Less is Moore: Men-Shuns, Pensions and Rape-Gangs

Languages never stay still. In one key dialect of modern English, meaning can be conveyed by the absence of adjectives. It happens with the nouns “man” and “men”, though you’ll also see it with nouns like “youth/s”, “teen/s”, and so on. Mentions of “men” are often men-shuns, because the media avoid describing the “men” any further. But that very absence of description conveys a clear meaning. I can remember seeing a good example of this semantic rule – meaning-by-adjectival-absence – in 2005, when a policewoman was shot dead by criminals in the vibrant multicultural city of Bradford, in northern England. It was a highly unusual crime by English standards and the police, as you would expect, quickly issued a description of the suspects. They were on the look-out, news broadcasts informed the nation, for “up to three men”.

So the shocked citizens of Bradford knew that the suspects were “men” and that there were possibly three of them. Beside that, they knew nothing. The police did not think it would be “helpful” to add further adjectives to the generic noun “men”. But that absence-of-adjectives conveyed a clear meaning to those, like me, who are familiar with Politically Correct English, or PCE. This is the special dialect used by politicians, journalists, bureaucrats, academics and all other public servants in the United Kingdom, including the police. In PCE, the phrase “up to three men” means, in a criminal context, that the “men” were of a particular kind and that the crime was a heinous one. And what particular kind were the “men”? I don’t like to say: I’m discussing semantics and the English language, so let’s not muddy the waters, as it were, by pursuing red herrings. Or herrings of any other colour, for that matter. Read more

Ben Zygier and Israeli’s Abuse of Australian Passports

 

Ben Zygier

Ben Zygier

A fascinating article recently appeared in the Fairfax newspapers in Australia concerning the late Melbourne-born Mossad agent Ben Zygier. The result of a joint investigation by Fairfax in Australia and Germany’s Der Spiegel magazine, the article, entitled “The life and death of Prisoner X,” outlines the sequence of events which led to Zygier’s arrest, imprisonment, and ultimate suicide in an Israeli prison. In the words of the author, Jason Koutsoukis, Ben Zygier “was responsible for one of the most serious security breaches in Israeli history, a breach that led directly to the imprisonment of two of Israel’s most prized Lebanese informants.” While an interesting story in its own right, the Zygier case also highlights the perils of allowing Australian Jews to have joint Australian-Israeli citizenship: in particular, it reveals how the Mossad deliberately recruit these dual nationals to use their Australian passports as cover for their operations – including for assassinations.

The general tone of the article is sympathetic to Zygier, whose story is described as “the tragic downfall of a passionate Zionist, a young man who aspired to a life of heroism, and yet, in the wake of his own shortcomings, willingly gave away such sensitive information to the enemy that it represents one of the most serious security breaches in Israel’s 65-year history.” It is quite bizarre that an Israeli spy, who betrayed his Australian nationality by using his Australian passport to conduct intelligence operations for another country, is described in an Australian newspaper as someone whose downfall was “tragic.” Zygier was a shameless traitor to the land of his birth, and one can only conclude that his ultimate downfall, rather than being “tragic,” was entirely appropriate.

Ben Zygier was born in 1976 in Melbourne to a wealthy Jewish family. His father owned a food manufacturing business and became a leading figure in Melbourne’s Jewish community, serving as Chief Executive of the Jewish Community Council of Victoria. Educated at Jewish Schools, Zygier quickly became a passionate Zionist and joined the Zionist youth movement Hashomer Hatzair. After beginning a law degree at Monash University, he deferred his studies to move to Israel. He ended up living at the Kibbutz Gazit close to Israel’s border with Lebanon. There he met up with fellow Australian Jew Daniel Leiton and the two became friends. Koutsoukis notes that “Leiton recalls first meeting Zygier in the late ‘80s in Melbourne. Even then, he says, the two teenagers shared a passionate belief in Zionism, with Zygier already making it clear he would make Aliyah, the act of immigration for diaspora Jews to the land of Israel.”  Another friend of Zygier, Lior Brand, described him as “obviously clever, and ready to defend Israel against its enemies, no matter what the cost.” Read more

Weiße Männer: Zeit zur Trennung

secession

Übersetzt von Tobias Schmidt

Ich habe den Eindruck, dass die Mainstream-Medien mit der Wahl Obamas sich im Glanz des multikulturellen Himmels sonnen. Es gab kaum eine Kommentierung der Rassenstruktur der Resultate und was sie für eine kommende schwierige Zeit für die Republikaner bedeuteten (bei TOO sind wir an der Sache dran). Diesmal hört man ringsum nichts als eine Kommentierung darüber, wie die Republikaner dem Tode geweiht sind, sollten sie nicht den Hispanics („Hispander“, wie es bei VDARE heißt) zu Willen sein.

