Monday, May 27, 2013
Saturday, May 25, 2013
Sweden is Burning
Faced by another night of terror at the hands of predominantly immigrant rioters, Swedes grown tired of the police’s inability to put an end to the unrest took to the streets Friday night to defend their neighborhoods.
In the Stockholm suburb of Tumba the police decided to abandon their earlier non-intervention policy as a large group of police officers rounded up and dispersed a group of vigilantes trying to fend off rioters.
The decision to round up vigilantes while, according to Stockholm Chief of Police Mats Löfving, ”doing as little as possible” to stop rioters, met with a wave of protests in various social media and on the Internet. Representatives of some vigilante groups contacted Fria Tider to give their view of last night’s events.
– The number of police officers on the streets is simply staggering. The police appear to have focused all their resources on stopping the Swedes, Fredrik Becklin, spokesman for the nationalist youth organization Nordisk Ungdom (Nordic Youth), said Friday night.
– It makes me sick to see the police clamp down on us Swedes with full force and without warning, using nightsticks and tear gas, while they don’t do a damn thing about the immigrants. We are only trying to help maintain order, while the immigrants set cars and buildings on fire, said a young man who wished to remain anonymous.
Western jewsmedia accounts are more or less biased against the Swedes and in favor of the aliens - blaming Swedes for being too unwelcoming and unaccomodating to the poor, victimized aliens who are only violent because they want a better life for themselves and their needy families. In contrast this Fria Tider report comes across as almost fair, giving voice to Swedes who are justifiably sickened by a government which won't actively defend the Swedes from aliens but will actively defend aliens from the Swedes.
Here are two Swedish nationalist sources (via /new/) run through Bing translator:
Note also The Jewish origins of multiculturalism in Sweden, at The Occidental Observer.
The alien interlopers don't belong in Sweden. Sweden is for the Swedes.
Thursday, May 23, 2013
Biden on Jewish Influence
Speaking on Tuesday night at a Jewish American Heritage Month reception hosted by the Democratic National Committee, Vice President Joe Biden claimed that jews, as a group:
- have "outsized influence", that this "influence is immense", but that jews "vastly underestimate the impact you’ve had on the development of this nation"
- "make up 11 percent of the seats in the United States Congress"
- have used media to alter public opinion
- have promoted immigration, civil rights, feminism and gay marriage
Hyper-jew Jonathan Chait immediately expressed his concern that such open and accurate acknowledgement of jewish power is not good for the jews. Biden Praises Jews, Goes Too Far, Accidentally Thrills Anti-Semites:
Biden indeed offered fulsome, heartfelt praise in his remarks, before wandering into highly uncomfortable terrain and delivering a speech that is likely to be quoted by anti-Semites for years and decades to come. (It’s already the subject of excited discussion among the white supremacist community.)
Biden’s remarks were not anti-Semitic. They were very, very philo-Semitic.
As the jews say, a "philo-semite" is just an "anti-semite" who doesn't know it yet.
It’s obviously true that Jews have flourished in the United States and, as Biden says, have achieved massively disproportionate representation in fields like science, culture, politics, academia, and so on.
Jews regard this fact with a mixture of pride and neurosis. The neurosis is a fear that our success will be seen as a kind of invidious control, that the broader society will at some point say, no, you have too much.
Like Biden, Chait omits finance, academia and law, in effect downplaying the extent as well as the disproportion of jewish influence.
Jews don't fear success. Jews fear being treated the way jews treat Whites.
It’s also true that, while Jewish opinions run the ideological gamut, they have clustered heavily on the left end of the political spectrum. When you combine that fact with the fact of disproportionate Jewish representation in politics and culture, you have a weirdly shared belief among philo-Semites and anti-Semites.
Chait dismisses these facts by first acknowledging they are true, then implying that believing them is weird.
Biden’s intentions here are obviously as friendly as can be, but the execution is awkward. The civil rights movement today is so widely sanctified that mentioning the disproportionate Jewish role in it is in the same category as mentioning Einstein, Jonas Salk, and so on — look at all these wonderful things the Jews have helped bring us.
Awkward for jews. The hallmark of jewish power is the pretense that it doesn't exist. The jews rule, but without public acknowledgement, much less consent. Jews know this and fear what will happen if it becomes more broadly known.
The main problem here is that gay rights, unlike black civil rights, are politically controversial at the moment. Biden may find it “all to the good” that Jews have used their influence over popular culture to change societal attitudes toward homosexuality, but lots of people don’t find it good at all.
The main problem here depends entirely upon your point of view. What the jews find good for themselves is not necessarily good for anyone else. For Whites, for example, the main problem here is the relentless animus jews have for Whites.
Thursday, May 16, 2013
Peekaboo, Another Jew
Venezuela's 'anti-Semitic' leader admits Jewish ancestry, The Times of Israel, 13 May 2013:
In an interesting twist, [Nicolás] Maduro, the political successor of the late president Hugo Chávez, told the press last week that he himself was descended from Sephardic Jewish ancestors.
