Blog has moved, searching new blog...

Thursday, October 21, 2010

Professional Bigots Harangue Tea Party

NAACP releases report accusing tea party groups of links to bigots:
The new report describes what it calls links between tea party factions and white supremacist groups, anti-immigrant organizations and militias, according to a news release issued by the Institute for Research and Education on Human Rights, which wrote the document.

Not only have tea parties given platforms to extremists, the news release said, the movement is a recruiting ground for hard-core white nationalists who are “hoping to push these (white) protesters toward a more self-conscious and ideological white supremacy.”
The "report" is available at Tea Party Nationalism, which is chock full of anti-White fear-mongering. Tea Parties - Racism, Anti-Semitism and the Militia Impulse is one comprehensive example.
big·ot - n. One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.
Today's news is that professional black and jewish bigots are denouncing Whites. They want everyone to know that they can't tolerate even the deracinated political views of Tea Partiers. "Supremacist", "extremist", "hard-core" they label us. Look how they frantically push those buttons, trying to pathologize and criminalize. They don't trust Whites. They don't like Whites. They are frightened of us, alienated by us. Our most naive attempts to appease them with color-blind politics simply don't well enough serve the interests of their groups. They already have a regime which favors them. They defend it, shamelessly, even as they grasp for more.

Their worst nightmares involve Whites becoming more self-conscious of our own interests and behaving as they do. Why shouldn't we meet them on a level field, as aware and organized as they are? Because it wouldn't be good for them? They don't care what's good for us. Because they might attack even more viciously? Yes. Exactly.

Labels: , , , , ,

white

16 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Some background from CofCC on Zeskind. Apparently the commie jews still in control of their NAACP.


Author of NAACP report is hardcore Marxist/Stalinist

http://cofcc.org/2010/10/author-of-naacp-tea-party-report-is-hard-core-marxiststalinist/

10/22/2010 01:59:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So after 100 years of the NAACP advancing colored people they still don’t have any colored people who can write a report for them and so they have to have their Jewish puppet masters write it for them.

DJF

10/22/2010 05:33:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

Here's the CoCC report on Zeskind: Author of NAACP Tea Party report is hard-core Marxist/Stalinist., which draws much information from Jack Cashill's Who's watching the watchdog?

See also Hunter Wallace's Leonard Zeskind and Tea Party Nationalism.

10/22/2010 08:52:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

http://www.slate.com/id/2272097/pagenum/all/#p2

Radical Shriek
Lefty academics convene in Berkeley to try to make sense of the Tea Party movement.
By David Weigel
Posted Saturday, Oct. 23, 2010, at 10:00 PM ET

...

"There is that U.S. DNA that goes all the way back and does provide the conceptual source for this lynch mob mentality," says Steve Martinot, who teaches at San Francisco State University. "And that is white supremacy. Shouldn't we be looking at the Tea Party through that?"

Perlstein moves around the question.

...

But the social scientists are more ready than the historians to crunch numbers and prove that racial animosity is key to the Tea Party.

[Numbers follow.]

...

Most of the scholars take a darker view, and provide more evidence that Obama was always going to be running uphill. Alan Abramowitz, a political scientist at Emory, presents data on the increasing partisanship of Republicans, who are more and more likely to despise Democratic presidents and deny them space to govern.

...

The research, the race theory, the scholarly speculation—all of this is a good start, but it doesn't soothe academics who expect the Republicans to win a bunch of elections in 10 days.

...

"I wonder if we're likely to see a Timothy McVeigh situation," says Nicholas Robert, an attendee originally from Australia, who basically wonders if any Tea Partiers can be arrested. "It seems to be that we're being very polite. I wonder if there are any legal mechanisms—one that comes to mind are the provisions used to crush the Wobblies."

He gets no sympathy from the academics. "I think that's a dangerous road to go down," says Berlet.

Abramowitz finds me and whispers into my ear. "In Berkeley," he says, "you're seeing the other side of polarization."

- Daybreaker

10/24/2010 04:34:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Off-topic, but important and in my opinion tragic for racially aware people supportive of White interests, the great Kevin MacDonald at The Occidental Observer is now a truther, or countenancing trutherism as an editor, with explicit sympathy for its claims:

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/Lonaker-9-11.html

http://theoccidentalobserver.net/tooblog/?p=3613

Credibility goodbye, clown shoes hello.

