February 5, 2017 LAT: How Trump’s policies and rhetoric are forging alliances between U.S. Jews and Muslims Luke Ford No sacred cows.

LAT: How Trump’s policies and rhetoric are forging alliances between U.S. Jews and Muslims

Posted on February 5, 2017 by Luke Ford

In the West, Jews and Muslims have always been a part of the Coalition of the Fringe (along with blacks, latinos, homosexuals, and other angry minority groups) against the white Christian core. Jews don’t have much in common with other members of the Fringe aside from fear of a white Christian core discriminating against them. Jews in daily life don’t tend to have deep interactions with blacks and Muslims and latinos (the IQ gap is enormous) but in politics, they have common interests.

Los Angeles Times reports:

Jewish and Muslim activists in the United States are forging alliances like never before in reaction to the president’s rhetoric and action toward Muslim immigrants.
Many Jewish organizations have interpreted Trump’s executive order banning entry by citizens of seven predominantly Muslim countries as a call to arms. Jewish delegations turned out en masse for a 10,000-strong demonstration Sunday night in New York. (“Granddaughter of Holocaust survivors standing with refugees, Muslims immigrants,” read one sign.)
Almost every day in New York this last week there was an interfaith conference or prayer service — involving Christian groups as well as Muslims and Jews — devoted to the current crisis over predominantly Muslim immigrants and refugees.
“We have common interests,” said Al Hadj Talib Abdur-Rashid, the imam of the Mosque of Islamic Brotherhood in Harlem. He was one of several Muslim leaders who appeared at a rally in Brooklyn in November after a playground was defaced with pro-Trump graffiti and swastikas. “The same kind of people who bomb synagogues [also] bomb black churches and now mosques.”
A Muslim-Jewish Advisory Council, made up of business and cultural leaders of both communities, both Democrats and Republicans, was formed days before the election and convened for its first regular meeting Wednesday in Washington to push the government for a coordinated response to hate crimes, up sharply against both Muslims and Jews.
The week after the election, Jonathan Greenblatt, chief executive of the Anti-Defamation League, raised eyebrows when he declared at a meeting in New York that if Trump imposed a Muslim registry, “this proud Jew will register as Muslim’’ — a dramatic statement for the head of an organization founded to fight anti-Semitism and protect Jewish identity.

Posted in Islam, Jews | Comments Off

The Taming Of The Daily Shoah

Posted on February 5, 2017 by Luke Ford

Background on the Mike Enoch doxxing.

Comments on the recent episode with Greg Johnson:

* …the Shoah has become tamer since the doxxing. Doxxing can be a force for good when it countervails the self-defeating extremism that anonymity on the internet tends to breed.

The old-school fans of the Shoah are going to listen to it even if it does become a little less extreme. But by coming a little less extreme, the Shoah opens up to a broader, more normie audience.

* How can you talk that long about The Wire without mentioning the Jewish defense attorney Maury Levy? He is a brilliant stereotype and the only real winner in the whole show. He profits off the drug trade and helps keep it going while assuming none of the risk.

Posted in Alt Right | Comments Off

Torah Talk: Beshalach (Exodus 13:17–17:16)

Posted on February 5, 2017 by Luke Ford

This week’s Torah portion is Beshalach (Exodus 13:17–17:16). Listen.

* Recap: Joseph designs a plan where the world has to turn over its gold to Egypt survive a long famine, and now with all the world’s gold in Egypt, the Jews get it and take it out of Egypt.

* Were the Jews freedom fighters or terrorists? Tweet:

Modern Hindus retrospectively cast 1857 as “war of independence”.Their ancestors in 1857 prayed for British victory over “freedom fighters.”

Every people wants self-determination, even if others can rule over them more efficiently and provide them with more stuff.

* God unleashes plagues on Egypt. Egyptians sees the Jews as a plague. Different peoples have different interests.

* The traditional reading of the Book of Exodus is that the Exodus the event represents life, Egypt represents death.

Egypt represents slavery, the Exodus represents freedom.

Egypt is bad, Israel is good.

The Pharoah is bad, Moses is good.

The Egyptian gods are false, only God is God.

To get an alternative perspective, to get an Alt Right perspective, put yourself in the position of groups competing with the Hebrews, such as the Egyptians.

* What are the chief contributions to the world from Egypt in the past 3,000 years? About 3,500 years ago, Egypt ruled. It was the mightiest empire in the world.

* The Exodus is the central event in Judaism. If the Exodus did not happen, then what is Judaism?

* If the Exodus is the one example of God interening in history, then what? It’s a ridiculous question because there is no empirical way of judging when God intervenes in history.

* Different groups have different traits. Jews tend to be emotional, like other Middle Eastern people, and so they complain more. Jews aren’t often criminally violent, but they do tend to be verbally violent and this “You’re killing me” complaints in the parasha are quintessentially Jewish.

* According to a midrash, only a fifth of the Jews left Egypt. The rest were not ready for the new way of life and died during the plague of darkness.

* According to the Artscroll, when “the wicked are punished, God is glorified.” More liberal Jews are less likely to say such things and to rejoice in the destruction of the wicked.

