May 20, 2011

It's AIPAC Policy Conference time

The annual American Israel Political Action Committee policy conference starts Sunday in Washington D.C. Here's AIPAC's promotional video:


In a 2005 Washington Post column, "AIPAC's Big, Bigger, Biggest Moment," Dana Milbank wrote:
How much clout does AIPAC have? 
Well, consider that during the pro-Israel lobby's annual conference yesterday, a fleet of police cars, sirens wailing, blocked intersections and formed a motorcade to escort buses carrying its conventioneers -- to lunch. 
The annual meeting of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee has long produced a massive show of bipartisan pandering, as lawmakers praise the well-financed and well-connected group. But this has been a rough year for AIPAC -- it has dismissed its policy director and another employee while the FBI examines whether they passed classified U.S. information to Israel -- and the organization is eager to show how big it is.... 
Another fact sheet announced that this is the "largest ever" conference, with its 5,000 participants attending "the largest annual seated dinner in Washington" joined by "more members of Congress than almost any other event, except for a joint session of Congress or a State of the Union address." The group added that its membership "has nearly doubled" over four years to 100,000 and that the National Journal calls it "one of the top four most effective lobbying organizations." 
"More," "most," "largest," "top": The superlatives continued, and deliberately. In his speech Sunday, the group's executive director, Howard Kohr, said the "record attendance" at the conference would dispel questions about AIPAC raised by the FBI investigation.
"This is a test, a test of our collective resolve," Kohr said of the "unique challenge" presented by the FBI probe, "and your presence here today sends a message to every adversary of Israel, AIPAC and the Jewish community that we are here, and here to stay." (The official text has two exclamation points after that sentence.) Kohr, without mentioning the fired staffers, told participants that "neither AIPAC nor any of its current employees is or ever has been the target."

Unlike the puny turnout of 5,000 delegates a half dozen years ago, AIPAC is expecting 10,000 delegates this year.

Here's a 2011 speaker's list:

The Honorable Barack Obama
President of the United States

The Honorable Benjamin Netanyahu
Prime Minister, State of Israel

The Honorable John Boehner (R-OH)
Speaker of the House, U.S. House of Representatives

The Honorable Harry Reid (D-NV)
Majority Leader, U.S. Senate

The Honorable Robert Casey (D-PA)
U.S. Senate

The Honorable John Thune (R-SD)
U.S. Senate

The Honorable Eric Cantor (R-VA)
Majority Leader, U.S. House of Representatives

The Honorable Steny Hoyer (D-MD)
Democratic Whip, U.S. House of Representatives

Mr. Jim Woolsey
Former Director, Central Intelligence Agency

The Honorable Martin Indyk
Vice President for Foreign Policy, Brookings Institution; Former U.S. Ambassador to Israel

Mr. Dan Senor
Adjunct Senior Fellow for Middle East Studies, Council on Foreign Relations

Mr. Paul Begala
Democratic Political Analyst and CNN Contributor

Mr. Ralph Reed
President, Century Strategies

Wouldn't it be simpler if American Jews just had a college football team to root for, the way American Catholics had the Notre Dame Fighting Irish?

119 comments:

Anonymous said...

"No matter what your political persuasion is..." there is but one god in American politics.

Even Jared Taylor and Alex Jones don't dare take on Jews. And Buchanan would rag on Muslims and Chinese than on Jews. And Komment Kontrol.. oh never mind.

Anonymous said...

They should invite Whiskey to speak. I wouldn't want to see the Scotch-Irish go unrepresented at this convention.

Utah HBDer said...

not so sweet on Obama after his big bombshell about the 67 borders...

Anonymous said...

I'm a Jew and I'm glad my ethnic group is smart enough to have rigged the American political system. And yes I do have dual loyalties, although if there were a US-Israel war, I would support the USA.

But the point I want to make it, to all you white guys who endlessly whine about my ethnic group's ability to manipulate 'your' country; why not actually try to emulate us instead of complaining?

Aren't you guys all about having high IQs and dominating other people like true alphas (and not betas?). You take on the language and attitude of the left by endlessly moaning about how the Jews have you by the balls. Get in touch with reality. You either manipulate the world, or the world will manipulate you.

We are to be envied and admired for our lobbying efforts.

What I find funny on stormfront is how white guys rationalize their inferiority to the power of Ashkenazi Jewry by pretending they're just more 'moral' or 'righteous'. Once again, the language of the left. All humans act on self interest.

Ashkenazi Jews, with higher mean and median IQs, just act on self interest more efficiently. Deal with it, and stop the crying.

That or just admit you're a crypto-leftist with appeals to equality and lollipops.

Anonymous said...

Conservatives pleading with Jews is like them pleading with blacks:
"Liberals are the REAL RACISTS. Affirmative action really hurts blacks. WE conservatives REALLY care about blacks. The problem is with liberal bigotry of low expectations. Blah blah blah."

Sailer Strategy should mean not only giving up on blacks but seeing Jews for what they really are.

goyische thought cop said...

Well I don't think there's a dearth of anti-Jew commentary out there, only that it occurs more commonly in Semitic languages. They are trying to branch out though--I saw an Arabic attempt at doing an Onion story where Netanyahu was soliciting tsunami refugees. As satire that doesn't work because I thought the Japanese were somewhat pro-P.A. in the past, insofar as they even care about such deeply relevant stuff.

The tripping-up-AIPAC genre that Milbank tries his hand at here was pioneered by Michael Kinsley back at the Washington Monthly. But it isn't that either of those guys have a problem, especially, with the 1948 crowd; it is merely that they want to stick it to their true archenemies among the U.S. evangelical redneck types. The sad fact is that Israel is one Rapture away from being demoted to a mere El Salvador or Austria. Personally I get sick of the back-and-forth (if I wanted to listen Jennifer Rubin-style sentiments on anything approaching a regular basis, I'd get married) and I now favor a policy of "Zionism In One Country"

Anonymous said...

"Sailer Strategy should mean not only giving up on blacks but seeing Jews for what they really are."

----

And do what about it? Half of you probably found this blog through google (sergey brin, Ashkenazi), then shared a blog you liked on facebook with your other WN friends (zuckerberg, Ashkenazi), then went on youtube to watch Kevin McDonald videos (who I actually think is correct about group selection, and I'm a Jew).

Isn't blogger.com some kind of offshoot of Google (could be wrong about this)?

You need us, so desperately need us. Hitler (who I also somewhat admire for looking out for his people's interests, and once again, I'm a Jew), suffered greatly from losing some of his brightest German Jewish scientists.

It's funny when people complain, 'why is Israel allowed to have nukes'. Probably should do some research on all those Jewish surnames on the manhattan project.

"Why do Jews get to control Hollywood"? Ughhh, because we created it from the very beginning? And as much as you guys love to complain about how it corrupts your innocent clean youth, you're mostly all hypocrites. You'll be consuming (and enjoying) all our filthy media trash until the day you die.

Like I said, you need us.

Enjoyed writing this post. Hope you get where I'm coming from.

Fred said...

"Wouldn't it be simpler if American Jews just had a college football team to root for, the way American Catholics had the Notre Dame Fighting Irish?"

I like it: the Yeshiva Maccabees. I bet that the type of flyover country college coach who would volunteer to whip them into shape would be an evangelical Israel-lover though.

"Ashkenazi Jews, with higher mean and median IQs, just act on self interest more efficiently."

Really? The policies and attitudes Matthew Yglesias promotes got him punched in the back of the head last week. There was also a Jewish reporter (for the NY Times or WaPo) who got killed in D.C. a few years ago, as a consequence of policies promoted by liberal Jews. Look at Jewish advocates for immigration policies which cost Jewish as well as non-Jewish Americans (in tax revenue, quality of life, crime, unemployment, inequality...).


"Sailer Strategy should mean not only giving up on blacks but seeing Jews for what they really are."

We're not all the same, but to be objective about it, there is a subset of American Jews that most flyover evangelicals wouldn't like if they met (rabidly secular, contemptuous of religion, conservatives, middle America). Their philosemitism could be similar to the positive feelings white voters in places like Iowa and Vermont have for black candidates -- uninformed by actual experience with the people in question.

Anonymous said...

That or just admit you're a crypto-leftist with appeals to equality and lollipops.

Not an appeal to equality.

An appeal to honor - an aristocratic concept.

Simon in London said...

