Vulture Capitalism, Jews — and Hollywood, Part 2

Go to Part 1.

The Big Short. Did things get any better in 2015 when the star-studded film The Big Short came out? Definitely not. Here we had Brad Pitt, Steve Carell, Christian Bale and Ryan Gosling — goys to a man — acting out the script of the book of the same name by best-selling author Michael Lewis (Moneyball, The Blind Side). And that script would be about how the subprime mortgage industry was slated for a big fall, with our main characters devising ways to place bets on such a fall. To them, there was a serious housing bubble and they meant to

collect when the collapse of the bubble came.

Ryan Gosling

This time, however, Hollywood alone cannot be faulted for seriously downplaying Jewish identity because gentile author Lewis already did that for them, thank you very much.

I had high hopes for Lewis’s book revolving around Jewish identity and was encouraged when I read the second sentence of Chapter One: “[Steve Eisman had] grown up in New York City, gone to yeshiva schools, graduated from the University of Pennsylvania magna cum laude, and then with honors from Harvard Law School.” Yes, I thought, this book was going to openly discuss Jewish identity on Wall Street.

A few pages later, Lewis describes Eisman’s wife and her mother talking about the United Jewish Appeal, as well as how the young Eisman studied the Talmud to find its internal inconsistencies, so I thought we might have a Jewish tale on par with Jordan Belfort’s The Wolf of Wall Street. Alas, that was the last we heard of anything explicitly related to Jews or Jewishness. What a pity, since the subprime mortgage bond collapse was in fact an intensely Jewish affair.

We could have read about Lloyd Blankfein of Goldman Sachs, Maurice “Hank” Greenberg of AIG, Sandy Weill of Citigroup, Dick Fuld of bankrupt Lehman Brothers, or Alan Schwartz of the failed Bear Sterns—and many, many other Jewish players on Wall Street. Most remarkably, we read nary a word on the real powers in finance, people like those “The Three Apostles,” Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan, Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin or his successor Larry Summers. Nor do we read more than passing reference to two-term Fed Chair Ben Bernanke, who oversaw the entire life of the subprime mortgage fiasco, serving from 2006 to 2014.

Worse, we never read about the larger narrative surrounding the financial crisis of those years. (This review of then Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson’s account of the crisis gives a suitable feel for how tremendously dangerous the period was.)

In The Big Short, Lewis follows previously mentioned Steve Eisman, as well as a gentile California neurologist-turned hedge fund manager, Michael Burry.  Also featured in the book is Greg Lippmann, head subprime manager at Deutsche Bank, but Lewis never once refers to Lippmann as Jewish. This just isn’t the story Lewis wants to tell, so it’s no surprise that Hollywood screenwriters also left out this important Jewish angle.

Turning now to the 2015 film version of The Big Short, we see that director and co-screenwriter Adam McKay, who is married to the Jewish Shira Piven, does, to his credit, faithfully show the scene where the young Eisman is in a synagogue with his rabbi. But my feeling is that this is done so much in passing that it will be lost on most gentile viewers. More to the point, however, is that actor Steve Carell simply doesn’t come across in any way as Jewish.

Steve Carell should have been Jewish

Now that we’ve looked at visual issues and identity in The Big Short, let’s consider some of the big dollar figures at stake. “Million” hardly has meaning in the debacle, with “billion” being a far more common term (and “trillion” popping up now and again). Despite the impression readers and viewers might have, the four main characters featured in book and movie were hardly the biggest players in the subprime mortgage game, though neurologist Michael Burry certainly did well, as this excerpt from a Vanity Fair article Lewis did in March 2010 shows:

It was precisely the moment he had told his investors, back in the summer of 2005, that they only needed to wait for. Crappy mortgages worth nearly $400 billion were resetting from their teaser rates to new, higher rates. By the end of July his marks were moving rapidly in his favor — and he was reading about the genius of people like John Paulson, who had come to the trade a year after he had. The Bloomberg News service ran an article about the few people who appeared to have seen the catastrophe coming. Only one worked as a bond trader inside a big Wall Street firm: a formerly obscure asset-backed-bond trader at Deutsche Bank named Greg Lippmann. The investor most conspicuously absent from the Bloomberg News article — one who had made $100 million for himself and $725 million for his investors — sat alone in his office, in Cupertino, California. By June 30, 2008, any investor who had stuck with Scion Capital from its beginning, on November 1, 2000, had a gain, after fees and expenses, of 489.34 percent. (The gross gain of the fund had been 726 percent.) Over the same period the S&P 500 returned just a bit more than 2 percent.

A far bigger winner was John Paulson, who appears briefly in the article, having spoken to Lewis for the book. Personally, what I’d like to have read about is Paulson’s bets on subprime mortgages. While Burry made just shy of a billion dollars, Paulson made history by earning $4 billion for himself in 2007, followed by $5 billion three years later. “Paulson, bucking the trends and the advice of other investors, gambled that the mortgage market would collapse. His bet paid off immensely. In 2007, the funds run by Paulson were up $15 billion — a staggering investment return rate of nearly 600%.” Of course, for career reasons, I can see why Lewis didn’t dwell on Paulson in the book, and naturally Hollywood was happy to let it go unmentioned.

Paulson’s mother was Jewish, and Paulson has worked in a highly Jewish milieu during his education and career, beginning with a Sidney Weinberg/Goldman Sachs scholarship. Later, he worked with Leon Levy at Odyssey Partners, then moved to Bear Stearns. His older sister, Theodora Bar-El, is an Israeli biologist. Perhaps I should read Gregory Zuckerman’s 2009 book The Greatest Trade Ever: The Behind-the-Scenes Story of How John Paulson Defied Wall Street and Made Financial History to fill in the missing gaps in this story. (And as far as I know, Hollywood has yet to make a film from Zuckerman’s book.)

Zooming out, we read in The Big Short that in total, according to an IMF estimation, about $1 trillion dollars was lost due to the subprime crisis. (Oddly, at the end of the film, we read: “When the dust settled from the collapse, 5 trillion dollars in pension money, real estate value, 401k, savings, and bonds had disappeared.” I can’t account for this large discrepancy.)

Let’s stick with the IMF’s estimate of $1 trillion. That’s a lot of billions in there, far, far more than Paulson’s money alone. So where did the money go?  More to the point, who is responsible? Lewis allows his characters to blame stupid investment banks, but others point directly to those in charge of America’s finances: “The Three (Jewish) Apostles — Greenspan, Rubin, and Summers,” as well as Greenspan’s successor, Bernanke.

