Navigating Hollywood: Conservatives and Christians Need Not Apply

From time to time I get letters from students who say they are on page with ideas like mine and want to pursue  a career in the academic world. I always tell them they have to be a secret agent, not only as a grad student but at least until they get tenure. And if you come out of the closet after you get tenure, don’t expect to get any grants or be invited to any of those cool faculty parties.

It’s pretty much the same in the movie industry, and for much the same reasons: A powerful and pervasive bias toward the left. In both areas and particularly in Hollywood, there is a strong Jewish influence that means that overt displays of Christianity are a ticket to oblivion.

This came out recently in an article in the Hollywood Reporter (Conservative Actors Reveal Life of Secrecy, Lost Jobs Amidst ‘Intolerant Left’“).

Morgan Brittany, an actress perhaps best known for her work in Dallas, the prime time soap opera of the 1980s, says that “I’d go out on location with the Dallas crew. .. Everybody in the van was bashing (President Reagan). I never said anything because I thought I’d lose my job. And I probably would have lost my job.”

Advertisement - We Need You

I had the academic version of the exact same experience:

I remember before I became an academic scofflaw—when I became a Reagan-type mainstream conservative, somewhere in the early 80s. Going to an academic party became an experience in dissembling—forced smiles at anti-Reagan jokes uttered with absolute confidence that everyone would join in the fun. There is an absolute certainty that all conservatives have two-digit IQs and are infinitely inferior to them intellectually. (“Why are professors liberals?” The Occidental Quarterly, Vol. 10#2, Summer, 2010)

Like her, I didn’t let people know my political views at the time, prudently waiting for the magic of tenure. Once Brttany came out of the closet, her life changed dramatically:

“Oh man, the flack I took from the people, the agencies — ‘oh, you can’t say that. You can’t do that. Casting people might see you. And directors!'”

“What is this, the blacklist?” she said. “They’re not going to hire me because I have an opinion? That’s the way Hollywood is and, unfortunately, I got that. But I still wasn’t going to back down.”

This is delicious irony, since the Hollywood blacklist remains a touchstone of Jewish hostility toward the culture of 1950s America because so many victims of the anti-communist fervor of the period were Jewish screenwriters. (See here, pp. 39-40.) The blacklist of the left that now prevails targets a quite different group, but of course we never hear any principled condemnations of the new blacklist from the people who matter in Hollywood.

Brittany has a great anecdote about Ed Asner, the well-known Jewish actor:

“Every night he just loved me and came in and gave me a big hug,” she said. “Then one night he was going crazy about Gore and Bush and stealing the election. I’m backstage and I said, ‘Ed, chill, not everybody thinks the way you do’.”

“Well, where do I begin?” I swear. It was like a light switch,” she said. “He turned to me and said, ‘you’re not a Republican?’ I said, ‘yep.’ And he said, ‘I can’t even look at you. I can’t even talk to you’.”

“From that moment on, he never spoke to me again, except on stage,” she said. “This is what we’re dealing with. The intolerance of the left.”

“The intolerance of the left.” Exactly. Intolerance against views that are well within the American mainstream–against a president who was completely tone deaf on immigration, the one issue that mattered for a real conservative. But for someone like Asner, being pro-Reagan condemns one to the furthest reaches of Hell. It’s okay to ruin their career or deny them free speech. They might as well be wearing swastikas. It’s the mentality of Bolshevism.

The only thing worse than being conservative is to be conservative and Christian:

While a starlet in her 20s [Brittany] met with the late Jay Bernstein, who managed the careers of Farrah Fawcett and Suzanne Somers back in the day, but the meeting went awry after Bernstein noticed the cross Brittany wore around her neck.

She said Bernstein told her: “You’re going to have to lose that, honey.

In this town, you can’t be religious, and you can’t be conservative.”

“He was a star-making manager, but I couldn’t sign on with him,” Brittany said.

In all the citadels of the elite–whether it’s Hollywood, the academic world, Wall St., or the media, not only do we see high levels of Jewish ethnic networking. We also see exclusion of certain types of non-Jews, particularly those who are overtly conservative and Christian, and promoting non-Jews who are tuned into the leftist zeitgeist.  Supporting California ballot Proposition 8, which banned gay marriage, was also a career ender in Hollywood, while at the same time there was wall-to-wall support for Roman Polanski in his attempts to avoid punishment for his sexual escapades with an underage girl.

The attitudes of Hollywood reflect the left/liberal cultural attitudes of the wider Jewish community — attitudes that are hostile to the traditional people and culture of America and the West. Whatever else one might say about him, Polanski is Exhibit A for the category of unusual or deviant lifestyle. Polanski’s behavior is exactly the sort of thing that Hollywood would see not as moral turpitude, but as reflecting a cutting-edge, unconventional lifestyle choice of a creative, talented person. (See here.)

Charles Saatchi's Creation, Damien Hirst: Promoting the Worst Non-Jews

So while conservatives and overt Christians are excluded, those with non-traditional and even deviant lifestyles are welcomed. Perhaps the nadir of this latter tendency is the art world, where only the most depraved, like Damien Hirst, need apply.

And this is how our elites become hostile to the traditional people and culture of America and the West.

  • Print
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

157 Comments to "Navigating Hollywood: Conservatives and Christians Need Not Apply"

  1. Arabella's Gravatar Arabella
    April 25, 2011 - 2:20 am | Permalink


    David Letterman’s hate is as old as some ancient Hebrew prophets.
    Speaking of anti-Semitism, it’s Jerry Falwell and other fundy leaders who’ve gleefully predicted that in the future EVERY nation will be against Israel (an international first?) and that TWO-THIRDS of all Jews will be killed, right?
    Wrong! It’s the ancient Hebrew prophet Zechariah who predicted all this in the 13th and 14th chapters of his book! The last prophet, Malachi, explains the reason for this future Holocaust that’ll outdo even Hitler’s by stating that “Judah hath dealt treacherously” and “the Lord will cut off the man that doeth this” and asks “Why do we deal treacherously every man against his brother?”
    Haven’t evangelicals generally been the best friends of Israel and persons perceived to be Jewish? Then please explain the recent filthy, hate-filled, back-stabbing tirades by David Letterman (plus Sandra Bernhard, Larry David, Kathy Griffin, Bill Maher, Joan Rivers, and Sarah Silverman) against Christians like Michele Bachmann and Sarah Palin, and explain why most Jewish leaders have seemingly condoned such “crucifixion”!
    While Letterman etc. are tragically turning comedy into tragedy, they are also helping to speed up and fulfill the Final Holocaust a la Zechariah and Malachi, thus helping to make the Bible even more believable!
    For even more stunning information, visit MSN and type in “Separation of Raunch and State,” “Michael the Narc-Angel,” and “Bible Verses Obama Avoids.”
    PS – – – There’s nothing wrong with Hollywood that a 10-point earthquake couldn’t fix !!

  2. March 7, 2011 - 9:49 pm | Permalink

    la la la la la la la

    Vote that down idiots…ha ha ha ha ha

  3. February 27, 2011 - 3:39 pm | Permalink

    Pierre de Craon,

    Why don’t you catch me at home:


  4. February 27, 2011 - 3:33 pm | Permalink

    Ha ha ha…I think you still haven’t hit on the Giordano Bruno that I quoted in my text here.
    This one writes articles for a site called ACTIVIST POST.
    I have not found his posts to be “doctrinaire leftist and Judaeo-voluptuary.” Indeed they seem quite anti-Zionist in temper and flavor.

    Looking for people according to their name in web searches can be quite daunting. There are close to 8,000 people with my first and last name listed on the web…if the full name of William is used.
    Fortunately if just Willy Whitten is typed into the browser, I am actually topping the list as per my artworks and some of my commentary.

    For Bruno, I would look into the ACTIVIST POST site.

  5. February 26, 2011 - 7:35 pm | Permalink

    GB figure into your (quite superb) demythologizing of derivatives?~Pierre de Craon

    The last sentence, with his name as author is his quote.

    And yes, I will second your bet that the Red Thumb Gang will bury both of our comments post haste.
    A certain looneytune factor seems to have infested this site…Lol

    • Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
      February 26, 2011 - 7:56 pm | Permalink

      Thank you, my friend. I am now wiping the egg off my face as I realize that the GB in question isn’t the recalcitrant Domincan friar and occultist of the sixteenth century. Had that elementary possibility occurred to me before I wrote my comment, I might have done what I should have from the get-go: search the Web.

      Incidentally, it was only when I saw the picture of Brandon Smith—dear Lord, he hardly looks old enough to have descended testicles, let alone a thoroughgoing knowledge of finance!—that I realized that he couldn’t be the only other GB I’ve run into: an elderly gent (comme moi, hélas) who posts a lot of reviews and comments at Amazon on musical and political matters, most of them doctrinaire leftist and Judaeo-voluptuary but (to give the devil his due) often brilliantly written and delightful to read.

  6. Si's Gravatar Si
    February 10, 2011 - 9:22 pm | Permalink

    From Twitter
    Joel Stein
    How is this film festival different from all other film festivals? RT @shawngreen15 On a plane to ATL for Jewish film festival
    23 hours ago via HootSuite Favorite Retweet Reply

  7. February 10, 2011 - 12:50 am | Permalink

    Don’t give me Renfields answer Longley.

    Think about it and give me your own.

  8. February 9, 2011 - 9:39 pm | Permalink

    “…trying to educate some other misguided people.”

    “Misguided,” Now that is an interesting word. Can you say that in German doctor?

    You mean those guided by their own lights I am sure. Can’t have any of them screwing up the marching columns now can we?

    I take it you don’t care much for Otto Rank. Preferring the likes of Ewing Cameron.
    Lets see the snarl.

    • February 9, 2011 - 11:02 pm | Permalink

      The only question I want answered from you and others Longley is this:

      What does it mean to be well adjusted in a pathological society?

  9. February 9, 2011 - 6:21 pm | Permalink

    So, I notice you have simply slipped out the backdoor Longley…
    This is typical of hot shots like you, who have all the right answers until they get some real questions.
    Back to your little box to batten down the hatches.

    Oh yes, you may pop back in on challenge and tell me that it is because I cannot learn from your “wise council”.
    But the fact of the matter is that you have no answers appllicable to the real world.

    • February 9, 2011 - 6:56 pm | Permalink

      “But the fact of the matter is that you have no answers appllicable to the real world.”

      You’re a bit self-centred are you not? I was busy replying to/trying to educate some other misguided people. You don’t understand what I am saying because you don’t have the relevant experience, and I can’t give you that in a blog. Whilst I suspect I’ve had more experience of the harsher side of the real world than you, given my applied profession, that does not matter. If you just want to verbally cage-fight, I have better things to do.

  10. February 8, 2011 - 2:16 am | Permalink

    Another thing Longley,

    You make a hero of these “great thinkers” from the Malthusian school, even making mention of Keynes.
    This tells me that you don’t have the slightes understanding of money, as much as you pico you psycho economics…it’s blithering BS.

    Credit derived from fiat is not “capital”, it is NOT wealth. Credit is the creation of an obligation, to be paid at a later date, if it is paid at all, and because there are no rules to tie the debt to any legitimate collateral (at least for banks), there is nothing to back the obligation if it falters. Therefore, fiat induced credit is not the creation of wealth (as Keynesians seem to believe), but the destruction of wealth!
    Because of its lack of tangibility, debt can be packaged and repackaged into whatever form banks like. Derivatives are a perfect example of the phantom nature of debt; securities which have no real value whatsoever yet are rated and traded as if they are a solid commodity. This brand of commerce is, at its very root, a kind of fiscal time bomb. Just as in the literary world of ‘Little Dorrit’, the Ponzi scheme in our very literal world had to reach a tipping point, and in 2008, it did.~Giordano Bruno

    It is because you are a “specialist” with no wider understanding beyond your field. You have offered me many volumes to read, now I’ll give you one, try The Technological Society by Jacques Ellul.
    Maybe even you can “learn something”.

    • Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
      February 26, 2011 - 7:06 pm | Permalink

      Mr. Whitten: Given the age of this comment thread, this query may be futile, but I’ll make it anyway. Your post directly above mentions Giordano Bruno. If I’m being dense, please forgive me, but how does GB figure into your (quite superb) demythologizing of derivatives?

      [[Postscript to webmaster and anyone else who’s interested. Anyone want to bet on how long it will be before this utterly anodyne comment gets half a dozen thumbs down? My money’s on less than 24 hours.]]

  11. February 8, 2011 - 1:59 am | Permalink

    Request: Please only down-vote abusive comments, not comments you merely disagree with or dislike.

    Some cretin just can’t seem to grasp this message.
    What a bone head.

  12. February 7, 2011 - 3:53 pm | Permalink

    Well Longley what I think is that it is very hard for you to write a simple sentence in plain English.
    But I take it that what you are saying is that behavioral science is predicated on the view that there IS freewill, and therefore you DO believe it exists. But you are unhappy with free expression thereof.

    Now understand this, I have known enough cretins in my life to understand such angst as you may feel in society being overwhelmed by the likes of them.

    However, if the choice is between dealing with cavemen on occasion, and living as an automaton in a brave new world, I would rather take my chances with the former.

    What we seem to be facing is what may be termed as the ‘Frankenstein Syndrome’, building a “new man”, and then dealing with all the unknown consequences and tragedies that radiate from that center.

    Another question; Do you consider yourself a robust individual? Have you any martial training? Have you ever had to fend off a physical attack on your own? Have you ever been successful in such defense?

    I find that more than anything the desperation of those who seek a state of perfect security at the price of liberty, are those suffering most from fear and loathing.

    • February 7, 2011 - 5:29 pm | Permalink

      “Well Longley what I think is that it is very hard for you to write a simple sentence in plain English.
      But I take it that what you are saying is that behavioral science is predicated on the view that there IS freewill, and therefore you DO believe it exists. But you are unhappy with free expression thereof.”

      or you find it hard to learn? So we appear to have a communication problem, we seem to be at an impasse. If I can only acceptably express myself to you in language which you find acceptable, there’s a good chance that you might not learn anything and even think that I’m like you. Since I’m not like you, perhaps you might learn some new verbal behaviours, i.e. expand your behavioural repertoire? I’ve given you some links. The alternative is that you’ll learn nothing and just stay the same. You don’t want that to be the case presumably?

    • February 7, 2011 - 7:05 pm | Permalink

      Well Doctor,
      I have never found it difficult to learn something that was of interest to me.
      As far as your language is concerned, it is not that I don’t understand it, or even that it annoys. It is that you rarely say exactly what YOU mean, but offer entire texts off site with no real indication as to what is to be found there.

      But this time you were quite straitforward and expressed yourself quite well.
      I am quite aware that you aren’t like me. I am not asking you to be like me. I think everyone should be themselves. This has been the gist of everything I have been saying.

      As far as wishing to adjust my behaviors…I don’t see what you are driving at. I have never seen myself as someone with dysfunctional behavior. I have never had any run ins with the law. I have had a great career, and have many admirers in my field.

      As far as learning, I am naturally curious and seek out new information and ideas constantly. In fact I find our conversation a learning experience, regardless of whether you grade me one way or the other.

      I have spent many years working on my own epistemic construct in seeking a coherent cognitive model. But I admit mine is not a closed book.

      That is what I feel I have found in you, a closed book.

  13. February 7, 2011 - 1:58 pm | Permalink

    Longley, rather than prattle back and forth, just tell me straight up–do you think man has freewill.
    No complex counterwailing, just a yes or no.
    You can make all your caveats beyond that after the simple answer.

    • February 7, 2011 - 2:30 pm | Permalink

      As Operant behaviour is emitted voluntary behaviour and since Behavioiur Analysis is the science of all such behaviour where the criteria for advancement of any science is the prediction and control of its variables, what do you think?

      Why do you think one of George Ainslie’s books is called Breakdown of Will and one of Howard Rachlin’s The Science of Self-Control? These are Behaviour Analysts. Ainslie’s first book was Picoeconomics. This is about impulsive behaviours (loss of self-control), which include addictions. It’s a science. We don’t live in the Middle Ages anymore, at least, not those of us who are prepared to learn.

  14. February 7, 2011 - 12:00 pm | Permalink


    I have found that it is those who are so desperate to deny that there is a such thing as freewill at all, are those attempting to dodge responsibility for their very own contributions—these ‘behaviorists’ have been some of the most culpable in twisting up the “mass mind’.

    Again, we have design masquerading as diagnosis…
    ‘suggestion’ as per programming, seeded at what are perceived as ‘weak moment’ such as a “confessional”, as Longley has been quick to grasp and use for his ends here, in the comment he tucked in the conversation above: “What you describe in your post above is narcissistic rage.”~Longley

    However, my “behavior” could also be characterized in a great many ways other than via the behaviorist lens.

