Dr. Lasha Darkmoon

Tag Archive for: Dr. Lasha Darkmoon

Sex Plague

Sigmund Freud: “Sexual morality is contemptible. I advocate an incomparably freer sexual life….If only Americans knew, we are bringing them the plague!”

A recent pamphlet published by the German government contains these chilling words:

Fathers do not devote enough attention to the clitoris and vagina of their daughters. The child touches all parts of their father’s body, sometimes arousing him. The father should do the same.

Toddlers are to be encouraged to indulge in “unlimited masturbation.” Their parents are expected to offer practical demonstrations if need be — the better to produce sexual precocity in their offspring. “Children should learn there is no such thing as shameful parts of the body,” the booklet advises. “The body is a home you should be proud of.”

Children, it is suggested, should be taught the movements of copulation as soon as they reach the age of four, giving them what virtually amounts to a crash course in the Kama Sutra as soon as they have learnt to walk.

Depravity, it seems, cannot be taught too early.

In Holland, things have gone further. Here a political party, set up by convicted pedophiles, clamors for the legalization of child pornography and intergenerational sex between children of twelve and adults old enough to be their grandparents. I forgot to mention bestiality. They want to legalize that too. (See here for a full report).

Who is to blame for the sex addictions we see suppurating all round us? This licentiousness, growing by the day, thanks to the internet and the mass media, is far deadlier and more destructive than it was half a century ago, before the sexual revolution.

Those who are responsible for this sickening depravity are clearly the people who started the sexual revolution. They are the people, moreover, who control the mass media.

Who controls the media? Who determines the imagery and attitudes drip-feeding steadily into the minds of the public? Who runs Hollywood? Who contaminates mass consciousness? Who defiles the collective mind? Who pulls the puppet strings of marionette man? Who are the Bad Shepherds leading the sheeple astray?

Who are to blame, in short, for letting the world go to hell in a handcart?

I won’t bother to answer that question. More to the point, I dare not. If you don’t know who owns the media—lock, stock and barrel—you’re wasting your time reading this article.

Art and Sexual Subversion: The Vaginocentric Female Artist

Let me resume here my discussion of sexual depravity which formed the basis of my recent article Sex and the Jews; and let me begin by saying a few words on art, a subject I know something about. (See here and here). And then let me proceed to the subject of pornography and consider its deployment in the systematic demoralization of the masses.

First, ask yourself this question: is there anything intrinsically admirable or aesthetically pleasing about British painter Tracey Emin’s attention-seeking leg-and-vagina paintings?

If you were a man of taste, which of these two depictions of the Eternal Feminine would you prefer: this beautiful woman painted by Botticelli or the ugly feminist icon who appears below?

Botticelli’s Venus

Consider only these titles by the outrageously untalented Emin and draw your own conclusions: Everyone I Have Ever Slept With, Fucking Down An Ally (sic), Asleep Alone With Legs Open (several large-scale canvases of her splayed legs and vagina), I’ve Got It All (legs splayed again, clutching banknotes to her crotch), Weird Sex, CV Cunt Vernacular, Is Anal Sex Legal, Masturbating, Get Ready For the Fuck Of Your Life.

With titles like these, Tracey Emin could hardly fail. Her rich Jewish patron, advertising mogul Charles Saatchi, knew he was on to a good thing.

As the Gadarene swine hurtle over the cliff top, Tracey Emin and her kind clearly lead the pack on their way down into the bottomless abyss. These are the dupes of organized Jewry. By doing exactly what appeals to art patrons (almost all Jewish; see below), these infinitely corrupt talentless opportunists know they will become rich and famous.

The sad truth is that so many female “artists” — almost all of them rabid feminists and sexual exhibitionists — have nothing to sell but vaginas.

Here are ten other vagina-obsessed females, apart from Tracey Emin and the notorious Annie Sprinkle (see my previous article), who use sex to sell their “art”:  Karen Finley, Hannah Wilke, Carolee Schneeman, Andrea Fraser, Sarah Lucas, Marlene McCarty, Vanessa Beecroft,  Malerie Marder, Katy Grannan, and Kembra Pfahler.

Being unable to paint properly or produce objects of lasting value, these exhibitionists like to display their vaginas to the world and call it “art”. Here is one such exhibitionist, Jewish performance artist Carolee Schneemann, pulling a paper scroll out of her vagina:

Carolee Schneemann:  “I saw the vagina as enlivened by its passage from the visible to the invisible, a spiralled coil with the shape of desire and generative mysteries….”

Who helps to promote this pretentious claptrap? You don’t need three guesses to answer that question.

In 2001, ARTnews listed the world’s Top Ten Art Collectors. Eight of them were Jews. Ponder these staggering statistics: A people who constitute 0.2% of the world’s population make up 80% of the world’s richest art collectors. Out of every thousand people in the world, roughly two are Jews. To be precise, one in every 457 people are Jews. Yet go to a conference at which 1000 of the world’s wealthiest art collectors have gathered and you will find, to your amazement, that 800 of them are Jewish! Phenomenal, isn’t it? (See here)

Some of the vaginocentric exhibitionists mentioned above, like lesbian “performance artist” Annie Sprinkle, maintain websites blocked by porn filters. The aptly named Sprinkle—a nom de porn in honor of  urolagnia — is the lady who douched her vagina onstage in 1991, before lying down and opening her legs so that members of the audience, mostly male, could inspect her cervix with the help of a flashlight and speculum.


Annie Sprinkle (Ellen Steinberg): performance artist, prostitute, porn actress, feminist icon, and lesbian diva of depravity. Her idea of “art” is to masturbate onstage with sex toys, her legs wide open, and invite members of a predominantly male audience to peer up her vagina with torchlight and speculum. Sprinkle’s show was funded by the National Endowment for the Arts, a mini-empire controlled by the hidden hand of organized Jewry.

If Sprinkle acquired fame and fortune by allowing dirty old men to peep between her legs, Hannah Wilke and Karen Finley sought variations in which the vulva was again put to good use. The Jewish Wilke, being sadly deficient in originality, molded bits of chewing gum into vulvas and stuck them all over her body, much to the delight of the dirty old men who could now examine an assortment of vulvas simultaneously instead of just one. Not to be outdone, Finley smeared her naked torso with chocolate syrup and performed public acts—using a yam—which I won’t describe in detail in case nuns are reading this article. Rape, flatulence and menstruation formed the least offensive items in her repertoire.

Andrea Fraser, however, deserves first prize for sheer chutzpah. This raunchy performance artist arranged to meet a man at the Royalton Hotel in Manhattan, owned by Jewish hotelier Ian Shrager. Above the bed, an overhead camera played Peeping Tom. The man was persuaded to part with $20,000 for the privilege of helping to create a “work of art” with the frisky Fraser, the said work of art being a pornographic video filming the two participants copulating on a Queen-size bed. This sex video, now available for posterity, is pretentiously called “Untitled”.

It’s not “art” we’re dealing with here, of course.  It’s pornography pure and simple.

The Jewish Affinity for Porn

Nina Hartley, Jewish porn star, who is reported to have said, “I’ve yet to meet a Jewish guy who wasn’t a horny rabbit.”

Jews dominate the world’s $10 billion a year porn industry, roughly 90 per cent of which is generated within the United States.

As many as 260 new porn sites go online daily, more than ten sites an hour.

