Featured Articles

America’s Inglorious Tradition of Election Fraud: Any End in Sight? Part 3

/9 Comments/in /by

Go to Part 2

Pathological Horrors.  The popular and electoral landslide for which Nixon yearned had always eluded him.[1]  In 1972, he ran for re-election against Senator George McGovern from Sout Dakota.  According to journalist Stewart Alsop, Nixon did not regard his opponent as a homme sérieux — a man  to be taken seriously.[2]

McGovern had been Nixon’s opponent of choice for the 1972 race.[3]  The South Dakotan did not disappoint; he was obviously short on personal charisma, and the lack of skill with which he managed his campaign was just as evident.  He accepted the Democratic nomination during the wee hours of the morning and so most Americans did not hear his acceptance address.[4]  A short time after becoming the Democratic nominee he was also compelled to find another running mate, when it was revealed that Senator Thomas Eagleton of Missouri had previously undergone electro-shock treatments for depression.[5]

Helping McGovern blaze a path to the nomination meant that Nixon’s re-election committee had to torpedo the campaign of the Democratic frontrunner, Senator Edmund G. Muskie of Maine, who enjoyed a reputation for calm and deliberate decision-making.  Donald Segretti, a low-level functionary in Nixon’s campaign, played “dirty tricks” on the Senator as he was vying for a primary victory in New Hampshire.  Segretti fabricated a letter, which purported to be written by Muskie to the Manchester Union Leader, referring to Canadian-Americans as “Cannocks” [sic].[6]  Segretti also fraudulently sent  the newspaper a second letter, which contained vicious slanders against Muskie’s wife.  Exhausted and overcome with emotion, the Senator unleashed a bitter, self-destructive attack against William Loeb, the owner of the newspaper. The diatribe ended Muskie’s presidential aspirations.[7]

Another Nixon operative was sent to Chappaquiddick Island to pose as a reporter in order to secure incriminating information against Senator Edward M. Kennedy. Nixon believed Kennedy might still attempt to run for the presidency although most considered the Senator’s dream shattered by the scandal of Mary Jo Kopeckne’s having drowned while a passenger in his vehicle.[8]

Nixon’s reprehensible actions against Democratic opponents were hardly necessary for his re-election.[9] His actions did, however, give new meaning to the term “overkill.”  His operatives also, in an infamous act of intrigue, burglarized the opposition’s campaign headquarters at the Watergate Hotel, in Washington, D.C.[10]  The subsequent cover-up, orchestrated by Nixon and his closest aids, resulted eventually in the revelation of the “White House horrors,”[11] which included but were not limited to the payment of “hush money,”[12] the offer of clemency to a Watergate burglar,[13] the plan to murder a journalist,[14] other covert break-ins and plots of break-ins,[15] the use of prostitutes to compromise Democratic politicians,[16] the utilization of the Internal Revenue Service against the chairman of the Democratic National Committee,[17] and the discovery of a White House “Enemies List.”[18]

Although Nixon was re-elected in 1972, he faced certain impeachment in the House of Representatives when his actions were made public. Instead of being impeached and standing trial, he resigned the presidency in disgrace in 1974.[19] Read more

America’s Inglorious Tradition of Election Fraud: Any End in Sight? Part 2

/6 Comments/in /by

Go to Part 1

Political “Nobility” in South Texas.  Truman was not the first, nor would he be the last, beneficiary of a corrupt election, propelling him to the supreme prize in American politics. Lyndon B. Johnson of Texas followed closely behind him.

