Anti-Semitic Chicken Nazis Threaten Jews

Prior to the latest Gaza War, one of the worst threats facing the Jewish state today was a tribe of Islamo-Nazi super-chickens being raised in Gaza by a suicidal chicken death cult to be suicide chickens and kill every single Jew in Israel. According to the Chicken’s Founding Charter, “not one Jew will be left in Israel.”
The chickens had recently taken over Gaza in a chicken coup (hehe), killing many moderate chickens in the process and instituting a chicken dictatorship over other animals. Lately, the chickens had been launching chicken poop rockets at Israel on a daily basis.
Although there were no casualties, the chicken poop launched at Sderot caused many cases of shock in the Israelis living near the Chicken Terrorist Haven of Gaza. Further, it is said that two Jews, one 85 and the other 87, forgot to take their heart meds and nearly had fatal heart attacks when the chicken shit was really flying over southwest Israel.
The chickens refuse to accept any past agreements with Israel and refuse to recognize the Jewish state, since it grants no rights to chickens. Further, the chickens say that Jews stole the land where they used to strut and fluff their feathers.
The chickens have also refused to renounce violence, and the roosters have been fighting a lot lately. There aren’t any Jewish chickens around to kill, so they turn on each other in a fratricidal chicken war in Gaza.
Israel has blockaded the chickens, putting them on a starvation diet and making for some awfully slim boneless fryers.
One of the great things about Israel is the US gets to use it as a testing ground for new weapons. Chickens, unlike humans, have proven impervious to most of the techniques yet developed by “USreal” to kill them. However, in the latest Gaza War, Israel used new weapons called “chicken hawks” to decimate the chickens. From the article:

Samir Sawafiri pointed at several dozen hungry chickens scavenging for food between the crushed bodies of nearly 65,000 other birds strewn across a destroyed farm in Zeitoun in Gaza City.
“They are all that is left and I have nowhere to put them,” he said. The poultry farms around Zeitoun used to be the Gaza Strip’s main provider of eggs, according to Oxfam. Little but twisted metal and crumbling concrete now remains of the poor suburb on the eastern outskirts of Gaza, one of the areas hit hardest during the war.
“I evacuated on January 9,” Mr Sawafiri said. “Three days later, on January 12, tanks came with bulldozers and leveled the fields. They wanted to spoil the economy – that is the only answer. There is no justification for what they did.”

In the war, at least 65,000 Palestinian terrorist jihadi chickens were killed by the IDF in just this one raid. All of the chicken counterattacks killed only 13 Israeli birds. Operation Plucked Chicken was declared a success by Ehud Olmert, though there were worries that the chickens would rebuild their coops and try to re-arm to fight another day.
The questions that remains is why the chickens turned into anti-Semites. It seems that not only have the Jews been hated forever by all other humans, but they have also been hated by most other animals, not just humans. It was a matter of time before Euro-weenies, the Far Left and radical Islam roused the chickens to join in the world’s oldest sport, hatred of and war against the Jews.

The Morgenthau Plan

I can’t believe that we actually did this. Reading this Wikipedia article, one assumes that the Wiki piece must have been written by neo-Nazis. Surely that could not be the case. The truth, then, resembles neo-Nazi propaganda about US aims and behavior in the first half-decade after the war.
It’s funny because you go looking for research on the case and mostly all these neo-Nazi sites come up. You read through them and think, “Yeah, but their Nazis, so you know they’re lying.” I think they are definitely exaggerating, but I was blown away by how close the neo-Nazi sites’ descriptions of this plan mirrored its actual implementation.
Not that I sympathize with Nazis. My general rule is when you start reading neo-Nazi stuff and you have to nod your head and say, “Wow, these guys are definitely not good for the Jews, but how can we deny that what they are saying is true,” that means not that Nazis are cool but that something is rotten in Denmark.
When you read Who Rules America, and nod your head at the Nazis’ analysis of Jewish media power, that’s not good. When you read William Pierce on Russian Jews bleeding Russian dry and participating in a White slave trade of East European Orthodox Christian girls to Israel and nod your head, that’s not good. It’s not good when the Nazis are right. Not good for the Jews. Not good for anyone.
Same with this Morgenthau Plan. Not that Nazis, or Germans (What was the difference, anyway? Most Germans, but not all for sure, were Nazis all right) didn’t more or less deserve it. Yeah, paybacks are a bitch and all that. But I also think you should give people a good reason to surrender.
Surrender to we can enslave you, starve you to death, let you die from disease, de-industrialize your country and maybe kill 20 million of your countrymen is not a very good reason for me to put down my gun and quit shooting. If there’s a pretty good chance you’re going to kill me anyway, why not die on my feet, gun blazing, like a man. That was the mindset of the Warsaw Ghetto, a tragic but noble one.
Give people a reason to live, for Chrissake.
Same reason I’ve always opposed beating up people who are arrested. Having been cuffed a couple of times and manhandled by the cops, I figure the cops want to beat up everyone they arrest. What’s the point? Getting arrested is bad enough. Being imprisoned is bad enough. Losing in a war is bad enough. You should treat your former enemy kindly enough so he does not want to take up arms against you again.
I also think that there was something just intrinsically wrong about starving all those Germans to death and raping all those German women. Whether they deserved it or not, I still don’t think it was right to do it to them. As above, there’s no point to punishing the defeated in war. Defeat alone is punishment enough.
The neo-Nazi sites claim 13 million excess German deaths 1945-50 via this plan. Wiki doesn’t give a figure, but you wonder if the Nazis are right on that one too. Remember. Anytime Nazis are right, it can’t be good.
Ross Vachon’s Semitism Run Wild is an excellent exploration of the Morgenthau Plan, drawing analogies to the neocons as latter inheritors of the Morgenthau throne.

The Whole Place is a "Settlement"

An pro-settlement Israeli commenter on Ha’aretz, the voice of Israeli liberalism (see comment 7 by a transplanted Dutch Jew in far northern Israel):

Settlement on the land, Hityashvut, has been the backbone of the Zionist endeavor since the first colonies were begun over 120 years ago. In the time of the British, it was especially necessary to create “facts on the ground” in places where the British discouraged settlement, in order to ensure that these locations would remain part of the state of Israel.
Today however, the government is us. Settlers who create illegal “facts on the ground” in Judea and Samaria help our own government and our own IDF – us. It is constructive to assist the Israeli government and the IDF with establishing settlements in places that have a large and hostile Arab population.
Large parts of the Negev and the Galilee remain sparsely settled and it is also important to invest our efforts in developing these lands. Facts, arguments and reasoning based on moral and historical rights are never obsolete and are still valid today. As to our historical rights: see here.

Sometimes there is no need to put words in their mouth. The horse’s mouth opens and speaks for itself. Not much to add here.
This is my beef against Zionism. “The settlements” and “normative Zionism” are properly conflated. Truly, they are an extension of one another. Focusing on “the settlements” while ignoring that the whole damn place is really a gigantic settlement creates a false distinction and whitewashes the Zionist project while legitimating it.
Note the comments about the Galilee and the Negev.
Israel has been engaged in something called “the Judaization of the Galilee” for many years now. This involves refusing to allow Arab cities and villages to expand, while surrounding them, as if they were bacterial infections,  with the antibiotic of government-funded Jewish communities.
The Judaization of the Galilee is discussed even in liberal Ha’aretz as if it were the most normal and proper thing around. The Israeli Left, those who decry “settlements”, seem to have nothing to say about the Judaization of the Galilee.
Couple of questions.
Suppose the US government regarded the Black areas of the South with alarm, refused to give Black towns and cities the permission to grow, shorted them on government aid, and surrounded them, as if to isolate them, with lavishly funded all-White towns and cities. Who would not call this out for the White Supremacism that it is?
It is this staunch anti-racist banner that I lift high when I oppose Zionism. It’s the only reasonable position for any anti-racist or non-racist to take.
Unless someone can make a case that Jews get to be super-racists while this project is denied to everyone else. Anyone takers?

More "Jews Got Warned on 9-11" BS

Some commenters are continuing to beat the dead horse of “Jews got warned on 9-11”. Well, 450 Jews obviously never got warned, and they got killed in the attack. And the 1 or 2 Israelis killed in the attack never got warned either.
One piece of evidence is that supposedly Odigo Headquarters in Israel sent out warnings to its NY subsidiary 2 hours before the attack warning of an upcoming attack.
I think this has been misrepresented. Odigo is just an instant messenger. It’s like Yahoo Messenger. That’s all it is. Tons of messages go out over it all over the globe all the time. I’m not sure of the details of this warning, but I believe that there were just some instant messages sent out over the Odigo network a couple of hours before the attack.
There were like 2 or 3 instant messages sent out on Odigo. I’m not sure who sent them out, or to whom they were directed. I am not sure that Odigo actually did evacuate its NY office as a result of some forewarnings.
I have done a lot of research into 9-11 myself. Keep in mind that tons of Arabs and Muslims also seem to have had some news of this impending attack before it happened, including knowledge of the attack even months before it went down.
Some notable cases were a case in Texas where an Arab elementary schooler was brought to the principal’s office several weeks before the attack crying and saying that they were going to blow up the WTC. The Principal’s office took the kid in, shrugged their shoulders, and sent him home.
In an English class for ESL students in NY a week or two before the attacks, a student went to the window and pointed to the WTC during class. He said, “See that building? In two weeks, it’s not going to be there.” Some of the students nodded their heads. I think the teacher reported it, but nothing happened.
It was later said that many Arabs and Muslims sympathetic to Islamist terrorists around New York had heard that the WTC was going to be attacked. It’s not known if they told anyone.
I also found that there were many Muslims, especially in Saudi Arabia, the Gulf states and Pakistan, who seemed to have some foreknowledge of this plot in some way or another.
It’s a monument to anti-Semitism that the “9-11 truth” anti-Semites focus solely on Israeli foreknowledge, and don’t say one peep about the tremendous evidence for Muslim foreknowledge.
There are continuous rumors of upcoming terror attacks all over the globe. Most of them are complete bullshit. So most people just dismiss them.
Most people I talk to about this don’t recall this, but I recall that in the few years before 9-11, I kept hearing reports on cable news that “bin Laden is trying to attack the US.” They would show his picture and say his organization is trying to attack us. This according to US intelligence reports. After a while, I got so sick and tired of hearing, “bin Laden is trying to attack us,” that I figured it was like the boy who cried wolf. Then 9-11 happened. So a lot of folks knew something was up, but they just didn’t know what.
It is true that  Israelis were warned before the UK 7-7 and Jordan Amman hotel terror attacks. All they were told is that a suspected terror plot was about to go down in the country. They didn’t have specifics about where, when or whom.
Keep in mind that there are near-constant warnings of upcoming terror attacks on one type or another all over the globe. These reports are called “raw intel”, most of them are either fake or never happen, and most are just dismissed by intel agencies. Sorting through “raw intel” and separating the wheat truth from the chaff BS is the job of intelligence agencies, and it is not so easy.
It’s interesting that Israeli Zim Shipping moved out of their WTC offices in the months before the attack.
Both US and Israeli sources say that Israel caught wind of some kind of a big plot a few weeks before the attack and tried to warn the US, but the US pretty much blew them off, since there were continuous warnings of such attacks at the time.
The behavior of Israelis, in particular the art students and the moving companies, in the events surrounding 9-11 is suspicious indeed. In particular the Israelis who were dancing on top of a building cheering while photographing the burning towers.
After the attacks, a number of Israelis were rounded up as possible suspects in the attacks. Also rounded up were many Muslims. After a while, all of these Israelis were released. I think some of them went on TV to vociferously state their innocence. Almost all, or all, of these Israelis seem to be connected to Israeli intelligence in some way or another.
It’s clear that Israel has attacked the US sometimes. They did in the US Liberty attack in which 36 sailors died. They did in Egypt in some bombings of US offices in the 1950’s.
In addition, they had knowledge of the Hezbollah attack on the Marine barracks in Lebanon but failed to warn and just let it go down. I assume they realized at the time that some US Jews may have been possible victims on the Liberty and in the barracks. On the other hand, Jews are dramatically underrepresented in the US armed forces.
One of the things I find so difficult to believe about the Israel knew about 9-11 thing is the idea that Israel would let the attack go down, knowing full well that huge numbers of US Jews were going to get killed. Jews are 2% of the US population and were 15% of the US victims. They warned Israelis but not US Jews? Huh?
Fox News did some excellent coverage on this issue and said that US intelligence agencies suspected Israel of foreknowledge of the attacks and failure to warn. That coverage was quickly pulled off Fox, and all transcripts of it vanished. Fortunately, I think you can find it in Youtube.
All US officials talking about their suspicions about Israel would only do so anonymously, as they said pushing such a theory was career suicide. Many had been ordered by superiors to stop pursuing the investigation of  Israel and 9-11.
Further, the US Army War College issued a report on Mossad calling them a total wild card, perfectly capable of pulling off a terrorist attack and then blaming it in Arabs or Muslims. Mossad has done this at least once in the past, in the Lavon Affair in Egypt in 1950’s.
Let’s be clear though that I think that Al Qaeda did 9-11. The question with the Israelis and others is one of foreknowledge and failure to warn. I don’t suspect Israel of doing 9-11. That’s just absurd, and anyway, the evidence for Al Qaeda doing it is overwhelming.

