Fresno Has a Bad Rap

Fresno, 30 miles away from me to the South, has a bad rap. It’s just another large city in California anymore. There are 440,000 people living here now, and it’s not that different from other California big cities, except that in a lot of ways it’s nicer.

There’s nothing particularly unpleasant about it except the weather. The crime rate is not that high. There are few Blacks. The traffic is excellent, and even at rush hour, it is still pretty much doable. There are nice parts of town and not so nice parts of town, but mostly it isn’t terrifying like parts of LA. The gangs mostly prey on their own kind. One thing though: this region has been one of the top cities in the nation for auto theft for some time now.

Many of the Whites here are derived from poor Whites – Arkies and Okies, who came here with the Dust Bowl. They have a working class base, are conservative and many practice fundamentalist Protestantism. They are often very friendly in a small town or Southern kind of way. When I lived in Fresno 20 years ago, it still had kind of a small town feel to it. Even people in stores would treat you like you were their neighbors. Not sure if that has changed.

A few areas have been taken over by Underclass Blacks and are best avoided.

Rents are quite reasonable.

All of the California subcultures are here: hippies, punks, goths, bikers, gays, preppies, emos, you name it, we’ve got it. There are art galleries and rock and roll clubs. There is even at artsy fartsy district called the Tower District.

The White politics is rather conservative, sort of like Reagan Democrats. They were originally Southern Democrats, but they’ve been registering Republican for 30 years now. The Hispanics and Blacks all vote Dem. The politics is divided between conservative White politics (some of the most conservative pols in California) and liberal Hispanic and Black politics.

Big Ag rules the day out here and is deeply conservative. They own most of the press and all of the pols. The whole Central Valley is like a company town with Big Ag as the employer.

The Sierra Nevadas are only an hour or so away, and they’re a total blast if you like mountains, rivers, lakes, forests, etc. A world-famous national park, Yosemite National Park, is 2 hours away.

Clovis is a suburb of Fresno the east. This is “White Fresno.” The Whites have moved here, and White culture is still well and alive in Clovis. Many apartments and new homes around here advertise “Clovis schools.” That’s racist code talk for “White schools.” Get the hint? Clovis schools are very hardass and really try to hold the line academically.

Fresno is just another big city school district full of large numbers of the usual Hispanics dropping out, getting pregnant, joining gangs and getting lousy grades. But serious problems on campus are rare.

Seriously hostile anti-White Aztlan Hispanic culture hasn’t really taken root here, since it’s an outgrowth of liberal politics, and we don’t really have that here.

The Hispanics have lived in the Valley forever and often grow up speaking Spanish as a first language. They learn English in school. They’re almost the majority group around here, so there’s nothing to rebel against. The Hispanics are socially conservative, often have deep roots, and are very family-oriented. Idiot liberal MECHA politics never really took hold here too much. These Hispanics are too conservative for that crap.

The Blacks are not very political either. They’re also mostly conservative working class people. There is an area called Southwest Fresno that is a Black ghetto and is best avoided, but as far as ghettos go, it’s not that bad. The Blacks around here have no numbers, so they don’t cause a lot of trouble, and mostly they hang out with Whites, Hispanics, etc. In lower class areas, Whites, Hispanics and Blacks all hang out and have sort of assimilated to some sort of Hispanic gangster culture, except most folks are not gangsters.

There are few Black gangs here, and some of the worst gangs, like the Bulldogs, are actually multiracial (Black and Hispanic).

There are White Supremacist gangs too. One is called the Peckerwoods. However, like the Aryan Nations, their White Supremacism is mostly for show. White culture is so far gone here that even our White Supremacists have gone Multicult. I understand that the local Peckerwoods mostly have Mexican girlfriends. At the local jails, they are good friends with the local Hispanics.

I was told that the White Supremacist stuff is a bunch of crap and that the whole purpose of the Peckerwoods is “all about drugs.” It’s just a way for Whites to form their own gang, sell dope and get by like everyone else.

The big drug around here is methamphetamine. It used to be manufactured in large quantity in the rural areas around here. It’s a drug of working class Whites, but the Hispanics have started to get into it. Hispanics often smoke it in a form called ice, which is one nasty drug.

There’s also a lot of very good pot around here, but it’s very expensive. The stuff around here almost all comes from the Bay Area, where it is grown in indoor gardens. The stuff is incredibly strong for an old stoner like me. I imagine the THC levels might be 15-2

There isn’t much racism here either for some reason. I think all the hardcore racists just took off for White California or left the state altogether. This area is turning seriously into the Multicult, the new culture of California and maybe the US.

Some Interesting Zionist Propaganda

I cut out some of the more egregious and nonsensical Zionist propaganda here. You have to admit there is a lot of truth is this bit of Zionist propaganda. I don’t like Zionism one bit. It’s a ridiculous settler-colonial project that the civilized world has given up on 100 years ago. The main problem is that the Arabs and Muslims, while obviously the victims of this settler-colonial aggression, often act like such shits that it’s hard to side with them over the Zionists. You really ought to seize the moral high ground in a war.

The mass movement of Muslims into Europe has been a catastrophe all around. Europe needs to start limiting the number of Muslims moving there, imposing some restrictions on them, demanding that they assimilate before being given citizenship, etc. There are all sorts of things that could be done. Main thing is to quit making it worse. If you’re in a hole, quit digging. Many Muslims in Europe seem to be refusing to assimilate to modern Western Europe. This is unacceptable. Immigrants must assimilate.

Furthermore, in general, Europe’s Muslims appear reactionary in the sense that they reject modernism in Europe and wish to turn back the clock. This is unacceptable. Europe is part of the modern, Judeo-Christian secular Western project. Islam seems to reject this project in its entirety. That’s not a problem if they want to sit over in their sandboxes and reject modernism, but if they need to Europe, they need to embrace modernism, grin and bear it and shut up about it, or take off back to their sandboxes.

A lot Left Anti-Zionists are actually anti-Semites. They support Islam in Europe and elsewhere because it’s the front line in the war against the Jews, oh, I’m sorry, I mean the Zionists. This is ridiculous. Talk to the Arabs and Muslim Left about how progressive Islamists are.

A lot of White nationalists are behind the Islamists too for the same reason. They’re the leading edge of the anti-Jewish, I mean anti-Zionist (!) resistance battalions. Nonsense. How would these White nationalists like it if huge numbers of these wonderful Muslims moved in next door to them. Mass Muslim immigration has not proven beneficial to Western White states.

The Nobel Prizes list is most interesting. I so want to be a Jew! Otto Weinberger must have been wrong. It’s not true at all that Jews lack the capacity for genius. That’s ridiculous. I don’t know what was wrong with Weinberger, maybe he was just another self-hating Jew. He wouldn’t have been the first.

All European Life Died at Auschwitz

By Sebastian Vilar Rodrigez

I walked down the street in Barcelona, and suddenly discovered a terrible truth – Europe died in Auschwitz….We killed six million Jews and replaced them with 20 million Muslims. In Auschwitz we burned a culture, thought, creativity, talent. We destroyed the chosen people, truly chosen, because they produced great and wonderful people who changed the world.

The contribution of this people is felt in all areas of life: science, art, international trade, and above all, as the conscience of the world. These are the people we burned.

And under the pretense of tolerance, and because we wanted to prove to ourselves that we were cured of the disease of racism, we opened our gates to 20 million Muslims, who brought us stupidity and ignorance, religious extremism and lack of tolerance and lastly, crime and poverty, due to an unwillingness to work and support their families with pride.

They have blown up our trains and turned our beautiful Spanish cities into the Third World, drowning in filth and crime.

Shut up in the apartments they receive free from the government, they plan the murder and destruction of their naive hosts.

And thus, in our misery, we have exchanged culture for fanatical hatred, creative skill for destructive skill, intelligence for backwardness and superstition.

We have exchanged the pursuit of peace of the Jews of Europe and their talent for a better future for their children, their determined clinging to life because life is holy, for those who pursue death, a people consumed by the desire for death for themselves and others, for our children and theirs.

What a terrible mistake was made by miserable Europe.

Nobel Prizes, Jewish and Muslim

The Global Islamic population is approximately 1.2 billion or 2

Literature: 1988 – Najib Mahfouz

Peace: 1978 – Mohamed Anwar El-Sadat 1990 – Elias James Corey 1994 – Yaser Arafat 1999 – Ahmed Zewai

Economics: (zero)

Physics: (zero)

Medicine: 1960 – Peter Brian Medawar 1998 – Ferid Mourad

TOTAL: 7

The Global Jewish population is approximately 14,000,000; that is 14 million or about 0.

Literature: 1910 – Paul Heyse 1927 – Henri Bergson 1958 – Boris Pasternak 1966 – Shmuel Yosef Agnon 1966 – Nelly Sachs 1976 – Saul Bellow 1978 – Isaac Bashevis Singer 1981 – Elias Canetti 1987 – Joseph Brodsky 1991 – Nadine Gordimer World

Peace: 1911 – Alfred Fried 1911 – Tobias Michael Carel Asser 1968 – Rene Cassin 1973 – Henry Kissinger 1978 – Menachem Begin 1986 – Elie Wiesel 1994 – Shimon Peres 1994 – Yitzhak Rabin

Physics: 1905 – Adolph Von Baeyer 1906 – Henri Moissan 1907 – Albert Abraham Michelson 1908 – Gabriel Lippmann 1910 – Otto Wallach 1915 – Richard Willstaetter 1918 – Fritz Haber 1921 – Albert Einstein 1922 – Niels Bohr 1925 – James Franck 1925 – Gustav Hertz 1943 – Gustav Stern 1943 – George Charles de Hevesy 1944 – Isidor Issac Rabi 1952 – Felix Bloch 1954 – Max Born 1958 – Igor Tamm 1959 – Emilio Segre 1960 – Donald A. Glaser 1961 – Robert Hofstadter 1961 – Melvin Calvin 1962 – Lev Davidovich Landau 1962 – Max Ferdinand Perutz 1965 – Richard Phillips Feynman 1965 – Julian Schwinger 1969 – Murray Gellmann 1971 – Dennis Gabor 1972 – William Howard Stein 1973 – Brian David Josephson 1975 – Benjamin Mottleson 1976 – Burton Richter 1977 – Ilya Prigogine 1978 – Arno Allan Penzias 1978 – Peter L Kapitza 1979 – Stephen Weinberg 1979 – Sheldon Glashow 1979 – Herbert Charles Brown 1980 – Paul Berg 1980 – Walter Gilbert 1981 – Roald Hoffmann 1982 – Aaron Klug 1985 – Albert A. Hauptman 1985 – Jerome Karle 1986 – Dudley R. Herschbach 1988 – Robert Huber 1988 – Leon Lederman 1988 – Melvin Schwartz 1988 – Jack Steinberger 1989 – Sidney Altman 1990 – Jerome Friedman 1992 – Rudolph Marc us 1995 – Martin Perl 2000 – Alan J. Heeger

Economics: 1970 – Paul Anthony Samuelson 1971 – Simon Kuznets 1972 – Kenneth Joseph Arrow 1975 – Leonid Kantorovich 1976 – Milton Friedman 1978 – Herbert A. Simon 1980 – Lawrence Robert Klein 1985 – Franco Modigliani 1987 – Robert M. Solow 1990 – Harry Markowitz 1990 – Merton Miller 1992 – Gary Becker 1993 – Robert Fogel

Medicine: 1908 – Elie Metchnikoff 1908 – Paul Erlich 1914 – Robert Barany 1922 – Otto Meyerhof 1930 – Karl Landsteiner 1931 – Otto Warburg 1936 – Otto Loewi 1944 – Joseph Erlanger 1944 – Herbert Spencer Gasser 1945 – Ernst Boris Chain 1946 – Hermann Joseph Muller 1950 – Tadeus Reichstein 1952 – Selman Abraham Waksman 1953 – Hans Krebs 1953 – Fritz Albert Lipmann 1958 – Joshua Lederberg 1959 – Arthur Kornberg 1964 – Konrad Bloch 1965 – Francois Jacob 1965 – Andre Lwoff 1967 – George Wald 1968 – Marshall W. Nirenberg 1969 – Salvador Luria 1970 – Julius Axelrod 1970 – Sir Bernard Katz 1972 – Gerald Maurice Edelman 1975 – Howard Martin Temin 1976 – Baruch S. Blumberg 1977 – Roselyn Sussman Yalow 1978 – Daniel Nathans 1980 – Baruj Ben Acerraf 1984 – Cesar Milstein 1985 – Michael Stuart Brown 1985 – Joseph L. Goldstein 1986 – Stanley Cohen [& Rita Levi-Montalcini] 1988 – Gertrude Elion 1989 – Harold Varmus 1991 – Erwin Neher 1991 – Bert Sakmann 1993 – Richard J. Roberts 1993 – Phillip Sharp 1994 – Alfred Gilman 1995 – Edward B. Lewis 1996 – Lu Rose Iacovino

TOTAL: 129!

Jews Versus Muslims

The Jews are not brainwashing children in military training camps, teaching them how to blow themselves up and cause maximum deaths of Jews and other non Muslims. The Jews don’t hijack planes, nor kill athletes at the Olympics, or blow themselves up in German restaurants. There is not one single Jew who has destroyed a church. There is not a single Jew who protests by killing people.

The Jews don’t traffic slaves, nor do they have leaders calling for Jihad and death to all the Infidels. Perhaps the world’s Muslims should consider investing more in standard education and less in blaming the Jews for all their problems. Muslims must ask what can they do for humankind before they demand that humankind respect them.

General Eisenhower Warned Us

It is a matter of history that when the Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces, General Dwight Eisenhower, found the victims of the death camps, he ordered all possible photographs to be taken, and for the German people from surrounding villages to be ushered through the camps and even made to bury the dead.

He did this because he said in words to this effect:

Get it all on record now – get the films – get the witnesses -because somewhere down the road of history some bastard will get up and say that this never happened.

Recently, the UK debated whether to remove the Holocaust from its school curriculum because it ‘offends’ the Muslim population which claims it never occurred. It is not removed as yet. However, this is a frightening portent of the fear that is gripping the world and how easily each country is giving into it.

It is now more than 60 years after the Second World War in Europe ended. This e-mail is being sent as a memorial chain, in memory of the 6 million Jews, 27 million Russians, 10 million Christians, and 1,900 Catholic priests who were murdered, raped, burned, starved, beaten, experimented on and humiliated while the German people looked the other way.

Now, more than ever, with Iran, among others, claiming the Holocaust to be a myth, it is imperative to make sure the world never forgets.

How many years will it be before the attack on the World Trade Center never happened because it offends some Muslim in the United States?

Musings on Dual Loyalty, Judaism as Zionism, and Anti-Semitism

Repost from the old site.

Always-perceptive commenter James Schipper makes some astute, terse and cut to the chase comments on my post, The “New Anti-Semitism.” In it, he moves beyond the typically vulgar anti-Semitism that much modern anti-Zionism descends into and offers a perfectly logical explanation for the dual loyalty accusation leveled at Jews.

He also brings up some very difficult questions about the differences between Judaism and Zionism and whether there is really any difference at all.

Schipper:

If criticism of Israel = anti-Zionism = anti-Semitism, then we should be proud to call ourselves anti-Semites.

What is really wrong with Israel? It is not such a bad country for Jews, or even for the Arabs in Israel proper. I would rather be a Jew in Israel than an Arab in any Arab country. Israel was born in sin, but so was every country in the Western hemisphere. Israel is oppressive in the occupied territories, but by historical standards, this oppression is hardly unique.

The real reason for opposing Israel is that it does not see itself as the country of its citizens but as the country of all the Jews in the world. According to Israel, Jews in other countries are living in exile, are really Israelis and should be loyal to Israel.

In other words, Israel expects the Jewish citizens of other countries to behave like Israel’s fifth-columnists, and that is exactly what Zionists outside Israel are.

No political party outside Israel should accept Zionists as members, and no government outside Israel should appoint Zionists to a senior government job. Instead, Zionist should be encouraged to put their bodies where their loyalties are: in Israel.

Suppose that Italy saw itself as the country of all Catholics in the world and expected Catholics everywhere to defend Italian interests, then it would be behaving exactly as Israel does. That would also be a good reason for non-Catholics in other countries to look at Catholics with suspicion and to regard Italy with hostility.

The late Arthur Koestler wrote in an essay that after 1948 all Jews should choose one of two options: go to Israel or abandon Judaism altogether. He is right insofar as Judaism implies Zionism.

Judaism has always posited that Jews are a people and that Israel is their promised land, which is also the position of Zionism. If Judaism implies Zionism, then Jews outside of Israel, it they want to remain Jewish, should emigrate to Israel or else detribalize and deterritorialize Judaism, which may be denaturing it.

Theological question: Why does Obama allow bad things to happen and evil people to prosper?

More seriously, why did Obama appoint a hard Zionist as his chief of staff? It is not a good sign.

I agree with several things in this post.

First of all, he attacks some of the usual broadsides leveled at Israel and dismisses them.

What I find disturbing, and many Zionists have noted this, is the particular vehemence many Israel-critics level at Israel’s oppression of Jews inside Israel, while they are silent or even supportive of even worse oppression by states against minorities outside Israel.

White nationalists think it’s awesome for Whites to treat non-Whites like shit, except when it comes to White Jews versus “muds” in Israel. Kurds in the Arab World are treated awfully bad, Berbers less so but still poorly, and the Shia are oppressed all over the Arab World. There is open oppression and violence against Christians in Egypt and Iraq.

Baha’i are treated horribly in Iran, Sunnis less so but still poorly, and the Ahwaz have some good beefs. Turks treat Kurds horribly in Turkey. Russia has massacred 2

Japan treats its Koreans, Burakumin and Ainu pretty badly. The Hmong are still treated like shit in Laos, and the Montagnards are not done well by Vietnam. Pygmies are openly genocided and cannibalized as a matter of custom in Zaire, and the Khoisan are nearly murdered at will in SW Africa.

There is a real genocide of Arabs against Africans in Darfur, and another one, Arabs versus Christians, has just ended in South Sudan. Africans are routinely enslaved by Arabs in the Sahel.

We could go and on, but you get the picture. What is disturbing about all of this is that most Israel-critics are either indifferent to, ignorant of or even supportive of, the maltreatment of minorities above. Zionists are correct that this is either ignorance or anti-Semitism.

All, or most all, modern nations were born in sin.

This was due to the nature of the modern nation-building exercise, which typically involved ethnic cleansing or some sort of mass killing or genocide of any existing indigenous people, sidelining, subjection, forced assimilation (cultural genocide) or outright genocide against anyone not part of the dominant nation of the nation-state, and forced destruction of all languages but the one chosen by the nation-state or that is the dominant nation.

The Modern Left in the West, which has adopted Third-Worldism, minority-hugging and European hatred with gusto, errs in singling out Europeans for particular abuse in terms of nation-building. It’s been bloody and awful everywhere and at all times.

Schipper also points out that although Israel is oppressive in the Occupied Territories, by comparative standards, they are relatively mild. Considering the outrageous provocations and attacks of the Palestinians, I am amazed Israel has gone as easy on them as it has.

Arabs do not believe in fighting wars in a civilized manner, and the Geneva Conventions are regarded by them as Western comedy. Any Arab state faced with Palestinian-type provocations by non-Arabs would have been vastly worse than Israel.

Truthfully, just about every nation fighting an insurgency has been more horrible that Israel by orders of magnitude.

Consider this: according to counterinsurgency doctrine, enshrined by the US military and state and promoted by the US media and both US political parties, any civilian who “supports” an insurgency needs to be arrested, beaten, tortured and killed. All counterinsurgencies supported by the US have routinely massacred, mutilated and tortured to death insurgency “supporters.”

This has been true in every counterinsurgency in Latin America, in Indonesia in 1965, the US counterinsurgencies in SE Asia during the Vietnam War, the counterinsurgencies in Mozambique, Algeria and Angola, Russia’s counterinsurgency in Chechnya, India’s counterinsurgencies in India proper and Kashmir, in Sri Lanka against the Tamils, in Indonesia against the Acehese and East Timorese, in the Philippines against the NPA, and in Nepal’s recent Civil War.

In these counterinsurgencies, hundreds of thousands of “supporters” of insurgencies were murdered, tortured and mutilated, while the US cheered, poured in money and looked the other way.

In contrast, almost 10

Considering the provocations of the Palestinians, Israel has fought one of the cleanest counterinsurgencies in modern times.

Zionists are correct that these criticisms of Israel, combined with support for to indifference to much worse behaviors by non-Jews, are evidence of either ignorance or anti-Semitism.

But Schipper does hit it on the head.

The reason to oppose Israel is that it is not a state of its citizens. Israel openly says that it is the state of all Jews on Earth, not of its citizens. Hence, it is perfectly reasonable for non-Jews in every nation on Earth containing Jews to look upon their Jews as possible traitors and dual-loyalists. Dual loyalty, rather than being an “anti-Semitic canard” as many Jews shrilly screech, is actually grounded in immaculate reason.

Schipper also suggests that the wall between Judaism and Zionism may be little more than a wall of sand, and one that has been hit by so many waves that there’s almost nothing left.

Although anti-Zionist Jews offer various reasons for their non-support of Israel, the fact remains that Judaism has always said that Israel is the land of the Jews. Assuming the Messiah returns tomorrow, even Naturei Karta is willing to head to Israel and become fervent Zionists.

Hence the uncomfortable notion, typically parroted by ferocious anti-Zionists and some vulgar anti-Semites, that it is not just Zionism that is the problem, but Judaism itself, is lent some troubling weight. I don’t want to go near this thesis because to be honest, I’m a pussy when it comes to the Jewish Question.

Schipper finally suggests that the Jews of the world either renounce Judaism or practice what you preach and head to Israel. Once again, troubling stuff.

There’s nary a trace of anti-Semitism in Schipper’s comments, but the issues he raises are toxic as Hell.

Just some thought-meals.

Enjoy.

Jews Are Not the Problem

A commenter asks:

Robert, you claimed that anti-Semitism on the Maury2K blog was disturbing to you. As a leftist, ask yourself this question: what have Jews done for workers and the left in recent years, I mean other than pushing for more wars in the Middle East and promoting neoliberal economics.

National Bolshevik retarded anti-Semitism is indeed disturbing to me, and the more I read it, the less I like it. If this is socialism, it’s the Socialism of Fools:

Trotsky was a Jew. The defeat of Trotsky by Stalin was the defeat of Jewish plutocracy by Stalin’s workers revolution. Why was Trotsky a “plutocrat?” Because he was a Jew, dontcha know?

Retarded.

Why are Jews not the enemy?

Simple, the Jews as a voting group are the most liberal and progressive group in the US. If you look at the US liberal-Left, it’s full of Jews. I was on the Left for many years. The Communist Party USA is Jews from top to bottom. So are the Greens and other Left parties. Jews completely dominate the entire US Left, and your average US Jewish voter is the most progressive voter in the US.

Jews lead movements. Sure, a few promote neoliberalism, but neoliberalism is simply what is promoted by the entire US capitalist class, 9

The US Gentiles support Israel and wars in the Middle East. Bush and Cheney knew what they were doing. No Jews secretly pushed them into war. They wanted war with Saddam going back years, but for reasons of US imperialism for the most part. Israel was a side issue, and Bush and Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al, could give a flying fuck about Saddam’s threat to Israel.

The entire US Republican Party is pro-Israel. And it’s not because Jews force them into this. It’s ideological. US conservatism at the moment is fanatically pro-Zionist. That is its ideological nature, and it has little to do with US internal politics, since Jews don’t vote Republican anyway.

Israel is a settler-colonial and imperialist state that is allied with US imperialism. As promoters of US imperialism, the Republican Party is deeply allied with Israel. Plus they see Israelis as Western Judeo-Christians in a sea of evil Muslims, so they support them on that basis  – the US Republican Party is now deeply Christian fundamentalist on an ideological level.

As far as the Democratic Party and Israel, the Democratic Party under Obama is the most anti-Israel Administration since Nixon 1972-1974. And it’s led by Jews. A Jew, Rahm Emanuel, is leading the anti-Israel charge with this Administration.

US Jewry is tiring of Israel’s crap. The gap between US Jewish liberalism, anti-racism and multiculturalism and Israeli Jewish fascism is becoming too wide to bridge. Israel’s bullshit is endangering US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

US Jews are not so dual loyalist as you think. They are loyal to the Jews, sure, but only up to a point. First and foremost, most US Jews are Americans and American patriots. A liberal and progressive Israel would win their loyalty, but Israeli fascism is getting too blatant these days. Hence US Jews are cutting the strings of their aprons to Israel.

What’s a Smart Guy Like You Doing in a Religion Like That?

A commenter asks how an intelligent and literate guy like me could possibly believe in the nonsense of religion:

I am always somehow startled and baffled when I encounter intelligent and/or literate Christians (although obviously this is an absurd feeling to have given the sheer number of Christians in the world).

Does this mean you accept as objective truth God’s existence, the Eternal Soul, Heaven, Hell, the Trinity, the Resurrection and Ascent, the Second Coming, the Day of Judgment, etc., etc.?

After initial belief, I was an agnostic/atheist for decades and it sucked! I finally got sick and tired of being philosophically miserable. I was associating with a bunch of Arabs in 2001 during and after the Middle East Crisis, including the Palestinians taking shelter in the Church in Bethlehem. All of the Arabs were either Muslims or Christians. And these were the Marxists. Then I started reading a lot about the Middle East, and everyone there has a religion, pretty much. It’s like a badge of identity.

