Yes, Virginia, the Jews Stole Christmas

Kevin MacDonald

Editor’s note: Originally posted in 2012, this article gets at the Jewish ethnic angle behind the “War on Christmas.”

A new book, Joshua Eli Plaut’s A Kosher Christmas: ’Tis the Season to Be Jewish, documents what we have known all along: The Jews did indeed subvert Christmas.  This book deserves a full review, but Ethan Schwartz’s summary and comment (“Twas the night after Christmas“) deserve scrutiny. First the summary:

Jews have been the vanguard of an effort to “transform Christmastime into a holiday season belonging to all Americans,” without religious exclusivity.  The most important Jewish mechanisms of secularization are comedy and parody, for laughter undermines religious awe.  Take, for example, Hanukkah Harry from “Saturday Night Live”, who heroically steps in for a bedridden Santa by delivering presents from a cart pulled by donkeys named Moishe, Hershel, and Shlomo.  Remarkably, Hanukkah Harry has emerged as a real Santa-alternative for many American Jews.  Plaut sees such things not as attempts at assimilation but as an intentional subversion of Christmas traditions.  “Through these parodies,” he writes, “Jews could envision not having to be captivated by the allure of ubiquitous Christmas symbols.”  And it isn’t just Jews: for Americans in general, Jewish parody helps ensure that Christmas “not be taken too seriously” and that the celebrations of other traditions “be accorded equal respect and opportunity.”

There seem to be two messages here. One is the message of subversion utilizing ridicule among other methods. The other is that Jews are seen as high-mindedly making Christmas  “into a holiday season belonging to all Americans.” The end result is that Christmas is not “taken too seriously” and the Christian religious aspect central to the traditional holiday is de-emphasized.

People who take their religion seriously do not allow their religion to be ridiculed. One need only think of the Muslim reactions to cartoons ridiculing Mohammed. The fact that Jews have been able to ridicule Christianity without any serious negative consequences is an important marker of Jewish power and an equally strong indication of the decline of Christian religious belief. I suspect that the organized Jewish community would react in outrage if non-Jews ridiculed religious Judaism. Indeed, any criticism of Jews as Jews is off limits in the mainstream media. (A topical short list of verboten topics: the loyalties of neocon Jews and their role in promoting the war in Iraq, the Jewish aspect of the Ivy League admissions scandal, how Jewish control of Hollywood influences media content.)

Advertisement - Time to SUBSCRIBE now!

Schwartz doesn’t quarrel with Plaut’s evidence, but wonders if it’s good for the Jews that such a book be written:

There is something disconcerting about this thesis, summoning up classic anti-Semitic images of conspiracy and sabotage.  Without a trace of irony, Plaut recounts incidents in which fundamentalist Christian groups complained that “certain Americans, particularly Jews, were trying to take the ‘Christ’ out of Christmas.”  He adds that “anti-Semitic comments often ensued.”  Those Christian fundamentalists might well feel vindicated by Plaut’s argument; yet Plaut is unfazed by this connection, and rightly so.  It is not inherently anti-Christian, he recognizes, to oppose Christianity’s domination of a secular democracy.  If Jews have helped to make American society more open, they should be proud of it.

So Jews subverted Christmas but their motives were pure and idealistic. But such an account ignores the Jewish role in conceptualizing America as a proposition nation—a major topic of The Culture of Critique. The Jewish stress on cultural pluralism (which has now morphed into multiculturalism) was an explicit rejection of the ethnocultural strand of American identity, an important part of which was Christianity. (Indeed, until the recent wave of immigration resulting from the 1965 law, Jews constituting 2-3 percent of the population, were the only identifiable American group that was not Christian.) Jews were central to building a wall between religion and the public square which has resulted in the “war on Christmas” that we still see raging. Jews were also central to changing U.S. immigration policy to be open to all the peoples of the world, again with an ideology that America is merely a set of abstract principles and has no ethnic or cultural core; therefore it should be open to all peoples and these peoples should be able to retain their own culture as part of the American mosaic.

I realize that many good people shy away from saying it, but the reality is that Jews have very aggressively pursued policies that benefit them and are opposed to the interests of the traditional people of America and the West. And because Jews attained status as an intellectual and media elite, they have been able to have a very large effect on public policy and even on the attitudes of non-Jews.

Plaut emphasizes the difference between the very aggressive behavior of Eastern European immigrants with their hatred of Christianity contrasted with the German Jews who arrived in the mid-19th century and “embraced the holiday.” It’s an important distinction, at least in the American context. But in any case, Plaut’s description of the motives of the Eastern European as stemming from their hatred of Christianity hardly paints them as idealistic crusaders on behalf of an open society.  It bears repeating once again that Jews react with hostility to the idea that Israel should not have a Jewish ethnocultural core while they have led the campaign against the idea that America and the West have any ethnocultural core. As with their promoting non-White, non-Christian immigration, their advocacy has nothing to do with ideals of moral universalism but everything to do with pursuing what’s good for the Jews, motivated by Jewish hatreds toward the traditional people and cultures of the West. The war on Christmas is thus a central example of the theme of Jews as a hostile elite.

  • Print
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • RSS
  • Add to favorites
  • Reddit
  • Technorati

66 Comments to "Yes, Virginia, the Jews Stole Christmas"

  1. Art's Gravatar Art
    December 25, 2015 - 3:08 pm | Permalink

    Sorry for the typo, due to my spellchecker.

    Of course mitochondria, not mythochondria.


    But this typo does not change anything.

    (Mod Note: I sort of liked “mythochondria”, after all, those memes do travel by “myths”!)

  2. Art's Gravatar Art
    December 23, 2015 - 2:24 am | Permalink

    @Karen T

    “Arthur Koestler did live in Israel from 1926 until 1929…”

    There was no Israel in 1929, Koestler lived in Palestine, but never in the Jewish state, that was created later.

    In any case, he was not a Zionist when he wrote “The Thirteen Tribe”, and he did not invent anything in this book, he just quoted the scientific evidence (Artamonov, Mieses, etc).

    Today Zionists try to prove with genetic “evidence” that their artificial creation (the “Jewish people”, which includes white, black and even Asian Jews with slitted eyes and Mongolian sculls) is a biological entity, and some white activists accept this BS, because they ignore that the Middle Eastern origin of some direct male ancestors of European Jews does not prove a Hebrew origin.

    Here is the map that shows us the spread of the haplogroup “J” (supposed “J”ewish) that can be found in the Y-DNA of some today living males (direct male ancestry).

    The males with this haplogorup had spread as early, as 10 000 years ago, they were neolithic people, and only tiny percentage of the descendants of these neolithic males converted to Judaism.

    As we see, J-haplogroup of the Y-DNA may also confirm the Greek or Roman ancestry, or Arab ancestry, or North African ancestry, or North Caucasian ancestry, but this cannot confirm anything about the religious practice of these males.

    There was a huge conversion of Middle Eastern pagans in the Roman Empire and in the first centuries of AD.

    But even if we assume that till the creation of Israel all Ashkenazi males had direct male Hebrew ancestors, that is not the case with today Jews that migrate to Israel.

