The Way To Attack Trump

Comments at Steve Sailer:

* While it is an outlier, the LA Times/USC national poll has reported the largest lead for Trump since the election began among reputable pollsters, putting him at 47 v 40 for Hillary. He is now +1.3 and rising in the poll average.

If I were Hillary I would make the background of the campaign focus on her and Kaine’s implicit whiteness, tamp down on BLM however possible, and run the same campaign against Trump as Obama did against Romney: a heartless rich guy.

Trump provides such a target rich environment with his long and sleazy business career and personal life that the Dems just can’t pick a line of attack and stick to it. And they always take his bait to make the conversation about “racism.” White Americans have had more than enough discussion about how they all suck and are awful racists. But the dems just can’t help themselves, they have to keep calling Trump a racist, I think it is an uncontrollable reflex for them.

* Well I awoke this morning expecting lots of media coverage of Trump’s alleged TREASON for making a wisecrack about Clinton’s inability to manage classified information but there is nothing at all about it. The libs were certainly unhinged about it last night. Shortest meme cycle I have seen to date.

* I watched most, but not all, of the speech. I found it interesting that he still claims the assassination of Osama Bin Laden as a big achievement (I agreed with SOD Bob Gates’ recommendation that we should have taken him out with missiles rather than risk Navy Seals), probably thinking it helped win the 2012 election so why not try it again, completely overlooking the fact that ISIS is the enemy du jour. I think it might have been an effective speech if we didn’t have the past 7-1/2 years of Obama reality to measure it by. A measure of how far we’ve come is that I heard Tim Kaine go through the list of past Democratic greats (from Jack to Martin to Lyndon to Bill) and the contributions they made and cited Obama for bringing us “hope” (“and Barack gave us hope”).Whatever happened to the second part: “change”?

BTW I recall Colin Powell endorsing Obama in 2012 and crediting him for ending the war in Iraq and arranging for the impending withdrawal from Afghanistan. Another great sales job by Gen. Powell. And another preemptive reward, like the Nobel Peace Prize, to a totally undeserving recipient.

* She was a National Merit Finalist: top 1/2 of 1 percent. Of course she’s never been right about anything in her life.

* First, Trump runs under the ‘Make America Great Again’ slogan. Then Democrat protesters at Trump events hold signs that read ‘America Was Never Great’. Now their leader has changed that to ‘America Is Already Great’. Which is it? Were we never great or are we great now?

* Obama has two things to his name: national health care, which has mixed reviews and basically amounts to a tax increase, and racial polarization, which he has managed to accentuate.

I think in the end Obama will be most associated with the continued economic sluggishness, and polarization and fragmentation of Americans along racial, ethnic, and sexual identification lines. “The Futility of Diversity” might be the title of a review of his presidency.

* I think Obama will be remembered in the history books for being the “black President”. Now that we have gotten that out of our system, I suspect it will be some time before we try that again. After Dinkins, NY did not elect any more black mayors and even in Phila which has as many blacks as whites the new mayor is white. After the 1st one you actually have to be qualified and not just black.

It’s just as well that he will be remembered for that because he won’t be remembered for anything else. The economy never fully recovered, there was no racial healing (in fact the opposite). Obamacare will probably self-destruct in a few years one way or another because the economics are not sustainable. So that his net legacy will be zilch.

* Watch out, Donald, they’re coming for you:

In Obama’s America, the wrong sort of joke is Treason.

And you know what the wrong sort is — and if you don’t, you’ll find out soon.

Posted in America | Comments Off on The Way To Attack Trump

Pussycats: Why the Rest Keeps Beating the West and What Can Be Done About It

William Lind writes: Martin van Creveld’s latest book, Pussycats: Why the Rest Keeps Beating the West and What Can Be Done About It, is so important that it re-defines the military reform agenda. Previously, military reform has focused on the problems that have led to America’s repeated military defeats. The issues van Creveld raises in Pussycats suggests we are moving from an American military that can’t win to one that won’t even fight.

The essence of Creveld’s argument is that we (both the U.S. and Western Europe) have de-militarized our military. The introduction of women is one of the factors, but not the only one, although if a military is to fight it must have an aggressively male culture. That is unacceptable not only to the women in the military but to a broadly womanized society and culture. It would not surprise our ancestors to hear that a womanized society can’t fight.

But Creveld looks at influences well beyond womanization. The de-militarizing of our armed forces begins, he argues, with the way we now raise children, especially boys. No longer do they “go out and play”, get into fights, get into difficulties they have to find their own ways out of. Rather, they live controlled, “safe” lives where they always have adult supervision and are instructed in how to do everything before they have to do it. Instead of growing up, they are forever infantilized.

This problem is very real. Recently, I recommended to a friend, a lieutenant colonel at the Marine Corp’s Basic School for new lieutenants, that they reinstitute the “Zen patrol”. In the Zen patrol, which TBS used to do, new lieutenants are simply taken out on a patrol, without having received any instruction in patrolling. They have to figure it out for themselves, which means they also learn how to learn.

Posted in America, Feminism, Military | Comments Off on Pussycats: Why the Rest Keeps Beating the West and What Can Be Done About It

Race & Economic Equality

Posted in Diversity | Comments Off on Race & Economic Equality

Hillary PR Team – On Message For Her!

From Twitter:

Posted in Hillary Clinton | Comments Off on Hillary PR Team – On Message For Her!