Then I went to see Mel Gibson’s movie and decided I was going to get back into Christianity, which I had believed in as a child.

As far as the details, I don’t think about them much. My philosophy is this: Jesus was sent down here by God. He transcended scientific laws by surviving death, but those laws can be transcended by someone with a tie-in to God. Guys like Jesus are floating down from the spiritual world all of the time. That’s what he was. He was just another in the endless string of guys that God sends down to the spiritual world.

I don’t think God plays much a role in this world. You can petition Him, but he may not answer. God is like this stoner guy who was real productive in his youth but now he’s this aging hippie, kicking it with a waterpipe. He made the Universe when he was young and energetic, but since then he hasn’t done much. He’s a Lazy God. He sits up there and takes bong hits all day. He plays little to no role in our lives, since he isn’t interested in us anymore. He just created the Universe, then he sat back and has not done much ever since.

Christianity has more history behind it than most other religions. There were lots of folks there at the time, many of the events were witnessed, and the witnesses never recanted, even under pain of death and torture. Over 900 people saw Jesus rise. Historians documented this soon after his death. Josephus for one.

The Virgin Birth is crap. Allegory. I throw out the whole Old Testament as Jewish. I’m not a Jew, so why should I believe in that. I’m a “Jesusist” and a strict NT guy. The NT replaces the OT anyway.

Christianity is a great way to live your life! Walk like Jesus! It’s a great step!

Heaven – not sure Hell – dubious Eternal Soul – sure Trinity – dunno, maybe Resurrection and Ascent – sure Second Coming – dubious but possible Judgment Day – dubious

Thing is, if you go and ask your typical person from a Catholic country this stuff, you often get a similar set of answers, especially from the men. Recall Mother Theresa was plagued by doubts her whole life – this means she was an agnostic? I’m similar.

But that’s Catholicism. The Catholic is supposed to question and investigate things his whole life. He’s not supposed to take things on faith. That’s the nature of the religion. If you go to Italy, Spain or Latin America, a lot of the people, especially the men, will say, “Sure I’m Catholic,” but then you ask them questions, and often they’re not even sure about God, forget the rest. It’s more of a form of identity and a culture and lifestyle.

Truth is, I don’t care if Christianity is true or not. If it’s not, what harm will come to me for believing in it anyway? Nothing. Atheism and agnosticism is cheerless, dreary and miserable. It’s no way to live. I’d rather believe gorgeous nonsense than believe in dark and dismal nothingness (basically nihilism) of atheism. And if there’s even

*I’m like the most secular Christian on Earth. I’m so secular, that the fundamentalists usually say, “You’re not a Christian.”

Transcript of My Latest Interview July 7, 2010

Interview July 7, 2010 with Reason Radio Network. The comments at the end of the post are hostile, but the site’s audience and hosts tend to be some mixture of paleoconservatives, White nationalists and anti-Semites. That’s not exactly where I am coming from, but I will interview with anyone, and most of the Left won’t touch me with a 10-foot pole.

I’ve been looking over your blog, and we talked about these labels as in Left versus Right, and I know you were describing yourself as a liberal, but you’ve been getting people describing you as a Third Positionist. The 3rd Positionist movement is a nationalist movement, but it’s not necessarily ethnonationalism – it could just be putting your country first. But they reject both Communism and capitalism, but they could sometimes incorporate some Marxist ideas. What is your take on being described as a 3rd Positionist?

I don’t know, I’m totally confused about 3rd Positionism – I don’t really know what it is, I don’t know what they want. They’re Euros, but the 3rd Positionists of the past were fascists and Nazis. But clearly they are pretty sui generis, and they are hard to pigeonhole and understand.

It’s a difficult movement to define. They don’t have a figure like the Marxists have Karl Marx and the capitalists have Adam Smith. I know that the 3rd Positionists have been smeared by being described as fascists.

It isn’t necessarily fascism, but it is true that when the fascists came to power, they said that they were nationalists, and that they were against the Communists and the capitalists. But you could be a 3rd Positionist and you could be a civil libertarian or you could be very authoritarian. Even among 3rd Positionists, there are a lot of different nuances within the ideology.

3rd Positionism is about as hard to pin down as fascism. Fascism is hard to pin down too. The fascists said that they were against both capitalism and Communism, but they just said that to get people to go along with them. It’s always been a rightwing movement. It’s never been anti-capitalist. The Nazis had the Night of the Long Knives, and they killed all of the socialist and anti-capitalist Nazis. There was a Nazi guy who was a big 3rd Positionist hero, but I can’t remember his name (Note: Gregor Strasser).

Is it Godfrey Feder?

No.

He was their economist.

No, see, when Hitler first started out in 1921, they drafted this Set Of Principles, and they called themselves National Socialists, and they had a pretty socialist, anti-capitalist economic project. And they got a lot of support. There were people on the Left who were even going Nazi, and there people who were going back and forth between the Nazis and the Communists in the 1920’s during all of that turbulence.

And in the early 1930’s, the Nazis were getting funded by major German industrialists. They were getting funded by the corporations. This is what almost nobody knows. The German corporations were behind the Nazis all the way. That’s where they got their money.

But there were bankers funding Bolshevism too. Like Jacob Schiff helped finance the Bolshevik Revolution. So there definitely were industrialists financing both sides. But I think they just want to make a profit. War is one of the most profitable things.

Why would a banker finance Communism? The international bankers generally did not finance Communism. That’s simply not true. There’s no money in it for them! Communism is the biggest money loser in the whole world for capitalists.

But the government still needs to borrow money whether it’s Communist or capitalist. The other thing is that when the Czar was in power, he was more of an economic nationalist and he did not want to do business with these bankers, so the bankers did have some incentives for financing Bolshevism.

Those Jews like Schiff, they did not make any money at all off of Russia going Communist. It was a gigantic money loser. The whole thing with Schiff was all about Jewish ethnic politics.

Yes, because the Czar was anti-Jewish, so it was more an ethnic thing than an economic thing.

Believe me, that’s all it was – revenge on the Russians. And a lot of the Communists were Jews. It was just let’s get rid of these anti-Semites and put some pro-Jews in power. Schiff was not acting in his class interests by doing that. This whole idea of bankers funding Communism, well, hey, I’m kind of a Commie myself. I mean, I wish they would give us some money!

There weren’t any Gentile capitalists who financed Communism.

Why would they? There are a few rich people who are Communists, but that’s rare. If you study Marxism, then you understand class, and so many things that people do are based on their class interests. People have class interests. Why would a rich capitalist finance Communism? Why would I buy someone the guillotine that’s going to chop my head off? It’s totally operating against your class interests. There’s no point to it unless you’ve got some kind of ulterior motive.

They have an ulterior motive unless they are already in power. But there’s socialism in different forms. There is socialism that is directed against the rich and also it’s possible that the elites are using a form of socialism to keep down the middle class. That’s not true Marxism, but it’s selected socialism to target a different class.

I don’t agree with that sort of rightwing populism. That’s just crazy. The elites hate socialism period. But there are some elites who go against their class interests and ally with the poor because, well, maybe they grew up poor or maybe they’re just nice people. But they are basically supporting a project that is going to cut their income.

And why would they do that? I mean a few of them will, just because they’re good people or they are self-sacrificing. But in general, the rich pursue their class interests, which is to retain their wealth or increase it. And they certainly do not support projects that are going to decrease their wealth.

You don’t think that rich liberals have ulterior motives?

Rich liberals are just nice people. They’re just nice people who feel guilty, and they’re willing to give up their money and share it with others, and that’s all there is to it. They’re self-sacrificing people. They have no ulterior motives or any of that. The notion that they do is rightwing populism. It’s crazy.

But 3rd Positionism ties in with populism. You’ve heard of that label producerism is the idea, not so much Right or Left, that the middle class is being exploited on both ends by both big government and by big business, especially the banking elite.

Well…The middle class typically is exploited by the rich under capitalism. Studies have proven that under neoliberalism, which is radical capitalism, the bottom 8

A lot of the middle class people align with the rich, the capitalists and the corporations too, but they are not really acting in their class interests when they do that. The middle class does not understand their class interests. They want to be rich. They typically align with the rich. But it often doesn’t make much sense for them to do that.

But you said that the Left doesn’t really represent the middle class either mainly because the Left is for Open Borders. You wrote a recent article where you said both the Democrats and the Republicans, the Left and the Right, is one big Corporate Party.

In the US, that’s true because the Democratic Party isn’t really a Left party anymore. It’s sort of a rightwing party instead, and it’s all just corporate politics. They just represent the corporations, the rich and the upper middle class. The Democrats are sort of for the middle class to a greater extent than the Republicans are, but I don’t think either party is for the poor or low income people anymore. Supporting them is considered to be a total loser.

The Democrats used to be for the poor, the low income and the workers, but supposedly, that’s why they were losing elections, and that’s why they went to the DNC model. The corporate Democrats decided that this is the way to win elections – be pro-corporate, get the corporate money, beat the Republicans at their game. That’s the DNC – the Democratic National Committee, and that’s where they’re all coming out of now. Even Obama, he’s a DNC guy.

I noticed that you commented on the new American 3rd Position Party. We were discussing on our show about the pros and cons of explicit racial activism, but you mentioned on your site that the A3P is probably one of the most pro-worker and anti-corporate parties in the US.

I think that what’s interesting about that is it’s showing you that these labels about the Left and the Right don’t make a lot of sense because a lot of people might hear about the A3P and they might think of it as a rightwing party, but you were saying that you looked over their platform, and you agree with a lot of what they have to say.

Well…it’s just a sad statement on the state of affairs of the Western Left. It exemplifies the total failure of the Western Left to support the workers, especially White workers, or just workers period, the low income, the working class, the poor. Especially the Whites.

They are opposed to all of these people, and the Western Left pushes anti-White politics. They are pro-non-White. They’re pro-Hispanic, they’re pro-Black, and they’re anti-White. And when they are pushing mass immigration, that’s just a spear into the heart of the White worker…the low income, the poor and the working class Whites, who are my people…those are my people. It’s just a sad comment when these rightwingers, who are almost fascists…when the fascists are the only people who are standing up for workers anymore.

Hold on now, when you make a statement referring to them as fascists. Now you’re entitled to your opinion, but if you look at the platform, they say they’re for Constitutionalism. What specifically about the platform is fascist?

Well…I think they said something about encouraging non-White immigrants to go back to their countries. “We’ll even give them money to go home.” But there’s nothing much in there that’s specifically fascist. It’s a very moderated program. Yet they are calling themselves 3rd Positionists, and 3rd Positionist is fascist…And the A3P is explicitly pro-White in the US.

The leaders of the party are White Nationalists. Kevin MacDonald is a White Nationalist who is sympathetic to fascism and Nazism. The leader of the party (Note: William D. Johnson) is an explicit White Nationalist who called for throwing all non-Whites out of the country 20-30 years ago (Note: Book penned in 1985 under the pseudonym of James O. Pace). That’s where these people are coming from.

Those are their leaders – they are coming out of the White Supremacist movement, the White Nationalist movement, which is a pro-fascist movement in the United States. And that’s how they totally failed, because, in being pro-fascist, they have blown off the entire White racist, White supremacist – especially Southern White Supremacist – segment in the United States.

Most White racists and White Supremacists in the US of the old White Supremacist types – they hate fascism, they hate Nazism. They fought in WW2. The Southerners fought in WW2. They were slaughtered in WW2 by the Nazis.

Southerners are pro-British. Their roots are in the UK. Hitler attacked the UK. The pro-White movement in the US – the White nationalists, the White supremacists – they’re pro-Nazi, they’re pro-fascist! That is the biggest loser project! I know White people. Most White people want nothing to do with fascism or Nazism. Why does pro-White politics have to be fascist and Nazi? That’s no good. These people are losers. That’s the biggest failure in White politics right there.

The Left likes to link the Southern nationalist types with Nazism but most people don’t know this but along with Jews…White Southerners and Jews were the most gung-ho groups about fighting WW2.

My mother was present in that era and I asked her, “Well, those Southerners were racists. Wasn’t Hitler’s seen as a pro-White regime?” and she said, “Oh no! I lived during that era and everybody hated the Nazis.” There were more pro-Nazis in Pennsylvania than there were in the entire South! The only Americans who were pro-Nazi were ethnic Germans, and then after Pearl Harbor, they basically just disappeared or went underground or shut up. The Nazis had zero support in the South.

The Southern White Supremacists liked democracy. My Mom said that Americans hated the fascists because they were a dictatorship…and they were persecuting Jews. And Southerners didn’t really care anything about Jews back then. Who cares about Jews?

And the Nazis were not seen as pro-White at all. I mean every White person was pro-White back then. Why would you line up with Nazis? And the people that the Nazis were fighting were pro-White. France was pro-White. The UK was pro-White. Denmark, everyone in Europe was pro-White back in those days.

So being pro-White was the norm, but what happened was the Establishment took it up, and they tried to link being pro-White with being with Hitler. But it’s a psychological thing, because if your enemy is telling you that if you’re pro-White, you’re like Hitler, psychologically, you’re going to think, “Well, maybe Hitler wasn’t such a bad guy, and maybe I should be pro-Hitler.” Would you say that that’s the roots of it?

Well…I’m not sure, I don’t know why the pro-White movement has gotten into Nazis and fascists and all that, because I think that’s the biggest mistake they ever made. For instance, there are probably still a lot of White racists down in the South, but I don’t imagine that most of those people like Nazis or fascists.

I think it’s one faction of the White Nationalist movement that might be Nazi. But it’s a problem that it might be guilt by association because in the White Nationalist community, they are going to network together, and if one person is their friend…if they have a political associate who might say something pro-Hitler, it’s going to rub off. So you’re saying that that’s one of the biggest barriers, because groups like the ADL along with the media – they’re going to try to link anything that’s remotely pro-White with Nazism and fascism.

Well…that’s simply not true. The old White Supremacists in the South, the neo-Confederates, and there are still many, many, many Southerners who believe in this stuff, and there are even White racists all over the country who subscribe to that, and they don’t want anything to do with Nazism, and they don’t even like fascism either. So the White movement is simply insane. Why have they taken up Nazism and fascism? I don’t know.

But for 20 years after WW2, White Supremacism and White racism was going gung-ho all through 40’s, the 50’s and into the early 60’s the Civil Rights Movement. They weren’t waving Nazi flags or supporting fascism. They were pro-democracy, pro-American, pro-European, and they hated Nazis and fascists.

If you look at the A3P, they are pro-democracy and pro-Constitution, so I don’t want to smear that party because I agree with what they are doing, but you do make a legitimate point that through guilt by association…maybe someone is affiliated with someone who may have those views, but the party itself, the platform and agenda put out by the party, is a Constitutionalist party that’s for democracy and individual rights.

Yes, the A3P could hardly be called a fascist party. There’s not a whole lot of fascism around anymore. Even the European Right, the Hard Right in Europe, they’re not all that classically fascist anymore – the BNP, the British National Party – is not all that fascist, they’re democrats last time I checked. They support civil liberties. The old fascism of the 20’s, 30’s and 40’s – it isn’t really coming back.

You see, fascism mutates. Pinning down fascism is like pinning down a blob of mercury. Fascism is like a chameleon. It changes colors, it changes shapes, it can be anything. It will take on the forms of other things. Who’s that guy who wrote Babbitt? Sinclair Lewis?

He said that fascism, if it comes to the US, will be wrapped in a cross and an American flag.

Exactly. Fascism takes on whatever forms it needs to take on to get in. It’s this very weird movement that’s very, very difficult to study, to define. They’ve been studying it since the 1920’s, and there’s some really good literature coming out in recent years – a lot of it can be found on a blog called Orcinus. There are some excellent pieces there that talk about something called “pseudo-fascism.”

Some of the top research right now on fascism is coming out of Political Science departments. They are trying to exactly figure out…what it is! Because…nobody…really knows…what fascism is! And the fascists are experts are concealing their motives, at lying, at not calling themselves fascists, at calling themselves anti-fascists.

You talked about Sinclair Lewis, well, Huey Long, who was a popular political figure in the US in the 1930’s, he said that fascism will return to the US, but perhaps under the title of anti-fascism.

That’s what they do. I’ve seen fascists on the Net, and they called their enemies fascists! It’s really weird and confusing. If you hang around Usenet sites that have a lot of fascists, after a while, your mind starts spinning around, and you start wondering if you are a fascist yourself. And they try to convert you to their movement.

They are like these shape-shifting forms that change into these other things and say all this contradictory stuff, and they’re just all over the place. They’re sneaky, and they’re tricksters, and mainly they confuse you. They confuse people, and that’s how they get people to support their project because often people don’t really know what they are supporting. They’re not up front about their aims – that’s another aspect of fascism. It’s basically a popular movement against the Left.

And populism can be a good thing, but fascism, it is an ultra-authoritarian movement. So I don’t think that being a racist automatically makes you a fascist. Even if you are a White Supremacist, one aspect of fascism that is essential to it is a reliance on a totalitarian form of government.

Well…certainly that is true, and all of those old-style racists in the US, and especially in the South, they’re anti-fascists! They hate fascism, they hate Nazism, and this crazy pro-White movement has blown all these people off by cheering on fascists and Nazis. What’s the matter with them? I don’t get it. For some reason, Hitler is held up as a hero of the White race. No he wasn’t! Hitler probably killed more White people than anyone in the 20th Century. What kind of hero is that?

Hitler did kill millions of White people, possibly even more than Stalin. I don’t get it. I think it’s just psychological where the enemies of people who are pro-White, they keep labeling pro-Whites as Nazis, and then they end up taking that label. Because when someone keeps calling you something, psychologically, you take up that label.

Well…that might be part of it. You call a man a thief enough, and eventually he might start stealing. “Well, if you’re going to call me a thief anyway, I might as well just start stealing.” And with the White Supremacists, since the 60’s, there’s been a total war on White racism coming out of the anti-racist movement. And that’s one thing the anti-racists have done really well – we pathologized racism, in particular, White racism, because, well…White racism is nasty, it has a bad history, and most White people don’t want to be racists anymore!

I think most Whites are racist in minor ways, but hardcore White racism has been so pathologized that most Whites will not take extreme, explicit racist stances anymore. So the only people out there taking explicitly pro-White stances are people who are so crazy that they don’t even care.

So it further stigmatized it so there’s no room for a healthy or more moderate pro-White movement.

There are no moderate pro-White movements!

Well, Pat Buchanan, he seems to have the best model because he basically is pro-White. He writes in his book, Death to the West that he does have a strong preference for White culture, and he laments the demographic change. But he’s able to appeal to a lot of people that White Nationalists can’t, and he has a following among conservatives where even people who are not White can admire him.

Well…Buchanan is basically…White politics. White politics isn’t really White Nationalism. The Tea Parties are White politics. The Republican Party, increasingly, is White politics. But you know Buchanan is sort of pro-Nazi himself. That’s a real problem with him.

Well, he’s not really pro-Nazi. Instead, he takes the position that the conservatives around the time of WW2, they were not explicitly pro-Nazi, but instead, they took the position that the Communists were a lot worse than the Nazis, or that defeating the Nazis wasn’t really worth it because Eastern Europe fell to Communism and Western Europe fell to multiculturalism. So that’s sort of where Pat Buchanan is coming from.

Break

The conservative movement around WW2 was under a lot of pressure, and the conservatives later changed their position – some conservatives nowadays will say that the Nazis and Communists were equally evil – there are even some who go out of their way to say that the Nazis were worse. I saw Denis Prager speak several years ago, and he said that he thought that the Nazis were even worse than the Communists, and that’s usually the position that the Left took.

Isn’t he a Jew though?

Yes, he is, so that’s a logical position but part of it is this Jewish influence for the neoconservative movement that has had a huge impact on the conservative movement in the US.

Well…I’m coming out of the WW2 Left, and those are my heroes, my comrades. The fascists and the Nazis are my enemies. They killed my comrades. If they ever come back in power, they will kill me, and I have no sympathy at all for those guys. And it’s not even a question of overall who was worse. See, I don’t think Stalin killed 20, 40, 60 or 110 million. I think Stalin killed 2.5 million. I don’t agree with those figures. Those are Nazi lies as far as I’m concerned.

I don’t believe that that famine was a deliberate famine, you know, the Holodomor, that fake famine that the Ukrainians go on about? Do you know what that famine is? The Ukrainian famine, the Holodomor?

Yes, I know what you are talking about, but it’s important to note that there is definitely a double standard when it comes to Communist atrocities, there can be an open discussion. But if you debate the Nazi atrocities, if you’re in Germany, you can actually go to jail for that.

Well…you can still debate the Nazi atrocities. And the legitimate figures for how many Jews were killed ranges all the way down to 4.2 million. So you can say that there were no 6 million killed, there were only 4 million, and that doesn’t make you a Holocaust Denier. And there are people who say it was over 6 million.

Anyway, historians pretty much agree about the basics. The debate’s over about the Holocaust. They did kill anywhere from 4 million to over 6 million Jews. That’s just the bottom line. There’s no further discussion about it. And the Holocaust Revisionists and the Holocaust Deniers have an ulterior motive, which is to bring back Nazism and to do the Holocaust all over again, and this time do it right.

So you’re saying that people who try to downplay the Nazi atrocities, their goal is to bring back the Nazis.

That’s correct, exactly.

For European nationalism, the accusation of Nazism is used as a weapon to suppress that nationalism, to make it pathological. But the other argument with regard to Zionism, if you look at Norman Finkelstein. His parents were actually Holocaust survivors. He wrote that book, The Holocaust Industry. And Israel has long stood by that, and they’ve used as a shield to be immune from any criticism.

Well, yes, there’s a good argument about the Holocaust as a religion. And Finkelstein does a good job on that. Finkelstein is not a Denier or anything like that that he is accused of. That’s not true. The Dean of Holocaust Studies is a guy named Martin Gilbert. I think he’s dead by now, but he puts the figure at 5.1 million. I don’t think it was 6 million myself. I think it was 5.7 million. Just because you say there were no 6 million Jews killed in the Holocaust doesn’t mean you’re a Denier. There is still a lot of debate on the issue. There’s no real debate on the basics.

But you think there are similarities…You were saying that Israel has been going in a fascist direction.

Right. Well, on the Left, we’ve always called Zionism fascism. We think it’s fascism for Jews. It’s been a fascist movement from Day One, from the very start. We on the Left don’t like any ethnonationalism.

The reason that the Left doesn’t like Zionism is because they see it as kind of a hyper ethnonationalist movement. But I think there is also an anti-Zionist Right. They see Zionism more as a form of internationalism.

Zionism? As a form of internationalism? See, that’s crazy though. That’s nuts. That’s just anti-Semitic whackery.

But they are occupying another people’s land.

It’s a colonial project. It’s a settler-colonial project. It’s an imperialist project. It’s an ethnonationalist project. It’s a fascist project. There’s nothing progressive or Left about it. Where’s the internationalism? Internationalists don’t persecute minorities in that fascist way like the Israelis do. That’s not what an internationalist does.

Well the thing is that the Israel Lobby is by far the most powerful lobby in the US.

It’s one of them. There’s actually another one that’s more powerful. I think that the Oil Lobby or the Military Lobby is bigger.

The Military-Industrial Complex.

They are the most powerful ethnic lobby, for sure. Our elections are all about Jewish money. And the whole pro-Israel thing is all about Jewish money. The Jews have the US Congress by the short hairs, and they control the US Congress and government on the Israel issue to a pretty significant extent.

I think that that is why the anti-Zionist Right says that Zionism is internationalist. Because they manage to simultaneously support things like multiculturalism and immigration and also Zionism. I think it’s this extreme double standard.

Well…They’re supporting fascism for Jews over there in their homeland. Fascism for Jews is good for Jews over in Israel, but on the other hand, there isn’t any fascism for Jews over here in the US. Fascism in the US, or anywhere else in the world, is bad for the Jews, always, and so is ethnonationalism, because it’s always going to turn on the Jews. So in the Diaspora, the Jews always promote multiculturalism and whatnot as a way of diluting their enemies and making the Diaspora societies more friendly to the Jews. It’s all about what’s good for the Jews.

That’s where you get that word “internationalist” that Henry Ford wrote about.

Henry Ford was a great man! I like Henry Ford. I think he’s unjustly maligned. The International Jew is a good book, and I like it. But he’s wrong about some things. See, the main thing is that back then, Jews were internationalists because they didn’t have roots to the land. They were internationalists in the sense that their only allegiance was to their international Jewish community.

They weren’t real true internationalists. It’s more that they weren’t nationalists. They were basically traitors! The Jews have always been traitors, and they still are to some extent nowadays because their primary loyalty is to their international Jewish community and not necessarily to their own homeland. And they will screw their own homeland if it’s good for the Jews. When it comes down to either supporting the homeland or supporting the Jews, they will support the Jews! And that’s the big problem with the Jews. That’s why the nationalists hate them.

Yes, it’s definitely the cause of anti-Semitism. You’re saying that you’re against anti-Semitism.

Right.

But you support rational criticism of the Jews.

Right.

But how do we deal with this? Because there is a flaw in anti-Semitism since the Jewish leadership relies on anti-Semitism to get their followers more radicalized and ethnocentric. But at the same time, I don’t want to give the Jews a free pass either. How do you propose that we deal with these issues?

Well…when you get into anti-Semitism, you are basically falling into the Jews’ trap because the Jews want you to be an anti-Semite! That’s the way I see it. Now, personally, I don’t think the Jews are very important!

