The USA As A Communal Apartment

Anatoly Karlin writes:

One of the most memorably vivid characterizations of the USSR was as a communal apartment, in which every ethnicity had its own room. Except the majority Russians, who had to make do with the foyer while paying the bulk of the rent, which didn’t make them too happy.

In some sense, US Whites are not in a dissimilar situation. They were the ethnic group that essentially built the country and produced virtually all its most eminent intellectual figures, but now have to listen to BLM activists claiming “their people” built Princeton. (Just as they were once Kings and Queens of Egypt, which just goes to show that at its root BLM is essentially a “progressive” front for Black Nationalism). They are faced with constant attacks on their “privilege” even as that very privilege not just vanishes by goes into active reverse (see Deaton & Case’s revelations about the the White mortality crisis, and Ron Unz’s finding that the most discriminated against group in university admissions are White Gentiles).

Thus, it is not surprising to see an incipient reaction against this, the latest facet of it being the rash of White Student Unions now being formed in universities across the US.

Although the MSM has attempted to portray them as hickbilly racists and the hacker 4chan, it appears that they are enjoying a surge in support that would have been unimaginable before “the year of shrieking young black women.” Here is the top-voted comment on the USA Today article on this, for instance:

In todays society where people seem more divided by race than any time in recent history, is this even surprising or wrong? Maybe white people feel the need to band together in order to stand up for themselves.

Nor is this even limited to aggrieved Whites. According to a Breitbart investigation:

But this narrative is incorrect. In private interviews conducted with the creators of a number of these groups, Breitbart Tech has found that a number of the new “White Student Unions” are indeed the product of students on campus who are afraid to speak out publicly.

But these students aren’t white supremacists, or even white nationalists. In some cases, they are not even white. One of the anonymous student group founders we spoke to, who did not wish to be identified, was of South Asian descent. Another founder was Mexican-American. They are concerned by what they see as unchecked hostility towards their fellow white students.

Interestingly, these pages themselves appear to be explicitly adopting the language of the diversity commissars, as seen on one of the posts at the UCF White Student Union.

The White Student Union surge is a legitimate one filled with positive intentions. We will continue to be a voice and safe space for people of Whiteness.


* This is a good article so it seems that we are finally getting to the bottom of the significance of the civil rights movement. The purpose of the civil rights movement and the doctrine of disparate impact is to undermine the idea of private property and the legal concepts of consent and consideration. It is not as simple as saying that women and minorities were “denied” a position on the other end someone has to offer it – at one time private property, liberty of contract and freedom of association were upheld to be sacrosanct principles. There are two ways of organizing society – status or contract as Sir Henry Maine stated in his book on principles on ancient law. In our disparate impact society any legal entity that does anything the civil rights leaders dont like (which cannot be defined ahead of time) is subject to legal extortion. Highly paid experts who produce nothing of value spend their lives trying to avoid and rationalize this extortion. Maybe some of the white working class should be retrained as disparate impact specialists in our new multicultural utopia.

* It’s just ironic that this kind of a White segregationist idea has long since been promoted by David Duke – a White nationalist opinion leader who has been marginalized and who’s always been viewed as totally “far out”. And here we have these White Student unions springing up left and right – it didn’t take very long.



Posted in Affirmative Action, America | Comments Off on The USA As A Communal Apartment

France Starts Shutting Down Alternative Media


Every time there’s a huge terrorist threat, the public gives up their freedoms for protection from the Government. And every time, our leaders use these new laws to destroy civil liberties.

What happened to ordinary French people (and their way of life) after the recent Paris attacks? All the mainstream media are concerned with 10 days after the event is making sure that public support for the increased war effort is high. We need more footage of ambulances, their sirens blaring and lights flashing. Put it on loop, 24 hours a day, with sad images of people crying and laying wreaths, then throw in some fear in the form of some ugly-looking jihadists, and the population will be cheering on another foreign mission in no time at all.

While all that’s going on, the Government invariably rush through tougher new laws against terrorism. And if history can teach us one thing, it’s that modern terrorism laws are actually anti-civil liberty laws in disguise. Today, with perfect timing, the French version of We Are Change was censored. This is a worrying and unprecedented crackdown on the alternative media in Europe, and one which French bloggers fear is the beginning of the end for freedom of speech.

‘Le Blog De Resistance‘ is a popular French-language alternative news source with over 10 million hits and thousands of regular subscribers. The author, who calls himself Z, has been in panic mode since a state of emergency was called after the Paris attacks. This high-level alert was extended for three months, along with a pro-war propaganda campaign and the media under strict orders to terrify the population like never before. While chaos continued outside, the French Government locked themselves away to discuss new legislation which would affect the alternative media in a very negative way. Today, Z’s greatest fear was realized, and he writes:

“And so it begins. How long will this blog remain open? The worst is that the French do not care, they are totally obsessed with more security at the expense of their freedoms. The world mocks the terrible secrets revealed by Snowden. Amazing – in France, the ‘land of liberty’. Today once again I repeat, I am very afraid for freedom of expression and the alternative media. I don’t know how much longer I can write and report freely. I fear for myself. Risk taking was already intense, made worse with the slew of laws passed since the beginning of the year (anti-terrorism law, intelligence …) now, it’s huge. It’s very hard for us to write under the state of emergency. Stress and tension are everywhere.”