* Rejoicing over the death of your enemies is normal, natural and healthy. When the Jews saw the Egyptians drowned, they rejoiced. “Israel saw the great hand that HaShem inflicted upon Egypt, and the people revered HaShem, and they had faith in HaShem and in Moses, His servant.” (Ex. 14:31)

Life is often zero sum. Different groups have different interests and we are all competing for survival in a Darwinian world. If the Egyptians had caught up with the Jews, it would have been very bad for the Jews. The Egyptian army drowning, on the other hand, was good for the Jews.

* Ex. 17:16. “…Hashem maintains a war against Amalek, from generation to generation.”

Amalekites are the descendants of Esau.

Artscroll: “[Amalek] attacked Israel because of their ancestor’s [Esau] ancient, implacable hatred of Jacob; they would have continued the attack even if the Jews had retreated toward Egypt.”

All forms of life have a group evolutionary strategy. Jews have one, Arabs have one, Africans have one, Chinese one. It is rare that a member of a group can see his group’s evolutionary strategy.

Every life form has a strong reaction against anything that threatens its survival. Groups normally need cohesion to survive. Threats to group cohesion, such as multiculturalism, should be expected to produce violent responses.

* Goy: “I want to ask about “conversion” and the persuasion that seems to come (to the Jews in this part) *only* when they see physical evidence of god’s intervening on their behalf and ask you more about your conversion, and miracles.”

Do these questions mean anything in a context of Jewish religion? –or is the question of “believing” not important at all?

* What White Supremacists Taught A Torah Scholar About Identity

* Carl Schmitt: The Concept of the Political

* The Ordeal of Civility: Freud, Marx, Lévi-Strauss and the Jewish Struggle with Modernity (1974)

* The WASP Question by Andrew Fraser.

Posted in Alt Right, Torah | Comments Off

NYT: ‘The Misunderstood Genius of Russell Westbrook Following the departure of his superstar teammate, Russell Westbrook was left to lead the Oklahoma City Thunder all by himself. That’s when something special happened.’

Posted on February 3, 2017 by Luke Ford

If Russell Westbrook is a “genius”, I’m not sure what kind of genius. His genius certainly does not consist of winning. Most casual fans of the NBA clearly understand that but apparently this writer does not.

Because they were underdogs, I rooted for the Thunder for years and more often than not, in the biggest games, it looked to me like Russell Westbrook with his reckless ball management, unwillingness to pass, and wretched shot selection (career FG % is 43.5, Alan Iverson, another black ball hog, is 42.5), did as much to harm his team’s chances as to advance them.

Steve Sailer writes: “On the downside, both Westbrook and Harden are on track to break George McGinnis’s seemingly unbreakable ABA record for most turnovers.”

Comments at Steve Sailer:

* Unfortunately all of their efforts will be fore not. Come finals time, both those players will be at home, like the rest of us, watching the finals. You could combine the rosters of both the Rockets and Thunder and they still wouldn’t be competitive against the Warriors. One man wrecking crews in the NBA, whilst entertaining, don’t win titles.
* Westbrook and Harden are great players, but their freak output owes a great debt to the distortion effect of recent rule and style changes in the NBA.
Not being able to put your hand on a guard on the perimeter has made pick and roll virtually unguardable. That in turn has motivated teams to completely overhaul style to take advantage, putting 3 3-point shooters on the floor at all times to pull defenders out of the paint and then run endless pick and rolls with the star and a big man.
The simple action produces a big volume of points and assists for the star guard and then on the other end, they are playing with so many lightweight 3-point specialists, there are a huge number of rebounds available.
I think it’s lame. Half the starting point guards in the league are “stars” under this system. You’ve got a 5’9 guy in Isaiah Thomas who can’t defend a lick putting up 30ppg and getting MVP buzz.
The stylistic diversity of the late 2000s is gone. A bunch of teams playing the exact same way, putting ball-hog scoring guards at the center of a 3-point shooting offense.
* I watch very little NBA, but I did watch Cleveland’s run to the Championship last year. One stat that they don’t list is YARDS PER CARRY! I frequently watched as a drive to the bucket included 3 giant steps, and occasionally four. But, what the hay, scoring drives the viewership numbers.
* Westbrook is great, but he has what some call the choke gene. He panics in big games. (Harden by contrast has the clutch gene). Westbrook’s end game blundering pretty much gave the Western Conference finals to Golden State. I doubt he’ll change.
* …it’s amazing how left the league has gotten the last few years. Probably was inevitable in a league that’s 80% black. And the whites who want to be involved with such a black dominated sport tend to become hyper SJWs (see Steve Kerr’s Twitter feed). Football remains relatively neutral politically due to the coaches and quarterbacks, along with the fan base. And it’s not just celebrating Black History Month and opposing the Muslim ban, the NBA was one of the most enthusiastic bullies pushing for tranny bathrooms. There’s a lesson there: if any institution is overwhelmingly non-white, it’s going far left not just on racial issues but everything. Same for the country.
* NBA’s tack left has a lot more to do with its massive ABC/ESPN deal and its commissioners than the athletes.
David Stern and Adam Silver both liberal NY Jews catering to the liberal media establishment and often chastising their own athletes – e.g., Kobe Bryant and Rajon Rondo getting major penalties for anti-gay slurs.
The black athletes push the NBA left on BLM, but the rest is all NY liberals using sports media as a wedge into flyover country.
* Westbrook makes only 43% of his shots and only 31% of his 3-point attempts. He wants to dominate possession of the ball. If he’s making his shots he’s pretty much unstoppable, but if he’s not he can take the whole team out of the game. By contrast, Larry Bird was the master of the “touch pass”; move the ball to the next player as quickly as possible. Westbrook does not contribute to a winning team nearly as much as his headline stats would suggest. Bird took a team that only won 29 games in the season before he arrived and led it to more than 60 wins–without Robert Parish or Kevin McHale present. Without Kevin Durant, Westbrook has no serious chance of being on a team in the conference finals.
* The NBA refs are also now more likely to call blocking fouls against the defender than charging fouls on the dribbler in order to make the games more exciting. If a defender steps into the path of a would be Michael Jordan who is still twenty feet away and running at the basket, he might be whistled on the claim that he hadn’t “taken a defensive position” no matter how long he had been standing there.
* Stuff like taking away the all-star game from Charlotte over the transgender bathroom law is using the popularity of sports in red states as a wedge to insert blue state power and influence.

