Sunday, 20 March 2016

Another one from the New York Times archives, testifying once again that the connection between Jews and Communism was not a figment of the imagination in the past, any more than the connection between Jews and "immigration & diversity" propaganda is today.

Source: New York Times, "Gerard says Reds menace the Jews", October 8, 1934

In Britain, in the last few days, we have had a couple of articles from Jews that are outstanding examples of the sheer egocentric blindness these people have. The first from Emma Barnett in the Telegraph (here) and the second from Nick Cohen in the Observer (here).They simply cannot understand why it is that any other people might find their actions objectionable. The only explanation they can offer is crazed demonic hatred. Of course, if we were allowed free speech, we might be able to explain in rational terms why antagonism to Jews exists. But the Jews themselves have ensured that we won't have that opportunity. No comments were allowed to Barnett's article. The Comment facility was turned on briefly for Cohen's and then switched off. This doesn't stop Cohen from absurdly portraying Jews as champions of free speech, at the very same time he is demanding the suppression of people who exercise that free speech.
Whether the antisemitic conspiracy theory is deployed by German Nazis or Arab dictators, French anti-Dreyfusards or Saudi clerics, the argument is always the same. Democracy, an independent judiciary, equal human rights, freedom of speech and publication – all these “supposed” freedoms – are nothing but swindles that hide the machinations of the secret Jewish rulers of the world. 
Describe the fantasy the Tsarist and Nazi empires developed that bluntly and it is impossible to understand how the Labour party is in danger of becoming as tainted as Ukip by the racists it attracts.
The Tsar's crazed "fantasy" that Jews were trying to overthrow his government, kill his family and install a terror regime that would brutalise Russia and threaten the world. Then this actually happened. But it remains a crazed fantasy nonetheless.

 Cohen does acknowledge the existence of a Jewish "fronde" against Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn.
I could describe at vitriolic length how disgusted leftwing Jewish friends are that Labour members chose Jeremy Corbyn, despite his support for an Anglican cleric who linked to extremist sites that blamed Jews for 9/11, and his defence of an Islamist who recycled the libel that Jews dined on the blood of Christian children from the bottom of a medieval dung heap.
Of course if anyone else had publicly noted the existence of this phenomenon - that Jews were mobilising against Corbyn because they perceived him as being unfavourable to their ethnic interests - it would have been described as a crazed antisemitic conspiracy theory. It doesn't occur to Cohen that people who see Corbyn as a vehicle of hope for change in their country might legitimately resent an ethnic group mobilising against him for their own purposes which have nothing to do with the interests of Britain.

Emma Barnett, in the Telegraph, is equally blind. She refers to an activist, Vicky Kirby, who has just been expelled from the Labour party because of various tweets she made, which Barnett describes as laying bare "a hatred that’s never gone away".

Where is the "hatred" in these tweets? Barnett variously describes Kirby and her tweets as "vile", "irrational", "cruel", "a nutter", "rotten", "atrocious", a "virus" and "awful". But what did she actually say that was so terrible? That Jews have big noses? Does that really merit such a list of exorbitant epithets? The most noteworthy thing about the tweets is that most of them don't refer to Jews at all, but to Israel. Barnett herself instantly assumes that anything referring to Israel must applies equally to Jews. But later in the article she describes exactly this assumed equivalence as a form of antisemitism.
It’s true the latest fashionable form of anti-Semitism is to hold Jews collectively responsible for the actions of Israel and then compare those acts to the Holocaust.
If someone claimed that virtually all Jews felt "hatred" for the Goyim, they would, of course, be accused of antisemitism. Their imputation of hatred would itself be considered an expression of hatred. But this logic does not apply in reverse. When Jews freely accuse entire peoples of feeling hatred for them, as Barnett does in the extract below, that is not in itself to be considered an expression of hatred.
Her tweets shine a light on what I’m actually concerned about, away from the Labour Party slanging match; anti-Semitic tropes that lovely regular folk still absurdly believe. One hundred per cent.
One hundred per cent. Barnett even yearns for some kind of re-education programme for these evil Brits.
Vicki Kirby may have deleted her atrocious tweets about Jews and the Labour Party may expel her permanently. But the bigger problem remains. She, and thousands others, (all of whom won’t be Labour Party members), still believe these awful things to be true. Now what are we really doing about that? That’s what I want to know. That’s where I look to the leadership of our country. People speak of ‘re-education’ but the details never materialise.
And in the end, after gloating about exclusion and anathema having successfully been applied, after demanding an even stricter policing of the boundaries of acceptable thought, after wistfully hoping for a "re-education" programme for the dumb goy, oops I mean British people, Barnett strikes the noble pose of a champion of free speech. She wants to have a "conversation" with Kirby. In private. After having created conditions ensuring that such a conversation could never take place in public.
So here’s an idea for Mr Corbyn; I hereby invite him and Vicki Kirby around to mine for a traditional Jewish Friday night supper. There’s a strong chance that the Woking woman has never met a real life Jew and one with a small nose at that. Perhaps she’s too far gone, but I’d welcome the challenge to disabuse her of bizarre views. Over a bowl of my mum’s chicken soup.


  1. Wow, look at what I stumbled across today:

    A black man apologises for whites being unfairly blamed for the slave trade and for all that's been done to keep the black man down in the US. It should be shared more widely.

    "I was brought up in a culture deeply infused with propaganda designed to lay the blame for all of the black race's ills on the white man."

    "The reality is that the white race had little to do with the slave trade that took our ancestors away from Africa and sold them into bondage in the New World. That crime was committed not by White Europeans, but by Jews who were engaged in transatlantic commerce between the Old World and the Americas"

    "Blacks have been purposely misled by the Jewish people who, in previous centuries, built their fortunes in the transatlantic slave trade, and who continue to manipulate and exploit us even today. Because most black people make no distinction between Jews and whites, it is easy for the Jews to evade justice and escape the blame for the wrongs that they have inflicted on our people for centuries by convincing blacks that it was the white man who did it."

    Heartening stuff!

  2. That's my favorite thing; the hypocrisy. All whitey goy is evil, nasty, barbarous and anti-Semite, but holy shit if you mention Jews and Israel in the same sentence.

  3. This is why exposing what the Talmud, the core and central text of Judaism is so important, for what it says about Jews, non-Jews (the animosity, contempt and de-humanisation of non-Jews is not not limited to Christians), truth (which must not be uttered if it endangers or places the Jews in a negative or dangerous light, the original ancestor of all 'politically correct' and "anti-hate" speech laws), apostasy (Deuteronomy calls for the apostate to be killed by his family member and then the larger community to join in it which Islam, a derivative of Talmudic Judaism, took on in its death for apostasy in the Koran, hadiths and sharia law), usury (deemed a sin worse than sodomy in the Old Testament but acceptable when used against non-Jews in the Talmud), rejection of integration into larger non-Jewish communities, and paedophilia (marriage and coition with female child aged three years and one day, and sexual relations with male child acceptable if said child is under nine years old since the child is not capable of active sexual response, thus effectively 'rationalising' child sexual abuse of male and female children). Ideology does count and once people realise the source of the hostility comes from Judaism itself, the notion of 'guilt' and its attendant vehicle, "anti-semitism", is nullified.

  4. Winston Churchill said that the Jews created communism. What do the Jews who wrote these articles have to say about that?