General

The Myth of Low Immigrant Crime

/1 Comment/in /by

The Myth of Low Immigrant Crime

   With the Biden administration hauling in millions of “newcomers” (the latest euphemism for illegal aliens) from booming economies like Venezuela, Senegal and Haiti, we seem to be getting a Kate Steinle every day.

     Among the recent atrocities committed by Our Greatest Strength is the savage murder of 22-year-old nursing student Laken Riley by Jose Antonio Ibarra, a Venezuelan illegal alien released into our country by the Biden administration. The “newcomer” beat Riley so badly that he disfigured her skull.

MEDIA ALERT: Time to roll out the fake studies on low immigrant crime!

The one-man factory producing these studies is Alex Nowrasteh of the libertarian Cato Institute. (Take our country, just don’t raise taxes.) He fudges the data, slaps a false title on his report, and journalists copy his work like they’re Claudine Gay writing a thesis.

Thus, in its story on the murder of Riley, The New York Times cited “studies” showing “no causal connection” between immigrants and crime. Indeed, the Times said, studies “have concluded” that immigrants are less likely to commit crimes than U.S. citizens.

The article links to 1) Nowrasteh’s sham study and 2) a 2017 Times story that cites Nowrasteh’s sham study.

That same day, the Times’ Angelo Fichera ran a “fact check” on Donald Trump’s claim that “the United States is being overrun by the Biden migrant crime. It’s a new form of vicious violation to our country.”

Fichera’s ruling: “This lacks evidence.”

His proof:

“One recently updated analysis by Alex Nowrasteh, the vice president for economic and social policy studies at the libertarian Cato Institute, found that the homicide conviction rate for illegal immigrants in Texas in 2015 was slightly lower than the rate among U.S. citizens.”

(If they’re so law-abiding, why are they fleeing the crime in countries full of people just like them?)

The Nowrasteh “study,” and others that perform the exact same error-ridden analysis, is the heart and soul of the immigrants-commit-less-crime scam. If it’s wrong, liberals have nothing, and you can go back to believing your lying eyes.

Needless to say, his study is not merely off by a homicidal illegal or two. He — and others like him — aren’t even comparing illegal aliens to citizens. They’re comparing illegal aliens to a group that includes both illegal aliens and citizens.

As I pointed out in “Adios, America!” (and apparently will have to keep pointing out for the rest of my life): Texas’ crime data only counts illegal aliens who have already been caught and fingerprinted by the Department of Homeland Security.

That leaves out a lot of illegals. Is the DHS even fingerprinting migrants at the border anymore? If not, then by Nowrasteh’s calculations, illegals’ crime rate in Texas is zero.

How about we only count the murder convictions of citizens who’ve previously been fingerprinted by the Denver police? Why would we do that?

Obviously, a lot of the inmates originally classified as “other/unknown” will later turn out to be illegals. But all these Nowrasteh counts as “citizens.” He had his headline, so why bother updating the data?

According to the more accurate count of illegals in Texas prisons, they commit 30% more murders than U.S. citizens — not to be confused with a “slightly lower” rate than citizens.

Not only that, but the longer inmates are in prison, the more of them will be found to be illegals, whereas the reverse is not true. Consequently, the number of illegal alien murderers continues to grow, while the “other/unknown” — all of whom Nowrasteh calls “citizens” — continues to shrink.

Apart from Nowrasteh’s “study,” the main argument for the peacefulness of illegal aliens relies on “post hoc, ergo propter hoc” reasoning:

The national crime rate declined since 1980, even as illegals poured in. Therefore, illegals cause crime rates to drop.

Cities with lots of illegals have low crime rates. Therefore, illegals are law-abiding.

This is how primitives think. Heard of Rudy Giuliani? Ed Meese? COMPSTAT, California’s three strikes law, the boom in prison construction or the sentencing commission? The cause-and-effect argument about immigration and crime employs the logic of a witch doctor, which may be where this country is headed.

One September day, New York City was 65 degrees, the skies crystal clear, and 3,000 people were murdered. Therefore, cool, clear days cause mass murder.

The media seem to think the criminality of immigrants is a critically important fact, judging by how often they wheel out these nonsense studies. But they don’t have the necessary information. There are no such “studies.”

Why doesn’t the government tell us? The fact that it won’t — and that the media aren’t asking for concrete numbers — tells us more than a million phony studies.

     COPYRIGHT 2024 ANN COULTER

Interview with Warren Balogh and Eric Striker

/3 Comments/in /by

Michael Moore: Jews should fight White Christians, not Hamas

/10 Comments/in /by

It’s paradigmatic of White European self-hate—much more empathy for people who are unrelated and with totally non-Western values and traditions than with their own people, and completely duped by the Jewish propaganda about the history of anti-Semitism where the main story is legitimate conflicts of interest on the part of the Christians.

The clueless Michael Moore doesn’t seem to realize that Jews are fighting a two-front war in the Middle East and against Christianity. They have regarded White Christians as the enemy for well over a millennia. Now that they are in power in all Western countries, they are well on their way to completely destroying their enemy—as they are doing to the Palestinians. And if they get absolute power, as they did during the 1920s and ’30s in Russia when 20–30 million White Christians were murdered , the results will be catastrophic.

<p>The surge in antisemitism in the UK comes as the conflict between Israel and Hamas continues in the Middle East </p>

The Tucker Carlson Encounter: Xi Van Fleet

/4 Comments/in /by
The main point of this interview with a Chinese woman who immigrated to the U.S. in the 1980s is important because of the obvious parallels between the Chinese cultural revolution and the revolution we are now experiencing. After describing her experiences during the Chinese Maoist cultural revolution, she begins to describe these parallels at around 00:16:00. Besides the incessant crude propaganda and encouraging people to denounce their neighbors, there were  “struggle sessions” where dissenters from doctrinal orthodoxy faced severe penalties, including death. So far the penalties for being a dissenter do not include death, but Tucker compares the phenomenon to his “Racist White Ladies” video in which White women are pressured into abject apologies for being White. Obviously, there are quite a few similarities with our current cultural revolution.
Xi van Fleet and Tucker are quite aware of how such cultural revolutions begin. It’s almost always a top-down process. True here and true in Maoist China.

Tucker [00:27:58] Maybe another similarity is that the people who are screaming about privilege, themselves have the most privilege. Right. I mean, so the people leading the struggle sessions were obviously more privileged in the people being interrogated. Correct?

Xi Van Fleet [00:28:12] In most revolutions, you can see who started it. It’s usually the elite. Mao was from a rich family. All his comrades are from rich families. Only people from rich families had the time to entertain how to start a revolution? Exactly the same. And then they turned the people against the other elite. [In the case of the U.S., this new elite is entirely in sync with Jewish interests and it turned the people against former elite centered in East Coast WASPdom.]  And that is always the case. Because they want people to fight against each other and that’s how they control them. [Or, in the case of the U.S., to render the formerly dominant White population powerless.]

Paywalled video of the interview.

The Cultural Revolution is here. Just ask Xi Van Fleet. She’s lived it twice.

Tucker [00:00:00] Shortly after George Floyd died, Memorial Day weekend 2020, people began to say what was happening in the United States bore some resemblance to what happened in China 50 years ago the Cultural Revolution with Red guards and struggle sessions, public humiliations, public atonement, a kind of secular frenzy that looked very much like a hate centered religious right. The Cultural Revolution. But what’s that overstatement? Well, Xi Van Fleet has seen both. She’s Chinese. She was seven years old in 1966, when the Cultural Revolution started, and 17 when it ended with Mao’s death in 1976. And along the way, she became one of its victims. She moved to this country, to Kentucky in 1986, and she’s been here ever since. So she has seen both revolutions firsthand, and she’s written a new book comparing them with the warning. It’s called Mao’s America, and we’re grateful to have her XI Van Fleet in the studio with us now. Xi thanks so much for coming on.

