The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Jonathan Revusky Archive
Faith, Reason, Fanaticism, and the Deeper Meaning of "The Donald"
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

If you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em

Perhaps the greatest historical archetype when we think about religious fanaticism and intolerance is the Spanish Inquisition, in particular the fearsome figure of Tomás de Torquemada, the first Grand Inquisitor.

The historical backdrop is that, in the wake of the Reconquista, centuries of back-and-forth conflict between Muslims and Christians, the Christians eventually regained control of all of Spain; the last Muslim stronghold, Granada fell in 1492. As Christianity gained the upper hand, many people who were formerly Muslims or Jews decided to become Christians. However, it was widely believed that many (most?) of these conversions were not sincere, but rather, made for reasons of expediency.

Now, when you look at this problem in a more general way, it is hardly unique to 15th century Spain. If a religion is established as the dominant religion and it is understood that there are great practical advantages to belonging to it, surely you’re going to have a lot of insincere conversions. I have no idea who originated the English saying “If you can’t beat them, join them”, but the concept has been well understood for a long, long time. Thus, it stands to reason that, had things turned out differently, with a Muslim victory, many Christians would have converted to Islam, and in that case, by and large, those conversions would have been about as sincere as the ones that actually did happen in the other direction.

Moreover, the basic principle operating here does not apply solely to religious affiliation, but to any ideology or set of dogmas that becomes dominant. So we can safely reason that not everybody who was a member of the communist party in the Soviet Union really believed in the communist ideology. Granted, you had your true believers, the real fanatics, but also plenty of people who proclaimed their belief and joined the Party because it was the expedient thing to do.

A True Believer?

Here is a fascinating video snippet from a talk given by the award-winning journalist Jeremy Scahill. In the Q&A session, Scahill is asked a question about 9/11 Truth.

This video snippet is only a minute long, but it is such a bizarre piece of doubletalk (or even triple-talk) that I think it is worth examining in detail. It is simply fascinating to see all the mental gymnastics that Scahill goes through in less than a minute.

Scahill begins by simply affirming his faith in the official story. Listen to him. He really sounds like somebody reciting scripture. He says: “I believe that the United States was attacked on 9/11 by Al Qaeda by men flying airplanes into buildings…” (DEEP STRUCTURE TRANSLATION: “I am not a heretic.” I believe in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost…)

Note that Scahill does not, at any point, make the slightest attempt to explain why he believes any of this. He simply says: “I believe…”. If his answer had simply ended right there, with him saying “I believe Al Qaeda did it”, then anybody could interpret this as a perfunctory response, where he says what he knows that he has to say in this spot, but without any real conviction.

But his response does not end there. He then goes on to represent that he is familiar with the 9/11 Truth literature, specifically mentioning the Loose Change documentary and the name of David Ray Griffin. I guess what happened here is that he senses that if he just states belief in the official story and nothing more, he comes off as a brainwashed fool, just reciting dogma, so he feels he must say that he has at least considered the other viewpoint. So, at the 0:20 mark, you would think that his position is that he respects the 9/11 Truth researchers, yet he has finally decided (though he won’t say why, but presumably has researched it) that he believes the official story.

But his response does not end there either. Around 0:22 there is an incredible shift in his entire register, the kind of vocabulary he starts using. He says: “I think it is so destructive to what is intended to be an honest dialogue in this country about U.S. policy. I don’t buy it for one minute and I think it’s insulting to the people who died.”

Note the language he suddenly starts using: destructive, honest dialogue, insulting… I believe what happened at around 0:20 is that it dawns on him (either on the conscious or subconscious level, I don’t know) that he must make a point of forcefully denouncing the so-called “truthers”. Because this is what expected of him. So now he completely shifts register, using this kind of language: they are not engaging in “honest dialogue”, they are “insulting” the people who died. When one hears the word “destructive” it kind of makes one wonder what precisely the independent 9/11 researchers are destroying. (He obviously doesn’t mean they destroyed any buildings! That, he has already said, was Al Qaeda!)

But, then, after saying this sentence, I guess he realizes that he just insulted the person who asked him the question (and probably some significant part of the audience as well) and, my sense is that Scahill is the kind of person who wants to come off as a nice guy, to be liked, so he tries to backtrack a little and says: “if you are of that viewpoint, that is your right. If you’re a truther (and obviously the person who asked him the question is!) then… hey, that’s okay too! But in the previous sentence, he said that they were “insulting” the people who died on 9/11!? Oh, really? But that’s okay, you have the “right”… You guys are doing the equivalent of desecrating a cemetery, but… you have the “right” to do that…

So, in summary, what we have here, compressed into under a minute is the most bizarre mental gymnastics and contortions. He asserts his belief in the official story but, initially, wants to represent that he respects the people who don’t. Then, in the very next breath, he says that the people who dispute the official story are being destructive, dishonest, and insulting. (Not just being insulting, mind you, but insulting the dead, which is, I guess, doubleplusungood because the dead can’t insult you back!) But then it’s all okay… you have the “right” to do that… I’m OK, you’re OK….

One thing that occurs to me about all of this is that, surely this is somehow very typical of the modern age we live in. Just try to imagine Torquemada going through all these contortions: “Oh, you ask me about heresy… well, I myself believe in the Church Dogma…. BUT…. those heretics are good guys and I respect them… OH, BUT… they are committing blasphemy (and deserve to die)… OH, BUT… hey, they have the right to do that, I’m a tolerant guy, after all….” All of that in the same minute, and then, of course, proceeding to burn them at the stake anyway. I wasn’t there, but I just can’t imagine Torquemada being so incoherent, well… such a flake. I get the feeling that, in a way, the Spanish Inquisition was much more honest and forthright than modern-day intellectual gatekeepers.

For purposes of contrast, I wanted to compare a similar video clip of Torquemada, but for some reason, I could not find any. So this will have to do:

Well, you see, Scahill has a problem that somebody like Torquemada would not have. Like Torquemada, he must vigorously condemn the heretics: they are unbelievers, they are unworthy, they stink and they make me wanna puke…. But then he also has this competing modern-day ethos of rational thought and open-mindedness and reasonableness and just general I’m OK, you’re OK-ness. So he is whipsawed by these contrary forces and it’s just sort of excruciating. Torquemada would not have that problem. He doesn’t have to pretend to be rational and reasonable and all that. He also probably doesn’t particularly care whether he comes across as a nice guy. In fact, he probably revels in the fact that (unlike Scahill) he is one scary dude and people are (quite justifiably) terrified of him.

Now, cutting to the chase, if you will… does Scahill really buy the official version of what happened on 9/11? Hmm… Damned if I know. It’s the same general problem as I outlined above, isn’t it? In 15th century Spain, there were very strong reasons to suspect that many declarations of Christian faith were not being made sincerely, but how could one ever tell for sure?

If Scahill were to come out as a “Truther”, he would essentially become a non-person as far as the mainstream media goes. Once he was tarred as a heretic conspiracy theorist, he would be effectively excommunicated banned. No more television appearances certainly, and he would be subjected to a whole campaign of attacks, with people saying that he had lost his mind and become a “conspiracy theorist”. They wouldn’t burn Jeremy at the stake, I suppose, but they would effectively excommunicate him. His charmed existence would largely come to an end and life would definitely become quite a bit more difficult for Jeremy.

Well, I would venture to say that, at the very least, he is far less certain of the Al Qaeda story than he is representing. What somebody in that position understands is that he simply must express his firm belief in the official story.

Modern-day Religious Intolerance

While the Spanish Inquisition stands out in our collective consciousness as a horrific example of religious intolerance, it did happen a good while ago. It doesn’t have all that much to do with what is going on now. Let me now share an anecdote that is far more typical of modern Spanish society than Torquemada or the Inquisition.

My friend R is a Spaniard in his early forties, who, in his youth was very religious and was active in conservative Catholic circles, Opus Dei and such. He later drifted away from that world, mostly because he lost his faith in the religion — just doesn’t believe in it any more. Nonetheless, R’s political and social views remain on the conservative end of the spectrum.

R recounted to me an incident that occurred with his sister, a conversation in which R stated his opposition to same-sex marriage. His sister became infuriated at him and insulted him, her own brother, calling him the F word (fascist) and such. R told me the story and shook his head in amazement, thinking of how utterly brainwashed his own sister was. And he added wistfully: “You know, on occasion, I run into the people that I knew back in my religious phase. They always greet me warmly and ask how I’m doing. They don’t preach at me. No one has ever reproached me for not going to the church in years. As far as they’re concerned that’s my own personal choice…”

I suppose this anecdote made an impression on me because it reinforced a view that had been forming in my own mind for some time. I have become increasingly aware that, in the modern-day world, most of the intolerance and fanaticism emanates from secular ideologies, not from religion. The anecdote of R and his sister is not at all atypical. Consider, for example, this 2014 article from the American Conservative.

“… a woman named Chauncy Childs is planning to open a premium food store, a place where she can sell locally-raised and grown fresh meat and vegetables, including the non-GMO food she grows on her farm. But the people in the progressive neighborhood where she’s planning to open read her Facebook page, and found that she does not support same-sex marriage, and was kind of ugly about it.”

This incident did not occur in Spain, but rather, in the U.S.A., in Portland, Oregon. The local “progressives”, on discovering that Ms. Childs’s Facebook page expressed disapproval of same-sex marriage, decided to try to organize a boycott of her organic produce business. It’s understandable, I suppose. People must be warned that they could be buying their tomatoes from somebody who thinks that marriage is between a man and a woman! The horror… the horror…

What I wonder about all of this is what happens if Ms. Childs now completely reverses her position and announces her support of gay marriage on her Facebook page? Would this solve the problem? Would the Portland progressives now relent, or would they, like Torquemada, harbor (well-founded) doubts that this woman’s “conversion” is sincere? But then, even if, by some incredible chance, she is sincere, how would she go about demonstrating it to these latter day Inquisitors?

Thinking about ARRF, Anti-Religious Religious Fanaticism

For a good while, I was looking for a term to describe these sorts of incidents involving secular, anti-religious fanaticism. It eventually dawned on me that there was no absolute need for any new terminology. These two above examples, R’s hysterical SJW sister or the secular fanatics in Portland, this can simply be called religious intolerance.

You see, finally it occurs to me that the secular, progressive set of ideas that this emerges from is best thought of as a religion. Well, I guess we could call it the anti-religion religion. (ARR?) This leads to the notion of Anti-Religious Religious Fanaticism, or ARRF for short. I know it sounds contradictory, but maybe it isn’t really. Apparently, figuring out that zero is a number was a big intellectual advance. At least it seems necessary for logical completeness, just like the notion that the empty (or null) set is itself a set. It also occurs to me that, in everyday usage, we invariably refer to black as a color, even though all the science websites say that black is not a color, but the absence thereof. Just consider the following dialogue that recurs constantly in retail outlets the world over:

What color would you like that in, sir?

Black, please.

Surely, sir, you realize that black is not a color, but is the absence of color…

Uhh, yeah, thanks for telling me that and, uhh… go **** yourself, you pedantic ****.

Well, actually, I don’t think that happens much. In fact, I just made that up. But regardless, finally, it seems to me that if black, the absence of color, is itself a color, and zero is a number and the null set is a set, then atheism (especially when accompanied by all the various secular progressive dogmas) can perfectly well be thought of as a religion.

The important conceptual jump here is that, once you realize that secular progressivism is itself a religion (of sorts) then it becomes all the more obvious that adherents of that “religion” can be as fanatical and intolerant as old Torquemada ever was. They can mount their latter-day Inquisitions and witch hunts and excommunicate people and all the rest of it. And they will do this, all the while claiming that the people they are persecuting are victimizing them! Militant atheists, like Richard Dawkins, will go on and on about “religious intolerance”, as something that they themselves cannot possibly be guilty of. Another way of putting this is that they remain blithely unaware of the existence of Anti-Religious Religious Fanaticism i.e. ARRF.

I assume that Dawkins and the other “New Atheists” would scoff at the very notion of ARRF. For them, religious fanaticism is something that other people are guilty of, never them. I suppose that they would see ARRF as an inherently contradictory, senseless term. However, this could well be the biggest single weakness in their world view. My own sense of things is not only that ARRF definitely exists, but in fact, most of the current-day religious intolerance and fanaticism actually comes from the secular camp! If you don’t believe that, then maybe you need to open your eyes. Some further examples are in order.

La Terre de la Liberté

This phenomenon we’re discussing here is not specific to any one country. It is strongly present throughout the Western world, though perhaps to varying degrees. Still, it really seems that France is the country where things are at their most intense. At least, to my knowledge, France is the only country that has issued fines to women for NOT showing enough skin on the beach! Consider this article about the banning of the so-called “burkini” in 30 different beach towns in France. There are various striking aspects of this whole story.

First of all, women exposing themselves as much as they do nowadays on the beach (or anywhere public) is really quite a recent phenomenon in Western society. Just consider what comes up in a Google Image search for Victorian women’s swimwear. It is pretty clear that the current-day Muslim women wearing “burkinis” would have fit in perfectly well in the Victorian beach scene. However, any woman wearing typical modern beachwear back then would surely have been arrested for indecent exposure!

There is the famous quip that when a dog bites a man, that is not news. But when the man bites the dog…. By the same token, the whole notion that women covering themselves too much (as opposed to too little) is an offense to public morals — this is already so bizarre that the phenomenon is begging for some serious analysis and explanation. Moreover, we are not talking about an isolated incident that occurs in one small place with a goofball mayor. No, we are talking about 30 different municipalities in France!

Since it seems to me that, in a free country, which France prides itself on being, you can wear a full body swimming outfit if you want, I was curious how they justified this burkini ban. I found a segment on the English language programming on France 24 entitled “Understanding the Burkini Ban” which actually seems to outline what is going on in a fair-minded manner. Around 0:40 of the video, the commentator, one Florence Villeminot, states that the various mayors have cited a wide range of reasons. She starts by mentioning some that are patently absurd, such as hygiene. Also, “security reasons” — the Muslim ladies could be hiding a John Rambo (Jean Rimbaud?) arsenal under the swimsuit maybe… But then Ms. Villeminot gets, I think, to the heart of the matter: when Muslim women wear this “burkini” swimsuit that exposes so little skin, this is considered a “symbol of religious extremism” and thus, constitutes an attack on France’s sacred principle of “laïcité”.

Any online French-English dictionary will tell you that the English word for “laïcité” is “secularism”, which is a rather intellectual word in English. I suppose most American readers would immediately think of the more long-winded formulation, “Separation of Church and State”, which is, of course, a founding principle of American government. Now, the intellectual origins of these things are broadly the same, since the American founding fathers, the framers of the Constitution, were influenced by French intellectuals of that time; in general, there has always been a cross-fertilization of ideas. However, it really seems that, at this point in time, the French concept of “laïcité” goes much further than its American counterpart, and has evolved into something quite a bit more radical and aggressive. I guess one way of characterizing this could be that it is the establishment of ARRF as a sort of official state religion.

In his sketch “La Gay Pride”, we see the controversial comedian Dieudonné viciously lampooning this French laïcité — in other words, making fun of ARRF.

In this sketch, five years before the “burkini” controversy, Dieudo is having a field day with the absurdities of modern France. The sketch is hardly even satirical, because it seems that the situation he describes is real and is beyond satire. A bunch of homosexuals can mount an orgy on the streets of Paris and this is a sign of France’s modernity and tolerance, but religious Moslems praying in the street must be violently dispersed by the police because, like the Muslim ladies dressing modestly at the beach, it is an attack on the reigning “religion” of laïcité.

Ah, the Smell of Boiling Frogs in the Morning

For some reason, all this talk of the goings-on in France reminds me of the boiling frog story. You know, they say that if you drop a frog into scalding hot water, it will immediately jump out, but if you put the frog in tepid water and very gradually raise the temperature, it will never notice anything amiss and gradually be boiled alive.

Actually, there seems to be some dispute over this and I’m not sure it’s really true. It might be something like the English idiom that if pigs had wings they could fly, which, as I’ve said earlier, I’m pretty sure is untrue. Well, never mind, people have been saying that for centuries without too much concern for whether it is true or not. I guess that’s the way it is with these sorts of metaphors. The point of the boiling frog story, of course, is that if change occurs gradually, people can remain surprisingly unaware of just how extreme the situation has become. And that point is certainly valid, and not just when it comes to all these various social derangements. Most Americans, for example, seem oblivious to just how unhinged their country’s foreign policy has become.

There is a certain kind of horror film genre, usually featuring some sort of psychopath killer. In such films, there is typically some key moment in which one realizes just how serious the situation really is. For example, in the Kubrick masterpiece, the Shining, you have Jack Nicholson endlessly typing “All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.” In the following classic movie clip, we see how the horror of the situation dawns on his wife (as well as the movie audience) when she realizes that her husband is a total whack job.

I guess we could call this the “All work and no play moment” or the AWANP Moment or AWANPM for short. Some Americans may reach this point when they are watching CNN or Fox News and some expert on military affairs says that they had to destroy the village in order to save it — or, if not exactly that, something of that nature. They can think, like Jack Nicholson’s wife in the Shining: “Oh my God, this person is a complete psychopath!”

