The Jewish War on White Australia: The Anti-Defamation Commission and “Click Against Hate,” Part 4 of 4

Brenton Sanderson


Go to Part 1
Go to Part 2
Go to Part 3

EXCERPT 6: “Six million Jewish people”  

Brett Kaye: Right, who’s this guy I googled over here? This one.

Child: Is that supposed to be Osama bin Laden?

Brett Kaye: That’s a Jew. I typed in Jew and that’s what came up first. Now that was taken from, just to let you know, this was taken from a newspaper from Germany in the 1930s called Der Stürmer, that was the name of the newspaper, the voice, and what was happening in Germany in the 1930s? My history buffs in the room. Yes?

Child: Um they were killing Jews?

Brett Kaye: Not yet. They were almost killing Jews. Like who was rising to power? What was their name?

Children: Hitler

Brett Kaye: Between 1933 and 1939 Hitler rose to power …; in 1933 he became the Chancellor, in 1939 World War Two started [claps hands]. So during that time Hitler went on a campaign against Jews, against gypsies, against gay people, against black people, against people who didn’t believe in what Hitler said. And from 1939 to 1945 there was this huge war, as we know, World War Two, and during that time a lot of those people were killed. Six million Jewish people. My family for example. Most of them were killed. My great grandparents, my uncles, my aunts. My grandparents survived, and I’ll tell you something interesting. You talked about bystanders. My grandmother, who lived in Paris, she was saved during the war by a non-Jewish family who didn’t even know her. They hid her in their farm. She lived with the chickens actually. They hid her in the farm and she managed to survive there for three years, from the age of twelve until fifteen, until the war ended, and she came out and she lived. Just because a non-Jewish family chose to save the life of a little Jewish girl they didn’t even know. They weren’t bystanders. Even though they could have got absolutely and utterly in danger, their family and their parents, everybody would have been killed and punished, if they would have been discovered, hiding a Jewish family. Yet they chose to save my grandmother. And because of that here I am and my family’s here. Because of the goodness of somebody who chose to do the right thing.

Children: [Inaudible]

Brett Kaye: I wouldn’t mind having a chat to you after as well matey. Um, hatred and fear of Jews is called anti-Semitism. And I’m lucky in my life, I haven’t experienced any. Nobody’s ever turned around to me and been mean to me because I’m a Jew. But what I can tell you is, the school where I teach at, which is a Jewish school, around the whole school is a big wall with barbed wire and at the entrance to the school are guards with guns.

Child: Guns?

Brett Kaye: At my school yep.

Child: When is this?

Brett Kaye: This is now. The school I teach at. It’s called Mount Scopus College.

Australian patriotism: Mt Scopus College style

Child: How far away?

Brett Kaye: Twenty minutes.

Child: And they have guns?

Brett Kaye: Yeah, the guards have guns. Because last year in Paris two kids were killed at a Jewish school, when people went in and just shot them. In Buenos Aires there were fourteen kids who were killed at a Jewish school because people went in and killed them. It’s stupid. People don’t play nicely together. And because of that we have to have walls around us. When I walk into your school I like it. I just went straight into the café at lunchtime and came straight in here. That’s how it should be. That’s normal. My school is not normal. That’s not how it should be. Shouldn’t have to have guards with guns at schools, that’s ridiculous. I think it’s important for you guys to know that in your city, at a school not very far away from here, there are six Jewish school, there are nine Jewish day-schools in Melbourne, and all of them have guards with guns, you wouldn’t see them obviously, because no one wants to show their gun, but just in case. It’s crazy. Some Muslim schools as well. Because of the threats against Muslim kids. It’s crazy.

“Click Against Hate” sessions build up to this emotional crescendo where “the Holocaust” is invoked as the ultimate, irrefutable moral justification for “diversity,” “multiculturalism” and “tolerance.” The entire social and political order of the contemporary West — based as it is on spurious notions of racial equality and the supposed virtues of racial diversity and multiculturalism — has been erected on the moral foundations of “the Holocaust.” White people cannot be recognized as a group with interests because “never again.” Western nations have a moral obligation to accept unlimited non-White immigration from the Third World because “never again.” Whites should meekly accept their deliberate displacement (and ultimate extinction) because “never again.”

Of course, the massive Jewish involvement in the deaths of many millions under communism could just as easily be cited as the ultimate, irrefutable, moral justification against any Jewish involvement in non-Jewish polities. How many Jews were “bystanders” in in the early twentieth century as millions of Europeans were sent to the gulag or murdered? Alexander Solzhenitsyn made the point trenchantly when he pointed out that “the leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians. They hated Russians. They hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured and slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of human remorse. It cannot be overstated. Bolshevism committed the greatest human slaughter of all time. The fact that most of the world is ignorant and uncaring about this enormous crime is proof that the global media is in the hands of the perpetrators.”

In the cause of “never again,” Jewish activists take great pride in having been the principle driving force behind the dismantling of the White Australia policy. However, what if the reverse was the case? What if White Australians had led a successful crusade against the “Israel is a Jewish state” policy, a series of laws that restricted non-Jewish immigration to Israel? What if they expressed great pride in this achievement, and remained in the vanguard of those pushing for ever greater racial and religious diversity and multiculturalism for Israel? What if they devised and ran “educational” programs in Israeli schools promoting ever-increasing racial and religious diversity for Israeli children as a moral imperative? Would this be regarded as anything other than hostile action on the part of an antagonistic group that fully merited the hatred of Jews? Would Jews be “tolerant” of actions that so obviously imperiled their group evolutionary interests? Of course not. Yet White Australian children are sanctimoniously lectured by ardent Zionists like Kaye to show “tolerance” as their right to demographic self-determination is denied, and their futures are stolen.

Thanks to the increased “diversity” triggered by the Jewish-led overthrow of the White Australia policy, and virtual commandeering of Australia’s immigration and refugee polices ever since, the Jewish lawyer and activist Ruth Barson is now confident that: “The chances of the Holocaust occurring in Australia today are remote,” but cautions that history shows Jews are never truly safe, and consequently, “we should have no tolerance for even the shadows of racism and xenophobia. These are dangerous in any guise.”

Jewish activist Ruth Barson

Barson is, however, willing to make an exception for one form of racism: that inherent in Judaism itself. The Jewish historian Norman Cantor observed how “racism is itself a central doctrine in traditional Judaism and Jewish cultural history. The Hebrew Bible is blatantly racist, with all the talk about the seed of Abraham, the chosen people, and Israel as a light to the other nations. Orthodox Jews in their morning prayers still thank God daily that he did not make Jews ‘like the other peoples of the earth.’ If this isn’t racism, what is?”[i]

Dvir Abramovich, the chairman of the ADC, contends that “The horrors of the Holocaust did not begin in the gas chambers — but with hateful words of incitement and contempt, and with the demonizing of anyone who was deemed unworthy by the Nazis.” Accordingly, in addition to supporting the prosecution of “hate speech” through Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act, he insists “it’s time that compulsory teaching about the Holocaust is introduced in all Australian schools, to not only develop an understanding of the dangerous ramifications of racism and prejudice, but to heighten awareness of the value of diversity, religious freedom, acceptance and pluralism.” In 2012 the New South Wales Jewish Board of Deputies succeeded, after intense lobbying, in having study of “the Holocaust” made compulsory for all New South Wales school students.

