HOME

Demanders

moshSteven Spielberg is upset. And not in pastel-tinged, sentimental approach with which he touches up his otherwise standard film-directing efforts.

Spielberg, the Oscar-winning director of the 1993 Holocaust film “Schindler’s List,” was introduced by an 81-year-old survivor, Paula Lebovics, who praised him as “a man who has given us a voice in history.” In a short speech, Spielberg spoke of how his own Jewish identity evolved, first as a boy learning to read numbers from the numbers tattooed on the arms of survivors, and as an adult when he filmed “Schindler’s List” in Krakow. But he warned of “anti-Semites, radical extremists, and religious fanatics” who are again provoking hate crimes — a warning that comes after radical Islamists massacred Jews at a kosher supermarket earlier this month in Paris. [CTV News]

Well, at least he mentioned Islam. Usually these days, when The Megaphone wails on, lamenting “growing anti-Semitism” in Europe (all that growing, it must be Alps-size by now), left out is any mention about Muslims committing virtually ALL violence aimed at Jews. We’re left with impression – deliberately contrived – that white-as-snow haters are bringing back the Nuremberg Laws.

That’s really ingratitude for you, too, since Jewish groups are among the most strenuous touting wonders of immigration and overwhelming need for vibrance in horridly honky countries. They seem so committed to destroying any goy institution with which they come in contact, they’re willing to commit literal suicide to see it through. All that purported intelligence, all that shit about being ‘chosen’ of some god or another – and they still can’t see any bulls charging them down the road.

To abate violence against Jews in ferocity and frequency, why not limit Muslim immigration to Europe? Virtually all these most recent deadly attacks really were perped by Muslims and connected to their anguish over affairs in the Mideast.

Why do virtually all accounts of recent attacks on European Jews – not only the most re cent but also the museum shootings last year and the demented 2012 attack in Toulouse – read as if perpetrators are rabid neo-Nazis or other maniacs pinkish in color? If Jews are being shot by Muslims, isn’t that atrocity without borders – since Muslims are now everywhere? Wouldn’t it mean the outrages aren’t connected to recent or long-gone European history and anti-Semitism, but to events in the Middle East?

Halting or at least diminishing Muslim immigration would relieve Europeans of the Levantine civil war exploding around them. You’d think Euro-gentiles would be caterwauling about that as much as Jews do about someone, somewhere believing they’re not what they’re cracked up to be. That surly demographic would truly be ‘growing’. Why should blood-drenched fury over whose dirt is whose in a shitty little backwater trouble modern the West?

But perhaps we’re at least free of any whine genes. We’re guilty of everything else, according to our masters of critique, so learning one irritant isn’t in our biology is a real boon. And that’s why “anti-Semitism” is couched in such free-floating language in our media, why impression of white gentile persecutors is so adduced. Our enemies know any lurking strengths in our character must be sought out and destroyed by reliable guilt-tripping. Evidence of diminishing returns in the con game has our elites near panic-level.

Another thing: Who named us guardians of Jews? I don’t think I was put here on earth to protect them. Who can, since they seem to be in perpetual state of peril – or, at least, paranoia about it?

Doesn’t matter, though, since Europe appears on the verge of destroying itself to – get this – outlaw anti-Semitism.

A panel of four prestigious international experts on constitutional law backed by the European Council on Tolerance and Reconciliation (ECTR) have spent three years consulting widely and drafting a 12-page document on “tolerance”. They are lobbying to have it converted into law in the 28 countries of the EU. The proposal would outlaw antisemitism as well as criminalising a host of other activities deemed to be violating fundamental rights on specious religious, cultural, ethnic and gender grounds.

These would include banning the burqa, female genital mutilation, forced marriage, polygamy, denial of the Holocaust and genocide generally, criminalising xenophobia, and creating a new crime of “group libel” – public defamation of ethnic, cultural or religious groups. Women’s and gay rights would also be covered. The proposed legislation would also curb, in the wake of the Paris attacks, freedom of expression on grounds of tolerance and in the interests of security.

