The Evil Among Us: Liam Neeson in “Taken”

Edmund Connelly


Israel is (in)famous for its “false flag” operations, covert provocations meant to create blame for innocent parties or nations. For instance, in the 1950s Israelis propagated the Lavon Affair, in which Jewish operatives in Egypt attempted to blow up American- and British-affiliated buildings and place the blame on Egyptians. In theory, this would have compelled the Americans and British to take punitive action against Egypt. As it turned out, the agents were captured before the bombs went off.

A far more subtle technique aimed at achieving goals surreptitiously is called “laying the mental threads” for a form of unconventional warfare employing game theory to get others to fight your enemies for you. Relentlessly, people’s minds have been exposed to scenarios of Arab enemies and terrorists, a signal example being the broad attention given to Harvard historian Samuel Huntington’s “Clash of Civilizations” thesis. A major element of that clash is the West’s struggle against Muslims. America’s (mistaken) response to 9/11, some have claimed, illustrates this.

Advertisement

In American popular culture, Arabs are the only non-White group that can be openly attacked and vilified. For evidence, Jack Shaheen’s The TV Arab (1984) chastised television for creating and perpetuating a noxious image of Muslim Arabs.  A second book, Guilty: Hollywood’s Verdict on Arabs After 9/11 (2008) shows that Hollywood portrays Arabs as terrorists, corrupt sheiks, or exotic, camel-riding primitives.  Reel Bad Arabs: How Hollywood Vilifies a People (2009), canvassed 900 films, “the vast majority of which portray Arabs by distorting at every turn what most Arab men, women, and children are really like.”

The issue is not really whether these images have a substantial element of truth. Muslims are indeed the most likely people on the planet these days to be terrorists. The point is that Hollywood is certainly not prone to providing true images of Blacks, Jews, or Latinos. Rather, it air brushes them to make them appealing to White audiences and paint a reassuring picture of the multicultural future. Hollywood excels at soothing the fears of its largely White audience about their future minority status. Again, Arabs are are the only non-White group that is not given a free pass in the multicultural West.

Is it possible that such imagery is not only the result of widespread Jewish fear and dislike of Arabs because of Arab hostility to Isarel, but also part of a larger plan to get Americans to fight Israel’s wars? After all, in addition to film and TV, we had the myriad neocon think tank studies suggesting that a “new Pearl Harbor” might serve as catalyst for a power reconfiguration in the Middle East.  David Ray Griffin, author of The New Pearl Harbor Revisited: 9/11, the Cover-Up, and the Exposé, suggests that American minds were “prepared” for 9/11. For example, the popular series “The X-Files” had a spin-off called “The Lone Gunmen.” Griffin writes that “In March 2001, the pilot episode of The Lone Gunmen, which reportedly had 13 million viewers, was based on a rogue group within the US government crashing a remote-controlled 747 into the World Trade Center.” (Watch the scene here).

An even better example is the big-budget film The Siege (1998). This action-packed thriller stars Denzel Washington as an FBI agent tracking Arab terrorists in New York. If indeed the media has been “preparing the minds” of Americans for future events, then The Siege fits the mold. For instance, Arab terrorists blow up themselves and a busload of innocent passengers in broad daylight (think suicide bombers in Israel). Then comes an attack on a theater. Finally, we have a scene that is more than suggestive of the airliner crashes into the Twin Towers: Arabs drive a van loaded with explosives into the FBI Counterterrorism Division at One Federal Plaza, raining debris down on New York streets.  Here we are now, nearly ten years after 9/11. We are still in Iraq and Afghanistan, and yet again the calls for an immediate attack on Iran are escalating. And Hollywood (which is, needless to say, a Jewish fiefdom) continues its role in “preparing the minds” of Americans for this attack by churning out horrendous images of Muslims and Arabs. (I know Iranians are not Arabs, but that is a point totally lost on Western people.)

Now, it seems, the French have entered the cultural fray and portrayed Arabs in a fashion more common to Hollywood. The 2008 hit Taken, starring Irish actor Liam Neeson as a retired CIA operative, could have come straight from Tinseltown. Directed by Pierre Morel and produced by “Cinéma du look” prodigy Luc Besson, its style and action fit in seamlessly with Hollywood super-agent flicks such as The Bourne Identity and Mission: Impossible, not to mention Besson’s own Nikita. The film was written by Besson and Robert Mark Kamen, author of Growing up Hasidic: Education and Socialization in the Bobover Hasidic Community.

Despite considerable French involvement, it is an American film with American characters playing the roles that the audience identifies with. Neeson even nicely Americanizes his Irish accent in the film. It’s no accident then that the film performed very well in the North American market, which yielded around $145,000,000 of the worldwide gross of $227,000,000.

In other words, it’s a movie that was successfully designed to appeal to the American market by trading on one of Hollywood’s favorite themes: negative stereotypes of Arabs.

The premise of the film is simple: Neeson plays Bryan Mills, a divorced husband living in Los Angeles who wants to be near his 17-year-old virgin daughter Kim. I need to mention that she is a virgin because that is central to the story: When she and her classmate take a trip to Paris to follow a tour of the Irish rock band U2, they are kidnapped by a prostitution ring. The friend dies but Kim is set to be auctioned off to the highest bidder. Bids will be high as Kim is “certified pure.” Mills puts to work his spy and martial arts skills and sets off to rescue her.

The group that has kidnapped her is the Albanian Mafia, while the buyers are Arabs. We know this because the bidder planning to deflower Kim is one “Sheik Raman.” What could be a better motive to find and punish such evildoers? Needless to say, for a father to do all he can to protect his young daughter is both understandable and highly admirable. Morality is fully behind him on this, and no degree of extra-legal behavior need be disallowed.

The subtext of Taken is unmistakably in the mold of Hollywood’s defamation of Muslims.To begin with, the two American teenage girls are abducted from a Paris apartment by vicious Albanians. Two thoughts cross my mind here. First, few Americans are likely to have any knowledge whatsoever of Albanians, so in a sense the filmmakers are given a blank slate on which to draw their image of the bad guys. Second, among the Albanian population, there is a heavy Muslim presence (~70%) so this would support that anti-Muslim aspect of the film.

If the Albanian kidnappers are uncouth, the Arabs who appear are at least clean. The sheik’s underling is even quite suave, with stylishly coiffed hair and fine clothes. The sheik, however, is repulsive. With pockmarked brown skin and a bald pate, he is repulsive. And he was within minutes of deflowering 17-year-old Kim.

Nabil Massad as Sheik Raman

While the storyline of Taken is easily forgettable, the underlying images of the violent, unclean, or lecherous Muslim are reinforced. This is what prompts me to insist that the film is part of the larger Hollywood effort to defame Muslims and Arabs—very useful if your aim is to go to war against pretty much the entire Muslim  world. Perhaps a key point comes with the fact that the American distributor of Taken is none other than 20th Century Fox, which is owned by the noted neocon Rupert Murdoch. Fox has a history of denigrating Arabs, as independent scholar E. Michael Jones’s showed in the April 2009 and January 2010 issues of his journal Culture Wars. In the article “Abu Ghraib, Torture, and the American Empire,” he tied Israelis to the torture of Iraqis by American troops, plus delved into the larger question of how Hollywood has been playing a role in “preparing the minds” of the American public for the mainstreaming of torture. Drawing from a New Yorker profile of the co-creator and executive producer of “24,” Joel Surnow, Jones quoted a description of the show:

Each season of “24,” which has been airing on Fox since 2001, depicts a single, panic-laced day in which Jack Bauer—a heroic C.T.U. agent, played by Kiefer Sutherland—must unravel and undermine a conspiracy that imperils the nation. Terrorists are poised to set off nuclear bombs or bioweapons, or in some other way annihilate entire cities. The twisting story line forces Bauer and his colleagues to make a series of grim choices that pit liberty against security. Frequently, the dilemma is stark: a resistant suspect can either be accorded due process—allowing a terrorist plot to proceed—or be tortured in pursuit of a lead. Bauer invariably chooses coercion. With unnerving efficiency, suspects are beaten, suffocated, electrocuted, drugged, assaulted with knives, or more exotically abused; almost without fail, these suspects divulge critical secrets.

Multitasking, Jewish producer Joel Surnow, whose politics “suffuse the whole show,” has also consistently allowed portrayals of Muslims as terrorists to appear. The most egregious image of Muslims probably came with the introduction in season four of the immigrant Araz family, composed of father Navi, mother Dina, and 17-year-old son Behrooz. Though Behrooz dates an American girl, the family is vile and corrupt in almost every other way. The entire family is on a knowing mission to destroy large parts of the United States with nuclear weapons. Father Navi exhibits his vileness by telling his son things such as “I listen to your phone calls, I read your e-mail” and striking him on the face.

This is nothing, however, compared to the father’s decision to murder his own son.  Fearing the American girlfriend will expose the terrorist plot, Navi orders Behrooz to cold-bloodedly murder her. Suspecting Behrooz does not have the inner strength to do so, mother Dina poisons the girlfriend by spiking her tea. Dina is at least considerate enough to then shoot the girl’s body in an attempt to persuade her husband that Behrooz had carried out orders.  Next, as Behrooz and one of his father’s henchmen are digging the girlfriend’s grave, the henchman tries to kill Behrooz. Incapacitating the attacker, Behrooz demands to know who ordered his death: It is his own father Navi. Jones is right to conclude that “Hollywood has always been a Jewish empire, so it is not surprising that when it merged with government, government would become more Jewish as well.”

“Marko” the Albanian slave trader learns he has kidnapped the wrong girl

Finally, Taken is guilty of the same subterfuge and mind control that many Hollywood movies are: it creates images of non-Jewish evildoers when in fact the crimes are far more representative of Jewish crimes. In this case, egregiously so. Ten years ago, a weekend edition of the Jerusalem Post featured a story about the widespread problem of prostitution and sexual slavery in Israel. Trading in non-Jewish slaves, it seems, is not illegal there. And many of these young women are from Eastern European countries.

In their June 16, 2000 issue, they wrote: “In Israel it is legal to buy and sell slaves, as long as they aren’t Jews. The slave trade is big business in Israel, and it’s legal.”

Every year hundreds of women, and an unknown number of girls under the age of 18, are bought, sold, drugged, imprisoned, and forced to work as prostitutes in Israel’s thriving sex industry. In countries such as Russia, Ukraine, Latvia, and Hungary, traffickers prey on desperate women. Facing poverty, the women are lured to Israel with the promise that they will make fabulous salaries working as teachers or caregivers.

Now think about that: “Every year hundreds of women, and an unknown number of girls under the age of 18, are bought, sold, drugged, imprisoned, and forced to work as prostitutes in Israel’s thriving sex industry.” Then compare it to the plot-line of Taken, where two girls under the age of 18 are kidnapped, drugged, imprisoned and readied for sale to the highest bidder. Further, we see that other girls kidnapped by the Albanian Mafia have already become addicted to heroin and are selling their bodies on the streets of Paris to turn a profit for their masters.

Marlon Brando, a Hollywood insider if there ever was one, knew about this subterfuge. On Larry King Live he said “Hollywood is run by Jews, it is owned by Jews, but we never saw the kike because they know perfectly well that’s where you draw the wagons around.”

This is so true. Name one scene where you see someone who is clearly identified as a Jew committing massive financial fraud or controlling Presidents. Or raping underage non-Jewish girls. Or buying and selling them for the sex trade in Israel.

Or even throwing lavish parties. Another instance in Taken where stereotypically Jewish behavior is acted out by non-Jews is Kim’s lavish 17th-birthday party. We see an opulent L.A. mansion decked out for the affair. Kim’s non-Jewish stepfather is fabulously wealthy and gives Kim an expensive horse as a gift.

The funny thing is, it is Jews who are famous for lavish displays of personal wealth: for throwing extravagant bar mitzvahsbirthday parties, weddings, and just regular parties.

One that really caught my attention is the story about the owner of a Long Island firm that specializes in making bulletproof vests for the U.S. military, vests which many critics claim are defective. CEO David Brooks has been in deep trouble, as ABC reports:

A class action lawsuit, which was recently settled for some $35 million, charged Brooks and his top executives with issuing misleading financial statements and then selling over 10 million of their own shares in the company and receiving over $200 million in illegal profits. . . . Following that stock sale, Brooks again raised eyebrows when he threw his daughter a lavish bat mitzvah, which reportedly cost $10 million. The party featured performances by Aerosmith and rapper 50 Cent and took place at the New York’s famed Rainbow Room.

This deception is no doubt what so aggravated film critic James Jaeger, prompting him to excoriate Jewish director Paul Haggis for his racial and ethnic depictions in Crash, the 2005 Oscar winner for Best Picture. Echoing Brando, Jaeger notes the film’s ensemble of a diverse array of characters “crashing” into each other in a racially tense Los Angeles, but charges that “Nowhere is it shown that Jews also CRASH into Blacks, Whites, Latinos, Iranians, Asians, and Persians and profoundly affect THEIR lives—especially in Hollywood where CRASH is set and Jews comprise a dominating minority in the Los Angeles area.”

Rather, Jaeger sees the same old display of select diversity on-screen but no mention of the lack of diversity behind-the-scenes. “Why doesn’t Paul write a feature that is set in the executive suites of say Warner Bros. or Paramount where the dominating minority is properly and accurately acknowledged as Jewish?”

So what can I finally say about Taken? In one sense, it provides a useful function by again alerting Americans, French and other Westerners to the risk posed by the presence of alien elements among us. While terrorism is one clear risk, it is not the only one, as Taken shows. But I’m still bothered by the fact that it projects the behavior of evildoers onto enemies of Jewry. That so many Westerners could not only overlook these facts but in essence worship Jews and Israelis is almost impossible for me to understand. Is this because they are taken in by the cagey projection technique employed so often by Jews?

Share:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

118 Comments to "The Evil Among Us: Liam Neeson in “Taken”"

  1. FREE MAN's Gravatar FREE MAN
    April 27, 2012 - 1:48 am | Permalink

    Robert Mark Kamen, a jew, is the writer of this “movie”.

    Elite Jews will never forgive France for the opposition to the Iraq War.

  2. Walter Lewkowski's Gravatar Walter Lewkowski
    December 17, 2011 - 3:08 am | Permalink

    I don’t think that Paul Haggis is a Jew. He is a lefty; a former member of the Church of Scientology; but not a Jew.

  3. Marilyn's Gravatar Marilyn
    March 17, 2011 - 6:43 pm | Permalink

    Speaking of Jewish excess in celebrating rituals, a close friend was an actress for about 25 years until she finally gave it up. During that time she supported herself as a belly dancer. She had a regular greek restaurant gig and did parties and events.

    One of the event planners who hired her troop did a lot of brisks (circumcisions) and bar mitzvahs. She and the other dancers in her troop did not just bar mitzvahs but brisks!!!!!