Or it might be something like this:

Here we see a person who came very close to becoming President of the United States, cackling like the evil Witch of the West about the death of a man. Surely this does cause some people to have an AWANPM, as in: “Oh my God. This woman really is an evil maniac!” By the same token, for many French people, it must be an AWANP moment when they see local police in some beach town issuing fines to women because they are not showing enough skin! Still, what is striking is how most people do not have an AWANPM when, by all rights, they should. The aforementioned boiling frog metaphor does offer one ready-made explanation.

Just to be absolutely clear, the boiling frogs story does refer to the actual animals, not the people in France. Facile jokes aside, this is not about the French specifically. While France does seem to be on the cutting edge of certain kinds of insanity, the rest of the Western world is not far behind, and in some regards, other places may actually be out in front. The U.S.A., despite what the super-patriots believe, is not always number 1 in everything — but we usually are strong contenders at least. So if France has its burkini controversy, the U.S.A. has the great transgender bathroom battle. Everybody does their best. Even little Austria has gifted the world with the sensational superstar Conchita Wurst

So all this derangement is not specific to France or any other country. The politically correct bullshit permeates current-day Western society as a whole. It so happens that I am composing these lines in Spain. While it would obviously be untrue to say that the Catholic Church here has ceased to exist, it makes little sense to refer to current-day Spain as a “Catholic country”. Nor, in general, does it make sense to refer to any other Western countries as “Christian countries”. No, the “religion” that dominates public discourse — the mainstream media, television, movies, higher education… — is clearly secular progressivism. I am satisfied that, by any conceivable metric, the dominant religion in Spain is not Roman Catholicism, but what I call here ARRF. And that, broadly, is the situation in the Christian (or formerly Christian) West.

“Let them eat ARRF.”

Now, at this stage of the exposition, I feel I have to make a general point, which is this: just because I am writing about a phenomenon, even inventing a term for it (ARRF) does not mean that I presume to understand it fully. For example, in an earlier essay, I defined the term “High IQ Idiot”, or HIQI. I described the phenomenon and tried to provide some framework of analysis, but I certainly do not claim to fully understand why so many high IQ, highly educated people are so helpless against the propaganda matrix and all of its cartoonish, synthetic narratives. Similarly, I have often wondered how many people really believe — I mean strongly believe — in the various politically correct, ARRF propositions, like same-sex marriage. For example, I have heard the claim that support for gay marriage is now the majority viewpoint, but I don’t know whether to believe that. If one’s source of information on something like that is the mainstream media, that is problematic, given the MSM’s pro-ARRF bias.

I don’t think it is easy to know. You see, a lot of people will proclaim (even loudly) their belief in all sorts of dogmas when they feel it is in their interest to do so, that this is what is expected of them. That is true now just as it was in Medieval Spain or Soviet Russia. That is one way that elites can become pretty disconnected from reality. Surely a lot of rich, powerful people believe themselves to be very witty and funny because everybody always laughs at all of their jokes. They would believe it because they want to believe it and also because nobody ever tells them that they suck.

I’m writing this not long after the 2016 presidential election, and like so many others, I am still trying to absorb the news, make sense of Trump’s win. I have to admit that I had long assumed that a Hillary Clinton presidency was inevitable. That’s what the mainstream media was telling us and I believed them, silly me. So, yeah, they had me conned, but that is of little importance, of course. More importantly, they had themselves conned! Basically, Hillary and the people running her campaign must have believed that they would have an easy victory if they configured the contest as a sort of ARRF referendum. I guess this is because the whole ARRF narrative is so dominant in the mainstream media that it was kind of an echo chamber and they were there believing their own bullshit. Well, Marie Antoinette allegedly said: “Let them eat cake.” That showed how out of touch she was, but that’s already a lot more realistic than “Let them eat feminism and gay rights.”

Hillary’s entire campaign message was very much a sort of progressive, ARRF narrative — that she, Hillary Clinton was going to fulfill historical destiny by becoming the first woman president. Actually, I guess it was part of a larger, triumphant ARRF narrative. She was the logical progression from Obama, the first black president. Not that the order was necessarily that important, I suppose. Had Hillary prevailed in 2008, then they would have had Obama waiting in the wings this time round. I also reasoned that, after Hillary was done and we’d had a black and a woman, we were going to have an openly gay president after that. I felt it was, as the Muslims say: Maktub. (It is written.) Or as the Borg say: “Resistance is futile.” Whatever. It was divine destiny, the next inevitable chapter in the world according to ARRF. Okay, it wasn’t so inevitable after all, but that is how they were trying to present it, and they certainly had me fooled.

Actually, it almost worked! Trump’s margin of victory was really razor thin. I mean, when you lose the popular vote but then eke out a win in the electoral college, that is something very close. If Hillary had got an extra 1% in Florida and Pennsylvania, she would have made it. Trump won by a hair really, but it wasn’t supposed to be close at all. Hillary was supposed to win in a landslide.

When Hillary referred to the core of Trump’s support as coming from a “basket of deplorables”, the deeper meaning was that these people were heretics or infidels, blasphemers against whatever sacred ARRF dogma — a motley crew of racists, sexists, homophobes… the “alt-Right”… All these infidels were standing in the way of progress. (Well, her progress, anyway…)

“YES, THEY DESERVE TO DIE! AND I HOPE THEY ALL BURN IN HELL!!!”

“OH, SHUT UP, HILLARY!”

(Don’t mind her, she’ll get over it…)

Not only was Hillary’s candidacy an ARRF candidacy, Trump was very much the anti-ARRF candidate. Time and again, the mainstream media claimed that Trump was committing political suicide by saying whatever politically incorrect thing he said and, in retrospect, it only seemed to make him stronger. But this can be understood. If much of Trump’s appeal was that he was the anti-ARRF candidate, then he was hardly hurting himself by being politically incorrect! (It’s not a bug! It’s a feature!)

So Trump’s victory was, to a large extent anyway, a triumph of anti-ARRF heresy. That is my own way of expressing it, other people will doubtless express the same approximate idea using other terminology. Regardless of the exact language one uses, this paradigm can help explain why there is such a diverse group of people, not just in the U.S.A., but around the world, who take such delight in Trump’s win. Within 24 hours of Trump’s victory, a visibly elated Dieudonné put up a video congratulating Trump. Unlike the previous Dieudo video I linked, this one does not have English subtitles, but I would still invite people to watch the first half minute or so just for the tone and body language.

At 0:19, he says: “Quelle bouffée d’oxygène!” What a mouthful of oxygen! Of course, in English we would say “a breath of fresh air”. (Actually, Dieudo said: “Quelle bouffée d’oxygène, putain de merde!”. But I won’t translate the latter part.) A breath of fresh air, just an expression, but if you think about it a bit, if the victory of Trump, the anti-ARRF candidate is a breath of fresh air, that means that the ARRF candidate, or ARRF itself, is the opposite of that, i.e. there is something suffocating about ARRF. And isn’t there? Isn’t political correctness terribly mentally oppressive? “You can’t say this, you can’t say that…” So when Trump did say this and did say that and won anyway, for many people, there was something very liberating about that.

I think it’s safe to say that, for the most part, people are far happier about Clinton’s defeat than Trump’s victory. The practical consequences of a President Trump remain to be seen. For many people it is more about the symbolism of the event. In the terminology of this essay, they could proclaim:

Hillary represents ARRF and ARRF makes me wanna barf.

Speaking of the Unspeakable

It has been said (though I honestly don’t know who said it first) that if you could ask a fish to describe its environment, the last thing it would ever mention is water. That might explain why I ended up inventing a new term for something that so pervades Western culture. It is so pervasive that, for the most part, people are unaware of it and thus, there is not even a generally accepted word for it. In an earlier essay, I pointed out how propagandists use language to frame issues. Well, we can (and should) play at that too. The initial point of the ARRF (Anti-Religious Religious Fanaticism) framing is to emphasize that this set of secular dogmas really is like a religion in very many ways — an especially fanatical, messianic religion at that! For the true believer, if you don’t believe in all the various PC dogmas — radical feminism, gay rights, multiculturalism and so forth — you are a vile and unworthy person. However, you won’t be called an “infidel” or a “heretic”, but rather, a sexist, a racist, or a homophobe. Interestingly, you could also be called a nazi or a fascist. If you step back and look at it, these last two are strangely anachronistic insults well into the 21st century. However, I would say that, once you better understand ARRF, it is not so strange after all. You see, it reflects another key facet of ARRF: aside from the PC side, with its bizarre questioning of traditional gender identities and all that, there is this indefinite extension of the very one-sided Manichean version of World War 2 and its origins, a.k.a. the “Good War” myth. It is probably in this aspect that ARRF is most like classic religious fanaticism. Of course, PC is a preachy evangelical religion for sure, but nothing in the modern Western world more resembles a Medieval Inquisition or heresy trial than the various Holocaust denial trials.

The other reason to define a new term myself is that I can play at Humpty Dumpty: “A word means what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.” What I am talking about when I say ARRF is really the dominant ideology or belief system of the AngloZionist West. I owe the term “AngloZionist” or “AngloZionist Empire” to the estimable Saker, who has, not surprisingly, been heavily criticized for this term. Typically, the critics object to the “Zionist” part more than the “Anglo” part. I think it’s unavoidable, since the out-sized role of Jewish intellectuals and Jewish ethnic networks in creating this whole ball of wax really cannot be denied — to the extent that any analysis that avoids mentioning this will not be worth very much. On consideration, if we are to discuss ARRF, then we cannot respect all the taboos that ARRF itself imposes when doing so!

This development of the ARRF concept is really a continuation of my previous writing. In the first essay I wrote, I introduced terms such as BDQ (Bullshit Detection Quotient) and the concept of the HIQI, the High IQ Idiot. Stepping back and looking at all of this, these concepts all revolve around a key question that has been tormenting me ever since I started to get a bit educated about the world. This is a question that many like-minded readers will doubtless have pondered as well. It is the following:

Why is everybody (or just about everybody) so damned brainfucked?

To be clear, the above question does not refer to uneducated people, of the sort who never read anything serious and would be hard-pressed to find their own country on a world map. I’m not talking about people who, through no fault of their own, are way on the left side of the old Bell curve. No, I’m referring to people who have some claim to belonging to the intellectual elite of society, who typically have a high level of formal education. In short, it’s about the HIQIs. Or, in other words, why is it that, almost invariably, if you try to talk to any of these people, these HIQIs, about world events or such, you quickly feel like you would be better off banging your head against a wall?

Well, I’m going to take an initial stab at answering this question. The short answer to the above question, in the terminology of this essay, is as follows:

The reason they are all so brainfucked is because their heads are crammed full of ARRF.

Now, I recognize that, at first blush, the above might seem a tad facetious. To say that people are full of shit because their heads are full of shit, though trivially true, does not really constitute a framework of analysis. I realize that. (A bit on the jejune side, eh?) Well, I guess it is good enough if all you want to do is rant and vent your frustrations, but I am trying to get beyond that and narrow in on some things that are conceptually useful. In the essay where I introduced the HIQI terminology, I admitted that I myself was a HIQI most of my life. In the terminology of this essay, my head was chock full of ARRF.

This, at least tentatively, provides a basic explanation of the HIQI phenomenon. It doesn’t matter how high your IQ happens to be if your head is full of ARRF. What this amounts to is having all these synthetic narratives floating around that render it impossible to think clearly about anything. What ARRF does is that it frames just about every major issue in a very deceptive, fallacious way. This is a very ambitious topic to take on and it can only be done here in a very general way. A thorough treatment would require a book-length exposition or more likely various books. Having expressed that caveat, here goes…

Dissecting ARRF

I sent earlier drafts of this essay to various people whose opinion I respect. I got various different reactions, useful feedback, but nobody ever questioned the basic concept of ARRF. Everybody seemed to know exactly what I was talking about! In fact, at least a couple of them, in later correspondence with me, started using the term themselves! I conclude from this, that unless we are all suffering from the same delusion, ARRF definitely exists — this kind of secular religion that pervades the Western countries. However, this religion has no official name and no official catechism.

Suppose you met a nice Jewish girl and things get serious but the young lady insists that, if you are to get married, you must convert to Judaism. Now, even if you only have the most vague idea of what this would entail, there are surely plenty of resources out there, books and websites and the rest, that explain it — the various rules and rituals, religious dogmas that you are supposed to believe in (or pretend to believe in) and all that jazz. Of course, that is not just the case for Judaism. The same comment applies to any well established religion — Roman Catholicism, Sunni Islam, Tibetan Buddhism… you name it. Granted, as always, there is nuance, complexity: within any one of those religious traditions, there are surely different currents and subcurrents and doubtless there is lively theological debate. However, the main strands of belief are pretty well established such that a curious person could figure out what they are. Moreover, one could say much the same thing about a secular “religion” such as Marxism-Leninism.

Now, I would submit that ARRF, like these other religions, also has its main dogmas and such, except that they are not officially outlined anywhere. So, however presumptuous it may be on my part, I shall take it on myself to sketch it out. As I perceive it now, the Western secular religion of ARRF contains four principal doctrinal strands. Here is a convenient shorthand for them: DM, PC, CT, and GW.

  1. DM. The Democracy Myth. This is surely the central ARRF sacred narrative, this notion that government in the U.S.A. and other Western countries emerges from the will of the ordinary people — you know, via the fact that, every four years or so, you get to go into a polling booth and vote for one grinning idiot or another one. There is really no more reason to believe in this than in Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny.
  2. PC. Alternatively: the Social Justice Narrative -— feminism, multiculturalism, gay rights and all that jazz…
  3. CT. The weaponized Conspiracy Theory construct. I have written extensively about this over the last year. One could alternatively call it the New York Times Cult. A traditional religious person believes something because it is in the Bible. The HIQI, a.k.a. the true believer in ARRF, believes something because it is in the New York Times. Or possibly the Guardian or the BBC — whatever mainstream media venue. In practice, the term “conspiracy theory”, like “democracy”, is close to meaningless. Basically, it’s just a new way of saying “heresy”.
  4. GW. The Good War synthetic narrative. Alternatively, we could call this the RRN (Roger Rabbit Narrative) version of WW2. Essentially, the war is presented as a kind of supreme moral battle between the forces of good and the forces of pure evil. The biggest single subcomponent of this is the Auschwitz death cult, a.k.a. “Holocaustianity”.

I am painfully aware that each of the above is, on its own, a HUGE topic. Entire books could be written on each of the above, yet I can really only devote a bit of explanation to each one, which is what I shall do here.

DM

I guess the most basic aspect of this to understand is that, while ARRF is obviously a godless religion, the closest thing that it has to a God is, in fact, this “Democracy” construct. In the formerly Christian (now ARRF) Western countries, you can question the existence of God all you want, but if you suggest that “Democracy” does not really exist, you will make people quite uncomfortable. If you don’t believe it, just try it in the appropriate social context. Go to any watering hole where the local HIQIs congregate, and tell them that “Democracy” is bullshit, a myth. See how upset they get at you. (Tell them that God and Jesus Christ are bullshit, and they’ll probably pat you on the back and buy you a drink…)

Note also that the missionary work devoted to proselytizing ARRF is typically called something like “promoting Democracy” or some other phrase with the magic word Democracy in it. Though not necessarily… they might call this “spreading Western values”, but if you were then to ask them: “What Western values?” then what will they answer?

Democracy!!!

(If you guessed that one right, award yourself a biscuit…)

The overall ARRF missionary effort is utterly massive, surely dwarfing the missionary efforts of any traditional organized religion in scale and the resources available to it. Just offhand, there is NED, the National Endowment for Democracy, but there is a whole network of foundations and NGO’s, where, if you examine what they are about, it could be best described as ARRF missionary work. The overall George Soros financed ARRF missionary effort is called OSF, the Open Society Foundation. By the way, if you were to ask people to summarize what the heck “Open Society” means, then what will they answer?

Democracy!!!

(I know you guessed that one right too. Have another biscuit…)

Consider the following video snippet, in which Victoria Nuland, one of the leading witches from Hillary Clinton’s coven, explains U.S. policy in Ukraine leading up to the 2014 putsch.

She intones:

“Since Ukraine’s independence in 1991, the United States has supported Ukrainians as they build democratic skills and institutions, as they promote civic participation and good governance, all of which are preconditions for Ukraine to achieve its European aspirations. We’ve invested over 5 billion (!) dollars to assist Ukraine in these and other goals that will insure a secure and prosperous and democratic Ukraine.”

It should not be a very difficult exercise to translate the above. All of the money spent “promoting democracy” means, of course, a massive proselytization effort to fill people’s heads with ARRF. The term “precondition” is interesting to consider. Filling people’s heads with ARRF, particularly the young people , is understood to be a precondition for orchestrating a successful CIA Color Revolution. The stuff about “good governance” is just gratuitous Orwellian language, as far as I can tell. I suppose it’s kind of a little cynical wink from this Satanic bitch. (That, or stealing everything that is not nailed down constitutes “good governance”.)

My initial rough translation of Ms. Nuland’s remarks are as follows: “We spent 5 billion dollars filling people’s heads with ARRF, so that they would be so brainfucked that they would be eager to become an impoverished vassal State of the AngloZionist Empire.” The latter is what “achieving its European aspirations” means, of course.

