World War One; a special kind of hell

I happen to be reading “History of the World War“, by Francis March, as this year’s Memorial Day approaches. While it’s common knowledge that war is hell, many people forget how horrific World War One really was. With the death of the last kn0wn World War One veteran barely three months ago, it is quickly fading from living memory.

Lest we forget, here are some excerpts from the book (pg. 220):

Trench warfare occupied most of the time and made nine-tenths of the discomforts of the soldiers of both armies. If proof of the adaptive capacity of the human animal were needed, it is afforded by the manner in which the men burrowed in vermin-infested earth and lived there under conditions of Arctic cold, frequently enduring long deprivations of food, fuel, and suitable clothing. During the early stages of the war, before men became accustomed to the rigors of the trenches, many thousands died as a direct result of the exposure. Many thousands of others were incapacitated for life by “trench feet,” a group of maladies covering the consequences of exposure to cold and water which in those early days flowed in rivulets through most of the trenches. The trenches at Gallipoli had their own special brand of maladies. Heatstroke and a malarial infection were among these disabling agencies. Trench fever, a malady beginning with a headache and sometimes ending in partial paralysis and death, was another common factor in the mortality records…

Trench warfare brings with it new instruments. There are the flame projectors, which throw fire to a distance of approximately a hundred feet. The Germans were the first to use these, but they were excelled in this respect by the inventive genius of the nations opposing them.

The use of poison gas, the word being used in its broad sense, is now general. It was first used by the Germans, but as in the case of flame throwers, the Allies soon gained the ascendency.

The first use of asphyxiating gas was by the Germans during the first battle of Ypres. There the deadly compound was mixed in huge reservoirs back of the German lines. From these extended a system of pipes with vents pointed toward the British and Canadian lines. Waiting until air currents were moving steadily westward, the Germans opened the stop-cocks shortly after midnight and the poisonous fumes swept slowly, relentlessly forward in a greenish cloud that moved close to the earth. The result of that fiendish and cowardly act was that thousands of men died in horrible agony without a chance for their lives.

Among the novelties introduced in that conflict, March counts: Tanks, hand-grenades, aerial bombing, poison gas, machine guns and flame-throwers.

Reading the book, I can’t help but be amazed at the loyalty people felt toward their respective tribes. For example, the German navel officer Von Tirpitz (pg. 144):

… admired the English. His children had been brought up in England, as was also his wife. He imitated the English, but on the day of the declaration of war, he absolutely forbade his family to talk English, and he made a bonfire of his fine scientific library of English books.

Fanaticism such as this inevitably lead to a cheapening of human life and the rapid expansion of the conflict. After World War Two, many Europeans looked back and wondered if patriotism justified such enormous suffering and destruction. Thus was sown the seed of destruction, among Western nations, when it came into fashion to adopt the opposite extreme. This will lead, ultimately, to even more suffering and destruction.

 

An anonymous reader visits Portland

I got this first impression of Portland from an anonymous reader and thought I’d share it with the rest of y’all:

I just witnessed a theft today, on SW 2nd near Yamhill.  First I heard angry shouting, then I saw a vibrant yoot carrying an electronic device sprinting away, followed by an angry White guy who wasn’t running as fast.  The latter jogged to a halt, shouted something angry, and walked away.  The former kept running south on SW 2nd.

So far, my experience back in Portland seems to be a dreamlike parody of Portland.  I had a couple of hipsters talk about how cute my son is with all sort of hip slang, saw a bunch of homeless people, saw a bunch of skinny jeans, saw someone who appeared to be filling out paperwork to get an ice cream cone at Ben & Jerry’s.

I had dinner at Rock Bottom with a young man who has recently gotten most of his teeth replaced after they were knocked out by the feet of some vibrant youths who were economically motivated / angry about slavery / had been called the N-word / whatever.  His mother seemed really mad … that Fox News exists.

I know Portland is a safe city, but I just get this sense that I’m surrounded by Eloi who are going to get eaten by cannibals one of these days.  How are you?  You keeping safe?  You worried about all those “Neo-Nazis”?  I found one under my ottoman the other day.  Must have been uncomfortable for the little guy … all scrunched up in his black lederhosen.

