Discussing Breivik on The Friday Show

I'll join Mike Conner and Matt Parrot on the Friday Show, live tonight at Voice of Reason, Friday, April 27th at 9PM ET.

In today's Breivik headlines, Anders Breivik: Unraveling Violent Crimes and Mental Illness, at ABC News:

“When people struggle to comprehend what lies behind the mass murder of adolescents gathered for a weekend of discussions and campfires, the simplest response is that the killer ‘must be mad,’” Dr. Simon Wessely, head of psychological medicine at King’s College London’s Institute of Psychiatry, wrote in the commentary published Thursday in The Lancet. “The inexplicable can only be explained as an act of insanity, which by definition cannot be rationally explained. The act was so monstrous, the consequences so grievous, that the perpetrator had to be insane.”

We can say the same for those who favor genocidal immigration and integration policies in spite of the monstrous, grievous consequences - all together far more destructive and widespread than what Breivik has taken responsibility for. The perpetrators of these genocidal policies should be on trial, compelled to explain their insanity.

UPDATE 12 May 2012: The Friday Show: Tanstaafl on Breivik (mp3)

Enemy Media: Breivik's Views Too Popular

In the wake of a very active first week, The Guardian's Anders Behring Breivik page is relatively moribund today.

Anders Behring Breivik loses front-page power in Norway, published Friday, provides a hint why:

Silje Gloppen, a teacher, said however abhorrent Breivik's views, lessons needed to be learned from him. "Norwegians and, I believe, the rest of the world have to consider the possibility that this man is speaking the truth when he says he believes our 'Norwegian culture and ethnicity' is threatened by multiculturalism," she said.

Breivik's outlook is shared by "too many", she argued, citing the comment fields under articles on Norwegian newspaper websites, and a battle on Wikipedia pages related to the case between moderators and extremist writers trying to take hold of "the truth" on the internet.

"I am afraid the left side in politics have for too long failed to grasp that there are challenges with the new society that need to be discussed," she added.

Paul Brennan (paulrbrennan) has been silent since court adjourned Friday.

Helen Pidd (helenpidd) twits today that she's back in London where she will find it tricky to report further on the trial. She redirects those who are interested to Lars Bevanger (lbevanger) and Trygve Sorvaag (trygvesorvaag). She also cites Chris Elliott's op-ed, Open door: The readers' editor on … the problems of tweeting the Anders Behring Breivik trial, which in turn provides a reporter's rationalizations about why reporting testimony directly from Breivik's trial is bad:

A tweet goes straight from event to air – and stays there. It is a discrete package that may later form a strand of a larger, more complex, story, but which will, nevertheless, exist of itself, shorn of context.

It is an effective form of digital journalism and is increasingly first with the news – whether that comes from a journalist or a well-informed tweeter. However, it is reductive by nature. When the Guardian was planning coverage of the trial of Anders Behring Breivik, the Norwegian extremist who has admitted killing 77 people, the Guardian's editorial team discussed whether tweeting was an appropriate tool.

Helen Pidd, the reporter who is covering the trial, was concerned beforehand that reducing "his justifications to a stream of 140-character soundbites" would be giving Breivik the platform he sought.

Pidd fingers the most important reason: Despite the reduction and distortion, she finds her enemy's position still too potent.

Pidd said: "I would say I have had far more comments from people thanking me for the 'grim but necessary' reports on Twitter than those complaining I was giving Breivik the platform he craved. Two followers tweeted me to say they were 'unfollowing' until I left Oslo because it was 'too much'."

She has gained almost 3,000 followers in four days, a number of whom were angry when she said she wasn't going to tweet everything on day one "because … they accused me of censorship".

She said she wasn't "completely comfortable with tweeting the trial", not least because so much of Breivik's ideology was formed online. But she felt it was important to engage readers, plus it does drive traffic to the website.

Breivik correctly identified the media and it's pundits as enemies. Those pundits are less forthright about it, but reading them closely it's clear they agree. They understand, at some level, that their multicult ideology is unpopular, that the verdict on it is already in. Now that they've gotten enough to reduce Breivik to "the Norwegian extremist who has admitted killing 77 people", that's the only context they want to provide.

Breivik Trial, Day Five

Courtroom twitterers:

Paul Brennan (paulrbrennan) on Twitter
Helen Pidd (helenpidd) on Twitter
Trygve Sorvaag (trygvesorvaag) on Twitter

Selected twits from 20 April 2012, in chronological order.