    About 70% of Soviet Jews were married to non-Jews, and their mixed descendants can trace their origin to any part of the Eurasian continent.

    So how can some Zionist “scientists” claim that different races of Jews are more related to each others, than to the host population they lived among for more than 1000 years?

    It is obvious that they pre-select the the males for their genetic tests, and that was especially obvious when they started their tests with the Cohanim-Clan, that represents only about 3% of Ashkenazi Jews.

    Jews are a mosaic of many different races and ethnic group, the same is true of Muslims and Christians. And if you take two different mosaics, you can find similar pieces in them, and ignore all other pieces. And that is precisely what dishonest “scientists” do, when they try to confirm the Biblical legends.

    Even the so-called Cohanim-Genes were just a scientific fraud, these genes are not restricted to the Cohanim-Clan, they can be found even in some parts of Black Africa in a higher proportion, than among the Cohanim-Clan.

    Again, in a nutshell: The conversion to Judaism of neolithic males or their circumcision did not change their genes. Middle Easter origin of some male Ashkenazi cannot prove that their direct male Middle Eastern ancestors were monotheists 2000-3000 years ago. Most of Middle Eastern people with J- haplogroups were pagans 2000 years ago or earlier.

  3. Art's Gravatar Art
    December 22, 2015 - 3:52 pm | Permalink

    @FKA Max

    Middle East is a huge area, even about 20% of German males have direct male ancestors with the haplogroups J in their Y-DNA (Middle Eastern Haplogroup).

    They chose “J” for this haplogroup, because they claimed that this is a Jewish haplogroup. But these oriental males moved to today Germany and other parts of Europe 15 000 years ago.

    So hundreds of millions of people in Europe, North Africa or Asia have direct male ancestors that lived in the Middle East, but what has this to do with conversion to Judaism?

    Most oriental people were pagans, how can a direct male ancestor that lived in the Middle East 2 000-15 000 years ago prove the Jewish ancestry?

    And direct male ancestry is only a tiny percentage of the total pool of ancestors.

    A person with a direct oriental male ancestory may look like a black African or like a North European, because we inherit the genome of indirect male ancestors and female ancestors, too.

    You have to check the autosomal and mythochondrial DNA (atDNA and mtDNA) to find out where the bulk of you ancestors lived 2000-15 000 years ago.

    In the case of European Jews it was proven by Eran Elhaik, that the bulk of the ancestors Eastern Ashkenazi lived in South Russia and North Caucasus 2000 -15 000 years ago.

    The Cohanim genes refer only to Y-DNA, a tiny percentage of the total genome, and even some black Africans have direct male ancestors who were believed to be the founding fathers of the Cohanim Clan (only about 3% of Jews belong to this clan), which is ridiculous.

    Genetics can only exclude the possibility of having Hebrew ancestry, if it confirms that the direct ancestors of a person did NOT live in the Middle East 2000 years ago or earlier.

    It is proven that the founding mothers of European Jews lived in Europe 2000 years ago, the direct male ancestors of Levites also lived in Europe 2000 years ago.

    So if all founding mothers of the Jewish communities in Europe were European women, then at least 50% of ancestors of Ashkenazi are not oriental people.

    So again, conversion to any religion does not have any influence on your genes, and a direct male ancestor that lived in the Middle East 2000 years ago or earlier is no prove of Hebrew ancestry.

    In fact, there are more non-Jews than Jews who have such ancestry, and it is more probable that these Middle Eastern ancestors were pagans 2000 years ago or earlier.

    Unfortunately, most people cannot understand that Middle Eastern ancestry is no prove of Jewish or Hebrew ancestry.

    • T. Juana's Gravatar T. Juana
      December 24, 2015 - 9:05 pm | Permalink

      “. . .mythochondrial DNA. . .”

      Satire I presume- very amusing.

      Moderator- where is the ignore button?

      Some research leads to this re “mythochondrial” DNA:

      Anonymous said…
      Have you read Chikhi’s letter in Human Biology 2009 where he appears to coin the term astrologenetics? “Far from the timely and appealing “archaeogenetics” nicely and independently coined by Colin Renfrew and Antonio Amorim, the 1990s saw the development of what I would rather call astrologenetics, with its “mythochondrial” DNA stories. ” see also Box 12.3 in 2nd edition of Human evolutionary genetics. So the attacks on phylogeography both professional and commercial are nothing new! reference is: Chikhi, Lounes. “Update to Chikhi et al.’s ‘Clinal Variation in the Nuclear DNA of Europeans’ (1998): genetic data and storytelling–from archaeogenetics to astrologenetics?” Human Biology 81.5-6 (2009): 639+. Expanded Academic ASAP. Web. 5 Nov. 2013.
      5 November 2013 at 08:42
      Debbie Kennett said…
      Thank you for that very useful reference. I was not previously aware of Chikkhi’s letter. The term “astrologenetics” doesn’t seem to have caught on, and “genetic astrology” now seems to be the favoured phrase. “Genetic astrology” seems to predate astrologenetics by a couple of months. The earliest reference I’ve found dates from September 2009:

      I rather like the very apt term “mythochondrial DNA stories”. We’ve had quite a few of these in the last few years!
      5 November 2013 at 13:13

      “Genetic astrology” ?? And the connexxion to “Mythochondrial?? Humbug

  4. Art's Gravatar Art
    December 20, 2015 - 1:45 pm | Permalink

    @Karen T

    “Disraeli was Jewish.”

    He converted to Christianity, so he was (from the religious point of view) a Christian.
    BTW, all first Christians were (in a vulgar sense) “Jews”, because Christianity originated as an Israelite sect. First Christians prayed in Synagogues.

    Disraeli was a Christian, but he believed in the existence of the “Jewish race”, and other Christian Zionists, like Churchill or Balfour, or the “Christians” in the Bible Belt of the USA, also believe in the existence of the “chosen Jewish race”, and that Christian foolishness gives the Zionists the power to control the Christian societies.

    “Arthur Koestler, a crafty Jew was a communist who became anti-communist under Stalin when communism no longer served Jewish interests.”

    That is not true. Koestler was born in a Jewish family, but he did not care about Judaism and he did not believe in the existence of the “Jewish race” and did not care about “racial Jewish solidarity”. He was, as a young man, a leftist, like his friend George Orwell, but he later rejected (like George Orwell) the leftist ideology. He visited Israel once in his life in 1948, but he never lived in Israel, and he was not a Zionist.

    He recommended the people, who called themselves Jews, to make their choice: become Israelis and live in Israel, or stop calling themselves Jews, and just become normal citizens in the countries they lived.
    I think that this was a good proposal.

    Most people who criticize Arthur Koestler have never read his book “The Thirteen Tribe”, which was written in the seventieth. Koestler did not invent anything, his book is full of quotes, he just popularized the scientific findings of archaeologists, like Artamonov, linguists, like, Mieses, and he quotes many historical documents. He pointed out in his work that prominent Jewish historians agreed that European Jews stem from Slavs and Khazars. That was the dominant opinion of secular Jewish historians before the creation of Israel.