    Longley, being the epitome of a clockwork orange is locked in the behaviorist box, seeing all the world as a mechanical device lacking spirit and freewill.
    Longley looks out at the world and sees his own reflection, and thus ‘projects’ that on all others, and all else.
    Rather than “narcissistic rage”, he reacts with “academic rage”, which is of course couched in highbrow terminology and ‘cool’ arrogance.

    Of course in rejecting his “diagnosis” one is then said to be shooting the messenger, and further acting out in a narcissistic manner. All things can ride this behaviorist carousel into infinity salivating like a Pavlovian dog.

    Check doctor, ww

    • February 7, 2011 - 1:24 pm | Permalink

      I can tell from your reply that you are unfamiliar with Behaviour Analysis (aka The Experimental Analysis of Behaviour), which you should read as a positive observation, as it means you have something positive and useful to learn, which can’t be a bad experience if it corrects and error can it?

      The Harvard labs were run at by Herrnstein after Skinner retired. Not enough people fully appreciate the significance of that, or that Herrnstein laid the foundations of what is now known as behavioural Economics (though drawing much on the work of Shin Ho Chung, a student of his in the early 60s, I suspect). This field has later been exploited by another group of Cognitive Psychologists going under the same name, but as Libertarians the main beneficiaries of their work appears to have been their friends in Wall Street who preyed upon the less smart unwary who took out ARMs and credit cards they could not afford.

      The former people working in Behaviour Analysis were generally good people in my experience. The latter, calling themselves Cognitive Psychologists, not. I suggest you look into the distinction, it’s important. The former have been treated as badly as those working in race/sex and intelligence research. You may ask why.

  15. February 7, 2011 - 2:25 am | Permalink

    Just some thoughts on our current circumstance from my perspective of many years of research, much of it centereing on Douglas Reed’s, The Controversy of Zion.

    Like Louis, Hosni too lives in isolation from the people who go about their business beyond the walls of his presidential palace. Thus, when Mubarak says he loves Egypt and will never run away from his country, he is talking about a place as distant from that of the ordinary citizen as the moon.~Prof Lawrence Davidson

    Orwell wrote 1984 in 1948. It was an allegory of a world that already was. Not the future, but then, as now. Winston lived in a hard core brutal police state, just like ones all over the world today, from the subtle self enforcing maximum security state like Amerika, to full fledged neofeudal/corpratist state of China, or a brutal theocracy like Saudi Arabia or Iran. Only their cover stories differ. The central premise however is the central global power of Big Brother. This translates to the international Money Power. The House of Rothschild, the Illuminati, or a hundred different brands, but all interconnected in a global matrix. This power has existed status quo for beyond a century.
    It is therefore naïve to speak of something that may or may not happen, that is history.
    It happened, and is happening as it has been–in stages.

    What is all an uproar today is that it is the leap fast forward to the fruition period:
    The Global Neofeudal/Corporatist system. Rockefeller’s CFR dubs this “The China Model”. A pretty bizarre model, something that would resemble the world of Zardoz—the compound of the elite and a literal slave-world beyond run by an hereditary military priesthood.

    Heaven for the privileged few, and Hell for the rest of humanity. The elites are reaching for this breach, to break the bonds with the lesser masses in some permanent fashion. It has been a history long dream of megalomaniacs. They believe with the control of modern technology they can become as gods to the rest of mankind. They feel entitled to this. They see it as their proper destiny. They utterly mad with hubris.

    And it seems that no matter how many see this clearly and report upon it, their message is swept away like Laocoon on the beach before Troy.


  16. chad's Gravatar chad
    February 6, 2011 - 5:49 pm | Permalink

    yeah willy i’ve been hoping they’d make that movie since the passion was released, hopefully some day he will. and i also apologise for talking smack.
    and athanasius i agree braveheart was a good flick, the first 15 minutes or so is in my opinion some of the best film making hollywood ever produced.

  17. February 6, 2011 - 5:38 pm | Permalink


    To each his own as they say. I have loved everyhing Mel has done since Road Warrior. Even the goofy cop flicks, just the fun of them. But his serious movies, bon, bon.

    I don’t pay any attention to the media harrassment of the man. He is after all just a man, whatever his personal failings, I have no judgement.

  18. chad's Gravatar chad
    February 6, 2011 - 4:16 pm | Permalink

    pierre hit the nail on the head. caviezel’s acting in the passion and frequency was spectactular in my humble opinion. but since he’s a christian and wouldn’t play ball he’s pushed into the shadows of mediocre crap.

    granted i should have researched it better, and i do accept your apology willy, it’s all water under the bridge.

    now if we could just get mel gibson and caviezel to do a prequel to the passion, about the life of Christ, i’d be content.

    • February 6, 2011 - 4:55 pm | Permalink

      Cool Chad, thanks.

      I would really like to see the whole story and lead up to the Passion directed by Gibson. The story needs to be told from the perspective that Gibson has of that era. He nailed it {no pun intended at all} in the Passion.
      Which is in other words what you just said…Lol.

    • Athanasius's Gravatar Athanasius
      February 6, 2011 - 5:26 pm | Permalink

      I’m rather surprised. Mel Gibson’s earlier movies were rather coarse (I liked Braveheart, but subtle it wasn’t). And he has shown himself to be something of a buffoon in recent years… but The Passion really was a sublime bit of film making. His ability to translate the imagery, emotion, and theological perspective of Western Christianity to screen was remarkable. Velasquez’s Crucifixtion, Caravaggio’s Deposition, medieval Carolingian manuscripts (among others), all brought to life. I doubt that many other directors in Hollywood of any persuasion could have accomplished this feat.

  19. February 6, 2011 - 1:29 pm | Permalink

    Pierre de Craon,

    I most humbly bow to your points. And I apologise most sincerely to Chad from this larger perspective.

    Adam Goldberg is indeed nothing but a hack as far as acting goes. And his success is obviously driven by the tribe.

    Thank you for your lucid commentary, Willy Whitten

    • Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
      February 6, 2011 - 2:23 pm | Permalink

      And thank you for the gracious reply—the kind of reply, in truth, that has been (absent severe provocation) your norm.

    • February 6, 2011 - 3:38 pm | Permalink

      As you have probably experienced yourself from time to time, unless you are a saint {grin} it is quite easy to grow a thick skin and get cranky dealing with bloggers of various outlooks.
      I grow impatient at times, and will sometimes go off half cocked. I usually regret it as soon as I hit the send button.
      This time your reminder had to sink in.
      So thank you again.

    • February 7, 2011 - 6:20 am | Permalink

      Willy Whitten February 6, 2011 – 3:38 pm
      “I grow impatient at times, and will sometimes go off half cocked. I usually regret it as soon as I hit the send button.”

      What you describe in your post above is narcissistic rage. It’s very common in blogs such a this as they tend to attract people prone to narcissistic behaviour, which, as I’ve explained elsewhere, is prevalent in our dysgenic societies – which is characteristic of arrested development (an infantile disorder) aka anarchism/Libertarianism.

      Be wary of those who’ll groom you for narcissistic supply. Those who don’t, will elicit narcissistic rage, but that doesn’t make their advice false just because it hurts, it’s you who’s doing the hurting, it’s just the consequences of your own behaviours. Watch out that thicker-skin too, as it often serves to make one less aware to what’s going on in the world. Useful learning usually hurts, and what we refer to as learning probably involves endogenous opioids initially being switched off.

      Don’t shoot your messengers.

  20. February 6, 2011 - 11:36 am | Permalink

    Stealing Chad?
    I admit I was a bit harsh with the liar/stupid thing…and yet, you said you “checked into it”….so, really?
    No you just haven’t seen anything about this actor recently yourself. You made an assumption. You were wrong, but you were really angry for no reason other than your own blazing imagination.
    I don’t much care what a person such as yourself thinks of me. But I am sorry for being so blunt and harsh as to call you a liar and stupid–the information from wiki was surely enough to leave that alternative unsaid.

    Luckily, pretty much the only ones that will see my blunder of etiquette are the White Identity Cultists that frequent this site.
    Then again, they will have to look under the thumbs down mobbing so happily done by YOUR KIND here.

  21. chad's Gravatar chad
    February 6, 2011 - 10:56 am | Permalink

    well willy whitten thank you for showing everybody how little class you have by calling someone a liar and stupid from the safety of your living room.

    and i promise that you will never catch me stealing line for line quotes from wikipedia and using them as my own, all the while using other peoples words to make me look more intelligent. as you are obviously fond of doing.
    but like all the rest of the internet tough guys out there i promise you that you have received your last reply from me.

  22. chad's Gravatar chad
    February 6, 2011 - 5:47 am | Permalink

    reading this article got me thinking, what ever happened to the guy who played Jesus in the passion of the Christ? so i looked up his bio and what a surprise he hasn’t been in a movie since.

    james caviezel didn’t reveal his strong christian convictions until 2002 when he refused to do a sex scene in a movie. it was around this time that mel gibson honorably gave him his role in the passion.

    i always knew that they would black list him for that. but now that i know it for sure, it makes me very angry.

    • February 6, 2011 - 7:19 am | Permalink

      Chad, are you a liar or just stupid?

      Caviezel plays a lead role in Unknown, an IFC Films project distributed by the Weinstein Company. Caviezel also has a role in Tony Scott’s 2006 action film, Déjà Vu opposite Denzel Washington and Val Kilmer. He also played the lead role, Kainin, in the 2008 film Outlander.
      In 2009, Caviezel played French-Iranian journalist Freidoune Sahebjam in The Stoning of Soraya M.
      Caviezel starred in a remake of the British science fiction TV show, The Prisoner, which aired in November 2009

    • Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
      February 6, 2011 - 1:04 pm | Permalink

      Mr. Whitten: Anent Caviezel post-Passion, you have effectively made chad’s point for him. When confronted with the charge of producing little but trash, filth, or degeneracy, the century-long claim of the masters of Hollywood “entertainment” has been that they respond to success and to success alone. They give the public, so they say, precisely what it demands and only what it demands. On this basis, since few films in the entire history of the flickers have had the box-office and critical success of The Passion of the Christ, Caviezel should have been forced to hide in the cave next door to Bin-Laden’s to save himself from being maddened by calls for his services. Instead, he has gotten the roles you list above and nought else. Of course, save for the dreadful (so I am told by people who watch such swill) Déjà Vu, the films are all indie stuff, and small-beer indie stuff at that. Note, too, that one of the other stars of Déjà Vu is a certain Adam Goldberg, a man whose career has proceeded apace for a decade and more, despite the fact that he is both a grossly untalented “actor” and one of the ugliest creatures that Hollywood’s Christophobes have ever tried to force-feed to the servile goyim moviegoers who make them rich beyond imagining. Has Goldberg ever given a single distinguished screen performance? An adequate one? (fill in the blank) What, then, could possibly be the basis of his success? Inquiring gentile minds want to know.

      No, sir, whatever other insightful remarks or winning claims you have made on this or other threads, this nag is a nonstarter. I respectfully but urgently suggest that you back another pony.

  23. February 5, 2011 - 9:51 pm | Permalink

    Political Ponerology is a study of the founders and supporters of oppressive political regimes. Lobaczewski’s approach analyzes the common factors that lead to the propagation of man’s inhumanity to man. Morality and humanism cannot long withstand the predations of this evil. Knowledge of its nature – and its insidious effect on both individuals and groups – is the only antidote.

  24. February 5, 2011 - 9:23 pm | Permalink

    I think not Jason…Longley is absolutely serious, I have read some of his papers on the web. I understnad what he is saying and it works together as a whole. He is a totalitarian ponerist nutcase, yes. But lying? No.

  25. February 5, 2011 - 8:02 pm | Permalink

    Wo-ho, now Longley, that is a classic. I am saving this one for my docs.

    I am as you say, “woefully ineducable”. Untwining that Newspeak means, totally beyond your attempts at reprogramming one of “the lost boys” of your empire of Political Ponerology.

    Do as I’m “instructed to do”? I am in your deluded mind, one you have the authority to instruct…
    I see. You have heard of delusions of grandeur I am sure—but don’t recognize it in the mirror.

    You say “history is not a science”, as if I made such a claim.

    I did not.

    However systems science is, a “science”, a hard science. In fact a well established science, applicable to many disciplines , and especially useful in the topic of political science.

    There’s that bloody word again aye, “science”. A word that is often used to define the voodoo world of “psychology”, which is NOT an exact science, no matter how you stack your linguistics with multilateral jabberwacky.

    Your a real piece of work Longley, a mad hatter in a social straitjacket. But I’d love to hear more of your “theories” As entertainment they are as good as some science fiction I have read,

    • Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
      February 5, 2011 - 8:11 pm | Permalink

      Longley is not being remotely honest. He doesn’t believe anything he is saying. He is a troll, sent to distract and disturb.

    • Venona's Gravatar Venona
      February 5, 2011 - 10:44 pm | Permalink

      Jason – I agree, sir. You would think that the near total control of mainstream media outlets would suffice for our opponents, but alas this is not the case. But I remain an optimist. Websites such as this are getting the word out, the annoying but harmless crosstalk notwithstanding.

  26. February 5, 2011 - 5:53 pm | Permalink

    As long as you continue to hold on to this pathetic view of history that “ideology” is the major motive force in politics you have no place shaming others for miscomprehended history.

    You do not comprehend the architecture of modern political power in the slightest.

    POWER is the only question…the only one my Psychodoppler.

    It is the power over the control of money that generates political power. Anything else is a discussion of style and form–but not the substance of the issue.
    You are hypnotized by your own academic programming, you are no wiser than the “commoners” you so obviously disdain.

    “Ideology” is a myth and lullaby for the masses and the go-betweens to those who hold the reigns to power.

    You are dishing out lollipop history to the children like a ballgum machine.

    • February 5, 2011 - 6:50 pm | Permalink

      Willy Whitten February 5, 2011 – 5:53 pm
      As long as you continue to hold on to this pathetic view of history that “ideology” is the major motive force in politics you have no place shaming others for miscomprehended history.”

      You’ve have already shown yourself to be woefully ineducable. History is not a science. It is not factual. Don’t make matters any worse for yourself than you already have. I’ve already suggested that you and some others like yourself here try to learn something about Behavioural Economics. If you can’t do as instructed, I suggest you watch TV, or do something even less taxing, as you’re currently wasting your time posting here.

  27. Felix's Gravatar Felix
    February 5, 2011 - 4:54 pm | Permalink

    Given the overwhelming number of Jews in Hollywood, it should be no surprise there really were so many dyed-in-the-wool communists, who were happy to betray the US, back in the ’50’s.

    • February 5, 2011 - 5:20 pm | Permalink

      Not ‘communists’ – anarchists/Trotskyities aka Libertarians. These are about as far from being communitarians as one can imagine. These are individualists aka ‘wreckers’ and asset-strippers. There is an important difference from ‘communists’ who believe in building a state. Why do you think the USSR threw the former lot out in the 1930s? More people in the USA desperately need to learn some history – although, saldy, it really does look like it may be far too late.

  28. Cheryl-BHHSGRAD's Gravatar Cheryl-BHHSGRAD
    February 5, 2011 - 11:04 am | Permalink

    Hollywood & Hollywood North (Toronto) & London – Film &/or TV – It’s all the same story. Make sure you’re ‘politically correct’ i.e. pro-deviants, or stand outside the glass wall/window, looking in at the beautiful people who have talent, but who destroy the talented people who do not share their views. Freedom of speech and freedom of conscience are not included in the liberal repertoire. This is my personal experience over many years.

  29. February 5, 2011 - 2:20 am | Permalink

    Where else in the world or in history can you find the whole myth spinning apparatus of a people- publishing, films, TV- resigned into the hands of a foreign, unassimilated, and in some regards contemptuous minority? The Romans during the empire relied on subject Greeks to educate their young, direct their theatre, and enliven their faith, but it was all out in the open and readily acknowledged that Hellenic culture had its merits. Nor was it ever forgotten who was boss and who was subject. But THIS? Where every image, idea and emotion gets filtered and fitted by some alien agenda masquerading as “universal values.” It is, I believe, unique and uniquely iniquitous, unheard of in human society. This is what the traditional Protestant distrust or indifference to art has cost the US: cultural usurpation and moral enslavement.

  30. February 5, 2011 - 1:19 am | Permalink

    The 2-party Political System is False. They both serve the Globalist-government-minded BANKSTERS and Corporations and many belong to the CFR, the myriad Jewish groups,, the Trilateral Commission and some attend the Belizean-Bohemian Club, the Skull-Bones Society and Bilderberg meetings.