The only people who think Jews are important are:

1. Jews. 2. Anti-Semites.

I don’t think that Jews deserve all this attention that we are giving them. They’re just this little pissant tribe, and I don’t think they are deserving of all this interest and obsession. When you go anti-Semite, you’re giving the Jews what they want. You’re telling the Jews that they are important, when they are not! And…anti-Semites created Israel!

You’re strengthening Zionism. Because the whole idea of anti-Zionism is that we anti-Zionists want the Jews to be able to live peacefully in the Diaspora. We don’t want them all running to Israel because of Diaspora anti-Semitism. If you’re an anti-Semite, you’re chasing them over to Israel!

It’s interesting because Helen Thomas was saying that Israel should be dismantled and they should all move here but if Israel was dismantled…I know some on the anti-Zionist Right who support returning that land to the Palestinians. But what would happen is that they would all move to Europe and the US. So I can sort of see what you are getting at.

Do the anti-Semites really want that? I know anti-Semites who support Israel. Their attitude is, “We sure as Hell don’t want the Jews in our country!”

I’m not sure if the BNP is anti-Semitic or not, but they support Israel.

The BNP has anti-Semitic roots, but they recently did a turnaround and now they are pro-Jewish, they are Judeophilic, they are pro-Israel, they are Zionists. And it’s all because they are anti-Islam. It’s all because they don’t like Muslims. The BNP doesn’t care that much about Jews. Jews are not that big of an issue in the UK anyway. The Jews in the UK are very well assimilated, and they don’t have a lot of power there.

The big problem in the UK is not the Jews, it’s the Muslims. They’re setting off bombs!

Well, with Europe and the US, we have to look at them differently because they do have very different issues. If you look at Europe, the Muslim issue is huge there. In the US, the Muslim community here is pretty small. With the Muslims, they try to stir up fears about Islam to get support for wars in the Middle East.

The Muslim community here is as big as the one in Britain! The ones in the UK are just not assimilated very well. They are Pakistanis from the former British possessions, and they are just not doing well. It’s more a question of assimilation rather than numbers. We are fortunate in the US to have such a well-behaved Muslim community…so far!

But you think there could be an issue here in the future.

Yes, definitely, definitely. I mean I would not want to allow millions more Muslims to flood into this country willy-nilly. No, not at all. And I think we need to be very careful about the Muslims that we let in here. We need to make them take things like loyalty tests. I don’t know, I don’t know. Muslim minorities in non-Muslim countries are not that great of a thing. They tend to get really agitated and radicalized. They tend to make demands for Sharia law.

They’re…they’re like the Jews! They’re not loyal! They have dual loyalty. Their primary loyalty is to the Ummah and barely, if at all, to the nation. They will actually set bombs against their own nation because the nation is fighting the Ummah. The Ummah is the Muslim community of the whole world. U-m-m-a-h.

You do think that they have an imperialist agenda too. We are being kind of imperialistic towards them in the Middle East, but they do want to spread their religion through demographics and move throughout the world and have as many kids as possible.

Islam is extremely imperialist! That’s a definite fact! One thing you can say about the Jews is they are not imperialist. They don’t want converts. They don’t want to take over. If you want to convert to Judaism, you go to a rabbi, and tell him you want to convert to Judaism, the first thing he’s going to ask you is, “Why? Why do you want to convert to Judaism? Why do you want to do that? What do you want to do that for?”

Do you think that is for racial purity reasons?

No…Jews just don’t convert. Religions either proselytize or they don’t. Jews used to proselytize and take a lot of converts, but they haven’t been doing it lately for some reason. Jews just don’t convert people. It’s not their thing. There are other religions like that too, especially in the Middle East. That philosophy has its roots in purity stuff, but it’s generally not a very good idea for your religion to not accept converts. It’s a way to make your religion go extinct – don’t accept converts.

I haven’t really studied Islam. I haven’t looked at the texts, so I don’t want to make claims about a religion if I haven’t studied it. But if you study the history of Islam, it’s definitely a pretty imperialist religion. With Europe, the Muslim leaders definitely have a goal to take over Europe.

Sure! And so do the ones in the US! If you read the statements of CAIR, the Council on American Islamic Relations, it’s run by Islamists, and they say the same thing as the ones in Europe do – that their goal is a Muslim America. And that’s what’s scary about these people. I don’t think we should be letting a lot of them in. As long as they are only

What is the level of growth in that community in the US?

Not that much in the US. They have a few converts here and there. Actually, a much greater problem in the West in terms of Islam is that a lot of Muslims leave Islam. In the UK, 1

Has that happened in Europe at all?

In the UK, about 1

Do you think it’s a motivation for terrorism to come from a sexually repressed culture, and they see the West as being sexually immoral. You’ve heard that argument. How much of a role do you think that plays?

Hmm…I’m not sure. They kill women for violating Islam, but they also kill men. In Muslim-majority countries, they will kill guys for leaving Islam. The thing about Islam is that, from the very start, Islam has not accepted people leaving their religion. They do not accept apostates! They kill them! They’ve always done this, from Day One.

I was talking to my Mom about that, and she just acted like, “Well, that’s just the way they are. Muslims don’t like that. They’ll kill you if you leave.” She didn’t say it like they’re evil, but more that this is just the way that they are. They’ve been this way for about 1,300 years. It’s the nature of their religion. But that’s their imperialist nature right there! Because they accept lots of converts, but they won’t let anybody leave! It’s like a house that’s an Open House. Anybody in the neighborhood can come in, but once you’re in there, they lock the doors, and you can never get out.

It would be like a country that took in all these immigrants, but will not let anyone leave the country.

Yes! Especially with the goal of, “We’re going to be the biggest country in the world and take over all the other countries.” And they have emissaries all over all the other countries in the world trying to make their Muslims dual citizens. It’s true that Islam has a world conquest agenda, and Al Qaeda and folks like that are absolutely explicit in their goals of taking over the world. I’ve read Al Qaeda’s statements. And I’ve been interviewed by the FBI too about Al Qaeda. Because I did some research on them.

Yes?

Yes I know something about Al Qaeda. It was funny, I called the FBI back one time, and I asked for the Bin Laden Division, because they’ve got this Bin Laden Task Force. And it was Friday night and they said, “Oh, they’re gone for the weekend!” I thought that was lame. I think the Bin Laden Task Force should be working 24-7. This FBI guy called me back and they did an interview with me. I didn’t really like it too much because they always treat you like you’re a suspected terrorist.

Yes, they think you’re a suspected terrorist if you’re going to them with information.

Yes, I don’t like to be interviewed by cops either. They always treat you like you’re a suspected criminal. That’s just their nature.

I don’t think that’s intentional, but it’s just what they are used to doing as part of their job.

Well, he wanted to find out if I was a Muslim! He was like, “Are you a Muslim?” I was like, “No way!” And he was breathing easier. I told him I was a Leftist, a Left-winger, and he was like, “Oh well, we’re not worried about you.” The FBI is worried about American Muslims, especially converts. White guys like me convert. And quite a few of those guys go super-radical. Because converts are often crazy.

They’re more radical than the people who are born into it because they joined just for that purpose, to embrace that belief system.

In many religions, even the converted Jews…the Jewish converts often go really nuts.

I’ve met Christians who converted to Judaism. They started out as Christian Zionists and that was their motivation for joining Judaism.

The Jews say that the Jewish converts are simply nuts in many cases. They’re like these fanatical Jews. And it’s interesting too, because the Jewish converts often take on a lot of these supposed “Jewish genetic tendencies.” They become extremely ethnocentric, they become paranoid of the Gentiles. These are not genetic tendencies! The ethnocentrism, the paranoia of the Gentiles, the tribalism.

Some people think that those traits are genetic.

Yes! I don’t agree with that.

But who’s been saying that it’s genetic? I think it’s cultural. Who’s been saying that?

Well, the Nazi thing was that there was something wrong with their genes.

Well, I see what you are saying. I know that way of thinking.

Kevin MacDonald has suggested that too, and boy is he wrong.

He has brought it up. I read his blog a lot, and I think that MacDonald’s main view is that it’s a culture, a political ideology. Do you think that he has mentioned the genetic aspect?

I think he mentions something about that. If you read his Trilogy of books, he suggested that Jewish character traits might be genetic. I think that’s crazy. Supposedly the Jews are really aggressive verbally and in business, and they can be rude.

Well, I think that’s cultural too, because the Jews are verbally and in business, extremely aggressive. But physically, Jews are not aggressive at all. Jewish guys have a reputation for being wimps. Jews commit almost no physical violence or violent crime. Jews are bad at sports. So…what did they inherit? Some sort of gene that made him extremely verbally aggressive but at the same time extremely non-aggressive as far as physical aggression goes? That doesn’t make any kind of sense.

Well, Jewish behavior is definitely cultural, since it also depends on where they grew up. If they grew up in New York or if they grew up in a small town in the Midwest is going to make a huge difference. I was reading about this story. There was this rabbi, he went to Peru and he got these Peruvian Indians and he took them to Israel and they turned into these fanatics after about 5 years.

Yes, they probably started acting more Jewish than Jews in New York that are 500 years Kosher. That shows you that one can take on those psychological tendencies of the Jews. It’s simply a cultural thing. I could be like that. I could be like that if I converted to Judaism. I could get really paranoid of the Gentiles and really hyperethnocentric, I could get really acquisitive, really verbally aggressive…

You grow up in a culture like that…and those people from around the Mediterranean, they tend to be that way anyway. They tend to be verbally aggressive, really emotionally expressive…They’re really into business too. Jews act a lot like Arabs, that’s the thing. They get in your face, but they’re really warm too, they embrace you, and when they’re talking to you, they’re like two inches away.

Mortalism: Definition

Definition: The belief that the soul lies dormant after the body dies.

Christianity believes that you die, go to sleep for a while, or a long time, or just about forever, and then you wake up, and then some Christian shit goes down, like a trial or something.

Even the trial’s probably not that bad; at least the judge is a nice guy, right, Jesus? After being asleep that long, Hell, I’d wake up for just about anything, maybe even torture, Fox News or Clear Channel radio (same thing anyway). And if I’m found guilty in the trial, oh well, most of us have gotten used enough to Earthly Hell so the real deal should be endurable, anyway. As long as they have lots of booze in dope in Hell to smooth thing out a bit for us immortal shades, I could be down for it even.

It’s like going to sleep. That’s all it is. No pain, nothing. Just sleep. It’s even supported by the Bible.

As far as a wedding of Christianity and science, it makes about as much sense as anything in any other religion. I’m on board.

And what’s so bad about it anyway? I like to go to sleep. In fact I could use some pretty soon.

India Has No Right to Exist

In the India Is a Shithole piece, James Schipper suggests that India has been free of significant civil strife:

Another thing for which India deserves credit is that, despite being one of the most multinational states in the world, it has managed to avoid serious internal conflicts. In terms of national composition, India should not be compared with the US but with Europe, which is of course divided in about 40 different states.

This is not true. Kashmir has been on fire since 1968 or so. There are now 500,000 troops locking the place down, and every day, another young Kashmiri or two at least is killed.

India was born in blood and sin, like the Americas, Australia, New Zealand, Israel and various settler-colonial states.

The difference is that the Indian state, incredibly, attacked her very own people from the start of the Indian state enterprise, and has been at war with them ever since. In this sense, India is an utterly failed state like Myanmar or Indonesia, two other former colonial states who have been battling insurgencies from the start from parts of the former colony who never wanted to join the new state.

India has about as much right to exist in its current form as Myanmar does. India is a failed state. It’s has failed to properly rule or provide for its people, and tens of millions of its citizens never consented to join the new state in the first place, but were dragged in kicking and screaming amidst slaughters.

Parents who can’t raise their children get their kids taken away. India’s children are its nations and peoples, whom it can’t and won’t care for because its ruling class is negligent and doesn’t care, like a crack-addicted Mom. Hence, India has no right to rule the peoples of the Northeast, Kashmir and Punjab and the Indian state in its current form should be dissolved as surely as Israel should be.

The Northeast has been in rebellion, often armed rebellion, nearly from Day One. There have been scores of armed groups fighting the state in that region, and many are still active. Bottom line is that India has no right to rule the Northeast, and as India is a cesspool anyway, why should the NE people be forced to live in a sewer? Let them secede and negotiate their way to modernity.

There is now a huge Maoist rebellion going on the East. There are easily 100,000 Maoists, and they have millions of supporters.

There was a huge rebellion in the Punjab a while back. It’s over, but it was nasty.

There is a continuous low level conflict going on with India’s Muslims, who regularly set off horrible bomb attacks on India’s Hindu cities. The Hindus are now responding by bombing India’s Muslim cities. Further, there have been many cases of inter-religious violence, mostly pogroms of Muslims by India’s Hindus and sometime riots by put-upon Indian Muslims. These pogroms started with the birth of the Indian state and the splitting of Pakistan, and to be honest, have never stopped.

In addition, there have been hundreds of killings of Christians in the East by Hindus, including burnings of churches and entire towns, pogroms, etc. This is ongoing as I write this.

Deepening Fascism in Israel: The Evidence

Like I said earlier.

From the always great Jonathon Cook (a bit long at 30 pages, but if I can read it, so can you), an American living in and writing from Nazareth, you know, the birthplace of, you know, that religion called, you know, Christianity? Except now Nazareth is part of something called a Jewish state, of the Jews, by the Jews and for the Jews.

The Christians are relegated to the background, to a footnote, and that’s at best. At worst, they are an oppressed minority like the Blacks under apartheid South Africa. But this is all necessary, you know, to give the Jews their safe haven from Holocaust 2 you know, because as Herzl and Hitler remind us from beyond the grave, everyone hates the Jews, with good reason.

Cook has the advantage of being neither Arab nor Muslim nor Jewish traitor, so no one quite knows what to do with these folks.

Yet I wonder for how much longer Mr. Cook can keep penning his prose from inside the heart of the beast amidst the deepening gloom. It’s no longer daytime in Israel, ever, anymore. Nor is it the darkest night. There’s still light, just enough to see by, but that’s it.

It’s dusk. The dusk of a settling fascist dark.

Idiot Defends Idiocy

Here.

Catholicism is probably the only religion where the holy men are required to be celibate. If you can think of another one, let me know. As the Orthodox consider themselves the true and pure Catholics or Christians, it follows that the Orthodox consider priestly celibacy to be some sort of crazy deviationism. Orthodox priests can marry, and as the original Christian Church was Orthodox, it follows that allowing priests to marry is right within the proper traditions of Christianity.

The reason for this is obscure and I’m not sure of the roots of it, but it was instituted at some time after the split between Rome and Constantinople.

It’s often said that priestly celibacy is the reason priests molest kids so much. The implication is that if guys are not given a healthy sexual outlet, as in a woman to fuck, they will go towards other things like kids. So guys who are not getting any pussy are at risk of child molesting.

I don’t agree that that’s the case.

Anyway, there are tons of priests out there messing around with women, trust me. What’s really going on here is that the priestly celibacy requirement means that you end up with a bunch of guys as priests who don’t care if they never fuck another woman or not.

That is, they have no use for normal sexual relations with women. What kind of men have no use for sexual relations with women? Guys who are not attracted to adult females.

Homosexual men, for one, and Andrew Greeley, a popular author and former priest, estimated that 1/3 of Catholic priests are gay. AIDS has actually hit the priesthood very hard, and many priests have died of it already, though you don’t read about it much. Catholic seminaries are said to be hotbeds of male homosexuality.

There’s not that much homosexuality in convents and monasteries as that is a preselected group, and there are not that many of them anyway.

It’s true that other religions have celibate monks and nuns. In Thailand, for instance, it is quite common for young men aged 18-21 or so to go off and join a monastery and be celibate for a couple of years. It’s kind of like going in the army, and seems to be good for them. Most only do it for a couple of years, then come out, marry and have normal lives.

In the Middle Ages, there used to be tunnels between nunneries and monasteries where the priests and nuns could meet and have sex with each other.

The other type of guy who has no use for sex with women is a pedophile or hebephile, since they are attracted to teens and especially children instead of adults of either sex.

So, it’s true that the celibacy requirement is the cause of a lot of the priest child abuse, but not in the way that you normally think.

It’s often said by dogmatic sexual liberationists that priestly celibacy will harm a man even after he comes out of it.

Not true. Most men like to fuck.

The argument makes no sense. If you’ve been on starvation rations for years, are you going to come out of it hating to eat a square meal? Forget it. Most people who have gone through that live for nothing more than a good square meal every day – that’s all they want out life to be happy.

Studies of ex-priests have shown that years of celibacy did not harm them. They come out of the priesthood, marry and go on to live normal, healthy, sexually well-adjusted married lives.

The whole argument is silly, but it was common in the 1970’s among what I call Sexual Liberationist Fascists. Among these folks, lack of sex, celibacy or virginity was regarded as a horrendous sin similar to the way child molesters are seen these days.

Say what you want about chastity, but it’s hardly a sin. True Sexual Liberation, what I preach, means total freedom about sex. You can have sex with any consenting adult you want to. With your own sex, with the opposite sex, with both, or with no one. As frequently or infrequently as possible and with as many or as few partners as you wish. Celibacy is one of the options available in a Sexually Liberated world. Some people actually prefer it that way, mostly women, but some guys too. You would be surprised.

Celibacy has a long tradition in Hindu India. A Brahmin friend of mine told me that he was celibate until he married at age 32. He felt absolutely no shame in this lifestyle, and he said that this was a typical way for a male Brahmin to live – to be celibate until marriage.

Alt Left: Where Helen Thomas is Coming From

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQcQdWBqt14]

This is the famous video where some rabbi set up Helen Thomas and got her on camera saying that the Jews should get out of Palestine and go back to Europe where they came from.

This comment has been attacked as everything from stupid to anti-Semitic. It’s neither, really.

The comment is best analyzed in seeing where Thomas herself is coming from. Helen Thomas is the child of Lebanese Christian immigrants to the US, specifically Greek Orthodox Arabs. These comments of hers are quite in line with the typical Arab attitude about the Zionist Jews forming their state on the ashes of Palestine. The attitude is that the Jews are occupying Arab land in Palestine and that they ought to go back to Europe where they came from. So, she’s just talking like a typical Arab, nothing more, nothing less.

Although many Arabs who say such things are anti-Semites, not all are. Surely they are anti-Zionists. Rather than a battle of racists, this is really a war between two tribes, the Arabs and the Jews, and increasingly between the Muslims and the Jews. Tribal wars are not very pretty affairs, but it’s often incorrect to accuse the parties involved in the war of racism. Were those who hated Germans and Japanese during WW2 a bunch of racists? Get real.

The Jews do not like Arabs very much. Understandably so, as the Arabs won’t stop trying to kill them. Likewise for the Arabs in turn. If members of some enemy tribe kept trying to kill my people and more particularly me, I would surely opt to paint myself with the flimsy stain of temporary racist sin as opposed to daubing my body with the sturdy blotch of universalist death.

But it’s not much of a choice.

Further, Thomas’ comments must be seen in terms of her Greek Orthodox Arab religion. There were many Greek Orthodox living in Palestine before the Nakba, and many were ethnically cleansed. George Habash, leader of the PFLP, was ethnically cleansed with his family from Lydda, and his own sister was killed by the Jews. He was permanently radicalized. The Greek Orthodox refugees spread out to the surrounding Arab states, and many were attracted to secular Arab nationalism. Waddi Haddad, another PFLP radical, was also Greek Orthodox.

In Lebanon, the Greek Orthodox live heavily in the South with the Shia, but they often have their own villages. During the latest Lebanese war, when Israel invaded a Greek Orthodox village, the Lebanese Army surrendered, but the Israelis were soon attacked by a Greek Orthodox militia from the Syrian Social Nationalist Party, a pro-Syrian and pro-Hezbollah political party.

In the early days of the Lebanon War of 1982, the first suicide bombers were often Leftists, often Lebanese Christians, typically Greek Orthodox, from parties like the SSNP. Only later did Hezbollah take up the tactic.

In Lebanon, the Greek Orthodox support Syria and Hezbollah and despise Israel. The Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem is a ferocious anti-Zionist and even anti-Semite who has supported suicide bombings and Hamas. The Greek Orthodox had a large population in Jerusalem. Recall that one of the four quarters of the Old City, the Christian Quarter, is mostly Greek Orthodox.

Unfortunately, the Greek Orthodox, and the Orthodox Church in general, has a long history of anti-Semitism. Note the anti-Semitism of the Russian Orthodox Church. Some say that Orthodox anti-Semitism is even worse than Catholic anti-Semitism. Note that the Orthodox Church sees itself as the true pure church, and has never gone through Vatican I, forget Vatican II. My understanding is that they don’t even like Catholics, and consider Catholics to be some sort of liberal deviationists.

The anti-Semitism of the Orthodox involves accusations that the Jews are Christ-killers and the ancient enemies of the Christians. In this way it is similar to Catholic anti-Semitism, which is all about a homicidal or even genocidal response to their descendants of those who committed the Deicide.

The Nazis killed 8

One of the worst Christian anti-Semites was the 4th century Archbishop of Constantinople, Church Father Saint John Chrysostom. He delivered a series of homilies about Judaizing Christians, suggesting that they needed to choose one religion or the other.

The Jewish people were driven by their drunkenness and plumpness to the ultimate evil; they kicked about, they failed to accept the yoke of Christ, nor did they pull the plow of his teaching. Another prophet hinted at this when he said: “Israel is as obstinate as a stubborn heifer.”…

Although such beasts are unfit for work, they are fit for killing. And this is what happened to the Jews: while they were making themselves unfit for work, they grew fit for slaughter. This is why Christ said: “But as for these my enemies, who did not want me to be king over them, bring them here and slay them.”

Here’s an excerpt from Homily 6…

You [Jews] did slay Christ, you did lift violent hands against the Master, you did spill his precious blood. This is why you have no chance for atonement, excuse, or defense.

Pretty ugly stuff.

In spite of these sentiments, or, even more frighteningly, possibly due to them, this man was made an Orthodox saint! His hatred for the Jews was palpable. He wanted them hunted down and killed, and he wanted their synagogues burnt to the ground.

In that sense Orthodox anti-Semitism is worse even than Catholic anti-Semitism founded in part on Saint Augustine. At least Augustine felt that the Jews should be preserved in humiliation as witnesses to the triumph of Christianity. Neither accorded the Jews full humanity, but at least Augustine was willing to let them survive, albeit as some sort of Catholic version of the dhimmi.

So, while I have no knowledge of whether or not Thomas is an anti-Semite, this is the cultural milieu that she comes from. She may have heard dinner-table conversations like this while growing up in her Greek Orthodox home.

Rima Fakih Crowned Miss America

Rima Fakih, a former Miss Michigan, whose family are Shia Muslims from Southern Lebanon, was crowned Miss USA recently, the first Arab to ever win the prize. The neocons have gone insane, among other reactions, they are being led by some Jew named Debbie Schlussel, a blogger from Michigan. There are still a lot of Jews living around Detroit. In addition, many Arabs, mostly Shia Lebanese, have moved into the same area in recent years.

Rima Fakih in a bikini at the Miss USA contest. Hezbollah does not approve, and they said so.

No one knows whether or not Fakih sympathizes with Hezbollah, but 8

Excellent photo of Fakih after winning the prize. She has an interesting phenotype that I can't quite put a finger on. Italian? Armenian? Something like those Georgians? The closest thing she resembles at all is a former girlfriend, who was part Lebanese Maronite and part Greek, among other things.

The thing about Lebanon is that just about everyone hates each other. The Shia, the Sunnis of the North, the Druze and Maronites from the Center, there is no love lost with any of them, unfortunately. There are temporary alliances, but they fall apart a lot. The Greek Orthodox seem to get along with others better than the others, and they are not aligned with the Maronites in any way. The Orthodox have long lined up with Syria. Many of the first suicide bombers in Lebanon in the mid 1980’s were Greek Orthodox, often Communists or Leftists.

Rima Fakih photo in the dark, making her skin look a lot darker. I don't know what she looks like in this picture. Almost like a North Indian?

Fakih’s family varies. Some support Hezbollah and the more secular but still religious Shia Amal. Others are secular Shia who have no particular love for the religious parties. Some of these secular folks are even Communists. Communists are not unusual in Lebanon – there are still quite a few of them for some reason.

Here she is in her gown. A good look at her phenotype here, which seems pretty unique. These people probably are the remains of the ancient Phoenicians, and that was pretty distinct group of folks. Of course, now their genes are scattered about the Mediterranean. After Lebanese and Greek, my next suggestion would be that she looks something like some of the Mizrachi or Arab Jews in Israel, although their looks vary somewhat. I once met an Iranian Mizrachi Jew who looked something like this. A commenter has noted that she looks something like a famous Israeli Yemeni Mizrachi Jewish transsexual Dana International.

There is much misunderstanding about Hezbollah and Lebanon. Hezbollah is not trying to create a fundamentalist state in South Lebanon. They understand the secular nature of the multicultural Lebanese state. In interviews, Hezbollah said that they would only push for a religious state if they could get say 80-8

Here is another look at her, this time with much lighter skin, probably due to the heavy bright lighting. Notice that her skin is about the same color as the White women on either side of her, especially the one to the right.