It’s not a coincidence that one of the NFL’s most consistingly white teams — the New England Patrios — is also the winningiest.

Dawkins on hoops in black and white
Charley Rosen / Special to FOXSports.com
3 days ago Darryl Dawkins has never worried about being politically correct. Ever since he made headlines in 1975 when he became the first schoolboy to be drafted into the NBA (Philadelphia — fifth pick overall), Dawkins was never shy about speaking his mind.
According to Dawkins, the outcome of the upcoming Olympic basketball tournament hinges on a subject no one else dares to fully address — the racial components that define basketball as we know it. “The game is the same,” says Dawkins. “The object is for the good guys to score and to keep the bad guys from scoring. But there’s a big difference between black basketball and white basketball.”
Darryl Dawkins isn’t afraid to sound off on the “big difference between black basketball and white basketball.”
Growing up poor (but happy) near Orlando, Fla., Dawkins learned the former before he learned the latter. “Black basketball is much more individualistic,” he says. “With so many other opportunities closed to young black kids, the basketball court in the playground or the schoolyard is one of the few places where they can assert themselves in a positive way. So if somebody makes you look bad with a shake-and-bake move, then you’ve got to come right back at him with something better, something more stylish. And if someone fouls you hard, you’ve got to foul him even harder. It’s all about honor, pride, and establishing yourself as a man.”
Once the black game moves indoors and becomes more organized, the pressure to establish bona fides increases. “Now you’re talking about high school hoops,” says Dawkins. “So if you’re not scoring beaucoup points, if your picture isn’t in the papers, if you don’t have a trophy, then you ain’t the man and you ain’t nothing. Being second-best is just as bad as being last. And if a teammate hits nine shots in a row, the black attitude is, ‘Screw him. Now it’s my turn to get it on.'”
If young black players usually cherish untrammeled creativity, white hooplings mostly value more team-oriented concepts. “White basketball means passing the hell out of the ball,” says Dawkins. “White guys are more willing to do something when somebody else has the ball — setting picks, boxing out, cutting just to clear a space for a teammate, making the pass that leads to an assist pass. In white basketball, there’s a more of a sense of discipline, of running set plays and only taking wide open shots. If a guy gets hot, he’ll get the ball until he cools off.”
Why is white basketball so structured and team-oriented?
“Because the white culture places more of a premium on winning,” Dawkins believes, “and less on self-indulgent preening and chest-beating. That’s because there are so many other situations in the white culture where a young kid can express himself.”
As the twig is bent, so grows the tree. When Dawkins and the Sixers squared off against the Portland Trail Blazers for the NBA championship in 1977, Philadelphia’s most dynamic players were Julius Erving, George McGinnis, World B. Free, and Dawkins.
“They beat us in six games,” Dawkins recalls, “and the series marked the most blatant example of the racial difference in NBA game plans. We were much more flamboyant than Portland, and certainly more talented. We had more individual moves, more off-balance shots, more fancy passes, more dunks, and more entertaining stuff. But everybody wanted to shoot and be a star (including me), and nobody was willing to do the behind-the-scenes dirty work.”
Meanwhile, the white players at the core of Portland’s eventual success were Dave Twardzik, Bobby Gross, Larry Steele and Bill Walton. Dawkins notes that “Even the black guys like Lionel Hollins, Mo Lucas, Johnny Davis, Lloyd Neal played disciplined, unselfish white basketball. Credit their coach, Jack Ramsay, for getting everybody on the same page.”
As much as Dawkins respected Portland’s game plan, however, he was never crazy about Walton. “The guy was a good player who could really pass and had a nice jump hook,” Dawkins opines. “What made Walton so effective was that he was surrounded by talented players who wanted to win and weren’t concerned with being stars. Personally, I think that Walton was, and still is, full of baloney. Back then, he had this mountain-man image, he smoked lots of pot, and I don’t think he bathed regularly. And the league let him play with a red bandana tied around his head. To say nothing of his involvement with Patty Hearst.
“If a black player ever tried any of that kind of stuff he would’ve been banished from the NBA in a heartbeat. Yet in spite of all the messed up things Walton did as a player, now that he’s a TV announcer all he does is tear down everybody else. The guy still ticks me off.”
During his 15-year tenure in the NBA, Dawkins’ signature move was bulldozing to the basket and smashing the Plexiglas backboard to smithereens. He was brash, outlandish, funny, and irresistible. He called himself “Chocolate Thunder,” claimed to be from the planet Lovetron, and devised names for his more awesome dunks — among the most noteworthy were In Your Face Disgrace, Cover Yo Damn Head, Sexophonic Turbo Delight, and his classic If You Ain’t Groovin’ Best Get Movin’-Chocolate Thunder Flyin’-Robinzine Cryin’-Teeth Shakin’-Glass Breakin’-Rump Roastin’-Bun Toastin’-Glass Still Flyin’ Wham-Bam-I-Am Jam!
For the past four years, the 6-foot-11, 285-pound Dawkins has been coaching the Pennsylvania Valley Dawgs in the summertime United States Basketball League. In so doing, he’s won two championships (2002 and 2004) and distinguished himself as a superior motivator and big man coach, as well as the kind of on- and off-court teacher who can help transform wild young hooplings into mature gamers. As a by-product of his own maturation, Dawkins can also see the pluses and minuses of both black and white basketball.
“The black game by itself,” he says, “is too chaotic and much too selfish. No one player is good enough to beat five opponents on a consistent basis. The black style also creates animosities among the players because everybody ends up arguing about who’s shooting too much and who’s not shooting enough.”
But the white game also has its drawbacks: “It can get too predictable and even too cautious because guys can be afraid to take risks and make mistakes.”
Dawkins believes that the best NBA teams combine the best of both. “In basketball and in civilian life,” Dawkins says, “freedom without structure winds up being chaotic and destructive. Only when it operates within a system can freedom create something worthwhile.”
And, according to Dawkins, this is the most difficult task at hand for Larry Brown. “Only Tim Duncan and Carlos Boozer are willing to play white basketball. All the other guys on Team USA really want to go off on their own.
“Unless Brown can bleach some of the selfish funk from their game, they’ll be lucky to win the bronze.”
Charley Rosen, former CBA coach, author of 12 books about hoops, the next one being A PIVOTAL SEASON — HOW THE 1971-72 LA LAKERS CHANGED THE NBA, is a frequent contributor to FOXSports.com.