The man from the hill country was elected to Congress in 1937,[1] a few years after Truman’s Senatorial debut.  The young Texan, driven by overweening ambition, ruthlessly vied for a Senate seat in 1941.[2]  His opponent was the irrepressible buffoon, Governor W. Lee “Pappy” O’Daniel,[3] of whom lobbyists and party functionaries desperately desired to rid themselves and the state.[4]  His ignorance had proved both adamantine and insurmountable as he threatened to wreak havoc upon the state’s lucrative beer and liquor interests and also proposed increasing pensions that caused oil, sulphur, and natural gas titans to fear their industries would suffer additional taxation.[5]  How better, they quietly asked themselves, to accomplish the goal of banishing him from Texas politics than by promoting him to the Senate?[6]

Because of the embarrassment and chaos following in O’Daniel’s wake, as well as the sensitive toes the governor happened to be stepping on, Johnson enjoyed the electoral support of the most influential person in South Texas politics.  He was George B. Parr, the ”Duke of Duval.”[7] Parr was an Anglo who had grown up in San Diego, Texas, having learned to speak Spanish at the same time he had English.[8]  He had been nurtured in raw political power, and had not only inherited from, but also fortified, expanded, and enriched the political fiefdom of his father Archie, who had served as a senator in the Texas legislature for 20 years.[9]  Both father and son played the role of old-style Mexican patrόnes[10] in Duval county, and did so with consummate skill.

All the Parr-manipulated votes were counted in Johnson’s favor, plus the suspiciously lopsided returns which Johnson’s campaign organization had bought in San Antonio and its outlying areas, were reported early.  As a result of this tactical error in timing, the subsequent counts from various precincts in East Texas could be, and were, conveniently skewed to give O’Daniel the margin necessary for a last-minute statewide victory.[11] Read more

America’s Inglorious Tradition of Election Fraud: Any Cure in Sight? Part 1

/5 Comments/in /by

Zbigniew K. Brzezinski, Johns Hopkins University professor and leading national security advisor to President Jimmy Carter, once suggested that, as a partial cure for what ails the country of Syria, the United States and other world powers consider supervising elections there.[1]  This recommendation is curious, for one of the most unspeakable truths in America is that election improprieties have undermined its national democratic ideals since the dawn of the Republic.  Does it really take a Donald J. Trump or any other brave political warrior to remind us of this fact? Stealing and manipulating elections is as American as apple pie.  One may chuckle at Louisiana Governor Earl Long’s request to be buried in Louisiana so as to remain active in politics.[2]  Senate Majority Leader and later President Lyndon B. Johnson was fond of evoking laughter at Washington dinner parties when he mimicked, in heavy accent, a Mexican boy’s sorrow upon discovering that his father, deceased for ten years, had neglected to pay him a visit although having obviously returned from the dead to vote for Johnson in the 1948 Texas Senatorial primary.[3]  One may even raise an eyebrow at Tammany boss William M. Tweed’s aphorism that the counters, not the ballots decide an election.[4]  Lurking beneath the surface of these humorous, tongue-in-cheek remarks lies, as Sigmund Freud would have suggested, the dark reality of subverted elections in American democracy.

How to cure the problem is a topic which has been bandied about by politicians,  academicians, election officials, and pundits for years.  One usual, underlying assumption in these discussions is that instances of election fraud are isolated and, while serious, can be overcome and do not pose a major threat to the nation’s democratic integrity. In this article, I beg to differ with that assumption.  I will, first, seek to illustrate that election improprieties have generally characterized American democracy.  Acts of dishonesty and illegality have pervaded the electoral system to an extent that they may be understood as common occurrences.  This shameful fact, however, is only the first and most obvious part of the story.  There are other parts which deserve highlighting as well.  The second is the way in which election fraud has gradually eroded citizens’ democratic spirit by heightening their sense of disempowerment and crippling their desire to participate in the electoral process.  The third and perhaps most significant part is that a cure for this malady appears remote.  The American citizenry lacks the moral stamina necessary to surmount the challenge of fraud at the ballot box and so, contrary to other times perhaps, may now be defenseless against it.