Thanks anonymous reader!

 

“Hispanics” were created by Jews*

Thanks to HBDchick for linking to this CNN article, which claims that Christopher Columbus was a Jew. Of course, I’ve heard of the theory before; it’s even mentioned in the “Ashkenazi Revolution”. But the clincher is that Columbus included the Hebrew letters Beth/He at the top of the letters to his son. In my opinion, if this is true, it is pretty much conclusive evidence.

The symbol is visible (not very clear, sorry) at the top left. To those familiar only with Israeli/Ashkenazic script, it would not be recognizable. But to those familiar with traditional Sephardic script, it’s easy to see how it could be the letters Beth/He.

Columbus wasn’t the only Jew on that fateful voyage. There were at least 5 other Jews with him. One of them, Luis de Torres, was the first to settle in the New World. Torres spoke Hebrew, and…

When de Torres had landed on Hispanola he saw a bird which he thought was a peacock and named it TUKI, the Hebrew word for that animal. We therefore call it turkey.

So, since it appears that Jews financed Columbus’ voyage, that Columbus himself was a Jew, and the expedition was partially manned by Jews, we can say that it was Jews who brought about the creation of the larger Mestizo ethnic group now known as Hispanics.

So I was wondering… Is it too late to change our minds about this? Isn’t there some sort of “undo” button we can press? If so, the “Hispanics” would go back to speaking their respective native languages, worshiping their old gods, owning their ancestral lands and (best of all) they would be able to keep their own best women for themselves instead of letting the Spanish have them. For our part, “Latin America” might be a place to visit exotic tribes in their natural state, to study the various cultures and languages and to explore unspoiled jungles – not a source of untold millions of illegal immigrants who want to transform our own country into their own image.

* For those who don’t know me very well, not everything in this post is meant to be taken seriously.

 

CBS: “Black women are not as attractive as white women”

CBS has come out and admitted that black women are not as attractive as white women. Well, they don’t actually say so explicitly, but they clearly imply it. Here’s a screen capture from a random news page from CBS local:

The casual, non-thinking, observer wouldn’t think twice about such an image. He would gloss over it and assume that the choice of races is totally random and without design. Of course he would be quite wrong about this. If we click on the respective links, we’ll find 30 “attractive guys” and 21 “attractive gals”. Of the 30 guys, 9 of them are black. Of the 21 gals, only 2 are black.

So, even though black guys constitute only about 13% of the population, almost a third of attractive guys are black according to them. Among gals, however, less than 10% of the attractive ones are black. CBS clearly agrees with Satoshi Kanazawa. As for their obvious, and blatant, promotion of black men over white men, this is simply in line with their overall agenda of promoting miscegenation between white women and black men.

 

Leni Riefenstahl

I just finished reading “A Memoir” by the late Leni Riefenstahl and, for balance, “Leni Riefenstahl, A Life” by Jurgen Trimborn.

Of course there’s too much to write, about the life of Riefenstahl, for one blog post. But I’ll share some of my thoughts anyway.

I think it’s terrible that she willingly, and enthusiastically, played such a prominent role in the Third Reich. Her deceptions, lies and moral flaws, as laid out by Trimborn, are disturbing to say the least. But, on the other hand, I also admire her for her talent, perseverance and vitality throughout her long and amazing life. Few others would have shown the raw determination, to achieve their goals against almost insurmountable adds and setbacks, as she did. It’s pretty astounding that the film career of one woman would begin with this – and end with this.

Even as I read her own account of her life, in which she portrays herself as practically blameless, I found myself judging her for some of her bad habits. For example, she would have us believe that being a woman presented an obstacle to her advancement. But I lost count of how many times she used crying and hysterical outbursts to get her way. From the very beginning, she used her feminine charms as a tool to get ahead. What I found especially irking was the way she took advantage of men who pursued her romantically. When they didn’t meet her standards, she used them shamelessly for their money and influence even as she had no intention of giving in to their advances. I got the impression she would lead them on for this purpose. I think there’s even a word for women like that.

