This comment originally appeared on Unz Review. I can’t say that I entirely agree with it — I tend to be more hopeful that something positive can be worked out, that a new, non-Jewish, politically based elite can arise, but it certainly deserves wider circulation. [I added the link to Horus’s article on The Focus, the group organized by Jews that lobbied for war with the Germans in prior to World War II.]

Comment on “What Ails America — and How to Fix It,” Jeffrey D. Sachs, Unz Review, November 25, 2024

https://www.unz.com/article/what-ails-america-and-how-to-fix-it/#comment-6877674

Anon[427]

November 26, 2024 at 6:41 am GMT • 1,900 Words

What “ails” America is Jews. Not “right-wing” Jews or “left-wing” Jews. Not Republican Jews or Democrat Jews. Not “globalist” Jews or “nationalist” Jews. Not Zionist Jews or Communist Jews. Not religious Jews or atheist Jews. Not George Soros/MSNBC/NYTimes/big-media-monopolizing Jews nor Gad Saad/David Sacks Jews. Just Jews. Jews are the problem. Jews are what ail us.

And it’s been this way in literally every nation they’ve ever resided in — in every time and place in history. Their own bad behavior has served as the root cause of their expulsion from some 109 countries some 1030(+) times, but Jews (with zero sense irony or self-awareness) tell us that this is because everyone else is bigoted and hateful and jealous of their superior intellect, morality and status as G-d’s Chosen.

(Unfortunately, the gentiles buy this argument with apparently little thought or reflection. Why? Because the Jews control the media and therefore their minds? Yes … but also because questioning the Jews’ self-serving narratives will destroy your career. Thus many choose to stay quiet — or just not ponder such thoughtcrimes: I.e., their crimestop instinct kicks in. “Who are you going to believe, Goy? What we Jews tell you about your wicked ancestors or what your wicked ancestors tell you about us Jews?”)

There’s a phenomenon — a classic blunder — where some people (such as, apparently, Elon Musk) mistakenly believe that there are “good Jews” and “bad Jews” and that by allying oneself with the “good Jews” (the Zionist/”right-wing” Jews to whom Elon ingratiates himself) one can defeat the bad Jews (like Soros) and thereby save the West. History and experience, however, show that this doesn’t work.[1]

You cannot “wield” Jews. Jews wield you. Jews are like the One Ring in Tolkien’s The Lord of The Rings. It’s tempting to think that you can “ally” with them and use them for your own purposes, but you really can’t — not, at least, for long and certainly not against themselves. (The One Ring itself is an apt metaphor for the corrupting influence of power and bribery.[2])

In the books, the One Ring is ultimately one with Sauron. You cannot wield it against him. And so too are “right-wing” Jews one in spirit and will with “left-wing” Jews (Soros/Sauron). They’re all one Jewish collective — though they will often pretend otherwise: “We’re not some hivemind goy! As we Jews like to say: Two Jews, three opinions on how best to fleece the Goyim! — Wait. Hehe. I meant, just, ‘three opinions.’ Not that ‘fleece the Goyim’ part. Hehe. Oops.”

Allying with Jews to further authentic right-wing, nativist nationalist ends has been tried and it’s always failed. Churchill tried it. Rupert Murdoch tried it. Trump’s tried it. It doesn’t work. Trying to separate Jewish factions and play one against the other (the “right” against the “left” or the “left” against the “right”) doesn’t work. It’s a classic trap, akin to … invading Russia.

Give the “right-wing Zionist” Jews everything in the world that they want — more money for Israel, the West Bank, more endless wars (against Germany or Iraq or Assad or Gaddafi), total support at the UN., total fealty at their wailing wall, etc. — it will never be enough. And they will never reciprocate

Jews always endeavor to control both sides. This is why explicitly anti-Jewish movements are the only kind that have shown any success against them and their agendas. It’s why movements which don’t see Jews as Jews, but as supposedly belonging to the separate camps or categories which they invent or infiltrate and pretend to belong to (and to which their allegiances are secondary or tactical anyways) always fail. Jews are Jews regardless of what they call themselves or dress up as. Every movement which buys into their wolf-in-sheepskin lies ends up inevitably being subverted by and destroyed by them.