The "Jews are Khazars, Not From Palestine" Nonsense

The age-old “Jews are Khazars, not from Palestine” thing has come up in the comments again. It’s too bad we have to refute this thing. It’s actually an interesting question, and Alfred Koestler, Jewish, wrote an interesting book on it called The 13th Tribe. Unfortunately, anti-Semites and especially anti-Zionists have gotten a hold of it and use it to say that Jews do not come from Palestine and hence have no right to it.
Ok, first of all, whether or not Jews come from Palestine or Khazaria 2000 years has no bearing on whether they have a right to colonize Palestine and throw out the natives. They have no such right. 2000 year old land deeds not being redeemable and all.
I know this guy, and he has done some excellent work on this stuff – it’s the best out there. He’s Jewish, his name is Kevin Brook, and he started out believing in the Khazaria thing, but his research led him to more or less refute it.
Let us put this another way. 13% of Ashkenazi Jews have some Khazarian genes. About 3% have considerable Khazarian genes.
There have been an incredible number of genetic studies of Jews recently (many or all of them are summarized on the Khazaria page). The results are very confusing, but the best summary is that Ashkenazi Jews are mostly from the Middle East, and in part from whatever country in Europe they come from.
They are most closely related to Palestinians, Syrians, Iraqis and Lebanese Arabs – the Arabs of the Levant and Mesopotamia. Before that, there is a strong relationship to the Kurds, Turks and Armenians. This follows Biblical teachings that the Jews originally came from northern Iraq before they settled in Middle East. There are a few Ashkenazi Jews who are pure Slavs and are related to the Sorbs and the Belorussians.
The Ashkenazi Jews left the Middle East between 1 and 500 AD and settled in Southern Europe, then moving up into Europe. In the first 500 years, there was some interbreeding with European populations, mostly Jewish men mating with Gentile women. Then after about 1000 AD, Talmudic Judaism took hold, and Jews bred almost exclusively among themselves.
The Ashkenazi Jews are Khazars, not from Palestine, thing has been refuted.

Civilization and Evolutionary Progress, or Otherwise

Congenial Times is an interesting, albeit conservative, blog. He’s also gay and a race realist, of all things.
A recent post is on a book by Gregory Cochran and Henry Harpending, The 10,000 Year Explosion. The subtitle of the book is “How Civilization Accelerated Human Evolution.”
Much of the book is spent on agriculture and how agriculture has driven human evolution, made us more civilized in a variety of ways compared to hunter-gatherers, etc. Congenial Times accepts this reading, comparing Europeans to Aborigines.
There are some problems with this analysis.
One of the oldest areas on Earth for agriculture is Africa. It probably goes back 8-12,000 years. Ditto with New Guinea. Both populations not only have low impulse control and foresight, but low intelligence.
Further, in both, agriculture has in fact selected for higher testosterone because primitive agriculturalists tend to be polygynous and primitive hunter gatherers tend to be monogamous and lower testosterone. Hence, you get elites with huge harems in both Africa and New Guinea and lots of guys who aren’t getting any.
Also, in Africa, along with the testosterone came large body size and great athletic ability in Blacks. Unfortunately, combined with high testosterone, this large body size is often put to less than social uses. So in this way, agriculture selected for less civilized traits (high testosterone, polygyny, large body size, physical aggression) while hunter gatherers selected for more civilized traits.
So in Africa, the hunter-gatherers remained low testosterone, with more androgynous, less physically exaggerated physiques and increased monogamy. Similar traits in Asian males are tossed out as a reason why Asians are the most highly-evolved race – if that is so, then why is the same not true of the Khoisan?
Monogamy is said to be one of the defining building blocks of civilization. So why do we see it in African hunter-gatherers but not in African agriculturalists?
Ag is not all it is cracked up to be.
The book also claims we are getting smarter. It’s certainly possible, but no one really knows. It’s not entirely clear that we are getting smarter, though it’s possible. Our brains were much bigger 10,000 years ago. One of the largest brains ever seen in modern man is from an extinct race that seems similar to the Khoisan – the Strandwalkers of SW Africa who went probably went extinct for the most part 3,000 years ago.
Congenial Times then riffs on dysgenics, noting that in modern society, the dumber you are, the more kids you have, and the smarter you are, the fewer kids you have. These trends seem obvious to me, at least in the USA (not so sure about Europe and other places). Nevertheless, the much-heralded by the Right Dysgenics Trend has not (yet) occurred.
Not only that, but our IQ’s have been rising at 3 points/decade since 1930. In addition, but there is evidence for genetic selection in both US Blacks and Whites in the last 200 years (Blacks in only the last 100 years) towards a more progressive phenotype and probably higher intelligence. The notion of dysgenics re: IQ is logical theorywise, but it doesn’t seem to be panning out that way in meatspace.

MRSA

Fascinating stuff.
I don’t know about you, but that bug is really creeping me out. How do you get it? Contact with other humans? So what are we supposed to do, become hermits?
By the way, I don’t have germ OCD. I do wash my hands a lot though, but not like an OCD nut. Maybe we all should.
Anti-Semites are kindly encouraged to find the obvious Jew-link to this nasty disease. C’mon guys, there must be one somewhere. Get crackin’, Judeophobic Sherlocks!

4000 Israelis Stayed Home on 9-11, and Other Bullshit

The 9-11 attacks really hammered the NY Jewish community hard. 3,000 people were killed, and about 450 of them, 15%, were Jews. That figure is from the ADL, so you are free to dismiss it. However, to argue that the ADL is so evil as to make up out of whole cloth the deaths of 450 Jews on 9-11 is to accuse them of a particular evil that I think even they are not capable of.
As supporting evidence, a while back, I had access to a list of the names of the people killed in attack on the towers, and I was interested in the “no Jews got killed on 9-11” thing, so I started going through and counting all of the obviously Jewish names. I got to around 300 or so and then I just gave up.
Manhattan is swarming with Jews, and I think one of the companies on the towers was called Cantor, Inc. It’s owned by a Jew, Cantor, and it had lots of Jewish staff. They got creamed in the 9-11 attack; the office just got decimated.
The 4000 Jews or 4000 Israelis or whatever staying home that day is one of the biggest lies of them all.
It comes from the fact that the Israeli government said that there were 4000 Israelis, or dual citizens, or whatever the Hell they were, living or working within an X-mile radius of the Towers at the time 9-11 hit. You know, the Israeli government freaks out whenever one Jew anywhere on Earth gets killed. So they just said 4000 Israelis or dual-citizens were missing. I specifically remember that announcement on the day of the attacks 8 years ago.
It’s also quite possible, as New York is Tel Aviv West, that there were 4000 Israelis or dual citizens situated in Lower Manhattan when the planes hit.
Well, it turned out almost all of them were ok, except one or two guys. One of them was on board one of the planes, so the anti-Semites peddling this tripe morph this poor Israeli guy into “one of the pilots,” as suicidal, well-armed Saudi Al Qaeda young men are such peaceful folks that they could never do such a thing, bless their Takfiri hearts.
But even if  “4000 Israelis got warned,” lots of NY Jews got killed, so that means that Israelis are so evil that they warn their own Sabra kind but piss on Diaspora Jews as kapos or something.
Bullshit.
Jews protect Jews, everywhere. That’s part of what being a Jew is all about. In fact, the prohibition against Jews killing Jews is supposedly based on a Jewish religious prohibition on suicide, so a Jewish friend of mine told me. This implies that in Judaism, all Jews are part of a whole, a body politic, and to kill a fellow Jew is to kill yourself.
The whole “Israelis got warned” shit is all based on the above, the Israeli government saying 4000 Israelis were missing, simply because they could not immediately account for them. Since they almost all turned up ok after people checked on them, this morphs into “4000 Jews/Israelis/whatever got warned and stayed home that day,” except they didn’t bother to warn the 450 NY Jews who got Shoah’d in 9-11.
Yeah right!
Anti-Semites are so stupid sometimes.

HR 362 – Beware the Monster

US House Resolution 362 was introduced last spring by Gary Ackerman, a New York Democrat. Text of the resolution. The resolution apparently imposes some sort of a military blockade on Iran. In particular, this part of the resolution here:

…imposing stringent inspection requirements on all persons, vehicles, ships, planes, trains, and cargo entering or departing Iran…

Looks a Hell of a lot like a military blockade to me. We are going to intercept all vehicles, ships, planes and trains attempting to enter or leave Iran to see if they have anything naughty on them? Whoa. That’s a blockade. A blockade is generally thought of as an act of war, and if a country is subjected to a blockade, I believe that under the laws of war, the blockaded country has a right to attack the people who are blockading them.
Well, yes, Gary Ackerman is Jewish, sure. There is a lot of talk about all sorts of folks who want to attack or fuck with Iran for various reasons outside of Zionism, but at any rate, HR 362 appears to have been drafted by AIPAC itself, and they are the main ones pushing it.
Amazingly, the House tabled this resolution when it came up last year. Mr. Ackerman has promised that he will reintroduce the resolution this January when Congress reconvenes (has that happened yet?). The Stop AIPAC website has some good updates on this resolution.
If Iran is intent on developing a nuclear bomb, and if Iran really is going to shoot a nuke at Israel, it seems reasonable that a blockade or even an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities by Israel, the US or other interested parties would be a good idea. I certainly don’t want to see Iran lobbing any nukes at Israel.
However, it seems that even if Iran is trying to get a nuke (I believe that they are), they are just trying to get one for self-defense, since the lesson that came out of the Iraq War 2003 was that countries without nukes can get attacked any time by the US, or I guess Israel.
It’s pretty amazing that Israel actually asked Bush for permission to bomb Iran’s nuclear sites last year, but Bush refused to grant flyover and other permission to do so.
Turkey was a major part of this Israeli plan (part of the attack would be launched from Turkey) but with this Gaza attack, Israel-Turkey relations are at an unbelievable low.
It’s also quite possible that Israel was grooming the new pro-West Georgian government as a place to launch the attack on Iran, but the Russian war with Georgia which resulted in the de facto independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia (which this blog supports, and we supported Russia versus Georgia in the war), seems to have put that on ice too. From the link:

There were reports that Israel wanted to use bases in Georgia to attack Iran and one of Russia’s aim was to preempt that. Interesting to note – Israel got wind of the Russian attack a week before the attacks and left Georgia with its advisers (note: USA stayed behind).
The Israelis went to Russia and admitted that arming Georgia was a mistake and implored Russia NOT to arm Hezbollah and Iran with sophisticated armaments and missiles.

