Jewish Involvement in Contemporary Refugee and Migrant Organizations — Part One

“The Tree of Life Synagogue victims died so that refugees could live.”
Rob Eshman, Jewish Journal

We seek advantage through our dead. We make our dead your problem. The meaning we find in our deceased we find as a courtesy to you, to help you, to change your societies for the “better.””
David Cole, Takimag —


Refugee and asylum legislation is now a key policy area for many major immigrant-receiving countries. The UN Refugee Agency estimates there are currently 28.5 million refugees and asylum seekers worldwide, with most originating in South Sudan, Afghanistan, and Syria. The world’s largest refugee hosting countries are located near the epicenters of those countries experiencing difficulties, and include Turkey (3.5 million), Uganda (1.4 million), Pakistan (1.4 million), Lebanon (1 million), and the Islamic Republic of Iran (979,400). More incongruous, however, is the fact refugee and asylum populations from these same troubled areas have exploded in the West, in countries both geographically and culturally very distant from exporting nations. Since 1990, the new refugee population of Austria has climbed from 34,948 to 115,197; in Belgium from 25,911 to 42,128; in Finland from 2,348 to 20,713; in France from 193,000 to 337,143; in Germany from 816,000 to 970,302; in Ireland from 360 to 6,324; in Italy from 10,840 to 167,260; in Luxembourg from 687 to 1,995; in the Netherlands from 17,337 to 103,818; in Norway from 19,581 to 59,160; in Sweden from 109,663 to 240,889; in Switzerland from 40,943 to 92,995; and in the United Kingdom from 43,632 to 121,766. Increased lobbying on behalf of refugees, and increased quotas for refugee admissions, are now a very significant part of the West’s overall approach to migration. The only significant current exceptions to these trends are Hungary, where the number of new refugees has dropped from 45,123 to 5,641, and the United States and Canada, both of which were home in 2017 to roughly half the number of new refugees they hosted in 1990.

In the United States, the lower figures can be attributed to clauses within the Refugee Act of 1980, which both defined a refugee and gave the President (in consultation with Congress) the power to determine the number of refugees accepted to the United States each year. That figure currently stands at 45,000. The history of the Refugee Act can be traced to the 1975 State Department, where Lionel Rosenblatt, a Jewish diplomat and future President of Refugees International, was working on persuading Ted Kennedy to back legislation providing a visa program for refugees from Indochina in the wake of the Vietnam War and mass executions in Cambodia. Stephen Young, then a recently qualified D.C. lawyer who worked with Rosenblatt, recalled that “In 1975, no one had any claim to enter the U.S. as a refugee,” though, since the introduction of the 1952 McCarran-Walter Act, certain foreign aliens could be “paroled” into the country at the discretion of the Attorney General. In 1975 alone, Rosenblatt helped relocate approximately 140,000 Indochinese to the United States by working within the existing structure.

As the number of claims under McCarran-Walter increased, decision-making power was increasingly dispersed to the Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, and International Law, then chaired (1967–1979) by Jewish Democrat Joshua Eilberg. As figures like Rosenblatt and Eilberg began agitating for a more fluid yet formal legislative approach to the refugee question, Young recalls one conversation where Kennedy informed Rosenblatt he would only be willing to back legislation that would accept a maximum of 150,000 Indochinese refugees. Kennedy was presumably only too aware that both Congress and the American public were opposed to the acceptance of significant numbers of Indochinese migrants. In the final event, however, the Refugee Act, drafted by Jewish Congresswoman Elizabeth Holtzman and given a public face by Ted Kennedy — the same Ted Kennedy who gave a public face to the 1965 immigration act — provided visas for more than 1.7 million Indochinese in the period between 1980 and 1989.

In July 2018, Holtzman penned a scathing letter of resignation from her then role at the Department of Homeland Security, expressing disgust with the immigration, refugee, and asylum policies of Donald Trump, and claiming, quite contrary to all available evidence, that the United States in 1980 had “welcomed refugees” and had “readily accepted and absorbed” them. In reality, in those areas where they settled, Indochinese refugees were a significant drain on welfare and other forms of public assistance, barely assimilated, and “overloaded the public schools and medical facilities and were blamed for a rise in the rate of tuberculosis and other diseases.”[1]

The conspicuous presence of influential Jewish diplomats and politicians in the formulation of the Refugee Act of 1980, together with the obvious dissonance between Elizabeth Holtzman’s presentation of the Act and the reality of it’s impact, should be contextualized within the question of ethnic conflict in immigration policy more generally. In particular, it should be contextualized within Kevin MacDonald’s discussion of Jewish involvement in shaping U.S. immigration policy, in the course of which MacDonald concludes that “Jewish organizations have uniformly advocated high levels of immigration of all racial and ethnic groups into Western societies and have also advocated a multicultural model for these societies.”[2] The posited reasons for this uniformity include the historical Jewish interest in securing immigration rights for Jews, and the fact that pluralism is conducive to increased feelings of Jewish security — a state of affairs in which Jews become just one among many ethnic groups instead of a sole outgroup in a predominantly White, Christian nation. The theory allows for exceptions to the rule, in cases where Jewish interests are interpreted differently by a minority of Jews. Further, Jewish success in advancing pluralistic goals are said to be rooted in a number of Jewish traits, especially high verbal intelligence and a tendency toward in-group networking. This theoretical framework would seem to predict that Jews would be overrepresented in positions of influence within contemporary refugee, asylum, and similar pro-immigration or “immigrants rights” organizations. The following study of a number of such organizations strongly confirms all aspects of MacDonald’s theoretical framework, and offers a rejoinder to some recent criticisms of it.