Since Jews are known to dominate the porn industry and comprise only 2% of America’s population, it is reasonable to suppose that most of the new sites being started up every hour are being started up by Jews.

It is even more alarming to note how sex is now deployed by many American Jews as a weapon against Christianity with its socially cohesive and family-friendly values.

Jewish pornographer Al Goldstein’s infamous words — “The only reason that Jews are in pornography is that we think that Christ sucks”—surely tell us all we need to know about the bitter hatred felt by so many Jews for the Western countries that have harboured them and given them hospitality for so long.

Jewish hatred for Christianity is legendary, spanning the Jewish political spectrum, from the far left to the neoconservative right. It can hardly be doubted, as the picture below makes only too clear.

“Christ sucks!”

The arrogance and sense of entitlement of so many Jews, whose values Al Goldstein seems to have imbibed with his mother’s milk, never cease to astonish me. “The difference between a Jewish soul and the soul of non-Jews,” Rabbi Kook assures us, “is greater and deeper than the difference between a human soul and the soul of cattle.” Given that Rabbi Kook would be the first to agree that rabbis form the intellectual and spiritual backbone of Jewry, one is tempted to ask what makes a man become a rabbi in the first place. Is it the thirst for God? Is it the wish to save one’s soul and help others along the path to salvation?

Here is Jewish actor Richard Pacheco who couldn’t quite make up his mind whether to become a rabbi or a porn star:

Five years before I got my first part in an adult film. … I went to an audition for an X-rated film with my hair down to my ass, a copy of Wilhelm Reich’s Sexual Revolution under my arm and yelling about work, love and sex, which were Reich’s three principles. These things have got to be in balance or your life is going to be fucked.

Note that Pacheco had signed on to the radical left-Freudian views of Wilhelm Reich—the wackiest and most extreme of the subversive sexual ideologies that emerged from psychoanalysis. Jewish devotees of psychoanalysis typically saw it, first and foremost, as a blow against Christian sexual mores; hence, as a sneak attack on Christianity itself. For Jews, psychoanalysis  placed  Western culture on the couch. It was an assertion of Jewish  contempt for Christian culture—the culture of the outgroup now destined for the dustbin of history.

Pacheco didn’t get the job, but he kept on auditioning, since all he really wanted was to screw gorgeous blonde shiksas—doubtless an atavistic expression of Jewish hatred for the goyim, every act of sex being an act of revenge.

Five years later I auditioned for another X-rated film. That very day, I also interviewed at Hebrew Union Seminary to do rabbinical study. I made the choice that the kind of rabbi I would be, if I became one, was one that could have been performing in sex films as part of his experience. (My emphasis, see here).

Mindboggling, isn’t it? This dupe of the sexual revolution couldn’t make up his mind whether to sing hymns to God or kiss the devil’s ass! In the end, it’s the devil who won out. Pacheco decided to build a career in pornography—with the full blessings, incidentally, of ADL chairman Abe Foxman who said that porn offered American Jews a valid and worthy way “to pursue the American dream.”

Richard Pacheco (b. 1948). Scion of an orthodox Jewish family from Pittsburg, Pacheco was attracted from an early age to the rabbinate and to porn in equal measure.  Star of over 100  X-rated films and winner of countless awards for his sexual prowess in front of the cameras, Pacheco was lucky to receive the loyal support of his wife Ashley. Managing somehow to juggle  a career in porn with a commitment to family life, Pacheco later had sex with Ashley “considerably less often after they had children and AIDS became a threat, but he credits his pornography career for giving him the opportunity to continue sexual encounters for a time without endangering his home life.”

Here is Pacheco being interviewed after his retirement from porn:

As a young husband, I had no idea how to ask my beloved wife to be my “fuck-your-ass whore”. Yeah, I wanted some of that kind of sex, some very, very selfish lust with a sex kitten.  A “fuck-me-fuck-me” woman. There’d be corsets and leathers, high-heeled boots laced up to crotchless  panties, breasts spilling out of nippleless bras in lush bordello bedrooms filled up with sex toys. Like blindfolds and vibrators, handcuffs and paddles. Yeah, and there’d be me with a genuine tarted up won’t-say-no-woman. All the best drugs and oils in the world and plenty of time. And there’d be no “I love you” in any of it! I would meet this X-rated woman at the hotel where they were holding the auditions…and I would have sex with her right there in the hotel elevator! And then I would go home to my wife.


Richard Pacheco (a recent photo). Asked if he still watched adult movies now that he was  a Senior Citizen, the former rabbinical student replied: “Not much.  Occasionally I’ll toss one on for masturbation if my wife ain’t around.” (See here).

In 1984, Pacheco won the Best Couples Sex Scene (video) with porn star Nina Hartley. In 1999, he was inducted into the AVN Hall of Fame with feminist porn diva Annie Sprinkle.  In 2000, along with Sprinkle, he was given a Lifetime Achievement Award by the Free Speech Coalition (FSC), an organization that had given Nina Hartley an award only a few months earlier. (See here).

Note that these three luminaries of lust—Pacheco, Sprinkle and Hartley—are all Jewish pornographers and that the impressively named “Free Speech Coalition” is in fact a trade association set up in 1991 to safeguard the interests of “adult entertainers” pornographers who for the most part are Jewish.

The FSC rejects all claims that pornography is addictive; it refuses to consider the possibility that serial killers and rapists could in any way be influenced by inflammatory erotica.

In an important court case in 2002, Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, the US Supreme Court decided in the Coalition’s favour, thereby making it easier for pornographers to demoralize Americans, corrupt their children, and promote a general debasement of values — all this in accordance, incidentally, with the Frankfurt School agenda of producing a “culture of pessimism” designed to foster anarchy and promote impotent anger and despair.  (See here and here).

Our new elite is clearly engaged in the business of mind manipulation and mass demoralization, nor will it rest until it has rebuilt the world in the image of a new Sodom and Gomorrah — a dystopic nightmare.
America, 2050

Apocalypse America

I have said it before, and I will say it again:

A great storm is brewing and only a military coup or revolution can now save America. Save it from what?  From the spiritual cancer that is consuming it from within, and from the foreign wars into which it is being lured—Afghanistan, Iraq, and soon perhaps Iran—on behalf of another nation and its indefatigable agents in America.

Unless a miracle soon occurs and some charismatic leader comes to our rescue, an unimaginably bleak future surely awaits us: a future in which the only consolations left to us will be mindless entertainment, drugs, alcohol, sexual intoxication—and suicide.

Depravity appears to have no limits, as those who have surfed the internet have often discovered to their cost. The most appalling sexual addictions now render even children helpless. Many a marriage is blighted and ends in ruins amid these terrifying toxins.

And yet, we are only at the beginning. We have many a slime-green step to go before we reach rock bottom. Abyss yawns below bottomless abyss, and even to peer into these black moral chasms is to make us giddy with vertigo.

There is indeed no end to man’s depravity.

And now…

Things fall apart. The centre cannot hold. The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere the ceremony of innocence is drowned.

And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born…?
— William Butler Yeats,
The Second Coming

Dr Lasha Darkmoon (email her) is an academic, age 32, with higher degrees in Classics. She is also a published poet and translator whose verse can be sampled here. “Lasha Darkmoon” is a pen name.