“My grandparents were Jewish, from a [Sephardic] Moorish background, and converted to Catholicism in Venezuela… The mother of [Minister of Communication and Information] Ernesto Villegas also comes from a similar background,” Maduro said last week
Yet, he said, “if there is a people that has a rich socialist tradition, it’s the Jewish people… We respect their history.”
He said the people who hated and killed Jews during the Holocaust were members of the far-right who built on the ideas of Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler, and not supporters of the ideals advocated by the Russian communist leader Vladimir Lenin.
“Karl Marx was a Jew,” he noted.
In casting left/right attitudes as pro-jew/anti-jew Maduro argues not only that jews matter, but that he identifies with them as a people, both biologically and ideologically, seeing himself on their side not only by heritage but in his view of history and politics as well.
The article is vague on this point but Maduro's grandparents, like others of "similar background", would most likely be descended from jews who last openly practiced judaism at least 500 years ago. After "converting" such crypto-jews somehow miraculously managed to identify a mate and raise a family with "similar background" through 25 or so generations.
The History of the Crypto-Jews/Hispanic Sephardi conveys the usual jewish explanation for this remarkable phenomenon:
The experience of the Crypto Jews in the Western Hemisphere was a litany of suffering, continual fear, social, political, professional, and religious suppression and murder. As late as the 1850s the Inquisition was finally officially ended in Mexico, and elsewhere a little sooner; however, overt discrimination and random incidents of lynching and murder continued until well into the 1950s in what we now call "Latin America".
The final result of approximately one thousand years of persecution and murder of the Spanish and Portuguese Jews (minus the three hundred years of the "Golden Age") caused many families who immigrated to the New World to become Crypto Jewish, while living their public lives as Catholics. In the Americas, some of the Crypto Jews reverted back to being openly Jewish, only to find a few years later that the Inquisition had followed them to their new homes, and they were forced to go back into hiding again. All of these people, the "Conversos" or "New Christians", were forced to submit to Catholicism, thus in Hebrew they are referred to as the "Anusim" or "those who were forced."
It has been approximately fifteen-hundred years since the emergence of Crypto Jews in the Iberian Peninsula, and five-hundred years since Crypto Judaism moved to the Americas. Today we find a large Crypto Jewish presence throughout the Western Hemisphere. No one knows for sure how many there really are, however in Brazil alone an estimated 10 to 25% of the total population are Crypto Jews, which translates to 15 to 40 million people.
While not all people of Crypto Jewish lineage are prepared at this time to accept the challenge to return to living a fully Jewish life, there are thousands, if not millions who are hungry to learn and to reconnect with G-d as Jews.
Three things to note here.
Jewishness has more to do with genetic lineage and an awareness of oneself, furtively or not, as a jew. Religion ranks somewhere below both.
The jewish version of history is a one-sided "litany of suffering, continual fear, social, political, professional, and religious suppression and murder" of jews. According to jews, whatever mischief jews get up to the Other gets the blame for it all, including even for jews disguising themselves.
The period jews regard as their "Golden Age" occurred during the Moorish/muslim occupation of Spain. From the perspective of jews, however bad muslims have been, European Christians have always been worse.
Monday, May 13, 2013
Talking with Tom Metzger
working-class white racist separatist
anti-capitalist anti-communist leftist white non-Jew socialist
Please join us at the White network.
Wednesday, May 08, 2013
Segan and O'Hehir's Big Damning White Problems
Does anyone who isn't a white man have Google Glass?
This is starting to get disturbing. Since Google Glass demo units started appearing a few weeks ago, proud Google Glass users have been spewing selfies all over the Internet. And except for the hired help in Google's demo videos, every single Google Glass owner I've heard a word from appears to be a middle-aged white male, usually with some receding hairline action going on there. There's even a Tumblr devoted to the phenomenon.
This is a big problem.
I say this as a middle-aged white man with extremely little hair. Google Glass is just breaking out of the dream stage, and our society is grappling with these wearable items: what they do, how to use them, and how we shouldn't use them. People who aren't white, middle-aged males need to be part of that conversation, but I don't see that happening right now with Glass.
People from non-Western-European-descended, non-male gender and ethnic groups have different perspectives on technology and society that could help shape Google Glass and how it's used.
For Segan Whites are "disturbing", a "big problem". Why? Because he sees Whites as distinct and different from non-Whites - a fact which Segan and PC Magazine willingly acknowledge, at least so long as it serves an argument in favor of non-Whites.
One of the reasons I so love reporting on mobile technology is that it's tremendously egalitarian, and it crosses all gender, ethnic, and class lines. My peer group of mobile tech writers is whiter and maler than America as a whole, but it isn't the complete white-out we're seeing with Google Glass early adopters.
So Segan likes pretending everyone is equal and dislikes when reality confounds his fantasy. His "peer group", however White, either shares his White-abnegating attitude or is unwilling to challenge it.