Theoretical Issues.

Perhaps the most high-profile recent criticism of MacDonald’s theory of Jewish involvement in shaping U.S. immigration policy is that of Nathan Cofnas, a graduate student in the philosophy of biology at the University of Oxford. Cofnas offers an alternative theory in the form of his “default hypothesis.” In his own summary of the default hypothesis, Cofnas states: “Because of their above average intelligence and concentration in influential urban areas, Jews will be overrepresented in all intellectual movements and activities that are not overtly anti-Semitic.” As such, while Jews may be overrepresented in pro-immigration, pro-pluralism organizations and movements, the default hypothesis insists that they will also be overrepresented in anti-immigration or restrictionist movements (that are not anti-Semitic) also. There is an inherent implication that these overrepresentations will be, more or less, to the same degree.

Before moving to a discussion of findings in relation to Jewish involvement in contemporary refugee and migrant organizations, it is first necessary to test the default hypothesis by examining the scale and nature of Jewish involvement in contemporary anti-immigration organizations that are not anti-Semitic. To date, the only evidence offered by Cofnas in relation to such a test is the list of scheduled speakers at a single 1994 American Renaissance conference (where four of the ten speakers were Jewish).[3] While an interesting, if perfectly explicable, statistic, when compared with the extensive discussion of Jewish involvement in shaping U.S. immigration policy before 1965, and the broader contemporary context of widespread and intensive Jewish activism on behalf of pro-pluralist, pro-immigration causes, Cofnas’s riposte can only be described, kindly, as entirely inadequate. For the purposes of this study, the senior staff directories of the three most prominent anti-immigration think tanks currently in operation in United States were consulted. The three main anti-immigration organizations are the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), NumbersUSA, and Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR). In the following the thumbnail sketches of these organizations was provided by a long-time activist against immigration with insider’s insight; figures for Jewish representation are mine.

FAIR: FAIR has been described by former board members as “Dan Stein’s 401(k) plan.” It scarfs up most of the immigration patriot money available, especially from timid Establishment foundations, does essentially nothing and spends a lot of its time undercutting and blocking potential rivals. Stein has been running FAIR since 1988, i.e. has presided over a period of continuous defeats for the immigration patriot movement. Activists seriously debate whether he is a mole.

At FAIR, four of 52 senior staff members are Jewish, including President Dan Stein, Media Director Ira Mehlman, and Board members Sarah G. Epstein and Paul Nachman. This is a Jewish representation of approximately 7.7%. Across all three major anti-immigration organizations, Jews occupy 5.13% of senior roles. This is in fact a generous figure to settle on as an approximate broader working figure, because Jews were totally absent from the senior levels of every smaller organization consulted.[4]

CIS: The CIS does a lot of worthy studies, but is determinedly PC, presumably to maintain viability in the MSM/ Beltway, which limits its ability to appeal to a wider audience. The $PLC named it a Hate Group anyway a couple of years ago (as was FAIR, for no apparent reason), after which its main spokesman, Mark Krikorian, has been a little more daring, especially on twitter. Senior positions at CIS are listed in Center Staff, Board of Directors, and Center Fellows, totaling 37 individuals. Of these individuals, two are Jewish: Chief Litigation Counsel Julie Axelrod and Senior Policy Analyst Stephen Steinlight, although Mark Krikorian is their main public spokesperson. This is a Jewish representation of 5.41%.

NumbersUSA: NumbersUSA is a worthy organization, and its Congressional Grade card system excellent. However, its founder ,Roy Beck, is apparently planning to retire, so the future is uncertain. There are no Jewish members of staff listed at NumbersUSA. A But we will assume that Jews have an average representation in the anti-immigrant politics of around 5%.

Given that the Jewish proportion of the population of the United States is assumed to be around 2.2-2.5%, the six individual Jews at CIS and FAIR do technically amount to an overrepresentation at the top level, albeit rather modest in light of the representation of Jews active in legal and associated professions more generally, not to mention Cofnas’s flamboyant panegyric to Jewish intellectual and organizational talent. Taking into account an allowance for any such Jewish representation in anti-immigration politics on the grounds of alternative perceptions of specifically Jewish interests, discussed in the MacDonald thesis, a search was conducted on commentary on immigration given by these figures, or other indications as to their ideological leanings that may be evident in their broader work.

Working within MacDonald’s theoretical framework, in which concerns about anti-Semitism will be primary among Jews of all political hues, a reasonable prediction would be that Jewish representation in anti-immigration movements would be both exceptional in the larger picture of the immigration debate, and, rather than being concerned about traditional America as a whole, will be focussed almost exclusively on the exclusion of those immigrants or refugees perceived to be anti-Semitic, especially Muslims from the Middle East. In other words, such representations will be based on what might be termed renegade, minority, or abnormal perceptions of Jewish interests, rather than shared concerns or earnest sympathies with the greater mass of the native population.

In this regard, Ira Mehlman and Stephen Steinlight are especially interesting figures. In a 2012 interview with Peter Beinart, Mehlman is unambiguous in telling his interviewer: “current mass immigration policies are harming the interests of American Jews … Mass immigration is introducing large numbers of new people to American society who hold far less favorable opinions of Jews.” Similarly, in 2001 Steinlight penned an essay for the Center for Immigration Studies bluntly titled “The Jewish Stake in America’s Changing Demography.” In the course of the essay, Steinlight condemns earlier periods of nativism and restrictionism in the United States, and strongly promotes pluralistic and multicultural ideals. In fact, Steinlight’s only apparent grievance with existing immigration structures is that they have resulted in the fact

at some point in the next 20 years Muslims will outnumber Jews, and that Muslims with an “Islamic agenda” are growing active politically through a widespread network of national organizations. This is occurring at a time when the religion of Islam is being supplanted in many of the Islamic immigrant sending countries by the totalitarian ideology of Islamism of which vehement anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism form central tenets.