@helenpidd: Breivik: "I am not a racist, I am an anti-racist." Concerned with the "anti-European racism" in the Norwegian media.

@helenpidd: Breivik complains that "cultural conservatives" such as himself has no chance of having a letter published in a Norwegian newspaper.

@helenpidd: Breivik says he was influenced in a particular bomb making technique by Andreas Baader from the Red Army Faction/Baader Meinhof Gang.

@helenpidd: Breivik: "We consider the police our brothers, along with the military. if we are going to have a coup d'état, we are going to rely on them"

@paulrbrennan: "Starting point was not to kill as many as possible, but to send a message and ensure the compendium was distributed."

@paulrbrennan: "If the building had collapsed, Utoya would have been unnecessary, and I could have driven straight to the police station...

@paulrbrennan: "I cannot claim to comprehend the suffering I have caused. If I were to try to comprehend the suffering I have caused, I wouldn't

@paulrbrennan: "...have been able to sit here today, or even to *live* after July 22nd."

@paulrbrennan: lawyer: how can you say that, but you cried when you saw your own film the other day (in court)...?

@paulrbrennan: says "What I love is not the same thing you love."

@helenpidd: Breivik asked to describe Norwegian culture he wants to protect: "It's everything in Norway ranging from door handles, patterns, beer..."

@helenpidd: "...The way we speak, act... school disciple, politeness, the way we address each other." (Breivik's idea of what is Norwegian culture)

@paulrbrennan: is being asked about journalists, and the fact he groups all together, but he differentiates between politicians. why so?

@paulrbrennan: says he differentiates between news and sports journalists....

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik is asked how he found out that 44 of his victims held leadership positions. #Breivik: "my assumption was that more than half would"

@paulrbrennan: After lunch, #Breivik will be asked more about the 'categories of traitors' which he outlined yesterday.

@paulrbrennan: MT @mmayson: Are you aware it's Hitlers birthday today? Is that why #Breivik is dressed completely in black? Mike << I wasn't aware. Maybe.

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik says he's a third generation militant nationalist. Says he tried essays on internet, debate, "absolutely everything."

@helenpidd: Breivik: violence was last resort: previously tried "everything that was possible through peaceful means until I lost my faith in democracy"

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik now to be asked about Cat A-B-C traitors.

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik is being shown an image of the badge he photoshopped onto his uniform: "Marxist Hunter: Valid for Cat A,B,C only"

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik is told that about half of those he killed were less than 18 years old. #Breivik says he assumed they were older.

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik psychiatrist asks him why he thinks they are lying. #Breivik "That is a good question, maybe you can tell me...?"

@helenpidd: Breivik tells psychiatrists that his meditation dulls all emotions - "from happiness to sorrow, despair, hopelessness, anxiety, fear"

@TrygveSorvaag: Prosecutor takes over and moves over to Utøya.

@TrygveSorvaag: #Breivik asks people to leave the room if they do not want to listen to this.

[Much twittering conveying Breivik's recounting of the attack omitted.]

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik looked at his notes for a second there. Says he shouted "You are going to die today, Marxists!" at the tent site.

[More twittering conveying Breivik's recounting of the attack omitted.]

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik says when he reached Lovers' Path again he heard a helicopter in the trees above. Thought police must now be on island.

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik: "And I thought, do I really want to survive this? I will be the most hated man in Norway. And I looked over and saw my Glock..."

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik: "...and I thought about shooting myself in the head." Says he remembered his compendium and the plan to face judicial process.

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik: remembers helicopter was very close, and wondered why, because new police had thermal cameras and didn't need to be so close.

@paulrbrennan: #Breivik: said he thought 'my mission is over', had no intention of firing on the police because they are not the enemy.

The journalists covering the story are the enemy however. Here they are fretting about how twitting makes it harder to spin the proceedings their way.

Reporting the Anders Behring Breivik trial | Online Journalism Features | Journalism.co.uk:

As the court's live TV feed is subjected to a ban on broadcasting any of Breivik's, or his victims', testimonies, many people across the globe are likely to choose to follow the Twitter feeds of journalists inside the court room for updates.

But free speech blogger Daniel Bennett told Journalism.co.uk he believes substituting reporting Breivik for tweeting his quotes leads to coverage fraught with problems. He also blogged about the issue for Index on Censorship.

