Blog has moved, searching new blog...

Saturday, December 22, 2012

Jews Veto Hagel

Chuck Hagel may be off of Obama’s shortlist to head DOD, by Adam Kredo, Washington Free Beacon, 19 Dec 2012:

Hagel immediately drew a frosty reception from observers who criticized him for advocating in favor of direct unconditional talks with Iran and for backing sizable cuts to the defense budget.

Those who have worked with Hagel and have an intimate knowledge of his managerial style also expressed concerns about his possible appointment.

Sources on Capitol Hill told the Free Beacon that opposition to Hagel reaches all the way to the Embassy of Israel, which is said to have quietly expressed concern about the former senator.

“Our office has talked with the Israel embassy who says their policy is to support whatever the president wants in his cabinet and would not provide further comment,” one Senate aide told the Free Beacon. “With a little prodding, our contact at the embassy did allude to their concern for Hagel’s nomination.”

An Israeli embassy spokesman declined comment.

Hagel has drawn additional heat from insiders who claim he lacks the credentials needed to manage a department as large and essential as the Pentagon.

“Yes, Hagel has crazy positions on several key issues. Yes, Hagel has said things that are borderline anti-Semitism. Yes, Hagel wants to gut the Pentagon’s budget. But above all, he’s not a nice person and he’s bad to his staff,” said a senior Republican Senate aide who has close ties to former Hagel staffers.

“Chuck Hagel may have been collegial to his Senate colleagues but he was the Cornhusker wears Prada to his staff, some of whom describe their former boss as perhaps the most paranoid and abusive in the Senate, one who would rifle through staffers desks and berate them for imagined disloyalty,” said Michael Rubin, a former Pentagon adviser on Iran and Iraq. “He might get away with that when it comes to staffers in their 20s, but that sort of personality is going to go over like a ton of bricks at the Pentagon.”

“Chances are he’ll view any legitimate effort to talk about military options with Iran as some plot by the ‘Israel Lobby’ to box him in,” the source said.

Reviewing the objections to Hagel, aside from the inconsequential nonsense, it's plain that the that Israel-firsters, AKA the Israel Lobby, AKA jews, effectively vetoed his nomination. They did so in the characteristically dishonest way jews usually go about exercising their power - a gaggle of jews furiously, publicly debating in markedly jewish terms, with the final verdict being Hagel has magically disqualified himself, because jews don't actually have any power.

In this absurd debate, represented in part by Doug Bandow's Neocons Against Chuck Hagel: The Independent Senator Who Wouldn't Genuflect, we hear what are considered examples of Hagel's "anti-semitism": "I'm a United States senator. I support Israel. But my first interest is I take an oath of office to the Constitution of the United States. Not to a president. Not a party. Not to Israel." Even more scandalous, "The political reality is that ... the Jewish lobby intimidates a lot of people up here."

The political reality is that USGOV officials, even at the very top, cannot say they would put US interests above Israel's, much less actually do so. Beside that, the mythical divide between "liberal" and "neocon" is once more revealed as a lie. In the wake of Obama's re-election the "liberals" are supposedly in power. The "neocons" should be licking their wounds. The political reality is dominated by jews debating the best interests of jews. Whatever the outcome, jews win.

There are copious examples of this farce. Beyond the two articles already cited I'll call attention to two more.

In Nebraska Jews Recall Senator Chuck Hagel as "Unfriendly" and "Unmovable" on Israel, "Didn't Give a Damn About the Jewish Community", published by, 21 Dec 2012, we read:

Former editor of the Omaha Jewish Press, Carol Katzman, who was in that role while Hagel was in office, related her experiences with him in an interview with The Algemeiner.

“He was not the most responsive politician in Nebraska to me personally at the Jewish Press and to the Jewish community as a whole,” she said.

“Every other senator, Nelson, Mike Johanns, (congressman) Lee Terry and (congressman) Peter Hoagland they were all very responsive,” she explained, “it didn’t really matter what their party affiliation was, if we were soliciting them for an interview or a greeting ad for Rosh Hashonah or Passover.” However Katzman says that “Hagel’s office never even responded,” adding, “we would make repeated calls, (and received) no response it was pretty obvious that he and his staff were dismissive.”

To be fair, articles like this weren't part of the debate, which is already over. It does however contain an essential element of the debate, whereby jews lamely try to rationalize their distaste for Hagel and stick him with the blame for it.