Well, it’s not exactly made up of “prestigious” authorities, this unelected law-making panel. But this is a favorite method of getting really unwanted laws on the books – have a think-tank cook them up. Jewish groups are drivers behind “hate speech” and “Holocaust denial” bans in every country stupidly instituting the ridiculous censorship.

“Hate speech” bans are attempts to outlaw objectionable opinions that may dash spirits and souls of little pink wonder-people who support “freedom”, black lives, muzzled goys and upscale shoe stores. Also, it’s muscle against inconveniences that may pop up – like doubts about wisdom of filling the West with immigrants from regions that have never known democracy or liberal values, are openly hostile to anyone or anything not them or theirs, and who cherish a religion that violently reacts to anything its fanatical followers deem blasphemy. Hate speech bans protect status quo in Europe and Canada, and that status quo commands that we pretend to believe globalization is good, white people bad, and that we can sustain an economy that has drained resources of working and middle classes to fatten elites waaaay above our degraded social status.

Since terms like ‘anti-Semitism’ and ‘racism’ now means anything, it means nothing. It’s amusing, though, that they’ve been infused with such magical rubbish by true believers, they can elicit apologies and disrupt routine simply by invocation – legitimately or not. I think I’m like most “average” white Americans – the non-preener class – which ignores these pressing ‘issues’ as much as possible, the way we’d avoid sauteed cockroaches and investment advice from reincarnated pharoahs.

But, it doesn’t matter. We’re to be sucked into this crusade whether we want to be or not. That’s the power of “lobbying” – our current euphemism for “graft” and “buying off cheap politicians”. With deep pockets like George Soros and Sheldon Adelson coughing up their considerable dough, there’s no telling how far-reaching this ugliness can go.

Although most of the victims of the now-sacred “Charlie Hebdo attacks” never blew a shofar, they has been recast as anti-Semitic acts, supposedly forcing Jews to emigrate out of France. (So lucky for France!) This is one of those, well, heaven-sent occurences, despite the bloodshed, that allows countermoves to be deployed against a growing anti-immigrant “right wing” throughout Europe. …Even in socially-holier-than-thou Sweden, where an anti-immigrant party forced parliamentary chicanery to deny its legitimate heft in parliament.

As we’ve seen here with crusades around a nondescript events recast as social crisis, anything can mutate into campaign PR to alter fabric of society. With Matthew Shepard, a simple robbery became gay persecution and rallying cry not only of LGBT groups, but for those pressing “hate crime” enhancements, as well. Michael Brown went from low-rent shoplifter to civil-rights martyr simply by treating his story like a fictional screenplay. With media beating the drum, anything hog’s ear can become silk purse of political advantage.

Suddenly, everyone is talking “anti-Semitism”. Mystery is why not?

- Jan. 28, 2015, 7:15 PST

~ O ~

Fraudocracy

Militant li’l booger, too

Failing mediably.

Another week, another brick busted out of the media narrative – and amusement watching it feverishly try to mollify wallop to its credibility residue.

Most news sites went a little beserk yesterday over reports the Justice Department won’t second-guess Ferguson, MO, prosecutors – and so won’t file federal civil-rights charges against the officer involved in shooting instant civil-rights placard Michael Brown. That was a blow. Surely Eric Holder’s department would find SOMETHING wrong with the case.

Blow, maybe to the true believers, useful idiots, and media – but no surprise, really. Slowly, facts emerged about the case that didn’t fit the “neo-lynching” outline. Three pathologists, including one hired by the Brown family, dismantled speculation and overheated witness reports that Brown was shot as he was running away, that he had his hands raised, that he was kneeling and begging for his life. CSI investigation of the patrol car supported idea that Brown tried to grab the officer’s gun and it went off prior to him being shot.

It seems “The Talk” – that hyperdramatic monologue black parents and the mayor of New York supposedly sound out for their man-chiles – failed this time. One of its tenets is not to resist arrest. Brown followed that advice the way Custer heeded wisdom not to attack the Indian village. In this horrid, racist society, assaulting a policeman, trying to take his weapon, ignoring his orders to surrender, and then charging him at a run – will get a young black angel killed. And, honestly, one more violent doofus removed from the streets.