Interestingly, despite his avowed determination to “fight prejudice, bigotry and hatred whenever and wherever it happens,” Abramovich had nothing to say about the recent move by Israel’s education ministry to ban a book for high schools that portrayed a love story between an Israeli Jew and a Palestinian Muslim. According to the ministry, those identities are best kept “separate,” because  “young people of adolescent age don’t have the systemic view that includes considerations involving maintaining the national-ethnic identity of the people and the significance of miscegenation.” In response to the move, Israeli sociologist Uri Ram made the point that “Israel is not a liberal democracy, but an ‘ethnocracy’” that “bases its dominant Jewish nationalism on an ethnic model of citizenship based on blood, compared with the territorial model of citizenship. Intermarriages are not considered as a private deviation from norms, but rather as a transgression of the boundaries of the national community. They are considered a treason of Zionism.”

While conveniently ignoring this, Abramovich is more than willing to get involved in censoring texts for Australian schoolchildren. Last year he “condemned the inclusion of a play on the [senior school] drama list, Tales of a City by the Sea, which depicted life in Gaza and was written by Palestinian playwright Samah Sabawi.” The Victorian education minister initiated the review “after the B’nai B’rith Anti-Defamation Commission and the Jewish Community Council of Victoria complained that the play promoted an anti-Jewish agenda and could isolate Jewish students.” Abramovich claimed, in truly Orwellian words, that students should not be exposed to “pedagogical materials” that “create tension and disharmony” and that school text selection “must reflect community standards by ensuring that students are provided with plays that promote understanding of complex issues and which furnish its learners with appropriate context and balance.” “Community standards” is Abramovich’s lexical camouflage for “Jewish standards” — which demand that pro-Palestinian and pro-White voices are systematically censored within the arts and education.

Kaye notes how in the new improved, diverse, multicultural Australia, Jewish schools have to be surrounded by barbed wire and guarded by armed security services (paid for with an $18 million grant from Australian taxpayers). Of course, this situation is a direct practical result of the Jewish community’s decades-long “diversity” agenda. It was only in 2016 that Jewish schools suddenly felt the need to adopt these security measures in response to large-scale Islamic immigration and the associated threat of terrorism. News Limited noted how “There are now more armed guards and CCTV cameras in Australian schools than ever before amid growing security and terror-related concerns. While there are no armed guards in government schools, it’s a different story for a string of Jewish and Islamic schools across Victoria and New South Wales.”

More fruits of Jewish-led “diversity” in Australia

It’s a stunning measure of organized Jewry’s fear and loathing of White Australia that this is regarded as an acceptable price to pay to ensure increased “diversity.” Doubtless it also serves an additional purpose in reinforcing the bunker mentality of Australian Jewry — the maintenance of which is a key part of the attempts by community leaders to prevent intermarriage. Kaye is careful not to associate the need for increased security with the threat posed by a growing Islamic population. He simply states that Jewish schools have been forced to adopt these security measures in response to “anti-Semitism,” while some Islamic schools have taken similar steps in response to “Islamophobia.” The children could reasonably conclude that it is White Australians, whose schools apparently don’t require such protection, that are the main source of this “crazy” violent hatred.

Despite having to fortify their schools against potential jihadist attacks, Australian Jewry see themselves as beneficiaries of policies explicitly designed to dilute the power of the traditional European-derived Australian majority. They have sought to make alliances with various immigrant groups in opposition to the White majority, including Muslims. Attempts to form a political coalition with Muslims dates from the earliest days of Australian multiculturalism. Australian Jews sought Muslim support for the enactment of the racial discrimination legislation recommended by the Walter Lippmann-chaired Committee on Community Relations in the mid-1970s. In the years since, the ADC has repeatedly enlisted the support of Muslims in lobbying for various multicultural policies, including those relating to “access to government services, recourse for victims of discrimination, and protection from harassment.” Jewish activist organizations like the Australia Israel and Jewish Affairs Council were quick to enlist Australia’s Muslim leaders in their successful campaign to oppose any changes to Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act in 2016.

EXCERPT 7: Shut it down

Brett Kaye: Right, somebody asked me earlier ‘how do you report?’ Who asked me that question? You asked me the question? Oh, you asked me the question? Somebody asked me the question. Well let me tell you. If we don’t want to be a bystander, we want to report. Every single social media sight has got a report button. On YouTube you have to be a member, in other words you have to have an account to report on YouTube. You press the three dots, where it says ‘More,’ and then it will tell you how to do a report and then ask you what don’t you like about this clip. Tell me. If they don’t take it down straight away, do it again, and if they still don’t take it down, do it again, get your friends to do it, get your family to do it, get your class, if not get your school to do it as a project about something that you find very offensive. This also applied to all social media sites, it applies to Facebook, where I found this meme about Cathy Freeman so we reported it at my school. It got taken down. Or it might be Instagram, that’s the old Instagram (we haven’t updated it yet), where you press the report. You don’t know whether they take it down or not, you have to keep checking. All right? If you see something bad, boys and girls, someone’s bullying you, someone’s mean to you, you see something yuck, take a screenshot so that, if you need to report it, you can show them exactly what it is that you don’t like. Lot of people unfollow, report the abuse and, of course delete the comment after you have taken a screenshot.

The above is interesting if only for the insight it gives into the psychology and tactics of Jewish activist organizations like the ADC. Report all content contrary to Jewish interests, and if this doesn’t work, simply keep reporting it until you eventually have it shut down. Monash University professor Andrew Markus has noted how, through adopting this aggressive and unrelenting approach to lobbying, “Jews were amongst the leading advocates of the enactment and extension of racial vilification and anti-discrimination legislation by the federal and state parliaments.”[ii]

In the decades since the enactment of the Racial Discrimination Act in 1975, Jewish activists in Australia have pushed for further legal restrictions on speech deemed contrary to their interests. In 1995 their activism, in the form of detailed submissions to the National Inquiry into Racist Violence and the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody, succeeded in having the notorious section 18C inserted into the Act. This section radically restricted free speech in Australia by making it “unlawful to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or a group of people because of their race, color or national or ethnic origin of the person or of some or all of the people in the group.” In doing so, Section 18C placed totalitarian limits on the freedom of speech in a nation traditionally regarded as one of the freest in the world. Since its enactment, as noted by the Jewish journalist Michael Gawenda, “Jewish community leaders have played a crucial role in organizing the opposition to any potential change to the RDA,” and Jews once again led the opposition to any change to Section 18C during a recent federal Parliamentary Inquiry into Freedom of Speech.