Friends: The Most Anti-Jewish Article We’ve Seen On

The author Israel Shamir could make the same points, but if he gave them a positive spin, he would be celebrated. “Oh look, how wonderful it is that Jews stand up for multiculturalism and for the oppressed. The Jews are the West’s conscience. They understand the meaning of suffering.”

If I had the energy, I’d rewrite Shamir’s essay as a value-neutral thought piece, neither pro-Jewish nor anti-Jewish, but rather understanding of Jews and their position in the West. Then I’d write a version of the essay that was pro-Jewish but was till based upon his main arguments.

Any people that wants to survive and prosper would benefit from looking at the experience, wisdom and folly of the Jews.

As a convert to Orthodox Judaism, I believe that the Jews are God’s Chosen People, that the Torah is God’s revelation to the world, and that the purpose of Jews is to be a blessing to the world. These are my faith statements. Without faith, the world is composed of various forms of life competing for scarce resources and trying to propagate their genes. With this clarity, it is usually effortless for me to read criticisms of Jews.

Israel Shamir writes:

The Secret of Identity Politics

The Jews can be a formidable enemy: devoid of scruples, they hunt in packs. Like aunts in P G Wodehouse’ fiction, they do not stoop to fair play: they go for the jugular. The hunt for disobedient leaders is their favourite national sport; and woe to a politician who crosses their path. They occupy commanding heights in the US media and finance and they can undermine politicians susceptible to pressure.

Luckily, they can be defeated. Powerful and cunning, Jews are not demonic and possess no magical superhuman powers. They are a force among many forces. Time and again they reached the pinnacle of power and were dislodged. This may happen to them in the US, as well.

It will not be the end of the world, nor the end of history, neither the end of the Jews. Only the Jewish dream to end history will end, at least for a while, while the world will go on. For their attitude is not all bad; they are needed; just their dominance became too total. For America and mankind to thrive, it must be rolled back, not eliminated.

The best politicians are those who succeed in repulsing a concerted Jewish action without giving an inch AND without antagonising the Jews too much. FDR and JFK, even Richard Nixon did it, so can Donald Trump.

The Donald succeeded in doing just that in the affair of the six-pointed star. He was attacked; ADL chief Jonathan Greenblatt urged Trump to apologize. “He should just admit the offense and apologize,” Greenblatt said in an interview on “CNN Tonight”. “I think this would satisfy all of the public – on the right and the left, Democrats and Republicans.”

Trump refused to apologise. He insisted that the star is just a star. He even took his staff to task for removing the offending image. He did not restore it, true, but he volubly scolded an easy-to-bend assistant. This ability to withstand pressure is the most encouraging feature of Mr Trump.

Just compare him with Jeremy Corbyn who took the bait and began to apologise, expel his supporters and demonstrate that he is unable to withstand Jewish pressure. It did not help him at all, the attacks on him grew exponentially.

Trump did not apologise, for it would never satisfy the Jewish appetite for apologies. They always fish for an apology, and an apology always makes them ask for more, and more. The ADL, the notorious organisation that spied on activists, ran its own spies and provocateurs, is the leading tool in this endless search for apology. Refuse apology, otherwise you invite more pressure for more apologies.

There is a long list of things Jews would like him to apologise for: (1) Trump tried to avoid denouncing David Duke for as long as he could; (2) he has said nothing about the racists and anti-Semites; (3) he refused to criticize the anti-Semitic trolls who hounded journalist Julia Ioffe after her magazine portrait that Trump’s wife Melania did not like and (4) he has said nothing about the vicious anti-Semitic social media bombardment of any Jewish journalist who happens to write a bad word about him; (5) he has refused to let go of the slogan “America First” even though he must surely realize by now that it carries a specific anti-Semitic historical connotation; (6) he repeatedly lauds tyrants and dictators that are problematic for Jews, including Benito Mussolini and Saddam Hussein; (7) and he himself has been known to release the occasional anti-Semitic remark, including his assertion to the Republican Jewish Coalition, that Jews won’t support him because they can’t control him because they can’t buy him with money.

This list of Trump’s failings with Jews (by an American Jew called Chemi Shalev) is intentionally humiliating in precluding any chance for rapprochement between the Jews and Trump.

Trump has no chance with Jews anyway, not for a lack of trying. Surely he is not an “antisemite” (a silly word of no meaning, just like “fascist”). Stephen Sniegoski convincingly proves that Trump is rather a philo- than anti-Semite. Trump’s kids married to Jews, his son-in-law is not only a rich Jew but (1) a son of a convicted Jewish swindler, (2) synagogue goer and (3) a newspaper owner, (4) publishing anti-Trump smear jobs, meaning he is a proper pukka Jew. Trump is as pro-Israel as they make them. Actually, my friends who are Jewish settlers in the occupied West Bank hope and pray for his victory. Sniegoski carefully debunks all other accusations against Trump as an enemy of Jews, and he does it compellingly.

Trump has no chance with the Jews, because he wants to change the order of things while the Jews are perfectly satisfied with the way things are. Perhaps you do not like that the US is flooded with immigrants, that so many Americans became poor, that students are indebted forever, that industries went abroad, that bankers are awash with money while the workers are impoverished. But for Jews, this is fine. This is exactly what they want, and this is what they have.