    They make it crystal clear they do NOT serve us when they bailed out the BANKSTERS twice (without reading the bills-loaded with earmarks). They refuse to secure our borders and enforce our immigration laws and they refuse to end the disasterous Free Trade Policies of NAFTA, CAFTA, GATT and the WTO.

    As for Reagan: He passed the 1986 AMNESTY for ILLEGAL ALIENS, he gave us the Trickle-Down economy, he deregulated many things, he was involved in Iran-Contra and Oliver North with his REX 84 camps and while Nancy was saying, “Say No to drugs,” L.A. was flooded with guns and crack cocaine. Furthermore, there could be NO E.U. (European Union) with the Berlin Wall still standing, could there?

    • February 5, 2011 - 11:55 am | Permalink

      I think you put in a nutshell pretty much the scenario faced by the people here.
      It is going to be pretty hard for me to take personally, all the mythic hulabaloo the media is going to make over that cretin Reagan, on what would have been his 100th B-Day.

  31. February 5, 2011 - 12:31 am | Permalink

    No matter how seriously the pawns and actors on this world stage take their parts, they are all merely reciting prefabricated scripts. The money Power plays everyone against each other. If this simple central rule is ignored nothing is understood.

    And this ties in with my analysis of the Egyptian situation. As much as my heart goes out to their hopes and dreams, I know what they face. The same thing everyone on the planet faces; the iron grip of the Money Power, which by it’s global extension has leverage on any single body of people.

    What is the answer?

    A single global uprising everywhere.

    That is why it is PLANNED to spark the uprisings regionally. Then the Money Power has that leverage of arranging everything bordering it against change to the underlying status quo.

    Obviously the underlying status quo will not tolerate change–that is their whole reason for existence, to maintain their power status.

    “If one strikes at the Prince, one must kill him.”~Machiavelli, THE PRINCE

  32. D.L. Meredith's Gravatar D.L. Meredith
    February 5, 2011 - 12:13 am | Permalink

    Lot of great responses and I enjoyed reading nearly all of them.

    As for my two cents, we whites may be slow to boil but when we finally get there we’ve always prevailed and so it will be this time.

    Some of our greatest attributes have been used against us but the downfall for the Chosenites is confusing softhearted with soft headed.

    I have to chuckle at the near panic Abe Foxman goes after his hate speech legislation. Does he really think that a piece of nonsensical legislation will keep us quiet? Everywhere you see the nation bleeding and torn the names of the perpetrators reads like the guest list at a Bar Mitzvah. More and more of us are connecting the dots and thankfully at a much faster pace than before.

    Just remember that when the party starts the place to be is at the airports where our patriotic brethren with the dual citizenship’s will be heading trying to stay ahead of the mobs.

    Their long overdue comeuppance is at hand.

  33. Irrelevant's Gravatar Irrelevant
    February 4, 2011 - 9:50 pm | Permalink

    The titular liberals are indeed a study in ironies. The majority of those (falsely) professing liberalism are in reality a rabidly authoritarian caste who find it all but impossible to ever progress beyond a type of mid level intellectualism. Their claims of advocating freedom for all political/philosophical/cultural views are easily exposed as false by simply mentioning any conservative cause or belief contrary to their constrictive agenda. Their claims to special relevancy via a type of Kabbalism whose keys they lost thousands of years ago also mark them as possible tools of darkness. Those “mysteries” are and always have been the birthplace and cradle of Paganism which was already ancient before Kabbalism sprang up only a few thousand years ago, and they can never concede (or even consider) that such keys were not exclusively theirs and may not have been lost by everyone else. They are quite easily seen as a morass of contradictions if they’re looked at with that in mind. If it seems I’m anti-liberal it’s because you’ve been conditioned to identify every belief structure other than theirs as “anti” something or other when in fact I’m being completely neutral. I will defend their right to practice their beliefs as quickly and vigorously as anyone else’s. It’s when you ask them to reciprocate that the shit hits the fan and you discover that you are a mere unenlightened racist/bigot/anti-semite/bible thumper/redneck/uneducated/cracker/nazi/extremist/chauvinist/sexist/xenophobic/homophobe who should do the world a favor and just die.
    It has not escaped the notice of worldwatchers that there is a growing sense of urgency in modern liberalism, one could say almost a foreboding, that makes them tend to appear even more shrill than they have historically been. I am an artist myself with a wide circle of friends some of whom are liberal to very liberal, and they do in general accede that the climate of socialistic sympathies among Americans is unquestionably cooling, and is in fact already a waning minority among whites.
    I have no problem with any movement expressing it’s convictions, and will allow it go in peace using all the voice it deems necessary, but the flip side of that is I expect the same consideration. I am one of the few “actual” liberals around, and I find myself being increasingly put off by all the bullshit rhetoric coming from the left these days. If you don’t know the difference between liberalism and socialism you are quite possibly ignorant of many other juxtapositions, and may be a threat to the future of this nation.

  34. February 4, 2011 - 9:12 pm | Permalink


  35. February 4, 2011 - 9:11 pm | Permalink

    I still do not get why those who crave individual freedoms would join a collectivist vision such as “White Identity”.

    I pride myself as an individual with a mind capable of reason and reckoning on my own without the “gang” standing behind me for the illusion of strength.

    And yes, what ever consensus you think you find here is delusional.

    And like the man says…is my comment abusive? Or do you just not want to acknowledge what I have said?

  36. Chuck's Gravatar Chuck
    February 4, 2011 - 8:46 pm | Permalink

    Hollywood continues to conduct its open hate campaign against Germans or people of Germanic descent, which includes a majority of Americans. Have you noticed that the villain is always a blond white guy with a German accent? Or at least a blue-eyed guy. Blockbuster movies contain constant references to the same tired old WWII cliches, propaganda and distortions of history. What for? So nobody wants to be like Germans. The Owners extort money for their goals by making Americans feel guilty, while tearing down the Germanic-Christian American values of self-reliance, honor and hard work that built this country, and instead, they surreptitiously work to create a decrepit, perverse, addicted, passive, lazy, dumb and helpless herd of disowned cattle ready to be milked and slaughtered.

    • buckle's Gravatar buckle
      February 5, 2011 - 7:18 am | Permalink

      There is a visceral hatred of all things German in England also and requires very little input from outside agents to activate it. Yet, when a German Pope was given a tiny opening last September, (even though the media campaign against him prior to the visit was violent), he absolutely wowed them over here. For a couple of days (only), it was cool to be a white European Christian again!

  37. Saxon's Gravatar Saxon
    February 4, 2011 - 8:43 pm | Permalink

    Not to worry folks…the revolution sweeping the middle-east today is headed our way. The everyday people are casting off the yoke of jewish/zionist oppression & malfeasance…soon…very soon…the ‘jew’ will run out of real-estate/places to hide, as one by one the entire human race will reject them & they’ll be justly “PROSECUTED” for their crimes against GOD & humanity!!! I can hardly wait……..

  38. Vince's Gravatar Vince
    February 4, 2011 - 8:17 pm | Permalink

    C’mon GDJ,
    Andy Warhol believe it or not was as Catholic as they come and Bukowski was a German American who drove a VW with a Maltese Cross hanging from the mirror in addition to driving drunk and being one of America’s finest writers. He is not promoted on U.S. campuses or in polite conversation in academic circles because he was wrongly branded an anti- semite just like Jimmy Carter, Nelson Mandala, Norman Finkelstein, Noam Chomsky, Helen Thomas (who is a self stated semite), etc., etc. Even Mr. MacDonald himself has been assigned this label.

  39. Incitatus's Gravatar Incitatus
    February 4, 2011 - 7:04 pm | Permalink

    Why do you folks validate that Tay-Sachs bacillus buggle by acknowledging is insane drivel?

  40. Pete's Gravatar Pete
    February 4, 2011 - 6:25 pm | Permalink

    Back in ’97, we moved to Tucson and we’re going to enjoy a local church’s concert of THE MESSIAH and unfortunately missed out on its performance. We got back later and read in the Arizona Daily Star that the words “Hallelujah, Christ the Lord…” had been expurgated of such references.
    We were told later that little old Tucson was also known as ‘Jewson’. Only 30-40 thousand people running the show for some close to a million people in and around the mountains there.
    Christmas we noted ended immediately after the ‘big day’ and long-time Mexican-American Christmas ceremonies/rituals likewise were scrutinized. One in particular of some 80+ yrs. practice was threatened with cessation — can’t remember the outcome… I think it still is held.
    Decorations for the city of Tucson turned out to be bargain deals of used Christmas ornaments and lights that included ‘dreidels’ from Phoenix.

  41. Dave's Gravatar Dave
    February 4, 2011 - 3:38 pm | Permalink

    @LC Vincent: You’re an “ex catholic” like I’m an “ex rabbi”. Anyone who feels even a little swayed by his fanciful myths, half-truths and outright lies keep in mind he called the inquisition “the blackest scourge upon civilization itself”. Some statistics: The Spanish Inquisition resulted in the executions of some 5000 people. The bolsheviks murdered nearly 7000 catholic clergy in the Spanish Civil War. In my book that is the worse atrocity, because it was committed by modern men. On the odd and highly improbable chance that you are what you claim and have fallen in with a cult that have told you some “big lies” if they are willing to inflate the scope of the inquisition, what other lies have they told you?

    • February 4, 2011 - 4:43 pm | Permalink

      Dave February 4, 2011 – 3:38 pm “Some statistics: The Spanish Inquisition resulted in the executions of some 5000 people. The bolsheviks murdered nearly 7000 catholic clergy in the Spanish Civil War.”

      I suspect you are wrong in a sense there. Can you clear some of what ou have said, or let me? The Spanish Civil War was in Spain. The POUM/CNT were essentially anarchists/Trotskyites, as were the International Brigades. They were fighting Franco, who had support from Germany, The Irish Brigades and…… note Stalinist USSR (who had forces shooting at the POUM/CNT etc).

      What is never made entirely clear as it is convenient to befuddle, is that Bolsheviks were being purged from the USSR in the 1930s as subversives acting on behalf of the West. Thee were anarchists/Trotskites. The Bolsheviks to which you refer were not the Russian Fabian socialists, they were anarchists which came largely from places like the USA, UK, Europe (cf. George Orwell and Emma Goldman) or were home grown. In the USA these types later morphed into Neocons (also known today as Libertarians). These people abuse what they call ‘democracy’ (anarchism) in order to tear down, i.e destroy other people’s governments/states, ultimately for profit. They deregulate in order to exploit. That’s why they were purged from the USSR in the 1930s.

    • buckle's Gravatar buckle
      February 5, 2011 - 7:26 am | Permalink

      The inquisition itself never actually executed. They accused and proved peeople of heresy. It was the secular governments who sentenced heretics to death.

  42. GDJ's Gravatar GDJ
    February 4, 2011 - 11:32 am | Permalink

    Another example of Jewish atavistic hatred of

    Christianity. This weekend Huntington Library and

    Gardens has a two-day celebration of the Chinese

    New Year. Last December at Huntington there

    was no indication of the Christmas season. Only

    vague decorations of the “Holiday Season.”

    At least Huntington didn’t sprout menorahs everywhere

    like public areas of Long Beach. Now Huntington

    is featuring low-brow, Jewish perversion of art

    by Andy Warhol, after a lengthy exhibition of

    the writings of the drunken, depraved Jewish writer

    Bukowski. Jewish money has completely corrupted

    and debased Huntington.

  43. Curious Spectator's Gravatar Curious Spectator
    February 4, 2011 - 9:24 am | Permalink

    Yes the Left Wing Bigots the Fascist Left have been with us for many moons now .They have moved from righteous to fearful , which makes them narrower , more intolerant ,hateful , fearful. The liar and the conman always live in dread of being exposed .
    The Jews have really made a mess of the western world and the whole world generally twisting their Victumhood into a cult movement of the Victim. The Victim is sacrosanct ,all crimes can be committed in defense of the victim–because after all when we have a victim WE have a perpetrator AND if you don’t support the victim you are the perpetrator (in the mind of the idiot left) .
    The Western Universities in the Social Sciences have been twisted completely and corrupted , to the point where they have fallen into disrepute .The minute I read a review on Amazon and some claims they are a professor (in the social sciences ) therefore……. . There opinion becomes highly suspect–Look at the lynching of David Irving etc etc etc .This is the doing of the fascist left driven by the fanatical Jew and the Cult of the Victim.
    I can’t see this ending well for the European peoples .International Jewry has declared war on us and they have used these Scombies–Scholar Zombies , to invade the social machinery of democracy and poison it.Multiculturalism is their tool and they are taking us Back to the USSR but with a market mechanism .
    What a weird, fucked up world these morons are trying to build. A world just as mad as their Communist predecessors .

    • February 4, 2011 - 10:56 am | Permalink

      Except they are not left-wing socialists, they are in fact right-wing (hypocritical) elitist Libertarians. Money-men/women. They blame the Left because they fear the Left as protectors of the vulnerable people who they prey upon (cf. liars-loans and who they mainly targetted, Blacks and Hispanics). They fear regulators. That’s the important point to grasp, and to work with. As to the destruction, they are doing it all to themsleves, and just can’t see it because narcissism blinds. It isn’t just Jewish people. They are legion.

  44. L C Vincent's Gravatar L C Vincent
    February 3, 2011 - 7:53 pm | Permalink

    To all my friends at TOA: I ask you please to follow the rules of the forum:

    please do not ‘down vote’ if you merely dislike or disagree with what follows; instead, please think about what I have written. I assure you that more than a few things here will strike a chord with you, and provoke serious self-inquiry.

    I offer these observations as a former Catholic, and for all Gentiles, both Christian and non-Christian, regarding the cogent observations KM mentions in his article, “Navigating Hollywood”… an experience I have lived thru in the 70’s.

    The following thoughts are offered for your consideration:

    o According to certain authorities, “Christianity” was already centuries old at the time of the alleged birth of Christ;

    o This early “Christianity” may very well have been linked to an ethical, occult system of conduct and enlightenment — the idea of treating people individually, with love and respect, a universalist mindset, and a search for higher, universal truths of thought, action and behavior, practiced by the Essenes and Gnostics; NOT the Hebrew/Jews; Jesus Christ, if he existed, simply continued this tradition;

    o all the original 12 Apostles and the early church fathers were Hebrews;

    o the “Great Plan” (that of somehow elevating a genetically inferior race to world domination) began with the Hebrew-Jews under the Pharaohs and has continued unabated thru the present day; they simply changed their tactics from physical slavery and bondage to mental-economic slavery and bondage (thru debt manipulation);

    o the “Bible” — as a written work — was not officially created for several centuries AFTER the time of Jesus Christ;

    o The Council of Nicea first gave name to “Jesus Christ” in the year 325 AD; up until then, He had no name; he was simply referred to as “The Great Teacher”;

    o The Council of Nicea codified the Bible into “Old” and “New” Testaments by the Church Fathers at that time; most of whom, of course, were still of that same “tribe”…;

    o The Council of Nicea also decided which “books” of the Bible (writings by various authors and followers of Christianity) to include in the official Bible; they pointedly discarded any books with references to re-incarnation, for example; who knows what else they may have discarded that did not sit well with their world view OR world PROGRAM at that time;

    o Is it so incomprehensible to hypothesize that a faction within this conclave at Nicea may have decided (during this first assembly to construct what we refer to as The Bible, based on determining which books and precepts and teachings and dogma and instruction and commandments were to be followed), to tailor the thrust of Biblical teachings in order to create a spirtiual-religious-behavioral philosophy which built upon the original occult Christian precepts, yet poisoned those same teachings with other ideas which would essentially inculcate a slave mentality — concepts such as “guilt” and “Original Sin”? Consider: Such concepts as “my reward lies in heaven” (therefore I will endure all this abuse and dishonesty by those in authority above me while I dwell on Earth); or “I turn the other cheek” (and revel in the supposed virtues of humility, servility and masochism); or the idea that the rich will have a harder time entering heaven than the poor, or the constant analogy of a shepherd and a tamed flock of subservient sheeple… Could not these memes have been placed and scattered within The Bible along with truly righteous virtues (The Law of Love) that exist within other parts of The Bible, in order to promote a dissociative mind set and incongruent behavior patterns? Sort of like mental viruses to be attached to the body politic for future contamination of generations yet unborn?

    o Consider that he creation of “The Church” itself is highly speculative, and is based on one single passage of the Bible: “Thou Art Peter, and Upon this Rock I Will Build My Church.” What real proof, other than this potentially contrived passage, exists to say that the figure referred to as Jesus would even require ANY sort of formal spiritual conduit to communicate with God, other than an INDIVIDUAL’s own desire to do what is right in God’s eyes? Why would the intervention of a priest or a Church be even necessary in order to communicate with ONE’s OWN CREATOR???