"The problem for live-tweeting journalists is that it is hard to do any more than simply relay what Breivik is saying," Bennett said.

"Live-tweeting is a time consuming exercise and it is difficult to consistently provide background information, context and challenge Breivik's unsavoury evidence."

He added that the "natural news instinct" is to repeat Breivik's "most shocking" comments, "potentially causing additional suffering or inspiring extreme right-wing nationalists."

As Bennett flagged up in his Index blog post, Guardian reporter Helen Pidd, tweeted on Tuesday: "Heading to Oslo today for the Breivik trial. Should I live-tweet proceedings? I'm thinking not. Loath to give Breivik the platform he craves".

And she went on to discuss the ethics of live-tweeting the trial with her followers and colleagues.

"@pollycurtis Well, I think with a report you have context. With tweets I'd feel I was publicising his warped soundbites without criticism."

Twitter users who replied to Pidd's comments were divided over whether she was justified in this self-censorship. However, Pidd disclosed that her colleagues at the Guardian had agreed that it was "not morally wrong to live tweet the trial" and went on to tweet the proceedings in its minutiae.

Bennett believes that the only way to overcome the ethical issues surrounding live-tweeting is incorporating the tweets into liveblogs, and longer articles where there is more space for additional analysis.

"But even then", he says, "there is a difficult balance to be struck between accurate reporting and providing a platform for an abhorrent ideology which led to the killing of 77 Norwegians."

Breivik Trial Begins

Norway mass killer deemed sane in new finding, Reuters, 10 April 2012:

"We're talking about psychosis, and we have found no evidence of it," psychiatrist Asgar Aspaas told reporters after submitting the 310-page report based on weeks of round-the-clock observation.

Aspaas was one of two experts appointed to provide a second opinion after a previous team using different methods found Breivik to be a psychotic who also suffered from paranoid schizophrenia. The initial finding caused a public uproar.

"It's a completely open question now," said Jo Martin Stigen, a University of Oslo law professor. "I don't think we can rule out that he will be considered legally sane in the end."

The dueling psychiatric teams are expected to defend their diagnoses in court, which is unusual in Norway. The final ruling will be made by a five-judge panel as part of its verdict at the end of the trial.

SATISFIED

Defense attorney Geir Lippestad told reporters Breivik was satisfied by the new report and that Norwegians should brace themselves for "tough and demanding" testimony by the killer who espouses far-right ideology.

"Not only will he explain (his actions), but he will also say he regrets that he didn't go further," Lippestad said.

"The background for the killings are his paranoid psychotic delusions that he is a participant in a civil war where he is responsible for deciding who lives and dies," the first report said. "His mission is to save the entire western world's culture and genes."

In a letter last week to news media, Breivik called the initial finding of psychosis a "humiliation" and said the experts seemed too traumatized by the killings to be objective.

Norway killer admits massacre, claims self-defense:

"I don't recognize Norwegian courts because you get your mandate from the Norwegian political parties who support multiculturalism," Breivik said in his first comments to the court.

"I admit to the acts, but not criminal guilt," he told the court, insisting he had acted in self-defense.

The key issue to be resolved during the 10-week trial is the state of Breivik's mental health, which will decide whether he is sent to prison or into psychiatric care. Anxious to prove he is not insane, Breivik will call right-wing extremists and radical Islamists to testify during the trial, to show that others also share his view of clashing civilizations.

Breivik also announced he doesn't recognize the authority of Judge Wenche Elisabeth Arntzen, because he said she is friends with the sister of former Norwegian Prime Minister and Labor Party leader Gro Harlem Brundtland.

The anti-Muslim militant described himself as a writer, currently working from prison, when asked by the judge for his employment status.

He claims he targeted the government headquarters in Oslo and the youth camp to strike against the left-leaning political forces he blames for allowing immigration in Norway.

Breivik wants to be judged as a sane person and will call radical Islamists, and extremists on the right and left to testify to support "his perception that there is a war going on in Europe," his defense lawyer, Geir Lippestad, told the court. Lippestad said Breivik wants to read a new document he's written at the start of his testimony on Tuesday.

While Norway has a legal principle of preventive self-defense, that doesn't apply to Breivik's case, said Jarl Borgvin Doerre, a legal expert who has written a book on the concept. "It is obvious that it has nothing to do with preventive self-defense," Doerre told The Associated Press.