In Gil Troy's Hagel: Not An Anti-Semite, Just A Slob, published in the Open Zion section of The Daily Beast on 19 Dec 2012, there is more of the same:

Without rehashing the entire debate, as senator, Hagel was more of an Israel skeptic than an enthusiastic Israel friend, no Ted Kennedy, or John McCain, or Joe Biden, or Hillary Clinton was he. And for that reason, snarky comments about the “Jewish lobby” and about being a “United States Senator” and “not an Israeli Senator” rankle. Prejudice has a pedigree. Just as we winced when Biden as a candidate called Obama “articulate”—because of the twisted history that had many people questioning black people’s brains and eloquence, respectful American leaders should not stir the hornet’s nest around the Israel lobby question.

Here is another characteristic strand of jewish argument, with Troy arrogantly lecturing "leaders" to respect jewish power by pretending it does not exist. He then recounts a lesson about that power from 20 years ago:

I learned from Malcolm Hoenlein that Shoshana Cardin, the President of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, confronted President George H.W. Bush after his dramatic September 1991 press conference, claiming he was “one lonely little guy” facing “powerful political forces,” after 1,200 Israel activists lobbied Congress seeking loan guarantees to help Israel resettle emigrating Soviet Jews. In a private meeting, Cardin explained that talk of Jewish lobbyists out-muscling the president echoed traditionally bigoted exaggerations about Jewish power. Bush pointed out that he “didn’t use the word ‘Jews.’ ” Cardin explained he did not have to. “Everyone understood that the people you were referring to were Jewish. That’s why the White House switchboard lit up with so many messages of support from anti-Semites.”

“I never intended to hurt anyone,” Bush said, teary-eyed, “Or give encouragement to anti-Semitism.” He then apologized to the American Jewish leaders gathered to meet him.

Even US presidents fear jewish power. One way to reconcile the jewish view of this as a "bigoted exaggeration" is to understand that, at least in the minds of hyper-jew-centric jews, US presidents can and should be doing even more for jews. For another example of this, read this bitter jew-centric assessment of Richard Nixon, another president whose failure to openly identify his and his country's enemies hasn't made those enemies hate him any less.

The take-away, once again, is that jewish rhetoric about "anti-semitism" is a simple and effective inversion and projection of their own obsessions and aggression. White political leaders should naturally seek to serve the interests and favor of fellow Whites. But none actually do. Instead what we have is a political reality in which jews relentlessly pathologize and demonize Whites for illusory "White privilege" and ineffective political "dog whistling". Meanwhile jews make ever more blatant and outrageous demands of a regime which already serves their interests first and foremost. Both are sure signs that jewish power not only exists, but is increasing. It will continue to increase until it is faced with real opposition.

Labels: , , ,



Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jewish control of the major media in the media age makes the enforced silence both paradoxical and paralyzing. Survival in public life requires that you know all about it, but never refer to it. A hypocritical etiquette forces us to pretend that the Jews are powerless victims; and if you don’t respect their victimhood, they’ll destroy you. - Joseph Sobran

12/23/2012 09:53:00 AM  
Blogger W.LindsayWheeler said...

You Europeans have left the Leadership of the Roman Catholic Church. Nature abhors a vacuum.

So Now, you will be led by the Church of Satan, the ungodly Jews.

Either you submit to God, or you submit to the Jews. There is no middle ground. No pagan theology will save you. No atheism will save you.

12/23/2012 08:39:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

As with most other institutions created and formerly dominated by Europeans, the Church was long ago infiltrated and subverted by jews. It is now more concerned to serve the interests of anyone but Europeans.

If one finds oneself in a vehicle being driven off a cliff, getting out is one perfectly sensible reaction.

12/23/2012 09:41:00 PM  
Blogger W.LindsayWheeler said...

Yes, I agree with today's Roman Catholic Church.

But the European himself left it before the Church left him. The European in the Protestant and Masonry movements followed the Jews instead of the Church.

"The Church is not defined by the heretics within it but by the Truth". Salvation is still necessary, the Creed is still necessary, the sacraments are still necessary. One must compartmentalize the Faith from the treasonous hierarchy. It is pretty sad to behold the Treason being done by the people of the Church.

12/24/2012 05:09:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

The mistake Europeans have made in "following the jews" preceeds the schisms starting around 1500 AD by about 1500 years. It has much to do with misunderstanding and underestimating the physical, biological distinction of jews from Europeans. This is a problem which Christianity, focused as it is on spirituality and ideology, has for its entire history generally tended to compound.

