Lies, Spies and Harvey Weinstein: Thoughts on Jewish Behaviour and the Pervnado

As a newspaper committed to improving the world, the Guardian is passionately pro-migrant and anti-racist. If a single migrant’s rights are threatened by racism and xenophobia anywhere in the world, it is swift to report, rebuke and provide a voice for the powerless. Deportation is cruel and unjust, the Guardian insists, and in the closing weeks of 2017 it has published the moving stories of a Jamaican in Britain, an Afghan in Germany and an Iranian in Papua New Guinea. These three vibrant migrants are all threatened with deportation by authoritarian states and, as we would expect, all three find a staunch ally in the Guardian.

40,000 unheard voices

So what happens when not three but forty thousand vibrant migrants are threatened with deportation by an authoritarian state? Have the Guardian’s cries of horror rung to the very heavens? Has it published story after story, defending the migrants’ rights and denouncing the state in question? Strangely, the answer is no. There have been no cries of horror and no stories. When I visited the Guardian’s dedicated section on “Refugees,” I did not find a single word about this heinous assault on migrants’ rights. The Guardian has turned off its principles and closed its eyes, just as it did during the decades of horror inflicted on vulnerable working-class girls in Rotherham.

Israel rejects enrichment

But the Guardian isn’t alone. As VDare has pointed out, this huge assault on migrant rights has been almost ignored by the Western media. Newsweek was one of the rare exceptions:

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s 28-member executive cabinet [has] voted unanimously to close Israel’s Holot detention center and give African asylum seekers three months to leave the country or face deportation to an undisclosed country. If they refuse to go, they will be imprisoned indefinitely. The proposal will now be considered by the Israeli legislature, where it is expected to pass.

“The infiltrators will have the option to be imprisoned or leave the country,” Israel’s Ministry of Public Security said in a statement. Officials also said that the mass deportations are meant “to protect the Jewish and democratic character” of Israel. The Israeli government says that there are 38,043 African migrants living in the country, most of them hailing from war-torn countries such as Eritrea and South Sudan, having illegally crossed the Israeli border between 2007 and 2012. …

“This is the right policy to ease the suffering of residents in South Tel Aviv and other neighborhoods where the infiltrators reside,” Interior Minister Aryeh Deri, who initiated the deportation proposal, said on Sunday, according to Voice of America.  … Netanyahu has even promised that he will “return South Tel Aviv to the citizens of Israel,” claiming that the African migrants “are not refugees, but infiltrators looking for work.” …

Critics say that Israel’s acceptance rate of asylum seekers from these nations is considerably lower than that of most developed countries; according to the United Nations High Commission for Human Rights, Israel has recognized only eight Eritrean and two Sudanese asylum seekers as refugees since 2009. … Israel and its partner governments say that it plans to give asylum seekers the basic necessities to start their new lives in a new country. But a 2014 investigation by Haaretz found that asylum seekers who “voluntarily departed” Israel for Rwanda “arrived in the country with no status, no permits and no path to livelihood.” Furthermore, “some were directed from Rwanda to Uganda with no warning and no infrastructure in place.” (Jewish Groups Denounce Israel’s Plans to Deport 40,000 African Asylum Seekers, Newsweek, 24th November 2017)

The closer you look, the worse Israel’s behaviour looks. Vulnerable African refugees are stigmatized as “infiltrators.” They must leave or face “indefinite detention.” If they leave, they will arrive in a strange country with “no status” and “no path to livelihood.” After liberals have overcome their nausea and investigated further, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz will tell them about “Theft, Extortion and Death: The Agonizing Stories of Refugees Israel Deported to Africa.” There will be much more agony in future — and most of the Western media just don’t seem to care.

The Semitic Filter

Why so? Well, I think this story has come up against what you might call the Semitic Filter. Because Jews are so powerful in the media, their attitudes and preferences have huge influence on what is reported and what isn’t. If a story suits the Jewish agenda, it will pass through the filter. If it doesn’t, it generally won’t. The truth or otherwise of the stories is irrelevant: Sabrina Rubin-Erdley’s hate-hoax of “gang rape on broken glass” was false, but sailed through the filter. So did the false story of the “white Hispanic” George Zimmerman brutally murdering the innocent Black teenager Trayvon Martin.

The story of Israel’s harsh treatment of African migrants, by contrast, is completely true. But the filter blocks the story because it reveals Jewish double standards. Jews in the Diaspora are overwhelmingly in favour of the warmest possible welcome for vibrant migrants, claiming that they feel a natural affinity with oppressed people fleeing for their lives. As Rabbi Laura Janner-Klausner most movingly wrote in the Guardian: “When Jewish people look at Calais migrants, we see ourselves.”