American Catholics also had the IRA, but the current still-killing offshoots of the IRA don't enjoy much support even among Northern Ireland Catholics, and 9/11 seems to have severely dented Irish-American support for terrorism such that they're happy to support Gerry Adams' Sinn Fein on the political route.

The bigger point is that Irish-American political power, while annoying to us Ulster Protestants, was never remotely comparable to the dominance Jewish-American power has now achieved. The first Bush Presidency was the last one where Jewish-American political power, specifically New York Elite Jewish American political power, could still be considered as one influence among many. Now it is clearly the dominant power.

Ironically, I'm a strong supporter of Israel, but I still think this overwhelming power has other distorting and harmful effects on US politics, notably on immigration policy. Also, evil Trotskyite policies such as neocon global democratic transformation, or unlimited third-world immigration, can be guaranteed support if they are sold as 'good for the Jews', even if they are actually harmful to Israel and/or the majority of American Jews.

Simon in London said...

anon:
"Ashkenazi Jews, with higher mean and median IQs, just act on self interest more efficiently."

It's not just your higher IQ. IME New York Jews at least are both smarter, more loquacious, and much more *verbally aggressive* than white gentiles. I think this verbal aggression - and lack of shame in propounding outrageous positions with a straight face - is an important factor in Jewish success in the political marketplace. High-IQ WASP elites lack the verbal aggression, and are easily beaten/shamed into submission. Some white minority groups have a more robust debating style, but lack the loquaciousness to debate successfully against Jews.

Anonymous said...

It's always struck me as sort of funny that our entire media and political establishment are so supportive of a white ethnostate in the Middle East, modeled along the lines of South Africa. Tough to reconcile that with the endless pronounciations on the wonderfulness of diversity, immigration, mobility of labor and people, and globalization.

Okay, well maybe not that hard to reconcile. Rich businessmen and other interest groups give lots of money and favors to politicians (ethnic La Raza type activists also give votes to leftist politicians), so they advocate for open borders here. Lots of Jewish money from wealthy corporate/Wall Street individual donors flows into American politics (plenty of influential Jewish-Americans in the media, politics, other powerful institutions too), so politicians advocate for strong borders for Israel.

I only wish that our politicians could be as worried about our borders as they are about Israel's borders. That'd be nice.

LBK said...

It must be awfully boring to have to sit thru all those speeches. I'm glad I'm not in politics so I don't have to go to events like that.

goy said...

Why don't they ban AIPAC, since it is lobbying for a foreign power and thus hostile to the US? Isn't that treason?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous Jew: You are correct. Please consider the latest example of Gentiles emulating Jews:

http://www.kevinmacdonald.net/SAIDChap5.pdf

Anonymous said...

Meh, other than Obama, Comic Con gets bigger names.

neil craig said...

Maybe a college chess team. Maybe they already have half of them.

Anonymous said...

one false assumption in the steveosphere is that all ashkenazi jews follow the same "script".
in reality, jewish populations in different eastern european countries followed different "strategies", sometimes with drastically different results.

case in point: romanian jews survived the ww2 period nearly unscathed, while hungarian jews perished in the flames.
what did they do differently?

Ranse Y said...

So what do you have to do to get 'The Honorable' as your title? It seems to only go to Presidents/Prime Ministers, and judges...

Jim said...

Wouldn't it be simpler if American Jews just had a college football team to root for, the way American Catholics had the Notre Dame Fighting Irish?

In the early 90's, in the course of one of the PC dust-ups about sports teams using Indian mascots, one Indian activist remarked (I'm paraphrasing), "What if they had a football team called the New York Jews and every time they scored a touchdown the crowd roared "What a deal!"

Sounds kind of fun, actually.

Anonymous said...

All this support for Israel and policies that support Israel. Who's looking out for America and supporting us?

John said...

I don't think that lobbying for your group's ethnic interests is that big a deal - or rather, it's certainly understandable. It's the espionage that really sticks in the craw.

Anonymous said...

"Wouldn't it be simpler if American Jews just had a college football team to root for, the way American Catholics had the Notre Dame Fighting Irish?"

No it wouldn't. AIPAC, ADL, SPLC, ALCU, etc have made it possible for Jews to enjoy the life in America that they do today. 70 years ago, Jews weren't allowed into Ivy League universities, country clubs, government and businesses in America. Why should Jews shut down organizations that have changed their lives for the better?

Anonymous said...

For fraking sake, why is it that this guy's(Sailer's) articles all pretty much revolve around Jews? Does he have a fetiche for prepuce-less penises or something? About half of all articles he writes revolves around Jews, Israel, Jewishness or talks about people in the media, politics or intllectual life who happen to be Jewish. It is incredible.

Camlost said...

They should invite Whiskey to speak. I wouldn't want to see the Scotch-Irish go unrepresented at this convention.

Instant classic

Luke Lea said...

Anonymous said...

"I'm a Jew and I'm glad my ethnic group is smart enough to have rigged the American political system. . . .

Ashkenazi Jews, with higher mean and median IQs, just act on self interest more efficiently. Deal with it, and stop the crying."

If Ashkenazi Jews are so smart -- and I think they are -- they should ally themselves with the interests of American working-class families instead of selling them down the river on trade and immigration.

Friends need friends.

Anonymous said...

"Not an appeal to equality.

An appeal to honor - an aristocratic concept."

------

Give me a break. In the 'selfish gene' oriented philosophy of the HBDsphere, there exists no such construct as 'honor'. Only gene replication strategies. Honor is obviously just a proxy for some type of social cohesion.

If we (Jews) can out compete without this proxy, then this is further proof of supremacy.

As for Yglesias and others amongst us being 'suicidal' for supporting black immigration or whatever. You've all read Kevin Mac and understand why we need them in our army. Yglesias doesn't realize it, but I do.

And to go back to my point re: the Manhattan project. One could probably make a (flimsy) argument that the United States super power status was a result of superior weapons created by Ashkenazis (we could have just stayed in the Soviet Union and deprived you of alpha status in the arms race). Which is to say, the people who think the Jews ruined your country forget how much we diminished the possibility of you being a Soviet satellite.

So perhaps you owe us forever (I don't actually believe this, but it's something to chew on)!

[English isn't my first language, so my prose is clunky].

Anonymous said...

"Wouldn't it be simpler if American Jews just had a college football team to root for, the way American Catholics had the Notre Dame Fighting Irish?"

How about if Jews just root for America. By now, I hope they realize Israel is not going to be around for another 60 years because of the Islamic population bomb, and the only place those 8 million or so Jews can flee to is the US. And it's not because of America's big heart -- it's because of Jews ridiculously outsize representation in our government and financial sector. It's the real reason Jews won't back an immigration moratorium. Our overlawyerd nation with all its diversity mandates and a cowed white population deprived of their identity and culture is global Jewery's safe house.

Anonymous said...

I know more and more people who have one Jewish parent or one Jewish grandparent. They don't usually seem very attached to the Jewish tribe. I suspect Jews will have a numbers problem over time despite the efforts of the Lubavitchers.

Anonymous said...

Henry Kissinger said 'power is the greatest aphrodisiac'. It is also the greatest doggy biscuit.

Anonymous said...

I couldn't help but be struck by the prominent nod to diversity even in an AIPAC promo.

In all seriousness, how might a concern for Israel's future by Israel-Right-Or-Wrongers EVER be something to be found in appreciable numbers of African-Americans, as the promo would like to suggest? How bizarre is it that they feel compelled to make this point even in such a context?

But the problem is: how do they even begin to make sense of the way Israel beats the hell out of Palestinians and Arabs and Muslims to the very people for whom "diversity" is so basic it must be deferred to even in an AIPAC promo?

That center's not going to hold.

The sound we are hearing in this video is, I think, the self-implosion of the classic Zionist movement in America.

Anonymous said...

What's really funny about all this is white conservatives act like big strong fellers who are offering their help to poor helpless Jews WHEN IN FACT they're really begging rich powerful Jews for crumbs. It's like a big tall white actor in Hollywood starring in gung ho movies and acting big but really being beholden to Jewish studio bosses who have the real power. AIPAC is political Hollywood. "Ohhhh please, give me a starring role in the next movie!! Obama doesn't know how to read the script. I'll read it like it's written."