The tone is clear. It’s fearful and worried. It’s eerie. It sounds like it was written in Nazi Germany in 1939, not France in 2015.

Les Moutons Enrages, Sputnik France and Fawkes are other popular alternative media sites which ‘Le Blog De La Resistance’ author Z references in his post. Most remain defiant, with the first promising to ‘open up in Russia if necessary’. Z points out that Francois Hollande has been promising to silence ‘conspiracy theorists’ since January this year. We Are Change’s crime was to post a video (below) with a few questions about the Paris attacks. They seriously pissed off the authorities, and it was enough to get the French version banned for ‘reasons of national security’. Z then quotes George Orwell, and laments the fact that telling the truth is now ‘an act of suicide’.

Here’s a question: when leaders keep telling us not to allow terrorists to change our way of life, why is crushing dissent the first thing they do when something horrific happens? Isn’t dissent part of living in a free world? Aren’t protests and asking tough questions of those in power just a couple of the liberties we are supposedly trying to ‘spread‘ around the world? Isn’t that part of what makes democracy so great?

Well, apparently not. We need tougher terrorism laws because the puppet media just told us that one of the evil guys came in from Greece pretending to be a refugee, and he even left a passport (later proven to be fake) outside the burning building he just escaped from. We need them because, despite the fact you or I could be arrested at home for an ‘offensive tweet’ within minutes of putting it out there, our intelligence agencies are supposedly too under-resourced to successfully track down a few ISIS Twitter accounts. They’re so crap, Anonymous had to step in and do their jobs for them. It’s strange how terrible the intelligence services are when it suits the agenda: Snowden has revealed how the government can control your mobile phone and listen in on your conversations even when it’s turned off, but somehow the real terrorists get to perfect their complicated and evil schemes without any detection at all. How very convenient.

Yep, the intelligence services are doing a terrible job. They have proven themselves incapable of predicting horrific attacks in advance, despite the fact that as soon as a terror attack occurs, a huge list of details is magically available to the media. How was it possible, for example, that alleged Boston Bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev‘s personal Amazon wishlist was being discussed well before the time it would take the authorities to even look at all the CCTV footage of the marathon? These perceived (ie fake) failings may lead many to support increased spying measures for the ever-growing sprawling network of global surveillance tentacles, but it’s worth asking whether these incompetencies are even real, because all terrorism laws tend to do is systematically dismantle what is left of our civil liberties.

We support our French independent media friends in their struggle against censorship. The following quote is falsely attributed to the French philosopher Voltaire, who was a great defender of freedom (and would no doubt be turning in his grave about France’s new gag laws). It turns out Voltaire didn’t say this, rather it was said about him- a friend’s description of the great man’s philosophy- which seems more relevant to his countrymen today than ever.

“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”

Note: The video that got ‘We are Change’ banned from the French internet can be seen below. The video above explains more about the censorship founder Luke Rudkowski is facing. Please share this story if you believe the independent media is vital in a democratic society to hold those in power to account, and let us know your thoughts below.



Posted in Censorship, France | Comments Off on France Starts Shutting Down Alternative Media

Massive PR push underway to change American minds on Syrian Muslim resettlement to US

From Refugee Resettlement Watch:

You already know this is happening because you’ve probably seen the media campaign where you live. Pro-Syrian Muslim groups and the federal resettlement contractors*** are putting in motion a campaign like no other especially since they have learned that the majority of Americans don’t want the US State Department to bring in 10,000 Syrian, mostly Muslim, refugees and scatter them throughout the country.

They think if they utter the word “robust” in regards to the vetting process, the public will say—well, then by all means let them in! WTH is “robust?”

Here is just one article about the media blitz by pro-Syrian groups and the No Borders movement, this one from Voice of America:

In three U.S. opinion polls published by Bloomberg, NBC News and the Washington Post/ABC News this month, 53 to 56 percent of respondents said no more Syrian refugees should enter. One reason cited by many respondents is a concern that Islamic State terrorists could slip through the U.S. refugee vetting process.

World Relief (National Association of Evangelicals) is one of the nine federally-funded resettlement contractors out in force in defense of their role in bringing in mostly Muslim Syrian refugees (98% so far are Sunni Muslims).

And, remember! The UN High Commissioner for Refugees told a Georgetown audience (here, we were there) that the Syrian Christians are not persecuted because the “regime” (Assad) is protecting them, therefore it is the Sunni Muslims that the UNHCR is focusing on and sending to your towns.