Police sealed off the streets around the Oslo court building, where journalists, survivors and relatives of victims watched the proceedings Monday in a 200-seat courtroom built specifically for this trial.

Thick glass partitions were put up to separate the defendant from victims and their families, many of whom are worried that Breivik will use the trial to promote his extremist political ideology. In a manifesto he published online before the attacks, Breivik wrote that "patriotic resistance fighters" should use trials "as a platform to further our cause."

After he surrendered, Breivik had told investigators he is a resistance fighter in a far-right militant group modeled after the Knights Templar — a Western Christian order that fought during the crusades. Police, however, have found no trace of any organization and say he acted alone.

"In our opinion, such a network does not exist," prosecutor Svein Holden told the court on Monday.

In his manifesto, Breivik described the supposed group's initiation rites, oaths and the "clenched fist salute" that he used in court, symbolizing "strength, honor and defiance against the Marxist tyrants of Europe."

Norway killer admits massacre | Photo Gallery - Yahoo! News

Breivik may indeed suffer "paranoid psychotic delusions", especially concerning the organization he purports to represent. That doesn't mean Norway's indigenous population, and for that matter European populations all over the world, don't face demographic swamping, displacement and dispossession by alien immigrants, muslim and otherwise. Whites who speak out against any of this, never mind resort to violence, are demonized and pathologized just the same.

Speaking of delusions... According to multicultists their genocidal anti-White agenda is both a good thing, something we should all celebrate, and it's not happening, it's just a "psychotic delusion" that only exists in the minds of White "racists". I think they're just lying.

UPDATE 17 April 2012: Excerpts from Breivik’s statement in court April 17, 2012 « Attack On The Labor Party (based on a Google Translate of http://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/22-juli/rettssaken/artikkel.php?artid=10065238):

A couple of questions that might be most important in our time and that all journalists, academics and politicians should ask about is the following:

Do you think it is undemocratic that the Norwegian people have never been asked through a referendum that was made into a multicultural state?

Is it democratic to do it without asking people about the law?

The second question is the following:

Do you think it is undemocratic that Norway welcomes as many African and Asian immigrants that they risk being made a minority in their own capital?

And then someone will say: No, there is no problem because there are free elections.

But then the next question: Do you believe that free choice is enough, and that the press has an obligation to communicate this to people? When the Norwegians, and Europeans have been displaced steering wheel, among other journalists.

That they will lose their culture, their land and traditions and Christianity. Many have seen on several occasions in Europe that (…) Our opinions are seen as inferior and we are seen as second-class citizens.

As it is now, there is no real democracy in Norway and Europe in the Marxist elite decide. The boycott democracy when they feel like it.

I’ll take an example from Austria a few years ago.
We can not allow a nationalist and cultural radical party takes power because their party is intolerant and inhumane.
National and international news agencies put much pressure on Austria, and called them racists and Nazis.

And the same happened when the Swiss voted against the conditions (…) Again, they spoke of them as intolerant and inhumane.

The same is happening now in Hungary, where the nationalist alliance is a victim of the same. (…) By calling them fascists and intolerant.

Swedish news agencies continue to do the same against Sweden Democrats and the Norwegian media has done the same for 20 years against the Progress Party. Here, too, boycotting the democracy and tries to push the Norwegians and Swedes by calling them racists, cruel and intolerant.

Norwegian and European politicians and journalists should ask themselves this question:

Have the Norwegian press ever driven campaign journalism against the Progress Party before the election? The answer is yes, they have been running a smear campaign against the Progress Party for 20 years and will continue to do so, and the same is in progress throughout Europe.

Norway can be called a democracy for 100 percent of the news agencies supporting multiculturalism and systematic censoring of individuals that support ethnic and cultural protectionism?

The answer is no. Norway can not be called a democracy as long as this systematic censorship is taking place.

More and more kulturkonsevartive realize that the democratic struggle is no point. It is not possible to win when there is no real freedom of speech. When more realize this in the coming decades is a short trip to the weapon.

When a peaceful revolution impossible done, a violent revolution, the only possibility.

All those who advocate multiculturalism and kulturmarxisme should expect to be liable in the future.
It is not difficult to foresee when Europe is controlled by multiculturalists. It is the price we pay.

You try to save your people, when the majority chooses propaganda and say that you are a murderer and terrorist. All this we know in advance, so we do not complain. I wrote in the compendium before the surgery that I would be demonized.