Is it possible to discuss important issues like Jewish self-deception (about moves that are really acts of ethnic competition over control of resources, reproductive success, and cultural changes that bear on who wins out by these starkly Darwinian standards, but which actors with very high ethnocentricity and thus very high ethnocentric bias prefer not to think of as moves in ethnic competition) while indulging the wild self-deceptions of conspiracy theorists? I don't think that works.

Kevin MacDonald can't be replaced. His three essential books, A People That Shall Dwell Alone (with Diaspora Peoples), Separation and Its Discontents: Toward an Evolutionary Theory of Anti-Semitism and The Culture of Critique: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth-Century Intellectual and Political Movements are foundation stones for understanding the problems that Whites face. They are academically bullet-proof, and they cover so much vital territory that to get by without them you'd have to get another equally well-credentialed and fearless academic to go do the same work again. That won't happen.

But now, every time Kevin MacDonald's work is mentioned, we're going to hear that it's Kevin MacDonald, evolutionary psychologist and truther.

As for The Occidental Observer, it's credibility is shot with anyone who sees "trutherism" as a line that must not be crossed. (Which I do.)

The same for the American Third Position Party.

This is awful.

- Daybreaker

10/24/2010 05:18:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

Truther, birther, denier, racist, fascist, nazi, anti-semite, oh my!

I don't expect my allies to be paragons of virtue. My enemies certainly aren't.

10/24/2010 07:38:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I guess it won't make any difference to those whose hostility to Whites and whose careers can't be disentangled. That would include professional bigots preparing slander for the NAACP and also academic left bigots like those in the Slate story.

- Daybreaker

10/24/2010 08:21:00 AM  
Anonymous Jim Jones said...

@Daybreaker,

I am not a truther either, and I am inclined to discredit any one who is a truther. That said, I believe there is a very high likelihood that Israel had some inkling of the attack in the days leading up to the attack. Several Western countries had inklings in the weeks leading up to 9/11 that there could be a devastating terrorist attack on U.S. soil, but they lacked specifics (except perhaps Israel).

I didn't fully read the pages you linked to, but the Fox News story-- as far as I know-- was never contradicted or retracted. The story was simply pulled from its website, which I find highly suspicious. In addition, the Forward (the Jewish paper in NYC) had a very long story on the five spies. I don't see any contradiction in believing (a) that the Fox News and the Forward stories hint at Israeli knowledge of the impending attacks and (b) that the attacks were carried out by 19 ragheads who were funded by Al Qaeda.

10/24/2010 03:45:00 PM  
Anonymous Pat Hannagan said...

MacDonald knows that he's opening up himself to ridicule and consigns himself to it: Anyway, the point of this post is simply to solicit commentary on this issue. Let the chips fall where they may.

It is a poor marketing move, and he could have simply left it as a topic open for discussion, since all open and honest debate is an American tradition.

His reticence to discuss the subject (it was "...a difficult editorial decision.") notwithstanding, his positions can now be reduced even further on the sole, incorrect, basis that he's been leper belled as a "Truther".

It seems that he has very little standing in the wider community so I am not too sure it matters. Still, I think he could have been more judicious with his choice of words.

Personally, of course 911 and those events should be open to all discussion. We're still in Iraq and Afghanistan all predicated on the events of that day. The marginalisation of any doubt as "Trutherism" is yet another instance of MSM denial or propagandising.

To my way of thinking, what matters is that people who would not normally, and never should have been in a Western country, Muslims, were allowed in, trained and fed even by the West, to destroy us. That is still happening today, even more so. Therefore the events of 911, whether seized upon or manipulated, need be honestly discussed.

The American reaction was one of vengeance. Now it is to democratise. How did this shift on motive come about? What relevance does the latter have with 911? None!

The whole thing stinks to high heaven whether it was a conspiracy or not. Either way the majority Whites have been duped.

Hey, Daybreaker, send me an email if you would at pathannagan at hotmail dot com.

10/24/2010 05:18:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey! If truther is defined as Urban Dictionary does:

"Noun- One who rejects the accepted explanation of the events of 9/11. Truthers generally believe the U.S. government committed the acts of terrorism against itself."

