Super Bowl pregame show Sunday afternoon, Trump’s comments drew scorn from the bellicose corners of the Republican foreign policy establishment. Several members of Congress took issue with Trump suggesting a moral equivalency between the United States and Putin’s Russia. Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio tweeted Sunday morning, hewing close to the American exceptionalism creed he professed in his 2016 presidential campaign.

        Comment by DanielS

        P.S., For the record regarding GW’s joke in the comment above, #42, I, Daniel, said nothing of the kind, not even jokingly!


45

Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 06 Feb 2017 17:36 | #

Spoilsport.


46

Posted by DanielS on Mon, 06 Feb 2017 18:04 | #

               

Well, it’s not for my sake, really ... if my girlfriend thinks something like that might be remotely true, she goes crazy


47

Posted by Bill Brasky on Mon, 06 Feb 2017 18:22 | #

I’m surprised you aren’t just deleting my comments, and I can’t help myself, so here I am again.

So you admit the Israeli Mossad agents were arrested after celebrating the attacks, and you somehow spin this around in your head to not even indicate that they had foreknowledge.

They had a camera set up, and later admitted on Israeli television they were “there to document the attacks”.

You literally claimed that it’s plausible a paper passport of a hijacker was recovered from the giant fireball created upon impact.

That is blatantly insane.  There is no sense in arguing with anyone who would believe such a preposterous and transparent lie.

The way the buildings fell - at freefall speed, approximately 10m/sec^2 - indicates the massive steel structure inside the building (full of living people, it wasn’t a giant furnace) was destroyed in a controlled demolition.  You could have dropped a ball from the impact site at the beginning of the collapse, and it would fall at the same rate as the rest of the building that was designed to withstand bigger jet aircraft impacts.

No such collapse has ever happened before to a steel framed skyscraper as a result of fire before or since.  It happened thrice that day, once to a building that wasn’t directly hit (Building 7 did have some structural damage, contrary to a popular bit of disinfo.  The way it collapsed uniformly and spontaneously is the important point.)

There is no other way to explain what we see with our own eyes - let alone the molten steel, and building 7 which collapsed in another apparent controlled demolition hours later.

Of course the entire subject has been saturated with tons of disinformation, on purpose.  “holograms, space rays” etc.

Anyone who doesn’t know the basics by now is hopeless.

I’m done here, I don’t need yet another reminder of how stupid our people are and how infiltrated the pro white spaces are.

Too depressing.


48

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Tue, 07 Feb 2017 05:00 | #

Bill Brasky on Mon, 06 Feb 2017 23:22, wrote:
I’m surprised you aren’t just deleting my comments,

Why would that be surprising? I’m fully aware that you chose to start this at Majorityrights precisely because you knew that you’d be arguing against me, and because you know that I wouldn’t delete your comments and that I would instead engage you on every point.

It’s obvious. I’m practically the only person who always lets this happen, every time. If you had tried this on Greg Johnson at Counter-Currents, or Andrew Anglin at Daily Stormer, or Hunter Wallace at Occidental Dissent, or whoever, they would’ve removed all your comments instantly because they have harsher moderation policies. Also, I assume that they don’t have the facts on hand to just respond off-the-cuff, whereas I do. So the decision-making process is different for me than it is for them.

I take a different approach because I think that sunlight and openness is the way to handle disagreements. In the case of the 11 September attacks, I don’t think that every person who brings a ridiculous conspiracy theory is doing it for the specific purpose of derailing threads. Sometimes a person who does that is simply sincerely wrong, and perhaps silent observers are also sincerely wrong in the same way.

So it is better for me to take the time to engage the arguments in that case.

There is something to be said for the idea that if a conscious agent of Mike Enoch had wanted to derail this thread, they would have done no differently than you have done. But even then, I would still have engaged the substance of such a person’s arguments anyway. It’s not beyond possibility that Enoch’s people would try to send people to write attack-comments here against me that would distract from the fact that Enoch is a massive infiltrator who is working to advance Israeli-American interests.

However, I think that you are not deliberately creating distractions. You’re just wrong about facts—facts which I’m having to openly correct in the sunlight.

Bill Brasky on Mon, 06 Feb 2017 23:22, wrote:
So you admit the Israeli Mossad agents were arrested after celebrating the attacks,

I just described those events in my previous comment. Your use of the word ‘admit’ is a weird one, given that it implies I’m standing between goalposts, or that I’m making some kind of concession.

The Mossad is a state actor for an adversarial power, I do not have to be coaxed into putting them under the bus. From my perception, their place of residency is under the bus by default. They are already under the bus. Look at the site you are having this conversation at.