To die as a martyr for his people’s survival is the greatest honor in a man’s life.

This is not only our right but our duty. Knowing that I will not scare imprisoned. I was born in a prison and has lived all his life in a prison, where there has been freedom of speech.

A prison where there is no freedom of speech and where I have been forced to look at, but my ethnicity is being deconstructed by kulturmarxister.

In this prison are not allowed to resist, and it is even expected that I should applaud my people.

In this prison management has decided that if you criticize it is not that good.

Demonized ridiculed. This prison is called Norway. It does not matter if I’m locked in Skøyen or Ila.

This is as urgent matter where you live in Norway, because you’re sitting there with a certainty that the country will eventually be deconstructed to the multicultural hell we call Oslo.

And you sit there with the knowledge that democratic struggle is useless because it is controlled with the use of undemocratic methods. The latest report from Statistics Norway show that immigrants will be in the majority in 2040 is very misleading.

It tells very little about the relationship between ethnic Norwegians and non-Norwegian. The reason the report is worthless is that they have deliberately omitted a number of other immigrant groups.

They have also dropped 3 generation immigrants, illegal immigrants and children where one parent is from another non-Nordic area.

The report was commissioned from the multiculturalists, where they try to hide the fact that ethnic Norwegians will be a minority in Oslo in a few years.

This is going to happen. In addition, statistics from the (…) that 47 percent are born to Norwegian sykeshus non-ethnic Norwegian.

It is today’s Oslo and Oslo in 28 years. SSB should be renamed the Labour Party sentralbyrå.

Many have claimed that ultra-nationalists like me want to build a terrorist regime. It is a mistake. I support the Japanese and South Korean model.

Nothing more, nothing less. Is really Japan and South Korea as terrible regimes?

No, they are not. They are high-tech nations. And saying no to multiculturalism and mass immigration in the 70s. They are living besviser that no to mass immigration is successful.

Discipline, æreskodekser and the pride of their own heritage is essential in Japan and South Korea. Women have a secondary role in the workplace. It is therefore absolutely wrong that people like me would like to introduce a vicious terrorist regime.

Today’s most successful nations are Japan and South Korea, which has used ethnic protectionism.

This model is currently the most perfect of all political models. In Europe, the alliance between Marxists and liberals after World War II, in principle, destroyed Europe.

Ethnic Norwegians, and Europeans have been subjected to cruel acts, since our doors opened for immigration in the 60 – and 70-century.

Since Norwegian and European multiculturalists opened to immigration has poured in about 30 million Muslims into Europe. More than 90,000 of my Norwegian sisters have been raped since 1960 until today.

Against the people’s will. It is primarily Labor held responsible for my brothers and sisters.

More that these have been gang raped. More than 300,000 have been physically and mentally harassed, been beaten and robbed by Muslims since 1950 and 60

Several have committed suicide as a result of these atrocities. Hundreds of Norwegians have been killed by Muslims in recent years, including Martine was killed and raped by a Muslim in England.

All these atrocities are crimes against the Norwegian people and it is the Norwegian Labour Party including the AUF that are responsible for this because they’ve invited them here and continue to invite them here.

As a result, we see that ethnic Norwegians.

(If interrupted by the judge asking him to come to a conclusion)

Sitting Bull is and was a hero who was feireret of America’s indigenous peoples. He fought on behalf of his people against General Custer.

Crazy Horse and Chief Galen were other military leaders of the American indigenous people. Were they terrorists, or were they heroes?

Were they evil or were they heroes?

American history books describe them as heroes, not terrorists. Meanwhile, nationalists in Europe are described as terrorists.

Is not that hypocritical and very racist? An individual or group that fights against foreign colonization is not terrorists as history illustrates.

We are no more terrorists against the native Britons who fought against those who fasciliterte the Roman invasion. Norway has an indigenous population. Are Norway’s indigenous ethnic Norwegians?

Did the indigenous people lived here over the past 12,000 years?

The answer is yes, Norway has an indigenous and ethnic Norwegians are Norway’s indigenous people.

There is no difference between the battle being fought in the Soviet and autonomy in Bolivia, and between struggle for us who are fighting for nationalism in Europe.

In 2009, Parliament decided that the indigenous people in Bolivia should have autonomy if they wanted this. There is no difference between the Norwegian people and the Bolivian indigenous people.