    How vulgar and tacky is that. Belly dancers at a ceremony for an 8 day old boy.

  4. EW's Gravatar EW
    February 14, 2011 - 3:06 pm | Permalink

    About that Marshall Plan – actually, what saved Germany (and the rest of Europe) from being intentionally ruined to poor and entirely rural country by Morgenthau Plan was Uncle Stalin, moving the borders of his empire to Central Europe. Let’s be honest, at least.
    Then the thought about having strong non-commie Germany and the rest of Western Europe really took off.

    Oh, and about those evil Albanians stealing young white gals and selling their cherry (if not their kidneys or liver) to the highest (Arab) bidder . The movie “Taken” was basically correct – but those who do it aren’t usually Albanians, but Kosovars. Kosovo Albanians are the most ruthless mafia behind the prostitute trade and also drugs. Y’a know, the very same angelic Kosovars who were so terribly oppressed by Serbs that it was necessary to perform a “humanitarian bombing” (the very words of the human right icon Vaclav Havel) on Belgrad.
    Just my two cents on the facts.

  5. January 6, 2011 - 1:52 pm | Permalink

    Rap star Kanye West makes video where he kills white women.
    Two of the biggest black celebrities in the world got together to make a video glorifying violence towards women (in which most of the women are white). The images are shocking, especially considering the close connections between one of the rappers and Barack Obama.

    The song will appear on Kanye West’s new album titled “My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy.” Based on the video, his fantasy appears to be to kidnap, rape, and murder white women. The initial cover art, which has already been rejected by Walmart, features a black man holding a beer bottle in a sexually explicit pose with a naked white woman.

    In 2005 the NAACP presented him with an award for “most outstanding black male artist.” It remains to be seen if groups like the NOI and NAACP will denounce the video, which seems to re-enforce the most negative stereotypes about black men.

    Kanye Westis depicted holding the severed head of a white woman in his new video. The video also features Jay-Z, another big name, who campaigned with Barack Obama.

    West’s CD’s are released by Rick Rubin’s Def Jam, a subsidiary of Universal Music Group. MTV recently named Kanye West its 2010 Man of the Year.

    The video shows dead women hanging from the ceiling and several images of women being held captive. In one scene Kayne West is in bed with two dead white women positioning their bodies in a sexually provocative way. In another scene West holds the bloody severed head of a white woman.

    Sample of the Lyrics…

    Conquer, stomp ya, stop your silly nonsense
    None of you n*****s know where the swamp is
    None of you n*****s have seen the carnage that I’ve seen
    I still hear fiends scream in my dream
    Murder murder in black convertibles
    I kill a block I murder avenues
    Rape and pillage a village, women and children
    Everybody wanna know what my Achilles heel is
    LOVE I don’t get enough of it
    All I get is these vampires and blood suckers
    All I see is these n*****s, I’ve made millionaires

  6. Der weiße Engel's Gravatar Der weiße Engel
    January 3, 2011 - 12:25 am | Permalink

    DMK: “Not completely true. Blacks are not always portrayed that well. Anyone ever watched Maury Povich? I’m surprised there hasn’t been an outrage from pro Afro-American groups about that show. How about all the “gangsta” flicks, where in blacks sell drugs, shoot people, and act like anti social scumbags.”

    I’m going to assume that this is in response to my claim above that “In the same way, you don’t see realistic [movie] depictions of evil negroes. Dat’d be all raciss’ an’ shit, which would make it real box office poison.”

    We could have a lengthy debate about whether movies depicting “gangsta” culture are depicting evil negroes or not. I’d just say that, to negroes and most Whites, such depictions aren’t interpreted as derogatory or racist, particularly since most of the victims are also negroes. Probably the same thing is in play on a show like Maury Povich’s. I would grant the point that ALL depictions of negroes aren’t unqualifiedly good, at least in the eyes of White people, but that’s not what I was saying. Not being good isn’t the same as being evil. For example, there are plenty of movies where White killers are depicted as the ultimate in evil, but you will NEVER see a movie based on the Knoxville murders (the so-called “Knoxville horror”), or the Wichita murders (the so-called “Wichita massacre”). Nor will you ever see a movie about the Zebra killings, or the brutal Anne Pressley rape/murder. Also, this apparent ban on depicting evil negroes isn’t limited just to murders. We are also very unlikely ever to see a movie about Nushawn Williams, a negro who, a few years back, deliberately infected at least a score of pubescent and pre-pubescent White girls in New York state with AIDS. (There have actually been a number of similar cases in the US, the UK, and Canada.) You will also never see a realistic depiction of the negro propensity for cannibalism, or his seemingly gene-level belief in witchcraft and muti, both of which continue to exist in Africa to this day. Nor, speaking of Africa, will you ever see a screen depiction of the genocide of the White farmers in Zimbabwe, or in other countries of sub-Saharan Africa formerly ruled by Whites. All of these things are off limits in Hollywood, and again, it’s clear this is primarily because people don’t enjoy having their preconceptions challenged. They go to movies to relax, not to be provoked into thinking or feeling “racist” emotions. If that happened, they might have to revise their beliefs. As we see again and again even on this very forum, that’s a very painful exercise for most people.

  7. DMK's Gravatar DMK
    January 1, 2011 - 6:08 pm | Permalink

    Not completely true. Blacks are not always portrayed that well. Anyone ever watched Maury Povich? I’m surprised there hasn’t been an outrage from pro Afro-American groups about that show. How about all the “gangsta” flicks, where in blacks sell drugs, shoot people, and act like anti social scumbags.

  8. December 31, 2010 - 7:36 pm | Permalink

    Svend:
    If by “our” you mean Communists, Capitalists, Africans, Mexicans, Atheists, ,Asians, Jews, Muslims, Christians, Hindus, ad infinitum, You are correct. Therein lies the problem. You see, without a geographical “place” (home) to call yours exclusively, you have no human dignity (social value, importance, power) and it is as if you are living in a giant dormatory, with the rules that must necessarily go with that arrangement (oppressive laws, mind-control, etc.
    The Jews are the only people that can legitimately claim this is OUR HOME (speaking of Isreal) because it was founded specifically for Jews, but America was not founded specifically for white people…Therein lies another problem, you can’t set up a place (home) where everyone is welcome to live with you…Try it, and see if you don’t end up homeless…If by some miracle you wind up with a little piece of land where everyone is white (White Homeland) then you can say this is OUR home.
    JMO

  9. December 31, 2010 - 9:36 am | Permalink

    The last line sould read:
    An abomination, invisable, with misery, and justus, for all……I might add that the rest of the world is it seems, following happily in its footsteps and not far behind

  10. December 31, 2010 - 9:30 am | Permalink

    A little poem I came up with some years ago:

    I pledge defiance to the fags;
    Of the jewnited states of America
    And to Big Brothers all across the land;
    An abomination, with lechery, and justus, for all.

    And I am being generous…since I live here

  11. Anglo Saxon's Gravatar Anglo Saxon
    December 31, 2010 - 9:01 am | Permalink

    @ Clytemnestra … as the old adage says: the truth hurts.

    I do not write or criticize out of malice, as you thin-skinned responders have assumed. I was attempting (as a generous Englishman) to knock some sense into your thick heads before you sink into a totalitarian hell-hole of your own making. I shall continue to try.

    To be perfectly frank, I have never envied anything in America, except the exceptional natural scenery in certain States. Along with most Europeans, I despise everything about your Mickey Mouse ‘culture’ and the delusional, sugary sweet values it propagates. When I was a kid, I despised John Wayne because I could see straight through the jerk. Motor-mouthed Lucille Ball was reason to immediately switch channels or turn the TV off. New York City, Chicago, and Boston, et al, are the ugliest cities in the entire world. As a game, Baseball is a joke, and so is your so-called ‘football’ which you ironically play with your hands. Now that’s clever! Therefore, by definition, I have absolutely nothing to be ‘jealous’ of, as you suggested earlier. I would not emigrate to America even if I was offered a Million Dollars upfront in Gold Bar.

    The USA is a make believe country. You are a creation of Freemasonry, and not of Free Men and Women. You were f*cked up at your creation. Can you understand what I am telling you?

    As for American Women, and the contempt in which they are increasingly held by people ALL AROUND THE WORLD, including men waking up from their slumbers who live within America’s borders … before writing silly ad hominems and barbs to try and insult me, perhaps it might be wiser to consult a website entitled “Boycott American Women”?

    Here is the link: http://boycottamericanwomen.blogspot.com/

    Do yourself (and everyone else) a favour, and try and read the contents of that website with some HUMILITY, and with a big mouth that stays shut for long enough.

    I don’t hate you, but I am completely tired of your cheap, childish, filthy, and corrupt value system. And also, your big, ignorant, loud mouths.

    And as for those of you making references to the Second World War … it was the United States of America who did more than everyone else combined to destroy Europe’s best hope for gaining freedom from the vice-like grip of the Zionist / Banker yoke. Your Molech and Saturn worshipping leaders (most of who had connections to Manhattan) set back what you ignorantly keep calling ‘White’ Nationalism by 100 years.

    We ain’t white … we are Germanic. Even the Irish are Germanic because that is what all Celtic peoples are! Authentic Europeans are Germanic, and not a colour on the Munsell Chart!

    And finally, just before I attract a stream of hate filled responses, I would like to take this opportunity of wishing you ALL a Happy New Year 20011.

    May common sense, truth, and wisdom prevail at last!

    • svend's Gravatar svend
      December 31, 2010 - 9:50 am | Permalink

      Comments like the above are unproductive and mean-spirited. Those of us who read TOO are well aware of the failings of our home. It is, none the less, our home. Our families and friends are here. Our home towns are here. It is a deeply imperfect country, but it is our home.

    • Clytemnestra's Gravatar Clytemnestra
      January 4, 2011 - 4:37 am | Permalink

      Anglo Saxon, I visited your site and found pretty much I what I expected to find. Losers who cannot meet the high standards of American women and feel that if they just go elsewhere they will find a woman who won’t nag them to put down the toilet seat after they take a piss. Pardon me if I use this scatological analogy, but all women are sisters underneath the skin and these guys don’t want women, they want compliant kewpie dolls. There is hope for them. The Japanese are doing remarkable work on very human-looking robots so they may be able to upgrade from their current blow-up dolls in their lifetime.

      I have spent my adult life chortling with glee over how quickly life changes for these idiots once their subservient, traditional female model gets her green card. Then they see how soon their little Lotus Blossom turns into a Dragon Lady. I guess they still haven’t seen that article about the poor Chinese guy who jumped into an icy river to escape his wife’s nagging. It never occurs to these idiots that if these women wanted to be traditional [fill in the blank] wives, they would have married [fill in the blank] men. Of course, these women have been subjected to a lifetime of bullying, probably have to put up with more of their American hubbies’ bullying until that magical day when the green card arrives, and take sadistic delight in shattering any expectations that it will continue.

      That old axiom about the grass being greener on the other side of the fence may be true, but truer still is better the devil you know than the devil you don’t know to find out what a real bitch life can be when dealing with a woman who has her own issues with men and is hell-bent on making you pay for the sins of the men who oppressed her.

      Now for your other nonsense. You don’t like America? Or American culture? Or the cheap American value system? I love John Wayne and Lucille Ball. Not a big Mickey Mouse fan; prefer Donald Duck. Glad you love England. Feel free to stay there. Don’t like our big, ignorant loud mouths? See, I don’t care for a lot of bitter, condescending, patronizing garbage to us “colonials” from you metropolitan British. But I have this thing called a channel changer on my “telly” and a button on my … radio … I hope that’s what you still call it … and when some stuffy, know it all Brit comes on, I change the channel.

      No one here is interested in imposing American culture on Great Britain. Conversely too many of our leftist libtards would like to impose the nightmare that passes as modern British culture on America. If anyone in GB is trying to do so, I suggest that you do what Americans do when some Anglophile tries to screw with us, and vote the SOB out.

      Again, it was Great Britain’s pissing match with Germany that caused WWI and WWII. We weren’t the big kid on the block, you were. Germany didn’t threaten our hegemony, she threatened yours. The American people were isolationist up until after WWII. I realize that you feel that we should have turned all power back into your infinitely more experienced management, but seeing as you couldn’t let a generation pass without engaging in yet another pissing match with the Germans and we ended up having to pay for the same real estate twice with waaay too many American lives, we decided to pass. Hope you understand our reasoning, but too bad if you don’t.

      The fact is, thanks to America, Great Britain hasn’t decimated the population of Europe again to keep Germany from getting too big for her britches for over seventy years. That’s three generations of Europeans that have been preserved … no thanks to you. I know that it must be frustrating indeed to see that even subjugated, Germany is a powerhouse country full of brilliant productive people. In a meritorious world, they’d be the damned superpower. But there are folks who want to kill the competition … literally … rather than step up and compete. I’m sorry that, in keeping you from causing the deaths of millions more, including the Irish, who still hate your guts, we have ruined your fun, but you are just going to have to find another way to express yourselves.

      Most of all, Anglo Saxon, I am putting you on notice that I will not let you get away with bashing my countrymen. It would be a good idea for you to show some civility when talking to them, because when a dog pisses on my rug, I rub his nose in it. I will not tolerate you blaming America for being dragged into the British Follies of WWI and WWII. Sneer at our sports all you will, but American men take ownership when they take their eye off the ball and fumble it. When you learn that ability, maybe you Brits can reconstruct some of your former glory. But if not, the next time you start nonsense that you can’t finish, kindly make believe my country does not exist and handle it yourselves!

    • Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
      January 4, 2011 - 6:43 am | Permalink

      Clytemnestra, that was awesome. I don’t know if Anglo Saxon is here to cause trouble or if he sincerely believes the drivel in that post.

      One thing I like to remind Europeans and other anti-Americans of: If the US had truly wanted to destroy German, Europe, Japan or anyone else, we had the unbridled power to do so after WWII. We had an absolute monopoly on nuclear weapons for 5 years. We could have started bombing and wiped out any population we wanted in short order. Instead, we spent that money on the Marshall Plan. You’re welcome

    • Clytemnestra's Gravatar Clytemnestra
      January 4, 2011 - 11:17 pm | Permalink

      Jason Speaks:

      “Clytemnestra, that was awesome. I don’t know if Anglo Saxon is here to cause trouble or if he sincerely believes the drivel in that post.”

      “One thing I like to remind Europeans and other anti-Americans of: If the US had truly wanted to destroy German, Europe, Japan or anyone else, we had the unbridled power to do so after WWII. We had an absolute monopoly on nuclear weapons for 5 years. We could have started bombing and wiped out any population we wanted in short order. Instead, we spent that money on the Marshall Plan. You’re welcome.”