While reading the memoirs, it occurred to me that she had grown weary of humanity and the various “persecutions” she had been subject to. All the people who stood in her way, and tormented her, were white. But later in life she discovered a new kind of human: The black human. Her memoir almost makes it seem as if she considered black Africans to be immune from the moral failings of whites. When they descended into crime, it was mainly the result of the corrupting influences of the white world (AKA “civilization”).

In various places, she tells us that not once did she feel threatened by black Africans – with one exception, and that was “her fault” (pg. 492,493):

Dinka warriors – very tall, slender men with spears and the traditional, rarely seen wide bead belts – emerged from the bushes, I asked the driver to stop and reluctantly he did so. At the time, I didn’t know about the tensions between the southern and the northern Sudanese, which triggered repeated uprisings in the south. All I could think of was the unique opportunity to photograph this unusual group and, clutching my Leica, I jumped out of the truck. Hesitantly, I walked towards the three Dinka, pausing just a few yards away from them; they paused too and when I pointed to my camera, they instantly understood. The tallest once came over to me and held out his open hand for money; I realized that many tourists passed by here on the Nile boat. I nodded in agreement, but somehow I felt uneasy. I did only a few shots and went back to the truck to get some money. Upon opening my bag, it struck me that I had no more money, only a cheque that I planned to cash in Juba. The Dinka watched me angrily, and, suddenly, one of them grabbed my bag out of my hand. I tried to collect everything that had fallen out, but I was surrounded by five or six Dinka instead of three, and more and more came charging out of the bushes. The Dinka rightfully felt cheated. They gesticulated vehemently and were assuming a menacing attitude with their spears when, in that moment of danger, my eyes alighted on a brass snuff box which I had bought in Malakal. The lid had a mirror inside it. I held the box high towards the sun, so that it shone like gold, and then hurled it over the heads of the Dinka into the grass. While they ran towards the box, my driver started the engine and by some miracle the truck made it out of the mud – luckily for us, because the Dinka raced after us for a long time, yelling loudly and brandishing their spears. The driver and I were scared to death, for if the truck had stalled, we would have suffered the revenge of the Dinka. That was the only time during my expedition that I was threatened by natives and the fault was mine.

I fail to see how the above incident could be blamed on her. She took their photos and didn’t have money – and, somehow, this is justification for trying to kill her and her colleagues? Clearly she held black Africans to lower moral standards, much as we wouldn’t blame tigers at the zoo for tearing up the zookeeper if he failed to feed them on time.

She praises the physical beauty of the native African tribes repeatedly and, when referring to the Nuba tribe she had first made contact with, she calls them “my Nuba”.

As much as Riefenstahl admired the Nuba for their physical beauty, she did recognize that female black beauty is wanting – though she was a bit more subtle than Kanazawa. She writes (pg. 491):

We reached Akobo, the home of the Anuak tribe on the fifth day. Nowhere else in Africa have I seen such lovely black girls – especially striking were those whose facial features revealed a trace of Arabic blood…

Though she claims to have never bought into the racial superiority theories of the Nazis, she certainly seems to have considered native African blacks to be superior in some ways. Nevertheless, I did find her description of her first contact with the Masai interesting (pg. 416):

However, our first contact with the Masai was not very encouraging. The women hurled stones at me, and the children ran off tearfully, while the men eyed me from a distance. I respected their timidity and refrained from photographing them; but I returned every single day, sitting down on the grass or on a rock and reading a book. In this way, they gradually became used to my presence, the children drew closer, the women stopped throwing stones at me; and then one day, it was almost like a victory when they stood in front of me, and the women and children laughed. The ice was broken. They allowed me to enter their dark huts, they touched me, and they let me drink milk from their calabashes. At last, they permitted me to take their pictures and, a few days later, when I had to say goodbye, they clutched my arms and wouldn’t let go.

That was the beginning of my great love for the African tribes.

Compare with this:

Jane was very discouraged and depressed after only a few weeks at Gombe. The chimps would not let her within 50 yards of them, and she had observed very little. Jane was getting discouraged about the project. She had never done research with animals, and the chimpanzees were certainly not cooperating with her…

Jane eventually grew very close to the chimps at Gombe. They would soon allow her to follow them, as they led the way. They greet her as they do each other, with a touch or a kiss. Her sense of patience and trust won them over.