    New evidence from the fields of genetic, archaeology and linguistics and the re-discovered historical works of Russian historians from Tsarist Russia, that were suppressed by Bolsheviks, confirm the evidence that was mentioned in the works of Koestler.
    But abrahamites just cannot accept the scientific evidence, even if they are not believers, because their world-view would collapse, if they had to accept that “chosen people” from their Bible are just a fiction.

    • Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
      December 20, 2015 - 7:22 pm | Permalink

      Let Rabbi Gutman put it straight for you: “Marry a Jewish girl!”

    • Karen T's Gravatar Karen T
      December 21, 2015 - 5:29 am | Permalink

      Until 1858 British MP’s were required to take the oath of allegiance to Christianity and Disraeli entered the House of Commons in 1837 so whether his fathers conversion to Anglicanism was because of an argument with his synagogue, or a sudden love of Christ, or most likely, a means to ensure his sons’ enty into politics, it was a necessary conversion for the future Prime Minister. He writes in Endymion “Semites now exercise a vast influence over affairs by their smallest though most peculiar family the Jews. There is no race gifted with so much tenacity, such skill in organization. These skills have given them an unprecedented hold over property and illimitable credit. As you advance in life and get experiece in affairs, the Jews will cross you everywhere.”
      Arthur Koestler did live in Israel from 1926 until 1929 and was involved with Ze’ev Jabotinskys’ Zionist Revisionist Party. In fairness, he was an intelligent, thoughful man, and a good writer. It was through reading several of his books that I criticize him and label him crafty. To put it as simply as possible, when considering his books, when they were written and their relevance to what was happening in the world at that time, the smell of subtle propaganda wafts across the pages. Two quick examples: Thieves In The Night writen in 1946 pushes the memes of anti-semitic Europeans, evil British, bloodthirsty Arabs, and suffering Jews but cushioned in a nice story. His later books, Ghost In The Machine and Janus push the materialistic/communist meme of man as beast.

    • Karen T's Gravatar Karen T
      December 21, 2015 - 6:02 am | Permalink

      Art, I hope my previous comment clarified my views on Disraeli and Koestler. Irregardless, it’s doubtful that many Jews today still see themselves as the biblical “chosen” but that isn’t preventing them from attempting to destroy white European culture and dominate us. You closed your comment with Koestlers’ recommendation and I agree with you, it’s a good proposal.

    • Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
      December 21, 2015 - 3:50 pm | Permalink
      • FKA Max's Gravatar FKA Max
        December 21, 2015 - 9:07 pm | Permalink

        Genetics Expert Insists 75% of Jews Share Roots in Middle East

        Read more:

        One of his major discoveries through DNA testing in the United States, says Greenspan, was that Ashkenazi Jews bear genetic similarities to Hispanic Catholics living in New Mexico and Colorado. “In fact, there was evidence of Hispanic women in those places coming down with similar types of breast cancer as Ashkenazi Jews,” he says. “What it means to me is that these Hispanics were actually the descendants of Anusim, or forced converts.”

        Genetic studies have been conducted on some Latinos in New Mexico. Michael Hammer, a research professor at the University of Arizona and an expert on Jewish genetics, said that fewer than 1% of non-Semites, but more than four times the entire Jewish population of the world, possessed the male-specific “Cohanim marker” (this is not carried by all Jews, but is prevalent among Jews claiming descent from hereditary priests). Some 30 of 78 Latinos tested in New Mexico (38.5%) were found to carry the Cohanim marker.

        Other Y-DNA testing of Hispanic populations revealed between 10% and 15% of men living in New Mexico, south Texas and northern Mexico have a Y chromosome that can be traced to the Middle East.[25]

      • FKA Max's Gravatar FKA Max
        December 22, 2015 - 12:50 am | Permalink

        Ok, this is getting confusing…
        I did some more research on the Crypto-Jews in New Mexico, Texas, etc., and found the following:

        Our results indicate that paternal genetic inheritance of Spanish-Americans is indistinguishable from that of Iberians and refute the popular and widely publicized scenario of significant crypto-Jewish ancestry of the Spanish-American population.

        Is perhaps this entire story just made up by Jews to make Hispanics sympathize with them or convert to Judaism?

        Have any TOO readers looked into this more deeply?

        Here the LA Times article, that kicked all this off I think. Maybe it is just a PR move to establish a Jewish-Hispanic-Catholic alliance? It is hard to keep up with all the narratives they spin. Stealing identities, traditions, etc.
        DNA Clears the Fog Over Latino Links to Judaism in New Mexico:

        This is just speculation on my part, but I think what this might lead to is a Jewish instigated Hispanic-White civil war and power struggle within the Catholic Church in the USA in the coming decades.

  5. Deep North's Gravatar Deep North
    December 20, 2015 - 12:28 pm | Permalink
  6. Martin's Gravatar Martin
    December 20, 2015 - 11:12 am | Permalink

    A schmule Yule to you all:

  7. Art's Gravatar Art
    December 20, 2015 - 7:42 am | Permalink

    @Kevin MacDonald

    “Elites as used on TOO means simply people who have power; hostile elites are powerful people who are hostile to the traditional White majorities in the USA, Europe, etc”.

    That is a very accurate definition, thank you Dr MacDonald.

    But it is important to answer the question: How could it happen that the native elites in western countries became hostile to their own people?

    Well, the answer is simple: this elites became morally and intellectually decadent, and eventually they were subverted by people that never considered themselves to be a part of people the original elites represented.

    Why could a tiny “out – group” so easily subvert the western societies?

    Well, I think that the reason is the abrahamitic dogma, speak the western version of this dogma, called “Christian Zionism”.

    First Zionists were not Jews, they were Christian Zionists, like Disraeli, Balfour, Churchill etc., and these “Christians” believed in the existence of the special “Jewish race”.

    Disraeli told his fellow Christians, that they had to serve the Jews, because Jehovah punishes people and nations, that do not treat the “God chosen people” according to their special “racial/religious” status, and Churchill & Co believed him.

    Churchill mentioned that in the preface to his article “Judaism vs Bolshevism”, and this superstitious abrahamitic world-view of Christians, like Churchill, played a fatal role in the history of the West.

    Look at all these people who are called by the establishment “wicked Anti-Semites”, almost all of them believed and still believe that Jews are a special ancient race.

    Take for example Henry Ford, he believed that Jews are a special chosen race, and his only issue with the Jews was that they refused to convert to Christianity or to accept, that non-Jews are as valuable to God, as the Jews.

    Or take Alexander Solzhenitsyn, whose “Anti-Semitic” work “Two Hundred Years Together” was never translated into English. In the preface to his work Solzhenitsyn talks about the special role of the “chosen”, about the role of the “Jewish God” in the destiny of Russia, and in his entire work he talks about how the Russian Tsars spend more money on Russian Jews, than on Russian Christians, trying to “convert” Jews into Russian peasants, and he is trying to understand, why God punished Russia, though Russians tried so hard to treat Jews as good, as they could.