Die rassischen Bruchlinien sind offensichtlicher als je zuvor. In 2008 hingegen lautete die offizielle Version, dass 58% der Weißen republikanisch gewählt hätten. Dieses Jahr, entsprechend der CNN-Wählerbefragungsdaten, spaltete es sich 59% zu 39% auf. Natürlich umfasst die weiße Bevölkerung Juden und Personen aus dem Mittleren Osten, die als Weiße klassifiziert werden, die jedoch nicht wie andere Weiße wählen und sich nicht mit der traditionellen Bevölkerung und Kultur Amerikas identifizieren. (70% der Juden votierten für Obama, weniger als die 80%  in 2008, vielleicht weil Obama nicht sofort auf Israels Geheiß den Iran bombardiert hat. Als eine kritische Komponente der neuen feindseligen Elite sind jüdische Wähler überwiegend durch ihre Identifikation mit der antiweißen Koalition der Demokratischen Partei motiviert, in der Annahme (richtigerweise), dass die Unterstützung Israels hinlänglich überparteilich ist, um den Sieg davon zu tragen.) Wie gewöhnlich setzte sich der Rückgang des Anteils der Weißen am Wahlvolk fort: von 74% auf 72%. Und, wie gewohnt, erhielt die Republikanische Partei mehr als 90% ihrer Stimmen von Weißen.

Nichtweiße votierten ganz überwiegend für Obama – 80% im Durchschnitt. Asiaten sind in ihrem Stimmverhalten so geworden, wie die Juden – nicht so sehr auf ihre ökonomische Position fokussiert, als auf ihre Identifikation mit Nichtweißen. In der Tat wählte ein höherer Prozentsatz an Asiaten (73%) Obama, als es die Latinos (71%) und die Juden (70%) taten.

Weiße beiderlei Geschlechtes wählten republikanisch, wohingegen nur 35% der weißen Männer und nur 42% der weißen Frauen demokratisch wählten. Auch die Weißen der jüngsten Alterskategorie (18-29 Jahre) – diejenigen, die durch Sumner Redstones MTV und durch das Schulsystem, deren Hauptanliegen derzeit es ist, die Segnungen der Vielfalt in die Gehirne eingefangener junger Zuhörer zu hämmern, am meisten beeinflußt wurden – wählten republikanisch (51% zu 41%).

Damit ist die Republikanische Partei die Partei der Weißen. Die Medien schreien nun danach, daß die Partei jetzt  ihre Hände zu den Latinos ausstrecken sollten, um wieder wettbewerbsfähig zu werden. Ich nehme an, daß es dies ist, was sie auch versuchen werden. Es ist jedoch sehr unwahrscheinlich, daß es funktionieren wird.

Dabei geht es nicht nur um die Einwanderung. Um die große Mehrheit der Nicht-Weißen anzusprechen, würden die Republikaner auch die Partei für die Ansprüche von Minderheiten und für höhere Steuern für ihre weiße Basis sein müssen. Betrachten Sie die Situation in Kalifornien. In einem Artikel des Wall Street Journals („Kaliforniens griechische Tragödie“), stellten zwei Stanford-Professoren, Michael F. Boskin und John F. Cogan, seit Mitte der 80er Jahre bis 2005 fest, daß Kaliforniens Bevölkerung um 10 Millionen wuchs, während sich die Empfänger von kostenfreier medizinischer Behandlung (Medicaid) auf sieben Millionen erhöhten, registrierte Steuerzahler, die Einkommenssteuer zahlen, wuchsen gerade mal um 150.000, und die Gefängnispopulation schwoll auf 115.000 an…Kalifornien verfügt mit 12% der amerikanischen Bevölkerung über ein Drittel der Wohlfahrtsempfänger der Nation.

Und als ein Resultat der allerjüngsten Wahl haben die Demokraten eine Zweidrittel-Mehrheit in der gesetzgebenden Gewalt des Staates, was bedeutet, dass sie die Steuern so hoch anheben können, wie es ihnen gefällt. Diese neue Zweidrittelmehrheit wird nun das weiße Kalifornien als eine Melkkuh ansehen, die nach Belieben gemolken werden kann, bis wir eine Erleuchtung haben und es verlassen. Kalifornien bietet einen Vorgeschmack darauf, wie die gesamte Nation bald aussehen wird.