Xi Van Fleet [00:01:02] Thank you. This is some unbelievable that I’m here with you.

Tucker [00:01:05] Oh, I’m so grateful. You are so you were seven years old when the Cultural Revolution started. The equivalent first grade. What was the moment you realized something strange and important was happening in China?

Xi Van Fleet [00:01:17] Yes. To me my memory is it happened overnight and overnight. I just noticed there’s a lot of what’s called big character posters everywhere. It’s just big pieces of paper and with, words written in very large letters so everyone can read it from distance. Kind of like today’s social media.

Tucker [00:01:40] Crude propaganda.

Xi Van Fleet [00:01:42] Yes. It’s really, the, posters, really of people, denouncing others. In my school, I remember it’s, the papers were denouncing, administrators or teachers, and it’s overnight and it’s just everywhere and in the cafeteria, because that’s the only place that I walk that’s indoor. And it just from my ceiling, from the, floor to the ceiling. And it’s, class, stopped. And so one day I went to the classroom and I saw, note on the blackboard, no class for three days. And that three days lasted for two years.

Tucker [00:02:26] Two years, two years.

Xi Van Fleet [00:02:27] No school. Because this school was, like all the other institutions, was shut down by the Red guards and the Red guards. And I think nowadays more and more Americans are familiar with that. And Red Guards with the kids from elementary school, two universities. So they took over the country. So there’s no school for two years. So what I, what did we do as a kid? We went to the street, so every day we went to the street. We watched the Cultural Revolution unfolding. And that is struggle stations. Parade of those people who were denounced. And eventually become violence.

Tucker [00:03:13] So it was young people aiming their rage at the behest, in the direction of the central government of Mao, against not foreigners who threaten China, but it against against Chinese, against your own people?

Xi Van Fleet [00:03:25] Yes. And it is difficult even for me to understand. And it took me a long time to understand what that cultural revolution was about. It is a revolution that Mao launched against CCP, against his own party, against his own government. Why? Because he thought he was losing influence. He thought he was no longer had absolute power. So it’s really a power struggle. And this time, he did not use the armies. He did not have to. He had tens of millions of young people that they have indoctrinated in the government school for the past 17 years. They’re ready to go. Just give them a call. Say you are now mobilized to defend the, to defend Mao and to defend communism. And that’s what, the, how they got the, kids all involved. And, they’re familiar to Americans now. They dismantled the, criminal justice system. No police.

Tucker [00:04:37] Really?

Xi Van Fleet [00:04:38] Just like a defund police. So the Red guards could do anything through no consequences. And eventually they start to kill. Kill their teachers, kill their principals, and they kill millions of people.

Tucker [00:04:54] Did, I mean, the normal people who are watching this, your family I assume. Did anybody say anything about it?

Xi Van Fleet [00:05:00] Nobody can say anything. Just like here. Because Mao openly supported them, and Mao had, eight, rallies to meet the Red Guards in Tiananmen square eight times to declare that the. He was their red commander in chief. And those are his little Red Guards.

Tucker [00:05:26] So there’s no dissent at all, at all. And things just get progressively crazier and crazier and crazier. Do people think that this was going to stop?

Xi Van Fleet [00:05:36] No one knows. And I remember that in the first. And it started it was somewhat peaceful because all they did was destroy the, the past. And in most words, it’s the four olds: Old ideas, old culture, old custom and old habits. Get rid of them all that include, destroy all the statues. The statues. Mostly in Buddhist statues, Christian statues. Everything has to come down. And everything that is old has to be destroyed. So when they finish with the public, spaces, they went to people’s homes. And I witness the Red Guards went to people’s homes, took everything they thought was old. All this bad. Old is something that need to be. Get rid of including furniture, people’s old photos, everything. Because the goal is to get rid of the past, we can replace it with the pure Maoism.

Tucker [00:06:42] I remember reading about the culture revolution years ago, reading a biography of Mao, and was so struck by how much Mao hated the Chinese, hated the country, hated the history, hated the culture, and yet he was in charge of the country and thought, that’s very strange.

Xi Van Fleet [00:06:56] So we were taught that the Mao was our savior. Yes. And we’ll have songs saying that he was our savior. He made it possible for us to have a better life. Why? Because he removed this three bit mountains that had been suppressed. And Chinese people that they imperialism, the old feudalism and the, well, capitalism. He removed them all. That’s why we could have such happy life. So, no, no, no, we never thought that. That he hate us. No. He did. But we were told we should be so grateful. And he was our not only savior during the Cultural Revolution, he really became our God.

Tucker [00:07:43] Was there a, do you remember the moment that the Red Guard went from carrying slogans and yelling at people, humiliating them to the point where they went to killing people? Did that seem were you shocked by that?

Xi Van Fleet [00:07:55] Were people shocked when actually it started about the same time, because the only, in the very beginning, it only started on campuses and and Canning started as early as August of 1966, a few months after the Cultural Revolution. The first killing took place in the very prestigious middle school for girls. They bunch of girls, young girls as young as 12 and old as 16. They beat, tortured and killed their principal. That was in August 1966, and I was, elementary school, student. So in my school I do not see killing, but I did see attacks by the kids. And one of the things I remember so vividly is a teacher. She is, she is, a pretty good teacher, and she usually will dress kind of nicely. And that’s considered a persona. So the, the kids. Followed her call her names. Eventually this surrounded her and spit on her. So after a while she was covered with spit from head to toe, and that was considered mild because she was not hurt, physically. The same time we heard caning happened in middle school, especially universities. But the police were told to stay away from campuses, and if the Red guards hit them, they are not allowed to hit back, just like here.

Tucker [00:09:36] So what happened to you as you got older during this period?

Xi Van Fleet [00:09:40] So the violence of the red guard movement. Lasted until 1969. By then all the power was taken down by the Red Guards for Mao so basically, the all the institutions, all paralyzed, there’s no one in charge. So they thought, okay, now it’s time for us to get some power. And then they start to fight each other for power. And that’s when it’s getting really, really violent. It become almost like a civil war. They raided the military, institute. They raided the ministry places and got a real weapon before it was just sticks and stones and rocks, and now it’s a real weapon. And they started to kill each other.

Tucker [00:10:32] The different Red Guard factions.

Xi Van Fleet [00:10:34] Factions, because they thought, now it’s time for now for us to get power. And then you. Exactly the faction. It got so bad that tanks were deployed in cities where there’s a lot of defense factory, and that’s not that far from where I live. And. And it was not safe by then for us to go to the street. One day, a stray bullet landed under our window when we were have dinner. So it was. And it was so bad that one day I described in my book that we were outside and we heard this really awful Chinese funeral music. And then the words came back that they have a cop parade. So it’s one faction of the Red guards try to gain public, sympathy. So they had the people that were killed by the other faction on the parade. That was the time that Mao got rid of them.

Tucker [00:11:35] So they basically they were his creation. He gave them all this power. Yes, to consolidate his own. But once they became a threat to him, he did what he suppressed.

Xi Van Fleet [00:11:47] Yeah. So the military to suppress them. So they, we don’t know the number, the real number. But he killed tens of thousands of Red Guards, and then eventually he got them together, the leaders, and said, you disappointed me. And then, just like that, the whole movement was dismantled, and they all sent to the countryside, many of them sent to the virgin land like a gulags. To be reeducated through physical labor. And that’s how you become real communists. You can’t just do the, what you did in the city. You have to be, really go through hard labor to become real communist and off the go. And a from 1969 from that time on, all city kids from high school were sent to the countryside. And when I graduated from high school, in 1975, I was to send to the countryside and doing the physical, labor that was very primitive. And I stayed there for three years after Mao died and after ten shopping re-opened universities. That’s how I could go to college to study.