Such sentiments are essentially neoconservative, itself of course a largely Jewish ideological movement in conflict with native interests, and are entirely predictable within the basic theoretical framework offered by MacDonald, while doing little or nothing to corroborate the default hypothesis offered by Cofnas. Steinlight and Mehlman are primarily concerned by potential increases in anti-Semitism and a decline in Jewish political clout, and not with any broader implications of pluralism, multiculturalism, or White demographic decline.

Similar issues emerge when one considers another issue raised by Cofnas, putatively in support of his default hypothesis. This is the presence of Jewish academics active in what might be termed “race realism,” or genetic determinism, and the apparent fact that Jews have been strongly overrepresented among high-profile advocates of hereditarianism. Cofnas writes that “two out of seven of the most prominent hereditarians were Jewish (Hans Eysenck and Richard Herrnstein), making Jews extremely overrepresented in this group relative to their numbers in the general population.” Eysenck was half-Jewish, and Herrnstein married outside his group. Neither appear to have lived in any kind of sustained Jewish milieu, and Eysenck made a point of explicitly denying any affinity or connection to Jewishness.[5] It is interesting that Cofnas does not place his contention in any kind of context, or seek to prove his theory of rough parity in overrepresentations, by offering comparisons with overrepresentations among anti-hereditarian scholars.

Another issue, of course, is the obvious problem of extrapolating broader issues of politics and identity from an academic’s career. An excellent case in this regard, from the Arts, is the Jewish literary critic and Yale scholar Harold Bloom, who combines an obvious love and respect for the Western canon with a clear loathing for cultural marxist or deconstructionist approaches in literary academia. Working within the Cofnas approach, Bloom would likely be held up as an example of the default hypothesis at work. And yet Bloom is otherwise a committed pluralist who viewed the Bush administration as verging on a theocratic fascist regime, and sees the Trump administration as a catastrophe. Bloom writes: “Trump won the election because 62 million Americans live in a state of virtual reality. They no longer know what facts are. They’re also consumed by resentment, racial prejudice, and the deep fear that their America is vanishing forever. It will.” [Emphasis added] Another example, from the sciences, is the geneticist David Reich who has done much to advance an understanding of genetic differences between the races, yet has also repeatedly insisted that race is largely a “social construct.”

The point here is that MacDonald’s thesis does not require every Jewish academic to cynically use his or her discipline to advance Jewish interests, but that it does advance the idea that Jews will overwhelmingly see support for pluralism and mass immigration as being in their interests. As such, not every Jewish scientist studying race differences will necessarily oppose multiculturalism, racial pluralism, or mass immigration, and in fact very few will.

While these points may highlight some of the more obvious problems with the default hypothesis offered by Cofnas, a more thorough test is proposed by examining the scale of Jewish representation in contemporary refugee and migrant organizations.

Go to Part 2.

[1] See Gee, H. “The Refugee Burden: A Closer Look at the Refugee Act of 1980,” 26 N.C. J. Int’l L. & Com. Reg. 559 (2000).

[2] MacDonald, K. “Jewish Involvement in Shaping American Immigration Policy, 1881–1965: A Historical Review”, Population and Environment (1998) 19: 295.

[3] See Cofnas, N. “Judaism as a Group Evolutionary Strategy: A Critical Analysis of Kevin MacDonald’s Theory”, Human Nature (2018) 29: 134.

[4] No Jews were/are listed on staff at similar but smaller groups such as American Immigration Control Foundation, California Coalition for Immigration Reform, ProjectUSA, or American Patrol.

[5] “Hans Eysenck’s Controversial Career,” The Lancet, Vol. 376, August 7 2010, 407.

26 replies
  1. Arlene Johnson
    Arlene Johnson says:

    Jewish people lived successfully in Iran at the time of the Shah of Iran and today under Bashar al-Assad in Syria. Both these men held the same philosophy of all religions which I demonstrate in my biography entitled The Shah of Iran Mohammad Reza Pahlavi: Victim of His Times ISBN 97809725798-3-4, but ended in Iran with the CIA’s deposing of the Shah. To read this and many other details, log onto To read comments by others who have already read this book, log onto The previous post is immediately after this one.


    Arlene Johnson

  2. Rerevisionist
    Rerevisionist says:

    Terrific piece by Andrew Joyce. (It’s a sad commentary that several British writers are doing work which Americans could be expected to have done, many years ago). May I just make two points:-
    [1] On Indo-China and refugees. Dr Joyce seems to have taken over the Jewish media view, that the (((USA))) lost their war on Vietnam. This of course is untrue: Jews made a fortune in profits, and the Rothschilds control the banking system in Vietnam. Plus of course millions of ‘gooks’ and their stupid US torturers – some of whom died – are chalked up to the dead goy count. The same misinterpretation applies to Jew commentators on 1968.
    [2] On Islam, I thought it was pretty well established that it was invented by Jews, trying to repeat their success with Christianity. The absurd rubbish about being ‘Abrahamic’, the killing by formula (percentage of Muslims in a population), the cultish group cohesion, etc ad nauseam is a Jewish thing transplanted into a new savage population. So, when a Jew says Moslems may be a problem, it’s just another set of dissimulations, a cover story, controlled opposition. Just as with Christianity, the claim of hatred and rivalry is another lie to be deployed on some occasions, not others; Popes and Jews have collaborated and continue to collaborate – the stories of rivalry are a pretence.