A prominent American Jew, Rabbi Eric H. Yoffie explained that much in an article in the Haaretz newspaper: Trump’s policies are beside the point. He would like to change things, he will fight the supremacy of the Supreme Court with its inbuilt Jewish majority, and Jews are for things being the way they are, perhaps even more so.

Indeed every possible step of President Trump will run into the Supreme Court. This is a body where an unelected (Clinton-appointed) Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg already declared she will fight him tooth and claw. That is the body that gave you gay marriages, unlimited immigration and other liberal joys. Sooner or later Trump will have to borrow a page from President Erdogan’s book and deal with them, if he is to achieve anything: unless, surely, they will refrain from action.

The Jews will give 90 per cent of their vote to Hillary Clinton, predicts Yoffie. This is to be expected: the brave Jewish anti-Zionist Jeff Blankfort wrote of the “actual owners of the Democratic Party, the American Jewish Establishment”. Yes, Jews vote for Democrats. They gave 80 per cent of their vote to Barack Obama. By comparison, the old masters of the US, WASPs, gave Obama just 34 per cent of their vote. If they were still at the helm, there would be no President Obama, no destruction of Syria and Libya, there would be fewer immigrants and the life of an average American would be better. Oh, perhaps there would not be an order allowing boys to pee in girls’ bathrooms if they feel girlish. Big loss.

The problem is that the Jews have much more than just their votes at their disposal. One of their mighty tools is the Google, their joint venture with the CIA. This works overtime and offers twenty million hits for “Trump Hitler”, seven times more than the Bing search engine. Google’s search function delivers results related to Donald Trump when users search for Adolf Hitler. The search “When was Hitler born?” generated not only the expected information on Hitler, but also a Donald Trump image and link. Jewish-owned media produces much anti-Trump trash.

But the people do not believe them anymore. Even such a pleasant guy as Bernie Sanders in the end gave up the fight and endorsed Crooked Hillary. Now people know the Jews are a force for status quo, and they want to change it.

For this purpose, a simple rhetorical device called Identity Politics should be dismantled. It is an enemy device made by a Gramsci blueprint in order to delegitimise the working class.

Identity politics is an extension of Jewish tactics, or perhaps Jewish tactics is a particularly loathsome form of Identity politics. A Jewish bankster defends himself by accusing his adversaries of antisemitism. This is so simple and useful, that many other groups copycatted the trick. The protected groups form a coalition under the Dem Party umbrella, while the Dem Party is doing the will of the Jewish establishment, as we noted above.

Identity politics have been enforced as the ultimate truth in the US. The protected groups are attacked for what they are, according to this concept, while unprotected suffer for what they do. This distinction is pure sophism: were the Japanese in Hiroshima incinerated for what they are (Japanese) or what they did (pretty much nothing)? If we disagree with Jewish politics, is that because of what they are or what they do?

Identity politics forbid us to generalise regarding the protected groups. You can’t say anything less than complimentary about Jews, for they are all so different. Well, 90% vote for the status quo is not a sign of variety. You can’t say anything at all about gender groups for they are what they are, like Lord Almighty. Indeed “white”, “male” and “Christian” are the only identities you may freely and gratuitously abuse in the US.

Consider the Catholic Church in the US. The Jews demanded an apology from the Church, and they got it. Afterwards, they continued their fight against the church unabated. In a recent attack on the VP candidate Mike Pence, the Jews made a lot of mileage from his attempt to allow Christians to refuse service to same-sex couples. They compared this attempt with Ku Klux Klan of old and with discrimination of Jim Crow days, when they had signs “Don’t let the sun go down on you here” and “Whites Only After Dark.” Everything goes to smear the church – and the PC rules do not defend it, like they do not defend the white workers of Detroit.

The Jews hate the church like the Turkish generals hate the mosque. For this reason they are so upset with Trump’s idea of limiting non-Christian immigration. It is not that they like Muslims: surely they do not, but they like to use Muslims to fight the Church.

Instead of saying “We Jews do not like to see Christian signs for Christmas” they prefer to say “Muslims do not like…” This is not even true: Muslims do celebrate Christmas, as anyone can witness in Bethlehem; but it sounds better.

Here is anecdotal evidence. I receive daily email with the Boston Globe headlines and suggested articles. Invariably their “Recommended for you” section begins with an anti-Church article published 14 (fourteen) years ago.

Recommended for you

JAN. 6, 2002 | PART 1 OF 2

Church allowed abuse by priest for years

I wonder why they think it is necessary for me to read an old antiquated anti-Christian abuse? Would they ever suggest I re-read a story of Bernie Madoff? Or a story of a Jewish terror attack on King David Hotel with its hundred victims? I do not think so.

It is not the first time ever that the Jews have acted in concert and against majority wishes. A great politician should know how to deal with them. Such a politician was Vladimir Lenin. In 1913, when his party struggled with the consolidated Jewish group called the Bund, he wrote “Dear comrades, if we shall keep mum today, tomorrow the Jewish Marxists will ride on our backs”. This advice is as relevant today as ever.

My response to some of these points:

* “The Jews can be a formidable enemy” Agree.

* “devoid of scruples” Disagree. No more so than any other group. Jews are blunt about putting their group interest first. Most peoples are like that (except for the WASPs and many other Christians).

* “they hunt in packs” Agree. Jews have a more corporate sense about themselves than do WASPs.

” they go for the jugular” Agree.

* “They occupy commanding heights in the US media and finance and they can undermine politicians susceptible to pressure.” Agree.

