Spotting the Enemy

Andrew Joyce

Could you spot a Jew in a crowd? And if so, what does it say about you? These questions, believe it or not, have been the subject of much hair-splitting in the academic study of nonverbal behaviour for the past seventy years. Although nonverbal behaviour (and psychology more generally) does not fall within my “expertise,” I stumbled upon this scholastic circus recently during an evening with some friends. As the night progressed, and not finding the subject of conversation among one group particularly interesting, I drifted towards a smaller knot of individuals who had assembled in front of a television of monstrous proportions. On screen was an inconsequential news item, but what drew my attention was the interviewee. It would be facile for me to name this individual, but I was struck by his appearance. I had neither heard of him, nor seen him previously. Nonetheless, I was struck with a certain sense of recognition. “A Jew,” I said. “He’s a Jew.”

Those nearby, some aghast and some smirking, turned to face me. A female acquaintance sitting nearest to me asked “How can you tell?,” while another nearby asked someone for the name of the interviewee (not, it appears, a typically Jewish name) and reached for his iPhone in an effort to verify my “psychic” supposition. A small number, I noted, began slowly moving away. I remained silent while the technophile consulted his phone, and only when he looked up, smiling and nodding, did I respond to the good lady beside me. I couldn’t then, and still can’t, articulate precisely what it was that led me to deduce that the interviewee was a Jew. The volume of the television was low, so I could neither hear his accent, nor pick up on any of the typically Jewish sound bites like “tolerance” or “persecution.” Having only recently sat in front of the television, I was entirely ignorant as to the content of the news item, and could see no indication as to this man’s profession. In terms of his bodily movements, the interviewee was not a wildly gesticulating remnant of the ghetto. In fact, he was almost perfectly still. To dismiss any further stereotypical notions, his nose looked perfectly European. Rather, it was something about the placement of his eyes, his pallid complexion, the texture of his hair, the shape of his forehead. He struck me as inescapably different. Some of my friends, not entirely satisfied with this explanation, joked that I must have known the man was Jewish. Others, evidently to some extent unsettled, asked quietly how it could be possible for someone to have such an acute awareness of the ethnic origin of someone in whom they themselves could see no visible difference from the White mean. My own curiosity aroused, I departed later that night into the cool evening air with more questions that I had answers.


In the days that followed I departed from my usual daily habits, and devoted some time to a further enquiry into the subject of indentifying Jews by sight alone, ultimately stumbling upon a 2009 paper from the psychology publication, The Journal of Nonverbal Behavior. The paper in question, “Anti-Semitism and Identification of Jewish Group Membership from Photographs,”[1] provides us with a fascinating insight into some of the mechanics of identifying Jews by sight alone. However, riddled as it is with problematic, loaded, and spurious terms, not least of which is “anti-Semite,” much of its value resides in its existence as a propaganda piece, and the blatant manner in which it shifts its theoretical foundations in order to “prove” a preconceived conclusion; to wit, that “anti-Semites” have an extreme deficiency in “interpersonal sensitivity.”

The authors of this article, a team of psychologists from Northeastern University led by Elizabeth Salib, state at the outset that their research arose from an apparent contradiction between early findings relating to ability to discern the Jewish origin of an individual by sight, and more recent research into interpersonal sensitivity. Salib, who has recently collaborated on a project designed to “prove” an “empirical relationship between modern anti-Semitism and opposition to Israel,”[2] states that “early literature found that holding more anti-Semitic attitudes positively predicted ability to discern whether a photograph was of a Jewish or non-Jewish person.”[3] Research since these early studies, some of which dates back to the late 1940s, has indicated that an ability to discern such information from photographs and with a lack of nonverbal ‘cues,’ strongly suggests a high level of interpersonal sensitivity. As Salib et al state: “Researchers generally consider interpersonal sensitivity to be a desirable skill for individuals to have. People who have this skill tend to be better adjusted, less dogmatic, less hostile and manipulating, more democratic as teachers, more effective in human relations-related occupations, more extraverted, less socially anxious, more empathetic, more encouraging and less shy…” In addition, they are “cognitively more complex.”[4]

To Salib and her team (and those providing the funds for this research),  this correlation is simply unconscionable. In their words, the scientifically proven presence of this ability in ‘anti-Semites,’ “contradicts the well established finding that interpersonal sensitivity is generally associated with healthy psychological characteristics.”[5] Already, in the first paragraph of the article, we have departed from any semblance of scientific or academic impartiality. There is no allowance for the fact that someone with ‘anti-Semitic’ beliefs or attitudes (never clearly defined) may be psychologically healthy, that anti-Jewish hostility may be rational under certain sets of circumstances, or that in fact the problem may lie in the deeply problematic terms ‘anti-Semite’ or ‘anti-Semitism.’ As they repeat later in the paper, “considering that ability to detect social group membership is a kind of interpersonal sensitivity, this result lies in direct contrast to the work that suggests that the ability to decode states, traits, or other qualities in another person from minimal nonverbal cues is often correlated with positive personality traits and attitudes.”[6] The goal of the article is therefore clear: since positive identification of ethnic origin from non-verbal cues is a sign of high levels of interpersonal sensitivity, and since interpersonal sensitivity is indisputably deemed a good and “healthy” characteristic, it must be argued that the original studies were flawed, and that in fact, ‘anti-Semites’ are less accurate at identifying Jews than the average white.

Let us first return to the original studies. In 1946, long before the study of interpersonal sensitivity and long before such findings could taint these early experiments, Allport and Kramer found that following a study of student responses, “those who were better able to discern whether a photo was of a person who self-identified as Jewish or a non-Jewish person tended to be more anti-Semitic that those who performed more poorly on this task.”[7] One of the more interesting things to note about this early study was that it was designed to be a typical study of the “authoritarian” personality. What was expected was that those students deemed ‘prejudiced’ following a questionnaire, when presented with an equal number of photos of Jews and whites, would disproportionately lean towards selecting “Jew” for their set of photographs, thereby allegedly proving their paranoia. What became evident, however, was that rather than the expected ‘scattergun approach’ those deemed prejudiced had demonstrated not a ‘trigger happy’ tendency but a significantly greater accuracy in ‘detecting’ Jews among the photographs.

Confronted with these results, Allport and Kramer argued that ethnocentric White students, somehow pathological, “were more prone to see those who were members of a minority group as threats and they had developed the ability to quickly and accurately ‘spot the enemy’ in new environments.”[8] Salib and her crew took issue with this, because in their view prejudice is “maladaptive in many different domains.” Further, the ‘spot the enemy’ hypothesis, they argued, “suggests that there is something to be gained from exercising prejudice.”[9] Again, this is anathema to the worldview they espouse.

Salib et al attempt in the first part of their paper to undermine the basis of the original experiments. This consists primarily of an attempt to argue that the ‘anti-Semites’ had in fact utilized a scattergun approach to the task but that this had not been picked up on because of the methodologies of the early studies. Much time is spent discussing how this could have been missed. For example, certain studies were said to have “confounded accuracy with bias” because they counted only hits, rather than misses or correct rejections. However, the writing in this part of the article, together with its reasoning, is rambling and generally incoherent. More importantly, it ends right back where it started. The only remotely solid conclusions that are reached in relation to the ‘scattergun approach’ are that some of the early studies were “potentially” guilty of confusing accuracy with bias (hardly a concrete assertion), and that some of the more definitive studies such as that of Allport and Kramer, had used an equal number of Jewish/non-Jewish faces and had included correct rejections as well as hits in their data—thereby reinforcing findings that those deemed ‘anti-Semitic’ were more accurate than biased after all. With no real case to stand on, they concede that “it is highly unlikely that methodological factors can explain the inconsistency.”[10]

This is somewhat of an understatement. Tucked away at the end of their paper is a table designed to show the results of the original studies with all possible methodological interference accounted for. Even with these adjustments, and in their own words: “these studies show that those who were more prejudiced towards Jews were more accurate at the Jewish identification task than those who were less prejudiced.”[11] Although they can’t bring themselves to state it explicitly, the implication is clear: that our 1940s ‘anti-Semites’ were better adjusted and psychologically healthier than the average, ‘tolerant’ White.

Faced with these realities, Salib and her team resort to a logic which at first seems reasonable but which quickly corrupts into a twisted fancy. They come to the conclusion that the ‘anti-Semites’ of the 1940s were indeed more accurate, and that Allport and Kramer had been wrong in deeming them pathological—they were healthy, well-adjusted people. They state: “In an earlier era, far from being associated with social deviance or maladjustment, the possession of anti-Semitic attitudes was respectable. At prestigious universities, anti-Semitism was openly espoused by many members of the student body, students’ families, faculty and administration.  Indeed, prejudice against minorities was previously seen as being rooted in normal processes, and the natural superiority of some groups over others.”[12] They conclude their discussion of the earlier studies by arguing that “the high prejudiced person of the past used to possess more well-adjusted psychological characteristics.”[13]

At this point however, we reach an important juncture. To Salib et al., a concession that those with ‘prejudiced’ or ‘anti-Semitic’ views in the present may be rational, healthy or, dare I say it, better adjusted than average is beyond comprehension. The team first set out with their own experiment designed, we can be sure, to first of all show that an ability to discern Jews among ‘modern anti-Semites’ is non-existent. Their study consisted of over 550 Northeastern students, split into five groups. The ‘anti-Semitism’ of a given participant was based on positive responses to such specious questions as: “Do you think Jewish people stick together too much?”[14] Departing  significantly from the methodology of Allport and Kramer, the ethnic make-up of the students was not 100% white—the maximum Caucasian representation in any of the studies was 74%, the lowest being 67.4%. Also complicating matters was the introduction in three of the groups of a range of different ethnicities among their photographs—participants were not faced with a simple choice between Jewish and White, but were bombarded with the faces of mixed-race individuals, Hispanics, and Arabs of varying hues. A veritable sea of foreignness in which to discern a few sparsely scattered Jews (of Ashkenazi or Sephardi origin who can say? The matter was never elaborated on).