You asked me to talk about the Mossad presence on the scene. I did so.

It’s like:

BRASKY: Will you ever talk about how the Jews are Jewing?!
OUMAE: Always. I literally talk about that all the time, I’m not a friend to Israel.
BRASKY: Aha, so you admit that the Jews are Jewing!
OUMAE: No one has to ‘admit’ it, it’s fucking obvious.

The only way that exchange could be more ridiculous is if you were to have me cosplaying as an Asian British Commonwealth officer in 1948-style Mandate of Palestine or Transjordan BDU while you asked those questions.

‘Admit’. It’s not ‘an admission’, it’s simply a description of reality.

The really pertinent question is not “Is Israel Jewing?” The correct answer to that question is always “Yes”, so it doesn’t even bear asking. The really pertinent question is, “In what specific way is Israel Jewing in this situation?” The specifics matter, because the answer will affect your decision-making and policy preferences.

Bill Brasky on Mon, 06 Feb 2017 23:22, wrote:
and you somehow spin this around in your head to not even indicate that they had foreknowledge.

No, I simply don’t reach beyond what the available information actually indicates. There is nothing which indicates that they knew that the 11 September attacks were going to happen before they happened, nor is there any indication that they knew the way in which it would happen.

Bill Brasky on Mon, 06 Feb 2017 23:22, wrote:
They had a camera set up, and later admitted on Israeli television they were “there to document the attacks”.

Context time. I’ll ask two questions and then answer them. When did they set up the camera? What specifically is the ‘there’ which they were talking about on television?

From eyewitness accounts, we know that the Mossad people set up the camera after the attacks had already begun to take place. They went back to their moving van, and tried to video what was happening. Then they seem to have realised that they didn’t have a good vantage point, so they went up onto a roof and continued recording from there.

The ‘there’ which they were referring to on Israeli television, is ‘the roof’. They are saying that they went onto the roof to document the attacks, they were not saying that they were in New York that day in the expectation that they’d be filming an attack.

Their behaviour at the time, and their explanation of it, does not seem to indicate that they knew about it before it happened.

Or, to put it in a humorous way, what was happening there was not pre-planned Jewing. Rather, it was spontaneous Jewing.

It’s a very important difference. A difference which leads to—for example—you and I arriving at entirely different conclusions about what the Global War on Terror has actually been about, and what actual reality looks like. To say the least.

It also leads to me supporting measures to actually defend people from a threat that you don’t seem to think exists. And then you getting mad about it.

Bill Brasky on Mon, 06 Feb 2017 23:22, wrote:
You literally claimed that it’s plausible a paper passport of a hijacker was recovered from the giant fireball created upon impact.

I claimed it was plausible that a passport can be thrown with the other debris into a place where it could have been found, yes. I didn’t say that it was inside a giant fireball, though. Clearly it wasn’t, since it was part of the debris that was thrown clear of the building.

Bill Brasky on Mon, 06 Feb 2017 23:22, wrote:
The way the buildings fell - at freefall speed,

The WTC buildings did not fall at freefall speed. Where does this myth come from?

Bill Brasky on Mon, 06 Feb 2017 23:22, wrote:
No such collapse has ever happened before to a steel framed skyscraper as a result of fire before or since.

Wrong criterion. What is interesting about WTC1 and WTC2 is that they were in fact a break from the tradition of skyscraper construction that had preceded it. It used lightweight construction material and modular construction methods. The WTC towers were not a standard ‘steel framed skyscraper’ in the way that you have categorised them.

Bill Brasky on Mon, 06 Feb 2017 23:22, wrote:
It happened thrice that day, once to a building that wasn’t directly hit

Al-Qaeda is pretty dangerous!

Bill Brasky on Mon, 06 Feb 2017 23:22, wrote:
Building 7 did have some structural damage, contrary to a popular bit of disinfo.  The way it collapsed uniformly and spontaneously is the important point.

WTC7’s collapse was neither uniform nor spontaneous. WTC7 was damaged by falling wreckage from WTC1. The wreckage struck the building on the western side of its south face and this ignited fires on floors 7 to 9 and 11 to 13. Normally, this would cause the sprinkler system to switch on, but this failed because the collapse of WTC1 and WTC2 had already severed the water lines which connected to that area of Lower Manhattan. This meant that the fires continued to rage out of control inside WTC7.