    Or take David Duke, he refuses to see the evidence, presented by decent and sane Jews, like Arthur Koestler (a good fiend of George Orwell), Shlomo Sand, Paul Wexler, Eran Elhaik, Ellen Levy-Coffman (Jews – A Mosaic of People), Jits Van Straten (Jewish Demographic “Miracle”). Or take the Korrher Report, the NS knew about mass conversion of European pagans to Judaism, they could not find any adequate definition of the term “Jew”, and they just decided to apply this term to Jews who did not look like Europeans, because they were not bright enough to understand, that the “Jewish race” is just a fiction.

    Many white activists, like David Duke, believe in the bogus Zionist interpretation of genetic evidence, without understanding the scientific language. These activists cannot understand, that they are helping the Zionists with their acceptance of this fraud about “Jewish genes” (is it not evident, that conversion does not change your genetics?).

    Why do people, like David Duke, support the idea of the “Jewish race”?

    Well, the reason is our white European culture, that became subjugated by oriental monotheists, and an alien oriental Desert Cult became part of our culture. If somebody got the name “David”, then he subconsciously believes in the existence of the ancient “King David”, and ignores the archaeological evidence, presented by Finkelstein and Silberman (The Bible Unearthed).

    So what is the solution?

    Well, we should stick to our pre-abrahamitic Nordic/Germanic traditions, like decorating the fir tree or painting eggs on Easter.

    Oriental monotheists, called Christians, tried to eradicate our native European traditions, they killed and persecuted our pagan ancestors, but they failed, and they just renamed our ancient pagan holidays.

    And Jews will not manage the destroy the original meaning of our holidays, too.

    So why should we participate in the religious conflict of different fractions of different followers of an alien Desert Cult?

    Why give the Jews, who are just descendants of Khazars, Slavs and Berbers, who converted to Judaism in the first centuries AD, the feeling that they are a special “chosen race”, mentioned in the legends of oriental monotheists?

    Does that make sense?

    Cui bono?

    That behaviour only fulfils the oriental prophecies.
    If somebody believes in something that is not real, he eventually helps, to his own disadvantage, to make something real with his irrational behaviour, even if he does not have any intention to do this.

    • Karen T's Gravatar Karen T
      December 20, 2015 - 12:18 pm | Permalink

      Disraeli was Jewish. Arthur Balfour was a notoriously weak man, resigning as Prime Minister in 1905 because of public anger over the Boer War, and again as Leader of the Opposition in 1911. He then resigned his position as Foreign Secretary two years after signing the Balfour Declaration and died penniless having sqandered his huge inheritance. He famously said “Nothing matters very much and few things matter at all.” Winston Churchill was an alcoholic and suffered from severe clinical depression. Arthur Koestler, a crafty Jew was a communist who became anti-communist under Stalin when communism no longer served Jewish interests. So he moved to Israel and became a Zionist. He was purportedly a serial rapist. Great gang of guys.

    • December 21, 2015 - 11:32 pm | Permalink

      “They were not bright enough to understand, that the “Jewish race” is just a fiction.”

      If this is the case, then how does one explain a race specific disease like Tay Sachs disease?

      As sickle cell anemia is largely confined to the Negro, Tay Sachs disease is largely confined to Jews, specifically the Ashkenazim. While there are some peculiar exceptions in both cases, these diseases are typically associated with a specific group of people identified by race.

      “Since carrier testing for Tay–Sachs began in 1971, millions of Ashkenazi Jews have been screened as carriers. Jewish communities embraced the cause of genetic screening from the 1970s on. The success with Tay–Sachs disease has led Israel to become the first country that offers free genetic screening and counseling for all couples and opened discussions about the proper scope of genetic testing for other disorders in Israel.”
      And wouldn’t you know it, while Jews foster and promote imbecility among their white hosts, they are busy practicing eugenics.

      “Mate selection – In Orthodox Jewish circles, the organization Dor Yeshorim carries out an anonymous screening program so that couples with Tay–Sachs or another genetic disorder can avoid conception.”

      As for the Jew’s own ideas on the subject, they switch between the arguments of their being a race or religion as the need arises.

  8. December 20, 2015 - 2:54 am | Permalink

    It was Jews using their ACLU front that got the Nativity Scene banned from being displayed on public property, yet they claim the menorah is not a religious symbol and therefore you will display it in place of the manger scene.

  9. December 19, 2015 - 1:59 pm | Permalink

    Jews have been the vanguard of an effort to “transform Christmastime into a holiday season belonging to all Americans,”

    Funny thing, that thought

    By all appearances, Jews have actually been the vanguard of an effort to transform Christmastime into a holiday season belonging only to Jews!

  10. Michael Adkins's Gravatar Michael Adkins
    December 19, 2015 - 1:52 pm | Permalink

    Karen T,

    What a breath of fresh air.

  11. Nick Dean's Gravatar Nick Dean
    December 19, 2015 - 5:27 am | Permalink

    I invite the author to reflect on why he calls Jew-installed taboos, ‘verboten’.

    In just one week I’ve heard or read three pro-White, antisemites use the term, Kmac, (and I think the others were…) Kyle Hunt and Tanstaafl.

    The conditioning runs THAT deep.

  12. Dave Bowman's Gravatar Dave Bowman
    December 19, 2015 - 3:12 am | Permalink

    Roy Albrecht – It’s only a very small point, but since you raised it – again – I felt I should perhaps offer a few words to try to help. It seems to me that the phrase “Jewish elite” which is often used here at TOO refers WHOLLY and SOLELY to their current position of established, accepted political and cultural power here in the western White world – and carries absolutely no moral, ethical or, God forbid, religious connotations whatever. It is simply a useful shorthand for the struggle we have against those who currently control the prevailing narrative, and I am sorry that you find it so hard to bear.

  13. Karen T's Gravatar Karen T
    December 18, 2015 - 12:47 pm | Permalink

    One needn’t be a Christian to celebrate Christmas, there are no references in the bible to Christmas.The Puritan parliament under Cromwell banned Christmas as a pagan festival, the same Cromwell who brought the jews back into England in 1655 at the end of the war between the Netherlands and England (considering that wealthy jews were in control of Amsterdam this is no coincidence). The 350 years prior to their return was known as Merry Olde England, never again to be merry. Christmas was also banned in Puritan New England for 25 years.
    Christmas was originally a mid-winter festival celebrating the harvest and the winter solstice, the start of lengthening days and more Light. Santa Claus descended from Father Christmas who originated in the Pagan belief in mid-winter sky spirits. Merry Christmas.

    • Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
      December 19, 2015 - 4:58 pm | Permalink

      “Merry Olde England” was completely unknown to me. Thank you for acquainting me with the term.

    • T. Juana's Gravatar T. Juana
      December 19, 2015 - 5:24 pm | Permalink

      Amazingly enough, Mr. Freberg is not a jew.