Unsurprisingly, given these and other obstacles, the modern study produced the desired result—now it was the ‘average’ American who could better identify a Jew, with the ‘anti-Semite’ now barely able to tell a Dutchman from a sub-Saharan bushman. To the team, this represents a momentous breakthrough, a triumph of scientific rigor. Now, they argue, simply because society no longer deems certain views acceptable, this societal shift has miraculously transformed the ‘anti-Semite’ from the possessor of high levels of interpersonal sensitivity, to one who is representing a “kind of social deviance or pathology.”[15] They state that “because being prejudiced is now seen as abnormal rather than normal, the characteristic of the high prejudiced person and the low prejudiced person have changed over time.”[16]

At this point in the article, I must confess to having increasingly deep doubts over the ability of people using this type of logic to expound on what constitutes ‘normality.’ They elaborate: “The person who espouses high levels of outgroup prejudice today is likely to possess a range of problematic psychological characteristics that are inconsistent with the development of interpersonal sensitivity, whereas we can speculate that the high prejudiced person of the past used to possess more well-adjusted psychological characteristics.”[17] Marvellous! Should we then, in the near future, expect the reputational rehabilitation of Luther, Voltaire, Grant, Stoddard, Chamberlain and untold thousands if not millions of others? I won’t hold my breath.

The article concludes with some rambling and contradictory ruminations on the idea that the ‘spotting the enemy’ hypothesis may hold some validity after all. It is said that in the 1940s “the motive to bar Jews from attaining power and privilege would have been well served by a finely honed ability to identify them.”[18] Now though, with it almost impossible to avoid or exclude Jews, the value of the ability has greatly diminished. According to Salib et al, given that many Jews in modern times do not conceal their group membership “the prejudiced person has much less need to develop sensitivity to subtle cues indicating Jewish group membership.”[19]

However, there are several flaws with this statement. Firstly, the statement that Jews concealed or were able to conceal their group membership in the past isn’t fully elaborated upon. Indeed, given the relatively recent nature of mass Jewish immigration to the United States, Jews in the 1940s would have had fewer means of effective concealment than they have at their disposal today. I am thinking of course in terms of last names, accent, and the persistence of certain traits or mannerisms. This is of crucial importance since the basic premise of the statement is that concealment has changed, or to be more specific, has dramatically reduced.

It also ignores the fact that one of the main concerns among those who would be described as present day ‘anti-Semites’ is that Jewish influence is out of proportion to their population in the United States, and therefore that concealment to them remains as important, if not more so, than ever. In addition, their beliefs are factually defensible, as Jeffrey E. Cohen pointed out in his 2010 Perceptions of Anti-Semitism among American Jews, 2000-05, A Survey Analysis, “politically, Jews are overrepresented in the halls of Congress. In the 110th Congress Jews held 13% of Senate seats, 18% of House seats, and 22% of Supreme Court seats [now 33%], where the Jewish population has been estimated about 2%.”[20] That the vast majority of Jews remain concerned about anti-Semitism despite their being “more successful than other ethnic, racial, and religious groups”, states Cohen, reflects more on the fact that “Jewish identity may sensitize a person to the concept of anti-Semitism and may lead them to interpret some events and behaviors as anti-Semitic,” than any tangible basis to their paranoia.[21] To sum up, just because Jews find it easier than ever before to gain influence, wealth and power, doesn’t necessarily mean that the issue of concealment is no longer a factor for Jews or those deemed ‘anti-Semitic.’ As such, there may be more to the ‘spotting the enemy’ hypothesis than Salib and her team would have us believe.

In any event, I have a party to attend this evening with my previously mentioned friends. I must admit to being rather uneasy though – the latest research suggests they may all be raving anti-Semites!

[1] S. Andrzejewski, J. Hall & E. Salib, “Anti-Semitism and Identification of Jewish Group Membership from Photographs” Nonverbal Behavior, (2009), 33, pp.47-58.

[2] F. Cohen, L. Jussim, & E. Salib “The Modern Anti-Semitism Israel Model: An empirical relationship between modern anti-Semitism and opposition to Israel”, Conflict and Communication, Vol. 10, No.1, 2011.

[3] S. Andrzejewski, J. Hall & E. Salib, “Anti-Semitism and Identification of Jewish Group Membership from Photographs” Nonverbal Behavior, (2009), 33, pp.47-58 (p.47).

[4] Ibid.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Ibid, p.48.

[7] G. Allport & B. Kramer, “Some Roots of Prejudice,” Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 22 (1946), pp.9-39.

[8] S. Andrzejewski, J. Hall & E. Salib, “Anti-Semitism and Identification of Jewish Group Membership from Photographs” Nonverbal Behavior, (2009), 33, pp.47-58 (p.48).

[9] Ibid.

[10] Ibid, p.54.

[11] Ibid, p.52.

[12] Ibid.

[13] Ibid.

[14] Ibid, p.51.

[15] S. Andrzejewski, J. Hall & E. Salib, “Anti-Semitism and Identification of Jewish Group Membership from Photographs” Nonverbal Behavior, (2009), 33, pp.47-58 (p.54).

[16] Ibid, p.54.

[17] Ibid, p.54.

[18] Ibid, p.55.

[19] Ibid.

[20] J. Cohen, “Perceptions of Anti-Semitism among American Jews, 2000-05, A Survey Analysis” Political Psychology, Vol. 31, No1. (2010), pp.85-104 (p.86).

[21] Ibid, p.90.

  • Print
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

123 Comments to "Spotting the Enemy"

  1. Bobby's Gravatar Bobby
    December 3, 2012 - 5:03 pm | Permalink

    @D. K.: D.K. good points. As a close friend of mine always says, “biology trumps everything.” When we don’t pay close attention to biology when arguing about human activity, even politics, then we are not arguing soundly.

  2. D. K.'s Gravatar D. K.
    December 3, 2012 - 1:48 pm | Permalink


    Let me repeat:


    “Born and raised as Paula Kranz in Bismarck, North Dakota, she attended Century High School, where she was homecoming queen, valedictorian of the class of 1991,[9] and an All-State basketball player.[3] Her parents, Paul and Nadene Kranz, divorced when she was a teenager. Paul was a high school basketball coach.[10]”


    Paul Kranz, of Bismarck, North Dakota, sounds like your typical Jewish American, doesn’t he?


    The notion that gentile women who profess Christianity do not engage in adultery is beyond laughable– as is the notion that gentile men, including powerful men like General Petraeus, are helplessly seduced by irresistible whores (who are inevitably Jewesses, openly or cryptically)!

  3. Felix's Gravatar Felix
    December 3, 2012 - 10:49 am | Permalink

    Latest addit: Petraeus’ seducer Paula “Broadwell”…real name Paula Kranz. Esther strikes again.

    I had wondered the same thing.

    No wonder Jews don’t like Christians. Christianity has from its beginning preached modesty, restraint and sexual temperance. Judaism celebrates women spreading their legs to trap men. It gives the expression black hole an entirely new level of meaning.

  4. Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
    December 3, 2012 - 10:25 am | Permalink

    @The Goy Chevalier: Yiddish is a necessary factor but not a sufficient cause. The influence of Italian and of the accented English spoken by the Irish cannot be discounted. Remember, too, that Jewish domination of the public school system is much less than a century old, and speech patterns among whites, well established by the thirties, were affected only at the margins. Furthermore, the speech patterns of Jews were long mocked by whites, especially middle-class and poor whites, whose minds were programmed to accept Jewish “superiority” only quite recently. Another very recent development is that rich Jews have ceased doing their damnedest to eradicate identifiably Jewish elements from their children’s speech patterns. What this says about their position in society could hardly be clearer. Or sadder.

  5. The Goy Chevalier's Gravatar The Goy Chevalier
    December 2, 2012 - 9:13 pm | Permalink


  6. The Goy Chevalier's Gravatar The Goy Chevalier
    December 2, 2012 - 9:12 pm | Permalink

    The Yiddish influence on various languages has produced the “New York accent” and its various dialects.

  7. The Goy Chevalier's Gravatar The Goy Chevalier
    December 2, 2012 - 9:11 pm | Permalink

    The Yiddish influence on various languages have produced the “New York accent” and its various dialects.

  8. Bobby's Gravatar Bobby
    December 2, 2012 - 6:21 pm | Permalink

    @Luke: That’s right Luke, we rescued them and a few years later they showed their gratitude and still do. But, since whites haven’t wised up AT THIS LATE DATE, I must pronounce my usual mantra particularly suited for the Euro-Americans of today, STUPID IS AS STUPID DOES, and it’s hard to argue with stupid!!

  9. Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
    December 2, 2012 - 1:00 pm | Permalink


    I am confident even Pierre could master his own sauce with these.

    I am tempted to invite you to come and see me make a liar of you. I have looked enviously at Jacques Pépin as he makes a flawless omelet with one hand while holding a glass of wine in the other and talking to the camera. Meanwhile I have tried for fifty years to make two properly cooked eggs sunny-side up. Once success comes to me in this arena, I’ll consider becoming a saucier.

    Nonetheless, I too am grateful for the tomato tip.

  10. Alice Teller's Gravatar Alice Teller
    December 2, 2012 - 8:26 am | Permalink

    How kind of you to share your secret. Thanks!

  11. Snowhitey's Gravatar Snowhitey
    December 1, 2012 - 11:50 pm | Permalink


    Here’s your hope… a great sauce starts with a fabulous tomato and these tomatoes have no competition:

    I am confident even Pierre could master his own sauce with these. They’re the only ones I buy (I buy multiple cases and have them shipped to Florida). And, I make a far better sauce than my Italian mother-in-law and her mother, too!!!