      Thank you. Alas, Anglo Saxon does believe his own drivel. I’ve run into too many of his own ilk to believe otherwise. What parochial Americans who rarely to never take the Continental Tour, until Uncle Sam drafts them into another war to defend our cousins across the pond, is how used to having their asses kissed by obsequious, self-loathing American ex-pats they are. I ran into a number of British and German tourists. They were very nice, but they were quite unused to speaking to an American who didn’t preface all her statements with, “I’m sorry.” Anglo-Saxon isn’t the only one “over there” that does not understand that White Americans are not a bunch of Creoles without a real culture of their own. Once I made them cognizant of the fact that we are not prepared to give up our God and our guns and be good little Euro socialists, we all got along fine.

      The British are particularly hard-headed. If the Chinese can be considered the Jews of Asia, then the British are definitely the Jews of Europe. I am not saying they have the Cohen gene like the Sephardim and Ashkenazim, but they have that same entitled, we’re superior and how dare you consider yourselves our equals, literally kill the competition approach to other nations.

      Worse than any other European nation, they have that “never forgive, never forget, never learn” approach to history. I get sick of hearing from people who are even more pissed over an insult offered eight hundred years ago than eight minutes ago because they have had generations to brood over it. Moreover, I will always believe they got particularly pissed with Hitler over his Master Race schtick, because it conflicted with their British Israelite “Covenant People” schtick.

      In any case, I don’t have the patience to coddle people like that. I believe in allowing the cream to rise to the top even though I do not consider myself the crème de la crème of any society. I value competence over all. The British dropped the ball because their leadership was incompetent and too arrogant to recognize it. Yes, I recognize that we are right where they were seventy or eighty years ago.

      To give the British their propers, they conducted the business of their empire without apologies or self-loathing, they knew better than to buy friends, they pursued their own interests first and foremost. It is a shame that they could not recognize that, when you throw your competition into a ditch, you have to get down in that ditch with him and stay on top of him, lest he get up and kick your ass. Better to just man up and compete to the best of your ability than sacrifice generations of yourselves and your neighbors to keep him down.

      If we truly wanted to subjugate the world after WWII, we would have never instituted the Marshall Plan. The Soviet system would have eventually imploded, because it is not a practical system. .The Marshall Plan was definitely not good for us. And I wonder if really helped as much as we had hoped. Had we not bothered, we would still be enjoying the prosperity and security of the fifties. The rest of the world would still be too busy slowly but laboriously rebuilding itself to cause their neighbors any more trouble. Pax Americana would be the order of the day and I believe it would be more beneficial to everyone in the long run.

      America has bankrupted herself trying to uplift, defend and save everybody from themselves. We let our infrastructure crumble to build theirs, we put our espionage in harm’s way while they put their espionage in our factories. I don’t know if it was worth it. Still, I believe in the resiliency of White Americans and hopefully, we once we learn from this very expensive lesson which only underscored what Mama told always told us, “you can’t buy friends,” we will profit from our mistakes and build a stronger, better society that is too savvy to be dragged into another war.

      The British were stupid enough to “take up the White Man’s burden.” We compounded their folly by taking up EVERY man’s burden! And once a nation does that, it is not allowed to put it down until it ceases to exist. IMO, the Marshall Plan proved that you cannot save people from themselves if they are hell-bent on their own destruction. They just resent you for it. But that doesn’t mean you have to enable them in their stupidity, either, which is why I remain a staunch isolationist at heart.

  12. December 31, 2010 - 4:03 am | Permalink

    My two cents on the so-called 9/11 conspiracy:
    Who gives a ____?!
    If the Jews did it it just proves those involved were insane.
    If the Arabs did it it just proves those involved were insane.

  13. December 31, 2010 - 3:42 am | Permalink

    This story leaves me underwhelmed (though very well written) and points out more than anything the evil nature of fiction of all types;
    Suppose the story glorified arabs and denigrated Jews?
    That would only mean the fiction would be less fictional. But the fact remains it is still….fiction….

    But the greatest fiction of all in this particular movie is the premise that an American women/girl in her late teens travelling unsupervised in a foreign land could be a virgen.
    Now THAT is an assualt on logic.

  14. me's Gravatar me
    December 29, 2010 - 10:36 pm | Permalink

    Someday: “Coordinating the jet crash with a demolition and keeping the whole thing from the public would require massive operation and an extraordinary degree of control over all institutions in the USA. In short to do that they would have to totally run the USA. Yet they couldn’t fake a Iraqi nuclear, chemical, or germ weapons program to justify the invasion. It’s puerile and preposterous.”

    There is no reason to believe that 911 was a massive operation requiring an extraordinary degree of control over all institutions in the USA. Black ops are compartmentalized. Classified information is disseminated on a need to know basis. Most participants would perform extremely simple operations and be completely ignorant of the goal. The handful of “middle-eastern looking men” responsible for carrying out the demolition would have been quarantined, then spirited out of the country to the middle east as soon as American airports re-opened.

    It was never politically necessary to fake an Iraqi nuclear, chemical, or germ weapons program.

    • Svend's Gravatar Svend
      December 30, 2010 - 9:17 am | Permalink

      Right. It was not at all necessary to fake a program in Iraq.

      When you have all the media in your pocket such concerns fade away.

    • Someday's Gravatar Someday
      December 30, 2010 - 3:30 pm | Permalink
  15. Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
    December 29, 2010 - 6:02 pm | Permalink

    Ciaran, I did see the dancing Israelis video and I think it should be investigated more. I know that according to that report several Israelis were held in the US for quite some time. I know this because the report was broadcast several times on Fox News along with discussion by two different reporters in a lengthy segment. I’m not quite sure why the conspirators allowed Fox to broadcast such a thing, since people smart enough and powerful enough to control this conspiracy, would most likely have control of Fox.

    So, It isn’t that there wasn’t something fishy going on, in some sense. Maybe the Israelis had foreknowledge for example. But the “strong” case is less likely to me and to most people. Meaning, the US gov’t or parts of it helping to plan the attack, helping bring the buildings down, covering it up later, working with powerful media insiders to cover it up, faking cell phone calls from the plane, coordinating with the media in the years before 911 to prepare American minds for the attacks with movies and television shows, etc., or some combination of those things.

    But, I get that some guys feel it is fully proved. So OK. I don’t think it is proven enough in the public mind until you get more evidence, but we’ll see.

  16. barb's Gravatar barb
    December 29, 2010 - 2:28 am | Permalink

    “Nobody is stopping anybody from making movies or television programs that are clean, wholesome, family entertainment. Nobody is forcing anyone to go to any movie they don’t want to see, or watch television programs that offend them.”

    Merlin Miller is someone who IS attempting to make wholesome family movies — and who has discovered there IS some “someones” stopping it. His article explicating how the stoppage is achieved ran here at Occ Obs in 2009.
    http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/Miller-Americana.html
    So, Mr. Miller has formed Americana Pictures too try to make good films OUTSIDE the Hollywood monopoly.
    http://www.americana-pictures.com/

    But note, it is only NOW, after Mel Gibson, with his billions and his personal star-power, showed us the way by making Passion of the Christ and distributing it through churches, as well as the emergence of cheap CGI techniques, that non-Hollywood movies stand a chance of being both good and profitable.

    Will he be successful? Time will tell. I’m certainly rooting for him.

  17. Someday's Gravatar Someday
    December 28, 2010 - 3:51 pm | Permalink

    Edmund Connelly has made two comments the first after I asked ‘ Why would a conspiracy broadcast a fictional account of their secret plan. How would that be anything but an insane risk for them ?’. Connelly failed to explain why a conspiracy would need to set about “preparing the minds” of people to “see” an attack on important buildings in NYC. ( and why the scare quotes around the word ‘see’ if not to imply that people did not really see the planes hit the WTC ). He failed to explain why it would not be an insane risk to broadcast the plot and simply asserted “there is little risk of exposure “. Allow me to explain something which seems to have escaped the notice of the fool Connelly. In the lone Gunmen episode here it was a faction of the the US government which was doing the remote controlled passenger Jet attack on the WTC to engineer a US invasion of a foreign country – not Arabs or Muslims . That is more or less what you say was the actual conspiracy!

    And the reason they did this was to get the public to see what actually did happen. Why would it be so difficult for people to believe their own eyes about planes hit the WTC?

    In his second comment Connelly says “But I DID imply that planes did not take down the towers (especially Building 7).”

    To do that in a way that would stand a chance of withstanding intense scrutiny of the film of the collapses may be technically possible but it would require total unquestioned access to the inner supporting structure of the building. Coordinating the jet crash with a demolition and keeping the whole thing from the public would require massive operation and an extraordinary degree of control over all institutions in the USA. In short to do that they would have to totally run the USA. Yet they couldn’t fake a Iraqi nuclear, chemical, or germ weapons program to justify the invasion. It’s puerile and preposterous.

    I am disconcerted by the editorial policy which allows posts like this

  18. Matt's Gravatar Matt
    December 28, 2010 - 11:28 am | Permalink

    Very good topic, jews are the ones behind the porn industry and international sex trade. The jew makes a film blaming others for it? that’s why it’s fiction, if it was a non fiction film, the rosenburgs would be the masterinds behind the scam, the attorney general would be someone named bloomberg, and old eddie the crackhead would be the one picking the girls up off the streets and malls.

  19. svend's Gravatar svend
    December 28, 2010 - 9:26 am | Permalink
  20. I's Gravatar I
    December 28, 2010 - 5:31 am | Permalink

    There is no evidence for the official story of 9/11. It’s all just government and mass media assertion. If you think the government and mass media are pathological liars and fabricators, as I do, then why would you believe the story of Osama and the 19 Arabs? What evidence is there for it that can be independently verified? The people who promote the official story have nothing to back it up with.

    • Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
      December 28, 2010 - 6:45 am | Permalink

      Maybe you can join a team of researchers to find more evidence for that claim. We can argue about it here, but it doesn’t really make anything happen. You need more evidence from more sources.

    • Ciaran's Gravatar Ciaran
      December 28, 2010 - 9:02 am | Permalink

      Jason – you have seen the Dancing Jews videos, right? I mean – you’ve seen those videos? Seen their interviews, on Israeli TV, anfter they were “deported”/hastily removed out of the USA?

      You’ve seen that stuff, right?

    • I's Gravatar I
      December 29, 2010 - 3:44 am | Permalink

      Maybe you can join a team of researchers to find more evidence for that claim. We can argue about it here, but it doesn’t really make anything happen. You need more evidence from more sources.

      Maybe you can join a team of researchers to find more evidence for the claim that Osama bin Laden was responsible for 9/11. We can argue about it here, but it doesn’t really make anything happen. You need more evidence from more sources.

    • Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
      December 29, 2010 - 5:08 am | Permalink

      LOL – I have to admit that is funny I. Well it’s just a reality that the onus is on you in a practical sense. The so-called official story is more or less accepted by the majority. So you have to find ways to challenge that version in the mind of the public. And I think to gain new people to your side, that will require more hard evidence, not so much talking about the nefarious nature of the government, the motives of various characters, etc. And yes I understand you believe there is evidence now, but if you want to truly build a case that convinces the majority, you will most likely need something much stronger.

      Otherwise, the current version pretty much remains dominant. But, if you are happy with how things are, then OK.

    • ben tillman's Gravatar ben tillman
      January 2, 2011 - 3:09 am | Permalink

      Jason Speaks:

      Maybe you can join a team of researchers to find more evidence for that claim.

      He didn’t make a factual “claim” that evidence could support or disprove. He pointed out a fact that is not subject to disputation because it is a matter of elementary logic. Everyone who believes the official story does so simply because he has uncritically accepted what the government/media told him. There is no other possible source of the belief.

  21. Edmund Connelly's Gravatar Edmund Connelly
    December 27, 2010 - 10:54 pm | Permalink

    Wow, lots of very good comments. Thanks.

    For instance, Jason asked: “Are you saying there was conscious collaboration between media companies, writers, and producers to prepare the minds of the American people for 9-11 and the earlier WTC attack, before they happened?”

    Yes. That’s why I included the E. Michael Jones piece about the Jack Bauer show “24.” Check the link to the interview with creator Joel Surnow.

    Also, I’ve sourced scholar James Petras and lawyer Jeff Gates many, many times in my writing. Petras has an excellent description of the “Zionist Power Configuration” that shows the mix of conscious and non-conscious efforts to promote Jewish interests. I _highly_ recommend his books.

    Gates has given me the “preparing the minds” idea. Read his “Guilt by Association.” He also believes Samuel Huntington’s “Clash” thesis was part of the campaign to “prepare the minds” for attacks on Moslem countries. (BTW, are you sure Huntington was a Jew? Where’s the documentation?)

    My work appears online in The Occidental Quarterly, TOQ online and here at TOO, but many links are old or have been changed. I do hope readers will try to go back to read my stuff, particularly the longer TOQ essays, including the Hollywood series (the next of which will be on Hollywood’s smear job of the WASP–can anyone say “Meet the Fockers”?)

    As for 9/11, I never said nor implied no planes hit the WTC. But I DID imply that planes did not take down the towers (especially Building 7). I’m not going to argue these points here, however. Instead, the one book I can recommend (among so many good ones) is David Ray Griffin’s “The New Pearl Harbor Revisited.” The official story is bunk. To me, the official story is not even in the ballpark of plausible. What really happened? I don’t know.

    • Ciaran's Gravatar Ciaran
      December 28, 2010 - 9:00 am | Permalink

      I cannot watch those “Fockers” excretions. They are foul, truly foul. The Judaic POV on full display. Obscene, smug, filthy-minded trash.

    • December 28, 2010 - 9:49 am | Permalink

      My theory is that sequels to hits become more politically engaged because they know they have a built-in audience. The Addams Family values is one example. TV series are the same. Think All in the Family or Roseanne. The second Fokkers movie stressed the Jewish inlaws and it looked like DeNiro had a yamulka on in one of the previews. But I haven’t seen the movie.

    • Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
      December 29, 2010 - 5:39 am | Permalink

      I’m now much more aware of this pattern of WASP/White bashing in movies due to KMD and the authors on this site. Even vulgar, low-brow movies like Porky’s portrays the White “rednecks” as the enemy (uneducated, hateful, bigoted) and the Jewish character as the most enlightened. In fact, one of the young men in the movie finds redemption by publicly rejecting his anti-Semitic father.

      Another example is Clint Eastwood’s movie Gran Torino. I had several friends who were taken in by the main character’s use of ethnic slurs. They found the seemingly un-PC nature of the movie refreshing. But really it is a story about a White man rejecting his own family, disinheriting them, leaving his inheritance to recent Hmong immigrants, and then literally giving up his life – literally – for a Hmong acquaintance. It is implied the Clint character committed war crimes against helpless Koreans during his service. I would like to see people like Clint Eastwood, who rides on a large White male audience, called out for using this audience and spitting on them at the same time.