The Subtleties of Jewish Humor

In response to a recent article by Edmund Connelly on Jewish self-mockery, Kevin MacDonald had this to say: “The question is, what about media pieces that have an obvious anti-Jewish sub-text? Jews control the media, right? So why do we find clips like ‘Overcome stress by visualizing a greedy, hook-nosed race of creatures.’”

“The Jewish sub-text,” MacDonald points out, “is obvious to anyone with any knowledge of negative stereotypes of Jews. Connelly doesn’t really know the answer, and I don’t either. That’s why we are asking for suggestions.”

Having spent quite a lot of time pondering Jewish noses and negative stereotypes — I once devoted an entire essay to the subject  —  I hope I may be allowed to suggest an answer to this riddle.

It’s a case of Jewish irony. If you don’t get it, it’s not because you are irony deficient. This is not meant to be a criticism of your sense of humor, still less of your intelligence. No way! It’s just that you have failed to understand that an extremely subtle sense of irony is the hallmark of Jewish humor. It is so nuanced, so rarefied, that you are often not even aware it is irony. Jews get the joke, but the goyim usually don’t. They’re not meant to get it. That’s the whole point.

The apparent self-mockery of the Jew is actually an inverted way of patting himself on the back. Woody Allen and Sarah Silverman specialize in this sort of black humor. Jewish comics make a habit of poking fun at Jews and their supposed faults in order to convince us of the sheer absurdity of anti-Semitism.

Let me give you some examples.

A few years ago, when I was a schoolteacher, I set up a cartoon competition for the students in my class. One of the entries was sent in by a boy called Cohen with a chip on his shoulder 2000 years long. It was a picture depicting a massive billboard on a major motorway. It showed a hideous, bald-headed man who looked like he’d just stepped out of a Der Sturmer cartoon:  a monstrous beak of a nose, a bile green complexion, and a mouth coruscating with gold teeth. The caption read: “WARNING!!! WATCH OUT FOR ALIEN ABDUCTION!!! Green-eyed monsters, Martian ghouls, and men with funny hooked noses could come knocking on your door offering to sell you encyclopaedias!”

You see what I mean? This apparent self-mockery was actually a sneer at the goyim for being so out of touch with reality that they still—even after the Holocaust—didn’t seem to get the message that Jews are just like everyone else: a pretty harmless, well-meaning race that the rest of the world have ganged up against for some inexplicable reason.

Of course, if such a billboard as featured in Master Cohen’s cartoon should ever become an actual  billboard one day, a large number of irony-deficient Jews would scream “Anti-Semitism!” And an equally large chorus of irony-deficient goyim would undoubtedly join the same shrill choir.

But consider this: a large number of Jews who were in on the joke and who were NOT offended by the cartoon would also, at this point, raise tongue-in-cheek cries of “Anti-Semitism!” These are the pranksters. The incorrigible pisstakers. You see, it’s a huge mistake to assume that every Jew who complains of anti-Semitism is one big angry Jew. No, he’s often pretending to be angry. His rage is ersatz. He’s putting on the fury, secretly snickering up his sleeve that you should be so dumb as to take him seriously.

Incidentally, I gave Master Cohen first prize for his cartoon. I had no choice.  If I’d given him second prize, he would have complained of anti-Semitism!

You can’t win.

*          *          *

Now consider this cartoon by the famous British cartoonist Steve Bell depicting Ariel Sharon eating a baby. Ask yourself: would this cartoon have won a major competition in a politically correct country such as Britain if organized Jewry had been up in arms against it? Of course not. No, the Jews let it win for two reasons: (1) It proved that “free speech” was alive and kicking in Britain and that we actually live in an intensely anti-Semitic world in which Jews, ever the victims, are totally helpless to stop people saying bad things about them. (2) The cartoon, on another level, was also saying: How absurd that anyone should regard cuddly old Ariel as a “baby eater” when President George W Bush apparently thought the world of him. I mean, wasn’t this charismatic war hero, so adulated in Israel and Brooklyn, actually a “man of peace”?

It has to be asked: was Ariel Sharon upset or angry at Bell’s cartoon depicting him as a child-eating ghoul?  No, I am reliably informed that he was delighted. He was tickled pink. This reminds me of the story of French poet Charles Baudelaire who, in order to improve his image as a monster of depravity, began to circulate the story that he ate babies for breakfast.

The point about anti-Semitism is this: when people who are neutral to Jews — and that includes most people — are presented with gut-wrenchingly distasteful displays of anti-Semitism, the seed of philosemitism is sown in their hearts. Their first reaction is: How unfair this is to the Jews, how needlessly cruel.

Here lies the supreme paradox: Philosemitism can actually be manufactured through ironical and over-the-top displays of anti-Semitism. It’s all a part of social engineering.

*          *          *

A point worth bearing in mind is this: a Jew is permitted to tell an outrageous anti-Semitic joke that a non-Jew would be crucified for relating. Recently, National Security Adviser General James Jones gave a key note speech at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and started the ball rolling by telling a joke depicting Jews as greedy merchants. He clearly meant no harm. He probably thought it would be obvious to his audience that he was merely sending up the silly anti-Semitic “canard” that Jews were just a bunch of moneygrubbing Shylocks.

 “I’d like to begin with a story that I think is true,” General Jones begins, somewhat tactlessly.  “A Taliban militant gets lost and is wandering around the desert looking for water. He finally arrives at a store run by a Jew and asks for water. The Jewish vendor tells him he doesn’t have any water but can gladly sell him a tie. The Taliban, the jokes goes on, begins to curse and yell at the Jewish storeowner. The Jew, unmoved, offers the rude militant an idea.  Beyond the hill, there is a restaurant. They can sell you water. The Taliban keeps cursing and finally leaves toward the hill. An hour later he’s back at the tie store. He walks in and tells the merchant: ‘Your brother tells me I need a tie to get into the restaurant.’”

Frankly, I think that’s funny. And if a Jew starts grinding his teeth with rage at such an innocuous joke, there has to be something seriously wrong with him. But sure enough, the joke was condemned by Jewish groups everywhere. Abe Foxman thought it “inappropriate”, and  the  Jewish Forward thought it “insensitive”. (See also here).

I have an anti-Zionist Jewish friend who told me this hilarious joke, adding a few embroideries of his own. He found it on a Jewish website, filed under “Israeli humor”. (See here). It’s the best example of Jewish self-mockery I’ve come across. I retell the joke in my own words, more or less as my Jewish friend told it to me.

If General Jones had told this joke, he would have been hanged, drawn and quartered.

This Israeli Jew arrives at Ben Gurion airport with two large suitcases. His name is Baruch and he’s been living in the United States. The customs agent opens up the first case and finds it stuffed with dollar bills. “How come you have all this money?” he asks.

Baruch grins and taps his hooked nose.

“Listen, I’ll tell you one way you can make a huge fortune in America. You just go into a public washroom and you see a guy having a pee. All you have to do is grab hold of his penis and say, ‘If you don’t donate ten bucks to Israel — for illegal settlements — I’m gonna cut off your goddamn penis!’ It’s fantastic, the amount of money you can make for Israel!”

“Wow, that’s cool!” says the customs agent. “So what’s in your other case?

Baruch shakes his head sadly.

“You just won’t believe,” he sighs, “the number of people in America who refuse to support Israel.” 

Goodbye, America! (Part 2)

In the near future, America will have a White minority.