  12. Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
    December 1, 2012 - 6:33 pm | Permalink

    @Alice Teller: I believe that what is true of many other worthwhile things is true of cooking, too: practice makes perfect. Unfortunately, it’s also true of the palates that you and all other dedicated cooks work to satisfy. Fortunate the children who grow up appreciating the difference between food that’s genuinely tasty and food whose sole virtue is that it lies motionless on the plate.

    If I am ever well enough to travel again, I would love to taste one or more of your sauces, Alice.

  13. D. K.'s Gravatar D. K.
    December 1, 2012 - 5:55 pm | Permalink

    @Pierre de Craon:

    I only learned a few years ago that my maternal grandmother was not a Roman Catholic, like her children, but either a Greek Catholic or a Greek Orthodox (I forget which). I had thought that actress Lizabeth Scott, now 90, was Slovak, too; but, now, it seems, instead, that she is (according to Wikipedia) Ruthenian!?! Reading up on them, it struck me as quite possible that my grandmother, apparently unbeknownst to her own children, was actually either half- or full-Ruthenian, rather than Slovak. I know from one of my surviving aunts that my grandmother’s mother was virulently anti-Roman Catholic–refusing to have anything to do with her own granddaughters who were raised Roman Catholic! That, for me, rules out my grandmother’s having simply converted to her first husband’s religion. (I forget if their children, and my cousins, were raised Roman Catholic, or not.) So, I may be able to add yet another ethnicity to that long list, enumerated above….

  14. Alice Teller's Gravatar Alice Teller
    December 1, 2012 - 4:57 pm | Permalink

    @Pierre de Craon:
    As was I, though my time in NY did teach me to appreciate the striking beauty of the Irish/Italian mix. Since we WASPs are forever being scolded for our lack of palate, a vicious generalization, which should only be applied to Yankee WASPs, I maintain that if I can learn to make a great sauce, there is hope for us all.

  15. Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
    December 1, 2012 - 3:45 pm | Permalink

    @D. K.: I’m not going there.

    You have, however, reminded me of a conversation I had with my mother more than thirty-five years ago, about a week after we buried my maternal grandmother; i.e., her mother, whose parents had been post–Civil War Czech immigrants. Sometime around 1910, Grandma married Granddad, the only Yankee in my past (his origins were Catholic Irish, however, from roughly a century earlier; so Tom and dixie will still consider me an Untermensch, thank God).

    Here’s how the conversation went.

    PdC: I just realized I never knew Grandma’s maiden name.
    Mom: It was [fill in a not uncommon Czech name].
    PdC: Ah! Was Grandma Bohemian or Moravian?
    Mom: [with some surprise] Why, Bohemian. [with affected disdain] We Bohemians hate Moravians.
    PdC: [wryly] Do we, indeed? I thought we hated Slovaks.
    Mom: [with an affected air of exasperation] Well, we hate them, too.

    Had my mother (RIP) lacked her dry sense of humor, she would have fit right in with the fewer-but-better-whites crowd here at TOO. N’est-ce pas?

    Grandma was a Lutheran, incidentally.

  16. Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
    December 1, 2012 - 3:17 pm | Permalink

    @Alice Teller: You do know that I was having my bit of fun, don’t you—the ignominy of the marinara sauce aside? The Irish-Italian marriages in my childhood Bronx neighborhood were too many to count. The girls they produced were, along with my big sister, my first and truest models for feminine beauty—and virtue, not coincidentally.

    Curiously, the girls of those marriages who had Italian rather than Irish dads turned out prettiest of all. By the sheerest accident I met one of those girls about ten or a dozen years ago, after not having seen her for 45 years (we didn’t recognize one another, of course). Six children later, her complexion was still radiant and flawless, and her corporate lawyer husband clearly knew he had hit the jackpot when he corraled her.

  17. December 1, 2012 - 1:52 pm | Permalink

    “The ‘anti-Semitism’ of a given participant was based on positive responses to such specious questions as: “Do you think Jewish people stick together too much?”[14]”
    This type of question is not only specious, it is designed to mis-direct real opinion. “Too much” is a term used when attempting to moderate responses. How much is “too much”? The response to a question interested in information would have been significantly different if “too much” had been omitted, or the question asked were: “Do you think Jewish people stick together more than other people?”

    Like a large per-centage of academic studies these days, the conclusions are drawn, and the study then designed to prove the conclusion. Just what we would expect of non-Whites conducting a study on Whites.

  18. Alice Teller's Gravatar Alice Teller
    December 1, 2012 - 1:04 pm | Permalink

    @Pierre de Craon:
    As always, I hesitate to disagree with you – but, it is my contention that the exceptionally beautiful children produced by Irish/Italian marriages have contributed to our reluctance to stay within our ethnic groups.

    While my pizza may indeed be lacking my sauce will be up to your standards. Get better, come for a visit and judge for yourself. I promise to make my own pasta and cheese from illegally purchased raw milk. Your trip to the Cape was clearly a restorative. Just think what some home cooking and stay in the Blue Ridge would do for you.

  19. D. K.'s Gravatar D. K.
    December 1, 2012 - 1:01 pm | Permalink

    @Pierre de Craon:

    What is Irish, Scottish, Welsh, “English, German, [Alsatian] French, and Dutch” code for, Pierre? My late father might have been hiding something from his half-Slovak brood!?!?!

  20. D. K.'s Gravatar D. K.
    December 1, 2012 - 12:55 pm | Permalink

    @Pierre de Craon:

    If only the opposite had been true, we would have been spared one Regis Philbin! (Although, Regis’ momma was, technically, Arbereshe, not strictly an ethnic Italian.)

  21. Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
    December 1, 2012 - 12:40 pm | Permalink

    @D. K.: My friend, why are you working to conceal the truth from me? You’re saying that De Niro senior’s mom was an Irish girl? No self-respecting Irish girl would ever marry a wop! (Proof of which is the fact that none of the thirty or forty Irish moms of the Italian-surnamed kids I grew up with could make a decent marinara sauce. I know, because they all tasted like my mom’s sauce rather than the sauce made by Mrs. La Bella, the Naples-born mom of my grammar school pal Angelo.) The dad must have been Jewish!

    As for De Niro junior’s mom, you know as well as I do that “English, German, French, and Dutch” is code for “Jewish.” For shame!

  22. D. K.'s Gravatar D. K.
    December 1, 2012 - 12:35 pm | Permalink


    “Born and raised as Paula Kranz in Bismarck, North Dakota, she attended Century High School, where she was homecoming queen, valedictorian of the class of 1991,[9] and an All-State basketball player.[3] Her parents, Paul and Nadene Kranz, divorced when she was a teenager. Paul was a high school basketball coach.[10]”


    Paul Kranz, of Bismarck, North Dakota, sounds like your typical Jewish American, doesn’t he?

  23. D. K.'s Gravatar D. K.
    December 1, 2012 - 12:25 pm | Permalink

    @Pierre de Craon:

    “Robert De Niro was born in Greenwich Village,[2] New York City, the son of Virginia Holton Admiral, a painter and poet, and Robert De Niro, Sr., an abstract expressionist painter and sculptor.[3] His father was of Italian and Irish descent, and his mother was of English, German, French, and Dutch ancestry.[4][5] His Italian great-grandparents, Giovanni De Niro and Angelina Mercurio, emigrated from Ferrazzano, in the province of Campobasso, Molise, and his paternal grandmother, Helen O’Reilly, was the granddaughter of Edward O’Reilly, an immigrant from Ireland.”

  24. Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
    December 1, 2012 - 12:02 pm | Permalink

    @Andrew Joyce: Overall a fine apologia. Thank you. One needn’t agree about that certain link to take your point.

  25. Facio Libre's Gravatar Facio Libre
    December 1, 2012 - 11:36 am | Permalink

  26. Andrew Joyce's Gravatar Andrew Joyce
    December 1, 2012 - 11:35 am | Permalink

    It occurs to me, on browsing the responses to this article, that it’s central message has been lost. This is not a call to “Jew-spot.“ On the contrary, to myself and many others this ability is as easy and mundane as breathing. Instead the article concerns how my briefly aroused curiosity in this area, admittedly not directly within my field of knowledge, led me to one quite astonishing series of shameless and absurd academic forgeries. We probably could have done without the links to a certain website, but I’ve never affected prudishness and I see no reason to begin doing so here. I also wouldn’t presume to pose the Jewish Question before other issues that concern the WN movement, though it concerns me more than others, believing as I do that even the best efforts of this movement will fail if the weight of Jewish influence (of the kind seen in this article) and its corresponding link to the inertia of the white masses, is not reckoned with.

  27. Alice Teller's Gravatar Alice Teller
    December 1, 2012 - 10:46 am | Permalink

    Well and wisely said, Bobby. In my humble opinion, this thread, more than most, shows us at our worst. Mr. Joyce makes an excellent point. that Jews use very silly games, in academia, to twist the normal into the evil. It is the responses which ignore he valid point and focus on foolishness. We really must ask ourselves how many of us are here because we care about white people?

    I hope that you keep weighing in. You real life experience on the front lines of the battlefield combined with your plain good sense benefits us all. We must fight on multiple fronts and with all the tools we can muster.

  28. ScarlettOHara's Gravatar ScarlettOHara
    December 1, 2012 - 10:43 am | Permalink

    I don’t know what the exact statistics are, but jews are so grossly overrepresented on television news programming that you could probably take a guess that whoever is speaking on the screen at any given moment is jewish, and be right at least 50% of the time.

  29. JPLex's Gravatar JPLex
    December 1, 2012 - 10:14 am | Permalink

    To Luke:

    Even better. What I like about the Jews is that they never seem to “get the satisfaction”. Just look at them, they are never genuinely happy. They are always bitter, for one reason or another.

    And the best is that THEY ARE NOT ACTUALLY ANY GOOD AT ANYTHING. Please remember that, do not fall for this superficial “success”.

    All magnificent culture is NON-JEWISH. All music, all films, all art. The Jews are NO-GOOD.

    They are no good at architecture, they are no good at industrial production, they are no good at producing something that you would recognize.