12/24/2012 11:26:00 AM  
Anonymous ThanksforSharing said...

Genetics and biology don't explain Christian Zionism.

It's all ideology, backstopped by spirituality.

The Church had it right.

12/24/2012 03:07:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

"Genetics and biology don't explain Christian Zionism."

Sure they do. The Biology of the Jewish Problem

Now maybe you can try and explain how ideology drives ants.

12/24/2012 03:21:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

See also What Jews Do: A Biological Analogy Illustrated, section 1:

Parasites are not accustomed to exerting themselves if they can coerce a stand-in. My favourite character in Wilson's The Insect Societies is Monomorium santschii. This species, over evolutionary time, has lost its worker caste altogether. The host workers do everything for their parasites, even the most terrible task of all. At the behest of the invading parasite queen, they actually perform the deed of murdering their own mother. The usurper doesn't need to use her jaws. She uses mind-control. How she does it is a mystery; she probably employs a chemical, for ant nervous systems are generally highly attuned to them. If her weapon is indeed chemical, then it is as insidious a drug as any known to science. For think what it accomplishes. It floods the brain of the worker ant, grabs the reins of her muscles, woos her from deeply ingrained duties and turns her against her own mother. For ants, matricide is an act of special genetic madness and formidable indeed must be the drug that drives them to it. In the world of the extended phenotype, ask not how an animal's behaviour benefits its genes; ask instead whose genes it is benefiting.

12/24/2012 03:32:00 PM  
Anonymous Thanks4Sharing said...

Christ figured out the antivenin and the Church carried it forward. The Mass, with proper Sacraments, and properly carried out, broke the trance.

Tomorrow the Pope could free the White world, if he chose.

12/24/2012 09:21:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

"Tomorrow the Pope could free the White world, if he chose."

This pope?

Pope Benedict Exonerates Jews For Jesus' Death In New Book

He shows no special preference for Christians, much less Whites.

12/25/2012 12:25:00 PM  
Anonymous ThanksforSharing said...

I didn't say he would, I just said he could.

It wouldn't be outside the historical context or the spiritual capacity of the Church to make a pronouncement tomorrow banning all Jews from Christian lands.

I do agree, though, that the Church, like every western institution, is done.

I'd be less surprised if Benedict pulled dead gentile children from under his and waived them at the crowd in St. Peter's square than if he did anything to cure the Church. But that would be still less surprising than to see whites relinquish the kind of power that would be necessary for universal genetic testing.

12/25/2012 03:12:00 PM  
Anonymous Scott said...

The etymology of "beyond the pale" is interesting

12/27/2012 08:24:00 AM  
Anonymous Scott said...

You Europeans have left the Leadership of the Roman Catholic Church. Nature abhors a vacuum.

Tomorrow the Pope could free the White world, if he chose.

I must say lately I've been warming up to the Catholic Church as a potentially potential Force for Good, on account of my Theory on Overcoming jewish Domination

If your proposed action doesn't make Lawrence Auster's blood boil, triggering an apoplectic fit (by which criterion I rule out things that just annoy him, like "liberalism"), it is basically a waste of time.

The anti-anti-semitic canary in the gentile coal mine that Auster is, his recent diatribes vs. the Catholic Church should not go unacknowledged. Case in point: his recent smearing of Thomas Fleming for a light, humorous Christmas essay (including the de rigeur accusations of his having a diseased mind):

12/27/2012 08:46:00 AM  
Anonymous A Non Moose said...

you will be led by the Church of Satan

Wheeler: Synagogue of Satan.

12/27/2012 10:00:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

I wrote about a similar reaction in A Christmas Story, in 2009, when Garrison Keillor expressed an attitude like Fleming's.

This is a typical jewish reaction to even the meekest, mildest criticisms of jews. The end is to make such a fuss about jews jews jews being victims victims victims that the critic's criticism of some aspect of jewish malfeasance is blotted out. In fact, jews seek to reverse the causal chain. They demonize and pathologize the critic, who in their minds is not making any kind of righteous defense of his own kind, but is really just a sneaky jew-hating criminal.

The response from jews in situations like this reflects 1) an extreme sensitivity to who is criticizing who and why, and 2) an extreme insensitivity in their attempt to attack any critic of jews and bury his criticism. That this is true even of jews who expend time and effort posing as something other than a jew, as Auster does, reflects the ultimate priority that a defense of jews takes in a jew's mind.