    o Is it not interesting that from the time period of the Council of Nicea to the Present, “The Church” has ALWAYS aligned itself with TEMPORAL POWER (Kings, Queens, Emperors, Nations), rather than remaining a NEUTRAL spiritual, universal force, whose only mission would be to equally help all mankind? Render unto Caesar, anyone?

    o Isn’t it interesting that The Church, since the Council of Nicea, has made the extraction of wealth from every source and avenue (weather it be from the poor as donations to the Church, or the accumulations of art, precious metals, property and real estate) its PRIMARY reason for existence? Is it not interesting that the mind set of humility and poverty and equality which Jesus supposedly promulgated was henceforth never followed by any of God’s own specially anointed, infallible, Papal representatives of Christ upon Earth?

    o Is it not interesting that the conception of Woman as the Bearer and Bringer of Sin into the world was codified at The Council of Nicea, and the multi-millenial suppression of Women as being inferior to Man and the Source of Evil upon Earth began at the same time as the establishment of The Church; this misogynist position is little more than an ethnic transliteration of Hebrew/Jewish attitudes towards Women, brought into the world of “Christianity” thru the Bible, to this very day;

    o The hypocrisy of instructing Christian Priests and all male and female hierarchy to remain single and celibate is monumentally absurd, especially when considering that all of Christ’s Apostles had wives. Is this not yet further proof, if any more be needed, that this proscription against marriage was done for no other reason that to assure the unobstructed funneling of real estate, silver, gold, jewels, art and other possessions gathered during the life time of a priest to be directed back towards Rome upon his death, rather than distributed among a wife and family?

    o Is it not curious that The Rothschilds control the financial resources of The Vatican Bank and have done so for well over 100 years? Curious too, that Pope John Paul I lasted only one month as Pope after demanding an audit of the Vatican’s finances, an audit that has still never been conducted? It is by coincidence that The Jews are known as The Poisoners?

    o Isn’t it interesting that the very “creation” of the Seven Sacraments may have been contrived as a means to keep all non-Jewish cattle/insects/goyim (here I am using the words of the Talmud, the true Jewish “Bible”) in a state of paranoid servitude? Consider that the very concept of “Original Sin” was again a creation of the Council of Nicea — it implied that without direct Church intervention thru the sacrament of Baptism, the individual could never gain heaven nor see God;

    o Consider that the “sacrament” of “Confession” enabled priests to hear the most intimate thoughts of both commoners and Kings, and funnel this information back to Rome for political leverage and advantage; the “sacrament” of “Communion” (common union) served to emphasize not only the lowest common-denominator mentality among the people, but also served to physically pinpoint those people who did not remain in the state of Sanctifying Grace, necessary to enter heaven, among the congregation (thereby publicly reinforcing guilt and shame); that being condemned by a Pope even meant that the heads of state (Kings and Queens, and all Royalty) must BOW BEFORE whoever sat upon the Throne of Peter, and thereby were made subservient to the Popes’ will, wish and whim, for he acted as God’s Gatekeeper to heaven on this Earth;

    o If the person referred to as Jesus Christ (the Great Teacher) truly existed, do you not find it curious that Jesus’ actual divinity (the idea that He was the Son of God) was not theologically established as fact until the 4th Century, again at The Council of Nicea?

    o If the person/entity/being we refer to as Jesus Christ truly existed — was he really a Hebrew? Based on what authority? The “Bible”? A book first compiled in the Fourth Century by Hebrews, who obviously had an agenda proven by the fact that they left out many spiritual books in circulation at that time which could have been included (The Apocrypha) but were only discarded due to SOCIO-POLITICAL considerations of control? By the same authority we are to accept the Papal claim of infallibility…. because THE POPE SAID SO….??

    o Are the titles “Jesus of Galilee”, and “Jesus of Nazareth” an indication that the Jesus of the Bible may NOT have actually been a Hebrew? What real proof, other than the Bible, do we have of Jesus’ lineage? When any inquiring mind can also find evidence that the books and teachings of the Bible were either specifically included or discarded or shaped to promote a specific train of thought, conduct, mental attitude and world view, why wouldn’t the authors and constructors of the first Bible create a link from God and Jesus to THEIR OWN CHOSEN PEOPLE??? Would this link not serve their interests in the very long term future, in the struggle for dominance and control of this planet?

    o Is it not interesting that the great Hebrew Kings and Queens and royalty of the Bible, featured prominently throughout the Old Testament and Hollywood Films, have absolutely zero outside correspondence in any written historical record? Put simply, there is no outside historical record of ANY OF THEM, other than the Bible.

    o Is it not interesting that by instilling/installing the concept that “Jesus” was “Jewish” (Hebrew), and descended from the “House of David” — that Christians end up worshiping a person/being/entity who has always been represented to us as being Jewish? Does the psychological concept of “disassociation” ring a bell?

    o Is being Hebrew the same as being Jewish? Are the Hebrews of The Bible the Jews of today?

    o If the real Jesus were Semitic, and the only real Jewish people of Semitic blood are Sephardic Jews, currently representing only 8% of the Jewish population on Earth, then the other 92% of the so-called “Ashkenazi” Jews (who descended from the non-Semitic Khazar conversion in the 14th century, and who currently run Israel, where Sephardic Jews are looked upon as scum) cannot have any claim to the Holy Land, EXCEPT by pretending to be “promised”‘ this land by ‘THEIR’ BIBLE, which they have illegitimately appropriated.

    o Do you not find the evolution of “God the Father” from the Old Testament to the New Testament to be utterly incomprehensible? In the Old Testament (which is a running commentary on the trials, tribulations, rewards and punishments of God’s “Chosen People”….!), God the “Father” condones the following: total genocide against one’s “enemies” (that is, anyone who is not a Jew/Hebrew), murder, rape, theft, plunder, pillage, lying, deception, child sacrifice thru immolation (fire), beheadings, incest with siblings, father and daughters, prostitution and poisoning for political ends, patricide, matricide, fratricide, etc.?

    o If God’ Love is Universal, and God is Perfect, than God’s creation must mirror that perfection. How is it, then that God (as we conceive him) would express a preference for only one certain group or “tribe” of his creation? Isn’t this expressing favoritism of some sort, when any possible conception of God would include EQUALITY? And what possible reason would God have to to express favoritism towards any particular group or tribe? If it were because these people were strict adherents to His Commandments, then the Hebrew/Jews, ipso facto, failed (and continue to fail) MISERABLY. But consider — what if the Ten Commandments were actually written and promoted only for OUTSIDERS? That is, what if the Ten Commandments were actually written for the cattle/insects/goyim, in other words, ALL NON JEWS, and a secret set of commandments, codified in the Talmud (allowing interesting exceptions to those Ten Commandments based on nothing more than membership in the Tribe of Hebrew/Jews, such as intercourse with 3 year old babies, incest, lying, cheating, stealing, revenge and murder — as long as the victim was not Jewish, it’s perfectly Kosher…) and such notably abhorrent behavior as ritual child sacrifice (as long as the baby is Gentile) were to be permitted to Jews? What sort of “God” or spiritual being would not only allow but encourage “His” “Chosen People” to continue these quaint customs against a non-Jewish world? Hmmmm…. Only one “being” comes to mind; the Rolling Stones referred to him as Mistah “D”… also known as El Diablo, The Devil.

    o Does this all seem far-fetched? We read in the Old Testament that the God of the Hebrews/Jews is a “jealous god.” Think on this: besides condoning and encouraging all the behaviors noted in the prior bullet point, what sort of “god” would be “jealous” of anything or anyone, or have any reason to be jealous? Would not jealousy imply a character flaw??? Are we to think of God as flawed? Isn’t the promotion and tolerance of all the wretched behavior noted earlier also flawed??? Do you see even ONE example of the “God the Father” of the Old Testament equating with God the Father of The New Testament? No, not even one! But if God is Eternal, does God change? Or is it that the Hebrew/Jew “god” of the Old Testament is actually The Devil, the only sort of inferior “god” who would perfectly reflect the character flaws of his own creation!

    o Throughout the Old Testament (noted as the philosophy of “an eye for an eye”, or more accurately the Hebrew concept of Justice = Revenge), the first part of the Bible seethes with murder, bloodshed, greed, ambition, avarice, deception, duplicity, rape, revenge, incest, pride, lust for earthly riches, and physical domination and rule over ALL OTHER PEOPLES on the face of the Earth. Where are those thoughts in the New Testament? They no longer exist; they have been eradicated by The Law of Love …. EXCEPT among Hebrew/Jews. The Law of the god of the Hebrews/Jews (hatred, revenge, and lust for physical riches) has been replaced by the Law of the God of Love. The god of the Old Testament of the Hebrews IS NOT the God of the Law of Love of genuine Christianity.

    o Could it be that even the very warnings and proscriptions against the Hebrew/Jews handed down to us in The New Testament were actually placed there on purpose by the very Hebrew/Jews who compiled the original Bible? As a means of continuing to promote outside oppression throughout the annals of time in order to foster group cohesion internally as well as hatred of “The Outsider” (goyim)?

    o Did not the the conception of Woman as the Bearer and Bringer of Sin into the world begin with The Church, and the multi-millenial suppression of Women as being inferior to Man began begin at the same time as the establishment of The Church; and isn’t this misogynist position little more than a mere transliteration of Hebrew/Jewish attitudes towards Women, brought into the world of Christianity to this very day?

    o Isn’t the hypocrisy of instructing Catholic Priests and all Catholic hierarchy to remain single and celibate monumentally hypocritical, when all of Christ’s Apostles had wives? Is this not yet further proof, if any be needed, that this proscription against marriage was done for no other reason that to assure the unobstructed funneling of real estate and other possessions gathered during the life time of a priest to be directed back towards Rome upon his death, rather than distributed among a wife and family?

    o Does not the selling and dispensation of “alms” and the forgiveness of sins for money, so prevalent during the Middle Ages, rather than suffering the public penance and punishment of whipping, floggings and public penance and humiliation, speak to the very avaricious and acquisitive Nature of the Church at its very core foundation?

    o To wrap this all up and state it all quite simply: could all non-Jews (Gentiles of all other races) for the last two thousand or so years have been “played” by an institution supposedly representing a “Christianity” conceived of in the Jewish mind, while that Jewish cabal suppressed an earlier occult (hidden) Christianity which truly dwelt upon Universal Love, Harmony and Understanding? Could the figure of Jesus as we have come to know him, been little more than a constructed vehicle to promote the conception and acceptance of poverty, chastity, obedience? Tolerance, humility, poverty? Original sin, guilt, conformity? All for the purpose of more easily manipulating society for their own depraved ends?

    Could the original Christianity, which pre-dated the time of Christ’s alleged birth, have been hijacked by an inside cabal of warped Hebrews for the purpose of creating an easily manipulated, pliable, gullible, accepting, tolerant, clay people currently known as Christians; whereas the secret suppressed teachings of Christianity — the secret mythos of The Chrystos or The People of The Christ-Heart — The “Chryst-al” [crystal] of Christ Consciousness, may perhaps have been suppressed for several thousands of years instead? Could this cabal have done this to foster an easily manipulatable meme of sheeple upon all outside non-Jewish people, for the purpose of wealth extraction and social control? Is it mere coincidence that The Rothschilds control the Vatican Bank? Is it that Christian Bankers cannot be found or cannot understand the complexity of Vatican Finance? Or is it because there is now and has always actually been a symbiotic, secret relationship between the Vatican and Haupt Juden (the Jewish Elite)?

    How is it that each successive list of Popes in recent history bends over backwards (or forwards) to modify, apologize for, eradicate and erase parts of accepted Biblical verse which warn us of the devious depravity of The Jews?

    Has not the Catholic Church ALWAYS stood for the Status Quo, including the vicious, vile and violent suppression of all seekers of Truth, such as Galileo and Giordano Bruno, blinded and burned at the stake, respectively, by God’s “infallible” representatives? Or instituted that blackest scourge upon civilization itself, The Inquisition, which philosophically found no contradiction in torturing and killing men, women and children in order to “save their souls”? Or supported and promoted wars of pillage, rape and conquest throughout the ages, races, nations and territories to reap more power, wealth, privilege and property?

    In every instance, has not The Church and the institution of Christianity acted and behaved in diametrically the DIRECT OPPOSITE FASHION as the supposed representative of Christ and God upon this Earth? The only possible answer to the above charges is a resounding YES!

    And there is only one possible explanation. The last two thousand years were hijacked by a small cabal of insiders whose true allegiance was not to God and Truth, but to The Devil and Deceit. They warped Christianity to portray it and bend it to their pleasure, as they wished, for their own purposes. They created the Sacraments and The Laws of The Church to promote guilt, depression, subservience, servility, to access secret information to more easily create and manipulate a herd mentality which would naturally accept any dogma or ruling from their hierarchy without question.

    They have fought all the first glimmerings of the scientific revolution, fearing that each discovery would somehow lesson the grasp of their horned fingers upon the levers of power and privilege. They have amassed fortunes by rape, plunder and pillage of “savages” and “non-Christians”, conveniently obliterating the truly Universal Law of Love which is God’s Law incarnate upon this Earth.

    They created The Church and The Cult of Christianity in order to make us more malleable and controllable by creating an image of a gentle Christ whose only temperamental outburst was against their own Pharisaic money-changers — the usurers and bankers of that time– for the purpose of re-enforcing that very behavior, knowing that their own people rejected ALL the teachings attributed to Christ, just as The Church, by its own behavior over the centuries, has stood in direct opposition to the welfare of mankind and the teachings of Christ it supposedly represents on Earth.

    It is no wonder that their hive mentality created Communism, simply a socio-political offshoot of The Sacrament of Communion, whereby the group collective, lowest common denominator mind is put in charge of resources to be reaped by The Elite who control the process? Nor is it an accident that all so-called “activist” priests today are Leftist in nature, character and action. The Collective has but one ultimate priority: TO COLLECT!

    What we know of as The Church may only be nothing more than the hideous Frankensteinian creation of a cabal of Hebrew savants and clairvoyants who, centuries before us, were able to enslave Gentile humanity thru elaborate ritual and dogma to do their bidding, fight their wars of pillage and conquest, and create generations of servile subjects who still worship a “Jewish” Messiah so that they continue to reap the political support which encourages the shedding of Gentile blood in their proxy wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, set in motion by the Mossad’s atrocity of 9/11, and continually nourished by the blood of Gentiles on the battlefield for an Earth they seek to totally exploit and rule.


    • Athanasius's Gravatar Athanasius
      February 3, 2011 - 9:31 pm | Permalink

      I’m not going to comment on the numerous contradictions (using Jewish revisionist history when it suits your thesis, using orthodox historiography other times, sometimes using occult fantasies)–but one thing. You are actually contending that the Church Fathers were Jewish shills?
      “Shall I tell you of their plundering, their covetousness, their abandonment of the poor, their thefts, their cheating in trade? the whole day long will not be enough to give you an account of these things. ”

      That’s what Chrysostom had to say.
      Are you really saying that Saint Basil, Saint Gregory Nazianzus, Saint Athanasius, Saint Jerome, were all Jewish or else compromised?

    • Jack Ford's Gravatar Jack Ford
      February 4, 2011 - 3:07 am | Permalink

      I stopped reading way up there but I get the picture. You have a personal problem with the Catholic Church. Is Christ God? Is there an eternity after this life, shudder? Is there a heaven, hell, and purgatory?

      Can’t prove that there is no God. Can’t imagine Him not caring about His creations. Can’t imagine Him creating man with no free will, and hence sin and evil.

    • February 4, 2011 - 8:09 am | Permalink

      “You are actually contending that the Church Fathers were Jewish shills?”

      We do all sorts of things without being (fully) aware of the consequences alas, it’s part of the human condition, i.e we are not omniscient.

      It is behavioural consequences which matter, not intentions.

      One thing to bear in mind about Catholic clerical celibacy and universal pro-natalism is that at root Catholicism (Christianity) was a Jewish radicals’ creation. Its celibacy is not practiced by rabbis. One of the consequences of Catholic clerical celibacy would have been dysgenics, and an insidious dumbing down of its population. What end might that have served? Might it have facilitated debt-slavery? There need have been no intention as behaviour is selected and reinforced by its consequences. There are of course many good things about Catholicism too.

    • Athanasius's Gravatar Athanasius
      February 4, 2011 - 11:14 am | Permalink

      But clerical celibacy was only imposed in the Catholic Church in the 10th century. In the Orthodox Church it was never imposed on most of the clergy (the exception being bishops).

      Incidentally, just after the imposition of clerical celibacy, there was a population boom in the high medieval period.

