Majorityrights News > Category: U.S. Politics

A Lawschool student at Oklahoma City University Law School was banned from campus due to a complaint in regard to his private Tinder singles account, which specified that he did not want a woman who has been with a black.

For a Halloween party, he ventured back onto campus in costume, thinking that he might not be recognized. But when he posted a flyer saying “it’s ok to be White”, the administration inferred that it was him - seen through security camera footage, as he made the postings - and expelled him from the Lawschool.

The more interesting part (and liable to challenge) is the banishment from campus (setting-up trespassing grounds for expulsion) for his preference on the Tinder account.

The American Enterprise Institute is a major (((neocon))) thinkthank, that conjures up ways to get poor White American boys to fight wars to “secure the realm around Israel” - i.e. Operation Clean Sweep/Project for a New American Century; and, in the case of the war in Afghanistan, to secure the opium cash crop for a corporation like the Sacklers to exploit; then if these White boys come home alive, albeit dismembered and/or mentally destroyed, they are prescribed the Sackler’s opioid product, Oxycontin, to deaden their pain until they are haplessly unable to head a family, eventually die off of an overdose or other indirect consequences of their trauma .... no worry, keep the borders open to replace their sacrifice with non-Whites.

AEI peddled fabricated stores for Purdue that Oxycontin is innocuous.

By Dr. Kevin MacDonald, December 6th 2019, at The Occidental Observer:

My 2017 article on the Sackler family and the unfolding opioid disaster (“Opioids and the Crisis of the White Working Class”) emphasized the corruption of the academic and medical establishment:

The AEI, a Major Neocon Thinktank, Implicated in the Sackler Family’s Opioid Crisis

As in The Culture of Critique, this was a top-down movement based ultimately on fake science created at the highest levels of the academic medical establishment, motivated by payoffs to a whole host of people ranging from the highest levels of the academic-medical establishment down to sales reps and general practitioner physicians.

Now Tucker Carlson has uncovered another angle intimately tied to our new Jewish elite: the American Enterprise Institute (AEI). The AEI figured prominently in my article “Neoconservatism as a Jewish Movement,” published in 2004:

Jewish intellectual and political movements also have typically had ready access to prestigious mainstream media outlets, and this is certainly true for the neocons. Most notable are the Wall Street Journal, Commentary, The Public Interest, Basic Books (book publishing), and the media empires of Conrad Black and Rupert Murdoch. Murdoch owns the Fox News Channel and the New York Post, and is the main source of funding for Bill Kristol’s Weekly Standard—all major neocon outlets.

A good example illustrating these connections is Richard Perle. Perle is listed as a Resident Fellow of the AEI, and he is on the boards of directors of the Jerusalem Post and the Hollinger Corporation, a media company controlled by Conrad Black. Hollinger owns major media properties in the US (Chicago Sun-Times), England (the Daily Telegraph), Israel (Jerusalem Post), and Canada (the National Post; fifty percent ownership with CanWest Global Communications, which is controlled by Israel Asper and his family; CanWest has aggressively clamped down on its journalists for any deviation from its strong pro-Israel editorial policies. Hollinger also owns dozens of smaller publications in the US, Canada, and England. All of these media outlets reflect the vigorously pro-Israel stance espoused by Perle. Perle has written op-ed columns for Hollinger newspapers as well as for the New York Times.

Neoconservatives such as Jonah Goldberg and David Frum also have a very large influence on National Review, formerly a bastion of traditional conservative thought in the US. Neocon think tanks such as the AEI have a great deal of cross-membership with Jewish activist organizations such as AIPAC, the main pro-Israel lobbying organization in Washington, and the Washington Institute for Near East Policy [which produces pro-Israel propaganda]. (When President George W. Bush addressed the AEI on Iraq policy, the event was fittingly held in the Albert Wohlstetter Conference Center.) A major goal of the AEI is to maintain a high profile as pundits in the mainstream media. A short list would include AEI fellow Michael Ledeen, who is extreme even among the neocons in his lust for war against all Muslim countries in the Middle East, is “resident scholar in the Freedom Chair at the AEI,” writes op-ed articles for The Scripps Howard News Service and the Wall Street Journal, and appears on the Fox News Channel. Michael Rubin, visiting scholar at AEI, writes for the New Republic (controlled by staunchly pro-Israel Martin Peretz), the New York Times, and the Daily Telegraph. Reuel Marc Gerecht, a resident fellow at the AEI and director of the Middle East Initiative at the Project for a New American Century [a neocon group], writes for the Weekly Standard and the New York Times. Another prominent AEI member is David Wurmser who formerly headed the Middle East Studies Program at the AEI until assuming a major role in providing intelligence disinformation in the lead up to the war in Iraq. His position at the AEI was funded by Irving Moscowitz, a wealthy supporter of the settler movement in Israel and neocon activism in the US.[2] At the AEI Wurmser wrote op-ed pieces for the Washington Times, the Weekly Standard, and the Wall Street Journal. His book, Tyranny’s Ally: America’s Failure to Defeat Saddam Hussein, advocated that the United States should use military force to achieve regime change in Iraq. The book was published by the AEI in 1999 with a Foreword by Richard Perle.