The beach in Beirut is full of women in bikinis and downtown Beirut is full of women in skimpy clothing. Downtown nightlife is popping, with lots of bars, drinking and even call girls. Nothing much is done to crack down on any of this, and Hezbollah could care less. Down in the South were Hezbollah holds sway, things are a bit different, but I think booze is still legal, and you don’t need to wear a hijab, though it’s preferred.

Here she is pole dancing from two years ago. She won the contest. I think it's safe to say she's not a Hezbollah fanatic. I don't think that the Lebanese Shia, or any Lebanese, have much Black in them, but I am not sure. Syrians are about

Homosexuals are beaten, it is true, but that’s about as bad as Hezbollah gets. Beaten and turned over to the cops, as homosexuality is still illegal in Lebanon and it’s pretty taboo. Gay rights groups have tried to organize, but it’s not going anywhere.

The religious leader of Hezbollah, Fadlallah, has issued some very interesting rulings lately, including one that sanctioned female masturbation, especially if the female is unmarried and has not outlet.

Keep in mind that the Shia are somewhat like Catholics in that doctrine is allowed to be continuously updated to keep with the times, as opposed to the set in stone philosophy of the Sunni, whose Christian analogy is the Protestants. Like the Protestants, the Sunni have no real head religious authorities issuing rulings. Like the Catholics, the Shia have religious leaders (Popes or Ayatollahs) whose job it is to continuously interpret doctrine in the face of changing reality.

The Ayatollahs, including Khomeini, have even allowed transsexualism, and a famous Ayatollah has had a sex change, is now a woman, and is married to another Ayatollah! Then there is the temporary marriage feint which allows for somewhat casual sex outside of marriage. A famous Iranian Islamic religious scholar, a woman, recently authored a book in which she recounted her temporary marriage affairs with 40-50 Iranians, often top Ayatollahs and religious scholars. No one much batted an eye in Iran.

Lebanon is simply a conservative Middle Eastern country, with life centered around families and extended families.

Has Catholic Theology Always Believed Life Begins at Conception?

The answer to that question is apparently not! Most people don’t know this, but for many centuries, official Catholic doctrine held that abortion was allowable up until “quickening.” That’s when mother senses the fetus kicking in her stomach. Quickening occurs around the third or fourth month of pregnancy, around the end of the first trimester in modern phrasing. So the Church allowed abortion until the first trimester.

At that point, it was assumed to be alive, or human, or something. Thing was, abortion was rare back in those days, just like Hillary Clinton wants it to be. Before the age of antibiotics and disinfectants, abortion was not common, it was quite dangerous, and women often died during the procedure. Nevertheless, it was done. The era of surgery began long before the 20th Century.

I don’t have access to any Church doctrine from those days, so I’m not sure what they based it on.

But if you read Dante, you get some glimpses into what they may have been thinking. Dante, writing in the early 1200’s, was not a Pope or a Church father, but he was an extremely religious Catholic. That is clear in all of his writings. He lived his life this way too, and after he moved away from Florence to the east, he was well-known for cursing and throwing stones at fellow citizens who he thought were sinning for some reason or another.

Hence, Dante’s works are good for glimpsing Church doctrine in the early days, since Dante won’t support any teachings not sanctioned by the Church.

In Dante, there are passages which discuss the development of human life and the soul. They are very interesting for a peek into what the early Church felt about human life and its beginnings. Dante’s version, like much of his thinking, is very Aquinian – via St. Thomas Aquinas, the great early Christian philosopher who wrote in the 1100’s.

Dante’s version of the beginnings of human life (and the development of the human soul) is not exactly in accord with modern science, but nevertheless, it is straight from Aquinas. Early peoples had some knowledge of conception and the development of the fetus in the womb. Women miscarried back then, and when you look at the material, you can see the fetus in the rejected uterine matter. From there, they could postulate various things.

First of all, soon after conception, the beginnings of human life take shape.

****** Stage 1: Dante says that in the beginning, the fetus is animate, but it is not even yet an animal. It is more like a plant; it is “vegetative.” This seems strange, but what he means is in terms of consciousness. To say it is like a plant means it is alive, but it can’t think. Plants are alive, but they don’t seem to think. In other words, it has the soul of a plant. I assume that killing a fetus at this stage would be as sinful in Church terms as killing a plant.

Stage 2: Later the fetus changes into a form that is part-animal and part-plant. This seems odd again, but he’s again speaking in terms of consciousness, or soul. Dante describes this fetus as being like a sea anemone, or as having the soul of a sea anemone. A sea anemone is an animal that looks and somewhat acts like a plant. It probably has a brain, but clearly it’s none too bright. It’s nearly transitional between plant and animal metaphysically speaking.

It’s vegetative (alive) and it has elementary sensory abilities, but not much beyond that. Killing a fetus at this stage would be as sinful in Church terms as killing a sea anemone.

Stage 3: After that, the fetus changes into an animal. But it is a non-human animal. Once again he speaks metaphysically. This means that it can’t really reason or think intellectually, or that it has no consciousness. It’s like a dog or a cat, or it has the soul of a cat or a dog. Killing a fetus at this point would be as sinful in Church terms as killing a dog or a cat.

Stage 4: Finally, at some point, the fetus is touched by God through some sort of mechanism and it is given a soul. At that point, it becomes a human being, since non-human animals lack souls. ******

It follows from this that the Church believed that in Stages 1-3, the fetus was not yet a human being. It was presumably for this reason that abortion was allowed until quickening.

The Catholic Church is derided as reactionary, but in some ways it is more progressive than at least fundamentalist Protestantism. Recall that the original Protestants rebelled because they thought that the Church had drifted too far away from Biblical teaching. They were a back to basics movement sort of like the Salafists in Islam.

There is a corollary between the Muslim Shia and Catholicism and between the Muslim Sunni and Protestants. The Sunni are also, like Protestants, a back to basics faction, this time of Islam, that traditionally believes that everything we need to know about Islam was codified in the Quran and Hadiths back in 800 or so. Anything else is deviation at best, heresy at worst. The Shia, on the other hand, feel that Islam is open to continuous interpretation by the high priest caste, which are the Ayatollahs or mullahs.

Ayatollah is derided as a reactionary, but he made some interesting judgments. One was that transsexualism is compatible with Islam, but homosexuality is not. Homosexuality was felt to be a choice and hence a sin, while transsexuals were created by God. There is a top Ayatollah who used to be a man and turned into a woman. Some other big Ayatollah has married her and they are now man and wife.

There is also the phenomenon of temporary marriage. In the religious city of Qom in Iran, there are many institutes of Islamic studies. Religious students come there from all over Iran to study. The city is teeming with female prostitutes. In some areas, the prostitutes gather, and young male students hook up with them. Then they go find a friendly neighborhood Ayatollah who gives them a temporary marriage of one or two days. Then they go off to do the deed in the local cemetery or some such place.

In Lebanon, the Ayatollah Fadlallah is said to be rather progressive as these fellows go. He issued a famous ruling that said that female masturbation was allowed by Islam that caused quite a stir in Lebanon.

It’s things like temporary marriage and the transsexual Ayatollah that drive Sunnis up the wall. The Sunnis, like Protestants, have no religious leaders who make official interpretations or reinterpretations of doctrine. There’s nothing to be interpreted. All the interpretation has already been done.

Sometimes mullahs issue rulings of clarification, mostly to say that this or that is a sin, or to condemn this or that. Some of these come out of Al-Azhar University in Cairo. They carry a lot of weight, but most Sunnis don’t pay much attention to such rulings. A lot of fatwas get issued, but those are just condemnations. And most of the folks issuing fatwas, like Osama bin Laden, have no right to do so. Mr. bin Laden is no scholar of Islam, hence he’s not allowed to issue fatwas, and if he does, they carry no weight.

The Catholic Church is similar to the Shia in that they also have church leaders who reinterpret doctrine for the faithful. In this case, it is the Papacy. The Catholic Church reserves the right to reinterpret religious doctrine as times change. Hence they changed course and endorsed Galileo after initially opposing him.

And recently the Pope declared that evolution is compatible with Catholicism, whereas tens of millions of Protestants are still Creationists. Catholic Creationists probably don’t even exist. Why are there so many Protestant Creationists? There’s nothing in Protestant doctrine telling them it’s nonsense, and there’s not much, if any, official Protestant doctrine anyway.

So neither the Shia or Catholics are necessarily as reactionary as they are often made out to be.

In Praise of Catholicism

Thinking about Alpha Unit’s latest, I love the Catholic religion, and I even call myself a Catholic on Internet surveys, even though I have not yet converted, and may never. I moved to an Hispanic town, and the happening religion here is Catholicism, so I started going to Mass for the Hell of it.

Now, I happen to think that the Church is full of crap on a million things, especially birth control, gays, abortion and immigration. But there is something special about a Mass, and I’ve been going to them lately.

I hate going to just about any Christian Church, and I haven’t gone to the churches of my Protestant religion for many years. Further, I dislike most Protestants. They’re way too uptight, and it’s all about this sickening White middle class morality that I grew up with and came to despise.

Protestantism, to me, is all about how I’m an evil, scummy, disgusting, immoral sinner!

Why? Because I hate. Because I get high on dope. Because I drink booze. Because I’ve spent most of my life trying, often successfully, to screw any nice looking female that moves. Because I fight back when someone attacks me. Because my enemies aren’t always right and I’m not always wrong. Because I’m happy working less than 40 hours a week. Because I’ll live off free money if I can figure out a way to get some flowing my way. Because I support non-state armed struggle (“terrorism”), as opposed to state violence that everyone loves. Because I used to sell dope. Because I like to shoplift a piece of candy now and again.

It’s just guilt, guilt, guilt, and I’m evil, I’m evil, I’m evil. That’s been the message to me from these Protestant shits my whole life. On the contrary, Hispanic Catholics never tell me that. It’s assumed we’re all a bunch of scumbag sinners. Big deal. That’s what the confession booth is for, folks. We’re always trying to do better, but we keep on sinning anyway. It’s a neverending struggle, but as long as you’re trying, you’re a good Catholic. You get to feel guilty, but everyone else feels guilty too, and no one acts like you’re worse than they are.

A religion just made for me!

The Catholic Mass is great. I prefer the Spanish language Mass because Hispanics are so much cooler than White people, plus the music is way better. The White Catholic Mass is what you would expect, a bunch of really uptight White people! Who needs that? I’ve been living with that BS my whole life.

The whole Mass is a great big ritual with a number of steps. The priest waves, you stand up, cross yourselves, mumble something, and kneel down. Then you stop kneeling and sit. There must be 20 or so steps like this. The priest lights some candles, eats something, and drinks some wine. A religion where the Holy Man drinks booze at the ceremony! Yo! My kinda religion, baby!

At a Catholic Mass you do your own thing. There’s people here and there alone, tripping away. They’re off in their own worlds, praying, or crying, or heads down and silent. None of these folks are participating in the ceremony, but no one cares. They’re thinking of something important, maybe something sad. Maybe someone died. Maybe they can’t pay their mortgage. Who knows? There’s lots of stuff to pray for.

The artwork on the walls, the huge Jesus statue and the cathedral itself is good for a visit right there. There are all sorts of ritualistic shrine-type things along the walls. Holy water, flowers, a statue of Mary. The Hispanics go up to these shrine things and pray to them, kiss them, touch them, do all sorts of strange things. But I like that. That’s how a religion should be. Ancient, ritualistic, with genuflections and shrines.

I don’t know how much most of you realize how hacked up Protestantism has become recently. There’s my old-line Church, which I always hated anyway. This Church is practically devoid of religious substance anymore. It’s like it’s had all the lifeblood sucked out of it, except the Protestant “you’re a sinner” thing. It’s been so denatured that I wonder why anyone even goes to the services anymore. What does it stand for? What do they believe?

Probably in response to this boring decaf Protestant Church, a super-caffeinated fundamentalist Church has broken off in the past 30 years or so. Anywhere you have lots of regular White people, you will find legions of these fundamentalist boneheads.

You’ll never even recognize them. With a lot of them, they drink, they smoke, they cuss, they watch porn on the Net, they screw around, they smoke weed, but they’re all Holy Rollers. What the fuck, man? The ones that are nice and tidy often have a seriously sinful past. The Church is full of  “I used to be bad” types. Reformed sinners are always the worst.

Anyway, the religion itself is completely insane. They’re all anti-abortion, they hate liberalism, and they’re not too wild about gays. These are nice middle class White types, often with money. They seem hip and cool, they have nice houses, nice clothes and are often well-educated. But every damned word in the Bible is true!

Nowadays, if you meet a White person who is at all religious, they are usually one of these whackjob types. As long as you keep away from their idiot religion, you can talk about anything under the Sun and they seem like normal people. But as soon as you venture into the religious area,  it’s clear that they are Pod People.

I know the Catholic Church sucks ideologically, but at least they are tolerant. Plus they don’t try to convert you. I talked to some of them, told them I’m pro-choice, and they just said, “Well, we have pro-choice Catholics, you know. That’s your problem.”

A nun (!) told me, “Well, we don’t agree, but really, that’s between you and God.” I like that! Of course it is! Of course it’s between me and God. Damn, why didn’t I think of that?

The Catholics don’t really have any litmus tests, while the fundies have about a million. Talk to a fundie, even if if you’re a Christian, and pretty soon the fundie makes it clear that you’re actually not really a Christian! Why? Because you just failed one of their million and one litmus tests. The fundies are quite clear that all of the mainline Protestant churches are not Christian.

The Catholic Church is definitely not Christian, though they started the whole thing. A lot of them really hate Catholics, and a number of them are on this, “Catholicism is the source of all the world’s evil” thing, like anti-Semites except substitute the Pope for the Jew. Try to give them some Church history about how the Catholic Church was the first, and their eyes glaze over.

Many, or most, of them, claim to not be practicing Catholicism or Protestantism. Well than what are they practicing? The “original Christian religion,” I guess from 60 AD.

Try to tell them that the oldest Christian church is the Syrian Orthodox, a bunch of evil Catholic scum, and their arguments start twisting like snakes. Try to tell them that the “original Christian Church” was a bunch of Jews and was little more than modified Judaism (with most of them still keeping Kosher I think), and their arguments start doing 180’s. They’re engaged in a Belief system that elides history and common sense.

The fundies love the Old Testament, even though it’s a bunch of Jewish nonsense to me. It’s ok for history, but that’s it.

Jesus showed up to erase the OT and replace it with the New Covenant, the NT. The Law (the OT) was gone. In its place was Mercy (the NT). Israel (the Jews and the OT) was no longer the Church. The Church was the new Israel, and the new Chosen People were the Christians.

Following this Replacement Theology further, Judaism (the OT) has been replaced, and the Jews don’t even get Israel anymore. This is why Replacement Theology is so popular with Arab Christians. From a theological perspective, a good case can be made that Christian Zionism is not only oxymoronic but also heretical.

One cool thing about the Catholics is that they seem to have junked the OT. It’s still part of the religion, but you never hear about. All of the little sermons they hand every Sunday are NT stuff. Even more than that, they always deal specifically specifically with Jesus himself. It’s the four main NT books, and that’s about it.

I’d give the Apostles some theological leeway too. Because those books were just written by guys (apostles) like me. Not Gods, or Gods in Flesh. There’s only one Guy in the NT with God’s phone number, so He’s the only one to pay attention to. The rest are just guys like you and me. Sometimes they’re right, sometimes they’re wrong, but there’s no reason to believe that their every word is Godly.

So Catholicism almost seems to be pure “Jesus-ism,” which is all Christianity ought to be anyway. If you study the very early Christians from the 1st Century, that was the original Christianity. Jesusism. No OT, no apostle BS, no Pope, no Vatican. Just one Guy. Listen to what He says and try to live your life by it.

Thing is, once you strip away everything else and just listen to what Jesus himself actually said and did, Christianity is a pretty cool religion. Jesus was a very tolerant dude. He never said anything about fucking, queers, abortion, drinking or dope, or if he did, it’s not too prominent. He hung out with sinners. He thought greedheads were assholes. He threw money-changers out of the Church.

And he was a nice Jewish boy who adored his Mom and was still living at home at age 33, so even the Jews ought to dig him for that alone if for nothing else.

"Blessed Art Thou Among Women," by Alpha Unit

I don’t think that Mary was Black, but the Jews back then were just Middle Easterners. They didn’t have any Khazarian or European blood in them yet, as most Ashkenazim do nowadays. They probably looked something like the Mizrachi Jews do today. If you’ve ever met any Mizrachis, they are fairly dark people. They look sort of like Arabs. I always found the Catholic religion quite impressive – not because of any real understanding of it but because of what I could see of it. And what I could see of it was quite mysterious and maybe a bit awe-inspiring, for someone used to the kind of plain religious services I grew up with. Unintelligible prayers. Incense. Sumptuous robes. Ornate crucifixes. I’m not Catholic, but even I kind of like watching the moment they announce a new Pope. Smoke and bells. Nothing like that at my old church! Gregorian chants are something I actually enjoy listening to, but it’s the kind of thing that would have been creepy to me as a child. And nothing could have prepared me for the first time I saw images of the Nazarenos during a Holy Week celebration. Wait a minute, I thought. This looks awfully similar to some other regalia I’ve seen… But something especially fascinating to me is the mystery of the Black Madonnas. Most people know about the Black Madonna – images of Mary in which she is shown with dark or sometimes black skin. Since these Black Madonnas are the creation of Europeans, there is speculation and dispute about their origin and significance. These paintings and statues of Mary date from the 11th or 12th century and were produced throughout the medieval period. And while they have dark skin, they are recognizably European, Typically, those trying to explain this phenomenon state that the wood was naturally dark, in the case of some statues, or that the darkness was a result of color changes in paint over time. So why did the skin tones alone change color over time? The darkness is also attributed to candle soot, from the countless prayers offered to the Madonnas over the centuries. Again, though, why did the candle soot only affect the skin tones? It is often stated that sometimes these Madonnas were cleaned for various reasons but then intentionally re-darkened to placate the faithful. This is one explanation as to why these European-looking Madonnas have black skin. Besides the explanations attributed to physical factors, there are those that suggest that the darkness of the Madonnas is inspired by Scripture, particularly a portion of the Song of Songs: “I am black but comely, O daughters of Jerusalem…” Others suggest that the Black Madonna is a throwback to earlier depictions of earth goddesses, some of whom had been depicted as black, as they represented fertile soil. Could it be that the color black represents the Primordial Darkness that gave birth to Light, or the archetypal Feminine? Some feminists think so. In the view of some Afrocentrists, the Madonna is Black because she is based on the Egyptian goddess Isis, who had to have been Black because the ancient Egyptians were Black. To them, one of the most revered Christian symbols is yet another instance of Whites stealing and trying to pass off Black creativity as their own. No one knows definitively why Europeans created Black Madonnas. To some of us, it almost doesn’t matter. They portray a powerful and venerated Blackness, and there is a lot to like about that.

“Blessed Art Thou Among Women,” by Alpha Unit

I don’t think that Mary was Black, but the Jews back then were just Middle Easterners. They didn’t have any Khazarian or European blood in them yet, as most Ashkenazim do nowadays. They probably looked something like the Mizrachi Jews do today. If you’ve ever met any Mizrachis, they are fairly dark people. They look sort of like Arabs.

I always found the Catholic religion quite impressive – not because of any real understanding of it but because of what I could see of it. And what I could see of it was quite mysterious and maybe a bit awe-inspiring, for someone used to the kind of plain religious services I grew up with. Unintelligible prayers. Incense. Sumptuous robes. Ornate crucifixes. I’m not Catholic, but even I kind of like watching the moment they announce a new Pope. Smoke and bells. Nothing like that at my old church!

Gregorian chants are something I actually enjoy listening to, but it’s the kind of thing that would have been creepy to me as a child. And nothing could have prepared me for the first time I saw images of the Nazarenos during a Holy Week celebration. Wait a minute, I thought. This looks awfully similar to some other regalia I’ve seen…

But something especially fascinating to me is the mystery of the Black Madonnas. Most people know about the Black Madonna – images of Mary in which she is shown with dark or sometimes black skin. Since these Black Madonnas are the creation of Europeans, there is speculation and dispute about their origin and significance.

These paintings and statues of Mary date from the 11th or 12th century and were produced throughout the medieval period. And while they have dark skin, they are recognizably European, Typically, those trying to explain this phenomenon state that the wood was naturally dark, in the case of some statues, or that the darkness was a result of color changes in paint over time.

So why did the skin tones alone change color over time?

The darkness is also attributed to candle soot, from the countless prayers offered to the Madonnas over the centuries. Again, though, why did the candle soot only affect the skin tones?

It is often stated that sometimes these Madonnas were cleaned for various reasons but then intentionally re-darkened to placate the faithful. This is one explanation as to why these European-looking Madonnas have black skin.

Besides the explanations attributed to physical factors, there are those that suggest that the darkness of the Madonnas is inspired by Scripture, particularly a portion of the Song of Songs: “I am black but comely, O daughters of Jerusalem…” Others suggest that the Black Madonna is a throwback to earlier depictions of earth goddesses, some of whom had been depicted as black, as they represented fertile soil.

Could it be that the color black represents the Primordial Darkness that gave birth to Light, or the archetypal Feminine? Some feminists think so.

In the view of some Afrocentrists, the Madonna is Black because she is based on the Egyptian goddess Isis, who had to have been Black because the ancient Egyptians were Black. To them, one of the most revered Christian symbols is yet another instance of Whites stealing and trying to pass off Black creativity as their own.

No one knows definitively why Europeans created Black Madonnas. To some of us, it almost doesn’t matter. They portray a powerful and venerated Blackness, and there is a lot to like about that.

Your Dreams Are Smarter Than You Think They Are

I actually remembered some of my weird dreams lately, and they were so funny and awe-inspiring I decided I would share them with you in part so we could both waste one and each other’s time, me in writing them, you in reading them.

Last night I had two seriously weird dreams. In the first one, I had to go some family gathering. That reminds of Thanksgiving 1978 in Huntington Beach. I saw this young couple, 20’s, unlocking their apartment to get back in late at night. Apparently they’d been to some family gathering. They both looked annoyed, especially the woman. “I so hate families,” the woman said. The was hurriedly nodding his head as he unlocked the door. Well, that about sums it up, right? As good as a Dostoevsky novel.

Dream 1

Anyway, this was some shitty family gathering, and to make matters worse, all of the family people showed up from far and wide, including the ones who you swore or had hoped you would never see again. The ones you hated most were their with their wives, who were beautiful of course, and I was single. The message – geek bachelor, no pussy. And my worst kith and kin are sitting up their on their fancy thrones with their hotties.

I got into some big public fights with two of these guys’ wives. In one case, I told her she insulted me and she blew up at me. Everyone accused me of starting it, but that’s what they always do anyway no matter what happens. I had some friends there, but they had some weird get-ups.

One of my cousins was dressed up as a gay leather boy with his dick hanging out, but it was understood to be a joke, since he’s not really gay, though he acts like he is. There was this performance artist dude who had knives or nails or something hammered into his dick and he did some weird naked performance art showing off his mangled organ. We were told that his dick still worked just fine in spite of the damage. All the older relatives thought this performance was really cool.

Of course I didn’t get laid, as I never have in my dreams, even when I was drowning in sex in real life. The message of my dreams is always: You ain’t getting any, chump! I’m always trying to get laid, but I usually never do, you know, kind of like my life sometimes. I’ve been trying to fix this part of my dreams forever to no avail.

Anyway, I saw the first girl I ever went out with (officially dated) there, Cathy Something. I was 17 and she was 15. She was now 50 years old. She actually talked to me and was nice, which was unusual.

Anyway, one of my worst enemy relatives was there with his buddy. They were pretending to be nice and offered me something to eat at the buffet. It was like a can of something but it had this mousetrap like thing in it. You were supposed to chew on the mousetrap too for some reason. I did it, even though it hurt my mouth because the family gathering was so fucked and distressing that chewing on the mousetrap was a good relief for my anxiety and honestly, chewing on that thing took was more pleasant than the get-together. I think there is some allegory going on here.

Anyway, it turned out that the mousetrap was full of sharp metal and glass, soon my mouth was full of sharp glass and needles. There were needles stuck all over my tongue. After a while, I got honest and admitted my problem, and people started freaking out. I was pulling needles out of my tongue and throwing them on the ground. They were all bloody and had bits of tongue on them. I was also pulling little shards of glass out of my tongue and throwing those on the ground too.

People were starting to get upset by this behavior. The relative who gave my thing knew this was going to happen, and he was laughing and saying I needed to go to the emergency room as I had “Needle Mouth,” a common condition. He fancies himself an amateur doc too, so that just made it worse. Every time I thought I had gotten all of the glass and needles out, I would find some more of them.

Then I heard that my worst relative of all was coming, this uncle who everyone hates. He’d been really mean in life and now he had AIDS for some reason, though he was not even gay. He said he had gotten somehow by “going to San Francisco,” and everyone believed him. He could hardly walk and I ran up to him and tried to help him. I told him I was his nephew, and he remembered me, but he could hardly hear, so it took me a while to get through to him.

I had to grab him and steer him through the crowd because he was staggering so much. He got to the buffet and I introduced him, and everyone thought I was a saint for helping the hated uncle. Here I’m playing this Jesus role of loving the sinners. The uncle was staggering back and forth at the buffet table and it was hard to serve him because he kept crashing into the table. It was understood that his disability and pre-eminent death were punishment for his life of evildoing.

Fortunately, this dream ended, but I still had needles and glass in my mouth. I woke up terrified that I would have a mouth full of metal and glass, but I was delighted to discover that it had just been a dream.