  22. Ilyes's Gravatar Ilyes
    December 27, 2010 - 9:51 pm | Permalink

    So, Arabs/Muslims are always portrayed in a bad way… We know that. What can you expect from Hollywood? But how does the author get the idea that: “Muslims are indeed the most likely people on the planet these days to be terrorists.”
    I’ma Muslim and my view is that terrorists are from the Secret Services of the West and Mossad. Those evildoers use patsies with some “islamic” background… It’s been proven in so many “terror plots” recently… See, bombings by “Muslims” always work well in Muslim countries like Irak but miserably fail in the West… Looks like those terrorists are smarter when they operate against their own people. Interesting, isn’t it? How logical is that? I don’t know. The logic in the West isn’t Descartes’. It’s more like filthy Zionists’.

  23. Clytemnestra's Gravatar Clytemnestra
    December 27, 2010 - 8:16 pm | Permalink

    I don’t know if I believe this Miscegenation comes “Da Jooze” per se, so much as the SWPL crowd that wants to breed a more docile Helot class. They thought they were onto something with the Mestizos, but the SWPLs didn’t realize that all those humble, hard-working people who want to pay dangerous coyotes five thousand dollars just for the privilege of wiping their babies’ asses and mowing their lawns at coolie wages are, in fact, advance troops of Mexican Nationalists are into taking over the joint. The Mestizos have this nasty habit of voting in their own people the moment they achieve any kind of superior demographics and it doesn’t matter how much a Gringo or Negro or Jew politician may have pandered to them in the past.

    Whites and Negros have a proven track record of being “Yellow Dog” Democrats and “Republicans,” it’s just that both races, in their own way, have certain racial traits that have proven problematic to TPTB and their control of us as homogenous groups. I think they believe that the correct mixture of Negro and Caucasian genes will wipe our White independent streak and the unpredictable Negro violence streak out. So far, though, mulattos have proven to be smarter, but not less violent than full-blooded Negros. I don’t know what, if any, research has been done on Negro-Asiatic breeds.

    The problem with conspiracy theories is that the Usual Suspects are either Incredibly Evil or Incredibly Stupid. The biggest disasters in the history of mankind come out of simple incompetence. I wonder how much Jewish nepotism leads to Jewish incompetence in the end? And that ‘s what gets them run out of one country after another. History dictates that most Jews manage to keep it together for a generation or two, but eventually the situation deteriorates. We’ve heard of companies that the government felt were “too big to fail” and so they jump in and bail them out, but we may be witnessing a phenomenon called “Too Jewish To Fail” syndrome.

    So what if in the case of the entertainment industry, you have some brilliant, innovative, creative Jewish entertainers who are responsible for the really good movies back in Hollywood’s Golden Age, but then, thanks to their own religious system that not only encourages group cohesion, but probably punishes going outside the established norms, they have to allow their mediocre or downright incompetent children or those of friends and relatives to take their place?

    It’s not just the move industry; look at how “Pinch” Sulzberger took Arthur Sulzberger’s legacy, the New York Times and ran it into the ground and it’s not like the old man didn’t know what a flaky leftist libtard loon his son was. But he let him take over anyway.

    I remember Florence King’s essay, “The Year Without A Kennedy,” where she mentioned that the old WASP elite recognized mediocre and incompetent offspring when they had them and, aside from allotting them a trust fund to keep them comfortable for the rest of their lives, allowed them to fail and fade into obscurity.

    • Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
      December 27, 2010 - 9:05 pm | Permalink

      Clytemnestra mentions how nice the SWPLs thought Mexicans would be … nice, humble, eager to please creatures … and our now shocked at how aggressive they really are in numbers.

      This is an obvious lesson we should drill into SWPLs: Everyone is nice when they are powerless and in very numbers. I keep having White friends tell me how “nice” this group or that group is, when said groups is powerless and needy. But when their numbers swell and they have full citizenship, they – and especially their children – are not so nice.

  24. Jim's Gravatar Jim
    December 27, 2010 - 5:45 pm | Permalink

    Getting back to the theme of Mr. Connelly’s article a bit, here’s what Chabad Rabbi Friedman (who frequently touts peace and love) said last year (speaking of Arabs):

    “The only way to fight a moral war is the Jewish way: Destroy their holy sites. Kill men, women and children (and cattle),” Friedman wrote in response to the question posed by Moment Magazine for its “Ask the Rabbis” feature.

    Friedman argued that if Israel followed this wisdom, there would be “no civilian casualties, no children in the line of fire, no false sense of righteousness, in fact, no war.”

    “I don’t believe in Western morality,” he wrote. “Living by Torah values will make us a light unto the nations who suffer defeat because of a disastrous morality of human invention.”

    This is taken from Haaretz:
    http://www.haaretz.com/news/chabad-rabbi-jews-should-kill-arab-men-women-and-children-during-war-1.277616

    • Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
      December 27, 2010 - 6:02 pm | Permalink

      That’s an interesting article. This line stood out:

      ““The only way to fight a moral war is the Jewish way: Destroy their holy sites.”

      That’s been the approach used against our traditional American values! They have been on a seek and destroy mission against our most sacred concepts and heroes.

      I notice that Foxman had to distance himself from these statements and called them racist. I think there is a lesson in that for us: If you want to be taken seriously, don’t say crazy things.

    • Der weiße Engel's Gravatar Der weiße Engel
      December 27, 2010 - 10:05 pm | Permalink

      Jim, quoting Friedman: “Living by Torah values will make us a light unto the nations who suffer defeat because of a disastrous morality of human invention.”

      I think this must be a typo or a misquote. Surely he meant that living by Torah values will ensure they DON’T suffer defeat, because “Torah values” include genocides of exactly the kind the rabbi endorses. Maybe if more Christians spent more time read their Bibles and less time kissing Jewish backsides the bloodthirstiness of Jews and their God would be better known among them. This is from the Book of Numbers:

      Campaign Against the Midianites

      31:6 So Moses sent them to the war, one thousand from every tribe, with Phinehas son of Eleazar the priest, who was in charge of the holy articles and the signal trumpets. 31:7 They fought against the Midianites, as the Lord commanded Moses, and they killed every male. 31:8 They killed the kings of Midian in addition to those slain – Evi, Rekem, Zur, Hur, and Reba – five Midianite kings. They also killed Balaam son of Beor with the sword.

      31:9 The Israelites took the women of Midian captives along with their little ones, and took all their herds, all their flocks, and all their goods as plunder. 31:10 They burned all their towns where they lived and all their encampments. 31:11 They took all the plunder and all the spoils, both people and animals. 31:12 They brought the captives and the spoils and the plunder to Moses, to Eleazar the priest, and to the Israelite community, to the camp on the plains of Moab, along the Jordan River across from Jericho. 31:13 Moses, Eleazar the priest, and all the leaders of the community went out to meet them outside the camp.

      The Death of the Midianite Women

      31:14 But Moses was furious with the officers of the army, the commanders over thousands and commanders over hundreds, who had come from service in the war. 31:15 Moses said to them, “Have you allowed all the women to live? 31:16 Look, these people through the counsel of Balaam caused the Israelites to act treacherously against the Lord in the matter of Peor – which resulted in the plague among the community of the Lord! 31:17 Now therefore kill every boy, and kill every woman who has had sexual intercourse with a man. 31:18 But all the young women who have not had sexual intercourse with a man will be yours.

      Also, in 1 Samuel 15, exactly the same plan that Friedman recommends is followed:

      The LORD Rejects Saul as King

      1 Samuel said to Saul, “I am the one the LORD sent to anoint you king over his people Israel; so listen now to the message from the LORD. 2 This is what the LORD Almighty says: ‘I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt. 3 Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy[a] all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’”

      In the rest of the chapter, Saul incurs the LORD’s wrath because he DOESN’T commit a good enough genocide, sparing the Amalekite King and a few of the best cattle. Later, even these are killed, but it’s still no good, as the LORD’s taste for human blood isn’t properly sated by a belated compliance. Genocide is the Jewish way, and has been for thousands of years.

    • Jim's Gravatar Jim
      January 2, 2011 - 9:51 pm | Permalink

      Der weiße Engel ,
      Yes I’ve always wondered about that passage of the medianite women and the brutality surrounding it. Modern Christian preachers “cherry pick” (as Pat Buchanan might say) the phrases form the bible that promote/validate either their “peace love and understanding’ message from scripture or their portrayal of jews as a noble people.

      Another Old Testament passage that always perplexed me also refered to the (i think) medianite conquest, and claimed that a certain percentage of women captives were offered “as tribute to the Lord. ” My understanding is that when cattle were offered as tribute, they were slaughtered on sacrificial altars. Could this have been the same fate of these poor women? If so, the Hebrews were a loathsome people.

  25. Someday's Gravatar Someday
    December 27, 2010 - 4:47 pm | Permalink

    Israel is a paper tiger, they were defeated by a rag tag militia in 2006 and Israel does not know how to defeat Hizbullah. Yet some people like to think that Israelis/Jews are ten feet tall maybe life is too prosaic for sensitive artistic types like Truthers, they want to believe in occult forces. Well I have news for you Jews don’t have special power to control minds, nor do they possess awesome technological competence.

    For all they knew 9/11 could easily have caused a recession or depression and would have led to a wave of nationalism with cataclysmic events on Jewish interests. Any conceivable false flag 9/11 has insurmountable technical problems ( i just don’t believe they have the means) and assumes that Israeli agents totally control every level of US government institutions.
    So why’d they take the insane risk of attempting an insane 9/11 false flag op if they already ran everything eh?

    But as we know from Professor MacDonald’s work they’ve not wreaked so much havoc by blowing things up but influencing gentile elites – working quite openly – and thus confirmed by Jewish fingerprints all over culture and politics. (The Iraq war is a particularly well documented example Stephen J Sniegoski).

  26. December 27, 2010 - 4:26 pm | Permalink

    “Trackback” How ironic seeing that Stormfront is doing the exact same thing as Hollyweird is, and is now a totally compromised front. Poor David Duke, he tried and tried to counter the neo-con propaganda there but was hooted down and derided, can you imagine?

    I do feel that Edmund is documenting the final ending of America and the race. I have struggled to maintain a positive view of our shared goal of white survival however reality is what remains after you stop believing in it.

    Because it’s time to realize that the averaage white goy is not up to snuff – and no one is going to save you.

    Keep telling yourself, it’s only a religion . . . it’s only a religion.

    A religion with the resources, foresight, and outlook enabling it to engage in a thirty year long breeding program to maximize genetic fitness.

    Why, it’s no different than the Episcopal church I was brought up in!

    The New York Times
    February 18, 2003
    Using Genetic Tests, Ashkenazi Jews Vanquish a Disease
    By GINA KOLATA

  27. Optimistic Truther's Gravatar Optimistic Truther
    December 27, 2010 - 4:17 pm | Permalink

    Jeff Maylor says:

    “OK, everyone who disagrees with you is just a big fat fatty fat liar. Good lord. ”

    Obviously, I didn’t say that anyone who disagrees with me is a liar, I specifically pointed out the lies that “Someday” and “Jason Speaks” were telling.

    “Go prove your case.”

    http://www.buildingwhat.org/ the families of the 911 victims and the Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth have made the case, and the 911 Commissioners agree that there is an ongoing cover-up and that we weren’t told the truth.

    I am certainly not trying to convince you of anything about 911, but I am interested in stopping the smears and lies about the 911 Truth movement and the families of the 911 victims from posters like “Jason Speaks” and “Someday.”

    • Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
      December 27, 2010 - 5:11 pm | Permalink

      OK, I don’t know why my name is in “quotes”, but ok. I said I think the theory is speculation at best. How did that smear 911 families? Is disagreeing with 911 families the same as “smearing”? And don’t hide behind them. If you have a case, go work on it.

  28. Optimistic Truther's Gravatar Optimistic Truther
    December 27, 2010 - 4:03 pm | Permalink

    “With facts. Not a case built on how mean those who disbelieve are.”

    Again, this is an obviously false characterization of what I said, exactly as “Jason Speaks” is falsely characterizing the families of the 911 victims and Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth.

    I’m not trying to “prove” anything about the events of 911 with my observations of the deception and lying from online posters like “Jason Speaks” and “Someday,” merely to shed some light on the “911 Liars Movement” as it should be called.

    • Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
      December 27, 2010 - 4:10 pm | Permalink

      OK, everyone who disagrees with you is just a big fat fatty fat liar. Good lord.

      Anyway, why focus on us? Go prove your case.

  29. Optimistic Truther's Gravatar Optimistic Truther
    December 27, 2010 - 3:43 pm | Permalink

    And now “Jason Speaks” takes the lie that “Someday” told and runs with it.

    Wow, if that is his claim, then he is way out there. Sadly, my experience over the years is that you absolutely cannot argue people back to sanity on issues like this. If they won’t honestly confront the problems with their theories, won’t even acknowledge them, then they are being guided by something other than reason. Usually some mix of emotions and an intense desire for it to be true. They confuse their intense desire to have knock down proof of something with a form of “insight”.

    Thus now “Jason Speaks” is relaying his supposed experiences with 911 Truthers, and gives us an over-the-internet psychological diagnosis. “Jason Speaks” also points to some bizarre theory and demands that 911 Truthers “prove” this bizarre theory that they never advocated.

    What “Someday” and “Jason Speaks” are doing is simply trying to smear the families of the 911 victims and their supporters such as the Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth as “crazy” because they are trying to stop the cover-up that the 911 Commissioners told us about.

    http://buildingwhat.org/

    Again one can only speculate on motivation but the actions are clear.

    • Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
      December 27, 2010 - 3:52 pm | Permalink

      OK, Optimistic Truther, all I can say is go forward and continue to build your case with facts. With facts. Not a case built on how mean those who disbelieve are. If you are honestly convinced that more investigation is warranted, then there is a lot of work for you to do.

  30. Someday's Gravatar Someday
    December 27, 2010 - 3:16 pm | Permalink

    “Mainly, they confuse proof with the idea something might be possible”.

    Yeah, like this.

    Edmund Connelly seems to be arguing no planes actually hit the WTC while a subtle form of mind control was used to make people think they had seen just that happening.

    • Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
      December 27, 2010 - 3:34 pm | Permalink

      Nice Randi link.

      “Edmund Connelly seems to be arguing no planes actually hit the WTC while a subtle form of mind control was used to make people think they had seen just that happening.”

      Wow, if that is his claim, then he is way out there. Sadly, my experience over the years is that you absolutely cannot argue people back to sanity on issues like this. If they won’t honestly confront the problems with their theories, won’t even acknowledge them, then they are being guided by something other than reason. Usually some mix of emotions and an intense desire for it to be true. They confuse their intense desire to have knock down proof of something with a form of “insight”.

      Same situation with the Moon Landing Hoax theory. You can argue around the facts all day long, but they won’t budge. And eventually, they accuse you of being a shill for NASA – LOL.

      I would tell 9-11 conspiracy theorists that if you want to gain a wider audience (and improve your own thinking), at least publicly acknowledge you are in the realm of speculation. That would actually give you more credibility, not less.