12/27/2012 10:47:00 AM  
Anonymous Porter said...


In further consideration of your excellent 8:23 comment…I read that Jim Goad piece and left thinking how painful are the cuts of cowardice. You noticed, of course, what he did there. He wanted to make some mild milquetoast criticisms of jewish idolatry and hypocrisy—the kind that could have been culled from practically any relevant alt-right comment thread—yet the coppery taste of fear was bright on his tongue.

Humans, and other herd animals, instinctively shrink from the periphery in a predator-rich environment. And so before offering an unkind word for those predators, he clumsily concocted a Potemkin anti-semite to place on his right flank. He then proceeded to pot shot while pointing to the scarecrow beside him saying, Look! It’s those devourers of jew sandwiches what dunnit! And, as great effort was expended to clarify, he is definitely not one of those bad people.

12/27/2012 01:08:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This Hagel incident strikes me as a PR stunt to keep up Obama's approval rating among an increasingly anti-Israel (and anti-Obama) liberal base, much like all of Obama's previous efforts at pretending to stand up to the Israel Lobby. Anyone who's paying attention can see that Obama's never been anything more than a jewish puppet.

12/28/2012 01:00:00 AM  
Anonymous sk said...

Whether it's jews, the pope or the queen of England, they are anti-white. We have every right to call them anti-white. They only SAY they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white. Can't emphasize that basic truth enough.

12/28/2012 07:40:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

Your primary concern seems to be for the Church's well-being. This is not my primary concern.

12/29/2012 07:44:00 AM  
Anonymous Thanks4Sharing said...

Your primary concern is Jews fouling up White cultural integrity. The oldest continuous institution in the western world had the same concern. It's only natural to turn there. Not turning there is the equivalent of desiring to build a four-wheeled internal combustion travel device and refusing to look at the cars all around you for examples of functioning devices.

Whatever works isn't going to taste as sweet or be as simple as you'd like. If we are to be set free, we must give our souls to God. Isn't that ironic? If only all we had to do was give our blood to scientists.

12/29/2012 12:49:00 PM  
Anonymous kirk said...

Christianity is not western, it's middle-eastern, a jewish gnostic sect. If Europe becomes islamised in the next 100-200 years, would you call islam a 'western institution' too?

Of course, as with many movements started by them, they gradually lost control of it and it actually turned against them in the end. But this doesn't change the jewish origins and core which are still there.
Today the church couldn't care less if its members are white, black, brown or extraterrestrial. It is the prototypical 'anti-racist' organization.

12/29/2012 05:54:00 PM  
Blogger W.LindsayWheeler said...

Tansfaal, I point to you Jerry Dell Ehrlich's book Plato's Gift to Christianity.

Prof. Ehrlich has done a masterful job showing the complete Hellenization of Christianity and its immersion into Greek Culture. Tansfaal, this was the plan of God, the creator of the universe.

You can not do anything without religion. All the atheist empires failed, Communist Russia failed and the pseudo-pagan German National Socialism has also failed. God blesses all projects and without him, nothing can be done.

God and his Son, Jesus Christ, created Race! God and Jesus Christ are going to defend race and nation. Watch and see. The modern Marxist Church is infected but God will not let it stand. God will take on his own Church if he has to and he will. No one, but no one, not even the Church, can remake reality or the Natural Law. God will not let that happen. He just as well end the world anyway because of its evil. Don't worry, Tansfaal, God has this covered. It won't stand for long, evil never does. In Heaven, Race, like gender, remains and in Heaven, all people will be reconstituted in their tribes. There is race in heaven. Know that for sure. Down here on earth, we just have stupid, evil men. But you must be saved in order to get to heaven. No sin enters heaven Tansfaal. You can't get to heaven without JC. Also, all kings will be restored over their people as well! There are no egalitarians in heaven. Heaven is for the righteous. God destroyed all the evil people on earth before Noah. He will do so again. He did it once, he will do so again. There are no commies in heaven.


12/30/2012 08:43:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

"Your primary concern is Jews fouling up White cultural integrity."

I care more for my race than the culture, the institutions, or the traditions. If those things need to change to benefit my race then I'm for it.

"The oldest continuous institution in the western world had the same concern."

I don't believe that the Church ever shared the concerns I've described, or even what you describe.

"Whatever works isn't going to taste as sweet or be as simple as you'd like. If we are to be set free, we must give our souls to God. Isn't that ironic? If only all we had to do was give our blood to scientists."