At the end of the “Click Against Hate” session, in order to consolidate the brainwashing that has hopefully occurred, the children are instructed to produce a poster or video promoting virtues of diversity and denouncing the various forms of “hate” that have been discussed in the session (which, strangely enough, doesn’t include Jewish hate of non-Jews). They are told they are “going to be ambassadors for this program” and are encouraged to “share the love” with their family and friends. “Click Against Hate” is yet another manifestation of how an organized, wealthy and intensively-networked Jewish community of just 100,000 has effectively hijacked the demographic destiny and culture of a nation. Through their indefatigable lobbying, propaganda and activism, these master infiltrators are always devising new ways to get inside the heads of White children. It is bad enough that Jews inculcate maladaptive ideas into our children through Hollywood and the general curriculum, without their having directly infiltrated Australian schools.


[i] Norman Cantor, The Sacred Chain – The History of the Jews (New York, NY; HarperCollins, 1994). 336.

[ii] Andrew Markus, “Multiculturalism and the Jews,” In: New Under the Sun – Jewish Australians on Religion, Politics & Culture, Ed. Michael Fagenblat, Melanie Landau & Nathan Wolski (Melbourne: Black Inc., 2006), 101.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks

44 Comments to "The Jewish War on White Australia: The Anti-Defamation Commission and “Click Against Hate,” Part 4 of 4"

  1. anarchyst's Gravatar anarchyst
    July 22, 2017 - 8:44 am | Permalink

    One can call a “jew” a scoundrel, liar, criminal, shyster, or any other derogatory name and it will roll off his back like “water on a duck”, but call a “jew” a “jew” and he will recoil in horror, having been “found out”…

    • Brent's Gravatar Brent
      July 24, 2017 - 6:12 am | Permalink

      Very true. Articles like these highlight the fact that there are very few options to fix the existential threat Jews impose on European derived societies by their mere existence. In a way, this justifies the Jewish stance that there is always another Hitler around the corner. Of course, it is their own behavior that makes this the case, and it appears they cannot help but seek our complete destruction. Mere logic dictates to any reasonable person that it is either us or them who will survive, but NOT both. If I have to make a choice between my children and posterity or theirs, especially considering it is their actions that push this ultimatum, I choose for mine to survive.

      In the past our people have used expulsion as the most extreme response to attacks on our people. How has that worked out for us and the world? How many have died because of our lack of will to do what is necessary to not only save our own people, but also many other non-Jewish people in the world? This is a question that should be pondered thoroughly as we regain the means to defend ourselves.

  2. Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
    July 22, 2017 - 12:30 pm | Permalink

    Insofar as money is a critical factor in establishing and maintaining Jewish power both in Australia and throughout the world, what follows is at least a marginally on-topic comment.

    A close friend, a retired corporate lawyer, has just clued me in on a runaway bestseller from 1971 called The Wall Street Jungle and, secondarily, its 1975 follow-up, The Wall Street Gang (there’s a link to the latter on the Amazon page for TWSJ).

    Evidently, these books’ author, a very successful Gentile investment analyst called Richard Ney,* ruffled so many feathers with his revelations that both the Times and the Wall Street Journal refused to review TWSJ—despite its showing up week after week in the former’s bestseller list—and the (((owners))) of NBC and CBS banned Ney from appearing on the Tonight Show and their other usual early-morning and late-night venues.

    As there are several commenters hereabouts who follow the markets and money-supply and money-manipulation matters far more closely and expertly than I do, I am wondering whether any of them know of these books or can comment upon them or both.
    _________________________
    *A search on the name Richard Ney has disclosed that in the forties, he was briefly a highly acclaimed actor. He played Greer Garson’s son in Mrs. Miniver and shortly afterward married Garson, who was a decade or more his senior. The (((usual sources))) say that their later acrimonious divorce (is there really any other kind) permanently deep-sixed his acting career, and so he then followed his native abilities into star billing in a second career. Good for him, say I.

    • T. J.'s Gravatar T. J.
      July 22, 2017 - 8:03 pm | Permalink

      I used to watch RN on an LA TV station [KWHY]. [1970s]. His theory was that “the specialists” moved markets, and that one should emulate them.

      • Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
        July 23, 2017 - 10:04 am | Permalink

        To the extent that I could make out what the Ozzie was saying, it looks as if what Ney was describing was a textbook example of (((insider))) manipulation. Oh for the good old days of James Comey prosecuting Martha Stewart to draw attention away from the locus of the true action!

        • Curmudgeon's Gravatar Curmudgeon
          July 24, 2017 - 9:11 am | Permalink

          Pierre,
          I am acquainted with a pension fund administrator who worked on Bay Street (Toronto’s Wall Street) in the 80s. He told me at the time the SEC started investigating Ivan Boesky in 1987, the question wasn’t whether there was insider trading, it was why was he the only one being investigated. It was common knowledge that it was rampant.

          • Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
            July 24, 2017 - 2:28 pm | Permalink

            Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.

            Thanks for the explanation of Bay Street. I’ve seen and heard references to it that have just failed to register.

      • Curmudgeon's Gravatar Curmudgeon
        July 30, 2017 - 9:35 am | Permalink

        TJ
        “Specialists”, in my view, is misleading. About 10 years ago, I was at a Pension and Benefits conference chatting with others from across Canada about the credibility of “the market”. Pension plans and how they invest are highly regulated. A trustee of a plan with assets in excess of $42 bn (large for Canada) commented that his plan was just barely able to move markets. In a pension context, that would mean his plan would have investments of $1-2 bn maximum in any single fund or company. He followed up with a simple question: If 1-2 bn was barely able to move markets, how much would be required to cause large shifts? The “market” myth is just that. How many investors like you and me, would have to be buying or selling a single fund or stock in order to cause the phrase “the market reacted by punishing…”?
        If that is shifted into an American context, the numbers needed to “move the market” are astronomical, and quite frankly almost impossible without collusion of some sort. The markets have always been manipulated, and the political prostitutes, who allow it to happen, are well taken care of by their pimps.

  3. Bramble's Gravatar Bramble
    July 23, 2017 - 3:21 am | Permalink

    Interesting how “The Pied Piper” interacts with this particular child, who gives him all the “correct” responses, as if the kid was planted there to do just that. He doesn’t leap in to ask the child’s name and twist his words like he did with the other kids asking awkward questions. It reminds me of a news story today that the British government is reneging on a promise to let Christian “faith schools” choose Christian pupils, and will continue to force them to admit 50% “other faiths”, which is why some Catholic and Anglican schools are now 90% Muslim! This rule is not enforced for Muslim & Jewish “faith schools”, just as John Bercrow, Jewish Speaker of the House of Commons, said that sodomites “bloody well ought to be able to get married in church”, but he never said they should get married in a mosque.

    See “Why are Jewish Orthodox schools unregulated?” http://www.besteducationnews.com/why-are-orthodox-jewish-religious-schools-unregulated.html

  4. E.'s Gravatar E.
    July 23, 2017 - 6:43 am | Permalink

    The Universal Declaration of Human Rights comes up against an absent Universal Declaration of Ethno-Racial Nationalisms; viz. the Right for an Israel (existence) for All, Kinds, always; (and backed by an international Court for Crimes Against, …the world of acknowledged Ethno-States).