We, the nominally Christian masses of European ancestry, will be surrounded by a sea of strange faces. All these polyglot multitudes, who have been teleported into America — and mainly because of Jewish influence against the will of its White majority — are now pitted against us. They are likely to be our new enemies. They have been shoehorned into America for one purpose only: to make life tough for us. They compete with us for vanishing jobs and diminishing resources, and inevitably they will obtain political power that they will use against us.  

The Multicultural Menagerie

One of the many “benefits” of multiculturalism is that loyalty issues come to the fore. Exhibit A for this is the notorious Jonathan Pollard spy case.

Jonathan Pollard, one in a long line of Jewish American spies. (See here). The total number of Jewish spies convicted or expelled from the US exceeds the number of spies from all other ethnic groups. As Jews make up only 2% of the American population and blacks 14%, there ought to be seven times as many black spies. In fact, there are none.

Requests for Pollard’s release from Jewish sources have been endless — Yitzhak Rabin (1995), Benjamin Netanyahu (2002), Ehud Olmert (2008). But Pollard remains safely behind bars, as if to show us that the old dog still wags its tail. Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz expresses his anger thus: “As an American and as a Jew, I hereby express my outrage at Jonathan Pollard’s sentence of life imprisonment for the heinous crime he flagrantly committed.”

Sorry, that’s a misquote! It should be:  “…for the crime to which he pleads guilty.” (Pleading guilty to a crime, in Dershowitz’s bizarre Alice-in-Wonderland world, is clearly tantamount to being innocent or at least getting a soft sentence.)

It gives me no pleasure to point out that Israel’s present Prime Minister, the thuggish ‘Bibi’ Netanyahu, resorted to moral blackmail in 1998 at the Wye River Conference in order to secure Pollard’s release. “If we signed an agreement with Arafat, I expected a pardon for Pollard,” he said. Quid pro quo, you see. If you give us Pollard, we’ll give you the promise of peace.

“Once we squeeze all we can out of the United States it can dry up and blow away,” the same Netanyahu reportedly told Pollard, upon exiting Pollard’s prison cell after a friendly social call in 2002. This quote, which is cited all over the Internet, is the sort of thing that, even if inaccurate, reflects the reality that Israel and its Lobby in the US are exploiting American blood and treasure on behalf of Israel.

This is the man who refuses to desist from his ongoing dispossession of Palestine, while at the same time expecting American largesse in exchange for his intransigence — and more American lives, needless to say, lost in foreign wars fought for Israel.

It’s only in America, it seems, that the piper seems unable to call the tune. Another quote:

Netanyahu: “Watch it, boy, don’t dare speak to me like that! WE JEWS CONTROL AMERICA!  Ever heard of the Samson Option?”

Okay, he didn’t say that! But it’s what he could have said in a parallel universe. It’s what he  might well have said in this universe, if he was speaking his real thoughts.

Even American Vice-Presidents, Zionist lackeys though they be, visit Israel only to get spat upon. How do they react to their ritual humiliation at the hands of their Jewish masters?  As the spit lands on their faces, they ask if it’s raining.

“It’s good to be home!” VP Joe Biden gushes, arriving in Israel on an official visit. “The U.S. has no better friend than Israel! Progress occurs in the Middle East when everyone knows there is simply no space between the United States and Israel!

Stick a tail on this guy and he’d win first prize in a poodle competition.

As if to emphasize the point of Israeli muscularity, Israeli military historian Martin van Creveld invokes the dreaded Samson option.”We possess several hundred atomic warheads,” he reminds us ominously, “and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets of our air force.”

Europe, watch out.

Meanwhile, in America, the Jews have never had it so good. In 2009, 35% of the richest men in America were Jews. This 2% of the population who are the wealthiest group in America and now comprise 25% of Ivy League undergraduates and 40% of Harvard alumni, are indeed voluble in their never-ending complaints about their victimhood. America’s 400 richest men, according to a report in the New York Times (March 23, 2009), own as much as 22% of the nation’s total wealth, and around 140 of these multibillionaires are Jews.

“Ah, how sweet it is to be Jewish at the end of this 20th century,” Alain Finkielkraut wrote in Le Monde in 1998. “We are no longer history’s accused, but its darlings. The spirit of the times loves, honors, and defends us, watches over our interests; it even needs our imprimatur. Journalists draw up ruthless indictments against the Nazis and their modern collaborators. Churches repent. States do penance.”

White America smiling … but not for long

You are this young couple. Here’s what happens to you. This is your fate:

You are kidnapped by four Blacks, three men and a woman, while out on a date. For the next twenty-four hours, you are subjected to systematic torture. Both of you are gang-raped. You, the young woman, are forced to watch your boyfriend being sodomized by three black men, one after the other. What does the black woman do? She stands in the background, watching, a kitchen knife in her hand, waiting to cut off your sweetheart’s penis. This happens. Maybe they all take turns to saw off your darling’s penis. It’s your turn now, White Lady. Let’s see your tits, Bitch! Hey man, pass me that knife! Yes, White Lady, it’s TIME FOR YOUR BREASTS TO BE CUT OFF! They rape you first. They make you drink cleaning fluid. And then they hack off your breasts. Finally, they strangle you to death.

No point going on. Both bodies are found dumped on waste ground later, riddled with bullets.

This happened in January, 2007, near Knoxville, Tennessee, to Christopher Newsom (23) and his girlfriend Channon Christian (21)  This whole grisly affair of Black-on-White violence was carefully covered up by the mainstream media.  Who owns the media? Don’t even ask!

“The details of the crimes were considered so horrific,” we are told, “that the authorities would not release accounts to the news media for fear of putting Blacks in a bad light and upsetting race relations. The facts emerged only when some enterprising reporters checked documents filed in federal court.”

This case is exceptional only for its psychopathic brutality.  Thousands of other cases occur in which Black-on-White rapes without murder feature, as well as countless cases of unprovoked beatings and verbal abuse of Whites.

Sarah Kreager, 26, suffered broken facial bones and other injuries after she was punched, kicked and dragged off a bus one Tuesday afternoon in January, 2009, by nine black students. Her boyfriend was also severely beaten up. There had been no provocation.

Apart from perfunctory local coverage with no mention of race, these crimes, almost without exception, go unreported by the media. (See here).

These are grounds for despair. Our new elites are of course behind this — we all know that now — deliberately fomenting racial hatred, while portraying White Americans as the underlying cause of that hatred.

Here’s an eerie picture of a future dystopia, the unimaginably grim America that awaits us:

Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch’entrate! — Abandon hope, all ye who enter here! (Dante’s Inferno)

It’s time to discuss despair. Despair in general. Let’s talk about our despair.

Creating  Despair

Who began the Great Despair? Probably Darwin, without meaning to do so. It’s perhaps worth pointing out that the happiest and most optimistic poem ever written was penned a mere eighteen years before the Darwinian bombshell of 1859.  Here it is. Savor it slowly. It was never to be like this again:

The year’s at the spring
And day’s at the morn.
Morning’s at seven,
The hill-side’s dew-pearled,
The lark’s on the wing,
The snail’s on the thorn,
God’s in his Heaven —
All’s right with the world

— Robert Browning, Pippa Passes, 1841

With the publication of Darwin’s Origin of Species, the mood was to change abruptly. A black cloud settled over the human psyche. Nietzsche was to cry out in anguish, “GOD IS DEAD!” And then, eight years after Darwin’s deathblow, came these — the noblest and most heartrending lines in the English language:

Ah, love, let us be true

To one another! for the world, which seems

To lie before us like a land of dreams,

So various, so beautiful, so new,

Hath really neither joy, nor love, nor light,

Nor certitude, nor peace, nor help for pain;

And we are here as on a darkling plain

Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight,

Where ignorant armies clash by night.