* “Luckily, they can be defeated.” Agree.

* ” Powerful and cunning, Jews are not demonic and possess no magical superhuman powers. They are a force among many forces. Time and again they reached the pinnacle of power and were dislodged. This may happen to them in the US, as well.” Agree.

* “The best politicians are those who succeed in repulsing a concerted Jewish action without giving an inch AND without antagonising the Jews too much. FDR and JFK, even Richard Nixon did it, so can Donald Trump.” Sometimes agree.

“Just compare him with Jeremy Corbyn who took the bait and began to apologise, expel his supporters and demonstrate that he is unable to withstand Jewish pressure. It did not help him at all, the attacks on him grew exponentially.” Agree.

* “Trump did not apologise, for it would never satisfy the Jewish appetite for apologies.” Agree.

* “Trump has no chance with Jews anyway.” Disagree.

* “By comparison, the old masters of the US, WASPs, gave Obama just 34 per cent of their vote. If they were still at the helm, there would be no President Obama, no destruction of Syria and Libya, there would be fewer immigrants and the life of an average American would be better. Oh, perhaps there would not be an order allowing boys to pee in girls’ bathrooms if they feel girlish. Big loss.” Agree.

* “Identity politics is an extension of Jewish tactics.” Agree.

* “Identity politics forbid us to generalise regarding the protected groups.” Agree.

* “The Jews hate the church like the Turkish generals hate the mosque.” Agree.

* “It is not the first time ever that the Jews have acted in concert and against majority wishes.” Agree. Of course the interests of minorities are going to often differ from those of the majority. Organized Jewry is invariably on the side of the Coalition of the Fringe.

Luke: American Freedom Party candidate Robert Ransdell ran for the U.S. Senate in Kentucky with the slogan “With Jews, you lose.”

I welcome that challenge. My faith tells me that the purpose of Jews is to be a blessing to the world. If Jews aren’t a blessing to their country, then something is very wrong. Jews need to look at themselves and ask, “Am I and are my people are blessing to the goyim?” Is it true that with Jews, the goyim lose? If so, then it is in the goyim’s interest to get rid of us. If we are a blessing to the goyim, then it is in the self-interest of the goyim to keep us around.

I don’t want to make any special pleading on behalf of Jews. If Jews are an asset to their gentile country of residence, they will be blessed by that country. They will be popular and revered. If Jews are a curse, they will be cursed. Just as the normal Orthodox Jew asks, “What is good for the Jews?,” I want and expect gentiles to ask the same question. “What is good for the Germans?” “What is good for the Americans?” “What is good for the Japanese?”

Wouldn’t it be great if unpopular groups in America asked themselves if there was anything they were doing that was hurting their popularity? I suspect most Americans would prefer to live without many Jews, blacks and Muslims and latinos around them. I wonder why? What are these groups doing that regular white Americans don’t want them around?

Every minority group should ask themselves if they are behaving themselves in a way that is a blessing to the majority population. If not, then there is no self-interested reason for the majority to keep them around.

I don’t believe there is any superior race. Different races evolved in different places. Some people are most fit for certain locations and other people for other places. Some races are great at living at high altitude, other races are great at living in the tropics, and other races thrive in the high latitudes.

I think the animal kingdom is a great analogy for how the different human sub-species relate. The introduction of cats in some places has been devastating for birds. Cats and birds usually have different interests.

Going back to the slogan, “With Jews, you lose,” I think it depends on what kind of society you want. For certain types of societies, such as a Nazi society, Jews are not a benefit. If you want a multicultural society and a proposition nation, then Jews are awesome.

It would be self-interested for birds to have the slogan, “With cats, birds lose.” It would be self-interested for the Japanese to not allow in much non-Japanese immigration, particularly very little Muslim and black immigration. For the Japanese and probably for Europeans as well, with blacks and Muslims you lose. You could make an argument that any gentile country that wants unity and cohesion around strong racial, national and religious identity, with multi-culti Jews you lose.

From Wikipedia:

Wild rabbits are a serious mammalian pest and invasive species in Australia causing millions of dollars of damage to crops. Rabbits in Australia are European rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus) in the Lagomorph family.

They were introduced to Australia in the 18th century with the First Fleet and became widespread after an outbreak caused by an 1859 release. Various methods in the 20th century have been attempted to control the population. Conventional methods include shooting rabbits and destroying their warrens, but these had only limited success. In 1907, a rabbit-proof fence was built in Western Australia in an unsuccessful attempt to contain the rabbits. The myxoma virus, which causes myxomatosis, was introduced into the rabbit population in the 1950s and had the effect of severely reducing the rabbit population.

It does not make sense that the introduction of a species or sub-species into a particular environment will only have benign results. Every species will have a differing effect. The introduction of a lion into a group of deer is going to result in a lot of dead deer.

In reaction to an invasive pest, Australia mounted a rabbit holocaust but it was not successful. So they turned to chemical warfare instead and it was more effective. I wonder if there are chemical weapons that affect different groups of people differently.

The rise of Jews in Australia meant the end of the White Australia policy. So if you want a return to a White Australia policy, and given the universal tendency of Jews in the West to side with the Coalition of the Fringe against the core, then I fear it would make sense to have a “With Jews, you lose” attitude, particularly with regard to Jewry’s political and cultural power.