Tucker [00:13:10] What did you do in the countryside?

Xi Van Fleet [00:13:13] Yeah. That is not a farm. So a lot of people think about the countryside. To think about farm? No.

Tucker [00:13:18] Yeah. Countryside here is a good thing.

Xi Van Fleet [00:13:20] Yeah. No, no it’s, a commune. Every. A rural area was arranged or organized as coming on campus collective forming. So in the commune there are a lot of production teams and so it’s all run by the CCP. So what I did is every day we would gather in the a meeting place of the production team, and the leader would tell us what to do. So we do the work and we get a point. And then in the harvest time, you use the point to get some, produce grain or potato or whatever.

Tucker [00:13:59] To get food?

Xi Van Fleet [00:14:00] To get food. Yeah. So I not only experienced and witnessed the whole Cultural Revolution, I also get three years work in the field and get to know how peasant did. Those peasants put Mao in power. He mobilized the whole peasantry and promised them free land. They put them in power after the revolution succeeded in 1949, the peasants, the same people that put him into power, found them in the very bottom of the society, and they were the ones that could not leave their land because…it’s called a hokou. It’s like a household registration system. So they become serfs. They just really live the life of the poorest. Kind of, in a way, I’m glad I get a chance to be with them and to know that this is communism. This is socialism, supposedly to liberate them from the oppression of the oppressors. And they they end up way more worse off than before. And during the famine in 1959 to 1962, up to 50 million of them starve to death. The peasants.

Tucker [00:15:26] 50 million.

Xi Van Fleet [00:15:27] 50 million.

Tucker [00:15:29] Unbelievable. So you’re there three years, so you’re there from ’75 to ’78, and then eight years later, you’re in the United States. How did you get here and why did you come here?

Xi Van Fleet [00:15:41] So I was so lucky that I was able to go to college at the age of 19, which is still not because I was sent to the countryside when I was only 16. So after I got my degree, I was given a job. You don’t just get a job. You were given a job. So I was given the job to teach in the teacher’s college. And, in the early 80s, more and more Americans, come to China to volunteer to teach during the summer. So there I met a wonderful lady. Her name is Pat. We became friends. And she wanted to help me to come to America. And so, true to her words, she did help me. She got assistantship for me and she sponsored me in 1986. I never dreamed that would happen to me. And I got my visa and I was on my way to America.

Tucker [00:16:49] Amazing. And you went to Kentucky.

Xi Van Fleet [00:16:50] Kentucky. Western Kentucky University.

Tucker [00:16:54] So you lived here. You married an American. You lived in this country, it sounds happily from, let’s just say ’86 to 2020. George Floyd gets killed and all of a sudden, in a day, the country changes. What did you notice about those early days, late May, early June 2020, and what did it make you think as you watched it?

Xi Van Fleet [00:17:19] It’s a long time coming because I start to notice things earlier, even as early as 1990s. And I remember in a class that I took and it’s about special education when the the act of American Disability…

Tucker [00:17:39] The ADA. Disabilities, 1990-91.

Xi Van Fleet [00:17:41] Yeah. Something like that. Yeah. And the teacher was telling us, you know, now, you know, that they are protected and, as, teachers, that we should… I just took the class, but there are others that are special ed teachers that we should be very, very respectful. And we should never say blind. We should say people with vision…Impaired vision, something like that. I don’t even remember. And I was so impressed. I said Americans are the nicest people, they tried, you know, to be nice and not, you know, not hurt people’s feelings. And now we know right during the process and we were taught, you can’t say vision impaired. Now it’s something different. And now you know what? What’s the correct way to call those people? Blind? Blind? Yeah, according to Stanford. Now, that is the correct way. So that just remind me of the Cultural Revolution, that there was only one correct way of thinking, of talking. And if you don’t do it, you’ll get into trouble. So I just noticed.

Tucker [00:18:49] So when the language started changing and people announced that, you know, from here on out, we’re calling x, y we’re calling, I don’t know, Peking, Beijing or the Orient, Asia or whatever, the blind visually impaired that reminded you of the Cultural Revolution

Xi Van Fleet [00:19:08] A little bit. I’m just saying, if you ask me what I noticed. Yeah, that was something I noticed because I noticed later. You can’t say that. You can’t. There are so many things you can’t say or you have to say differently. And who will tell you? The authority will tell you that’s the correct way of saying things. And that’s correct way of thinking. Okay, but still, I did not lose my sleep over those things. And until later. And in my book, I did say Trent Lott probably is the person that came to my mind that can really pin down the moment I really say this is kind of really like cultural revolution. I don’t even know the story. Whatever. He was called a racist because he said something. I said, that really sounds like Cultural Revolution. You say something and your life is over.

Tucker [00:19:58] Trent Lott was a Republican Senator from Mississippi who went to the funeral of the longest serving Republican senator from South Carolina, Strom Thurmond, and praised him at his funeral. And for that, he was –

Xi Van Fleet [00:20:10] Forced to resign. Right? Yeah. And that really made an impression on me. I think that’s just like cultural revolution. And things go from bad to worse. And it was way before 2020 that I know that things really, really going wrong. Because in the workplace, I was invited to be a member of DEI. Back then it was DEI: Diversity and Inclusion Council, and I notice every member has an identity there. And I just realize this is not really about making people work together or how people work together. It’s more like political identity. But things, you know, got so much bad in the, 2020 when I saw the Antifa and BLM burning our cities, I said, this is no longer some kind of troubling sign here. This is a full blown Marxist revolution. This is exactly what I noticed, or what I witnessed during a cultural revolution. So I said I got to do something. I have to get involved one way or the other. And that’s the end of 2020. I got involved with the Loudon County Republican Committee. And after that, and now we get emails and, you know, ask us to go to school board. And, I was never, never involved politically to go and give a public speech. It was just intimidating to me. But I got so much support from the members. I said, I don’t even have children in school at that time. They said it doesn’t matter. We’re all taxpayers. And you should go there and voice your opinion. So I said, okay, okay.

Xi at school board meeting [00:22:03] I’ve been very alarmed about what’s going on in our school. You’re now teaching, training our children to be social justice warriors and to loathe our country and our history. Growing up in Mao’s China, all this seems very familiar. The communist regime used the same critical theories to divide people. The only difference is they use class instead of race.

Xi Van Fleet [00:22:25] And back then, you know, you had to wear a mask. I said, thank God I have to wear a mask and I can cover, you know, hide myself. So I went there and I did that, and I have no clue. I have no clue. What happened after that?

Tucker [00:22:38] Well, I have to say, one of the features, just as a foreigner reading about it of the Cultural Revolution that’s always struck with me is the mass hysteria. Rational people becoming irrational, people going crazy, getting caught up in this frenzy and really believing things that are absurd. I want to show you a piece of tape from the United States. This is after George Floyd’s drug overdose death. And this is a table of affluent white ladies who have paid money to be told they’re racist. And I just want to get your view of this. Watch this.

Women (soundbite) [00:23:13] Actually, Margaret, you didn’t say yours. What? Your racist thing. The thing that you’ve done, thought about or done. You have something inside of you that’s not quite — like that’s racist. So you must have you examples in your own life. Well, I also work in environmental engineering. I have absolutely no people of color or minimal people of color, possibly with the exclusion of being slightly Hispanic.

Narrator (soundbite) [00:23:41] Saira doesn’t like her attitude.

