Why Does American Choose Sides In The Middle East?

Posted on December 20, 2014 by Luke Ford

Jared Taylor wrote soon after 9/11:

On September 11, President George W. Bush explained to us on national television that “America was targeted for attack because we’re the brightest beacon for freedom and opportunity in the world.” Two days later, he spoke of terrorists who “hate our values” and “hate what America stands for.” The next day, at the National Cathedral, he said, “They have attacked America, because we are freedom’s home and defender.” If that were indeed what motivated the men who flew airplanes into the Pentagon and World Trade Center, there would be reason for the huge military operation President Bush now tells us we need in order to “whip terrorism.”

But what the president said about the attacks is not just nonsense; it is dangerous nonsense. If our country believes him, and we go to war against Islamic fundamentalism, we will succeed only in adding millions more to the millions who already hate us, and some of them will launch yet more attacks on us, perhaps even worse than the ones we have just suffered.

Does President Bush really imagine Osama bin Laden saying to his men: “Those Americans are just too damn free; they’ve got too much opportunity. Let’s kill as many as we can”? The idea is absurd. Islamic militants have a grudge against us because of our attacks on Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq, and the Sudan. But the main reason they hate us and want to kill us is that we support Israel. Can anyone deny that if we were not Israel’s enthusiastic backer those thousands of Americans would still be alive? It is no coincidence that the two nations against which suicide attacks are now launched are the two nations out of 160 that walked out together from the Durban racism conference in defense of Israel. To Muslim fundamentalists we and Israel are one and the same, and we have given them ample reason to think so.

Fundamentalists dislike us for what we are, but they hate us and kill us for what we do. They despise our loose sexual standards, and many of them have not forgotten the Crusades, but this does not make them mad enough to kill us. They kill us because we support and finance a country they see as having been illegitimately carved out of the very flesh of their Islamic kinsmen. With so much at stake, it is vital that we not be confused about what motivates the terror we plan to combat.

If there really were something about the essential nature of the United States that made people try to kill us, the president’s plans would be justified. Congress would be right to appropriate an emergency $20 billion for a war against Islamic terrorism. Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz would be right to promise, as he did on September 13, a “sustained and broad” campaign on the scale of the Gulf War. The Senate would be right to authorize the president, as it did on September 14, to use “necessary and appropriate force” to retaliate.

But that analysis is wrong, and acting on it will bring calamity. The real question is: Why have we so obviously chosen sides in a bitter, decades-long fight in the Middle East? Is Israel so clearly in the right that we should risk the hatred of half the world in order to support it? With the risks so great, we should understand what we are doing with perfect clarity. If we go to war, it will not be because we are the land of freedom and opportunity, but because we are the best friend and benefactor of Israel. Should we go to war for Israel? Should we spend $20 billion to kill Muslims, and thereby expose our cities to inevitable reprisal for the sake of Israel? There had better be convincing answers to those questions, but no one is even asking them.

Americans are prepared to kill and die for America; they will think twice about killing and dying for Israel. Surely, it is because he dares not say thousands of Americans have just died because of Israel that President Bush invents preposterous motives for the men who killed them.

But even if Americans were prepared to fight for Israel, a war to “whip terrorism” will only whip up terrorism. Israel has responded with great force to terror attacks, and the fury that provokes among Palestinians leads only to more terror. What we are planning will have the same effect, except that the terror will be directed at us.

Of course, there is a way Israel could end all Palestinian terror attacks. It need only act on the principle President Bush announced on September 11: to make “no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them.” By that terrible logic, Israel should exterminate every Palestinian — it has the means to do that. By that logic we should exterminate every Iraqi, Afghani, Yemeni, and Iranian — we have the means to do that, too. Of course, we would then have to exterminate all Muslims, since by then all would be potential terrorists.

If we fight Israel’s enemies, the United States will become like Israel: a garrison state and battleground. Our leaders are already warning us that our safety will henceforth require more inspections, restrictions, and intrusions. There will be worse. The latest series of revenge killings in the Middle East has finally driven some of Israel’s own Arab citizens to violence. Is it out of the question to suspect that if we launch our own jihad against terrorism, we may eventually drive some of our 7 million Muslim citizens to violence against us?