Unfortunately, the new senator from New York, Kirsten Gillibrand, taking Hillary Clinton’s place as Hillary moves to Secretary of State, is a strong supporter of HR 362, in fact, she’s a co-sponsor of the bill. Gillibrand’s face was on the front page of the New York Times today, so she’s definitely in the news. She’s in AIPAC’s pocket all right.
How do I feel about Iran getting a nuke? I hope they get one. As per the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, the nuclear powers were supposed to get rid of their nukes on the basis that non-nuclear powers would not be allowed to get nukes. The nuclear powers are not upholding their end of the bargain, so screw it.
Any reasonable and sane country (Iran is one) who is being threatened by nuclear weapons has a right to get nukes themselves (I believe there is even a provision in the treaty that allows that). Iran’s being threatened with nukes by both the US and Israel, so Iran gets to get a nuke for deterrence. The nuclear powers could have avoided this whole mess by fulfilling their end of the bargain. They have not, and in the foreseeable future, they will not.
How worried am I that Iran will lob a first strike nuke at Israel, Europe, or anyone for that matter. Not at all. If I were the least bit worried, I wouldn’t support them getting a nuke.
Support Iran’s effort to get a nuclear bomb!
Whoa, is that a radical statement or what?

Does Israel Have a Right to Defend Itself?

This is the typical question lobbed by the pro-Israel crowd. What we are saying is that Israel doesn’t have a right to defend herself. This is supposedly an aspect of the New Anti-Semitism, in that everyone has a right to fight back but Jews. Jews have to just sit there and let people kill them, like in WW2. Maybe someone is saying that, but it sure isn’t me.
Let’s get things straight here. Everyone has a right to self-defense in wartime (Article 51 of the UN Charter), and possibly in peacetime.
If you haven’t shot at cops, but cops are shooting at you (assuming you are not pointing a weapon at them) I assume you have a right to shoot back at cops. This is basically what Leonard Peltier is accused of doing, although the Indian who killed the FBI agent is not Leonard but another guy.
During the AIM vs. BIA wars of the early 1970’s, some FBI agents pulled into the Pine Ridge Reservation Sioux reservation in South Dakota, got out of their cars, and started shooting at the Indians up on the ridge. The Indians took cover, grabbed some guns, and started shooting back. Peltier was shooting, but he wasn’t the one who shot the agent, some other Indian was. This is exactly what I think happened.
So let’s get clear on this. Everyone has a right to shoot back. Including Nazis. Including Japs in WW2. We were shooting at them, so they had a right to shoot back. They had a right to attack us even when we were not shooting at them, since we were hostile forces at war with them. So of course Israel has a right to fight back, and even to attack Palestinian forces in Gaza who were shooting rockets at Israel.
What about proportionality? Israel killing 1,400 Palestinians while only 13 Israelis got killed is said to be the war crime of lack of proportionality. Actually, this is a difficult case to make.
Disproportionality can be a war crime, but even this is uncertain. There are laws against collective punishment, but it’s uncertain if disproportionality is included. There is stuff about disproportionality in the Draft Articles in State Responsibility, recently adopted by the International Law Commission (see December 29, 2008 1:02 PM comment), but that’s not international law yet.
What that means (see December 28, 2008 1:18 PM comment) is that if you have a town where there is one building in the town with some fighters in it shooting at you, you don’t have a right to blow up or level the whole town to get at the one building. You can blow up the building, sure. So it’s hard to argue that Israel committed the war crime of disproportionate response in this case.
However, the UN is complaining that what Israel did is to lock the civilians into Gaza, prevent them from fleeing, and then attack. I’m not sure on international law, but I’m pretty sure you have to give civilians the right to flee the fighting? Egypt and the US are also at fault here, since the US, Egypt and Israel all control the Rafah checkpoint, and terrified Gazans were not allowed to flee to Egyptian safety in this latest war, held back to gun-wielding troops.
I will point out that the US did much the same in Fallujah. Right before they invaded, scores or hundreds of civilians, mostly unarmed young men in civilian clothes, tried to flee the city, only to be turned back at gunpoint by US troops. How cruel can you get?
In the Gaza case, even worse from my point of view is that they dropped leaflets on Gaza telling civilians to leave the area as it was about to be attacked, then the Israelis went ahead and attacked them anyway after they fled to UN shelters and whatnot.
I guess that is some kind of a super-cruel Israeli joke. “Flee! Flee! Civilians get out! We are going to attack the area!” Then later, “Haha! Just kidding! You fell for it. Suckers! Here’s a bomb on your head!” The punch line is there’s no escape.
It’s like throwing a Surprise Birthday Party for a guy at work, and then the boss barges in and says, “Happy birthday! You’re fired!” And the whole room erupts in gales of laughter as birthday boy shrivels up. Downright hilarious.

Good God, Haven't We Heard This Before?

They think we are going to fall for this one again?
If you’re reading, 4th paragraph is the take-home point.
What on Earth are they thinking? Do they think we are stupid?
Last time they played this trick on us, the country at the butt end of the joke got attacked around a year later. The trick was just part of the Felix’s bag of tricks designed to fool people into going along with a war of aggression on a foreign state.
So what’s the purpose this time?

Joseph Cannon Channels Robert Lindsay

This guy has a very interesting site that I have been reading off and on for some time. He’s smart as a whip, and he’s one kickass writer to boot. I like him because he’s not afraid to take on conspiracy theory – his site was one of the best for up to date coverage of the stealing of several recent US federal elections via computerized voting machines. And yet, he’s not a nut.
He knows where to blow the whistle on conspiracy theory – he bans all 9-11 conspiracy morons in the comments, especially the “controlled demolition” boneheads. A lot of gullible folks have fallen for this very well thought out nonsense. They have all sorts of engineers, scientists and whatnot on board to prove that the Twin Towers were actually blown up by “controlled demolition”, not by two jet airplanes full of ultra-flammable jet fuel flying into them at 400 mph.
I guess the government ran around for weeks beforehand planting explosives all over the towers, but no one ever saw them! Whoa! How did they pull that off, man? Crime of the century!
Oh, Larry “Lucky Larry” Silverstein, who owned the buildings, just so happens to be a Super-Jew. Not such a big Super-Jew though, they he didn’t get about 300-400+ of his fellow New York dual-loyalists massacred in the controlled demo. Did he fuck up or what? Everyone knows Jews don’t kill Jews.
Lucky Larry adds the anti-Semitic twist, the diabolical Semite zillionaire super-criminal mass killer – to the mix. Stir and serve! Controlled demolition, anti-Semitism, several heaping teaspoons of stone ground silliness, and it’s ready to eat! Anyway, if you are interested in takedowns of the controlled demo BS, there are plenty out there on the Net, including one done by Andy at Xymphora.
Which brings me to Cannon’s post. In which he decries Andy’s spiraling tumble into the fetid Mumbai-like alleyways of anti-Semitism. He was once a fine blogger, though a bit of a conspiracist, pretty good on Israel too, until he got the Jew-thang. And down he went. Andy complains in a recent post that folks are calling him an anti-Semite. Let me throw my shout out into the ring, too, Xymphie! You’re an anti-Semite! Neener neener!
The fall of Xymphora has been gradual. Xymphora (clever name means ‘misfortune’ in Greek) has been sliding for a while. The first symptoms were the colonization of the comments threads with super-strains of multidrug resistant anti-Semites and conspiracy nuts. Then came the Far Rightwingers and the Nazis, as they always do, trailing like seagulls to the anti-Semitic chum trail.
Then Xymphie himself became increasingly deranged. It’s all Zionism all the time at Xymphie’s place. Zionism being the cause of just about everything unpleasant, deadly and even capable of causing minor itching, on Earth. He appears to be heading into the terminal stage of the illness, as he’s now linking to the charming David Irving.
Anyway, I will send you over to Joseph’s piece, where he riffs on Jews, anti-Semitism, Israel, Gaza, Super-Jews, Jewish paranoia and the often-Jewish organisms that feed it, etc.
The part about the Jewish lady who is convinced that Hollywood films and TV shows are filled with somewhat hidden anti-Semitic imagery – the cause being a “glass ceiling” that prevents Hollywood Jews from rising to a roiling boil at the top of the Tinseltown Pan – was classic Jewish paranoia and nearly had me falling out of my chair. Some folks jes needs to be victims, you know?
He pretty much sums up my feelings on all of these things, so I will just hand him the mike. Take it away, Joseph.

"They Spit On the Returning Soldiers!" The Journey of a Nazi Lie

Perhaps most of you are familiar with the line from the Vietnam War days. The line is: “The anti-war people spit on the returning veterans!” The story, told endlessly by pro-Vietnam War folks, is that long-haired, hippie, anti-American antiwar protesters spit on the returning veterans coming back from the Vietnam War. They also supposedly called them, “baby-killers.”
As the story is usually told, it’s always women, young, beautiful women, who spit on the haggard, wounded, ill and psychologically battered heroes as they disembarked off the plane or ship or whatever and set their first steps on US soil. “Their women spit on our brave heroes!” is the line.
A journalist, Jerry Lembcke, investigated these claims and wrote a whole book about it, Spitting Image: Myth, Memory, and the Legacy of Vietnam, published in 1998.
Lembcke went back over every single case of someone who said they got spit on, or who reported soldiers getting spit on, and he was not able to substantiate a single case. None of the soldiers reported getting spit on, though you might have expected some of them to lie. It’s was always, “someone I know” or “someone told me.” Same thing with the civilians. A friend witnessed soldiers getting spit on, or told them about soldiers getting spit on, or a soldier they knew got spit on.
None of the stories panned out when Lembcke tried to track them down.
Furthermore, Lembcke noted that there were no regular flights or ships coming into civilian airports or ports bringing soldiers in uniform. The story always is that the uniformed soldiers are disembarking the flight or the ship at a civilian airport or civilian port to waiting throngs of jeering antiwar protesters. It is here that the dirty deed of girls spitting on brave patriotic men occurred.
One problem here. All soldiers coming back from Vietnam disembarked at Navy, Air Force or Army bases. These are places where no civilians are allowed. There’s no way for waiting throng of protesters to greet uniformed troops coming off planes or ships. The protesters can’t get anywhere near the scene of the disembarking in order to line up and protest.
So it turns out that one of the worst lies of Vietnam War is just that – a great big fat lie.
I believe that some antiwar protesters may have shouted, “Baby-killers!” at some soldiers, but after My Lai and other massacres, you had to admit there might have been some truth to that. Actually, considering how crazy a lot of those Vietnam protesters were, I am surprised that they didn’t spit on returning troops. That’s something I fully expected the most whacked out of them to do.
Perhaps you were wondering where that line originated? It did not have its genesis in the Vietnam War. The reporter, on doing some digging, found something far more sinister.
The story about beautiful young, unpatriotic antiwar protesters spitting on wounded, shell-shocked and beleaguered heroes originated WW1 postwar Germany. At the time, it was said that as the brave German soldiers trudged home from the front, battered, freaked-out and defeated, throngs of beautiful, blond young German maidens lined the streets and spit on them as they passed by. After all they had been through, it was the ultimate insult.
Problem is it was a lie then and it was a lie in Vietnam.
Lembcke went back and researched the cases in Germany, and it turned out that German historians widely agreed that this never happened. Guess who made up this lie? The Nazis, and the proto-Nazis.
After all, Hitler himself, as a wounded returning soldier, came out of the hospital after three months and was outraged that his society turned his back and him and his fellow returning veterans. Worse, the vets seemed to be blamed for the war. That was the last straw.
The vets formed rightwing populist groups like the Freicorps and rampaged through the streets of Germany in the 1920’s, attacking Communists, socialists, pacifists, trade unionists and anyone deemed un-German. They were used by the German elite to attack their enemies on the Left at a time when Left wing revolution threatened Germany in the early 1920’s. Problem is, the monster got out of hand, turned into the Nazis 13 years later, seized the government and went nuts.
If the story ended there it would be bad enough, but it does not.
Lembcke found that the story emerged again in France, when returning vets from the Algerian War were spit on beautiful, unpatriotic young French lasses as they trudged home, bitter, wounded, defeated, thousand yard stares poking holes in the Parisian landscape. The author researched the story there, too. French historians looked into the case and found that it never happened then either.
It’s never happened anywhere, not in Germany, nor in France, nor in the US. Sure, it could happen anytime, but historically, it never has. It’s important to shoot down this lie because even I believed it until a colleague told me about this book.
Note that the beautiful young women are an essential aspect of the story. The evil unpatriotic antiwar protesters convince the most beautiful women of the land to turn against its very finest men, men who risked their lives for the nation.
There is something particularly humiliating about a grown man being spit on by a woman, especially a beautiful young woman, especially when he is a brave warrior, especially when his pride, dignity, manners and chivalry prevents him from fighting back against a woman.
The scene implies all sorts of things, especially men humiliated in their manhood after it has already been battered by war and especially by defeat or quasi-defeat. There are overtones of impotence and women mocking men for their impotence or lack of masculinity. The symbolism runs deep and it’s designed to make blood boil. It all adds up to one nasty equation. You do the math.
It’s also interesting  that this lie originated with fascists, in particular ultra-nationalist Nazis. Then it went to ultranationalist French colonizers of the early 1960’s. The French who supported the war in Algeria are generally considered to be a far Right grouping. It emerges again in nationalist Americans fighting another more or less colonial war in Indochina.
I don’t like to call my fellow Americans fascists or Nazis, but the trail of this lie is quite clear.
Shame on anyone who knowingly repeats it.