The irony is Obama is reading the script as written the Jews. Jews know they're in a precarious position, and they know the world thinks: "JEWS CONTROL AMERICA." Conservatives don't seem to understand that their slavish devotion to Jews make Jews nervous. It sends the message that American politics is nothing but serving Jewish interests. Jews want someone who serves Jewish interests but comes across as non-partisan. Obama and Samantha Powers are useful this way. Of course, Jews still want to keep the support coming from conservatives, so while one bunch of Jews write one script for Obama and Powers--faux-critical of Israel--, another bunch of Jews--Neocons--act like, 'oh my, Obama is out to hurt us. Oh you Christian conservatives, please help us.'. And cons fall for this crap every time.

Or maybe conservatives are subconsciously ashamed of their slavishness to Jews and trying to repress this fact by militantly supporting Jews, as if to prove to themselves and the world that their devotion to Jews is purely idealistic, pure-hearted, and moral AND HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH POLITICS.

It's like some Jewish conversos in Medieval Spain became even more extreme than other Christians in their antisemitism. Since it was emotionally painful to admit they were running dogs who betrayed their own people and accepted another religion, they did their utmost to convince themselves that their conversion was pure and genuine.

Conversos today are American cons.

beowulf said...

Really? The policies and attitudes Matthew Yglesias promotes got him punched in the back of the head last week

The thought of poor Matt being waylaid by dissatisfied readers is kind of funny. The cops would have to go through months-- years-- of blog comments to put together a list of suspects.

Anonymous said...

The Jews are a small, helpless and powerless minority, who are suffering genocide by haters and terrorists. This is why America MUST continue to provide massive foreign, military, and political aid to Israel, including buying off with “foreign aid” or fighting wars to take out all the surrounding Muslim nations (Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Lebanon, Syria, Iran, Egypt, Libya, etc., etc.). No matter how many enemies Israel has, it is America’s job to fight all of them, and continue fighting them for as long as it takes. There are perhaps a billion Muslims in the world, and it will take American taxpayers trillions of Dollars, thousands of cruse missiles and predator drone strikes, and a long, long time to bring all the Muslim terrorist Nations to peace and understanding and “freedom and democracy”. Sure there is some blow-back, such as 9-11, National bankruptcy, ~8,000 American service personnel dead, 50,000 wounded, and an oppressive Homeland Security bureaucracy. But Christian American boys and girls are happy to die in the Middle East so that Israel can grow and prosper. I’m an American from Illinois with 3 children, and I hope that all of them can grow up to fight and die for Israel. This is because I know that what happens in Gaza, the West Bank, Afghanistan, or Iraq is of vital importance to us here in the Mid-West.

Also, Israel’s population is growing. Where do you expect those new people to live? There simply isn’t enough room in Pre-1967 Israel to fit all the European and American Jews who are immigrating to Israel. That is why those Palestinians (who are mostly radical Muslim haters & terrorist) need to vacate the West Bank. That land should be for Israeli Jews, not for terrorists and haters.

Anonymous said...

Ah, come on, Anonymous--It's all about what my mom called "Dumb stupid."

Yes, the contributions in science are fantastic, but when it comes to smarts about social policy, Jews are self-destructive, and they're taking the rest of us down with them.

Olof Wallach Sorospritzzuckemanuelerberg said...

Wouldn't it be simpler if American Jews just had a college football team to root for, the way American Catholics had the Notre Dame Fighting Irish?

The shegetz's problem is that it thinks too small.

Anonymous said...

Jewish power is immense. It's not just the their material power but moral power. Consider Solzhenitsyn's last book. Sure, many of the top publishers are owned by liberal Jews, but surely there are some major ones owned and managed by non-Jews or even conservative-leaning people.
It's understandable why Jewish publishers didn't like the book, but why did EVERYONE ELSE also pass on the book? Because they will marked as 'antisemitic' by all the big players. They'll lose investors, partners, alies, clients, etc.
Or consider this:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2011/may/03/jim-caviezel-passion-of-the-christ

"Jim Caviezel claims The Passion of the Christ made him a Hollywood outcast"

Jews who decried 'guilt by association' during the 'McCarthy Era' practice it in spades today.

Jews understood that money would not be sufficient as power. After all, Chinese own much of the economy in Indonesia, but Indonesian mobs attacked them with impunity during the Financial Crisis. And Christian gentiles too routinely criticized and challenged Jewish power--responsibly and irresponsibly--in the past before the rise of Holocaustianity.
Indeed, a small minority with lots of power and wealth can be the target of envy, resentment, suspicion, and hatred.
This is why Jews understood the crucial need to gain MORAL power over us all. If any major publisher were to publish Solz's book, it would be morally marked as impure, anti-kosher, antisemitic, evil. Whether the book makes or loses money is immaterial; all publishers take losses. The real problem would be it would lose business relations with everyone else and be tarred both in public and behind closed doors--big shots, many of whom are Jewish, will say DON'T DO BUSINESS WITH THAT FIRM.
This power is real. Norman Finkelstein would now be professor at an elite university had it not been for the likes of Dershowitz. He couldn't even get a gig at a middle college like Depaul in Chicago! Depaul didn't wanna be marked as 'antisemitic', even though Finkel is Jewish. Depaul knows Jewish money is crucial, even for a Catholic college. It got cold feet.

A publisher can release books on evil Germans, evil Japanese, evil Muslims, etc, etc, but it cannot release a book on evil Jews. Jews cannot be evil since they're perfect.

This is what wasp elites didn't understand or forgot along the way. That, especially in a democracy that makes a big fuss about 'justice', morality is the ultimate apollodisiac, the ultimate source of light and power. This is what American Jews have but Chinese minority in SE Asia don't have. Jews, by erecting a selective grand narrative of noble victimhood, made themselves out to be eternal saints and have guilt-baited whites for all the wrongs done to them--and so, whites have to make it up to Jews all the time. So, any business or publisher who displeases Jews must be EVIL.
Unless this stranglehold is broken, we are finished.

Anonymous said...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2011/may/03/jim-caviezel-passion-of-the-christ

The problem is not just that Jewish and liberal guys won't work with him but even gentiles and conservatives won't work with him. If the latter did work with him, they would be marked by powerful Hollywood Jews, and they too would be finished.

Jodie Foster is a marked woman for defending Gibson.

Anonymous said...

As a Jew myself, I would submit that a Jewish football team would get trounced on a regular basis, lol!

Anonymous said...

"Why do Jews get to control Hollywood"? Ughhh, because we created it from the very beginning?

Actually, that's not true.

And if you spend any time watching Turner Classic Movies [which most GOP folks do, BTW], then you'll be just stunned at the sight of how much more WASP-ish* the culture was, as recently as about 45 years ago.

Historically speaking, this hyper-jewification of the media begins very suddenly, circa 1970.


And as much as you guys love to complain about how it corrupts your innocent clean youth, you're mostly all hypocrites.

At our house, almost every single [ostensible] children's channel [all the Disneys, all the Nickelodeons, all the Cartoon Networks, etc etc etc] is blocked precisely so as to shield our children from your filth.


You'll be consuming (and enjoying) all our filthy media trash until the day you die.

As above, we are doing everything in our power to divorce ourselves from you and your nihilism.




*Which means, among other things: better mannered, more dignified, more graceful, more elegant, more creative, more insightful, kinder, gentler, and with a very strong sense of the difference between right and wrong [or even that the difference exists in the first place].

And it also means that the actors and actresses can actually ACT [unlike, say, a nepotism hire, such as a Shia LaBeouf, or a Natalie Portman].

Shawn said...

I don't follow football but I think a Jewish themed football team would be a good idea if it gives a good outlet for ethnic rooting.

We have the Fighting Irish. How about the Neurotic Jews?

jody said...

maybe at this meeting they can ask why the mossad provided no information on bin laden for 10 years.

america's best ally and a source of critical anti-terrorism intelligence, i was told over and over and over during the g-dub years. america really, REALLY needs israel's help in that region of the world. israel does so much for the united states.

LOL. the stormfronters are right on this one.

Formerly.JP98 said...

I don't know how else to put this, so I'll just put it: What's the point of this anti-Jew stuff?

Severn said...

Half of you probably found this blog through google (sergey brin, Ashkenazi), then shared a blog you liked on facebook with your other WN friends (zuckerberg, Ashkenazi), then went on youtube to watch Kevin McDonald videos (who I actually think is correct about group selection, and I'm a Jew).