By all means, let us find and even kill the people who helped carry out these terrible acts of terror against us. But it is madness to invent false motives for them, to pretend we have done nothing to provoke them, and to launch a war for Israel that will only give yet more millions reasons to hate us. If that is our response to terror we will only ensure for ourselves yet more terror, yet more smoldering ruins and shattered lives.

Posted in America, Israel, Jared Taylor | Comments Off on Why Does American Choose Sides In The Middle East?

The Birth Of American Renaissance

Posted on December 20, 2014 by Luke Ford

Evelyn Rich emails me April 11, 2016:

Your information about me, my education and my personal relationships is all wrong. I did not graduate from Boston College. I do not have a doctorate in history. I did not “couple” with Jared Taylor. I never “leant my name” to anything. And so on.

Here is Evelyn Rich’s story in her own words. She has a PhD from Boston University in Sociology and African-American Studies (with her dissertation on the ideology of the modern KKK).

In 2014, I posted lengthy excerpts on my website from the 2009 book Blood and Politics: The History of the White Nationalist Movement from the Margins to the Mainstream by Leonard Zeskind, a veteran anti-racism campaigner who nonetheless received some credit for his work from some people on the Alt-Right.

Leonard Zeskind wrote in his 2009 book:

[Jared] Taylor eventually coupled up with Evelyn Rich, who came to the partnership with her own understanding of white supremacy… She earned a doctorate in history from Boston College in 1988. Her dissertation topic: “Ku Klux Klan Ideology: 1954-1988.” While doing research, Rich had formally interviewed many of the white supremacist movement’s leading figures, attended semipublic events such as Institute for Historical Review conference and Bob Miles’s fests, and been privy to a number of meetings, including a one-to-one visit between David Duke and William Pierce. Rich seemed to have a particularly intense interest in Duke, whose Knights of the Ku Klux Klan loomed large in his dissertation.

On each of these occasions, she would tape her interviews and take extensive notes and then share notes and transcripts, along with her observations and analyses, with several civic organizations that monitored racist and anti-Semitic activities. To the anti-Klan groups, she reported with a scholar’s precision on the ideological arcana of each organization she encountered. With the scalding sarcasm of late-night television comics, she recounted several bouts of movement infighting. And with an apparently anti-racist perspective, she detailed the failures of the individuals she met…

Rich grasped the subject of her inquiry like few others, including the national socialist character of Duke’s ideas in the 1970s and the role anti-Semitism played in transforming a backward-looking Klan movement into a revolutionary vanguard. When her dissertation was completed in 1988, Rich understood that after conservative racists publicly tarred themselves with the brush of anti-Semitism, their claims to mainstream respectability were compromised.

Eventually Rich’s interview transcripts became part of the library archives at Tulane University in Louisiana, and when David Duke ran for governor in 1991, Rich lent her name to the anti-Duke opposition. Particularly revealing segments of her audiotapes were broadcast as part of anti-Duke radio commercials. Nevertheless, Rich continued to keep her reports to the anti-Klanners quiet.

At some point Evelyn Rich must have dropped any scholarly distance she had from white nationalists. She attended the Atlanta meeting that May in 1994 alongside Jared Taylor, quietly tending to their first child while he carried on the conference. Rumors swirled around the room about “Taylor’s wife.” One held that the couple had met at an Institute for Historical Review conference in California; if true, that meant Taylor, despite keeping Holocaust revisionism off the agenda, had more than a passing acquaintance with its claims. True or not, Rich’s antipathy to David Duke was well known; it was also rumored that she had suggested the once and future candidate be excluded. None of the rumors suggested that just a few years earlier she had been making notes on meetings such as these and sharing her observations with the movement’s opposition. Soon, however, Mark Weber [head of IHR] used quotes from Evelyn in the IHR’s promotional material…

For national socialists and Aryanists, Jews were wholly of another race, a biological breed apart. And a Christian Identity tenet asserted that Jews were inherently Satanic… Wilmot Robertson’s influential Dispossessed Majority had cast Jews as a particularly pernicious “unassimilable” white minority, a classification mixing Aryan-style anthropology and genetics. A less caustic and but still anti-Semitic mythology contended that Jews were not eligible for the rights of natural sovereign citizenship, as the United States was constitutionally a “Christian republic.”