So, in Ukraine in the past few years, we see the results of the ARRF missionary efforts. Well, the Russians see the results too and their response is not really so hard to understand. They are a proud people who wish to maintain their independence. It is a dual response basically: on the one hand, they are reinforcing their traditional religious culture of Orthodox Christianity. They surely reason that people who practice their traditional religious culture are far less susceptible to having their heads filled with ARRF. Also, they take the rational, common-sense step of kicking the George Soros outfit and the rest of the ARRF missionary NGO’s out of their country. And, naturally, they ban some of the more obnoxious (at least from their point of view) ARRF manifestations, such as Gay Pride parades.

PC

Again, this is a very big topic. I believe that, to embark on a detailed analysis (which I will not do right here) requires one to break it down into two sub-topics. On the one hand, there is the role of the whole PC narrative in the core ARRF countries, i.e. North America and Western Europe. Then, on the other hand, you have the instrumentalization of the PC ideology in foreign policy, i.e. the proselytization of ARRF in the formerly communist countries, or in the Islamic world, for example.

I suppose that most people will have noticed how the Western propaganda matrix utilizes the overall PC narrative to demonize foreign governments and leaders. For example, that Vladimir Putin does not want a bunch of flaming pansies prancing around Red Square in a “Gay Pride” parade is used to show what an evil dude Vlad is. One interesting aspect of this is that it is pretty clear that the Russian people, by and large, don’t want this, so the government banning such things reflects the popular will, i.e. by basic definition, is “democratic”. Or, conversely, if Putin bowed to pressure from Western backed PC lobbies and allowed gay pride parades, when the vast majority of the Russian people don’t want that, this would, by any common-sense definition be “anti-democratic”, no?

Hmm…

Well, one way of looking at this is that ARRF is a religion and it is typical of religions that different doctrinal strands can contradict one another. Things written in one part of the Bible can certainly contradict something in some other part. And, in general, I would never claim that hypocrisy is exclusive to ARRF. However, at times ARRF really does seem to take hypocrisy to an entirely new level. The central sacred narrative in ARRF is democracy, after all. So how does ARRF deal with the fact that the leader they are demonizing (the new Hitler, bringing in the GW sub-narrative) wins election after election?

Well, they simply ignore it, of course. They repeatedly refer to somebody like Hugo Chavez or Putin as a dictator, even though these leaders came to power in fair elections and are far more popular in their own countries than any Western leader is. The thing to understand, of course, is that in ARRF-speak, the word “democratic” does not realiy mean anything. Or really, it means, pro-Western, i.e. pro-AngloZionist, or pro-ARRF. It does not, however, mean governance that reflects the popular will — unless that popular will coincides with what the Western power elite wants.

CT

I’ve already written extensively about the CT construct. Of course, it is a very deceptive use of language because being a “conspiracy theorist” really has nothing to do with constructing any theory oneself. It just means that you disbelieve the official Western propaganda matrix version of events. Thus, the little boy in the Emperor’s New Clothes story, when he saw a naked man and said that he was not wearing any clothes, was, in modern-day language, a “conspiracy theorist”.

In terms of the framing being used here, the notion of ARRF as a religion, the “conspiracy theory” construct is simply a relabeling of what traditional religions call “heresy”. Thus, when you read any ARRF rant about “conspiracy theorists”, if you simply mentally substitute the older term “heretic”, it will be more readily comprehensible. This is broadly similar to the idea that if, when you read things like “promoting democracy” or “instilling Western values”, you substitute in “filling people’s heads with ARRF”, then the real meaning of the text will again be more readily understandable.

In the time since I first started writing about this topic, they have put out a new framing: fake news. That whole thing leaves me speechless; it is astoundingly brazen. The basic idea is that the Russian government (or any other non-MSM approved) version of events in Syria, say, is propaganda, i.e. fake news. The U.S. government and mainstream media version of events is not propaganda; that’s the real news.

They are basically saying: “When they fart, it stinks, but ours smells like apple pie.” I know that’s vulgar, but I am satisfied that it is a fair and accurate characterization: Russian government propaganda is propaganda, but U.S. government propaganda is simply the truth. The whole thing is such an outrageously shameless and self-serving sort of idea, such an insult to anybody’s intelligence, that one would think there will be a backlash because now they’ve really gone too far. (Or have they? How utterly brainfucked are people? This is a moment of truth, no?)

It is truly breathtaking, since it’s so blatant that there is not even any sort of deception to deconstruct. All the pretenses are tossed aside and it’s: Our version of events is simply the truth. Why? Because we say so.

You see, what is striking about all this is that ARRF presents itself as a secular ideology that exalts science and reason and eschews belief in the supernatural. This is the position of the bestselling (heavily promoted) ARRF screed, The God Delusion, by Richard Dawkins. The problem is that, on examination, this is complete nonsense. In practice, secularists have simply displaced their unquestioning faith. Instead of saying that they believe some story because it’s in the Bible, they believe it because it’s in the New York Times. Moreover, it is perfectly clear when you look at it, that ARRF, like the traditional religions, does effectively require belief in miracles. Ironically, this point was made by Christian theologian David Ray Griffin in an open letter addressed to a set of left gatekeeper public intellectuals. In any case, it seems abundantly clear that Dawkins’s argument is fundamentally wrong. All of the case he makes for religion being harmful applies to ARRF in spades: ARRF is fanatical and intolerant and also requires unquestioning belief in things that have no particular rational or scientific basis.

Certainly, ARRF requires declarations of faith in things for which there is no proof. That is completely apparent in the above-linked video snippet of Jeremy Scahill’s answer to a question on 9/11 Truth. In deep structure, the situation there is not at all different from somebody making some declaration of faith in the Middle Ages. “No, not me, I’m no dirty heretic, I believe those wicked Ay-rabs flew those planes into those buildings.” Where it does differ a bit is that Scahill feels the need (momentarily anyway) to say that he has at least considered the other point of view. But then he quickly backtracks and starts vociferously condemning the heretics.

The veneer of rationality can fall off pretty quickly. What is striking about the “fake news” construct is that there’s not even the veneer. They just say: “We’re the ones in possession of the truth.” All the science advocacy has clear limits. If Professor Richard Dawkins and the rest of the ARRF priesthood really believe in the primacy of science over faith-based superstitions, why don’t they advocate a science-based investigation of 9/11? Well, I think the answer is obvious, so I leave it as an exercise to the reader.

GW

When I refer to four broad strands of ARRF doctrine, another way of saying this is that there are, broadly speaking, four different kinds of anti-ARRF heresy. Despite the fact that you can get into real trouble for the first three kinds of heresy, by far the most dangerous is heresy related to GW. Of course, the GW related taboos are so strong that even seven decades after the end of the war, calling somebody a fascist or a nazi is just about the greatest insult imaginable. Thus, if you commit anti-PC heresy by saying that marriage is between a man and a woman, you are a “fascist”, say. Of course, it is true that the Germans of the time believed that marriage was between a man and a woman, but that was also the belief in every other country that fought in WW2. (Whatever they were all fighting about, it sure wasn’t that! But never mind…)

Well, you see, never mind that it makes no sense. The point is that if you want to demonize somebody you call him a Nazi. They are always setting up some foreign leader as the “new Hitler”. Of course, it never makes sense. The situation they are super-imposing the Hitler narrative on typically has no real resemblance to what was going on in Germany in the 1930’s. But, as I have said earlier, the bullshit tends to be quite repetitive and this is a key repeated element.

This, again, is a very big topic, but in this context, a discussion of the main doctrinal strands of ARRF, the really important point is that the GW narrative, the History Channel AngloZionist version of the Second World War, is not really a scholarly, historical narrative; it is something much more like a religious dogma. I think the best way to illustrate this might be to contrast GW with Christian dogma.

In Christianity, Jesus Christ is understood to be the embodiment of God — the epitome of Good. ARRF, on the other hand, is a godless religion. This abstract construct called “Democracy” plays, to a large extent, the role of a God, but it is an impersonal God. However, there is a devil, who is a person! Of course, the devil’s name is not “Satan” nor is it “Lucifer”; it is “Adolf Hitler”. Just as, in Christianity, Jesus is not a man like other men, but the embodiment of Good, in ARRF, Hitler is the very epitome of pure Evil.

The main Christian narrative culminates in Calvary and the Cross, while the GW narrative, specifically the Holocaustianity subcult, has Auschwitz and the Gas Chamber. Of course, in current-day Western countries, the Gas Chamber is far more revered than the Cross. You can deny the Cross and mock Jesus all you want but they will destroy your career and even have you imprisoned in various countries for denying the gas chambers. This, by the way, surely constitutes the greatest single piece of evidence that ARRF has supplanted Christianity as the official religion of the West.

In Christianity, Jesus is supposed to come back one day, but we’ve been waiting for nearly 2000 years. Hitler, on the other hand, after only 70 years, came back numerous times.

A fascinating subnarrative is the treatment of the Munich Conference of 1938. You can be certain that if, tomorrow, Trump were to go off to Russia and talk to Putin, that the entire media would be going crazy screaming about Neville Chamberlain in Munich in 1938. The strange thing about the whole Neville Chamberlain in Munich narrative is that the people trotting this out always take as a given that the big mistake that Chamberlain made was going and talking to Hitler. Now, he may well have made a bad deal with Hitler that he should not have made. However, it is puzzling to me the notion that his mistake was going and talking to Hitler. They would say this even assuming that Trump went and talked to Putin and didn’t make any deal or give him anything, just talked to him. Neville Chamberlain in Munich, nya nya nya! Where’s yer umbrella, Donald?

I wonder how many people ponder just how dangerous this entire implicit framing of situations is. You see, once you say that somebody is Hitler, there is no moderate course of action. You can’t get together with Hitler over a beer (or mint tea, maybe) and talk things through. No! This is Hitler, dammit, he’s pure evil! Also, if your enemy is Hitler, no matter what barbaric, ultraviolent measures you take, they are always justified — bombing cities full of innocent civilians, implementing an economic blockade that causes people to starve or die from lack of needed medicines. No matter what evil you do, it is always the lesser evil, because the greater evil is… HITLER!!! No matter the price, the new Hitler must be stopped!

I think the succint way of characterizing all of this is that the GW narrative is the main theological justification in ARRF of the “Zionist Golden Rule”, which, in case you did not know, is:

Do unto others before the others get a chance to do it unto you.

Well, actually, one cannot credit the Zionists with that. The basic idea surely predates Zionism and even predates Christianity. However, the Zionists do live by it and the Hitler/Holocaust narrative really is the cornerstone of it in ARRF theology. For example, it underlies the whole doctrine of “pre-emptive war” and RTP (Responsibility To Protect) that was used to destroy Libya in 2011.

American Pravda and ARRF

On the Unz Review, there are currently 25 articles under the rubric of “American Pravda”. I believe that, overall, they constitute an important body of writing. Most (20) were written by Ron Unz himself. I am quite proud that two were written by me. Of course the common theme tying all these articles together is just how untrustworthy the American mainstream media is, perhaps no better (or possibly even worse) than Soviet era propaganda; Pravda (“Truth” in Russian) was the main Soviet newspaper. Ron’s approach has been to meticulously document all sorts of lies the media tells and that is worthwhile, of course. My articles also do that a fair bit, though nowhere near as meticulously as Ron does, since I’m not really an academician or a researcher.

In any case, the main focus of my writing is not really about demonstrating that the media is lying about whatever specific topic. Frankly, to me that is no longer that interesting a question. Of course they are lying about everything! I’m far more fascinated by the big picture question of why it is that people believe the lies. Well, not just people generally. I mean ME! Why did I believe all the bullshit for so long? And also: why do I no longer believe it? Self-observation is very problematic so it’s not like it’s easy to answer such questions. I have never asked my lapsed Catholic friend R why he stopped believing but I suspect he would not really be able to tell me.

So I don’t know what precisely would cause somebody to stop believing in ARRF or anything else. However, one thing I am pretty certain of at this point is that, once anybody stops believing in the main ARRF doctrines, — i.e. DM, PC, CT, and GW — then that person becomes largely immune to the mainstream media propaganda. The reason would be that all these things are sort of like building blocks in the various synthetic narratives they present, so once these things no longer have a hold on you, the propaganda narratives become ineffective. For example, if somebody is telling you that so-and-so is another Hitler, well, obviously it has no effect on you if you don’t really believe the GW sacred narrative anyway. Or if somebody tells you that the U.S. is intervening to establish “democracy” somewhere, you don’t believe it because you don’t believe in DM anymore. And so on.

On being partially pregnant

There is a prolific commenter on the Unz review who comes to mind. He is a racialist, Alt-right sort of guy, who despises all things PC. Well, there are many who fit that description, but the one I just happen to have in mind, in the run-up to the election wrote a comment that fascinated me. He said he was nervous about Trump because Trump was a “conspiracy theorist”, so it was like: “Is it a good idea to elect a heretic conspiracy theorist to the White House?” This commenter did not mind that Trump was allegedly a racist, a sexist, or whatever other ungood things. For him that was all good. But a conspiracy theorist? God save us!

Of course, it’s not about that one commenter. There are all these people who somehow do not see any connection between the enforcement of ideological conformism from the PC crowd and all the arrogant dismissal of so-called “conspiracy theories”. On the one hand, they firmly believe (correctly) that the mainstream media and the government are imposing a false narrative about one set of things — multiculturalism, feminism and such — but the dominant narratives about another set of things cannot be questioned. Thus, for example, these same people believe that the West is under attack from something called “radical Islam” and if you question that synthetic narrative (and the synthetic events that comprise it), you’re a “conspiracy theorist” and self-evidently crazy!

If there is one idea that I would really like to get across in this essay, it is the sheer futility of this sort of blinkered approach. Look, as a general principle, if you are going to oppose something, you have to oppose it integrally — as a holistic entity. Well, that maybe sounds more profound than it is. It’s actually a really dead simple idea. Like, if you get into the ring to box with somebody, you can’t just pretend that your opponent can only hit you with his left hand. (“The right hand, you say? What’s that? Sounds like a silly conspiracy theory to me….” BOOM!!!)

So, if you do broadly accept the framing of this article (which could be a big assumption, I know…) you can’t just oppose PC but then toe the line on CT or GW. You can’t do that any more than you can selectively decide to fight with somebody’s left hand and pretend that their right hand doesn’t exist. Because all of these things are bound up with one another. They are part of a whole.

If you don’t believe that, well, okay, but then I would suggest that you look more closely at the lay of the land. If you look at the network of NGO’s and foundations that we could say broadly are proselytizing ARRF, persecuting the heretics, it’s the same people enforcing the approved line on these various things. If you want to get on the shit list of the B’nai Brith Anti-Defamation League, say, you have various routes: you can be a white nationalist (anti-PC heresy) or you can be a 9/11 Truther (CT) or you can be a WW2 revisionist (GW). The same Masters of Discourse (to use the great Israel Shamir’s term) are enforcing intellectual conformity on all these various things. You may not think that these things are connected, but believe me, they are. All of these different constructs are ideological weapons for these people. Really, it’s the same little man behind the curtain.

Concluding Remarks

The origin of this article is that I wanted to write a devastating critique of a certain intellectual movement, broadly called the New Atheists. Probably the leading figure of that is Richard Dawkins, at least now that Christopher Hitchens is no longer. Though I am not a religious person myself, those people really annoy me and it was an itch I wanted to scratch. But I didn’t anticipate writing such a lengthy article. As I wrote it, it developed more into an analysis of the dominant Western ideology, looking at it as a religion. The way this developed is as follows: you see, the single thing I find most offensive about Dawkins and the rest of these people is the way they constantly preen themselves that they are taking some sort of brave, principled stand against these horrible religious people. And that really is quite fraudulent. Whatever courage is exactly, it is largely situational. Fighting Nazis in 1942 or 1943 on a battlefield or joining the French Resistance required real courage. However, battling (non-existent) Nazis in the 21st century requires no courage whatsoever. It amounts to vacuous posturing. The religion bashing that Dawkins and the other so-called “New Atheists” engage in requires no courage either. To say the same things in Torquemada’s day, that would have taken some real balls! These people, properly understood, are proselytizing ARRF, and ARRF, not Christianity, is currently the dominant religion in the West and there is nothing daring or courageous about upholding your society’s dominant religion! This was a central point I wanted to make, but to get there, I had to develop the ARRF concept more and that kind of took on a life of its own.

Also, I started writing the article before the U.S. elections in which Trump surprisingly won. When this took place, with the article still unfinished, I felt that I had to incorporate that into the exposition and the focus of the article shifted somewhat. I was interested in looking at the election and Trump’s surprising victory through the lens of this ARRF framing.

Finally, I ended up saying a lot but much is left unsaid. I outlined the core ARRF “catechism” in very broad strokes. I try to be mindful of what criticisms my analysis is open to. For example, I am quite aware that there is nothing like a complete unity of belief in ARRF. But actually, that is also true of traditional religions; a single religious tradition can encompass different tendencies and there can be various subcults within a religion that are more or less optional. For example, in Roman Catholicism there are all these saints, more of them than you could shake a stick at actually. So venerating any of the more minor saints is obviously optional; there are simply too many of them. You could choose to revere a certain saint and even do a pilgrimage to a holy site related to that figure, but it’s not mandatory. So there are core doctrines that everybody really must believe, like Jesus on the Cross at Calvary, but then there is a bunch of stuff that is more or less optional.