Given this history—and understanding the Sacklers’ modus operandi—I should not have been surprised that AEI has been involved in promoting false, Purdue-funded research that doubtless had a prominent role in creating the crisis. Here’s Tucker’s segment:

Kevin MacDonald
@TOOEdit
@TuckerCarlson links Purdue Pharma’s opioid epidemic to the American Enterprise Institute, a neocon outfit. No surprise really. An excellent example of the corruption of Conservatism Inc. https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1202820016145461249 …

The Columbia Bugle@ColumbiaBugle

Tucker Carlson on the Opioid Crisis & Corrupt Conservative Think Tanks Defending Big Pharma

“If you’re starting to suspect that the Conservative Establishment doesn’t really represent your interests, there’s a reason for that. They’re every bit as corrupt as you think they are.”
     
        video
        2:55 PM - Dec 6, 2019

In my 2017 article I described how Purdue funded research that found that Oxycontin was not significantly addictive.

Purdue essentially created a very large community of people who benefited financially from prescribing opioids. They set up and funded organizations that lobbied for more aggressive treatment of pain by treatment with opioids. Millions were funneled into organizations like the American Pain Society and the American Academy of Pain Medicine and Purdue’s own advocacy group, Partners Against Pain, as well as to medical professionals willing to provide data supporting the movement. Purdue hired an army of sales reps to promote opioids to all medical personnel, from doctors to physician assistants. A consistent part of the pitch was to minimize addiction rates. Purdue claimed addiction rates were less than 1% by cherry picking studies that did not examine the effects of long-term use. Other studies often showed much higher rates, as high as 50%. This misrepresentation was at the root of the $600M judgement against Purdue obtained by the US government.

Related at Majorityrights:

Big Pharma Pushes Opioid Epidemic on West Virginia, the Poorest and Whitest part of America 

       

READ MORE...

Executive Order on Combating Anti-Semitism

LAW & JUSTICE

Whitehouse.gov

  Issued on: December 11, 2019:

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1.  Policy.  My Administration is committed to combating the rise of anti-Semitism and anti-Semitic incidents in the United States and around the world.  Anti-Semitic incidents have increased since 2013, and students, in particular, continue to face anti Semitic harassment in schools and on university and college campuses.

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI), 42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq., prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national origin in programs and activities receiving Federal financial assistance.  While Title VI does not cover discrimination based on religion, individuals who face discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin do not lose protection under Title VI for also being a member of a group that shares common religious practices.  Discrimination against Jews may give rise to a Title VI violation when the discrimination is based on an individual’s race, color, or national origin.

It shall be the policy of the executive branch to enforce Title VI against prohibited forms of discrimination rooted in anti-Semitism as vigorously as against all other forms of discrimination prohibited by Title VI.

Sec. 2.  Ensuring Robust Enforcement of Title VI.  (a)  In enforcing Title VI, and identifying evidence of discrimination based on race, color, or national origin, all executive departments and agencies (agencies) charged with enforcing Title VI shall consider the following:

(i)  the non-legally binding working definition of anti Semitism adopted on May 26, 2016, by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), which states, “Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews.  Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities”; and

(ii)  the “Contemporary Examples of Anti-Semitism” identified by the IHRA, to the extent that any examples might be useful as evidence of discriminatory intent.

(b)  In considering the materials described in subsections (a)(i) and (a)(ii) of this section, agencies shall not diminish or infringe upon any right protected under Federal law or under the First Amendment.  As with all other Title VI complaints, the inquiry into whether a particular act constitutes discrimination prohibited by Title VI will require a detailed analysis of the allegations.

Sec. 3.  Additional Authorities Prohibiting Anti-Semitic Discrimination.  Within 120 days of the date of this order, the head of each agency charged with enforcing Title VI shall submit a report to the President, through the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy, identifying additional nondiscrimination authorities within its enforcement authority with respect to which the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism could be considered.

Sec. 4.  Rule of Construction.  Nothing in this order shall be construed to alter the evidentiary requirements pursuant to which an agency makes a determination that conduct, including harassment, amounts to actionable discrimination, or to diminish or infringe upon the rights protected under any other provision of law.

Sec. 5.  General Provisions.  (a)  Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i)  the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii)  the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b)  This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c)  This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

DONALD J. TRUMP

THE WHITE HOUSE,
December 11, 2019.