    Not to say the hypothetical latter Declaration would withstand the former, in the event of mass transgressors and measures to effectively realize latter; a partitioned world for the sake of holistic sovereignty (not merely civic).

    Further, …not to conclude that such (stasis) is necessarily laudable anyway, although it depends on what would come thereafter; planned or not, and how acutely disruptive it would be?

  5. Ole C G Olesen's Gravatar Ole C G Olesen
    July 23, 2017 - 7:17 am | Permalink

    I have read the Comment Section of all 4 Articles in this series .. but not the articles themselves .They have been Copied in Full and Archived for later Study
    But what baffles me is
    That People within the British Commonwealth do not seem to UNDERSTAND .. that the BRITISH EMPIRE ..in reality was a JEWISH EMPIRE … which will become evident for anyone examining the History of that Entity and its FINANCIAL BENEFICIARIES …

    • T. J.'s Gravatar T. J.
      July 23, 2017 - 12:59 pm | Permalink

      Hmmm- perhaps the reason they “don’t understand” is that jews are doing what they can to block understanding, such as creating information hegemons, which nicely complement monetary hegemons. . .why would you be baffled?

  6. Leon Degrelle jr.'s Gravatar Leon Degrelle jr.
    July 23, 2017 - 7:32 am | Permalink

    This Jew got the name of Julius Streicher’s newspaper wrong. It’s not the voice, which would be Die Stimme, but the attacker. Speaking about attacking, Hitler never went on a campaign against black people. That’s why Jesse Owens said that he was treated much better in Berlin than at home…

    • Eric Blair's Gravatar Eric Blair
      July 23, 2017 - 10:02 am | Permalink

      Actually Kaye’s very 1st sentence is a distortion /fabrication when he says referring to the caricature ” That’s a Jew. I typed in Jew and that’s what came up first.” This image will not come up first on any google search by anybody at any time.
      Kids response was brilliant “is that Osama bin Laden ?”

      • Franklin Ryckaert's Gravatar Franklin Ryckaert
        July 23, 2017 - 11:51 am | Permalink

        Go to Google Images and type in “Jew”. In the first row of images you will see that image. That image is called the “happy merchant”, and if you type that name in Google Images too, the same image will appear.

      • T. J.'s Gravatar T. J.
        July 23, 2017 - 1:04 pm | Permalink

        Yes and no. I googled jew and then clicked images- this one came up first:

        http://www.renegadetribune.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/jew-stereotype-800×445.jpg

        • Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
          July 24, 2017 - 2:22 pm | Permalink

          From your “yes and no,” I was afraid for a minute that the link would open to a picture of Dickens’s Riah or Jenny Wren. Happily it doesn’t.

  7. Leon Degrelle jr.'s Gravatar Leon Degrelle jr.
    July 23, 2017 - 7:47 am | Permalink

    One more thing: following his logic, why on earth would Jews have emigrated to evil Apartheid-South Africa?

    • Mountain Man's Gravatar Mountain Man
      July 23, 2017 - 2:48 pm | Permalink

      Because it was full of enough White people, i.e., civilization, so that they could make a good go of things.

    • Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
      July 23, 2017 - 6:02 pm | Permalink

      Apartheid was instituted post-WWII, so the answer would presumably be that the immigration occurred prior to its introduction.

      • Curmudgeon's Gravatar Curmudgeon
        July 24, 2017 - 9:16 am | Permalink

        I believe that it began, in earnest after the Boer War, which secured SA for the (((British Empire))) and secured for the (((diamond miners))) the rights to those areas.

        • Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
          July 24, 2017 - 2:02 pm | Permalink

          Curmudgeon, am I correct in thinking that the “it” in your first sentence (referring to Trenchant’s preceding comment) stands in for immigration, specifically Jewish immigration, and not apartheid? That reading certainly makes the most sense to me.

          • Curmudgeon's Gravatar Curmudgeon
            July 25, 2017 - 7:28 am | Permalink

            Yes, “it” referred to the (((immigration))), or perhaps more correctly (((emigration))) primarily from the UK.

    • Karen T's Gravatar Karen T
      July 23, 2017 - 6:23 pm | Permalink

      Diamond mines.

      • Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
        July 24, 2017 - 12:42 pm | Permalink

        Indeed, Karen. And it wasn’t long before “diamond mines” became “O diamonds mine”!

  8. T's Gravatar T
    July 23, 2017 - 8:41 pm | Permalink

    The ‘camps’, the ‘cattle cars’, the planned ‘systematic’ mass murder of nearly unfathomable numbers, the manufacture of leather products made from the human skin of the murdered prisoners, the ‘crimes against humanity’, the cries of ‘never forget’, all this being just a portion of the accusations leveled by the victorious power against a defeated foe. One camp and its associated rail link, amongst these centers of death, whose name begins with a large capital letter ‘A’, has a special notoriety within this. These accusations are then to be used by the victorious power to form the basis of a trial with the intended result that the entirety of the senior political and military leadership of the defeated foe are to be executed by hanging.

    But wait! Due apparently to a realization at some level of the utterly fraudulent nature of the ‘case’ directed against the defeated foe, and thus no hope of achieving the objective, this plan collapses in upon itself and falls apart. The defeated foe’s political and military leadership are spared. A rewriting of events surrounding WWII? Hardly. This is the documented history regarding the conclusion of the US Civil War in 1865 and the intent of the US government to have executed the entirety of the South’s political and military leadership. Yes, the United States intended to execute both Robert E Lee and Jefferson Davis, amongst others, for ‘crimes against humanity’. The Southern POW camp that was at the center of this attempt by the US government was Andersonville.

    Do a search of ‘Andersonville’ at the site linked below. It links to a page containing the University of Michigan’s ‘Making of America’ 19th century book and journal collection. Cornell University also has a similar ‘Making of America’ collection which should be on the same page. Patiently look thru the book and journal text of the search results for Andersonville and you will find the quoted terms and phrases of the initial sentence of this post…ie ‘camps’, ‘cattle cars’, planned ‘sustematic’ mass murder, cries of ‘never forget’, etc. There you will find the accusations of leather products (ie leather wallets) made from the skin of the ‘murdered’ prisoners. While they didn’t have the term death camp they had its synonym ‘slaughter pen’ to describe the Southern camps…ie a place designed so that living beings enter and none leave alive. Southern attempts to protect the health and well being of the prisoners, such as innoculations against disease, were turned upside down and made into accusations about ‘poisonous injections’ to kill prisoners. You’ll also find discrete acknowledgements in the years following the Civil War by the US establishment that the disastrous Southern camp situation at the end of the war was more than anything due to the US government’s own policy of blockading food and medicine to the South and destroying the same as contraband as its armies advanced rather than any deliberate effort by the South to murder or harm prisoners.

    http://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/moagrp/

    Is it any wonder that Andersonville is so little taught about in US schools?

    • Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
      July 24, 2017 - 7:18 pm | Permalink

      If in fact any online site talks about Andersonville in terms other than those of horror modeled on the Shoah yarn, it’s cause for rejoicing.