On Monitoring Jews in the Workplace

In the comments section, one commenter suggested that Jews should have to state whether they are Jewish on employment forms, which should then be collected and monitored by the government for the purposes of seeing if they are foreign agents. A (non-Zionist) progressive Jewish commenter took extreme umbrage to that.
Let me weigh in here on the collect data about Jews in employment stuff. First of all, I think it is completely unnecessary to collect information on Jews in the workplace and monitor them.This is America, not Syria or Iran. I’m sure Syria or Iran does this, but maybe they have a good reason?
On the other hand, we already collect racial data, do we not, about employees? Anyway, in anti-discrimination cases, we collect data about race and try to figure out if there is discrimination going on.
I understand that in Hollywood, there are claims that Hollywood Jews preferentially hire and promote their own. There is a group called FIRM (Film Industry Reform Movement) that is fighting this. I don’t see how pro-Jewish and anti-Gentile discrimination can be legal. When Whites and men preferentially hire and promote their own, you can go to the government or sue on anti-discrimination statutes and win your case.
I don’t see why such cases cannot be filed against Jews who may be discriminating against Gentiles in Hollywood or other places. Gather some data, take it to the state (wait, forget that) well, take em to court, sue em, and see where you get.
Anyway, if you have nothing better to do, check out the FIRM site. It’s really interesting, and hardly anyone knows about it. The people running it are really cool and are bending over backwards to not be anti-Semitic.
Nevertheless, you can go on the site and read all sorts of disgusting running conversations they are having with sundry Super-Jews who are, of course, accusing them of being Jew-haters, bigots, anti-Semites, Nazis, KKK, White supremacists, White trash, racists, fascists, you know the script.
There is also the typical line super-Jews throw out in these conversations – the reason you’re not making it in Hollywood (or wherever) is because you’re a failure! There’s no anti-Gentile discrimination in Hollywood. You’re just a loser who can’t make a good movie. Hahahahaha!
I imagine this will be the line thrown out there in any anti-discrimination case filed against Jews discriminating against Gentiles. You weren’t promoted cuz you’re all shitty employees, not because you’re Gentiles!
Wow, that’s pretty galling and ballsy. There’s a reason chutzpah is a Yiddish term.
Can you imagine if every time women or Blacks took men or Whites to court on anti-discrimination the Whites or men just said, “You ladies and Blacks are just shitty workers! You Blacks are shiftless and you ladies are too emotional. That’s all there is to it. There is no discrimination!”
Or is this what Blacks and women do have to put up with in these cases? Shudder to think.
Anyway, FIRM was saying a while back they were going to try to sue some Hollywood firms for anti-Gentile discrimination. Not sure where they got with that.

This Map Make Sense to Anyone?

PNAC's Plan For South Asia
PNAC's Plan For South Asia

What do you think? Is there anything to it? I shouldn’t really need to explain it too much, and it’s late. If you read all the captions, you should be able to figure out what’s going on.
Part of the project here is the dismemberment of Pakistan. Pakistan’s territory will be divided up between Afghanistan, India and an independent Balochistan. Although this map was drawn by an American, it’s safe to say that this represents the paranoid world view of the Pakistani elite, and certainly that of the Pakistani military.
This is why they oppose an independent Balochistan, all of Kashmir going to India, and Pashtun nationalism in Pashtunistan on the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Islamists like the various Talibans are not nationalists, and they don’t give a damn about Pashtunistan. All that matters is to live under Islamic rule, borders are nothing.
This is why Pakistan has promoted the Talibans at the expense of secular nationalists like the Awami Party in the Northwest Frontier Province and the Territories.
The Great Game didn’t end in the 1800’s. You kidding? You think we planted all those bases (lily-pads in imperialist-speak) in Central Asia for no reason?

In the US, It's Illegal to Boycott Israel

Is it illegal to boycott any other state on Earth? Of course not.
In fact, boycotting is official state policy; it’s as American as Mom, apple pie and baseball. If you try to not boycott certain countries, you can actually go to jail. What countries? Oh, evil, diabolical countries like Cuba, North Korea, Syria and Iran. Got that? Try to do business with any of them, and you go to jail. You can’t even translate their stuff from Syrian Arabic into English. That’s called “doing business.”
Why can’t we do business with any of these countries? Because they are “enemy states”, and apparently we are at war with them. Officially at war? Of course not. So are we at war, really, with Cuba, North Korea, Iran and Syria? Not really. So how can we be at war and not at war? You  tell me.
And why do I, an independent businessman, go to jail if I refuse to do business with an Israeli on the basis that I am boycotting his shitty little country? Because I live in a free country, where freedom and democracy reign, and we even spread it with guns all over the world.
USA! USA! USA! USA!
Get that? In the US, it’s illegal to boycott Israel, as a private businessman! WTH?

The Mutual Intelligibility of the Scandanavian Languages

In the comments section, heg clears up some of the nonsense about the dialect chain in Scandinavia. It’s commonly held in Linguistics that Danish, Swedish and Norwegian form a dialect chain where they can all understand each other, more or less. Heg points out that this is not really true.
First of all, Heg says that in Jutland, in Denmark, a language called Jutish is spoken. I was aware of this, but I was not sure how different Jutish was from the rest of Scandinavian. Jutish speakers can understand Danish, Norwegian and Swedish, but Danes, Norwegians and Swedes can barely understand a word of Jutish.
Heg also points out that Scots, a separate language from English spoken in Scotland, sounds much like Jutish. He says if you can understand Jutish, you can understand Scots.
This is very interesting, because Scots really is just an Old Saxon lect, let’s face it. Three tribes, the Angles, the Saxons and the Jutes, from southern Denmark and northern Germany, migrated to the UK in the 600’s.
This Germanic tongue became Old English, which, if you have ever tried to read Beowulf, is quite unintelligible to English speakers. As an aside, there is an Old English Wikipedia, there are Old English conferences and magazines, and there are even speakers, readers and writers of Old English! Why people want to learn dead languages is beyond me, but it’s better than committing suicide by fork like most Americans do for a hobby.
Heg says that Swedes can also understand Norwegians and apparently vice versa, though he did not elaborate on whether Norwegians could understand Swedes. Norwegian TV shows are regularly shown on Swedish TV, and most Swedes can understand them just fine.
Likewise, Danes can understand Swedes, but crucially, Swedes can hardly understand a word of Danish.
Further, there are lects inside of Sweden that are not intelligible to a speaker of Standard Swedish, for instance, Dalecarlian. In fact, Dalecarlian itself is split into multiple varieties that are not even intelligible with each other.
There are lects way up on the northwest coast of Sweden near Norway, in Bohuslän that are not intelligible to other Swedes. Gutnish, spoken on the island of Gotland, is not intelligible with Standard Swedish. There are also some highly divergent and unintelligible lects way up in far northern Sweden such as in Överkalix, Västerbotten, Norrbotten and Piteå.
Scanian is not fully intelligible with intelligible with Swedish, although this is controversial. Jamtska is said to be fully intelligible with Swedish..
Heg says that most Danes understand most Norwegians and vice versa.
One of the Norwegian spelling systems was copied over from Danish (Norway was long a Danish colony), and the other was a nationalist response to this that was based on the Norwegian language actually spoken in Norway at the time. So began the Bokmål and Nynorsk wars in Norway.
It’s freezing cold up in Norway, and when they aren’t being evil progressives and engaging in The New Anti-Semitism, Norwegians sit around and engage in the stupidest fight over language that I have ever heard of. Oh well, if it’s that cold, you may as well argue about just about anything if only to warm yourself up.
Bokmål is the one taken from Danish, and Nynorsk is the nationalist one based on Norwegian. They are not so much ways of speaking as they are ways of writing.
Bokmål is clearly more popular, but Nynorsk just won’t go away. You would think that one would be championed by the Right and another by the Left, but it’s not so simple. The Left often champions Bokmål, the language of the colonizer, and Right often supports Nynorsk, the nationalistic tongue. As in other parts of Europe, nationalists here are often rightwingers instead of leftwingers.
To make things even more insanely confusing, there are various forms of Bokmål and Nynorsk, including forms associated with the working class or rural areas and forms that are more urbanized, upscale, etc. While it is true that the Left supported Nynorsk in the 30’s as some kind of populist gambit, by the 60’s, things had reversed. 60’s radical hippies were championing the working class forms of Bokmål. Since then, the Right seems to be taking the Nynorsk mantle.
There is also something called Riksmål, which I guess is transitional between Bokmål and Nynorsk? And there is something called Høgnorsk, which is some kind of purist Nynorsk or something. I’m getting confused just writing about this stuff.
After spending an hour or so reading about this language fight, I still can’t make heads or tails of it. I always try to narrow complex issues down to make them more understandable, but this is one case where I could not do it. The fight makes no sense in sociopolitical terms. It’s about as sociopolitical as people arguing about which way to put the toilet paper on the roll, in or out.
If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site. Donations are the only thing that keep the site operating.

Standard French Was Not Based on the Parisian Dialect

A very smart female commenter (Why is that foreign women always seem so much smarter than American women?) corrects me on an earlier post in which I said that Standard French was based on the Parisian dialect:

I’m afraid you are wrong saying standard French originated from Paris. Bernard Cerquiglini, in Une Langue Orpheline shows Standard French was in fact elaborated by the “British” administration in today’s western France (Normandy, Anjou) and mixed with other local scripta (the Picard and Champenois ones).
Its adoption by French kings came later. The “Parisian origin” was a construction of French republican ideologists of the XIXth century. As a government lingua franca, it has become more and more distant from local, non-written, dialects of French.