After 7 hours of these uncontrolled fires, a steel girder on the 13th floor failed and floor 13 collapsed, causing a series of collapses down to floor 5. Column 79, which now was no longer supported by a girder, buckled, which caused in turn a cascading succession of structural failures moving east to west. All 23 columns, as well as the exterior columns then failed.

And that’s how WTC7 was destroyed.

Bill Brasky on Mon, 06 Feb 2017 23:22, wrote:
Of course the entire subject has been saturated with tons of disinformation, on purpose.  “holograms, space rays” etc.

And you can’t see how you may in fact just be another part of that phenomenon?

Bill Brasky on Mon, 06 Feb 2017 23:22, wrote:
I’m done here, I don’t need yet another reminder of how stupid our people are and how infiltrated the pro white spaces are.

That’s a truly ironic way for you to end your comment, given that you are making this comment in part two of my three-part (so far) series on how Mike Enoch infiltrated the White Nationalist movement in the United States.

You entered this thread, ignored the topic which was Mike Enoch the literal infiltrator, and set about instead attacking me, an Asian woman who has been exposing that infiltration.

But hey, the fact that I refuse to accept your 9/11 conspiracy theories, is apparently more enraging to you than the fact that Mike Enoch infiltrated your movement for five years without being detected.

Consider the absurdity of that. Apparently in your view the problem is not Mike Enoch. Rather, in your view the problem is me.

Bill Brasky on Mon, 06 Feb 2017 23:22, wrote:
Too depressing.

I should be the one who is depressed, not you.


49

Posted by Bill Brasky on Wed, 08 Feb 2017 08:54 | #

This is why I don’t argue with women, even intelligent ones -  the appeals to authority, to THE OFFICIAL NARRATIVE of the herd, as if that has some kind of metaphysical power over reality.

You seem to have a typical, completely unfounded faith in the official stories from institutions and organizations that are “in charge”.  They are all bought and paid for by the money the jews print out of thin air, and beyond that, are compartmentalized and operate on a need to know basis. 

The arrested mossad agents were part of a giant network of spying, of unprecedented scale, uncovered before and during the attacks.  Watch “Missing Links” and see if you can hold on to your comforting illusions about 9/11.  The dual citizens and Israeli companies behind every single aspect of the operation, from security at ALL the airports, a shipping company that moved out of a tower, forfeiting a 50k security deposit weeks before the attacks, Israeli firms that sold off the steel murder evidence to china while it was still hot, the list goes on and on.  That last one should clue in any honest person - swift destruction of murder evidence for profit

The buildings had unprecedented amounts of steel reinforcement:
Link wont post, just google images of the towers under construction.
They indeed fell at a rate of acceleration that was close to gravity - Impossible with such an intact structure.  The explosions were heard before AND during the collapse, so not explained by the ridiculous invented “pancake theory” of bought and paid for government stooges.  Building 7 did indeed fall in a uniform way that is not explained by localized damage in its steel lattice construction.  And the BBC reported it 20+ minutes before it collapsed, or as Silverstein stated “they decided to pull it”.

The assertion that I am somehow pro-muslim is just tard-level, something I would expect from the likes of Bill O’reilly or a Trumpcuck.

Of course Muslims are the enemy as well, but they are just the low-iq golems of the main enemy.  From what I understand of history, that has literally always been the case.  They would never dare to come in our borders if we weren’t subverted by the enemy.

I brought this up because I saw you try to hand wave the profoundly important topic away above. 

As I said earlier, I found it obvious, due to the 9/11 issue and many others, that Mike Enoch is a lying fraud.  Accusing me of covering for him by bringing up factual information about the most important event in modern history (countering your disinfo), is bizarre.


50

Posted by Bill Brasky on Fri, 10 Feb 2017 00:07 | #

Nothing says winning an argument like silencing the opposition.

I’ve found others are on to your bullshit as well, shill.


51

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Fri, 10 Feb 2017 04:03 | #

Anyone who opposes me is free to come here and argue with me. You haven’t been silenced at all, and I continue to welcome any and all challengers. Regarding your talking points, you are just shifting from one desperate thing to another. It’s like playing Super Mario Brothers: The Lost Levels, every time I destroy you in one weakly defended castle, you just abandon it instantly like it never existed, and you flee to the next ramshackle condemned structure of a castle and dare me to play through the next set of stages to reach it with no apparent change in morale.

Look at this thread. I have to break into Asian-British dialect here, it’s so incredible. You have made it happen now. Because seriously. All your arguments are in complete wreckage on the floor, and you still have the gall to be actually running bantz? I mean, come on, famalan.