Posted in Basketball, Blacks | Comments Off

Why Would America And Australia Want To Accept Each Other’s Illegal Immigrants?

Posted on February 3, 2017 by Luke Ford

From news.com.au:

As the White House confirmed a “horrible deal” between Australia and the US on refugees would remain, US President Donald Trump cast more scepticism.
He said he questioned the purpose of the agreement, and suggested the number of refugees could increase to 2,000, after the Trump administration agreed to honour an Obama-era plan to resettle 1,250 asylum seekers in the US.
“For whatever reason President Obama said that they were going to take probably well over a thousand illegal immigrants who were in prisons and they were going to bring them and take them into this country,” Trump said.
“And I just said why?”
“Why are we doing this?”

Why would America want to take in 1250 to 2000 people who tried to enter Australia illegally? Why does America need more Muslims? From an American perspective, these people are scum.

I understand that in exchange, Australia will take in people who tried to enter America illegally. Why would Australia want them?

HOW THE REFUGEE AGREEMENT UNFOLDED
November 13, 2016: The Turnbull Government unveils the refugee resettlement deal with the United States agreed to under the Obama administration. Australia will take refugees from Central America in exchange for the US resettling people currently on Nauru and Manus Island as part of a one-off agreement.
January 27, 2017: President Trump signs an executive order on immigration, banning citizens from seven majority Muslim countries from entering the United States for 90 days and halting all refugee resettlement for 120 days.
January 29, 2017: White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer says he will honour pledge to resettle 1250 refugees from Nauru and Manus Island during a 25-minute conversation with Mr Turnbull despite his executive order on immigration.
Fe bruary 1, 2017: Media reports the White House has backtracked on a promise to honour the refugee deal with Australia, saying President Trump is still considering whether it will go ahead. Mr Turnbull says he’s confident it will be given the green light.
February 2, 2017: Media reports President Trump reportedly blasted Mr Turnbull during a phone conversation, calling the refugee resettlement agreement the “worst deal ever”. Mr Turnbull doesn’t comment on the conversation, instead saying he is assured the deal will still go ahead.

I don’t want these refugees on my block. Do you want them as neighbors?

Washington Post: “Trump’s blowup with Turnbull shocked Australians, who have stood by America’s side in Iraq and Afghanistan…”

It was moronic for both countries to go to war in Iraq and Afghanistant.

Posted in America, Australia | Comments Off

Jewish Federation Of Los Angeles: ‘Our Commitment to Immigration and Resettlement’

Posted on February 2, 2017 by Luke Ford

I wonder if they are similarly committed to resettling Palestinians in Israel? Or is it only goyisha states they want to ruin?