I think the concept of invasive species is a good analogy for immigration. Immigrants always affect the native population, and often negatively.


An invasive species is a plant, fungus, or animal species that is not native to a specific location (an introduced species), and which has a tendency to spread to a degree believed to cause damage to the environment, human economy or human health.[1][dubious – discuss]

One study pointed out widely divergent perceptions of the criteria for invasive species among researchers (p. 135) and concerns with the subjectivity of the term “invasive” (p. 136).[2] Some of the alternate usages of the term are below:

The term as most often used applies to introduced species (also called “non-indigenous” or “non-native”) that adversely affect the habitats and bioregions they invade economically, environmentally, or ecologically. Such invasive species may be either plants or animals and may disrupt by dominating a region, wilderness areas, particular habitats, or wildland-urban interface land from loss of natural controls (such as predators or herbivores). This includes non-native invasive plant species labeled as exotic pest plants and invasive exotics growing in native plant communities.[3] It has been used in this sense by government organizations[4][5] as well as conservation groups such as the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and the California Native Plant Society.[2] The European Union defines “Invasive Alien Species” as those that are, firstly, outside their natural distribution area, and secondly, threaten biological diversity.[6] It is also used by land managers, botanists, researchers, horticulturalists, conservationists, and the public for noxious weeds.[7] The kudzu vine (Pueraria lobata), Andean Pampas grass (Cortaderia jubata), and yellow starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis) are examples.
An alternate usage broadens the term to include indigenous or “native” species along with non-native species, that have colonized natural areas (p. 136).[2] Deer are an example, considered to be overpopulating their native zones and adjacent suburban gardens, by some in the Northeastern and Pacific Coast regions of the United States.[citation needed]
Sometimes the term is used to describe a non-native or introduced species that has become widespread (p. 136).[2] However, not every introduced species has adverse effects on the environment. A nonadverse example is the common goldfish (Carassius auratus), which is found throughout the United States, but rarely achieves high densities (p. 136)

Here are some comments to the Israel Shamir essay:

* The Jews are a force to be reckoned with wherever they are found. As a tribe they have an acquisitive genius, a lust for wealth, power and control, which places them in a position of ascendency in almost any mixed polity everywhere. It’s ironic that they manage to do this, all the while they complain that they have been unjustly persecuted, just for being Jews. No doubt, as a people, they deserve our admiration as much as our reservations for their boundless ambitions and successes. However, they have made many enemies through the pursuit of tribal excellence and I fear that in America there will be a fateful reckoning for American Jews for the great misfortune that is now stirring within the American Nation. This is the inevitable outcome which bestrides Jewish history from time in memorial.

* The Jewish people have high function abilities in science, medicine, and many other fields because of their great intelligence. They also have greater abilities in manipulating, controlling, and using other people as objects because of their great intelligence.

* The Judaization of America begins with the “Great Migration” of Puritans out of England in 1620 in a move compared from the start with the Exodus. Jewish themes abound in the outlook of the Puritans. From the start, they identified with the Israelites of the Bible. So, the first generations of settlers of the Massachusetts Bay Colony believed their own lives to be a literal reenactment of the biblical drama of the chosen people―they were the children of Israel and the ordinances of God’s Holy Covenant by which they lived were His divine law. Since they viewed themselves as the persecuted victims of the sinful Christian establishment of the Old World (England), the Puritans also had a natural sympathy for the Jews of their own time. The Protestant Puritan leader Cotton Mather repeatedly referred to the Jews in his prayer for their conversion as God’s “Beloved People.” The New Israel―The influence of the Hebrew Bible marks every step of the Puritan exodus to their Zion in the wilderness of the New World. The Jewish Bible formed their minds and dominated their characters; its conceptions were their conceptions.
The Puritans fanatically believed that it was their special mission to establish in America a society precisely modeled on the precepts of Sacred Jewish Scriptures. The Massachusetts Bay Colony was a state inspired by and thoroughly devoted to the Jewish Bible. “If we keep this covenant,” Governor John Winthrop assured his people, “we shall find that the God of Israel is among us, but if we deal falsely with our God… we be consumed out of the good land whither we are going.” The Jewish covenant concept was thus the bedrock of all Puritan religious communities. Actually, the first settlers in New England called themselves “Christian Israel”
and the Indians were the ancient Canaanites whom they had the divine obligation to exterminate. They were the new Israelites, entering into a new covenant with God in a new Promised Land, etc, etc.
These are the roots of ‘Manifest Destiny’, of the ‘City on the Hill’, of the ‘indispensable nation’. Unfortunately, America IS already thoroughly Judaized.

* For the past few centuries Jews have wanted power more than anything else, but these things never last. Groups go through power hungry phases and then relax as the sacrifices for power begin to seem pointless and too great. So called Jewish tactics are the tactics any group or person that wants power has to use to get it.

The British had a complete lack of scruples in India when they made their empire, and in fact the Brits had a reputation for being ‘perfidious’ all over Europe during their power hungry phase, just like the perfidious Jews do today.

A group in its power hungry phase will always win over a group that balances other values with power, even if it’s less talented (and I consider Jews the less talented group because of sheer numbers, but the more power hungry).

A handful of Brits lorded it over clever and far more numerous Chinese because the former were in their power hungry phase and the latter were not.

So today with the Jews.