Why be treated Nordic and European indigenous worse than other indigenous peoples. Why is the Norwegian Indigenous activists branded as rasisier and Nazis, while indigenous activists in other parts of the world will support and acceptance?

It is extremely unfair and it is unacceptable. Our ancestors have lived in this country for 12,000 years and we, as Norway’s indigenous people, do not accept that our country is colonized against our will.

We like all other indigenous peoples have special rights in this country, and this is something we will continue to fight for. I know that the information that I represent are difficult to understand. When one is taught to believe otherwise.

It is difficult to fight against the multi-cultural flow when the media pumps out to multicultural propaganda all the time.

Thomas Jefferson said: “Tree of Liberty must be watered from time to time with the blood of tyrants.” When national governments are destructive, the people have the right to abolish them.

It is their duty to overthrow such a government. And then to establish new guards for their future security.

It is 100 percent certain is that there is a war between nationalists and internationalists in Europe. We, the first militant nationalists, the first drops of water that realizes that there will be a big storm.

There will be a gradual escalation and polarization in society and we will see further attacks. The multukuluraismenn government is forced to fight an imagined against us on one side and militant islamsisker on the other side.

My European nationalist brothers and sisters will prevail, which will declare the end of a venstreekstremt board that has lasted since the Axis powers fall.

His conclusion:

Multiculturalism is an anti-Norwegian and European anti hatideologi. Multiculturalism is an evil ideology that pushed forward.

We, the indigenous people of Norway, is now in a situation where we are losing our capital and cities. We are about 5-10 years a minority in their own capital.

The political elites in countries stretcher is so brazen that they expect us to applaud deconstruction. And those who did not applaud, are branded as evil racists and Nazis.

This is what is the real madness – they should be subject carried a psychiatric evaluation and labeled as sick, not me.

But the Labour Party’s parliamentary group and all other social democrats in Europe. And why is this the real madness?

This is the real madness because it is not rational to work to deconstruct his own group, their culture, their own religion.

It is not rational to flood his country with the Africans and Asians, so that our culture is lost. This is the real madness. This is the real evil. The universal menneskerettightene allows for the ethnic Norwegians have the right to defense.

Responsible Norwegians and Europeans who feel morally obliged to not see that Norwegians are made to a minority in their own country.
They’re not going to see that we are made to the minority in their own country, we will fight against multiculturalism in the Labour Party and others working towards the same goal.

The attacks were preventatives attacks in defense of the Norwegian culture and my people. I acted with the principle of necessity on behalf of my people, my religion, my ethnicity, my city and my country.

I therefore demand that I be acquitted of these charges.

IREHR: Human Rights is Anti-White

Institute for Research and Education on Human Rights

The About link points to A New Statement by a Renewed Organization for New Times, by Leonard Zeskind:

The white nationalist movement consists of an ever-shifting array of organizations, publishing houses, think tanks, websites and individuals with an interlocking leadership and cross-pollinating memberships. Two relatively distinct trends exist in the movement: a mainstreaming wing that hopes to build a political majority among white people, and a vanguardist wing comprised of hard-core cadres with a more violence-prone tendency. Both movement wings aim at establishing a whites-only political, cultural, and social dominance over the United States. The long-term goal of the most significant sector of the movement is the creation of an Aryans-only nation-state, separate from the rest of the country.

The influence of the white nationalist movement has far exceeded its size. In the post-Jim Crow years, it has re-articulated racism and white supremacy in American life, and turned them into an ideology of white dispossession. The expected loss of majority status by white people, projected by the Census Bureau to occur around mid-century, has animated this idea. One immediate outcome has been that the public discourse about affirmative action has been dominated by notions that white people are the new "victims." Talk of discrimination quickly turns to charges of "reverse racism" and "special rights" for "minorities." More, white nationalists years ago cut the turf for the anti-immigrant sentiment that has swelled behind it. In the United States, anti-Semitism exists in its most congealed form in the Jewish conspiracy theories that white nationalists have propagated; and the notion of Holocaust denial would barely exist at all if white nationalists had not turned it into their movement's calling card.

The so-called Christian right, paleo-conservatism, and other far-right movements exist in a symbiotic relationship with nativism and white nationalism; and ideas and people flow between these movements, sometimes creating a whole that is bigger than its parts. In the current period, during the first months of the Obama administration, white nationalists have grown stronger in a milieu of racist and nationalist opposition to the status quo.