The standard Jewish mentality appears to consist of delusions of grandeur combined with whiny insecure self-pity. In some strange fashion the two seemingly contradictory impulses feed each other.

If you imagine that Google and Facebook are impressive achievements than you've fallen on hard times. It used to be that Jews could feed their egomania with references to Einstein, Freud, and Marx.

Mercer said...

"Ashkenazi Jews, with higher mean and median IQs, just act on self interest more efficiently. Deal with it, and stop the crying."

American Jews are using their IQs to attack anyone who wants to lower immigration. Current immigration trends mean Muslims will outnumber Jews in the US. How is that good for Jews self interest?

Jews also support letting in millions of Latinos who are indifferent to Israel while they use their verbal skills to attack conservative Christians who support Israel. How does that benefit Israel?

American Jews are doing a far better job of undermining their future self interest then Muslims ever could.

jody said...

"Like I said, you need us."

it's the other way around, but you're certainly allowed to have an opinion. the bill of rights ensures this. well, for as long as we can keep it. liberal lawyers, many of them jewish, work tirelessly to erode US rights. i'm not clear on the situation around the world but it's probably similar anyplace the ashkenazi jewish population reaches a critical level. i did notice in the 2010 US census that the poorest city in america, is majority jewish, but those weren't ashkenazi jews but one of the other kinds, who are unemployed and sit around all day reading their religious texts and taking government handouts.

i object to one particular claim (i don't agree with any of them, but this one the most). facebook is a massive, MASSIVE waste of time. a productivity destroyer. the majority of time spent on facebook is not even spent using facebook but playing games. playing games is hardly bad but playing hours of them when you're supposed to be working is bad.

if facebook completely disappeared tomorrow, the world would be better, not worse. people would get more work done. oh, not tons more work done, but let's say 30 minutes more work done per day per heavy facebook user. in aggregate that's probably several million man-hours every work day diverted back into work.

and as i'm sure you are aware, there were things exactly like facebook, before facebook. it's not a new idea. people who really need to do social networking can use the alternatives. there are definitely better examples of helpful, important technology developed by jewish guys, than facebook.

vint cerf, tim berners, and marc andreesson weren't jewish, and also were not paid anything for being key figures in creating this web we are using here in 2011 (andreesson was later paid for netscape). mark zuckerberg is under no obligation to thank them, just like none of us need to thank the technical creators who came before us, but he wouldn't be a billionaire without them.

Anonymous said...

Jewish power works like this. Suppose you're a filmmaker and has been marked by Jews. You will of course have trouble raising funds. But even if have the funds, talented people--even non-Jews--will not work with you, either because they are totally philosemitic or scared of Jews themselves. If a talented editor or sound guy works for/with an 'antisemite', forget about being hired by other top guns in Hollywood. He or she too will be marked.

But there are other problems. Movies require lots of location shooting, and this means getting permits. If the filmmaker carries the mark-of-cain, many localities will not give him the permit--not in the US, Canada, or Europe. Even if he does obtain the permit, the Jewish-funded organizations--'leftist' or 'progressive'--will raise hell with protests and other forms of heckling at shooting locations. And Jewish-controlled media will cover the controversy in lop-side manner,
further marking the filmmaker as an evil, mentally-deranged person.
It will show protests at the location, followed by the likes of Abe Foxman going blah blah. And then the filmmaker, if interviews, will be put on the defensive with questions like "Have you ever been a member of or in any way associated (either directy or indirectly) with 'antisemites'"?

And if the movie still gets made(by some miracle), there's the problem of distribution. The major companies may refuse to distribute and many theaters may refuse to screen the movie made by the guy with the mark-of-cain.
I think this was the joke Tarantino was making in INGLORIOUS BASTERDS when the Nazi guy at the end has the swastika--the current mark of cain--carved on his forehead.

Jews circumcize the foreskins of their children and circumscribe the foreheads of their enemies(with the mark of cain). If you're their 'enemy', you are marked for good and will never be forgiven.

So, Jewish power isn't just about what Jews do but what Jews prevent non-Jews from doing. Especially if your goal is to be successful, rich, famous, and powerful, you better not mess with the Jews cuz they can publicly shame you not only for what you 'are' but whom you associate with.

This explains why so many 'conservatives' like Paul Johnson, Charles Murray, and others are such total lapdogs of Jews. If you wanna express views that majority of Jews don't endorse or like, you better prove 1000% that you love, love, revere, revere, worship, and worship Jews.
And in the end, this was the biggest legacy of WFB to conservatives. Worship the Jew.

read it said...

"Why don't they ban AIPAC, since it is lobbying for a foreign power and thus hostile to the US? Isn't that treason?"

Do other foreign governments have lobbying organizations?

Please give links.

Anonymous said...

Call it AIPORN.

Mark Caplan said...

In former days when Jews piled into teaching, journalism, science, and medicine, they were a huge benefit to America. Now that they've piled into law, public policy and the financial services industry, their contribution to our society is somewhat less of an undiluted blessing.

Anonymous said...

"You need us, so desperately need us."

No. You need us. Without Jews, the West invented modernity. Without the West, the Jews invented nothing. (Incidentally, I am 1/4 Jewish, but not Jewish-identified, myself.)

Between 1200 A.D. and 1850 A.D., was there a single Jew of world-historical significance? Where was the Jewish Galileo, Newton, Leibniz, Hooke, Huygens, Lavoisier, Maxwell? (Spinoza was, of course, a philosopher, not a scientist.) During that period, Jewish culture was nothing but fundamentalism, kabbalah, the Talmud, and the shtetl.

By one of God's crueller jests, it turned out that intensive inbreeding in the shtetl produced great intellectual abilities in the Ashkenazic Jews. (By the way, does anyone need the Sephardic Jews? I'd miss Elias Canetti, I suppose.) When provided with a ready-made corpus of Western science, secular Jews proved extremely able at extending it and advancing it, and indeed, became most of the leading figures in the second great scientific revolution. But left to their own devices, those Jews' high IQ's would have been squandered on numerology and midrash just as their ancestors' were in 1700. Can you imagine if Paul Erdos had grown up as a Yeshiva boy? What grand nonsense he'd have come up with.

Fortunately, beneficial alleles disperse rapidly across populations once there's interbreeding, so the continuing dissolution of secular Jews through intermarriage will provide a shot in the arm to white American IQ - insofar as intelligence proves beneficial in the Mexified, "Idiocracy" America to come.

-bb

Garland said...

I don't know what evidence there is to believe that a football team would inspire the same commitment as a homeland.

Svigor said...

You need us, so desperately need us. Hitler (who I also somewhat admire for looking out for his people's interests, and once again, I'm a Jew), suffered greatly from losing some of his brightest German Jewish scientists.

Projection. All the smart Ashkenazis live here, all the dumb ones live in Israel. Ashkenazis need Euros far, far more than Euros need Ashkenazis. And Euros have done far, far more for Ashkenazis than Ashkenazis have done for us.

Perhaps it is this asymmetry that drives much of the resentment?

Anonymous said...

Was Bill Gates a great genius or great predator? Facebook guy is different?

Jews are the biggest self congratulating cheerleaders on earth. If Trump was Jewish we'd never hear the end of what a brilliant man he was.

Anonymous said...

Obama dares to take on nationalist jews. Head on. '67 borders speech was another big finger to israel.

Classic leftism. The only jews he keeps on his team are deracinated nwo utopians.

He did it right before aipac too. Obama has cojones.

Anonymous said...

... how much $$$ did madoff funnel to these agressive jewish groups?

... how many more madoffs are out there?

Anonymous said...

Simon,

I would guess that trait is a minor advantage.

Anonymous said...

Simon, I noticed the race and immigration issue can be discussed much more freely in the UK than over here in the U.S. I read conservative British papers occasionally - and I've seen many columnists openly express anxiety toward the racial demographic shift that Labor's immigration policies caused. I've also seen a lot of stories run on the negative affect of Muslim immigration and the difficulties with integration. British papers are also willing to mention when a crime is committed by someoe who's black and (especially) Muslim/Asian/Pakistani.

In the US, not even the really conservative media personalities touch the race/immigration issue. On a very, very rare occasion when one does, they get slammed into the ground by both the left and right. Talking about ethnic crime or immigrant integration issues is also pretty difficult, even with conservatives. It's permissible (on the right, never the left) to criticize illegal immigration or quota/affirmative action, but that's about it. You can't question legal immigration, you can't mention difficulties with ethnic groups, and you sure as hell can't say anything about racial changes.