Excellent. I love learning stuff like this.
What’s important is that as a government lingua franca, it has moved further and further from local forms of French, which in most cases, are actually separate languages altogether! See the cases of Picard and Champenois above. Those and other forms of “French” are not intelligible to speakers of Standard French. How do they communicate? Via Standard French.
A very similar thing has occurred in Germany with Standard German, in which a wide ranges of other forms of German are spoken in the country in addition to Standard German. Most of these, like the French lects, are not yet recognized by Ethnologue (only Picard is recognized, and, but Normand, Bourguignon, Champenois, Franc-Comtois, Gallo, Poitevin, Santongeais and Lorraine, (all apparently separate languages, not dialects as Ethnologue states, as I believe that they are not intelligible with Standard French) are not.
As for Angevin, Berrichon and Bourbonnais, I am not sure if those are dialects of French or separate languages.
In Germany, many more German lects are recognized by Ethnologue as separate languages, for instance Alemannisch, Bavarian, Cimbrian, Colonia Tovar German, Eastern Yiddish, Kölsch, Limburgisch, Luxembourgeois, Mainfränkisch, Mócheno, Pennsylvania German, Pfaelzisch, Plautdietsch, Low Saxon, Upper Saxon, Lower Silesian, Schwyzerdütsch, Swabian, Walser, Westphalien, Western Yiddish.
So you can see that there are 21 different kinds of German, mostly spoken in Germany, which are not intelligible with Standard German. There are actually more than that, and I have to do a writeup on that some day.
Similarly, in Italy, there is Standard Italian, and then there are a variety of other Italians, many of which are separate languages. I will go through the Italian lects at another time.
The lect chosen as standard is often rather artificial, though it is often based on the language of a large city, often the capital. I think that Standard Dutch is based on the Amsterdam dialect, but correct me if I am wrong.
Over time, the standard form tends to drift further away from the other lects, though there is also a reverse tendency whereby the other languages start to wear down under the influence of the standard language, and come to resemble the standard language more and more.
We find this happening in Germany, France, Italy and China, where the other Germans, Frenches, Italians and Mandarins are starting to look more and more like the Standard language as they come under pressure from the standard language.

David Kelsey Has a New Site

David is a regular reader of this site, and yes, he is Jewish. His site is  called The Kvetcher. I think he had it up on another site before, but it was in conjunction with a bunch of other writers.
David seems to be a progressive Jew who couldn’t care less about Zionism or Israel. I think, like some of my other Jewish commenters, he just wants nothing to do with either one. They’re not exactly anti-Zionists; they’re just sitting it out. They’re happy in the US, they’re never going to Israel, they seem dubious about the whole project, and they have little or no connection with the place.
I’m not Jewish so it’s hard for me to say what I would do if I were a Jew. But as my Jewish former gf never failed to remind me, screeching, “Admit Bob!! You want to be a Jew! You’ve always wanted to be a Jew!” I sadly had to admit it was true. Just another sorry goy longing to don the kippah.
Nevertheless, I’m not Jewish, so it’s kind of dicky of me to say Jews should do this or that.
Still, the position taken by Dave and others seems to be laudable: as far as Zionism goes, the less said the better, I don’t want to talk about it, and if you’re selling aliyah, thank you very much, but I’m not buying.
Dave and the other Jews on the site are also reasonably (not shrilly and insanely like so many Jews) opposed to anti-Semitism, which makes sense if you are a Jew.
Keep in mind that not all Jews oppose anti-Semitism. I’ve always held that Zionists love anti-Semites as long as they are not too deadly.
This was confirmed for me in correspondence with a hard rightwing Israeli, former high-ranking member of Israeli society, who runs a site which I can’t name since I’m reporting his email comments. He told me in private conversation that he and others like him on the Israeli Right actually like anti-Semites, since they prevent the assimilation of the Jews. And hasten aliya, I might add.
As you can see, there are folks on both sides who have a Machiavellian stake in keeping these fires burning away.
Dave’s a great writer and a really smart guy. I don’t know why, but I actually agree with him a lot.

Does Israel Deliberately Target Civilians?

In the comments section, Dano points out some of the Israeli crimes in the Gaza attack, including targeting the UN building and the use of white phosphorus.
I am convinced that Israel was directly targeting civilians in this Gaza incursion and that they do so regularly. The UN seems to agree with me.
Why?
The reason is to make the civilian population pay for supporting Hamas, the PLO, Hezbollah or whoever. Are they trying to kill every civilian in sight? No way. If they were even halfway trying that, there would be 13,000 dead in Gaza in 2 weeks and not 1,300.
So it’s complicated.
They shoot at civilians, ambulances, journalists, hospitals, UN buildings, etc. sometimes, but not all the time.
The message for targeting the places where the refugees were huddled is that “no place is safe.” This is what will happen if you support Hamas, Hezbollah or whoever. This is what happens if you let Hamas, Hezbollah or whoever shoot rockets at us or attack our troops.
The message, as Marty Peretz says in The New Republic, is “don’t fuck with the Jews.” Peretz’ comment set off a lot of criticism, even amongst progressive Jews. If you let these armed groups attack Israel, we are going to invade you. Don’t think you are get away by being a civilian and hiding in the UN building and letting the armed guys take the heat.
Forget that. There will be no mercy for civilians. As a civilian, you will be attacked, in any place you hide, no matter how safe or secure. So keep these damned armed groups on a reign or this will be your punishment.
It sort of works, as you can see – Hezbollah has engaged in few, if any, attacks on Israel since the Lebanon invasion.
For a long time, I did not believe that Israel was deliberately targeting civilians. Their whole thing is we are White and Western and most civilized army on Earth, so we don’t do that shit.
But if you dig around, you find that they definitely do, but it’s in pretty judicial amounts. Do a lot of digging into the attack on the Qana Base in Lebanon in 1996 and it’s obvious that Israel deliberately hit it. There were no Palestinian fighters shooting from the UN school, the UN relief agency, the Islamic University, or lots of other places.
In the case of the UN school where 40 civilians were killed, there were fighters, but they were a couple of streets away, not firing from the building. So, did Israel target the UN school? I’m not sure, but I am starting to think that maybe they did.
There was no firing whatsoever from the UN relief agency either.
It’s well known that Israel and its supporters despise the UN as anti-Semitic. This is a tragic statement. The UN is nothing more than all of the nations on Earth. If these Jews really think that almost all the nations on Earth hate them, then that’s sad and it’s getting into psychopathology, notably paranoia. Is it true? Does nearly every nation on Earth hate Jews? That’s an incredibly dubious proposition.
But keep in mind that the Israelis lie like maniacs, too. First we never used White Phosphorus, now we did use it, but only to light things up. I doubt it. They used it to terrorize the civilian population into knocking off the rockets. Amnesty International has accused Israel of a war crime in using white phosphorus in a heavily built-up area such as Gaza. Amnesty International is a pretty subdued organization, so if they accuse you of war crimes, that’s pretty hard-hitting stuff.
As far as DIME and depleted uranium, Palestinian physicians are saying that they are finding it in victims. I think it’s quite possible that Israel is using DU in Gaza. After all, their munitions come from the US, and many US munitions now include DU, because it is one kickass weapon.
We have a lot of reports that civilians were shot as they were waving white flags and fleeing, that IDF troops stood there and shot civilians over and over as they stood near them.
The response of Israel is always, “These Arabs are lying.” But I’m quite sure that these stories are true.
Once that argument is demolished, the Israelis always say that “they missed.” In general, that doesn’t seem to be the case either.
It’s classic counterinsurgency doctrine that you always arrest, beat, torture, shoot and kill the civilian supporters of any insurgency. Just about every counterinsurgency in the last 100 years has been fought this way. It’s never enough to get just the armed guys. You go after their civilian support base too. It’s called “draining the sea to kill the fish,” and it’s taught at US military schools, for sure at the School of the Americas.
What does a state have the right to do in a counterinsurgency? They can pass laws that outlaw supporting the guerrillas. You can arrest people, take them to court and try to prove that they are supporting the armed group in some way or another. But that never seems to be enough.
States almost always end up committing mass murder of civilians in any counterinsurgency. An exception is Spain’s war against the ETA, but that was not a very hot war anyway.
What can a state do with fighters? Well, try to arrest them, if you catch them in civilian clothes and you think they are a guerrilla. Take them to court, charge them with terrorism, rebellion or whatever, and try to convict them. Typically, states just kill anyone suspected of being a guerrilla. Or they arrest them, take them into custody, and kill them.
Typically, they utilize “non-state actors” like death squads to do this sort of nasty business. Death squads are typically state security forces in civilian clothes. Problem is it’s often hard to prove in court that someone was a guerrilla.
So the rule of law usually gets suspended in a counterinsurgency, and lots of folks just get socked away on “no charges” for God knows how long, or “disappeared.” Sometimes the disappeared turn up alive, but mostly they are killed. When states do go the legal route and try to convict guerrillas in court, it’s not helpful that insurgents often threaten judges and witnesses in the cases.
Peru is a recent example of a state that somewhat went the legal route (at the same time they were committing mass murder against civilians) in its war against the Shining Path. The legal route was not working, so Fujimori came in, created a dictatorship, abolished the rule of law, and crushed the insurgency. He arrested an incredible 15% of the population over the next 1 1/2 years, but he dealt a serious blow to Sendero.
If you strike enough terror into the civilian population, they won’t support the insurgency anymore. Tragically, this does work. Terror works. Nevertheless, it’s terrorism.
You can make just as good of an argument for Al Qaeda’s attacking British, Spanish, Australian and US civilians in the London bus bombings, the Spanish train bombings, the Bali bombings and 9-11. Al Qaeda, as bin Laden has made clear, is attacking the civilian support base of the enemy forces. This is just as moral or immoral as any counterinsurgency on Earth attacking and killing the civilian support base any non-state armed group.
Supporters of counterinsurgency, prove me wrong here! Show me you’re not just as bad as any terrorists out there?
I will point out that Hezbollah, Hamas and the rest are obviously committing war crimes too. They’re deliberately targeting Israeli civilians, right?
I would also note that hardly any armies fight fair in war anymore. Show me an army that is fighting a war or fought a recent war which fought fair and did not commit war crimes? We include counteringencies here. Pretty hard to find, huh?