Women (soundbite) [00:23:43] I can say a racist thing you’ve done because it just happened when you just talked to me the way you just did. This is how white women talk to us all the time. These are microaggressions. When I say the exact same thing to my white girlfriend who says the same exact thing. I don’t care if you talk to everybody like that. The way you just spoke to me was straight up white supremacy. You actually just answered with racism.

Narrator (soundbite) [00:24:08] White supremacy is said to be hidden in innocuous phrases and banal behavior. The smallest things could be considered racist. It’s enough that a person from a minority group feels insulted.

Woman (soundbite) [00:24:19] Sounding terribly white. I don’t know that I was all that racist to start with, but I also will be more aware or hyper aware of my thoughts or reactions to circumstances that would be racist.

Tucker [00:24:40] So here we have privileged white ladies being barked at by even more privileged nonwhite ladies about their sins, and the white ladies are loving it. What is that?

Xi Van Fleet [00:24:50] That’s a struggle session. Yeah, and that’s something that everyone have to go through. During the Cultural Revolution, in the very beginning, that was those in power that was taken down by the Red Guards that were struggled against in the so-called struggle session. That was brutal. Some of them were killed right there in the public trial, but everyone have to go through the gentler form of struggle session, and that’s called criticism and self criticism. So as kids, we all have that kind of a struggle session every week. And we all sit together and after, you know, referring some of Mao’s quotes and we will, criticize self. You really start with yourself. And you would say, and I did this and that, not quite up to the requirement by Mao’s instruction. And and I still have this bourgeois influence in me. And then everyone will join and say, yes, you’re right. You did this and this that day. You said, this is this, that day. And then we go around. So we struggle against others and we against ourselves. So to get rid of every little incorrect thought from our mind. That’s what it is.

Tucker [00:26:09] So China is, I mean, overwhelmingly Han Chinese. So you’re not going to have racial lines in a country that’s got one race. But if you take the race stuff out, white supremacy, it’s identical.

Xi Van Fleet [00:26:28] Identity politics. That’s exactly what it is. In China, it started with class. Yes. And they divide the whole population into two classes: red class and the black class. And you can figure out pretty much what it means. Red, the correct class. And the black is the incorrect class. Those are the property owners, landlords or people with bourgeois worldview. They’re all black class, so they are the enemy of the state. We all look alike, right? But that’s how China was divided, by Mao. And I’m talking about identity. It’s not something, you know, just say, okay, I’m black class. No, you are black class and that is your identity. And that is required in every government document. Just like here, race, you have to figure out. You have to figure out what your race, what your race is there. You have to fill out what your class is, and then you passed it on to your children and your children’s children, and you will forever be the enemy of the state. And here we still have class. You know, Bernie Sanders still talk about 1% versus 99%. But race is the most potent way to divide America. And that’s just exactly the same thing that happened in China.

Tucker [00:27:58] Maybe another similarity is that the people who are screaming about privilege, themselves have the most privilege. Right. I mean, so the people leading the struggle sessions were obviously more privileged in the people being interrogated. Correct?

Xi Van Fleet [00:28:12] It’s in the revolution. Most of the revolution, you can see who started. It’s usually the elite. Mao was from a rich family. All his comrades are from rich families. Only people from rich families had the time to entertain how to start a revolution? Exactly the same. And then they turned the people against the other elite. And that is always the case. Because they want people to fight against each other and that’s how they control them.

Tucker [00:28:41] So as you’re starting to notice these things, do you tell your husband who’s American, your children are born here, your friends who are American — do you say, wow, this looks like what I grew up with? Do you tell anybody that?

Xi Van Fleet [00:28:55] That is a mistake I’ve made that for a long, long time I never really talk much about my past. Yes, because I want to forget it myself. It’s unpleasant, it’s awful. And no, I haven’t share a lot of the stories with my family and with my colleagues. A lot of them say oh, she had such an interesting story because it’s awful things that you want to forget. And that is the mistake that I made. And that is the mistake the conservatives made. They never really fight for the schools to teach the horror of communism. People don’t know. People have no idea. And, when I went to that school board and given that speech. I think a lot of them have probably the first time heard such a thing as culture revolution. Yes, that’s why that’s, I say, when we people like me who live through communism, we sort through it right away. The Americans have no clue. That’s why they don’t realize what was happening here in 2020. And what’s happening now is communists take over. I mean, there’s no doubt about it. It is communist takeover.

Tucker [00:30:10] When you say that to Americans, how do they respond?

Xi Van Fleet [00:30:12] I think more and more started to see it. But many told me they never. They don’t know anything about Cultural Revolution. They know very little about communism. They thought communism was defeated. Berlin Wall was torn down. It’s over. And. I think that’s the mistake the conservatives made.

Tucker [00:30:34] Tell us about your speech at the Loudoun event.

Xi Van Fleet [00:30:38] It’s only one minute. And. So the only thing I can say is that what’s happening in our schools and how you push the CRT, just to me, is just a repeat of the Cultural Revolution. During the Cultural Revolution, I witnessed students and teachers turned against each other. We changed school names to be politically correct. We were taught to denounce our heritage. The Red Guards destroy anything that is not communist. Statues, books and anything else. And we were also encouraged you to report on each other, just like the, student equity ambassador program and the bias reporting system. This is indeed the American version of the Chinese communist, the Chinese cultural revolution. The critical race theory has its roots in cultural Marxism. It should have no place in our schools.

Tucker [00:31:33] What kind of response did you get?

Xi Van Fleet [00:31:35] Well people applaud. And then my minute was over and I was just, you know, I really I just left the meeting and, because I took time off my work, I have to go back and make up the time. So I thought everyone knew it. Cultural revolution. Who doesn’t? Well, then I got calls later and the people want to interview. And I realized, my God, people just don’t know. Americans do not know.

Tucker [00:32:03] And why don’t you think? Why don’t they know?

Xi Van Fleet [00:32:06] I think it’s on purpose. That is absolutely to me. I’m convinced it’s on purpose. They do not want to teach communism, and they do not teach the horror or the history of communism, because those they can control. They are Marxists. They want to use the same tactics. To gain power. That’s why it’s not taught. It’s not taught at all. And as later from my Twitter followers and I see comments like in school we learned slavery and everyone knows slavery. Everyone knows, Nazi Germany. We’re never taught communism. And that’s why people don’t know what’s going on today.

Tucker [00:32:52] Yeah, because they know that history has been withheld from them.

Xi Van Fleet [00:32:56] Yes.

Tucker [00:32:57] Do you notice similarities in, between, Mao’s attempt to destroy Chinese culture, history, language and our government’s attempt to hide our history and change our historys, lie about our history to the populace.

Xi Van Fleet [00:33:13] That’s exactly the same thing. History is so important. And as we know that whoever controls the present, controls the past. And whoever controls the past, controls the future. That’s what our CCP did when they took over China in 1949. They totally took over the educational system. They remade the curriculum. But what they really put their energy and focus on is to rewrite history. So the history that I learned, and even today I have to get rid of all this misinformation that I’ve received as a, as a schoolgirl and later on in college. All fictional. Absolutely fictional. And that. But that that’s how they control you. And you believe, just as I said earlier, you believe that Communist, the CCP is our savior. Mao is our savior to, to save us, to liberate us. Now, we heard that word, too. To liberate us from the oppression of those, you know, imperialism, feudalism and capitalism. And you believe it. And people ask me, did you question? I said, how could I question? I was taught one thing. I have no access to other information. I could not think. Thinking. I think, requires, you know something. You have information, you have different sources of information. And hopefully you can, you know, go through them and come up with your own conclusion. That’s critical thinking, right? When you have only one information you can’t think. I can only think one way. That’s Mao’s way. That’s the correct way. And I have been like that for a long time. Some people were saying that they see though things in the cultural revolution, not me. I’m totally into it. I’m totally accept everything I was told, no matter how absurd it is, was I accepted because party can’t be wrong. Mao can’t be wrong.