Even the British Labor party, as crazy as they are, are more conservative on immigration than American Republicans. It's tough to overstate the insanity that has gripped our nation.

People say that America is a much free and more conservative than Europe. It's not. The US is completely run by leftist elites that enthusiastically embrace all sorts of destructive nonsense - and if you question them, you get fired and blackballed. Except on economic issues, this country is firmly leftist.

SFG said...

"I'm a Jew and I'm glad my ethnic group is smart enough to have rigged the American political system."

Ended rather badly in Germany. For all concerned.

Dude got his country split in half for 60 years, but he still killed a lot of us.

I have to say, this whole idea that open borders is entirely or even largely a Jewish thing seems ridiculous. OK, so Jewish groups are pro-immigration. The Catholic Church has nothing to do with this? Democratic politicians who want Hispanic votes? The Chamber of Commerce wanting cheap labor? This is the elites on both sides benefiting at the expense of the lower middle class, and there are plenty of gentiles cashing in.

Anonymous said...

Silly Jews - we'd rather have a homeland than give a crap about football.

Whiskey said...

Steve, you don't get it. Israel is a proxy for the divide among White Americans, not a show of "Jewish power." Jews are 2% of the voting population. They have so little power in the Dem Party (where they voted 78% for Obama) that Obama deliberately endorsed both the pre 1967 borders AND a contiguous (and non contiguous Israel) Palestinian State.

Boehner, Reid, Obama, Woolsey etc are not Jews. The highest ranking Jew is from a quick glance, Eric Cantor. Rather, it is the populist Whites (hate Muslims, like Israel) and the elites (love Muslims, hate Israel) that battle over Israel's existence and the ME.

Most Jews meanwhile have so assimilated into the elites that they endorsed Tony Kushner (honorary degree from CUNY) who wants Israel destroyed. Most American Jews would be perfectly happy to see Israel and distant cousins destroyed because they are so assimilated into the Elites.

Whiskey said...

AIPAC also is small potatoes compared to the Saudi lobbying effort (the Saudis paid Bill Clinton about $300 billion in speaking fees over the years and paid about half the GWB library fundraising amount). Obama bowed not to Bibi but to the Saudi King. Of course the payoffs take place out of the limelight.

Snooki and the Situation can warrant a motorcade, no big deal. What matters is who shapes policy, to what degree? Elites who hate Israel, ordinary Whites, and national borders, or those on the opposite fence?

Whiskey said...

I'll further say that Israel's existence comes down to ... throw Israel under the bus as a weakling, grovel and prostrate ones's self, to Saudi and Islamist groups, and maybe they will sell oil a bit cheaper, maybe not.

Or use Israel and other alliances to make the US FEARED and threaten military action to get oil down (like maybe bombing Iran to make the message clear).

Anonymous said...

"Why don't they ban AIPAC, since it is lobbying for a foreign power and thus hostile to the US?"

Israel is hostile to us? That's news to me.

"Isn't that treason?"

To what enemy are they giving aid and comfort?

Anonymous said...

"Half of you probably found this blog through google (sergey brin, Ashkenazi), then shared a blog you liked on facebook with your other WN friends (zuckerberg, Ashkenazi), then went on youtube to watch Kevin McDonald videos..."

You sound like the equivalent of a committed Chinese nationalist who believes the Chinese invented everything. Ironically, I think the Germans have the most impressive record of inventions (car, computer, television, printing, rockets, bicycle, typewriter, x-rays, etc.). I wonder how a Jew would respond to an equally boastful German.

elvisd said...

"Like I said, you need us."

No, we don't need you-we being the WASPs, anglo-americans, or whatever else you want to call us. We have done fine since the seventeenth century here. We were doing fine when the 1848-germano/irish immigration hit, and were doing fine with every new immigrant wave. We have nothing against you, the italian-americans, irish-americans, or whatever hyphenated americans you care to mention. There have been many from many ethic backgrounds who have contributed to this country, but this canard that we have ever "needed" anyone else to lead a decent, free, modern life if bullshit. This is not to arrogantly say that we are the greatest at anything, but we've never needed anyone else, we've always done well enough, and we continue to do well. If every hyphenated American left today, we would still do fine. Our political philosophy, our technical feats, our morals, are sufficient to sustain us. I refuse to accept some narrative that we have been some stunted people who would not be able to go at it alone. We've welcomed others, and have enjoyed their contributions, but without them, we still would have done OK- not the huge superpower or as an interesting place to live, but an accomplished enough society to sustain itself.

David said...

>"Why don't they ban AIPAC, since it is lobbying for a foreign power and thus hostile to the US?"

Israel is hostile to us? That's news to me.<

Look up the word "thus," moron.

(Just using an appropriate verbally aggressive style there. I'm always trying to be smart and effective.)

>To what enemy are they giving aid and comfort?<

No countries' interests are identical, snd there is no such thing as two top priorities. Either your efforts are for America or for some other country. Thus US citizens lobbying for other nations are disloyal = treason. You cheese-eating surrender monkey, asshat, or hostile epithet of your choice.

Whiskey said...

I would certainly agree that AIPAC has at least as much clout as Charlie Sheen who got a police escort in DC for his "Violent Torpedo of Truth" show there.

Winning?

Anonymous said...

Like I said, you need us.

Enjoyed writing this post. Hope you get where I'm coming from


Thanks for that comment, Anonymous. The whining and demoralization of white America are what needs to be fixed. Not any perceived "Jewish Problem." A secure, non-demoralized white America doesn't have anything to fear from American Jews as a group -- they aren't *that* smart or *that* important as long as we're on the ball. And vice-versa of course: Jews don't have much to fear from a political class secure in its political and social power.

If we're so lost that "the Jews" are any sort of problem, then something about us needs to be fixed. Now I wouldn't mind if Jews were on our side for that, but they can a bit crazy when it comes to group political movements, so I'd be just as happy not, actually. Either way, they just aren't going to be central to fixing the problems of white America. And anyone who thinks they are is delusional.

josh said...

Look what happened to the Irish. What happened to Irish political power or even Irish neighborhoods. Hell, looks what happened to Notre Dame football.

SFG said...

A football team? Wait, you want Jews to give up their homeland...for sports? What ethnic group are you talking about again?

Maybe you should tell the Southerners they should have been happy to be conquered if we had just built really nice libraries down there. ;)

Anonymous said...

"Jews are 2% of the voting population. They have so little power in the Dem Party (where they voted 78% for Obama) that Obama deliberately endorsed both the pre 1967 borders AND a contiguous (and non contiguous Israel) Palestinian State."

Whiskey, I always said Jews make the funniest comedians. Mazel Tov.

Anonymous said...

"In the US, not even the really conservative media personalities touch the race/immigration issue. On a very, very rare occasion when one does, they get slammed into the ground by both the left and right."

I think immigration is a more sensitive issue in UK cuz it never habored the notion of 'UK is a nation of immigrants' whereas many whites in America have immigrant origins from the late 19th and early 20th century. So, seening a lot of different people and accepting them as 'Americans' is less problematic than for Britons to accept a whole lot of newcomers as 'British', an identity that goes back a millennia.

RKU said...

Well, I think there's a natural human tendency to assume things continue in the future as the did in the near past, but history shows this to often be mistaken.

An interesting empirical fact is that "polarity reversal" both seems a natural part of human psychology and also of human social organization. For example, in 1789 France was the most centralized, most absolute monarchy and had held that stable position for centuries. Yet soon thereafter, the king and all his aristocrats had their heads shortened. Similarly, in 1917 Russia filled a similar role in European states, and followed a similar trajectory. Social organizations are a bit like stretched rubber bands, and when they snap, they often snap very hard.

Certainly, American society has been stretched *awfully* much in recent years, and only our (probably fleeting) position as the world's currency printers has kept things from snapping long ago. Stiglitz had a good article a few weeks ago describing today's America as being a country of the One Percent, by the One Percent, and for the One Percent, and such a situation tends to be dynamically unstable. And when people compare the standard of living of Americans to those of e.g. Europeans, there's a tendency to forget our extraordinarily unequal concentration of wealthy, and look at things like per capita GNP, perhaps adjusted for purchasing-parity. But remove the One Percent, and you're probably left with a rather grim picture. A few decades ago, America was by far the wealthiest nation in the Developed World, and we're now rapidly moving towards becoming among the most impoverished.