Time Magazine’s Entry in the “Most Ironic Story of the Year” Category

Just as when you throw a rock in the air at a Wall Street soiree you’ll almost certainly hit someone guilty, one can turn to practically any source on Greenspan et al.’s roles and find many suspicious characters. For instance, let’s consider this unlikely source for suspicion about what The Three Apostles and other high-placed Jews were up to — Clyde Prestowitz’s 2010 The Betrayal of American Prosperity. Here, Prestowitz notes how in 1989 and 1993, financial instruments that later played a central role in the meltdown of 2008–9 were exempted from government oversight. For instance, Greenspan was adamant about getting the government out of the way. “In fact, Greenspan largely halted the Fed’s active oversight of the banking industry.” Joined by Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin and subsequent Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers, “the three mounted an aggressive campaign to halt any efforts to regulate trading of new derivative instruments.”

When measures to impose constraints on these risky trades were being considered, Greenspan, Rubin, and Summers pointedly blocked them. Also, when Brooksley Born, Chairwoman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, attempted to do her job, Summers aggressively attacked her actions. Right on cue, Greenspan, Rubin and Arthur Levitt of the Securities and Exchange Commission pressured Congress to straightjacket Born. (I thought of the beleaguered Ms. Born when in the film version of The Big Short, Georgia Hale, an employee at Standard & Poor’s Financial Services, was grilled by a visiting Mark Baum [Steve Eisman].)

This bullying of Born persisted into 2000, as Greenspan continued to insist that Wall Street should be trusted and left to its own devices. “With those assurances, Congress went ahead and stripped the CFTC of responsibility for derivatives, and President Clinton signed the bill into law in December 2000.” Meanwhile, Ms. Born quietly left government service.

Money Monster. The last money movie I dissected was Money Monster (2016), starring two more big names: George Clooney and Julia Roberts. Clooney plays Lee Gates, the slick and jaded host of a TV financial advice show of the same name. Gates plugs a company which mysteriously loses $800 million, and many investors are ruined — including one who arrives at the studio and takes Gates hostage with an explosive vest.

The hostage taker is one Kyle Budwell (played by Anglo-Irish actor Jack O’Connell). Budwell is mentally challenged, as shown by his speech and childish behavior. For example, when his mother died and left him $60,000, he invested the whole amount in a company named IBIS, after Gates on a previous show highly recommended the stock. Budwell aims for revenge against Gates for his poor advice and against the CEO of IBIS, Walt Camby.

In the film people are busy behind the scenes finding out where corrupt CEO Camby is. It turns out that he made a secret trip to South Africa to advance his scheme to temporarily employ $800 million from his company to make a killing on a certain mining stock. The deal, unfortunately, falls through and the money is gone. This is then blamed on a “computer glitch” linked to sophisticated trading algorithms, but terrorist Budwell isn’t buying it. For that matter, Grant is becoming suspicious, as well as the head of PR at IBIS.

Emotions evolve. Even though enraged swindled invester Kyle Budwell has laced Grant with an explosive necklace, Grant has begun to feel growing sympathy for Budwell, and eventually we learn of another huge financial crime committed by the fictitious CEO Walt Camby. But of course, if you are going to have a financial criminal, he will have to be cast as not possibly Jewish. Wikipedia informs us that Dominic West, who plays CEO Camby, “was … the sixth of seven siblings … in a Roman Catholic family, largely of Irish descent.” So Jewish he ain’t.

Dominic West

Still, despite its obvious deception, Money Monster is instructive in a way. For those who understand which group is really culpable, a soliloquy by Budwell explains some of that group’s offenses:

I want everyone to know something. I might be the one with the gun here, but I’m not the real criminal. It’s people like these guys! [pointing to Grant and the set crew]. They’re stealing everything from us and they’re getting away with it, too. Nobody’s asking how. Nobody’s asking why.

You got to open your eyes out there. … the government’s no help. How they just look the other way, since after they’re done stealing our money, they barely even have to pay any taxes on it!  I’m telling you, it’s rigged. The whole goddamn thing. They’re stealing the country out from under us. Not the Muslims. Not the Chinese. Them.

It’s all fixed. They like how the math adds up, so they got to keep rewriting the equation. Which means, the one time you finally get a little extra money, you try and be smart about it, you turn on the TV. Boom. That’s how they fucking take it. They take it so fast they don’t even have to explain it! They literally own the airwaves. They literally control the information.

That is very good: “Not the Muslims. Not the Chinese. Them.” Ah, yes. Budwell is blaming people like Grant, CEO Camby and those like them. But if you replace “they” and “them” with “Jews,” his speech is instructive indeed. Is it rigged? Well, anyone reading accounts of the trading patterns of Goldman Sachs, for one, will agree with that. Just Google it — you’ll get about 800,000 hits.

Also informative about Goldman Sachs is Budwell’s claim, “They take it so fast they don’t even have to explain it!” Many of us still remember the charges laid against Goldman in this respect. In brief:

While the SEC is busy investigating Goldman Sachs, it might want to look into another Goldman-dominated fraud: computerized front running using high-frequency trading programs. . . .

[Called] High Frequency Trading (HFT) or “black box trading,” automated program trading uses high-speed computers governed by complex algorithms (instructions to the computer) to analyze data and transact orders in massive quantities at very high speeds. Like the poker player peeking in a mirror to see his opponent’s cards, HFT allows the program trader to peek at major incoming orders and jump in front of them to skim profits off the top. And these large institutional orders are our money — our pension funds, mutual funds, and 401Ks.

Sort of like how the Kosher tax skims money off the food industry. I think what made the most pointed sense to me was Budwell’s linking of financial deceit with the power to create the (un)reality we see and hear: “They literally own the airwaves. They literally control the information.” This has been a key point others and I at TOO have made for years: Jews have immense media control throughout the West — and it’s killing us.

White societies throughout the world have been and continue to be subverted culturally, diluted through scandalous levels of non-White immigration, and drained of wealth and treasure, which Greg Johnson of Counter-Currents summed up so accurately:

Jews, of course, more than any other people, are aware of the necessary conditions of collective survival. They are concerned to secure these conditions for their own people even as they deny them to us. The obvious conclusion is that they mean for us not to survive as a people. America is being corrupted, exploited, degraded, and murdered by the organized Jewish community.

Johnson later added another idea relevant to my article here: “White Nationalism is an intellectual movement. We are a vast online educational project.” Indeed, TOO lives only on the Internet.

(I confess I was miffed when I read recently the following lines from Andrew Anglin in an otherwise good entry: “The grounds are fertile and the time has come for an open discussion about Jews in society. What we need now is an unironic, non-humorous take on the Jewish problem from serious people who are able to speak seriously about this serious problem.” Has TOO not been a leading source of serious discussion of this topic for two decades?)

Strike Through the Mask!

To recap, I’ll repeat the reasons for linking financial scandals with Hollywood: First, Jews run Hollywood. It is indeed an empire of their own. Second, Jews throughout modern history have been involved in immense financial scandals, reaching truly astonishing proportions in the last half century. Third, Jews use their Hollywood propaganda machine to obscure these facts. Case in point: This is the sixth major film I’ve featured that advances the deception about the Jewish role in financial skullduggery. As I’ve said, this is an explicit disinformation campaign.