    If they are somewhat good at something it is always through limitless practising, like whining the violin. But give the violin to a gypsy and he beats the best isaacstern prompt.

    Jews are NO-GOOD.

    If they make money it is all because they act non-transparently in white man’s transparent world. They succeed because THEY BREAK THE RULES.

    “Juden sind unser Ungluck”.

  30. Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
    December 1, 2012 - 10:08 am | Permalink

    @Jason Speaks & @Jason Speaks:

    Excellent, very apt comments. Your estimation of the value of this article is underlined by the fact that certain commenters thought it appropriate to provide several hundred photographs showing areolar characteristics of Jewish women. I am sure this information will come in handy on a daily basis—especially for those young WNs who intend to pursue careers in pimping.

  31. Luke's Gravatar Luke
    December 1, 2012 - 9:06 am | Permalink

    @Shiva: Isn’t it interesting, how even those jews who have hijacked a few White European genes and who look very European when they are young, say in their 20s and 30s – as the get older, the older they get, the more those jew genes seem to take over and before long, they all look like Henry Kissinger or Madeline Albright?

  32. Luke's Gravatar Luke
    December 1, 2012 - 8:58 am | Permalink

    @fender: Actor Paul Newman was an example of what Fender is referring to. I remember enjoying most of his movies, as I grew up – and particularly liked Butch Cassidy & the Sundance Kid. I was aware that Newman was a flaming liberal, as most of the creeps in Hollywood also are – but, most of Newman’s movie roles tended to be non-political and the characters he played were meant to appeal to White conservative audiences. It wasn’t until many years later that I learned that Newman was part jewish.

    A few summers ago, I rented a copy of his western ‘Hombre’, which also starred Richard Boone. I’d seen this movie before, about the time it first hit the theaters – and I liked it back then. Of course, I was not yet jew-wise in those days and so, when I sat down to watch it again – I was immediately struck by how virulently anti-White Newman’s character was, and how many of the now familiar anti-White, “Whites are evil”, “Whites are uniquely demonic” themes that were literally exploding out of this movie script.

    In one scene, Newman’s half breed character is discussing his past experiences with the ‘evil White man’, who he clearly hates with a murderous passion – and I was amazed at how incredibly intense the hate appeared to be in Newman’s famous blue eyes – that wasn’t acting, folks. That was real hate. It was jewish hate and it burned like red hot fire out those famous baby blues of Paul Newman.

    The interesting part about Newman and about the rest of these very White European looking jews in Hollywood – is that every one of them owe their fame and fortunes to the White audiences who flocked to see every new movie that they starred in. Whites made these people rich beyond their wildest dreams and with the money we gave them at the box office, they lived lives that we could only dream of being able to live. But, none of them feel any sense of appreciation or gratitude towards White European people.

    Heck, we rescued them from Uncle Adolf and how did they show their gratitude? By rewriting our immigration laws in 1965, so they could begin to flood our native homelands with hundreds of millions of non-whites from the third world, reduce us to minorities inside our own nation, and subjugate us to being ruled by non-whites who hate us.

    I think we need to stop doing any favors for this tribe of ungrateful backstabbers.

  33. JPLex's Gravatar JPLex
    December 1, 2012 - 6:47 am | Permalink

    @Jason Speaks: I elaborate. Stupid me…

    Look, the whole concept of multiculturalism is Jewish. Regular, hard-working, normal white people DO NOT embrace that idea. They may not go to streets to riot for expulsion of arabs etc., but they do not LOVE them either. No way.

    This all is typical, hundreds of years old Jewish conniving against their competitors. Jews prefer more a unstable society even with lower living standard compared to stable, white-led high-living standard society, because (if they are given power) the Jews live well anyway.

    So, simply, to get back to a Good World, one has to throw the Jews away. If it means that one has to be an Ally with muslims, fine.

    The Jews do not care HOW, they only want to win. If it means our downfall, so be it. They only care about themselves. Never in history have they helped white people. Not once. Never.

  34. JPLex's Gravatar JPLex
    December 1, 2012 - 6:38 am | Permalink

    @Jason Speaks: Nothing.

    But is very easy o deal with muslims if need be. They are like children compared with the Jews. If You have given the Power to Jews, you are finished. With muslims, you kick them out. Easy. Or live with them, but keep the Power.

    You see, Jews never give an inch without force. Never. Not an inch.

  35. Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
    December 1, 2012 - 5:53 am | Permalink

    @Floda:I appreciate that whilst his bloodline is ambiguous, his loyalty is not.

  36. Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
    December 1, 2012 - 4:31 am | Permalink


    What are Muslims willing to do to stop mass immigration and forced assimilation of non-Whites with Whites?

  37. JPLex's Gravatar JPLex
    December 1, 2012 - 4:01 am | Permalink

    Very interesting.

    I agree, Jews can easily be spotted.

    I also think that you can safely say that they are practically all non-patriots (except to their “own land”, Israel), narcists (bordering to psychopath) and simply, obsessed with money.

    Have you ever heard a Jew talking about his hostland patriotically? No, never. The host is there to suck blood from, it is never loved. Like a genuine psychopath, Jew is always ready to leave, always ready to drop everything and move.

    Hilter said it: The volk (people) are rooted in their homeland, Jews are at home everywhere. That is why they always cause destruction, when they get the upper hand.

    In Europe there are countries where they have minimal influence, because they are so few and far between. And they do not much like cold places. Like Finland, it is clean from Jews and not because they would be hated, it is because they have no interest (yet) in it. Also, Finnish people are tough guys to betray, because people are educated and Finns “take care of their own”.

    You americans are going to lose this, just admit it. You have absolutely no hope. You are goners, I am sorry. You embraced the Jew, and you dug a grave for yourself. Only Europe and Russia can, maybe, still save themselves. And in this fight muslims are our brothers. You just do not get it over there. Jews are so mighty enemy that you have to join forces with Devil himself. Otherwise you lose. Show no mercy.

  38. Mace's Gravatar Mace
    December 1, 2012 - 2:41 am | Permalink

    @Duke Mantee: There are quite a few interesting points in this comments section, but your remark that spotting Jews is, “… a subliminal skill, not dissimilar to spotting sociopaths,” is just wrong. Spotting Jews (especially in the manner that this article addresses using nothing more than visual cues) is very dissimilar to attempting to “spot” sociopaths, and I don’t think the latter could be done with any reliability or accuracy.

    Jews are an ethnic group who, though individually dissimilar in many ways, share certain physical characteristics in various combinations per individual (normally). Unlike your other comparisons, spotting fake dollar bills and differentiating poisonous from nonpoisonous mushrooms, there is no physical feature set to look for among sociopaths. What criteria would you use in such a case? A certain sort of gaze in their eyes may mark a sociopath, but then I’ve seen the same sort of thing in people with Asperger’s Syndrome. I’m sure there are other mental conditions which people identify with an empty gaze, and there are innumerable people with no psychological problems at all who have it.

    That’s the only remotely physical trait I can think of that you could go by to spot a sociopath, and that’s really stretching it, because sociopathy is a behavioral profile. I’s a psychological diagnosis; a label you may apply to someone once you know something about an individual’s general behavior, and to really be sure you aren’t mislabeling that person, you’d have to know a good bit about them. This is nothing like spotting a Jew based on a quick glance, a still picture, etc.

  39. 90404's Gravatar 90404
    December 1, 2012 - 2:38 am | Permalink

    @Paul Hausser:
    Do you watch Yahoos news and home page?
    Over representing Blacks, day after day.

  40. Bobby's Gravatar Bobby
    December 1, 2012 - 2:08 am | Permalink

    @Jason Speaks: I think it’s a useless waste of time, because it doesn’t take into account the valuable piece of advice, that also happens to stem from Christianity, that, ” you will know them by their fruits.”,etc.

  41. Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
    December 1, 2012 - 2:03 am | Permalink


    Oh I certainly don’t think spreading the Mantra and it’s concepts are a waste of time. I think it is the best thing going. I meant, spending a ton of time on our Jew-spotting-in-a-crowd skills doesn’t seem like the best use of time. But I know it’s a lot of fun to the TOO crowd, so there are worse hobbies. :)

    On Christianity, I suspect the reason it is hated by Anti-Whites so much is because it is used as a standard for Whites to rally around, at least implicitly. I don’t think they care as much about Christianity in Africa or Latin America.

  42. Bobby's Gravatar Bobby
    December 1, 2012 - 1:34 am | Permalink

    @Jason Speaks: Jason, I personally don’t think spreading the Mantra is a waste of time. I think it is part of the arsenal that we have against our vile enemies. Just as slapping down our enemies that complain about, nativity scenes, christmans trees, and every other symbol that so many people on European-American forums also think isn’t important. My view is simple. ANYTHING, and I mean ANY THING, that shoves it in the faces of our enemies has values for this movement. Anything that tells our enemies where they can go is a valubable thing and I wish some of the anti-Christians would get this message. They don’t understand that Christianity can be turned into a weapon towards the evil that is consistently and relentlessly attacking European-Americans on a daily basis. I marvel at the fact that these folks just don’t get it. Don’t they understand that if Christianity and its extended symbols is such a pain in the A–, to our enemies, then that pain in the A– needs to be used as a rusty nail in their knees, over and over and over. Instead, like I have pointed out before, they make the enemis job simpler by arguing about stuff like whether a Christmas Tree was really part of Christianity,etc. My God, some white nationalists are their own worst enemies.

  43. Floda's Gravatar Floda
    December 1, 2012 - 1:28 am | Permalink

    I’m an Australian and while a lot of people claim Murdoch is Jewish, I have my doubts. However there’s one thing about Murdoch of which I am 100% certain:

    I have long believed that Murdoch woke up one morning after a strange dream during which he realized that all he had to do to become the World’s most successful Newspaper mogul, was to assure Jewish investors it was vital to their interests to have him and not ordinary Goyim significantly controlling the World’s press.