      The “modern” cult of evil, evil Southerners and their evil, evil concentration camp began in the mid-fifties, with the publication of the seemingly endless (750+ pp.) novel Andersonville, by the popular “prestige fiction” author MacKinlay Kantor. This misrepresentation met with such acclaim from (((our narrative overlords))) that I was in my thirties before I learned two things that every Civil War historian alive then knew: (1) Andersonville’s horrors were more of the North’s making than the South’s; and (2) more than one Northern prison camp, Camp Douglas in Illinois being especially notable, was far worse and had far less excuse for being so bad.

      Also, if nowadays “Andersonville is little taught about in US schools,” that’s news to me—but very good news. As recently as the first decade of this century, it was listed by name in the public high school curricula of several dozen states. Clearly what was being taught then was the (((Establishment))) Kantorial version of the tale. It would be cause for wonder if indoctrination in this one historical distortion should have fallen victim to an assault by partisans of truth and balance.

    • T's Gravatar T
      July 29, 2017 - 6:28 pm | Permalink

      Before commenting further I have to say when the slaving power elites and their hangers on (wage slavery, also known far less accurately as ‘cheap labor’, having been adopted by the US North in conjunction with the British Empire and chattel slavery remaining predominant in the US South) insisted upon violence in 1861 to resolve which slavery system would prevail in the country, the guns should have been turned upon them, the ones pushing the war, rather than upon each other. The vast majority of the population, north or south, neither owned or traded chattel slaves, nor did they exploit others as wage slaves, but indeed rather had to suffer with it. Slavery, whether of the chattel or wage slave kind, is correctly referred to as ‘a scourge upon mankind’, perhaps more than anything due to its genocidal effects upon both those peoples preyed upon as a source and those peoples having the misfortune of having some of their own living amongst them so self centered as to be engaged in the sordid business. Besides that, it perpetually drives down and depresses wages. There is nothing good about it .

      Most of these elites and their hangers on would have surrendered pretty quickly had they been confronted by their own in such a way in 1861. The probable relative handful who might have fought on to protect their ‘property’ and ‘rights’ at their own and other peoples’ very great expense should have been summarily executed wherever and whenever they were found like the mad dogs they were. A true abolition of slavery could then have taken place, rather than the fraudulent one that did (at the expense of six hundred thousand lives) which merely replaced the chattel slavery system with wage slavery. Wage slavery is the very economic basis of the ideology of multiculturalism. The right of self determination for the various peoples in North America could then also have been had. Both the North and South’s moral causes of wage and chattel slavery respectively, and the clash between these two terribly destructive slave variants, despite the lies told the general non-slaving public of both sections as to why the war must be fought, were dubious.

      Having said that, the primary target of such accusations as outlined in my initial post of this thread (ie the camps, cattle cars, claims regarding systematic mass murder of prisoners, etc) is the very people from whence the claims emanate, in this case the US (Union public) and in particular its troops fighting at the front. It serves as a negative means of social control by way of instilling fear…ie you’d better fight hard, very hard, and not surrender, lest you too wind up in one of those places. A powerful secondary purpose is the demonization of a declared enemy.

      Sometimes, when a moral cause is dubious, such as in the case of the US in the Civil War, when in reality it was greatly expanding the ghastly institution of slavery rather than abolishing it, and merely exchanging one variant (chattel) with the far more destructive and virulent variant (wage) slavery, it is found necessary to augment the cause with something…anything.

      • T's Gravatar T
        July 29, 2017 - 7:11 pm | Permalink

        After the war books were written by both northerners and southerners denouncing the fraudulent accusations regarding Andersonville. Below is a link to a free online scanned book published in 1908 by a former Union prisoner at the camp entitledThe True Story of Andersonville Prison

        https://archive.org/stream/cu31924095623504#page/n0/mode/1up

        And from a Southerner who had been to the camp during the war. The book is free scanned in online at the link below and was published in 1876. It is entitled The Southern Side; or, Andersonville Prison

        http://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/moa/abz3860.0001.001

  9. Michael Adkins's Gravatar Michael Adkins
    July 24, 2017 - 7:34 am | Permalink

    Mr. Kaye will always be what he is. It’s those who allow his like into our schools that are the problem.

  10. Jesse's Gravatar Jesse
    July 24, 2017 - 10:14 am | Permalink

    My deceased Mother was taught in school people liked Abe Lincoln for he spoke a common language average people understood.
    Thats what I love about the occidental Observer… like Lincon’s speeches you don’t have to be a scholar to understand the message.
    The above might be off the subject but I think it may be to the advantage of the highly educated to remember the above when giving a speech or writing to us average folks. Just a thought
    ——–
    (Mod. Note: Not “just a thought”, Jesse, but a very important thought!)

    • Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
      July 24, 2017 - 3:22 pm | Permalink

      Dear Jesse and Moderator:

      While few would argue with the value inherent in a message that one needn’t be a scholar to understand, I respectfully contend that Abe Lincoln is a poor choice to illustrate Jesse’s proposed maxim.

      The “common language” Lincoln spoke contained a myriad of references to the King James translation of the Bible, far and away the one most familiar to Americans of his day. So far, so good. But virtually all of his quotes were wrenched from proper context, cherry-picked for rhetorical effect (he was, after all, a politician,* not a benefactor to his kith and kin), and many of them incorporated artful alterations—the famous “house divided” quotation being a representative member of both categories.

      Most important of all, Lincoln’s message—in common with that of most politicians (= scoundrels)— was simply not the “simple” one (((our masters))) insist he was preaching. In the real, complicated world, Lincoln was a faithful, career-long servant of the moneyed railroad interests and an equally long-standing opponent of states’ rights and of largely unfettered freedom for the private citizen. In aid of both these interests, he worked to initiate and prosecute the most devastating and needless war in American history, and he “engineered” his own reelection in 1864 with a relentless albeit dishonest firmness of purpose that partisans of Hillary and the Sacred Jigaboo look upon with awe and admiration. What’s more, he did it all without Russian assistance or Wikileaks!**

      In sum, my message is that it shouldn’t be forgotten that what appears plain and simple is not necessarily coextensive with what is true. With specific reference to this site, surely a central aspect of KM’s work is his determination to penetrate the facade of appearances to discover the wheels within wheels within wheels of complex and often sordid self-interest that make the apparatus of Simple go.

      As a famed Afro-Caribbean author*** wrote, “All that glisters is not gold.” Nor does all rhetorically polished “plain speech” embody equally plain and honest meaning or motivation.
      ___________________________________
      *“Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason.” (Mark Twain)
      **Whimsicality Alert!!
      ***As above.

  11. royalbrecht's Gravatar royalbrecht
    July 25, 2017 - 9:52 am | Permalink

    Jewish and Islamic “…Schools…”.., much like their respective…, “…Places of Worship…”, really function more like military intelligence training centers.

    While I was studying in India, if memory serves correctly, I remember hearing stories of there being a rather major confrontation between government forces of the day and Sikh Nationalists because Sikh Temples were being used to store weapons (used to fight the war in Kashmir I assume).