Um den Latinos die Hand zu reichen, werden die Republikaner nicht nur zustimmen müssen, mehr Latinos herein zu lassen, sie werden auch bei der Erhöhung der Steuern und beim in-die- Höhe-Treiben der Unterstützungszahlungen übereifrig sein müssen. Das ist eine nicht einmal ferne Vision, die nicht einmal ein gemäßigter Republikaner akzeptieren kann. Es bedeutet die vollständige Niederlage und dem würde sich der Kern der Anhängerschaft standhaft widersetzen. Wie sämtliche Untersuchungen zeigen, sind Weiße nicht gewillt, für öffentliche Guttaten zu bezahlen, die von Nicht-Weißen aufgezehrt würden. Für eine sehr unglückliche weiße Minorität wird es gerade umgesetzt. Es ist nichts als eine weitere Kostenbelastung durch den Multikulturalismus.

Und der Endeffekt ist, dass sich die Latinos genauso fordernd verhalten werden, wie die Juden und Asiaten – sie werden ihre Zukunft in der Demokratischen Partei sehen, als eine Partei des nichtweißen Amerikas, unabhängig von der sozialen Klasse.

Weiße Männer stellen nur 34% der Wählerschaft und dies wird fortlaufend weniger werden. Es ist kein Zufall, dass Aktien von Waffenfirmen nach der Wahl in die Höhe schnellten, obwohl der Aktienmarkt insgesamt sich nach unten bewegte. Was wir hier vorliegen haben, ist eine Situation, in der ungefähr 70% der traditionellen amerikanischen weißen Männer (hier richtig gestellt wegen der von den Medien übermäßig ausgedehnten Kategorie dessen, was sie unter dem Begriff der Weißen zusammenfassen), nun ziemlich stark entrechtet sind, in einem Land, für das sie sich als die Gründerbevölkerung ansehen. Das ist eine große Menge wütender weißer Männer. Die übergroße Mehrheit dieser Männer wird nicht dazu zu bewegen sein, bereitwillig Mitstreiter für eine republikanische Kampagne zur Rekrutierung von Latinos zu sein, ganz egal was die erleuchteten Parteieliten wollen. Und es werden in 2016 weit mehr Nichtweiße abstimmen, da Obama daran gebunden ist, die Illegalen zu legalisieren und auch schon wegen des fortschreitenden Verdrängungsgrades durch die legale nichtweiße Einwanderung.

Das ist oder sollte zumindest explosiv sein. Es mag eine Weile für die 70% dauern, um in der Realität aufzuwachen, dass sie politisch impotent sind. Aber es wird geschehen. Separatistische Bewegungen in den vielen Staaten, die tief rot sind (rote und blaue Staaten stehen jeweils für die Demokratische und die Republikanische Partei – d.Übers.), sind sicherlich eine Möglichkeit, wie sie von Farnham O´Reilly hier schon befürwortet wurde. (Ein Freund erwähnte, daß Rush Limbaugh über die Sezession gescherzt hat.) Gibt es irgendeine andere Alternative? Jenseits vergeblicher Gewalt gegen den Leviathan – haben weiße Männer wirklich irgendeine andere Wahl? Dies ist so, es sei denn, daß sie so denken würden, daß ihr Verlassen der Bühne der Geschichte, zu etwas Geringerem als Mannhaftigkeit, eine denkbare Alternative wäre.

Original: “Disenfranchised White Males: Time for Secession,” The Occidental Observer (TOO), 9. November 2012

Letter to the ADL re Merlin Miller and the American Freedom Party

afp

American Freedom Party
9811 W. Charleston Blvd. Suite 2-441
Las Vegas, NV 89117

 

 

 

National Chairman: William D. Johnson, Esq. 


Executive Director:
Don Wassall, Esq.


Board of Directors:

Kevin MacDonald, Ph.D.

Tom Sunic, Ph.D.

Dr. Adrian H. Krieg

Virginia Abernethy, Ph.D.

James Edwards

Alex Carmichael, Esq.

Harry Bertram 

Membership Coordinator:

Jamie Kelso

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TO:     Anti-Defamation League

April 1, 2013

RE: Mr. Merlin Miller, AFP  

Dear Madams, Sirs: 

When depicting individuals or scholars voicing concern about the multicultural experiment in the USA, the ADL seems to be quite at ease tossing around the locution “white supremacists” (“Extremists Flock to 40th CPAC Conference”). The ADL’s apparent intent is to associate the word “supremacist” with both violence and marginal lawlessness, and then with those who identify with their European-American heritage. The ADL’s effort to smear anyone who disagrees with their view that European-American identification is illegitimate but that Jewish-American identification is legitimate betrays the thinness–if not dishonesty–of the ADL’s position. We believe that European-Americans have just as much right to identify as European-Americans and pursue our interests in the American multicultural landscape as do Jews or other groups such as African-Americans and Latino-Americans. One cannot create a multicultural society without legitimizing the identifications and interests of all groups in the society, including European Americans.  