The problem with power is that it doesn’t make you happy and demands the sacrifice of all other good things – you cannot enjoy a quietly poetic mood on a crisp Autumn day over a cup of coffee, nor a leisurely chat with old friends, nor contemplate the ends of life, nor savor the refinements of culture, if you are obsessed with power.

After a while, the power hungry begin to perceive they are the victim of a jealous and destructive demon whose benefits are illusory.

The history of nations is often the story of the unhappy and power obsessed taking it out on those who have more life affirming values.

France conquered a dreamy and poetic Germany, and Germany conquered a France devoted to culture and refined living – notice the two countries only fought when one was power-hungry and the other given to humanistic values. This seems to be a historical pattern.

The WASPS were turning into a refined aristocracy balancing power with humanistic values just as they were allowing large numbers of power hungry Jews come in.

A humanistic elite might retain power if the system balances other values against power and success – but American capitalism, alas, is a system designed to elevate those least distracted by humanistic considerations.

But have no fear, Jews will eventually mellow out just as everyone else has, according to Ron Unz, its already happening and apparently we’ll have to contend with power crazed Chinese. Yay, I guess.

* The Jews are masters at emotional unthinking brainstem politics. They push people into low level non-intellectual instinctive political positions. Black, white, brown, yellow, men, women, old, young, tribe, religion – all become emotional fodder for Jew manipulation. The appeal is always to guttural identity. The appeal is always to group victimhood.

By virtue of their existence and size, these divided base guttural groups have political power. Clearly if you can divide and conquer enough groups you can control a nation. Clearly that is what the 2016 election is all about.

There is only one way out of this coercive situation – that is for people to see themselves as local cooperative functional groups – not as divided national groups. People must identify with each other as local neighbors, not as national biological group victims. Local is far more rational then national.

It is clear that the nation state is corruptible – the Jews are doing it.

We must direct our political actions to returning government to local control – period.

Who is Israel Shamir? According to Wikipedia:

Israel Shamir (Russian: Исраэль Шамир; born 1947),[1] also known by the names Jöran Jermas[2][3] and Adam Ermash, is a citizen of Sweden and Russian writer and journalist.[4][5][6][7] He is a commentator on Arab–Israeli relations and Jewish culture.[8][9][10] Originally from Novosibirsk, Siberia, Shamir moved to Israel in 1969.[11][12][13] He says that he served in the 1973 war, after which he took up journalism and writing.[14]

Shamir writes about Israel, Palestine, and the Jewish people, and has published or self-published a number of books that have been translated into several languages; the French edition of Flowers of Galilee (2004) was banned for a time in France over allegations of antisemitism. Shamir has been accused of antisemitism and Holocaust denial,[15][16] charges he has rejected.

Shamir says that he is an ethnic Jew born in Russia who converted to Orthodox Christianity.[3][12][17][18][19][20] At birth, his name was Izrail Schmerler.[12][13] Shamir says that he was born in Novosibirsk, Siberia, in 1947, although the Shorter Jewish Encyclopedia article “Jews in the Soviet Union” claims Schmerler was born in 1948.[13] According to him, he studied mathematics and law at Novosibirsk University. He moved to Israel in 1969,[11][12][13] and states that he served as paratrooper in the Israel Defense Forces and fought in the 1973 Yom Kippur War.[14] After the war, he says he returned to studying law at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, but abandoned this for a career in journalism.[21]

Norman Finkelstein is quoted by Tablet magazine article “His Jewish Problem” as saying that Shamir “has invented his entire personal history. Nothing he says about himself is true”.[22] Manfred Ropschitz in the Independent Media Center article writes that “For twenty years the Jewish Israeli journalist Israel Shamir has been living a double life as a Swede called Jöran Jermas”.[19]

Searchlight describes him as a “Swedish anti-semite”,[23] and says that was registered in Sweden in 1984 and gained Swedish citizenship in 1992.[12] He left Sweden for Russia and then Israel in 1993, before returning in 1998, having remarried in Israel in July 1994.[23] However, others argue that Swedish files show that he was married in Sweden.[24] He was known as Jöran Jermas from 2001 to 2005, before changing his name to Adam Ermash, although continuing to use Israel Shamir as a pen name.[12] According to Shamir, these name changes were necessary “in order to safeguard my private life and to manage to travel without harassments from political adversaries”.[25]

In 2004, Shamir was baptized into the Greek Orthodox Church of Jerusalem by Archbishop Theodosios (Atallah) Hanna of Sabastia and given the name Adam.[14]

According to his website, Shamir “lives in Jaffa and spends much time in Moscow and Stockholm”.[14] He has three sons,[14] one of whom is the Swedish journalist Johannes Wahlström.