Jay Sanderson sent out this email blast:

I returned this week from an incredibly meaningful trip to Hungary and Israel where I experienced the power of our work abroad. During my ten-day trip, I received many e-mails asking, “Where is the Federation’s statement on the Executive Order on Immigration?”
I stood on the banks of the frozen Danube where thousands of Hungarian Jews were forcibly drowned during the Holocaust. It was a deeply emotional experience for me because my grandmother was Hungarian. Like all of us, I am a descendant of immigrants. America is a country of immigrants. Immigration has strengthened America, and has helped build this great country.
Upon my return, I continue to receive e-mails asking me, “Where is the Federation’s statement on the Executive Order on Immigration? Our Federation’s statement on immigration was made 104 years ago when we made the rescue and resettlement of immigrants — like our parents, grandparents and great-grandparents — a top priority.
I want you to know that we have heard your concerns and feel the anxiety of our community. Our commitment to the community is steadfast. We are convening our community partners, our social service partners and meeting with leaders throughout Los Angeles, and will continue to strengthen these relationships. We are enhancing our ongoing lobbying efforts for social service funding at the local, state, and federal levels. We are a Federation that takes action. Our Jewish values inform and inspire our work. We are proactive in serving our most vulnerable and protecting those who come to our country. We are invested in Jewish immigrants and we care about all those who immigrate from the four corners of the world, dreaming of a new home here in Los Angeles.
Since 1973, we have welcomed refugees from around the world including over 27,000 from the former Soviet Union and Iran. We resettle over 100 immigrants every year.
Today, we are deeply concerned about those members of our community who are anxiously waiting to come to Los Angeles after fleeing Iran. They are in a Federation program in Vienna, which supports them as they prepare to move to America. I have met many of them and heard their heart-wrenching stories. Yosef is 23 and arrived in Vienna just two months ago. His father passed away from brain cancer just before he left. His mother and sister are anxiously counting down the days for his arrival. They need him because his sister suffers from degenerative MS and his mother is struggling. Yosef is stranded. We are doing everything we can to reunite him with his family.
I hope you understand that our work strengthens and supports our community every day, and this is the strongest and most enduring statement we can make. This is our promise to you and to Yosef.
Today, I received even more e-mails asking, “What can we do to help?”
There are other issues surrounding the Executive Order on Immigration. The federal funding that we receive to help refugees is in jeopardy, and we expect a loss of support of over $100,000 towards our immigration and resettlement work. If you want to help, a gift to our work in this area would make an immediate impact.
During the days, weeks and months ahead, no matter what may concern you, you may ask the question, “Where is the Federation’s statement on…?”
We are responsible for our entire community. We identify and address our greatest challenges and opportunities, and our commitment to these goals is unwavering. Please know that we will always care about you and your concerns. As we must be, we are extremely focused on our essential work: supporting and sustaining our community and building an even stronger community for the future.
Thank you for your continued support.
Jay Sanderson
President & CEO

Posted in Immigration | Comments Off

Former Pico-Robertson Resident Tziporah Malkah reveals she hasn’t ‘had a shag’ in six years on I’m A Celebrity Get Me Out Of Here

Posted on February 2, 2017 by Luke Ford

At least she has HaShem to hold her close.

News.com.au:

TZIPORAH Malkah has admitted she hasn’t “had a shag” in six years on I’m A Celebrity Get Me Out Of Here.
On Thursday night’s episode, the former fiancee to James Packer was talking to Lisa Curry when she made the personal admission before revealing she has a special friend in South Australia.
“Ash (Pollard) said today, ‘God I need a shag’, and I said, ‘Darl, I haven’t had a shag in six years,” 43-year-old Malkah told the Olympian.
Later in the conversation with Curry, Malkah dished on her male friend in South Australia.
“I haven’t seen him for a long time. We were teenage friends,” she said. “As soon as I can get a couple of weeks off I am going to go and stay in a hotel within walking distance from him and see how it goes.
“We’ve discussed that there may not be any physical chemistry between us,” she added. “We are getting on really well on the phone. We’ve had marathon phone calls. We are like teenagers. We spent literally seven hours on the phone one night together. It is ridiculous.”
Malkah and billionaire James Packer dated in the mid-90s for five years and had a two-year engagement, before separating in 1998. Last November she told KIIS FM’s Kyle and Jackie O the split was mutual.
“It was just talking about the time that we needed to spend together and he just said, ‘My job’s too stressful and if I need to go off and do whatever I want I need to be able to do that,’ and I said, ‘That’s not the sort of marriage that I want.’ It was sort of mutual in a way,” she said.