Here is World Relief’s Washington advocate (aka lobbyist) Jenny Yang:

Yang never tells the listening audience that World Relief is PAID BY THE HEAD by the US taxpayer for their work in ‘welcoming communities’ and that they work closely with businesses to supply them with cheap immigrant labor.

World Relief’s vice president of advocacy and policy, Jenny Yang, also appeared on Hashtag VOA, and said her organization works with businesses and religious groups around the country to provide Syrian refugees with jobs and welcoming communities.

World Relief is also reimbursed by the taxpayer through a match program for supplying the volunteers in churches who pick up the refugees at the airport!

“We equip churches to respond tangibly,” Yang said. “We work with them in picking up a refugee family at the airport, or providing them with a meal, or even inviting a family [to join them] for the holidays.”

Then here she is implying that they are saving the Christians, WORLD RELIEF IS NOT SAVING THE CHRISTIANS! The UNHCR is picking Sunni Muslims for resettlement to America and as a federal contractor, World Relief must resettle the Muslims or lose their federal funding (it is about the money!). Imagine having to dodge and weave like this! I repeat, they are not helping Christians!

Yang said World Relief believes there is a need to help religious minorities in the Middle East, including Christians. “But helping Christians doesn’t have to come at the expense of other refugees like Muslims who also are persecuted,” she said. “As Christian evangelicals, we believe that we can live out the calling of Jesus in welcoming the foreign-born and others into our communities.”

One of their favorite talking points is this one about how Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan are doing more than their fair share. But, please remember that the Syrians who have gone to those countries will be sent back to Syria the minute the fighting is over and will never become voting citizens of those countries. Those coming here will live permanently in the US, bring their family members and become voting citizens of America. And, it will never end. More than two decades after the Somali civil war the US (World Relief and others) are still resettling Somalis in small town America by the thousands!

Yang said the number of Syrian refugees that the Obama administration wants to welcome in fiscal year 2016 — 10,000 — is a “drop in the bucket” compared to the millions of Syrian refugees absorbed by Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan and Iraq.

More here at VOA.

World Relief is just one of nine federal contractors working to change America for Obama, for the NO Borders Left, and for the Democrat Party.

Go here for a list of cities where World Relief is doing its “welcoming” work. Any‘pockets of resistance’>forming in these cities?

***Nine major federal contractors which like to call themselves VOLAGs (Voluntary agencies) which is such a joke considering how much federal money they receive:

  • Church World Service (CWS)
  • Ethiopian Community Development Council (ECDC) (secular)
  • Episcopal Migration Ministries (EMM)
  • Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS)
  • International Rescue Committee (IRC) (secular)
  • US Committee for Refugees and Immigrants (USCRI) (secular)
  • Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Services (LIRS)
  • United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB)
  • World Relief Corporation (WR)
  • Comments


    Posted in Immigration | Comments Off on Massive PR push underway to change American minds on Syrian Muslim resettlement to US

    Revolt of the masses and Republican elite shock

    Jews tend to fear populism because Jews have rarely been popular.

    When you read about “elites”, think Jews.

    Michael Gerace writes:

    Remember how Republican elites and wealthy donors in 2000 were happy to get behind George W Bush—and W wasn’t known for his intellect.

    It’s never been much of an issue with elites before. So why now?

    It’s really about policy. The desire to stop Trump and Carson is really about preventing the political desires of large numbers of Republican voters from being realized. It’s what elites really fear.

    Take immigration, for example. Trump’s stance on this, which has found vast support among voters, is directly contrary to the cheap labor regime that has defined immigration policy for ions and which both parties support. Economic elites want cheap labor and our politicians know who butters their bread. As such, politicians pay lip service to the job loss and other economic distortions that come from this policy, while couching the policy in moralistic/ideological language and poor economic arguments. Trump threatens to unseat this policy regime and it has elites rattled.

    What about trade agreements? Critics say Trump hasn’t got the knowledge base here, but he has been railing about bad trade deals for quite a long time. Our trade deficit, which has been around for decades and reflects those deals, makes a net negative contribution to our economic growth, while contributing to unemployment and lower wages. Many are listening.

    In the past, such policy complaints were drowned out by the dominant rhetoric of establishment candidates, but things are different today. The Post-ABC poll mentioned above also showed about 60 percent of Republican voters support the three candidates with no political experience, with Trump getting the bulk of it. This is a vote of no confidence in Republican elites.

    Trump was close to being right when he said in an Nov. 22 AP article “They can’t understand, you know, how come an outsider can be doing so well within the party.” Elites understand it all right, they just don’t know what to do about it.

    While the Koch brothers wring their hands on the sidelines, and operatives fantasize about a Romney draft, large numbers of Republicans are in revolt.

    The question now before us is how far the revolt will go. Will voters go all the way and put a guy like Trump in the drivers’ seat or will their resolve dissipate once elites finally unleash all that pent up money to finance low-road attacks on Trump and Carson?