      While I must admit that there was ethnic Jewish consciousness among some Christians (i.e., people whose ancestors had converted during the first couple centuries A.D.) as late as the 10the century (they were a very small population though), then as now, there is nothing that Jews hate so much as the Orthodox and Catholic churches.

    • Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
      February 4, 2011 - 2:22 pm | Permalink

      Perhaps Professor MacDonald et al. might consider restructuring TOO as a social networking site. After all, and against all hope, in LCVincent it has provide Mr. Longley with a soul mate! I eagerly await the announcement of the civil union ceremony. Will George Soros attend, I wonder?

      Athanasius, permit me, as a long-time admirer of your posts, to suggest that you read a bit more widely about clerical celibacy in the first millennium AD. It was the de facto norm long, long before it became de jure—indeed, evidence for it is found in the Pauline epistles. As with most other defined doctrinal and disciplinary matters, the spelling out of what had to be done or believed came only when the accepted teaching or practice came under attack or fell into desuetude. The semitraditional site Rorate Caeli has had quite a few posts and comments on this matter within the past two or three weeks. A judicious reader can find there a good deal of wheat midst the expected chaff.

    • Di, Cerrillos,NM's Gravatar Di, Cerrillos,NM
      February 5, 2011 - 10:59 am | Permalink

      Well said Mr. Vincent. What your statement boils down to is that we have been lied to from the beginning. By their actions shall they be judged. We created God in our image.

    • Athanasius's Gravatar Athanasius
      February 5, 2011 - 9:47 pm | Permalink

      Pierre- I shall look into that. I do agree that the Pauline epistles provide plenty of encouragement for celibacy.

  45. bill's Gravatar bill
    February 3, 2011 - 10:54 am | Permalink

    I would like to see a list of A stars, I imagine they are mostly Jewish. Whites talk about white stars and they do not realize that the stars are Jewish.

    Yet, several years ago the blacks demanded more and they got more. Probably the whites jobs.

    So that makes Hollywood mostly Jewish and Black. I love the movies and I will not go. I refuse to give money to people who hate me and work for my demise.

  46. Balthasar's Gravatar Balthasar
    February 2, 2011 - 10:17 pm | Permalink

    I understand the concept of remaining a secret agent. But here’s a question – what do you teach your kids? Do you tell them the truth and risk messing up their life, by them telling this to the wrong people? Or do you lie to them and risk messing up their life because it may take them as long as it took me to figure this all out?

    • February 3, 2011 - 2:10 am | Permalink

      The problem with secret agents is that most people never know who they are, or where they are with them. It’s best to tell kids to pursue and tell the truth, pointing out that subterfuge and make-believe is women’s work.

    • bill's Gravatar bill
      February 3, 2011 - 11:03 am | Permalink

      PLease forgive spelling.

      Jews and blacks teach their children to hate. They will openly admit that, only whites cannot educate their children to what is so. I know blacks and jews who speak very openly about what they teach their children. They do it under the guise “We must not let history be repeated. We must never forget the past.

      Jews already have a service for the Holocaust. It is called the breaking of the crystal to commemorate the night several synagogue had rocks thrown through the windows. A civil disobedience at best.

      Twice as many non Jews were killed in the camps and only the Jews use it for their cause. I called a Catholic Diocese in my town and ask for a commemorration of the non Jews killed in the Holocaust and they said absolutely not.

      As long as there are Jews there will be Hate.

  47. February 2, 2011 - 7:38 pm | Permalink
  48. European's Gravatar European
    February 2, 2011 - 7:19 pm | Permalink

    No, the evidence suggests that it will turn out to be genetic and it is universal. Similarly,

    When I find it I will send you the new study, that is is only about 50% genetic, the rest is cutural opportunity.

    • February 2, 2011 - 7:35 pm | Permalink

      Are you sure you understand this? I suspect you don’t understand what ‘environment’ refers to, or the nature of this research? The recent work you may be referring to is probably not what you think (see Murray’s response).

      Furthermore, it isn’t shared environment which is important, and Non-Shared environment refers to all sorts of post conception influences which include physical damage due to hypoxia, nutrition, knocks etc lowering innate ability (but that is not the point I was making about sex and intelligence. Note there are 2x the number of males with an IQ of 120+ than females. Note also, non-genetic means all outside gene expression.

      Finally, not all in blogland is equal. The Null Hypothesis should not be taken too literally. Please read the link in the last comment carefully – you responded to quickly to have done so ;-)

  49. Brandy's Gravatar Brandy
    February 2, 2011 - 6:59 pm | Permalink

    Big Evolution Discovery !

    British professor Nigel Swiggerton of Chapsworth College has recently found a missing link in the evolution/creation debate. Everyone is familiar with the “stages of man” chart found in textbooks which begins with a naked, hairy, bent over, grunting Neanderthal type which over millions of years finally learns how to stand erect while sporting a 1930s-style haircut. Well, Dr. Swiggerton discovered that someone accidentally reversed the negative. It turns out that the first man was actually standing erect with a short haircut but has been descending over the years until he has finally reached the last stage – the stage at any rock concert filled with naked, hairy, bent over, grunting Neanderthal types!

  50. European's Gravatar European
    February 2, 2011 - 6:22 pm | Permalink

    David L,

    We protect women and children because we know they’re relatively under-developed (females being smaller in stature and muscle mass, and on average less intelligent with a narrower IQ range than the male group. If a population becomes less intelligent and/or more feminized, my point is that it will regress collectively, and it will so economically and competitively.
    This is only true if we have swang the pendalum from wholy masculine to wholy feminine in regards to governing. The feminine becomes destructive in society the same way the masculine has been dominant for the past 2000 years, and very destructive I must say. Male has elevated himself at the expense and suppression of the feminine female (just think of Judaism and the Catholic Church) Balance is the key. Neither is superior or inferior to the other. You are very very wrong in your thinking. Your statement is almost stupid and prove of a low IQ.
    If the feminine gender still proves to have a lower IQ, then it is because they have been placed behind closed doors, out of discourse and discussion, with not the same opportunities, or just involved in rearing and taking care of families. Never the less they have skills and abilities that you can not learn in any University. (Emotional Intelligence, which you appearantly do not posses) Give them time and they will catch up with you in the accademics. And they are doing it, because of your and others like you, remarks and insults to the femine gender. Maybe that is why the white race is dying out, there is no one at home to rear successful white off-springs. Your post is insulting to the femine gender, and I would not have wanted to visit your school of learning. Either you are truly stupid with a low IQ, or very old.

    • February 2, 2011 - 7:10 pm | Permalink

      “If the feminine gender still proves to have a lower IQ, then it is because they have been placed behind closed doors, out of discourse and discussion, with not the same opportunities, or just involved in rearing and taking care of families. Never the less they have skills and abilities that you can not learn in any University. “

      No, the evidence suggests that it will turn out to be genetic and it is universal. Similarly, the difference between the Ashkenazim and others is highly likely to be genetic (I’ve mad some suggestions as to where this may be), The B-W difference is looking genetic too. Whilst there are probably many genes determining what we refer to ‘intelligence’ (‘g’) itself, exactly where to look in the genome for the universal sex difference in brain gender is difficult. Some are looking at the X, but note, as I have pointed out elsewhere, one thing to bear in mind is that whilst both sexes have one fully active X chromosome (~1000 genes), the second female X being largely inactivated outside the gonads, the Y chromosome does provide males with some extra genes which females do not have at all.

      I infer from your response that a) you’re not familiar with this area of research b) that you haven’t read/understood many/any of my earlier comments to this blog on this and c) that you may be female?

      Incidentally, why do you think I must be truly stupid with a low IQ, or very old? Is it because I persist in trying to educate people who don’t want to be, because you don’t like what I am writing, or perhaps because it surprises you and you think that must mean I am wrong? If your reaction is representative, it might explain quite a lot of other people’s behaviour here over the past few weeks, which is still a little surprising, as it would seem to suggest that many here know far less about the relevant matters than they think they do.

  51. MaDsKiLlZ's Gravatar MaDsKiLlZ
    February 2, 2011 - 3:34 pm | Permalink

    Buggle makes good points. The ultimate theological criterion of Judaism is “Is it good for the Jews?” What makes the Jews strong is “good”, what weakens Jewish power and cohesion is “evil.” With this kind of ethics, a tribe can’t go wrong.

    The problem with Christianity is: It’s not a vehicle for European GES the way Judaism is for Jews. It never was a tribal strategy, rather a universalist construct designed to hold together multiethnic empires from Rome and Byzantium down to Austro-Hungary and everything in between–including America until recently. Christianity has always had universal and multiethnic currents.

    A people won’t thrive by asking themselves “Is it good for the imaginary sky god?” They must ask “Is it good for [Europeans, Spaniards, Danes, Aryans–fill in your collective/level of specificity]. If Europeans want a religious GES, then “God” must be subservient to the European collective, not vice versa. Like the Jews: They don’t let a smelly, decrepit fart like Yahweh get in the way of what’s good for Jews. (They make Yahweh work for them, in effect.) Literally, Jews regard their own collective as the closest thing to “God” in the Void.

    @buggle: You sound like Alex. ;-)

    • Athanasius's Gravatar Athanasius
      February 2, 2011 - 9:16 pm | Permalink

      Well, if we are to survive, I think we once again need a Byzantium or a Holy Roman Empire. We need something multi-ethnic to bind us together.

      I realize some of you think that the Germans can go it alone….

  52. European's Gravatar European
    February 2, 2011 - 1:17 pm | Permalink

    David Longley February 2, 2011 – 10:04 am | Permalink

    Certainly more discipline to follow the 612 commandments of Marmoides.

    Germans and Europenas have/had discipline and organisational skills, but this attribute gets put down at every turn because of WWII. There is so much good and value in History by none-jews to learn from, but for some reason America has divorced itself from History over 200 years. That is a sad development. The general mass in America has two types of people. Winners and Loosers, which is also a sad development. Good loosers learn, but America disposes (paper-plate society, ) and trashes them. None-Jews have a lot of History of which to learn from. I read about the pagan Religion Asatru (thru info on this site) which existed before modern Judaism and Christianity. I found it interesting that their Marriage rites and ceremony was almost the same as in todays modern Judaism. So who adopted tradition and History from who. The disposession of our values and knowledge is enormouse. (I am not into pagan religions, but I learn from all) The jewish culture takes them from where ever they have lived and make it their own, and name them jewish. Coming from Europe I notice it all the time in the US. But the US does not know it is actualy German or Dutch or whatever. You buy it as being jewish, wow, their invention, and therefore not ours. They own what is ours/yours. You got to keep your jewels, your history, our honor, your European Ancestors and learn from their struggel of survival, not the jews or anyone elses. They have different ways that don’t help, validate, encoaurage or benefit us. Take back what has been stolen from us. Look how the Indians were dispossesed, if you live in the US. The native Hawaiens. They faded into Alcoholism, deprived of their own way of life, with some remaining. America and the drug-culture is heading in the same direction. We are loosing out and dowsing ourself with Drugs, Alcohol, sex, food, violent Movies and the Entertainment Industry of make belief, Gambeling, or any other addiction you can think of.
    Self-discipline, a way of life, honor, courage, fidelity, etc…..what are the values that binds people together so they can make a difference and survive. ? Right now America is a ME-me, now, immediate gratification generation. Sacrifice it seems exist only for soldiers, on forgeign soils and wars. You got to fight your battles in this country. If we are individualists, then do it individualy, one person at a time, win them over. But fight…and I don’t mean with guns, or violence.
    By the way, I just learned that Colombus was actualy a Jew, a converted Jew to Christianity, who presumably had a Ship with more Jews, escaping the forced conversions in Spain. Our ignorance is hillarious. (in a positive sense as it encourages me/us to learn more.)

    • February 2, 2011 - 2:24 pm | Permalink

      European February 2, 2011 – 1:17 pm America is a ME-me, now, immediate gratification generation.”

      That certainly appears to be what the empirical evidence shows. The most recent to wake up was ETS back in February 2007, but many have reported the trend over the past few decades, and Herrnstein and Murray weren’t the first. One point worth holding on to is the relationship between self-centredness (narcissism) and childishness, and with that feminization. We protect women and children because we know they’re relatively under-developed (females being smaller in stature and muscle mass, and on average less intelligent with a narrower IQ range than the male group. If a population becomes less intelligent and/or more feminized, my point is that it will regress collectively, and it will so economically and competitively. If one looks at the USA as it shows itself to the world through Hollywood and the media, one does see encouragement of self-obsession and promotion of competitive attention-seeking behaviour, i.e the behaviour of childish and female behaviours being championed. One does not see moral leadership being promoted. Similarly, if one points these facts out, (all of which appear to be well documented), one is likely to elicit tantrums, hissy fits, denial and abuse, none of which make the observation untrue, in fact, it just serves to reinforce the analysis. The USA truly seems to have become the world’s super-spoiled brat, and many of the other European and Far Eastern Liberal-Democracies are following suit. That’s dysgenesis, but I’m not sure it can or should all be laid at the doors of Jews :-(

    • February 2, 2011 - 5:15 pm | Permalink

      “MaDsKiLlZ February 2, 2011 – 3:34 pm Buggle makes good points. The ultimate theological criterion of Judaism is “Is it good for the Jews?” What makes the Jews strong is “good”, what weakens Jewish power and cohesion is “evil.” With this kind of ethics, a tribe can’t go wrong.”

      Is this good for the Americans?

      Russia Today is currently broadcasting a highly critical series entitled Russia Today Documentaries’ about the Vietnam War. What you say above could just as easily be applied to the USA in that war. Was it good for Amercians? My point is that if one look more closely at how the class ‘Jews’ is being used one can see how the logic could be applied to any self-interested group: AIG, Goldman Sachs, ENRON, KFC, The Republican Party, you name it. What you are describing is how many corporations or businesses often operate (even football teams). They operate like competitive extended families, and can be cruel and ruthless. If you look closer still you will see that many here are being encouraged to behave in this competitive way, i.e to pursue the American Dream. But how can that possibly work if you are all so critical of Jews doing just that? Is that not tu quoque Do you not see that all that’s being promoted is Libertarianism, i.e anarchism? See end of the video, and see ETS on The American Dream. Has some agency got you running in self-destruct mode?

  53. Jack Ford's Gravatar Jack Ford
    February 1, 2011 - 11:14 pm | Permalink

    Mr. Buggle has not read enough MacDonald and has not done much thinking.

    He is confused. MacDonald has pointed out that the white race is different. It is the only race that evolved with a “ tendency toward individualism and all of its implications: individual rights against the state, representative government, moral universalism, and science. This makes them vulnerable to invasion by other races.

    It is as though a town of peaceful citizen is invaded by a motor cycle gang. The townspeople will not kill the gang because the townspeople believe that the hoodlums have rights and must be indicted, tried and convicted before they can be stopped.

    Bungle must take the time to read What Makes Western Culture Unique?, and a lot more Kevin MacDonald before he can stop sounding grossly ignorant. When the Jews invade European societies they are the organized motor cycle gang and the Europeans are the fair minded townspeople.

    • fender_strat's Gravatar fender_strat
      February 1, 2011 - 11:59 pm | Permalink

      You have to remember that Christianity was a semitic religion that was imposed on Europeans at the point of a sword, and that part of the reason why Europeans evolved with a tendency towards individual rights, universalism, and vulnerability was because of the spread of this religion.

      Imagine if, instead of Christianity, which was authored by Jews, the Norse religions had conquered Europe. Instead of a worshipping a Jew, Europeans would have worshipped their own warrior deities. Do you think, with that kind of mentality, Europeans would have ever tolerated outsiders or people who wished them harm? I think not.

      In a way, Europe never had a chance with Christianity, because it was an alien religion that was always at odds with European spiritual origins. Now with the death of Christianity by the hands of the Jews who authored it, Europeans are a people without a religion. I suppose that’s better than adhering to a religion that was never theirs to begin with.

      Now what can fill the void? Jews have it easy because they have centuries-old religious documents specifically telling them how to behave and how to procreate. We don’t. We really have nothing. No rules, no unity, no cohesion, nothing. Christianity won’t make a comeback, and certainly the original pagan religions won’t.

      The only thing I can think of is some form of mild eugenics; policies and culture formed around science instead of religion might be what saves us. The recognition by the masses that science does in fact explain life better than religion might lead to more Europeans wanting to preserve their identities through selective breeding. Just an idea.

    • Athanasius's Gravatar Athanasius
      February 2, 2011 - 12:30 am | Permalink

      I’ve thought about that to some extent. As much as Jews hate Christianity, I can’t help but wonder if they would have been truly expelled from Europe had the Europeans seen them as utterly alien.