ARRF seems to work quite a bit like that. For example, take the WC cult. (This refers to the British wartime leader Winston Churchill, not the washroom.) WC is a subcult of GW, but I don’t think it’s really core ARRF. A public figure could probably get away with saying negative things about Churchill. And one potential problem with the WC subcult is that the man was such a horrid imperialist/racist that it runs up against the PC component — at least if Churchill is portrayed halfway honestly, which is a big “if”, of course. So this is an example of how there can often be tension between the different ARRF doctrines.

On the other hand, the negative personality cult of Hitler, AH for short, that really is core ARRF and saying anything positive about the man is hard-core blasphemy. So, for example, suppose you felt the sudden urge to say something like: “Hey, you know, Adolf looks like a nice feller to me. I love his cute little mustache.” I would advise you to bite your tongue. If there is the overpowering urge to blaspheme, I suggest you dash into the WC (here, WC means the washroom, not the British wartime leader) and say it there where nobody can hear you.

Or consider the American Exceptionalism cult, AE for short. This is mostly a subcult of DM, I think, but GW ties in very strongly. What AE most venerates is the U.S. military. America is the “policeman of the world”, defending “Democracy” — you know… all that crap… Obviously, AE is optional since it is mostly for Americans, though I suppose some extremely servile Western European politicians are also members of the cult. The AE subcult is agnostic, I think. Members are unsure whether God exists. However, if he does exist, he damned sure is an American!

Ich bin ein Häretiker

In this entire series of essays, I have said some very controversial things and I expect, even welcome criticism. That said, I would warn people that they really should only write a critique if they are absolutely sure that they understood the overall point of the article.

The point here is not really my own precise views regarding all the various ARRF dogmas. Now, as regards an archetypal PC issue like same-sex marriage, a reader could infer (correctly) that I am not in favor of it. But the thing is, even if my opinion on that was different, I would react to those progressive fanatics in Portland the same way. I’m not going to boycott somebody’s business or refuse to greet them in the street simply because they have a different view about that issue than I do. The problem is that this really is a religion for these people and they literally think it’s a crime for somebody to think differently, just to express a different view! Heresy! Even if they are not burning people at the stake (not yet, give them time…) they surely create an atmosphere that must be quite similar to that of a Medieval Inquisition. And, as I said, this is religious fanaticism. There is no need for a new word for it. I’m pretty sure the psychology is the same, that the same brain chemistry is involved. And then, the problem is that, whenever the part of the brain that does religious fanaticism gets flipped on, the part that handles nuance and complexity get turned off. There is no moral ambiguity; everything is black or white.

Now, to be absolutely clear about something here, I am not saying that the PC social justice narrative is completely wrong. Far from it. I’m certainly against persecuting people for being homosexuals. I’m quite happy that the Jim Crow laws in the American South were done away with and that Apartheid in South Africa was dismantled. And, yes, I believe these things, by and large, constitute progress.

The point is that rejecting PC as a religion, i.e. what I call here ARRF, does not constitute a wholesale rejection of every single liberal/progressive idea. I am against PC as a religion because it amounts to taking very complex situations and bowdlerizing them into some simplistic good vs. evil narrative, and then anybody who expresses any disagreement is a heretic, guilty of thought crimes.

This kind of binary, all-or-none reasoning is at its absolute worst when it comes to the GW component of ARRF, the “Good War” narrative. What they will argue basically is that if you reject their dogma of Hitler as the embodiment of pure Evil, this must mean that you believe in some alternative theology in which Hitler is pure Good. Well, no, I think a serious student of history should reject any sacred narrative being presented as history. Hitler was not God or the Devil, but a man, and as such, should be studied like any other historical figure, be it Stalin or Mao or Napoleon Bonaparte.

If people want to set up a religion and worship Winston Churchill as a God and say Hitler was the Devil, I guess that’s their own business. But once something gets turned into a religious dogma, doesn’t freedom of religion apply? Don’t we have the right to reject Holocaustianity the same as we have the right to reject Christianity? Or to tell the Jehovah’s witnesses at the door to get lost?

In closing, I should point out to people that if your critique boils down to hysterically shrieking that I am a heretic, then it’s all grist to the mill. It only goes to reinforce the central point of this essay! Besides, if you want to call me a heretic, i.e. a conspiracy theorist or a holocaust denier or any of these things, I think I really should take it as a compliment. These terms really have to lose their power over people. It really seems to me that all the anti-ARRF heretics should come together, not to agree with one another about everything, mind you, but at least to identify a common enemy. To paraphrase JFK, I think we should all more or less stand up and say: “Ich bin ein Häretiker.”

Fan mail (as well as hate mail) can be directed to revusky at gmail.

 
Hide 410 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Yeesh says:

    Good lord. I read 1000 words before I realized this guy really, really

    1) Wasn’t saying anything new, surprising or original

    2) was convinced he was.

    • LOL: Clyde
  2. CanSpeccy says: • Website

    A religion is simply a community moral code. The code may be rationalized by reference to a deity, the spirits of ancestors, Brahma or whatever, but it need not be. Thus Communism, Nazism or atheistic progressivism are all regions, and among the most intolerant.

  3. Alephzero says:

    Interesting and a thoughtful piece. I wonder if you will consider exploring the possibility that ARRF is not a godless religion and see how far it will take you. The god to look for is “money” or something along that line.

  4. candide says:

    Wow! So many words!
    Let me check if I got it right:
    So, OFF is truly a TV channel after all?

  5. Yeah, American liberals often are sanctimonious and arrogant sons of bitches, no question about that. And hypocritical to the bone. I like Daniel Dennett, though, he sounds okay.

    I think every religion or ideology has this problem, they all produce dogmatic zealous strains. And eventually zealots tend to take over.

    This is related, perhaps: The Most Intolerant Wins: The Dictatorship of the Small Minority, by Nassim Taleb.

    https://medium.com/@nntaleb/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dictatorship-of-the-small-minority-3f1f83ce4e15#.prrsco4aj

  6. edNels says:

    The best article I’ve read here! You can really make w0rds flow too. I only read 1/3 so far, will continue the rest.

    The phrase that comes to mind is: It couldn’t happen here.

    A book The Beast: about the early developments in ’30′s Germany makes believable that just folks, have been easily steered into… Inquisition kinds of things.

    This artical is extremely timely, checking the general indicators.

    Oh, and Scahill, well of course he tows the line, but maybe he just had desire to ”differentiate his personal style from the guy who drove his Mercedes 100 mph into tree, these journos need to keep current, with some by line, different look, they compete a lot.

    Thanks.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  7. MarkinPNW says:

    “On being partially pregnant” describes a couple of dear friends of mine, both Never-Trumpers. My son-in-law from the right – a Ted Cruze/Evan McMullin Republican, and a retired college professor from the left – Occupy Democrats. Both see through some of the falsehoods of the ARRF, but accept other parts of it!

    Overall excellent summary and essay!

  8. “the out-sized role of Jewish intellectuals and Jewish ethnic networks in creating this whole ball of wax really cannot be denied — to the extent that any analysis that avoids mentioning this will not be worth very much.”

    The quote above comes at the half-way point of the essay: the author writes almost 6,000 words before finally getting to gist of the problem. “Finally!”, I say to myself. “Finally he will get to what really matters!” But no, it was not to be. The author then goes on to… practically ignore this pivotal issue in the final 6,000 words of the essay!

    The author commits the same mistake he accuses others of: his essay is not worth very much because he completely avoids the central question implied by his own words in the above quote: what explains the fact that the Jews were so successful in manipulating the goyyim to the extent that the goyyim now have a totally new belief system?

    His essay is of little worth because it skirts this fundamental question of our time.

    If he rewrites the essay pinpointing how the Jews went about constructing each of the four pillars of the new religion, then it will be worthwhile reading his analysis.

    But, of course, an investigation of the sort already exists: Kevin MacDonald’s The Culture of Critique. A good strategy would be to apply Professor MacDonald’s methodology to each of those four pillars mentioned in the essay, and only then will it be possible to unpack the “ball of wax” concocted by the Jews.

    Kevin MacDonald has given us a key and opened a few doors – Boasian anthropology, Freud’s psychoanalysis, The Frankfurt School — to let us get a glimpse of the inner workings of the Jewish Method. We should all go out (and this includes the author, Jonathan Revusky) and use this key and open as many other doors as we can.

    • Replies: @Art
    , @Rich
  9. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    My own coinage of terms has been to call it ‘PC-cult-think’. It’s a secular religion which spawns fanaticism in some adherents who go on to play the role of modern day Red Guards, sniffing out heretics and other enemies and at the very least intimidating the entire society. The majority of people are just conformists who go along with whatever the prevailing trends are. If they’re told by the court experts that some Broadway play is a work of genius then they’ll parrot that without ever coming out and saying the emperor has no clothes.
    Having been acquainted with some loud avowed atheists I’ve seen that their main activity seems to be self-congratulation. They get together and bash the hicks, scouting out the latest example of faith healing nonsense and feeling smug and superior by contrasting themselves with the unenlightened ones. However, almost to a person they’re followers of the PC-cult-think religion. They simply traded one religion for another and are now rivals fighting for the supremacy of their denomination against all others.
    I’ve noticed that the greater the gap between the tenets of this religion and observed reality the greater the intensity and shrillness of the rhetoric coming through the loudspeaker so as to scare one off from lingering too long at that spot. They’ve been running a reign of terror in this country, intimidating and browbeating people and putting them in fear for their ability to hold a job. Although a legitimate candidate, at least as legitimate as those other bozos, most people swayed by what Trump was saying seemed to feel it best to keep their thoughts to themselves during the campaign. Wherever he now goes people spontaneously break out in applause and cheers so it’s apparent that many people were getting tired of the Red Guard stranglehold. Reality can break through now and then.

  10. Sir,

    You seem to either have some real basic reasoning problems, or to be a very disingenuous guy. Among other things, you seamlessly jump from 9/11 to the matter of separation between Church and State.

    The only reason Catholics are so “tolerant”, as in the episode of your friend’s former religious buddies, is that they’re losing. When they were winning, they weren’t as tolerant. Maybe you could extend this phenomenon into other religious ideologies (or ideological religions).

    If I can discern a purpose in your text, it is that you seem to have a problem with some groups of people asserting their cultural hegemony. You seem to reduce this problem into one of sanity (yours) against insanity (everyone else’s).

    I didn’t read the whole text. Maybe later, if I can endure it.

    • Replies: @FKA Max
  11. Miro23 says:

    “You see, a lot of people will proclaim (even loudly) their belief in all sorts of dogmas when they feel it is in their interest to do so, that this is what is expected of them. That is true now just as it was in Medieval Spain or Soviet Russia.”

    I think that this is it, and the key words are in their interest to do so.

    Speaking about Spain, there is a Socialist/Partido Popular split from the national level down to villages with the elected party (national, provincial or local) having its friends and clients accompanied by a good deal of insider dealing, favouritism and straightforward corruption.

    Anyone in business (corrupt or otherwise) or in a public position, has an interest in aligning with the dominant party or at least to not oppose it. When the power shifts, so do the “chaqueteros” (jacket people – as in putting on a different jacket to suit the fashion) and all kinds of newly expressed doubts/disappointment are voiced about their previous power holding friends (now that their power has gone).

    And conversely, looking from the top down, national power holders need to consolidate their power, with the spiritual aspect being a recognized and effective method – laying claim to the spiritual areas of the human psyche (and they’ve been doing it for some time e.g. Roman Emperors claiming divinity, or Charlemagne’s Papal Coronation justifying his status as Holy Roman Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire).

    If you wanted to get ahead in the USSR you needed to be a Party member which involved public voicing of the “prayers” (stock Marxist phrases).

    In the current US, the “prayer book” is the PC package, and anyone in a public life needs to be quite familiar with it to get ahead.

    And the power holders enforcing it are Jewish/Zionist, as shown by its essential elements, the “original sin” of the previous Anglo power holders, the worthlessness of their Christian religion and Constitution, Jewish martyrization in the Holocaust (dying for all humanity), hunting down and prosecuting heretics (questioning Jewish power, questioning the Holocaust, questioning the events of 9/11 etc.)

    In fact the Holocaust and 9/11 have turned into the new “loaves and fishes” or Papally Approved Miracles with facts not getting in the way of Group Unity.

    And an interesting aspect not covered in the article, is the way that these Power/Religious alliances eventually deteriorate and collapse in similar ways.

    For example, corrupt and sleazy late Roman paganism had nothing to do with earlier Greek classicism in the tradition of Homer. The corruption and sleaze were plain for anyone to see, and the ambience opened the way for the adoption a clean and ethical early Christianity. Equally, by the late Middle Ages, a rich and corrupt Church selling indulgences had nothing to do with early European Celtic monasticism, weakening Catholic establishment power and setting the scene for its rejection through Martin Luther and the Protestant Reformation.

    In the case of modern US Judaism, the self interested promotion and sleaze has nothing to do with the closed and disciplined early religious life in Eastern Europe. The present corruption and sleaze is plain to see, with the “victim” narrative going to bizarre extremes – and getting public rejection (e.g. right of access to female toilets for males who think they are females, or state support for schools introducing children to the “alternative and equal” homosexual lifestyle, or encouraging “gender neutral” behavior).

    The article could have looked for more positive routes out of the mess, for example in the US Articles of Confederation: “Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.” If rights of taxation and spending were returned to states and all issues were truly debated and voted at the local level in Swiss style (rather than centrally imposed), many of the US problems would disappear – but of course, the disadvantage would be a system not suited to the lazy person. Everyone would need to engage and contribute and dedicate time to it.

    One sentence in the article that I would question is the following:

    “Separation of Church and State”, which is, of course, a founding principle of American government.

    The First Amendment says, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”

    “Making no law” means that it is perfectly OK for someone in government to put up a Christmas tree on public land since there is no law “prohibiting the free exercise off..” The Constitution doesn’t have an opinion on it.

    The authors of the Constitution were religious people and it this was taken for granted. George Washington repeatedly expressed the value of Christianity in daily life and required his troops to attend religious services . The whole PC anti-Christian edifice of State/Religion separation is built on an obscure reference in a letter from Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association in Connecticut in 1802, which had nothing at all to do with any legislation.

  12. alexander says:

    Dear JR,

    I find this article somewhat lost in the inanities of superfluous things that seem to function as the main discourses of our time.

    That is too bad.

    These “inanities of superfluous things” serve to blanket over the core
    “reality” of the United States, over the last sixteen years.

    Namely that the American people, on the whole, were “deceived” into war…… A war,( or series of wars )which have extracted tens of trillions of dollars from our balance sheet and caused the deaths of over a million innocent people.

    This grotesque “defrauding”of the taxpayer and the utter lack of accountability for any of it, is the most profound issue of our time.

    All the other “issues” which you raise are essentially superfluous .

    Imagine a scenario where big media has convinced you that the Norwegian air force (not the Japanese) had bombed Pearl Harbor…..

    And Americans, who have trusted them to be wholly forthright on such grave matters, agree to go to war against Norway…and obliterate the entire country in the process.

    This is EXACTLY what happened when we were all told, with resolute certainty, that Saddam had “anthrax-ed” our news rooms and capitol.

    Then , after the fact, we find out the truth ……

    This is where we are today…this is the very core issue of our time.

    There has been absolutely “zero” accountability for this monstrous fraud.

    The fact that these same defrauders have not been remanded to federal prison or Guantanamo bay, but have been allowed to continue “pontificating” on various social identity issues(such as you enumerate) is tragic .

    It is the equivalent of watching Bernie Madoff, after having been found guilty of defrauding his investors out of ALL their money AND multiple, multiple homicides….not only walking away Scot-free….but able to expound, ad nauseam, on issues of moral relevance and social justice.

    The fact you are caught up in what he/they have to say, after these heinous criminal actions have occurred , is sad, JR.

    Very sad.

  13. Renoman says:

    Brevity! Learn about it. No one under 75 has the patience for this style of writing.

    • Disagree: CK, Daniel Chieh
  14. n230099 says:

    This piece is an example of someone that completely overthinks everything. We used to believe these kind of conversations were of real value but, then again, we were doing peyote.

    • Replies: @Wally
  15. Thank you Mr Revusky for this thought provoking piece. And by the way, it wasn’t too long.