Of course, being explicitly anti-Jewish isn’t sufficient and it doesn’t guarantee success. After all, Hitler didn’t ultimately prevail despite his initial successes due to the Jews arraying a coalition of useful idiots (the “Allies) against him — but it’s the only approach that has ever worked (109 expulsions).

If you try to wield “right-wing” Jews against “left-wing” Jews, or, conversely, “left-wing” Jews against “right-wing” Jews, you will find that you get very little utility out of your Jewish “allies” whereas they get tremendous utility out of you.

They spy on you — as does the One Ring. They influence you — as does the One Ring. They promise you powers and riches which they will never ultimately grant — as does the One Ring. And, in the end, whatever power or riches you may acquire you still end up a slave to them — a ringwraith — as did the kings of Middle Earth.

What did Britain’s — or Churchill’s — alliance with Jews in WWII (see: The Focus) do for Britain? Sure, they defeated Germany — in a largely unnecessary war which the British establishment (under Jewish influence) themselves provoked — and then what? What happened post-War? What happened to the British Empire? What’s happened to their country since? Did the Jews show their gratitude by helping ensure that Britain retained strong borders and the demographic integrity of its isles (as the Jews jealously guard Israel’s demographic integrity)? Or have the Jews worked, at every turn, to undermine the ethnic integrity and demographic continuity of Britain? Or, have the Jews worked to undermine the sense of ethnic pride of the British people? Much of Britain is unrecognizable today. London is minority White British. By virtually every conceivable metric Britain would be vastly better off if the Germans had won, even if (as the fever dream hysterics claim) “we’d all be speaking German today.” So? At least Britain would still be White and British. What would Churchill think if he could see Britain today? What would the men who stormed Normandy beach think? Unfortunately, Churchill, in the end, let himself become a ringwraith for ZOG.

(To illustrate Churchill’s thinking, he, in 1920, wrote an article called Zionism versus Bolshevism,[3] where he argued that there were two groups of Jews. The “good” Zionist Jews and the “bad” Bolshevik Jews. Churchill then goes on to argue that “good” Zionist Jews should enter into an alliance with the British against the “bad” Bolsheviks. Well … how’d that all work out in retrospect? The Zionists got basically everything they ever wanted (and so did the Bolsheviks for a time) and where are the British today?)

What did Roosevelt’s alliance with the Jews (through his heavily Jewish cabinet) do for his nation — America? What does it look like today? Demographically, it shares the fate of Britain and it looks like, increasingly, its empire is going the same way, and in large part due to interminable Middle East wars which serve just one interest: Israel. In Roosevelt, again, we find a ringwraith: a man who sold out his soul (and his nation) for power … or perhaps a Denethor-like character who was under the control of Wormtongue Morgenthau and Harry Dexter White.

What of Rupert Murdoch and his business empire? Steve Sailer has related a story wherein an acquaintance of his mentioned Murdoch saying privately that in order to do business in America (paraphrasing) “one needn’t befriend all the Jews, but one must befriend at least one of two factions of Jews.” Meaning, essentially, one must either submit to the Zionist “right-wing” faction or the anti-white/anti-American “left-wing” faction (which controls most of the balance of traditional that Murdoch doesn’t). Clearly, Rupert chose to ally with the “right-wing” Zionist faction. And what has that done for the American right? In what way has the “right” in the U.S. actually been served by Fox? All it does is lose on every domestic social issue year after year. It’s in constant retreat.

Thanks to Fox News, all of the healthy, natural, nativist, ethnocentric and patriotic energy of an authentic right-wing which might actually serve core white Christian America is being parasitically channeled away from protecting its own borders and demographic majority to protecting Israel’s borders and … not just their demographic majority … but their project of erecting a supremacist expansionist land-hungry apartheid state.

White Christian America has gotten nothing from Fox News — or any “right-wing” media, be it Breitbart or The Daily Wire, etc. (all of which are just Zionist fronts), but Israel, on the other hand, has gotten everything it could ever dream of.