— Matthew Arnold, Dover Beach, 1867.

“God is dead…”

This is what Thomas Huxley, Darwin’s best friend, had to say after The Origin of Species hit the world like a screaming comet on 24 November 1859:

I know of no study which is so utterly saddening as that of the evolution of humanity. Man emerges with the marks of his lowly origin strong upon him. He is a brute, only more intelligent than other brutes, a blind prey to impulses, a victim to endless illusions which make his mental existence a burden and fill his life with barren toil and battle.

In other words: you might as well blow your brains out!

Charles Darwin (1809–1882): “Man still bears in his bodily frame the indelible stamp of his lowly origin. … What a book a Devil’s Chaplain might write on the clumsy, wasteful, blundering low and horribly cruel works of nature. … I cannot persuade myself that a beneficent and omnipotent God would have designedly created parasitic wasps with the express intention of their feeding within the living bodies of Caterpillars…I cannot persuade myself that a beneficent and omnipotent God would have designedly created that a cat should play with mice.”

No God, no morality: anything goes.

Life is no longer worth living in a world without God. Nietzsche knew this. Even as he pronounced God dead, he anguished: “Formula of my happiness: a Yes, a No, a straight line, a goal.”

In other words: faith, certitude, meaning, purpose. These were the vital ingredients that were needed to make life endurable and invest it with dignity. Dostoevsky felt the same way. For him, nihilism was the ultimate nightmare. The problem was neatly summarized for him in the famous phrase he put into Ivan Karamazov’s mouth: “If God is dead, everything is permitted.”

Having concluded that God was dead, the philosophers of the Frankfurt School naturally believed that all was henceforth permissible. This followed from the premise that God was dead. It could not be avoided. If all was permissible, then the rape and murder of a little child was permissible. Ivan Karamazov was quick to point this out. Torture was permissible. There was no point obeying the Ten Commandments, let alone international law. Why bother?  “For if there’s no God,” Ivan Karamazov argued, “there’s no such thing as virtue — and no need for it.”

“DO WHAT THOU WILT” becomes the only law.

Today, at this very moment in New York City, a Muslim detainee is being tortured. He is being tortured in violation of international law, the American Constitution, and every ethical principle we hold most dear. This man has no criminal record and has not even been put on trial.

Why be good when evil’s easier? There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so.


“DO WHAT THOU WILT shall be the whole of the law.”  — Aleister Crowley (1875–1947), English Satanist, also known as “the Great Beast”. The Frankfurters would have been tickled pink by his next remark: “I was in the death struggle with self. God and Satan fought for my soul those three long hours. God conquered.  Now I have only one doubt left — which of the twain was God?

Freud and the Frankfurt School intellectuals — by all accounts a Jewish sect — now set out to manipulate this godless world out of bitter spite and despair. Racked with existential angst and hatred against Europeans and their culture, they created a culture of despair.

To destroy Western civilization now became their clearly articulated aim. “Who will save us from Western civilization?” Georg Lukács, one of the founders of the Frankfurt School, asked rhetorically. He began the “rescue operation” himself, convinced that the best way to do this was to create “a culture of pessimism” and “a world abandoned by God.” (Evangelizing despair.)

Georg Lukács (1885–1971): “I want a culture of pessimism…a world abandoned by God”

It was of vital importance to these spiritually deracinated Jews — with a chip on their shoulders two thousand years long — to launch a blitzkrieg of cultural iconoclasm against the Western countries that had harbored them for centuries and done their utmost to assimilate them. They saw Christianity as their main enemy and set out to destroy it: to undermine the family, to turn parent against child, to blur the lines between good and evil, to promote sexual promiscuity and moral relativism — in short, to strip man of his dignity and reduce him to the level of a beast.

A key component of the culture of despair and nihilism  was sex. Western mores on sexuality  — mores that had the effect of building strong families and providing a safe, loving environment for children — became a prime target of these revolutionaries. Solace and salvation henceforth lay in a hedonistic creed of sexuality.

It was Freud who said, “Sexual morality — as society in its extreme form, the American, defines it — is contemptible. I advocate an incomparably freer sexual life.” (See here.) Other Jewish intellectuals — notably Herbert Marcuse and Wilhelm Reich along with a phalanx of supporters in the media and the universities — marched in lockstep behind Papa Sigmund and spread the message to the masses: salvation through sex.

Freud:Sexual morality … is contemptible. I advocate an incomparably freer sexual life.”

This cultural nihilism also spread to politics. Appointing himself mankind’s chief  evangelist for moral anarchy, Frankfurt School luminary Walter Benjamin announced blandly: “To organize pessimism means nothing other than to expel the moral metaphor from politics.”

This sentence needs deconstruction. I understand it thus. Fussy distinctions between good and evil should be removed from the realm of politics. If you can get away with flouting international law, as Israel does, then by all means do so. If you want to torture people, as the American government obviously does, don’t let moral scruples stand in your way. DO WHAT THOU WILT.

Following policies like this can be extremely effective, if only for this reason: The human psyche cannot bear to exist in a world in which such vile abominations are freely practised. Result?  Existential dissonance. Despair. The culture of pessimism and nihilism.

Walter Benjamin did well to map out a strategy of systematic despair creation. His own ideas got to him, working for him only too well. He committed suicide — hoist by his own petard.

I have said this before. Let me say it again. This is how the song goes:

Let’s create a culture of pessimism!  Let’s make western civilization stink! Let’s create a godless world and drive people to despair! Let’s corrupt society’s values and make life impossible! In short, LET’S CREATE HELL ON EARTH! To undermine. To corrupt. To create discord. To drive crazy. To destroy.

Verbs to remember.

Dostoevsky:  If God is dead, everything is permitted! Homo homini lupus — man is a wolf to man.

The Frankfurt School intellectual, with his philosophy of iconoclastic chaos creation, is Dostoevsky’s Ivan Karamazov in the flesh.

Here he is:

I hasten to give back my entrance ticket to heaven! As I’m an honest man, I give it back right away! It’s not God I don’t accept, Alyosha — only I most respectfully return him the entrance ticket.

Sigmund Freud: “If only Americans knew, we are bringing them the plague!”

We are in the last days of a dying civilization. The writing is on the wall. Unless a miracle now occurs, we are history.

Dr. Lasha Darkmoon (email her) is an academic, age 31, with higher degrees in classics.  A published poet and translator, she is also a political  activist with a special interest in Middle Eastern affairs. ‘Lasha Darkmoon’ is a pen name.

Israel’s Latest War Crime: Peace flotilla attacked bringing humanitarian aid to Gaza

Israel has done it again. (See news articles and videos compiled by Alison Weir at “If Americans Knew.”) Creating outrage on a daily basis seems to be its speciality. It has now launched an attack on international peace activists carrying humanitarian aid to besieged Gaza — “the world’s largest concentration camp” still recovering from war crimes committed by Israel almost 18 months ago. Here are some of the bare facts: The Mavi Marmara is a Turkish vessel. It was part of a 6-ship unarmed flotilla, including a U.S.-flagged vessel, carrying 700 passengers from 40 different countries and 10,000 tons of humanitarian aid on a mission of mercy to besieged Gaza.