  16. KA says:

    Dear Muslima

    Stop whining, will you. Yes, yes, I know you had your genitals mutilated with a razor blade, and … yawn … don’t tell me yet again, I know you aren’t allowed to drive a car, and you can’t leave the house without a male relative, and your husband is allowed to beat you, and you’ll be stoned to death if you commit adultery. But stop whining, will you. Think of the suffering your poor American sisters have to put up with.”

    http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/10/26/sexism-and-the-new-atheism/

    Richard Dawkins to Rebecca Watson who protested against unwelcome sexual advances by a fellow atheist in a meeting also attended by Dawkins.
    It s obvious that Dawkins suffer from a number of congenital defects – islamophobia, tunnel vision, inflexibility. inability to shift set when evidences require him to shift ,and a fixed world view which persuades and forces him to fit each and every phenomena to that world view . It is a religion . A religion of extreme idiocy sold as extremely unique liberation of mind . Media glitz ,media exposure, media courting sustain him Automatic denunciation — how can’t you support X,Y Z of atheism and sexual liberation – guides the discourse that Dawkins kind of non Muslima is always ever poised guarnatted to win . Devil is to the believer what the Muslima is to Dawkins kind of shit filled head

    Inquisition appeared and survived in a unique juncture of history . It was a response Modern age atheism is not a response . It is a phenomenon that was contrived and spread to weaken any fath based collective resistance against vulgarity,corporatism,against exploitation whether by Christian in India or Indonesia or China or by Catholics in Central America or by Muslim in Gaza or Iraq or Afghanistan . They are poor visible powerless and not so bewitched by the corporate and market , they have offered the greatest opportunity to the new age intellectual orphan like Dawkins and Sam Harris .They have not hesitated to use it for simple personal advancement like any other crooks would do

  17. Miro23 says:

    Scahill begins by simply affirming his faith in the official story. Listen to him. He really sounds like somebody reciting scripture. He says: “I believe that the United States was attacked on 9/11 by Al Qaeda by men flying airplanes into buildings…” (DEEP STRUCTURE TRANSLATION: “I am not a heretic.” I believe in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost…)

    There’s no point the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth analyzing in any more detail the collapse of Building 7 and the other two towers.

    They may as well question the scientific basis of the Miracles of the Saints and present their results to the Vatican.

    While power in the US is in Jewish hands they are wasting their time. The media has a pre prepared playbook of stock phrases to deal with Heretics ( “Conspiracy Theory”, “Fake News” etc.).

    So, looking to their interests, 94% of US architects in their recent National Convention, voted against a reexamination of the official 9/11 collapse story, although they all know exactly what happened (and how the 2750 Americans in the towers died).

    But should Judaism/Zionism lose its dominant power in the US, they would probably all become responsible professionals and discover that an investigation would have some merit. After all they really had doubts about the official account from the start and need to stand up for truth and justice.

  18. Chridtopher Hitchens was fat bloated narcissistic homosexual War Criminal Pansy who cheered on mass murder in Iraq in the the name of New Athiest Religious Fanactism.

    The young English W0men of Dawkin’s New Athiest England are being raped by the Mohammadan Army.

    Monty Python’s Eric Idle is an enthusiast for the mass murder of millions of Conservative Orthodox Christian Russians because they won’t give homosexual-pedophiles like the late Graham Chapman the right to exchange wedding bowels in a Russian Conservative Orthodox Christian Church.

    The new Athiest deserve to be violently eleminated from the Planet Earth….along with the New Atheist Nuns….Pussy Riot….

    • Replies: @Stonehands
  19. Wally says: • Website

    As laughable as the storyline is, and as stated by Revusky, the impossible ’6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers’ is merely another manifestation of religion. A religion which provides incredible profit and political power to supremacist Jews.

    Put simply, there were the ‘Nazis’ with the mythological ’6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers’ and there were the ‘Nazis’ without the mythological ’6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers’.

    The ’6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers’ are scientifically impossible frauds.
    see the ‘holocaust’ scam debunked here:

    http://codoh.com

    No name calling, level playing field debate here:

    http://forum.codoh.com

    “Alone the fact that one may not question the Jewish “holocaust” and that Jewish pressure has inflicted laws on democratic societies to prevent questions—while incessant promotion and indoctrination of the same averredly incontestable ‘holocaust’ occur—gives the game away. It proves that it must be a lie. Why else would one not be allowed to question it? Because it might offend the “survivors”? Because it “dishonors the dead”? Hardly sufficient reason to outlaw discussion. No, because the exposure of this leading lie might precipitate questions about so many other lies and cause the whole ramshackle fabrication to crumble.”

    - Gerard Menuhin / righteous Revisionist Jew, son of famous violinist

    Must reads:
    Holocaust Handbooks & Documentaries

    http://holocausthandbooks.com

    and:

    http://holocausthandbooks.com/index.php?main_page=1

    Why have supremacist Jews have been marketing the ’6,000,000′ lie since at least 1869?

    • Replies: @Laugh Track
  20. utu says:

    If people in the West started reading and then rereading when older Jaroslav Hašek’s “The Good Soldier Švejk” we would have no problems Revusky is trying to describe and systematize here. His taxonomic and scientific approach that even invents its own nomenclature and acronyms clearly indicates that he did not read The Good Soldier Švejk and has no clue how to navigate the reality.

    Revusky you are an awful bore. But do not try Švejk at this point. You are too old. It won’t fix you. You are beyond repair.

    There was this joke about homo sovieticus that was told in communist countries. A Soviet man is interviewed by a western journalist and asked about his position on various political issues. On one issue he gives an answer that line by line Pravda position. On another he gives Izvestia position, and so on. The journalist gets exasperated and asks him “Don’t you have your own opinions?” The Soviet man answers: “Sure I do, but I do not agree with them.”

    People found this joke very funny and thought that the reality that created such a pathetic figure like this Soviet man was the most awful. Well, after 40 years of living in America I think that the homo sovieticus from the joke was on much higher level of awareness than the contemporary homo americanus. The joke is no longer funny. Nothing is funny in America because America is really scary, partly because that even the ones who try to see through it, who are in dissent like Mr. Revusky here, more often than not turn out to be monomaniacal bores.

    Mr. Revusky has not achieved the level of not agreeing with himself, yet. It is a koan. You will either get it or not.

    • Replies: @Paul Humphries
  21. The Four Girly Boys of the Enlightenment…cheering on the mass rape of the Women of Europa and America by the Mohammadan Rape Jism Army.

  22. Wally says: • Website
    @n230099

    Or is it when ‘YOU were doing peyote’?

    I found Revusky to be spot on.

  23. @Yeesh

    LOl I was smart enough to stop after a page or two. I think i was 16 in 76 when I first argued that atheism was its own religious position and not the neutral position being argued. Not long after that I was able to point out that if leftists were correct that morality [along with the rest of experience] was subjective, then their own moral values like tolerance were no less subjective than christianitys. By the early eighties Books like the world according to garp were making the case as explicitly, while leftism had actually developed several quasi religions that they claimed incorporated their beliefs. Cults, new age fads, and western reinterpretations of Hinduism Islam and Buddhism.By this time I had read all sorts of philosophers who seemed to make the same claim.And of course along comes mencius moldbug with a detailed provenance of leftism from Cromwell, again Yarvin is not original either but he was at least entertaining and erudite

    • Replies: @Intelligent Dasein
  24. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    I can remember one of the columnists here some years ago, mad at Ann Coulter because she had shed some light upon the vast civilization gap between Mexico and the (however decaying) first world (it was about marriage with teens being, albeit not too explicitly, legal over there. After all, when you know no law would change attitudes, it’s nor unreasonable to legalize the conduct at hand, and there’s no way you won’t have early-teen girls sexed in high-libido countries unless some system of perfectly non-liberal governance like Islam isn’t in place).

    The main point of his blame was to link her to Hitler/Nazis.
    It’s a conditioned reflex.

    You turn a person/idea/culture into a symbol of shame and wrongness, and throw that word at whatever/whoever opposes you in any way, shaming them by fallacious association, and betting on people’s lacking BSQs and openness to embrace fallacies.

    It’s a way to “win” debates that couldn’t be won by actually debating.

    Where you are wrong is in thinking the problem is local/circumstantial/solvable.
    Kick it out of the door; it’ll come back through the window.

    Erase “Nazi/Hitler/fascist” and you have a lot of X-phobic and Y-ist.
    Among the ole-time labels you mention heretic but forget mad/insane.
    Sanatoriums where the place of choice for restraining conspiracy theorists for quite a long time in human history.

    What you hopelessly fight against, like Don Quixote, is the root of human nature.
    Several times you refer to the Middle Ages, so you know it’s dynamics inherent to human business (you should also know that like IQ can’t be changed, BSQ can’t be changed. If you were a HIQI, that’s because in the pre-Internet time, as Unz has written about himself, there just was no way to access a wealth of information. Once you were exposed to information you absorbed it. Your BSQ was never low). Then, it seems, you forget it and keep hoping and fighting again.

    I can’t make myself enthusiastic about replacing current historical and scientific myths, deception, and orthodoxy (and its devotees’ intolerance) with the next ones. Because that’s the only thing that can and will happen.

  25. Old hist(e)rical SCW (social christian warriors) are against same-sex marriage versus new hist(e)rical SCW (social communist warriors) [who] are supporters that fu…king OTHER people can marriage one each other. Ok ok. Jewsuis versus Marx.

  26. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Brevity! Learn about it. No one under 75 has the patience for this style of writing.

    That the young are losing any ability to think (despite their IQs, or apparent IQs, rising due to the Flynn effect) is something we know.

    We also know that a few are proud about this condition and see it as an accomplishment.

    Very favorable conditions for potential, incoming dictatorship.
    Those who “have no patience” to use their mind and do the effort to understand and learn have been the most loved by every authoritarian power, no matter the time in history and place. Wonder why?

    Excuse me but I see nothing to celebrate.

    Look at the schools, teachers and learners, of a nation, and you’ll see the future of that nation.

    • Replies: @Wally
    , @NoseytheDuke
  27. Pirouette says:

    Read this from after a late breakfast through to sitting down with a coffee after doing the washing up, by hand, after lunch on Boxing Day. It is quite an impressive piece and in its own way, comprehensive.

    The four pillars of the new religion is the destruction of white races, white nationalism, traditional God-based religions, and man-woman marriage for the sake of creating the next generation.

    ARRF for all its blind acceptance by the elites, is having serious problems imposing the first of these manifest in the ghettoisation of communities.

    In the second instance there is some success but with the perhaps too frequent Mossad false flag terrorist atrocities such as Neice, Paris, German Christmas Market there is a widespread alarm that open borders means more terrorism even though most are unaware that all attrocities carried out in the west are false flags instigated by Mossad. Nationalism with guarded borders is becoming an issue to counteract Mossad terrorism.

    Traditional God based religion has been on the wane for a long time since even the most ordinary person realises that it is a political system designed to collect the meagre resources of the poor and place them in the hands of the rich bishops. Thus ARRF’s success in this area is generally pretty good.

    Finally there is the anti marriage for procreation aspect. Sex with someone of the opposite sex is still the preference of the large majority. It is only the elites, societies’ posers and social climbers that promote this…but along with this is the Jewish perversion and preference for paedophilia (not covered by the author) that is used to blackmail the elites by the Jews.

    The problem with the homosexual bit (anti man-woman marriage lot) is that there is enormous evidence that paedophilia is most common amongst the homosexual community. The vast majority abhor child abuse, especially sexually, and no amount of indoctrinating four year old school children by the Jew run states seems to change this.

    The ARRF preference for child abuse (and correspondingly animal abuse…think kosher and halal slaughter as well as factory farming) is probably its Achilles heel! The general public hate child abuse and animal abuse, to the extent that they will lynch perpetrators.

    The Jewish bullying instinct cum claiming victim hood at the same time together with abuse of the weak, whether people (goys) or animals, Palestinians Muslims or Christians (10% of Palestinians are Christian), and all the other poor and/or weak peoples will be the downfall of ARRF and Holocaustianity.

    Child abuse, animal abuse and congenital lying will bring the whole facade crashing down one day. What will be the trigger is hard to say, but the demise of this modern Jewish cult is clearly there in its construction for all to see.

    Clearly the abolition of cash and the forced adoption of electronic credit will be the first major mistake they will make. This one act will bring back the age old tradition of barter, and to avoid electronic records Tallysticks will be reintroduced after nearly 200 years absence from the market place, to be used in deals instead of written or electronic contracts.

    Hand written or typewriter written letters will be hand delivered to avoid email and State controlled postal services. People will go back to bottling their own food, making their own clothes and shoes, and nature cures (herbalism) will replace the ludicrously expensive Jewish controlled pharmaceutical drug industry rip-off.

    Essentially what will happen as the Jews exert even more fascist control over the world is that the people will create their own alternative sub culture that does not utilise money per se. Barter, self-help, intimate community and integral honesty in all things will replace the official State perversions.

    The fascist Jews will ruthlessly destroy this alternative society where ever they find it, but no matter what these fascist Jews and their shills do, the new alternative ‘no money’ world will flourish and the Jewish supremacy will self destruct on the back of its intrinsic evil.

    And now for afternoon tea!

  28. CK says:

    When they burn the heretic he only suffers for the short time it takes for the flames to do their work.
    Within ARRF, the heretic is no longer burned, instead his business is destroyed, his career is truncated, his income is diminished, his voice is silenced, he is no-platformed for the rest of his days.

  29. @Colleen Pater

    LOl I was smart enough to stop after a page or two.

    You should have stopped when you saw the name Jonathan Revusky in the byline. This moron is a 9/11 Truther-Douchebag, a hopelessly conceited bad-faith arguer, and a cowardly word-mincer hiding behind his keyboard and pretending to be some sort of modern day Valiant-for-Truth. Like Paul Craig Roberts, he is a perpetually deluded simpleton who thinks he’s a genius, a halfwit who thinks he’s a one-and-a-half wit. Just avoid him altogether.

    • Replies: @CK
    , @NoseytheDuke
  30. Since David Ray Griffin was mentioned…

    David Ray Griffin….the Pope of The 9/11 Truther Movement…is another sociopath who is on-board with the mass importation of the Mohammadan Gang Rape Army. Professor Griffin is one main reasons why I violently hate 9/11 Truthers with every fiber of my being!!!

  31. Bertrand Russell once wrote that he was neither a Christian nor a Communist, believing that both were, in the strictest sense of the word, religions–only the deities were different.

  32. anon • Disclaimer says:

    You neglected to mention in your piece that a majority of Muslims are a part of and vote for the commie intolerant left. They hate Christians as much as the atheist. They are a part of the people of color coalition that votes as a block to strip the rights of the mostly white people on the right in their own country.
    What a shill article. It starts out the intolerant left and how the others are so tolerant and then on to a ban muslim clothing on the beach in France. Just Ban the Muslims instead. Hows that grab you for a thought process? I swear you most writers work for the government re-education division.

  33. Sam J. says:

    My “All work and no play moment” was 9-11 and specifically building #7. You don’t need to be an Architect or Engineer to determine with 100% reliability that on 9-11 the buildings were demoed.

    I’m going to strip out all the bullshit and prove that building #7 was demoed in some manner. All the 9-11 talk by the lying “Spoofers” is just a distraction. It it 100% that building #7 was demoed and could not have been brought down by fire because of the basic physics of the fall. You don’t need to rely on anyone to know the truth. Look with your own eyes. Basic high school physics. Undisputable. Building #7 fell the same speed as a rock dropped beside it in free air for roughly 108 feet. This means the building had no resistance to falling except air. Impossible without explosives.

    All materials fall the same speed in a gravity field disregarding air friction which I don’t thing we need to worry about for a building falling. So the speed of our imaginary rock falling next to the building is just gravity related. The speed of the buildings falling, the exact same as the rock, is just gravity also. This means that there was NOTHING to slow the fall of the building. The density of the material under the imaginary rock falling was air. The building fell the same therefore the density of the material under the building was also air. We know this is not true. Building #7 was not hovering in the air. The lower portions of the building were demoed out from under it.

    It’s makes NO difference how big the fires were. The buildings density never reached the same value as air! The fires did not boil away the building structure where it was light as air! All the talk about damage, fires, this, that, all bullshit because the building fell with all four corners almost level the same speed as a rock in AIR. If a building falls as fast as a rock and the rock is falling through JUST AIR then the building is falling through JUST AIR also. Simple equivalence. 1=1, 2=2, big rock falling in air=small rock falling in air=building falling in air. One problem is people sometimes believe that a really heavy thing will fall faster than a lighter thing. Not true. Look at this video of the Apollo astronaut dropping a feather and a hammer on the Moon. They land at the same time.

    Once you realize 9-11 is a big lie you soon realize there’s a LOT of lies and what you thought about your country is no longer true.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Anonymous
  34. Agent76 says:

    Oct 8, 2016 Afghanistan: 15 Years of Invasion and Occupation

    15 years after NATO’s invasion and occupation of Afghanistan, the 9/11 and Al Qaeda lies that were used to justify the war have disappeared. Now the truth about oil and gas, mineral wealth, opium and naked imperial ambition are all that remain.

  35. Another ringer from Revusky! Thanks for this piece, which nicely summarizes the case against our new official state religion of Holocaustianity.

    The point of the boiling frog story, of course, is that if change occurs gradually, people can remain surprisingly unaware of just how extreme the situation has become.

    In addition to the existence of the internet, one important reason why opposition to movement AARF is gaining steam is because it is no longer progressing gradually; it is now moving very rapidly–rapidly enough even for the dimmest people to notice. Think about it: as recently as 2003, it was still possible for US states to have anti-sodomy laws; but within a decade, gay marriage was made legal and legally obligatory everywhere in the US. People have still not had a chance to catch their breath from that one, and now the they’re already moving on to tranny bathrooms.

    Now, I would submit that ARRF, like these other religions, also has its main dogmas and such, except that they are not officially outlined anywhere.

    Another way of looking at it is that those doctrines don’t necessarily have to be outlined anywhere in particular when they are constantly being pushed on you from everywhere at once.