    The government eventually succeeded in removing the weapons only to have one or more of the Gandhi presidents assassinated over the issue.

    Jews (and I assume Islamics as well) do not only give kids a basics education, they train them in how to lie to the Goyem, incite Islamics, and prepare them for their 2 or three year stint in the Israeli military.

    Many Jews in Canada have served in the Israeli armed forces. I know this for a fact because not only have I BEEN ATTACKED BY THEM they freely admit doing so.

    So when I saw the pic of the armed guard in front of the “..Jewish day school..”,
    I could not help wonder whether the excuse used to get the Goyem to pay for these “…self defense…” measures was just a way to provide money for weaponry and security for things that are going on in these schools that could better be characterized as a military build up.

    Remember; the day WILL come when these Islamics and Jews will begin to round up and murder Whites en mass.
    In the mean time, search for hidden, subterranean quarters used to house things of a military nature.

    One must also keep in mind that because of the Jew-induced, millenniums long, indiscernibly gradualized nature of the White Regressive Spiritual Crippling, (((they))) are, comparatively speaking, light years ahead of us in terms of what they are used to getting away with and what they would attempt.
    Just one small example of this sort of blatant, in your face, mass murder planning and execution events that took place is the 9-11 Twin Towers+ Bldg. #7 take downs.

    The Rothschilds supposedly became super rich during the White Aristocratic warring period of the 1500 to 1700’s when Jewish financiers held White Aristocratic wealth “…in trust…”. Around this time, piracy was rampant as supply lines for the monarchs were raided and pilfered almost without opposition.
    Biographies would have us believe that the Rothschilds used the wealth they held “…in trust…” in honest investments to eventually eclipse the wealth of the of the monarchs themselves.
    However, a more likely scenario is that the pirates themselves were largely Jews or financed by them to steal from the people whose wealth they were entrusted to guard!

    “…Double-ended dealing…” is an understatement when it comes to the cunning of Jews and the stupidity of the Goyem in allowing it.
    A more appropriate phrase to describe their behavior with respect to fleecing the Whites might be:
    “On-the-fly search for ‘..multiple-ended..’ improvised ways to cripple the Goyem”.

    With just about every opposing force to their eventual White extermination plans being effectively neutralized…,
    except the cohort that subscribes to TOO et al…,
    what do they really have to fear?

  12. July 26, 2017 - 2:35 am | Permalink

    Kudos to courageous Mr Sanderson for this series as well as previous ones that definitively exposes jews for the destruction of White Australia. It is revolting to see this rape of young children minds by manipulative scoundrel Brett Kaye for jewish mendacity. I have recently suggested to the Australian parliamentary inquiry into multiculturalism to invite Mr Sanderson to the senate hearings currently in progress. It would have blasted Australian jewry covert subversive cover to smithereens if it took place.

    Those in Australia are encouraged to make contact at my link for more info on what we could do together in this struggle against jewry or just to share camaraderie.

  13. pterodactyl's Gravatar pterodactyl
    July 26, 2017 - 5:24 am | Permalink

    The ‘never again’ speaker admits he has never experienced antisemitism personally in Australia. If this changes in the near future, we all know the source of future antisemitism – it will be the muslims that the Jews wish to bring in. We have to establish a motive. Most (Jews and the Right) assume that destroying white nations by mass immigration is somehow in the ethnic self-interest of the Jews – ie a genuine desire to prevent the ‘never again’ from happening, by weakening the West and destroying their cultures (or banking wealth, or international power are also suggested as motives). The assumption generally made is that there must somehow be something in it for them, ie self-interest that makes them devote their money and time to this task (of ensuring a high rate of immigration and to facilitate the national suicide of the West in other ways also, such as in rejecting their own culture).

    But this assumed motive (of self-interest) cannot be the real motive, as any fool can see that in white countries the Jews are (1) safe (2) rich (3) allowed to practice their racist segregation. Furthermore, it is obvious that when these countries become multiracial and largely muslim, that all these benefits will decrease markedly – with the final outcome possibly in the end being that the muslims carry out their threat to drive the Israeli Jews into the sea – ie a real holocaust. There is only one group openly calling for the Jews to be driven into the sea – and this group is not the white Autralian hosts who have reached out the hand of friendship, rather it is the newcomers, the muslims, the ones that the Jews wish to invite in.

    Clearly the Jews are therefore acting CONTRARY to their ethnic self-interest (as well as that of the host nation). So we need another motive if self-interest has to be discarded. Perhaps we can find this by taking Kevin MacDonald’s approach, which is to recognise that humans, like other animals, are controlled in their behaviour (including political behaviour) by their wiring/genes, and when humans are controlled in this way, THERE IS NO PLACE FOR REASON and LOGIC. These are added after the event. We pretend that it was logical and reasonable for Britain to go to war against Germany. Really? Would logic and reason really make the people of Britain decide it was worth killing off their best men and bankrupting their economy in order to ‘help Poland’ or ‘help the Jews’? Which of these scenarios happened: (a) The soldier types in the pubs discussed international politics and then decided to sign up to the army to sacrifice themselves and their country for the greater good (b) The inner war instincts of the men were activated and they readily accepted whatever reason their leaders gave them in order to tick some inner boxes. They readily accepted reasons connected with ideals, as they were individualistic. (‘Help the Jews’, Hitler is bad, Stalin is… well never mind block that one out, Hitler is exra exra bad’ and the purpose of the war is to ‘fight evil’).

    If Arab leaders or African leaders or Jewish leaders wanted a set of reasons to activate their own people, then these races, being tribal, would not be fed ‘reasons’ linked to ideals, they would be fed by their leaders reasons connected with fighting for the tribe or homeland, and in the case of arabs, for ‘honour’ ie the glory of conquest itself is an aim. If you say to a group of arabs ‘think of the glory of conquest over your enemies’ they will jump up and down, but if you said that to a group of Westerners they could not relate to it. To the Westerners you say a different message.

    The Jews are not individualistic in their genes, but they live amongst the individualistic Westerners, and therefore fully use the language that appeals to an individualistic indiginous people – ie ideas about morals. They tell the people that by accepting the third world into their countries they are doing morally the right thing, as to refuse them full access would be racist ie bad. So the Jews can readily join in with the moral message about third world immigration being morally right, and at the same time support closed borders for Israel – this shows that clashes of logic are no problem for them. Their position about immigration is therefore 100% hypocrisy, but the point is this does not trouble them. An individualistic and truly moral person is genuinely troubled when he realises he is not being moral after all. (Some were disturbed about helping Stalin in WWII and that the outcome was to help communism). In westerners this awareness that you are not moral after all causes feelings of unease to say the least (this is now applying to WWI). But the leading Jewish advocates of immigration into the West who at the same time oppose it for Israel – for these people this hypocrisy causes no feeling of unease. This is because they are wired differently, to be tribal, and the way they talk of ‘ideas’ like ‘fairness’ as if this is their motive – this talk is not genuine, just adopted to fit in with the audience that you wish to persuade to commit national suicide. The Westerners where the Jews live are accessing their own inner Western ‘moral thinking’ (having said this, they are loyal to sometimes SHALLOW and DISTORTED MORAL IDEALS of the group that can be changed, rather than ones that arise from deep thinking), whereas other races (Jews, arabs, Africans, Indians) will readily use the language of the Westerners (‘fairness’, ‘justice’) but they do not really mean it. This different thought patterns explain why the Jews are not disturbed by hypocrisy and double standards, whereas non tribal types often are.