Furthermore, these days a very large fraction of the activity of that aforementioned One Percent seem totally parasitic, and their elimination would clearly increase rather than decrease the total wealth production of the remaining 99% of society. I'd think the harmful impact of their parasitism might actually be greater than that of the doomed elites of the ancien regimes in France and Russia. Offhand, that seems to be a recipe for "interesting times."

A few months back, everyone in the world was rather surprised when massive popular uprisings spontaneously broke out among the long-suppressed and long-impoverished masses of the Arab world. I think there's a reasonable likelihood our national trends may be leading us towards similar "surprises," but much closer to home.

As near as I can tell, the greatest strength of our existing Regime lies in the decades of total dominance enjoyed by the various branches of its propaganda organs, which are far higher in quality and effectiveness than those of its old Soviet competitor. But technology is undercutting this monopoly, and given the increasingly apparent "unreality" of the public images being presented, a single major rip or tear may easily cause the entire dishonest superstructure to collapse, and the Regime with it. One suspects that increasingly impoverished individuals who discover they've been totally lied to about nearly everything important for many decades will become quite angry. Given the enormous social forces involved and the complexity of the interactions, plotting a resulting social trajectory is simply not possible. But at the very least a major discontinuity involving complete "Regime Change" seems plausible on the near horizon.

And when Chinese professors twenty or thirty years from now teach the actual, factual history of the Western world over the last hundred years in their survey courses, none of their students will ever believe them...

Anonymous said...

"No. You need us. Without Jews, the West invented modernity. Without the West, the Jews invented nothing. (Incidentally, I am 1/4 Jewish, but not Jewish-identified, myself.)"

No Jews, no Judaism. No Judaism, no Christianity. No Jews, no money lending which was necessary for the development of the West.
Also, Jewish accomplishment since the late 19th century is MINDBLOWING. For centuries, due to self-enforced orthodoxy and gentile discrimination, Jewish talent had been trapped in a bottle, but when it was released via Emancipation, Jews have disproportionately been involved in many of the most profound innovations and changes in the West, some good, some bad, some both good and bad.

I suppose it's like blacks and sports. Beore blacks gained equal access in sports, most of the great names in sports were white. But once blacks got an equal chance at sports, they totally blew away whites in many fields: track and field, boxing, basketball, football, etc. Since the 90s, even in tennis and golf.

But whites may still ask the question... is it good for us?

Anonymous said...

Damn the ignorance re Manhattan Project is stunning. It was one of the greatest tech mobilizations ever. The number of personnel involved was many tens of thousands.

And the claim that gentiles couldn't do it reminds us of the American music biz circa 30's-40's: nearly all Jewish songwriters. So obviously the gentiles couldn't do music either.

Even this blog community does not understand the power of ingroup>outgroup strategy.

SR said...

I am Jewish. I read this blog to read taboo opinions. I find insightful and incisive criticism of Jews engaging because I never see it in public. Usually criticism of Jews comes down to "they're cheap." I only hope that hefty critiques of Jewish culture can be done in good faith as peers as opposed to as enemies in a zero-sum conflict. As David Brin says, "CITOKATE "Criticism Is The Only Known Antidote To Error." I hope that Jews sympathetic to HBD ideas like Michael Levin do not get scared away.

nader paul kucinich gravel mckinney baldwin said...

Names and faces.
Remember every person in the media that lies to you.
Remember every person in the government that lies to you.

Anonymous said...

Give me a break. In the 'selfish gene' oriented philosophy of the HBDsphere, there exists no such construct as 'honor'. Only gene replication strategies. Honor is obviously just a proxy for some type of social cohesion.

I didn't say it was universal. Honor exists as a construct in some groups. It doesn't exist in others.

There are many different strategies and practices that have evolved. Not all organisms follow the same ones. For example, dung beetles feed and live off dung. Not all beetles do this. Not all organisms do this.

Anonymous said...

Formerly.JP98 said...

I don't know how else to put this, so I'll just put it: What's the point of this anti-Jew stuff?

I might be mistaken, but I don't think Steve is particularly fond of Jews.

Anonymous said...

In all seriousness, how might a concern for Israel's future by Israel-Right-Or-Wrongers EVER be something to be found in appreciable numbers of African-Americans, as the promo would like to suggest?

Most African-Americans are Christian, so they would probably support Israel over their enemies.

Another Anon said...

"I didn't say it was universal. Honor exists as a construct in some groups. It doesn't exist in others."

Honor, courage: this harks back to the blood-and-soil nationalism of the late 19th Century and early 20th Century, which was used as a platform from which to disparage Jews as a stateless people (then once they got a state, of course, they got disparaged for not treating their enemies nicely enough). In response, Jews took up fencing and soon became some of the best fencers in Europe -- and the gentiles refused to fight them. So much for honor.

Anonymous said...

Google is fucking impressive.

It's the tip of the spear of quants taking over everything.

Hopefully Anonymous
http://www.hopeanon.typepad.com

Jack Aubrey said...

"No Jews, no Judaism. No Judaism, no Christianity. No Jews, no money lending which was necessary for the development of the West."

I don't disagree with all of your post, but this: 'no Jews, no Christianity AND no moneylending.'

In fact, it is Christianity which barred moneylending. No Jews, no Christianity - but no prohibition on moneylending either. And there were Christians engaged in Medieval moneylending - the Fuggers, the Medicis, etc.

In addition, it's interesting to note that Jews were driven from most of Western Europe by 1500 and yet Western Europe managed to be far more advanced than the parts of Europe where Jews were living.

I am not saying the Jewish contributions aren't playing a role, but in my opinion the non-Jewish American elite seem entirely capable of destroying this country all on their own, without any help from the Jews. A glance at the politicians who support open borders - and the businessmen who support them - should be all you need to know. Compared to their influence over some other industries, Jews don't seem particularly dominant in restaurants, hotels, or construction. Yet those are the industries pushing hardest against immigration enforcement. Jewish pols may be pro-amnesty, but they are not the leaders of the pro-amnesty movement by any means - Ted Kennedy, John McCain, George Bush, Karl Rove, Orrin Hatch, Lindsay Graham. Not Jewish, any of them.

Because of their money and their education, Jews do have an outsized say in American politics. But much of that say is due to the fact that so many Americans have abdicated their option of participating in the political process. How many commenters here have made a single campaign contribution over $200? Not many, I'd bet. How many have volunteered for a campaign, manned the phones, etc.? Probably even fewer.

I'm not against criticizing the Jews or any other ethnic group, including my own, and have done so routinely. What I am against is this mindless bashing of Jews for no reason other than what is probably just malice and envy.

Jack said...

As a half-Jew I will repeat which I always think of when Jews' support for immigration is discussed - GW Bush is not Jewish. Ted Kennedy was not Jewish. On and on and on. John McCain is not Jewish. While Jews mostly support more immigration (I don't), the bigger problem is white Gentiles supporting more immigration. White gentiles are split. That's the real problem.


My rule for immigration is simple - we take the groups with the most attractive women. It's a win-win - generally, these are the more productive groups.

"If Ashkenazi Jews are so smart -- and I think they are -- they should ally themselves with the interests of American working-class families instead of selling them down the river on trade and immigration."

I'm with you. Jews' support for a terrorist-named leftist president is gonna fuck over Israel bigtime. And Jews should ally more with middle class gentiles. Intermarriage and increased diversity will make that inevitable, though it will take a while.

Anonymous said...

In response, Jews took up fencing and soon became some of the best fencers in Europe -- and the gentiles refused to fight them. So much for honor.

LOL. Fencing is a sport. Up until the late 19th and early 20th century, Europeans would still engage in duels. Until WWI, a German military officer who refused a challenge to duel would be kicked out of the military.

Wandrin said...

"John McCain is not Jewish."

McAmnesty got something like $20 million for his Senate re-election bid.

His immigration-restrictionist challenger got $2 million.

Heliogabalus said...

Taken from an apparently satirical post above:

"But Christian American boys and girls are happy to die in the Middle East so that Israel can grow and prosper. I’m an American from Illinois with 3 children, and I hope that all of them can grow up to fight and die for Israel."