    Anyway, good job, Jonathan. Keep ‘em coming …

  36. Wally says: • Website
    @War for Blair Mountain

    “Truth is hate to those who hate the truth.”
    - Germar Rudolf

    Sorry old boy, science refutes the government’s laughable conspiracy theory about 9/11.

    http://www.ae911truth.org/

    http://www.hangthebankers.com/24-hard-facts-about-911-that-cannot-be-debunked/

  37. Art says:
    @Fin of a Cobra

    If he rewrites the essay pinpointing how the Jews went about constructing each of the four pillars of the new religion, then it will be worthwhile reading his analysis.

    I agree – these things that Revusky is writing about so well, are dominated by Jews and their media.

    Face it, Christianity and Judaism are at loggerheads – they are different – Jews see it as a life and death thought war. Whereas Christianity is only beginning to comprehend what is happening.

    For whatever reason, voting for Trump was the first shot from the Christian side.

    Sadly it looks as if Trump is going against his campaign words and is bringing us a war heavy Jew administration.

    Not to worry, because it is so intellectually superior in matters of real goodness, a new better Christianity will arise.

    Peace — Art

  38. FKA Max says: • Website
    @Brás Cubas

    The only reason Catholics are so “tolerant”, as in the episode of your friend’s former religious buddies, is that they’re losing. When they were winning, they weren’t as tolerant. Maybe you could extend this phenomenon into other religious ideologies (or ideological religions).

    That is exactly right!

    “Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a men’s character, give him power[/money].” [...]

    “Knowing others is intelligence;
    knowing yourself is true wisdom.
    Mastering others is strength;
    mastering yourself is true power.”

    http://www.unz.com/announcement/expanding-our-science-and-history-coverage/#comment-1692056

    Christopher Hitchens on Holocaust Denial, Religion and Free Speech 1/2

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIU96N7ciXM

    Christopher Hitchens – Mother Teresa: Hell’s Angel

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65JxnUW7Wk4

    Opus Dei & Christian Dominion

    Forget about Dan Brown’s fantasy conspiracy cult, this is a story of the real Opus Dei

    The American founders clearly recognized the history and danger of any ‘Christian Dominion’ as eloquently stated by James Madison:

    Experience witnesses that ecclesiastical establishments, instead of maintaining the purity and virtue of religion, have had a contrary operation. During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution.

    http://churchandstate.org.uk/2016/04/opus-dei-christian-dominion/

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  39. I link youtube videos of political heretics in my blog. Here are three from this year.

    Here is a great clip that exposes fake news about Syria. Don’t expect this news from a reporter who was in Syria to appear in our corporate press.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUhe87r5bEE

    Trump was the first 9-11 Truther. Watch this video of a news report on that day where Trump says that an airplane couldn’t have knocked down the WTCs, and states bombs must have been used too. I find it interesting that this was never used to attack Trump, perhaps because it supports 9-11 truthers.

    Here is a great video clip of an American Admiral baffled by common sense offered by a reporter who explains that NATO’s expansion is provocative, not Russia’s reaction.

    • Replies: @Miro23
  40. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @FKA Max

    then there’s Richard Spencer, come along (or created by the usual puppet masters ??) to give Nazis a bad name –

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/12/19/jewish-leaders-in-richard-spencers-hometown-targeted-in-posting-on-neo-nazi-website/?utm_term=.811901cabd24

    Spencer defines the phenomenon that Revusky describes: fanatics from all directions are vainglorious and seek power.

    Dr. Matt Johnson explains that the better-best-only appropriate response to oppressors is the Jesusian response: to go about doing good, accepting the blows along the way

    Spencer’s actions are guaranteed to provoke retaliation and smearing of legitimate opposition to elitist oppression, which causes this skeptic to wonder if Spencer is not as much an asset of the CIA as folks like Podhoretz and Irving Kristol were when they got their start. Spencer’s behavior definitely follows the modus operandi of the authoritarians who want to be in charge of tikuning the olam.

  41. jamie b. says:

    I’m an atheist and not at all PC. And I’m hardly alone. The two are not one and the same.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    , @Anonymous
    , @fnn
  42. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Yeesh

    Good lord. I read 1000 words before I realized this guy really, really
    1) Wasn’t saying anything new, surprising or original
    2) was convinced he was.

    Always check the word-count at the top of the article. Had I done so, I would not have waded through the first 4000 dolefully uninteresting words. Come on, revusky, be at least trivially entertaining. This was interminable drudgery to read.

    I don’t want to watch videos. I want to read clear, expository English composition. Don’t bullshit me — spit it the hell out in 2000, or less, concise and well-chosen words that illustrate and summarize you central point, or at absolute most, 3 central points.

    This article is a horrifying mess, insulting to the intelligence of any who are foolish enough to read past the first few thousand dreary words.

    • Agree: Laugh Track
    • Disagree: CK
  43. Wally says:
    @Anonymous

    Rising IQs because of lowered IQ standards.

    Everyone gets a trophy.

  44. @jamie b.

    Not at all, but I can see why PC can become its own religion. Atheism is often a part of it, if not the converse, e.g. all SJWs are some form of atheism, but not all atheists are SJws. I think the first part of the statement is overreaching some, but its a decent way to understand the author’s arguments.

    • Replies: @jamie b.
  45. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @jamie b.

    I’m an atheist and not at all PC. And I’m hardly alone. The two are not one and the same.

    I read a fragment of something from Bertrand Russell the other day, in which he mentioned that he was agnostic in accordance with philosophical definitions (philosophy as science, not as subjective musings), but that he felt forced to use the term “atheist” in order for conventional public perception to make effective recognition.

    “Atheism” is essentially a religious formation, in that it recognizes the human-created component of which real “existence” it denies. Agnosticism is, philosophically, the more accurate term because it is simply the assertion of “I don’t know.”

    • Replies: @jamie b.
  46. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Sam J.

    Once you realize 9-11 is a big lie you soon realize there’s a LOT of lies and what you thought about your country is no longer true.

    Mother of God, will you twits ever shut the hell up? Terrorism or conspiracy, it just makes no fucking difference at all.

    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
  47. The burkini bans aren’t so much a matter secularization as an expression of the friction between an alien, invading culture and the host population. Burkas and the like (and what they signify) are a means and manner that Muslims claim public spaces and signal that they’re aggressive and ascendant.

    Because of the cult of anti-racism, it’s impossible for a man in France to freely say that France ought to be full of Frenchmen, that he doesn’t like his villages and towns overtaken by hostile foreign peoples, that France ought to have at least a vestigial Catholic identity, and that he enjoys seeing pretty young French girls frolicking on the beaches of Marseilles in bikinis as an expression of the French way of life. As these natural and understandable objections are made impossible, a Frenchman must express them in a way that is somewhat acceptable within the cult of anti-racism.

    • Replies: @RodW
  48. annamaria says:
    @Yeesh

    “But once something gets turned into a religious dogma, doesn’t freedom of religion apply?”

    This is a clearly-articulated idea targeting both opportunists and faux revolutionaries that want to look radical while staying comfortably safe.
    This clip (linked above) should help to better understanding of the idea:

    Moreover, the indifference of the EU/US “progressives” to the massive crimes committed by NATO/US/Israel/SA in the Middle East (in the name of democracy, of course) is the symptom of the “progressives” groupthink that the author is so good at describing. The article is indeed a whiff of fresh air.

    • Replies: @Alec Leamas
  49. Mr. Anon says:
    @Yeesh

    “Good lord. I read 1000 words before I realized this guy really, really

    1) Wasn’t saying anything new, surprising or original

    2) was convinced he was.”

    You might have added an additional point to item 1): “or right”

    I realized all that the moment I saw the byline “Jonathan Revusky”.

  50. Bill says:

    OP: read much more; write much less. Especially try reading things by smart people you anticipate you won’t agree with.

    Oh, and the article is sophomoric garbage.

  51. Miro23 says:
    @Carlton Meyer

    Interesting clip of Donald Trump’s reaction to the collapse of the WTC Towers on 9/11.

    Trump was the first 9-11 Truther. Watch this video of a news report on that day where Trump says that an airplane couldn’t have knocked down the WTCs, and states bombs must have been used too. I find it interesting that this was never used to attack Trump, perhaps because it supports 9-11 truthers.

    This is probably right. No doubt the 9/11 planners didn’t want it to become an open issue in the election.

    A separate question is why Trump also decided not to use it? Maybe he needed (some) Jewish support, or (more likely) he incorporated it in some kind of specific deal with the Zionist branch. On the one hand counter cultural Jewish activists mostly did everything in their power to stop him getting elected, and on the other he knows exactly how the Towers came down but officially agrees with the Big Lie.

    Conclusion – that he’s allied with the Zionist Neo-cons but intends to fight corporations/Wall St. on the economic front (read Breitbart comments for a clue – they’re all for Israel and MENA wars but want to stop immigration and outsourcing).

    • Replies: @MarkinPNW
  52. @Wally

    http://i1117.photobucket.com/albums/k598/WhiteWolf722/TheSixMillionMyth.jpg

    That’s a very interesting jpeg of all those brief news clippings. However, it is hella difficult to read as it is low rez and trying to enlarge it just makes it fuzzier.

    By any chance do you have a link to a higher resolution version?

  53. David says:
    @Renoman

    I agree. The following passage is a typical example:

    Now, cutting to the chase, if you will… does Scahill really buy the official version of what happened on 9/11? Hmm… Damned if I know. It’s the same general problem as I outlined above, isn’t it?

    What of it is worth saying could be said in four words.

    Condensing his thoughts seems like one of a writer’s fundamental duties. At least a writer presenting ideas he values to people he respects.

  54. Mark Green says: • Website

    This was a very interesting and readable essay. It connects the dots. It penetrates the matrix. It synthesizes a multiplicity of counter-revolutionary ideas. Revusky successfully unmasks many of the myths and ideologies that shape today’s suffocating universe of political-correctness.

    Revusky’s innovate acronyms and memes are especially useful. They really get the job done. Small complaint: eliminate the lowbrow and unimaginative term ‘brainfucked’. Even the worn-out, cold-war term ‘brainwashed’ is better.

  55. @Anonymous

    FKA MAX

    You are seeking the approval and respect of the Democratic Party and the SPLC…that makes you a fool and irrelevant at a time when it is one minute before midnight demographically for The Historic Native Born White American Majority.

    You don’t seek approval and respect from creatures that want us dead as soon as possible.

    Richard Spencer is no more, and no less racialized than Black Obama, and the Chinese Fifth Column and the Hindu Fifth Column in America.

    Just reminder:in one week…The Russian Ambassor to Turkey murdered in broad daylight…Russian Ambassador to Latin America murdered in his Moscow Apartment…two days ago, a Russian Military Passagener Jet crashes in the Baltic Sea…192 dead Russian Soldiers and one elite Russian General.

    There is an obvious pattern here….

    Barack Obama has made a genocidal declaration of a race war against European People.

    • Replies: @FKA Max
  56. Rich says:
    @Fin of a Cobra

    I can’t agree with the supposition that the “Jews” were solely responsible for the creation of what the author calls ARRF. Religious Jews gain little from PC. There were a lot of ethnic, agnostic Jews who chose this leftist path, but in America at least, they were merely following the thoughts and actions of the leading Anglo-Germans who ran the country when they got here. Fanatical egalitarianism was more a product of New England Protestants, not Eastern European Jews. The War Between the States, the civil rights movement, feminism, were all products of fanatical Protestants seeking dragons to slay. Many ethnic Jews latched onto this as a means of acceptance into the ruling class of the US.

  57. @Wally

    Wally

    9/11 Truthers don’t believe in science..because they don’t believe in the scientific process of argumentation…Contact the Engineering and Physics departments of elite Universities and demand a hearing in front of faculty and Grad students…give a detailed scientific and physics presentation on the collapse of the TT and Building 7…and explain why the faculty and grad students in these physics and engineering departments at these elite universities have a substandard grasp of first semester freshman physics….

    In the meantime….FUCK OFF!!!

    • Replies: @Stonehands
    , @Mr. Anon
  58. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Sam J.

    Didn’t Unz make a separate thread for all of this 9-11 talk?

    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
  59. I got about half way through this thinking there must be a pony in here somewhere. Then I dozed off. This terrible writing may express something profound. I will never know.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  60. Half way through the article I almost fell asleep, so I went to bed.
    But I left your article open on my also sleeping computer, and next morning I read it to the end.
    I haven read such a brilliant and insightfull article in a long time!

  61. Linh Dinh says: • Website

    I thank Ron Unz for introducing me to Jonathan Revusky, whose articles I always look forward to. Ron’s campaign against the real purveyors of fake news should be loudly applauded. While not every article is perfect, or each writer to my taste, this website has become invaluable to me as a reader. Unz Review makes nearly all the other political webzines superfluous.

    Unz writers suffer some the nastiest abuses anywhere on the web, however, and I assume Ron allows this to show how degraded and vicious our culture has become. Fred Reed’s and John Derbyshire’s wives are mocked, Paul Craig Roberts and the Saker are called idiots, and the foreign-born are told to go back where they come from. It is striking, and very sad, this pseudonymously spewed venom.

    I thank Jonathan Revusky for another thought-provoking article. I find very useful his listing of The Democracy Myth, Social Justice Narrative, Conspiracy Theory and Good War as the four pillars of this Anti-Religious Religious Fanaticism. You’ve set the table nicely for further discussion, so bravo!

    • Replies: @WorkingClass
    , @David
  62. Mr. Anon says:
    @Wally

    “Sorry old boy, science refutes the government’s laughable conspiracy theory about 9/11.

    http://www.ae911truth.org/”

    Utter nonsense. 2500 architects and engineers (if indeed, they all really are s0) is not “science”.

  63. somebody who thinks that marriage is between a man and a woman!

    cause Torquemada, you know

  64. @Rich

    …feminism, [was a product] of fanatical Protestants seeking dragons to slay.

    That might have been true of so-called first wave feminism in the U.S. in the 19th century, but I challenge you to name five fanatical Protestant women who were prominent in the radical feminism that exploded in the late 1960′s. Not Freidan, Dworkin, Ehrenreich, Alpert, Steinem, Firestone, Rowbotham, Willis, Piercy… Feminism broke out as an intra-left quarrel within the New Left which had heavy Jewish participation. Granted it may have rapidly spread to mainstream Protestantism, but I don’t believe that the founding theoreticians were Protestants.

  65. FKA Max says: • Website
    @War for Blair Mountain

    War for Blair Mountain,

    the comment by “Anonymous” is not by me!? I have NEVER commented on the Unz Review anonymously. To be honest, I don’t even know why “Anonymous” thought to bring up Richard Spencer in this context/discussion, since my comment was pertaining to Christopher Hitchens, the Roman Catholic Church, etc., NOT to Richard Spencer!?!?

    If you are interested to know what I think about Richard Spencer please read my comments in this comment thread; a selection:

    [MORE]

    I somewhat disagree. This was not the first time I witnessed Richard Spencer underperform and choke when the stakes were really high. He does not seem to be a ‘closer,’ as Donald Trump likes to say.

    A couple of weeks ago Steve Bannon’s protege and surrogate Milo Yiannopoulos ( read my posts, and follow the links in them, in this thread, for more details: http://www.unz.com/isteve/donald-trump-messiah-of-american-education/#comment-1663331 ) attempted to hijack and co-opt the Alt Right movement, and there was virtually no pushback from Richard Spencer against this attempted intrusion. [...]

    I personally like Mr. Spencer. He is charming and well spoken, etc., but, in my opinion, he does lack some essential and necessary leadership qualities and skills, at the moment.

    I believe he can develop these qualities and skills, but he needs to do some serious soul-searching and self-reflection first, in order to ‘up his game.’

    This is the Big Leagues with the Big Boys, now. He needs to bring his A game!

    http://www.unz.com/article/npis-spencer-vs-politcos-hirsh-etc/#comment-1664291

    The Zionist-Vatican alliance wanted to get rid of the authentic Alt Right after their intrusion was repelled and their co-option failed, and Richard Spencer gave them a huge opening to do that with his ‘Hail Victory’ stunt at NPI…

    It is no coincidence, in my opinion, that the ‘Alt Lite’, e.g. Infowars, Paul Joseph Watson, et al. are calling themselves the ‘New Right,’ now.

    Infowars has tons of Vatican connections just like the Murdoch media empire

    http://www.unz.com/article/npis-spencer-vs-politcos-hirsh-etc/#comment-1665634

    Mr. Webb,

    where did you read, that Mr. Johnson was accusing Richard Spencer of being an agent?

    He specifically stated in his article:

    Now I do not wish to split hairs about the motives and culpability for this public relations disaster, except to say that I do not believe the charge that Spencer was intentionally sabotaging NPI and the Alt Right.

    In regards to Mr. Spencer potentially being a homosexual as well, and his wife being overweight, etc.; this is just unproductive and distracting gossip, in my opinion. [...]