      The ridiculous thing is that while Jews bitch incessantly about Christianity, any walk through European museums and churches will show tribal Jewish chieftains and minor historical figures elevated to the heights of heroism. David, Solomon, Moses–all taught to generations of European children as their own heroes. I learned to admire these figures as a child and when I have children, I’ll teach my children the same way.

      I think it is certainly true that had it not been for Christianity, Jews would not have had the a priori respect in Europe that they did. There is no way that Romans and Greeks would have respected the heroism or the intellect of Jews without the Bible laying the groundwork.

      NOW, having said all of that, the New Testament also contains many warnings against the behavior of Jews, as do many of the Church Fathers (the Western Europeans suffered for de-emphasizing them).

      Two more points. Islam is also a semitic religion rooted in Judaism, but they have almost completely displaced them from Muslim countries (despite a 1000 year symbiotic relationship in which they pillaged Christians as a group). Furthermore, Jews have shows an even higher ability to dominate post-Christian societies than they have Christian ones. In Christian America, they at least had to publicly cater to the sensibilities of the majority. Now they openly scorn us.

    • buggle's Gravatar buggle
      February 2, 2011 - 9:39 am | Permalink

      But I have read mucho MacDonald, pallie – every book, every review, and every essay I could find, and I’ve been doing it for a long time. I’m not sure how you magically know what I’ve read, but hey, you must, otherwise how could you make such assertions?

      I like the motorcycle gang analogy – always a giveaway that one is dealing with some ancient, reactionary conservative type. You and many other fellows here always go on about the evil organized Jews picking apart the poor individual Europeans. You complain, you whine, but you don’t do anything except pine for the past or wish reality were something other than it is. Guess what – eusocial organisms are the way of evolution. Your Christianity only worked because it was a group against a group – it was a collective. Your “evolution” into individuals has been actually a slow unraveling. You wear that individualism badge like it means something awesome when, clearly, it just signifies slavery, then extinction. You’re not just being eaten alive by Jews – every collective is devouring, from the Hindoo to the Chinaman to the Muslims. The fact that the collective trumps the individual is nothing new. What is new is shoulder shruggers saying, “Oh well, that’s it, there’s nothing we can do. We’re individuals, and that’s the way it is.” And at the end of the day, you’re gone. And the great void doesn’t notice a thing.


      Like the big, bad German said, Odin became obsolete with the coming of Christianity. We can’t imagine what things would’ve been like, because that’s false, they didn’t go that way. The Norse religions were as doomed to go as Xtianity is. Clovis dropped his gods to huzzah the Christ because he thought it ensured success in battle – so there he goes, slaughtering more of his folk in the name of this new guy, just like he was slaughtering them in the name of the old guys. There’s just been too long a history of dysgenics with our people.

    • February 2, 2011 - 10:04 am | Permalink

      “fender_strat February 1, 2011 – 11:59 pm You have to remember that Christianity was a semitic religion that was imposed on Europeans at the point of a sword, and that part of the reason why Europeans evolved with a tendency towards individual rights, universalism, and vulnerability was because of the spread of this religion.

      Martin Luther (from whom King presumably got his name) tried to do something about this, but clearly failed, as did Wagnerian Hitler. So why do people fail? Might it be an aversion to communitarianism?

      “Now what can fill the void? Jews have it easy because they have centuries-old religious documents specifically telling them how to behave and how to procreate. We don’t. We really have nothing. No rules, no unity, no cohesion, nothing. Christianity won’t make a comeback, and certainly the original pagan religions won’t.”

      If serious, look into what Skinner (Walden II) and Herrnstein had to say. Herrnstein even laid it out as policy advice in ‘The Bell Curve’, much as Michael Young did in the Labour Party manifesto in the UK in 1945 (note how it was quasi-Stalinist?). Leave Murray aside for a moment as prima facie he hawks status quo Libertarianism, which seems form recent economic events to be the problem, not the solution. The truth is, for decades, communitarianism, like IQ research and Radical/Evidential Behaviourism has always got a big thumbs down in the USA in favour of Libertarianism and Cognitivism/Mentalism. Why? Many peole here write as if they understand all this, but then agains, what they write shows they don’t. Libertarianism etcr seems self-destructive. Might it be that following rules is harder work? Requires more collective intelligence?

    • February 2, 2011 - 11:20 am | Permalink

      ““Now what can fill the void? Jews have it easy because they have centuries-old religious documents specifically telling them how to behave and how to procreate. We don’t.”

      Note the paradox. You correctly write “they have centuries-old religious documents specifically telling them how to behave and how to procreate.” but go on to falsely write “We don’t.”. This not only tells one something odd about our intensional verbs of propositional attitude, but it should also make one stand back and ask why it is that if one can read their documents, one can’t do the same as they.

      This, some have said, is precisely the line which Hitler took, i.e copying and beating the Jews at their own strategy, hence the Nuremberg Laws and perhaps the muddle as to whether National Socialism was left-wing or right-wing (not the competitive, Libertarian streak).

      The problem is that tu quoque like ad hominem in general (arguments from authority etc) miss the point and are irrational. Better to take a leaf out of the pragmatic Chinese Constitution perhaps? After all, they’ve been at civilization far longer than we have, and as a nation, they’re collectively smarter too [although, some of Finnish heritage might be worth a look too…].

  54. Scooter's Gravatar Scooter
    February 1, 2011 - 10:55 pm | Permalink

    Bravo on a fine article, Professor. I did the same thing in a 500 person history class I had back at big state U. I hated the teacher who I suspected was a jewess and argued with her in class on many subjects. She hated me back and you would think with graded essays she could have got me. However, we turned in our essay books to a big stack and I pointedly waited until the stack was big enough and another person was there, and stuffed it in the middle of the pile so she couldn’t catch my name. Then I wrote the most ridiculous liberal BS you’ve ever heard to the point she wrote on one of the pages that “some conservatives are actually nice people”.
    The dumb and totally partisan cow gave me an A for the course, in spite of my illogical arguments. She wanted to help a fellow traveler along.

  55. February 1, 2011 - 9:29 pm | Permalink

    As with GEORGE SOROS, there is another Jew who helps bankroll the anti-2nd amendment movement: Peter Herschend, who owns in Branson, Missouri: Silver Dollar City, Celebration City, Dollywood, Stone Mountain Park, The Adventure Aquarium, and The Newport Aquarium.

    The movie A History of Violence was mentioned earlier, I first learned of that film through TOO: A History of Violence

    Several years ago a young White gentile wrote to various Hollywood and New York TV and movie people, all were Jews, about what he might do to achieve an opportunity in the field, he supplied various credentials and so forth. He recieved few replies and of those replies they were ALL negative telling the person to FORGET it.

    Then he happened to talk with an acquaintance who suggested he submit the request again but sign it with a Jewish name. Surprise, surprise. There wasn’t a single non-reply! ALL were warm and encouraging, everything one could hope for. Needless to say that young person got the wake-up that day.

  56. Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
    February 1, 2011 - 8:48 pm | Permalink

    What’s interesting about the Jewish Left is their absolute inability to tolerate people who disagree with them. I don’t think it’s an act, they seem to become visible distraught by the existence of those that have a different worldview. Perhaps it is related to the guru phenomenon that MacDonald has described with regard to Jewish intellectuals (Freud and his followers and many others). It becomes more like a cult than a normal social scene.

    If they truly suffer from an inability to tolerate those that don’t share their worldview or are part of their “clique”, this is both a competitive group advantage in some situations, but also quite risky, as MacDonald has described.

    Note that WASPs and other Whites have often acting exactly the opposite, apparently feeling the need to bend over backward to include those different from themselves.

    • ben tillman's Gravatar ben tillman
      February 3, 2011 - 6:04 pm | Permalink

      What’s interesting about the Jewish Left is their absolute inability to tolerate people who disagree with them.

      That’s the essence of monotheism. Contrast it with the henotheism that John Murray Cuddihy talks about in No Offense: Civil Religion and Protestant Taste.

      Henotheism is the practice of worshipping one god without denying the existence of other gods

    • Athanasius's Gravatar Athanasius
      February 3, 2011 - 6:16 pm | Permalink

      The ancient Hebrews WERE apparently henotheistic.

    • Felix's Gravatar Felix
      February 5, 2011 - 5:16 pm | Permalink

      “What’s interesting about the Jewish Left is their absolute inability to tolerate people who disagree with them.”

      When you’ve been told all your life that your “God’s” annointed, then you know better than everyone else and they’re second class. Why in the heck do you think even the “conservative” neocons stupidly believed that they could defy thousands of years of history and remake the ME? Why do you think the ham-fisted poobahs of finance thought they could ignore economic realities and create WEALTH out of thin air?

      Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t believe there exists any concept similar to “hubris” in Judaism.

  57. Tom's Gravatar Tom
    February 1, 2011 - 7:03 pm | Permalink

    White Man Goes to Jail in Australia for Making “Anti-Semitic Movie”:

    Here’s part one:

    • European's Gravatar European
      February 2, 2011 - 12:18 pm | Permalink

      How about this new Movie:

      Austrian Jews press charges over ‘anti-Semitic’ Turkish film on Gaza flotilla
      Politicians and Jewish groups in Austria and Germany criticized action film ‘Valley of the Wolves – Palestine’ ahead of its release on Holocaust Memorial Day.
      By DPA
      Tags: Israel news Jewish World Austria anti-Semitism Turkey
      The Jewish Community in Vienna pressed charges Tuesday against cinema operators and a distributor on Tuesday, alleging that a Turkish film, Valley of the Wolves – Palestine, was anti-Semitic.

      Copied from the for more

    • Tom's Gravatar Tom
      February 2, 2011 - 1:03 pm | Permalink

      What the Aussie did, was insult a Jew. The insult got him 3 years in prison.

  58. Jim's Gravatar Jim
    February 1, 2011 - 6:07 pm | Permalink

    Good timing for this blog. I watched “My Name is Earl” for the first time last night just to verify that it was indeed as moronic as I suspected. (It was, and so much more.) The purpose of the show seems to be to portray poor southern whites in an extremely negative light. The characters are all very stupid, some are members of the KKK, and the women are basically whores. The writing isn’t even remotely clever.

    Now, there were some comedy/musical acts in the early Grand Ol’ Opry that played up the hillbilly image in an attempt at self-effacing humor, so there is an established tradition for that sort of thing. I noticed at the end of last night’s show, however, that it was created by Hispanic producer Greg Garcia (who didn‘t grow up in the South.) It seems the humor isn’t self-effacing at all, only contemptuous towards whites.

    True, Garcia had another comedy with white characters that was far more benign (“Yes Dear”), but his latest effort (which I haven’t seen) is called “Raising Hope”, also with all white characters. The premise is as follows (from wiki) :

    “A 23-year-old must raise his infant daughter, conceived by a one-night stand, with the help of his flawed family after the baby’s mother (who has killed multiple boyfriends) is given a death sentence and executed when the baby is only six months old.”

    Keep in mind, this is a COMEDY.

    There are bright spots in other areas of entertainment, however. I personally don’t care much for Christian Rock, but it’s become very popular over the last 15 years, and isn’t subject to the jewish stranglehold that exists in Hollywood. I presume this is because there’s always been a segment of the market devoted to gospel music (both black and white.)

    I care even less for the type of music found in Branson, MO, but I was there 6 or 7 years ago at my family’s request, and I was impressed by how family friendly it was. Places like Branson exist only as a response/reaction to the depravity of Hollywood and popular music.

    • Ciaran's Gravatar Ciaran
      February 1, 2011 - 7:12 pm | Permalink

      Branson’s great! Whether you like the styles of music, there-in, or not – ask any professional musician (An actual musician. Not a wannabe) about the quality and expertise of the musicians there-in – and you’ll get universal admiration. Branson is almost akin to a medieval monastery, keeping the flame of literacy alive.

    • buggle's Gravatar buggle
      February 1, 2011 - 8:08 pm | Permalink

      “Christian Rock [has] become very popular over the last 15 years, and isn’t subject to the jewish stranglehold that exists in Hollywood.”

      Dude, it’s Christian, therefore it is a jewish stranglehold.

    • Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
      February 1, 2011 - 8:40 pm | Permalink

      Same thing is true with regard to shows like True Blood — the traditional Americans are portrayed as toothless, uneducated bigots. The White Christian characters are shown as lacking any humanity, compassion or intelligence. The themes Dr. MacDonald has highlighted are present everywhere you look in Hollywood. I think we could all do good by pointing these tropes out to our friends, in a non-controversial way.

    • Jim's Gravatar Jim
      February 1, 2011 - 10:23 pm | Permalink

      Of course, you’re right. The general level of musicianship was high in Branson. Actually, I’m a great fan of traditional Appalacian/Ozark music (as well as Irish/Scottish/British Isles) though I prefer a bit less flashy than what I saw in Branson. Still, I’d much rather sit through a dozen Roy Clark or Andy Williams shows than one contemporary R&B/”American Idol” style concert.

  59. buggle's Gravatar buggle
    February 1, 2011 - 5:32 pm | Permalink

    “Buggle, you don’t seem to understand that when whites act the way Jews act- that is, in an ethnocentric, exclusive and nepotistic fashion- that they are branded as racists, fascists, and even psychopaths by a media, an academia, and a political system that is completely controlled by Jews.”

    You’re right – I don’t have that understanding at all. It’s never crossed my mind. But since you’ve pointed it out to me, I guess the question is, “So what?” Them’s the rules, pallie. You can either play by them or ignore them. The details might vary, but the situation isn’t unique historically.

    “Slaves cannot free themselves. Either the oppressive system has to natually collapse, such as the USSR, or be destroyed externally through warfare, such as the Confederacy during the civil war. So please, explain to us how Europeans and European-Americans are supposed to suddenly act in their self-interest when the very thought of doing so isn’t even there?”

    At least you’ve acknowledged the reality of the slavery and of your status in the new world. If, for those others who can’t do what you’ve done, the “very thought” of freeing themselves “isn’t there”, then who cares about their fate? Who wants as kin slaves who don’t have the will to free themselves? There’s a reason the gang you don’t like eat those bitter herbs at Pesach.

    As far as some anonymous poster blipping out a few words that will open the eyes of the world (i.e. “So please, explain…”) I’m not going to explain it to you. Too many pathetic holdovers from medieval Europe here, too many morons who don’t realize that when the Jews say “god” they don’t mean the beard man on the cloud but the ethno-collective. I’d suggest though, as starters, to not refer to yourself as a lower case adjective that denotes only skin color, and, additionally, to not then pose that adjectival identifier against the proper noun “Jew”.

    • Athanasius's Gravatar Athanasius
      February 1, 2011 - 5:46 pm | Permalink

      too many morons who don’t realize that when the Jews say “god” they don’t mean the beard man on the cloud but the ethno-collective.

      Isn’t that what Christians have been saying for the past 2000 years?

      In any event, religion is irrelevant with respect to orthodoxy or even praxis per se. What obviously plays a role are ethics. What Prof. KM is explaining is how Jewish ethics promote aggrandizement of the tribe, whereas Christian ethics leave Europeans/Americans susceptible to hostile infiltration.

      The thing is, most of us don’t want to live like Jews. You can call use pathetic medieval holdovers, but we want to live in an ethical, meritocratic, honest, society. We just want to live free of Jewish cultural, academic, and financial dominance.

    • fender_strat's Gravatar fender_strat
      February 1, 2011 - 7:59 pm | Permalink

      “If, for those others who can’t do what you’ve done, the “very thought” of freeing themselves “isn’t there”, then who cares about their fate? Who wants as kin slaves who don’t have the will to free themselves?”

      Do you think I care about genuinely suicidal Europeans and European-Americans? I don’t, and I’m pretty sure writers on this site and elsewhere have routinely railed against liberals and leftists who have thrown their own people under the bus. The point is to get those who do care onto the same page intellectually.

      “As far as some anonymous poster blipping out a few words that will open the eyes of the world (i.e. “So please, explain…”) I’m not going to explain it to you.”

      Erm, that last part was sarcasm. I didn’t actually expect an explanation because we both know it’s quite futile in the current climate. That doesn’t mean it will be futile in the future.

    • buggle's Gravatar buggle
      February 1, 2011 - 8:37 pm | Permalink


      Apologies. It’s hard to catch all sarcasm, particularly without a voice behind the words (not to mention the generally humorless nature of the bunch here).


      sigh, here i go, preparing to waste my time. you needn’t explain what KMac’s explaining. I’ve had his books a long, long time, and I get it. As I mentioned on here once before, I’ll never understand why A) an evolutionary psychologist’s site attracts so many primitives, or B) why the evolutionary psychologist can’t dispassionately bring his intelligence and knowledge to bear on his own group, which also happens to be my group.