  14. December 18, 2015 - 10:13 am | Permalink

    Damian Thompson is a Roman Catholic who used to work for the London Daily Telegraph. In 2010, he blogged on ‘Jewish hostility to Christians: the prejudice no one ever writes about’. One of his paragraphs reads:

    ‘Jewish hostility towards Christians isn’t confined to the ultra-Orthodox. A woman friend of mine tutored the daughter of a Jewish couple in north London. When she said she wanted to take a break for Christmas, the wife went bananas. “We do not allow that word to be spoken in this house,” she said. An unrepresentative incident, no doubt; but my friend’s attitude towards Judaism changed after it took place. And I could tell other stories, of unbelievable haughtiness by the leaders of Anglo-Jewry, which would have led to diplomatic incidents if the Christians involved weren’t afraid of being accused of anti-Semitism.’

    • Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
      December 19, 2015 - 11:13 am | Permalink

      Thank you for this comment.

      I opened the linked article with some interest because at no time in the past fifteen years have I ever seen Damian Thompson forthrightly defend the Catholic faith or even call out its plain-as-day enemies for what they are. In other words, I think of him as a wimp at best, an utter sellout to the rulers of Journalism World at worst.

      The article as a whole doesn’t alter my view of him by a micrometer. The very tame criticism present in the excerpt above, alas, is in the larger context hedged about by so many qualifiers and so much subservience to Jews and their soi-disant victimhood that it reads like an attachment to a memo requesting a raise and a promotion. His broad swipes at people with more gumption and principle than he possesses demonstrate that he is no stranger to truckling.

      • December 19, 2015 - 3:05 pm | Permalink

        It isn’t often you read any criticism of Jews, however mild, in the British press, so I think Thompson went as far as he dared. I couldn’t judge his defence of Catholicism but I do know he has an abiding hatred of polyester chasubles, which is surely a point in his favour.

        • Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
          December 19, 2015 - 5:17 pm | Permalink

          He could have spared us his sanctimonious criticism of Bishop Williamson, upholder of the truth in the age of lies. Offering up a bigger anti-Semite is a loser’s bargain, in any case.

        • Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
          December 19, 2015 - 6:40 pm | Permalink

          Yes, your points are fair ones. But as I see it, his familiar focus on liturgical niceties—vulgar vestments and the like—which is characteristic of a great many upmarket Catholics, serves primarily to shift readers’ attention from essentials to furbelows.

          I certainly appreciate his criticism, however careful, of the scornful aspect of typical Jewish conduct, but what I think is far from clear is whether the accompanying (and far sharper) criticism of other non-Jews is a price worth paying.

          I do not, of course, discount the possibility that those who don’t share my particular religious perspective, which has soured me completely on Thompson, see him as more of an asset than I do. For me, he represents yet another safety valve designed to take legitimate anger about Jews and their dirty dealings and vent them harmlessly into the atmosphere.

          Merry Christmas to you, Johnny.

      • December 20, 2015 - 2:36 am | Permalink

        Thompson certainly had a fondness for extravagant ritual, and a particular love of towering mitres. He once posted a photograph of what must have been the world record mitre, at Brompton Oratory. A Merry Christmas to you, too, and to all at TOO.

    • December 19, 2015 - 10:25 pm | Permalink

      How about this one –

      Oh the unbelievable effrontery, the unmitigated gall, of those Christian anti-Semites! Imagine trying to prevent Jews from performing their Talmudic religious duties!

      By the way, “chutzpah” is an interesting word whose meaning goes far beyond the similar Anglo concept. Anglos have the “nerve” or “unmitigated gall” to tell small, baldfaced lies. Only Jews have the “chutzpah” to lie on the scale of the mythical Holocaust.

  15. Art's Gravatar Art
    December 18, 2015 - 8:51 am | Permalink

    Jews are not the reason, they are rather the consequence of the moral and intellectual degradation of the western elite.

    • Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
      December 18, 2015 - 2:47 pm | Permalink

      The moral and intellectual degradation of the Western elite was a result of prolonged Jewish activism. Co-option and punishment the methods and the State as the primary vehicle for centralizing power that it be easily commandeered. Happy Christmas!

      • Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
        December 20, 2015 - 12:41 pm | Permalink

        @Trenchant: Seconded, down to the last grapheme.

        May I suggest that Art’s formula might look truer to life were it amended as follows: Jews are the primary motive force behind the moral and intellectual degradation of the Western elite. Jewish power is that degradation’s consequence.

        Happy Christmas to you, my friend, and to all our fellow beneficiaries of Kevin MacDonald’s intellectual and moral generosity—by all means including those with whom I occasionally spar.

        • Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
          December 20, 2015 - 2:18 pm | Permalink

          Happy Christmas to you, too, Pierre, and thanks for making this virtual community less so.

    • Sgt. Pepper's Gravatar Sgt. Pepper
      December 18, 2015 - 11:56 pm | Permalink

      Jews are not the reason, they are rather the consequence of the moral and intellectual degradation of the western elite.

      Art, you have a great sense of humor! I love it!

    • December 20, 2015 - 9:47 am | Permalink

      “Jews are not the reason, they are rather the consequence of the moral and intellectual degradation of the western elite.”

      Are non-Jews then to be held responsible for the giant Menorah Jews erect in front of the white house as a demonstrable show of power and influence?

      “The moral and intellectual degradation of the Western elite was a result of prolonged Jewish activism.”

      Absent the Jew, the moral, intellectual, economic, legal, religious and overall cultural degradation will shrink to insignificance, if not disappear altogether. National Socialist Germany, early America, and 300 years of pre-Cromwell English history are proof of this.

      Adolf Hitler summed it up perfectly when he wrote:

      “Was there any form of filth or profligacy, particularly in cultural life, without at least one Jew involved in it? If you cut even cautiously into such an abscess, you found, like a maggot in a rotting body, often dazzled by the sudden light – a kike!” – Mein Kampf

      “I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.” – Mein Kampf

      Amen to that brother. There is only one true “Jihad – The one that will rid the world of the Jew.

      An especially Merry Christmas to all Christians in recognition of the antidote that Christianity once represented to poisonous, Talmudic Judaism.

  16. Passer by's Gravatar Passer by
    December 18, 2015 - 8:42 am | Permalink

    I do not agree with ridiculing Christmas, but some christians/christian institutions deserve to be ridiculed.

    “Vatican says Catholics should not try to convert Jews, should fight anti-semitism”

    • FKA Max's Gravatar FKA Max
      December 18, 2015 - 12:35 pm | Permalink

      Passer by,

      a TOO commenter shared another very important article on this recently:

      December 14, 2015 – 3:41 pm | Permalink

      “You have hit on an advantage of the Roman Catholic Church vis-à-vis Protestantism and, at the moment, Islam: its hierarchy. The Church is headed by a pope; bulls and encyclicals have the force of law. Once a law is promulgated, of course, it can take time for hearts to follow. But that is, in effect, what has happened.”

      An interesting comment by BHL.