    Much of Mr. Spencer’s time and tweeting on Twitter, before he was banned from the platform, was dedicated to defending Russia, Putin and Bashar al-Assad of Syria, instead of advocating for and defending the historic Protestant American people and nation. What exactly are his real priorities?

    http://www.unz.com/article/npis-spencer-vs-politcos-hirsh-etc/#comment-1669380

    I actually credit both Mr. Johnson and Mr. Spencer with initiating one of the most important ideological changes and evolutions within the Alt Right movement, and this is the reason why it is so much more disappointing and saddening to me to see Mr. Spencer sabotage and taint much of the good work he has done in past for the Alt Right movement by not being more careful and measured when it mattered most:

    Radix Journal publishing the two following articles, in my opinion, was the most crucial turning point and moment in the history of the Alt Right movement, and which decoupled it from Catholic dogma/control, which had held it back and weakened it prior:

    The alt Right, for both our own principles and the greater good, must oppose the pro-life agenda.

    The Pro-Life Temptation
    Aylmer Fisher · April 8, 2016

    http://www.radixjournal.com/journal/2016/4/8/the-pro-life-temptation

    Unintended Consequences
    T. M. Goddard · April 13, 2016

    http://www.radixjournal.com/journal/2016/4/13/unintended-consequences

    In October 2015 Alt Right website Counter-Currents had published a piece in a similar vein:
    White Nationalists Need Planned Parenthood, Not the Pope
    Patrick Le Brun

    http://www.counter-currents.com/2015/10/white-nationalists-need-planned-parenthood-not-the-pope/

    http://www.unz.com/article/what-can-msmclinton-say-about-alt-right-that-theyve-not-already-said-about-trumpgop/#comment-1561897

    http://www.unz.com/article/npis-spencer-vs-politcos-hirsh-etc/#comment-1670144

  66. To speak to this essay itself, while the author makes several good points, I think his overall message is undercut by a meandering and prolix style. I don’t think there is anything crucial in it that couldn’t have been covered in 3000 words instead of 12,000. Too many acronyms to keep track of, too much self-referentiality, too many asides, just way too much verbiage.

    Hey, I could see this as a first draft where you just let the writing flow, but you really should consider then going back and ruthlessly paring it down and cutting out all the self-indulgence. If your goal is to communicate your ideas, “less is more”. Go study Orwell’s essays. 1500 words can be sufficient for a good think piece, especially in a Web context where one is reading from a monitor (much less a cell phone screen).

    To put this another way, I found much to think about in this essay, but the writer is his own worst enemy if he actually wants people to read and finish his pieces. I slogged my way through this, but it was not easy.

    • Replies: @landlubber
  67. @annamaria

    “But once something gets turned into a religious dogma, doesn’t freedom of religion apply?”

    Well, at least in the United States atheists have more or less been able to establish in law that they have a freedom from religion, and arrogated to themselves (together with their tribal fellow travelers and confreres) special standing to divorce the faintest trace of religion from culture. They don’t want to admit that theirs is a religion carrying with it all sorts of positive beliefs, dogma and symbols, because in such a case they’d be subject to the same regime of laws that they’ve used to hem in their enemies.

  68. CK says:
    @Intelligent Dasein

    No one required either of you brilliant people to click on the article.
    Colleen was apparently not wise enough to recognize the author’s byline according to the I.D.
    I.D. does the invective thing almost as well as it was described in the article. “Truther-Douchebag”, “cowardly word-mincer”, “perpetually deluded simpleton”, “halfwit”, not a lot of intellect in that spew. Have to agree however if something offends you; don’t do it.

    • Replies: @Intelligent Dasein
  69. @CK

    No one required either of you brilliant people to click on the article.

    I didn’t—I only clicked on the comments. I don’t waste my time reading Revusky.

  70. @Linh Dinh

    With respect Linh, anti-religious fanaticism is ideological fanaticism. It cannot be religious AND anti-religious. Not for non poets at least.

    • Replies: @RobinG
    , @Jonathan Revusky
  71. RobinG says:
    @WorkingClass

    Why not? Don’t forget, there are anti-Zionist Zionists.

  72. @WorkingClass

    It cannot be religious AND anti-religious. Not for non poets at least.

    Hmm…. that’s interesting. Just a little verbal acuity test, if you don’t mind…

    Suppose I (or anybody) were to say to you: “The politician talked at length but he didn’t say a damned thing.”

    Would you think that this is an inherently meaningless, contradictory sentence?

    • Replies: @WorkingClass
  73. @Rich

    I can’t agree with the supposition that the “Jews” were solely responsible for the creation of what the author calls ARRF.

    The above is a straw man. I never said “solely”.

    What I actually said was that Jewish intellectuals and Jewish ethnic networks played an “out-sized role”. And the word “Jewish” in the above refers to ethnicity, not religious faith.

    Religious Jews gain little from PC.

    I never said anything about religious Jews. You’ll have to try harder at reading comprehension.

    In fact, I specifically referred to Zionist Jews, who, by and large, are not religious.

    • Replies: @Rich
  74. MarkinPNW says:
    @War for Blair Mountain

    So apparently this “David Ray Griffin” fellow is an example of Revusky’s “On being partially pregnant”, still no reason to sterotype a whole “movement” on the basis of one of the proponents obvious flaws.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  75. MarkinPNW says:
    @Miro23

    Yea, Trump probably wants to get as much positive stuff accomplished as he can before he gets Dealy Plaza’d or Watergated.

  76. @Anonymous

    Neil Postman covers this very well in Amusing Ourselves to Death.

  77. @Intelligent Dasein

    Hmmm, it is a fact, easily proven without even leaving this website, that Jonathan Revusky has contributed some lengthy, thought provoking and generally well received articles to this discerning forum.

    You, on the other hand, have managed a few ill considered and mostly worthless ad homonym attacks in your comments, but thanks for sharing anyway (kindly forgive my sarcasm).

    p.s. Your cognitive dissonance is showing.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  78. @War for Blair Mountain

    Professor Griffin is one main reasons why I violently hate 9/11 Truthers with every fiber of my being!!!

    Nope, that would be your stupidity.

  79. The article is puerile and diarrhetic.

    Scahill has never been PC, by the way, unlike Goodman.

    He also has done an enormous amount of brilliant work as a foreign correspondent, from Serbia through Iraq to Afghanistan and the rest, and his unveiling of Blackwater mercenaries was single-handed and Herculean.

    He has also documented Obama’s extrajudicial executions. Here is a link to an interview with him on “How Obama made assassination foreign policy”:

    http://www.mintpressnews.com/216210-2/216210/

    This vacuous article cannot hold a candle to anything Scahill has said or written, even on a off day.

    By the way Señor Trump just appointed Erik Prince’s cousin as a candidate to his cabinet.

  80. @Anonymous

    I can see why you would want to use the Anonymous “handle”, your comment is possibly THE most idiotic one on here, and I mean the the whole website not just this thread. Congratulations!

    • Replies: @Talha
    , @Anonymous
  81. @Anonymous

    9/11 and its aftermath has affected almost every aspect of life in America and most of the rest of the planet too so don’t be too surprised if the more alert amongst you repeatedly bring it up in differing contexts.

  82. Rich says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    With all due respect Mr Revusky, I was responding to something “Fin of a Cobra”, wrote,not what you wrote. And even though you insulted my reading comprehension I still agree with most of what you wrote.

    Also, (with a wink) I understand why you responded so vehemently after misunderstanding what I wrote. You’ve got a career to worry about and, I’m sure, mouths to feed.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  83. @MarkinPNW

    So apparently this “David Ray Griffin” fellow is an example of

    Actually, because I had interacted a little bit with “War for Great Blair Mountain” before, I was wondering about his claim here. I did a quick google search, trying a few different strings such as “David Ray Griffin refugee crisis Europe” and variants on that and I cannot find anything where DRG says anything about the issue one way or the other. (Of course, even if DRG had expressed whatever opinion about refugees/immigration, it has nothing to do with any topic under discussion here.)

    The thing is that “Great Bullshit Mountain” is obsessed with the idea that 9/11 has something to do with immigration policy. He says it stems from the immigration reform act of 1965. I pointed out to Bullshit Mountain that the 9/11 official story is untrue, but even if it were true, that it has nothing to do with immigration policy. People wouldn’t need a green card, say, to fly a plane into a building. They could just come in on a tourist visa and do it! I told Bullshit Mountain that and I think, on some other occasions, corrected him about some other BS of his, and his modus operandi is always to answer by simply repeating the same bullshit. He’s kind of autistic or something.

    But anyway, Great Bullshit Mountain is one of the most clearly demented people here. And that’s saying something! Whatever he says about anything can’t really be trusted.

  84. @Rich

    With all due respect Mr Revusky, I was responding to something “Fin of a Cobra”

    Yes, that is true, and I think I did sort of miss that aspect.

    “Fin of a Cobra” was reproaching me for leaving certain things unsaid. Though, what I did write goes further than just about anybody is willing to do. Most people won’t touch it with a ten foot pole.

    You’ve got a career to worry about and, I’m sure, mouths to feed.

    Well, no, my concern is just accuracy really. In terms of making certain people unhappy, my saying that the Jews had an “out-sized” role as opposed to an exclusive role, it probably makes little difference. The thing is that, saying it was exclusively Jews is not accurate, I don’t think. However, “out-sized role”, I don’t really see how an honest, informed person could dispute that!

    And, as for them being religious, that’s almost entirely a red herring. The original Zionists like Herzl were not religious men. Also, Bolshevik Jews like Trotsky (and the less prominent ones, of course) were not religious at all. Nor were the Frankfurt School cultural marxist intellectuals.

    Actually, traditional religious Jews have as much reason to hate ARRF as traditional religious Christians or Muslims do.

  85. @E. A. Costa

    He also has done an enormous amount of brilliant work

    Well, fine. I never said otherwise.

    The problem here is that you don’t really understand the point I was making. It’s not really about attacking Scahill specifically. All of these guys behave roughly the same way in that spot. Chris Hedges certainly… Matt Taibbi… Alexander Cockburn was awful… that’s just off the top of my head… certainly, anybody who is mainstream enough to be on television is never going to touch certain things. I’m not saying that none of these people do good work at all. The point is that there are things they just won’t touch.

  86. Sam Shama says:

    Egad! What on earth is this thing?!!

  87. fnn says:
    @jamie b.

    Revilo Oliver was an outspoken atheist.

  88. Talha says:
    @NoseytheDuke

    Hey NtD,

    Or in another context, “Well Watson, the man is dead – whether it was murder or self defense – who cares? Let’s go smoke our pipes, shall we?”

    Peace.

    • Agree: Rurik
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
  89. @Jonathan Revusky

    What you do not seem to understand is that “PC”, is also corrosive among the Republicans, the Neo-Cons, the “White Nationalists” and the rest, as well as among the milquetoasts who try to split the difference.

    In fact, trying to force people to split the difference is part of the game.

    “Well, sure, you can oppose the war in Iraq but, you know, you support the troops, right?”

    In fact it is only recently that the long history of the term became adopted by the faux-”Left” in the US.

    There is even a version in Banking and Finance–for one example, the altogether unidirectional “Moral Hazard”, just for starters, which is as comic as it is absurd.

    Even more important, each of these different kits keeps changing.

    A serious analysis would begin with the roots of it, not its political applications by or to one group.

    The acronyms are just silly, which may have been intended.

    • Replies: @Sam Shama
  90. jamie b. says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    “…all SJWs are some form of atheism…”

    Mainstream religions in America/Europe are all rather P.C.

  91. Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 U.S. (2 Dall.) 419 (1793). Associate Justice James Wilson, of the U.S. Supreme Court comments:

    “The states, rather than the People, for whose sakes the States exist, are frequently the objects which attract and arrest our principal attention… Sentiments and expressions of this inaccurate kind prevail in our common, even in our convivial, language. Is a toast asked? ‘The United States’, instead of the ‘People of the United States’, is the toast given. This is not politically correct.”

    Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 US 419 (1793)

    Note 29 here:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_correctness

  92. jamie b. says:
    @Anonymous

    “…recognizes the human-created component of which real ‘existence’ it denies.”

    This argument seems circular to me.

    “Agnosticism is, philosophically, the more accurate term because it is simply the assertion of ‘I don’t know.’”

    There are many conceptions of God that I am agnostic about, and many that you and I both would deny. Or would you claim that Zeus just might possibly exist?

    “…agnostic in accordance with philosophical definitions…”

    Yes, strictly speaking, Zeus can’t be excluded as a logical possibility. Does that make me “religious” when I deny his possibility? Again, there are many conceptions of God that I’m agnostic about, and others about which I am highly doubtful. In the end, “atheist” is the most honest label I can give myself.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  93. @War for Blair Mountain

    Why did .Gov ship out all the evidence to China, ASAP?

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  94. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @jamie b.

    “Agnosticism is, philosophically, the more accurate term because it is simply the assertion of ‘I don’t know.’”

    There are many conceptions of God that I am agnostic about, and many that you and I both would deny. Or would you claim that Zeus just might possibly exist?

    So sorry. My mistake. Have a nice day.

  95. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @NoseytheDuke

    I can see why you would want to use the Anonymous “handle”, your comment is possibly THE most idiotic one on here, and I mean the the whole website not just this thread. Congratulations!

    Perhaps 9/11 is of great significance to you, but its historical significance is established, and thereby exhausted. Its political utility has expired. I would explain in greater detail, but you would not understand — it’s an abstract thing that historians discuss on occasion. It is a situation similar to that of the wackadoodles who howl at the moon over Lincoln’s purported perfidy, tyranny, Constitution-destroying, nigger-loving, etc. etc. Too late, even if accurate. Work on something else more constructive. You will never get back the pre-9/11 world. Done and done. All over.

    • Replies: @Sparkon
    , @NoseytheDuke
  96. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @WorkingClass

    I got about half way through this thinking there must be a pony in here somewhere. Then I dozed off. This terrible writing may express something profound. I will never know.

    Not to be too subtle here, but I’ve noticed that the rave reviews seem to be coming from commenters whose writing “may express something profound”. Funny how that works. Profundity abounds.

    “Great Scott, Holmes!! Green hairs!!”
    — Firesign Theatre, circa 1976, The Giant Rat of Sumatra

  97. edNels says:
    @Anonymous

    Thank you for that link who ever ya are.

  98. Mr. Anon says:
    @War for Blair Mountain

    Forget it, man! The Truthers have Ed Asner, Charlie Sheen, and Rosie O’Donnell on their side, all of them known for being virtually infallible brainiacs. They’re invincible!

  99. Mr. Anon says:
    @Stonehands

    “Why did .Gov ship out all the evidence to China, ASAP?”

    It’s only evidence if one subscribes to your “theory”. Otherwise, it’s just scrap metal that’s in the way. Afterall, after a mass shooting in a mall, why don’t the police preserve the blood stains all over the floors and walls indefinitely, just in case some “researcher” wants to investigate them?

    • Replies: @Stonehands
  100. Mr. Anon says:
    @NoseytheDuke

    “Hmmm, it is a fact, easily proven without even leaving this website, that Jonathan Revusky has contributed some lengthy, thought provoking and generally well received articles to this discerning forum.”

    Lengthy? Most definitely. Does he get paid by the word?

    Thought provoking? Well, his essays have provoked me to think: Why on Earth would anyone bother to publish this tiresome, logorrheic clown?

    Well Received? Obviously not by everyone, not nearly.

    • Replies: @Sam Shama
    , @5371
  101. Gabriel M says:

    This is essentially Moldbug for stupid people written by a stupid person. Still, at least he’s not claiming that the Berlin truck attack was a hoax. Progress of sorts.

    The fact that Unz publishes this loon, but won’t publish Gregory Cochran because he wouldn’t let him spam his blog speaks volumes.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  102. RodW says:
    @Alec Leamas

    Yes, this is true, but only half the story. The pagan French, having struggled with Catholicism for hundreds of years, have only recently become free enough to take their clothes off on the beach, both male and female together. An innocent sort of wish really. Now comes a foreign invader with the same hideous black garb that the French have only recently thrown off themselves. Of course they react strongly. And they understand that the beach is just the skirmishing line. The PC brigade all post memes on Facebook about how ridiculous and contradictory it all is, but the French will soon elect someone who bears no malice against Muslims in their own ghastly countries, but who will not let them impose their will in France.

  103. Sam Shama says:
    @E. A. Costa

    [There is even a version in Banking and Finance–for one example, the altogether unidirectional “Moral Hazard”, just for starters, which is as comic as it is absurd.]

    Do you mean that recaps were absurd? Perhaps I am misreading.

    Re-capitalisation of systematically important financial institutions by the CB, which will not brook any half-witted arguments from the loony libertarians is a matter very well understood by now, proper regulations being key.

  104. GogMagog says:

    I really enjoyed reading this lengthy article. Unless you are intellectually dishonest you will have no problem stating this was at the very least interesting and well explained and at most, a devastating critique that lays bare the foundations of this giant edifice that weighs down upon our troubled psyches.

    The little worker ants, seeing the hive being threatened, rush out to hurl insults, discourage, confound and dismiss – they project their own hopes (that 9/11 has been and gone and is irrelevant) and all but confirm main points of the article.

    Great work.

  105. Sam Shama says:
    @Mr. Anon

    [Thought provoking? Well, his essays have provoked me to think: Why on Earth would anyone bother to publish this tiresome, logorrheic clown?

    Well Received? Obviously not by everyone, not nearly.]

    LOL.

    They are well received in some strange world beyond the stars by readers who disclaim anonymity, alleging instead dubious recognition, even notoriety, in their chosen handles; they write with insights no ordinary soul raised on mere human rations would be capable of discerning, often regaling others with quaint misspellings of common latin phrases.