Google Glass, and wearables in general can change our society. That includes everyone. Being the vanguard of a major new product category, with so many possible societal ripples, makes Glass more important than a typical game or website whose usage naturally skews to one ethnic or gender group.
If the direction of this societal change is being determined entirely by a socially homogenous group of guys (no matter how hard they try), it's going to be a less useful technology for that.
Who is "us"? Who comprises this society of "ours" that Segan thinks "we" should be so worried about? Who is this homogenous group determining the direction of societal change?
The prevailing wisdom of the current anti-White regime is that race is "entirely a social and political construct". Yet somehow Segan is able to judge who is "white" just by looking at faces.
Based on his face - as well as his name and his anti-White attitude - I think Sascha Segan is a jew. I think a large fraction of the men in the Tumblr he links look like jews. I say this as a White man who recognizes that jews are different from Whites.
Even setting aside biological differences, Segan's own line of argument suffices to make the point. Jews have a completely different perspective than Whites do. On the one hand, jews see jews as distinct from Whites, with jews as victims and Whites as their oppressors. On the other hand, Whites see jews as victims and also mistake them for "white". It's no mystery why so many Whites make this mistake. Jews constantly espouse these jewish perspectives at the same time they pathologize and demonize Whites for expressing any kind of White perspective.
In this case the difference between Whites and jews is even more glaring than usual. Segan is specifically blaming "whites" for a phenomena that is in fact even more markedly jewish. Would Segan have written an article about the disturbing big problem that too many Google Glass wearers are jews? Would PC Magazine have published it?
On one hand, the evidence dredged up by an extensive Los Angeles Times investigation into the membership of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences is damning: The Oscars are being decided by 5,765 voting members (itself a smaller number than usually reported) who are 94 percent white.
O'Hehir is another jewish-looking, jewish-sounding anti-White critic. To him an organization being 94 percent White is not only a "problem", it's "damning". Unlike Segan, O'Hehir doesn't even try to explain why. An anti-White attitude is simply taken for granted at Salon.
Now, it’s also true that my reaction to all this diligent legwork by a team of at least seven Times reporters can be summarized with a colloquial phrase that begins with “No” and ends with “Sherlock.” No one who has paid attention to the Oscars or the Academy — or the American film industry at large — harbors any illusions about who’s running the show, or believes that Oscar voters have much in common with Americans or moviegoers at large. Indeed, the borderline-cruel caricature of a typical Oscar voter, often bandied about in private by journalists and publicists, is of a 70-something retired actor, certainly white and probably Jewish, who wears sky-blue slacks and white patent leather shoes and lives in Brentwood or Beverly Hills. That seems to be almost exactly what the Times investigation has revealed.
Whereas Segan ignored jews while he was blaming Whites, O'Hehir actually calls attention to what he's doing. He conflates Whites and jews, while in the same paragraph he acknowledges that he and anyone else who's paying attention can see there's a clear distinction.
For O'Hehir, like Segan, the problem is a certain concentration of "white" faces. How many have to identify positively as White to be a problem? It doesn't matter. The problem is "white".
It’s worth noting, by the way, that the Times pointedly did not inquire into the religious or ethnic affiliations of the Academy’s white members. I can’t deny being curious about the question of how Jewish the Academy is these days, and you might be able to construct a non-offensive argument for why that’s relevant information. But it’s information that ugly people would use for ugly reasons, and you can’t blame the reporters and editors involved for not jabbing a stick into that particular hornets’ nest.
It's worth noting that O'Hehir explictly describes how different jews are from Whites. Counting and calling "whites" a problem is relevant and non-offensive. It's something O'Hehir does and Salon enables. Counting jews, on the other hand, is offensive, irrelevant and ugly. These are two totally different kinds of problem. If they look "white", "white" is the problem. Noticing jews makes them swarm and cause you problems.
One response is to say “so what,” as some people do in the Times piece. The Academy is a private membership organization, which is devoted to burnishing the image of the film industry and has never claimed to represent the public at large. It can give out awards however it wants, and people aren’t required to watch.
Once again, this only highlights the difference between jews and Whites. When someone in the jewsmedia calls out a so-called White problem they don't lose their job. Instead Whites are expected to get busy increasing diversity, which means in effect to make whatever is being criticized less White. Even a passive "so what" is regarded as confirmation of the supposed problem. It's a moot point because there isn't a White left in the jewsmedia who would even dare say "so what", never mind point out that jews aren't White.
In contrast, "so what" is a typically jewish response to a criticism like this, and it is deployed in a decidedly aggressive manner. Regarding Hollywood, for example, Ben Stein and Michael Medved expressed this attitude. Both made the same basic argument: Yes, jews run Hollywood, and if you think that's a problem then you're the problem.
Jews take this hostile attitude toward criticism specifically because they are acutely aware of and attached to their jewishness. They voice their hostility toward Whites specifically because they don't identify as White. This is a problem for Whites.