This event encouraged Jane to keep trying to form a sense of deeper trust with the chimps. Everyday, Jane was allowed closer.

It appears that, on some level, Riefenstahl viewed the African natives as childlike and needing protection – though she would probably have never admitted so herself.

At the age of 71, she discovered deep-sea scuba diving and, over time, she turned this hobby into a profession. She perfected her underwater photography to such an extent that the world was awed by the wonders she portrayed. She continued diving for many years to come and learned to love the underwater world. According to Trimborn (pg. 266), Riefenstahl had joined Greenpeace. This was due to the destruction of the oceans and reefs she so loved to visit and photograph in her later years.

Interestingly enough, Riefenstahl was admired by a great many pop personalities. According to Trimborn (pg. 275, 276) her admirers included Andy Warhol, Siegfried and Roy, Steven Spielberg, Francis Ford Coppola, Helmut Newton, Madonna, Mick and Bianca Jagger and David Bowie.

Though accused of being an incorrigible fascist by some, I think it would be more accurate to describe her as a woman of the times. When it was fashionable, and advantageous, for her to associate with Nazis, she did so. When it was more advantageous for her to be a liberal, she became one.

Riefenstahl’s life, in some ways, embodied the 20th century itself. Her flaws embodied the flaws of many and her adventures, thanks to her obsessive need to record them, have become the adventures of many. I’m sure I speak for a lot of people when I say that few lives were as remarkable as hers.

 

As a Jew, I’m offended!

Thanks to Martin B over at Mangan’s for linking to this BBC article:

Five men and a 15-year-old youth have been arrested in East Renfrewshire and Glasgow after anti-Semitic remarks were posted on social network site Facebook.

Almost 50 police officers raided seven addresses after complaints from members of the Jewish community in Giffnock.

It followed a number of offensive posts on a page entitled: “Welcome to Israel, only kidding you’re in Giffnock.”

The six people arrested were charged with a breach of the peace with religious and racial aggravations.

Hate crimes

One other man was detained and later released without charge pending further inquiry.

Ch Insp Alan Murray, of Strathclyde Police, said: “This was a very complex and protracted inquiry that required assistance from many departments of Strathclyde Police and the support of the procurator fiscal at Paisley.

“I hope it clearly demonstrates that Strathclyde Police will not tolerate hate crimes of any kind.

“It should cause anyone who believes they can get away with this sort of behaviour to think again.”

The Community Security Trust (CST), which helps protect the Jewish community in the UK, said: “CST welcomes the arrests of suspects regarding alleged anti-Semitic statements.

“Glaswegian Jews should be reassured that local police take anti-Semitism seriously…

Let me clarify what constitutes an anti-semitic hate crime, so that the Strathclyde police, and the paranoid Jews over there, can educate themselves:

Throwing rocks at Jews = anti-semitic hate crime.

Vandalizing a synagogue = anti-semitic hate crime.

Physically assaulting Jews or threatening them with violence = anti-semitic hate crime.

Murdering Jews = anti-semitic hate crime.

Saying bad things about Jews on the internet ≠ anti-semitic hate crime.

I’m deeply offended by the draconian laws against free speech in the U.K. I’m offended that it’s completely permissible to write disparaging words about the native population of the U.K., and that it’s even encouraged. I hope some of the citizens of Strathclyde read this, and that they post it on Facebook.

Meanwhile, as the over-sensitive Jews of Strathclyde worry about negative comments on Facebook, the founder of Facebook (a Jew himself), has married an Asian woman. While negative comments about Jews on Facebook pose no threat to our survival as a people, Jews marrying non-Jews poses a very grave threat. An intelligent, and extremely wealthy, man like Zuckerberg could have easily found himself a nice Jewish wife. Instead, he chose to serve as a bad example and marry out. Shame on him; he gets a thumbs down from me.

 

 

The Bill of Whites

The Federal government has been whittling away at our constitutional rights for decades now. Some might say it has been doing so for centuries. Our struggle for liberty has seen ups and downs, to be sure. In some ways, Americans today enjoy more liberty than in the past. For example, the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 constituted some of the gravest threats to our liberty in the history of the republic. That they remained in effect for several years, and many people prosecuted under them, is evidence that the early republic was not a utopia for lovers of freedom. Abraham Lincoln’s treatment of those who opposed his war against the South would be unthinkable today. Much as we complain about government violations against our rights, so far they’re not arresting newspaper editors for their opinions (though this may be because government and the media are now controlled by the same people).