  3. Rerevisionist
    Rerevisionist says:

    I should have mentioned two other consequences of the Jewish/US invasion of Vietnam.
    [1] All the experimental weapons, mass herding of populations, rapes, close quarter murders, napalm and burning people to death,chemical warfare, and use of shells/ gunships/ high explosives and all the rest of it, was visibly carried out by whites. This is a handy propaganda weapons for Jews. Next time a simpleton like MacDonald expresses surprise at anti-white beliefs, perhaps he/they might look into the issue.
    [2] Another consequence of course was the evidence used by Jews to force displaced people into white countries. The reason there are people trying to escape e.g. Afghanistan and Syria is because US generals etc under Jew control have bombed an attacked them. Obviously the Jew-controlled media are going to conceal this. And presumably with equal inevitability whites will continue to watch their streams of propaganda garbage.

    • Charles Frey
      Charles Frey says:

      01 R, much of what you say above is valid. What is not valid, NOR ACCEPTABLE, is your characterization of host KM as a
      ” simpleton ” !!!

      02 You state, that Britishers write about salient matters, that Americans should deal with. Yet I, living behind my rural Ontario cornfield, had to inform you about the all but unknown ” Round Square Conference “, domiciled in Scotland. A network of schools for the Super-Elite, now straddling the world.

      This is in your very own backyard, yet you admitted complete ignorance of its existence.

      03 You lack all evidence of what KM knows, nor what he thinks about US involvement in Nam.

      04 The famous ” girl in the picture “, often referenced merely as ” the napalm girl “, is the South Vietnamese Kim Phuc; since married, with two children, living just east of Toronto: including one or both parents.

      05 Some anonymous donor from Montreal had gifted her a house. Probably some hopefully regretful and guilt-ridden armaments supplier to the apparatus raining American Values on an unreceptive world. And since then: as well as being in the offing.

      06 My photo journalist sister had been to Viet Nam and was well acquainted with Kim. There are brief videos on the net, taken immediately after her escape from her village, in which a Temple had just been napalmed by the USAF.

      This photo was/is the most published and republished in the world. What the hell do you know about world opinion in general at that time, or KM’s in particular ???

      07 I invite you to make good on your last threat here, some time ago, not to deign to write for us dimwits any longer.

      08 Factual or interpretive disagreement, even assertively couched, is in. Kindergarten name calling is out !

        • Charles Frey
          Charles Frey says:

          Your link is not exactly confidence inspiring when you analyze its windings.

          01 Without the US, there would have been no war, the routed French would just have gone home. As befitted all colonialists at that time.

          02 VN would have become what it became, despite the War.

          03 The plane was a US Douglas Skyraider.

          04 The napalm was US or possibly Canadian made. Billions in war supplies came from Canada: including 800 million tax fraudster Bronfman’s rye whiskey.

          05 The commander having assigned the periphery of her village as a target was American.

          06 The last and least cog an inexpert South Vietnamese Air Force pilot.

          Function – not labels !

  4. Phillip Kameen
    Phillip Kameen says:

    Does Andrew Joyce have a twitter handle again or is he permanently banned? I really liked his tweets

  5. melvin polatnick
    melvin polatnick says:

    Liberal Rabbis herd members of their Synagogues to protest against border control. Immigrants provide jobs and votes for Jewish social workers and politicians. Follow the money.

  6. RonaldB
    RonaldB says:

    I’m kind of curious where you’re going with this. You see to be saying that any Jewish involvement in anti-immigration groups is either out of direct perceived self-interest, as in admitting hoards of anti-Semitic Muslims, or by elapsed Jews, like myself, with little or no connection to the organized Jewish community.

    I think to have a more detailed picture of Jewish positions, you have to differentiate reform Jews, whose representative organizations are pretty much straight cultural Marxist, with the Orthodox Jews, who maintain a more traditional Jewish identity and who have a greater understanding of, and sympathy for, national identity. See for example, the following YouTube video:

    A study is, by its nature, empirical, but you bring in motivations and writings from the Jewish examples in the anti-immigration organizations. To me, the safest place, by far, for a Jew is in traditional, Christian-oriented America. The fear that without destroying our culture through multi-cultural dilution, the Jews are not safe, is just nuts. It’s totally illogical. John Derbyshire labeled it the “Cossack” syndrome: any ripple brings out fears that the Cossacks are sharpening their swords and gathering their horses.

    • Lasse Karagiannis
      Lasse Karagiannis says:

      RonaldB, I see that you link to a videoclip with Rabbi David Bar Chaim.
      It is funny how you Jews never want to alert the Non-Jew about the mind blowing criminality of Judaism, save for a handful of whistle blowers throughout world history.
      Judaism forbids compassion towards the Non-Jew (Lo Sichonaym), it is forbidden to save the Non-Jew from death if the Jew can get away with it without retribution(Lo moridim ve lo moalim).
      Murder of a Non-Jew by a Jew is not considered murder within Judaism.
      You have the concept which you call Mipnei Darkei Shalom (peaceful ways) were the ruling is that Jews are allowed to perform acts of compassion as long as Jews are not in power, but only if not are performed out of compassion but as sort of a PR-stunt.
      Here a videoclip that I made from a lecture by rabbi David Bar Chim which probably was not intended for a Non-Jewish audience, since he teaches Jews how to lie to the Non-Jew.
      In the video description there are links to sources proving my above statements about Judaism, where I only use presentations from Jewish humanists and former Jews.