Dream 2

I went back to sleep and soon had another dream. I’ve never had kids, and there aren’t really even any wives on the horizon, so I’ll probably never have kids. Nevertheless, in the last 5 years I decided that I might want a kid, since before I never wanted one.

So in this dream, I went to this in vitro fertilization clinic. Turns out they have em for guys now too! Cool! Well, thing is, you have to bring in your own egg. This is kind of hard for guys cuz the only eggs we have are between our legs and those hairy things don’t incubate babies, they just inject some baby-making raw materials into the female manufacturing plant.

Well, problem solved. Guys can have eggs too! How, you ask? Just get yourself a chicken egg, crack in two and look at that broken egg there. That there is your egg, young feller. Now go West, young man, until you find a fertiility clinic, and for several thousand $, they will turn that egg into a human baby!

This part of the dream has to be a joke, but it was never stated as such. I had my broken chicken egg (apparently that’s what it was, because that’s what it looked like, though it was never stated exactly what kind of egg it was)  in a Tupperware container, and yeah that was my egg all right. Damn that’s funny! Someone said why didn’t I use some other egg, but I said it was important that the egg be my egg since that way I could pass on my genes. That’s funny! The fertility clinic was located in this weird place that shows up in my dreams a lot.

Sometimes it’s San Pedro, and sometimes it’s San Fransisco. If you’ve been to either, you know what I mean. They are both these cities next to bays on sloping hills with lots of small structures crammed together and narrow streets. In this case, it was also West Hollywood, and the main drag was sort of this San Pedro-like Sunset Strip.

Anyway, the fertility clinic was staffed by these women, mostly young women. I got a job working there, and I was there all the time, often at night and on weekends. I paid $5000, and they were going to try to make my egg into a baby in a few months. But first they had to inject it with methamphetamine. This sounded terrible from a public health standpoint, but they insisted it was fine and did not hurt the fetus.

The women were sympathetic to a guy who wanted to have a baby without a mother, since they wanted to have a baby without a father. No one asked why I didn’t have a female partner. I noted a few times that I didn’t have one, but the women just shrugged their shoulders, like, “Well, I sure ain’t gonna hook up with you!” Like I said, I never get any in my dreams. One time I wondered aloud if any of the women in the clinic would marry me, but they all just looked bored and gave me these looks like, “Yeah right dude! Why would any woman?”

Anyway, there were problems at the clinic. The women kept screwing up and leaving the door open and such, and I kept having to clean up after them. The boss kept me on because I was the only responsible one, being a male of course. All the young females were irresponsible fuckups, apparently because they were young females. The older female boss perfectly understood that males were superior to females in this regard. So you see the sexist message here. It’s also pretty damn funny!

At some point, I discovered that they were making porno movies at the clinic. That’s funny too! I saw some of the movies, and they were filmed in the clinic. The dream then segued into some of the porno movies. I had some stills and I was trying to figure out which actress was which since their bodies were all tangled together.

I’m not sure if the young females were starring in them. I told the boss, and she said sure we make porn, why not, it’s a good way to make money, right? She was totally blase. I agreed, great way to make money, you got it. Then I went to the young women, and they all knew about the porn movies too, and none of them cared. They acted as if the subject was boring.

There were problems with the eggs. Up to 3

Dream 3

This one happened a while back. On April 19 of this year, my father died. I’ve had a few dreams about him since then, but he’s always still alive!

In one dream, my Mom called me and told me to come over. My father was lying there in her bed, apparently alive, with a bloody crown of thorns on his head! He wasn’t particularly Jesus-like in his life, but the theme of Resurrection is obvious.

Later on, I had another dream about him. In this dream, my father kept showing up. He’d often show up when I was driving in my car, or when I was sitting down at the table to eat. He would just sort of “beam himself in” like in Star Trek. You’d just turn around and he’d be there. It’s pretty cool when the dead come back to life and come visit us, but these visitations were bothering me because I could not figure them out.

I’d go visit my Mom and walk out into the living room, and she would be sitting there in a chair. On another chair would be my very much alive father. I’d point to him and ask her, “Do you see that too?” She’d nod her head gravely like she was almost sorry he was there. When he returned to life, he’d often act about as annoying and unpleasant as he could often be when he was alive, and after a while, my Mom started saying, “You know, why don’t you just go back to being dead! Honest, it was more fun with you not around!” That’s funny!

When he came back, my father would start complaining about his diet like he was doing the last few years of his life when he turned into an insufferable hypochondriac. This is a game he started playing called, I’m Sick! He really got into being sick, but not at the end, of course. Most of the time there was nothing that much wrong with him, but he’d get furious if you pointed this out. This people actually love being sick! It’s fun!

He couldn’t eat this, he couldn’t eat that. Bad for his health. My Mom would yell at him, “You’re dead, dammit! Go ahead and eat whatever you want!” That’s funny!

Then he was all upset about paying bills.

He was going on and on about family finances like he’d been doing the last 40 years of his life when he was playing what I call the game of Poorhouse (sort of opposite of Monopoly). They actually had a comfortable standard of living, but to my Dad, it was always, “Were broke, dammit!” I think he liked to feel like he was broke. If he won the lottery, he’d probably be furious because then he couldn’t be broke anymore, and he couldn’t play that game of his.

Anyway, he had all these bills scattered all over, and he was fretting about how he was going to pay them. My Mom started yelling at him, “You’re dead, dammit! You don’t have any bills anymore! Enjoy it! That’s one of the great things about being dead!” But that would not stop him. That’s pretty funny too.

We kept on confronting him. “Look, dammit, you’re dead! We saw you die! We went to your funeral! Just accept it!” He refused to accept that he was dead, did not remember dying and had no memory of any funeral. He’d say, “Hey, come over here and touch me. Do I feel dead to you?”

We started doing all this research on what was going on because most other people could not see him. We wondered if we were going insane. Turns out that this area of life is being newly investigated, mostly by psychologists. The atheist-scientist assholes hate the idea of anyone coming back to life, party poopers that they are, so they said the whole thing was mental illness of some kind. But none of us felt crazy.

The psychologists were calling this phenomenon “Visitations.” No one really knew what Visitations were, but they thought that those seeing the dead come back were usually not mentally ill. There was a lot of debate about whether the person coming back was still dead or was really coming back to life. The psychologists thought that they were probably really dead. It was a complex phenomenon, and no one had any answers. It was also thought that Jesus coming back to life in the Bible was an example of a Visitation. Once again the dreams are tying my rather unholy father in with Jesus.

This Visitation crap started really getting on my nerves. I’d wake up in the morning in my dream and think, “Damn, I so hope I don’t see him again today.” Then he’d show up again.

I talked to some folks and they said that the dream means that I haven’t really accepted that my father is really gone. Perhaps…

******

What’s interesting in that my dreams, and maybe yours too, operate on a very complex level almost like great literature. There are characters in the dreams, and they actually do symbolize this or that. I’m not very religious, but there are a number of religious themes in my dreams. It’s only when I wake up and start to analyze the dream that I start figuring out all the weird symbolism. The symbolism is not intentional; the dreams are just doing it on their own without me directing them.

My dreams, and maybe yours, are also very funny. I’m not making my dreams like a film director and deliberately throwing in jokes. The dreams are just making up these rather hilarious jokes by themselves. It’s often not until morning when I think about the dream that I realize how damned funny it is. The humor, like the symbolism, often operates on all sorts of complex levels.

It’s common nowadays to trash Jung and especially Freud for placing emphasis on dreams. The new thinking is that dreams are just mental garbage that don’t mean much of anything at all. I wouldn’t place too much weight on dreams, but I think they are more than mental garbage. They are actually some very amazing mental phenomena, and perhaps they are evidence of the existence of an unconscious, another concept that is being heavily trashed nowadays. Modern theory often says there is no unconscious, or even if it exists, it means nothing. Freud and Jung were smarter than we think they were.

By the way, Jung’s autobiography below is an incredible read.

References

Jung, C. G. & Jaffe, A. 1962. Memories, Dreams, Reflections. London: Collins.

Muslims Are Dumbfucks Too

Here.

In addition to all the other problems with Islam, and I believe that they are considerable, it turns out that Muslims are complete dumbfucks when it comes to science. As you can see in the article, Islam is opposed to the Theory of Evolution. It’s often said that this is yet another problem with Islamic fundamentalism, but actually the rejection of evolution is across the board with Muslims, with a majority, and possibly a vast majority, of Muslims rejecting Darwinism, including most moderate and liberal Muslims.

Like everything else between the West and Islam, Evolution is coded in the Muslim World as a tool of Western imperial hegemony. Battles are being fought all over the Muslim World, mostly in the moderate states, to remove evolution from the public school curriculum. These battles have been most prominent in moderate states like Turkey, Indonesia, Egypt and Lebanon. I assume that in the rest of Dumbfuck Land (excuse me, I mean the Muslim World) evolution is simply not taught in schools so there is no curriculum to remove.

Now that the battle against Idiot Christian Creationists has been all but won in the West (despite a 6

Belief in Evolution
Nation            
Iceland*           80
Denmark*           80
Sweden*            80
France*            80
United States**    40
Turkey**           25
Indonesia**        16
Pakistan**         14
Egypt**             8

*Smart countries
**Dumbshit countries

So, in addition to making people violent, (Yes, Islam makes people violent indeed.) Islam also makes people stupid. A stupid person is just an idiot, but a violent stupid person is a dangerous idiot, and that is another matter altogether.

Catholic Anti-Semitism

Check out this site, if you dare. There are many varieties of anti-Semitism. It is an error to conflate all of them. One very common variety is Catholic anti-Semitism. It is a particular type, and is quite virulent. Let’s face it, not only have these folks persecuted a lot of Jews, but they also killed a lot of Jews. Some of the most ferocious of the uber-Catholic Jew-killers were the Croatian Ustashe regime in Croatia in WW2. Operating out of the Janesovac concentration camp, they may well have killed 400,000 people there. Mostly they killed Serbs, but they also killed tens of thousands of Jews and some Gypsies. Traditional Catholicism generally doesn’t have much against Protestants. The Ustashe were just Catholic loons from the Balkans, and their Serb-killing was based on ancient tribal feuds in the Balkans. Since they were considered Slavs under Nazi race theory, the Croatians (racially probably more Med and Dinaric than Slav anyway) invented a weird theory whereby the Croats were actually some lost Germanic tribe stuck south of the Dinaric Alps. Whatever. The ferocity and insanity of the genocide in Croatia shocked even the Nazis, who looked dimly on the genocide of Serbs by Croats, which they could not see any reason for. Incredibly, the Nazis themselves even told the Croats to knock it off or at least calm down, but all such imploring fell on death ears. The Ustashe genocide played a large role in the Balkan Wars 50 years later, especially as Serbs were terrified of resurgent Croatian nationalism and the terrors that lay behind it. For some weird reason, Ustashe type Croatian ultranationalism is still popular in Croatia among ultranationalists. The crazed Ustashe Catholics gave non-Catholics a jihadi-style choice: Either convert to Catholicism or die. Apparently a lot of Serbs refused to convert. Damn, these guys were some hardcore Catholics, man! Right up there with those Iberian dudes during the Inquisition! Catholic anti-Semitism has a heavily religious focus, as you might gather. The main beef against the Jews is that they are or were Christ-killers. The age-old anti-Semitism of Rome, delineated carefully by historians, provides them with an historical basis for their anti-Semitism. Their heroes are some of the nastier anti-Semitic popes from the old days. In 1965, the Mass was rewritten to take out of the nastier anti-Semitic bits. The Pope also ruled it was ok to say the Mass in local vernacular as opposed to Latin. In addition, a Circular was issued that attempted to see the Jews as part of some common tradition with Catholics. This attempt at the creation of a monster called “Judeo-Chritianity has never made sense to me theologically. I believe that the Church also made some sort of statement in favor of the poor, while stopping short of the Liberation Theology that AK-47 toting priests in the jungles of Latin America and the Philippines preach. For these sins, Trad Catholics continue to simmer. Some parishes continue to defy the Vatican and recite the traditional Mass with all the nasty anti-Semitic bits. Trad Catholics flock to these churches to partake of the Real anti-Semitic Deal. Pat Buchanan seems to be a bit of a Trad, and the journal Human Events is sort of a Trad type magazine. There are some big names out there in Trad Catholicism, guys who also double as anti-Semites, but their names escape me at the moment. If you want to know where Mel Gibson was coming from with his great movie (The Passion of the Christ) that the Jews hated so much, it’s from a position of Trad Catholicism. His elderly father, now living in Australia (since the US is “Jew-controlled”) is even worse. Gibson Senior is said to have been a big influence in Gibson Junior. The movie isn’t really anti-Semitic. Or if it’s anti-Semitic, then so is Christianity, which is a position many Jews take anyway (Chew on that, “Christian” Zionists). Polish and Latin American anti-Semitism has always been heavily based on Catholic anti-Semitism. Catholic anti-Semitism has always struck me as particularly retarded. Of all the reasons to hate Jews, “Jesus said so,” “the Bible says so” and even worse, some fag in a dress in Rome says so (sorry Catholics) seem like some of the stupider reasons. There’s more to say about this subject, but I’ll save it for later.

Great Pro-Choice Site

In these times when the pro-choice movement seems to be more at risk than in decades, it’s heartening to see a pro-choice website that is as large and active as Rh Reality Check. It covers not only pro-choice views, but also contraception, sex education, sexual health and just sex news in general. It has a great attitude. All the writers are women, many of them young women, and many are Black, Hispanic or Asian. The pro-choice movement really needs a shot in the arm nowadays, as its been under withering assault since the rightwing backlash started under Reagan in 1980. We have almost 30 years of rightwing blowback, and maybe the winds are finally shifting. Taking the race of the anti-abortion folks into consideration, I would say that most of the anti-abortion folks are Whites, usually conservative Whites. I find it fascinating that almost all White nationalists and other racist Whites really hate abortion. Do they realize how many more Blacks and Hispanics would be born if there were no abortion, since Hispanics and especially Blacks have far more abortions proportionately than Whites? Blacks, despite their religiosity, seem to be pro-choice, and Black women are more likely than non-Blacks to have abortions. Latinas are more likely to have abortions than non-Latinas, I believe that by the second generation or so, they are about as pro-choice as anyone, both unusual facts considering their Catholicism. In fact, Catholic women in general are more likely to have abortions than non-Catholics, which implies that a lot of Catholics think the Church is full of shit. And most of the anti-abortion folks are coming from a religious point of view, which is interesting since neither the Bible nor Jesus deal with the issue at all. All it is says is, “Thou shalt not kill.” But we kill all the time, in justified homicide by cops and folks defending themselves, in wars; Hell, nothing kills like capitalism itself. The US government has been funding and/or committing mass murder for a long time now. It’s called imperialism. We fund and advise death squads in the Third World and shower military aid on the most murderous fascist regimes. Then, every now and then, we start a war ourselves and slaughter lots of folks. We started a Nazi-like war of aggression in Iraq which has resulted in over 1 million deaths. It’s also interesting that the anti-abortion idiots seem to love fetuses so much, but they don’t seem to give a fuck about kids as soon they done get themselves borned. The fact that the anti-abortion crowd is coming from a usually fundamentalist religious point of view implies that their position is irrational. It can’t be justified by philosophical traditions outside of some Holy Book. Religion is fine, but we have separation of Church and State here, and religion is not supposed to guide public policy. Even the Catholic Church itself allowed abortion until the time of “quickening” up until about the 17th Century. The opposition to it in toto is simply a Papal Canonical matter that is not necessarily consonant even with Catholic theology. Islam tends to take a pretty hands-off position to abortion, although the fundamentalists hate it. Anti-abortion views are associated with fundamentalism, backwardness, obscurantism and in particular, anti-woman politics all over the world. Pro-choice societies are more scientific, rational, humane, modern and especially pro-woman than those who are not. Buddhism and Hinduism don’t appear to take a stand on abortion. I admit to being queasy about late term abortion, but if the life or the health (Not the mental health!) of the mother is truly or at risk, it’s reasonable. However, I don’t approve it in other circumstances, and using abortion as birth control, which I am convinced some of my female acquaintances have done, makes me ill. It’s still killing, not of a life, but of a potential life, and that is not a breezy matter.

Chechclear Vidéo: Décapitation – La Pire de Toutes!

The video has been removed following discussions with WordPress staff. Try here instead. This is a French translation of the Chechclear post. The translator is Natalie From France. This post has also been translated into Italian. Italian version (traduzione in italiano). Regular readers, you don’t really want to download this file or view this video at all. This is one of most evil videos ever made. Chechclear est l’une des vidéos les plus horribles, disponibles sur le Net. Elle montre l’exécution barbare d’un soldat russe durant la guerre de Tchétchénie. Les avis sont divergents à propos de cette vidéo. Les Tchétchènes affirment que c’était un mercenaire et que c’est pour cette raison qu’il a été tué, d’autres versions disent que c’était un soldat appelé. Cela s’est passé soit en 1996 en Tchétchénie ou en 1999 au Daguestan. Tout n’est pas clair concernant cette vidéo. Il s’agit d’un horrible chapitre de plus dans cette guerre en Tchétchénie. Le fait est que la gorge de l’homme a été tranchée par Khattab, le renommé combattant saoudien, qui s’est battu aux cotés des Tchétchènes jusqu’à ce qu’il soit tué par une lettre empoisonnée. Ici vous pouvez télécharger la vidéo. Plusieurs personnes m’ont écrit pour m’informer que cette vidéo est vraiment très difficile à trouver. C’est la toute dernière version, qui dure seulement 16 secondes. Il existe une version plus longue, atroce, non publiée, qui dure cinq minutes. Elle est actuellement impossible à trouver. Dans ces images, les bourreaux battent le soldat et l’humilient durant plusieurs minutes avant de le décapiter.

Latin American Hispanics Versus European Spaniards

One of my favorite commenters is a fellow named Rafel from Catalonia in Spain. He knows his country inside out. He’s also quite a progressive fellow. In the recent post Hispanics and Alzheimer’s, he remarks on some of my comments about the working class Hispanics that I live around:

I would tag the mentality you describe as “fatalism,” and I think it happens more among Hispanic lower classes. Hispanics are very polarized by social class, even more so than Anglo-Americans. Depending on one’s social class, one’s values and mindset vary dramatically (and also the perception of what’s good and evil and gender roles). Perhaps in the US you lack some perspective because there aren’t many super-rich Hispanic big landowners (most of Hispanics in the US have their roots in poor families from Mexico and other countries). Class polarization in countries like Mexico or Brazil is brutal, and it doesn’t have to do only with wealth and living conditions. This huge divide of mindset and values depending on class is to be found in many Catholic countries (not only Hispanic). As for Spanish machismo…take a look at today’s Spanish society where it has diminished dramatically. “Machismo” may have been originated in Spain, but today’s mentality in the country is very similar to other West European countries…Today the strongholds of “machismo” in Europe are Italy, Greece, Portugal and the former communist countries of central-eastern Europe such as Poland, Rumania… Even inside Spain until the 70’s, there were strong mentality differences with regard to gender between the north of the country and the center and south (the North being more “European” and “liberal” and the South with more “machismo” values), but today the mentality is more “liberal” all over the country. This means the machismo mentality can evolve. Unfortunately in Spain during the last 10 years, massive migration from Moroccans, Latin Americans and Eastern Europeans (and all of them from lower classes) has brought machismo with them (most of episodes of violence against women involve immigrants, and the integration of Muslim women in Spanish society is almost impossible due to their strong submission to their husbands and families). Spanish Gypsies have “preserved” a lot of machismo too, and, by the way, they fit in a lot with the portrayal you make of US Hispanics. Each word of your text referring to US Hispanics could be applied to Spain’s Gypsies!

I don’t know many upper class Hispanics. Most of the ones I know are definitely lower class. It’s heartening that Spain is leaving this idiot machismo behind and becoming more normal. The way we see it in the US is that this machismo just goes too far. I respect masculinity in males, but machismo is almost a caricature. I’m not as hopeful about machismo diminishing in Hispanics just because it has in Spain. Spain is White, and it’s part of Europe, hence it’s influenced by European trends. Hispanics are isolated in Latin America and are influenced by that continent. The Spaniards of the North take pride in being “Whiter.” True, all Spaniards are White, but the Northerners see themselves as aligned more with Northern Europe, especially Celtic heritage. The South has long had a heavy Arab influence. It is the South we think of when the other continentals say “Africa begins at the Pyrenees.” I am sure that Muslims are not assimilating in Spain, and furthermore, it seems that they are never going to assimilate. That can only mean quit importing them. It’s not surprising that Gypsy culture is so sexist and male chauvinist. I had long suspected that. He mentions Italy, but the machismo is much stronger in the South, especially Sicily, than up in the north around Trieste, where a friend of mine lives. Sicilians are almost Arab-like in secluding their daughters are protecting them from other males. In an older post, What the Future Hispano-Catholic USA Will Look Like Rafel takes a similar tack.

How do you explain that today Spain is one of the most socially liberal countries in the world? Ever traveled to Madrid or Barcelona? You’ll see gay couples walking the streets holding their hands, Spanish women practicing nudism at the beaches, etc…In Spain, we have had gay marriages since 2005. By the way, a new, more progressive law on abortion has been approved this year (and anyway, since 1985 we already had  more liberal abortion laws than Ireland, Poland, Portugal or Italy). Besides, in places like Catalonia, the number of civil marriages surpasses that of Catholic marriages. Spain’s society has changed dramatically during the last 50 years! If you compare the birth rate per woman or church attendance, Spain happens to be much less religious than any part of the USA. Yes, it’s true that Catholic Church still has a lot of power and tries to influence society…but at least in Spain they’re losing the battle year by year. In Barcelona there are almost no locals in a Sunday mass…most people you’ll see attending the Sunday mass are immigrants from South America! As for the Islamic influence…remember that the kingdoms that founded Spain as a political entity (Castile and Leon, Aragon including the county of Barcelona, etc.) were either never conquered by Arabs or just experienced Arab occupation for a century. For instance, Arabs were in Barcelona only from ~720 until 801, when the Franks conquered the city. The northern Christian kingdoms conquered and repopulated the south of the peninsula. True, there is still a lot of Moorish cultural influence, especially in Andalusia. But I’d say that Italian, Spanish and Portuguese “machismo” is more a consequence of the androcentric Roman culture and Roman law (for example, the institution of the paterfamilias) than a consequence of Arabic influence. As for the burning of churches thing…well, it’s just that the Catholic Church in Spain was perceived by both liberals and socialists as a threat. No doubt the Catholic Church has been a reactionary force during the history of Spain…but much in the same way as other traditional Catholic countries like France. The difference is that revolutionaries in France had more success in setting apart the Catholic Church from politics and only had to burn churches once, not every ten years like in Spain! In Spain early attempts to separate Church from state began at in the start of the 19th Century…the problem was that they never succeeded, as reactionaries always regained the power soon after every short liberal period (with the help of the Catholic Church and the army). As the Church always supported the reactionaries during the 19th and 20th Centuries, the population in the cities accumulated a lot of resentment against the Catholic Church, especially in industrial areas like Catalonia or Asturias. That’s why in every revolutionary period, uncontrolled crowds burned churches and killed a lot of clergymen. They were sort of a scapegoats for the masses…

It is very nice to hear that gay rights is quite open in Spain, at least in the large cities. Incredibly enough, this “backwards Southern European Catholic country” now has legalized gay marriage, something the US cannot seem to get behind. So Spain is becoming part of the rest of the Europe in a pan-European sort of way. What happens in Netherlands, several years hence, moves as a trend into Spain. Spain increasingly has more in common with Denmark and Sweden than with Mexico and Bolivia. In this way we see how shared geography influences culture possibly more than shared ethnicity or language. Being situated in Europe trumps the ethnic culture and language that Spain shares with Latin America (as Latin American culture is descended in part from Iberian roots). Catholic Spain, like Catholic Italy and France, is seeing plummeting Mass attendance and a very low birthrate. The low birthrate can only be explained by mass contraceptive use by women. Clearly, Catholic Western Europe pays little attention to the Pope’s lunatic decrees on birth control. Along with declining attendance, we see the declining power of the Church. I’ve always felt that the Catholic Church was mostly about power more than anything else. It’s probable today that the Church is less powerful in Spain than in Italy, where it is still quite strong. In no Catholic country, including Italy, can the Church seem to keep its mitts out of politics. It’s good to hear that Spain’s abortion law is fairly liberal compared to other European Catholic countries. I still don’t think it goes far enough, but it’s not bad. Abortion in Latin America is a tragedy. It’s illegal in most of the region, and 250,000 women die every year from botched abortions in Latin America. El Salvador and Nicaragua have now passed some truly evil abortion laws that ban it in all cases, even rape, incest or the life or health of the mother. It’s hard to see what kind of good Catholicism does in this world anymore. Thanks to Rafel for clearing up the church-burning business. I just thought it was bizarre, and that that Spaniards were just nuts. However, it was frustrated rage on the part of an oppressed population at a reactionary Church that just would not go away. It kept rising, Lazarus-like, every 10 years, just when they thought it was down for good. He attributes machismo more to Roman influence than to the Arabs, but I am not so sure, as one who subscribes to the Pakistan-Peruvian Axis Theory of Arabized societies. While it is heartening that Spain is moving forward on gay rights, reduced church influence, declining birth rates, abortion and reduction in male chauvinist machismo, Rafel implies that US Hispanics may be ready to follow suit. I would not be so sure about that. US Hispanics, and Spaniards are quite different. True, young US Hispanics now show trends of increased tolerance towards gays, at least here in California. US Hispanics get more abortions than non-Hispanics, and US Catholics get more abortions than non-Catholics. Among the lower-class Hispanics I am around, unplanned pregnancies and abortions are omnipresent. Those ending their pregnancies are nominally Catholic, but they never go to Mass and don’t seem to have religious qualms about abortion. Nevertheless, they may vote against abortion in the booth. But after a generation or so, US Hispanics’ views on abortion are little different from the general population. As far as machismo, I don’t see that lessening too much in Hispanics, but it may be in the younger generation, as the increasing acceptance of young Hispanic gays may suggest. As far as declining birthrates, we are not seeing that yet in the US, though in Brazil, incredibly enough, the rate is actually below replacement. In a super-Catholic, macho culture too at that. So there’s hope.