In other ways, we are much less free today than in the 19th century. While our freedom to criticize the government has increased, our freedom to criticize the government program of population replacement is severely curtailed. While there are no specific laws against criticizing non-whites, it’s virtually impossible to gain public office if you do so. You are also likely to lose your government job, or be demoted (hat tip to human-stupidity), if you express unorthodox opinions even outside of work.

It took whites a long time to recognized freedom of speech, and not all regions of the white world have advanced equally. How sad then, that the countries that have cherished this freedom the most, have also been the ones whose governments have been actively working to replace their white majorities with more primitive peoples – peoples that have little concept of “freedom of speech”. Eventually, the increasing numbers of non-Asian minorities will bring about a decrease in freedoms and the standard of living. When this reaches a certain point, the influx of NAMs will diminish – because there will no longer be a strong enough incentive for them to come here.

Considering that Obama’s predecessors, all of them white, showed little respect for civil liberties, we can hardly expect the mulatto (self-proclaimed “black”) president to be any different. Whether he was born in the U.S. or Kenya, some four years of his formative years were spent in Indonesia. Obama is not a protector of freedom and now, it would seem that Obama has issued an executive order making it a crime to obstruct the implementation of the new regime in Yemen. According to Salon:

As it does with most U.S.-compliant dictators in the region, the Obama administration has since been propping up Hadi with large amounts of money and military assistance, but it is now taking a much more extreme step to ensure he remains entrenched in power — a step that threatens not only basic liberties in Yemen but in the U.S. as well:

President Obama plans to issue an executive order Wednesday giving the Treasury Department authority to freeze the U.S.-based assets of anyone who “obstructs” implementation of the administration-backed political transition in Yemen.

The unusual order, which administration officials said also targets U.S. citizens who engage in activity deemed to threaten Yemen’s security or political stability, is the first issued for Yemen that does not directly relate to counterterrorism.

Unlike similar measures authorizing terrorist designations and sanctions, the new order does not include a list of names or organizations already determined to be in violation. Instead, one official said, it is designed as a “deterrent” to “make clear to those who are even thinking of spoiling the transition” to think again. . . .

The order provides criteria to take action against people who the Treasury secretary, in consultation with the secretary of state, determines have “engaged in acts that directly or indirectly threaten the peace, security or stability of Yemen, such as acts that obstruct the implementation of the Nov. 23, 2011, agreement between the Government of Yemen and those in opposition to it, which provides for a peaceful transition of power . . . or that obstruct the political process in Yemen.”

In other words, the U.S. Government will now punish anyone who is determined — in the sole discretion of the U.S. Government — even to “indirectly” obstruct the full transition of power to President Hadi. But what if someone — a Yemeni or an American — opposes Hadi’s rule and wants to agitate for a real election in which more than one candidate runs? Is that pure political advocacy, as it appears, now prohibited by the U.S. Government, punishable by serious sanctions, on the ground that it “obstructs” the transition of power to Hadi? Can journalists who report on corruption or violence by the Hadi regime and who write Op-Eds demanding a new election be accused, as it seems, of “threatening Yemen’s political stability”?

Few Americans care about what happens in Yemen. This is what makes such executive orders so dangerous; they pass under the radar – only to bite us later when we least expect it. If the president can issue an executive order prohibiting us from “obstructing” the transition of power in Yemen, it is not such a stretch to imagine a similar order that applies to a regime here in the U.S.  Obama is establishing a dangerous precedent. If a future president (or even Obama himself) issues a similar order protecting his own regime, he can answer his critics by saying, “you didn’t seem to have a problem with the Yemen order; this one is no different.”

Following a link in the comments there, I found a case where a Muslim (holding U.S. citizenship) was prosecuted, and convicted, for translating “39 Ways to Serve and Participate in Jihad”. Reading the article, I have little sympathy for the man. He clearly works for the downfall of Western Civilization and he has no business even being in America. He obviously presents a threat. But the court ruling against him also presents a threat.