On Israeli Fears of Palestinian Intentions

In the comments section, a commenter quotes Ahmed Rami the Radio Islam site and wonders what he means by “Hatred, force and ethnic cleansing never originate where self-determination, freedom and justice are guaranteed.” Rami is a notorious anti-Semite Moroccan Arab from Sweden. However, he does have some interesting stuff on his site. He’s a big fan of the Palestinians, so that’s what that quote is all about.
On the other hand, Rami is fanatically in favor of Morocco’s colonization of the Sahrawis’ land in Spanish Sahara, which is awfully close to what the Israelis are doing in Palestine. There’s a reason Morocco has so many UN resolutions against them. By the way, the US has always backed Morocco’s colonization of Spanish Sahara to the hilt.
What Rami means is if Jewish Israelis had “guaranteed self-determination, freedom and justice” for the Palestinians, there would have been no need for Israelis to engage in “hatred, force and ethnic cleansing” of the Palestinians.
On the other hand, the Israeli Jewish argument is that the Palestinians, given half a chance, would not “guarantee self-determination, freedom and justice” for the Jews in Israel, and would engage in “hatred, force and ethnic cleansing” of these Jews.
Statements by Arabs to the effect that “we are going to drive them into the sea” and whatnot haven’t helped to assuage such fears. Arafat himself, asked what would happen in a free Palestine with Jews and Arabs living together, said that the Palestinians would “engage in psychological terrorism” to make the Jews leave.
Hamas has recycled some of the most noxious and notorious anti-Semitic bullshit and stuck it right in its founding charter. It has also refused to amend this charter despite some major efforts by Gulf Arabs at Doha a while back to do so. Doha is where a lot of the Hamas leadership spends quite a bit of its time, by the way. I think they also spend a lot of time in a North African country, possibly Morocco, but I could be wrong.
There’s also some choice Islamic anti-Semitism in that charter that says at the end of the world, the Muslims are going to chase all the Jews on Earth down and kill all of them. Yeah, Mohammad wrote that.
Hamas’ leader, Sheik Yassin, said that all of the Jews in Israel who could not trace their ancestry back to 1917 (Balfour Declaration) would need to take off. The Zionist movement actually began before Balfour, but I guess Hamas is being generous.
Islamic Jihad, in a statement by the leadership in 1992 on their website, is willing to let all Jews stay in Israel, hopefully provided they live under Islamic Law. Their basis for this was that Jews had always lived in Palestine. I haven’t seen any recent statements.
Al Qaeda’s position is that all Jews in Israel need to take off. Even Al Qaeda doesn’t say that they are out to kill all the Jews in Israel! Or at least not now, anyway. Anyway, under any of the Islamic groups, Jews could always stick around provided they convert to Islam. I realize that’s little consolation to 99% of Israelis, but it’s not the same as Hitler’s race-based genocide that tragically left Jews with no out whatsoever, condemned by their genes.
Even the PFLP “bases” reportedly still hold that a free Palestine “must be Arab“, with Jews, if they are present, as a minority in an Arab land. I don’t see how “Palestine is an Arab state” is any more democratic than “Israel is a Jewish state.” Any pro-Pallies want to help me out here?
As far as the PFLP leadership, no one seems to quite know what they think, but Leila Khaled has taken on Hezbollah recently for suggesting that the Jews in Israel all have to take off, based on Islam. She said the PFLP position is that Jews and Arabs can live together in Palestine, and said that the PFLP rejects Hezbollah’s religious-based anti-Jewish position.
Some of the PFLP base people like the Free Arab Voice take the position that all the Jews need to take off too. No one saying this says how they are going to accomplish this task, although the FAV page linked does say that they propose “armed struggle to throw the invaders out of Palestine.”
The original PLO Charter of 1964 signed by Arafat said that all Jews must take off other than those who can trace their ancestry back to 1917. That’s my take on Article 7 after I read some other documents surrounding this typically mealy-mouthed declaration, plus I knew some hardline Arab Commies who read it that way. Balfour again.
So the saner Jews in Israel who might not mind living with lots of Arabs are afraid that the Arabs don’t want to live with Jews as much as so many Jews don’t want to live with Arabs. I must say that unfortunately there is something to their fears.
Nevertheless, even the hardest line factions like Hamas and the PFLP (the ultimate hardliners – one Islamist and the other super-secular Marxist) have more or less said in a mealy-mouthed way that they will support a 2-state solution. Both say they will support it “for the time being” as a temporary solution. Neither one really comes out and says that, but if you read between the lines, that seems to be what they are saying.
Hezbollah, as hardline as their rhetoric is, says that they will support whatever solution that the Palestinians agree to, no matter what it is. If the Palestinians agree to 2-state, Hezbollah isn’t going to say, “Forget that, we are still fighting.” Iran pretty much says the same thing.
So the notion that all of the Arabs are still committed to “throwing the Jews into the sea,” as my dear 87-year old Judeophilic father insists, just does not seem to be the case. On the other hand, are the Arabs ready to join hands with Israeli Jews, sing Kumbaya, and live in peace happily ever after? Well, not that either.
Once again, it’s comlicated.

Ok, Jews Do Run Hollywood

My bad.
I thought things were getting better, but I guess not. I know a local cinematographer who was working in Hollywood 1/2 the time and up in the Sierra Nevada the other half the time. This guy was an out and out anti-Semite, and he insisted Jews ran the whole place. He said you just have to deal and not freak out about it. That’s the way it is.
Looking through the movie ads, it’s hard to see. The lower rungs of the movies, judging by the credits, are quite Gentile these days. In particular, tons of Italians. I’m told they took their Mafia bucks and moved them legit into the movies, Vegas and corporate America, but who knows if that’s true.
This article still pretty much clinches it. Even the CEO of Fox is Jewish. They’ve still got NBC and CBS. Turns out that the National Alliance may be right after all. Darn. I was hoping one of the worst anti-Semitic “canards” of them all was not true. Guess I’m wrong.
So, what to do? Jewish influence is waning nevertheless. This latest crap in Gaza seems to have been the icing. A lot of Americans have just about had it now. They don’t think much of Arabs or Palestinians, but more and more, when you bring up Israel, you get a frown. Even from my hopelessly Judeophilic relatives.
Israel seems to be losing the NY Times and the Washington Post. That’s a good argument right there that Jews don’t run those papers. My commenters from Israel tell me that Super-Jews consider the Sulzberbergers to be lost. They’re all marrying into Gentiles, and they’re lost to the Jews. You can make a good case that the Washington Post never was all that Jewish. Ben Bradley seem Jewish to you?
On the Daily Show, Jon Stewart (yeah, Jewish), staunch cheerleader against Iran and Hezbollah and fully behind the Israeli War on Lebanon in 2006, has about had it. During this Gaza War, he was slamming away at Israel. If you lose the Daily Show, you lose most of under-30 America. Israel’s already losing the Internet, and The Huffington Post seems gone now. That’s the left wing of the Democratic Party right there.
The Lobby really needs to sit down and think hard about this fuckup. They think they won big in Gaza, but as far as public opinion is concerned, they are just piling up the losses.
If you read the Israeli press (I do, diligently, and I recommend it highly for anyone interested in the conflict) the Israelis all think they won this conflict. 100-1 wins in any contest, contact or otherwise. Fine, you, the World Series Champs, win 100-1 against the Little League. Pat yourself on the back. But you lose the Public Opinion War. Israelis like to blow that off, but do they do this at their peril? Curious minds want to know.

"A Jewish and Democratic State"

Tom Segev is ok, and as far as Israeli intellectuals go, he’s a shining star. Like George Habash, we need to praise every little bit of positive movement on the part of progressive Israelis. Segev is one of the “New Historians” so despised by the Israeli rightwing for, well, telling the truth? Even this truth has been rather hedged lately as folks like Benny Morris have started to cave under overwhelming attacks from their fellow Jews.
What’s telling is how Segev keeps repeating this phrase over and over, tick-like, “Jewish and democratic state”. You can Google “Segev” and “Jewish and democratic state” and find that he says this phrase the same way clocks chime the hours. He can’t help it. He’s just programmed to say those words.
But as we think it over, we being sensible folks, doesn’t the argument of the recently-banned Balad Party in Israel (secular Left Arab party loosely allied with the Palestinian PFLP containing not only Arabs but some leftwing Jewish supporters) seem to make sense? Balad says it supports an Israel of all of its citizens, not just Jewish ubermenschen. I guess they got banned for that. All Arab parties must now sign a pledge saying that they support Israel as a Jewish state. As long as that is the case, if you are an Israeli Arab, why bother to vote?
If you’ve gotten this far, I should not have to point this out: A “Jewish and democratic state” is obviously…an oxymoron? Zionists please, prove me wrong here. I mean, it can be either a Jewish state or a democratic state, but it can’t be both at the same time, you know?
Segev is one smart guy; he must know this phrase is oxymoronic on some level. So why does he keep spouting nonsense? Zionism is a secular religion?
P.S. Ditto for all those “Islamic states” out there. You guys don’t get a pass!

Ownership Not Required – An Examination of Jewish Media Control

It’s commonly said that in the West, the Jews run the media. Who says this? Anti-Semites, and some folks who are not anti-Semites.
I have a degree in journalism and I worked in the field for a bit.
At one time, Jews were pretty dominant in the US media, but I’m not sure anymore. Papers are not that profitable anymore, and more and more, they seem to be getting bought out by standard corporate brands as just another business and way to make money.
Putting the Washington Post, Newsweek, etc. in with the Jewish media is problematic. Katherine Graham is not Jewish. Her Dad was Jewish. She’s not even Jewish under Jewish law.
Half-Jews or folks with some Jewish ancestry sometimes have some Jewish identity, but in other cases, they don’t. I’ve known some half-Jews who were ferocious supporters of the Palestinians and had no Jewish identity whatsoever. Others seemed to have a pretty strong dose. The impetus is on the anti-Semites to prove that K. Graham sees herself as a Jew and not as an ordinary very wealthy high society blond White woman, which is what she looks like.
As the media industry corporatizes and consequently democratizes ethnically, the media control charge holds less and less power. Seeing how the US media stood up to Israel in the strongest way it ever has in the course of this latest Gaza outrage was instructive. No Jewish-controlled industry would have done such a thing. If the US media was really Jewish-controlled, it would have read like the Israeli press in this latest Gaza blowup.
Nevertheless, Jewish media control does exist, but not necessarily through ownership. You don’t need to own a paper folks! All you need is one badass, kickass, muthafuckin’ Lobby. And that the Jews have.
They also have a very deadly weapon called the “boycott” – for that, read “Jewish advertiser boycott.” This is one of the real reasons why US papers shy away from criticizing Jews or Israel. Even if no boycott is announced, there is always the veiled threat of one. When something Jewish or Israeli-critical is published in a newspaper, the Lobby goes into action. They all rise up and very loudly demand an apology.
If none is forthcoming, well, then there’s the boycott threat. Before that kicks in, there are usually mass cancellations of the paper by Jewish subscribers, followed by noisy demos outside the paper’s office and floods of letters, emails and phone calls.
I don’t think there is anything criminal or evil about this. That’s the way any effective Lobby, ethnic or otherwise, probably ought to work. They get the job done, hey.
An instructive case is that of Michael Backman, a Business editor for The Age, an Australian newspaper. He recently wrote an article entitled, Israelis Are Living High on US Expense Account. The original article has incredibly been taken down from the web (!!) and the link is to a Malaysian paper that reprinted it.
The counter-reaction was stormy indeed. Articles in JTA and the Australian Jewish News were typical. The Jewish Community Council of Victoria (JCCV) and the Zionist Council of Victoria (ZCV) both threatened, incredibly, to sue the paper, on what insane basis, God only knows. The organizations termed it “blatantly anti-Semitic”. “This is not 1930s Germany,” they said. “We will not accept this hatred.”

“The Victorian Jewish community’s experience is that such commentary rouses violence and hatred against local Jews,” the groups went on.

This is the typical moral argument used by Super-Jews against their critics. They used to throw it at me in the newsgroups. The idea here is that if you say Boo to Jews to Israel for even 10 seconds, you’re gonna set off a fuckin’ pogrom. Jewish activists actually wrote me emails telling this.
As if some peaceful, loving person reads Robert Lindsay, goes insane, turns into a skinhead maniac, and beats up some Jew on the street. This is designed to hit you in your heart – where it hurts. My words were resulting in poor innocent Jews getting bashed over the head. So how did I feel about that? This is really just moral blackmail. It’s like the Borderline Personality Disorder patient threatening to commit suicide unless the therapist stops criticizing.

“It is inexplicable why The Age would publish such a pernicious article, and why by one of its business columnists, a man whose field of expertise is Asian business and art, a man apparently without credentials on the Middle East, international politics or contemporary religion,” the groups said.

This is another typical feint. Did you know that only “Middle East experts” are allowed to comment on ME matters? Neither did I!
This was another common tactic used in the newsgroups. Lack a Jewish education? Haven’t read all 13,000 pages of the Talmud? Never been to the Middle East, not to mention Israel? Then shut the fuck up, asshole, and let the experts take over. The only experts on Jews and Judaism, of course, being other Jews, and in the West, the only ME experts being Jews or pro-Israeli Gentiles.
The article in question is actually quite innocuous, though admittedly outrageous by the standards of neutered Western journalism. He takes Israel to task for not making peace with Palestinians and pissing off the whole Muslim World. Then he suggests that the 9-11, Bali and London terror attacks were in part a Muslim response to Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians. Which is all arguably true to some degree or another.
According to this over the top slam in The Australian (Murdoch paper?) Backman supposedly lays the Deicide charge on the Jews, but if you read the article, he does no such thing.
Backman also supposedly says Jews are cheap, tight, rude, arrogant and flashy (all supposedly “anti-Semitic canards” though there is tons of truth in them), yet once again, he does no such thing.
Backman merely pointed out that in Nepal, where there are many young Israeli trekkers, the Israelis are widely despised. This in a Hindu country which probably lacks any deep seated anti-Semitism. Why are they disliked? For acting like Sabras. The Nepalese claim that the Israelis are arrogant and rude and haggle over tiny amounts of money. They are so disliked that hostels will tell Israelis the place is full even when there are vacancies.
I can’t see how this is anti-Semitism. I don’t know if Sabras act this way, but this isn’t the first time I’ve heard tales like this. Anyway, this is how they come across to the Nepalese. Are the Nepalese making this shit up because they are evil Jew-hating Gentiles? Really dubious. Is Backman an anti-Semite for reporting reality-based observations of Nepalese? Come off it.
The Australian piece gets down to brass tacks and sums up the real beef against Backman’s piece, The Age’s coverage, the UN (nothing less than every nation on Earth), the world media (nothing less than every paper on Earth):

“But Backman shows that one cannot despise the world’s only Jewish state without much of that hatred rubbing off on the Jewish people as well.”