…Rabbi Mayer Schiller’s convivial presence in a room with men such as Ed Fields, Mark Weber, and Sam Dickson casts doubt on his common sense, but it signaled no change in the liberal mainstream of the Jewish community. Neither did it suggest any swing among conservative or neoconservative Jews, who might have truckloads of grievances with black people but would have little truck with either Holocaust deniers or so-called scientific racists… If Mayer Schiller’s common platform with the Renaissancers created not a ripple of interest among Jews, Jared Taylor’s invitation to the rabbi provoked a continuing wave of controversy among white supremacists. The common refrain: What was Taylor thinking?

Several possibilities were proferred. The first came in the form of a brief review of the conference published in Wilmot Robertson’s Instauration. It noted the presence of Schiller and several other men of Jewish descent on the platform. But the monthly’s usually strident anti-Semitism remained remarkably restrained. A bit of nuance was needed by white activists, the reviewer suggested: “The time-honored strategy of fighting two enemies is to pretend to be the friend of one while zapping the other.” And for this meeting, attacking just the so-called Negroes, while leaving the Jews off the hook, worked quite well. “Maybe after the Negroes are put in their place,” the reviewer speculated, “another conference in a few decades will take on those who purists contend are the real enemy.” By this favorable account, Taylor’s overture toward Schiller was little more than a clever chess move, a tactical decision of little long-term consequence.

Other views were less friendly toward the inclusion of any Jews on the platform, and a debate over Taylor’s motivations and the prospect of ultimate success for the American Renaissance project rankled during the years following the first conference. Some activists accepted at face value Taylor’s inclusion of Jews but objected nonetheless, using terms familiar on the vanguardist side of the movement. There were no “good Jews” and “bad Jews,” they argued, just Jews — who were poison, one and all…

It would be wrong to conclude that Taylor was by any means philo-Semitic. Shortly after September 11, he issued a statement blaming the attacks on American support for Israel and claiming that “if we go to war, it will not be because we are the land of freedom and opportunity, but because we are the best friend and benefactor of Israel.” Nevertheless, a couple of Jews continued attending conferences. And a contingent of young National Alliance cadres in 2002 kept a subterranean murmur of dissent going during the course of the weekend. The anti-Semites chafed at the Jews, and the Aryans-only whisper occasionally broke out into the open during question and answer sessions. One observant young Aryan woman, writing on the internet under the sobriquet the Cat Lady, may have ventured the most insightful parallel. She compared developments within American Renaissance to recent changes of focus by the British National Party. The British Nationalists’ approach was “very appealing,” she wrote. It was a racial nationalist, a socialist party but not “explicitly anti-Semitic.” She also noted that at a side meeting a British representative who had spoken at an American Renaissance meeting had “pointed out that when Hitler was pursuing power, he hardly ever spoke publicly about the Jews either.”

…[Jared] Taylor served, for example, as Weber’s best man at his wedding eight weeks after the conference. Weber’s betrothed, Priscilla Gray, had once worked for Phyllis Schlafly… A priest who had spoken at the American Renaissance conference, Father Tacelli, officiated at the St. James Roman Catholic Church in Falls Church, Virginia. The wedding of a former Schlafly staffer with a former National Alliance cadre should have received notice on somebody’s society page. Taylor’s relationship with Weber extended back to the days when he was still a leading cadre of [William] Pierce’s organization. Weber had received a special mention in Taylor’s acknowledgments for his 1983 book on Japan. Ten years later Taylor continued to think highly of Weber. “Any man of whom Mark Weber speaks highly is a man worth knowing,” Taylor wrote in a 1993 letter to a new American Renaissance subscriber. Then in a remark that might have pleased Taylor’s detractors in white nationalism’s traditionally anti-Semitic ranks, he made an oblique reference to the “frolic” surrounding the Holocaust Museum in Washington, D.C. “The march of folly never rests,” he wrote…

As [Wayne Charles Lutton] became directly involved with the Institute for Historical Review, however, his political life came to resemble binary stars. One named Charles Lutton quietly associated itself with Holocaust revisionism. The other, Wayne Lutton, assumed increasingly important roles in the fight against immigration.