    Which as we know is absolutely the case, look no further than reporting on 911.

    That explanation has eluded financial commentators, many of whom have expressed astonishment at some of Murdoch’s acquisitions over a very long time.

  44. Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
    December 1, 2012 - 1:21 am | Permalink

    Spreading the Mantra, using pro-White talking points, imposing terminology like Anti-White and </i<White Genocide, signing petitions … this is all considered a waste of time or hyperbole by the “pro-White” crowd here?

    But talking about how to spot a Joo in a crowd is a worthy pursuit?

    Time Wasters.

  45. Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
    December 1, 2012 - 12:03 am | Permalink

    A question for anyone. What is the basis for describing Robert de Niro as a Jew or of Jewish descent? Does he call himself a Jew or a descendant of Jews? Is there other evidence pointing to his Jewishness? The fact that he has played a Jew in a fair number of movies doesn’t count as evidence, unless one is to believe that Anthony Quinn’s movie roles prove he was Greek or Arab or both.

  46. Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
    November 30, 2012 - 11:41 pm | Permalink

    @Tom: Your curious transcriptions, meant to represent one or more of the dozen or so New York accents that you are suggesting you know well, reveal (1) that you think there’s only one New York accent, (2) that you don’t actually hear even that one right, or (3) both of the preceding.

    Since there is no longer a countable born-in-the Netherlands Dutch presence anywhere in New York State, literally no resident has ever been heard to say “Lonk Island.” The island’s lowbrow Italians (most of whom are actually Sicilians and Calabrians, there being roughly 17 Tuscan and Veneto Italians in the entire Northeast) mostly pronounce the place-name with only a slightly exaggerated and nasalized first vowel: something akin to “Lawng Island” spoken with one’s nostrils clamped shut. No other group or subgroup pronounces those words as you transcribe them, and virtually no one in the metropolitan area ever says “New Yawk,” save in self-mockery. (Blacks, of course, have ugly and uglier ways of pronouncing everything, but few of them have accents traceable to the region, as opposed to what they ludicrously call their “community.” Those that do are invariably the slightly more employable of their group, and they tend to sound Jewish more than anything else.)

    Indeed, you are probably just doing a poor job mimicking the widely recognized, widely mocked Jewish pronunciation, which ranges from “Lawng Guylənd” (with “Guy” representing the usual pronunciation of that word and the upside-down “e” being a schwa, the sound of the unaccented vowels in “dither” and “bazooka”) through “LawnGoylənd” to something as odd as “Lung Guylən,” with the final “d” gone missing.

    The curious phonetic combination of misdivision and what phonologists call epenthesis that transforms the terminal sound of “ng” in -ing words to “ng” + initial hard “g” with a following word beginning with a vowel is peculiar in my experience to Jews. I have always presumed it relates to bad speech habits picked up from parents, the Hebrew language, or both. Perhaps Arabic speakers do it, too, but their influence on New York area speech patterns is still largely confined to convenience stores and gas stations.

    For the record, I am not saying that the New York area is not flooded with barbarous speech patterns and equally barbarous people uttering them. It is, of course. You just don’t seem to hear them right. Since several million of the region’s crude speakers happen to be admittedly crude but decent white people who daily suffer indignities far worse than anything you or your sneer-buddy Luke experience in a year, you owe them the courtesy of getting your sneers straight before you utter them.

  47. Random's Gravatar Random
    November 30, 2012 - 9:26 pm | Permalink

    I’m pretty good at spotting jews based on facial characteristics. It’s pretty easy to do if you’ve looked at a lot of them. I’m sure most jews are a lot better at it than I am. There’s no one specific feature that gives them away, though. It’s some subtle quality of the entire face that tells you that you’re looking at a jew. In the same way, members of the same family will often look quite different from each other in terms of the “obvious” features like eye color, hair color, nose shape, etc., but will have some subtle yet distinctive quality that makes it immediately obvious that they are all related.

  48. Hedgerow's Gravatar Hedgerow
    November 30, 2012 - 9:18 pm | Permalink

    I see learning to spot Jews as an acquired survival skill. After having been ripped off by them in the past, then one pays more attention with whom one is making a transaction.

  49. November 30, 2012 - 9:16 pm | Permalink

    Not all Wall Street/DC banksters and kleptos are Jews; Corzine and Geither are shabbatz goyim. Sotomayer spends quite a bit of her quality time in Israel, and may have Sephardic connections. I’d put the link to the “Seductive Jewess” website here, but I see it’s already linked 2X above. Latest addit: Petraeus’ seducer Paula “Broadwell”…real name Paula Kranz. Esther strikes again.

  50. Snowhitey's Gravatar Snowhitey
    November 30, 2012 - 8:46 pm | Permalink

    I think it is quite easy to spot certain types of Jews but not all Jews. I think the more contact you have with them on a daily basis, the sharper your primal instinct is. And a good primal instinct always has a built-in Jewdar.

    I think there is a strong possibility both Timothy Geithner and Sonia Sotomayer are Jews regardless of what the information out there says about them. Anyone know with certainty?

  51. November 30, 2012 - 8:45 pm | Permalink

    @Tom: Speaking of that –
    Jack’s War

  52. November 30, 2012 - 8:34 pm | Permalink

    @starera: Also, if it acts like an anti-white, it’s an anti-white.
    Jack’s War

  53. Mary Thomas's Gravatar Mary Thomas
    November 30, 2012 - 8:22 pm | Permalink

    Go to Youtube and look up the vids for “Jewish celebrities” and “famous Jews.” The Hollywood list is especially stunning. I guarantee that there will be many people included that you assumed were white. It’s really stunning and shocking. Hell, Harrison Ford, Sean Penn, Scarlet Joahansen!!, Robert Deniro…
    they definitely keep Hollywood Jewcentric.

  54. George's Gravatar George
    November 30, 2012 - 7:48 pm | Permalink

    @Abe Fauxman:

    “However I must admit I spend much time studying this scientific site devoted to my female coreligionists’ distinctive characteristics.”

    Predictable and typical of your species.

  55. Bobby's Gravatar Bobby
    November 30, 2012 - 6:20 pm | Permalink

    @tombarnes:Ron Unz is a mightmare where immigration goes, because he is a mass immigration advocate and none too bothered by illegal immigration, either.

  56. fender's Gravatar fender
    November 30, 2012 - 6:02 pm | Permalink

    @Julian Curtis Lee:

    “And long before a “Gentile” gets his switched turned on, they are walking down the street sorting you out. They themselves know “there’s another Jew, there’s a g—-”. ”

    I do the same thing, only it’s, “White, White, untermensch, White…”

  57. fender's Gravatar fender
    November 30, 2012 - 6:00 pm | Permalink


    They’re still easy to spot by their behavior and manner of speaking. Jews sound different from Whites: the former tend to have voices that are either very nasally or very throaty(although with a “buzzing” quality), while the latter tend to have smoother, fuller voices.

  58. Hedgerow's Gravatar Hedgerow
    November 30, 2012 - 5:39 pm | Permalink

    The Jews who appear to have more European ancestry tend to be harder to pick out and better looking than the others.

  59. Mick Smitzel's Gravatar Mick Smitzel
    November 30, 2012 - 4:40 pm | Permalink

    It is like they are shamelessly pursuing the fulfillment of George Orwell’s slogan: 2+2=5.

    They’re just like, yep, if I can take command of the Social Sciences, then I am in charge of what is real and what isn’t. If I say anti-Semites are pathological, then they are. If I say that everyone is equal, then they are.

    ^Now that is what I define as evil. Evil should be defined as the falsification or perversion of nature — which is the only legitimate god.

    Two plus two does not equal friggin 5 you bastards!

  60. Luke's Gravatar Luke
    November 30, 2012 - 4:00 pm | Permalink

    @norman S: Shatner got a big kick out of planting a big smooch on his negro junior officer babe. That was an early jewish ‘white miscegenation is cool’ trial balloon, because most White fans of Star Trekstein thought Shatner was a white guy.

  61. Luke's Gravatar Luke
    November 30, 2012 - 3:57 pm | Permalink

    @Richard Pierce: My personal experience tells me that they are permanently hardwired to always exhibit jewish traits.

    I’ve never seen even one lonely exception to this rule.

  62. Franklin Ryckaert's Gravatar Franklin Ryckaert
    November 30, 2012 - 3:50 pm | Permalink

    @Graham Wellington:
    Colin Quinn doesn’t look Jewish at all, but in that video he “speaks with his hands”, and that gives him away.

  63. Richard Pierce's Gravatar Richard Pierce
    November 30, 2012 - 3:30 pm | Permalink


    If a New Yorker moves away from New York how long does it take them to become normal?

    About a year.

  64. November 30, 2012 - 3:05 pm | Permalink


    Yes, Ron Unz is jewish:

    “My casual mental image of today’s top American students is based upon my memories of a generation or so ago, when Jewish students, sometimes including myself…”

  65. November 30, 2012 - 2:38 pm | Permalink
  66. Sector 19's Gravatar Sector 19
    November 30, 2012 - 2:04 pm | Permalink

    Yet another example of a dominant group manufacturing it’s own credibility. The only decision we have now is whether to separate or reconquer. What’s it gonna be, Mr. Andersen?

  67. Paul Hausser's Gravatar Paul Hausser
    November 30, 2012 - 2:00 pm | Permalink

    The national news stations are filled with Jews.

    At any given moment Jews are on one channel at the very least and in many cases multiple channels at once.

    Spewing their twisting of all the current events. All with that snarky know it all sanctimonious Jew smile.

    Then to add further insult if you don’t see a jew you see a black in the commercial to follow. A commercial that you can bet was scripted and cast with a jew making the final call on the commercials content.

    Based on TV today you would think jews are 40% and blacks are 40% of the population.