The ship was attacked approximately 65 miles off the coast of Netanya and 80 miles from Gaza, well within international waters. This is regarded as an act of piracy in international law. It is a war crime. It is too early to put a final figure on the number of casualties. These keep changing by the hour, depending on which side is providing the figures. AP’s initial report, based on figures helpfully supplied by Israel, stated that only two peace activists had died. This figure has now been rejected. The latest reports indicate that 16 unarmed activists may have been killed and up to 60 injured. Israeli casualties, as expected, have been minimal and almost cosmetic: two gun-toting commandos killed and three lightly injured. The AP report skilfully managed to give the impression that the heavily armed Israeli attackers were in fact the victims. The AP version comes down to this (my paraphrase):

Armed to the teeth, the Israelis board a vessel in international waters with peaceful intent, only to meet with violent resistance from a bunch of potential terrorists consisting of members of parliament from Germany, Sweden, Ireland and Turkey. Among those on board: Nobel Peace Laureate Mairead Maguire of Ireland, Holocaust survivor Hedy Epstein, US diplomats Amb. Edward Peck and Col Ann Wright, not to mention peace activists from forty countries — including a US Navy survivor of Israel’s infamous attack on the USS Liberty.

By some remarkable inversion of logic, all these highly respected humanitarian peace activists are portrayed as aggressors seeking a confrontation with peace-loving Israel, while their  Israeli attackers are seen as defending themselves by opening fire on orange-vested civilians rash enough to resist their ‘tough love’ overtures. Israel naturally claims that there is no humanitarian crisis in Gaza. The Gazans are purportedly doing quite well under Israel’s benevolent supervision. All Israel wants is to stop arms getting through. And of course cement — for what is the point of rebuilding all those demolished houses if Israel, in its compassionate wisdom, intends to demolish them all over again? AP fails to mention that a recent Amnesty International report stated that Israel’s siege on Gaza had created a humanitarian crisis of horrendous proportions: that  four out of five Gaza residents needed humanitarian assistance and that hundreds were waiting for medical treatment that is cruelly denied by Israel.

Mass unemployment, extreme poverty, food insecurity and food price rises caused by shortages left four in five Gazans dependent on humanitarian aid,” said the 2010 report, released on Thursday. “The scope of the blockade and statements made by Israeli officials about its purpose showed that it was being imposed as a form of collective punishment of Gazans —  a flagrant violation of international law.

Pay no attention. This is only Amnesty International speaking — an organization that gives aid to terrorists. Gilad Atzmon speaks for us all when he says:

The Israeli government fails to gather that the tide has changed.  We see through them. We all know what the Jewish state stands for. We  all know about the devastation in Gaza, we know about the siege, the destruction and  the crimes against humanity…In case the Israelis fail to see it, they are dealing with an international flotilla that is sailing under Turkish and Greek flags, a fleet that carries 800 enthusiastic activists from  all over the world. The Israelis are dealing with peace  lovers who are determined to break  through the  siege and deliver  medical aid, cement, paper and food. On the deck we have 35 European parliamentarians who must have  decided to say NO to Zionist fund  raisers. This flotilla is a clear signal to Israel that the game is  over. Israel is now all but officially isolated. All that is left for Israel is to  come to terms with its true nature: a shameless racist, murderous and  terrorist state…. The Israeli government and the Israeli people better start to come to terms that the game is soon to be over. The Zionist project and the Israeli state is in a state of moral bankruptcy.”

The foundation of the state of Israel in 1948 will one day be seen, I believe, as one of history’s most tragic mistakes. We witness the bitter consequences now. We have witnessed them for the last sixty-two years. Is it too late to reverse this catastrophic error of history?
Bookmark and Share

Dr. Lasha Darkmoon: Multiculturalism — An Open Letter to Israel Shamir

Dr. Lasha Darkmoon:  A few weeks Israel Shamir wrote a controversial essay called The Poverty of Racialist Thought in which he took issue with Kevin MacDonald on the subject of multiculturalism. Yesterday I received from him (in an email) an advance copy of his recent follow-up essay: Part 2 of The Poverty of Racialist Thought. He was kind enough to seek my opinion on his new essay, along with the opinions of eight other people far more qualified than myself. 

As I understood this to be an open invitation to discussion, it occurred to me to send my reply to Mr Shamir for publication to the Occidental Observer. I thought the feedback from commentators here could only be beneficial to all concerned: to myself, to Kevin MacDonald and, above all, to Mr Shamir. 

Please note that Part 2 of Shamir’s article has not yet been published. This critique of mine addresses issues raised mostly in Part 1 — see the link above — but which are alluded to and further developed in Part 2.

Dear Mr. Shamir: I read your recent essay, The Poverty of Racialist Thought, with great interest. It is crackling with original ideas, many of them highly subversive, as one would expect from a controversial writer such as yourself!  The main bone of contention between you and Kevin MacDonald is obviously multiculturalism. This is a subject I’ve alluded to only briefly and tangentially in my articles, while dealing mostly with other topics. 

I have enormous respect for KMD, a man who is not only moved to pity by the plight of the Palestinians but who is also deeply concerned at the way his fellow Americans are having their traditional culture subverted and alien values thrust upon them—values which, I think you will agree, are positively satanic: namely, contempt for Christianity, sexual perversion, mind pollution and mendacity in the media, the uglification of daily life, and the systematic demoralization of the masses.    

I feel strongly, as I know you do, about the double standards involved in the fact that organized Jewry promotes multiculturalism in America while insisting that Israel should remain  monocultural and Judeocentric. It’s also of great concern that racial tensions between various ethnic groups in America should be deliberately ignited in order to distract and debilitate the different groups at the expense of the Master group — organized Jewry. It is considerations like these which undoubtedly exercise KMD’s mind and the minds of all Americans who feel they are “losing their country.”  

To portray these beleaguered White Americans  as “White Supremacists” or “racists” is, in my humble opinion,  a low and dirty trick. As disgraceful as calling critics of racist, apartheid Israel with its black record of war crimes — men like Judge Goldstone — “anti-Semites”.  

I do believe with total sincerity, however, that the use of the word “White” is a tragic mistake — from a public relations viewpoint, if no other and that this word should be avoided if possible.  “This word ‘WHITE’ is the bugbear,” I wrote to KMD a few months ago. “If only a less abrasive and more emollient equivalent could be found.”  You echoed my own sentiments when you said to me in a previous email: “Whites are indeed a misnomer and KMD should give thought how to change it. Christians? Logos believers? Let us give it a thought and share it with KMD.” 

I have racked my brains for a suitable alternative to “Whites”, but have been unable to find one. I don’t think “Christians” would satisfy KMD  with all that that term connotes now. It has to be clearly understood that KMD does not view this matter of multiculturalism, as you and E. Michael Jones do, through the prism of religion. His training as an evolutionary psychologist gives him an entirely different perspective. It’s all about different races competing for resources in a cut-throat Darwinian environment. It’s also about the chronic conflicts that multicultural/multiracial societies have been prone to throughout history and about the psychological reality that people tend to become isolated, politcally disengaged, and mistrustful in multicultural/multiracial societies. He points out that no one has come up with a way to get rid of race as a touchstone of conflict within human societies, and he just doesn’t see that happening in the future.