  1. Strolling Down Memory Lane 

The term “election fraud,” as used in this essay, encompasses a wide and diverse multiplicity of ways in which one can subvert the integrity of an election.  As one pundit correctly notes, “There is no one way to steal an election in the United States.”[5]  The methods used depend upon the opportunities relative to the historical moment in question.  George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, for example, dispensed gallons of liquor on election day to voters.[6]  James Madison was disgusted by the practice and maintained that “swilling the planters with bumbo” was “a corrupting influence.”[7]  Corruption, unfortunately, did not stop with the distribution of liquor during colonial times.  Since only propertied White men were privileged to vote, a well-to-do candidate for office would purchase freehold estates for landless men to be returned immediately after the election.[8]  Buying votes was also a popular practice, most notably in Rhode Island, since “Rhode Islandism” became synonymous with vote-buying.[9] Read more

Europa Terra Nostra Conference: European identity and the populist revolt in the USA and Europe

/37 Comments/in , /by
sunic-kevin-bill

Left to Right: Kevin MacDonald, William Johnson, Tom Sunic

Europa Terra Nostra recently held a conference in Wismar, Germany titled “Freedom Conference, with a message of hope.” The conference was sponsored by the EU (!) because the EU sponsors groups associated with parties that are represented in the European Parliament. This includes Germany’s NPD (Nationaldemokratische Partei Deutschlands; National Democratic Party

Das Logo der Nationaldemokratischen Partei Deutschlands - NPD, 2005

of Germany) which has several representatives in the European Parliament, including Udo Voigt, former party leader of the NPD, who gave a photo presentation on the disaster in Syria, Israeli complicity, etc. The program featured speakers who will be familiar to TOO readers, Nick Griffin (whose talk focused on the dire consequences of massive non-White immigration combined with a disastrously low White birthrate) and Tom Sunic (whose talk focused on differing European identities and the limits of petty European nationalisms). Daniel Friberg, founder of Arktos Media, gave a very upbeat talk on the prospects for the European nationalist right.

logo_-_ludova_strana_nase_slovensko_-_peoples_party_our_slovakia-svgThe contingent from Kotleba (People’s Party — Our Slovakia) were also very optimistic about the future.   Dr. Milan Uhrik, MEP and vice-chairman of the party talked about the success of the party in obtaining 14 of the 150 seats in the National Council, the Slovak Parliament, noting that the ongoing disaster in Western Europe is making nationalist ideas more attractive. William Johnson, Chair of the American Freedom Party, gave a brief presentation on the AFP’s activities in the current election.

Frank Rennicke, a well-known nationalist folk singer and composer, provided entertainment. Nothing like a crowd of around 100 singing enthusiastically and in unison to get the blood flowing — even if you can’t understand the words. This video, featuring Rennicke in a duet with a backdrop of Hamburg, 1945, gives a flavor of his singing and world view.

My talk was a pastiche of some of my previous ideas, with some additions for the predominantly German audience. I present it here in its entirety.

Some attendees at an outing to the beach at Ostee.

Some attendees at an outing to the beach at Ostee.

Read more

Reality is Racist: Fighting Hate-Logic with Stereotype Denial

/11 Comments/in /by

Logic is a fascinating subject, full of subtleties, paradoxes and intellectual adventure. But it has one shocking flaw: its evolution has been dominated by stale pale males. Men like Aristotle, George Boole, Gottlob Frege and Bertrand Russell all belonged to the White majority in their societies. This toxic legacy has tainted logic for far too long.

Jeremy bursts the envelope

But now there’s some good news. Some astonishing breakthroughs are being made by men and women from oppressed minorities. The tainted logic of stale pale males — hate-logic, as we might call it — is being challenged by a vibrant new logic, or vibro-logic. And are you surprised to learn that Jews are leading the way? You shouldn’t be. Take Jeremy Newmark, national chair of the Jewish Labour Movement (JLM) in Britain. He hasn’t merely pushed the envelope of logic: he has burst through it and triumphed over millennia of gentile hate.