Tucker [00:35:18] You’ve seen the whole cycle. You’re born ten years after the Communist revolution. And you, you know, you watch the whole cycle of it. So given that, where do you think things are going in this country right now? Where are we in that progression?

Xi Van Fleet [00:35:36] People ask me that a lot. You know, it is really, really decades in the making in America. After the. The 60s, when the Marxists took over our universities. They have been creating generations, not just one generation, generations of Marxists or people who absolutely, follow that those ideologies. Now they are in our institutions, in every institution, including educational system, corporations, government and even our military. It is everywhere. So I always say that the infiltration of communism is complete in this country. And, so it is it is really, really we’re in a dire situation. So what do we do? Well, we’ll have to start from educating people and to wake people up by telling them history, by telling them that what’s going on here is nothing new. It happened before. Not that long ago. It happened to me 50 years ago. The witness, the survivors are still here trying to tell American people this is a communist revolution. And the goal is to destroy this country. And the goal is for the globalists, globalists to take power.

Tucker [00:37:03] Can it be stopped?

Xi Van Fleet [00:37:04] It has to be stopped. So we have to wake people up, get involved. And, sometimes I feel so, just feel like there’s no hope. But many times I do feel like there’s a great hope. I have been invited to talk to so many people around the country, and I met people who got parents who never involved politically, just like me. But they are involved now. They’re fighting. They’re fighting in the trenches. And so I say there is a hope. There is a great hope. And, we can’t just fight because we kind of figure we might win. To me, we have to fight because we believe in it. And what I believe in is America. And so there’s no choice but to fight.

Tucker [00:37:54] People who grew up in this country. Most, I know, assume that it can never get to out of control here. Yes, there’s revolution going on. We’re living through it right now. But because it’s America, that revolution will never entail the killing of a lot of people. All revolutions end up killing a lot of people, but ours won’t somehow. What do you think?

Xi Van Fleet [00:38:16] Just looking out on the streets and the campus today. Look, those people who have no empathy because their empathy is, guided by the, the ideology, that ideology is Marxist ideology about oppressors and oppressed. The world view is looking at everything in terms of who is the oppressor and who is the oppressed. And that that is absolutely the communist worldview. And for those who are oppressed, anything they do to the oppressed, or the oppressor is justified. That includes murder, kidnap, raping, that’s all justified, just like the Cultural Revolution. And that’s what’s happening in today’s America. Those are the absolute result of decades of indoctrination.

Tucker [00:39:11] So people with no empathy will kill.

Xi Van Fleet [00:39:14] Will kill. And today they’re just out there accepting, justifying and celebrating violence. It’s only a short step away from committing violence. Those kids in China that kill their principals, their teachers. They’re not monsters. They’re not. They were, most of them were from very prestigious universities and, and high schools.

Tucker [00:39:42] You know, I mean, the parallels are unbelievable.

Xi Van Fleet [00:39:44] Unbelievable.

Tucker [00:39:45] So the Chinese Harvard was more radical than the Chinese HVAC repair school?

Xi Van Fleet [00:39:50] Absolutely. The cultural revolution started in Tsinghua and Beijing University. The top of the top. And those the red guards that committed murders were the best of the best, supposedly. And then they kill. And there was one, one short step that would see this happen if we don’t stop it.

Tucker [00:40:12] When you say that, do people take you seriously? Do you think in this country, they believe you?

Xi Van Fleet [00:40:16] I think the people who listen to me, yes, they believe me. And that’s why I think it’s, I play a very, very important role because I’m telling people not something I just learned from books or just I did some research. It is from my lived experience using the left’s terminology. I lived through it. I saw it, and. Absolutely. This can happen here. And this will if we don’t stop it.

Tucker [00:40:43] So. But our system was supposed to. We were taught growing up that our system would never allow something like this to happen, because it’s a democracy and the people are in charge. And you can vote them out if you don’t like them.

Xi Van Fleet [00:40:55] I know, I know.

Tucker [00:40:56] What do you think of that?

Xi Van Fleet [00:40:57] I love what John Adams said. Our system, our constitution, is made for moral and religious people, and it won’t work for any other. And that the Constitution is still there. The rule of law is still there. But the people have changed, and that is what’s happening today. We are dealing with Marxists and Communists who control our institutions, and so they can use this democratic process and carry out their agenda and destroy everything on the path.

Tucker [00:41:36] So the process itself is irrelevant. It depends on the intent of the people.

Xi Van Fleet [00:41:40] Yeah. And people have changed. The people have really changed.

Tucker [00:41:44] Why do you think that? What do you think they have changed?

Xi Van Fleet [00:41:46] Indoctrination. Decades. And just. Just think about it. From the 60s. It’s several decades. That’s the power of indoctrination. That’s why I always tell people the only way for us to win the war is, to, get our schools back, get our university back, and of course, media, because those are the institutions that shaping people’s mind. And they’re all in the hands of Marxists.

Tucker [00:42:19] What motivates Marxists?

Xi Van Fleet [00:42:21] Power. Power. When you think that way, everything’s easier to see. I do not know why Mao would just launch this revolution that destroy everything and destroy people’s lives. My life. Power. Power. He wants to launch the Cultural Revolution because he want to have absolute power. And he did. In the process, he become not just the supreme leader. He’d become our God.

Tucker [00:42:49] In China today, are average people aware that the Cultural Revolution happened, are they upset about it, do they talk about it?

Xi Van Fleet [00:42:59] That is a great question. I think it’s so important for people to understand. People in power. They want to control history and they want to erase inconvenient history. And that’s exactly what happened in China. Young people were not taught Cultural Revolution. And, when they, talk about it, they were told that was an anti-corruption campaign. That’s it. And the young people, many of them never heard about the Tiananmen massacre because it was not in the history book. Not taught, forgotten, all the history of the atrocities by the CCP were not taught to the new generation.

Tucker [00:43:46] Is it, I mean, it’s not, very reassuring that the political party that killed tens of millions of people is still in power.

Xi Van Fleet [00:43:56] Absolutely. Because they control the history. Yeah. You don’t know. And young people don’t know. And old people dare not to talk about it. And that’s happening here. We don’t know history. People who know. A lot of them don’t want to talk about it.

Tucker [00:44:14] My last question to you. You survived all of this. This first revolution. What advice would you give to Americans for how to respond to our revolution right now happening in this country?

Xi Van Fleet [00:44:27] I would say you understand what’s going on. Only when you understand what’s going, you can fight back. Otherwise, you can’t fight something you don’t understand. And it’s not some kind of crazy kind of Democrats that they just do some crazy things. No, this is absolutely a full blown communist revolution. And the goal is very simple. It’s just one: destroy this country so some people can have total control of power.

Tucker [00:44:54] So it has nothing to do with improving anybody’s life?

Xi Van Fleet [00:44:56] No. And if you want to, if you want to save this country and save it for your children and your children’s children, you have to get involved. You have to fight back as your life depend on it.

Tucker [00:45:11] With that, Xi Van Fleet. Thank you very much. Thank you. And congratulations on this book.

Xi Van Fleet [00:45:17] Thank you.

Tucker [00:45:17] Horrifying as it is.

Xi Van Fleet [00:45:18] It is.

Tucker [00:45:20] Thank you.

Xi Van Fleet [00:45:20] Thank you.

CUOMO: FROM NURSING HOME KILLER TO BIMBO ENABLER

/2 Comments/in /by

CUOMO: FROM NURSING HOME KILLER TO BIMBO ENABLER

  According to media reports, Andrew Cuomo, the former governor of New York, is eyeing a run for mayor of New York City. Unfortunately for him, his top aide, Melissa DeRosa, has written a book, “What’s Left Unsaid,” revealing that his most trusted adviser is a complete nitwit.