Murdoch has become another ringwraith. A king reduced to a ghostly Zionist pawn.

What of Donald Trump? Did he actually close the border and build the wall in his first term as he promised in every campaign rally he’d do for eighteen months straight? No. Did he deport illegals in appreciable numbers? No. Actually, he carried out very little in his populist agenda to serve the interests of the core demographic which voted for him. Instead he basically carried out Jared Kushner’s agenda which served primarily to benefit Israel — oh, and he pardoned a bunch of Jewish fraudsters and black felons.

Trump was, and probably still is, just another ringwraith pawn of the Jews.

Now what about Elon? Is he another ringwraith? Destined to become one? Judging by virtually everything he’s written (and retweeted) on X since he had his little oopsie last year and told the truth about the malign influence of Jews on Whites, and then had to be led around Auschwitz like a dog and go kiss Bibi’s ring, Elon now shows all the signs of someone who’s turning into yet another ringwraith. Elon also presumably believes (falsely) that by “allying” (or bowing) to one group of Jews (“right-wing” Zionist Jews) he can fight against and defeat the other group of Jews who are destroying the West. He’s wrong. At least that’s what all precedent says. You can’t wield “right-wing” Jews any more than you can wield the One Ring. It wields you, and it will turn you into its slave just as it has done to so many others. The only solution is to destroy the Ring — to destroy Jewish power. That’s how you save the West.

I still hold out hope that Elon will change his mind on this or that he, in some sense, secretly already knows or understands what I’ve written here and what a problem Jews are and that, perhaps, he’s just playing the long-game — perhaps hoping to “out-Jew the Jew” or something, but even that being the case, there are only so many time one can put the Ring on before it fundamentally compromises and corrupts you and you end up just another slave to ZOG.

[1] One also sees this with the “anti-Zionist Jews” like Finkelstein and Blumenthal. Their true function — whether conscious or unconscious — is to subordinate and lead the “anti-Zionist” movement thereby neutering it. See, for example, how in Finkelstein’s case, he attacks Zionism’s most effective critics, like John Mearsheimer, as an anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist who propounds Protocols-like conspiracy theories of Jewish subversion of the American political system through the “Israel Lobby.”

(There’s various names for when Jews employ false dialectics where they seem, superficially, to oppose each other, but they’re actually furtively on the same side: E.g., The Kosher Sandwich, or the Esau Gambit, etc.)

[2] More on the LOTR analogy:
https://www.unz.com/isteve/1945-the-year-zero-of-american-architecture/#comment-6474944

[3] https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Zionism_versus_Bolshevism

Ursula Haverbeck (11/8/1928 – 11/20/2024) recently passed at the ripe old age of ninety-six. She was known or “notorious” in Germany because she dared to challenge the Jewish Holocaust ‘narrative’ of six million. Time after time, she got into trouble with the German authorities for ‘Holocaust denial’ and ‘incitement to hatred,’ a crime that often results in either an exorbitant fine or imprisonment. The poor woman’s offense was that she dared to believe that Auschwitz was a work camp (which it was) and not a death camp. In a speech that Ursula gave in 2016 in the southern Berlin district of Lichtenrade, she described the Holocaust as one of the greatest lies in history. She also stated that the gas chambers of Auschwitz were not real.

Ursula’s imprisonments, however, reveals something deeply maniacal about our enemies. It shows not only how desperate they are to maintain at all costs the Holocaust propaganda they’ve spoon-fed us for the past 60 years, but how foundationally weak it is that they feel it necessary to imprison a woman in her 90s simply because she thinks differently about Auschwitz. Ursula’s crimes were essentially thought crimes; she happened to think differently than what the German authorities thought about that historic period of time from 1939–1945. And as a result, she was arrested, fined, sentenced, and imprisoned.

Ursula might have been allowed to keep such ‘heretical’ thoughts and never suffer a day in court if she had just kept it to herself. But she dared to share her ‘heresy’ with others and to align herself with Germany’s ‘far right’ political dissidents. Tyrannical governments, such as Germany’s, can’t allow their citizenry to ‘notice’ or even publicly question Jewish dogma about what happened at Auschwitz. All of it must be believed. To do otherwise is to invite inquiry, differing opinions, or even disbelief in the entire Holocaust story itself. Thus, it’s better to stamp out a dissenting whisper or even the mildest objection lest the entire house of cards crumble to the ground.