…And he did not challenge directly the facts of the Holocaust itself. Nevertheless, he personally gave a presentation at the IHR’s 1981 conference, joined its editorial board in 1985…

Lutton’s list of accomplishments as an anti-immigrant activist alone merit notice, as does his work with American Renaissance, which eventually included multiple conference presentations and a seat on the board of directors of its parent corporation, New Century Foundation. But Lutton’s attempt to cloud his association with the Institute for Historical Review may reveal more about his ultimate aims than he wanted to show. Perhaps this version of white nationalism hoped to include anti-Semites, while occluding anti-Semitic ideology as a motivating force. Unlike William Pierce’s wing of Aryan vanguardists, and different even from Willis Carto’s attempts to find a mainstream constituency, Jared Taylor, Wayne Lutton and the American Renaissance crew already had a seat on the (far) edge of conservative respectability, and they were apparently loath to lose their perch in a controversy over Jews and Hitler. Over the next several years, American Renaissance became the premier gathering place for intellectuals in the white nationalist movement, firmly supplanting the Institute for Historical Review and all other ventures. The IHR still maintained a unique status in the movement, however, particularly in its role as an international transfer station.

Posted in American Renaissance, Anti-Semitism, Holocaust, Jared Taylor, Jews, KKK, R. Mayer Schiller, Whites | Comments Off on The Birth Of American Renaissance

Is Christianity A Good Thing?

Posted on December 19, 2014 by Luke Ford

Jews tend to have ambivalent feelings about Christianity. The more traditional the Jew, the more likely he is to regard it as idolatry. From a Jewish perspective, how could saying a man was God not be idolatry?

White nationalists are also split about Christianity.

From Blood and Politics: The History of the White Nationalist Movement from the Margins to the Mainstream by Leonard Zeskind:

According to [William Pierce], Christian values provided white people with no protection from the Jews and did little to assert white racial goals…

Always Pierce saw a genetic first cause. He argued that there were racial differences between the pre-Christian northern Europeans and the peoples of Asia Minor, where Judaism and Christianity were born. Because of these racial differences, the religions of the Middle East…did not fill the spiritual requirements of northern Europeans.

Posted in Christianity | Comments Off on Is Christianity A Good Thing?

Blood and Politics: The History of the White Nationalist Movement from the Margins to the Mainstream by Leonard Zeskind

Posted on December 19, 2014 by Luke Ford

The author is a Jewish anti-racist campaigner of many decades. His book nonetheless has received plaudits from white nationalists for its fairness. It’s the best book of its kind.

From pages 57-58:

William Pierce put it squarely. “A morality which damns the Germans for attempting to rid themselves of a pernicious infestation,” he wrote, would also “damn any attempt by White Americans to disinfect the cesspool of mongrelization.” The weight of genocide in Europe blocked its repetition in the United States.

Nevertheless, Pierce loathed Holocaust denial as it was practiced by Willis Cato. “There are reckless ‘revisionists’ who assert that no Jews were killed, solely for being Jews, by the German government,” Pierce scolded. “That is certainly not true.” He claimed to have talked with Nazi veterans who had assured him that they had shot Jews (solely for being Jews)…

“The ‘revisionist,’ the conservative, the right winer, the anti-Semite who canont face the Holocaust squarely and judge it on the basis of a higher morality,” Pierce wrote, “cannot, for example, cope successfully with the challenges to a White future which are presented by non-White immigration and by a high non-White birthrate.” One should not deny the industrialized murder of Jews, Pierce’s logic ran, because it may become necessary to repeat it on Jews and “nonwhites” in the future.