      As you may recall, I wrote about DeRosa’s book a few months ago. Here are a few more things you should know before allowing Cuomo to foist this birdbrain on us again.

1. Anyone who disagrees with DeRosa is a terrible person. Probably a liar.

— In a phone call with Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., after she criticized Cuomo for ordering hospitals in her district to send all their ventilators to New York City — a disastrous idea — DeRosa blew up. (As we now know, ventilators were not merely useless for treating COVID, but often killed the patients.)

DeRosa: “’Who have you become?’ I asked in disgust. ‘I am embarrassed to be associated with you.’

“’What?’ Now she sounded genuinely hurt.

“’Yes, you heard me,’ I wasn’t backing down. ‘Do you know what it’s like when people ask me how I could possibly be friends with you? The things you say. The way you defend Trump. … It’s embarrassing.’”

— About Democratic state senator Alessandra Biaggi posting a tweet attacking Cuomo for not acting on COVID sooner — i.e. run-of-the-mill politicking — DeRosa writes:

“Fuming, I sent a text, ‘You are both full of shit and a pretty terrible person.’”

— Then there’s this gem from DeRosa, apparently after maintaining a lifelong vow to never notice the Democrats’ behavior, from their accusations of affairs against George H.W. Bush and John McCain, through the front-page stories about Mitt Romney’s hair-cutting incident in high school, to their Russian collusion hysteria:

“While Democrats, for the most part, believe there is honor in playing by the rules, Republicans have a tendency to flip the table over and play dirty.”

— DeRosa says the Trump White House was probably “happy that the [BLM] protests had turned violent” and that Republican governors loved when COVID spiked in their states, seeing it as “badass.”

Those are just a few examples of the generosity of spirit DeRosa extends to those she disagrees with — bad motives, liars and terrible people. She proudly cites her fiery responses even after it has been firmly established that she was wrong and they were right.

And yet, in another vignette, she describes a dinner with The New York Times’ Nick Confessore, saying, “we found out quickly that we both enjoyed the art of a good argument, ending the night debating politics over vanilla creme brulee.”

Based on her responses to others with an opinion different from hers, “debating politics” presumably consisted of her talking and Confessore nodding his head in agreement.

2. She’s the bee’s knees!

— “At age thirty-eight, I was the most senior member of Andrew Cuomo’s team leading the nation through a once-in-a-century pandemic, making life-or-death decisions, projecting our administration’s competence to an admiring world.”

— “Matt (DeRosa’s husband) told me I reminded him of his mother, a smart, driven workaholic.”

— “Next to my father, I was my grandmother’s favorite, her nickname my own middle name. I inherited her cheekbones and work ethic.”

— “While I may have been one of the most powerful women in New York …”

— “Our office had a reputation for being hard-charging. We didn’t run from that characterization; we prided ourselves on it.” (This is in contrast with other offices that pride themselves on a reputation for lethargy.)

— “I ran faster, jumped higher, and tried to never let them see me sweat …”

3. DeRosa is always crying.

— Reading a Times story about her that highlighted her “powerful lobbyist” father: “Reading the headline filled me with a wave of emotion, blood rushing to my face, tears welling up in my eyes, my hands beginning to shake …”

— Three weeks into the Cuomo lockdown: “Little things like a video message from my eight-year-old niece, Ashley, would send tears streaming down my face.”

— After finally allowing her husband to tell her he wanted a divorce: “’Matt, I can’t handle this. With everything else that’s going on right now … please … it’s too much,’ I pleaded, tears streaming down my face.”

— In bed, the morning Cuomo was to announce the end of his daily COVID briefings: “(O)vertaken by the enormity of it, by depression, pride, and sheer exhaustion, I started to cry.”

— Later that day, at a staff meeting after Cuomo announced the end of his daily COVID briefings: “I didn’t typically show emotion at work; I grew up being taught that if I did, especially as a young woman, I would be viewed as weak or hysterical. … I started to tear up for the second time that day, this time not curled up in bed, but standing in front of all of our staff.”

— Meeting a friend for a drink after DeRosa had heard a rumor about a possible sexual harassment charge against the governor:

“[Friend:] ‘What happened?’

“’The last four months happened.’ As the words crossed my lips, tears started to well in my eyes …”

— When Biden was announced the winner of the 2020 election: “Overcome with raw, genuine emotion, I could feel my eyes start to well up with tears.”

— Upon reading Cuomo’s draft resignation speech: “I read it and started to cry.”

— After some nut called her cellphone, threatening to kill her: “I burst into tears.”

We definitely could use this kind of steady hand in the Big Apple.

4. She calls everyone she works with “smart.”

— “Annabel Walsh was our director of scheduling. At twenty-six, she was whip-smart, hardworking, and sassy.”

— “Steve and Bill … had Cuomo’s full confidence. Smart, steady, and wise to their core …”

— “Dina DeRosa [Melissa’s grandmother] was smart, hardworking, warm, and classically beautiful.”

— “I often used the girls [Cuomo’s children], who were smart, curious, and [so on].”

— “Sarah, a former administrator of the Federal Railroad Administration under President Obama, was tough as nails and as smart as they come.”

— “Jack Davies, a whip-smart up-and-comer in our press shop …”

— “As press secretary in the Clinton White House, [Dee Dee Myers] had been smart, savvy …”

And on and on.

5. Maureen Dowd should have written about DeRosa much, much sooner.

Despite DeRosa’s claims of never being “weak or hysterical,” it only took one snarky Dowd column to trigger the waterworks.

Upon reading the column, which criticized DeRosa — “one of the most powerful women in New York,” I remind you! — she dropped the phone and ran to the governor:

“I took a deep breath. My whole body was shaking now.

“Cuomo pulled me in close, ‘Okay, okay,’ he said in a paternal whisper. ‘It’s going to be okay. Shush. It’s going to be okay, I promise you. Take a deep breath. It’s all going to be okay.’”

Then, she drove to her brother’s house:

“Joey pulled me in close and told me it was going to be okay.”

After a little more bawling, she resigned.

Maureen, if only you’d acted sooner.

     COPYRIGHT 2024 ANN COULTER

We’ll Get To Your Country Later

/7 Comments/in /by

We’ll Get To Your Country Later

After House Republicans demanded a border bill in exchange for Ukraine funding, guess which one was intentionally tanked? Pro-open-borders Republicans like Sens. Mitch McConnell, James Lankford and Lindsey Graham teamed up with Majority Leader Chuck Schumer to offer a pretend “border security” bill that would only make things worse.

Once again, voters are being told, Yeah sorry, something came up and we couldn’t get to the border, but if you’ll just give us $60 billion for Ukraine [and $14 billion for Israel] today, we’ll definitely get to your issue tomorrow …

By now, protecting our border has lost out to defending every other country’s border so many times that we currently have 750 military bases around the world. There are only 195 countries in the world.

But as long as we have troops spread out across the globe, why not stick our nose into every inter-regional bar fight? Since 2001, the U.S. military has been involved in combat in at least 25 countries. Name five. That’s how important these military interventions are to the average American.

We’re always told that there’s no reason we can’t wage pointless wars abroad, and protect our border at the same time. They’re not mutually exclusive! But somehow they always are.

First of all, we don’t have unlimited taxpayer dollars to spend on national security. Merely to maintain those 750 bases costs us more than $130 billion annually, to say nothing of the hundreds of billions of dollars required to build them in the first place.

By contrast, the absolute highest possible cost of a border wall — as calculated by people adamantly opposed to a wall — is $25 billion.