  68. Paul Hausser's Gravatar Paul Hausser
    November 30, 2012 - 1:51 pm | Permalink


    This chart is very well suited for the Ashkenazi version

    The ones who are tough to spot are the very few with white hair and even blue eyes. Rare though they are

  69. Julian Curtis Lee's Gravatar Julian Curtis Lee
    November 30, 2012 - 1:40 pm | Permalink

    I have been blessed — or cursed — with the ability to spot them continuously and on a daily basis. Both in media and on the street. I think you get an instinct for it. Including the ones that don’t have patent looks. In the cases where I am able to observe more or get to know them, I get confirmation of my original instincts.

    What’s interesting is that they have the very same instinct and recognition power — about us. And long before a “Gentile” gets his switched turned on, they are walking down the street sorting you out. They themselves know “there’s another Jew, there’s a g—-“. When they know what you are, it seems to me, they ignore you and pretend you don’t exist, making communities strange places and helping to make them non-communities.

    This except for a small number of Jews who are highly liberalized and enjoying mixing with the Gentiles for various reasons, both incognito or occasionally dropping the “I’m just a Jewish…” patter to test you out. Even in the case of these liberal ones, once they realize that you knew they were a Jew or had they had the same sorting power as they have, they tend to become alarmed and even affronted.

  70. norman S's Gravatar norman S
    November 30, 2012 - 1:29 pm | Permalink

    Can you tell the difference between William Shatner, Kirk Douglas and Woody Allen? It’s not how they look that is important but how they act. Norman Finkelstein is a perfect example.

  71. Tom's Gravatar Tom
    November 30, 2012 - 1:25 pm | Permalink



    I remember reading an essay by one “Homeless Jack” who claimed that you breathed in, and, ingested the dna of those you are around? At first I thought that was kinda crazy, but, the more I read about dna & gmo the less sure I am of how crazy it is…LOL.

    You are right on about New Yorkers (New Yawkers). Amazing.

    If a New Yorker moves away from New York how long does it take them to become normal? New Joisey, and Lonk Islandt need studied too. LOL.

  72. Alice Teller's Gravatar Alice Teller
    November 30, 2012 - 1:18 pm | Permalink

    The anti-white meme is going mainstream. This is not a WN site. Kudos to bugsters.

  73. D. K.'s Gravatar D. K.
    November 30, 2012 - 1:15 pm | Permalink


    If I were a betting man, I would bet, instead, that she is a shiksa, who took her Jewish husband’s last name. It is possible that she either is a half-Jew, with a blonde mother (a la Chelsea Handler, whose mother is, or was, a Mormon), or that she converted for the inestimable “privilege” of being allowed to marry her way into the Tribe (a la Donald Trump’s daughter, and so many others). I am myself a long-lapsed Catholic, and I do not particularly care about people’s private religious beliefs, one way or the other; but, there are few things in this world that I find more nauseating than a gentile– usually a woman– abjuring a lifetime’s profession of Christian faith in Jesus as one’s Lord and Savior, not because of any actual loss of faith, but merely for the aforementioned “privilege” of marrying a religious Jew!

  74. Bear's Gravatar Bear
    November 30, 2012 - 12:51 pm | Permalink

    Being able to correctly identify a Jew is an essential survival skill for Whites.

    So exercise and develop your skill friends.

    know your ememy.

    You never know when you will be colluded against or disfavoured by member of the tribe in buisiness or employment. You must also know when you can speak freely and when you have to ‘pretend’. In these politically correct times anything you say can be lead to repercusions in certain circumstances.

    Furthermore it helps to know the enemy. We know they speak with a forked tounque; reframing their hatreds and self interest in other terms, including of all thinks “love”.

    Noteworthy of Salid and many before he is her willingness to use statistical empiricism when it suits her agenda of pathologising conscious Whites but ignoring or changing the standard of evidence when it does not.

    So much of their “research” is not a quest for knowledge but simply a way of developing and disseminating structures and techniques for pathologising Whites (race conscious one or not) or damaging our culture.

    They are makers of meme-viruses.

    We need to take the initiative from them, we need to set the agenda. We aslo need to donate to fund our own efforts of this kind.

    Keep speaking the truth to break the spell of lies.

  75. Marcus's Gravatar Marcus
    November 30, 2012 - 12:47 pm | Permalink

    @Luke, they live overwhelmingly in large cities, so it’s not surprising that urban and Jewish traits are often overlapping. In general people who have lived in such an environment for so long lose touch with nature and believe they can mold the surrounding world to their will. I think this is why utopian marxist ideologies have always been born in cities. Also the generations of Jewish inbreeding surely weren’t conducive to producing a pleasant people.

  76. November 30, 2012 - 12:07 pm | Permalink

    Even when they have plastic surgery it is still very easy to spot them. Unlike say spotting a Christian Scientist or a Quaker.

    Crypsis only works on dozing Whites, not on Middle Eastern Muslims for instance. I was in Paris years ago with a gal that was HALF-JEWISH and we sat at a sidewalk cafe and this Arab walks up and says to her, “ARE YOU A JEWESS?”

    I thought to myself, by God, it is THAT obvious.

  77. lobro's Gravatar lobro
    November 30, 2012 - 11:41 am | Permalink

    a tricky business made easier by spotting huge, fleshy noses, smell of chicken and decomposed fish, greasy curly hair, hunched back, erratic head jerks and amiable, charming behavior, always ready to help goy in trouble, especially a christian boy under 5 years of age.

  78. Junghans's Gravatar Junghans
    November 30, 2012 - 11:16 am | Permalink

    A most interesting article about Jew recognition, or ‘Jewdar’. Ah, the wonders of instinctive racial radar, indeed. Lot’s of good comments on the thread as well. Juxtaposed to the so called “anti-Semites”, nobody, but nobody is as racially/ethnically conscious as Jews themselves. They pride themselves at being able to spot one another, and discern the “schmucks & schlemiels” from their ‘chosen’ own; now, how bigoted and “Semitic” is that?

  79. Abe Fauxman's Gravatar Abe Fauxman
    November 30, 2012 - 11:08 am | Permalink

    Your stereotypical observations about alleged Jewish features are borderline antisemitic.

    However I must admit I spend much time studying this scientific site devoted to my female coreligionists’ distinctive characteristics.

    (scroll way down)

  80. Paul Weir's Gravatar Paul Weir
    November 30, 2012 - 10:14 am | Permalink

    I used to think I could tell who was jewish and who wasn’t but over the years I’m not so sure.
    Some jews don’t seem to have the stereotypic behaviour or physical characteristics.
    One thing though I have noticed over the years. Jews usually have something calculating about them which shows in their faces and their personalities.
    They are never an open book.
    I have also been told that many of the big name Hollywood actors have one parent at least who is of the tribe.

  81. Luke's Gravatar Luke
    November 30, 2012 - 10:12 am | Permalink

    @Tom: You hit a home run with that observation, Brother Tom.

    New Yorkers are exhibit A for the prosecution. Never in my entire life have I EVER met someone who was from New York who did not have the exact same obnoxious characteristics and personality traits that are usually associated with jews.
    And, I’m talking about White people who did not have any jewish DNA in them as far as I could tell, or for as far as they themselves would admit. This clearly proves that being around lots of jews can most definitely transmit their disease into our people.

  82. Felix's Gravatar Felix
    November 30, 2012 - 6:26 am | Permalink


    We are all standing accused in an an absurd Talmudic court, where we just can’t win and they just can’t loose. Something out of the imagination of Franz Kafka.

    Blowback always comes.

  83. NM156's Gravatar NM156
    November 30, 2012 - 5:59 am | Permalink

    @90404 Poles and Russians with glasses are Jews? Drinking tonight or what?

  84. JoeHobby's Gravatar JoeHobby
    November 30, 2012 - 5:49 am | Permalink

    @Richard Williams:

    Gaydar, jewdar, so what. The critical thing is that the non-Arabic Semite style is to consistently pose their identity, concerns, and issues as the centerpiece to any event or effort.

    Homosexuals also consistently pose their identity, concerns and issues as the centerpiece to any event or effort. As such I do not include homosexuals as being White (capital W) because they do not act or fight White. They put their own group’s particular interests ahead of White interests regardless of the cost to the larger White population.

    The Seductive Jewess blog (Not for Work – nudity) has a lot of examples of female jews for those needing to be aware of being caught by such a creature !

  85. tombarnes's Gravatar tombarnes
    November 30, 2012 - 5:48 am | Permalink

    Speaking of demographic over representation, I echo Graham Wellington and urge everyone to check out Ron Unz’s long (40 pages)article( he is a Tribal guy as far as I know) on Jewish over representation in the Ivies( and thus over representation in the corridors of power).
    The numbers are shocking.
    Check out the second set of charts and the successive paragraphs.

  86. Marcus's Gravatar Marcus
    November 30, 2012 - 2:07 am | Permalink

    Franz Boas, coincidentally enough, would be a great example for such studies. Also Larry David, joe Lieberman, Jerry Seinfeld, Howard Stern, and David Stern.

  87. 90404's Gravatar 90404
    November 30, 2012 - 1:51 am | Permalink

    Ben Affleck? W Nose job.
    Carole King.
    Speilberg fer crap sakes..he looks like a rabbi.

    Folks, add to list!!!

  88. Andrew's Gravatar Andrew
    November 30, 2012 - 1:51 am | Permalink

    I don’t see how the ability to identify Jews can be argued as dysfunctional by philo-semites, as Jews are better at this than anyone else. My thinking is that the author has a knack for it because he is aware that a difference exists and has been exposed to a number of them. The human mind does quite well in recognizing patterns, even if they consist of very subtle clues, and this gets stronger with practice. Clearly, the Jewish genotype and thus phenotype is quite different than Europeans. Doubtlessly, the average person with a bit of practice and exposure to Jewish phenotypic traits could become expert at spotting them. Animal breeders tend to have a keen eye for the animals they specialize in, even rock collectors can tell much about their specimens just by tiny clues that would mean nothing to your average layman. The idea that developing this ability to differentiate when it comes to human racial types is a sign of mental dysfunction is rather unconvincing (but standard fare in the search for, brace yourself, “racism,” that Marxist construct that symbolizes for many the Ultimate Evil of mankind).