There’s your downside/upside, right there.

CNN, flavorless and odor-free Nancy Reagan of cable news, chimed in today with expected story about “yeah… well… the feds almost never second-guess locals. Still no justice for the family, though. They just didn’t do their job…”

“I think you have a lot of people who will be disappointed if this does turn out to be the case,” said Antonio French, a St. Louis city alderman who lives near Ferguson. “The community and the family wanted a day in court, an opportunity to see all the evidence laid out, cross-examined. And it looks like that’s not going to happen.”

Let me go way out on a limb and puncture emotionally charged balloons crowding airspace since this stupendously minor incident became international news in August. Holder went to Ferguson days after the shooting and all-but promised his office soon would have that h0nkie cop blowing an Afro-cellmate no matter how things shook out locally. So if his department couldn’t find anything that contradicted justifiable homicide, there’s nothing to find.

But CNN and the rest of our corrupt media bet the farm on this one, pumping up the non-story into a tale harkening back to lunch-counters and fire hoses, of civil rights battles long past. “Black Lives Matter” became a rallying cry, and we were told, even after forensics fell apart only a short while after the shooting, even after a store video showed Brown pulling off a strongarm robbery, that this was yet another case of police brutality against people of color. …Open and shut.

Democrats sounded out the cliche and were soundly defeated in November for their trouble. Can anyone doubt the party’s advocacy of this increasingly threadbare narrative was factor in voter aversion?

There appears, in our post-Hebdo world, a move afoot to import odious European “hate-speech” laws. Ordinarily, a poisonous meme flapping its batwings on the other side of the globe affects me only if we share real time – unless it bewitches fanatical suckers. Part of this is reaction to embarrassing amusement we poured on Euro leaders marching for free speech while upholding “hate speech” bans in their own countries. Part of it is, well, the usual bullshit warping our Constitution into a comic book.

All that’s needed for such bans to be seriously discussed, at least, are a few more racist outrages . Or, trivial indidents and very local tragedies to be adorned in sackcloth of culture-crime. Trayvon Martin and the late Mr. Brown are elevated as civil rights flashpoints to create illusion that blacks are oppressed by armed white violence – a crisis that must be answered by new rounds of legislative posturing. If not hate bans, then …perhaps a latter-day Voting Rights Act (Blocking Traffic in the Street Act)?

It almost worked with lies that American campuses are beset by a “rape crisis” even if evidence for it is as valid as Goldman Sachs’ investment advice. Or that the Republican Party is conducting a “war on women”. But these frauds dissolved with disinterest obvious from “everyday” women, not to mention Rolling Stone’s rape-cult cataclysm last fall.

There were rounds of “debate” online by twits who’ve swallowed millennial Kool-Aid, trying to connect moral equivalency between, among other idiotic examples, the Crusades and Charlie Hebdo. “Sure there are violent Muslims, but look at evils Christianity has deployed!” Well… No one today remembers the Crusades first-hand. Our reality is valid only to extent it isn’t frozen in  the past. Things change or they don’t. It changed, it seems, for the West. And, sure, even for disciples of the tired old savior fairy tale, too. Change, though, doesn’t seem so apparent in Islam. Weighed by commitment and fanatical belief, this may as well be 1095.

Now we have inflatable “reasons” excusing suppression. When a rightwing militia is busted, to give it immediacy and danger, Oklahoma City is invoked (even though Timothy McVeigh wasn’t a militia member.) When a firecracker scorches a building near an NAACP field office in Colorado, “white militants” get the blame. There is feverish mirage construction to convince us we’re under attack not by Muslims, since they’re not so numerous in this country, but by mom-and-pop radicals out in honkidom.

If backward idiocy like hate-speech bans make it to status of American law, it will be on basis not of need, or to control rampaging hate, but from one of these these fortified nonevents transformed into national turning point on basis of media duplicity, emotional extremism – and opportunistic elites, always ready to downsize our troublesome Bill of Rights.

- Jan. 22, 2015, 13:34 PST