Tag Archives: Book

The Way Life Should Be?: Maine as a Microcosm of Jewish Activism

While married to Congresswoman Chellie Pingree, Jewish financier S. Donald Sussman, through his Maine Values LLC, acquired a 75 percent ownership stake in MaineToday Media—the newspaper group that owns the Portland Press Herald, the Maine Sunday Telegram, the Kennebec Journal, the Coastal Journal, and the Morning Sentinel—meaning Sussman now had a controlling interest in most of Maine’s largest newspapers. The Jewish Cliff Schechtman is the editor of the Portland Press Herald, which has published naked propaganda supporting Jewish mayor Ethan Strimling’s call for any and all “migrants” to come to the city. The Press Herald and Sunday Telegram editorial board has endorsed Eliot Cutler[1] (also Jewish and childhood friend of former owner Richard L. Connor) for governor and in Portland’s 2015 Mayoral election, the newspaper endorsed Strimling. The paper has a long history of neglecting to report on essential facts—such as violent felons’ immigration status—and for favoring biased hit pieces. In other words, it is lock-step with its national counterparts in the Jewish-run media.

https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2020/01/02/the-way-life-should-be-maine-as-a-microcosm-of-jewish-activism/

Retired Col. Frank Sobchak on the Army’s Study of the Iraq War

Col. (ret) Frank Sobchak is the co-author, along with Col. Joel Rayburn, of the Army’s two-volume, 1,300-page study of the Iraq War. In this event hosted by the Modern War Institute at West Point, he speaks to faculty and cadets about the study, why it’s important that the Army conducted it, and some of the major conclusions about the US Army’s performance during the war that they drew from their research.

Virginia Goes Zionist

A particularly egregious and also unique example of a state’s economic policies being manipulated by a dedicated Israeli fifth column in government is the Virginia Israel Advisory Board. Grant Smith, long a critic of the VIAB, heads the Institute for Research: Middle Eastern Policy (IRMEP). He has written a new book entitled The Israel Lobby Enters State Government: Rise of the Virginia Israel Advisory Board, which documents in considerable detail how the conspiracy by powerful Jews in Virginia to benefit Israel has actually operated, much of it secretly through special arrangements and deals. He has also had a long interview with Scott Horton of Antiwar.com regarding the book which is well worth listening to.

https://nationalvanguard.org/2020/04/virginia-goes-zionist/

Jennifer Jaynes Cause of Death

Jennifer Jaynes Cause of Death – USA Today bestselling author who wrote about corruption inside the vaccine industry has passed away. She died on November 25, 2019.

Jennifer Jaynes Cause of Death is Suicide. But we have not been able to verify this yet.

Jennifer Jaynes was born October 30, 1972 in Minot, North Dakota. She graduated from Old Dominion University with a B.S. in Health Sciences and a minor in Management.

Dangerous, Controversial books, vlogs, lectures

For pro-White
William Pierce
Jared Taylor
Lana Lokteff
Brenton Tarrant

For Race Realism
J. Philippe Rushton
Colin Flaherty
George W. Gill & Stanley Rhine
Richard Lynn & Tatu Vanhanen
Gregory Cochran & Henry Harpending
Carleton S. Coon
Madison Grant
Arthur Kemp

For American Nationalism
Michael Scheuer
Patrick Buchanan
Ann Coulter

For Jew Realism
Kevin B. MacDonald
David Duke
John Mearsheimer & Stephen Walt
And a second mention for William Pierce and for Michael Scheuer

Search for their books and recordings. Digest it all. You won’t see the world the same ever again.

Award-winning blogger Marie Sophie Hingst accused of inventing her Jewish family history

The German blogger and historian Marie Sophie Hingst was stripped of her Blogger of the Year 2017 prize, as investigations revealed that her stories about her family who perished during the Holocaust were contrived.

https://www.dw.com/en/award-winning-blogger-marie-sophie-hingst-accused-of-inventing-her-jewish-family-history/a-49035058

(Book) Whiteness: The Original Sin

https://www.amazon.com/Whiteness-Original-Sin-Jim-Goad/dp/1729700411

As they say where I come from: Ol boy is pretty good! Jim Goad highlights two truths. 1.) That Whites (in particular White males) are under attack with pinpoint specific examples. 2.) And with more pinpoint examples that today’s progressive (and if I may add fanatical) liberals are the biggest hypocrites – even more than politicians. If you ask what is truth then you get it in a shot from the hip style from Mr. Jim Goad. Clearly has his hand on the pulse of today’s culture. Powerful, hard-hitting and honest; I highly recommend it for those who are interested in the real state of affairs. I know his critics have to hate him because the truth hurts. I highly recommend his work; he is the Dirty Harry of Journalism.