      This is a very touchy subject here on TOO, so I have tried to refrain from commenting on this topic too much, which I used to do, when I first started participating in the comment discussions on TOO, but I think it is extremely important to remember that the United States of America is still, barely though, a majority Protestant nation and was founded and historically inhabited by mostly White Anglo-Saxon Protestants , so this Jewish-Vatican alliance is highly significant in my opinion on many levels, especially considering that the majority of legal and illegal Third World immigrants coming through the southern border, are of a certain Christian persuasion, and some of them are even bringers and preachers of ”Liberation Theology”:

      Detractors have called it Christianized Marxism.[3]

      More or less at the same time as the initial publications of Latin American Liberation Theology we also find voices of Black Liberation Theology and Feminist Liberation Theology as well.[20]

      Decentralization of power and a separation of powers is one of the best ways to prevent a Jewish takeover of institutions, movements, nations, etc. At the same time decentralization of power can and often does lead to compartmentalization and fragmentation, which is also problematic.

      We cannot let Jews steal the traditional United States of America, too. The traditional United States is the last bulwark against a global Jewish takeover. They know that, but most White European Americans are not aware of it, and that is why TOO is so important in my humble and grateful opinion.

      What gives me great hope and joy , is that Christians like Franklin Graham, are supporting Donald Trump:

      • Sgt. Pepper's Gravatar Sgt. Pepper
        December 19, 2015 - 12:34 am | Permalink

        We cannot let Jews steal the traditional United States of America, too. The traditional United States is the last bulwark against a global Jewish takeover.

        We need to take control of our institutions (media, universities etc.) away from the Jews.
        How exactly is protestantism going to help us do this?

        What do you have in mind? Are you thinking of some kind of “christian uprising” against the Jews?

        • FKA Max's Gravatar FKA Max
          December 19, 2015 - 3:15 pm | Permalink

          Sgt. Pepper,

          the biggest advantage Protestantism has on a purely practical and tactical basis, as I pointed out above, is its decentralized character, which makes it harder to infiltrate and co-opt for Jews. And again, here it is extremely important to distinguish, between Protestants and Catholics, and not let pundits, commentators, etc. just generalize with the term ”Christian” or ”Christan Nation”, etc. Just saying Christian, and making no distinction between Catholics (55% of all Hispanic and Latino Americans are Catholic, in 2010 it was even 67%) and Protestants (22% of all Hispanic and Latino Americans are Protestant) is like declaring Jews as Whites, in my opinion. When we speak of Catholics in the American context, we are actually speaking of a group that is turning even faster into a non-White denomination/group than any other:

          Between 1990 and 2008, there were 11 million additional Catholics. The growth in the Latino population accounted for 9 million of these. They comprised 32% of all American Catholics in 2008 as opposed to 20% in 1990.[37] The percentage of Hispanics who identified as Catholic dropped from 67% in 2010 to 55% in 2013.[38] .


          Racial and ethnic minorities now make up 41% of Catholics (up from 35% in 2007), 24% of evangelical Protestants (up from 19%) and 14% of mainline Protestants (up from 9%).

          The main trend for Whites is actually to become religiously unaffiliated, while African Americans remain overwhelmingly Protestant, which puts non-Whites (including blacks) at 31% of the total Protestant population in the USA:

          Making no distinction, between the two main Christian denominations, creates a whole host of problems, as we know from Ivy League admissions when Jews become White, or from crime statistics when Hispanics become White, etc. I actually wonder how many non-Jewish Whites in the Ivy League are Protestant, and how many are Catholics? I see the possibility of a Protestant uprising against the Jews in America, but not a Catholic uprising against the Jews, for all the reasons discussed and stated above, most specifically the Catholic Church’s hierarchy and its centralization of power and its increasingly non-White flock, and how the Vatican hierarchy has become ever more closely intertwined with the Jewish power structure. Especially in New York City. The main culprit, who intensified the Jewish-Vatican collaboration there being Cardinal Spellman: and
          We won’t see another Father Coughlin phenomenon I think. Even the Protestant resistance will be an implicit uprising against the Jewish power structure in my opinion.
          A Protestant uprising is a possibility, but it would be/will be a takeover by White Protestants of the political process and the important institutions of the United States, not a Jewish witch hunt or a Christian civil war between Catholics and Protestants, or a race war between Whites and non-Whites.
          The chances, as things stand right now, of the USA to have a White Protestant president in 2017 are extremely high. Of course I would much prefer Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton, but at least there will most likely be a non-Jewish White person in the White House again, unless Jew Bernie Sanders, or Hispanics Cruz and Rubio or Catholic Jeb Bush somehow get the nominations.
          I always cite the example of the Supreme Court, no Protestants on the Court (6 Catholics and 3 Jews are currently on it, and those two groups make up only about 25% of the American population), in a still majority Protestant nation, as the main evidence of the current power of the Jewish-Vatican alliance. Besides the discrimination against non-Jewish Whites at the Ivy League, etc., we also need to point out the discrimination against Protestants in the halls of power, and always point to the fact, that the United States besides being a traditionally White European nation, is also a traditionally Protestant nation, and not just a traditionally ”Christian” nation, because this opens up the possibility of Vatican infiltration, just as declaring Jews as Whites, invites and facilitates Jewish infiltration. The devil truly is in the details here, and every White American Protestant should have the right to keep living in a Protestant nation, and not in a Jewish or Vatican controlled nation. I have been to several Catholic countries and worked in a Catholic institution for over one year during my mandatory civil service in Germany, dated Catholic women, etc., and there just is culturally a big difference between Catholics and Protestants. Even in my home country Germany, where most every Christian is White, the difference between the Catholic South and the Protestant North is huge, and the influence of the Vatican in Bavaria, or cities like Cologne, etc. is palpable. Franklin Graham speaks about this Protestant political takeover in these following videos, but he does not use the term Protestant explicitly, he just speaks about and refers to biblical principles. I think implying, that the Bible is the main authority, and not the Pope or the Mother Church in Rome, etc.:
          Rev. Franklin Graham: ‘Our nation is in trouble’
          Video Link:
          Published on Dec 14, 2015

          On ‘Hannity,’ reverend weighs in on 2016, refugee crisis
          Watch Sean Hannity talk about Elections, Presidential Primaries, and Republicans on Hannity.

          This CNN Catholic anchor is just infuriating to me, but Franklin Graham is doing a good job refuting and debating her:
          Rev. Franklin Graham: Only ‘biblical principles’ can fix the U.S. government
          Video Link:
          Published on Dec 15, 2015

          via CNN

          I also agree with Edmund Burke on his assessment of Protestantism and its origins and strengths:

          … the people of the colonies are descendants of Englishmen…. They are therefore not only devoted to liberty, but to liberty according to English ideas and on English principles. The people are Protestants… a persuasion not only favourable to liberty, but built upon it…. My hold of the colonies is in the close affection which grows from common names, from kindred blood, from similar privileges, and equal protection. These are ties which, though light as air, are as strong as links of iron.

          Protestantism is founded on the principles and the experience of speaking truth to power (Luther vs. the Vatican), especially to unjust or decadent power and elites, whereas Catholicism is an ideology and system created to maintain power for a small and privileged class (Roman Empire/Vatican).

          This is a highly delicate topic as said before, and I have been trying to refrain from discussing it, in order not to offend anybody, or create dissonance in the TOO comments, etc., but we are in such dire and important times, that we can neither be politically nor religiously correct in my opinion. And Protestantism is the better and logical tool and weapon in this fight for the traditional heart and soul of White European America in my humble opinion.