    • Optimistic Truther's Gravatar Optimistic Truther
      December 27, 2010 - 3:36 pm | Permalink

      Someday says:

      Edmund Connelly seems to be arguing no planes actually hit the WTC while a subtle form of mind control was used to make people think they had seen just that happening.

      But of course, Connelly said no such thing. “Someday” is creating a strawman and then declaring it absurd. “Someday” is doing this intentionally, specifically, over the issue of Israeli and/or US complicity in the 911 attacks.

      “Someday” is declaring it out of bounds for discussion, and creates bizarre conspiracy theories like “no planes hit the WTC” and falsely ascribes those to his targets.

      While one can only speculate about motives, the actions are clear.

      No one in this discussion is claiming that “no planes hit the WTC” and everyone can clearly see that no one is claiming that “no planes hit the WTC” yet there are still people lying and saying that someone is claiming that “no plane hit the WTC.”

      Why is there this deceptive and hostile attack on the 911 Truth movement? The families of 911 victims and Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth have never claimed that “no planes hit the WTC” yet online there are presumably thousands of posters lying and say they are. Why?

      http://www.buildingwhat.org/

    • ben tillman's Gravatar ben tillman
      January 2, 2011 - 2:56 am | Permalink

      Jason Speaks –

      “I would tell 9-11 conspiracy theorists that if you want to gain a wider audience (and improve your own thinking), at least publicly acknowledge you are in the realm of speculation.”

      YOU are a 9-11 conspiracy theorist. People who doubt the self-serving story told by the obviously guilty prime suspect are not.

  31. Someday's Gravatar Someday
    December 27, 2010 - 2:38 pm | Permalink

    it would not have been “simple” to fake and plant a nuke, and the fact that a nuke was not planted does not prove anything in regards to Israel, the Iraq war, nor Israeli complicity in the 911 attacks.

    Planting evidence of an ongoing Iraqi nuclear program to justify the invasion would have been child’s play compared to a 9/11 false flag operation.

    If you are in the market for an entertaining sci- fi conspiracy depicting a remote controlled plane being crashed into a building I’m here to help 30 secs to 2min 10 secs.

    • Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
      December 27, 2010 - 2:54 pm | Permalink

      I’ve noticed it’s impossible to get anywhere with the 9-11 false flag crowd. It’s more like an article of faith. If you question their conspiracy theories it’s like you are denying the divinity of Christ. Mainly, they confuse proof with the idea something might be possible. So they spin a theory that sounds vaguely plausible, based on discrepancies of some kind and possible motives, and they consider that a proven case. When in reality it is little more than a reason to investigate more, at best.

    • Optimistic Truther's Gravatar Optimistic Truther
      December 27, 2010 - 2:56 pm | Permalink

      “Planting evidence of an ongoing Iraqi nuclear program to justify the invasion would have been child’s play compared to a 9/11 false flag operation. ”

      Even if true, it’s irrelevant and doesn’t prove anything. But planting evidence of a nuclear program would have been difficult when the entire world, including factions in the US establishment, was “watching” so to speak. There *were* accusations that the Bush administration or allied factions (read Israel) were trying to plant evidence of WMDs in Iraq, and the entire “outing of Valerie Plame” scandal was a reflection of the establishment infighting over this.

      Continuing with the basic tactic, he then links to some comedy show about “space aliens” or some such nonsense. The most clever are those who talk about “Bush doing 911 with “directed energy beams” such as the disinfo artists Judy Wood of Clemsen University and Gregory Jenkins of S911Truth.

      That’s the basic tactics of those trying to cover up Israeli and US complicity in the 911 attacks: first, simply call anything that differs from the 911 Commission Report “crazy” then “debunk” bizarre conspiracy theories promoted by the same “debunkers.”

      The time for arguing with these people is over; those who want to help get justice and find the truth about 911 are encouraged to help the Building What campaign, run by 100 families of the victims of 911 and the Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth.

      http://www.buildingwhat.org/

    • Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
      December 27, 2010 - 3:49 pm | Permalink

      Optimistic Truther, all I can say is I’ve heard all those arguments for 9-11 conspiracy theories and they aren’t very convincing to me. So, unless something changes, it will forever be relegated to the same bin Moon Landing Hoaxes are kept in. Which is my way of saying, you all need to find new facts, not focus on how everyone that disagrees with you is part of a grand conspiracy.

  32. Someday's Gravatar Someday
    December 27, 2010 - 1:45 pm | Permalink

    “preparing the minds” of people to “see” an attack on important buildings in NYC.

    It wasn’t just any important building it was the WTC which Arabs had already tried to demolish ( with a massive bomb). And it was reported by the BBC well before 9/11that an Islamic preacher in London was advocating hijacking planes and crashing them into skyscrapers.

    The Israel Lobby/Neocons were hurt by the failure to find Saddam’s nuke after invading Iran, so why didn’t they fake one?: It would have been simple to fake an Iraqi nuke and plant it. The fact they didn’t proves that Israel/ The Jews do not have the capability for that kind of operation. Anyone who thinks they could have done 9/11 ( a virtually science fiction level of technology ) is living in a fantasy world.

    Why would there be any need to prepare the minds” of people to “see” an attack on important buildings in NYC; obviously you don’t think that the buildings were struck by planes at all.

    Good luck with your mental problem.

    • Optimistic Truther's Gravatar Optimistic Truther
      December 27, 2010 - 2:12 pm | Permalink

      “It would have been simple to fake an Iraqi nuke and plant it. The fact they didn’t proves that Israel/ The Jews do not have the capability for that kind of operation.”

      Both sentences are false; it would not have been “simple” to fake and plant a nuke, and the fact that a nuke was not planted does not prove anything in regards to Israel, the Iraq war, nor Israeli complicity in the 911 attacks.

      “obviously you don’t think that the buildings were struck by planes at all. Good luck with your mental problem.”

      Here comes the ad hominem and the cries of “insane” straight out of 1984 or the USSR. It shows more than anything the intellectual dishonesty of those trying to cover up Israeli and US complicity in the 911 attacks.

      It’s great that you bring up the attacks on the WTC in 1993, considering that the FBI had an infiltrator in the terrorist group and failed to prevent the bombing which killed six and injured a thousand.

      Here’s Dan Rather on CBS news:

    • Ciaran's Gravatar Ciaran
      December 27, 2010 - 2:34 pm | Permalink

      So – the Israelis, with thier high-tech industries, and their militatrism in extremis, and their American Goy Military factotums and minions, would not ever be capable of staging an attack requiring the “science fiction technology” as the ttack on the WTC was – yet a handful of Arabs, coming from countires tht possess limited militaries, and even less technological development, would be capable of staging 9/11/01?

      Uh-huh.

      That makes sense.

      Someday – you are slandering other posters, re: mental issues?

      Were yo uaware of the fact that Jews have 4x the genetic illnesses of any other Race, and these genetic diseases usually result in cretinism and insanity?

    • Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
      December 27, 2010 - 2:49 pm | Permalink

      Yeah this is the point I’ve never seen answered by the Alex Jones type of conspiracy theorist. If they could pull off and and manage to conceal the crime of the century (9-11) it sure seems like they could plant a few chemical weapons or evidence of a nuclear program, in order to justify an invasion. Alex Jones is not a reliable source of anything.

  33. December 27, 2010 - 1:07 pm | Permalink

    I’ve seen Taken and was somewhat surprised to see muslims as the bad guys. I figured CAIR would be all over that like stink on YKW, but it must have passed below their radar or they had bigger fish to fry.

  34. Svend's Gravatar Svend
    December 27, 2010 - 12:15 pm | Permalink

    Last night my wife and I attempted to watch a movie for the first time in years. We couldn’t get more than 30 minutes in to Cyrus and less than 10 min into Scott Pilgrim vs. the World. We watched an episode of MST3k instead.

    I suggest you all attempt Cyrus. It is Jewish neurosis writ large. Good lord, they are neurotic. I saw an episode of Larry David’s Curb Your Enthusiasm for the first time last week. The plot was that he saw his therapist out on the beach, with neurotic shenanigans to follow. He’s a regular (jew) guy with millions and no struggles and he needs a therapist. Neurotic. Weird, neurotic little people. I live among Europeans exclusively and none of them/us behave like that.

    The whole of the media is dysfunctional, neurotic, degenerate bile. Jerry Springer, Maury Povich, Sally Angeline Lowenthal (Sally Jessy Raphael), Jenny Jones (Janina Stranski), Ricki Lake.. All jews and all pushing degenerate values upon the underclass. It is disgusting.

    From this day forward, I will never consume a second of the pollution again.

  35. Jim's Gravatar Jim
    December 27, 2010 - 12:12 pm | Permalink

    The only major theatrical release that came close to portraying (some) jews in a negative light was “Eyewitness” from 1981 (starring William Hurt and Sigourney Weaver.) I’d recommend that everyone who hasn’t seen it go out and rent it (if it’s still available.)

    The story involves an American jewish underground group who is smuggling jews out of Soviet Russia. Of course, it portrays many jewish characters as selfless and well meaning, (lest we jet the wrong ideas about jews) but it’s really weird to see other jews who are pursuing jewish causes portrayed as warped and even evil. You’re not gonna see that very often in Hollywood. It was made 30 years ago and I’ve never seen anything like it since.

  36. ionstorm's Gravatar ionstorm
    December 27, 2010 - 10:44 am | Permalink

    When [IF] Americans take their country back (though, sadly I doubt that would become attainable given the demographic realities in the US) The first thing should be done is to shut down Hollywood; it has been nothing but a mind-poison and an instrumental in the element of obfuscation used by the.power.that.be.

    Furthermore, Huntington’s [a Jew] utterly ridicules book ‘clash of civilizations’ [sounds like a video game] was thoroughly dismissed by many even in the West as too simplistic and delusional; it’s just an attempt to condition the masses, same like 9-11′s fairy tale “report” and Das Kapital, to accept the coming disasters in Iraq, Afghanistan and who knows where to.

    The most absurd claim made by Huntington is that China have a secret “alliance” with the Islamic world to destroy the West, why China want to destroy an important source of income, a huge market and traid partner; these same occusations are made daily against Iran when they claim that Iran’s “ballistic missile can target parts of Europe” and so on, while in fact it’s nothing more than a scrabble: playing with words.

    China have an alliance with Pakistan because of India, Not because of “secret” intent. China is an “ally” of Iran because the same reason America is an “ally” of Gulf Arab states; energy security. The only difference though, is that China knows where and what its true interests are, China have a clear and coherent policies- the policies of ‘what’s good for China’ not for the AIPAC.

    It’s clash of interests, nothing more.

  37. anne's Gravatar anne
    December 27, 2010 - 9:45 am | Permalink

    IIt produces a reality as well as describes what was previously produced as reality, by using that paradigm)

    • Doug's Gravatar Doug
      December 27, 2010 - 11:14 am | Permalink

      Thanks for you exposition, Anne. You are absolutely correct.

  38. anne's Gravatar anne
    December 27, 2010 - 9:44 am | Permalink

    Whoops. I meant consciously malicious. Once a new paradigm or meme is implanted in the psyche—- the work is done. Other people simply replay it. Did somebody, somewhere sit down and THINK about a interpretive narrative that would implant these new American myths?—- obviously yes. We have the records of this, in the history of the formation of psychiatry. Should the public question the long-term effects of why they should buy into this “trauma scene” (that has become a new staple of how they see the world and how they believe is right to interpret random data they experience)— yes. A lot of money went into the creation of this one idea and its replay. It is MORE THAN “true” or “not true” (as a theory)—- it is an IMPLANTED NEW PARADIGM that is largely now categorically accepted by the public as the correct response to understanding what is happening in the raw data outside themselves. The new paradigms are logically disprovable, but once accepted are replayed: “language is both descriptive then, and productive.”

  39. Rod Mckenzie's Gravatar Rod Mckenzie
    December 27, 2010 - 9:43 am | Permalink

    I stopped going to the movies when they started having negro heroes, scientists, leading men etc. I was so turned off by them I stopped going to the movies. The only thing that will send me to a theater will will be a movie like “Catch Me if You Can” or the occasional documentary or foreign film. I couldn’t sit through a film like “Taken”. I would leave almost immediately.

    • Luke's Gravatar Luke
      December 27, 2010 - 10:28 am | Permalink

      Rod and I could be related, because I’m the same way. In my area, before the recent big bankruptcy shuttering of a large number of Blockbuster video stores near me occurred – whenever I would get bored, and decide to stop by one and check to see what kind of movies were available, I started noticing a nauseating abundance of new movies that had negro leading actors in them. Always paired with blond haired, blue eyed, attractive White females. At the same time, I began to notice a huge decline in the number of new movies that were featuring the ‘White Male’ leading star prototype that has been such a successful money maker for Hollywood for the last century. And, even in the movie selections that weren’t top shelf material – it became increasing impossible to find ANY movie that didn’t shove unwanted negroes in my face as supporting cast members. I recently watched a Kevin Costner movie from 2008 called ‘Swing Vote’, and in it – his little white daughter’s ‘best’ friend in school was a little negro boy, and while the age of the two kids was a bit young to openly push romance – it was clear as day to me that this was the insinuation and the agenda behind that casting decision. The jews are now openly and aggressively going after our pre-puberty white daughters with their race mixing/white genocide propaganda. Rod is right – whites need to refuse to spend their money on movies or on cable subscriptions that push this kind of racially destructive filth.

  40. anne's Gravatar anne
    December 27, 2010 - 9:35 am | Permalink

    “….Are you saying there was conscious collaboration between media companies, writers, and producers to prepare the minds of the American people for 9-11 and the earlier WTC attack, before they happened? That seems highly unlikely….”

    Media collusion, like everywhere, is not an either/or. To underlings, some stories or types of stories just seem to get buzz or be “hot right now” or whatever. Look back on Mind Hunter, how it talked about “profiling,” then the literally hundreds of stories about the “genius white male” who always does the “ritual serial” murders and so on. This THEN BECAME a standard “American myth” through repetition.

    Or the imbedded story of TRAUMA. The myth of psychiatry is that trauma causes dissociation. This theme is in all movies. Some new trauma opens up an old trauma–the shrink can overstep ever bound to use this to make character “interventions,” and though reform and so on. It is the Given Plot (like in Shutter Island) and literally THOUSANDS of films, books, etc. It was splashed out as a theory and then is blindly disseminated, on some levels. Anyway—now you cannot tell someone otherwise (that that is not how real human personality works). And in fact, “naming brings into being.” And then in fact, it sort of does work that way (as long as the participants indoctrinated into ‘trauma theory’ (lingo, myths, practices, etc.) continued to be fed its products. Every film using this motif— remakes a depth paradigm for how a person can interpret. (Then THEY REPRODUCE the underlying meme).

    No one questions the value of Implanting this “Trauma theory model” into the consciousness of populations, least of all the public to whom it is done. That, like many other ideas, has become so standard (in only about 20 years) as never to even be questioned.