      As for your assertion that religion is irrelevant, I say nothing is irrelevant when it impacts the biological reality of life on this earth. Religion can enhance or diminish fitness of a race. How’s Christianity doing for yours? Hundreds of years of race mixing, genetic disasters, and self-slaughter. it was such an awesome strategy, we’d never be in this mess.

      The atlatl was something potent at one time too, bro.

      “The thing is, most of us don’t want to live like Jews.”

      Then prepare to live like slaves to the Jews. There’s a whole world outside the Christian realm – some call it reality, others speak of ecology or evolution. One of the basic facts of life posited by one of the granddaddies of this non-Christian world is that, under a constantly changing environment, one either adapts, migrates, or dies. Globalism has mitigated the second option. That leaves #1 or #3. Since I’m not a Christian or Muzzie, there’s no magic world for me after I go. That wipes out #3. That leaves adaptation, which Christianity itself was for a while. It adapted to another GES, and it worked for a time. Now things have changed. So you have to too.

    • Athanasius's Gravatar Athanasius
      February 1, 2011 - 9:37 pm | Permalink


      By your imperiousness and condescension, I can see you’ve been adapting to the tribe’s strategy rather well.

      Normatively stating that I like Christian morality isn’t a sign of mental weakness, it’s just value judgment. We all make them, just like the value judgment that European culture and people should survive and thrive. There is no scientific or evolutionary reason for this, it is just what we value.

      Science helps us understand the world around us. Prof. KM’s theories seem to many of us to help explain what we have observed. By so understanding an outcome that we don’t like, we can work to change it. I think that’s quite simple.

      Now I have a question: How is post-Christian Western Europe working out for white people?

    • buggle's Gravatar buggle
      February 1, 2011 - 10:36 pm | Permalink

      Normatively stating that I like Christian morality isn’t a sign of mental weakness, it’s just value judgment.

      Which Christian morality? See, that nutty term changes every century. The Christian morality of Lincoln’s VP when he said that the Southerners should be hung as high as Haman? The Christian morality when the Church was wiping out the Cathars or the Balts? The Christian morality of the Thirty Years War, or the Christian morality of the St. Valentine’s Day Massacre? The Christian morality of burning old herbalists as witches? Or, more current, how about the Christian morality of today, which includes, as mentioned earlier, adopting Haitians, or Ethiopians, or Chinese, or what have you? Or the Christian morality of sending millions to Israel? Or the Christian morality of condemning racists as evil? There are plenty of Christian moralists in my town who think a dude like you, just from you commenting here, will burn in hell.

      “Now I have a question: How is post-Christian Western Europe working out for white people?”

      Inane. Might as well ask how post chariot is working out for Aryans. It worked for a short time. Things changed. It doesn’t work anymore. Move on.

    • Athanasius's Gravatar Athanasius
      February 1, 2011 - 11:07 pm | Permalink

      The Saint Valentine’s Day Massacre? What does Al Capone have to do with anything? I suspect that you mean the Saint Bartholomew’s Day Massacre, but it is clear that history isn’t your strong suit.

      To point out that people have acted differently at different times doesn’t speak to Christian theology or morality in the least. There IS an orthodoxy, and sometimes people have violated it or tried to subvert it. You may as well say that Christianity doesn’t exist at all because for any tenet that can be stated someone in history who calls himself a Christian could be found who denies it.

      I congratulate you though, you’ve really taken this “act like the Jews” strategy to the next level!!! I’m sure the $pIc is reading this with deep admiration!

    • buggle's Gravatar buggle
      February 2, 2011 - 9:07 am | Permalink

      “The Saint Valentine’s Day Massacre? What does Al Capone have to do with anything? I suspect you mean the Saint Bartholomew’s Day Massacre, but it is clear that history isn’t your strong suit.”

      Yeah, t’was written hastily, and with a bunch of Valentine’s Day cards my kids had lying around the table. Of course I meant St. Bartholomew’s Day. And actually, history is a strong suit of mine, but that’s neither here nor there – these boards here at the Occidental rapidly degenerate into pathetic solipsism and egotistical one upmanship. Believe what you’d like.

      The “orthodoxy” you speak of exists in your own mind. You attempt to make it mesh with your particular ego and your particular view of what Christianity is. It’s an individual interpretation – which is what makes the religion so weak as a GES. Good old Al Capone was fingering the rosary when he went away to prison after offing all of those people. The Southerners said that the Northerners were coming down to “slit their throats in the name of Jesus”. Christians? Whatever works, man.

      Take a trip through the museum near the ruins of Ephesus and notice the toppled Greco-Roman statues with crosses carved into their foreheads, showing an ancient Christian hatred for “idolatry” and artistic representation of the human form. Then hit the museums of the former Italian Republics and notice that, a millenium later, during the Rebirth, this had been completely reversed. So what’s the “Christian” orthodoxy on art, for instance?

      The Catholic church was encouraging race mixing among the Spanish and Portuguese colonists of the New World and Asia, but at the same time was the only European entity fighting the incursion of the Turks. The Dutch and English and German Prots abhorred admixture of foreign blood, but at the same time tried to undermine Spain as it battled the infidel. Who were the proper Christians? Seriously, I’m asking, because I don’t know what men like you think, and I’m curious.

      What orthodoxy do Nestorian Christians share with Swedish Lutherans? Who most captures the morality of your religion today, the Vietnamese Catholics, the Egyptian Copts, or the Palestinians in Santiago? Do both the Korean Christians and the Mexican Christians adhere to the exact same Christian morality as the other, and is that the same as the Armenian Christians, or more closely aligned with the Lebanese Maronites? If, silently, in your room, you can ask yourself those questions with the desire to truly find answers, you might get closer to where I’m coming from.

      This’ll be my last comment, but thanks for the triple exclamation points.

    • Felix's Gravatar Felix
      February 5, 2011 - 5:09 pm | Permalink

      Athanasius: Very well said. While I’m not a believer, Christians have to realize that Judaism is NOT just Christianity without Jesus but an ethno-centric philosophy meant to promote narrow tribal interests. Strip away everything else from it to arrive at it’s racist core: You are the “chosen” people, the vanguard elite, the master race. Everyone else are just cattle.

    • Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
      February 5, 2011 - 5:32 pm | Permalink

      I’m not understanding why Buggle got hit with so many negative flags? I didn’t see anything abusive or that disagreeable in his posts. Was it the critique of Christianity? Believe me, Christians need to critique themselves. They have allowed themselves to be played for fools in recent generations.

    • Athanasius's Gravatar Athanasius
      February 5, 2011 - 9:33 pm | Permalink

      Felix- Jewish (and also Muslim) law is designed to identify and provide a basis for collusion against the outsider. Whereas for the Muslims this means anyone who won’t submit to Arab culture, for the Jews, this means their tribe. Sort of interesting, given how obsessed with genealogy the Arabs also are that they ultimately accepted submission to their culture to be method of entry into their cohort, but there you have it.

      I think the complexity of the issue is that while the very catholicism of Christianity has allowed Christendom to be infiltrated (and also accused of seeking to dominate the world), Christian ethics are also highly conducive to societies that produce beautiful art, orderly public spaces, intellectual ferment, and reproduce themselves. Somehow, we’ve been forced to preserve dogmatic catholicism in our social outlook while being told that Christian ethics are in fact evil (by feminists, human rights activists, ‘scientists’, etc.). And so we are left in a weaker position than ever.

      I think it’s fair to debate in this type of website the merits of pagan Norse or Greco-Roman ethics (though first and foremost, much of those ethics were preserved in the respective churches). Of course, there is a time and a place for debating the metaphysics of religion as well–but that has to be an honest debate. 95% of this sort of discourse isn’t really about religion at all, it is a debate about Christendom, not about Christianity.

      It is rather frustrating to see people come in here and attack Christendom (for all its imprecisions and shortcomings). How many of those types of people would watch the recent movie about Hypatia with approval–when in fact, that is PRECISELY the message that the Jews want disseminated.


      Whatever else it is, Christianity is the religion of my father, and his father, and his father before him–if we really are to preserve ourselves, we must also consider what we are preserving.

      As I said above, intellectual ferment is good. I don’t advocate attempts to enforce orthodoxy on individuals. And you are right, there is much in the clergy and laity of all branches of Christianity that should be criticized. But what Buggle seems to be advocating is the adoption of a whole other ethical standard.
      For one thing, that is nearly impossible to implement–think of the problems that Ashkenazi have with Sephardics in Israel and multiply that by about 30.

    • Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
      February 5, 2011 - 11:06 pm | Permalink


      I agree that attacking Christianity as such is a bad strategy for Whites. It is apart of our common culture. However, I do think Christians need to be encouraged to rub two brain cells together. The utter naiveté of Christians, who are now being subjected to a cultural genocide, is astounding. That is what I mean when I say Christians need to both wake up and examine themselves.

    • Athanasius's Gravatar Athanasius
      February 6, 2011 - 12:31 am | Permalink

      I think that by Christians, you mean two relatively small subsets. Dispensationalist Evangelicals and liberal Protestants. (and perhaps the Catholic hierarchy that is doing stupid stuff like evicting Irish grandmothers in Boston from churches their grandparents scrimped and saved to build).

      As for the former group. Their theology is goofy and not historically founded, but their lives are getting increasingly uncomfortable–is this why they are obsessed with eschatology? Nevertheless, they need to somehow be made aware of some hard facts, such as the amount of wealth that Jews control relative to their hard earned savings that they are willing to donate to Israel (or ridiculous programs like Hannukah presents for Russian Jews). They also need to be made aware of Jewish undermining of Christian morals. And finally of Christian suffering in the Middle East–their pastors quickly dismiss these people as ‘nominal Christians’ but the authenticity of Palestinian, Syrian, and Coptic Christians needs to be stressed.

      Of course, that method won’t work with the latter group, liberal Christians. They instinctively think that any concern for a group with any kind of shared identity is bigotry and that they can only prove their bona fides by elevating other groups. Of course, they don’t really believe in Christian dogma anyway… and to be frank, I’m not sure how big of a group this is. They own a lot of real estate, though.

  60. Someday's Gravatar Someday
    February 1, 2011 - 5:21 pm | Permalink

    ” Only trolls would talk in this manner against jews.”
    It is indeed ironic that you would say that.

  61. Barbara's Gravatar Barbara
    February 1, 2011 - 5:06 pm | Permalink

    Well the last time I posted here my comment didn’t get approved and now I’m surprised that the previous one actually showed up!!! I thought I was banned. Again.

    I was being ironic. Because everything here is about how jews control everything and yet we’re not supposed to actually do anything about it. We are supposed to wait for some magic moment or for God to intervene on our behalf. Or move off to the North West.

    Seems to me like someone is still playing Secret Agent.

    • European's Gravatar European
      February 1, 2011 - 11:54 pm | Permalink

      Barbara, don’t feel bad. Almost all my posts are awaiting approval. It reminds me of the many years on a job here in the US. I was constantly in the hot-seat, because I defended myself and exposed what should not have been acceptable. But to my surprise, I discovered that I live in an up-side-down society were no one realy cares. (no one takes responsibility, blame the other guy, or don’t make waves it will cost you, hush and controled by fear) I learned the hard way. What is wrong with the American People? I hear you. Christianity is preaching a perverted gospel of no action. (God will take care of it/you) They leave out the struggle, the will, and that everyone must “work” out their own salvation with God by your side.(if you so believe) It is a fight for LIFE. Instead we have an American-People with no guts, no back-bone, money and corruption rules, and oh, those who kiss …., politics is a joke and more of the same, but much worse because they are educated.
      It is nice to know some of you do care about your country and heritage) Ideas must be put into a plan, or they remain just concepts/ideas.
      I get the “do not pass go ” all the time. So I can relate to all those, (even angry at times, or call it rightous indignation), who have been slammed for being, or thinking differently. I wished I could give you more encouragment. Europe is eroding too. A world Government will probably be next, a final attempt to save the world from it’s own destruction. How far can man sink to bring a host of Nations down? History should tell us, and experience (struggles) tells us what we can do to prevent it. If we have it in us to destroy our selfs, then we also have it in us to save our selfs.

    • Ex-Pro White Activist's Gravatar Ex-Pro White Activist
      February 2, 2011 - 10:06 am | Permalink

      Excellent, Barbara! You’ve captured the essence of the non-movement. Find reasons for doing nothing.

      And for everyone’s listening pleasure, here’s Johnny Rivers singing the original “Secret Agent Man”:

    • Whites Unite's Gravatar Whites Unite
      February 2, 2011 - 5:29 pm | Permalink

      Barbara and ExProWhite Activist,

      Here is an active step you can take.

      Enrich yourself and impoverish the so-called “Entertainment Industry”.

      Cancel your cable subscription. Stop going to the movies.

      Then persuade others to do likewise.

      If you are active in a church, ask your fellow Christians if Jesus would support Hollywood.

      If you are active in the Republican Party or the Tea Party movement, ask your fellow activists why they watch enemy propaganda, and why they indirectly finance the Democratic Party.

      This is just one example of economic warfare. You can fight the finance industry in a similar way – don’t borrow, save up and buy with cash. Your savings on interest payments will be huge – that much more money in your hands, that much less in enemy hands. Let your kids live at home until they have enough money to buy a house with cash.

      Acedemia is another great target for defunding. Make sure your kids take as many Advanced Placement and CLEP tests as possible, and make sure they major in engineering or hard science – not “social science” or humanities. Or learn a trade and avoid college altogether.

  62. Barbara's Gravatar Barbara
    February 1, 2011 - 5:02 pm | Permalink

    Oh this is terrible! How can you write things like this? Do you want people to think that you’re like the Storm Troopers? Only trolls would talk in this manner against jews.

    • dc's Gravatar dc
      February 2, 2011 - 12:13 am | Permalink

      You seem to suggest that members of the SA were bad people. Undoubtedly there were some bad apples, but I’m sure that if you take the trouble to reflect you will agree that they were just the sort of idealistic young nationalists that were needed at the time.

  63. Tom's Gravatar Tom
    February 1, 2011 - 4:48 pm | Permalink

    Yep. Real political understanding is when you get past the liberal vs. conservative thing, and start to see the politics of the Jews, and, the Roman Catholics, as Jews and Roman Catholics. It’s a real eye opener.

  64. European's Gravatar European
    February 1, 2011 - 4:40 pm | Permalink

    Not only in Hollywood need Christians or conservatives not apply, it is anywhere you go. They have standards and would object to the debasement of society, which the Jews do not. They encourage low and self-distructive behaviour in the name of freedom. They can say … we did not do it, we entertained you. They do not care what affects TV, Movies etc. has on the Society and the subtle degrading presentations of other people. Their young go to the Schul and are taught different, and Christianity gets the whip and a beating left and right. (Though some is Christianities own fault, stupidity) Rand Paul suggested to cut aid to Israel (to work our deficit down, and NOT finance Israels Arms war with Egypt who both get billions from the US) The Jewish lobby was all over him. It will be interesting to follow his political career. (most likely Jews will oust him)
    Hollywood is disgusting. Two Generations of Trash fed (body and mind) Americans are entering the adult world, but with super-egos of America being the greatest. (illusional)
    What will you do, or anyone, to change the course (meal , what we take in) and where America is heading.? Someone ought to come up with a solution to the trends if you don’t want America to become a third world country with slave and masters. The masters(race) who have the wealth and the paupers the rest of us. That would be what the Jews had invisioned for themselves. Goyim stupid indead.

  65. February 1, 2011 - 4:39 pm | Permalink

    As someone else astutely observed and reported, go into any Chinese or ‘Indian’ restaurant in the USA or EU and you’ll find them owned/run by ‘Chinese’ and ‘South Asians’. That the Hollywood industry is Jewish (and nepotistically so), is pre-occupied with fantasy, image, pretence and deceit, and that those involved crave narcissistic supply, is not news, nor is it unexpected, any more than the dominance of finance in NYC by Jews should be given the demographics of NYC. What should perhaps be of more interest is what genetically accounts for narcissistic behaviour given that Cluster B Axis II disorders are all but untreatable, cause so much misery (and entertainment) for some many whilst also figuring so dominantly in crime (see ASPD which, as psychopathy shares at least half its FACTOR structure according to Bob Hare), whether these behaviours are any more prevalent in the Jewish group than in other groups, or whether we’re just observing the behaviours of a highly salient section of the cognitive elite and the politics of envy (which can also be diagnostic of narcissism).