  89. 90404's Gravatar 90404
    November 30, 2012 - 1:42 am | Permalink

    DNA and da Joo. In mainstream News I read that millions of Joos are from 3 Russian Women. I read this in the LA Times in [2006?].
    And somewhere back there I read that millions of Joos go back to 2 ? Turkish men.
    I kid you KNOT darlings!
    How to spot one that conforms to the Phenotype? Narrow Face. Big Nose [ that had to breath cold air and warm it, a PHD told me this]. Eyeglasses. ‘Polish – Russian’ looking.

  90. dixie's Gravatar dixie
    November 30, 2012 - 1:02 am | Permalink

    As far as I know, only the catholics really try to argue they are “universal.” It is an “empire religion,” so it has that ideological component, but IN REALITY, it is deeply related to their genetic group— the farther north one goes, the further away from it, usually. South Europe being the most catholic, but much in parts of central europe, like the east being Orthodox.) So it is always bound up with genetics, and ethnic group, also. Lighter people have often escaped it longer, but are ever under attack for it. Like in Iceland, England, and so on.

    Jews also— usually come from very specific experience. Like from eastern europe, usually in u.s., although there are some sephardics, (often slave holders settled in places such as new york, a wave that was before the ashkenazis). A lot of the catholics came straight away from real fascism (militarist-corporatist-medicalist), or the communism of the turn of the last century. Before that, neither group was particularly prevalent in u.s.

  91. Peters's Gravatar Peters
    November 30, 2012 - 1:00 am | Permalink

    Their study consisted of over 550 Northeastern students, split into five groups. The ‘anti-Semitism’ of a given participant was based on positive responses to such specious questions as: “Do you think Jewish people stick together too much?

    I suspect that those who answered negatively to this question fall into two very distinct groups. Those who know that the answer is actually ‘yes’ and simply play dumb. They might also be very good at discerning jews. The second group contains those who have not thought about Jews; they would be unlikely to recognize a Jew from a photo. Would be interesting to see what the distribution curve for recognition was like.

  92. dixie's Gravatar dixie
    November 30, 2012 - 12:52 am | Permalink

    I must be really sensitive. I can tell Jews, sure… but also catholic-raised versus protestant raised, north from south, and both those from midwest and left coastal, as well as pinpoint arrival to america, and with a few questions, discern which exact political upheaval (or payoff) caused them to move, and therefore which politics they had in the old country. Most colonial americans (Northwest Euro Protestants, the dreaded “wasp,” you know) can do that.

    Recently read a immigration site for mexicans— and it interestingly coached that one never has to answer any questions about the “home country.” You have a right to be silent on that! it impressed upon whatever type immigrant.

    wonder why. In the positive experience of diversity, wouldn’t people be falling all over themselves to SHARE the wonders of their nifty life stories?

  93. russ hook's Gravatar russ hook
    November 30, 2012 - 12:44 am | Permalink

    @anonymous: Which “holocost” are you referring to? The one where 66 million christians were murdered, or the one where millions of Japanese, and Germans were murdered,,,, by JEWs?

  94. George's Gravatar George
    November 29, 2012 - 11:28 pm | Permalink

    Recognizing a “full-blooded” Jew is not difficult at all. My mother could spot them right away (she was born in Germany in 1914 and lived through WW2 and Mr. H’s 3rd Reich). She would point them out to me on television when I was a child and listed the features to look for; typically close set eyes, large ears, the classic hooked nose- but the nose is long from the bridge to the upper lip (some Mediterraneans can have this hooked nose, but the length is not there), a wide mouth with lips that are formless and this feature in itself almost defies description, the lower lip will be thick but not as thick as a Negro’s lips. The skull is long and the ears are usually very large. What I call full-blooded Jews are not physically attractive. Where it gets difficult to spot them is when they have intermarried with whites and these classic features have been moderated with fresh genetic material.
    Barbara Streisand is a Jew and looks the part (despite a not too successful nose job). Haillee Steinfeld (“Mattie” in the remake of True Grit) however does not have the classic “jewish” look at all, having had a Jewish father and Causasian mother. Not having had a Jewish mother technically makes her non-Jewish, but such a child is still treated as part of the clan by the Tribe.

  95. Sandman's Gravatar Sandman
    November 29, 2012 - 10:36 pm | Permalink

    Personally. I’m pretty good at this game and have noticed that many who have the hyperbolic nose also will have darker skin around the eye sockets which is easy to notice. These individuals never seem to have light colored eyes wether they have the “heavy eyelids” or sleepy look or not. Wonder if others have noticed that. Rahm Emanuel is a good example of what I’m saying. Bloomberg’s eyes are different but give up his identity as well. I guess in their case, the eyes are a gateway to something. But usually tell me whom I’m dealing with.

  96. Vlad writes's Gravatar Vlad writes
    November 29, 2012 - 10:17 pm | Permalink

    Looks like the jewish policy of inundating the white countries that protect them with non-whites is backfiring on them. Arab swamped France now is the third of the five permanent members of the Security Council to back the Palestinians and their two-state solution to Israeli oppression, leaving only jew controlled USA and Britain hanging their neck out for our oppressors.

  97. Alice Teller's Gravatar Alice Teller
    November 29, 2012 - 10:03 pm | Permalink

    It seems that some are concerned about the breakup along tribal lines. Perhaps it is coming clear that the new paradigm frees whites of any imagined obligation to play fair? I am not used to this much honesty from the Wall Street Journal. The Racializing of American Politics.

  98. russ hook's Gravatar russ hook
    November 29, 2012 - 10:02 pm | Permalink

    @starera: The INTERNATIONAL JEW had to STEAL DNA, (like everything else they have stolen) from whites/goyim so they could blend in more, and their crimes could be less noticeable. I can spot a lot of them, yet they have attained so many different looks today that it is near impossible to spot them all.

  99. anonymous's Gravatar anonymous
    November 29, 2012 - 9:37 pm | Permalink

    After reading a recent book, “The Hebrew Republic,” by Eric Nelson, young Harvard professor of Government, I looked him up to see if he was from MN, (a common name there). His photo did not match his name; they were oddly incongruous. Then I learned that his maternal grandparents were Holocaust survivors.,

  100. Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
    November 29, 2012 - 9:29 pm | Permalink
  101. Steve's Gravatar Steve
    November 29, 2012 - 9:24 pm | Permalink

    We’re of the same mind. I’ve been eager to write a piece like this or read one of this nature, and here it is. Finally!
    After years of study pertaining to political research and Jewish ethnocentricity, I too am able to spot the Jew under most conditions no matter the circumstances. Some obvious key features are the eye sockets, color of the eyes, nose, lips, and ears. The nose is a given. Even after generations of intermarriage with Gentiles, I am still able to key in on subtle features of Jewish origin. And I’m only referring to still photos at this time. If you throw in movement and mannerisms, they it becomes easier to spot the Jew. A fascinating topic I must say.

  102. Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
    November 29, 2012 - 9:19 pm | Permalink

    I do hope no tax dollars went into this “study”. Andreski’s Social Sciences as Sorcery comes to mind.

  103. Duke Mantee's Gravatar Duke Mantee
    November 29, 2012 - 8:44 pm | Permalink

    A jew is like the definition of pornography to me in that it’s difficult to nail down in words but “I know one when I see one”.

    It’s a subliminal skill, not dissimilar to spotting sociopaths. The way one learns is the same way one learns to spot a counterfeit dollar bill or a poisonous mushroom from a good one. Looking at the ones you know are jews like on television or in the office. Lots of tells. And don’t forget the pointy satan-like chins and the oddly shaped skulls that often make them look so hideous.

    My accuracy is fairly reliable. My wife is getting pretty good at the game too. We’ll be watching a movie and she’ll say, “That’s a jew”. I had to chuckle as I read of the author’s encounter. Sometime’s it’s SO obvious that they seem to scream out, “I’m a jew!” even when they try not to.

    Just too bad we can’t get a bounty for suchha skill. Well, I can dream. :~)

  104. Gregor's Gravatar Gregor
    November 29, 2012 - 8:14 pm | Permalink

    @Alice Teller: Alice, not all “non-Jews” are Whites. When we discuss the non-Arab Semites, it’s important to realize that they see the world through a special kind of eyes; “Us” and “Them”. The “Them” is EVERYBODY except members of the “Us” in their eyes. They don’t really distinguish between different sub-groups of “Them”, since relative to the non-Arab Semite “US”, there is no distinction.

    Is this anti-White? If one of the non-Arab Semite “Us” is calling YOU a “goy”, a “gentile” or a “shicksa”, and you are a White … it’s anti-White.

    But that really isn’t a problem for us. We are not OFFENDED by what they “Call” us. When they do this, it gives us permission to look into and investigate the kind of sick mind which only sees two kinds of people in the world. If we speak with a White voice about ourselves, and put OUR interests in the center of the discourse … their sense of being “offended” just shows them for what they are … sickos.

    Practice saying, “As a white European American woman, my interests revolve around (list of things that are good for us, like a healthy sense of self-respect for our children and their future)” It’s pretty hard to say anything about this without the person saying it self-identifying as an anti-White hater.

  105. Alice Teller's Gravatar Alice Teller
    November 29, 2012 - 7:43 pm | Permalink

    Jews pride themselves on their ability to spot another Jew. I think Seinfeld referred to it as Jewdar. This obviously implies the ability to spot non-Jews. Is than anti-white?

    The brilliant point this article makes is the extent to which our masters play games with what they claim is science. We need more like it. Thanks.

  106. November 29, 2012 - 6:47 pm | Permalink

    @The Goy Chevalier: It says something that the researchers behind this study didn’t include jews and had them answer the same questions and evaluated their ability to spot whites or other jews. One would think that that would also be interesting to know while they are at it doing this study.