Time To Apologize For The Deicide?

In a comment on the We Killed Jesus and We are Proud Of It! post, a Colombian commenter says that I am wrong for suggesting that the Jews apologize for the Deicide:

Apologizing for Deicide? that’s outright moronic. Deicide charges were leveled against the Jews by the early Church fathers, who were conveniently oblivious to the fact that the very first Christians were Jews themselves. And were consistently used as an excuse to persecute the Jews in Europe for centuries. It sounds to me like a lame PC attempt to create a Jewish counterpart to white guilt.

Some of the usual arguments are laid out here. Jesus himself was Jew, and so were those who killed him, so the charge is absurd on its face. However, Talmudic Judaism, or modern-day Judaism, is clearly the spiritual descendant of the Pharisees. It was the Pharisees and Phariseeism that Jesus and his disciples were fleeing in terror from. Recall the NT sections where the Disciples say, “The Jews are after us!” as they run and hide all over the Galilee. Any honest Rabbi will tell you that they were hiding from the followers of the Pharisees. The same honest Rabbi will also tell you that Talmudic Judaism is the spiritual descendant of Phariseeism. In fact, a Conservative Rabbi admitted both of those things to me. Super-Jews make a big deal about Christianity being de facto anti-Semitic by the very nature of the New Testament. Making Christianity safe for the Abe Foxman crowd would mean excising the entire NT. That leaves Christians with the OT, at which time all of us Christians may as well just to convert to Judaism and get it over with. The fundamentalist Protestants are very Judeophilic, and we can see this in their fetishism of the decrepit and frankly Jewish Old Testament. In that sense, paradoxically, they are less Christian than an NT-only “Jesusist” like me. In a way, the Super Jews are right. Let’s not kid ourselves. Jesus, as Reform a Jew as ever lived, came, said, “I’m the Messiah, and the Law is abrogated.” The law is the Hebraic Laws and Rules that the Jews live under. In his revolutionary overturning of this archaic and reactionary code, Jesus offered a new code, one of Mercy. Mercy is clearly absent from much of the OT. The God of the OT is clearly not one of Mercy either; he’s a cruel and capricious fellow, but He’s the God of the Jews, so they can have him. The God of the NT is a different fellow altogether. He’s forgiving and kind, and the fire and brimstone, the genocides, the wars, the ethnic cleansing, the leveling of cities with fire and turning humans into Dresden-like fried pillars – that’s all under the dam, past and gone. The Jews were offered a choice – to follow the new Messiah or to be passed over. They didn’t follow him, so their religion was abrogated, and the torch was passed to the new religion, the Christianity. To us Christians, Judaism is old hat. At one time, sure, it was the law of the land all right, but we’ve since moved on. To us, Judaism is spiritual roadkill. Sure it’s part of our heritage, but so was Homo Erectus. We’ve moved along now. There is no Judeo-Christian religion anymore than there is a Judeo-Muslim religion or an Islamo-Christian religion. They’re just not the same thing. Pat Robertson and all are on theological thin ice shilling for the Jews of Israel. Why not shill for the Hindus or the Muslims? It’s makes about as much sense theologically. This leads us to Replacement Theology. I’m a follower of this. The Jews have been replaced by the Christians. Judaism has been replaced by Christianity. Further, the Jews no longer get Israel either. After the NT, the (Christian) Church is the New Israel. The Jews contract with that land was abrogated also. Sure, God gave the land to the Jews, but the NT abrogates that deed of title. Another argument against the Deicide charge is leveled by Jews. Even if we did it, they say, it was a good thing, as the Deicide was necessary for the unfolding of Christianity. Well of course. But that’s not why I say apologizing is a good idea. The Jewish religion, in particular the Orthodox, has traditionally taken the position that Jesus was a Jewish heretic who was tried in a Jewish court, convicted, and received appropriate punishment. The Talmud is full of hostile references to Jesus. It’s true that Jesus was a Jew, but it’s also true that Talmudic Judaism is the spiritual heir to the Pharisees. The Jews want it both ways. According to their religion, they state that Jewish was a Jewish heretic who was tried by the Jews and got what he deserved. Then, to the Gentiles, they deny this. Some Orthodox are honest and say, “Hey, we did kill him, and it was a good thing!” This happens quite a bit in Israel, by the way. The usual response of the other Jews is the typical, “Are you trying to start a pogrom?” screeching. I don’t really care. What’s done is done. But I think it is grossly unfair for the Jews to demand that other religions like the Catholics amend their anti-Jewish teachings while at the same time, the Jews refuse to amend their anti-Christian teachings. But then, it’s just typical Jewish hypocrisy du jour. Hypocrisy goes with Jews like lox goes with cream cheese. Jewish hypocrisy is related to Jewish hyperethnocentrism in that all nationalists are hypocrites. Think about it. Sure it’s dumb to hold folks responsible for something their ancestors did 2000 years ago, but if the Jews are still crowing about it (the Orthodox are) and if the Jewish religion still stubbornly states, “We did it and what about it?”, an apology certainly makes sense. As a philosemite, in a way I’m interested in what’s good for the Jews. One thing that’s bad for the Jews is anti-Semitism. My position is that Jews promoting anti-Semitism is bad for the Jews, so don’t do it, Jews. It is in this sense that I advocate an apology and some official amending of Judaism (Is that even possible?) as the Jews demanded of the Pope at Vatican II in 1965.

Many Books, One Author

Buddhism: “Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful.” Udana-Varga, 5:18; Christianity: “All things whatsoever you would that men should do to you, do you even so to them.” In Matthew 7:12; Confucianism: “Do not unto others what you would not have them do unto you.” Analects 15:23; Hinduism: “This is the sum of duty: do not unto others that which would cause you pain if done to you.” Mahabharata 5:1517; Islam: “No one of you is a believer until he desires for his brother that which he desires for himself.” Hadith; Jainism: “In happiness and suffering, in joy and grief, we should regard all creatures as we regard our own self.” Lord Mahavir 24th Tirthankara; Judaism: “What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow man. That is the law; all the rest is commentary.” Talmud, Shabbat 31a; Zoroastrianism: “That nature only is good when it shall not do unto another whatsoever is not good for its own self.” Dadistan-I-Dinik, 94:5. As a Theist of course, I say that that one author of those many books is God, the One, the Supreme. And what is God? Let us turn to the Kabbalah of the Jews (I paraphrase): God is endless, pure, White light, stretching for infinity in all directions. God is that which can never be known. In fact, God is that concept that is so beyond our understanding that we cannot even entertain it in our minds. A famous cosmologist, astronomer and yet still a Theist, said, “God is hydrogen.” A Deist view, also summed up in what has been called the Deus Obtusa concept that many California Indians had pre-contact, is that God created the world, and he has not done much since. The Deus Obtusa concept is one of the “lazy God,” a creator who nevertheless plays little to no importance in our lives. Lack of an active parental, law enforcement or judicial role does not mean that God lacks an intelligence or a spirit which cannot be tapped into. It can be, and that’s what the authors below did. God can also be seen as a manifestation of the spirit of pure Good or pure Righteousness in the Universe. As Christians (and I am a Christian), this can help us to explain some things. Some wonder how Jesus was resurrected, and I believe he was. This is said to be unscientific. A friend who is a physician offers a response: “If one is tapped into God, then God can transcend physical laws, at least temporarily.” Christianity and Hinduism are also compatible, since Hindus can follow any guru they wish. A friend of mine had a Hindu teacher who followed Jesus Christ as his guru. The Hindutvas will go insane if you mention that, since they hate Christianity, but I think it’s a cool concept. According to this teacher, people like Jesus are missionaries from God. They are floating down from the spiritual world all the time, and they come to teach us things. I agree with this concept, and also that of Deux Obtusa. How can they be reconciled? If God only worked one day in his life, and has been a slacker ever since, how did he resurrect Jesus? I figure God is like this guy who never gets old. He sleeps most of the time, and when he wakes up, he takes bong hits and drinks wine. Sort of like Robert Lindsay! He also does a few lines of coke sometimes, and he definitely loves psychedelics. Those are his favorite drugs of all, right? What else does God do, read the great books? What for? He’s already read em all, and he pretty much wrote most of them anyway. He also spends a lot of his time screwing this hot young angel chicks. This is a cool metaphysics. In this way, whenever we hit the bong or drink some booze, we are essentially communing with God the same as kneeling in a pew on Sunday. I haven’t screwed any hot young chicks in a while (it gets harder as you age) but if I ever do again, I figure I can skip church the next four Sundays. After all, I just went to the Super Mass. In this way, we turn the tables on traditional Christian no-fun morality, which never had much to do with Jesus anyway. Partying and screwing all you want are, instead of Evil, manifestations of the Good. Every now and then God feels guilty for being such a good for nothing slacker, and he decides to get off his ass for once. That’s when he does stuff like resurrecting Jesus. Then he says screw it and goes back to Supreme Apathy. So, he intervened in our lives then, but he ain’t doing much now. That’s obvious. Look around the world. Obviously either no one’s in charge, or whoever is is a total asshole. If God exists as a manifestation of pure Good or pure Righteousness in the Universe, then the Devil must exist too. The Devil, then, is simply the manifestation of pure Evil in the Universe. Since such evil exists the same as the good of God, if God exists, then so must the Devil. One theory suggests that God and the Devil are necessary for each other. That is, one cannot exist without the other. Certain things existence, then, are related to the existence of their opposite. Their presence is defined by and necessitated by the existence of their opposite. The existence of a God requires the existence of His polar opposite, a Devil. The existence of a Devil requires the existence of his opposite, a God. Taoism has a lot to say about complementary opposites requiring each other for their existence. Surely we only know what Good is, and how to define it, since we know what evil is. And we only know what Evil is since we can define good. Without the presence of their opposites, the terms are essentially undefinable. Metaphysics class is dismissed!

The Key to Understanding US Behavior in Iraq

This post from the old blog is four years old, but it still pretty interesting in how it lays out neoconservative machinations in Iraq and goes into great details about the Sephardic Jewish community in the Mediterranean, particularly in Greece. This research was done to try to determine whether or not John Negroponte was Jewish, as asserted by some prominent anti-Semite “progressives” on the Net. As it turns out, he’s not Jewish at all. Apparently he’s a Greek Orthodox Christian. However, the name Negroponte can be a Sephardic Jewish name too, and it has links back to the history of the Sephardic Jews in Greece and Romania. This Jewish community is little-known, so some of you into Judaica might find it interesting. An old news story from four years ago blasted, “Syria Undermining Iraq’s Stability”. Robert Zoellick, a horrible Zionist Jew neoconservative who thirsts for Arab and Muslim blood, is the source of this “statement”. Zoellick, along with Zionist neoconservative Arab-killer John Negroponte, now the US ambassador to Iraq, was the latest neoconservative outrage to be shoved down the unwilling throats of the Iraqi people. Although the notion of whether or not Negroponte is Jewish is somewhat controversial – for instance, the popular Amygdala blog and the (now apparently defunct) blog Spookspot, both disagree – the balance of the evidence, so far ,Note May 2006: One year after I wrote this article, I no longer feel that Negroponte is Jewish. If he were, I think we would have heard about it by now. I feel that Negroponte is exactly what he says he is – a Greek Orthodox Christian. It is still possible, though not very relevant, that he may have Jewish roots. For that matter, many of us may have Jewish roots. But the major source for the notion that Negroponte is Jewish, Ghali Hassan, is, in my opinion, a proven liar and propagandist. I advise readers to take anything the intellectually dishonest Arab nationalist sophist Hassan says with a massive grain of salt. And Counterpunch needs to quit publishing this proven liar. Nevertheless, I still think this article has a lot of fascinating info about the Sephardic Greek Jewish community. Have fun reading it! The fact that a few leftwing writers have pointed out that Negroponte may be Jewish when he was selected as top Intel Czar and then later as the outrageous US Ambassador to Iraq has been noticed by some right wing bloggers and denounced as, you guessed it, “anti-Semitism”. See the obsessively Zionist Indymedia Watch (on the ambassador selection) and the conservative blog ColdHearted Truth (on the Intel Czar selection) for examples. As suggestive evidence, the name “Negroponte” is also the former name of the capital of Evoia Island, Chalkis; this link also contains a number of photos and paintings of synagogues, Jewish cemeteries and Jewish relics from Chalkis. The city acquired this name during the Venetian Domination, the period after Venetians conquered the island, which lasted from 1205-1470. This city is the only Jewish community in Europe that has been living in the same place for 2,500 years. The Jews on this island were very assimilated. De la Negroponte is the Italian name for Evoia; it is also a Venetian Italian surname from the 14th century. This city, Negroponte, was also a major destination for Turkish Jews fleeing the Ottoman conquest of Turkey and subsequent persecution of Jews, as described by a Jewish doctor from Istanbul, who fled to Negroponte with many other Jews in 1455. Furthermore, “Negroponte” is also the name of an ancient Jewish cemetery in Romania dating from the 14th Century; “Negroponte” was also the surname of a prominent Romanian Jewish family in that area. A famous Jewish author, born in Heraklion, Crete, toward the end of the 1100’s, was called “R. Chemarya of Negroponte“. A famous early translation of Genesis was done by a Greek Jew, Shemariah of Negroponte (1328-46). Shemariah was trying to bridge the gap between the Karaites and the Rabbinites. The evidence suggests that the name “Negroponte” may be a Romanian and Greek Jewish name dating from 14th and 15th Centuries. On the other hand, it is probably also a Greek Orthodox name too. Back to Zoellick and Negroponte. These dual outrages – the neoconservative Negroponte appointed as an ambassador to Iraq, the Jewish Zoellick making high-profile appearances in Iraq – were concocted deliberately by a single group of people. That group is the Zionist neoconservative Jews and their Zionist Gentile allies who have infiltrated our government and have successfully managed to take over at best or wield massive control over at worst, under George Bush, all of US Mideast foreign policy, and some of US non-Mideast foreign policy, for the Jewish-Israeli Lobby. Why were these deeply offensive moves done? In order to understand this, we need to understand the psychology of both the largely Jewish neocons and Jewish history and psychology in general. As a tribal people, indeed, as the most tribal humans on Earth, the Jews have a long history of this sort of thing. Jewish history tells us that the Jews have been noted for harboring endless grudges against whoever wronged them, even 2500 years in the past. It’s typical Jewish behavior to pine endlessly for defeat of any and all enemies, ancient or modern, to right the wrong done to the Jews, no matter how long ago. “Never forgive, never forget” was not invented with the Shoah – it’s classical Jewish psychology, and it doesn’t apply only to Nazis, it applies to any group that ever wronged the Jews. After defeating an enemy, Jewish history tells us that Jews have often tried to wipe out the collective culture and history of the adversary. This may explain the lackadaisical attitude the neocons took towards the looting and destruction of much of Iraq’s history and infrastructure. In addition, I have noticed that Jews seem to delight in utterly humiliating their enemies after they surrender. In fact, if an individual Jew ends a friendship with you after he suspects the slightest anti-Semitism (a very common occurrence) they usually will only accept you (if at all) again after forcing you to utterly humble and humiliate yourself at the feet of the Jews. This ties into the Jewish uber-tribal view of humanity, in which there are three categories of people – Jews (the only really important people in the world), non-Jews (people who barely exist in the human world, or are at least not important to it – kind of like the wild animals in your country lot), and enemies of the Jews – a vast, ever changing, always growing, undifferentiated mass of humanity. Not all Jews hold this tripartite worldview, but many do, particularly the Orthodox. A solid majority of US Jews (about 8 There is also a third category – suspected enemies of the Jews. For all practical purposes, these are nearly as bad as the enemies. Less assimilated, more traditional Jews will tend more towards the traditional tripartite world, more assimilated Jews will tend more towards the dual worldview and the most assimilated Jews will be like the rest of us and hardly trouble themselves with anti-Semites at all. The enemies are lumped together as “the people who threw us in the gas chambers” – everyone from the person who utters the slightest Jewish-critical remark to the most deranged genocidal Nazis – the Jews, in their blindness, see them all as one. The enemies are endlessly cultivated and provoked into greater and greater extremism, in part due to a Jewish need for as many enemies as possible, of maximum virulence. Jews do something I have never seen any other ethnic group do. If they feel you are anti-Semitic (often a false characterization) or anti-Israel even in the slightest, they will often immediately end the friendship or business-professional relationship with you, forever. At the very least the temperature of the relationship will grow colder. Completely unforgiving, totally black and white, no gray area. If these Jews continue in some professional relationship with you, they will sometimes try to screw you in order to “get back at the anti-Semitic enemy” – which is why it’s a bad idea to piss off your Jewish lawyer. As noted above, they may take you back if you debase yourself enough at their proud feet, but you will always retain a taint of suspicion. Jewish qualities of vengefulness, vindictiveness, a Manichean mindset, hypersensitivity to criticism, us versus them thinking, obsession with enemies, provocation of enemies, need for victimhood, and desire to humiliate the crushed enemies are some of the most extreme examples of these behaviors I have seen in any human group. I’m going to submit that there is something pathological about these extreme behaviors. A more important question is: What is the explanation for the Jewish behaviors above? A variety of explanations have been offered for the Jewish behaviors above, along with other Jewish behaviors deemed objectionable by non-Jews. The standard, classical anti-Semitic line is that Jews are just plain damn evil. The racial anti-Semitic view is that Jews are not only evil – they are born evil, their evilness is genetic, and it’s bred right into their genome – this was the Nazi line. The Islamist line is that it is due to the Jewish religion, a religion that causes ornery and malicious behavior due to its innate characteristics. Christian anti-Semitism also focuses on the Jewish religion as the source of these behaviors. Catholic anti-Semitism will lay furious blame on the Jews’ role in killing Jesus, a crime that, according to this doctrine, the Jews can never live down. These explanations also differ in the possibility of Jewish redemption. The racial point of view says that since Jewish evilness is bred in the Jewish genome, there is no solution but expulsion, conflict, restriction of Jewish rights, homicide, or genocide. The Jew is hopeless, at the least; we must separate ourselves from him. The Christian and Muslim points of view see the Jewish religion as the source of these behaviors, hence, conversion to Christianity or Islam is sufficient to redeem and purify the Jew of his objectionable Jewish characteristics. All of these explanations are interesting, some are just wrong, and most have elements of truth in them somewhere, but none of them seem sufficient to explain the behaviors described above. Look at those characteristics – extreme vengefulness, vindictiveness, Manichean mindset, hypersensitivity to criticism, us and them mindset, obsession with enemies, provocation of enemies, need for victimhood and desire to humiliate the crushed enemy. Careful, thoughtful analysis shows us that those are characteristics of human tribalism, clannishness or ethnocentrism (same thing). Note: Not Jewish tribalism, but human tribalism. This is an important point to make, since so much anti-Semitism seeks to make the Jew appear non-human. The tribalism of Jews, the most extreme tribalism of any human ethnic group, is simply human tribalism, and these “Jewish” behaviors can easily be revealed as human behaviors once we open our minds and try to see these same qualities in non-Jews. The purpose of this little excursion into Jewish history and psychology is to shed some light on so many things about this Iraq War that seem to defy understanding. If we plug our new found understanding of Jewish hypertribalism into the largely Jewish neoconservative movement, more and more lights wink on and things seem even clearer. When we recognize that the (largely Jewish) neoconservative War on Terror battle plan has nothing to do with spreading democracy, the blurred lines get even clearer. Off the record, many neoconservatives have admitted that the purpose of the War on Terror is simply a war on the Islamic religion. In order to set off this war, neoconservatives seek to do precisely those things that are designed to humiliate and infuriate the Muslims most of all. In off-record comments, neocons have admitted that what they really desire is not democracy but the radicalization of the Islamic World. Why would anyone want something so counterproductive? In order to “smack the hornet’s nest”, to “get the enemies to show us their true colors”, and to “get the enemies out in the open where we can destroy them” – that’s why. At the moment, most Islamic countries cannot be attacked by the neocons, because Islamic hostility to the US and Israel, officially anyway, is somewhat hidden. The neocons hope that by radicalizing the world’s Muslims, Muslims will be turned into a worthy, evil target that the neocons will be justified in attacking. In the same fashion, Israel undermined the PLO and promoted Hamas in order to give the enemy an evil face and weaken the more moderate PLO, whose relative moderation threatened to gather world support. The neocons hope this provocation will set off a religious war of the West, or really the Jews and whatever Christian and maybe Hindu allies the Jews can round up, versus the radicalized, evil Muslims. I know that sounds insane, but bear with me. The neocons realize that this will be a long, hard, drawn-out war, but they make the analogy of the Cold War. The war against Islam will last for maybe 40 years, the neocons figure, but they assume that, like the Cold War, the West will come out on top. In the end, Islam will be defeated and the Islamic religion will be transformed into a neutered, harmless version of itself. Once we recognize the outlines of the neocon conspiracy and trace its roots to Jewish ultratribalist psychology and history, so many things start making sense. Shoving Jay Garner, the arch-Zionist general from JINSA, down Iraq’s throat. Desecration of the Koran – stomping on it, tossing it in the toilet. For Muslim POW’s – forced nudity, nude human pyramids, exposure to dogs, blasting with “immoral” rock music, forcing Muslim women to undress, forced eating of pork, forced watching of US jailers having sex. The outrageous new Iraqi flag that looks suspiciously like the Israeli flag. Having a US Jewish Zionist run the new Occupation regime’s radio network (Norman Pattiz’s Radio Sawa). The deliberate US plot to wipe out of Iraq’s cultural history and infrastructure. Sending an uber-Zionist neocon (Negroponte) to Iraq as an ambassador. Attempts to force Iraq to recognize Israel or sign a peace treaty with Israel. The delighted, repeated, floating in the media of the Israeli plan to rebuild a pipeline from Kirkuk, Iraq to Haifa, Israel. Major construction of 14 permanent US military bases in Iraq, whether the Iraqis want them or not. Outrageous plans to turn over most of Iraq’s public property to rich foreign investors and wipe out most Iraqi private businesses, all at once. Loud plans to privatize Iraq’s oil industry. The loud demands of the expatriate Iraqi Jews to be compensated for the money and property left when they were evicted from Iraq so long ago. Sending a super-Zionist Jew, Zoellick, to Iraq on frequent, in your face, junkets to Iraq. The deliberate destruction of Iraq’s infrastructure, so it can be rebuilt at maximum cost by US companies. The destruction of the Michael Aflaq (a founder of the Baath Party) statue in Baghdad. The faked humiliating capture of Saddam Hussein in a spiderhole, when he was actually caught in a firefight with US and Kurdish forces, defending himself with a pistol, 2 days before. The humiliation of a US Army doctor searching Saddam for lice. The deliberate opening of the uberZionist Mossad office, MEMRI, right in the heart of Baghdad. The smashing up the Palestinian Embassy in Baghdad and the arrests of Palestinian diplomats, for no apparent reason, by US troops. The flooding of Iraq with mismarked Israeli products, camouflaged and marked by treasonous Jordanian partners – the mentality is – we will force the Iraqis to buy Israeli products. The deliberate US bombing of mosques, the outrageous attack on the Shia holy cities of Najaf and Karbala, and on and on. The reason for all of these baffling, seemingly counterproductive US-Zionist behaviors becomes crystal clear when we see their genesis in Jewish hypertribal thinking and the related neocon efforts to provoke the Islamic World into a World War 3, so the Muslims can be beaten once and for all. Now, moving on, what of Zoellick’s charges? They are deeply problematic. First of all, Syria has caught more jihadis trying to cross into Iraq than Jordan or Saudi Arabia combined. The Saudis support, at least ideologically, the Sunni Salafists, who play such a major role in the insurgency. Jordan, while hostile to Salafism, has a majority fundamentalist Parliament, and is strongly Sunni chauvinist. If you go to downtown Amman, you find it crowded with Iraqis, many of them Sunni refugees of Saddam’s regime. Many of these people have links to the Sunni insurgency. These Sunni Baathists do not bother to conceal their utter delight in the chaos caused by the Iraqi insurgency; such is their furious hatred of the present Shia regime. Indeed, most every Arab Sunni state is so terrified of the Shia government in Iraq that they are surely rooting for the Sunni insurgency. Jordan and Saudi Arabia have done little or nothing to stop guerrillas crossing into Iraq. There are 2,500 Saudis in Iraq now, and they get official sanction and approval from state preachers. By contrast, the Syrian regime is a Shia Alawi regime. In fact, Alawis are a minority, very divergent Shia sect who have been treated like little more than slaves by their Sunni neighbors for centuries. Highly secular, the Alawis have long had to constantly ward off accusations of not being Muslims, or of being apostates. It would seem the Syrian regime would have little reason to support Sunni fundamentalism. In fact, of all the nearby Arab nations, Syria has been by far the most hostile to Sunni Salafism. The Syrian government attack on the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood Salafists in the city of Hama in 1982 killed some 20,000 residents. Syrian prisons are full of Sunni fundamentalists, and the Syrian regime is the most secular Muslim regime in the region. Further, the Syrians have arrested quite a few jihadis trying to head into Iraq, as opposed to Jordan or Saudi Arabia, who have arrested few or none. On the other hand, the Zionist-dominated US is intent on overthrowing the Syrian government, and, conversely, the US government is not conspiring to overthrow any other Arab government, including the Saudis or the Jordanians. In addition, part of the neocon conspiracy is to use the US base in Iraq to attack surrounding regimes, especially defiant Iran and Syria. Therefore, the Syrians have exactly zero reason to cooperate with the US in keeping guerrillas out of Iraq, since they get nothing in return, and since the US troops in Iraq are a major, demonstrable threat to the nation of Syria. The reasons for all of this finger-pointing at Syria, while ignoring, say, the Wahhabi regime in Arabia, are obvious. The Occupation of Iraq, on balance, looks pretty bad. The neocon plan was to overthrow the Iraqi regime quickly and then give Iraq a US-Zionist makeover as some sort of a spearhead to redraw the map of the Middle East and force major culture and political change in the region. Instead, Iraq is a catastrophe; a horrible, chaotic mess, a failed state torn apart by the most savage Arab insurgency in decades. When humans are stuck in a lousy situation, they tend to blame others; it’s a classic defensive psychological reaction. Rather than admit that many of the Iraqi people are in open revolt against the US Occupiers and what they as their Iraqi lackeys, the neocons have come up with a new theory. The theory is that all of the mess in Iraq is due to the existence of the Iranian and especially the Syrian regimes, who, alone, are creating the insurgency and wreaking havoc on the peaceful, lovable, Occupation-loving, Judeophilic, Zionist-enamored Iraqi people, who are just dying to become the 51st state of the US and sign a peace treaty with Israel. This laughably dishonest theory, reeking with psychological defense, is quite useful: it gives the neocons an excellent reason to try to overthrow, one way or another, Iran and Syria, who are the last two state enemies of Israel. The theory is: as long as the Syrian and Iranian regimes are not overthrown, the Iraqi insurgency will rage on. These accusations are simply part of the propaganda campaign being waged as part of a US-Israeli conspiracy to overthrow the defiant governments of Iran and Syria. This research takes a lot of time, and I do not get paid anything for it. If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a a contribution to support more of this valuable research.