      It is a undisputed fact that the Holocaust and the guilt associated with it,
      is the reason why so many white people in European countries battle expressions of nationalism and patrotism, believing that the “Nazis will come back” if not sensations and expressions of said emotions are being surpressed.
      The irony of the story is that no Non-Jew would ever believe the fantastic atrocity stories propagated by Organized Jewry if they knew what Judaism really teaches and knew about the concerted effort by Jews to keep the Non-Jew in the dark regarding its criminality.
      Instead there would even be a broad sense of sympathy for the false idea that the Nazis intended to exterminate the Jews when finding out that the very climax of Judaism is defined as the arrival of the Moshiach where his tasks are to enslave the Non-Jew and exterminate the ones who refuses to accept Jewish supremacy.

      There would also be no support whatsover by the Non-Jew for the criminal entity in the Middle East, if he knew about the incitements against his life as defined in Judaism.
      Therefore the only solution for Jews and Non-Jews who want to live in a world of peace and harmony is to expose Judaism’s criminality to the world, because only by undermining the credibility of Organized Jewry is the Holocaust belief and associated guilt going to be dropped from the European Non-Jew.
      The Jew who wants to be a friend of the Non-Jew should therefore immediately start to expose Judaism with tweets and facebook posts and
      -shame organized Jewry for their refusal to alert the Non-Jew that his children might not always be saved from death by all Jews,
      -shame them for not alerting the Non-Jew denouncing the tasks of the Moshiach,
      -shame them for censoring survivors of Auschwitz who tell a diametrically opposite story than the official narrative (Search “Holohoax survivors who tell the truth”),
      -shame them for creating the false eternal victim hood narrative to steal indigenous peoples land while surpressing that murder is not murder when it comes to Non-Jews etc. etc.

    • Sam J.
      Sam J. says:

      “…I think to have a more detailed picture of Jewish positions, you have to differentiate reform Jews, whose representative organizations are pretty much straight cultural Marxist, with the Orthodox Jews…”

      Actually we don’t need this at all. Most of us have fairly good picture of the Jews and the only thing we need is to get rid of you. Deport you from our territories. Peacefully if we can get it but by any means possible. This endless quibbling that the Jews create just hides the the fact that every country that has any significant amount of Jews move to it turns to shit from your relentless attacks on it. The non religious Jews are bad and the religious ones religion says we will all be Jews slaves and everything we own will be theirs. I find no redeeming value in any of you.

      As best as I can tell the behavior of a large number of Jews over thousands of years moving into your country is identical to a tribe of psychopaths invading the country. Whether all Jews are psychopaths or not is irrelevant as the behavior is the same. Maybe this is why the Jews have been thrown out of every single country they’ve been to in any great numbers. People can only stand psychopathic behavior so long then they must get rid of them to save themselves.

      The single greatest greatest piece of evidence proving that we should have zero refugees is a Jew holding up a sign saying they were refugees once.

      • Normal White Man
        Normal White Man says:

        Well said!

        And to ‘RonaldB’: You seem to be operating under the misconception that we are still susceptible to the same stale old jewish gibshite. That ship has sailed bud!
        You can get out now. Go be with your ethnic kin in the rogue, terrorist state of Israel, amongst people who are genetically, psychologically and spiritually akin to yourself.
        You people are no longer wanted in White nations, do you understand? Give up your psychotic, idiotically delusional aspirations and leave wilfully or be removed in a manner that you jews truly deserve. Jüden RAUS }: )

    • BigGuy
      BigGuy says:

      Unless your name is Stephen Miller, you can f*ck right off. You jews really do feel the need to stick your noses in everything, as your comment shows. We get it – you “people” need to make sure you have co-ethics everywhere so that you have all of your bases covered. Jared Kushner is a great example.

      The differences between reform, conservative, and orthodox jews are negligible; the most important factor is that you’re all ashkenazis. There are more than a few news articles written recently about how there’s broad jewish opposition to Trump, even among orthodox jews. One article focused on how Jared Kushner’s friends and family were upset with him due to his involvement in the Trump administration.

      In conclusion, please deport yourself to Israel. You’re not wanted in the West.

  7. Trenchant
    Trenchant says:

    Yeoman’s work yet again by Dr. Joyce. It’s quite extraordinary that CCTV did not capture the alleged Tree of Life synagogue attack, despite a security drill earlier in the year. Those cameras always seem to be malfunctioning at inopportune moments.

    • Charles Frey
      Charles Frey says:

      ” [I]nopportune moments”… such as the dozen or so cameras [14 ?] surveilling the Pentagon impact by something other than a plane.

      A plane whose unrecovered engines were ostensibly shredded by the impact and heat of the explosion, though an engine itself is a sort of bomb, whose continuous nano second explosions power its turbines.

      A physical impact, on 9/11, necessitated by CEO Dov Zakheim’s to date unexplained missing TRILLIONS [no typo] announced by Rumsfeld on 9/10; a day prior.

      Adding a new, in this case Jewish explosive principle to the “International Accounting Principles ” standards. Politically useful cameras indeed: at least when purposefully deactivated !

  8. Charlie
    Charlie says:

    Americans believe there’s a difference between a democrat and a republican. Democrats are happy with the communist government they created and republicans are happy with the fascist government they created and both want it kept that way. Democrats want the moochers to keep them in power and republicans want the cheap labor to exploit. Jews want the moochers as a standing army against whites and to dilute nationalism and to replace whites with the Talmudic goal of enslaving the population. Western civilization is Jew controlled and their populations a slave mentality. Western corporations are The Synagogue of Satan and their executives the Sandedrin and Pharisees.