Oh yeah! The old MLK “Anti-Zionism can only be anti-Semitism” game. And these folks have the nerve to accuse their opponents of canards.
The heads of these same too organizations marched off to The Age’s editorial offices two weeks ago to complain about “biased coverage” in the Gaza mess. I guess they thought they got somewhere, as The Age assured them that coverage was even-handed.
“And yet its editors saw fit to publish this vile piece,” the groups said.
So you see how Jewish media control works in the real world, not the fantasy world of the anti-Semites. Owning the press is utterly unnecessary. All you need is one badass Lobby that plays for keeps.

Jewish Use of the Word "Goyim"

In the comments section, an anonymous coward commenter wrote that Jews demonize Gentiles by referring to them as goyim. Mort Goldman, a well-known psychologist who is also a regular reader of this site, said he had not heard that word in decades, and anyway, it was more derisive that demonizing when and if Jews used it. He also said he thought it was BS that the word means cattle. Actually, it means people.
Maybe goyim does mean cattle according to the Talmud, but I have no idea – I believe there are some Talmudic references equating goyim with cattle, but you would have to look it up, as I’m no Talmudic scholar.
The point is, as Mort points out, that most assimilated Jews in the US have no use for the term.
I dated a Jewish woman for about a year and I never heard her say it once. Well, actually, she did use the term goyischkopf which means something like “my stupidhead.” Jews supposedly say this when they do something dumb. That was my stupidhead talking.
However, she really hated the Orthodox. She used to work at a Jewish agency and this Orthodox woman who worked there was always calling my gf a goyischkopf for not being Jewish enough. My gf used to put her food in the fridge, but this Orthodox woman took over the fridge and said that only Kosher foods would be allowed in there, and I guess my gf’s un-Kosher food was contaminating everything else.
I told her that goy and goyish meant about the same to Gentiles as calling a Black “nigger”, and my gf was dumbfounded. She also acted dumbfounded when I threw a bunch of Talmudic stuff at her. She’d never read the Talmud and she yet she had had some sort of a Jewish education. That’s typical of most Jews I know. They don’t know the Talmud from Adam. So digging up all this sick and evil Talmudic stuff and throwing at assimilated US Jews is idiotic.
I’m sure that there are Jews who have studied the Talmud, but now you are getting into the Orthodox and the people in Israel – what I call the Super-Jews. Especially, you are getting into the Jewish religion.
Most secular assimilated US Jews don’t take Judaism all that seriously. I’m convinced it is pretty much a set of rituals to them. I asked my gf once what she believed in, and she said, “Well, we believe in God, yes, we believe in God…” She couldn’t seem to go much further than that. The religion of most assimilated secular US Jews is awfully minimalist. You go to temple for weddings, funerals, bar and bat mitzvas and that’s about it.
Goy or goyish or goyischkopf seem to be words that some assimilated secular US Jews just say sometimes. They’re not even clear on what it means. If you tell them it’s offensive, they act shocked and dumbfounded.
Some groups have taken on words or phrases they find offensive and tried to get them banned. Nigger, faggot, beaner, Chink, wop, etc. come to mind.
The Aztlanistas are working on anchor baby, but they haven’t been able to socially engineer a banning yet, though they’re working on it. There has been no real effort by Gentiles to protest the use of goy, etc. by Jews, hence many Jews just use it without much knowing the baggage that it carries in some minds.
When you get to Israel and into the more religious and Orthodox Jews, and they start tossing around goy and goyischkopf and whatnot, there’s probably more hostility involved, though as Mort notes in the comments, it’s probably more derisive than anything else.
As for the word goyim, oh boy! Do the anti-Semites love this word! They love it so much that I swear I think I have only heard anti-Semites utter it. I doubt I’ve ever heard one Jew say the word goyim. I’m sure some do, but it’s surely not common.
That your average, everyday, secular assimilated Jew goes around condemning all of us Gentiles as goyim all the time has to be up there on the list of the Big Lies of the Anti-Semites.

The Left's Nonsense on Palestine

Lafayette Sennacherib points out in the comments section that the British Left says that the whole problem in Palestine is “capitalism and imperialism, not Jews.” This can be seen eloquently on the PFLP’s website where they carry recent statements by the KOE in Greece, the ILPS (International League of People’s Struggles) and the CMKP in Pakistan.
All of these are pretty hard-Left organizations. The KOE is a Maoist party in Greece, the CMKP is a more or less unapologetic Stalinist type party in Pakistan and the ILPS is now chaired by Jose Maria Sison, head of the CPP, Communist Party of the Philippines, whose armed wing, the NPA (National People’s Army) wages a Maoist rebellion in the Philippines. So we have two Maoist parties and a Stalinist party.
If you read all of those statements, you will note that they all take the line that Israel is a pawn of US imperialism. It’s US imperialism’s “attack dog” in the region.
I’ve already discussed in previous posts why Israel is of little to no benefit to imperialism at all, and in fact, it’s a great big gigantic fat liability. It’s true, some sort of dysfunctional imperialist-Zionist hegemony has come to define the relationship, but it’s not like we get much out of it, other than maybe letting Israel use our latest weapons.
We now colonize Iraq as a result in part of this twisted co-dependency, but it’s hard to imagine a US imperialism not entangled up with Zionism would be idiotically colonizing an Arab country. Sure, we get to buy influence in the region, but the costs to imperialism of this project would seem to massively outweigh whatever crumbs of benefits we get out of it. Surely there must be a cheaper way, in both blood and treasure, to purchase influence in the Arab World.
I’m not going to say the problem is Jews either, other than Jews being typical primitive humans who have not yet joined the modern world and are continuing to engage in ancient tribal  behaviors.
But it’s downright absurd to say that the problem in Palestine in capitalism and imperialism. The only reason that the Left says this is because nowadays they are terrified to discuss race or ethnicity. And the lunacy of Marxism says that race or ethnicity has nothing whatsoever to do with anything. Why are Jews and Palestinians fighting? Capitalism done made em do it. Why is there racism? Capitalism done turned us into a bunch of knuckle-dragging bigots.
Yet any sensible view of human relations shows that tribal warfare and conflict and the racism that inevitably springs from must be as old as man.
What does capitalism and imperialism have to do with a Jewish settler-colonial project and the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian aborigines? About as much as capitalism and imperialism had to do with the settler-colonial projects in North America, Australia, Hawaii or elsewhere. Conquer the natives, steal their land, kill them if they resist, put them on reservations, throw them out of the country.
This stuff is as old as man. Tribes have always been conquering other tribes, throwing them off the land and stealing their land. For 1000’s of years. Before there was any capitalism or imperialism. It’s age-old tribal behavior. The Geneva Conventions after WW2 which outlawed annexing land, ethnically cleansing conquered peoples or settling conquered lands, were supposed to put an end to this age-old bullshit once and for all.
So Zionism really is an anachronism. Neither is it the only settler-colonial project going on the world.
There are others – Chinese settler-colonists in Tibet and Xinjiang in China; Indonesian Malay settler-colonists in Papua New Guinea and Aceh in Indonesia; various settler-colonial projects in South Kurdistan carried out by the Kurds themselves and displacing Shia and Christian Kurds, Christian Arabs, Shia, Sunni  and Christian Arabs and Sunni and Shia Turkmen; various settler-colonial projects carried out in Kosova by the Albanians in which Serbs and Gypsies were replaced by Albanians; the whole mess of the Balkan Wars in the 1990’s where Croats and Serbs carried out various settler-colonial projects against Croats, Serbs and Bosniaks; a settler-colonial project in Darfur and Southern Sudan in which Arab Muslims replace African Muslims and Christians; another one being carried out by Morocco in Southern Sahara in which Sahrawis are replaced by Moroccan settlers; and settler-colonial projects in Syria and Iran involving removal of Iranians, Assyrians and Kurds and their replacement with Sunni Arab settler-colonists.
It’s hard to say whether there is a settler-colonial project going on Mindanao. There was one a while back involving Christian settler-colonists in Muslim Mindanao, but I don’t think it’s ongoing. There are also settler-colonial projects going on in Brazilian Amazon, Mexico (Chiapas) and Colombia where Indians are thrown off their land with violence, which is then stolen by rich people for plantations.
A good argument is that nowadays only fascist regimes engage in settler-colonialism and ethnic cleansing. Any regime doing that nowadays has some serious fascist tendencies. That some are nominally Communist, as in China, makes it all the more shameful.
So you can see there is nothing aberrant about the Zionist project. Similar projects are going on all over the globe. But setter-colonialism and ethnic cleansing define one as a primitive. If you engage in primitive behavior, you’re a primitive. Everyone doing this sort of crap needs to knock it off and join the civilized world.

The Benefits of Anti-Semitism

I realize that that is a provocative title, but stick with me here for a minute.
I’ve already gone over the problems of anti-Semitism on this site before. For one thing, nothing feeds Zionism more than anti-Semitism. The mantra of the Zionist is that no Jew can be safe anywhere on Earth except in Israel. So all Jews in the world have to move to Israel pronto.
Israel actually is a monument to anti-Semitism. Theodor Herzl, the Austrian journalist who founded Zionism, was originally an assimilationist.
With the Dreyfus Affair, he left all that behind. Dreyfus was a French Jew who rose to the top of French society despite considerable anti-Semitism. He was an example that said that Jews could make it in France and didn’t need to be separatists. But then Dreyfus was accused of treason and there was a great big to-do. He lost his high position in society and fell.
It’s generally agreed that the charge was faked by anti-Semites in order to “get the Jew.”  The Jews were crestfallen. Herzl assumed that this meant that assimilation of Jews in France is impossible due to the permanent nature of anti-Semitism. He blamed the Jews as much as the Gentiles. Neither one could stand the other, and it was the fault of both of them.
Herzl wrote that when Jews rise, they become filthy rich and inspire resentment “the power of the purse’ beckoned, “when we fall,” he said, we Jews become bomb-throwing revolutionaries who inspire more resentment against “revolutionary Jews:” (italics by me).