Thanks for a good laugh, but it raises an underlying question that is seldom addressed: How much PAIN are Americans willing to take on Israel's behalf? What's more important - supporting Israel or having cheap gas? If it comes down to that choice, which way will they break? It's all fine & dandy to say "we support Israel", but what happens when that support starts to hurt you personally?

troll-123 said...

Anon upstream said:Consider Solzhenitsyn's last book. Sure, many of the top publishers are owned by liberal Jews, but surely there are some major ones owned and managed by non-Jews or even conservative-leaning people.
It's understandable why Jewish publishers didn't like the book, but why did EVERYONE ELSE also pass on the book? Because they will marked as 'antisemitic' by all the big players.


I bought the book in Germany, and read it in German. Excellent read and real eyeopener. Solzhenitsyn really took trouble to be fair to the Jewish side of issues and has endless sources, many of them Jewish. This renders the accusation of antisemitism really just an exposure of the accusers.

Silver said...

I'll further say that Israel's existence comes down to ... throw Israel under the bus as a weakling, grovel and prostrate ones's self, to Saudi and Islamist groups, and maybe they will sell oil a bit cheaper, maybe not.

Or use Israel and other alliances to make the US FEARED and threaten military action to get oil down (like maybe bombing Iran to make the message clear).


Israel makes oil more expensive, not cheaper, lying cretin.

The reason that Israel must be "thrown under the bus" (in reality the only people thrown under the bus are Palestinians) is because Israel's lies are becoming clearer and clearer to the world -- and perhaps even to cosmically benighted Americans. Far-sighted Jews grasp this. You, you hyperventilating twit, apparently do not.

Anonymous said...

Israel is hostile to us? That's news to me.

They've sold many advanced weapons systems, given to them in good faith by the US, on to China.

Anonymous said...

read it said...Do other foreign governments have lobbying organizations?

Sybil Sheperd unearthed the activities of the Turkish state through people like Dennis Hastert to suppress recognition of the Armenian Genocide and get better deals for Turkey. Just as shameful as Aipac and should also be banned.

Anonymous said...

Saw this bumpersticker: DIVERSE ENOUGH

International Jew said...

Wouldn't it be simpler if American Jews just had a college football team to root for, the way American Catholics had the Notre Dame Fighting Irish?

Maybe that will happen in some future world in which Israel's right to exist, like Ireland's and Italy's today, is no longer controversial or endangered.

Y'all should know, by the way, that Jews who support AIPAC, and the New York Times Jews whose dominance over the conversation in the US media you bemoan, are two quite distinct groups. The New York Times Jews are just as hostile to Jewish nationalism and Israeli territorial integrity, as they are toward expressions of those sentiments by Americans.

Anonymous said...

"Wouldn't it be simpler if American Jews just had a college football team to root for, the way American Catholics had the Notre Dame Fighting Irish?"

Why would they need a college football team when they own much of the NFL? No matter which teams wins, Jews are proudly cheering the fact that they own the teams and the media that carry the games(and rakes in all the dough).
Jews own both political parties like they own sports teams. No matter which side wins, Jews win.
Jews own the left but also the hearts/minds of the Christian Right.

Anonymous said...

"In response, Jews took up fencing and soon became some of the best fencers in Europe -- and the gentiles refused to fight them. So much for honor."

Yeah, I think I saw something like this in Szabo's SUNSHINE. It could be Jews made better fencers because there is an element of bluffing and trickery. It's like using the 'tell' in Mamet's HOUSE OF GAMES. You make to strike 'this way' but feint and strike another way. Also, you have to read the opponent's movement--look for the 'tell' or bluff--before he makes it. It's a competition where wit can overcome strength. So, a Jew who fences like a haggler or comedian is bound to throw the more straight-laced gentile fencer off off the fence.

It's like verbal dueling between William F. Buckley and Alan Dershowitz. Dersho usually won because, as agile as Buckley was, WFB's attacks were straight and narrow whereas Dershowitz's wit moved in arcs and curves. Left hook, uppercut, and fancy footwork are more effective than straight jabs and rooted-footed-ness.

Anonymous said...

"As a half-Jew I will repeat which I always think of when Jews' support for immigration is discussed - GW Bush is not Jewish. Ted Kennedy was not Jewish. On and on and on. John McCain is not Jewish."

So, as a half-Jew, you speak half-truths.

While I agree that Jews were/are not the only people who are pro-immigration, just look at poll numbers and it's obvious no group is as pro-immigration as Jews are. Also, no group is as powerful as the Jews in pushing and getting what they want.
I'll concede on Ted Kennedy, but George W. Bush and McCain were pro-immigration for reasons different than those of Jews--and indeed they were given a pass by the Jewish media establishment becaue they were so pro-immigration(and pro-Jewish).

Three reasons why Bush/McCain supported immigration.
1. They come from heavily Mexicanized states and wanted support from the Mexican-American community.
2. They hoped to use Mexicans as future counter-balance against blacks.
3. Big business lobbying.

Anyway, Bush and McCain's pro-immigration stance wasn't as dangerous because there was no compelling MORAL reason behind it. It was mostly political or economic. If those clowns were the ONLY ones pushing immigration, we could counter them effectively.

It was the Jews who MORALIZED the immigration issue so that most Americans, even those opposing it, dare not speak out or do so only mutedly because they don't want to be labeled as 'racist' or 'xenophobic. It's the Jews who turned the immigration issue into 'are you a Nazi or a KKK?' Thus morally defined, opposition to out-of-control immigration--even illegal immmigration--is regarded as EVIL.

And Jewish control of mass media and education fooled a lot of kids that 'diversity' is not only wonderful and essential to our economic and cultural well-being but absolutely MORAL. This idiocy has spread so far and wide around the Western world that even Swedes are eager to import more Muslism to ruin their cities and more Africans to do their womenfolk.

But then, no non-Jewish immigration to Israel! Oy, Jews deserve and need a state of their own.
And the so-called 'antisemitic' call for return to 67 borders by Obama is nothing of the kind. It is merely smoke-and-mirrors ruse for a landswap which hands over Arab-Israeli areas to the Palestinian authority, thereby making Israel even more homogeneously Jewish.

Anonymous said...

Will the Jewish-controlled media ever call Obama's deal what it is? It's a landswap, not return to 1967borders. Liberal Zionists wanna annex huge areas of West Bank in exchange of Israeli areas with heavy Arab populations. Jews gain more Jewish-occupied lands and take their hands off troubled parts of Israel already lost to Palestinians. It's win-win for Jews.

Nanonymous said...

RKU:
in 1789 France was the most centralized, most absolute monarchy and had held that stable position for centuries. Yet soon thereafter, the king and all his aristocrats had their heads shortened. Similarly, in 1917 Russia filled a similar role in European states, and followed a similar trajectory.

Nothing of this sort. By 1917, Russia's politics was in turmoil for at least 40 years. Tsar was killed by a bunch of terror-minded revolutionists in 1881, remember?
1905 Revolution, widespread terror, end of absolute monarchy, etc, etc. 1917 was a very logical consequence of the preceding half a century.

Anonymous said...

I don't know how else to put this, so I'll just put it: What's the point of this anti-Jew stuff?

Are you blind? Look, America saved Jewish arses in WWII. How many Jews would be alive today if America had not fought against Hitler? If Germany had won WWII, there would not be a single Jew living today! By the way, around ½ million Christian goyum Americans died fighting Germany. Then America took in and welcomed a million immigrant Jews from all over the world. Here, the Jews prospered and gained the highest levels in academia, science, media, medicine, finance, banking, commerce, and politics etc. Today, American Jews enjoy safety, opportunity, and an exceptional standard of living.

So how do Jews pay us back? By doing everything in their power to destroy our heritage, our history, our pride, our culture, our security, and our standard of living. I could document this with 10,000 specific examples, but I will illustrate with just one, which you can try on any high school student in America. Ask them who Omar Bradley or Richard Ira Bong are, or how many Americans died in WWII, or what was Andersonville – not a clue! Often, they don’t even know who we fought in WWII. Now ask them who Anne Frank was or how many Jews died in the Holocaust, or what Auschwitz was, and they can talk for an hour about that – they might even start to cry with trained emotion and sympathy. How is it that American children learn the history of European Jews over the history of their own people?

The worse thing is that through the action of the Jews, America has, and is changing in a way that will turn America into a Third-World hell-hole. Our grandchildren will suffer greatly in this future dystopian multicultural odorous carcass of a once great nation. But by then, the Jews will have all moved to China, to feed on that rising economic star.