Again plugging the recent TOO article from “Publius,” we see how the author has gone through volumes of evidence of interlocking Jewish financial and political activity. He then adds a nice literary touch when he quotes this, then expounds further:

“So you see, my dear Coningsby,” the Jewish Benjamin Disraeli wrote in his novel Coningsby, “that the world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes.” It is my goal — and if I may be so bold as to speak for others, that of the other writers at the Occidental Observer and other dissident voices I’m sure — to shoulder our way into the conversation and show plainly the architects of this modern horror show. With any luck, figures like Steyer and Bloomberg will continue to drop the mask and show the public who they really are, making our job that much easier. To combat the pernicious agenda of the globalist establishment, we must first understand it. We must know the what’s, the when’s, the where’s, the who’s, the why’s, and the how’s and proceed accordingly. [emphasis added]

I’m glad Publius saw fit to mention the word mask, for that has been a driving theme of this essay. Joyce uses it by demanding that we “Strike through the mask!” and later explains how “these Jewish financiers also escape scrutiny by hiding behind the mask.”

I’ve tried desperately for years to help others see through this mask, in large part by examining the products Hollywood has inundated us with since the advent of moving pictures. My appeal to you is captured by Publius’s plea: “Do you see how all this works? This is how a decadent ruling class operates — governing for its own benefit and, for the preponderance of Jews, that of its tribe” [emphasis again added].

The half-dozen or so Hollywood films I’ve examined here at TOO play a central role in covering up what is so stunningly obvious. We need to understand these propaganda techniques and somehow teach others to see them as well. Otherwise, organized Jewry will continue to siphon off vast sums of money from the greater economy and employ it against the whole of the goyische world.

In closing, I’ll say that after “striking through the mask,” we must follow an observation from leading unmasker of Jewish behavior, E. Michael Jones, where he concludes a recent video with these simple but profound words: “Consciousness is the beginning of change.” MacDonald, Joyce, “Publius” — and, yes, Edmund Connelly — are doing everything humanly possible to “strike through the mask.”

49 replies
  1. lucius vanini
    lucius vanini says:

    Yes, that’s the way the essentially Ashkenazi enclave of Hollywood works: demonize goyim through omission and distortion, and in the process insulate Jewry from culpability.

    I could write a similar article about how Hollywood familiarized everybody with Italian-American organized crime, making household names of Al Capone and the Mafia, while remaining silent about the HUGE Jewish participation in organized crime. Hollywood left the impression that Italians were almost uniquely inclined to organized criminality–something which I, an Italian-American, has held against Jews..

    It was only after THE GODFATHER humanized mobsters, depicting them as people loving things that “decent” people love–e.g., family and food–that Hollywood depicted identifiably Jewish mobsters, as in THE GODFATHER, Part II, with Lee Strasberg playing Hyman Roth. Then Richard Dreyfus did LANSKY, portraying actual mob king Meyer Lansky; but throughout the film I kept feeling I ought to take off my hat whenever he entered a scene or spoke–so wonderful a personage was this Lansky made out to be! There was another film about an actual Jewish mobster–BUGSY, starring Warren Beatty; yet no one not well-informed about the historical Benjamin “Bugsy” Siegel would’ve learned that Siegel was Jewish from seeing the picture, since the ONLY person in the whole film who’s identified as Jewish is a JUDGE, and not a corrupt judge, either!

    Anyhow, I responded yesterday to a JEWISH TELEGRAPHIC AGENCY article, shared to JTA’s Facebook page, an article concerning the current film THE IRISHMAN (which features or mentions Jewish gangsters) and asking whether there were in fact Jewish gangsters. Lol, I said that the latter question shows how effective Jewish Hollywood’s crimes of omission have been, and rattled off a long list of notorious Jewish mobsters, from Buchalter to Zwillman.

    P.S. I thought Carell WAS Jewish, and certainly he could pass for an Ash or a Seph without any trouble. If you didn’t know who Dominic West is and he were called “Elliot Greenwald,” you’d have no trouble believing he was Jewish. The belief that the Ashkenazim and Sephardim are of a different “race” is one of the most embarrassing tomfooleries to afflict the White Nationalist movement. They are NOT, and continually pretending that they are makes us look half-baked and like the ignorant hicks that Talmudic bigots say we are; and it diminishes our chances of influencing people whose good opinion we need. Our trouble with Jews is not a racial conflict, like our problem with negroes, but a POLITICAL/CULTURAL one.

    • Charles FreyWhi
      Charles FreyWhi says:

      01 While I read the article I was reminded of the very same issue you mention in your second paragraph.

      02 Too many years ago I saw a short film on that poor, maligned, misunderstood Meyer Lansky. Much of the footage showed him and his wife sitting in airliners, flying from Western Hemisphere country to country: none of which would have this poor, persecuted Jew. With the connotation of Just like earlier.

      Society was persecuting him for a mere couple of number rackets and perhaps call girls he knew nothing about: but that was about it.

      Had I been a Cuban working man in Havana and found out that my daughter was reduced to prostitution in one of his Casinos there, plied with drugs, pleasuring the overwhelmingly East Coast scum of the scum, I would personally have carried Fidel to his next attack; optimally including Sinatra.

      They blather about being a light unto the nations, while all they do is to profitably set them alight.

    • Eric
      Eric says:

      Well said. “Der ewige Jude” gives a good racial and historical picture of the Jews. A mix of Caucasian, Asian and Negroid from a part of the world where Europe, Africa and Asia intersect. The Ashkenazim are just a whiter version of the Shephardi, with a heavier Turkic admixture.

      The Jew is a master chameleon — a Frenchman in France, a German in Germany, an American in the United States, etc.

      I feel sorry for gentile German-Americans, who have had to share their last names with so many American Jews…

      • Charles Frey
        Charles Frey says:

        01 “… and as ultra patriotic citizens when in Congress, in support of Impeachment “. Undoubtedly all but their actual lawyer Managers had to borrow their kids’ CIVICS 101 texts to catch up, ad hoc, to the names of the Founding Fathers and their dicta: mouthed ad nauseam as their sharing our common values. While that other passport dangled out of their back pockets.

        02 You gave us such a scintillating expose of the tapestry of the Wall Street thefts. May I suggest that you write an article here, pursuant to the multiple fact-checked INSTITUTIONAL INVESTOR article on HOW HARVARD LOST RUSSIA.

        The combined Third Reich propaganda machine would have declined, for fear of rendering themselves incredible.

        03 How many, in and out of Congress, could identify the names or scholarly opus by Walt and Mearsheimer: while a mere handful would admit of having heard somewhere, a long time ago, about AIPAC.