  9. Richard B
    Richard B says:

    “The posited reasons for this uniformity include the historical Jewish interest in securing immigration rights for Jews,”

    It’s all about them. All the time, always.

    “and the fact that pluralism is conducive to increased feelings of Jewish security”

    If they really want to be secure then start your own country. I mean a real country. Not a country built from the dollars of your tax-slaves.

    “a state of affairs in which Jews become just one among many ethnic groups instead of a sole outgroup in a predominantly White, Christian nation.”

    No, a state of affairs in which Jews rule over those they can control. Because, as already stated, it’s all about them. All the time, always.

  10. Richard B
    Richard B says:

    “Jewish success in advancing pluralistic goals are said to be rooted in a number of Jewish traits, especially high verbal intelligence and a tendency toward in-group networking.”

    This is the one-two punch that really knocked out the Host Population.
    Because there is an almost irresistable tendency to attribute high verbal intelligence with intelligence itself, ie; the capacity to make experience and learning synonymous; to then convert that learning into knowledge and then use that knowledge to learn more, to make predictive statements, thereby improving one’s adaptive powers.

    In other words, not just to create a stable environment, but one so stable that significant innovation is possible. Innovation used as a means of improving adaptation and growth. You know, Western Civilization!

    There is no question at all that this is the signal acheivement of Whites, and the reason they’re so envied and resented. It’s hard to keep up.

    But that brings us to the next point.

    Higher Education, advanced learning, high-level problem-solving and significant innovation is for the very few, though everyone in the end ultimately benefits in one way or another. Still, being for the very few it tends to produce resentment.

    So, when the West extended its fruits, so to speak, of higher education to Whites who emerged as a result of the population explosion, they responded negatively, dismissing it higher education as “Elitist” and having nothing to do with what they were really intersted in – money. These were the original snowflakes. They were the ones who páved the way for the snowflakes who currently occupy the seats of our teaching-learning institutions. Which is why little of either teaching or learning goes on in them today.

    A kind of Gresham’s Law took over as inferior culture began to drive out superior culture – Among Whites!, ie; intra-racial. This was the beginning of the end.

    To be perfectly blunt, Dumb middle-class Whites pushed out culturally superior Whites (a superiority that has nothing at all to do with one’s socio-economic background), ie; Whites more competent at high-level problem-solving and significant innovation. You know, the kind of thing that keeps a race going, and not just a race, but the entire species. Which would explain the mass migration to the West.

    In any event, this left a big gaping hole for Jews to move right in and impress easily impressed Whites with their verbal gifts which the dumb, traitorous Whites confused with high-level intelligence, which it wasn’t – as we’re all learning, given the extraordinarily dysfunctional and maladaptive culture Jews created. Or, more accurately, the see the shambles they’ve made out of a once great culture (the West) since they got their grubby little paws on the centers of power.

    Whites also discovered at the same time that they didn’t have each others back. They weren’t organized and couldn’t defend their own interest. They couldn’t even defend their own children’s future. And, in the case of Joe Biden’s insane speech lauding the replacement of Whites (which presumably includes his own children) were enthusiastically working against the interest of their own children.

    Hence the one-two punch.

    They say that admitting one has a problem is the first step in solving it. Well, wanting to live in the solution and not simply complain about the problem or get stuck in the level of analysis, it might be well worth our time to recover what we do best and organize along those lines for the purpose of survival. And, if that’s not going to happen for whatever reason, then to do as much damage as humanly possible before it’s all said and done.

  11. Richard B
    Richard B says:

    “Because of their above average intelligence and concentration in influential urban areas, Jews will be overrepresented in all intellectual movements and activities that are not overtly anti-Semitic.”

    If they really possessed above average intelligence why didn’t they create their own civilization? Why were they so dependent on the West. Another way of putting it is that Jews are dependent on the very people they’re violating! Is violating a people you’re dependent on some new definition of intelligence? Really?

    Also, if Jews are so smart where’s their Homer, Plato, Aristotle? Where are their Ceasars? Where is their Rome? Of course, anyone of us could provide endless examples in the Arts & Sciences and forms of governance in the West throughout the last 3,000 years. But you get the idea.

    So, let’s use a cozier, more homely example, shall we?
    Let’s use as our analogy a world Jews love, the world of business. Let a Corporation serve stand for Civilization. Let Jews stand for a modestly talented, positively obnoxious and extremely ambitious new hire who is a low-character, self-focused employee, but a high performer who makes his partners and stakeholders money.

    From the moment he enters the company he’s got his mind set on being CEO. He lusts after nothing more than that view from the top. So, as he moves up, he’s constantly looking up (with characteristic hatred of anything not him, or anything that stands in his way).
    And, though he makes his partners money, it’s not at all clear – yet – what he’s actually doing with it.

    What do you think he’s going to do when he gets to the top? Which he ultimately does, impressing the easily impressed with his verbal gifts, which they confuse with genuine intelligence.

    He will have nowhere to look but down. And he does look down, with contempt. Just as his employees look up with admiration at first, but now with resentment when it becomes clear he doesn’t care about him. Especially since he’s started replacing them with employees who make him feel more comfortable, ie; won’t expose his corruption and incompetence and take his job from him.

    But the company must look up and forward in order to keep from stagnating, from becoming dysfunctional and maladaptive. In short, from going out of business. But, alas, he doesn’t change. He’s incapable of change. And so, the whole thing comes crashing to the ground.

    And that is the postion we’re in today.