Posted in Holocaust, Jews, William Pierce | Comments Off on Blood and Politics: The History of the White Nationalist Movement from the Margins to the Mainstream by Leonard Zeskind

International Jewry Is A Power After All

Posted on December 19, 2014 by Luke Ford

Most groups tend to boast about their power when they feel that is to their advantage, and they tend to complain about their victimhood when they feel that is to their advantage.

From The Jew Accused: Three Anti-Semitic Affairs (Dreyfus, Beilis, Frank) 1894-1915:

Of perhaps even more pressing concern to [Czar] Nicholas and his high officials was their belief that a number of powerful Jewish financiers outside of Russia were working ever more openly, diligently, and effectively to deny the country the financial aid it sought. These were not entirely fantasies: A most tenacious and effective enemy of tsarist Russia was Jacob H. Schiff, the American financier. Schiff played a crucial role not only in denying the Russians the bonds they sought in the international market to finance the war, but even more decisively in providing financial support for Japan, which then so humiliatingly defeated Russia. In Great Britain Lucien Wolf, joined by the English Rothschilds, and in central Europe Paul Nathan led the efforts to isolate Russia both economically and diplomatically.

By this time American Jews, especially Schiff, had begun to claim the leading role in international Jewish affairs that would become so important as the century progressed… Schiff delighted in the way that he and other Jews had been able to humble the great Russian Empire. He boasted that after its humiliation in the Russo-Japanese War Russian had come to understand that “international Jewry is a power after all.” (Pg. 168-169)

Posted in Jews | Comments Off on International Jewry Is A Power After All

Levi Moscowitz Sentenced On Sex Offender Charges

Posted on December 18, 2014 by Luke Ford

Levi Moscowitz worked in gay porn, using such names as “Izzy Klein”. Just put “izzy klein dirty tony” into Google.

Most dudes in gay porn have AIDS.

Levi Moscowitz also worked as a gay escort.

Most of the male porn stars in straight porn during the 1970s and 1980s were Jewish and most of the important businessmen in the sex industry in America have been Jewish. Jews dominate porn like they dominate Hollywood.

Levi Moscowitz has been working on the Fairfax/La Brea side of town for a few months (though not in the sex trade).

From the Jewish Journal:

Levi Moscowitz, a 24-year-old man from Chicago now living in Los Angeles, pleaded no contest in late October to charges of arranging to meet a child this past February with the intention of committing sexual acts.
Court documents, which are available by public records request, contain notes from a lead detective on the case indicating that on Feb. 25 Moscowitz posted a Craigslist ad “seeking to participate in a sexual encounter with a family interested in incest, or to ‘teach,’ a step-son or daughter.”
A Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) detective — who was helping run a sting operation that searches for potential child predators seeking out children online — responded to the ad, created a false identity and posed as a father. He and Moscowitz then engaged in a back-and-forth conversation by email in which Moscowitz described what he would like to do with the “father’s” fictitious 13-year-old son and 15-year-old daughter — all lewd acts punishable as felonies.
After arranging to meet at a Long Beach hotel, Moscowitz drove there on Feb. 28, entered the prearranged room and was arrested without incident by four Long Beach police officers. The detective’s notes indicate Moscowitz came to the room with items that matched the items discussed in the online chat with the fictitious father. After searching his car, officers found a loaded Glock handgun magazine and items that indicated an intention to commit sexual acts. In March, Moscowitz was charged in Glendale with illegally carrying a concealed firearm; he was found guilty.

Posted in Abuse, Pornography | Comments Off on Levi Moscowitz Sentenced On Sex Offender Charges

Separation For Jews & Muslims

Posted on December 18, 2014 by Luke Ford

This Israeli leftist wants separation between Jews and Muslims: “Instead of persuasion let us promote separation. Like Amichai and like myself, many Israelis “sometimes remember the quiet one” and yearn for a separation between the two states and a separation between the two Jerusalems.”

Many whites and asians in the West strive for separation from blacks, Mexicans and Muslims but I heard that white flight is evil.