Jeremy Newmark of JLM

Jeremy Newmark of the Jewish Labour Movement

Here’s the story. In 2013 he appeared before a legal tribunal that was investigating a claim of anti-Semitism against the University and College Union. A lawyer alleged that Mr Newmark had attempted to “push” his way into a meeting despite not having the right credentials. You might think Mr Newmark then had two options: to deny the allegation, if it was false, or to accept it, if it was true. But that’s hate-logic. Mr Newmark applied vibro-logic and came up with a devastating response: he was being stereotyped as a “pushy Jew.” In other words, the truth or falsity of the allegation was irrelevant. It invoked a stereotype and ipso facto could not be made against him.

But alas! The tribunal refused to accept Jeremy’s ingenious use of stereotype denial:

Evidence given to us [the tribunal] about booing, jeering and harassing of Jewish speakers at Congress debates was also false, as truthful witnesses on the Claimant’s side accepted. One painfully ill-judged example of playing to the gallery was Mr Newmark’s preposterous claim, in answer to the suggestion in cross-examination that he had attempted to push his way into the 2008 meeting, that a “pushy Jew” stereotype was being applied to him. (UCU cleared of antisemitism — Anthony Julius charged with ‘being rubbish’, New Left Project, 26th March 2013)

The tribunal was obviously using hate-logic, which is simply unacceptable in a vibrant multi-racial society like twenty-first-century Britain. Read more

David Duke for US Senate

/13 Comments/in /by

cv-o_76w8aadb0k

David Duke is running for United States Senate in Louisiana. We should all support him. He has voiced strong support for Donald Trump and has qualified for a televised debate that will be held on November 2. Duke is sure to stand out in this debate as the only candidate who is speaking to the very legitimate fears and concerns of the traditional White majority as the immigration onslaught continues to erode the ability of Whites to defend their heritage. A win by Duke would be a “shot heard round the world” — an indication that Whites are standing up for their interests and are not intimidated by labels like “racist” or “ex-Klansman.”

Money is desperately needed to fund advertising during the final days of the campaign. Please do what you can by donating at the official campaign website, DukeForSenate.com.

Labeling Duke “the ex-Klansman,” which is how the mainstream media typically refers to him, is nothing more than the usual guilt by association argument. After watching David Duke’s videos and reading his writings, I decided that I agree with the vast majority of what he is saying. His main mantra that he repeats at the beginning of every radio show is that all peoples have a right to a homeland and to have sense of peoplehood—what Frank Salter terms “universal nationalism.” The problem, of course, is that only White people of European descent are enduring a suicidal wave of non-White immigration that will make them relatively powerless and victimized minorities in areas they have controlled for hundreds, and, in the case of Europe, many thousands of years.

As do I, Duke repeatedly calls attention to the hypocrisy involved in the mainstream Jewish community and activist organizations. In the Diaspora in the West they  advocate multiculturalism and massive non-White immigration, while steadfastly promoting Israel as a Jewish ethnostate where Jewish racialism is alive and well.

While people like Duke must live with the label of “ex-Klansman” in the mainstream media, supposedly reformed far left radicals and even terrorists like Bill Ayers are welcomed into polite society and have positions at prestigious universities.

We have to understand that David Duke is a talented politician whose greatest achievements may lie ahead.

Review of Money Monster

/29 Comments/in , /by

Actors George Clooney and Julia Roberts have now joined an illustrious group of starring actors in an ongoing disinformation campaign. Look at the company they join: Leonardo DiCaprio, John Travolta, Brad Pitt, Richard Gere, Susan Sarandon, Tim Roth, Jeremy Irons, Kevin Spacey, Danny DeVito, Gregory Peck, Ryan Gosling, Christian Bale and Steve Carell.

Their role: To conceal the facts about massive Jewish involvement in Wall Street finance — including immense malfeasance and endless instances of shady practices. Not only does Hollywood conceal these facts, it also projects them onto innocent actual Whites. Consistently.

In Money Monster (2016), 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.