Anti-Semitism increases day by day and hour by hour among the nations; indeed it is bound to increase, because the causes of its growth continue to exist and cannot be removed.
Its remote cause is or loss of the power of assimilation during the Middle Ages; its immediate cause is our excessive production of mediocre intellects, who cannot find an outlet downwards or upwards – that is to say, no wholesome outlet in either direction.
When we sink, we become a revolutionary proletariat, the subordinate officers of all revolutionary parties; and at the same time, when we rise, there rises also our terrible power of the purse. (Herzl 1897)

This was before Communism, as the book, “Der Judenstaat” was written in 1897. The writings of many early Zionists are mirrors of the worst anti-Semitic rants. We Jews suck, here’s why, it’s permanent (must be something in the Jewish soul), no wonder the Gentiles hate us, so it’s time for a divorce. A permanent divorce.
This is not to say that early Zionists were Gentilephilic. Clearly they were not. But in contrast to the Zionists of today, they laid a of it down on the Jews too. We can’t live together. We’re bad, so they hate us and try to kill us. Plus they’re shits too. Anyway, we can’t live together. Ever. Hence Zionism.
The notion that Jews and Gentiles cannot live together in peace and harmony is essential to the discourse of all anti-Semites. However, this same notion is at the heart of Zionism. If we create societies where Jews feel comfortable, there’s no need for Zionism. If all anti-Semitism disappeared tomorrow, Israel would fold up and wither away.
So one of the best ways to fight Zionism, strange as it seems, is to make Jews feel at home in the Diaspora. When you make Diaspora Jews uncomfortable, it makes them want to high-tail it to Israel to get away from the heat. No one likes being pissed on. If I were a Jew, I wouldn’t like anti-Semitism either.
Let me tell you a story.
Once I was in a White nationalist chatroom. I just drifted in there. I’m not sure what happened, but soon I was the enemy. Plus they “figured out” that I was a Jew. I’m not a Jew, but never mind. As soon as the spotted the Jew in their midst, the whole room changed. The mood became ominous, creepy, and homicidal. Even though they couldn’t kill me over the Net, I actually started getting frightened. In mind, I had become the Jew.
I had become the terrified Jew surrounded by hissing anti-Semites. It was like watching a scary movie. I was trembling in front of the computer screen.
Another time I was at a coffee shop and we were talking. One guy is an Italian from New York. At some point, I guess I made him mad. He got this sneer on his face and snarled at me, smirking, “Are you Jewish?” That smile didn’t look too nice. No, I wasn’t. He wasn’t convinced, and he was still smirking. I should have been disgusted, but I got scared again. Once again, I was Jewish for a few minutes.
If you can ever maneuver yourself into a position of empathy like that, you can begin to understand Jewish paranoia. If you’re Jewish, anti-Semites must feel  downright creepy. Maybe they’re scary too. They sure scared me. So now I think I understand Jewish fear and hatred of anti-Semitism, Jewish paranoia, and even the Jewish feeling of need for Israel.
On the other hand, I’m convinced that letting Jews get too comfortable in any society other than Israel is not a good idea. They have a tendency to take the ball and run with it and generate lots of anti-Semitism in the meantime.
Actually, a bit of anti-Semitism is a good weapon against Jewish power and its excessive buildup. Anti-Semites like to go on and on about Jewish control of the media or Hollywood. On the other hand, this is true pretty much only in the US, Israel and to some extent in the UK. In the rest of the world, forget it.
Jews don’t run much media or entertainment in the vast majority of the world. Why not? Well, truth is that most of the world will not let Jews buy up the their media and entertainment industries. Why not? Well, a lot of reasons, but anti-Semitism must be up there on the list.
Do you think the Arab and Muslim World will put up with Jewish media moguls buying up the Arab press, Al Jazeera, the Egyptian movie industry, the Lebanese music industry, or the Arab book publishing industry (Lebanon and Egypt)? Not on your life. Will Turkey, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Indonesia, Malaysia? Get real.
Will India? Indian nationalism will put a stop to that. China, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Singapore? GMAB. They aren’t many Jews in those societies, but for some weird reason, there’s tons of anti-Semitism. You think the Oriental East will let Bronfman, Asper, Sulzberger and Spielberg buy up their media and movie industry? Try again.
Some of my Jewish readers may disagree with this post. But a bit of anti-Semitism does serve as a break on excessive Jewish power. Super-Jews feel that Jews can’t get enough power, but any reasonable Jew knows that the Jews shouldn’t grab for too much.
Do the Jewish media and entertainment moguls send my Jewish readers a check from Jewish Central Control every month? Come on. So would they get a raise if the Jewish information control spanned the globe instead of parts of the West? No way. Would significantly increased Jewish power in the world’s entertainment and media industries increase world anti-Semitism? You bet your sweet bippy!
How much anti-Semitism is enough? Enough that constrains excessive Jewish power, and hence, paradoxically, blocks the waves of anti-Semitism that would follow in the wake of such power.
How much anti-Semitism is too much? Enough that Jews feel frightened and uncomfortable and feel like they want to take off for the Levant.
Tough call. But walking a tightrope ain’t easy.

References

Herzl, Theodor. 1897. Der Judenstaat, “The Jewish State.” Edited and original translation by Slyvie d’Avigdor revised by Jacob M. Alkow. 1988. New York: Dover Publications. 1946. Reprint – originally published New York: American Zionist Emergency Council.

Site Stats

People are wondering about the site stats. Combined with the two sites, they are running about 950 visitors/day lately. Before Blogger blocked me, I was running at 2,700 visitors/day. So I lost about 2/3 of my traffic right there. Thanks, Blogger! Traffic at this new site is fairly slow yet (but not that bad), but hopefully it will pick up later on. If these WordPress bastards would let me upload some really awesome beheading videos, this site could really take off.
It takes a while to build a brand. It took me 4 years to build the old site up from 0 to 2,700/day. A lot of it has to do with Google ranking, but it’s also just building a brand and popularizing a product.
Most people are trying to make themselves likable, but I’m actually trying to make people hate me.
If I notice there’s lots of Leftists coming around, I post some stuff that drives Leftists up the wall. Unwashed, stinky racists on the site? No problem. Watch me morph into antifa-boy and kick some skinhead ass! Seedy anti-Semites sulking about in trenchcoats and dark glasses? Watch my hidden Judeophile rabbit pop out of the hat! Lots of Israel-haters steaming up the comments threads? Time to bash the suicidal maniac moronic Pallies!
It seems nuts, but it actually worked. I don’t know if people like abuse, or if they just like combat, or if they’re in on the joke, but gimmicks are fine as long as they work.
Those of you getting too comfortable on the site, you just wait!

For MLK Day – The Need to Demonize

As it’s MLK Day, it’s time for a post about the need to demonize our enemies.
If you’re White, no matter what you think of Blacks, Hispanics, Puerto Ricans, etc., there are some reasons you might want to reconsider becoming a White nationalist. For starters, Martin Luther King is just about #1 on their enemies list!
WTH? That sucks. MLK is now as American as baseball, Mom and apple pie. He’s one of my heroes, and he’s the hero of most decent Americans of all colors. Oppose MLK? What’s next? Trash George Washington, Abe Lincoln, Ben Franklin, Jesus Himself?
Yes, he’s one of their worst enemies. Why? He stood up and demanded something completely outrageous for Black folks. Equal rights. We can’t have that!
Now, race realists can go on and on about B-W IQ differentials, high Black crime rates, the tendency of Black districts and schools to decay and get run-down in a variety of ways, gangster rap, Detroit, this and that. Clearly, Black folks have lots of problems. Go to any web forum for middle class Blacks on the web and get an earful of this stuff.
I would like to point something out there. Despite all of the above…Blacks, or any minorities, or any humans, really, are not exempted from the basic principle of democracy and fairness. Why did Blacks deserve equal rights? Because they are human. Does any of the above come into play? Not at all. Having problems certainly does not exempt you from the basic rights of a human.
Now, onto MLK. White nationalists completely demonize this man, as they must, I suppose. Their supposition – that he was an immoral man. Forget for a moment that those accusing MLK of being less than moral are themselves guilty of a severe moral transgression – savage racism. So in this case we have some very immoral persons attacking MLK for being immoral. What’s their problem with that? They should welcome him with open arms if that were the case.
Now, onto the accusations. The standard ones are that he’s a plagiarist, a Communist and a philanderer. The plagiarism accusation is apparently true. I forget what it deals with – possibly his doctoral dissertation. He lifted a few lines here and there.
Heck, I’ve just about done so myself, though not word for word. I’m not stupid! I borrow ideas all the time. People have been writing for a few thousand years, and there are not a lot of new ideas floating around anymore.
The next charge is that he’s a Communist. Apparently not true. MLK was never a Communist. Communists supported him, sure. MLK was a leftwinger with some socialist tendencies, sure. He may have had some Communist friends, but so do lots of folks. The FBI tailed him for years trying to pin this one on him, and they never could.
The next one is that he was a philanderer. Like many Black men, he seemed to be incapable of monogamy. Yes, he cheated on his wife, possibly habitually. I would argue that many great men do such things. Added to this charge is the charge that he hired prostitutes and badly beat them. Apparently not true. That’s a lie made up by White racists out to destroy him.
The scorecard? I would argue that what MLK did was less bad than what his critics are doing. Plagiarizing and philandering are not as bad as being an out and open racist. Sorry racists. My opinion.
Notice here the tendency of people to demonize their enemies.
Let’s take Hitler for example. Now he was a major scumbag for sure, but that’s not enough for those who really hate him. The super-Hitler haters I’ve run into were mostly Jews. Now surely Jews have a beef with Hitler. He killed 75% of the Jews of Europe after all.
But look what the Jewish Hitler-haters say about him (I used to hear all this on the ME and Jewish newsgroups all the time).
He was a failed artist.
He was a sick, twisted, unhappy, neurotic or mentally ill boy, even as young as elementary school.
Supposedly he had a severe flatulence and indigestion problem as a young person. He wouldn’t stop farting! He just stunk outright. They must have called him Adolf Fart behind his back.
After high school, he wandered around Vienna as a footloose starving artist. This is usually parlayed into the “Hitler was a loser” gambit. As an artist, he was a failed artist, they say. They laugh at his paintings, atrocious and horrible, they say. A bitter man, wandering around Vienna, broke and homeless, getting more and more furious at Jews and other successful people.
I’m not sure what they say about his military career. I guess he was a crappy soldier too. They’d probably say he was a coward, except he got badly wounded, so that won’t fly.
Now I have done some investigating into Hitler, and the picture that emerges is quite the opposite of the above. As a child, he seems to have been pretty unremarkable. I don’t think he was either popular or seriously rejected.
I’ve asked some artist friends about his art. They’ve told me that his art is good; it’s not crappy art at all. He just never hit the bigtime is all. Sure, he was a “failed artist.” Almost all artists, writers and musicians are failed artists, writers and musicians if we are going to play that game.
As for his time wandering around Vienna, well, there are starving artist types out there. Orwell was one. Check out Down and Out In Paris and London if you don’t believe me. Big deal. Some of my best friends were starving writers, musicians, artists, etc. What about it?
Now we get to the more crucial part. In Mein Kampf, Hitler paints a picture of Vienna life in which he is growing more and more furious at the Jews and some others in Vienna. I think this is a case of false memory syndrome.
Thing is, if you ask people who knew him back then and hung out with him in cafes and whatnot, he didn’t seem that way at all. He spoke to and befriended Jews and could not be less interested in anti-Semitism, which was pretty popular at the time. When others got on the anti-Semitic kick, Hitler typically waved them off and defended the Jews or said leave them alone.
So what happened? He went off to war, got wounded, and apparently went nuts.
He came out of the hospital, and veterans were being demonized and blamed for the war. It was Vietnam, half a century too soon. The veterans were furious. Then there was Versailles, and Germany was driven to economic ruin.
The Nazi Party grew out of the Freicorps, the far rightwing WW1 vets used by the elite to go into the streets and crush the Left. The worst enemies of the Freicorps were on the Left. They were shock troops to destroy the Left, and they did it well. The elite used them, but the pawns got out of hand. They made Frankenstein, then he got up, walked out of the lab, and trashed his inventor’s home and everything else for miles around.
Hitler is a case of a good to ordinary man gone bad. Way, way, way, way bad. Psychologists insist he had to have been ill his whole life, but I doubt it. Good men go bad, bad men go good. It happens.
One would think that all of Hitler’s crimes would be serious enough. He killed millions of people. Why not leave it at that? Because we can’t allow our enemies to have any positive attributes. It clouds the picture and causes cognitive dissonance. All black or all white. No gray areas. Hitler was a bad man who had some positive qualities, particularly before he went bad. Surely his bad qualities disastrously outweighed whatever good he did in life.
MLK was a good man with some bad qualities, like most of us. I argue that the good he did far outweighed the bad.
People are complicated. We want our heroes to dress in pure white, but their costumes are soiled here and here. We want villains to wear black all the time, but there are splashes of white glinting off their outfits, making us blink and wince.
People are complicated. So is life.
Everything’s a grey area. My motto.