Takedown of Jared Diamond’s “Guns, Germs, and Steel”

It’s full of lies trying to show, as always, that Europe is nothing special.

backup link: https://invidio.us/watch?v=qvaxPH3ftUQ

* No references, beyond “read these books too.”

* No methodology for domesticatable animals. Ignoring many cases of domestication of Zebras, Bison, Llamas.

* Outright lies about the benefits of wheat. Ignores the superior calorie density of potatoes and corn. Outright lies about the supposed inappropriateness of early corn to other climates.

* Claims that rice and barley were only domesticated once.

* Lies about African Sorgum crops.

* Bantu expansion.

* and much more . . .

Lying about Judeo-Bolshevism

Although this evasion is predictable, it’s quite remarkable to see a more or less open admission from two allegedly masterful historians that they don’t possess facts sufficient to dispel the very “myth” they set out to challenge. To describe any such presentation of facts as a “futile attempt” seems intellectually flaccid; a concession of the weakness of one’s case.

But what is really presented here, of course, is the standard structure of Jewish historiography: avoid the facts, downplay them if concession is absolutely necessary, and move the discussion into abstractions and sophistry. Taking a page from the ADL playbook, Browning mewls coyly that “a small kernel of truth underpinned the stereotype of the Jewish Bolshevik,” but insists, regarding Communism, that “the Jew as “the face of the revolution” was a “culturally constructed” perception.” We therefore arrive at the familiar position where facts don’t matter and everything Jews don’t like is triumphantly declared a mere construct. . . .

Jewish economic competition in the modern period is caricatured as an irrational “image,” and Jewish war profiteering is simply an “accusation.” Epithets, images, accusations, and the passive and innocent Jew. In sociological-psychological terms this is classic Freud and Frankfurt School, and in historiography it is classic Langmuir.

As with Langmuir’s sophistry, such assertions require a significant amount of either duplicity or cognitive dissonance, or perhaps both. The number of texts covering historical Jewish black-market activity alone is astonishing. We know from one Stanford-published history, for example, that in France in 1941, 90% of black market traders in one province were Jews.[6] Similarly, in Mark Roodhouse’s Oxford-published Black Market Britain: 1939–1955, it is remarked that Jews were massively over-represented in prosecutions for black-market activity in London during the 1940s. . . .

We’re again in very familiar territory: when you feel you can’t avoid a fact (“Jews were invariably disproportionately represented”), and you can’t downplay it, then explain it by way of prejudice (“they were not welcome”). The problem with snapshots of history like this, as I’ve explained many times before, is what I’ve come to term a “cropped timeline explanation” — something that is extremely common in all Jewish and philosemitic historiography concerning anti-Semitism. When faced with an uncomfortable and unavoidable fact involving Jewish behavior (Leftism, usury, financial crime, pornography, etc.) one starts with assumptions of anti-Jewish prejudice and works from there. Jews are on the Left? It must be because they were excluded from the Right. Problems begin to arise when the question is asked why Jews were excluded or viewed as socially or culturally oppositional in the first place. Here, “irrational prejudice” is the last resort, but beyond it, when faced with further interrogation of that idea and the even deeper historical context, nothing is there. One is confronted with blank stares, rhetorical dead ends, and a factual wasteland.

By now I was already getting the sense that Browning was drowning in his own review, under the sheer weight of his own evasions and contortions. The questions, for any reader, were surely multiplying. Were Jews over-represented in Communism or not? If yes, how is the idea of Jewish leftism a myth? If the ‘myth’ can’t be debunked with facts, how can it be debunked by a work of academic sophistry that labels it a cultural construct? The contortions only worsen. . . .

Thus, we are treated to a review of Gerrits by Eliezer Ben-Rafael of Tel-Aviv University, who asserts that Gerrits tackles “the myth of Jewish Communism” by presenting “the fascinating stories of Jewish Communism and Jewish Communists.” If debunking ideas with proof of their veracity wasn’t enough, it’s explained in one banal revelation that the myth combines “anti-Semitism and anti-Communism,” and has a link to reality in the fact that “in effect, many Jews were prominently involved in Communism not only in Russia, but also in the Hungarian and Bavarian revolutions of 1917 and, after the Second World War, in Czechoslovakia, Romania, Lithuania, Poland, and Bulgaria.”[12] Jewish Communism is thus clearly a myth because Jews were prominently involved in Communist revolutions in several countries over several decades. Right. . . .