The individual who has most recently become he target of such conceptual errors–very similar to those in the ex-Soviet and ex-Yugoslav vocabulary–is my friend and colleague, the 2012 AFP presidential nominee, Mr. Merlin Miller. Aside from the fact that Mr. Miller, a West Point graduate and military veteran, is not a “supremacist” of any kind, he is a supremely qualified artist and accomplished movie maker who is concerned with the wellbeing of America. 

Neither Mr. Miller, nor our American Freedom Party advocate any kind of “supremacy,” or claim for that matter to be “supreme” leaders of other peoples or races. We are proud of our European heritage and we are aware that European Americans, like other groups, have interests. Based on our understanding of the consequences of the utopian mixture of different cultures and peoples, as occurred in the former Yugoslavia, we are deeply concerned that America is entering an age where multiethnic hatred and the balkanization will be the norm. 

If you have questions about the American Freedom Party, I’d be glad to answer them. 

Sincerely, 

Tom Sunic, PhD
AFP Board member
American Freedom Party

 

 

 

The War on Easter

German postage stamp, 1933, depicting Parsifal as an Aryan Christ

Editorial Note: This article is a slightly edited version of an article that appeared last year at Easter.

  •  A teaching that does not come out of Nordic blood and carry Nordic spirit cannot spread itself among Nordic races. Since Christianity had become a successful religion for two thousand years only among Nordic races (not among Jews) and Christian ideas were the greatest culturally creative force in human history, it was simply impossible that Christ, the driving force of Christianity could have been a Jew. (From a 1938 issue of the National Socialist newspaper Der Stürmer)[1] 
  • [Kosher Jesus] seeks to offer to Jews and Christians the real story of Jesus, a wholly observant, Pharisaic Rabbi who fought Roman paganism and oppression and was killed for it. . . . As Christians and Jews now come together to love and support the majestic and humane Jewish state, it’s time that Christians rediscover the deep Jewishness and religious Jewish commitment of Jesus, while Jews reexamine a lost son who was murdered by a brutal Roman state who sought to impose Roman culture and rule upon a tiny yet stubborn nation. (Hasidic Rabbi Shmuley Boteach)[2] 

Every year at Easter as we look forward to the great Passion music, we are accustomed to hearing the usual shrill accusations of anti-Semitism. The purpose of such accusations is to force non-Jews to feel shame for a civilization whose art supposedly resulted in atrocities against the ancestors of the Jewish activists. A new twist on Jewish perceptions of Easter can be found in Rabbi Boteach’s book, Kosher Jesus, in which he defends Jesus as one of the tribe’s own, but stops short of accepting Jesus as God or as the Jewish messiah.

What could be a Hasidic rabbi’s motivation for writing a positive portrayal of Jesus? After all, Jews have found the person of Jesus anathema for pretty much the entire history of Christianity. That Rabbi Boteach and other prominent Orthodox Jews now purport to regard Jesus as a welcome racial insider worthy of intense sympathetic study does not portend well. In the following I discuss the Jewish campaign to transform traditional Christianity in a way that serves Jewish interests.  Read more

Jewish groups endorse immigration amnesty/surge

The fact that Jewish groups are in favor of amnesty for illegal immigrants is about as newsworthy as a report that the sun rose in the east today. But the wording of a letter organized by the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society and sent by over 100 Jewish organizations to President Obama and Congress bears mentioning.

Specifically, it notes that “American Jews know too well the impact of restrictive immigration policies.”

The Immigration Restriction act of 1924 is etched in Jewish memory more than any other single event in American history. Jewish activists routinely blame the law for Jews dying in the Holocaust — never mind that it was enacted long before the war.

One of the things that struck me in reviewing Paul Gottfried’s War and Democracy  was that his father “would go speechless with rage if someone suggested that Jews were morally required to support a porous border with Latin America because a ship of German Jews had not been allowed into the U.S. in 1940.” This attitude, which is utterly commonplace in the Jewish community, shows no concern for the interests of other Americans. Only Jewish interests matter. Old historical grudges, no matter how unreasonable, must never be forgotten. Why not focus on the good aspects of the Jewish experience in America—the dramatic decline in anti-Semitism after World War II, and the rise of Jews to elite status all the important areas of American society?