The refugee-loving Rabbi

But Rabbi Laura is not speaking the truth. In fact, “when Jewish people look at … migrants,” they see more ways to atomize British society and undermine Britain’s native White majority. Israel’s behaviour gives the lie to the Rabbi’s schmaltzy claims of how “for the Jewish people, for thousands of years a dispersed nation without guaranteed safety, the sight of the Calais ‘jungle’ camp on our doorstep is especially painful.” Benjamin Netanyahu and his “28-member executive cabinet” don’t feel the slightest pain at the plight of migrants. Quite rightly, they put Jewish welfare first and seek to prevent an atomized society, rather than, like Barbara Roche and Rabbi Laura, to encourage one.

A Political Taboo

That’s why the huge story of forced deportations from Israel has been largely ignored by the Western media. It doesn’t suit the Jewish agenda and so doesn’t pass through the Semitic Filter. Not for goyish eyes. The Jewish Chronicle has covered the deportation story and remarked on two glaring facts: first, that “there is no standard naturalisation process” in Israel, “apart from the Law of Return that allows Jews and their family members to emigrate”; and second, that “changing the country’s immigration laws and opening an avenue for large numbers of non-Jews to move to Israel … remains a political taboo.”

Benjamin Netanyahu: “Ausländer raus!”

Does the refugee-loving Rabbi Laura Janner-Klausner know about Israel’s cruel and xenophobic attitude to aspiring immigrants and vulnerable refugees? She should know all about Israeli policy, because she has dual British/Israeli citizenship and lived in Israel for fifteen years. She must know about the deportations planned in Israel and it would be very easy for her to write a stern article for the Guardian denouncing Netanyahu, who has boasted that Israel is now able “to deport the 40,000 remaining infiltrators against their will.” But she has written no such article. Her double standards are plain — or at least, they would be if Netanyahu’s boast had received more publicity.

Cubic Flair

It hasn’t, which is a particular shame when you consider that Netanyahu must now be susceptible to international pressure. He is the subject of no fewer than two police investigations and “has been questioned six times under caution by police looking into allegations he accepted gifts from businesspeople and colluded with newspaper publishers.” Israel is a highly corrupt country and Netanyahu, who belongs to the right-wing Likud party, may have been following a tradition established by one of his left-wing predecessors. The former Labour Prime Minister Ehud Olmert actually went to jail for corruption. But that hasn’t stopped Olmert continuing to help persecuted Jews, as you can see in this report about Harvey Weinstein and the Israeli spy-company Black Cube:

You’d be forgiven for thinking that the story was the paranoid raving of the strangest of conspiracy theorists, but it’s true: alleged multiple-rapist and disgraced Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein really did hire former agents of Israel’s Mossad spy agency to snoop on his accusers and on journalists who were planning to report the story that has rocked the world since the start of October.

In a long and meticulous investigative report published by The New Yorker earlier this month, journalist Ronan Farrow broke the news that Weinstein hired Israel’s Black Cube to spy on Rose McGowan — who accuses him of rape — and on Ben Wallace, a reporter at New York magazine whose story on Weinstein was ultimately spiked by his editors.

Hired via Weinstein’s lawyer — to ensure the secrecy provided by attorney-client privilege — the Israeli firm went to extreme lengths to get dirt on McGowan. According to The New Yorker report, the firm dispatched a former Israeli military officer to pose as a women’s rights activist, whilst hinting to Wallace that she also had an allegation to make against Weinstein. …

What’s more, as journalist Max Blumental points out, Weinstein has a long record of financial and political support for Israeli causes. Indeed, it was former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert — once of the Israeli Labour Party and with a prison sentence for fraud and bribery on his record — who first recommended Black Cube to Weinstein and apparently made the introductions.

Black Cube has offices in Tel Aviv, Paris and London. Given the company’s admission that it worked on a disgustingly unethical project to protect the man who may well turn out to be Hollywood’s biggest sexual predator ever, it is surely time for the British and French authorities to investigate the “business” activities of this mercenary spy agency. What else, we need to know, is Black Cube up to? (The Israeli spy company which protected Weinstein operates in London; Britain must investigate its activities, Middle East Monitor, 25th November 2017)

Whatever else Black Cube is up to, we can be sure of one thing: its activities are always designed to advance Jewish interests. And obviously Black Cube and its ex-Mossad operatives felt that assisting a Jewish sex-predator met that criterion. Mossad’s motto is “By way of deception thou shalt do war.” I would claim that Black Cube and the Weinstein scandal provide an excellent example of the Jewish attitude to information. For decades, Weinstein successfully concealed information about himself while exploiting information about others.

That he colluded with an Israeli spy-agency on the advice of an Israeli politician is no coincidence: he took advantage of Jewish ethnocentrism and Jewish hostility to gentiles. After all, he was preying on shiksas whose plight seems to have roused no sisterly sympathy in the female journalists Rebecca Rosenberg, Mara Siegler, Jamie Schram, Danika Fears and Maria Wiesner. Rosenberg et al. wrote stories in “Weinstein-compliant scandal sheets” seeking to undermine Weinstein’s victims. Ann Coulter has condemned the journalists as “ugly girls taking their revenge on pretty girls.”