Posted in Blacks, Islam, Israel, Jews, Whites | Comments Off on Separation For Jews & Muslims

Why Mr. Obama Plays So Much Golf

Posted on December 18, 2014 by Luke Ford

From comments to Steve Sailer:

* You see a lot in racialist sites arguing that blacks’ resentment and surliness stems from some conscious or sub-conscious desire to be White, wanting more than anything what Whites have–their fine hair, fair skin, historical achievements–therefore, the almost manic desire among black men for White women (receptive or otherwise) and the even stronger anger among black women because very few White men are interested.

I think that’s all bunk. Obviously, the data (from Rushton, etc.) shows no racial group with greater self appreciation and ego than blacks, no group loves themselves more than blacks, blacks find themselves endlessly attractive and interesting. Hence this insanity from Barry and Michelle that their experiences of being mistaken for service employees really strikes a chord among blacks. For most White, who wouldn’t think twice about such innocent and harmless mistakes, the world has a lot of interesting things, natural wonders and otherwise and the self has its place, but unless the stakes are significant, Whites are excellent at subsuming self into a larger context. Blacks, as Derbyshire observes, are their own context, nothing larger matters. And society indulges (without hesitation, out of fear, guilt, etc) and blacks become even more unbearable. There’s no satisfying someone who’s always thinking about themselves, first and last. it’s beyond childish–it’s an infant’s world view.

* Its also quite revealing because if that’s the best she has in the way of playing the race card, a la “look how YT treated ME! I can relate and I’m down with the struggle!”, then it really isn’t saying very much. Couldn’t she have picked a much stronger story of being hassled and harassed by big bad Jim Crow during her Princeton years? [e.g. ‘They actually made me revise my senior term paper! Me! Claimed the thesis was incoherent. I’m telling you, you have to watch your back every single second or else these racists are going to drag you down to their level!”]

Speaking of which, this story sounds very similar to what happened to Oprah last yr in Switzerland while visiting a high end boutique, except Oprah played the “Dont you know who I am” card. Then later thought the better of it and played the race card. (The shop didn’t have what she wanted cause she was black after all and doncha’ know…).

Another thing: The First Lady is required to travel with Secret Service people so the idea that she was completely unrecognized including by the person who asked for her help should require a more than healthy dose of skepticism.

But after all, she is the First Lady. We’re not supposed to ask for her help; she is entitled to request and require our help whether we like it or not.

* Reminds me of the “awful” slight that Oprah Winfrey suffered while shopping at a pricey boutique in Switzerland. Having seen a picture of the god-awful ugly expensive handbag that Mrs. Winfrey was inquiring about, I imagined that the saleswoman was sincerely trying to help by presenting a more tasteful but also less expensive option.

Too bad that with that chip on the shoulder, one always assumes the worst.

If all White Americans took a pill today to make them color blind and “cure” racism, many Blacks would likely still interpret much innocent behavior as hopelessly racist.

Sad indeed that our fellow Black citizens have to suffer that. Whatever racism there is, certainly is bad enough. The paranoia to see bad faith everywhere makes it even worse.

Maybe both Black and White America would be better off with a no-fault divorce. Irreconcilable differences and all that. When an all black police force stop and frisks fellow blacks in an all black society, there can be no charge of racism. They’re just trying to keep innocent black civilians safe…

* You know what’s a real shame? The POTUS lives with his overbearing wife and mother in law, and comedians are afraid to make jokes about it.

Posted in Barack Obama, Blacks | Comments Off on Why Mr. Obama Plays So Much Golf

WEHT To Australia?

Posted on December 17, 2014 by Luke Ford

From comments to Steve Sailer:

* Australia is even further along the path to PC, Cultural Marxist insanity than the US, according to what I have been seeing for some time. They have more anti-speech and anti-white laws than the States, and this surprises me.

I thought I knew Aussies.

My late brother-in-law was an Australian pilot, decorated as a fighter ace in WWII. He shot down 15 Japanese aircraft. Do you know what set him off? He was flying near a hospital ship his girlfriend was on when he saw it get sunk by the Japanese. A hospital ship.