        04 If you too were to at least peruse the HAARETZ headlines daily, you would know, that recently the top brass of the IDF admitted, that they maintained a special Army unit to funnel funds for troop salaries, along with weapons, to ISIS.

        Hitherto they merely admitted, reluctantly and faux modestly, that they fulfilled their Godly Command to Heal The World by healing enemy soldiers on both sides of the Israel-Syria border.

        The American milk cow pays both for supporting and fighting ISIS: including the ” return to sender ” draped coffins.

    • Fibblegarbingtoid
      Fibblegarbingtoid says:

      Dominic West is supposedly native Irish catholic although his father was a rich factory owner and he was born in England. His grandmother’s name was ‘Moya’ as seen here:

      Moya is listed in a list of names punished by the inquisition:

      Crypto Jews used surnames as first names to help keep the lineage alive.

      West is also a first cousin of a U.S senator from missouri Thomas Eagleton:

      If you look at him he is very clearly a descendent of sephardic Jews and more than likely a crypto Jew.

      So many of the ‘black Irish’ (Irish with dark hair/features) are really Spanish Jews relocated to Ireland- same woth the so called ‘black dutch’.

      Carrel is one as well as Stephen Colbert.

    • Edmund Connelly
      Edmund Connelly says:

      Lucius, thank you for the reply. Now, here you wrote “I could write a similar article about how Hollywood familiarized everybody with Italian-American organized crime, making household names of Al Capone and the Mafia, while remaining silent about the HUGE Jewish participation in organized crime.”

      Excellent topic — and I wish someone would address it with the attention it deserves. Chances are, however, that it would never go through, even if done by a Jewish author or director. The deception is still just too valuable. For a comparison, look at Neal Gabler’s book “An Empire of Their Own.” Very open about Jewish influence. But when a couple of young Jews did a documentary about it — “Hollywoodism– the Big Jews quashed it.

      Incidentally, someone wrote in a reply to Part 1 of this essay (I believe) the following: “”The italian bourgeousie is jewish and the workers are italian in general. Italy is occupied territory always been ruled by the jews posing as italians, italianized surnames.”

      Would you care to comment on that? Thanks.

      • lucius vanini
        lucius vanini says:

        ED CONNELLY: You ask for my view of a reader’s comment, which goes “The Italian bourgeoisie is Jewish and the workers are Italian in general. Italy is occupied territory always ruled by Jews posing as Italians, Italianized surnames.”

        I don’t claim omniscience as regards things Italian but I believe I’m relatively well-informed about Italy and Italians. I’m not only Italian-American but an Italian citizen (two passports) with a passion for history and Italian culture. And my impression is that that commenter sees a Jew under every bed. Jews ARE under a great many beds around the world–far too many, as we know–but not under all beds.

        Italy has a population of 61 million so the bourgeoisie can’t even be mainly Jewish as there are less then 30,000 Jews in the land. I have no trouble imagining that the Italian Jews include a higher proportion of bourgeois persons than do regular Italians, because, to borrow a Yiddish word, money is one of Jews’ schticks; but that’s not the same as saying “Italian Jews are the bourgeoisie, garden-variety Italians the workers.”

        Italy is OCCUPIED territory “always ruled by Jews”?! I’d say that Italy is surely occupied by foes now–but chiefly by garden-variety-Italian Leftists and self-hating race traitors, not so much by Jews, though some of the latter are indeed among the prominent Leftists and europhobes.

        “Always ruled by Jews”?! I think not. There appears to have been a substantial Jewish community at Rome in the days of the Roman Republic! In 150 BCE, the year before the Romans finally heeded Cato’s “Carthago delenda est”! When the Romans were ascendant, anything but in decline, and hard as nails! Jews definitely did NOT rule the ancient Romans. About two and a half centuries later the Roman historian Tacitus said the Jews were by nature a race of slaves.

        Nor do I see reason to think that during the Empire, even the declining Empire, the Jews ever came close to ruling. When Christianity officially became a powerful influence in the Empire, under Constantine, and then the state religion under Theodosius, Jews in Italy not only didn’t rule but began suffering some seriously discriminatory treatment.

        By the way, to go back to a somewhat earlier period, the story of Titus and Berenice would appear to indicate just how much the Jews were valued in Rome and ancient Italy and how much clout they had there. As you know, Titus was a son of the Emperor Vespasian and was the Roman general who took Jerusalem and destroyed the Temple in 70 CE, while Berenice was a Hebrew, Herodian princess and queen who supported the Romans against her fellow Jews’ “Great Rebellion,” and was in love with Titus who loved her in return. After the Roman victory Berenice followed the future Emperor to Rome, thinking they’d be married; but Roman public opinion was so violently against such a union that Titus was finally persuaded to dump her. Clearly there was no great respect in Rome for Jews and the Jews there were not nearly influential enough to create support for a match which might’ve been advantageous to them.

        For centuries after the fall of the Western Empire the Italian Peninsula was dominated by various conquering nations such as the Goths, Lombards, Franks, Saracens and Normans, and during Medieval times and the Renaissance it was divided into many independent states, such as the Republics of Venice and Genoa, the Papal States, the Kingdom of Naples, the Duchies of Florence and Milan, etc. The Jews of Italy experienced varying fortunes under the various nations and governments–protected and favored here, harshly treated there; given the freedom of cities in this state, required to dwell in ghettos in another. Nor was any of the states continuously hospitable or hostile: Venice say might be tolerant and indulgent in one period and much less so in another. Expulsions seem not to have been uncommon, with Jews having to pack up and move from one Italian principality, republic or kingdom to another.

        As for Rome again, only in a much later era–in Medieval times and under the popes–I recalled the other day how the Jews were required, through a special annual tax, to pay for a kind of athletics festival which the city held annually. The sum they paid was 1130 florins, “of which [Edward Gibbon writes] the odd 30 represented the 30 pieces of silver for which Judas had betrayed his master to their ancestors.” Evidently the Jews were NOT at the helm there and then….

        A goodly number of Italian Jews left Italy to live under the friendlier rulers of Poland. In any case, by the time Mussolini’s Fascists were in power there were, I believe, fewer Jews in Italy than there are even today. In sum, while I believe that in certain periods and regions Italian Jews had influence disproportionate to their number, the notion that “Jews always ruled” and Italy has been their “occupied territory” is no small exaggeration. I rather think that Jews now have a lot more power there than they’ve ever had, but that the powerful Jews concerned aren’t Italian Jews but American or international ones, e.g,. Soros, who pull strings from afar.

        Concerning the assertion that Jews have been “posing as Italians, [using] Italianized names,” I don’t know of any Italian Jew, whether through historical research or through personal acquaintance or via the grapevine of family and friends, who bore or bears a typical Italian name. All the names of famous Italy-related Jews I can think of strongly suggest a Jewish background–e.g., Primo LEVI, Rita LEVI-Montalcini, Benjamin DISRAELI (Brit PM but of Italian-Jewish descent)–or are names belonging only to Jews, e.g., Luzzatto, Sarfatti, Segre.