How can we reconcile the two threats? How can we mitigate the danger of radical Islam and, at the same time, protect our own freedom of speech? I think the answer is: We cannot! Freedom of speech is a concept that is foreign to Islam, at least to traditional Islam. As a matter of fact, is is foreign to most civilizations; it is at home only in Western-style democracies. It’s a white concept. I’m not saying that non-whites can’t learn it. Asians certainly can. I would hope that, some day, the whole world can learn to value the civil liberties of others. But I hope they learn it in such a way that they also recognize the limitations of civil liberties. If, through the protection of individual civil liberties, a society loses sight of its own identity, then all their struggles come to naught.

 

Why are Jews leftists? The Kabbalah

Long-time readers of this blog are probably already aware that I do not hold so-called Jewish mysticism, AKA the “Kabbalah” in high regard. While living in Israel, I spent a lot of time and effort researching the origins of this malignant tumor upon Judaism. The more I researched, the more clear it became that most of the Kabbalah is based on forgeries, baseless fanciful thinking and thinly veiled ideas borrowed from the gnostics, Christians and various ancient pagan religions. I’m not saying that everything in authentic Judaism is true, only that the Kabbalah was a later, and foreign, graft.

The Kabbalah teaches, and stresses, such concepts as “we are all one”, “god is in everything” and “nothing is truly mundane”. One of the pivotal beliefs of the Kabbalah is that humans can affect the higher spiritual realms through our actions, and even through the words we speak – such as in prayer. According to the Kabbalah, a prayer is not simply a creature speaking to his creator. Rather, it is a creature acting as an engineer and manipulating the various relationships between the various lofty spheres (called “sephiroth”).

The belief in an ability to bring about change in remote entities, through seemingly minor actions (before the invention of remote control, mind you), is not unusual in primitive religions. In fact, the first such religion that pops into the minds of many people is Voodoo.

Some of you may be surprised to learn that there are Jews who practice Voodoo. But this does appear to be the case. According to Free Republic:

Voodoo Dialogue

by Jonathan Mark, Associate Editor

[...]There is Jewish-Christian dialogue; Jewish-Muslim dialogue; Jewish-Hindu dialogue; Jewish-Buddhist dialogue; rabbis have met with the pope, the Dalai Lama and imams, but Voodoo dialogue is the ecumenical stepchild. An informal round of phone calls to rabbis turned up nothing. Voodoo gets a laugh; to most Jews it’s a punchline.

Even Clal-The National Jewish Center for Learning and Leadership, an organization that, decades ago, was one of the pioneers in serious interfaith understanding, has yet to meet its first houngan, mambo or manbo (Voodoo priests).

And yet, out on the street, there is more of a Jewish-Voodoo intersection than one might think.

Up in the Bronx, on Webster Avenue, Jason Mizrahi, son of a Turkish Jew, sells around 100 Voodoo dolls each week at his Original Products Corp. The emporium, founded by his father in the 1950s, sells potions, amulets, herbs, oils and varied accessories for the occult, on the site of an old A&P supermarket.

“We sell books on kabbalah,” says Mizrahi. “In Spanish.”

We telephoned Martha Ward, professor of anthropology at the University of New Orleans. Are there Jews involved with Voodoo in America’s capital of Voodoo?

She laughs out loud. “The largest [Voodoo] congregation here in New Orleans, La Source Ancienne, is headed by a nice Jewish girl from Maine, Sallie Ann Glassman.”

Glassman, who also operates a New Orleans spiritual emporium, fittingly on Piety Street, didn’t return our calls, but her Web site says she was ordained as a manbo in Port-au-Prince, Haiti, in 1995.

“She got into this out of the kabbalah,” says Ward. “Mysticism crosses all artificial boundaries. The Spirits choose whom they will, it is said, picking out people with special abilities and qualities and the Spirits contact them.”

But of course! It should be no surprise that the same people who are attracted to the hocus pocus of the Kabbalah would also be attracted to the hocus pocus of Voodoo.