    That underlying meme will continue—-WHETHER the “enemies du jour” are Arabs or not. The enemies may change, but the UNDERLYING new consciousness-material is a true game changer. That’s what people, going a step deeper, aren’t considering at all, (and probably will not).

    The creation of the new HUMAN subject through the afternoon fair giving the new stay-at-home (state supported) moms, of tribunal t.v. (the five different “judge judys,” where the vision of a very different kind of court is shown to people who do not know better), and the shrink t.v. where the mental tribunal holds sway—as the people bare their souls before millions, and are told what to say, do, how to act, and so on. The world of tribunal judges and the psychiatric preisthood. Even if one “doesn’t like” those show, they are all that is available, and no matter what one’s attitude toward them, the MAIN IDEA is the implantation of a new vision of courts, and in this way the public is primed.

    But the average worker producing the ‘popular’ show FORMS, is just a person who wants a job, like anyone else. Maybe their folks were in that industry, or they just happened to get a job in it, and so on—with increasing consciousness up the ladder, like anywhere else. So, none of it may be very malicious.

  41. Anglo Saxon's Gravatar Anglo Saxon
    December 27, 2010 - 7:58 am | Permalink

    There is a cultural theory that posits American women so dominate their menfolk that any perceived attack on the freedom of women to deport themselves like common sluts (such as like learning how to “Pole Dance”) is an attack on human freedoms and thereby deserves a robust US military response.

    That young Arab boys succeed at growing into men without having to bulk up in the gym as if trying to emulate ‘The Hulk’, or without getting violent every Saturday night, or without trying to screw 50 girls before they reach their 20th birthday, is a major irritant and source of resentment to the average American male. The average American male is just putty in the hands of their manipulative and materialistic women; a fact that is a problem for the world, and not just one confined to Indiana, or Missouri, et al.

    It is the American males’ inability to grow into manhood without causing damage to others (outside of America) that is one of the primary drivers behind the widespread hatred of Arabs … and by extension, your psychotic hatred of Islam.

    I have lived in 3 Islamic countries, and consistently found Muslims to be the most enjoyable and trusting people to have around. Some of their cuisines are amongst the world’s best. Even their ‘veiled’ women readily beat American gals, with their notoriously loud mouths and huge thighs, in the sexual attraction stakes.

    Americans (in particular the white males) are being played like marionettes by a cunning people who have studied you closely, and know what makes (and does not make) you tick. Until you realize this, and until you understand that muscular bulk, aggression, and endless competitiveness does NOT define manhood, then there shall be no hope for you.

    And in case any of you are upset or angry at what I have just written, you should note that I have spent over 10 years of my life living/working in Islamic countries, have visited the USA twice, and I have also observed in four other countries (and at close quarters) the notorious “overseas paranoia” displayed by most American males. Leave your own borders and you get so frightened, your first and sometimes only response is to compensate by getting overly aggressive. That is one reason (presumably) why you believe you must cover this planet with US military bases, in the same way you covered the interior of a nascent USA with Forts to attack the noble Red Indians (whom you then more or less wiped out).

    It is not just the fault of the Jews: who are nothing but Saturn worshipping, ugly pussies from the Pontic Steppe. Believe it or not, and because of your present nature, you Americans would be a major problem even without those retards who live amongst you only to play you like violins.

    • Ex-Pro White Activist's Gravatar Ex-Pro White Activist
      December 27, 2010 - 9:56 am | Permalink

      I commend you for a superbly written polemic. Best of all, it’s one that is 100% legal from the point of view of Her Majesty’s ever darkening “Crown Prosecution Service”. As is well known, the non-white servants of Elizabeth the Useless do not permit her subjects to direct such words against any but white men.

      I am naturally unpersuaded.

      But it is a fine display of English language polemics. Empty rhetoric is the only remaining export of that emerging colony of Africa.

      I heartily commend this to anyone who still fantasizes there is any possible point to cooperation with so-called “British Nationalists”.

      As a population they are several more generations down the slope that Swedish-American Charles Lindbergh saw them on in 1939-1940: this is a mediocre people ruled by a tiny number of geniuses.

    • Clytemnestra's Gravatar Clytemnestra
      December 27, 2010 - 7:14 pm | Permalink

      Anglo Saxon posted:

      “Leave your own borders and you get so frightened, your first and sometimes only response is to compensate by getting overly aggressive. That is one reason (presumably) why you believe you must cover this planet with US military bases, in the same way you covered the interior of a nascent USA with Forts to attack the noble Red Indians (whom you then more or less wiped out).”

      Actually the vast majority of Red Indians were wiped out by European diseases during the Columbian Exchange. However, if it’s any consolation, the “noble Red Indians” infected a lot of Europeans with syphillis with which they then took back to Europe and infected their wives. I heard it does a real number on the brain. Maybe that’s what screwed up your thinking.

      Gee where was this Pacificism for Americans sentiment when Great Britain needed our “overly aggressive” help bailing your behinds out against the Germans during WWI and WWII? Talk about ingratitude. Oh, well, “Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.” Matthew 7:6

      Americans pay Great Britain and other countries lots of money for the dubious privilege of maintaining those forts that protect them. I would be more impressed if part of your diatribe included, “Filthy yanks! We don’t need your stinking money!” Oh, well, I may look great in blue, but I won’t hold my breath.

      This is not the first Brit who has his nose out of joint, because Great Britain dropped the ball and handed us the dubious distinction of being the superpower. We never asked for it, we never wanted it. We were isolationist. You dragged us in to clean up after you made a big old hot, smelly mess of things. I’m sick of your whining; get over it.

      “Americans (in particular the white males) are being played like marionettes by a cunning people who have studied you closely, and know what makes (and does not make) you tick.”

      The entire field of Social Psychology came from the United States government allowing Jewish psychologists to be let loose like wolves among the sheep on innocent, unsuspecting Americans of the fifties and the sixties to mind-rape as they pleased. Mind you, White Americans Protestants did not have the centuries of Antisemitism to guard them the way White Europeans did … for all the good it did them in the end. Moreover, they had been disarmed by the dispensationalists in their churches.

      I highly recommend every White Nationalist to get thoroughly versed in Social Psychology, because that is the field where a lot of the data leading to this manipulation of the American people is coming from.

      As for the rest of this Brit’s diatribe, pffft. Wrong, wrong, wrong. But what else can one expect from somebody who doesn’t even know how to drive on the right side of the road? That has to warp the brain.

      As an White American woman, I know that we have raised up the best damned men in the world, bar none. Women from all over the globe, including the United Kingdom would love to marry our wonderful White American men. You’re just envious, Anglo Saxon. Man up and compete or stop your sniping. Geesh. I thought WOMEN were jealous bitches.

    • Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
      December 27, 2010 - 8:04 pm | Permalink

      Yeah, I gotta agree, are you blaming the same Americans that bailed Britain out in WWI and WWII? The same “hostile” America that rebuilt Europe and Japan after the war? The one troublesome note I pick up on this site is an occasional anti-Americanism – in the comments section not the main articles.

    • Der weiße Engel's Gravatar Der weiße Engel
      December 27, 2010 - 11:22 pm | Permalink

      Noble Red Man? People from Europe have an idealized notion of him. Here’s Mark Twain’s account. He actually knew them for what they were.

      In books he is tall and tawny, muscular, straight and of kingly presence; he has a beaked nose and an eagle eye.

      His hair is glossy, and as black as the raven’s wing; out of its massed richness springs a sheaf of brilliant feathers; in his ears and nose are silver ornaments; on his arms and wrists and ankles are broad silver bands and bracelets; his buckskin hunting suit is gallantly fringed, and the belt and the moccasins wonderfully flowered with colored beads; and when, rainbowed with his war-paint, he stands at full height, with his crimson blanket wrapped about him, his quiver at his back, his bow and tomahawk projecting upward from his folded arms, and his eagle eye gazing at specks against the far horizon which even the paleface’s field-glass could scarcely reach, he is a being to fall down and worship.

      His language is intensely figurative. He never speaks of the moon, but always of “the eye of the night;” nor of the wind as the wind, but as “the whisper of the Great Spirit;” and so forth and so on. His power of condensation is marvelous. In some publications he seldom says anything but “Waugh!” and this, with a page of explanation by the author, reveals a whole world of thought and wisdom that before lay concealed in that one little word.

      He is noble. He is true and loyal; not even imminent death can shake his peerless faithfulness. His heart is a well-spring of truth, and of generous impulses, and of knightly magnanimity. With him, gratitude is religion; do him a kindness, and at the end of a lifetime he has not forgotten it. Eat of his bread, or offer him yours, and the bond of hospitality is sealed–a bond which is forever inviolable with him.

      He loves the dark-eyed daughter of the forest, the dusky maiden of faultless form and rich attire, the pride of the tribe, the all-beautiful. He talks to her in a low voice, at twilight of his deeds on the war-path and in the chase, and of the grand achievements of his ancestors; and she listens with downcast eyes, “while a richer hue mantles her dusky cheek.”

      Such is the Noble Red Man in print. But out on the plains and in the mountains, not being on dress parade, not being gotten up to see company, he is under no obligation to be other than his natural self, and therefore:

      He is little, and scrawny, and black, and dirty; and, judged by even the most charitable of our canons of human excellence, is thoroughly pitiful and contemptible. There is nothing in his eye or his nose that is attractive, and if there is anything in his hair that–however, that is a feature which will not bear too close examination . . . He wears no bracelets on his arms or ankles; his hunting suit is gallantly fringed, but not intentionally; when he does not wear his disgusting rabbit-skin robe, his hunting suit consists wholly of the half of a horse blanket brought over in the Pinta or the Mayflower, and frayed out and fringed by inveterate use. He is not rich enough to possess a belt; he never owned a moccasin or wore a shoe in his life; and truly he is nothing but a poor, filthy, naked scurvy vagabond, whom to exterminate were a charity to the Creator’s worthier insects and reptiles which he oppresses. Still, when contact with the white man has given to the Noble Son of the Forest certain cloudy impressions of civilization, and aspirations after a nobler life, he presently appears in public with one boot on and one shoe–shirtless, and wearing ripped and patched and buttonless pants which he holds up with his left hand–his execrable rabbit-skin robe flowing from his shoulder–an old hoop-skirt on, outside of it–a necklace of battered sardine-boxes and oyster-cans reposing on his bare breast–a venerable flint-lock musket in his right hand–a weather-beaten stove-pipe hat on, canted “gallusly” to starboard, and the lid off and hanging by a thread or two; and when he thus appears, and waits patiently around a saloon till he gets a chance to strike a “swell” attitude before a looking-glass, he is a good, fair, desirable subject for extermination if ever there was one.

      There is nothing figurative, or moonshiny, or sentimental about his language. It is very simple and unostentatious, and consists of plain, straightforward lies. His “wisdom” conferred upon an idiot would leave that idiot helpless indeed.

      He is ignoble–base and treacherous, and hateful in every way. Not even imminent death can startle him into a spasm of virtue. The ruling trait of all savages is a greedy and consuming selfishness, and in our Noble Red Man it is found in its amplest development. His heart is a cesspool of falsehood, of treachery, and of low and devilish instincts. With him, gratitude is an unknown emotion; and when one does him a kindness, it is safest to keep the face toward him, lest the reward be an arrow in the back. To accept of a favor from him is to assume a debt which you can never repay to his satisfaction, though you bankrupt yourself trying. To give him a dinner when he is starving, is to precipitate the whole hungry tribe upon your hospitality, for he will go straight and fetch them, men, women, children, and dogs, and these they will huddle patiently around your door, or flatten their noses against your window, day aft er day, gazing beseechingly upon every mouthful you take, and unconsciously swallowing when you swallow! The scum of the earth!

      And the Noble Son of the Plains becomes a mighty hunter in the due and proper season. That season is the summer, and the prey that a number of the tribes hunt is crickets and grasshoppers! The warriors, old men, women, and children, spread themselves abroad in the plain and drive the hopping creatures before them into a ring of fire. I could describe the feast that then follows, without missing a detail, if I thought the reader would stand it.

      All history and honest observation will show that the Red Man is a skulking coward and a windy braggart, who strikes without warning–usually from an ambush or under cover of night, and nearly always bringing a force of about five or six to one against his enemy; kills helpless women and little children, and massacres th e men in their beds; and then brags about it as long as he lives, and his son and his grandson and great-grandson after him glorify it among the “heroic deeds of their ancestors.” A regiment of Fenians will fill the whole world with the noise of it when they are getting ready invade Canada; but when the Red Man declares war, the first intimation his friend the white man whom he supped with at twilight has of it, is when the war-whoop rings in his ears and tomahawk sinks into his brain. . ..

      The Noble Red Man seldom goes prating loving foolishness to a splendidly caparisoned blushing maid at twilight. No; he trades a crippled horse, or a damaged musket, or a dog, or a gallon of grasshoppers, and an inefficient old mother for her, and makes her work like an abject slave all the rest of her life to compensate him for the outlay. He never works himself. She builds the habitation, when they use one (it consists in hanging half a dozen rags over the weather side of a sage-brush bush to roost under); gathers and brings home the fuel; takes care of the raw-boned pony when they possess such grandeur; she walks and carries her nursing cubs while he rides. She wears no clothing save the fragrant rabbit-skin robe which her great-grandmother before her wore, and all the “blushing” she does can be removed with soap and a towel, provided it is only four or five weeks old and not caked.

      Such is the genuine Noble Aborigine. I did not get him from books, but from personal observation.

  42. Daybreaker's Gravatar Daybreaker
    December 27, 2010 - 3:37 am | Permalink

    Jason Speaks, you’re making sense. I think Taken (2008) presents healthy values that feminism has rejected, so it is in effect an anti-feminist movie.

    • Der weiße Engel's Gravatar Der weiße Engel
      December 27, 2010 - 4:40 am | Permalink

      No, he’s getting even more confused than usual. When you make 50 posts a day, they can’t all be gems, and sometimes consistency goes out the window, right Jeff? He’s been arguing all night long that Hollywood films are a Jewish anti-White conspiracy to denigrate “White culture”; that they deliberately try to offend their audiences and deliberately make less money than they could. But suddenly he’s switched and now he’s arguing that somehow Taken’s “anti-feminist theme” has slipped through their fiendish plans. How’d that happen Jeff … oops I mean Jason? Are those nasty Joooze finally losing control? Were they careless? Or are you just drunk on Manischewitz again?

    • Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
      December 27, 2010 - 6:01 am | Permalink

      Man, when you have a breakdown it’s a doozie. I would skip past the Prosac and go straight for the Thorazine. Let me try and gleam some sense from that word salad of yours.

      Yes, I do believe that Jews have a ton of control in the media and Hollywood – that’s not really controversial. But I don’t think they act as some unitary Borg unit. Many could care less what kind of trash they put out. But the driving force tends to be those Jews that are most committed to various Jewish beliefs, like Cultural Marxism or Zionism. Most of it doesn’t require some “grand conspiracy”, it’s just a function of highly motivated passionate people (with bad ideas and a grudge). And some of it happens with all manner of ethnic conflict.