        Today there are a couple of Italian Jews very vocal politically, of whom one is Gad Lerner (a name of Germanic origin, it would seem) and Liliana Segre (originally a Spanish Sephardic name). Surprise: both of these crumbs are apologists for the Sub-Saharan invasion. Lerner appears to be a lieutenant of Soros, and is always attacking the razzismo (racism) of Salvini and of La Lega Nord (the Northern League). Liliana Segre is a lifetime Senator for claiming to be one of those curiously numerous survivors–I think there were six million survivors–of that wholesale genocide called the “holocaust.”

        A newer face in the mass media, whom I assume is Jewish, is a certain Elly Schlein; and I believe she works for Soros. I’m not sure whether she’s an Italian Jew or a foreigner fluent in Italian; but if she’s an Italian national, she’s likely another Jewish one without a typically Italian name.

        I’ll go and try to find out whether she’s actually an Italian national and report my finding here.

        • lucius vanini
          lucius vanini says:

          ED CONNELLY: Yes, I was right: Elly Schlein is an Italian national, and considered an ebrea–the usual Italian word for Jewess and it literally means a female Hebrew (a male is an ebreO). She seems to be only half-Jewish, however, on her father’s side–which means that some Jews probably consider her non-Jewish, since as you know Jewishness is technically matrilineal and not patrilineal.

          Anyhow, she’s a politician and it’s no surprise that, in Soros’ pocket, she favors everything inimical to Italy and Europe. It seems that she, young and pretty good-looking in a Levantine way, is being groomed by the media to be a prominent enemy of the people–and in any case is another example of a somewhat empowered Italian Jew without a typical Italian surname. I really don’t know how that “commenter” you speak got the idea that Italian Jews have been hiding behind typically Italian surnames. IF they have been, it’s been totally without my knowledge, and I haven’t exactly been inattentive.

          Whew! Glad that she turned out to be considered Jewish after all, because a couple of days ago in Facebook I called her “Bigotta talmudista contro i popoli europei”–“Talmudic bigot against the European peoples.” It would have been humiliating to have called her that if she’d been a non-Jew….

    • moneytalks
      moneytalks says:

      ” not a racial conflict ” ? Another instance of babylonian confusion for the goyim . The ” race ” concept is widely and tacitly understood to mean [ breed ] . A ” tribe ” is basicly one step away from a pure breed and is thus normally , for most goyim , close enough to being considered a ” race ” . Our trouble is very much a tribal/racial conflict as well as a political/cultural conflict . The ruling globalist ashkenazim are the top tier of a relatively coherent worldwide tribe whereas the so-called ” White race ” does not have a tribal identity and much less does it have of an unequivocal racial identity .

    • Wtf
      Wtf says:

      Lol I have Italians in my
      Family (by marriage) but I’m Jewish. Both parents Jewish. How can u “hold something against” the Jews? We are such funny successful people. Why don’t u instead try and follow our footsteps instead of bashing us for being successful seems kinda embarrassing for you. Also I’m conservative bc the left has become so anti Israel it’s disgusting. People like illhan Omar and then entire movement to boycott anything Jewish / Israel is hilarious. Have fun being a snowflake hurt
      About the Jewish success. Oh and ps my dad owns a hedge fund on wallstreet so I’m basically you’re worst nightmare. Pathetic.

      • Eric
        Eric says:

        “your,” not “you’re.”

        The increase in Jewish “success” is accompanied by a decline in literary, artistic, intellectual, moral and social standards — as well as a decline in the standard of living for the middle class.

        Odd, isn’t it?

        By the way, why don’t you Jews all move to Israel now that you have that country to call your own?

        You made a lot of noise about needing to have a country of your own.

        But most of you don’t want to go and live there.

        Why not?

    • Oracle
      Oracle says:

      You are wrong. It is a racial conflict because they are able to identify themselves racially (DNA testing Israel) and they are able to identify us quite easily and they act accordingly.

  2. Sophie Johnson
    Sophie Johnson says:

    Thank you for this excellent read, Dr Connelly. But oh dear oh dear! You, and Dr Joyce, and a number of others, have already struck through the mask. You have struck hard, and you have shown us exactly who are behind it. And now what? Or, so what? The masses have not risen up in arms. But then, uprisings happen only when they organise them, and then only so that they can put them down. Even if each and every one of us is informed in detail and to the hilt about the vulture capitalists and their depredations, what can we do to stop them? (I began playing with the possibility that all we White folk get together and destroy the power of capital by trampling it underfoot, having organised our own local money and barter system. All too soon, I had to laugh at myself.)

    • Charles Frey
      Charles Frey says:

      01 In Year One, A.D. Christ whipped the money changers out of the Temple.

      02 1933 years later Hitler did the same by announcing that Germany would henceforth use the barter system with all trading partners: with the clear implication that he would not be coming to NYC henceforth to buy foreign currency with the added commissions.

      03 In a few days we reach the 75th anniversary of the complete, militarily unnecessary destruction of Dresden, along with the rest of the country. Such is the price for impudently attempting to wrest out of their stranglehold.

    • Eric
      Eric says:

      You start small and do whatever you can do. Cut the cord of the TV they control. Boycott their movies. Patronize gentile businesses. Etc.

    • Edmund Connelly
      Edmund Connelly says:

      “And now what? Or, so what? The masses have not risen up in arms.” I confess you got me, Sophie. For perhaps the first time, before and during the writing of this essay I kept thinking that someone would call me out on what we can DO about these inescapable truths.

      To close, I’ll say that my conscious failure to offer any solution was the reason I ended the essay with E. Michael Jones’ quote: “Consciousness is the beginning of change.” That’s the best I can do for now.

      Sadly, I have no answer. As a scholar, my talents consist of analysis and synthesis, not solutions. I’ve been conscious of that for a long time but that’s just my lot in life.

      In any case, if KMac, Dr. Joyce, others and I were ever to come upon workable solutions, would you recommend broadcasting them on the Internet?

  3. Curmudgeon
    Curmudgeon says:

    I realize that the article is about movies, but I would add that not only did Brooksley Born try to do her job, but when going toe to toe with Greenspan, she said his “complex financial instruments”, meaning derivatives, were illegal, then accurately predicted the result. It was particularly galling to see Greenspan testifying after the 2008 collapse, that “no one could have foreseen” the collapse, when Born did, and not a single committee member having the cojones to call him out on her prediction.

  4. Jody Vorhees
    Jody Vorhees says:

    “All war involves the art of deception.” How true, how true. And if you don’t think what we’re witnessing is a conflict, then number yourself with the beguiled.

    • Pierre Simon
      Pierre Simon says:

      Indeed, this is a racial war, a darwinian type of conflict for power. Jews are winning big time. I don’t see how we can beat them.

