Jews Vow to Destroy Future Careers of Campus Anti-Israel Activists

Looks like Jews have set up a new organization called the Canary Mission to uncover campus anti-Israel activists in order, as the video implies, to destroy their chances of having a career after graduation.

Many of the profiled are Arab Muslims. I assume that many are Palestinians. Here are the lists, and yes, many of them are Arabs. Good Lord Arab women are beautiful!

This is creepy as Hell, but the Jews are very good at menacing their critics in this way.

I remember when I was debating on the Usenet Israel and Jewish groups, the Super Jews on there were always menacing their critics, threatening us, including lots of death threats, and making threats to uncover our real identities, track us down and post all of our personal information including real name, address, phone number, arrest record and any dirt they could dig up on us.

They especially wanted to find out who our employers were so they could try to get us fired from our jobs. They also threatened to get us in trouble with police and government services agencies. In addition, they kept extensive documentation of all of our posts.

One Jewish woman really creeped me out because apparently she had some sort of a database of everything I had said on the group, and she was always digging through it to post some incriminating thing I had said some time earlier. It creeped the Hell out of me, and I started to develop an extreme hatred of her.

I don’t think this campaign was very successful at silencing critics because more often people would come into the group with a pretty fair-minded opinion of Jews but after experiencing this abuse for a while, they would turn into wild antisemites.

They would come in saying, “Well, I’ve had a lot of Jewish friends, and I admire the Jews very much,” and after six months, they would almost be raving, drooling Nazis.

The Jews seemed to be making people hate or dislike them even more, but God knows, maybe that was the plan after all? Maybe Jews love to make enemies (as long as they are not too lethal of course) so they can play the victim role better and in order to scare Jews away from assimilation and breeding out.

After all, the Jews only retained a pure bloodline for 2,000 years by preaching that the non-Jews were evil and ordering the Jews to have no contact with them. In Medieval Spain, the penalty for a Jewish woman caught having sex with a Gentile man was to have her nose cut off. A proper European Jewish man in 1800 would never eat with a Gentile. In fact, he would refuse to even have tea with any Gentile. If you want to keep your people from outbreeding, continuously preach that the out-group is evil and wants to kill all of your people. Then people will stick to their own group and not breed out.

The Jews have been menacing their critics in the US for a long time now. In the 1930’s, they tried to kill Henry Ford. Marlon Brando was told by Jewish Hollywood moguls, “You will never work in this town again.” This implies that Jews have significant control over the movie industry. But if you say Jews run Hollywood, that’s an “antisemitic canard,” and the Jews will try to ruin you over it. It’s that sort of behavior that angers me about these people.

I must say that the Jews seem like one of the most totalitarian ethnic groups in America.

That said, some of the behavior of the anti-Israel Arabs in that video is disgusting. Voicing Nazi-tinted slogans like, “Start up the ovens!” and support for genocidal anti-Semitism is despicable and unacceptable, but after all, we are dealing with Arabs here, and Arabs are pretty uncontrolled, fanatical and somewhat less civilized people.

Please follow and like us:
error3
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

27 thoughts on “Jews Vow to Destroy Future Careers of Campus Anti-Israel Activists”

  1. The ADL made threatening phone calls to a teacher at a local high school just because he showed some students a documentary that was sympathetic to the Palestinians. If jews find themselves locked in genocidal death struggles time and time again, it is only because they will never compromise. They will never stop trying to quench even the faintest glimmers of resistance until you put a bullet in their brain. This is why Hitler had to send them to the camps.

    http://www.dailystormer.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Adolf-Hitler.jpg

  2. Dear Robert

    Have you ever considered how the US would look like if, as a matter of principle, it had refused to take in immigrants after, say, 1800. Its population might be 150 – 160 million instead of 315 million, the level of conflict would be much lower, and foreign policy would be much easier. There would essentially be only 3 ethnic groups: Wasps, blacks and Amerindians, with the first group being about 90% of the population.

    Immigration increases the population, or sometimes prevents it from shrinking, and it often increase the level of diversity, and more diversity = more conflict. Even without immigration, there will be some diversity, and there always will economic classes, but immigration is a policy that enhances conflict. It can also intensify class struggle, because immigrants compete more with domestic labor than with domestic capital. Quite often immigration is top-down class warfare against labor by capital.

    Regards. James

  3. Doesn’t this Canary site violate any privacy laws? Wow you really have to be doing some serious spying and stalking to set up a list like this.

  4. How any sane white person could not be a nationalist is beyond me. Perhaps they don’t know much about it and immediately think of skinheads….