In Era of Hardening Identities, Trump Order on Jews Kindles Questions Old and New

The New York Times, 15 Dec. 2019:

The president said he wanted to target anti-Semitic speech on campuses, but in the time of new nationalism, nothing is really that simple.

President Trump’s executive order targeting anti-Semitic and anti-Israel speech on campuses might be framed as a narrow legal matter, but it has touched on a defining issue of our time: Who belongs, and who decides?

The order is ambiguous as to whether it sees Jews as a distinct nationality or a minority race, but either interpretation aligns with Mr. Trump’s preoccupation with defining, and policing, the boundaries of identity.

And the order’s creation of special status for Jews, but not other religious minorities, follows Mr. Trump’s habit of welcoming some demographic groups into the rights and protections of American identity and excluding others. Tellingly, the singling out of Jews for special protection in the order left some feeling still more exposed.

Such preoccupations with identity have animated not just the Trump administration but much of the global populist backlash. Leaders and movements across the democratic world are increasingly focused on enforcing narrow national identities of the sort that defined the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

The era of hardening national identities includes the rise of far-right parties in Europe, white nationalism in the United States and a campaign for Hindu dominance in India.

Mr. Trump’s order, however narrow its intentions, underscores the degree to which the problems and contradictions of national identity — a distinctly modern invention that remade the world before almost destroying it — remain unresolved.

READ MORE...

Trump signs executive order combating anti-Semitism

Claire Khaw continues to sponsor directions which are beyond abject irresponsibility, to what is outright egregious misdirection for White people. This time by means of two fools, “Focken” and “Ovfuckyou”, who insist upon misrepresenting White Nationalism as synonymous with Hitler and Nazism.

Hitler was not a White Nationalist. “White” stands for the genus of European peoples and nations. Hitler was a German supremacist and imperialist, who was bound to create the catastrophe that he did for his world view, its epistemological blunders.

OV returns from his Sabbatical to join Fockn in discussing tribal matters [sound fades from 1:58:00]: “Ovfuckyou” says that “Hitler did nothing wrong” ..he is either a Fed or a remarkably stupid person:

Ovfuckyou: Says he’s coming to Bismark, North Dakota, not far from you folks in Leith.

Claire is apparently not troubled by this stuff as it was not over 50 million of her people who wound up being killed by it.

                          Claire Khaw and David Irving

READ MORE...

Fay Stender didn’t want to talk about it either.

The Life and Times of Fay Stender, Radical Attorney for the Black Panthers, Part 1

Karl Nemmersdorf for the Occidental Observer 3 Nov 2019:

Fay Stender earned fame as a radical attorney in the 1960s and 70s, defending two of the most prominent Black Panthers in highly publicized court cases. During the course of her career in left-wing activism, she embraced numerous “causes” with a passion as flamboyant as it was unbalanced. She worked strictly within the stream of Jewish anti-White activism, but inside that framework her aims were random, a consequence of her peculiar personality. She displayed during the course of her work a toxic combination of Jewish radicalism, selfishness, ambition, egotism, and unrestrained female emotion. The blend eventually destabilized social institutions and got people killed.

Fay was the personification of psychological intensity, a classic marker of Jewish activism. Her personality traits were etched in bold lettering. People “who knew her intimately . . . regarded her as one of the most forceful persons they had ever met.” Her sympathetic biographer mentions her “extraordinary” ego, and even her husband was appalled by her “analytic, calculating ambition.” She was “deeply typical” of the radical movement, says a fellow 1960s leftist, “the paradigmatic radical—relentlessly pushing at human limits; driven to a fine rage by perceived injustices; searching for personal authenticity in her revolutionary commitments.” Like many subversives of the 1960s, she was also a strongly identified Jew, and consciously linked the supposed values of her Jewish heritage with her social activism.

Her life story is a revealing case study in Jewish activism.

Related at Majorityrights: Women Without Class

READ MORE...

YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki and the debate over Section 230:

A Youtuber going by the clever name Donald Netanyahu has put up the full 60 Minutes segment featuring Wojcicki, titling it:

Dec 10th is the end of YouTube says Susan Wojcicki on 60 Minutes:

Anti-Racism is Cartesian, it is not innocent, it is prejudice. It is prejudice against prejudice, far from innocent - it is hurting and it is killing people.

It is a YKW construct, a weaponization of the Cartesian prejudice against prejudice primarily directing its rational blindness to prohibit White/European defense and to make YKW speech and protection exceptional.

....as the Sacha Cohen speech to the ADL illustrates….

Among the week’s events, Heinrich Palmgren and Mark Collett discuss this censorship of White self defense by Youtube and the ADL.