    Posted in Donald Trump | Comments Off on Revolt of the masses and Republican elite shock

    Welcome Refugees!





    Posted in Immigration | Comments Off on Welcome Refugees!

    Why don’t the French bomb Belgium?

    Rod Liddle writes: I am always open to spiritual guidance from any quarter, all the more so if that guidance is of practical import. So I was especially grateful to hear reports of a fatwa from the prominent Saudi Arabian cleric, Abdul Aziz bin Abdullah. This fatwa apparently made it clear that it was perfectly permissible for me, if suffering from ‘severe hunger’, to eat my wife. Either eat all of her — or merely, as it helpfully elucidated, some of her ‘body parts’. It did not say which body parts. In lieu of further enlightenment, I assumed that all of them were up for grabs.

    Anyway, many has been the time that I have rooted through the fridge for something to stave off a ravenous hunger and found nothing but those tiny yoghurts that women eat to assuage constipation. I have stamped around and cursed, not understanding that the answer to my problem was sitting a few yards away in the living room, watching a re-run of Wolf Hall. Some, perhaps including the renowned Quranic scholar David Cameron, will no doubt say that such a fatwa (which Abdul insisted was a fabrication) would exemplify a ‘perverted’ view of Islam. Perhaps. But might it actually be rather moderate in stipulating that this recourse is available only to men suffering ‘severe hunger’? There may be other Muslim clerics who would argue that we should eat our wives even if we feel only a little peckish, or have got the ‘munchies’. The disputed fatwa, by the way, was said to reinforce the thesis that wives should be obedient to their husbands and that eating them was merely another way that ‘2 become 1’, as the Spice Girls once had it.

    It may well be that when you first heard of the barbarous Islamist atrocities in Paris you thought: ‘My God. My God. How could they do that? At least now maybe the scales will fall from some eyes and we will tackle the problem head on.’ And then, like me, having thought this, you will have watched a BBC news programme and very quickly realised — nope, not a chance, business as usual. The same delusional rubbish, the same gerrymandering of public opinion, the same absurdities. My anti-epiphany began with Kirsty Wark on Newsnight interviewing two women, one of whom said that the problem was France’s racist society and the other, a French-Algerian, who opined that it first looked like the attacks could have been caused by rival drug gangs. I stared at the screen, mouth agape, unable for a while to believe what I was hearing. A whole programme about the Paris attacks in which three words — Muslim, Islam, jihadi — were not used at any point. The desperation to exculpate the ideology was present long before the bodies had been carried away. Then, when it was revealed that some attackers had entered the country as refugees, the Today programme had a fair, balanced and unpartisan debate between three people who agreed that we should take more refugees, because getting tough is ‘what they (the nasty terrorists) want us to do’. Even before the attacks the majority of British people wanted fewer migrants to be allowed in and a bit more rigour at the checkpoints — but that view was not remotely reflected. With the exception of a rather fine piece by John Sweeney on Panorama, the BBC’s coverage throughout was appalling in its cringeing, politically correct, liberal bias.

    Meanwhile, the Home Secretary was telling us that the terrorists represent a ‘perverted’ form of Islam. Hmm. The same perverted form of the religion as practised by Abdul’s home country, Saudi Arabia? Or in Iran, or Libya, or Palestine, or Somalia, or . . . the list of countries which kill apostates, persecute Christians, Jews, homosexuals and women is longish, you have to say. We must grasp that the proportion of Muslims worldwide who hold this ‘perverted’ view is far, far, higher than Mrs May or the BBC would like you to think. Some 27 per cent of British Muslims, for example, expressed sympathy with the Charlie Hebdo murderers. This week it was reported that one in five British Muslims sympathises with Islamic State fighters. That is a number which is, as John Major might put it, not inconsiderable.

    And the weird canards and the non-sequiturs. I have lost count of the number of times I have heard politicians express worry about British Muslims going to Syria and coming home ‘radicalised’. No. They were radicalised before they went. That is why they went there. In any case, we always let them back in when they arrive home after a spot of decapitating, instead of confiscating their passports and telling them to clear off.



    Posted in Belgium, France, Islam | Comments Off on Why don’t the French bomb Belgium?

    French comic convicted in Belgium for anti-Semitic jokes

    I am so glad to see Jewish groups in Europe leading the way to restrict speech and to send people to prison for jokes.


    A Belgian court sentenced controversial French comedian Dieudonne M’bala M’bala on Wednesday to two months in prison and a 9,000 euro ($9,534) fine for making anti-Semitic jokes during a comedy show in 2012.

    Dieudonne, known for his use of jokes based on ethnic stereotypes, has repeatedly been convicted of racism in France and fined for hate speech. He insists he is not anti-Semitic.

    The court in Liege found the comedian, known by the stage name Dieudonne, had spread racist ideas by making discriminatory, anti-Semitic and holocaust-denying remarks in the 2012 gig in nearby Herstal, a court spokeswoman said.