Whether you dislike science or not, race is real. It's effects are visible all around us.

The main problem for Whites is simple to describe. Whites do not spend enough in pursuit of the best interests of our larger group, our race. We spend instead on individual concerns, frivolities, or worse, for the benefit of other races or in support of institutions, like the Church, which are antithetical and harmful to White interests. Thus we suffer as a group, as a race.

This problem is visible in the case of Hagel. Whites are over-represented in the military, yet what's best for Whites was not part of the debate.

The irony is that you're the one proposing a simple solution. It might work for Christians, but it's disingenuous to sell it as salavation for the White race.

12/30/2012 09:38:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

WLW, please stop. It's clear we have different goals. You want to solve the Church's problems, which you claim will somehow indirectly benefit White people. I don't see it, and at any rate, I favor a more direct approach.

12/30/2012 10:01:00 AM  
Anonymous Thanks4Sharing said...

This is the argument:

Jews eat away at white cultural integrity and therefore at the integrity of White Race.

Ergo we decide what is Jewish, and what is not Jewish, so even if a white person catches Jewishness, they are not effective at undermining what is white, and therefore the integrity of the white race, because we know that person is carrying Jewishness. Because we recognize that even genetically white people can "catch" Jewishness. So what's the point of separating from Jews if we end up just like Jews? Why not just become a "white Jew" and move to Israel and further the white race as Jews?

So I guess your position is that you don't care if whites end up being exactly like Jews, as long as the genesis of the doctrine is strictly white? But then how will whites know after that initial genesis that grows into white Judaism that which was white and that which got copied from Jews? You can't genetically test an idea. But you can very easily know that which is Jewish, and that which is not. For whatever the Church became over time, its initial purpose was this.

If whites were genetically separated from Jews and over time whites came up with the Kol Nidre, how would you know that white person wasn't an infiltrator? How would you know that which truly had a white race genesis and that which truly had a Jewish genesis?

What you do if you want to make sure your race doesn't fall prey to an alien race is you center your race's culture around the idea that the alien race's God has totally forsaken them, and that said alien race is cursed.

If someone was disgusted with the Jews, was white, and knew the white race like the back of their hands, the Church was the perfect institution to invent to damn the Jews and ping all the genetically white characteristics at the same time.

All things considered, it has been the biggest thorn in their side since its inception. It WAS the four wheeled internal-combustion travel device.

All this aside, the final question is: if whites adopted Judaism, but came up with it in a completely genetically white environment, would all it took to get us there (all the genetic testing, etc.) have been worth it to you?

12/30/2012 10:36:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

"So I guess your position is that you don't care if whites end up being exactly like Jews"

Identity has biological and ideological components. Whites and jews are distinct in both senses.

The problem as I see it, is Whites serving non-White interests rather than our own. This is due to a lack of or confusion about identity.

"Whites catching jewishness" doesn't quite fit. I have no objection to Whites using the weapons and tactics jews use, if and when that can be effective for us. Whites will not turn into jews by doing so.

"What you do if you want to make sure your race doesn't fall prey to an alien race is you center your race's culture around the idea that the alien race's God has totally forsaken them, and that said alien race is cursed."

When I want to do X, I usually plan and organize to do X. Disguising your goals as a pursuit of something else is a good way to end up doing something else. To use your own example, the something else is serving God, or worse, an alien race's God.

12/30/2012 01:44:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

"Whites need the high road like a car needs wheels. Show them the high road and and they'll die trying to reach it."

Agreed. The road is identity. Racial identity. Let's stop taking detours through other vehicles with other destinations. If we organize as Whites, to serve the best interests of Whites, then Whites will have a much better chance of actually getting where we want to go.

12/30/2012 01:55:00 PM  
Anonymous Scott said...

Let's stop taking detours through other vehicles with other destinations. If we organize as Whites, to serve the best interests of Whites, then Whites will have a much better chance of actually getting where we want to go.

That's the truth. Christians who believe that Christianity is integral to Whites' organizing as Whites to beat back our enemies shouldn't waste their time arguing with Whites who already wish to organize as Whites. We can all be saved later. They should try to convince their fellow (White) Christians to start organizing as Whites. Judging from my experiences talking race with serious Christians, best of luck to you -- you will really need it

12/30/2012 02:13:00 PM  
Anonymous Thanks4sharing said...

How do you get whites to organize as whites without addressing the main issue preventing whites from doing so?