Why do Jewish leftists so fear and loath “racism” – even when the “racist” is harming nobody? Perhaps because generations of their ancestors were conditioned to believe that mere words, spoken among friends, can harm others. They do not accept the old adage that “sticks and stones may break my bones but words can never harm me.” If the words of prayer can affect the heavenly spheres (“sephiroth”) then the words of racists (even amongst themselves – such as at an American Renaissance conference) can also affect non-whites, even if they’re thousands of miles away and know nothing of these conversations.

But believers in the Kabbalah/Voodoo/Leftism don’t stop there. They attribute supernatural powers even to thought. Hence their embrace of the concept of “thought crime”.

It never occurred to me, years ago when I rejected the Kabbalah, that this same type of critical thinking would some day lead me to reject Leftism. If I am correct, in linking the spread of the Kabbalah to the ultimate spread of Leftism, then the former can be viewed as one of the greatest sources of evil the world has ever known. It first poisoned the minds of Jews, then those same Jews helped spread the disease to the entire Western world.

It’s ironic that the most conservative Jews, traditional religious ones, are now the most fervent believers in the Kabbalah. They cling to it because they consider it an integral part of Judaism – and Judaism defines their identity. Yet the remnant of authentic Judaism, which they still keep to some extent, protects their minds from the poisonous brew of the Kabbalah. At least to a certain degree.

But once the Jew discards his mantle of Judaism, his immunity vanishes and he has no defense against Kabbalistic thinking. The Kabbalistic demon, freed from its restraints, is now at liberty to assert itself over the minds of its Jewish hosts and, by extension, the minds of the entire Occident. I’m not saying that the Kabbalah was the only source of Voodoo-like thinking, only that it laid the groundwork for Jewish Leftism.

It’s not difficult to reveal the true origins of Kabbalistic works such as the Zohar. They are blatant forgeries. What is difficult is to wean people of the defective thought processes that came along with it.

 

 

Leftists incredulous at Aboriginal skull

In a thread at The Escapist, somebody cited this image from my blog:

If memory serves me right, I first found it at the now-defunct HBDbooks blog. Can you guess which one is Australian Aboriginal, and which one Slavic? The one on the left belonged to an Aboriginal man who lived some time in the 19th century. He belonged to the Pintupi (or Pintubi) tribe. Jim Vanhollebeke wrote about it on canovan.com:

The controversial Pintubi-1 skull of Australia (pictured above) is a paradox of paleoanthropology. As a hominid fossil, its so young that it has been assigned to a tribe that survived into the last century. A modern aboriginal skull. Yet its morphology could be described as archaic. The skulls history is shrouded in mystery (not unlike others from the down under). Even without documentation, its age and Australoid identity are indisputable. The man it inhabited lived An anthropologic paradox very recently (in paleo-terms), likely in the 1800s or later. It is in perfect condition and shows no signs of antiquity. The skull was discovered or obtained around 1905 near the lower Darling River in New South Wales, Australia. Beyond that, all we are able to determine is that it is said to be a large adult 50 year old male from the Pintubi tribe…

The subject skull, modern in age, yet archaic in structure is a relevant example and deserves the following brief description.
Even if a pathological oddity it would demand attention but an anthropologist at the University of Michigan assures us that this is not the case and that this specimen isn’t that unusual.

But somebody at The Escapist couldn’t believe that the Pintubi is a modern skull. He writes:

(Supposedly a comparison between an aboriginal skull and a slav skull).

For a start it comes from a blog labelled as “Jew among you” and is apparently dedicated to “race realism”. I did a reserve Google image search to find out where it had originally came from and among nuggets like Stormfront and some Nazi forum I found the original source from early 2009, over a year before your link was made:

http://ricercares.wordpress.com/category/uncategorized/

It’s in Spanish but a quick translate brings up the skulls true identity, human vs Neanderthal! You’ve been caught red-handed.

The poster’s “research” apparently consisted of a quick google search, and involved no critical thinking. Tellingly, everybody else in that thread took his words at face value and let it go at that. Naturally, I went ahead and pointed out their error. You would think that they would be embarrassed at having mistaken an Aboriginal skull for a Neanderthal, that it would illustrate the exact opposite of what they wish to believe about race. But I predict that the matter will be dropped and ignored.