Anonymous said...

" suppose it's like blacks and sports. Beore blacks gained equal access in sports, most of the great names in sports were white. But once blacks got an equal chance at sports, they totally blew away whites in many fields: track and field, boxing, basketball, football, etc. Since the 90s, even in tennis and golf. "

Only 10% of the medals won in the Summer Olympics were by black people. Golf and tennis? Tiger is only part black and where are all the other blacks. There were more blacks in pro golf in the 70's-Calvin Peete, Jim Dent, Jim Thorpe.
There are more sports than basketball and football.

Even in Jews were held back in the past, all the accomplishments were still done by whites. So we didn't need you.

Did Jews invent money lending? Didn't the Medicis lend money?

Anonymous said...

I think immigration is a more sensitive issue in UK cuz it never habored the notion of 'UK is a nation of immigrants' whereas many whites in America have immigrant origins from the late 19th and early 20th century.

This nonsense about America being "a nation of immigrants" is of quite recent origin. Nobody in the late 19th and early 20th century was talking like this.

Anonymous said...

Y'all should know, by the way, that Jews who support AIPAC, and the New York Times Jews whose dominance over the conversation in the US media you bemoan, are two quite distinct groups. The New York Times Jews are just as hostile to Jewish nationalism and Israeli territorial integrity, as they are toward expressions of those sentiments by Americans.


I can't help but notice that Strauss-Kahn and his wife, Ann Sinclair, are two "international Jews" who are not at all hostile to Jewish nationalism but who are quite hostile to American nationalism. Their attitude to French nationalism falls somewhere between those two extremes.

Mr. Anon said...

"Whiskey said...

AIPAC also is small potatoes compared to the Saudi lobbying effort (the Saudis paid Bill Clinton about $300 billion in speaking fees over the years and paid about half the GWB library fundraising amount)."

$300 billion? $300 billion?! So Bill Clinton is now the richest man in the world - being some five or six times richer than Carlos Slim or Bill Gates? The Saudis have paid Clinton an amount comparable to the annual budget of the defence department?

Whiskey, you are an idiot and a fool.

Mr. Anon said...

"Anonymous said...

When provided with a ready-made corpus of Western science, secular Jews proved extremely able at extending it and advancing it, and indeed, became most of the leading figures in the second great scientific revolution."

This is not true. Jews have certainly contributed greatly to science, and many of the greatest scientists of the last century have been jews - but not most.

Rosalie said...

Maybe that will happen in some future world in which Israel's right to exist, like Ireland's and Italy's today, is no longer controversial or endangered.

Italy's and Ireland's existence are endangered more than Israel's, through genocidal levels of non-white immigration (ever heard of Lampedusa?). Besides, they don't have an AIPAC to defend them, or 3 billions USD per year financial aid plus military assistance, or the whole American political class worshiping them as the best thing since sliced bread. And, talking about non-white immigration in white countries, it's a state of affairs not completely unrelated to the Jewish organizations, who push it relentlessly throughout the West, directly or via their military branch, the US. Their credo: nationalism is unacceptable, except Israeli nationalism.

Mr. Anon said...

By the number and kind of powerful people who are eager to bow and scrape before them, AIPAC proves just how insignificant jewish power is in this country. Remember, they are a powerless and persecuted minority. And if you ever forget it, they will crush you.

Svigor said...

I might be mistaken, but I don't think Steve is particularly fond of Jews.

Well put; in today's climate it takes a lot of fawning to come across as particularly fond of Ashkenazis.

What I am against is this mindless bashing of Jews for no reason other than what is probably just malice and envy.

I'm into reciprocity. And there's an awful lot of Ashkenazi malice and envy to reciprocate. But really, the only thing I'm envious of is the fact that my people recognize Ashkenazis' right to rule themselves, but not their own.

As a half-Jew I will repeat which I always think of when Jews' support for immigration is discussed - GW Bush is not Jewish. Ted Kennedy was not Jewish. On and on and on. John McCain is not Jewish. While Jews mostly support more immigration (I don't), the bigger problem is white Gentiles supporting more immigration. White gentiles are split. That's the real problem.

But this is like a crook using the fact that there are other crooks out there as a defense. Does anyone really buy that? Now, if we're apportioning blame, surely you can admit the possibility that ethnopatriotic Euros might be able to (or have been able to) handle the problem within, sans the problem from without?

You can't just transform peoples' arguments whenever they don't suit you. That's called a straw man argument. I say Ashkenazis have been bad for Euros, which is an assertion that is quite distinct from "everything would be hunkey-dorey if not for Ashkenazis," or even "the problem might be manageable if not for Ashkenazis."

Indeed, just look at your own characterization again:

"White gentiles are split. That's the real problem."

Yep. But what if the split was really close? And Ashkenazis are/were the deciding factor? What if team A could have defeated team B in if team Z hadn't helped team B?

The New York Times Jews are just as hostile to Jewish nationalism and Israeli territorial integrity, as they are toward expressions of those sentiments by Americans.

Everyone who believes this please raise your hand.

Anonymous said...

"We are to be envied and admired for our lobbying efforts."

*screws a whole bunch of Jewish girls in retaliation*

Anonymous said...

"Only 10% of the medals won in the Summer Olympics were by black people."

I was talkinga bout prestige sports, not stuff like walking, synchro swimming, archery, field polo, and team handball.

ben tillman said...

Between 1200 A.D. and 1850 A.D., was there a single Jew of world-historical significance?

Sure:

Spinoza
Columbus (converso, but Jewish ancestry)
Isaac Luria
Menasseh ben Israel
Sabbatai Zevi
Disraeli
Marx

toboggan or not toboggsn said...

"Only 10% of the medals won in the Summer Olympics were by black people."

I was talkinga bout prestige sports, not stuff like walking, synchro swimming, archery, field polo, and team handball."

personally I am not interested in spectator sports much. Certainly sports-players were not that important prior to the 20th century. However, blacks do well basically in basketball, football and various forms of running and jumping. That's a lot of sports, but there are others like baseball, tennis, golf, horseback riding and racing, skiing, gymnasitcs, ice skating, soccer and ping pong, that are non-black dominated and appear to be reamining that way despite being entirely open to any black wishing to learn them.
And anyway, basketball and football are white inventions. If blacks are such sports geniuses, why haven't they invented their own games. Why don't they invent their own superheroes instead of insisting the white writers turn their white superheroes into sub-Saharan blacks?

ben tillman said...

Israel is hostile to us? That's news to me.

Is the sinking of the USS Liberty news to you?

Dutch Boy said...

Is there a bigger show of nauseating personal abasement than the annual AIPAC circus?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

There are more sports than basketball and football.

Not for most Americans.

Anonymous said...

Google is impressive? They've been stealing their ideas from Bing ... for years.

MSFT has been run aground by a mediocre CEO overall (more Jewish genius? Ha) but Bing is cutting edge.

Anonymous said...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mk5LVFs3LlQ&feature=related

We were assigned to watch MASADA back in grammar school--the teacher was an old Jewish woman-- when it first broadcast, and I'd forgotten it over the years. Seeing it again on dvd, it makes for interesting viewing in the era of the War on Terror.

The story is about the Roman Empire vs a band of Zealots willing to fight to the last.

What weird irony. Today, the world's neo-Roman-Empire, the US, is controlled by Jews, and the fanatical Muslism we are fighting in the Middle East are like the ancient Jewish Zealots.

Anonymous said...

America would be better off in every possible way without its connection to Israel.

ATBOTL said...

White nationalists have been translating Solzhenitsyn's 200 Years Together online, but it's been taken down now. Does anyone have working links to the text?

Here are Kevin MacDonald's commentaries on some of the chapters:

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2010/10/solzhenitsyn%E2%80%99s-%E2%80%9Cthe-february-revolution%E2%80%9D-chapter-13-of-200-years-together/

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2011/05/during-1917-chapter-14-of-solzhenitsyns-200-years-together/


http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/articles/MacDonald-Solzhenitsyn-200-Years-Together-18.html

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2010/08/alexandr-solzhenitsyns-%E2%80%9Cduring-the-soviet-german-war%E2%80%9D-chapter-21-of-200-years-together/

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2010/12/in-the-1930s-chapter-19-of-alexandr-solzhenitsyns-200-years-together/