    He was not in court on Wednesday.

    Judges said that the remarks, made in front of an audience of 1,100 people in the town of Herstal, were clearly calls to hatred and violence. By calling on Christians and Muslims to unite to kill Jews, he had incited genocide.

    He was also ordered to pay for the entire text of the judgment against him to be printed in two leading French-language Belgian newspapers.

    In March, he was given a two-month suspended sentence for condoning terrorism in a Facebook post shortly after Islamist attacks that killed 17 people in Paris in January.

    He was later fined 22,500 euros for a jibe against a radio journalist in 2013, suggesting that hearing the broadcaster speak made him think of Nazi gas chambers.

    The comedian, who began his career with a Jewish sidekick in the early 1990s, is credited with inventing the “quenelle”, a downward Nazi-like salute.

    Originally active with anti-racist, left-wing groups, the Paris-born son of a Cameroonian father and French mother began openly criticizing Jews and Israel in 2002, and ran in the European elections two years later for a French pro-Palestinian party.

    Where on earth do European countries get the idea that jokes should result in prison? What insane white people want to restrict speech? Well, it turns out that Jewish groups have led the way in restricting speech in France.


    In France the Jewish organizations LICRA (Ligue internationale contre le racisme et l’antisemitisme) and CRIF(Conseil Représentatif des Institutions Juives de France) representing the Jews of France, which are some of of the driving forces in the promotion of hate speech legislation, the multicult and the defamation of nationalist organizations and individuals. This in spite of the fact that it is North African muslim immigrants who are the real threat to the life and well being of Jews in France. Both organizations have close ties with the Jewish Freemason Organization B’nai B’rith (In France formerly known as U.F.A.B.B).

    LICRA (International League against Racism and Anti-Semitism) started as ‘The League against Pogroms’ in 1927 after the Jew Sholom Schwartzbart had murdered the Ukrainian national hero and enemy of the Bolsheviks in Paris in 1926. It then became LICA (League against Anti-Semitism) but changed name in 1979 to the present LICRA, in order to take full advantage of the cornerstone anti-racist law enacted in France in 1972. It took 51 years, before LICA found out that it missed the word ‘racism’ in its name.

    League for Human Rights (La Ligue des Droits de l’Homme) was founded after the trial, sentencing, jailing and final acquittal of the Jewish officer Alfred Dreyfus. Founded in 1898. Staffed and supported heavily by Jews ever since.

    Jewish book burning: The Jewish / Zionist organization LICRA managed to have the first French edition of Israel Shamir’s book Gallilea Flowers, in France published as L´Autre visage d´Israel burned.

    Gayssot Act

    The present ridiculous law in France which make it a punishable offense to even argue in favor of free historical research; the so called ‘Loi Gayssot’ (Gayssot Act) have been created according to Jewish wishes, pushed for by Jewish academics, like Pierre Vidal-Naquet, and some Jewish propagandists, like Serge Klarsfeld and Georges Wellers. The proces was supervised by Chief Rabbi René Samuel Sirat, proposed by the communist Parliament member Jean Claude Gayssot [not Jewish] and passed by the Jewish former Prime Minister Laurent Fabius, resulting in the infamous Fabius-Gayssot Act of July 13, 1990.

    Before the law was passed, ‘anti-Semitic incidents’ conveniently surfaced in a cemetery in Carpentras where Jewish graves were desecrated, according to a massive propaganda campaign, ‘inspired by revisionist writings’.

    Rabbi Sirat also is the Director-Founder of the Unesco Chair “Reciprocal Knowledge of the religions of the Book and teaching of Peace”. Just as in Britain and Denmark, the Jewish organizations rather join forces with islamic organizations and hold dialogues with islamists than solidarizing themselves with organizations which represent the indigenous populations, this goes for Rabbi Sirat as well.

    Breaking the law is punished by heavy fines and jail time. A peculiar detail is that the heavy fines in the 10,000 Euro range often are handed out to the ‘injured party’; the organization or organizations who filed the complaint. This means that there is direct financial gain to be had for the ‘anti racist’, and most often Jewish organizations for accusing and persecuting people for ‘thought crimes’.

    Under this law the French Nationalist Jean Marie Le Pen was fined 10,000 Euro’s and a suspended sentence of 3 month in jail, for having said only that the German occupation of France had not been especially inhumane, compared to the occupation of other countries such as Poland.

    In France the courts try to avoid jail time when it comes to sentencing ‘holocaust deniers’ (everybody who says anything deemed improper by Jewish organizations) to avoid too much public uproar and sympathy for the victims, and prefers to break down dissidents financially and socially, by heavy fines, stripping people of their jobs, impounding of possessions, and a whole arsenal of chicaneries, such as searches and repeated police interviews.