And talk about delicious serendipity! Though written long before Trump emerged as a serious challenger to the corrupt status quo in American politics, the film has the hostage taker voicing outrage over financial and media corruption that almost perfectly parallels what Trump has often thundered, including recently at a West Palm Beach campaign rally.

I’ve written far too many TOO columns about Jewish deception and Hollywood’s role in hiding incredible financial theft to list them here. For that matter, I’ve written far too much in my long essays for The Occidental Quarterly about Jewish control of Hollywood to repeat them either. Just start clicking on links and you’ll find all of this. Thus, the present essay will assume you know something about my previous writing.

Still, I’ll briefly run through my argument. 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 reviewed that advances the deception about the Jewish role in financial skullduggery. As I’ve said, this is an explicit disinformation campaign.

Okay, let’s get on with a reading of this year’s Money Monster.

George Clooney as Lee Gates is in the middle of one of his shows, with Julia Roberts’ character directing him from a darkened booth. Suddenly, our hostage taker arrives on stage disguised as a delivery man and soon raps an explosive vest around the startled Gates. The police are called, etc. etc.

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.

Amidst the usual Hollywood drama comes a scene where Budwell’s pregnant girlfriend is located and whisked to the set to talk Budwell out of his suicidal plan. Instead, she learns how her boyfriend lost all of their money and launches a blistering verbal assault, knocking him down about as far as a man can go. (It comes across as an apt one-minute microcosm of current relations between the sexes in America.) Remarkably, Budwell doesn’t shoot anyone then.

In the meantime, people are busy behind the scenes finding out where 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 Budwell isn’t buying it. For that matter, Gates is becoming suspicious, as well as the head of PR at IBIS.

Gates by this time has begun to feel growing sympathy for Budwell, the explosive-laden necklace notwithstanding.

Cutting to the chase, we follow Gates and Budwell as they march through the streets of Manhattan in their quest to confront Camby face to face. Since Camby is responsible for the missing money, a look at his image and identity is helpful. In short, he ain’t Jewish.

 

Wikipedia informs us that
“[Dominic] West was born and brought up in Sheffield, West Riding of Yorkshire, the sixth of seven siblings (five girls and two boys) in a Roman Catholic family, largely of Irish descent.”

As I keep saying, Hollywood consistently distracts its audience’s attention away from the far, far more likely ethnicity of the culprits in financial crime: Jews. Dig up TOO columns on the topic, where you can find at least thirty-one essays in the archive under Jews in Economy/Finance.

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 their 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 Gates 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. It’s not like 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.

There’s a lot to unpack here. First, watching the film, we see that Budwell is blaming people like Gates, 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.

And the government won’t help? Go back and read my review of The Big Short, particularly my account of

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, [Alan] 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 his successor 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.

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.

And I liked Budwell’s explicit lines that it’s “Not the Muslims. Not the Chinese.” Yes, he’s right. We know who it is.

I think what made the most pointed sense to me was Budwell’s linking of financial deceit with the power to create the reality we see and hear: “They literally own the airwaves. They literally control the information.” This has been a key point others and I on TOO have made for years: Jews have immense media control all through the West. And it’s killing us.

What I’ve discussed so far is enough to make my case about Hollywood films deceiving us about identity of the real culprits in money crimes. What really astounds me, however, are the recent claims by Donald Trump that so closely mirror what Budwell speaks. And it seems Jews themselves agree that what Trump means when he says all this is: “Jews.”

In his October 14th speech, Trump charged Hillary Clinton with, as NPR reported, “meeting in secret with international banks to plot the destruction of U.S. sovereignty.” NPR used a soundbite from Trump to show whom he was attacking:

DONALD TRUMP: … In order to enrich these global financial powers, her special-interest friends and her donors.

[NPR host] GJELTEN: Not a word there about Jews — but some writers pointed out that the reference to international bankers undermining national sovereignty had parallels with classic anti-Semitic propaganda.