      • PaleoAtlantid
        PaleoAtlantid says:

        We can leave that task to a more racially conscious and determined people than we, namely the Chinese. The ‘Middle Kingdom’ may for the time being expediently cooperate with globalist jew power but ultimately the Han will put them in their place. They have long memories and know the real identity of the people who tried to destroy China during the 19th century Opium Wars. It wasn’t the British!

        • moneytalks
          moneytalks says:

          Are you insinuating that the Opium War troops against the chinese were not British ? And that the Chinese Communist rulers of China hate their jewish mentors ?

          • Charles Frey
            Charles Frey says:

            The ” British ” soldiers in China were ” rent-a-soldier “, by the very same element that abused them in their private conquest of Africa: especially the Boer Wars for Dutch gold and diamonds.

            Press gangs, keel hauls and all the other refinements to keep the Royal Navy fully staffed. Followed by Kitchener’s originating concentration camps filled with only the old, women and children since their men were in the field. Ca. 20,000 dead, including their black field and domestic workers. All farm animals killed and buildings burned. The perfect definition of demoralizing terrorism succeeded later by terror bombing: only not called that by the west’s free historians.

        • Eric
          Eric says:

          I understand the English branch of the Jewish Sassoon family (“the Rothschilds of the East”) was behind the opium trade that led to the Opium Wars in China.

          But Jews also mentored Mao and helped him run the country.

          I’m afraid the Chinese are just as liable to fall into the Jewish trap as anyone else.

      • Richard B
        Richard B says:

        They’re beating themselves.

        Everything they control right now is in free fall.

        People can say it’s “by design”, but that’s attributing to them God-like powers they Do Not possess.

        They were good at hiding and we weren’t good at looking.

        Then they stopped hiding as much as before and we got a little better at looking.

        Today, a lot more people can see. And not just us. But the others are either too indifferent or too scared.

        Jewish Supremacy Inc. (JSI) might have been good at infiltration, subversion, betrayal, destruction and death.

        But they have never been good at social-managment. And now even less so.

        Just look at the things they do control.

        The MSM is a joke.
        The Deep State is out of its mind.
        The DNC (Demonic Narcissistic Communists) have collapsed.
        The RNC (Repressed Neo Cucks are ineffective)
        The Universities are totally corrupt.
        The Financial World is a Ponzi Scheme.

        I could go on, but I’d never finish.

        In short, what we’re witnessing is nothing less than

        The Pyrrhic Victory of JSI.

        Because their rise to power has been in direct proportion to the collapse of the very social-institutions that power controls.

        We might not be able to stop them, and they might still be capable of doing serious damage to Whites, and not just Whites, but to their proxies as well.

        But, ultimately, they are doing damage, perhaps irreperable damage, to themselves right now as we speak.

        It’s the fate of any person or group possessed by a single-mindedness of purpose.

        Like the hunter poised to kill the charging lion who can’t feel the tingling of the poisonous spider crawling up his leg.

        Shakespeare was right,

        “The readiness is all.”

        • Richard B
          Richard B says:


          Jewish Supremacy Inc. is the real cancer of the human race.

          The coronavirus has nothing on these guys.

          In fact, given that the Chinese have effectively replaced Whites as the new challenge, and threat, to JSI’s power, they could have uleashed this virus on their latest enemy.

          It very well may be.

          Of course, this is just speculation.

          But would anyone put it past them?

        • Eric
          Eric says:

          Revilo P. Oliver made the point that Jews don’t consider even the destruction of themselves a “loss” as long as they have managed to destroy the world in the meantime.

          Destruction is what they are about, and they will do it regardless of any potential backlash.

  5. Alex Thomas
    Alex Thomas says:

    Thank you. Very illuminating and of course very true. Hollywood’s history is steeped in this propaganda. I recently watched an old black and white film by Zanuck called the House of Rothschilds. It was a hoot, steeped in inaccuracies; I call Hollywood The Factory of Lies. A good book if you can get it is Guilt by Association by Jeff Gates. He was interviewed by the Swedish Red Ice TV and what he said was astounding. I heard Red Ice TV has been banned (what a surprise) but you can still watch the video. Gates is as straitlaced as they come. Regards, Alex Thomas.

  6. gerry
    gerry says:

    With any luck, figures like Steyer and Bloomberg will continue to drop the mask and show the public who they really are, making our job that much easier. To combat the pernicious agenda of the globalist establishment, we must first understand it. We must know the what’s, the when’s, the where’s, the who’s, the why’s, and the how’s and proceed accordingly.

    Jimmy Moglia has a great piece on ‘Vulture Capitalism” and the who’s who? It’s a wonderful telling and hopefully someone will make a movie about Harry and David!!!!

    Quantitative easing may just be one quirk of the banking world, were it not that it involves trillions. The trillions created so far, after the burst of the 2007-2008 housing bubble, if equally distributed among Americans, would roughly correspond to occasional bonuses of 8,500 $ per individual, or $30,000 for a family of 4. I doubt if most families in the US have seen a similar added bonanza to their spending money or net worth. If so, where then the trillions go?

    I found a clue in the solution of the riddle that chance, not purpose brought to my attention. For it happens that the small computer company I directed for 20 years had a toll-free number differing by just one digit from the toll-free number of a company located in Medford, Oregon, 300 miles south of us.

    Medford is a pleasant town, whose air nimbly and sweetly recommends itself to our gentle senses. And, with the help of good soil and mountain water, Medford has acquired a historic reputation for growing the best pears in the country. It’s no surprise then that in 1910, two entrepreneurs, called Harry and David, established a company to ship Medford pears and other choice fruits to the rest of the country.

    During the holidays, especially at Christmas and Easter, we received a large number of calls from people who wanted to buy pears but misdialed the digit. One year “Harry and David” even sent us a free fruit-basket, in recognition of our help with re-directing the calls to the correct party.

    Then one of many New York investment firms (in the instance “Wasserstein, Goldman and Steinberg”) bought “Harry and David” for 85-million $$, via a “leveraged buyout,” an operation made familiar by Wall Street. In the instance, the investment firm put down 5-million $$, while the other 80 were borrowed from a bank. The 5-million being the ‘lever’ with which the investors got an extra 80-million to buy “Harry and David.”

    The reader will assume that the bankers who fronted the 80-million believed the borrowers to be trustworthy – and equally believed in the future increased prosperity and value of the leveragely-purchased company. The assumption is correct but, as we will see, for reasons different from what common sense would suggest.

    By the way, I acquired the preceding and following information directly from a journalist of the major Portland daily newspaper. He had investigated in detail the developments of the affair, and I explained to him how my interest in Harry and David sprang from the near identity of our respective toll free numbers.

    Upon buying the firm, what did Wasserstein, Goldman and Steinberg do? They fired 30 percent of the workers involved in production (60 out of 180 employees), eliminated the pensions, drastically reduced the health-care benefits and doubled the salary of two or three managers of the firm.