"We Killed Jesus and We're Proud of It!"

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Ek5G6337yU] Repost from the old site. This video shows what I call the Jewish Nazis, these ones from Israel. This is basically a Commie antifa blog, and we hate Nazis and fascists both pretty much. I mean, every time they get into power, we are the first people who they come kill. Recall that the Jews were the fourth to be persecuted by the Nazis – first the Communists, then the socialists, then the trade unionists, and finally the Jews. So we hate Jewish Nazis, and really all Nazis for that matter. This video is often hard to find, and it tends to keep disappearing from wherever it shows up on the web. My old copy went dead a while back. This one just went up on Youtube 5 days ago, and it will probably get pulled pretty soon. Youtube’s getting pretty PC-awful about pulling videos on the basis of “racism.” Super-Jews are going to complain that this video is racist against and I guess Youtube is going to pull it after that. This fascinating video from the Tel Rumeida district in Hebron in the (West Bank) shows outrageously arrogant Orthodox Jewish Israeli settlers threatening Christian peacemakers – threatening to break their cameras, threatening them with death, and cursing Jesus. The words are shocking: “We killed Jesus and we’re proud of it! We’ll kill you and the Palestinians both! This is our land – God gave it to us! Fuck you and your Jesus!” As usual with ultranationalist Jews (and all ultranationalists of all groups), when they attack other races, they project their chauvinism and racism onto the victims of their own supremacism. In this case, note how the settler refers to the peacemakers over and over as “Nazis”. The only people that even remotely resemble Nazis in this video are the Jewish settlers. Keep in mind that the settlers are amongst the most militant and crazy of the Jews living in the Territories (admittedly, a tough call). Many are associated with the illegal Kach movement associated with Meir Kahane. The Israeli government has designated parts of Eastern Hebron as part of settlement enclaves for radical Jews who have moved into the area. There are three small Jewish settlements in Tel Rumeida, spaced apart. But these Jews are in the process of trying to force out the remaining Palestinians in the area. The Palestinians have become prisoners in their own districts to a greater degree than anywhere else in the West Bank. More on this in a future post. Let us note that not all Jews act like these militant settlers. Probably many American Jews, and some Israeli Jews, might be outraged by this behavior. So it’s wrong to use the behavior of these settlers as a reason to hate Jewish people in general. I found this video terrifying. This is the kind of crap that the Palestinians have to put up with every single day of their lives. It’s perfectly legitimate for Palestinian freedom fighters to wage armed struggle against both the adult settlers who stole their land and the Israeli military that protects them. It’s just as legitimate as the armed resistance of Geronimo or Sitting Bull. If the settlers don’t like getting shot at, they can move back inside the Green Line. Note that this radical Jew takes pride in killing Jesus. This is a longstanding theme of many Orthodox Jews. Those who are angry about the Deicide have a right to be upset at those particular Jews who openly take credit for it. But at the same time, I agree it is wrong to blame, hate and attack Jewish people at large for killing Jesus, a Jewish rabbi, something that happened 2000 years ago, and for which both the Jewish leadership and the Roman occupiers were responsible. But if Jews really want to significantly reduce the Deicide charge (echoing Gilad Atzmon), why don’t they apologize on behalf of their ancestors? After all, the Jews have demanded apologies of everyone else for their anti-Jewish behavior. If such a move stood a chance of significantly reducing anti-Semitism, wouldn’t it be a risk worth taking? But that’s not the Jewish way – never has been. Along with “never forgive” and “never forget”, let us remember, is “never say you are sorry”. And so the sorry cycle continues. As the brave Israeli humanist Israel Shahak noted in Jewish Religion, Jewish History, The Weight of 3000 Years (A great read!), the other side of the coin of anti-Semitism is Jewish chauvinism. Until and unless there is a diminishment of Jewish chauvinism, anti-Semitism is likely to be a serious continuing problem in our world.

Do the Yezidis Worship the Devil?

Repost from the old site. This is a very, very long piece, so be warned. But the subject, the Yezidi religious group, is extraordinarily complex, as I found out as I delved deeper and deeper into them.

They are still very mysterious and there is a lot of scholarly controversy around them, mostly because they will not let outsiders read their holy books. However, a copy of their holiest book was stolen about 100 years ago and has been analyzed by scholars.

I feel that the analysis below of the Yezidis (there are various competing analyses of them) best summarizes what they are all about, to the extent that such an eclectic group can even be defined at all. The piece is hard to understand at first, but if you are into this sort of thing, after you study it for a while, you can start to put it together. There are also lots of cool pics of devil and pagan religious art below, for those who are interested in such arcana.

The Yezidis, a Kurdish religious group in Iraq practicing an ancient religion, have been accused of being devil worshipers by local Muslims and also by many non-Muslims.

The Yezidis appeared in Western media in 2007 due to the stoning death of a Yezidi teenage girl who ran off with a Muslim man. The stoning was done by eight men from her village while another 1000 men watched and cheered them on. Afterward, there has been a lot of conflict between Muslim and Yezidi Kurds.

As Western media turned to the Yezidis, there has been some discussion here about their odd religion. For instance, though the local Muslims condemn them as devil worshipers, the Yezidis strongly deny this. So what’s the truth? The truth, as usual, is much more complicated.

The Yezidis believe that a Creator, or God, created a set of deities that we can call gods, angels or demons, depending on how you want to look at them. So, if we say that the Yezidis worship the devil, we could as well say that they worship angels. It all depends on how you view these deities.

In the history of religion, the gods of one religion are often seen as the devils of another. This is seen even today in the anti-Islamic discourse common amongst US neoconservatives, where the Muslim God is said to be a demonic god, and their prophet is said to be a devilish man.

Christian anti-Semites refer to the Old Testament God of the Jews as being an evil god. Orthodox Jews say that Jesus Christ is being boiled alive in semen in Hell for eternity.

At any rate, to the Yezidis, the main deity created by God is Malak Taus, who is represented by a peacock. Although Yezidis dissimulate about this, anyone who studies the religion closely will learn that Malak Taus is actually the Devil.

On the other hand, the Yezidis do not worship evil as modern-day Satanists do, so the Satanist fascination with the Yezidis is irrational. The Yezidis are a primitive people; agriculturalists with a strict moral code that they tend to follow in life. How is it that they worship the Devil then?

First of all, we need to understand that before the Abrahamic religions, many polytheistic peoples worshiped gods of both good and evil, worshiping the gods of good so that good things may happen, and worshiping the gods of evil so that bad things may not happen. The Yezidis see God as a source of pure good, who is so good that there is no point in even worshiping him.

In this, they resemble Gnosticism, in which God was pure good, and the material world and man were seen as polluted with such evil that the world was essentially an evil place. Men had only a tiny spark of good in them amidst a sea of evil, and the Gnostics tried to cultivate this spark.

This also resembles the magical Judaism of the Middle Ages (Kabbalism). The Kabbalists said that God was “that which cannot be known” (compare to the Yezidi belief that one cannot even pray to God).

In fact, the concept of God was so ethereal to the Kabbalists that the Kabbalists said that not only was God that which cannot be known, but that God was that which cannot even be conceived of. In other words, mere men cannot not even comprehend the very concept of God. A Kabbalist book says that God is “endless pure white light”.

This comes close to my own view of what God is.

Compare to the Yezidi view that God “pure goodness”. The Yezidi view of God is quite complex. It is clear that he is at the top of the totem pole, yet their view of him is not the same as the gods of Christianity, Islam, Judaism or of the Greeks, although it is similar to Plato’s conception of the absolute.

Instead, it is similar to the Deists. God merely created the world. As far as the day to day running of things, that is actually up to the intermediary angels. However, there is one exception. Once a year, on New Years Day, God calls his angels together and hands the power over to the angel who is to descend to Earth.

In some ways similar to the Christian Trinity of God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost, the Yezidis believe that God is manifested in three forms.

An inscription of the Christian Trinity, the father, or God, as an old man with a beard; Jesus, a young man, and the Holy Ghost, here depicted as a winged creature similar to Malak Tus, the winged peacock angel. Compare to Yezidi reference for Šeiḫ ‘Adî, Yazid and Malak Tus (Father, Son and Holy Ghost)

 

The three forms are the peacock angel, Malak Tus; an old man, Šeiḫ ‘Adî (compare to the usual Christian portrayal in paintings of God as an old man with a long white beard); and a young man, Yazid (compare to the usual Christian paintings of Jesus as a healthy European-looking man with a beard and a beatific look – a similar look is seen in Shia portraits of Ali).

Since there is no way to talk to God, one must communicate with him through intermediaries (compare to intermediary saints like Mary in Catholicism and Ali in Shiism). The Devil is sort of a wall between the pure goodness of God and this admittedly imperfect world.

This is similar again to Gnosticism, where the pure good God created intermediaries called Aeons so that a world that includes evil (as our world does) could even exist in the first place. On the other hand, Malak Tus is seen my the Yezidis as neither an evil spirit nor a fallen angel, but as a divinity in his own right.

One wonders why the Malak Tus is represented by a bird. The answer is that worshiping birds is one of the oldest known forms of idol worship. It is even condemned in Deuteronomy 4: 16, 17: “Lest ye corrupt yourselves and make a graven image, the similitude of any figure, the likeness of any winged fowl that flieth in the air.”

More likely, the peacock god is leftover from the ancient pagan bird-devil gods of the region. The ancient Babylonians, Assyrians both worshiped sacred devil-birds, and carvings of them can be seen on their temples. The Zoroastrians also worshiped a sort of devil-bird called a feroher.

A winged demon from ancient Assyria. Yezidism appears to have incorporated elements of ancient Babylonian and Assyrian religions, making it ultimately a very ancient religion. Note that devils often have wings like birds. Remember the flying monkey demons in the Wizard of Oz?

 

The pagan Phoenicians, Philistines and Samaritans worshiped a dove, and the early monotheistic Hebrews condemned the Samaritans for this idol-worship. The pagans of Mecca also worshiped a sacred dove. Pagan Arabian tribes also worshiped an eagle called Nasar.

What is truly odd is that peacocks are not native to the Yezidi region, but instead to the island of Sri Lanka. The Yezidis must have heard about this bird from travelers and incorporated it into their religion somehow.

In the Koran, both the Devil and the peacock were thrown out of Heaven down to Earth, with the Devil and the peacock both suffering similar punishments. So here we can see Islam associating the peacock with the Devil also.

In popular mythology, peacocks tend to represent pride. Note that the Koran says that the Devil was punished for excessive pride (compare with a similar Christian condemnation of excessive pride). Peacocks are problematic domestic fowl, and tend to tear up gardens, and so are associated with mischief.

The Yezidis revere Malak Tus to such a great extent that he is almost seen as one with God (compare the Catholic equation of Mary with Jesus, the Christian association of Jesus with God, and the Shia Muslim association of Ali with Mohammad).

Malak Tus was there from the start and will be there at the end, he has total control over the world, he is omniscient and omnipresent and he never changes. They do not allow anyone to say his name, as this seems to imply that he is degraded. Malak Tus is the King of the Angels, and he is ruling the Earth for a period of 10,000 years.

They also superstitiously avoid saying an word that resembles the word for Satan. When speaking Arabic, they refuse to use the Arabic shatt for river, as it sounds like the word for Satan. They substitute Kurdish ave instead. Compare this to the Kabbalist view of God as “that which can not even be comprehended (i.e., spoken) by man.

In addition to Malak Taus, there are six other angels: Izrafael, Jibrael, Michael, Nortel, Dardael, Shamnael, and Azazael. They were all at a meeting in Heaven when God told them that they would worship no one other than him. This worked for 40,000 years, until God mixed Earth, Air, Fire and Water to create Man, as Adam.

God told the seven angels to bow before Adam, and six agreed. Malak Taus refused, citing God’s order to obey only Him. Hence, Malak Taus was cast out of Heaven and became the Archangel of all the Angels. Compare this to the Christian and Muslim view of the Devil, the head of the angels, being thrown out of Heaven for the disobedience of excessive pride.

In the meantime, Malak Taus is said to have repented his sins and returned to God as an angel.

So, yes, the Yezidis do worship the Devil, but in their religion, he is a good guy, not a bad guy. They are not a Satanic cult at all. In Sufism, the act of refusing to worship Adam (man) over God would be said to be a positive act, one of refusing to worship the created over the creator, as in Sufism, one is not to worship anything but God.

The Yezidis say that God created Adam and Eve, but when they were asked to produce their essences, Adam’s produced a boy, but Eve’s was full of insects and other unpleasant things. God decided that he would propagate humanity (the Yezidis) out of Adam alone, leaving Eve out of the picture. Specifically, he married Adam’s offspring to a houri.

We can see the traditional views of the Abrahamic religions of women as being sources of evil, tempters, sources of strife, conflict and other bad things. The Yezidis see themselves as different from all other humans. Whereas non-Yezidis are the products of Adam and Eve, Yezidis are the products of Adam alone.

Eve subsequently left the Garden of Eden, which allowed the world to be created. So, what the Abrahamic religions see as man’s greatest fall in the Garden, the Yezidis see as mankind’s greatest triumphs. The Yezidis feel that the rest of humanity of is descended from Ham, who mocked his father, God.

Compare this to the Abrahamic religions’ view of women as a source of corruption. Christians say that Eve tempted Adam in the Garden of Eden, causing them to be tossed out. In Islam, women are regarded as such a source of temptation and fitna (dissension) that they are covered and often kept out of sight at all times. In Judaism, women’s hair is so tempting to men that they must shave it all off and wear wigs.

The Yezidis say they are descended directly from Adam, hence they are the Chosen People (compare to the Jewish view of themselves as “Chosen People”).

Yezidism being quite possible the present-day remains of the original religion of the Kurds, we must acknowledge that for the last 2,000 years, the Yezidis have been fighting off other major religions. First Christianity came to the region.

As would be expected, the Nestorian Christians of Northern Iraq, or “Nasara” Christian apostates, as an older tradition saw them, hold that the Yezidis were originally Christians who left the faith to form a new sect. The Nestorians and other ancient Christian sects deny the human or dual nature of Jesus – instead seeing him as purely divine.

This is in contrast to another group also called “Nasara” in Koran – these being the early Jewish Christian sects such as the Ebionites, Nazarenes and Gnostics, who followed Jesus but denied his divine nature, believe only in the Book of Matthew, and retained many Jewish traditions, including revering the Jewish Torah, refusing to eat pork, keeping the Sabbath and circumcision.

Mohammad apparently based his interpretation of Christianity on these sects. The divinity of Jesus was denied in the Koran under Ebionite influence. The Koran criticizes Christians for believing in three Gods – God, Jesus and Mary – perhaps under the influence of what is called the “Marianistic heresy”. At the same time, the Koran confused human and divine qualities in Jesus due to Nestorian influence.

Finally, the Koran denied the crucifixion due to Gnostic influence, especially the apocryphal Gospel of Peter. The local Muslims, similarly, hold that the Yezidis are apostates, having originally been Muslims who left Islam to form a new religion.

There is considerable evidence that many Yezidis were formerly Christians, as the Christian story holds. Šeiḫ ’Adî, one of the tripartite of angels worshiped by the Yezidis, was a Sufi Muslim mystic from Northern Iraq in the 1100’s. He attracted many followers, including many Christians and some Muslims who left their faith to become Yezidis. Yezidism existed before Šeiḫ ’Adî, but in a different form.

Šeiḫ ’Adî also attracted many Persian Zoroastrians, who were withering under the boot of Muslim dhimmitude and occasional massacre in Iran. Šeiḫ ‘Adî (full name Šeiḫ ‘Adî Ibn Masafir Al-Hakkari) was a Muslim originally from Bait Far, in the Baalbeck region of the Bekaa Valley of what is now Eastern Lebanon.

He came to Mosul for spiritual reasons. He was said to be a very learned man, and many people started to follow him. After he built up quite a following, he retired to the mountains above Mosul where he built a monastery and lived as a hermit, spending much of his time in caves and caverns in the mountains with wild animals as his only guests.

His followers were said to worship him as a God and believed that in the afterlife, they would be together with him. He died in 1162 in the Hakkari region near Mosul. At the site of his death, the Yezidis erected a shrine and it became one of the holiest sites in the religion. However, Šeiḫ ’Adî is not the founder of Yezidism, as many believe. His life and thought just added to the many strains in this most syncretistic of religions.

The third deity in the pseudo-“Trinity” of the Yezidis is a young man named Yezid. They say they are all descended from this man, whom they often refer to as God, as they sometimes refer to Šeiḫ ’Adî. In Šeiḫ ’Adî’s temple, there are inscriptions to both Šeiḫ ’Adî and Yezid, each on opposing walls of the temple. In a corner of this temple, a fire, or actually a lamp, is kept burning all night, reminiscent of Zoroastrianism.

There is a lot of controversy about what the word Yezid in Yezidi stands for. The religion itself, in its modern form, probably grew out of followers of Yazid Ibn Muawiyah Ibn Abu Sufyan, the 2nd Caliph in the Umayyad Dynasty of Caliphs. Yazid fought a battle against Mohammad’s grandson, Hussayn, in a battle for the succession of the Caliphate.

Hussayn’s followers were also the followers of Ali, the former caliph who was assassinated. The followers of Hussayn and Ali are today known as the Shia. The Sunni follow in the tradition of the Umayyads. In a battle in Karbala in 680, Hussayn and all his men were killed at Kufa and the women and children with them taken prisoner.

To the Shia, Yazid is the ultimate villain. Most Sunnis do not view him very favorably either, and regard the whole episode as emblematic of how badly the umma had fallen apart after Mohammad died.

Nevertheless, there had been groups of Sunnis who venerated Yazid Ibn Muawiyah Ibn Abu Sufyan and the Umayyads in general in northern Iraq for some time even before Šeiḫ ’Adî appeared on the scene. Šeiḫ ’Adî himself was descended from the Umayyads.

Reverence for Yazid Ibn Muawiyah mixed with the veneration of Šeiḫ ’Adî in the early Yezidis. It was this, mixed in with the earlier pagan beliefs of the Semites and Iranians discussed elsewhere, along with a dollop of Christianity, that formed the base of modern Yezidism. But its ultimate roots are far more ancient. Yezidism had a base, but it was not yet formed in its modern version.

Here we turn to the etymology of the word Yezidi. It is possible that the figure of “Yezid”, the young man-God in the Yezidi trinity, represents Yazid Ibn Muawiyah. By the mid-1200’s, the local Muslims were getting upset about the Yezidis excessive devotion to these two men. In the mid-1400’s the local Muslims fought a large battle against the Yezidis.

To this day, the top Yezidi mirs are all related to the Umayyads. Muslim scholars say that Yezid bin Unaisa was the founder of the modern-day Yezidis. Bin Unaisa was one of the early followers of the Kharijites, an early fanatical fundamentalist sect that resembled our modern-day Al Qaeda and other takfiri Salafi-jihadi terrorists. Bin Unaisa was said to be a follower of the earliest Kharijites.

These were the first Kharijites. Early split-offs from Ali’s army, they took part in the Battle of Nahrawan against Ali’s forces outside Madaen in what is now the Triangle of Death in Iraq. In 661, the Kharijites assassinated Ali, one of the penultimate moments in the Sunni-Shia split.

At some point, bin Unaisa split from the Kharijites, except for one of their early followers who were following a sect Al-Abaḍia, founded by ‘Abd-Allah Ibn Ibad. He said that any Muslim who committed a great sin was an infidel. Considering his fundamentalist past, he developed some very unorthodox views for a Muslim.

He said that God would send a new prophet to Persia (one more Iranian connection with the Yezidis), that God would send down a message to be written by this prophet in a book, and that this prophet would leave Islam and follow the religion of the Sabeans or Mandeans. Nevertheless, he continued to hold some Kharijite beliefs, including that God alone should be worshiped and that all sins were forms of idolatry.

In line with this analysis, the first Yezidis were a Kharijite subsect. The fact that bin Unaisa said that the new prophet would follow Sabeanism implies that he himself either followed this religion at one time or had a high opinion of it.

Muslim historians mention three main Sabean sects. They seemed to have derived in part from the ancient pagan religion of Mesopotamia. They were polytheists who worshiped the stars. After the Islamic conquest, they referred to themselves as Sabeans in order to receive protection as one of the People of the Book (the Quran mentions Jews, Christians and Sabeans and People of the Book). One of the Sabean sects was called Al-Ḫarbâniyah.

They believed that God dwelt within things that were good and rational. He had one essence but many appearances, in other words. God was pure good, and could not make anything evil. Evil was either accidental or necessary for life, or caused by an evil force. They also believed in the transmigration of souls (reincarnation).

It is interesting that the beliefs of this sect of Sabeans resemble the views of modern Yezidis. So Yezîd bn Unaisa believed in God and the Resurrection Day, he probably respected angels and the stars, yet he was neither polytheistic nor a true follower of Mohammad.

At the same time, he lined himself up with those People of the Book who said that Mohammad was a prophet, yet did not follow him (in this respect, he was similar to Western non-Muslims who acknowledge Mohammad as the prophet of the Arabs).

Although most orthodox histories of the Yezidis leave it out, it seems clear at this point that Yezîd bn Unaisa was the founder of the Yezidi religion in its modern form and that the Yezidis got their name from Yezîd bn Unaisa. This much may have been lost to time, for the Yezidis themselves say that Yezidi comes from the Kurdish word Yezdan or Êzid meaning God.

After naming their movement after Yezîd bn Unaisa, the Yezidis learned of Šeiḫ ‘Adî’s reputation, and become his followers, along with many Muslims, Christians and Iranians.

Like their founder, the Yezidis believe in God and the Resurrection, expect a prophet from Iran, revere angels and stars, regard every sin as idolatry, respect Mohammad as a prophet yet do not follow him and at the same time pay no attention to Ali (recall that the early Kharijites assassinated Ali). Being opposed to both Mohammad and Ali, bn Unaisa is logically despised by both the Sunni and the Shia.

The fact that the Yezidis renounced the prophet of the Arabs (Mohammad) while expecting a new one from Iran logically appealed to a lot of Persians at the time. Hence, many former Zoroastrians, or fire-worshipers, from Iran joined the new religion, surely injecting their strains into this most syncretistic of religions.

There is good evidence that many Yezidis are former Christians. The Yezidis around Mosul go by the surname of Daseni, of Dawasen in the plural. It so happens that there was a Nestorian diocese in Mosul called Daseni, or Dasaniyat. It disappeared around the time of Šeiḫ ’Adî. The implication is that so many of its members became Yezidis that the Diocese folded.

Furthermore, many names of Yezidi villages are actually names in the Syriac (Christian) language, more evidence that many Yezidis are former Christians.

Adding even more weight to this theory, the Yezidis retain two Christian customs – the baptism and the Eucharist.