On his website, Shamir states that, after dropping out of law studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem some time after the Yom Kippur War, he took up journalism and writing.[14][21] He says that he was initially a journalist for Israel Radio, before becoming a freelance journalist, and covered the latter stages of the war in South East Asia (Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia).[21] He says that he joined the BBC in 1975, moving to London, before moving to Japan (1977–79), writing for Maariv and others.[14][21] He says that in 1980 he returned to Israel, and wrote for Haaretz.[14]

After a career in journalism, Shamir says that he focused on other writing, particularly translation. Shamir states that he translated various works of Shmuel Yosef Agnon (Nobel Prize for Literature, 1966) from Hebrew into Russian (1981–2004), as well as Chaim Herzog’s The Arab-Israeli Wars (1986). Other works he says that he translated include a 2006 annotated translation of Abraham Zacuto’s 15th century history of the Jews, Sefer Hayuhasin (The Book of Lineage).[14] With the outbreak of the First Intifada in 1987 Shamir says that he went to Russia and wrote about the political changes until 1993, for newspapers including Pravda and the extreme nationalist Zavtra, whose author, Alexander Prokanov, is connected with the extreme anti-Semite David Duke.[27][28]

Shamir writes about Israel, Palestine, and the Jewish people.[14] Several of his books have been translated into a range of languages. Shamir did not publish in English until January 2001, after the beginning of the Palestinian Second Intifada in September 2000. As he put it, “Israeli attacks on Palestinians forced him to give up literature and turn to politics.”[29] An article in the Russian-language Israeli newspaper Vesti was cited by Christopher Hitchens in 2001 as “a brilliant reply to [Elie] Wiesel”.[30]

The French edition of Shamir’s Flowers of Galilee was initially co-published in October 2003 by Éditions Blanche and Éditions Balland, and was prominently displayed in large bookshops. It was withdrawn from sale at the end of October after Balland’s director had his attention drawn to the content of the book, which he considered anti-semitic.[31][32] The book was republished in 2004 by Éditions Al-Qalam, which led to a court case (a civil case brought by the Ligue internationale contre le racisme et l’antisémitisme [LICRA]), with the publisher sentenced to three months in prison (suspended) and a 10,000-euro fine, and the banning of the book.[33] The ban was overturned on appeal, and the fine reduced

Shamir supports the proposed one-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.[34] He has argued that there is organized Jewish control of the media and public discourse: “The rich Jews buy media so it will cover up their (and their brethren’s) misdeeds. The Jews in the media are giving protection to the rich Jews. … In the US, even in Western Europe, no view can be proposed to the general public unless approved (after being vetted and corrected) by a Jewish group.”[10] He is critical of what he considers a Jewish quest for world hegemony, having written, “Palestine is not the ultimate goal of the Jews; the world is. Palestine is just the place for world state headquarters; necessary, for otherwise the people of Europe wouldn’t be magnetised like a rabbit in the headlights of a car.”[9]

In 2001, Ali Abunimah and Hussein Ibish circulated an email in which they said that “from early on, some of Shamir’s writings struck us as straying beyond criticism of Israel and Zionism, and crossing into the territory of implicit anti-Semitism”. They urged “all our friends in the movement for Palestinian rights” to consider the effects of Shamir’s writing, which includes “elements of traditional European anti-Semitic rhetoric”, on their cause.[35]

He has been accused of being an antisemite and Holocaust denier,[36] with Searchlight in 2004 accusing him of connections to antisemitic publications and groups,[23] and its campaign Hope not Hate at one time listing Shamir as a “notable Holocaust denier,” citing the “rabid Holocaust denial material” on his website.[37] Essays by Paul Eisen supporting the tenets of Holocaust denial, such as the alleged non-existence of gas chambers at Auschwitz, are posted on Shamir’s personal website.[38] In February 2005 Labour life peer Nazir Ahmed held a book launch for Shamir in the House of Lords. Commenting on the event, Stephen Pollard in The Times,[36] called him a “rabid anti-Semite.”[36] Shamir rejected the accusations, and Gilad Atzmon wrote to The Times in his defence.[21][39]

In an essay published on his website discussing Holocaust denier David Irving, Shamir wrote that “the Jews” now “rule over the minds and souls of Europeans”:

David Irving was sentenced for denial of Jewish superiority. His doom seals the reign of (albeit limited) freedom that began with the fall of Bastille. European history went full circle: from rejecting the rule of Church and embracing free thought, to the new Jewish mind-control on a world scale. Not only is Western Christian civilisation dead, but even its successor, secular European civilisation, has met its demise only a few days after its proud and last celebration by the Danish scribes. It was short-lived: about two hundred years from beginning to the end, the Europeans may once have had the illusion that they can live without an ideological supremacy. Now this illusion is over; and the Jews came in the stead of the old and tired See of St Peter to rule over the minds and souls of Europeans.[40]

Shamir was also accused in connections with extremist groups in Europe. The Times of London had reported that in September 1998 a radical Russian group tried to sell Nazi items from WW2 that were released from Soviet archives. The group’s representative in Western Europe was Shamir who tried to offer those items to David Irving. Irving did not respond to Shamir and published a letter stating that the items were stolen and whoever is selling them is doing so against German and Russian law. Irving also reported Shamir’s proposal to the German authorities and neglected further attempts from Shamir to contact him.[28]

In 2006, discussing the upcoming Iranian International Conference to Review the Global Vision of the Holocaust, Deutsche Welle wrote that the Iranian government “said it intended to invite academics such as German neo-Nazi [lawyer] Horst Mahler and the Israeli journalist and Christian convert Israel Shamir, both of whom are Holocaust deniers.”[41] Shamir denied receiving an invitation to the conference, and said he did not attend.[42] Shamir wrote of his interest in the conference, concluding that “Nobody – and I do mean nobody, including British, French, American, German, Russian leaders – really cares about the victims of a war long past, Jewish or otherwise; they pay tribute to the Holocaust as nations pay tribute to their vanquisher.”[43] The widespread acceptance of the Holocaust narrative “as a justification of [rich and powerful] minority rights over [oppressed] majority needs”, Shamir argued, showed “that the mass media machine is well integrated and concentrated in philosemitic, mostly Jewish hands. The occupation of Palestine by Jews is painful, but it is not more harmful than this captivity of free discourse.”[43]