TOO editor Kevin MacDonald clearly saw this point as well, writing that “Jewish activists were horrified, claiming any mention of secret meetings with international banks should be banned because such talk is historically linked to anti-Semitism.”

My main point, however, is how closely Trump’s words parallel Budwell’s:

This election will determine whether we are a free nation or whether we have only the illusion of democracy, but are in fact controlled by a small handful of global special interests rigging the system, and our system is rigged. This is reality, you know it, they know it, I know it, and pretty much the whole world knows it” [emphasis added].

Clearly, this sentiment is thick in the air now. Pat Buchanan, for one, just voiced the same fears, writing:

The establishment is horrified at the Donald’s defiance because, deep within its soul, it fears that the people for whom Trump speaks no longer accept its political legitimacy or moral authority.

It may rule and run the country, and may rig the system through mass immigration and a mammoth welfare state so that Middle America is never again able to elect one of its own. But that establishment, disconnected from the people it rules, senses, rightly, that it is unloved and even detested.

Returning to Trump, he, like our hostage-taker Budwell, is aware of the special role of the media:

The establishment and their media enablers will [wield?] control over this nation through means that are very well known. Anyone who challenges their control is deemed a sexist, a racist, a xenophobe, and morally deformed.

In an essay this month, MacDonald took this charge to its logical conclusion, writing that “We at TOO have made no secret on the role of Jews in the media (summarized briefly here and more extensively here, pp. xlvi-lvi).”

Now watch Budwell perform his speech about those who rig the system. It is so easy for me to envision the exact same tone and fury when Trump launches his attack on the hostile elite ruling over us now:

They will attack you, they will slander you, they will seek to destroy your career and your family, they will seek to destroy everything about you, including your reputation. They will lie, lie, lie, and then again they will do worse than that, they will do whatever is necessary.

I really think I’m on to something with these readings of Hollywood films that whitewash Jews out of questionable or criminal financial activity. Instead, the blame is laid on real Whites, who are, in fact, the victims (including Budwell in the film).

I’ll close with quotes from my previous essays on this theme, for the quotes are as pertinent as ever. In my review of Richard Gere in Arbitrage, for instance, I noted how former Counter-Currents writer Andrew Hamilton wrote about hedge fund managers:

More often than not the privileged Jews turn around and use the vast wealth they’ve skimmed from the productive sector of the economy to advance anti-White, pro-Jewish, and Left-wing causes, thereby harming America and the world in two ways — economically through callous and shortsighted market operations, and politically through their “philanthropy” and lavish political donations. George Soros has done enormous harm to Whites worldwide in this manner. . . .

Hamilton specifically noted the shocking wealth concentrated in such hands, referring to Forbes Magazine’s recent ranking of the richest hedge fund managers in the United States by estimated personal net worth: “Twenty-four of the 32 names on the list (75%) are Jewish. Of the 10 wealthiest, 8 (80%) are Jewish.”

 

I’ll ask again: Does it matter that Jews run Hollywood? Of course it does. I’m in total agreement with what our editor Kevin MacDonald concluded on the topic: “It matters a lot that Jews Run Hollywood.” Concealing Jewish identity when it could hurt Jews but help Gentiles is just one facet of how control of the medium of film puts Whites at a severe disadvantage. We at TOO do our best to neutralize this power, however.

Readers, time grows short. Trump may or may not win. We need more than ever to name the Tribe attacking us. Money Monster helps a bit when the viewer understands how to read the grammar of the film, just as Jews rightly understand who Trump is attacking. Help others to realize what the hints, wink-winks, and allusions mean.

Finally, always keep in the fore of your consciousness what Greg Johnson of Counter-Currents so accurately summed up:

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.

Friends, a full generation ago a character named Howard Beale made a furious plea to average Americans, a plea to say no to the degradation and crime of that era. Now it is Kyle Budwell making a plea for our generation — and by some fluke, Donald Trump is proclaiming the same message with the same sense of inner rage. Now let’s cultivate that righteous rage to the max.