  107. Bobby's Gravatar Bobby
    November 29, 2012 - 6:28 pm | Permalink

    @tadzio: I agree with your points. Couldn’t the whole article be stated simply,

    We become more acutely aware of those things we focus on.

    Already those who characterized this focusing, anti-semitism, are simply guessing about motives. It’s long been a kind of hobby of mine, to guess the culture people belong to. My motives as far as I could consciously tell, had nothing to do with hate or making some value judgement.

  108. tadzio's Gravatar tadzio
    November 29, 2012 - 6:18 pm | Permalink

    People of reasonable intelligence whose interest in politics, religion or whatever has led them to recognize that there is a jewish problem should have a higher ability to recognize a jew. They think about it. They master the differences. They have an expertise. Pig farmers can tell you what breed a pig is for the same reason, they are familar with them.

    It is so obvious that studying it is redundant. An anti-semite is one of that subset that knows jews, who has thought about them. The same can be said of philo-semites. Of course the bulk of the population that has never thought about jews can not see the differences. They have no experience thinking about it.

    Study, practice and attention lead to expertise in every other field of human endeavor from carpentry to lawyering. Why would the ability to spot a jew be an exception to this rule? People who have attained an expertise, any expertise, tend to be smarter and more stable than those who have not the self discipline to master anything.

    It would be truly odd if anti-semites were not better able than others to identify the jew in the woodpile.

    Anti-semitism is a result of what is observed. One who has not observed jews, first, second or third hand, has no skill in the matter. The more people see of jews the more most dislike them.

    What these ‘academics are trying to say is that anti-semitism has nothing to do with jewish actions. It is the silly jews-are-always-innocent-victims mantra. The cause of their fuzziness in logic is that that they are desparately trying to not engage reality in order shimmy up the greasey academic pole. They are not serious people. They are bumkissers.

  109. The Goy Chevalier's Gravatar The Goy Chevalier
    November 29, 2012 - 6:16 pm | Permalink

    @kilroy: Well said.

  110. The Goy Chevalier's Gravatar The Goy Chevalier
    November 29, 2012 - 6:09 pm | Permalink
  111. The Goy Chevalier's Gravatar The Goy Chevalier
    November 29, 2012 - 6:00 pm | Permalink

    The most revolting and psychologically frightening aspect of the whole question is that the manipulators of thought and soul have been successful to the point of completely convincing the Goy that doing the wrong thing is actually doing the right thing, and the Goy is totally unconscious of it.

    For example, Israel does not want Palestine to be granted the opportunity to become a non-member observer state because they are afraid that Palestine will attempt to charge Israel (Jews) with years worth of war crimes in international court. The apprehension has issued the verdict. Goyim will fight to the death defending Israel and this position, despite the blatant sickness of this Weltanschauung. The folds apparently cannot be rippled. The Kosher faculty continues to fortify the guilt complex in the West, amazingly to such an extent that the guilt-ridden Goyim enact and support self-genocidal policies at home, while supporting the extermination abroad. Virtually immaculate propaganda techniques.

    The Jews who author “studies” on “interpersonal sensitivity” like the one cited above are the same Jews who will support to death Jewish policies of detaining and exterminating from Israel thousands of Sudanese blacks. But as soon as they make the Western paradigm shift they appear again producing documentaries like “Lincoln” and other such filth. That this is happening beneath our noses is unconscionable, sense it is literally they who should not be able to see past theirs. Is it a coincidence that Pinocchio’s nose grows when he lies?

    Jews are the masters of “interpersonal sensitivity,” make no mistake about it. They will assume the position of Goy’s best friend, smiling schemingly the whole way (of course the sincere but gullible Goy thinks this is a genuine action), directing their course of action either consciously or unconsciously according to Talmudic law.

    But why — or how — especially in light of the above cited study could the situation actually be so depraved? Yes. It is true: The ability to lie, cheat, and steal, while feeling good about doing it has not only been reduced to a science, it’s a religion.

    Obviously, over time the situation will become obvious to the point of social hernia. Of course, life appears to be cyclic in nature.

    Jews are necessarily the best at ethnocentric “spotting.” I would love to see these kinds of studies done in the reverse. In the end the strongest counter-measure will be to turn the beast on itself.

  112. November 29, 2012 - 5:43 pm | Permalink

    there are four ways to spot Jews, and since they are so slippery sometimes you have to use a combination or all these methods simultaneously: 1. physical appearance, mainly, the fact that they have exaggerated, disproportionate and asymmetric facial and body features, doesn’t matter how “white” they are – 2. their names, and this can get tricky because they steal gentile names, but usually they do not take names related to Christianity, although they will do even this on occasion. learning commonly used “fake” names is a good skill to have in identification, as well as knowing hebraic roots words. 3. Context of their job, is it important/influential in society? Does it make a lot of money? 4. ideological background, what are they promoting?

  113. The Goy Chevalier's Gravatar The Goy Chevalier
    November 29, 2012 - 5:19 pm | Permalink

    Easily are they spotted, and internal recognition (or the “sixth sense”), if the faculties have not been too severely corroded, is always at work, whether or not the gullible Goy is conscious of it.

  114. Tom's Gravatar Tom
    November 29, 2012 - 5:05 pm | Permalink

    I ran across a funny story in an 1850’s Methodist Protestant Magazine about a White woman in Virginia who was asked by her slave girl what a Jew looked like? The woman was stumped for a minute, and then she said well you know that peddler so & so who was by here a few weeks ago well he’s a Jew…

    One thing that I’ve noticed is that people who work in industries, or for companies that are heavily Jewish tend to act, and sound like Jews even if they are not ethnic Jews.

  115. starera's Gravatar starera
    November 29, 2012 - 4:52 pm | Permalink

    @wolfhound, yes, the “distinct behavioral patterns and mannerism(s)” are important. In my view to be safe, if it acts like a jew it’s a jew, the names have been camouflaged and race-mixing has hidden the semitic exterior in many. For example here is a picture of our dear S. Andrzejewski (one of the authors) I found;

    I wouldn’t have guessed by looking, but I’d bet she’s a jew.

  116. Gregor's Gravatar Gregor
    November 29, 2012 - 4:31 pm | Permalink

    @Richard Williams: Richard, there’s one BIG problem with your suggestion(s):

    If pro-Whites, White Liberationists, or whatever you want to call them … actually focused on White interests and in a White voice …

    The people here at TOO wouldn’t know what to do with themselves.

  117. November 29, 2012 - 4:01 pm | Permalink

    “…approximately 65–70 percent of America’s highest ability students are non-Jewish whites, well over ten times the Jewish total of under 6 percent.”

  118. November 29, 2012 - 3:41 pm | Permalink
  119. Marcus's Gravatar Marcus
    November 29, 2012 - 3:14 pm | Permalink

    Don’t forget “canard.” Anyway, I find it fairly common for Jewish males to have receding foreheads, coarse wavy or curly “wild” hair (many bald at young ages though), thicker lips, and bigger ears. Good examples: Franz Boas, Elie Wiesel, and Joe Lieberman. Nose is not necessarily bigger but has a “hook” to it. Of course, some Jews have so much European blood that they have no Jewish physical characteristics: a Jewish acquaintance of mine from grade school had very pale skin with strawberry blonde hair and blue eyes.

  120. Richard Williams's Gravatar Richard Williams
    November 29, 2012 - 3:13 pm | Permalink

    Gaydar, jewdar, so what. The critical thing is that the non-Arabic Semite style is to consistently pose their identity, concerns, and issues as the centerpiece to any event or effort.

    Imagine what the diverse white American peoples could do if we placed our identity, concerns, and issues at the center of any given event or effort. That would make us white-centric and able to speak out of our white American voice.

    When we munch on judeo-centricity without noticing that judeo-centricity is their dominant fact of life, we simply place ourselves in a system where we rotate around them, not ourselves. This piece is a perfect example of that…rather than being about ourselves as affected by the above example of the century & 1/2 old Graetz Legacy, we simply adopt their centricity.

    Down with judeo-centricity, up with white-centricity.

  121. Nave Wilson's Gravatar Nave Wilson
    November 29, 2012 - 2:39 pm | Permalink

    Even when i was a liberal, i could tell there was something different about Jews. Deep down i already knew that Jews were a racial group that had certain physical characteristics that distinguished them from whites.

  122. kilroy's Gravatar kilroy
    November 29, 2012 - 1:49 pm | Permalink

    I find these socioengineering science experiments endlessly fascinating, and full of an unintended humour which is well highlighted by this author. Jesus well described pharisaic Judaism as a kind of science of hypocrisy and deception. Once you can spot the game it appears so crude and blatant. We are all standing accused in an an absurd Talmudic court, where we just can’t win and they just can’t loose. Something out of the imagination of Franz Kafka.

  123. Wolfhound14's Gravatar Wolfhound14
    November 29, 2012 - 1:26 pm | Permalink

    It is very easy to spot jews in the crowd no matter how much they have toned down their obviousness. Physical appearance is the best way to spot them, especially when one knows the tell-tale signs to look for: Even with a good name change and plastic surgery they can’t hide all the features which give them away.

    Surnames speak volumes if you can decipher them properly, but as mentioned above, the jews are notorious name changers:

    Jews have distinct behavioral patterns and mannerism and these usually give them away when the other methods fail. Jews usually revert back to their norm when agitated and begin going into spittle filled fits when cornered after they have been caught doing whatever it was they were up to.

    Their choice of words, phrases, quotes, and particular way of illustrating their points also give them away so does the obvious hypocrisy between their rhetoric and how they live their lives, IE their promotion of “diversity”, “tolerance”, “universal brotherhood”, etc, etc, etc.

    I never understood how other people around me couldn’t see them as clearly as I could. They are more different from us than even the common negro.

Comments are closed.