He once got shot down in a P-38. The control linkages in one of the tail booms were destroyed. He waited hours in the Pacific to get rescued. He knew there were sharks there, but thank God he never saw one.

That beloved Australian brother-in-law of mine was brash, funny, dirty-mouthed, and smart as hell. An aeronautical engineer and aircraft broker in SoCal, he introduced me to marvelous things. He let me fly copilot with him in vintage airplanes. Two planes he personally showed me under restoration are now in the Smithsonian.

He personified Australia for me. Brave, tough, and possessed of a seemingly endless supply of dirty jokes. The pussies I am hearing about in today’s Australia make me cringe. He would cringe too. Oh, and of course this amazing guy was a white man. Heaven forbid!

* Reading Amy Chua’s book, I am struck by how Whites are a global minority. As countries (at least Western ones) dissolve borders in a never ending quest for cheap labor, non-Whites sense that White guys in particular will soon be the minority. This is made worse by the explicit anti-White views of many if not most White women, and certainly the majority of single White women.

Australia is right next to massively bigger Indonesia. Sooner or later it will be annexed and filled with non-Whites who will treat White men in particular somewhere between a Jew in Weimar and a Tutsi in Rwanda in 1994.

The Sydney Cafe Massacre was all about: non-White Muslim dominance, and non-White Muslim dominance. Helped by the coalition of the MAJORITY. Aussie Whites are (for now) the majority population, but momentum matters. Non Whites know that they will soon be running things and have a nice heaping helping of their own Hutu Power ready and waiting.

* Rachael Jacobs and Tess Kum are kinda cute. They’re not all hard and dykey. I’m willing to let them slide. But it’s amusing how these recently arrived foreigners presume to lecture the natives on white racism. Rachael Jacobs born in Oz from Hindu immigrant parents and Tessa Kum? Chinese but not sure where she was born.

* There is a problem involving Muslims and harassment in Australia. It involves Muslim men, from places like Lebanon, raping and sexually abusing white Australian girls.

There is no harassment of Muslims by Australians. It is entirely an illusion created by the media.

There actually was a real backlash a few years ago – the Cronulla beach battle. Australian-Australians had finally had enough of invasive middle easterners raping young Australian girls, so they kicked some ass. It’s the kind of thing I desperately wish would happen here in England, to demonstrate to our invasive species that this behaviour won’t be tolerated, and to our vulnerable young girls that someone is looking out for them – but it hasn’t happened and I now fear it won’t.

* Here’s a genetic-culture one for you, Steve:
The Julia Baird bylined in the NYT story is the younger sister of Mike Baird, the current state premier (ie, state equivalent of federal prime minister in our Westminster system).
Mike is a relatively unsquishy conservative, but being a state leader, very pragmatic.
Julia is a classic liberal arts feminist on typical leftist career path through the local MSM Sydney Morning Herald (I worked with her there), then onto the government media ABC.
Their dad Bruce was a squishy Liberal who didn’t quite make it federally.
Sometimes a bit of sibling rivalry hangs tougher than alleles.

* Jews are not nearly as prominent in Australia as the US -but they’re still pretty prominent given their numbers ( 0.4-0.5% of the population and many have British origins )
I see that this Muslim gunman here had particularly targeted with hate mail the family of a Jewish soldier killed in Afghanistan and I remember at the time being surprised that there was a Jewish Australian soldier especially in a combat zone -and a private at that ! ( he was a part timer who did special forces stuff the way others do ironman triathlons )

* “I’ve also fantasized about giving “minutes long hugs” to some Persian gals, but I don’t write about it on Facebook.

Posted in Australia | Comments Off on WEHT To Australia?

Fair Play For North Korea

Posted on December 17, 2014 by Luke Ford

Chaim Amalek: HANDS OFF NORTH KOREA! Already our efforts are paying off, as Jewish-run Hollywood has, through its movie theaters, decided not to show “The Interview.” The danger is that White Americans might look on and think “If the North Koreans could do that, then just think what WE might be able to accomplish in Hollywood.”

Posted in Hollywood | Comments Off on Fair Play For North Korea