Between the biological approach of KMD (genetic interests meshing with cultural constraints) and the metaphysical approach of E Michael Jones (Logos), there would appear to be an unbridgeable chasm.  

A final word on KMD’s position — a position I regard as entirely reasonable, because scientifically defensible. He believes that there are many meaningful commonalities between Europeans [“Whites”] at the genetic level. This is because they have similar genetic interests and a natural, instinctive solidarity in spite of their religious differences. That is to say, a European atheist and a European Christian have more in common ultimately than a European Christian and an African Christian. It follows from this that a marriage between a European atheist and a European Christian, which helps to produce children of pure European stock, is to be preferred to a marriage between a European Christian and an African Christian — a marriage that could only result in miscegenated children or “half breeds” — children who would not only be genetically removed from their parents but totally alien to their grandparents. 

In an ideal world, Mr Shamir, all such children would turn out to resemble Dumas père or Pushkin. Proud to be what they are and uniquely valuable in God’s variegated world. In the real world, however, they face many serious problems. If they were happy with their pigmentation, why the incessant and growing demand for skin-whiteners? Even in India there is color prejudice. Indeed, it is India that produces the best skin-whiteners and exports them all over the world. That tells you something.   

There is also the delicate question of IQ. If the IQs of Whites and Blacks were equal, and if this could be adequately proved, there would be no problem. But if Whites are much smarter than Blacks, as is often alleged, then intermarriage can only result in a general diminution of IQ. When diversity entails a general deterioration of intelligence and culture, this surely has to be deplored. This “diversity” is celebrated in America by the Jew-controlled media but, curiously enough, is abominated in Israel. Losing one’s racial identity is apparently good for Whites but bad for Jews. I have to say it: these double standards suck.   

To give KMD his credit, he honestly believes that if we identify on the basis of religion that does not take account of ethnicity at least implicitly, as E. Michael Jones does vis-à-vis his Catholicism, the White race will eventually be destroyed. I think KMD is right to be concerned that the race that gave us Dante and Shakespeare, Leonardo and Botticelli, Mozart and Beethoven, may soon become extinct as a result of malevolent immigration policies designed to serve the interests of one group and one group only: organized Jewry — the group you yourself castigate and criticize in veiled terms as “predators” and “the Masters of Discourse.” 

I’ll conclude this critique by saying that this is an infinitely complex subject. I don’t pretend to have all the answers. I  see through a glass darkly, only too conscious of my intellectual limitations. You will therefore pardon me, I hope, if I’ve said anything foolish or inappropriate. I have no wish to offend anyone. 

Kind regards and blessings, 

Lasha Darkmoon.

Bookmark and Share

Dr. Lasha Darkmoon (email her) is an academic, age 31, with higher degrees in classics.  A published poet and translator, she is also a political  activist with a special interest in Middle Eastern affairs. ‘Lasha Darkmoon’ is a pen name

Lasha Darkmoon: Germany Then — America Now!

Lasha Darkmoon:  Kevin MacDonald’s recent review of William Marr’s 1870s pamphlet, The Victory of Judaism over Germanism,  raises many interesting questions. “Marr sees himself as a soldier fighting a lost cause,” MacDonald notes at one point, without making it clear if he agrees with Marr that it is indeed a lost cause.  

Since the parallels between Germany then and America now are too glaringly obvious to ignore, one is tempted to ask MacDonald: “And what about you, Kevin? Do you consider yourself a soldier fighting a lost cause?” 

MacDonald’s article ends with Marr’s chilling two-word prediction: FINIS GERMANIAE. (The end of Germany) 

We have seen it happen. Germany’s cadaver lies rotting. Exactly a year ago the state of Israel demanded from Germany a further 1 billion euros ($1.4 billion) in Holocaust reparations for its endlessly traumatized Jewish survivors. Sixty-five years after World War Two, the grim extortion racket continues unabated. 

Forget that. The thing we need to consider now is the parallel situation with America. Is it time to write America’s obituary? Or is it too early to say, FINIS AMERICAEthe end of America? 

*   *   *  

A confession of ignorance: I had no idea things were so bad in Germany in the 1870s when Marr wrote his prophetic treatise, only recently translated from German into English and now available in pdf format. I had been under the false impression that the notion of Jewish world domination came much later — after the publication of the Protocols (1903) and the Russian Revolution (1917). 

Here is a pertinent, relatively modern quotation which will serve as a useful coda to the doomladen citations from Marr that MacDonald presented. Read it carefully. It will not only hammer home the points made by Marr several decades earlier, it will also provide the reader with a sharp reminder of the parallel situation in which America finds itself today. 

With one significant difference: America is in a far worse condition.

Under the Jewish heel in pre-Hitler Germany :

 It was the Jews with their international affiliations and their hereditary flair for finance who were best able to seize such opportunities…They did so with such effect that, even in November 1938, after five years of anti-Semitic legislation and persecution, they still owned, according to the Times correspondent in Berlin, something like a third of the real property in the Reich [my emphasis]. Most of it came into their hands during the inflation… But to those who had lost their all, this bewildering transfer seemed a monstrous injustice. After prolonged sufferings they had now been deprived of their last possessions. They saw them pass into the hands of strangers, many of whom had not shared their sacrifices and who cared little or nothing for their national standards and traditions…

The Jews obtained a wonderful ascendancy in politics, business and the learned professions [in spite of constituting] less than one percent of the population [my emphasis]… The banks, including the Reichsbank and the big private banks, were practically controlled by them. So were the publishing trade, the cinema, the theatres and a large part of the press — all the normal means, in fact, by which public opinion in a civilized country is formed… The largest newspaper combine in the country with a daily circulation of four millions was a Jewish monopoly…

Every year it became harder and harder for a gentile to gain or keep a foothold in any privileged occupation [my emphasis]. … At this time it was not the ‘Aryans’ who exercised racial discrimination. It was a discrimination that operated without violence. It was exercised by a minority against a majority. There was no persecution, only elimination. … It was the contrast between the wealth enjoyed — and lavishly displayed — by aliens of cosmopolitan tastes, and the poverty and misery of native Germans, that has made anti-Semitism so dangerous and ugly a force in the new Europe. Beggars on horseback are seldom popular, least of all with those whom they have just thrown out of the saddle.

—   Sir Arthur Bryant, Unfinished Victory, 1940, (slightly edited for brevity).

*   *   * 

MacDonald notes elsewhere in his thought-provoking review of Marr’s pamphlet: “Marr correctly believed that societies centered around a strong collectivist religious core (e.g., medieval Christianity) or a strong sense of ethnic nationalism are more able to defend themselves against Jews.” 

We cannot help asking at this point: So how does America hope to protect itself against the Jews? (Or “organized Jewry”, to be more precise). Is there any hope for the beleaguered majority whose traditional values are now being destroyed by an alien elite who view their new subjects with hostility and contempt?   

Consider the two factors that are seen as an antidote to the Jewish poison: “a strong collectivist religious core” (i.e., Catholicism in some historical eras) and “ethnic nationalism” (e.g., the sense of being an American of European heritage). 

Ethnic nationalism in America, assuming it ever existed to the same degree as British or French nationalism existed, is now clearly in its death throes — thanks to multiculturalism and malignant immigration policies enacted as a result of Jewish activism — an activism that has helped to produce a polyglot mélange of multicolored folk forever at each other’s throats.