          As I said before, I grew up non-religious, but I am not an atheist. I consider myself to be a theistic rationalist, like some of the Founding Fathers were, and Protestantism (excluding Christian Zionism) is the closest ideology currently available on the planet and in America, that is practiced by large numbers of White Europeans, to this theistic rationalism. We need to work with what we have, and Protestantism is the best tool and weapon in our arsenal in my opinion, even though it is far from perfect:

          Theistic rationalism is a hybrid of natural religion, Christianity, and rationalism, in which rationalism is the predominant element.[1] According to Henry Clarence Thiessen, the concept of theistic rationalism first developed during the eighteenth century as a form of English and German Deism.[2] The term “theistic rationalism” occurs as early as 1856, in the English translation of a German work on recent religious history.[3] Some scholars have argued that the term properly describes the beliefs of some of the prominent Founding Fathers of the United States, including George Washington, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, James Wilson, and Thomas Jefferson.[4][5]

      • T. Juana's Gravatar T. Juana
        December 19, 2015 - 6:25 pm | Permalink

        The industrial revolution was Protestant due to higher smarts of protestants:

        Protestant means protesting against authority. Smart Whites only are strong enough to do this. Power seeking groups [the other two] want subjects who are EZ to control- that is, neither very bright nor rebellious.

        The war should be smart Whites, of any background, battling against all others.

        This site documents the intelligence differences between Protestant and Catholic:

        • T. Juana's Gravatar T. Juana
          December 20, 2015 - 10:27 am | Permalink

          Jesuits were established to block the Reformation. It seems to me that jewry and Catholicism are trying to make evolution go backwards, lest they LOSE CONTROL.

          The current [and past] Governor of once glorious California is Jesuit Jerry Brown.

          I have a spreadsheet with various population fractions for each state, such as % jewish, % Catholic and so on. I am going to run a correlation on these last two data sets.

        • Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
          December 20, 2015 - 2:14 pm | Permalink

          Your link is missing an autographed portrait of Cotton and Increase Mather waving at the camera. Pity.

          This stuff really marches in lockstep with Max and his gospel according to Wikipedia.

          Every time I read something, like this linked article, that either focuses or touches on how benighted Catholic students are compared with Protestant ones, I can’t help recalling that the public school system here in the United States was the creation of Protestant geniuses whose hatred of Catholicism was so deep-seated that they decided to “reform” education by transforming it into government-regulated and -controlled indoctrination. Nowadays, however, many descendants of these Protestant geniuses, on both coasts and everywhere in between, petition Catholic schools to educate their children so that they aren’t swallowed up by Horace Mann’s incredible propaganda machine—and they do so despite the undeniable decay at virtually every schooling level and every educational locus in the USA, by all means including Catholic ones (even if they are, as often, only nominally Catholic).

          As for the Jesuits, the prime motivator for the bulk of the hatred regularly directed at them is the plain fact that they started off gloriously. They preached the actual Gospel with unprecedented success in the face of pagan savagery and fought the molecular-level fragmentation of society that the “Reformation” and its various smug, self-appointed popes produced. Then in the early twentieth century, many of them succumbed to the very Judeo-Masonic self-absorption and Luciferian vanity that they had spent much of the last half of the nineteenth century warning others against. Now, tragically, it almost seems as if they are trying to live up to the very letter of the centuries-old hyperbolic caricature that your link and Max’s endless comments have bought into.

          All that being said, however, blaming Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown on the Jesuits is about as reasonable as blaming Barry Soetoro-Obama on Andrew Jackson.

      • December 20, 2015 - 11:52 am | Permalink

        As Mormonism is nothing more than a peculiar form gentile Judaism, the church was, and is, nothing more than Judaism redesigned for former Temple Jews and non-Jews. The basic structure and principals of early Christianity are merely modifications of the first century’s “second” Temple, sacrificial system.

        Early Jewish Christians intended Jesus to become the new YHVH/High priest “in the flesh” so to speak (

        Temple Judaism, like early Christianity, was a “secret religion”, meaning it was written maintained and interpreted by an elite religious structure that closely guarded its true meaning for the elite who maintained it.

        Like the Temple scrolls, early Bibles were closely guarded possessions of religious leaders. Like Temple Judaism, the principles of Christianity were couched in an esoteric language that had to be translated by religious leaders before it could be understood by the followers.

        The idea was to elevate these teaching to mystical level to impress the followers. Like later Churches, the Temple itself was a huge, imposing structure designed to inspire awe and subservience to its ignorant followers. Like the later Christian church, the Temple required constant tithing and sacrifice by its followers, ten percent was the minimal standard as it still is today among Mormons.

        Essentially, early Jewish Christians simply stole the Temple’s religious thunder, redesigning the sacrificial system and it’s god with the intention of meeting their own personal desires for power and wealth.

        Before known history, mystics have maintained man’s true place is to serve the design by serving others and devotion to the welfare of the planet. Jesus reflects this very idea in his two commandments (that supersede all other commandments), i.e. Love God as no other and love thy neighbor as thyself.

        In contrast, Judaism and its derivatives are all about power and wealth. These religions, antithetical to original esoteric teachings, are all about serving a privileged elite at the expense of the design and one’s neighbor.

        The process of enlightenment develops servitude to the divine creation and others. Judaism and its derivatives, develops servitude to a powerful elite while serving oneself – It’s all about greed and selfish desire; it’s all about me! Me! ME!

        This is why mystics say religion “is a good start”, as it alerts man to a higher purpose, but religion must be transcended if one is to follow the path of enlightenment.

        ~ Merry Christmas ~

    • Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
      December 18, 2015 - 5:00 pm | Permalink

      Oremus et pro Perfidis Judaeis.

    • Nick Dean's Gravatar Nick Dean
      December 19, 2015 - 5:39 am | Permalink

      The Vatican tried to push this ‘Jews need not be converted’ line before, back in the 90s I believe. It has a name that escapes me …

      Catholic rank and file rejected the idea then for the obvious reason that such a claim means their Christ need never have appeared in the first place and Christianity in toto is unnecessary.

      It’ll be interesting to see how the new ploy to destroy utterly Western Christianity fares.

      • Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
        December 21, 2015 - 12:50 pm | Permalink

        It has a name that escapes me …

        Perhaps you’re thinking of “antisupersessionist,” a term that I used to see regularly twenty-plus years ago in the writings of what I then called the dialogue hustlers (e.g., Eugene Fisher, Celia Deutsch, the long-deceased Cardinal Koenig). The term is still widely used by the Tribe’s brown-nosers, albeit without its “anti-” prefix, to characterize any dreadful, dreadful Christians who think that Christ’s appearance on earth rendered Judaism a dead letter forever after. (I should add that back in the eighties and nineties, my work obliged me to read a lot of this stuff. Doing so would hardly have been my own preference.)

        My impression, both then and now, is that whether the “Catholic rank and file” reject or embrace this un-Christian and self-destructive outlook matters hardly at all. The sort of person who makes a living as a Christian saboteur or sellout has no intention of allowing mere principle or public opinion to interfere with his or her racket! What’s more, with the presence in the chair of Peter of a man whose absence of belief in Christian dogma would make the merely voluptuary popes of the Renaissance stagger in horror, the antisupersessionists have found a true friend and ally.