    The French politician and member of the European Parliament Bruno Maigret was fired from his job as a professor at the University of Lyon, stripped from his titles, and ordered to pay a fine of about 5.000 Euro and ‘compensation’ of 50.000 Euro to Jewish organizations, for having argued for free historical research, without having mentioned, doubted or denied specifics, like the number of Jewish victims of ‘the holocaust’ or the existance of gaschambers.

    Law to cover up social unrest and the failure of multiculturalism

    A law has been passed in March 2007, which criminalizes everybody but accredited reporters from the press when filming or photographing episodes of civil unrest, like the much publicized riots in the suburbs of French cities, where immigrant youth aided by criminal immigrant gangs torched thousands of cars and other property and engaged in fights with the police.

    This law was promoted by the French president Nicolas Sarkozy, son of Hungarian / Jewish immigrants. The purpose of this law is obviously to enable the French government to remain in control of the media coverage, and if necessary downplay the seriousness of the violent incidents in the ‘banlieux’; the immigrant ghetto’s in the suburbs in order not to jeopardize the ‘multicultural’ ideal.

    Sarkozy wanted to lay guilt trip on innocent children

    The same Sarkozy has proposed that all 10 year old school children should ‘adopt the memory’ of a Jewish child murdered during ‘the holocaust’. This proposal came under heavy criticism from the left wing senator Jean-Luc Melenchon, Gilles Moindrot, general secretary of the Union Snuipp-FSU, and a spokesperson of the childrens rights organization EMDH, but was supported by the Socialist Party leader Francois Hollande, who is also said to be of Jewish heritage1), and is married to Selegene Royal, Sarkozy’s socialist rival during the presidential elections.

    Since 2007 also criticism of homosexuality resorts under the French hatespeech laws.

    The Jewish organizations were a main obstacle for anti-immigrationalist Jean Marie Le Pen in the past. (e.g. LICRA, Ligue internationale contre le racisme et l’antisemitisme)

    Jewish groups have similarly led the way in restricting speech in Britain.

    In other places and times, I’m thinking particularly of America, Jewish groups in the first 70 years of the 20th Century led the fight to expand free expression.

    There’s nothing inherent in Judaism and Jewish law to make Jews and Jewish groups take any particular side in the free speech divide. It all comes down to what is best for Jews at a particular time and place. In some times and places, more expression is good, and at other times and places, less expression is better for Jews.

    Generally speaking, in the past 60 years in the Western world, Jewish groups (though less often in America) have been on the side of criminalizing hate speech. The Simon Wiesenthal Center is headquartered in America and it fights around the world to restrict the rights of people to criticize Jews (SWC calls it “hate speech”) and to punish such critics with great severity.

    From Feb. 25, 2015:

    France prepares for war against online hate speech

    France’s government is looking to adopt a tough new stance on online racism, anti-Semitism and other hate speech that would allow authorities to shut down offending websites amid a recent rise in hate crimes in the country.

    Justice Minister Christiane Taubira has said she will push for legal reforms that would help French authorities crack down on racism and anti-Semitism online in much the same way they do with paedophilia. The proposals include empowering French authorities to shut down websites hosting content that is deemed illicit without prior court approval.

    “Crimes recognised in public spaces must also be recognised as such on the Internet,” Taubira told a French Jewish student group on Sunday, echoing other recent statements on combating terrorism. “Our challenge is to find the most appropriate responses, but we are determined to wage an unmerciful battle against racism and anti-Semitism on the Internet.”

    The declaration of war against online hate speech has raised questions about possible violations of civil liberties and the curtailing of due process as France struggles to find a way forward after a wave of deadly violence and anti-Semitic hate crimes in the country…

    Last week more than 250 tombs were vandalised by a group of teens at a Jewish cemetery in eastern France, sparking what appeared to be copycat acts in other non-Jewish cemeteries in Normandy and the Pyrenees in the following days.

    Amid the compounding tensions, and real fears over the radicalisation of young people via the Internet, Taubira and other authorities want the legal means to counter racism, anti-Semitism and Islamist extremism on the web. But blocking ubiquitous online hate speech could be a thorny task for officials.

    Some people are applauding France’s aggressive approach. The Simon Wiesenthal Center, an international rights group researching the Holocaust and hate crimes, says it has observed a steady rise in racist and anti-Semitic speech online since it began studying the phenomenon 20 years ago. The increase has been exponential since the advent of social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter.

    “France’s efforts must be congratulated,” Shimon Samuels, who heads the center’s Europe office, told FRANCE 24. “If child pornography and paedophilia have no place on the Internet, if advertising for things like alcohol and tobacco are controlled because they are considered noxious to children, then what about hate?”

    Samuels downplayed the dangers of curtailing free speech or privacy as a result of Taubira’s proposed reforms. He pointed out that nowhere are free speech laws an unlimited privilege, and that we constantly forfeit our right to privacy to online advertisers without batting an eye.

    “I see this as a way of ultimately protecting civil liberties,” Samuels said. “Of course the measures need to work within the framework of the law, of course there has to be oversight so that they are not abused. A healthy debate is arising about freedoms, but that is part of democracy.”