The combined experience of the Institute for Research & Education on Human Rights’ board members represents nearly a century of direct experience countering racism, anti-Semitism, white supremacy and white nationalist movements.

Individually and together, we have investigated the smallest corners of white nationalist activity, in the process building one of the largest research archives on white nationalism in country. We’ve also helped conceptualize the broadest band of understanding of the problems at hand. We have written extensively on these issues for publications in the United States and Europe. And we have helped build trans-Atlantic relationships to trace and disable the international designs of white nationalists.

We have organized to protect Native Indian sovereignty rights in the Northwest, fought Klan groups in the Southeast, and helped build a family farmer's movement that opposed anti-Semitism and the Posse Comitatus in the Midwest. We organized a broad-based opposition to the militia. We initiated peer-based responses to the white power music scene and were the first to point out the white nationalist origins of the anti-immigrant movement.

IREHR brings both a long-term perspective and a short-term urgency to our work. We aim to continue examining racist, anti-Semitic, and far right social movements, analyzing their intersection with civil society and social policy, and to educate the public and assist in the protection and extension of human rights through organization and informed mobilization.

Judeo-liberal "human rights" rhetoric doesn't get much more blatantly anti-White than this. What's more, this is plainly driven by a deep and overriding concern for the best interests of jews.

Self-righteous anti-Whites like Zeskind regularly remind us that jews aren't White. Jews think of and portray themselves as innocent victims with Whites as their evil victimizers. They aren't us, and they aren't interested in sharing a "civil society" with us. In their minds we have a duty to provide them a "civil society", abandoning or subordinating our own best interests while they freely pursue theirs.

Open Thread on Trayvon, Zimmerman, Derbyshire, Weissberg, ...

Here's an older article by self-righteous black pundit Leonard Pitts spouting the jewish narrative about "White privilege". Surreal, especially in light of John Derbyshire's subsequent crucifixion.

Commentary: Race and privilege must be considered in Trayvon Martin's death:

The long reason begins with an understanding that the word in question — race — is a term both meaningful and yet, profoundly meaningless. It is meaningful in the sense that it provides a tool for tribalism and a means by which to organize our biases, fears, observations, social challenges and sundry cultural products. It is meaningless in the sense that, well . . . it has no meaning, that there exists no definition of “black” or “white” that carries any degree of scientific precision.

We are taught to believe the opposite, that “black” and “white” are self-evident and immutable. But I invite you to look up Walter White, the blond, blue-eyed “Negro” who once led the NAACP, or Gregory Howard Williams, the university president who didn’t even know he was black until he was 10 years old. Dig up the old Jet magazine story about a woman who gave birth to twins — one “black,” one “white.” And then think again. Race is a fraud, a cruel and stupid fraud.

The people who came here from Europe did not automatically consider themselves “white.” They identified as Irish, Hungarian, Italian, Jewish, Armenian. As David R. Roediger observes in his book, Working Toward Whiteness: How America’s Immigrants Became White, they were emphatically taught that “white” was the identity that conferred status and privilege and that it was defined by distance from, and antipathy toward, black. They were advised to avoid being friendly with blacks or else put their whiteness at risk.

Nor did Africans kidnapped into slavery think of themselves as “black.” They were Mandinkan, Fulani, Mende, Songhay, Wolof. “Black” was something imposed upon them as justification for slavery and other means of exploitation. As one historian puts it: Africans did not become slaves because they were black. They became black because they were enslaved.

Well into the 20th century, America recognized dozens of “races.” In that America, people we now regard as white — the Irishman, Conan O’Brien; the Armenian, Andre Agassi; the Jew, Jerry Seinfeld — could not have taken for granted that they would be seen that way. People like this had to become white, had to earn whiteness, a feat African Americans have found impossible to duplicate, no matter how many harsh chemicals they use on their hair and skin.

White, then, is not simply color, but privilege — not necessarily in the sense of wealth, but rather in the sense of having one’s personhood and individuality respected, a privilege so basic I doubt it registers with many whites as privilege at all. We’re talking about the privilege of being seen, of having your worth presumed, of receiving the benefit of the doubt and some human compassion, of being treated as if you matter.

Consider that, then consider the fair-skinned Hispanic man, George Zimmerman, who evidently stalked and killed an unarmed kid he wrongly thought was up to no good, yet was not arrested, nor even initially investigated. He said it was self-defense. Police took him at his word and sent him on his way.