From News.com.au:

From Vogue model to the I’m A Celeb jungle: How Kate Fischer became Tziporah Malkah
SHE’S appeared on the cover of Vogue four times, starred alongside Hugh Grant in a hit film and was once engaged to billionaire James Packer.
But now Tziporah Malkah, formerly known as Kate Fischer, is back in the spotlight as a contestant on I’m a Celebrity Get Me Out Of Here!, a reality show famous for featuring D-listers looking for a career revival.
Malkah, 42, made her reappearance on national television by being spun around in a box filled with insects and had to fill in fellow contestants on what host Dr Chris Brown called “her previous life”.
At age 14, she won the Dolly Covergirl of the Year competition and was touted as the next Elle Macpherson. The Vogue cover girl later starred alongside Portia de Rossi and Hugh Grant in the Australian film Sirens, two INXS music videos, as well as the soap opera Echo Point.
A portrait of her by Australian painter Paul Newton was a finalist in the prestigious Archibald Prize exhibition – the painting is believed to now be in James Packer’s private collection.
So what is she doing now, where did it all go wrong, and why is she suddenly back in the public eye? This is how she explained it on Monday night’s show.
“I got outed recently in a tabloid magazine, dressed in a bedsheet collecting my mail and I looked absolutely hideous,” she said, referring to Woman’s Day, who published unflattering shots of her outside her home in Melbourne’s leafy Toorak. Malkah had been on the cover of Woman’s Day before, in 1997, looking glamorous in a crotchet bathing suit…
On Monday night’s show, former MKR contestant Pollard asked Malkah what we were all thinking: “What does your name mean?”
Apparently it means “bird” in Hebrew. Her family is Jewish (her mother is NSW member for Goulburn Pru Goward) but has not practised Judaism for many years.
“I was given a gentile name to be in the street, but at home I’ve always been Tziporah. I’ve just decided to reclaim it,” Malkah said.
“If anyone calls me ‘Kate’, ‘Zippy’ or ‘Zip’, they’ve got three strikes and they’re out. I’ll let them know.”
She was born Katherine Helen Fischer, but legally changed her name to Tziporah Malkah in her early 20s. It’s a family name passed down from her grandmother.
In the ‘About Me’ section on her public Facebook page, she renounces her birth name.
“Tziporah is how I wish to be addressed,” she wrote. “You won’t get far with Kate – it is not my name and it is disrespectful for people to be wilfully rude and ignore this simple request.”
HER WEIGHT LOSS BATTLES
Malkah is open about the fact that at 118.5kg, her doctor has classified her as “morbidly obese”. Her weight has made her the target of ridicule on social media, with some criticising her for not wearing a bra in the jungle.
“I’m going to lose at least 20kg, hopefully much more. I’m way too heavy and it’s time to trim down,” she told New Idea last year.
“This is doctor’s orders — he says I’m morbidly obese. My blood pressure is way too high and I’m likely to die prematurely unless I lose weight. So my life depends on this. I’m ready!”
“I don’t advocate fatness or thinness, but some of us fight the good fight in regards to our weight all the time. It can be mentally all-consuming and very draining- particularly if there are other stresses and distractions going on in one’s life.”

Posted in Australia, Orthodoxy | Comments Off

The Wall Street Journal Vs America

Posted on February 2, 2017 by Luke Ford

Comments at Steve Sailer:

READ Bari Weiss's superb piece about the splendor, and profound American-ness, of the pro-refugee protests: https://t.co/em0Rq8XUf1 via @WSJ
— Bret Stephens (@StephensWSJ) January 31, 2017

* Wall Street Journal owner Rupert Murdoch and WSJ editorial page editor Paul Gigot may surpass most Jews in their support for nation-wrecking mass immigration. Gigot is notorious for allowing Jewish writers to push for mass immigration in the editorial pages of the Wall Street Journal. Very rarely does Gigot allow a writer from the European Christian ancestral core of the USA make the case for immigration reductions.

Wall Street Journal columnist Bret Stephens is a Jewish writer who routinely states that European Christian Americans are not the ancestral core of the United States. Stephens thinks that there is no ancestral core of the United Sates. Bret Stephens is dead wrong.

Bret Stephens has recently praised a bit of slop written by another Jewish person who does not recognize that the USA is a European Christian nation-state.

Gigot saw fit to add to the Ellis Island emotionalism by allowing a WSJ associate book review editor by the name of Bari Weiss write a vapid piece on the protests surrounding President Trump’s decision to temporarily suspend some refugee admissions into the USA.

The Wall Street Journal article was entitled “A Trump Protest Under Lady Liberty’s Gaze.” The female Jew who wrote the article is no friend of the European Christian ancestral core of the USA. Her intention in the article was to use the imposition of White guilt as a weapon to smash her enemies. We know what your doing.

Rupert Murdoch, Paul Gigot, Bret Stephens and Bari Weiss all push open borders mass immigration and amnesty for illegal alien invaders. President Trump and American patriots will no longer pay any attention to the politically correct crap that is destroying us.

* Alliance with Jews who promote homomania as new religion.

Only Jews who reject or completely pervert Judaism. (Alas, such individuals now make-up the majority of those ethnically or genetically Jewish.) You may not like (even authentic) Judaism but at least be accurate and honest enough not to confuse or conflate it with Cultural Marxism/SJW-ism. Judaism, as anyone at all actually familiar with it would know, is quite unequivocal and unambiguous in condemning homosexual behavior.

Cons: Increasingly silly and tiresome. Decadent and dissipating of Western spirit.

Oh, it’s much more than that.

First, the hideous reality of male homosexual buggery (i.e., anal penetration) alone is that it is an inordinately disease-promoting, gruesome and brutal* pseudo sex act. Defiant indulgence in this anatomically and physiologically unsound, inherently unhygienic but completely voluntary* behavior continues to come at a heavy a price in already-strained public health resources, to say nothing of human lives. And since these are communicable diseases we are dealing with, their proliferation places everyone at some degree of risk (health care workers and blood transfusion recipients would seem the most obvious but even anyone who merely spends any time in a hospital, for example, is subject to some degree of risk as well).