You are literally the WN 9/11 conspiracy-theorist Bowser at this point.


52

Posted by Bill Brasky on Fri, 10 Feb 2017 09:27 | #

You haven’t dealt with a single one of my points, then, like a kike, pretend to have won the argument, waving the flag of victory for rhetorical purposes.

Referencing bullshit nonsensical reports from ZOG agencies is not an argument.

I’m sure if Kissinger had been clueless enough to accept Bush’s invitation to take part in the 9/11 “commission”, you’d be quoting his expert opinions as well.

You clearly aren’t dumb, so that makes you a liar.  And I really don’t think it’s just to yourself.


53

Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Fri, 10 Feb 2017 11:19 | #

Bill Brasky on Fri, 10 Feb 2017 14:27, wrote:
You haven’t dealt with a single one of my points,

I’ve been dealing with literally every single point that you’ve been raising.

Bill Brasky on Fri, 10 Feb 2017 14:27, wrote:
then, like a kike, pretend to have won the argument, waving the flag of victory for rhetorical purposes.

Wow, really? I was thinking literally the same thing about you. Except you are the one walking around with the name BRASKY, so explain that.

Bill Brasky on Fri, 10 Feb 2017 14:27, wrote:
I’m sure if Kissinger had been clueless enough to accept Bush’s invitation to take part in the 9/11 “commission”, you’d be quoting his expert opinions as well.

I don’t like Henry Kissinger (Kissinger is extremely anti-Asian in case you somehow weren’t aware) and I don’t think he’d be qualified to write for NIST about buildings collapsing anyway, so the answer on that one is “no”.

Bill Brasky on Fri, 10 Feb 2017 14:27, wrote:
You clearly aren’t dumb, so that makes you a liar.  And I really don’t think it’s just to yourself.

You what?

That bait is now mediocre and stale.

Bill Brasky, when are you going to admit that you were sent here to basically troll so as to see if you could get some good information for whatever study the behavioural sciences division of whatever American agency you work for (DHS?), is looking to glean today? I’m just asking.

You know that I’m never going to give you anything new or interesting that I haven’t already talked about at Majorityrights already, right? Why even bother with all this? I’m sorry to break the fourth wall so soon (I was intending to string you on for at least another week), but your game is just too obvious. Did you think I was going to get mad at some stage and start trying to prove to you, when you are a semi-anonymous troll, that I’m “really not a shill okay and here are some wonderful anecdotes from my life to prove it to you, oh troll, please analyse them?”

Get real. You Americans are absolutely garbage at this and you need to tell your boss to go right back to the drawing board and start over with some new model that is totally different from whatever stupid idiotic model that he (and it will be a man, only a man could fuck up so grandly) is using.



Post a comment:


Name: (required)

Email: (required but not displayed)

URL: (optional)

Note: You should copy your comment to the clipboard or paste it somewhere before submitting it, so that it will not be lost if the session times out.

Remember me


Next entry: These Are White Nationalists? What Is Behind TRS And The Alt-Right’s Gushing Effusion For Trump?
Previous entry: Being in kind – part 2

image of the day

Existential Issues

DNA Nations

Establishment Problem

Categories

Links

Endorsement not implied.

Immigration

Islamist Threat

Anti-white Media Networks

Audio/Video

Crime

Economics

Education

General

Historical Re-Evaluation

Controlled Opposition

Nationalist Political Parties

Science

Europeans in Africa

Of Note

Comments

Guessedworker commented in entry 'Terror in Westminster and the official lies which follow' on Mon, 27 Mar 2017 02:06. (View)

Kamchatka Peninsula commented in entry 'Tillerson, Putin, Sakhalin, Fukushima: Why would Japan Hate Trump's outreach to Russian Federation?' on Sun, 26 Mar 2017 13:18. (View)

Whales from Wales commented in entry 'Terror in Westminster and the official lies which follow' on Sun, 26 Mar 2017 02:36. (View)

Out of the woodpile commented in entry 'Terror in Westminster and the official lies which follow' on Sun, 26 Mar 2017 01:56. (View)

..his wife and daughters commented in entry 'Terror in Westminster and the official lies which follow' on Sun, 26 Mar 2017 01:20. (View)

Khalid Masood Mulatto commented in entry 'Terror in Westminster and the official lies which follow' on Sun, 26 Mar 2017 01:03. (View)

John Peel branches off commented in entry 'Pursuit of Authentic "Soul" Takes Wrong Turn From White Soul: Eat It - Humble Pie & Black Coffee' on Sat, 25 Mar 2017 23:59. (View)