Second, why did the ruling class freak out when Gov. Ron DeSantis said he cared more about our border than Ukraine’s border if defending both isn’t mutually exclusive? Can’t he have a preference?

The reason is, the warmongers know they need to keep the words “our border” as far as possible from the word, “Ukraine.” Otherwise voters might start making unreasonable demands about protecting our country.

But when you give politicians a choice between:

— Spending hundreds of billions of dollars on bases in Afghanistan so our military can paint George Floyd murals 20 years after we’d already won that war [??!!];

Or

— Building a wall on our border;

… 100% of Democrats and 70% of Republicans choose the George Floyd murals.

At least liberals I can understand. They hate our country, so depleting the U.S. military on worthless missions abroad dovetails perfectly with allowing a full-on invasion at our border. If America faced any real enemies abroad, I promise you, liberals would be stone-cold pacifists.

Also, it’s so Walmart-y to care about your own country. True sophisticates obsess over what’s happening in Burkina Faso. (Yes, of course we have a military base there. How else do you think we got up to 750 bases?)

But conservative war hawks are perplexing. While liberals think we’re still at war with the USSR — Donald Trump is colluding with the enemy! — warmonger conservatives seem to think it’s 1941 and every world leader is Hitler.

Or maybe their war fever is just a cover for flinging open our borders: Sell out your country on immigration, while cosplaying Gen. George Patton.

Just as gun rights and pro-life go together, putting U.S. troops all over the world while leaving our country unprotected go hand-in-hand, too. President George W. Bush, his father and brother, Sens. Marco Rubio and Lindsey Graham, and Ambassador Nikki Haley all support the entire Third World moving here. Curiously, they also all support nonstop wars. Ditto the Wall Street Journal and Fox News. (To be fair, after his thumping by Trump, Rubio seems to have gotten religion on immigration.)

The late Sen. John McCain demonstrated his enthusiasm for starting wars by singing “Bomb Bomb Bomb, Bomb Bomb Iran” to the tune of the Beach Boys’ “Barbara Ann.” That was in between his repeated attempts to pass an amnesty for illegals. Only when McCain ran for president did he grudgingly allow, “I’ll build the g-damned fence if they want it.” (Yes, voters have been asking for a wall forever. Trump isn’t the first politician to betray us. [Maybe he, like Sen. Rubio has gotten religion on the border; he certainly talks like it.)

Suzy Warmonger Haley wants to wage war on three continents at once, but is so chary of reminding voters about the border that she blames China for something that is entirely Mexico’s fault: the fentanyl flooding our country.

What’s the calculation on that?

— Mexico: 0 miles away and responsible for every molecule of fentanyl in the U.S.

— China: 7,000 miles away and isn’t even sending fentanyl precursor chemicals to Mexico anymore.

Yes, definitely blame China. True, hundreds of thousands of Americans will continue dying of drug overdoses and destroying our cities in the process, but Nikki will get another foreign war! And that will give her husband more social work to perform in countries other than ours, while she gets to play the brave military wife at home.

Haley keeps falsely telling voters that her husband has gone to “war,” is “protecting our family and our freedom,” and has “the courage to fight for our country.” In fact, her husband has never gone to war, he’s not protecting our freedom and he hasn’t had to fight for our country.

A decade after we invaded Afghanistan and vaporized the Taliban [except they’re now ruling the country], Michael Haley was sent there to teach Afghans to grow crops other than opium — which failed, as any half-wit knew it would. Currently, he’s in Djibouti, holding bazaars and Ramadan dinners for the locals.

I wouldn’t mention it — it’s not his fault that the Department of Defense decided to take the best fighting force in the world and turn it into a bunch of social workers — except that Haley keeps acting like she’s Martha Washington bringing food and medicine to the troops.

Law-abiding citizens in Chicago face more risk of death on a daily basis than Michael Haley. But they’re just Americans, so who cares?

COPYRIGHT 2024 ANN COULTER

Israel über Alles: The Rochdale By-Election Exposes the Zionist Control of British Politics

/12 Comments/in , , /by

There’s only one problem with opposing identity politics. All politics is identity politics. Anyone who says otherwise is either a fool or a fraud. For example, the American pseudo-conservative Ben Shapiro (born 1984) is a fraud. He’s a strongly identified Jew and Israel-Firster who tells his White followers to eschew identity politics. He wants them to ignore race and emphasize character. He promotes the lie that America is based on ideas, not on identity. As he famously said: “I don’t give a good damn about the so-called ‘browning of America.’ Color doesn’t matter. Ideology does.” But would Shapiro be indifferent to the “browning” of Israel? Of course not. When he says he opposes identity politics, he means he opposes the wrong kind of identity politics: anything that threatens Jewish interests.

Ben Shapiro fights for Israel by fooling goyim (cartoon by Jinjer Zilla)

There are many other frauds like Shapiro. And even more fools who believe what the frauds say. You can’t escape identity. In a mono-racial society, politics is a struggle between different classes or religions, with relatively small genetic differences playing an important but largely unrecognized role. In a multi-racial society, politics is a struggle between different races, with much larger genetic differences playing a decisive role. Sometimes racial politics will be disguised as class politics, as they were when the disproportionately Jewish Bolsheviks won power over the old Tsarist empire and proceeded to slaughter and tyrannize millions of White Christians.

“Same as the old boss”

In formerly mono-racial Britain, the Labour party was founded in 1900 to champion the interests of the working-class. The White working-class, of course, but that didn’t need saying in the early twentieth century. Now it does need saying, because Britain has become multi-racial and Labour has become a dedicated enemy of the White working-class. White Labour-supporters completely opposed the mass migration by non-Whites that subjected them to violent crime, huge financial losses, and ethnic cleansing. But the Labour elite ignored their wishes and betrayed its most loyal supporters. That’s because Labour had been taken over by Jews and turned into a vehicle for Jewish interests. Jews espouse identity politics for themselves and anti-identity politics for Whites. That’s why they welcomed immigration by non-Whites and by Muslims in particular, because they saw the newcomers as “natural allies” against the White Christian British. Tony Blair’s so-called New Labour might as well have been called “Jew Labour,” because Blair was a narcissistic gentile front-man for Lord Levy and other Jewish plutocrats.

Tony Blair performs the goy grovel overseen by Jewish supremacist and alleged child-rapist Greville Janner (image © PA Wire/Press Association Images)

When Levy was forced out by a scandal over hidden donations to Labour by Jews like Sir David Garrard (born 1939), he was replaced as Labour fundraiser by the Jewish plutocrat Jonathan Mendelsohn, who was described by the Telegraph as “steeped in the north London Jewish community” and “a close friend of Lord Levy, who was at the heart of Labour’s cash for peerages affair.” As Roger Daltrey of the Who has often sung, it was a case of “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.” However, Jewish control of the Labour party was threatened in 2015 by the unexpected election of Jeremy Corbyn as leader. Corbyn was very popular with ordinary Labour supporters and party membership increased sharply during his leadership. But he wasn’t popular with Labour’s Jew-controlled Zionist elite. Jews didn’t object to Corbyn championing the interests of non-Whites and Muslims, because that meant that he continued to betray the White working-class. But Jews certainly objected to Corbyn refusing to make Jewish interests his first and overwhelming priority. Indeed, he didn’t want to make Jewish interests a priority at all. This was completely unacceptable, so Jews made an example of Corbyn first by vilifying him for years in the mass media, then driving him out of the party after he was toppled as leader.