Main Currents of Judaism

That may well be so. But it could also be that they were ugly Jewish girls taking their revenge on pretty gentile girls. As Kevin MacDonald has written in his discussion of the Weinstein scandal: “Revenge is important — even critical — in understanding the main currents of Jewish behavior.” Weinstein has also been defended by the Jewish fashionista Donna Karan. And the convicted Jewish paedophile Jeffrey Epstein is alleged to have been assisted in his crimes by Ghislaine Maxwell, the daughter of the late Robert Maxwell, a Jewish tycoon who set a record for financial larceny that was surpassed only by the Jewish fraudster Bernie Madoff. Maxwell is also alleged to have been a sexual predator. So is Lou Pearlman, a Jewish music executive who ran another massive Ponzi scheme and had a “well-documented track record of robbing his [gentile] artists blind.”

Pervnado: Minority success at last!

Fraud and sexual abuse are predatory crimes in which Jews are hugely over-represented. This is another fact that the Semitic Filter is intended to block. For example, the Jewish comedian Larry David was strongly condemned in early November 2017 when he said of the “Hollywood sex abuse scandal” that: “I couldn’t help but notice, a very, very disturbing pattern emerging — which is that many of the predators — not all, but many of them are Jews.” A non-Jewish comedian would have lost his career for saying the same thing. Since then, the scandal has got bigger and extended beyond Hollywood. But it has not got any less Jewish, as the TV host Matt Lauer and the senator Al Franken can testify. Like the reign of the Alawites in Syria and the Bolsheviks in the Soviet Union, the so-called Pervnado seems to provide more evidence of how predatory minorities can dominate and abuse passive majorities.

“A scarily lascivious Czech-Jewish editor…”

But does the Pervnado also say something about the male supremacism of Semitic cultures? Jewish men can behave very badly towards Jewish women too:

Dodging the pests at the JC [Jewish Chronicle]

Gloria Tessler recalls life at the JC in the 70s when “so many editors were lunging, touching and smooching”. … Girls had to manipulate, charm and edge their way out of sexual harassment at the JC. Yes, the JC! When I started here in my 20s, back in the 1970s, I was the only woman reporter and I could not imagine lasting out the week, so many senior editors were lunging, touching and smooching. If you were not agile enough to manage a pre-emptive escape, life would be a true battlefield. …

The way to stave off these men’s unwelcome advances was to keep talking about other things, reminding them of their wives and children, praising their brilliant articles, charming them, until they slowly — very slowly, if ever — began to see you as a human being and not a sexual plaything. …

But worst of all, was the day when I walked into one senior executive’s office. His door bore a red light, so I politely knocked. Once inside, I turned to face him — to find he had exposed himself. Shocked and disbelieving, I offered some gibbering excuse about the editor needing to see me, and made a quick getaway. This was something you read about in the papers; half-dressed blokes leaping out of bushes in the park, not something you expect in a newspaper office. …

Working freelance in Fleet Street proved easier, apart from a publication where I tried offering stories to a scarily lascivious, Czech-Jewish editor with a mordant wit. He suggested lunch and the harassment began in the taxi and ended in a restaurant where he had booked a private room. With his hands groping everywhere except the salmon en croute, I managed to free myself and flee in time, lamenting later that I hadn’t sold a single story. (Dodging the pests at the JC, The Jewish Chronicle, 9th November 2017 / 21st Cheshvan 5778)

Fleet Street was London’s newspaper district. Did Gloria Tessler find “working freelance” there “easier” because there were fewer Jewish males than at the Jewish Chronicle? I would suggest so. I would also suggest that Jewish feminism is, in part, a projection onto gentile society of Jewish female resentment at Jewish male behaviour.

That behaviour is now receiving attention on a hitherto unprecedented scale. The Pervnado has already blown Harvey Weinstein and other big Jewish names from the heights of media power. If rumours at previously reliable gossip-sites are to be believed, some even bigger Jewish names may follow.

Harvey and Hillary: Who’s Laughing Now?

Jewish power has relied heavily on controlling information and forbidding pattern-recognition. Like so many other things, that has begun to change. If the staunch feminist Hillary Clinton had won the presidential election, it seems highly likely that staunch feminists like Harvey Weinstein would still be committing their crimes safe from scrutiny. That seems paradoxical, but the paradox is easily resolved. Clinton and Weinstein were always lying when they claimed to want improved lives for ordinary women.

They pursued power, not principle, and their decline has allowed some heretical truths to emerge. Liberalism is very bad for women and Jewish dominance is very bad for Whites. As the Pervnado continues to blow, those truths will be exposed even more.

38 replies

Comments are closed.