An excellent example of evasion along these lines is Hanebrink’s discussion of Béla Kun. Hanebrink argues [p.25] that there was “nothing meaningful at all” about Kun’s Jewish background while elsewhere [p.16] noting that of the 47 people’s commissars gathered by Kun for the 1919 Hungarian Soviet regime, 30 were fellow Jews. Clearly feeling that his own arguments are unconvincing, Hanebrink follows up his earlier surrender on the issue of facts with [p.25]: “Truly understanding the hopes, fears and motivations of any particular Jewish revolutionary in all their irreducible complexity is ultimately a task best undertaken by a biographer.” . . .

Paul Hanebrink’s A Specter Haunting Europe is, ultimately, an extremely strange book, but all too typical of contemporary writing on Jewish history. It is thick on promises and thin in substance. It is characterized by glaring omissions and a deeply insincere analysis accompanied by a cloying philosemitism. Interestingly, the text lacks any semblance of intellectual confidence, and one feels that Hanebrink, who is presumably not himself Jewish, is surely aware of what he is creating: a blatant pro-Jewish apologetic. The reasons why a White academic might want to produce something like this are not difficult to surmise. As with Christopher Browning, such endeavors are massively incentivized. Despite being unoriginal, low on facts, and poor in analysis, Hanebrink, associate professor of history at Rutgers, has written a book published by a prestigious academic publisher (perhaps the most prestigious) and has been lavishly praised in the major organs of the mainstream media. The message from our latter-day commissars is clear: “Sell out and we’ll make you a star.”

-A Distant Mirror by B. Tuchman (pp.141-142)

In one medieval village game, peasants with both hands tied behind them competed to kill a cat nailed to a post by battering it to death with their heads, at the risk of their cheeks ripped open or eyes scratched out by the creature’\冱 frantic claws. Trumpets enhanced the excitement.

Or a pig enclosed in a wide pen was chased by men with clubs until, to the laughter of spectators, he ran squealing from the blows until beaten lifeless.

Accustomed in their own lives to physical hardship and injury, medieval men and women were not necessarily repelled by the spectacle of pain, but rather enjoyed it.

The citizens of Mons bought a condemned criminal from a neighboring town so that they should have the pleasure of seeing him quartered.

It may be that the less than tender medieval infancy produced adults who valued others no more than they had been valued in their own formative years.

-A Distant Mirror by B. Tuchman (pp.141-142)

Haille Mariam-Lemar on Thucydides

(note to myself for future reference)

Several years ago, before I discovered Popper, I read Thucydides and his account of the Peloponnesian War. After about 150 pages of reading I began to despise the Athenians deeply. However it had not occurred to me that my feelings were being manipulated by the omissions of a long dead author. However one day I picked up the Open Society and its Enemies and in that book I discovered that Thucydides was an anti-democrat belonging to the autocratic faction of the Athenian Aristocracy. With this insight came a greater appreciation of the text. Whilst reading Thucydides i had ignored all the hints that he was a rabid anti-democrat and that with the spartans he had actively conspired to destroy the greatest civilization ever to emerge in the Peloponnese

***

The Spartans unlike the athenians left virtually nothing. Their cities were like villages, decrepit and disorganised. All they were good for was war and the yearly pogrom of slaves. They also opposed free trade and bNned their nobles from owning gold. In effect they were proto-totalitarians who were only good at breeding armed sociopaths. When the Persians came, they allied with them to defeat their kinsmen. They then imposed an autocracy on Athens which lasted a few years before it was destroyed. Plato, as you may know was a member (admirer) of the anti-democratic athenian faction. His Republic is a mirror of the Spartan “Constitution” although in this case, the ruler is a philosopher such as Plato aspired to be.

***

Roman, the man was a rabid anti-democrat with strong oligarchical inclinations. One of the best works out there is
A.H.M. Jones’, ‘The Athenian democracy and its critics’, Cambridge Historical
Journey. 11.1 (1953), 1-26.

Beverly Cleary on turning 100: Kids today ‘don’t have the freedom’ I had

“I think children today have a tough time, because they don’t have the freedom to run around as I did — and they have so many scheduled activities.”

In her youth, she points out, “mothers did not work outside the home; they worked on the inside. And because all the mothers were home — 99 percent of them, anyway — all mothers kept their eyes on all the children.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/books/beverly-cleary-on-turning-100-kids-today-dont-have-the-freedom-i-had/2016/04/02/7a63e92c-e6d4-11e5-b0fd-073d5930a7b7_story.html