In December 2010, Shamir’s connection with WikiLeaks brought him new public attention. Andrew Brown of The Guardian repeated the accusations of antisemitism, relying on Magnus Ljunggren’s piece that month in Expressen.[44] Shamir responded to Ljunggren, saying “the stories he tells are all lies. And these lies are old and well known and refuted years ago.”[42] Katha Pollitt, writing in The Nation in December 2010, described a visit to Shamir’s web site:

I spent a few hours on and learned that: “the Jews” foisted capitalism, advertising and consumerism on harmonious and modest Christian Europe; were behind Stalin’s famine in Ukraine; control the banks, the media and many governments; and that “Palestine is not the ultimate goal of the Jews; the world is.” There are numerous guest articles by Holocaust deniers, aka “historical revisionists.”[45]

In early 2011, The Guardian described Shamir as “notorious for Holocaust denial and publishing a string of antisemitic articles.”[46] Defending himself, Shamir wrote in early 2011:

“As for the accusation of ‘Holocaust denial’, my family lost too many of its sons and daughters for me to deny the facts of Jewish tragedy, but I do deny its religious salvific significance implied in the very term ‘Holocaust’; I do deny its metaphysical uniqueness, I do deny the morbid cult of Holocaust and I think every God-fearing man, a Jew, a Christian or a Muslim should reject it as Abraham rejected and smashed idols.”[47]

Shamir claims his concern with the Holocaust is with the use of the narrative of the Holocaust by Jews to promote Jewish “superiority and exclusivity”:

It has everything to do with the Jewish claim of superiority and exclusivity. There is a Jewish prayer saying: “Bless you, Lord, that you created me a Jew, that you separated between Jews and the earth folks, like you separated between the Holy and Profane, that our fate is not like their fate”. The Holocaust concept is just another form of this prayer. They say that even their death is not like the death of anybody else.[48]

In a May 2011, Tablet magazine described Shamir as a “Holocaust doubter”.[22] The article includes a transcript of an interview in which Shamir repeatedly refuses to acknowledge the mass annihilation at Auschwitz.

In 2012, CounterPunch published an article titled “Pol Pot Revisited,” in which Shamir argued:

“New Cambodia (or Kampuchea, as it was called) under Pol Pot and his comrades was a nightmare for the privileged, for the wealthy and for their retainers; but poor people had enough food and were taught to read and write. As for the mass killings, these are just horror stories, averred my Cambodian interlocutors. Surely the victorious peasants shot marauders and spies, but many more died of American-planted mines and during the subsequent Vietnamese takeover, they said….. Noam Chomsky assessed that the death toll in Cambodia may have been inflated “by a factor of a thousand.” …. To me, this recalls other CIA-sponsored stories of Red atrocities, be it Stalin’s Terror or the Ukrainian Holodomor….It is fine that they canceled money, dynamited banks and sent bankers to plant rice. It is fine that they dried up the great blood-sucking leech, the big-city compradors and money-lenders.”[49]

In 2013, CounterPunch published an article titled “Russia, Syria and the Decline of American Hegemony” in which Shamir argued:

“The shutdown of their government and possible debt default gave the Americans something real to worry about. With the end of US hegemony, the days of the dollar as the world reserve currency are numbered.”

World War III almost occurred as the banksters wished it. They have too many debts, including the unsustainable foreign debt of the US. If those Tomahawks had flown, the banksters could have claimed Force Majeure and disavow the debt. Millions of people would die, but billions of dollars would be safe in the vaults of JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs.”[50][51]

Association with WikiLeaks
Shamir is a vocal backer of the WikiLeaks organization.[52] In a Sveriges Radio interview with WikiLeaks spokesman Kristinn Hrafnsson, Hrafnsson stated that Israel Shamir “is associated with” WikiLeaks, as are “a lot of journalists that are working with us all around the world” who “have different roles in working on [the] project”.[26] Russian Reporter claims that it has “privileged access” to the 2010 United States diplomatic cables leak via Shamir.[26] Shamir described his relation with WikiLeaks as being “a freelancer who was ‘accredited’ to WikiLeaks”.[53]

Former Wikileaks spokesman Daniel Domscheit-Berg noted Wikileaks’ ties to Shamir among the reasons he quit the organization.[54] Domscheit-Berg described Shamir as a “famous Holocaust denier and anti-Semite.”[55]

Yulia Latynina, writing in The Moscow Times, alleged that Shamir concocted a cable which allegedly quoted European Union diplomats’ plans to walk out of the Durban II speech by Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, for publication in the pro-Putin Russian Reporter in December 2010. Shamir has denied this accusation.[53]

Shamir has also been accused of passing “sensitive cables” to the president of Belarus, Alexander Lukashenko.[56] Index on Censorship has expressed concern that such an event could physically endanger Lukashenko’s political opponents; Wikileaks has refused to reply to Index on the issue, although one Wikileaks representative called Shamir’s alleged leaks “obviously unapproved.”[57]

Shamir’s son, a journalist named Johannes Wahlström, is a spokesperson for WikiLeaks in Sweden.

Posted in Anti-Semitism | Comments Off on Friends: The Most Anti-Jewish Article We’ve Seen On