    They are now proving to the world that though they are good at infiltration and subversion, they’re no damned good at what matters most, social-management.

    Let me be blunt. As long as Jews are in power they’re a threat to the survival of the human race. Because they don’t have the human race’s best interest in mind, at all, and never did. They’re too self-focused.

    Maybe we should work toward directing the public’s attention toward this unpleasant fact. Maybe we can derive a certain healthy power from this. After all, wasn’t it Orwell who talked about the power of facing unpleasant facts. Well, to the extent that he’s right, that’s what we should do.

    • Richard B
      Richard B says:

      “What do you think he’s going to do when he gets to the top? He will have nowhere to look but down.”

      Forgive the omission in the above comment, but the main point was that they were looking up only in ambition to take over, not lead. So, they’re not only a hostile elite, they’re an incompetent elite as well.

      People from Nicholas Hassim Taleb (Skin In The Game) to Tucker Carlson (Ship Of Fools) have pointed out the unbelieveable incompetence of our leaders today and the corresponding lack of accountability.

      Incompetent, Unaccountable, and, so it would seem, All Powerful. And at a time when the world is more complex and unpredictable than ever before. This means they’ll become increasingly more dependent on force to sustain their power.

      But, if history proves one thing it’s that a social order sustained by force only increases the uncontrolled exercise of naked power. All of which results in a dramatic destablization of the very culture and its social-institutions the elite are attempting to control (witness Chicago, for example, and not just Chicago).

      I think we’ve stumbled on something that could serve as 1. an organizing principle, to moblize a critical mass, and 2. a point of attack, a valid accusation to hurl at the elite in an effort to question their right to rule – given that their success will spell mankind’s failure.

      From this perspective it will be easier for more and more people to see that their slanderous accusations are simply an attempt for the truly guilty to cover their tracks.

      Just as Law Enforcement couldn’t get Al Capone for murder they had to get him for tax evasion, we might have to settle for the non-stop 24/7 accusation of an easily verifiable fact – their unbelieveable incompetence and how, mixed with a lack of accountability and unlimited power makes them a threat to the entire human race. Who’s calling who a “cancer”?

  12. tom sunic
    tom sunic says:

    The German Bishops’ Conference ( Cardinal T. Marx) and the US Bishops’ Conference are equally vocal in support of bringing into the EU/ USA millions of non-European migrants. The Unholy Alliance: The capitalist Merchant the communist Commissar, the catholic Pope.

    • Richard B
      Richard B says:

      Which means, in effect, Jewish Supremacy has successfully subsumed Christianity in all of its forms, and not just Christianity.

      It might well be worth pointing out to Westerners in general, and Whites in particular, who may or may not be believers, what the word “God” in the West signifies, what it refers to.

      It refers, of course, to a being that is not only totally adequate to all demands, perfectly competent in all action, a being of the highest possible value, whose spirit pervades in all things, so that it’s placed above criticism, loved unconditionally, and blindly obeyed; but also, and above all, the word God refers to a being absolutely free of all consequence. It has nothing to do with consequences. The idea that God would have to pay the consequences of his actions is absurd, which might explain why some choose not to believe in the word God, though they believe in value, and a pervasiveness of spirit and all the rest.

      And that choice to believe didn’t come out of nowhere. It was created out of the hearts and minds, out of the great and terrible suffering of a people who far from thinking they were chosen, believed instead in choice. The freedom of choice to believe in God or not is entirely the creation of White men.

      That is why we’re despised. There’s simply too much responsibility and hard work when it comes to freedom, especially the freedom of choice. Better to simply believe and obey. Heaven is a place where no one creates, where no one doubts, or innovates. And that is what the Pyrrhic Victory of Jewish Supremacy, means. The end of the brief 200+year Culture of Individual Conscience and the return of the thousands of years old Culture of Blind Obedience to Authority. Their authority.

      And what is their authority?

      They see themselves as God. They see themselves as possessing all of the attributes listed above. If a person with those attributes was analyzed by a psychologist they’d qualify as a someone with narcissistic personality disorder, as a sociopath or psychopath. But not a God.

      So what does this mean?

      It means that an antisemite today is someone who doesn’t believe that Jews are God. An antisemite is someone who values the culture of individual conscience and freedom of choice over the demands of Jewish Supremacy.

      What all of this means is that, because Jews do feel that way about themselves and have the power to effectuate that belief, they also have the power to effectuate their demands. It means they have the power to remove freedom of choice from the matter as far as we are concerned (it also makes a mockery out of the accusation of White Supremacy).

      Now this, I believe, is the basic assumption behind the argument that we should allow to burn like a hard, gem-like flame. That Jewish Supremacy’s demand that we abandon our culture of individual conscience and freedom of choice, a culture that took thousands of years to achieve, so that we must now bow down before the culture of blind obedience to their authority and worship them as God, is Insane!

      And an insane person is incompetent to judge anyone on moral grounds. This invalidates the accusation of antisemitism and completely discredits the accuser. It also reveals them for who they are, a highly intelligent criminal gang who have hijacked a culture and are holding its people hostage.

      There’s only one way to free ourselves and it isn’t by paying a ransom.

    • Olorin
      Olorin says:

      Not at my home info nexus, but would like to mention the recent 4chan meme showing that the entire staff of immigration lawyers for one of the big Catholic immigration organizations is entirely Jewish or nearly so.

      People trafficking is big and lucrative global bidness.

  13. Loren R.
    Loren R. says:

    The great news is that if we deport all jews to Israel we will be getting rid of a boatload of lawyers!!
    This is a win, win situation. Our GDP will go through the roof!!
    We want reparations for all the crap they have done to middle American and then they get get on the boat and get the hell out of here.