    Nothing extraordinary so far, from a management point of view, though it is somewhat difficult to clearly link these measures to the firm’s growth and projected increase in profit. But the investors had in mind a cunning plan as follows.
    For ‘Harry and David’ to grow – they said – it must expand, and to do so it required a direct investment from another bank.
    The sought-for amount was 250-million $$. To help obtain it, the leveraged buyers needed the total and unquestioning support of the Harry and David’s managers involved, meaning those whose salaries they had doubled.

    Whereupon the lucky managers, with charts, graphics, expertise, presentations and savoir-faire, demonstrated and convinced a second lending bank that with 250-million $$ “Harry and David” would become a profitable giant in their market. After all, the managers had already succeeded in streamlining costs. And by so doing, they had proved the seriousness and trustworthiness of their intentions.
    Believing the cleverly couched presentations and confident in the positive prospects, the second bank loaned the 250-million $$ to “Harry and David. “

    What did the investors do with them? They used 80-million $$ to repay the loan from the first bank – the same who had enabled Wasserstein, Goldman and Steinberg (WGS) to buy ‘Harry and David’ with a mere ‘leveraging’ 5-million $$ of WGS’ own money.
    There remained 170-million, of which 15-million went immediately to Wasserstein, Goldman and Steinberg as “consultant salaries,” and another 100 million in various general and questionable development costs.

    The managers with the doubled salaries now realized what was happening, but it was too late, and as long as it lasted, it would have been stupid to complain. After all they were the authors of the convincing pitch that made the second bank agree to the 250-million $$ loan.

    But the situation quickly worsened. Clearly “Harry and David” could not even pay the interest on the 250-million, let alone the principal. The company went into receivership, workers and managers lost their job, while farmers and contractors, who sold their products, machinery and services to the firm, were left with unpaid invoices. Meanwhile Wasserstein, Goldman and Steinberg laughed all their way to their bank, maybe the same that gave them the 80-million $$ to begin with.

    For the second bank, the 250-million un-recoverable loan became a bad-asset – similar to those ‘purchased’ by the Central Bank with ‘quantitatively eased’ money – though the bad-assets would remain just as bad in the books of the Central Bank.
    In the end the losers at large – besides the workers and suppliers of Harry and David – were the American people, whose deposits, in the instance, had enabled the second bank to fork out and lose the 250-million $$.

    • Edmund Connelly
      Edmund Connelly says:

      Gerry, what a story. And so sad, too. Also so familiar. In fact, of the books I mentioned in my essay, James Stewart’s “Den of Thieves” was most full of tales like yours.

      Given that the average American can’t quite handle a whole book anymore, I would recommend “Other People’s Money,” which I mentioned, and which stars de Vito and Gregory Peck. Very similar to your true story but on the opposite coast. Same vampire squids, however.

    • Flo
      Flo says:

      I remember those gaudy Harry & David mail order catalogues. Out of curiosity I looked the company up in Wikipedia (yeah, I know . . . ). The company was founded as Bear Creek Orchards by Samuel Rosenberg, and Harry and David are (or were) his sons. The family name was changed to Holmes shortly before WWII due to (what else?) rising antisemitism. The company name was changed to Harry & David. Since 2014 the company has been owned by 1-800-Flowers.

    • Anne
      Anne says:

      This is an excellent illustration of how “good capitalism” (i.e. the original Harry and David pear company) differs from “vulture capitalism.” Thank you for taking the time to tell this story, Gerry. It really helps me understand “where all the trillions went.”

    • moneytalks
      moneytalks says:

      Interesting story . The Harry and David jews sold out to the WGS jews . It’s a family affair … where all the jews involved made lots of money . Nothing unusual there . Making Money is after all The Mother of All Jewish Gigs .

  7. Eric
    Eric says:

    Another factor that needs to be considered in the sub-prime mortgage crisis is the role played by government. In 1999, HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo (now governor of New York) ordered Fannie Mae to underwrite $2.1 trillion in sub-prime loans over a period of 10 years. This HUD order was approved by then President Bill Clinton as a way to increase homeownership for the poor and for non-white Americans. So it is not surprising that the housing market collapsed nine years later.

    Banks do not normally lend money to people who are unlikely to pay it back. They have to be pressured into making such loans, and they have to be reassured that they won’t lose money if the loans aren’t paid back.

    The pressure began in the late 1970s during the Carter Administration. Civil rights activists had long complained of “red-lining” — meaning banks not making loans to poor blacks and insurance companies not insuring their homes. The government stepped in with the Community Reinvestment Act. Activist groups such as ACORN (Obama worked for them) kept putting on the pressure. The government used threats against the banks — such as not allowing them to expand if they did not succumb to this pressure. At the same time, banks obtained assurances that they would not lose money if they cooperated with the government.

    There was an understanding by the time Cuomo issued his order that the government would bail out the banks in the event of a massive default. And that is what happened. The banks also got a sweetener in the deal: the repeal of the Glass-Steagle Act, which had been passed after the Great Depression in order to stop banks from merging their investments with their retail banking operations. This, I believe, is how they got into the derivatives business, which enormously magnified the risks they and their investors were taking by issuing and then both investing in and selling bundled mortgages as investments.

    Lehman Brothers took a fall, but the rest — and their insurer AIG — were bailed out. So was Fannie Mae. Where did the money come from for the bail out? It was mostly created out of thin air by the Federal Reserve through quantitative easing. Of course, when the Fed prints dollars (each of which is an interest-bearing loan to the American people that has to be paid back by the taxpayers), it has to issue Treasury bonds that investors are willing to buy. It was only because the dollar was the best currency to invest in (the best of an array of bad choices) that the Fed was able to pull this off. I would estimate that the bailout added at least $5 trillion to our national debt.

    What about the effect on the housing market? The sub-prime mortgages that flooded into the housing market beginning in 1999 radically increased the demand for home purchases since more people could qualify for a loan. This in turn radically increased the prices of homes (increased demand vs. limited supply).

    When the bubble burst, who was hurt the most? Not the banks — they were bailed out. Not the government — its participation in the Ponzi scheme wasn’t even talked about.

    Before the crash, President Bush wanted to increase oversight on Fannie Mae. Democrats on the congressional oversight committee screeched that this was an attack on poor people (with Maxine Waters screeching the loudest) while Republicans on the committee took bribes (“campaign contributions”) from Fannie Mae (which was technically a private corporation even though it was controlled by the government).

    Fannie Mae of course wasn’t hurt. Obama’s buddy Franklin Raines, the head of Fannie Mae, walked away with $90 million.

    Obama wasn’t hurt, even though he had worked for ACORN, a group that constantly threatened banks.

    The people who had received sub-prime mortgages weren’t hurt because, while they did lose “their” homes, they hadn’t put any money into them.