    • Mimir's Well's Gravatar Mimir's Well
      February 1, 2011 - 11:24 pm | Permalink

      Well it sure as shit was news to me when I found 10 years or so ago via the internet. Seems most people I talk to don’t realize it either. When it’s pointed out to them the wheels start turning. The dots start connecting. The big picture starts becoming a bit clearer.

  66. Venona's Gravatar Venona
    February 1, 2011 - 4:23 pm | Permalink

    I have not seen a Hollywood movie in many, many years. When I do catch a brief glimpse of one, I get a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach. Hollywood just seems so alien and sinister, so completely detached from the reality I witness every day of my life.

    • Ilie's Gravatar Ilie
      February 2, 2011 - 6:30 am | Permalink

      Why the hell do you still let women post?

  67. BubbaBoBubba's Gravatar BubbaBoBubba
    February 1, 2011 - 4:21 pm | Permalink

    Quite laughable, given that many White Nationalists are as anti-Christian, pro-homosexual and anti-conservative as the Jews. Some WN sites even praise themselves on championing anti-Christian and anti-conservative values. In many White Nationalist circles, Christians and conservatives also need not apply.

    Whites who have gotten rid of Christianity and replaced it with nothing other than slogans (like “my race is my religion”) are as decadent and morally corrupt as the Jews. Christians and conservatives wouldn’t have any success in advancing in an industry controlled by decadent Whites either.

    White Nationalists are conveniently schizo when it comes to Christianity – depending on the need, they can bash or support Christianity. So long as Whites have no spirituality we deserve to be wiped out.

    • Tom's Gravatar Tom
      February 1, 2011 - 6:46 pm | Permalink

      Yeah, you got White pagans, and, atheists who want to play Pope. LOL.

      As a Protestant, I could care less what any Pope, anti-Pope or wannabe Pope thinks about religion. I got my own religion. LOL.

      Atheist Pope, Pagan Pope, still a Pope. LOL. Get my drift?

  68. Someday's Gravatar Someday
    February 1, 2011 - 1:59 pm | Permalink

    Guilty by Suspicion was about the blacklist, and (predictably) a very dull film, but it rated Robert De Niro in the lead

    The 1941 novel ‘What Makes Sammy Run?’ was written by an insider and portrays Hollywood as run by Jews. (Goldwyn offered the author money to not have it published). ‘What Makes Sammy Run?’ has still not been made into a film. Spielberg said it was “anti-Hollywood and should never be filmed”.

    • m hALBERT's Gravatar m hALBERT
      February 1, 2011 - 4:44 pm | Permalink

      Bud Schulberg was the author of “what makes sammy run”
      and it was made into a TV drama.

      Schulberg was, indeed, Jewish but seems to have been his
      own man.

      He also wrote, “On The Waterfront” which portrayed
      Catholicism is a very positive light. At least at the parish

      “A Face in the Crowd” based on Huey Longs rise, although;
      not an outright affirmation of populism was at least

  69. Athanasius's Gravatar Athanasius
    February 1, 2011 - 1:50 pm | Permalink

    Yeah, we’ll see if another Mel Gibson slips through the cracks. I’ve noticed that gentiles who are successful in media, finance or other fields dominated by the tribe tend to tow the party line. Amazingly, this happens even to more explicitly ethnic whites. We’ve all seen many Greeks (Stephanopoulos, Pete Peterson, Elia Kazan), Serbs (Karl Malden, Blagojevic), Russians (Nabokov, Vadim), Italians (Guiliani, Pelosi, Scorsesi), Poles who are very ethnically conscious, but as soon as they gain success, throw their people under the bus. If narrow ethnicities can be co-opted, what can we hope for a broader European/White/Christian identity.

    • DianaBlaze's Gravatar DianaBlaze
      February 8, 2011 - 8:08 pm | Permalink

      Pelosi’s Jewish.

  70. fender_strat's Gravatar fender_strat
    February 1, 2011 - 1:18 pm | Permalink

    The sad thing is that European films aren’t any better. White European filmmakers display the same irrational, pathological hatred of traditional western culture that Hollywood films do, with schlock like The Girl With the Dragon Tatoo and Antichrist. In fact many European films are far worse than what Hollywood pumps out; you would never see any European directors making films like Braveheart, Troy, Gladiator, or Black Hawk Down, Hollywood films that are oddly pro-western…and, perhaps not coincidentally, all action films and war epics.

    That being said, despite his obvious problems with alcohol and bipolar disorder, I think Mel Gibson sets a good precedent for how someone can beat Jews at their own game. Make millions as an actor, then found your own production company to make the films you want to make. I’m no fan of Christanity, as I think it imposes on us a slave mentality in the Nietzchean sense, but making a film that portrays Jews as an angry mob of murderers is one hell of a gutsy thing to do…and it became one of the biggest hits of the decade.

    This proves one thing: that the audience is there. There may be millions of freaks and cosmopolitans who would sit down to watch digusting, artless dreck by Jewish filmmakers who are obsessed with base behaviors (Eli Roth, David Cronenberg, and the like), but there are tens of millions more who would much rather watch something truly well-made that speaks to the majority. The Passion proved that, and I say this as someone who is not religious.

    • Someday's Gravatar Someday
      February 1, 2011 - 5:04 pm | Permalink

      Hollywood is constrained by the need to make money so some of their productions still appeal to the average white.

      The average white has no influence on the art world which no doubt explains why ‘artists’ like Hirst and Emin are feted by Charles Saatchi

  71. Someday's Gravatar Someday
    February 1, 2011 - 12:01 pm | Permalink

    Ed Asner co authored a 2005 book called ‘Misuse of power: how the far right gained and misuses power’ He is an extreme leftist yet was made head of the screen actors guild. He parlayed his comic turn in the Mary Tyler Moore Show into his own prestigious series, a plum role as uber-liberal ‘Lou Grant’. No one thought any of that was odd.

    But when Ed Asner’s show got cancelled while he was opposing the neocon policy in El Salvidor the world heard about it. A Jewish leftist opposes other Jews over foreign policy and gets squashed, that is proof that the extreme right run things apparently.

    • February 1, 2011 - 2:49 pm | Permalink

      “A Jewish leftist opposes other Jews over foreign policy and gets squashed, that is proof that the extreme right run things apparently.”

      They are. Except Neoconservative Libertarians unrule.

      The main article appears somewhat muddled to me. One has to look back at the 50s and judge who were Trotskyists and who were Stalinists (in Hollywood and elsewhere) as a Trotskyite best describes right-wing subversives of the status quo i.e state. Read what the VENONA traffic says on US ‘rats’ and ‘polecats’. The no longer hidden Hollywood nepotism is probably parsimoniously explained in terms of an inevitable keeping of the money within the tribe/family business which is only to be expected in the USA’s Libertarian democracy? Just think about what anti-statist anarchists do. They just undermine regulation (the status quo) which obstructs what they want to do. Ironically, that’s exactly what Reagan did very well, and the results were disasters like ENRON, and in the wake of the repeal of Glass-Steagall in 1999, California and much else today. :-(

  72. February 1, 2011 - 11:43 am | Permalink

    The DVD of A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE film there is a “making of” segment, they vote, in Canada, for the 2004 Presidential race. I think only the armorer for the film voted for Bush the rest solidly Kerry, a fellow tribal member.

    (Deconstructing Hollywood Mind-Control)
    by Mark Green and Wendy Campbell

    -Subliminal propaganda radiates from The Big Screen-

    By Mark Green and Wendy Campbell
    May, 2005

    With that in mind, it’s important that the aspiring film-maker should remember these three things:

    One: Jews tend to occupy the top of the Hollywood food chain.

    Two: They intend to remain there.

    Three: Don’t forget those first two things.

    Like it or not, the “gatekeepers” of American mass media are disproportionately ‘Israeli-American’. Though Tinseltown famously disdains “white (non-Jewish) racism”, prevailing Hollywood customs affirm industry-wide Jewish networking. The results are nothing less than astounding.

    • Johnny's Gravatar Johnny
      February 4, 2011 - 7:06 pm | Permalink

      As a non-believer of any religion, I find it amusing that both sides (Xians vs Jews) follow their prescribed beliefs as though they were universal truths. It is well known that Jews have on occasion used their positions of power to weaken Xian beliefs thru the media and entertainment. The irony is that Xian teachings have created a modern day climate of tolerance and pacifism towards Jews which non-believers do not have. When Jewish efforts in diluting Xian ferver succeed towards a tipping point, I believe they may see the error in this strategy when their “enemy” no longer has a Xian guilt complex to limit their actions. Hitler’s party had no Xian values to prevent their diabolical final solution. Could Jewish media moguls be setting themselves up for a modern day replay ??? If I were Jewish, I would be very supportive of Xian truths.

  73. Buggle's Gravatar Buggle
    February 1, 2011 - 11:43 am | Permalink

    “It’s the mentality of Bolshevism.”

    More of the same from KMac. Dude, EVOLVE. Intolerance is the mentality not just of Bolshevism, but of survival, that’s all it is, and there’s no other way. Even if you don’t get it, or are just dissembling (self-deception or deception) Jews know that there IS a swastika worn figuratively on the heart of every non-Jew, because any healthy group, from Bushmen to Chinamen, will remove or exclude the Jew in order to preserve itself. Eternal struggle, Professor. That’s life on this earth, the Law of Competitive Exclusion, and your current betters get that and act accordingly. Please acknowledge that Israel actually is a light unto the nations – they show every nation exactly what to do. They teach you all how to behave and you act like it’s crazy. Come on, why would a people, once gaining power, let in others who are against them? That’s insane, and to think that someone should act differently shows astounding naivete. You consistently write as if networking, backslapping, ethnic promotion, hostility toward enemies, etc…is somehow abberant. It’s not. It’s the other way that’s screwy – the way of the lower-case white, adopting his Haitians, signing up to murder Afghanis, drinking his Coke, cheering his basketball team, shopping at Walmart, filling the multiplexes, glugging his beer, divorcing her husband, praising his sky god as if it’s 3,000 years ago, and believing that politics in a rigged “democracy” have any meaning without the industry, finance, and media behind the curtain. As asked before, when will you coldly and scientifically analyze the batshit insanity of the “traditional people” and “culture of America”? And I don’t mean the Indians.

    Quick, push the thumbs down button, thin-skinned white anachronisms.

    • fender_strat's Gravatar fender_strat
      February 1, 2011 - 3:55 pm | Permalink

      Buggle, you don’t seem to understand that when whites act the way Jews act- that is, in an ethnocentric, exclusive and nepotistic fashion- that they are branded as racists, fascists, and even psychopaths by a media, an academia, and a political system that is completely controlled by Jews.

      Slaves cannot free themselves. Either the oppressive system has to natually collapse, such as the USSR, or be destroyed externally through warfare, such as the Confederacy during the civil war. So please, explain to us how Europeans and European-Americans are supposed to suddenly act in their self-interest when the very thought of doing so isn’t even there?

    • Athanasius's Gravatar Athanasius
      February 1, 2011 - 5:53 pm | Permalink

      Fender, you raise a good point about how we are limited by the fact that others control the narrative (in ways, believe it or not much more deeply than people here seem to realize–I’m not talking about occult nonsense, but the fact that departments of seemingly irrelevant topics like “East Asian Studies” are controlled by Jews means that the will govern our relationship with China). Control of the narrative is control of possibility.

      The door isn’t closed yet. There still must be an appearance of meritocracy. But to take back society would require many highly disciplined and highly intelligent individuals who are driven by love of their own.

    • February 1, 2011 - 6:21 pm | Permalink

      Buggle: “It’s the mentality of Bolshevism.” More of the same from KMac. Dude, EVOLVE.”

      I agree with MacDonald’s assessment of Asners reaction. Jews in the vein of Ed Asner believe they should be entitled to their extreme left-wing bias, and should be able to publicly rant and rave and incite contempt against conservatives and Christians (a right inferred by fiat of the Holocaust), and if someone disagrees with them, these people are automatically outside the realm of political respectability and to be shunned and treated like Nazi pariahs.

      Left-wing Jews pose as if history started in 1938, but if they’re going to play by those arbitrary rules, it can just as well be said that history started in 1917 with the rise of Communism and the progressive Bolshevik implementation of mechanized state mass murder of Christians and dissidents by the millions for their faith and political thoughts and orientation.

      This feigned righteous indignation by left-wing Jews is all part of the diaspora Jewish-supremacist social, economic and political hegemony program and agenda, which seeks to bash down all other political perspectives and portray itself as the ultimate authority to define what is allowed and de rigueur in terms of political speech and respectable political orientation within any institution or establishment.

      And of course, left-liberal Gentiles happily go along with supremacist Jewry employing this contrived cudgel, because it suppresses alternative political speech and competition.

      That’s why its so important to cite the Jewish Bolshevik holocaust of Christians, dissidents, Cossacks, kulaks, Ukrainians etc every time they try to impose this Holocaust framework around political speech, and to note that the Jewish Bolshevik holocaust was perpetrated well before the German Nazi one, and the Nazis likely would have never arisen but for Jewish Bolshevism and its mass murders.

      When the Jewish agent told Brittany “You’re going to have to lose that [cross necklace], honey.” She should have replied something like “The Bolsheviks murdered millions of Christians in the early Soviet Union. I wear this cross in commemoration of them.”

      If Christians shoved it back in their faces every time these left-wingers and Judeofascist operators tried to intimidate them with the righteously-indignant shtick, more people would know about the Jewish Bolshevik and Communist perpetrated holocaust, and be less hesitant to “talk back” to Judeofascists and left-wing fanatics.

      I’m not sure why some professed White advocates don’t want the Jewish Bolshevik card played, given that the Jewish Bolsheviks murdered plenty of Whites who weren’t Christians, too. I have to question the authenticity and/or intelligence of those who seek to suppress the history of Jewish Bolshevik mass murder.

    • Ciaran's Gravatar Ciaran
      February 1, 2011 - 7:01 pm | Permalink

      Buggle – I agree with some of the content of your post. Not everything; a few things.

      That said – according oyur your analysis – the complete and thorough extermination of EVERY single Jew on Earth would be beneficial to every other Race/ethny – considering the historical Jewish mandate to infiltrate and subdue every other social order.

      Is this what you are saying?

      FYI – the “Light unto the World” provided by Jewry, is that of sulphuric hellfire.

    • freddie_t's Gravatar freddie_t
      February 1, 2011 - 7:03 pm | Permalink

      This Buggle character is an straight down the textbook case of projectionist victim/revenge fantasies: “Jews know that there IS a swastika worn figuratively on the heart of every non-Jew”
      Absolute Classic….
      Perhaps a troll post due to the over-the-top posting but supposing it isn’t.
      A bit like the “Protocols” quandary: you know they think and act like that but would they ever actually write it down….
      So we would then say just in case it is Kosher: “Lost this in Translation” it means “I hate you to the core of my being” because I know you really actually hate me (umm despite any appearance to the contrary).
      In this mindset Buggles sees him/herself of achieving proto-typical Tribe “Victim Status” which he/r conceives gives him/er a head start in the power struggle for supreme power which is, from this standpoint, definitely a zero-sum game.
      But he/r contrives for “Victim Status” without ever coming within sniffing /punching distance of ever being a real life victim of the forces he/r “knows” in his/er head are ranged against him/er and their kind.
      Thus with this mindset of persecution he/r feels “liberated” to be free to “Bolshevise” (silence/intimidate/attack/physically liquidate/Enslave to punish with backbreaking labour) his/er fancied political/social enemies without any conscience (which in a Bolshevik has only ever been a means to an end) for him/her kind to rule without opposition which is the aim of Bolshevised Apparatchiks.
      To be a real victim one is powerless or constrained over against others but Buggles and his/er type seek the converse: that of power gained by “Victim Status” by which they seek to put themselves at a moral advantage with their victim fantasies but actually they seek triumph and “revenge” despite never suffering any consequences of a victim themselves.
      Quite a comforting position for him/her but not for those who he clearly “knows” are only hiding fantasies of his/her termination.
      1st Amendment types they are not.

    • Mimir's Well's Gravatar Mimir's Well
      February 1, 2011 - 11:20 pm | Permalink

      Interesting commentary, Buggle, but I think you miss the point. It’s the hypocrisy in what jews do that is damned abhorrent. And their duplicity. And their backstabbing. And their, well, you get the point.

    • posterchild's Gravatar posterchild
      February 5, 2011 - 1:01 pm | Permalink

      Bugsy just doesn’t get it. If there were no Christians or everyone had a swastika on their heart they would have never been allowed here or they would have been removed by now. They should be thankful for Christians. When Christians are gone so will Jews dissapear. No on else is kind enough to tolerate them. They need to keep their *ffin’ mouths shut.

  74. February 1, 2011 - 11:34 am | Permalink

    ….So what else is new…

Comments are closed.