  14. Andrea Ostrov Letania
    Andrea Ostrov Letania says:

    When Jews purport to support ‘refugees’, they are really pushing for De-population of Arabs in the Middle East. Jews want more war in Syria… so that Jews could grab territory in there … or to drive Palestinians in West Bank into Syria.

    Jews want to empty parts of the Middle East so that Zionists can create Greater Israel. And Jews want to fill up the West with more non-whites in order to play divide-and-rule among goyim. When Jews say ‘Diversity is OUR strength’, they don’t mean All of Us will benefit. ‘Our’ just means Jewish.

    If Jews really cared about refugees, they should first acknowledge that the main problem(or crime) is people being forced to become refugees in the first place. So, real humanitarians should try to prevent wars that turn people into refugees. But notice how Jews NEVER address that issue. If anything, Jews have been pushing for endless Neocon warmongering policies that turned the Middle East and North Africa upside down. Jews also worked with Neo-Nazis in Ukraine to foment a refugee crisis there as well.
    So, Jews see nothing wrong with using their power to spread wars and/or economic destruction(via sanctions especially) that turn millions into refugees. Turning goyim into refugees is okay, indeed wonderful. Jewish Moralism on the Refugee Question is never about preventing people from becoming refugees but about how the West(but never Israel) must welcome the refugees. And we must never ever mention the fact that those refugees are fleeing from war zones created by Zio-globalist policies carried out by the US-Israel-Saudi Axis. (Saudis are turncoat Arabs who will harm other Muslims to maintain their artificially vaunted place in the Middle East.) Libya and Syria would be stable nations if not for the fact that US-Saudis-and-Israel(and Turkey in a spectacular act of miscalculation) conspired to aid and arm Jihadi lunatics. Of course, this entailed violation of border security in Libya and Syria. So much for the wonders of Open Borders. In Syria, it led to 10,000s of terrorists flowing freely from all sides. I guess the West must take in millions of refugees while Syria must take in tons of Jihadis. The wonders of Open Borders(or Broken Borders).

    Jews say the West must accept refugees because them poor folks are just like Jewish ‘refugees’ in the 20th century. But if we go by the earlier history, the sober lesson should be ‘taking in refugees is a bad idea’. Palestine took in Jewish refugees, and guess what happened? Jews took over the territory and now treat Palestinians like subhuman cattle in West Bank.
    US took in Jewish refugees, but Jews took over America and are now gloating about how they’re gonna replace the white population. Boy, aren’t Jews so grateful to whites for having been welcomed into America.
    Even Jewish ‘refugees’ from the Soviet Union in the 1980s turned out to be vile scum like Max Boot and Julia Ioffe who hates people saying ‘Merry Christmas’ to her. (Btw, if Jews hate Christmas so much, how about a law that forbids Jews from profiting from Christmas? Jews rake in so much cash from the Christmas season but bitch about how much they hate Christians and the Christian holiday.)

    Jews always mention evil Hitler and how the world didn’t do enough to save Jews from Nazis. But when millions were dying in genocides in Ukraine, China, Cambodia, or Rwanda, how many Jews volunteered to save innocent lives from mass slaughter or famine? (Has anyone met a Jew who thinks the Jewish race should nobly sacrifice their own to save members of another kind? Jews would laugh at such a notion. When millions of Ukrainians were dying in the Great Famine, how many Jews
    urged fellow Jews to sacrifice their own lives to save those poor Ukrainian goyim? NONE. Also, whenever Jews invoke altruism, it is never at their own expense but at the expense of others. Jews tribalize the sanctimony but universalize the costs. Jews make a big show of caring about refugees, but the burden is pushed onto goyim. Jews use Western Power to invade & destroy the Middle East and then encourage more immigration/migration of non-white ‘refugees’ to use against white goy ‘racist-nazi-xenophobes’ in the West.)

    Also, even though the Nazis were clearly evil, maybe the fact that there was yet another outbreak of anti-Jewish violence had SOMETHING to do with Jewish perfidy? Given Jewish behavior in the US and Russia since the end of the Cold War — Jews surely knew how to rape the entire economy of Russia in the 90s — , is it a stretch to assume that Jews in the past acted like they do in our time? While there’s no doubt that the Nazis over-reacted, they meted out violence not to a saintly innocent people but a vile, hateful, murderous, and contemptuous people.

    • Richard B
      Richard B says:

      Certainly one take away from your excellent comment is that Jewish intelligence is pretty much limited to infiltration, subversion and destruction.

      But, though they live out of a consequence-free mental model, they definitely don’t live in a consequence-free world. Because Jews are now at the height of their power there’s a tendency for many to think that they’re invincible. But I think that’s a judgment made in error. They’re powerful, but not invincible. No one is.

      I wouldn’t be surprised if they destroy half the human race before it’s all said and done, and without batting an eye, but Jews possess a fatal flaw that many people are beginning to see and that they simply won’t be able to hide.

      They’re no damned good at social-management.

      In a world more complex and unpredictable than ever before social-management is not a skill any elite can afford to be without. Not if they want to maintain their power.

      But they won’t be able to, and for two reasons devoid of any complexity,
      1. They didn’t create what they now control.
      2. They’ve never controlled anything before, ever. Let alone anything of this magnitude. Like Milton’s God they’re becoming increasingly dark with excessive bright. A phrase I never understood until now.

      In any event, they’ll be destroyed in pretty much the same way they’ve destroyed everything around them for the last 100+years. It’s their destiny.

Comments are closed.