*Graphic content

That would be more than bad enough. The perniciousness, often quite insidious, of the “LGBTQ” lobby and its agenda, however, does not end with the mere sanction, promotion and subsidization of buggery alone but goes much farther. Nor even does it end with transmania, as utterly insane and truly corrosive and dangerous that is. (So much so that it has gone too far even for a number of “respectables” who have been fully-on board for the rest of the “LGBT”, or at least “LGB”, agenda.)

Obviously, this thread is not the place to elaborate much further. Its title, however, does provide a segue to mention what is perhaps the least recognized (or, at any rate, least acknowledged) area in which “LGBTQ” indoctrination– specifically, the incredible success it has had in normalizing anal buggery– has contributed to societal dissolution. This is the increased incidence of this vile practice among heterosexuals. Females have faced increased pressure from their male partners to submit to this dangerous, painful and humiliating act. Can anyone doubt the convenient expedience in persuading their invariably (instinctively) reluctant female partners (or, perhaps more accurately, toys) that resorting to the “homophobia” card has provided for these young, porn-fueled males? (“What’s the matter, Suzy, you’re not homophobic [sic] now, are you?” “Millions of ‘gays’ can’t be wrong…”) That’s a real war on women– and girls. But don’t expect to see much indignation about it from the likes of the “pussy”-hatted marchers.

(As a currently popular to transgress taboo among youth, buggery, particularly of the heterosexual variety, is said to have taken the place that fellatio previously held. The taboo and stigma of the latter no doubt having been considerably lessened during Bill Clinton’s Presidency, as a direct result of the Lewinsky scandal and the lurid headlines it generated.)

* If there was a single reason why I became furious and signed on with the alt-right, even with people who probably want me exterminated, is because the homomania people brought about the pronoun “they” and began to force people to agree to it.

I couldn’t do that. That was my last straw. Let the world burn.

Posted in America | Comments Off

Illegal Immigrants Overwhelm Our Health System & Social Services

Posted on February 2, 2017 by Luke Ford

Comments at Steve Sailer:

* “The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function.”
– Al Bartlett

One thing that’s so frustrating about the immigration debate is how proponents of open borders can’t or won’t think in exponential terms. Western healthcare systems are already strained and the single least sensible thing we could do is bring in ever more poor pregnant women. What reason is there to think Priscilla’s children would have grown up to be any more capable of paying for their four children each than their mother?

Libs and neocons see the little girl pictured in Ms. vanden Heuvel’s WaPo piece and can think only how sad it is that she could be denied her human right to American citizenship. I see her siblings that are here now; her cousins, grandparents, “cousins”, etc. that will chain-migrate here; as well as the dozen kids she’ll eventually have, each of whom will be more likely to catch Sudden Jihad Syndrome than that girl and her siblings. All of these people will of course be beneficiaries of various forms of welfare and loyal Democrats.

Our vibrant new Americans treat emergency rooms like walk-in clinics because they don’t have to pay, giving everybody else longer wait times and more expensive treatments so the hospitals can try to cover their losses. They can’t wrap their heads around the fact that ending a round of antibiotics early because symptoms disappeared helps speed along evolution of the bacteria, so we get new superbugs, ever fewer effective antibiotics, and diminishing returns on money spent on drug development.

Posted in America, Immigration | Comments Off

Will Trump Be Overthrown By A Revolution?

Posted on February 2, 2017 by Luke Ford

Steve Sailer: “Sometimes I think that the only thing holding back the American Color Revolution is that the Coalition of the Fringes can’t agree over what color it should be.”

Comments at Steve Sailer:

* The right is largely suppressed from organizing, and thus cannot have the benefit of coordination. I believe that many of us are realizing this, however, and learning to compensate. There’s no reason why we should just allow ourselves to be wiped out without resistance.

* I don’t like Milo, but Trump should really do a joint rally with Milo, on Berkely’s campus. He should frame it purely as “free speech”, not an endorsement of Milo. And he should explicitly dare the antifa to come test the U.S. Secret Service.

* Trump hires Michael Anton, neo-con friend of Bill Kristol and the Cheneys, fan of Tom Wolfe, enemy of business casual, and loose-nuke-terrorism worry-wort.

He wrote some of his more explicit articles as Publius Dio. He is kind of long winded but had some great lines attacking “Conservatism Inc” and the whole Koch Bros network.

This is from one of his pseudonymous articles right before the election:

“Third and most important, the ceaseless importation of Third World foreigners with no tradition of, taste for, or experience in liberty means that the electorate grows more left, more Democratic, less Republican, less republican, and less traditionally American with every cycle. As does, of course, the U.S. population, which only serves to reinforce the two other causes outlined above. This is the core reason why the Left, the Democrats, and the bipartisan junta (categories distinct but very much overlapping) think they are on the cusp of a permanent victory that will forever obviate the need to pretend to respect democratic and constitutional niceties. Because they are.”