It's as if there are a bunch of whites together and a huge wall, and a prize behind the wall. Everyone needs to get over the wall in order to win the prize. 70% of the whites refuse to climb the wall. You're saying if we organize as whites we can get the prize. But we already are organized as whites. It's just that it has been religiously engrained in most of us that we may not climb the wall.

"Look at your skin color" is not a powerful enough argument to refute years of media and religious indoctrination.

What's the point of organizing as whites if most whites are poisoned?

I guess I'm more interested in getting the poison out first. Then when we get to the wall we can go right over it.

Appreciate the discourse.

12/30/2012 03:13:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

"It's a collective case of persecutory delusion."

More a deliberate collective tactic. Too many are conscious of the deliberate use of this tactic for the delusion that it's delusion to continue.

What jews call "anti-semitism" is the recognition of and reaction to jewish aggression. Their attacks on "anti-semitism" are an extension of that aggression. Jews who try to disguise this aggression with double-talk and inversion are just doing their own part of it. The jew cries out in pain as he strikes you.

The objective view is that there are always conflicts of interest. In the case of conflicts with others jews aren't interested in an objective view.

12/30/2012 10:43:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Hagel pick is yet more sheer political brilliance from Jarret.

Hagel gives Obama cred among his white liberal supporters who are anti-israel or at least pro-palestine/anti-aipac/"anti-war" (Obama does not have a "base") that he sorely needs after 4 years of literally being W's third term.

Hagel is an economically and socially moderate Republican who wants to put American interest first in foreign policy, not Israel, ie, no more pointless wars. This combination is a huge huge huge winner among whites. The lack of more people like Hagel in the GOP is why they lose nationally.

So, what does Obama do? Obama runs him for SecDef, and he gets the GOP to purge Hagel, and purge anyone like Hagel, from the party. Thus, Obama tricked the GOP into eliminating the most serious medium-term threat to liberalism's national dominance.

Finally, since Hagel was an ""anti-semite"", he's softened the bulkhead. Whoever Obama nominates next will seem wonderful by comparison. Perhaps a transgender who in the 80s bombed a hospital... as long as he's pro-israel, he'll sail right through.

12/31/2012 01:24:00 AM  
Anonymous Thanks4Sharing said...

"If a person gets infected, I see the infection as the problem, not the person."

Exactly. As I said above, I call it "carrying poison." If someone is carrying poison, the first step is getting rid of the poison, not gathering. That is what this argument is about. Yet you say I'm taking the round-about way by preferring to deal with the poison first.

As Barb admits, most whites are carrying poison. That my primary concern is about the poison first, the gathering (or "person" second, is not Jewish. A jew's concern would be "is it good for the Jews?" And of course it's good for the Jews that whites carry poison and love doing so. Barb, being a Christian Zionist herself tells me my perspective is JEWISH that the poison is my main concern. And we're going to gather these people together as white? What does being white mean again? At this point, as Barb concedes, it's white to be Zionist! So this is exactly what I am talking about.

Here we go: whites believe it is JEWISH to care more about the soul than skin color. When that's all Jews do, is care about race. And how has this Zionism done for whites? Has it made them care more about race? NO! And why would it? Your primary concern is for JEWS! Your RELIGIOUS worldview is that it's at least as important for your biggest competitors and enemies to have their own place as it is for you! Do you realize how ducked up that is? And how has it been for you? And yet if Christ, the Zionist polar opposite you also put in your head as part of your hydra-religion, had given them sovereignty, they wouldn't have killed him! So who died for your sins? Christ or the Jews? You cannot have any moral authority while holding these conflicting elements in your mind. It's poison. It makes you useless to your race in any meaningful way. Yet it makes you extremely useful to Jews.

Here's the question: When do you hold an adult accountable for their own decisions as to what to believe? How many times to you try to talk the poison out of their hands before you admit they are just flat-out human waste?

You do know, Tan, that when you gather whites for whites, 70% of them at least are going to be just like Barb. Such a gathering will be great for planning a Holocaust memorial site, but that's about it. Regaining white moral authority over Jews? Holy crap you do see the impossibility of that, don't you?

12/31/2012 07:07:00 AM  
Anonymous Thanks4Sharing said...

We both agree whites need the high road.

Whites prosper in a truth-first environment (in which all the greatness of whites is an obvious truth).

Jews prosper in a race first environment.

Zionism is a race-first environment.

12/31/2012 07:20:00 AM  
Anonymous Thanks4Sharing said...