    So if logic and reason are not the motive for wanting to assist the West to commit suicide, what is the motive of the Jews, linked to animal behaviour instincts? Maybe it is simply that loyalty to tribe goes hand in hand with hostility to any other tribes – EVEN THOSE WHO HELP YOU. The same is happening in S.Africa. The Africans in the end will completely oust the white tribe and thus get rid of a white tribe that is (a) always holding out the hand of friendship and fairness to them (b) has given them health, education, jobs, wealth, security etc. When the blacks oust them finally, they will have sunk the luxury liner that they live on at present, and they will sink it out of their animal behaviour instincts of hostility to other tribes, even though they know full well what will happen when he liner sinks and their luxury life ends. They cannot stop themselves. Their hostility is stronger than self-interest. Self-interest says leave the whites alone. This is very clear to them, but they cannot go on that path. Their wiring compels them to stay on the path that will sink the ship (to mix metaphors). The wealthy blacks will try and get the best lifeboats. Perhaps the Jews are acting the same way – they are offered the hand of friendship by the Gentiles, but in return they seek to sink the ship (the West) in which they too enjoy peace and luxury (safety, wealth, freedom to practice their racist segregation in places like Australia). Maybe they cannot help or stop their inner hostility. But of course when the ship sinks they will seek the best lifeboats. They are bankers and wealthy and will take what they can from the sinking ship (unlike the blacks they do think of tomorrow). But overall they will be far worse off in Australia etc, like the Africans will be in S.Africa, and they know it, as do the Africans. They know they will be worse of whenever they ACCESS LOGIC in their thoughts. But they cannot access logic, or rather they do, but it is overwhelmed by tribal thinking.

    • July 26, 2017 - 4:43 pm | Permalink

      I disagree with your contention that jews do not act in their self-interest in spearheading multiculturalism and the more specifically threatening prospect of muslim fanatical riots in Australia. They are sophisticated in using it as a battering ram against the dwindling Whites of Australia and to mask themselves as the prime agents for extermination of Whites. A way for jews to try escape blame for the bloody social chaos descent coming to Australia.

      Do you seriously think that they could have so carefully schemed their world domination over many centuries without application of extreme premeditated cunning logic and reasoning? A racial supremacist trait that no other come close to match.

      Jews are, full knowingly in ethnic self-interest, guilty of all their horrific crimes against humanity. Please do not excuse this outright criminality down to unconscious urges to pretend their innocence.

      • pterodactyl's Gravatar pterodactyl
        July 27, 2017 - 3:16 am | Permalink

        I am trying to explain why so many Jews are biting the hand that feeds them (the West) and are in many cases devoting their energies to killing the goose that lays the golden eggs (the West), and I am suggesting that they act as they do UNTHINKINGLY from their inner instincts, and not from any deliberate plan or strategy, as if they used logic and reasoning to develop a strategy they would never do this as it is clearly AGAINST their own interest to help the left and muslims to bring down the West. (Although they later on try to justify it by saying ‘never again’, or ‘remember the Romans’). They are simply obeying their inner wiring, as do almost all humans except those who have access to reason. This does not in any way excuse them. In the same way a violent criminal behaves as he does from his inner wiring, and neither does this excuse him. All it does is explain why he does it – namely that he is wired to be like this – even if in the end it is against his own interest.

        Suppose a pitbul is brought up in a loving human family. All it has to do for an easy life of luxury is not bite the children. But in the end it cannot help itself and it bites them and is put down. So the dog is to a large extent incapable of controlling its wiring that is compelling it to act against its own interest. Some might ask ‘how could natural selection make it like this?’. The answer is that when natural selection made the dog like this the circumstances were different. Just as when the Swedes were made by natural selection to be like they are today (cucks) the circumstances were different – namely life was hard. Now life is easy these genes of the Swedes are no longer helping them, and the more primitive genes of the newcomers have the advantage. If the Western economies eventually collapse and life is no longer easy once again, and food shortages return, then the whites might go into a different mode. They will become less over-tolerant.

        The Africans do the same in S.Africa – ie they are intent on bringing down the whites who provide them with jobs, food, medicine, comforts. Reason would tell them to live in harmony with this benevolent tribe that offers them the hand of friendship and co-operation. But all they do is obey their inner instincts to drive out this ‘rival tribe’. And they even KNOW that they will be far worse off when they achieve this aim. It is the same with the Jews. The West offers the hand of friendship. In return many of them are trying to bring us down. This is clearly NOT in their own best interests, so the only explanation is that they do it from inner wiring. But then they seek explanations in logic such as the ‘never again’ one, to excuse and explain and justify their own inner hostility.

        On Breitbart, before I was banned, I noticed many Jews in the comments obsessed with things done against them thousands of years ago even by the Romans. I have never seen gentiles do the same. In my opinion this trait arises from their genetic tendency to be more tribal. It cannot simply be due to their schooling – these ideas have to ‘click’ somewhere in their wiring for them to be so important to them.

        And because the white race do not think like the Jews, Arabs, Africans, Indians, they are oblivious to the way the other races think differently, due to different wiring from their genes. The whites think it is morally wrong to even notice race (apart from discriminating against whites). The whites make the big mistake of assuming the other races think the same way. Other races do not think about ‘fairness’ they think about their own tribe or religion, and their loyalty is to the tribe or religion, not to concepts like ‘justice’. The left-wing enemy within of the whites are using this genetic characteristic of the whites against them. Blacks who hated blacks or arabs who hated arabs could not use this tactic against their own people as it would have no effect at all. But whites are vulnerable to this line of attack from other whites.

        • NostalgicNationalist's Gravatar NostalgicNationalist
          July 28, 2017 - 10:30 pm | Permalink

          Convicts were sent to Australia by Briton to stop over population, a form of eugenics in which they tried to create a society with no low IQ poor. The convicts were meant to perish in what the British thought was the uninhabitable continent of Australia. Instead they created the modern nation of Australia, which is the envy of the world. Whites do not hold onto past grievances- they forgot and move on- and the modern day people of Australia celebrate their British history. You are right, the victim complex is a genetic Jewish pathology alien to Whites, but it doesn’t explain why they are destroying White nations.

          The Jews co-existed with Muslims for thousands of years and survived- that is why they are importing them en mass, because they know the low IQ of Muslims which has them ending up as religious fanatics, means they will always be easily manipulated. Muslims never rose up and posed a threat to Jewish evolutionary survival like Whites did- they simply taxed Jews and considered them as “protected people”, which ensured them certain rights in Muslim society. In fact Jews fleeing persecution from Europe in the Middle Ages would move to Muslim countries where they knew they would be ensured protection as “people of the book”, which the Quran describes as consisting of people who share the monotheistic faiths.