Would Ursula have been fined and imprisoned had she dared to challenge or question whether the Cambodian genocide (1976-1980) by the Khmer Rouge actually occurred? Would she have been arrested for ‘incitement to hatred’ if she professed not to believe certain parts of the Holodomor genocide (1932-1933) that led to the deaths of millions of Ukrainians? Or what would have happened to Ursula if she refused to believe the Armenian genocide by the Turks (1915-1923) in which approximately one million Armenians were brutally slaughtered? Or what if Ursula had thought differently about the Rwandan genocide (1994) which led to the mass murder of nearly one million Tutsis? Would Ursula have been arrested or fined if she declared Joseph Stalin’s mass murder of approximately 50 million people (1929-1953) never occurred or that his regime had nothing to do with the Great Purge which targeted political dissenters? If Ursula were to tell her German countrymen that Mao Zedong’s regime (1949-1976) never led to the mass murder of an estimated 40 to 70 million people, how likely is it that she would have been summoned to the authorities for questioning?

Truth is, nothing would have happened to Ursula. No German court would have criminally convicted her for believing differently about such human genocides, nor for sharing her thoughts to others. The subject of the Holocaust, however, in their minds is an entirely different matter and that not because of its overwhelming historical and numerical veracity when examined carefully, but because of the power, money and influence that Jewish power wields throughout Europe. Jews will not permit any deviation on whether the Holocaust death count was six million or something far less. They will not agree to anything less than Auschwitz being a death camp for the sole purpose of exterminating Jewish prisoners. And they have placed enormous pressure on the German authorities to never allow even the slightest departure from the received narrative.

In a way I understand this because every aggrieved group or ethnicity that feels it has been wronged view themselves as history’s ultimate victims. Jews, then, are only doing what other groups who feel they have been wrongly persecuted have done.

But there is an important difference.

Jews use lawfare and criminal indictments to enforce their beliefs that pressure non-Jews to comply lest they be summoned by the authorities. As it currently stands, there are 17 European countries, including Israel and Canada, that make Holocaust denial a punishable offense. Jews often publicly malign those who refuse to go along with the narrative via their media outlets. They do all in their power to portray any and all dissenters in the worst possible light. This is something no other ethnic group on the planet does.

The Armenian people, in contrast to Jews, will not engage in a holy crusade against anyone who happens to think differently about the details of the Armenian genocide. They may argue against such notions as individuals, but not in some collective public campaign to force everyone to agree on every conceivable detail over those events. The same may be said of any other ethnic group that has experienced wholesale slaughter at the hands of their enemies. Neither do Armenians erect sympathy museums throughout Europe and America that visually dramatize their sufferings by the Turks as Jews have done in their Holocaust museums. Armenians have not sought exorbitant amounts of reparations from other countries either nor have they instituted policies of perpetual reparations to each new generation of their people as Jews have. Only Jews could create such devious financial scams and trickery and manage to get away with it. Rightly did Norman Finkelstein title his 2000 book, The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering.

The Israeli government, interestingly, has refused to formally acknowledge the Armenian genocide (see Yossi Melman, “Israel’s Refusal to Recognize the Armenian Genocide is Indefensible,” Foreign Policy, 4/29/2019). Jews have tended to either deny or downplay the horrors of the Armenian genocide because anything that detracts from the centrality of Jewish suffering is seen as a threat to their power, to their very existence as a people.

The Jewish obsession to marginalize and criminally prosecute those who refuse to believe the Holocaust reflects a strongly religious character. Like the Roman Catholic Church during the Middle Ages that persecuted ‘heretics’ for their thought transgressions, so also today’s Jewish power system that has infiltrated the West fanatically believes it must attack and, if possible, criminally prosecute anyone who renounces Holocaust dogma and makes it known to others.