    It is unclear whether France will get what it wants from other countries and the Internet giants, with whom it has clashed in the past. In the meantime, it has launched an Internet site where citizens can report worrying content to police, and launched a multimedia campaign to expose the recruiting methods and myths used by jihadists.

    Samuels and O’Loughlin agree that more also needs to be done on the education front.

    Parents in both Jewish and Muslim communities need to be better informed about the kind of content children are encountering on the Internet, and be encouraged to have frank – even uncomfortable – discussions with them about what they see, said Samuels.

    O’Laughlin said people who have become blasé about the vitriol they encounter regularly on the web need to be woken from that stupor and given the tools to identify and report online hate speech.


    Justice Minister Christiane Taubira

    Justice Minister Christiane Taubira looks like just the type of person I want determining what information I can read and what I can say. I’m glad the Simon Wiesenthal Center is guiding her.



    Posted in Anti-Semitism, Censorship, France, Simon Wiesenthal | Comments Off on French comic convicted in Belgium for anti-Semitic jokes

    JTA: For Jewish groups, Syrian refugees are a reminder — not a threat

    I don’t know a single Jew in my real life who wants more Muslims in America. I suspect most Jews in America and in the West don’t want more Muslims around. Yet Jewish elites through the major Jewish organizations keep pushing for more Muslim immigration.

    These Jewish elites are rich and they don’t have to worry so much about Muslim aggression. Regular Jews and regular goys pay the price for Muslim immigration.

    We must never forget and never forgive the machinations of the Treason Lobby who want to flood our country with people who hate us.

    The Treason Lobby consists of organizations and individuals pushing for more Muslim immigration into the West.

    If you found poisonous snakes in your bedroom, would you hate the snakes or would you hate the people who put them in your home? All of the major Jewish-American organizations (except ZOA) want more Muslim immigrants in America. They won’t stop flooding us with Muslims until America is destroyed or these traitors are thrown into camps.

    WASHINGTON (JTA) – American Jewish organizations don’t see the Syrian refugees as a threat; they see them as a reminder.

    With rare unanimity on an issue that has stirred partisan passion, a cross-section of the community has defended the Obama administration’s refugee policy in terms recalling the plight of Jews fleeing Nazi Europe who were refused entry into the United States.

    “The Jewish community has an important perspective on this debate,” the Orthodox Union said in its statement. “Just a few decades ago, refugees from the terror and violence in Hitler’s Europe sought refuge in the United States and were turned away due to suspicions about their nationality.”

    Echoed the Conservative movement’s Rabbinical Assembly: “We can sadly remember all too well the Jews who were turned away when they sought refuge in the United States on the eve of, and during, World War II.”

    Eleven Jewish organizations joined another 70 groups in pleading with Congress to keep open the Obama administration’s program, which would allow in 10,000 refugees over the next year from among the 200,000 to 300,000 in Europe. Neither the Orthodox Union nor the Rabbinical Assembly signed the letter.

    Among the signatories were mainstream bodies like the the Reform movement, the Anti-Defamation League, the American Jewish Committee and the National Council of Jewish Women, as well as HIAS, the lead Jewish body dealing with immigration issues, and the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, the umbrella body for Jewish public policy groups.

    Officials from the organizations that support allowing in the refugees said they were not likening the magnitudes of the two catastrophes, but could not help noting the reluctance in the 1930s, as now, to accept refugees and the accusations that the refugees posed a danger.

    “It’s obviously a sensitive comparison, but it’s the right point to make,” said Nathan Diament, executive director of the Orthodox Union Advocacy Center. Both the Orthodox Union and the Rabbinical Assembly added in their statements that the administration and Congress should also take into account legitimate security concerns, while pressing forward with resettlement.

    The consensus among the three major streams of U.S. Jewry – Reform, Conservative and Orthodox – is derived from a shared understanding of Jewish scripture, said Rabbi Jonah Pesner, who directs the Reform movement’s Religious Action Center.

    “Our role is to be the pure rabbinic voice that lifts people up beyond their narrow partisan views,” he said of rabbis.

    Rabbi Steve Gutow, a Reconstructionist who is the outgoing president of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, said sympathy for the refugee was written into the Jewish cultural genetic code.

    “We’ve been facing the need to have refuge since we left Egypt,” he said. “To think about not speaking out flies in the face of who we are.”

    Being on the losing side of a political debate is nothing new for organizational American Jewry, said the ADL’s CEO, Jonathan Greenblatt, noting that the ADL in 1958 solicited a book from a “young senator from Massachusetts” — John F. Kennedy — to counter rising anti-immigrant sentiment. The future president wrote and published “A Nation of Immigrants.”

    “‘We were once strangers’ is core to our identity,” Greenblatt said.

    There are signs that support for the refugees may not always be a partisan one.