A dedicated shabbos goy

Unlike Corbyn, the present Labour leader, Sir Keir Starmer, is thoroughly kosher. He has a Jewish wife and belonged to a radical Trotskyist sect at university. Like Tony Blair, he intends to be a dedicated shabbos goy. Blair’s thuggish and Machiavellian press-secretary Alastair Campbell once told the Jewish Chronicle that Blair “was conscious of the need to have very, very good relations” with “the Jewish community.” That “community” is small in numbers but gigantic in power, influence and wealth. Starmer knows about Jewish power as well as Blair did, which is why he intends to govern Britain as Blair did: in strict obedience to Jewish orders. This is what Peter Hitchens, the insightful brother of the neo-conservative gasbag Christopher Hitchens, has said of the impending Labour victory in the general election: “Sir Keir [Starmer], whose hard left political roots are in a revolutionary movement called Pabloism, comes from the same stable as the 1997 Blairites. He will try to manipulate the voters with populist slogans, but his real programme will be miles to the left, concentrating more and more power in a left-wing state.”

Starmer is heading for victory because he has returned Labour to the paths of righteousness after the blasphemies of Corbynism. The party continues to betray the White working class, of course, and it continues to champion non-Whites, Muslims, and the “transgender community.” But all that is secondary, because Starmer now runs Labour as all decent and respectable parties should be run: as a vehicle for Jewish interests. However, this isn’t proving as easy for Starmer as he would have hoped, because Muslims aren’t being the “natural allies” that Jews fondly imagined they would be. To the dismay of Jews around the world, the war in Gaza has prompted Muslims in the West to side with Muslim Palestinians rather than with the poor persecuted military superpower of Israel.

Typical Muslim duplicity

And so, even as Keir Starmer has allied Labour with the completely Zionist and Jew-controlled Conservatives, Muslim members of the Labour party have been campaigning not of behalf of Jews but on behalf of their fellow Muslims. Look at the by-election in the solidly Labour constituency of Rochdale, where Muslim rape-gangs have preyed on White working-class girls for decades just as Muslim rape-gangs have done in the solidly Labour constituency of Rotherham. Because Labour is now the enemy of the White working-class, it did nothing to stop the rape-gangs either in Rotherham or in Rochdale. On the contrary, it sided with Muslims and helped the sexual jihad to continue. It’s still siding with Muslims, which is why the official Labour candidate in the Rochdale by-election was a fat and sleazy-looking Muslim Pakistani called Azhar Ali. With typical Muslim — and Pakistani — duplicity, Ali pretended to be an ally of Jews as he rose in the party. But his real allegiance was revealed in words he uttered in a meeting of the Lancashire Labour party shortly after October 7, the day that will live in infamy when Hamas terrorists invaded Israel to murder and rape the wrong kind of people.

The fat and sleazy-looking Azhar Ali, former Labour candidate in the Rochdale by-election (image from The Daily Mail)

And who are the wrong kind of people? Jews, of course. Jews have never cared about Muslims and other non-Whites murdering and raping Whites. Indeed, many Jews see this as well-merited payback for historic persecution of Jews in the West. That isn’t openly stated in the Jewish media, but nor is any regret for what Muslims and Blacks are doing to Whites. Jews have overwhelmingly ignored the Muslim rape-gangs of Rochdale and Rotherham. But they certainly condemned the Rochdale candidate Azhar Ali when he espoused a “vile conspiracy theory” at that meeting of the Lancashire Labour party. Ali said that Israel was warned by Egypt and America about a Hamas attack, but “deliberately took the security off.” According to Ali, Israel wanted to ensure the “massacre that gives them the green light to do whatever they bloody want.”

“Deeply offensive, ignorant, and false”

Ron Unz has convincingly argued that the conspiracy theory espoused by Azhar Ali is very probably baseless. Yes, Israel is happy to sacrifice unlimited numbers of goyim to secure its own interests, as it did in the false-flag attack on the USS Liberty in 1967 and as it intended to do in false-flag bombings of Egyptian targets in 1954. But the Hamas invasion of 2023 seems to have succeeded because of Israeli incompetence and arrogance, not because of Israeli complicity. All the same, why shouldn’t Azhar Ali be allowed to express his views? In a genuinely pluralist Labour party, there would be debate about the war in Gaza, not defenestration of all who disagree with the Zionist line. But Keir Starmer’s Labour party isn’t pluralist. It exists to serve Jewish interests and oppose White interests. That’s why Azhar Ali was forced to make a grovelling apology in words that were clearly dictated to him by Labour’s Zionist elite:

I apologise unreservedly to the Jewish community for my comments which were deeply offensive, ignorant, and false. Hamas’s horrific terror attack was the responsibility of Hamas alone, and they are still holding hostages who must be released. October 7 was the greatest loss of Jewish life in a single day since the Holocaust, and Jews in the UK and across the world are living in fear of rising anti-Semitism. I will urgently apologise to Jewish leaders for my inexcusable comments. The Labour Party has changed unrecognisably under Keir Starmer’s leadership — he has my full support in delivering the change Britain needs. (“Outrage after Labour candidate claims Israel deliberately allowed 1,400 of its citizens to be massacred on October 7 in order to give it the ‘green light’ to invade Gaza,” The Daily Mail, 10th February 2024)

Ali wasn’t sincere in his apology, of course, but like countless other ostensibly leftist Muslims in the West, he entered politics deciding that, for the time being, it’s better to submit to Jewish authority in public. However, what British-based Muslims intend to do in the future can be seen in Germany, where the Turkish president Recep Erdogan has set up “a political party for ‘people with foreign roots’ in Germany that will ‘stand against anti-Muslim racism’.” Indeed, what Muslims intend to do in future can also be seen in Rochdale, where the former Labour MP and eternal exhibitionist George Galloway is standing in the by-election for the far-left Workers Party of Great Britain. Galloway is pursuing Muslim votes and his campaign foreshadows the arrival of one or more permanent Muslim parties. In the meantime, the Labour party, formed to champion the White working-class, is the scene of a struggle between Jews and Muslims for supremacy. Here is a Jew responding to Azhar Ali’s comments and openly admitting that Jews are interested only in themselves:

Mike Katz, the national chairman of the Jewish Labour Movement, said his group would not campaign in Rochdale because Ali had “destroyed his past record of allyship with the Jewish community” with his “totally reprehensible” comments. But he stopped short of calling on Labour to drop the candidate, warning that the “alternative in Rochdale is George Galloway”, whose victory would “harm the Jewish community far more than electing Ali”. (“Labour’s Rochdale byelection campaign engulfed in antisemitism row,” The Guardian, 12th February 2024)

Katz isn’t bothering to hide his ethnocentrism and his belief that Labour exists first and foremost to serve Jewish interests. However, he’s unable to admit that Ali’s past “allyship” with Jews was never sincere. Ali simply recognized that Jews currently control Labour and that he had to pretend to care about them in order to get on. Now his mask is off and he’s been suspended from the Labour party while an “investigation” is carried out into more of his comments, this time about Jewish power in the media.

Hidden in plain sight

Again, in a genuinely pluralist Labour party there would be debate about such topics, not defenestration of anyone who raises them. But Labour isn’t pluralist. It’s run for Jews by shabbos goyim, so Azhar Ali has been defenestrated, not debated. The trouble for Labour is that Azhar Ali holds the same views as the vast majority of Labour’s Muslim supporters. There are far more Muslims than Jews in Britain, so why does the party leadership side with Jews and Israel rather than with Muslims and Palestine? What hidden factor is at work?

In fact, it’s not hidden at all. It’s simply unmentionable in the mainstream: Jewish wealth and Jewish power in the media. Jews finance British politics and naturally enough dictate the pro-Jewish, anti-White agenda for British politics. Jewish interests must come first and White interests must come nowhere. The Rochdale by-election is a perfect example of Zionist control. It’s also a perfect example of how all politics is identity politics.