      For whatever reason, Jews (or Joooze as you call them) in positions of power are hostile to traditional American values and White people in general. So, if you can talk to them, and convince them to let go of their grudges and just be grateful for the wonderful life America has given them, maybe things can be different. They should be among the most vocal cheerleaders of true American values.

    • Der weiße Engel's Gravatar Der weiße Engel
      December 27, 2010 - 6:22 pm | Permalink

      Jeff Maylor aka Jason: “Most of it doesn’t require some “grand conspiracy”, it’s just a function of highly motivated passionate people (with bad ideas and a grudge).”

      Great, except the idea you are peddling that Jews deliberately made less money on movies in order to push an agenda REQUIRES a conspiracy, you fucking idiot.

      Jeff Maylor aka Jason: “So, if you can talk to them, and convince them to let go of their grudges and just be grateful for the wonderful life America has given them, maybe things can be different. They should be among the most vocal cheerleaders of true American values.”

      So Jewy Jeff Maylor suggests that the best thing for Whites to do is to try to TALK the Jews out of genociding them. Once again, this slimy kike tries to steer us into a thoroughly kosher course of action that is guaranteed not to work. What a fucken surprise. We SURE don’t want to do anything violent, illegal or (God forbid!) weird, do we Jeff? Why, that’d be just CRAAAAAAAAAAAAZY! :-)

  43. Daybreaker's Gravatar Daybreaker
    December 27, 2010 - 2:56 am | Permalink

    I think this is a practically flawless, healthy movie. It’s about a strong White father protecting his daughter. The daughter, letting herself be seduced by a corrupted mass culture, makes herself an easy victim. Such trashy, over-trusting behavior is not encouraged, and the mother’s disdain for the traditional protective male and her priority on money are shown not to be justified. The French cop who looks the other way while the Muslim threat grows in his country is shown to be no hero, and neither more sophisticated nor wiser than the American who does what has to be done to rescue his daughter from, ultimately, a non-White sexual predator. 10/10.

    • Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
      December 27, 2010 - 3:28 am | Permalink

      I think you’ve got some good points Daybreaker. I thought there was an anti-feminist theme to the movie. Although one of my complaints about movies like this or the show 24, is that the father (or other male figure) is endlessly having to save the stupid willful daughter.

      And also, we have to remember that Muslims really are … different. I knew a family that traveled to Europe long ago, and went over to Morocco for a night. While there a swarthy gentleman asked how much it would cost to buy their daughter! When he found out she was 21 he lost interest – he thought she was younger. This was long before our current conflict with Muslims.

  44. Edmund Connelly's Gravatar Edmund Connelly
    December 27, 2010 - 2:53 am | Permalink

    “Someday” wrote: “I don’t follow you about the “The Lone Gunmen.” plot. Why would a conspiracy broadcast a fictional account of their secret plan. How would that be anything but an insane risk for them ?”

    No, there is little risk of exposure. What they are doing is “preparing the minds” of people to “see” an attack on important buildings in NYC. Lone Gunmen did it with a jetliner (though there was no impact), while The Siege did a realistic job with a van. Let’s argue that 9/11 was an inside job. In that case, the people needed “help” in seeing airliners destroy the World Trade Center (all three buildings). There were no controlled demolitions (according to the script).

    • Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
      December 27, 2010 - 3:19 am | Permalink

      Hmmm that part of the review went over my head the first time. Are you saying there was conscious collaboration between media companies, writers, and producers to prepare the minds of the American people for 9-11 and the earlier WTC attack, before they happened? That seems highly unlikely. Are you saying they literally knew attacks were coming in advance and wanted to prepare people for them? That would require large numbers of people from different industries to be involved – and keep quiet.

  45. BOMFOG's Gravatar BOMFOG
    December 27, 2010 - 2:44 am | Permalink

    Mr. Graham:

    You’re right on the money about blonds being stereotyped as dumb as a way of Hollywood sticking it to gentiles. This is true even where the person is supposedly smart — the blond woman will be the least smart of the smart bunch. The best example I can think of is the character played by Janel Moloney in “The West Wing.” Her character worked in the press office of the White House, but was constantly doing stupid things and making herself the butt of the other White House staffers’ jokes. Why does Hollywood never cast a Jewish-looking brunette into such a role? Look at the characters Larraine Newman played on Saturday Night Live compared with those played by Jane Curtin or Victoria Jackson.

    • Doug's Gravatar Doug
      December 27, 2010 - 10:54 am | Permalink

      Or just look at every Super-Negro TV commercial.

  46. December 27, 2010 - 2:27 am | Permalink

    Many people complain about the excessive profanity and sexuality on TV and in the movies. Now, after two generations of a steady diet, the tastes of the people have been a bit degraded. But that just means Hollywood was willing to forgo making more money in order to dumb down the culture and shape it’s sensibilities. I can remember my parents and grandparents being shocked by how American values and heroes were torn down by the media — Hollywood wasn’t catering to them at all.

    There is some truth to this. G-rated movies make more money, but, R-rated movies are made more often.

    • Der weiße Engel's Gravatar Der weiße Engel
      December 27, 2010 - 4:48 am | Permalink

      There is a disparity alright. A quick count of films now playing at my two local cineplex theaters shows no G-rated films at all, but a total of 24 PG or PG-13 movies versus only 6 R-rated films, and that’s not an unusual ratio. Maybe it just seems the R-rated ones are more common because those are the only ones adults usually go to see. It could also be true that perhaps G films aren’t made more because virtually any violence, profanity, or nudity will earn at least a PG. Taken, the subject film of this article, received a PG-13. By contrast, Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ received an R-rating.

    • Doug's Gravatar Doug
      December 27, 2010 - 10:52 am | Permalink

      You are on to something, Danielj.

  47. ben tillman's Gravatar ben tillman
    December 27, 2010 - 12:43 am | Permalink

    Nobody is stopping anybody from making movies or television programs that are clean, wholesome, family entertainment. Nobody is forcing anyone to go to any movie they don’t want to see, or watch television programs that offend them. If people do so, it’s because they like it.

    You appeal to people’s basest instincts and then blame the victim for being human. Alcohol, prostitution, sugar, pornography, whatever — it’s all the same. This is why your people are known as misanthropes.

    We try to elevate ourselves, and you try to debase us.

    Remember, Weisse Engel that YOU have decided that you are not part of our moral community. If we don’t have moral rights in your view, neither do you in ours.

  48. December 26, 2010 - 10:58 pm | Permalink

    It is truly irritating to come across white “conservatives” who do not hesitate in the slightest to harshly criticize “Islamofascism” but who also bow before the altar of Zionism. They have swallowed the neoconservative propaganda that Israel is essentially the 51st state, our gallant “democratic” (you have to mention that) ally in the Middle East that must be protected at all costs. The sad truth is that nearly all American politicians and pundits would proudly insist that American troops be put on the ground to fight along side the IDF if a major war ere to break out between Israel and Muslim forces. And you know what? The American military would be deployed there to fight on Israel’s side, and nobody here could do a damn thing about it. That’s how extremely powerful the Jewish Lobby – in both politics and culture – has become.

    • Ilie's Gravatar Ilie
      December 27, 2010 - 6:55 am | Permalink

      Actually, Israel is the 1st state, not the 51st. ;)

  49. John Graham's Gravatar John Graham
    December 26, 2010 - 10:40 pm | Permalink

    Further to your ethnic thesis, note that Neeson’s screen daughter Kim is put in danger in Paris by the feckless behavior and bad judgement of her classmate, the WASPY-sounding Amanda. The former is brunette
    http://www.imdb.com/media/rm3027274240/tt0936501
    the latter blonde (of course). Actually both actresses, Maggie Grace and Katie Cassidy invariably present in their PR photographs as blondes.

    • Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
      December 26, 2010 - 10:45 pm | Permalink

      But on the other hand, did anyone else pick up on an anti-feminist theme in the movie? The girls are insistent on doing their own thing, and well, it doesn’t turn out too well for at least one girl. They should have listened to Dad.

    • Bob Martin's Gravatar Bob Martin
      December 27, 2010 - 1:31 pm | Permalink

      “Neeson’s screen daughter Kim is put in danger in Paris by the feckless behavior and bad judgement of her classmate, the WASPY-sounding Amanda.”

      Once you see it the first time, the anti-WASP theme in Hollywood films and TV is impossible to miss. There was an article on here about Caddyshack not long ago, and I remember movies like Revenge of the Nerds and Heathers from the 1980s; the anti-WASP, anti-fraternity, frankly anti-white nature of these movies are more obvious in hindsight after a few decades.

      Of course, anti-WASP is the official policy of the US government, check out this “anti-housing discrimination” ad, paid for by your tax money, accusing WASPs of housing discrimination … against Jews. You couldn’t make this stuff up.

  50. Tom Brown's Gravatar Tom Brown
    December 26, 2010 - 9:17 pm | Permalink

    I enjoyed your article, Edmund. We goyim can take scant comfort in the knowledge that the tribe eventually moves on to
    wreck the next nation. This is particularly so, because all of
    Western civilization is near the end.

  51. Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
    December 26, 2010 - 9:17 pm | Permalink

    Very interesting review. I suspect that most of what seems conspiratorial (like Jewish conspiracies) is what scientists call an emergent property. It’s a pattern that develops from lots of local, unplanned interactions.

    For example, if you import 500,000 Blacks to Wisconsin, I bet the crime rate would shoot sky high. But this wouldn’t be due to a Black conspiracy, it’s just what happens when you have a lot of Blacks around. Same thing is true with Jews. Get enough of them and they start trying to automatically turn the world to their advantage. They naturally gravitate toward certain careers, they have a similar worldview and they are very nepotistic.

    • Jim's Gravatar Jim
      December 27, 2010 - 11:46 am | Permalink

      That’s a good observation, Jason. I suspect it’s true, to a certain degree. I also think, however, that there’s such a thing as a “jewish power structure” that just doesn’t exist (in the same context anyway) in black culture.

      It’s the reason that every Israeli citizen gets the equivalent of $500 per year in US foreign aid while an impoverished (and black) country like Haiti gets only $27 per person per year. That can only be explained by conspiracy, to one degree or another. Now, it’s doubtful that every, or even most, individual jews are involved DIRECTLY involved in this, but the profoundly influential jewish lobby/power structure certainly is.

  52. Der weiße Engel's Gravatar Der weiße Engel
    December 26, 2010 - 9:15 pm | Permalink

    EC: “But I’m still bothered by the fact that it projects the behavior of evildoers onto enemies of Jewry. That so many Westerners could not only overlook these facts but in essence worship Jews and Israelis is almost impossible for me to understand. Is this because they are taken in by the cagey projection technique employed so often by Jews?”

    I think you’ve got it backwards. You don’t see realistic depictions of evil Jews precisely because Jews are worshiped in the culture at large. Even if someone made a film like that, it would be immediately denounced as anti-Semitic, and most of the denouncers would not be Jews. In the same way, you don’t see realistic depictions of evil negroes. Dat’d be all raciss’ an’ shit, which would make it real box office poison. Nor will you ever see a cinematic depiction of George Washington or Thomas Jefferson whipping their slaves. That would just be too shocking, too opposed to how people want to imagine them. People like seeing their view of the world reinforced, having their prejudices confirmed. They don’t like to be challenged or made to think what fools they’ve been or how they’ve been duped. That’s not why they go to the movies. On the silver screen, the hero always wins, and good always triumphs over evil, and comforting reassurance is given out along with the popcorn that you were right all along to believe whatever it is the larger culture has programmed you to believe. That’s what sells.

    • Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
      December 26, 2010 - 9:43 pm | Permalink

      Uh, actually I think Hollywood has been offending it’s audiences for at least 40 years. Television too. People in the media have reveled in shocking the bourgeoisie. In fact, Hollywood not only fails to give people what they want, they have actually driven some of their audience away.

      Many people complain about the excessive profanity and sexuality on TV and in the movies. Now, after two generations of a steady diet, the tastes of the people have been a bit degraded. But that just means Hollywood was willing to forgo making more money in order to dumb down the culture and shape it’s sensibilities. I can remember my parents and grandparents being shocked by how American values and heroes were torn down by the media — Hollywood wasn’t catering to them at all.

    • Der weiße Engel's Gravatar Der weiße Engel
      December 26, 2010 - 9:59 pm | Permalink

      If people didn’t like the media they wouldn’t watch. That’s always been true. Nobody holds a gun to the audience’s head and makes them watch. On the contrary, they pay good money to do so. Also, especially nowadays, there are alternatives. There are plenty of old episodes of Leave It to Beaver or the Andy Griffith Show or other stuff in that vein you can watch instead if you want. Few do though. If they were dead set on losing money, someone could even open a movie theater showing stuff like that, and old Disney films too. You know, real “White culture”. ;-) I think we both know how that would turn out. No market for it, unfortunately.

    • Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
      December 26, 2010 - 10:26 pm | Permalink

      Der, there is no reason to be an apologist for the Jewish media. As I said, Hollywood made less money than they could have, because they offended many in their audience. I didn’t say they made zero money. Your response makes no logical sense. A circus can offend its audience, lose half of them, and still be generating revenue – you can’t point to that revenue as proof “the people” approve. Movie attendance is way down and this is true even though the population of the United States is way up.
      http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/06/02/entertainment/main6540984.shtml

      Your example about TV Land is a flop. Needless to say, people would prefer something made in the last 10 years with updated production values and reflecting current events. The fact that TV land exists at all is a sign of how poorly the modern media serves its audiences.

      Sure, they turn a profit, in fact if it wasn’t for the profit motive, they would give us much worse. But they leave a lot of money on the table. I suspect they never think of it consciously, they are just so nauseated by White culture they can’t produce anything that supports it.

      There are countless examples of Hollywood turning against traditional all-American themes for the past 40 years. They absolutely hate that stuff. And yes, now that the schools, the universities and the media have spent two generations pushing a Leftist/Jewish/anti-White agenda, most Whites are left helpless, without an explicit understanding of their own people and culture.

      But the incredible success of Fox New (as imperfect as it is) is evidence of how hungry White people are for something that upholds and supports their values. Again, I know the problems with Fox, but Murdoch shrewdly understands that there is a huge untapped market out there.

    • Der weiße Engel's Gravatar Der weiße Engel
      December 26, 2010 - 10:41 pm | Permalink

      Nobody is stopping anybody from making movies or television programs that are clean, wholesome, family entertainment. Nobody is forcing anyone to go to any movie they don’t want to see, or watch television programs that offend them. If people do so, it’s because they like it. That should be obvious, even to Jewish trolls who are apparently trying to depict White people as too stupid and weak to stop watching stuff they don’t like.

    • Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
      December 26, 2010 - 10:50 pm | Permalink

      I’m not understanding you Der. Why are you parroting the standard apology for Hollywood? I just explained the illogic of that argument. That whole “nobody is forcing them” line is so lame.

      And I am defending White people, what on Earth are you talking about? Are you misunderstanding me? I’m saying what we see in the movies and on TV is an offense to White people. Why are you arguing the pro-Hollywood line?

    • ben tillman's Gravatar ben tillman
      December 27, 2010 - 12:27 am | Permalink

      Weisse Engel —

      You are outrageously wrong.

      If people didn’t like the media they wouldn’t watch.

      Wrong.

      Nobody holds a gun to the audience’s head and makes them watch.

      Wrong.

      You don’t belong here, and you need to leave.

      You need to leave this site, and you need to leave us physically. Go to Israel, and stay there.

      Even according to the central government, genocide is a capital crime. You are guilty, and you need to get out while you can.

    • Der weiße Engel's Gravatar Der weiße Engel
      December 27, 2010 - 3:15 am | Permalink

      ben tillman: “If people didn’t like the media they wouldn’t watch.

      Wrong.

      Nobody holds a gun to the audience’s head and makes them watch.

      Wrong.”

      Wow. I’m awed by your rhetorical skills, Ben. Who wouldn’t be? “Wrong”, he says. Okay then, case closed. White people watch movies and television even though they don’t like it, because the Jews are holding guns to their heads. Ben says so. Let’s move on; there’s nothing more to say about this.

      ben tillman: “You don’t belong here, and you need to leave.

      You need to leave this site, and you need to leave us physically. Go to Israel, and stay there.”

      You need to pull your head out of your ass, ben. It will give you a whole new outlook on things.

    • Doug's Gravatar Doug
      December 27, 2010 - 10:47 am | Permalink

      Say what? Wahington and Jefferson whipping slaves? Where the hell did you come up with that example, patriot?

    • Ciaran's Gravatar Ciaran
      December 27, 2010 - 2:21 pm | Permalink

      Der weiße Engel – actually – viewership is dropping, except among Blacks. That’s why you see relentless programming that caters to Blacks.

    • Der weiße Engel's Gravatar Der weiße Engel
      December 27, 2010 - 6:30 pm | Permalink

      Doug: “Say what? Wahington and Jefferson whipping slaves?”

      Yeah, Doug. Believe it or not, Washington and Jefferson actually kept slaves! Whipped ‘em, too, and you know what? I bet they enjoyed it. :-)

      PS. Why the ebonics? Are you a negro?

    • Captainchaos's Gravatar Captainchaos
      December 28, 2010 - 5:57 pm | Permalink

      Yeah, Dweeb. Believe it or not, the personal conduct of Washington and Jefferson is of no relevance – none – to the merits of the survival of the European race. And even to say why you think it is would be to give your game away. So please do feel free to expound.

    • Der weiße Engel's Gravatar Der weiße Engel
      December 29, 2010 - 12:51 am | Permalink

      Der weiße Engel: “Nor will you ever see a cinematic depiction of George Washington or Thomas Jefferson whipping their slaves. That would just be too shocking, too opposed to how people want to imagine them. ”

      The details of negro slavery have been endlessly popularized in film and literature, but in an effort to sanitize the more sordid aspects of American history, entirely suppressed has been the equally miserable life of the White slaves kept by the rich planter class of which Washington and Jefferson were the most prominent members. In the colonies there was indeed a lively trade in White child slaves, to be used for purposes that, many times at least, probably didn’t differ much from the purpose of child slaves today. Some of these children came with their parents, and others were “kid-nabbed” from Europe (in fact, this is the origin of the word “kidnapped”), and”spirited off”. One source describes it this way:

      “Many of the spirits [people who recruited indentured servants] haunted the London slums and those of Bristol and other seaports. It was not difficult to find hungry and thirsty victims who, over a dinner and much liquor, would sign anything before them. The spirit would then hustle his prey to his headquarters to be added to a waiting company of others, safely kept where they could not escape until a ship was ready for them. An easier way was to pick up a sleeping drunk from the gutter and put him aboard a vessel for America, where, with no indenture, he could be sold to his own disadvantage and with the American planter’s gain. Children were valuable and could be enticed with candy to come along with a spirit. Sometimes they, and older people too, were seized by force.”

      The voyage of these White slaves from Europe was hazardous and undertaken in pitiable conditions differing little from those in the African slave ships; the bondage that they contracted to endure for a period of years as “indentured servants” put them in a position distinguishable from that of a negro slave only by the fact that theirs wasn’t for life, at least in theory. In practice, the suicide rate of White slaves was very high, death from abuse or disease was common, and many did not live to the end of their terms. The female White slaves were especially subject to rape, as it was the law that if they became pregnant, their term of indenturement would be extended. These White slaves of course also had no right to vote, were paid no wages, and could legally be beaten by their masters. At the time of the Revolution, up to 80% of the White inhabitants of the colonies had arrived as White slaves, indentured to rich planters like Washington and Jefferson, and often were bred by their owners to their negro slaves. As slaves were expensive, breeding them up like cattle from existing stock was a profitable sideline for slave owners, and a premium was realized on light-colored slaves, so these slavemasters had a financial incentive to promote race-mixing. The fact that the average American negro is approximately 20% White by genetics shows that racial cross-breeding of slaves was widespread in colonial times. In fact, just as Australia began as a British penal colony, it is equally true that the United States had its start as both a penal and a slave colony. A first person account from a German who made the voyage states:

      Gottlieb Mittelberger, Journey to Pennsylvania (1750).

      [Gottlieb Mittelberger traveled to Pennsylvania from Germany in 1750 on a ship primarily filled with poorer immigrants who would become indentured servants upon arriving in Philadelphia. Mittelberger was not a servant, and worked as a school master and organist for three years before returning to Germany in 1754.]

      [The Journey On Board Ship]

      When the ships have for the last time weighed their anchors near the city of [Cowes] in Old England, the real misery begins with the long voyage. For from there the ships, unless they have good wind, must often sail 8, 9, 10 to 12 weeks before they reach Philadelphia. But even with the best wind the voyage lasts 7 weeks.

      But during the voyage there is on board these ships terrible misery, stench, fumes, horror, vomiting, many kinds of sea-sickness, fever, dysentery, headache, heat, constipation, boils, scurvy, cancer, mouth-rot, and the like all of which come from old and sharply salted food and meat, also from very bad and foul water, so that many die miserably.

      Add to this want of provisions, hunger, thirst, frost, heat, dampness, anxiety, want, afflictions and lamentations, together with other trouble, as c. v. the lice abound so frightfully, especially on sick people, that they can be. scraped off the body. The misery reaches the climax when a gale rages for 2 or 3 nights and days, so that every one believes that the ship will go to ‘the bottom with all human beings on board. In such a-visitation the people cry and pray most piteously. . . .

      I myself had to pass through a severe illness at sea, and I best know how I felt at the time. These poor people often long for consolation, and I often entertained and comforted them with singing, praying and exhorting; and whenever it was possible and the winds and waves permitted it, I kept daily prayer-meetings with them on deck. Besides, I baptized five children in distress, because we had no ordained minister on board. I also held divine service every Sunday by reading sermons to the people; and when the dead were sunk in the water, I commended them and our souls to the mercy of God.

      Among the healthy, impatience sometimes grows so great and cruel that one curses the other, or himself and the day of his birth, and sometimes come near killing each other. Misery and malice join each other, so that they cheat and rob one another. One always reproaches the other with having persuaded him to undertake the journey. Frequently children cry out against their parents, husbands against their wives and wives against their husbands, brothers and sisters, friends and acquaintances against each other. But most against the soul-traffickers.

      Many sigh and cry: “Oh, that I were at home again, and if I had to lie in my pig-sty!” Or they say: “0 God, if I only had a piece of good bread, or a good fresh drop of water.” Many people whimper, sigh and cry piteously for their homes; most of them get home-sick. Many hundred people necessarily die and perish in such misery, and must be cast into the sea, which drives their relatives, or those who persuaded them to undertake the journey, to such despair that it is almost impossible to pacify and console them. In a word, the sighing and crying and lamenting on board the ship continues night and day, so as to cause the hearts even of the most hardened to bleed when they hear it. . . .

      [Arriving in Philadelphia]

      When the ships have landed at Philadelphia after their long voyage, no one is permitted to leave them except those who pay for their passage or can give good security; the others, who cannot pay, must remain on board the ships till they are purchased, and are released from the ships by their purchasers. The sick always fare the worst, for the healthy are naturally preferred and purchased first; and so the sick and wretched must often remain on board in front of the city for 2 or 3 weeks, and frequently die, whereas many a one, if he could pay his debt and were permitted to leave the ship immediately, might recover and remain alive. . . .

      The sale of human beings in the market on board the ship is carried on thus: Every day Englishmen, Dutchmen and High-German people come from the city of Philadelphia and other places, in part from a great distance, say 20, 30, or 40 hours away, and go on board the newly arrived ship that has brought and offers for sale passengers from Europe, and select among the healthy persons such as they deem suitable for their business, and bargain with them how long they will serve for their passage-money, which most most of them are still in debt for. When they have come to an agreement, it happens that adult persons bind themselves in writing to serve 3, 4, 5 or 6 years for the amount due by them, according to their age and strength. But very young people, from 10 to 15 years, must serve till they are 21 years old.

      Many parents must sell and trade away their children like so many head of cattle; for if their children take the debt upon themselves, the parents can leave the ship free and unrestrained; but as the parents often do not know where and to what people their children are going, it often happens that such parents and children, after leaving the ship, do not see each other again for many years, perhaps no more in all their lives. . . .

      A woman must stand for her husband if he arrives sick, and in like manner a man for his sick wife, and take the debt upon herself or himself, and thus serve 5 to 6 years not alone for his or her own debt, but also for that of the sick husband or wife. But if both are sick, such persons are sent from the ship to the sick-house [hospital], but not until it appears probable that they will find no purchasers. As soon as they are well again they must serve for their passage, or pay if they have means.

      It often happens that whole families, husband, wife, and children, are separated by being sold to different purchasers, especially when they have not paid any part of their passage money.

      When a husband or wife has died at sea, when the ship has made more than half of her trip, the survivor must pay or serve not only for himself or herself, but also for the deceased. . . .

      [Immigration to Pennsylvania]

      I cannot possibly pass over in silence what was reported to me by a reliable person in Pennsylvania, in a package of letters which left Philadelphia Dec. 10, 1754, and came to my hands Sept. 1, 1755. These letters lament the fact that last autumn, A. D. 1754, to the very great burden of the country, more than 22,000 souls (there was a great emigration from Wurtemberg at that time) had arrived in Philadelphia alone, mostly Wurtembergers, Palatines, Durlachers and Swiss, who had been so wretchedly sick and poor that most of these people had been obliged to sell their children on account of their great poverty. The country, so the letters state, had been seriously molested by this great mass of people, especially by the many sick people, many of whom were still daily filling the graves.

      [...]

  53. Glen's Gravatar Glen
    December 26, 2010 - 7:07 pm | Permalink

    Of course the supreme irony here is that Jews are the ones responsible for the massive influx of Muslims into white homelands over the past few decades.

    • Venona's Gravatar Venona
      December 26, 2010 - 10:08 pm | Permalink

      Eventually the US puppet governments in Iraq and Afghanistan will collapse. When that day comes, I predict the same people that lied us into these wars will lead the charge to allow the immigration of millions of Afghans and Iraqis into the US and Europe.

      On the bright side, Hollywood will have no trouble finding extras for their propaganda movies.

  54. Someday's Gravatar Someday
    December 26, 2010 - 5:01 pm | Permalink

    I long ago noticed the anti Arab animus in Golam Glubus productions – scene from delta force. It’s true that white hero would not be shown doing that to a black character whatever he had done. And the US military altually protested about scenes where Jack Bauer tortured suspects But I don’t agree that is projecting the behavior because it is true to a non trivial extent that Arabs are terrorists and Muslims force teenage white girls into prostitution.

    I don’t follow you about the “The Lone Gunmen.” plot. Why would a conspiracy broadcast a fictional account of their secret plan. How would that be anything but an insane risk for them ?

    • Luke's Gravatar Luke
      December 27, 2010 - 10:01 am | Permalink

      Somebody: We are dealing with an enemy that appears to take an enormous delight in rubbing our noses in our own inferiority, and in this case – they show us what they are planning to do to us in the near future, then proceed to pull it off and then they sit back and laugh hysterically over how they were still able to snooker the stupid goyim with their lies and fabricated cover story about 19 Arabs with goat poop stained toenails pulling off 9-11. In other words, they have such an astounding contempt for the intelligence levels of White American gentiles that they like to play these kinds of games, to toy with us, and to show us their contempt. This, I am convinced, is a source of enormous laughter and amusement in these evil people – and the ‘risk’ aspect is just their way of flipping us the Bird.

      I would also like to remind everyone that this characteristic, this arrogance and inability to control how far they will push our people – has historically been their eventual downfall.

    • Ciaran's Gravatar Ciaran
      December 27, 2010 - 2:17 pm | Permalink

      “I don’t follow you about the “The Lone Gunmen.” plot. Why would a conspiracy broadcast a fictional account of their secret plan. How would that be anything but an insane risk for them ?”

      It’s a big sick private joke, designed to flaunt their power for the benefit of each other’s amusement. The Goy are too ignorant and/or stupid, and craven to even notice.

    • M's Gravatar M
      February 20, 2011 - 5:07 pm | Permalink

      The “lone gunmen” has other possible (additional) reasons than “in your face, haha”

      There was a screenplay or movie I heard about where a man was suspected of killing his wife — but the evidence was circumstantial (we were out boating, the boat sank and she drowned – or similar — but more complex than this example). The interesting part was that the man had authored a book wherein is described a murder quite like the one he was being tried for committing. His plea amounted to “If I was going to kill my wife, why would I write a book that mirrored what I was about to do?”

      It is much like “This sentence is false” kind of paradox.

      The other reasons are for what is called “gaslighting”. Wiki that. Basically its about making your accuser look crazy.

      More possibilities exist in the idea of 911 being leaked and essential elements being converted to a script.

      Another is the idea of collective consciousness, or the 100th monkey effect.

      And finally, what about the idea of 911 being FIRST a movie script that was appropriated and used in reality.

      When I think of the nuts and bolts of the main theories behind what motivated 911 — Islam, Oil, Israel — I find there is no reason to be mutually exclusive. I call this the “dust bunny” conspiracy — where everyone jumps on board and helps things along.

4 Trackbacks to "The Evil Among Us: Liam Neeson in “Taken”"

  1. on January 19, 2011 at 3:58 pm
  2. on January 11, 2011 at 2:38 am
  3. on December 27, 2010 at 6:06 pm
  4. on December 26, 2010 at 3:11 pm

Comments are closed.