Many Jews cannot even accept that one might reject the Holocaust story because of problems that make it appear questionable or greatly exaggerated and still have positive feelings for the Jewish people. In their minds, an unwillingness to fully accept what Jews have suffered is clear proof that they are ‘anti-Semites.’ No reasonable nuances are accepted. For the Jews, the Holocaust is an all or nothing proposition that again reveals its overly dogmatic and religious nature.

All of this on the part of Jews stems from an inflated and grandiose view of themselves. Nothing in the world even matters except how it impacts the Jewish people, and this includes the suffering of other groups. Jews may claim to care about non-Jews, poor migrants and the impoverished in their efforts to ‘repair the world.’ But what it almost always amounts to is burdening White western governments with more non-White immigrants at tax-payer expense and less social cohesion.

There is a popular phrase among Jews taken from the Talmud: “Whoever destroys a single life is considered as if he destroyed an entire world; and whoever saves a life is considered as if he saved an entire world” (Sanhedrin 37a). I was at first bewildered by what it meant until I realized that what it’s really saying is that saving one Jewish life has so much intrinsic value and worth that it’s equivalent to saving the entire world, all of humanity! Granted, modern Jews try to argue that it applies universally to everyone, Jews as well as non-Jews. But this is not the dominant opinion among the ancient rabbis, especially when one considers how painfully derogatory Jews routinely spoke of gentiles evident in their Talmudic writings.

One understands, then, why Jews are unwilling to see the genocidal suffering of other groups as equivalent or greater than that of their own. This is one of several reasons why Jews seek to punish all forms of Holocaust denial. The same will occur here in the U.S. if the First Amendment is ever neutered or abolished altogether. Jews in America are currently working on doing that very thing since the First Amendment stands in the way of their efforts to outlawing all speech deemed ‘anti-Semitic.’

What Jews seem to fear most are words. As Abe Foxman, the former national director of the ADL, reminds us: “The Holocaust didn’t start with gas chambers or Auschwitz. It started with words.” Is it any wonder, then, why they do so much in their power to both control the thoughts and words of others? Jews only want free speech when it benefits them. What they really want is controlled speech.

Our opponents try to justify prosecuting dissenters to the Holocaust story by arguing that the atrocities committed by the Nazis were unique in all of history. It’s necessary, therefore, to maintain the historical integrity of what occurred, including Germany’s complicity in the deaths of millions of Jews which must never be forgotten. Thus, it’s incumbent upon the German government to fine and even imprison those who ‘incite hatred’ against Jews lest the same events be repeated.

But such thinking is wrongheaded from the outset. The Holocaust is not a unique event in all of history if one is talking about genocides or human death tolls. Aside from serious questions about where the notion of ‘six million’ originated, including its symbolic usage among Jews many years prior to WW2, the Holocaust story is replete with a multiplicity of historical problems that have caused a growing number of people to question its veracity.

Moreover, a host of truly bizarre and outright silly Nazi death stories surround the Holocaust narrative that only serve to cast even more doubt on what we’ve been told about it (e.g., death by masturbation machines; soap made from the skin of Jews; and the silliest accounts of surviving the gas chambers).

There have also been numerous genocides throughout human history that were greater in number and sheer horror than the alleged Holocaust. Any attempt to make the Holocaust the greatest human atrocity one could imagine is absurd and flies in the face of the historical record.

Finally, when has outlawing speech and free inquiry ever benefitted the progress of Truth? If the Holocaust narrative is factually true, why is it necessary to surround it with legal penalties and punishments if one dares to think and speak otherwise? Why can’t the proponents of the Holocaust story defend their position in the arena of ideas and open inquiry rather than so often resorting to threats of criminal punishment and costly fines? Is the conduct of Jews in this realm the mark of a people devoted to Truth, or a people so desperate to maintain lies that they will gladly resort to imprisoning a 96-year-old elderly woman because she dared to have a contrarian viewpoint?

Ursula Haverbeck was a brave woman who stood by her convictions. She was willing to pay the price for it too. I hope more Whites will be as steadfast in their convictions as she was.

This is from Ambrose Kane’s Substack. Please subscribe.