        In addition, I quite agree with what Rosa wrote (12/19 – 2:23 pm). Unfortunately, neither the media nor most ordinary Catholics (i.e., what we Traditionalists usually call conciliar Catholics) pay any attention to the niceties of authority, let alone doctrinal soundness, where the incoherent flailings of Pope Bergoglio are concerned. The media are being fed what they eat, and the conciliar Catholics, being the products of a half-century of either false or nonexistent catechesis, simply don’t care one way or the other. Put otherwise, it is true that orthodox doctrine is unaffected, but the Remnant for whom orthodoxy and doctrine matter is vanishingly small. I trust it won’t be ever thus, but I shall be long dead before the turnabout begins.

        Merry Christmas!

    • Rosa's Gravatar Rosa
      December 19, 2015 - 2:23 pm | Permalink

      It is a document of a Joint Judeo- Catholic Commission. It is not an official Catholic document, such as Enciclicae, Bullaw, Motus poprii, et even less a dogma. It is not Magisterium, neither ordinal nor extraordinal. So, as a Catholic, I am not at all bound to read it, respect it anf follow it. “Oremus et pro perfidia Judaeis”.

  17. royalbrecht's Gravatar royalbrecht
    December 18, 2015 - 5:50 am | Permalink

    “… And because Jews attained status as an intellectual and media elite, they have been able to have a very large effect on public policy and even on the attitudes of non-Jews.”

    As someone who views “elitism” from a Moral or Spiritual perspective, it irks me to see “our” so called “leaders” maintaining the Jew-deconstructed false-paradigm, framing the “cunning and usurping Jews” as an “elite”…, “hostile” as they may be…

    More aptly, I would tend to call them something like a “…hostile deplete…” rather than a “hostile elite”.

    Matthew 16:26
    “For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?”

    Knowing full well that many WNists are quite secular and even atheistic to a certain degree, it may be inappropriate to use quotes from the Bible, especially since many of these secular Whites view the Bible as part of the problem and not the solution.

    However, if the false paradigm of naming the Filthy Jew as an elite.., hostile as it may be…, will not be broken, then we may as well start calling Whites, who have sacrificed their material well being and status…, if not their lives…, within the “Filthy Jewish Usurped False-Paradigm” the “well meaning Low-Lifes”.

    How anyone can actually attach the word “elite” to a Jew is beyond comprehension.

    • T. Juana's Gravatar T. Juana
      December 18, 2015 - 11:58 am | Permalink

      More language corruption. Today elite means best scammers.

      . . .crème de la crème has been replaced with crème de la scheme. . .

      • T. Juana's Gravatar T. Juana
        December 18, 2015 - 9:34 pm | Permalink

        The current veneration of equality is, indeed, a very recent notion in the history of human thought. Among philosophers or prominent thinkers the idea scarcely existed before the mid-eighteenth century; if mentioned, it was only as the object of horror or ridicule.2 The profoundly anti-human and violently coercive nature of egalitarianism was made clear in the influential classical myth of Procrustes, who “forced passing travelers to lie down on a bed, and if they were too long for the bed he lopped off those parts of their bodies which protruded, while racking out the legs of the ones who were too short. This was why he was given the name of Procrustes [The Racker].”3

        One of the rare modern philosophers critical of equality made the point that “we can ask whether one man is as tall as another, or we may, like Procrustes, seek to establish equality among all men in this respect.”4 But our fundamental answer to the question whether equality exists in the real world must be clearly that it does not, and any quest “to establish equality” can only result in the grotesque consequences of any Procrustean effort. How, then, can we not regard Procrustes’s egalitarian “ideal” as anything but monstrous and unnatural? The next logical question is why Procrustes chooses to pursue such a clearly anti-human goal, and one that can only lead to catastrophic results?

        Egalitarianism and the Elites [M. Rothbard, jew]

        Long, and worth the time to read.

    • Bobby's Gravatar Bobby
      December 18, 2015 - 3:03 pm | Permalink

      Couldn’t agree more. Great point. Whites, as I keep saying, let themselves off way too easily. ….peace and Merry Christmas.

  18. FKA Max's Gravatar FKA Max
    December 17, 2015 - 4:49 pm | Permalink

    A perfect example of this is the new Seth Rogen movie ”The Night Before”:
    Here the Trailer:

  19. john7's Gravatar john7
    December 17, 2015 - 4:45 pm | Permalink

    Read Rudyard Kiplings ‘When the Saxon Begins to Hate’. Right wrong or indifferent, white folk tend to tolerate a lot of crap. Couple that with the brainwashing of most Christians by ‘theologians’ who are merely judaisers and you have our current situation ; its not so much the loss of numbers of Christians in the country as it is the loss of true Christianity being replaced by this oxymoronic ‘judeoChristianity’.
    The time is coming, as it has numerous other times throughout history, where the good people of this nation will finally figure out not only what has happened to them , but who is responsible for it. Then we will see another jewish expulsion like many [memory says something like 180 or so] times before.
    Pray that it comes quickly.

    • royalbrecht's Gravatar royalbrecht
      December 18, 2015 - 6:21 am | Permalink

      Jesus warned we will be hated for His sake. Because those who reject Him hate Him, they will hate His followers as well (John 15:18).

      “Next, those cultural facts explain the immediate literary context, which shows division among family members. The context must be quoted in full to explain the meaning of “sword” in Matthew 10:34 (bold print):

      32 “Whoever acknowledges me before men, I will also acknowledge him before my Father in heaven. 33 But whoever disowns me before men, I will disown him before my Father in heaven. 34 Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth, but a sword. 35 For I have come to turn

      a man against his father,
      a daughter against her mother,
      a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law—
      36 a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household [Micah 7:6]
      37 Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and anyone who does not take up his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. 39 Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.”

      The above said, I still view anger or a certain degree of hate )…which gives rise to anger) as a legitimate path towards White Racial Awakening. Anger has a way of “snapping one out of one’s Thieving Jew-induced delusional hypnotic paradigm”.

      The danger is, not the anger itself, but at whom it is directed and, in the case of false direction…, that the victims of Jewish deceptions end up being the recipients of yet more death and destruction as a result of misplaced anger or hate, when in fact it should be the filthy Jew who receives this righteous wrath.

  20. Karen T's Gravatar Karen T
    December 17, 2015 - 4:08 pm | Permalink
    • Christine's Gravatar Christine
      December 18, 2015 - 4:19 am | Permalink

      Thanks, Karen.

    • Barkingmad's Gravatar Barkingmad
      December 18, 2015 - 12:25 pm | Permalink

      I went to youtube to listen to this. Here is one of the comments:

      imagine being a british soldier hearing this drift across no mans land in 1914, then joining in

      • Karen T's Gravatar Karen T
        December 18, 2015 - 1:05 pm | Permalink

        Looking at these beautiful men I think “their mothers must be so proud.”

Comments are closed.