So what about Christianity as a cohesive countervailing force?  Why has Christianity failed so abysmally to counteract this spiritual virus? 

This is a question I am unable to answer.  Others, I am sure, will have their theories — and I wish them good luck. 

Despite its history as the only Western institution that has been able at times to stand up to Jewish power, the Catholic Church, of which I am a hopelessly dysfunctional practising member, has proved to be an acute disappointment. It has been thoroughly subverted from within and without. It offers neither guidance nor leadership.

So forget the Catholics—a spent force—many of them, I regret to say, almost as daft and deluded as their competitors in folly, the evangelical Christians.  

I am also forced to conclude, with a heavy heart, that there is little hope that American Protestants could come to the rescue. Its infatuated legions — namely, the 50-70 million Christian Zionists who constitute the most influential group of American Protestants — are as rabid in every way as the fanatical Jews who have infected them with their zealotry, egging them on to find solace in eschatological ecstasies and millenarian mumbojumbo

Life is indeed so empty and sterile for these wretched lumpengoyim that the only thing that excites their sluggish sensitivities is the prospect of Armageddon and the thought of universal and catastrophic death — the quicker the better.  

Whipped into a frenzy of religious fervor by the Grahams and the Robertsons, the Falwells and the Hagees, the Lindseys and the La Hayes, these Christian Zionists have become imitation Jews almost indistinguishable from Jabotinski and Baruch Goldstein. They believe in a Greater Israel — entailing further conquests of Arab Land — and in the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians. They have “adopted” illegal settlements and directly finance with their donations the bulldozing of Palestinian homes, the uprooting of olive trees, and the daily oppression of the rightful owners of the Holy Land. They pray every Sunday in their vast soulless churches for the destruction of Iran. And if push came to shove, they would gladly give their blessings to genocide — and call it “the will of God.”     

There are now 80,000 fundamentalist pastors and clergy preaching their message of madness to these ill-educated Christian masses — in many ways as gullible and gormless as medieval peasants.  The pernicious views of their “pastors” are disseminated by 1000 local Christian radio stations as well as 100 Christian TV stations. See here

*   *   * 

Consider the unimaginable war crimes committed by the state of Israel exactly a year ago in Gaza. The world saw it happen. Judge Goldstone saw it happen. His meticulously documented report makes it abundantly clear that Israel is a criminal nation and that its politicians and generals are as steeped in criminality as their Nazi persecutors and recent role models in racism ever were. 

Yet here is Christian Zionist Grace Halsell, like a character straight out of Alice in Wonderland, preaching to the starry-eyed Christians who offer incense to Israel: “Every act taken by Israel is orchestrated by God, and should be condoned, supported, and even praised by the rest of us.” 

The American government appears to agree with this demonic drivel.   

Enthralled by organized Jewry, mercenary and corrupt to the core, this shambolic apology for a government — this psychopathocracy masquerading as a democracy — recently came out in overwhelming condemnation of the Goldstone Report. 

America is dead.  

Behold the New Zion!

Bookmark and Share

Lasha Darkmoon: Why Obama Won the Nobel Peace Prize and Hitler Didn’t

Lasha DarkmoonAsked why the Peace prize had been awarded to President Barack Obama, Nobel committee head Thorbjorn Jagland said: “It was because we would like to support what he is trying to achieve.” 

Obviously such a comment would make sense if we knew what Obama was trying to achieve. Even assuming that the President were trying to achieve something noble and uplifting for mankind  — an assumption it would be rash to make — why give a man a peace prize if all he does is make war?  

Mr Jagland then added somewhat enigmatically: “It is a clear signal that we want to advocate the same as he has done.” 

How strange. What has Obama done exactly? I mean, what has he done that the Nobel committee are so enthused about that they wish to advocate it? Get more American soldiers killed in foreign parts? Increase the number of amputees in the armed forces? Order more torture?  Kill more Muslims? Expand old wars and start new ones? 

Mr Jagland does not explain. 

Perhaps there’s something in the air hanging over those Norwegian fjords that does something to the brainsof Nobel Committee members. In 1973 they gave the Peace Prize to one of the world’s most shameless warmongers: Dr Henry Kissinger. Taking note of his war crimes in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia, the committee decided that here was a man who clearly needed to be commemorated for his unflinching efforts in pursuit of peace. A few years later, in 1994, they handed the peace prize to Yasser Arafat, Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres at a time when the Israelis and Palestinians were, as ever, fighting like cats and dogs. 

The Nobel Peace Prize committee have obviously been influenced by the Orwellian mantra “War is Peace!” Anyone who starts a war, it seems,  automatically becomes a candidate for the Peace Prize. 

*   *   *   *   * 

When Obama collected his prize on December 10, you could almost sense his embarrassment. It’s as if he knew that satire had died yet again. He had the modesty to admit he had no idea why he’d been given this prize. He even pointed out that there were millions of worthier recipients. After all, he had just ordered 30,000 more troops into Afghanistan and had refused to consider a ban on land mines. Not exactly a peacenik. 

His spokesman Robert Gibbs, putting in a good word for this boss of his who had broken all his election promises, noted apologetically: “The president understands that he doesn’t belong in the same discussion as Mandela and Mother Teresa.” 

The understatement of the year. 

*   *   *   *   * 

A few weeks ago, I received an email from a man in Malaysia who asked me if I knew why Obama had been nominated for the Peace Prize. “Isn’t it strange?” he asked. I felt I owed him an explanation, since he was under the impression I was some kind of authority on world peace. So this is what I wrote back to him: 

Yes, it is indeed very strange, seeing that Obama has done nothing to deserve the Peace Prize apart from give a speech in Cairo which hinted at a solution to the long-standing Arab-Israeli problem. I can’t see how anyone can get a pat on the back for telling Israel to stop settlement activity when the Israelis ignore him anyway. Nor can he be given a peace prize for continuing the carnage in Iraq, expanding it in Afghanistan, and starting a new war in Pakistan which has already created over a million refugees. So the answer has to be this: having received the Nobel Peace Prize, Obama will now find it extremely difficult, if not impossible, to start a war with Iran. 

The Norwegians may well have maneuvered Obama into a corner. How can a man who has just received the accolade of the world’s most prestigious peace prize give the order to launch an unprovoked attack on Iran in defiance of international law? The people who are crying for Iranian blood in America right now are the known neoconservative warmongers. How can Peace Prize Obama give ear to such warmongers? It won’t be easy. Nor will it be easy, if Israel launches an attack on Iran, to join Israel in pulverizing a helpless and innocent civilian population. Obama’s name would be mud.

Conclusion: give a man a peace prize when you want to stop him starting a new war.

*   *   *   *   *

We shall have to see what happens next. Iran will be the litmus test. If Obama gives the order for an attack on Tehran, our worst suspicions will be confirmed. We shall then have to seriously ask why the Peace Prize wasn’t awarded posthumously to Adolf Hitler.

It’s amusing to note in this context that kookie Jewish-American lesbian litterateuse Gertrude Stein said in 1938: “I think Hitler ought to have the Nobel Peace Prize!”  And she did her best to persuade the Nobel Committee to honor the Nazi leader in this way.  

My Aunt Agatha thinks the reason Obama got the Peace Prize and Hitler didn’t has something to do with Hitler’s mustache. As far as the Norwegians were concerned, that dreadful mustache was a big no-no.  Obama, she says, labored under no such disadvantage.     

She could have a point.