          The Jews are the ones in power now, and will dictate the terms of any culture via their media apparatus and financial apparatus- so it makes sense to import Muslims when they know they are not a threat to Jewish evolutionary survival, because they always allowed the Jews to co-exist in their societies( albeit they never allowed the Jews upward mobility in their societies- that is why the Jews immigrated to Europe). Now that the Jews have obtained upward mobility in White nations, they can import Muslims en mass without worrying about being dis-empowered via restrictions on upward mobility Muslims historically place on non-Muslims.

          The Jewish grasp of the media and financial institutions means their power has transcended reality- and a small Jewish minority will always have the power to control any population no matter how large, as long as they have these tools at their disposal. How else do you think a community numbering only 100,000 people changed a nation of 20 million?

          The only peoples who have shown themselves as a threat to Jewish evolutionary survival are White Europeans- it is why their nations must be demographically destroyed at all costs- until no representative of the White race exists.

          • NostalgicNationalist's Gravatar NostalgicNationalist
            July 28, 2017 - 10:54 pm | Permalink

            Likewise, Jews existed in Asian societies for thousands of years, in Central Asia, and possibly in China. The Mongoloid never rose up or posed a threat to the Jew. In fact the Mongoloid is one of the most easily controlled people due to their biological need to conform to social norms dictated by those around them. And what better way to do this than through the mass media? The Jewish propagandists who were utilized in Mao’s China learnt a lot about the Mongoloid psychology which no doubt is common knowledge among the tribe today. This explains why the nations of Asia have been empowered while all White nations have been dis-empowered through economic re-calibration. It explains why Jews embrace mongoloid immigration.

            The Jews were also historically protected in the socities of South Asia, modern day India, where they existed for thousands of years without any uprisings. It is why they also embrace Indian immigration into the West.

            You just need to look at the way Europeans pushed the boundaries of the known world during the age of discovery, to see why the Jews are not worried about such inward looking peoples as the non-Whites. It is only Whites, and their questioning mindset and disposition that favors personal freedom over collectivism, that poses a threat to Jewish hegemony.

          • pterodactyl's Gravatar pterodactyl
            July 30, 2017 - 2:28 am | Permalink

            Well the Jews do seem very keen on the Muslims for some reason. But perhaps it is not that they are useful to them, perhaps it is that they are useful in undermining the West, and this objective is, to some Jews, even more important than their own ability to continue living in a particular host nation in peace and harmony (and with great wealth). ie their hostility to the West (unprovoked) is stronger than even their own self-interest. They want to burn down the house even though they live in it too. But they are playing a game that can take a wrong turn for them. Eg the muslims getting hold of nuclear weapons due to lefty-traitors in the West also siding with the muslims.

          • Curmudgeon's Gravatar Curmudgeon
            July 30, 2017 - 9:47 am | Permalink

            “Convicts were sent to Australia by Briton to stop over population, a form of eugenics in which they tried to create a society with no low IQ poor.”
            Some context is needed. As was the case in sending debtors to the colonies as indentured servants, so it was to Australia. Large numbers of the convicts sent to Australia were debtors convicted of petty crimes, often related to poverty. Few if any were violent convicts. It does not necessarily follow that those sent to Australia had low IQs, or that those who controlled Britain, had any goal to create a society with no low IQ. In fact, if there were such a goal, it would be self defeating. A higher IQ society would have caught on to the game leaving the (((controllers))) at risk.

  14. NostalgicNationalist's Gravatar NostalgicNationalist
    July 28, 2017 - 7:10 pm | Permalink

    “The person responsible for introducing her in January, 1931, to Edward, then the Prince of Wales, was his mistress Thelma Furness.

    As her husband was away, convention demanded that one married couple should be present as chaperones at her weekend house party.

    Having met Thelma through a mutual friend, Wallis was asked if she and her husband, Ernest, would provide the necessary cover. You bet, they would.

    For Ernest, an American businessman of Jewish extraction who’d taken British citizenship and revered the monarchy, meeting the king-in-waiting was close to the pinnacle of his dreams.

    For Wallis, the connection promised an important step up the social ladder, with the likelihood of more invitations to fashionable parties.”

    Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2023050/Was-Wallis-Simpson-woman-New-evidence-speculates-sexual-make-up.html#ixzz4oBNi0CgI

  15. T's Gravatar T
    July 30, 2017 - 7:31 pm | Permalink

    Of the giant wrongs to which they [the Jewish people] have been subjected for the last ten centuries, the huge Andersonville outrages, few need to be reminded.’

    The above quote might be reflective of the dysfunctional relationship that has long existed between the Anglo-Saxon and Jewish peoples and a certain belief system. There has been an unfortunate ideology that has been around for several hundred years known as ‘British Israel’ (in the US as ‘American’ or ‘Anglo-Israel’) that is the belief amongst powerful elements of the Anglo-Saxon elites, and all too many amongst their everyday non-elites, that they, the Anglo-Saxon people are (somehow) ‘the lost tribes of Israel’ rather than originating solely from tribes of northern Europe. The current Queen Elizabeth II is thought to adhere to this belief which is described more fully below in an excerpt (linked below) from a 1987 study of the subject entitled ‘Imperial British Israelism: Justification for an Empire’.

    ‘British-Israelism” is the theory that the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel comprise the bulk of the population of Great Britain, the British Commonwealth of Nations, and the United States of America….The movement was not without important followers among the aristocracy in this period, with such notables as Queen Victoria, King Edward VII, King George VI, and currently Queen Elizabeth II all embracing the tenets of British-Israelism…

    http://www.revneal.org/Writings/british.htm

    The emboldened quote regarding Andersonville was from a chapter of a Boston, Massachusetts published 1871 book entitled ‘Our Israelitish [Jewish] Brethren’ written by a James Parton. The book was entitled Topics of the Time and is linked and quoted a little more fully below. The excerpt starts towards the bottom of pg 289 and continues on from there…

    ‘Who can estimate the reparation which Christendom owes this interesting and unoffending people? How abundant, how untiring, should be our charity in judging the faults of character which our own superstition has created or developed!

    Of the giant wrongs to which they [the Jewish people] have been subjected for the last ten centuries, the huge Andersonville outrages, few need to be reminded…’

    http://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/moa/AJD6442.0001.001/293?rgn=full+text;view=image;q1=Andersonville+outrages

  16. White Cornerback's Gravatar White Cornerback
    August 1, 2017 - 4:33 am | Permalink

    What I would like to know is why can’t there be a competitor to Hollywood for example? There is certainly enough non Jewish money to form it.. Create a charter to make sure the movies stay patriotic and Christian. This begging Jewly wood to change is an utter absurdity and will never happen. A patriotic film industry showing what happens with mass immigration for example would be a huge hit. Fox News, though not nationalistic, is an example of success going up against the jewish run controlled news.

Comments are closed.