    “Where some such as skinheads and neonazis have hijacked the idea of the far right, the European New-Right movement is about taking the term back from the degenerates that make up both of the before mentioned groups. Yes I said it, degenerates. These so-called neonazis and skinheads are nothing more than degenerate thugs raping the ideology of nationalism and by that they have undermined and ruined it to the brink of no return. Thankfully the new-right emerged before it was too late and we’re reinstating the pride of nationalism. The goal of this article is to clarify the idea of the new-right and what it means to be a member of the new-right. It will cover everything from ideology to the way we talk. The article will however not put forth practical solutions to every aspect but rather highlight the fundamental ideas that is the new-right.”

    http://www.europeanguardian.com/87-uncategorised/opinion/373-being-a-new-right-nationalist-is-more-than-just-ideas-it-s-a-way-of-life

  5. James Schipper,
    I agree with the overall point. Though it doesn’t detract from your argument, I think your alternative history of what the US would look like without immigration after 1790 is off in two respects.

    First, the population estimate of 160 million is too high. The population of the United States was 7 million in 1790. This doesn’t include people living in the Spanish territories in the southwest and Florida that the US later conquered. However, it was low enough that population-increase-due-to-fertility probably only gets you to 120 million to 140 million.

    Mexico might be a reasonable point of comparison, though there are complicating factors such as larger families in Catholic Mexico than you would have had in Protestant US (much more Protestant than at present), a big chunk of Mexico’s late twentieth century population increase winding up in the US, and the fact that Mexico did get some immigration itself.

    The second, more trivial point, is that unless by “WASP” you mean “northern European Protestant”, no you don’t get a 90% WASP population. Remember that unlike the French, Spanish, and Portuguese, the British government ran something of an open borders policy for its American colonies and let lots of people from other countries settled in the thirteen colonies. This is a big reason why this area could send out military expeditions to conquer Canada (which the US didn’t absorb since it happened pre-independence) and alot of Spanish held territory (post-independence, so the US kept these territories). If by “WASP” you mean actual Protestants from England, by 1790 this made up maybe a third of the population of the US. If you use “WASP” to include Protestants from Scotland, Wales, Ulster, Netherlands, Germany, and France as well then you get closer to 90%, though the African-American percentage was significantly higher than at present, and with no immigration Native Americans would also have a much higher population share are present. There were also some Catholics, though few enough that when immigration from Catholic countries expanded in the 1830s it became a big political issue.

    Since the British colonial authorities had an open borders policy, and the new US government was filled with people eager to boost the US population and conquer the rest of the continent, its hard to envisage the circumstances where immigration would be cut off in 1800. I think the earliest point of divergence would be the 1860s. Either the draft riots are much worse and occur in other cities than New York, convincing the administration that the newly arrived ethnic groups are not reliable supports of the government and they need to close the borders, or the Whig party doesn’t split and incorporates both free soil and cutting off immigration into its platform.

    Again, the overall point is correct, you would wind up with a more cohesive culture with a higher per capita income with much lower than historical immigration.

    1. Note that white nationalists wouldn’t have so much support, if the government wasn’t pushing free trade on :Latin America. After the US fucks the Latin American poor, then they have no choice but to come to the US. You can bring up Latin American over-breeding or whatever you want. I don’t believe that. They breed normally.

      This stuff is mostly the blame of the US government, and the main problem isn’t a lack of a fence on the southern border. The 60s and 70s also had a border with no fence, but somehow, there wasn’t hordes of Mexicans coming in. Why was that?

      1. Whites have 2 kids per family, Hispanics have OFFICIALLY SIX, but I’ve seen far more than that!
        So what definition of “normal” are you using that they breed “normally”? Normally for quadrupeds, perhaps?

        1. It’s mostly a battle between the rural and the urban. In the past, many US farm families had 5 kids. Note: it’s your all insistance on male domaination (BEA-ST GANNON etc..) that is causing women to have more kids. Without a career life, what else is there for them to do?

          Ultra macho Latin nations have large populations cause the women are kept under the foot of men.

        2. Mexico’s population is 150 MILLION, officially, BUT they count expats — like illegals in America.

          Calderon says there are 50 MILLION in America illegally.
          So they must be breeding like mold to have more to break in, right?

          As to your other argument “Without a career life, what else is there for them to do?”, IIRC, in the 50s, AMERICAN women didn’t have a career, how did they avoid breeding that much? Maybe they kept to what they could afford, rather than breed and if they couldn’t afford it, invade their betters’ nation?