I don’t read Spanish, but I’m sure some of you readers do. So please, if it’s not too much trouble, one of you post an English translation of the important parts of the Spanish blog cited above. I’d like to know if it’s a simple mistake or perhaps something else.

 

Rehabilitating neo-Nazis

The movie “American History X” fresh in my mind, I’ve decided to start delving deeper into the pathology called “neo-Nazism” and efforts to cure it.

An organization called Fast Coexist, which is an online leftist publication, recently had an article about how to cure young people of their extremism, whether it be neo-Nazism, gangs or militant Islam. The Author, Paul Glader, interviewed specialist Judy Korn:

How do you rehabilitate a young Neo-Nazi behind bars?

“You talk with them,” says German social entrepreneur Judy Korn. In the past, German prisons showed films about Hitler and the Holocaust to try to reach such extremists. But Korn says re-integrating the young men happens with personal communication, not by showing them passive media.

And it turns out that helping Neo-Nazis change their ways requires the same five principles (see the sidebar below) that work on Muslim extremist youth and others who end up behind bars for violent or hate-motivated crimes. The chief skill to teach them: empathy.

“If you work with violent people, you can be sure at one point in their biography, they stopped having the ability to feel empathy for other people,” says Korn, who has worked with right extremists since she was a teenager. She said most Neo-Nazis her team of trainers work with in 10 of Germany’s 16 states come from abusive homes with alcoholism and other problems. “If you train people to feel empathy for themselves, you can train them to be and feel empathetic for another person.”

Korn’s organization–Violence Prevention Network–has worked with 500 such cases of incarcerated young skinheads, Neo-Nazis, and Muslim extremists in Germany since 2001. Her records show recidivism rates for the young men they work with is 30%, compared to 80% for all juvenile offenders in Germany. Her team of trainers can work with about 100 young people a year, but she would like to expand to work with more than 300. Other projects like Exit Deutschland also helps shuttle Neo-Nazis out of the scene, offering a witness protection type of program to young people who might fear violent retribution when they quit an extremist movement.

Clearly, a lot of ignorant, angry, and violent young men find a voice for their frustrations in movements such as neo-Nazism or skinheads. It goes without saying that if a person is willing to tattoo swastikas, or other Nazi insignia, on his flesh for all to see, he has little regard for societal norms – especially in a place like Germany. Along with this might come a readiness for violence. It would be interesting to observe a rehabilitation, done by Korn, and try to figure out if she is curing the subject of neo-Nazism or of delinquency in general. If the subject is a delinquent, and his Nazi creed is merely a manifestation of this, then curing him of his anger, low self-esteem and ignorance might also cure his Nazism. Some disturbed individuals are attracted to Nazism, not because they’re convinced of its tenets, but because this is merely an expression of their condition. The same could be said of any number of fringe movements. The individual might be convinced that he has attached himself to the movement through his powers of reasoning, but the underlying motivation is psychological.

But what about well-educated people who have become inflamed by the ongoing genocide of their own people, by the ongoing propaganda or by the pattern of abuse perpetrated by the elite few (many of whom are Jews)? In their case, ignorance is not the problem. Such people may be perfectly healthy psychologically. Their creed may be based on rational choices (taken to extremes, perhaps, by runaway emotions). Could this be the 30% recidivism?

Slyly, the author of the above article equates all right-leaning nationalism with neo-Nazism:

Rightist movements are on the rise in several European countries at the moment, causing increasing concern by officials. The EU recently created the Radicalization Awareness Network after Norwegian extremist Anders Behring Breivik killed 77 people last summer. It will spend $28 million in the next four years to help prevent extremism in Europe. While Germany has its share of ongoing problems with extremist communities, she worries about the right-leaning rhetoric coming from the political class in some Western European countries

This tendency shows that those doing the healing are in need of healing themselves. Time and time again we have seen how steeped leftism is in emotion, conditioning and mental flaws. Cold reasoning is near the bottom of the list of reasons why people subscribe to leftist ideologies. People like Korn may simply be replacing one mental illness with another. One religion with another. This might explain some of her success; most people need a religion as a crutch and it’s easier to jump from one religion-raft to another – rather than jumping in the water and swimming.