The Yezidis must baptize their children at the earliest possible age, and the priest puts his hand on the child’s head as he performs the rite. Both customs mirror the Christian baptism precisely. When a Yezidi couple marries, they go to a local Nestorian Church to partake of the Eucharist. The cup of wine they drink is called the cup of Isa (Jesus). The Yezidi have great respect for Christian saints and houses of worship, and kiss the doors and walls of churches when they enter them.

When a Yezidi woman goes to the home of her bridegroom on wedding day, she is supposed to visit every every religious temple along the way, even the churches. On the other hand, Yezidis never enter a mosque. Sadly, the Yezidi reverence for Christianity is not returned by the Eastern Christians, who despise the Yezidis as devil-worshipers.

They revere both Jesus and Mohammad as religious teachers, not as prophets. They have also survived via a hefty dose of taqqiya, or dissimulation, in this case pretending outwardly to be some species of Shia Muslims.

This is common for minority faiths around the region, including the Alawi and Druze, who have both proclaimed at the top of their lungs that they are Muslims and have hidden to the aspects of their religion which would cause the Muslims to disown them at best or kill them at worst. The primary Islamic influence on the Yezidis is actually Sufism, not Shiism per se.

There are traces of other religions – Hinduism may possibly be seen in the five Yezidi castes, from top to bottom – Pir, Shaikh, Kawal, Murabby, and Mureed (followers). Mureeds are about on a par with Dalits or Untouchables in Hinduism. Marriage across castes is strictly forbidden, as it has been disapproved in India.

On the other hand, pre-Islamic Iran also had a caste system, and the base of the Yezidi religion seems to be derived from Persian Zoroastrianism. The Yezidi, like the Druze and the Zoroastrians, do not accept converts, and like the Druze, think that they will be reincarnated as their own kind (Druze think they will be reincarnated as Druze; Yezidis think they will be reincarnated as Yezidis).

The Yezidis can be considered fire-worshipers in a sense; they obviously got this from the Zoroastrians. The Yezidis say, “Without fire, there would be no life.” This is true even in our modern era, if we substitute “electrical power” for fire, our lives would surely diminish. Even today, when Kurdish Muslims swear on an oath, they say, “I swear by this fire…”

Many say there is a resemblance between Malak Taus and the Assyrian God Tammuz, though whether the name Malak Taus is actually derived from Tammuz is much more problematic. Tammuz was married to the Assyrian moon goddess, Ishtar. But this connection is not born out by serious inquiry.

Ishtar the Goddess of the Moon, here represented as a bird goddess. Worship of birds is one of the oldest forms of pagan idolatry known to man. What is it about birds that made them worthy of worship by the ancients? The miracle of flight?

Where do the Yezidis come from? The Yezidis themselves say that they came from the area around Basra and the lower Euphrates, then migrated to Syria and then to Sinjar, Mosul and Kurdistan. In addition to worshiping a bird-god, there are other traces of the pre-Islamic pagan religions of the Arabs in Yezidism.

They hold the number seven sacred, a concept that traces back to the ancient Mesopotamians. The Yezidis have seven sanjaks, and each one has seven burners of the flame. Their God created seven angels, and the sculpture carved on the temple of Šeiḫ ’Adî has seven branches.

The Sabeans, another ancient religion of Mesopotamia who are now called star-worshipers by their detractors, also worshiped seven angels who guided the courses of seven planets – it is from this formulation that our seven days of the week are derived. In the ancient religion of Assyria, Ishtar descended through seven gates to the land of no return. The ancient Hebrews likewise utilized the number seven in their religion.

An ancient seven-armed candelabra, a symbol nowadays used in the Jewish religion, with demonic sea monsters drawn on the base.

The Yezidis worship the sun and moon at their rising and setting, following the ancient Ḥarranians, a people who lived long ago somewhere in northern Iraq. Sun-worship and moon-worship are some of the oldest religious practices of Man. The ancient pagans of Canaan worshiped the Sun.

At the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, the religion practiced there had little in common with Talmudic Judaism of today. For instance, the horses of the Sun were worshiped at that temple (see II Kings 25: 5, 11). The ancient Judeans, who the modern-day Jews claim spiritual connection with, actually worshiped the “host of heaven” – the Sun, the Moon and the Planets. So much for “the original monotheists, eh?

In Babylonia, there were two temples to the Sun-God Shamas.

Another pre-Islamic Arab pagan belief is the belief in sacred wells and sanctuaries that contain them. The springs contain water that has curative powers. The holy water found at the Zamzam Well in Mecca is an example; even to this day, Muslims bottle the water and carry it off for this purpose. Often sacred clothes are used to make these pilgrimages, because ordinary clothes are thought to contaminate the holy site.

In pre-Islamic days, when the pagans circled the rock at the Kaaba, they were completely naked. In Islam, men and women are supposed to remove their clothing and wear a special garb as they circulate around the rock. In Mandeanism, both men and women go to the Mishkana, or tabernacle, take off their clothes, and bathe in the circular pool. Emerging, they put on the rasta, a ceremonial white garment.

At the temple of Šeiḫ ‘Adî, there is a sacred pool. The Yezidis throw coins, jewelry and other things into this pool as offerings. They think that Šeiḫ ‘Adî takes these things from time to time. And they must remove their clothes, bathe, and wear a special garment when they visit the holy valley where this temple resides.

The ancient Arabs also worshiped trees. There were sacred trees at Nejran, Hadaibiya and Mecca. The pagans hung women’s ornaments, fine clothes, ostrich eggs, weapons, and other items.

Similarly, the Yezidis also worship trees. They have their favorite trees, and sick people go to these trees and hang pieces of cloth on them, hoping to get well, and believe that whoever takes one of these down will get sick with whatever disease the person who hung the cloth had.

An inscription of a sacred tree from Ancient Babylonian civilization. Trees were worshiped not just in ancient Arabia; they were also worshiped in Mesopotamia.The Christian Trinity combined with the pagan Tree of Life, in an interesting ancient Chaldean inscription that combines pagan and Christian influences. The Tree of Life was also utilized in Kabbalism, Jewish mysticism from the Middle Ages. Nowadays the symbol is used by practitioners of both White and Black Magic. Radical Islam is committing genocide once again on the Christians of Iraq, including the Chaldeans.

Yet another Tree of Life, this time from ancient Assyria, an ancient civilization in Mesopotamia. The concept of a tree of life is a pagan concept of ancient pedigree.

The ancient Meccans used to worship stones. At one point the population became so large that they had to move out of the valley where the Kaaba resided, so when they formed their new settlements, they took rocks from the holy place and piled them outside their settlements and made a sort of shrine out of these things, parading around the rock pile as they moved around the Kaaba.

In Palestine, there were sacred wells at Beersheba and Kadesh, a sacred tree at Shekem and a sacred rock at Bethel. As in animism, it was believed that divine powers or spirits inhabited these rocks, trees and springs. This tradition survives to this day in the folk religion of the Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese.

The Yezidis also have certain stones that they worship. They kiss these stones in reverence. When the Yezidis reach the goal of their pilgrimage or hajj, they become very excited and start shouting. After fasting all day, they have a big celebration in the evenings, with singing and dancing and gorging on fine dishes.

This hajj, where they worship a spring under Šeiḫ ‘Adî’s tomb called Zamzam and then climb a mountain and shoot off guns, is obviously taken from the Muslim hajj. Mecca has a Zamzam Spring, and pilgrims climb Mount ‘Arafat on hajj.

The shouting, feasting, singing, dancing and general excitement is typical of a pagan festival. The non-Yezidi neighbors of the Yezidis claim that Yezidis engage in immoral behavior on this hajj. No one knows if this is true or not, but if they do, it may be similar to the festivals of the Kadeshes discussed in the Old Testament, where people engaged in licentious behavior in their temples.

Although the Yezidis have a strict moral code, observers say that they allow adultery if both parties are willing. That’s pretty open-minded for that part of the world.

The Yezidis – A Mysterious Kurdish Religious Sect

About two years after the publication of this post, I wrote an update to this article, Do the Yezidis Worship the Devil? which goes into much more detail about the religion. Since hardly anyone has any idea about who or what the Yezidis of Northern Iraq are, an introduction is in order. The Yezidis are a minority religious group that lives in Northern Iraq, Eastern Turkey, Eastern Syria, Armenia, Northwestern Iran, Georgia, Russia and Germany. Some estimates put the number of Yezidis at 100,000. However, Yezidi spokesmen say there are 600,000 Yezidis, mostly in Iraq. Other estimates put the number of Yezidis as high as 2 million. There are 10,000 Yezidi refugees in Germany. German Yezidis have created a home page to help introduce others to their religion, but unfortunately it is all in German. The Yezidis are more of a religious than an ethnic grouping. All Yezidis are Kurds and they all speak Kurdish. In Iraq, most of them live north of Mosul and in the Sinjar Mountains near the Syrian border. There are also Yezidis in Tel Afar, Mosul and the city of Sinjar. Iraq’s Yezidis are seizing Iraq’s democratic moment to press for their rights for the first time. Yezidis have long been persecuted by Muslims as heathens and devil-worshipers. Although it’s true that the Yezidis worship a peacock angel they call Lucifer, they are basically good, upstanding, moral people. They are not in any way analogous to the actual devil-worshipers who exist in the West, like Anton Levay’s Church of Satan (COS), etc. Yezidis do not believe in Heaven or Hell and they do not regard Satan, who they regard as the Chief of the Angels, as evil. Instead, he is sacred. The Yezidis feel the Devil created the world and is de facto in charge right now. From the perspective of my life at the moment, those scenarios seem distinctly possible. Yezidis are allowed to eat pork, unlike Muslims. But bizarrely, they cannot eat lettuce (because the Kurdish word for lettuce rhymes with their word for devil) or wear yellow. This dietary code is not often followed these days. The restriction on eating lettuce may have been due to outbreaks of E. Coli. Like the Zoroastrians, Yezidis do not accept converts – a tendency which may result in the end of Yezidism with time. Yezidism shares many things with Zoroastrianism, and some commenters regard it as either a Zoroastrian sect or a religion with roots in Zoroastrianism. My opinion is that a synthesis between Zoroastrianism, Islam, Judaism and pre-religious paganism is more accurate. It is likely the Yezidism predates all of these – Zoroastrianism, Islam and Judaism – in fact, it may be one of the oldest extant human religions. Somewhat similar to the caste system of Hinduism, another ancient religion, Yezidis have seven levels of initiation, or classes. The classes are princes, sheiks, senators, seers, ascetics and the community of the faithful. The large faith community class makes up 7 This split, with a small elite sect who retain most of the (oral) knowledge of the religion and a large majority of mere followers who are kept in the dark about most of the religion, is also similar to other “secret” religions in the area, including the Sabeans, the Druze and Alawi. The Alawi of Syrian and Lebanon are a highly divergent Shia sect, a split-off from the extremist Nusairi split early in the history of Shiism. Although the Druze call themselves Muslims, it is probable that they are not Muslims at all, since their religion is so divergent. Instead, like Bahaism, the Druze religion is more properly considered to be related to Islam, rather than part of Islam proper. The Druze date back to the 1100’s and also seem to be the result of a Shia split, similar to the split that birthed Alawism. Both sects persisted via extreme tribalism, refusing intermarriage, accepting no converts, keeping their religion secret, pretending to be Muslims to avoid persecution while still practicing the religion in secret, and especially, seeking shelter in the difficult, mountainous terrain of the Levant. The Sabeans or Mandeans of Iraq are probably the last remains of the ancient Gnostic religion; they may also be former Diasporic Sephardic Jews who split off from Judaism in Iraq around the year 600. The Mandeans also worship the North Star, revere John the Baptist and consider Jesus Christ as the font of all evil on Earth! In Yezidism, marriage across classes is strictly forbidden, again reminiscent of Hinduism. However, people do marry across caste nonetheless. Although the new Iraqi regime is basically a puppet regime of US colonialism, at least the Yezidis do have three members of the new Iraqi Parliament, all elected on the Kurdish list. Saddam’s regime persecuted the Yezidis first for being Kurds and second for their religion as they were viewed as heathens. Yes, Saddam’s regime was not completely secular. Under Saddam’s extremely racist, fascist-like, Sunni Arab Nationalist regime, Yezidis, Kurds, Assyrians, Shia and Turkomen were all persecuted by the Ba’ath Party. For instance, Assyrian Christians were denied an identity by the Baath and referred to as “Kurdish Christians”. The Baath forbade the use of the Assyrian or Turkoman languages in the schools. Yezidi religious studies have been banned in Iraq since 1963, the year of the Baathist coup. In its censuses, Baathist Arab nationalist racists called the Yezidis “an Arabic people”, clearly a falsehood. Saddam’s racist Arab regime engaged in ethnic cleansing of the Yezidis on several occasions. Usually, the Yezidis were driven off their land onto other lands, and their land was given to nearby Arabs. In 1978, 126 Yezidi villages in Sinjar were “collectivized” into 10 villages while 10 villages near Dahuk were destroyed and the villagers were forced into another village. The new villages created for the Yezidis lacked even basic health care, and it was hard to earn a living. Arab invaders who colonized Yezidi lands forbade the Yezidi from herding animals, and the new villages the Yezidis were pushed into lacked decent pasture. In 1997, two Yezidi teachers from Elqush were arrested by Saddam’s intelligence services and tortured until they agreed to stop teaching the Yezidi religion. In the same year, in Ayn Sufna, Baathists stole 1,500 Yezidi properties and gave them to Arab and Kurdish tribes in the region. Saddam’s army surrounded a Yezidi village in 2000, but left after the Yezidis staged a defiant demonstration. In the no-fly zones formed by the allies in the Kurdish Regional Government area of Iraq instituted after the Gulf War, the Yezidis have fared much better than they did under Saddam. They liberated many villages that were seized by Arab colonists and today in school, classes in the Yezidi religion are even taught in areas where there are good numbers of Yezidi pupils. However, since the US invasion, the Yezidi situation in some ways has worsened. The entire north of Iraq has come under the control of Kurdish racist fascist parties, the KDP and PUK. These parties are lately promoting a sort of Kurdish Sunni racism which attacks Sunni and Shia Arabs, Shia, Christian and Yezidi Kurds and Assyrian Christians – in short, everyone who is not a Sunni Kurd. The racist Sunni Kurds succeeded in preventing large numbers of all of these groups from voting in the election in February 2005. In the case of the Yezidis, Kurdish racists never even allowed polling stations to open in a number of Yezidi zones. Racist Sunni Kurds have been attacking and ethnically cleansing Assyrian Christian villages in the north for decades now, a process which accelerated when the Allies granted the Kurds their Kurdish Zone in 1991. This is a continuation of long-standing Kurdish Sunni Muslim racism against Assyrian Christians extending back to the 1920’s. In that decade, Kurdish Muslims gleefully slaughtered huge numbers of Assyrians in a naked display of Islamist bigotry that reached genocidal proportions. Formally, the Yezidi religion was founded in the 1100’s by Sheikh Uday bin Masafel al-Amawi. Uday was born in Damascus but died in Shaikan in northern Iraq. His tomb in Shaikan is now Yezidism’s holiest site. As noted above, many scholars trace Yezidism to one of the world’s oldest extant religions, Zoroastrianism, founded in ancient Persia. Traditionally, Yezidism is variously regarded as either an offshoot of Zoroastrianism or Shia Islam. Those who say the Yezidis are Shia hold that they are an extreme Shia “Sevener” Ismaili sect similar to the Druze and the Alawi (see discussion of the Alawi and Druze above). A better analysis is to regard Yezidism as a syncretic mix between Zoroastrianism and Shia Islam. Others note Judaic traits in the Yezidis; some suggest that the Yezidis are former Jews who broke away from Judaism and formed a new religion. Indeed, some theorists that the Kurds in general are former Jews. See Rabbi Joe Katz’s Eretzyisroel site for more on that interesting theory, which may have some validity. The best analysis would leaven the Zoroastrian-Shia syncretism of Yezidism with dollops of Judaism and tablespoons of ancient paganism, while noting the Yezidism is probably older than any of its parts, except for the pagan. Oddly enough, the Yezidis have a monk and nun class, men and women who dress in white and have taken a vow of celibacy. Yezidis are also said to be sun worshipers, in another similarity with Zoroastrianism. A famous Yezidi, Sharfadin, has a tomb in Sinjar. Sharfadin also serves as a personified sun god. Note that sun-worship is one of the most ancient of human religious tenets, dating back to the Egyptians and probably beyond. The leader of the Yezidis is a prince called mir, or mireh shekha. The Yezidi religion is passed down orally through families and officially, there are no Yezidi religious texts. However, closer analysis seems to reveal that there are a couple of Yezidi holy books, but they are hidden by followers, and their existence is denied to outsiders. Outsiders have somehow managed to get a hold of a couple of copies of these holy texts, or at least parts of them, and they have been published, both in print and on the Internet. Some say that these supposed Yezidi holy texts are actually fakes, and that no extant holy texts exist, as all knowledge is oral. I glanced through the material in these texts along with an analysis of them. Shall we say that Yezidism is an immensely complex religion and that this article does not begin to tickle out an understanding of it? Kakaism is another Kurdish sect that is very similar to Yezidism. It arose 1000 years ago in northern Iraq due to conflicts between the Umayyad rulers of Islam and the Zoroastrian priesthood. Kakais, like Yezidis, are forbidden from cursing Satan on religious grounds. Hence, many Muslims see them, like the Yezidis, as devil-worshipers. There are 300,000 Kakais in Kurdistan. This research takes a lot of time, and I do not get paid anything for it. If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a a contribution to support more of this valuable research.

Jews Who Pretend To Be Nazis

Repost from the old site. This post has been accused of anti-Semitism, but I disagree. I agree that anti-Semitism exists, and should be opposed, my definition being an irrational fear or hatred of Jews. Perhaps we have some warring definitions going on here. My site also has a no anti-Semitism policy and two posters have been banned for incessant anti-Semitism. A Jewish fellow just came by this blog and left me this Nazi-like message, urging the killing of all Jews, implying that I support such insanity, and trying to claim that my blog promotes the notion of the extermination of the Jews. This fellow is well known and either acts alone or as part of a group. He used to live in Chicago but recently has relocated to New York. He or his group now operates out of Jamaica, New York and a university in New York. He or his group usually writes comments and emails under the names Tom Phillips or Sam Jones. He is also a strong supporter of Israel (Zionist) and has strong feelings against the Palestinians. Hence, he typically writes about how the Palestinians are Nazis and are trying to carry out Hitler’s Final Solution and how the Palestinians’ supporters need to cheer them on in this endeavor. Here is what he wrote in my comments:

[name withheld] wrote the following: Robert, thanks once again for helping to convey the message of white patriots like myself. The subhuman degenerate Jews are indeed a hideous cancer in our midst -and it is excellent to see the awakening of people like you and your readers on this issue. Hopefully, this will lead to enough people taking the necessary (or should I say “final”?) actions to see that this situation is PERMANENTLY reversed. If ever a race of so-called people DESERVE to be “gassed to death in ovens”, it’s the Jews! If this ever comes to pass, we will have blogs like yours to thank.

Note the Nazi-style nature of the anti-Semitism that he is writing here. He’s obviously a smart fellow and he has tailed his fake anti-Semitism to mirror well the particular anti-Semitism of the Nazis, their allies and their modern-day supporters. His objectives are various:

  • To tag me as a Nazi-style anti-Semite bent on the extermination of Jews.
  • To promote Nazi-style exterminationist anti-Semitism amongst me and people like me – supporters of the Palestinians, critics of Israel and critics of the Jews. As persons in these groups move towards Nazism, it will be easier to destroy them through the classic Jewish technique of character assassination (no one does it better). In this, he is serving as the Jewish version of an agent provocateur – the equivalent of the guy who shows up at the Communist Party meeting saying, “Hey let’s go set off a bomb!”
  • To associate me and my blog, which merely criticizes Israel and Jews in a most mild manner (in addition to critiquing just about everything else on Earth) with Nazi-style exterminationist anti-Semitism.

There are quite a few Jews who engage in this sort of profoundly perverse behavior, and they have been doing so for at least 100 years. Theodore Herzl, the founder of Zionism, reportedly encouraged Cossack gangs to destroy Jewish property in Russia in order to fan anti-Semitism and encourage Jews to support Zionism. Israeli agents attacked Jewish targets in Iraq to encourage Jews to flee to Israel. Israel bombed a synagogue in Beirut during the Civil War, probably on purpose, probably for the same reason – to encourage Jews to flee. The former head of the World Zionist Organization famously remarked around 1960 that any serious decline in anti-Semitism would seriously endanger Israel. The implication was that anti-Semitism in the Diaspora was good for Israel. The more anti-Semitism in the Diaspora, the more Diaspora Jews will want to come to the Jewish state to escape anti-Semitism. Jews (particularly young Jewish males) are often arrested for writing gross anti-Semitic graffiti – KILL THE JEWS!, vandalizing Jewish cemeteries and even faking anti-Semitic assaults. Is there any other ethnic group on Earth that fakes attacks on itself? Do Hispanics write graffiti saying, “Kill the Spics!”? Granted, there have a few scattered cases of Blacks faking racist attacks on themselves. Do Asians write “Kill the Gooks!” all over their own neighborhoods? Do Arabs write emails saying, “Kill all Arabs now!”? Can anyone find any other ethnic group, anywhere on Earth, that engages in such perverse behavior to any significant degree? I wonder what your ordinary, fairly sane Jewish person thinks of Jews who do this? Do they think they are good for the Jews? Do they think it’s understandable? Do they deny that it exists? Do they lash out and attack anyone who brings it up as an anti-Semite? Just wondering… Seeking out answers, the $64,000 question is, how did the Jews survive in the Diaspora for 2000 years? It’s the racism, stupid. They did it by cultivating racist attitudes towards the surrounding non-Jewish communities. This was particularly true in Europe, where the Ashkenazim were under a virtual dictatorship of the rabbis for 1000 years (This was the so-called Golden Age of Orthodox Judaism.). Elaborate strictures were put into place to keep Jews from mingling with Gentiles. Not that such mingling was bad per se, but if left unmolested, it could lead Jews marrying non-Jews, and at some point, the Jews would simply breed themselves out of existence. The only way to survive was to keep Jews breeding amongst themselves. In Medieval Spain, the penalty for a Jewish woman who had sex with a Gentile was to have her nose cut off. Many of the infamous Jewish ghettos were actually built by Jews themselves to keep themselves from mingling much with Gentiles. Until the early 1800’s, no religious European Jew would think of eating with a non-Jew, nor would he even have tea with a Gentile. While Christian hatred of Jews in Europe was substantial and sometimes deadly, on the other hand, Jewish rabbis, for their part, preached hatred of Christians and Christianity in Europe for many centuries. It’s quite probable that the desire of this group to remain apart from others did quite a bit to stimulate distrust and anti-Semitism amongst the Gentiles. From AD 200 to the early 1800’s, a religious European Jew was required to spit in the direction of any church he walked past. On Christian holidays in Europe, a Jew was required to pray for Jesus to suffer in Hell. Even recently, the ceremony to convert to Judaism in Israel, given over to the ultra-Orthodox of Kibbutz Sa’ad and financed by the Israeli government, required spitting on the cross. In the 1950’s. there was a major furor in Israel when an Israeli postage stamp had a drawing of Bethlehem with a church and a tiny cross visible on top. The government eventually had to redo the stamp to wipe out the cross. A similar crisis occurred when it was revealed that Jewish children were forced to write a cross when they wrote a plus sign in math class. In the early 1970’s, the government then decided that, in all secular schools, in most Hebrew elementary and some Hebrew high schools, Jewish Israeli children, alone on Earth, write an upside down “t instead of a cross for the plus sign. In order to keep the Jews from outbreeding, it was also important to remind the Jews that all Gentiles harbored permanent metaphysical hatred of Jews inside themselves. In those Gentiles who seemed friendly, this hatred had merely not been revealed yet. Thus a Jewish culture of paranoia and masochism, a culture that needed and cultivated enemies for its own survival, was created and nourished. Hence, large number of Jews are afflicted with what Jewish psychologist Stanley Rothman calls a paranoid-masochistic character. Here is Rothman and Jewish co-author S. Robert Lichter, quoting Jewish psychoanalysts Jules Nydes and Theodor Reik on this character:

[Jewish psychologist Jules] Nydes argues that such individuals [representing the “paranoid masochistic character”] tend to see themselves and groups within which they identify as victims who are being persecuted. This sense of persecution derives partly from unconscious feelings of guilt. The paranoid masochistic person engages in aggression against others because he or she expects to be attacked. His aggression, which is accompanied by feelings of self-righteousness, is rarely satisfying. Indeed, he can often achieve gratification only when he is punished, and the punishment is interpreted as confirming his preconceived sense of persecution…The typology is suggestive. [Jewish psychoanalyst] Theodore Reik, who was Nyde’s teacher, suggested that a ‘paranoid masochistic’ personality structure is modal among Jews.

Rothman on the Jewish need for anti-Semitism:

For some Jews and perhaps some of the Jewish leadership, the fear is that if anti-Semitism completely disappears then the Jewish community might erode or dissolve.

Rothman is presently Director of the Center for the Study of Social and Political Change at Smith College in Northampton, Massachusetts. With those two fine Rothman quotes, we leave you to intertwine them with the mysteries of so many things: the behavior of the Jewish state and its Israeli Lobby in the US, the baffling behavior of many Jews towards the often largely hallucinated phenomenon of anti-Semitism, and the behavior of young Jewish men, who, in ultimate perversity, mimic Nazis.

error

Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)