Folks, that’s not just white. It’s blinding.

Greg Johnson: Our Fault?

In Our Fault?, Greg Johnson groks the suicide meme:

Most of the time, the claim that white dispossession is “our fault” really means one thing: that it is not the fault of the organized Jewish community. The primary purpose of blaming whites is merely to avoid blaming Jews.

He takes the next logical step, addressing those who would defend Whites rather than blame them:

But once one knows understands one’s mistakes and learns how to avoid them in the future, there is no point in dwelling on the past. Our goal as White Nationalists should be to bear no further culpability for our ongoing genocide. And the way to do that is: (1) to understand the problem to its roots, (2) to reject all the causes of our predicament, and (3) to actively work for our race’s salvation. Until you do that, you remain part of the problem.

The cost attached to any such understanding is one of the many forces discouraging Whites from from accepting it. Far easier, at least for the time being, to continue in willful blindness, or even by pretending you can join the Other in their multicult paradise. The genocidal anti-White nature of the regime will make itself increasingly difficult for Whites to simply wish otherwise.

How Whites Took Over America

How whites took over America (This link fast-forwards to where the argument begins.)

This video was perhaps inspired by the cartoon discussed in Anti-White Rationalizations at Reddit. It's the same idea: Apply anti-"racist" rhetoric to non-Whites. The resulting cognitive dissonance and gnashing of teeth highlights the disturbing reality that anti-"racism" is anti-White.

I don't find the underlying subject at all amusing, but I have to admit that I chuckled quite a few times at Horus' pitch-perfect delivery of arrogant, mendacious, judeo-liberal moralizing.

Jews Claim Responsibility for Occupy Movement

Filmmaker’s Son Takes Occupy to the Internet, by Marc Tracy, Tablet Magazine:

Pierre Sauvage, whom literary editor David Samuels interviewed for Tablet Magazine, makes documentaries such as Weapons of the Spirit and Not Idly By, about people who saved Jews during the Holocaust. While his son David would never claim to have the equivalent subject, he argued that Occupy.com, the Website he founded which launched today, as well as the larger message of Occupy Wall Street are consonant with his father’s themes.

“His running theme in life is people who save people in crisis,” Sauvage told me. “The evil in his movies is never the Nazis, it’s always the people who stood ‘idly by’—who let it happen. The real evil guys are almost not the point.”

He added that the point of Occupy is to turn the system’s bystanders into activists. “Occupy Wall Street,” he explained, “is a bunch of people saying, ‘We’re not going to stand by anymore.’ There’s a whole host of systemic injustices that people have been letting stand by for years.”

Occupy.com aims to be ground zero for Internet media—words, photographs, videos, music, even games—for the Occupy movement as it aims a spring rebirth, most notably perhaps with the general strike called for May 1. It is not a “working group,” not officially sanctioned via general assembly and consensus and the other arcane procedures by which OWS is governed; it is calling itself an “affinity group.” “As editors, we’re just giving a place where all the content that’s being produced will be curated, and putting it up there,” said Michael Levitin, a veteran of the Occupy Wall Street Journal.

Levitin also noted that most of Occupy.com’s staffers, including himself and Sauvage, are Jewish. Even the site’s prime funder, whose name was not given, is apparently a left-leaning, Jewish philanthropist.

Sauvage’s trajectory feels typical of many young people who got involved in the Occupy movement. Grew up in L.A.; majored in English at Columbia; wrote and directed some plays; worked in television; went to business school (the founder of Occupy.com has an MBA!); made a well-received documentary short. Two friends (who, he noted, knowing his audience, also happen to be Jewish) took him down to Zuccotti Park, and he was hooked.

Jewish moralizing in action. Note how skillfully the particularist jewish interests are wrapped up in and justified by universalist-sounding rhetoric. Unwrapped, the message isn't just at all.

Jewish holocaust propaganda is aimed at guilt-tripping non-jews who don't actively put jewish interests before their own. The theme of Occupy's ringleader jews is consonant with this, and they deem the Occupy movement, or leading it at least, to be in the best interests of the jews. Standing idly by, not doing what jews want you to do when and how they want you to do it is, to a jewish mind, the very definition of evil.

[The image above comes from an article written and published by jews whose main concern is that Occupy is bad for the jews.]