SA White genocide in gear commented in entry 'Suidlanders Reach out to Americans to Stop South African White Genocide' on Sat, 25 Mar 2017 12:45. (View)

Wild Kamchatka commented in entry 'Tillerson, Putin, Sakhalin, Fukushima: Why would Japan Hate Trump's outreach to Russian Federation?' on Sat, 25 Mar 2017 12:22. (View)

Guess who really did it? commented in entry 'Coerced Confessions of The Central Park Five' on Sat, 25 Mar 2017 10:30. (View)

Colored Islam commented in entry 'Terror in Westminster and the official lies which follow' on Sat, 25 Mar 2017 07:04. (View)

It happens to Whites too: Norfolk Four commented in entry 'Coerced Confessions of The Central Park Five' on Sat, 25 Mar 2017 06:18. (View)

Craig Cobb's new digs commented in entry '"Welcome to Leith" - A Review' on Sat, 25 Mar 2017 05:17. (View)

Perhaps a Sallis type commented in entry 'Women Without Class' on Fri, 24 Mar 2017 20:58. (View)

London Mayor's shocking omission commented in entry 'Terror in Westminster and the official lies which follow' on Fri, 24 Mar 2017 20:36. (View)

Canada passes Islamophobia motion commented in entry 'Terror in Westminster and the official lies which follow' on Fri, 24 Mar 2017 19:27. (View)

Cindy commented in entry 'Were the original Indo-Europeans from Europe, Asia or India?' on Thu, 23 Mar 2017 10:05. (View)

Tillerson: my wife made me do this commented in entry 'Tillerson, Putin, Sakhalin, Fukushima: Why would Japan Hate Trump's outreach to Russian Federation?' on Thu, 23 Mar 2017 03:41. (View)

Is Sylvain Mirochnikoff ((()))? commented in entry 'Dickenhorst Farm Cash Cow' on Wed, 22 Mar 2017 22:05. (View)

Yes, evidently Rebekah (((is))) commented in entry 'Dickenhorst Farm Cash Cow' on Wed, 22 Mar 2017 20:20. (View)

Robert Mercer on Civil Rights Act of 1964 commented in entry 'Women Without Class' on Wed, 22 Mar 2017 19:55. (View)

Is Rebekah Mercer ((())) ? commented in entry 'Dickenhorst Farm Cash Cow' on Wed, 22 Mar 2017 19:48. (View)

Jane Mayer: Mercer, Dark Money, Bannon.. commented in entry 'Dickenhorst Farm Cash Cow' on Wed, 22 Mar 2017 19:06. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'Dickenhorst Farm Cash Cow' on Wed, 22 Mar 2017 08:48. (View)

Kumiko Oumae commented in entry 'Dickenhorst Farm Cash Cow' on Wed, 22 Mar 2017 08:12. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'Dickenhorst Farm Cash Cow' on Wed, 22 Mar 2017 07:51. (View)

Kumiko Oumae commented in entry 'Dickenhorst Farm Cash Cow' on Wed, 22 Mar 2017 07:45. (View)

Sharon Stone's X commented in entry 'On The Regnery Circus Big-Tent-O-Sphere, Featuring Richard Spencer as its Ring-Master' on Wed, 22 Mar 2017 07:26. (View)

Guessedworker commented in entry 'The daunting task of policing in Sweden.' on Wed, 22 Mar 2017 02:40. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'Brett Stevens: Not just a Government Issue Patriotard, but a Full-Blown ZOG Disinformation Agent' on Tue, 21 Mar 2017 00:09. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'Brett Stevens: Not just a Government Issue Patriotard, but a Full-Blown ZOG Disinformation Agent' on Mon, 20 Mar 2017 20:13. (View)

Kumiko Oumae commented in entry 'Bold and Brash Intelligence: Examining Geert Wilders and the PVV in the Netherlands.' on Sun, 19 Mar 2017 22:42. (View)

Geert Wilders suspicious relationship with Israel commented in entry 'Bold and Brash Intelligence: Examining Geert Wilders and the PVV in the Netherlands.' on Sun, 19 Mar 2017 20:36. (View)

Government issue children commented in entry 'Poland: Europe's Vanguard Nation - accepted just 0.21 asylum-seekers per 1000 citizens last year' on Sun, 19 Mar 2017 20:23. (View)

Hungary's 'border hunters' ready for action commented in entry 'V. Orbán: “Hungary is in a State of Siege”' on Sun, 19 Mar 2017 11:52. (View)

affection-tone