You see why it's smart to burn people at the stake? You see how that keeps the poison away? You see why it's smart not to give people the Bible and let them figure it out on the their own, because whites love carrying poison?

The Church struggled with every one of these questions and, while not perfect, came up with, on balance, good answers. There is nothing new under the sun. These same answers will, in time, come around again. There is no getting around it. It may be 500 years from now, or it may be 50. But eventually, whites will tire of playing games.

12/31/2012 08:04:00 AM  
Anonymous Thanks4sharing said...

Sorry for spamming here.

But the idea of the Church based on a self-sacrificing God bearing the pain of the world is to fill that hole in whites -- to satisfy that need that evidences itself today as "carrying poison" -- with something that doesn't involve destroying your entire race. The purpose of the Church and Christ was to feed that need so the Jews or other enemies couldn't take advantage of it. Because let's face it -- everyone knows it's there. Blacks, latinos, Jews, everyone.

Two thousand years ago a group of whites decided they needed to take control of that hole, and fill it with something less self-destructive, to build something bigger and create a generally more satisfying world for themselves and their posterity. The job of the Church was to protect that hole and deal with it proactively as enemies came from all sides to take advantage of it.

Nothing about the idea of race alone is going to make sure that hole gets filled in a non-destructive way. Because clearly our own race, we who walk around with a hole and looking to fill it with the glorious pain of sacrifice (Zionism, communism, the multicult, A.A. etc.), is our own worst enemy. The Church was not some crazy freakish idea. It was built to address very scientifically the recurring problems within us.

Whatever ends up addressing it again will look very much like it.

12/31/2012 09:53:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

White Christian zionists aren't my bugaboo. There are Whites serving jewish interests for other reasons.

"That my primary concern is about the poison first, the gathering (or "person" second, is not Jewish. ... And we're going to gather these people together as white? What does being white mean again?"

The poison is ideological. It can be cured by bringing the ideological side of the afflicted person's identity into alignment with their biological side.

Being fully White means expressing a whole and healthy identity. It requires the recognition of the primary, existential importance of questions like, "Who is White?", and "What's best for Whites?". This line of thinking naturally excludes jews, who are biologically distinct and have an antithetical ideological view of Whites as antagonists.

Consciousness of being X is a prerequisite for being a good X. Being a good X implies, among other things, that you don't put the interests of Ys or Zs above Xs.

12/31/2012 10:14:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

Thanks4Sharing, you say the problem with Whites is our low regard for our race. You propose to fix this problem by ignoring the causes and treating it indirectly, based on a scheme you admit has already failed once, as if it is actually a different problem you are trying to solve. At the same time, you reject an approach which addresses the problem forthrightly.

You've demonstrated conclusively that you're full of shit. You can stop spamming now.

12/31/2012 10:39:00 AM  
Anonymous Thanks4sharing said...

Roger that. Didn't expect to change any minds. Those with ears to hear will listen, others will not.

Happy trails.

12/31/2012 12:26:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

More on Hagel.

Thomas Friedman, at the jewish paper of record on 25 Dec, Give Chuck a Chance:

"If ever Israel needed a U.S. defense secretary who was committed to Israel’s survival, as Hagel has repeatedly stated — but who was convinced that ensuring that survival didn’t mean having America go along with Israel’s self-destructive drift into settling the West Bank and obviating a two-state solution — it is now.

. . .

The only thing standing between Israel and national suicide any more is America and its willingness to tell Israel the truth. But most U.S. senators, policy makers and Jews prefer to stick their heads in the sand, because confronting Israel is so unpleasant and politically dangerous. Hagel at least cares enough about Israel to be an exception.

The graphic accompanying Friedman's op-ed.

William Kristol, responded with apoplexy at The Weekly Standard on 26 Dec, Tom Friedman: ‘Hagel Is Out of the Mainstream’:

"So Hagel, "unlike most U.S. senators, policy makers and Jews" will seek confrontation with Israel. Is that what we want in our next defense secretary? Is that what most U.S. senators—dismissed by Friedman as "stick[ing] their heads in the sand"—want? In any case, Friedman confirms that on Israel as well, Hagel's views place him out of the policy-making mainstream.

Tom Friedman came to praise Chuck Hagel. He may have ended up burying him.

Friedman and Kristol agree that what's best for Israel is the highest priority.