The main theme of my review is the hostility of Jews toward the traditional people and culture of America. Several examples of such hostility are noted in the review. They are easy to come by and are entirely within the mainstream of the American Jewish community.  Needless to say, however, the letter is phrased in terms of the loftiest moral sentiments: “Our views are shaped by our Jewish religious and ethical traditions, as well as our own history in this country and by core American values. The commandment to ‘welcome the stranger’ is mentioned 36 times throughout the Torah, more than any other commandment.” While these same organizations would doubtless endorse the idea that Israel’s immigration laws must ensure that Israel remain a Jewish state (e.g., by not allowing displaced Palestinians the right to return to their land), they have no sympathy for the idea that America’s immigration laws should reflect the interests of its White, Christian majority (see also “Jewish groups oppose Arizona-type immigration laws except Israel“).

Besides hatreds fueled by historical grudges, the other emotion fueling Jews is fear that White Americans would assert their ethnic interests:

American Jews know too well the impact of restrictive immigration policies [again the historical grudge], and we have seen how the immigration issue can become a flashpoint for xenophobia. We are concerned the failure of national leaders to fix the broken immigration system has fueled racist, nativist, and extremist groups who blame immigrants for our country’s problems, and has been a central factor in the spread of state and local policies and laws that legalize discrimination against immigrants.

The cure for xenophobia is legalizing illegals? It’s far more likely that the massive invasion—legal and illegal — feeds xenophobia and that the cure would be an immigration moratorium. But for these Jewish organizations, the way to fix the fears of White Americans that they are being displaced and squeezed out of the labor market is to bring in yet more immigrants.

The letter closes with a plea for expanding legal immigration and shortening the path to full citizenship. It also emphasizes family reunification and admitting more refugees and asylum seekers. These points emphasize two aspects of the traditional Jewish attitude on immigration to the U.S.:

  • Maximize the total number of immigrants; in the immediate after math of the passage of the 1965 law that removed the bias toward Western Europe, Jewish immigration activists switched to focus on maximizing total numbers.  (See here, p. 291)
  • Promote the idea that immigrants not be chosen for their ability to make an economic contribution to the U.S. The assumption is that, apart from those who are “dangerous or a threat to national security,” all immigrants in whatever numbers have a positive impact on the society as a whole  (see previous link, p. 277-278). Family reunification, which has been a bedrock Jewish attitude at least since the 1940s (see previous link, p. 277-278)  is the basis of chain migration which has been one of the main reasons why numbers of immigrants has skyrocketed.

It’s apparent that despite the lofty rhetoric, the entire organized Jewish community sees liberal immigration policy as a Jewish ethnic interest. This is ethnic hardball, pure and simple, motivated by fear and loathing of White America. Such policies are a consensus view among American Jews. Their position has been the same for 100 years, and there is not one Jewish organization that opposes these policies.

And given the effectiveness with which Jews as a wealthy, intelligent, and highly organized group have pursued their interests in the U.S. (see above link), the results have been disastrous for the traditional people and culture of America.

Review of Paul Gottfried’s War and Democracy

Gottfried

War and Democracy
Paul Gottfried
London: Arktos Media, 2012; 167pp.
Available at Arktos Media and Amazon.

Paul Gottfried is an important voice on the right. War and Democracy, a collection of his essays published between 1975 and 2012, bears that out.

Dissident History

Perhaps what struck me the most is his grasp of history and his ability to use his knowledge to illuminate present issues and, especially to argue against currently fashionable interpretations that reinforce the hegemony of the left (including within the left everything from the radical left to the neoconservative right). For example, a review from 1975 of Fritz Stern’s The Failure of Illiberalism, describes the “refugee historical tradition” (presumably a reference to Jewish refugees from National Socialism) on German history as “bad theology”; its purposes are “to be an object lesson to foreigners and to serve as a means of contrition for Germans. … Any interpretation of the past that puts the Germans in a particularly bad light can expect an enthusiastic hearing among large segments of the American academic community”  (“History or Hysteria”).

Gottfried rejects much of the received wisdom on issues related to the German past. In “Germany’s War Wounds” he notes the hypocrisy of framing World War II as a moral crusade while ignoring the crimes against the German people. While England suffered around 21,000 civilian deaths from German bombing, over 600,000 German civilians died as their cities were bombed, with much of the carnage occurring after the war was effectively won and the cities were defenseless. Yet we have intellectuals like Christopher Hitchens stating that Germans who complain show “a combination of arrogance and self-pity tinged with anti-Semitism.” And politicians like former foreign minister Joschka Fischer, “an ostentatiously self-hating German who has published ten booklets to express his revulsion for his own country and his hope that it will soon disappear.” Read more