Then the only thing wrong is that it was not the US government, but the active complicity of Israel and traitors, many (or most) of them jews, including some others not thought to be jews within the US government, none of whom are mentioned in the definition above. The information is out there which should resolve all reasonable doubts and it is you who are the complacent dorks (who have not fully examined all of the facts and evidence which have come forward since 9-11) and you are without credibility. Get out and look and you will find. If you don't, you are either lazy, ignorant (at least taking an unreasonable view) or a stealth jew hasbara.

Flanders

10/24/2010 07:27:00 PM  
Anonymous Wandrin said...

If truther stuff has reached enough of a critical mass in the states then it won't hurt.

In terms of cracking open the shell of the multicult and getting at all the fat cockroaches inside it doesn't matter if its true or not - what matters is how many people believe it.

10/25/2010 03:22:00 AM  
Anonymous Pat Hannagan said...

Flanders, we're on the same team. With 911 I have very minimal technical expertise and rely upon those with that knowledge to inform me. Obviously that is problematic in a society where information is closely guarded and false information disseminated.

But because of my lack of expertise, which many share pro or anti "911 Truthers", the debate is beyond my sphere. As it is for many.

It is easier for me, and far more effective, to hit on that I can prove being Jewish dominance of Western (especially US) policy, education, economies and propaganda (i.e. Hollywood).

With that in mind I want to stay 'on message' as the saying goes. As I say, there needs be an honest and open debate without the tagging of "Truthers", just as those who see through Global Warming/Climate Change are called "Deniers" or "Skeptics" or worse.

There are so many variations of the theory about who did what re. 911 that the total message, of course distorted by the MSM, is one of confusion.

There are obvious problems with some of the theories, like the Pentagon plane Flight 77, that it diminishes the effect of outing a conspiracy as such.

So please accept, I'm on your side. I simply do not wish to see MacDonald expose himself, his message, and by extension us to needless ridiculing of a our hard fought positions, that are backed by fact and endless citing of sources, as Tan does so effectively here.

Cheers mate. No matter what, we're all in this together.

10/25/2010 05:09:00 AM  
Anonymous ben tillman said...

Off-topic, but important and in my opinion tragic for racially aware people supportive of White interests, the great Kevin MacDonald at The Occidental Observer is now a truther, or countenancing trutherism as an editor, with explicit sympathy for its claims.

Good. It proves he's not in the clutches of baseless group-think orchestrated by the mass media.

Granted, he didn't really have to bring up the subject, but once the suubject is brought up, you have to admit that there is no reason whatsoever to believe the official story.

As for what exactly did happen, we don't and probably can't know, although there is plenty of evidence pointing to collusion by the US government, but how is that relevant? The point is that a thinking person has no basis for accepting the official story and is going to be interested in finding the truth.

10/25/2010 08:58:00 AM  
Anonymous fellist said...

On Lonaker's piece ... TOO and like venes should discuss the major issues of the day, and 9/11 remains topical -- not least because the official story is so much nonsense. My only concern was the exclusive focus on Israeli foreknowledge/complicity. Sure, that evidence exists, but they weren't the only state / security service involved. That's what looks bad.

Daybreaker, it would be nice if support for nationalism were as widespread and strong as doubt about the official version of 911. I think the truthers, more numerous than we, are the ones worrying.

10/25/2010 10:00:00 AM  
Anonymous Captainchaos said...

I don't see Daybreaker complaining about the fact that Peter Brimelow publishes Craig Paul Roberts' articles at Vdare though Roberts believes the 9/11 attack was a false flag.

Nor do I see questioning the official explanation for 9/11 as being any less legitimate and a detriment to one's credibility than were one to question the guilt of a man convicted of a crime by the state.

10/26/2010 01:42:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tanstaafl your heroic and righteous labours are bearing fruit! A comment - reproduced below - I found following an article about which countries to seek out as refuges when Judaeo-America collapses, concisely and clearly describes the plague infecting the West:

Luckily Europe except the British Satrapy has disconnected itself from the Anglo/American Jewish Wall Street cam. It isn't anti-semitic if you call it Jewish! It is the truth!

Don't be a Jewish hostage - abolish Judaism, Wall Street, Mormon and Evangelical faith!


I still entertain strong hope for the indigenous white peoples of Europe to revive and rally, though there is sure to be mucn pain. In the US, the whites of the Dakotas and Wyoming probably have a more than fifty % chance of surviving the end of Madoff economics and Kotkin social policy and Kristol realpolitik.

10/26/2010 04:03:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home