    The U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, which has a rigorously bipartisan board, has weighed in backing the program. And Michael Chertoff, President George W. Bush’s secretary of Homeland Security, who is Jewish and otherwise has been sharply critical of the Obama administration, joined his Democratic successor, Janet Napolitano, in urging Obama to safeguard the resettlement program, describing the current screening program as “robust.”

    Jen Smyers, the director of advocacy for Church World Service, one of several groups involved in refugee advocacy and resettlement, said she expected more Republican backing for the refugees once grassroots activists contact their representatives during the Thanksgiving break.

    “This is a powerful week to be in touch,” she said, referring to the holiday commemorating refuge.


    * Clergy and religious organizations are pressuring politicians to allow the resettlement of Syrian refugees in their states. This reminds me of the 1600 Rabbis for Obama who I fought years ago when I was chairman of Rabbis for Romney. I am a lonely voice who is attacked by organized groups and politicians primarily democratic. I will not back down . I hope you will voice your concerns to your clergy and politicians. They are backing Obama. I believe these Muslim refugees have not been vetted enough and our country and families are in jeopardy.

    * So, Mr. Kampeas, it becomes clearer that you are a lib. These Jewish organizations are shameful. THere is no comparison with the Jews on the St. Louis or any other Jews being turned away. Those Jews were really, really seeking refuge from those that would kill them. THese so called refugees are only about 10% families seeking true refugees. The rest are young men between 19 and 45 who are coming here and to other countries to take us all over. I am very thankful to G-d for making me Jewish, but I am shamed of all the stupid Jews who are cowards, afraid to fight, afraid to let people know they are Jewish, afraid to stand up for what is right and godlike in this world.

    * You are not alone Rabbi Rosenberg. Many Jews stand with you! We know a hostile invasion when we see one. The major organizations are run by Democrat party lackeys and guilt-ridden Libs, who will rue the day they invited these Jew-haters, when they will, no doubt, give America a taste of what’s happened to France.



    Posted in ADL, Immigration, Islam, Orthodox Union | Comments Off on JTA: For Jewish groups, Syrian refugees are a reminder — not a threat

    A Nation Of Immigrants

    Who can forget this stirring book, solicited by the ADL in 1958 and written in the president’s name.

    According to Wikipedia:

    The book was originally written by Kennedy in 1958, while he was still a senator.[1] It was written as part of the Anti-Defamation League’s series entitled the One Nation Library.[2] Subsequently, after gaining the presidency, he called on Congress to undertake a full reevaluation of immigration law; and he began to revise the book for further publication. In August 1963, excerpts of the 1958 pamphlet were published in the New York Times Magazine.[3] He was assassinated before completing the revision, but the book was nevertheless posthumously published in 1964 with an introduction by his brother, then Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy.[4] In 2008, the book was re-issued by the Anti-Defamation League.

    The book contains a short history of immigration in the United States beginning in colonial America, an analysis of the importance immigration has played in American history, and John F. Kennedy’s proposals for the liberalization of immigration law.

    In his book, A Nation of Nations: A Great American Immigration Story, Tom Gjelten writes:

    John F. Kennedy had been talking immigration off and on for a dozen years… With the 1960 presidential election on the horizon, Kennedy set out to burnish his reputation as an immigration reformer. First came the 1958 publication of his book A Nation of Immigrants, written at the suggestion of the Anti-Defamation League, with an outline prepared by a Harvard historian. (One of Kennedy’s aides, Myer Feldman, was later quoted as saying he, not Kennedy, did the actual writing.) A year after the book’s publication, Kennedy introduced still another bill to do away with national quotas.

    It’s so easy to go along with the treason lobby (aka the ADL, SPLC, SWC, OU, American Jewish Committee and all the other organizations pushing for the immigrations of groups that America and don’t assimilate). They do the work for you and you get to slap your name on it and rake in the money and applause. Betraying white people is massively incentivized. It’s cool to be anti-white and to work for white replacement. A Harvard historian will do an outline for you, an aide will write the book, the ADL will publish it.



    Posted in Immigration | Comments Off on A Nation Of Immigrants

    Little Rock Police: Black Guy Kills White GF During Argument



    The Little Rock Police Department has released the names of the victim and suspect involved in a homicide in the 2500 block of Bishop Street Tuesday morning.

    According to Officer Ernest Hilgeman with Little Rock PD, the suspect, identified as Derrick Mason, called police just after 11 a.m. on Tuesday asking to speak with police. Mason said he had killed his girlfriend, according to a Little Rock PD release.

    When detectives arrived on the scene, a woman, identified Jessica Berliew, was found dead in a home. Berliew’s body has been transported to the crime lab for an autopsy.

    Mason was taken into custody and interviewed by detectives. According to police, after waiving his rights, Mason told police he killed Berliew when they got in an argument after she got home from work.

    Mason has been charged with 1st degree murder.



    Posted in Blacks, Crime | Comments Off on Little Rock Police: Black Guy Kills White GF During Argument