12/31/2012 07:12:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

Ed Koch, former mayor of New York City, at on 28 Dec, Tom Friedman: Confused and Clearly Hostile to Israel. There are the same jew-centric objections to Hagel, but the bulk of it, and the main point, is to condemn Friedman as a bad jew for supporting Hagel and other supposed transgressions.

Dennis Halper, at The Weekly Standard on 28 Dec, 'What They're Saying about Chuck Hagel'. What they (mostly jews) are saying is all about Hagel's comments regarding the jewish lobby and Israel. Here again jews crossing party lines is the rule. It's so lopsidedly about Israel that the usual Red/Blue pretense that Republicans should support a Republican nominee doesn't even come up.

Here's a real gem:

"Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA): And Barbara Boxer of California said she disagreed with the idea that there exists an intimidating "Jewish lobby" in Washington. “People can say whatever they want,” Boxer said. “I don’t agree with it.”"

Indeed. People can say whatever they want, and if the jewish lobby doesn't agree with it, that trumps everyone and everything else. It's not only intimidating, it's creepy.

12/31/2012 07:12:00 PM  
Anonymous Thanks4Sharing said...

I wouldn't worry about it much, Tan. I know they're all shivering at the thought of your white color and Zionist faith. No doubt you'll slice through that iron wall with surgical precision in order to.... Keep Israel safe.

1/01/2013 12:08:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Even though Christianity is nuts, I'd willingly support Christianity if I thought it would save our people.


1) Christian ideology is Bolshevism plus magic tricks. It's anti-white by nature.

2) The only reason Christianity didn't self-destruct in Europe was due to its ability, much like Soviet Communism, to ignore and contradict its own maladaptive belief system.

3) The Church bows down to Jewish power and the forces of modernity even though it has plenty of money and throngs of followers. Even if Christianity were pro-white, there's no church left to join.

4) Today's crisis of the West is also an opportunity. The failure of our old institutions and the ideas that guided them gives us the chance to recognize race and biological differences and to organize our civilization around a reality-based worldview.

1/02/2013 12:53:00 PM  
Anonymous Pat Hannagan said...

Christian ideology is Bolshevism plus magic tricks. It's anti-white by nature.

So stupid it deserves no rebuttal.

You do not even know what Bolshevism is, obviously.

1/04/2013 06:23:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"So stupid it deserves no rebuttal."

Read the Bible, Patsy.

1/04/2013 08:18:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I like how Auster pretends to be rational, level headed, and not emotionally motivated or biased, while serving up completely irrational, immature, emotional outbursts as "critiques":

"The worst problem with Chuck Hagel as a possible Secretary of Defense is not that his positions on issues during his time as a senator were consistently wrong, wrong-headed, and cheaply motivated; and it’s not that he’s anti-Israel; it’s that he is actively stupid. His face is Neanderthal-like, his eyes disturbingly void of intelligence."

Hagel, whether he is actually dumb or not, just looks like a normal man. To make these kind of remarks while pretending to be a serious commentator who's a stickler for decorum and proper grammar, suggests it's deep visceral animus that motivates these kinds of statements.

1/06/2013 01:10:00 PM  
Anonymous Pat Hannagan said...

One things for sure, when I pray for him, it's not what Kristor and co desire.

1/06/2013 02:41:00 PM  
Anonymous ben tillman said...

it’s that he is actively stupid. His face is Neanderthal-like, his eyes disturbingly void of intelligence

More like Auster is "actively stupid". Everyone who pays attention to race should know by now that Neanderthals were/are much smarter than "modern" humans.

1/06/2013 07:40:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Most of the Christians I know in real life are at least moderately pro-jew. All the people I know who are anti-jewish are secular. Other people seem to report the same thing. The "pro-White Christians" one can find on WN forums and blogs seem to be almost exclusively concerned with defending their co-religionists from any criticism. None will ever admit that Christian philo-Semitism even exists, and they certainly do not seem to be bothered by it.

I think it's clear that Christianity is the most formidable barrier to the adoption of pro-White and anti-jewish attitudes that we face, and therefore should be regarded as one of our most serious enemies.

1/07/2013 07:57:00 AM  
Anonymous Pat Hannagan said...

In honour of Auster's bowel blockage and the "massed intercessory prayer" from the Orthosphere on his behalf, I'd just like to offer up the following tribute.

A massed pipe band would be just the trick but, in the circumstances, a lone piper has all the gravitas three weeks of constipation requires.

Take it away lad! A one and a two, and a one two three four!

1/13/2013 05:18:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home