    No, the people who were hurt were the ones who had taken out regular loans (between 2000 and 2008) based on a 20% down-payment, good credit, and a solid source of income. They paid more for the homes than the homes were actually worth because of the rise in prices caused by issuing over $2 trillion in sub-prime loans. Most of them had no reason to suspect what was going on. When the market crashed, they were stuck owing more than their properties were worth. The other losers were the American people as a whole, who suffered through a bad economy that has only recently started to improve.

    So how do the Jews play into this? Well, they’ve controlled our government for decades going all the way back to the Woodrow Wilson Administration. Cuomo and Clinton were just two of their puppets doing what they were told to do.

    • Anne
      Anne says:

      Eric, while I’ve been reader of this website for years, I’ve only recently started commenting, and hence paying more attention to what other commentators have been writing.

      I am amazed at the incredible wealth of information provided by TOO readers like you. Your comments are like mini-articles unto themselves – insightful, pertinent, and extremely well-written. Thank you so much.

      It is incredibly encouraging to realize how the truthfulness, intelligence and courage of TOO extends from the editorial staff to the contributors to the commentators. It’s a credit to everyone involved.

    • Charles Frey
      Charles Frey says:

      I have unlimited room and board with friends, eager to repay a favour, in a formerly ministerial apartment near the Kremlin. What I lack is funds and youth in order to seduce the hopefully widowed secretary of Minister of the Interior Bakatin. [ Then KGB; with miles of files ].

      It is he who granted Clinton a two-hour interview a day after Clinton attended the Bilderberger conclave in Baden-Baden, Black Forest, in June 1991; at the behest of Washington lawyer and power-broker Vernon Jordan.

      As of course Rhodes Scholar, Clinton earlier established quite a record during his stays in Moscow. On one occasion we were both at the National Hotel a mere day apart. I paid for my room, as where Clinton was pennyless and had someone else pay, and even had to accept the train fare to Prague en route back to Oxford, from two coeds at the then Patrice Lumumba Freedom and Friendship University. In Prague he stayed over with friends; the daughter of their General Secretary of the Communist Party, who presumably would have footed the bill for the remainder of his return trip, including the Ferry ride.

      I think the transcript, even the minutes of that two hour pre- and un-presidential chat would be a major fiasco; even for him. I would willingly sacrifice my honor for God and Country: overtly; even undercover.

      • Charles Frey
        Charles Frey says:

        Obliged by truthfulness, let me qualify my very last word. AS LONG AS SHE DIDN’T BEAR THE FAINTEST RESEMBLANCE TO WARREN !

    • Trenchant
      Trenchant says:

      Good points, to which I’d add another. The Fed’s consistent pushing down of interest rates in the wake of the Tech Crash created a genuine demand for instruments yielding more than Treasuries: Enter various derivative-based products and high-risk paper.

  8. Susan
    Susan says:

    On the TV side of Hollywood, there is a series on Showtime, Billions, the production that finally made me give up the idiot box for good. Billions was created by Brian Koppelman, David Levien, and Andrew Ross Sorkin, loosely based on the real-life legal goings-on between a U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York and a hedge fund manager, Steve Cohen of S.A.C. Capital Advisors. On the show, the sometimes lovable but insider-trading and bribe-employing hedge fund manager is played by red-haired, blue-eyed Damian Lewis. That the hedge fund manager could possibly be a gentile is so unlikely and enraging, that was the last straw for me. I can’t believe there are enough idiots watching that show that it is on its 5th season. I hope that at least some of them realize that in real life as opposed to reel life, the super rich tricksters on Wall Street are very disproportionately Jewish.

  9. Anne
    Anne says:

    Another great piece by Edmund Connelly.

    It is interesting that once your eyes are opened to the chutzpah on display in Hollywood movies, there is just no going back.

    By sheer coincidence, my husband and I re-watched “The Wolf of Wall Street” just a few nights before Edmund’s article was published. The first time we saw the movie, sometime around 2013-2014, Donnie Azoff (played by Jonah Hill) was the only character we identified as Jewish, simply because the script pointed that out. Sure, we suspected the other characters were Jews in real life, but that wasn’t apparent to us from simply watching the movie.

    However, when we recently re-watched the movie, it was overwhelmingly obvious to us that virtually everyone in Jordan Belfort’s circle (including of course Belfort himself) was Jewish. No matter that the script did not overtly identify them as such – the overwhelming materialism, degeneracy and greed on display made the cultural background of these shysters utterly self-evident.

    Reading all the brilliant work put out by TOO contributors like Edmund Connelly has no doubt contributed enormously to our “shift in consciousness.”

    I would encourage other readers to try this experiment: choose any popular Hollywood movie you innocently enjoyed watching 15-20 years ago, and watch it again with a view to analyzing the brainwashing you were unwittingly subjected to. Once you’ve recovered from your shock, re-consider how you’ve personally been affected by this indoctrination and start cleaning up your own mental act.

    For me, this has meant completely re-visiting the way I view (and treat) white men. They have been demonized beyond belief in most mainstream movies, and I for one refuse to join in on the berating and demoralizing of the natural defenders of our race.

    Don’t underestimate the powers of your own thoughts. They underpin everything in our world.

  10. Coll Doll
    Coll Doll says:

    I wanted to post this on Andrew Joyce’s Vulture Capitalism article but the comments section is closed.

    Vanity Fair:  Hedge Fund Vampire That Bleeds Newspapers Dry Now Has the Chicago Tribune by the Throat

    Not once does this Vanity Fair article note that the hedge funder Heath Freedman is Jewish.  I had to find that info indirectly in this article Hedge-Fund Asshole Who Is Destroying Journalism Came From Duke: 

    The little that can be gleaned about Freeman comes via blogs produced at Duke University, where he and his two older sisters are active in the school’s Jewish community.

    • Charles Frey
      Charles Frey says:

      So called journalism died of venereal disease a long time ago, infected by its own presstitutes. Between the Wars the somewhat normal NYT was turned into a Zionist rag by protracted withholding of advertising by major NY department stores. If memory serves, captured by the book titled: All the News fit to Print.

      Freedman is merely scavenging the cadavers for every last cent through staff and space reductions and certain property sales. Understandably angry journalists are writing biting op eds about their new majority owner: none of whom will be missed by this readership.

    • Eric
      Eric says:

      Jews are like a plague of locusts.

      They took over the newspaper business about 100 years ago. They used the influence that control of the mainstream media gave them to overthrow the WASP ruling class of America and become the new elite of the nation.

      Once that was accomplished, they had no more use for newspapers. They pushed their own papers so far to the Left that Americans stopped buying them.

      Now we see Act III in this drama: Jews squeezing every last penny they can get out of a moribund enterprise.

      The parasite consumes the host until it dies; then moves on to another host.

Comments are closed.