* If I read the tea leaves correctly the next revolution will not be pink but blue. Women now are far better organized and are getting a much better deal from society than are men. Men are the ones who would benefit far more from organizing and the climate is such we are at the point where that could happen relatively easily now.

What more can women get from society? They are already getting the lion’s share of the public welfare spending. They consume 30-40% more health care than men throughout their entire lifetime (not just when pregnant), they can choose if they work or have children (gratis welfare) and if they work, they can avoid the hazardous and unpleasant work including selective service. They also get preferential treatment under the law including family & criminal courts.

I think that part of the pussy pout we saw a week and a half ago was more of a “don’t take away my “rights’.”(i.e. privileges). Abortion and birth control will still be around for women albeit not men (because we spend nothing on Men’s reproductive health). I also think it is a plea for men not to organize. Trump’s support among men and married women was almost entirely organic. There is no Geo. Soros funded organizations or politicians like the Hildabeast, who advocate exclusively for men or men’s issues. All Trump did is say he was not Hillary. In the future, feminism inc. will not be “pushing on an open door”. We have been frozen for the last 40 years choosing to focus exclusively on women’s pussies and think the society is moving forward finally.

Steve Sailer writes:

If only Berkeley Latinx Studies major Pablo “They” Gomez could be there to fan the flames …

Heckuva job, Mayorie!

And now the antifas are running amok smashing up Berkeley businesses:

Note that the criminals aren’t necessarily Berkeley students.

A Starbucks was ransacked. Oh the irony. Do you think Howard Schultz ever has any doubts?

By the way, if you are wondering why all the antifas are wearing masks, it’s no doubt because of the bitter cold and driving wind of a California February:

Admittedly, the other possibility is that they wear masks so that they can beat people with impunity:

Why is it legal to wear a mask to a riot?

In contrast to what happens when Milo tries to speak at Berkeley, famous for the Free Speech Movement of 1964, here’s the kind of intolerance we see when Bernie Sanders speaks at the Falwell family’s Liberty U.:

Seriously, what % of the political violence in the U.S. over the last 18 months has been from Trump’s side of the spectrum and what % from the respectable side?

5% vs. 95%?

2% vs. 98%?

I resist the 1% vs. 99% ratio as improbable (although, admittedly, possible).

Here’s the beginning of the NYT coverage:

Speech by Milo Yiannopoulos Is Canceled Amid Protests at Berkeley
By CHRISTOPHER MELE FEB. 1, 2017
A speech by the divisive right-wing editor Milo Yiannopoulos at the University of California, Berkeley, was canceled on Wednesday night after demonstrators set fires and threw objects at buildings to protest his appearance.
The university announced the cancellation on Twitter around 9:15 p.m., about an hour after a section of the campus erupted in protest. There were no immediate reports of arrests or injuries.

Nothing to see here, folks, just move along.

Update: As of 7 am EST, the word “Berkeley” does not appear anywhere on the NYTimes.com home page.

Problem solved!

And then the Twitterer-in-Chief weighed in:

How expensive would that it be for Berkeley to maintain it’s policy of accommodating violence against free speech?

Each year, the UC Berkeley campus receives well over half a billion dollars in research and other support from external sources. In the fiscal year ending June 30, 2016, UC Berkeley attracted $673.9 million in new awards. Many of these awards fund multiyear research projects and support expenditures that will be reflected in subsequent years. The federal government provided 55 percent of these funds, and California state agencies and other government sources, industry, and the nonprofit sector supplied the rest. Of the research funding provided by the U.S. government, the largest contributors are the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation.

But that’s not counting federally-subsidized student loans …

COMMENTS AT STEVE SAILER:

* Send Milo to every PC campus.

Let the proglodyte anarchists smash and burn stuff.

* The interesting thing is that the heckler’s veto stratagem is employed by the administration and faculty a priori – they charge the speaker for the extra security to discourage the speech and then challenge the rioters to force cancellation by presenting a security threat in excess of the capacity of the security detail (assuming in such case it’s been paid for by the speaker). There is a definite pattern to these things.

Of course, if Trump’s eventual DOE Secretary put their Federal funding in jeopardy for suppressing speech, he’d be the fascist.

* If Kim Jong-Un had step foot in Berkeley he would not receive 1/32 the hostile violent reaction that Milo Yiannopoulos has received for stepping foot there, after all Little Kim is a Conmie and Berkeley is a Communist city. Kim is one of them, he is their fellow political tribesman.

* Free Speech was only ever a tactic for the left, not an end. Once they became the establishment, free-speech became subversive.

As Richard Spencer said about antifa and various other SJW protestors: They are not truth speaking to power. They are power speaking.

* President Trump should threaten to refuse federal funds to the entire California state university system until Berkeley moves to thoroughly investigate and ask for prosecution of at least some of the perpetrators of the violence, because not prosecuting them would be an injustice based on upper-middle class (white) privilege, as the same behaviour in by minorities or lower class citizens would never be tolerated.

Imagine the pressure on Berkley to change its ways

* We need to always remember that this is the caliber of opposition that we’re up against, and this is why our tactics need to take in account that logic and reason are of limited utility against people who are, basically, hate-fueled orcs.

Posted in America, Berkeley, California | Comments Off