    2. Dear Ed

      Thanks for the reply. i picked the figure of 150 – 160 because, according to one demographer, whose name I forgot, the American population today would be about half of what it in fact is if no immigration had occurred since 1800. Of course, such a figure can’t be calculated, only estimated. Let’s assume that the American population was 7 million in 1800. If it had grown to 160 million today without immigration, then that would have been about 4.4 doublings. Dividing 215 (2015 – 1800) by 4.4, we get 53.75. The population would have had to double every 53.75 years to arrive at 160 million today. Applying the rule of 70, this means a rate of growth of about 1.3% per year. That lies within the realm of possibility.

      As to the share of blacks, there was involuntary immigration of blacks after 1800, even after 1808, when it was both involuntary and illegal. With regard to Amerindians, if the US is like Canada, then many people classified as Amerindians are in fact more than 50% white. In Canada we have so-called status Indians. Those are people who are officially Amerindian and who belong to some tribe. Many people with such status have obviously more Caucasian than Amerindian ancestry.

      You were right in pointing out that I used the term WASP loosely. I really had people in mind whose ancestors came from a European country where a Germanic language is spoken.

      Regards. James

  6. So what white racists teach their daughters that blacks are the most evil thing around to prevent “out-breeding”, so what’s the difference? I could be wrong, but i heard that the women were 1000 times more racist then the men are.

    If Jews are racists, then white racists only seek to copy the Jews, eugenics, racial snobbery and all.

    1. Who in the crap is going to China, except for ESL teachers? Note: if people are now starting to go to China, say Africans or something, it’s only cause the place is richer than before.

  7. I clicked on the link because you said there were beautiful Arab women there… didn’t find any. 95% are fat butt ugly.

    Israeli girls… now that’s a different story

    1. The Sam above is not the Sam that used to post a lot here about the perfidious psychopathic Jews. It’s someone else. I quite posting after Robert post where he said he just doesn’t care what the Jews do and it doesn’t matter.

      https://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2015/08/03/anti-semitism-as-an-essentially-rightwing-ideology/

      Maybe Robert was trying of get rid me. Well it worked. I see no point in posting if no one cares. If someone cared I would at least make the effort to counteract the vile propaganda we’re constantly exposed too. Why Robert is still posting about the actions of the Jews if he doesn’t care is beyond me but I’ve said about all I need to on the issue.

      So any post by Sam is not me.

  8. the ONLY difference between us and them is that they are united, we aren’t.
    We will learn with them**

    They hate one each other, from the ortodox nationalist to homossexual activist… but to compete and attack other peoples they become strong unite.

  9. At the end of the day, I’d say Jews have been a net positive for the US. If you isolate the cultural impact I’d still say they were a net positive till around 1970. White Nationalists rant about Jews causing the early stages of the civil rights movement and feminism. but the civil rights changes wrought before 1970 were to my eye were positive and way over due. Black people had been living in the US for hundreds of years but the majority were not allowed to vote (or serve on juries, run for office) This was simply not acceptable for a representative democracy and the so called leader of the free world. As for women there were a lot of ridiculous restrictions (from Universities, jobs, credit, etc..). Up to the mid seventies lefties were sympathetic to illegal labor but understood clearly that bringing in droves of people from the third world suppresses wages.

    Somewhere in the 70s or perhaps 80s the cultural left seems to have gotten bored, crazy, or whatever (The late land whale Andrea Dworkin comes to mind). They concocted white privilege even as that privilege was rapidly waning. Toss in whacky gender studies, trenchant “patriarchy”, and ongoing oppression of women (of course mostly white males were scrutinized for bad behavior) all the while women became the majority on college campuses and single women under 35 now make more than men with the same status. Oh my smell that patriarchy. Jews were by no means alone promoting these notions but tended to be the most adept and connected. I’ll note also that Jews seem to be over represented on the alt-right (Auster, Horowitz, Unz, and various bloggers) but perhaps not as much as the cultural left.

    Financial support for Israel existed but was minor until the 1973 war (the main Israeli armament suppliers were the French and British until 1968)..After 1973 the US and Israel have become as thick as thieves.

    Looking at other countries with rather low Jewish populations (and larger Muslim populations) one can see that whacked out cultural policies (and suppression of free speech) are also popular. Britain and Sweden come to mind. Are Jews behind the odd cultural drift in Europe or have gentile whites lost their way..?

  10. This is DISGUSTING.

    I would suggest that anyone who believes this BS about “antisemitism” watch Israeli Jew Yoav Shamir’s brilliant film “Defamation” where he travels the world searching for this “rabid antisemitism” he heard about in Israel so much…

    And finds NOTHING.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.