    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
  106. @Jonathan Revusky

    Webster agrees with you at #4. You have my apology. I was happier not knowing that BLM and the SJW’s are religionists.

    Definition of religion

    1
    a : the state of a religious b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance

    2
    : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices

    3
    archaic : scrupulous conformity : conscientiousness

    4
    : a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

  107. @Gabriel M

    Because Gregory Cochran is a bit of an ass that has pissed off Mr. Unz is probably why.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  108. David says:
    @Linh Dinh

    I agree that Unz.com is central to my reading, even including books. And I agree that people ridiculing others’ wives is rude. But the thrust of your comment, that you’re surprised Ron allows comments you find objectionable makes you sound like an Asian bent on harmony over vigorous debate. Oh, you’ll say you just want civility, but your standards are not likely Anglo Saxon, a culture degraded mostly by too rapid dilution in these later times.

    Allow me to say that Paul Craig Roberts is a blow hard who happens to be right a lot. No one is ruder without obscenities than he is.

    When Turkey shot down a Russian jet, PCR said about western reportage, “the presstitutes were too lazy to do the math.” A day or two later he published a long email from a pilot showing PCR to be incompetent to do the math.

    PCR lies when he says video exists where Silverstein takes credit for pulling down 7 WTC. At best the interpretation is highly doubtful.

    PCR’s repeatedly described the generality of Americans as stupid. A view you may endorse.

    He recently quoted a comment saying “we moved the world” when the commenter had written “you moved the world.” Why the slight change? Because PCR was about to ask for money. It’s just a little lie, but it was intentional and shows the kind of person he is.

    If Unz.com has become a forum of excellence, the commenters deserve some of the credit. I don’t read you but I’d be surprised if some harsh comment hasn’t influenced your style.

    According to Kenneth Clark, a 16th century Florentine painter attributed his city’s excellence in the arts to “The spirit of criticism: the air of Florence making minds naturally free, and not content with mediocrity.”

  109. Sparkon says:
    @Anonymous

    Wackadoodle: A pejorative neologism that sounds cool to teen-age boys, and others who are excited, even convinced by creative name-calling, and think it empowers bogus arguments.

    And now, having a little fun in the holiday spirit, it’s my turn to coin a neologism, or two:

    I offer: Gatekeepers and Guardians of the Official Myth –GAGOTOMs– or GAGs, for short, and my new term for their special brand of specious sophistry– Gagillogic, to wit:

    The crime is over; therefore the criminals should be allowed to escape.

    Historians should forget about this history, and work on something else.

    Destruction of evidence is permitted because scrap metal.

    Back to reality. For me, life is too short for long articles, having too many irons in the fire, and not always enough fire. ‘Makes it tough too, coining neologisms. Fortunately, I have a cool magic aluminum knife to carve out any imperfections when my steel die is cast not quite right.

    Wishing everyone Peace and Prosperity,
    Truth and Justice in 2017.

    –sp–

  110. 5371 says:
    @Mr. Anon

    To be fair, this piece, though excessively prolix, was considerably better than his previous efforts.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    , @Sam Shama
  111. @David

    PCR lies when he says video exists where Silverstein takes credit for pulling down 7 WTC. At best the interpretation is highly doubtful.

    You mean this video?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jPzAakHPpk&feature=youtu.be

    • Replies: @David
    , @alexander
  112. David says:
    @Seamus Padraig

    That’s it. I think Silverstein is talking about pulling the firemen from the building, giving up on fighting the fire, to prevent more loss of life. To me that’s the obvious interpretation but I can admit there is some ambiguity. I could make further arguments for my view, but PCR is too dishonest to admit one of his supporting points is doubtful at best.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    , @NoseytheDuke
  113. Dear Mr. Revusky,

    Thank you for your contribution. You embrace your points in a unique way which cannot but end to appear somewhat disjointed, but that is what I enjoy.

    Thought provocation should be the intended purpose. Several asswipes tried to criticize you because the article was too long (ADHD Trolls?) or they had read a couple of paragraphs and complained that they were not entertained yet. Unbelievable! Did they demand a refund on the advance?

    Be that as it may, I normally post to challenge positions that I disagree with or to point out errors in thought and/or logic but I wish to give you sincere kudos.

    From a previous article of yours I came to the realization of the phenomenon of the ‘ learned but sincere authority’ and subsequently adopted the term HI IQ Idiot in further conversations with anyone in my association. How many eyes the simple term opened up would have made you proud. Non confrontational but at the same time all encompassing it gave me the inspiration that thankless burdens (yours) can have far reaching effects.

    Ignore your detractors. It only shows that you are reaching the target as per the old flak analogy.

    Best regards,

    TTL

    • Agree: CK
  114. @Mr. Anon

    It’s only evidence if one subscribes to your “theory”. Otherwise, it’s just scrap metal that’s in the way. Afterall, after a mass shooting in a mall, why don’t the police preserve the blood stains all over the floors and walls indefinitely, just in case some “researcher” wants to investigate them?

    I see what you are saying.

    If the blood stains inconceivably took down the structure of the mall at free- fall speed, by golly-let’s ship the evidence of the most incredible mall attack ever to CHINA.

    Yawn.

    • LOL: Talha
    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  115. Qasim says:

    Wow, another excellent article, Mr. Revusky!

    A bunch of people are criticizing the length of this article and Revusky’s prolix writing style. But any sharing of ideas is dependent on the presence of shared, unstated, underlying assumptions that facilitate the discourse. Since the main thrust of Revusky’s worldview is the rejection of much of our culture’s foundational subconscious maxims, spending a lot of time on explicitly establishing new parameters for debate is inescapable.

    I was hoping this article would have kept more of its focus on the New Atheists, or atheism in general. The way atheists get to endlessly attack other worldviews and hardly ever have to answer for their own misdeeds boggles the mind. In particular, this is an alt-Right sort of website, where many people vociferously criticize the hypocrisy of multiculturalism. But when it is time to apportion blame for the current state of affairs, things seem to get out of whack.

    Western civilization has been largely created (and certainly dominated) by White, Christian, heterosexual men, and multiculturalism has brought under its umbrella numerous groups that seek to undermine this state of affairs. But some groups are more influential in this movement; others are just self-servingly along for the ride.

    There are endless articles (and comments) on this website about the malign influence of Muslims, Hispanics, and Blacks on Western societies. And increasingly, the roles of feminists, gays, and Jews in the multicultural project are being highlighted. But there is almost no outrage directed at atheists or the irreligious, although an excellent argument can be made that it is irreligion that forms the primary impetus to destroy traditional Western civilization. For example, it is irreligious women (not nuns) who make up the bulk of the most strident feminists, and it is irreligious secular Jews (not the orthodox) who make up the bulk of the Jews engaging in the “culture of critique”.

    Also, religion tends to inculcate the adoption of the correspondence theory of truth in its followers (a true statement is one that corresponds with external reality), whereas atheists are must more apt to adopt constructivist versions of “truth” (truth being a man-made social construct). It is not a coincidence that our increasingly irreligious societies are so obsessed with POLITICAL correctness (i.e. factual incorrectness), and that sincere religious belief is the strongest antidote to this B.S. No religious society has ever come up with such nonsense as race and gender are merely social constructs.

    I have one criticism of the article though. Although I sympathize with the point he was trying to make, comparing irreligious fanaticism to a religion just feeds the unjust stereotype linking religion and fanaticism! This reminds of the way Sam Harris attempted to explain away the hundreds of millions killed by state-sponsored atheism by saying Communism functions like a religion!! Even more asinine was Richard Dawkins saying one could as easily put the blame on atheist dictators such as Stalin on their mustaches as you could to their atheism! I think it is fairer to say that fanaticism is just an inextricable part of human nature. However, if you look at history as a whole, atheists have proved themselves much more prone to fanaticism when they obtain power than any religion has.

  116. Mr. Anon says:
    @Stonehands

    You guys keep reciting that “free fall” mantra. I wonder how many of you even know what the term means.

    • Replies: @Stonehands
  117. Mr. Anon says:
    @5371

    “To be fair, this piece, though excessively prolix, was considerably better than his previous efforts.”

    “Bad” is considerably better than “very bad”; it’s still not good. I’ve read enough of what he’s written to have an informed opinion of the poor quality both of his writing and of his thought.

  118. Mr. Anon says:
    @David

    “That’s it. I think Silverstein is talking about pulling the firemen from the building,”

    No, that can’t be right. No, he must be admitting on television, months after the fact, that he was a party to a vast and sinister conspiracy that murdered thousands of people. Because that’s what conspirators always do. That’s the only possible rational explanation for his choice of words.

    • Replies: @Seamus Padraig
  119. Sam Shama says:
    @5371

    [To be fair, this piece, though excessively prolix, was considerably better than his previous efforts.]

    Or it’s your Christmas spirit peeking out.

  120. @Mr. Anon

    This has been discussed endlessly, even on this webzine.

    I don’t believe anything the criminal syndicate says happened on 9/11, or anything else the surveillance apparatus has conned YOU into defending.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  121. maatbeker says:

    I think that with your ARRF you conflate so called ‘cultural marxism’ with atheism which seems wrong to me. atheism is simply absence of believe in a deity that created the universe and everything in it. From that no social theory follows whatsoever. That is not to say a secular atheist don’t need a social theory, they just don’t accept getting their ethics from traditional religion. They have to reason about it and it is quite possible to make colossal mistakes and venture into complete nonsense when it comes to that. But as long as nobody conclusively refute a theory, it stands. That is what’s been happening. You have an edifice of progressive liberalism that has been created by the social departments of Universities based on radical environmentalism and theorists like John Rawls that is a big toolbox you can take from when attacking biblical values and I guess a lot of people may not agree but are simply intellectually outgunned in these arguments and do not have a comprehensive theory themselves to fight back (tradition religion, while some of its traditions still make sense is outdated and..lets face is total bull-crap). What now is happening is that people don’t care anymore if they can’t win the argument, they just stick to their opinion anyway, they sensed there is something wrong with the pc-narrative, couldn’t comprehensively refute it and Trump just sticks to his opinions on a case by case bases with wider ideology behind it. If you can’t refute it, just ignore it. It is like untying the Gordian knot with your sword.

  122. @Talha

    Very well put, Talha. I really think it is a shame that people are allowed to comment more than two or three times using Anonymous, anon or some variation. People who flaunt their ignorance in the manner that Anonymous has should at least be identifiable. It would be my one request for Ron Unz to change about this terrific forum.

    Cheers

  123. @Anonymous

    As I said previously, 9/11 would continue to be of great importance to the more ALERT, clearly that does not include you. Again, I can see why you would post here as Anonymous.

  124. @Sam Shama

    Sham Sama, your recent comments appear to show you to be engaged in an ever more fierce contest with the Wizard of Oz in the matter of grand puffery, and I do believe that you’re catching up. Well done, keep at it.

    • Replies: @Sam Shama
  125. @David

    Silverstein “We decided to pull the building” (WTC7)

    What other interpretation do you have to offer?

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  126. @David

    I’m sure you are an excellent ventriloquist BUT that’s NOT what he actually says.

  127. @Jonathan Revusky

    Yes the left gatekeepers or the right gatekeepers….whose afraid of saying the truth?!

    So here is today’s litmus, not 9/11 but rather who is willing to come right out and call Obama a Traitor per his arming of terrorists.

    I have, having informed Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT) that his Co-Sponsorship of Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) Stop Arming Terrorists Act, is great, but that by its own definition such an act I identifying not only a felony, but more importantly an act of Treason, and that by not addressing this felony and treason, he is being warned that he is party to such Treason as Misprision of Treason.

    This challenge needs to be addressed, by competent news outlets, and more importantly citizens willing to make the challenge of their elected servants whose sole duty above all other considerations is to uphold the Constitution. Remind them that it may be their own family that may be killed in a plane taken down by a Man-Pa that Congress and Obama gave to terrorists.

    We have Professor Francis Boyle, who wrote the Articles of Impeachment against GHW Bush by Rep. Henry Gonzales willing to write up Impeachment Papers on Obama right now, while Congress is technically still in Session, and World War III still smoldering.

    So act.

    Bruce Marshall
    Rochester, Vermont

  128. alexander says:
    @Seamus Padraig

    Seamus,

    Lets give the benefit of the doubt to Mr. Silverstein for the moment.

    Lets assume that the Fire Chief informs him the fire cannot be put out…and that the catalyst for the fire was flaming debris from one of the towers…

    Lets assume this is all true…because its not unreasonable that it might be.

    He then states the Fire Chief recommends they “pull it”….not pull the firefighters out…but “pull the building”……demo it .

    Okay.

    Makes sense…They cannot contain the fire so they have to bring the building down.

    Fine.

    The only problem with all this , based on the information I have gleaned from listening to demolition experts …is that it takes SEVERAL WEEKS to properly rig a structure to collapse within its own footprint.

    And nobody can dispute that building #7 collapsed perfectly within its own footprint.

    So the demolition charges for the “pull” must have been placed well in advance of the 9-11 attack .

    Correct ?

    And foresight of this type implies foreknowledge of the event….doesn’t it ?

    Please correct me if I am wrong on this, because I would be interested in another plausible scenario.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  129. interesting article. but I think moldbug did a better job explaining progressives (https://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.ca/) their religion is equality. and he called the elites of this group the cathedral. Honestly I think his explanation and historical prospective is much better than this article and will last longer than ARRF will.

  130. Of course you are right but let us NOT say that the fire could not be put out because it simply ISN’T true. It is unreasonable to assume that it IS true. The fires were not very hot and thermal imagery validates that.

    The building was wired for demolition and, as you say, that takes time to do. The Salomon Building (WTC7) was reported to have collapsed about 15 mins (BBC) before it actually did. How’s that for prior knowledge?

    WTC7 was allegedly used to store files that were evidence of various different cases of fraud that were under investigation by the SEC. They were all, conveniently for some, destroyed.

    WTC7 is also the likely location for the control centre for the much more complex demolition projects undertaken that same day, namely WTC 1 & 2. It had to come down. Silverstein was just seeking the most opportune moment to announce the justification for it.

    Maybe there was supposed to be a bigger fire, maybe there were plans for it to be more damaged by the collapses of WTC 1 & 2 or maybe another attack was planned, who knows?

    What we DO know is that the damage to the building was minimal, the fires were not very hot, there was little danger to firefighters and absolutely NO LOGICAL reason for it to collapse straight down in practically free fall speed, as if the building suddenly turned to paper or matchwood.

    “Pulling” IS a term used in building demolitions. British men use it as a term for picking up women. Evacuating is the term used by emergency services for removing people from danger.

    I hope all decent Americans will call on their representatives to demand a new, open and independent investigation.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  131. Mr. Anon says:
    @Stonehands

    “This has been discussed endlessly, even on this webzine.”

    But, evidently, not understood. There is so little you guys understand. Your understanding of physics seems to be derived from comic books.

    • Replies: @Stonehands
  132. Mr. Anon says:
    @alexander

    “And foresight of this type implies foreknowledge of the event….doesn’t it ?”

    And mass-murderering millionaires with everything to lose are in the habit of giving full and free confessions, completely unprompted, during television interviews. Aren’t they?

    Is there anything so stupid that you guys won’t believe it?

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  133. Mr. Anon says:
    @NoseytheDuke

    “The Salomon Building (WTC7) was reported to have collapsed about 15 mins (BBC) before it actually did. How’s that for prior knowledge?”

    Right – because in the chaos of the day, it is completely impossible that a report by someone that a building “might collapse” would be confused with “did collapse”. Such things never happen. Journalists always – always! – get everything right.

    “What we DO know is that the damage to the building was minimal, the fires were not very hot,”

    That is complete crap. The fires were massive (there are pictures of them, readily available with a few minutes googling). They burned, uncontrolled, for about eight hours before the structure collapsed.

    ““Pulling” IS a term used in building demolitions.”

    “Pulling” is an english word used for a lot of things. Barbeque restaraunts serve “Pulled Pork”. Is the pork cooked with explosives?

  134. Mr. Anon says:
    @NoseytheDuke

    “Silverstein “We decided to pull the building” (WTC7)”

    You’re wrong. He didn’t say “pull the building”. He said “pull it”. Look it up. Your quotes aren’t even quotes.

    “What other interpretation do you have to offer?”

    Pull the fire crews?

    Or do you think that multi-millionaires are in the habit of confessing to mass murder on PBS?

    • Replies: @Rurik
  135. Mr. Anon says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    “Because Gregory Cochran is a bit of an ass that has pissed off Mr. Unz is probably why.”

    But Cochran, who is a smart guy, is clearly a lot smarter than Revusky, who is a bloviating dullard.

  136. @Mr. Anon

    …Revusky, who is a bloviating dullard.

    Hi, I asked you this before, but I’m pretty sure you never gave a straight answer.

    As I recall, in the days following the attacks of 9/11, the government put out a pretty amazing story, that the whole thing had been orchestrated from faroff Afghanistan, by a bearded religious fanatic named Osama Bin Laden.

    Could you outline what the strongest available evidence for that story is?

    If there is no evidence for the story, that’s an answer too, but you really ought to answer the question, no?

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  137. @Mr. Anon

    And mass-murderering millionaires with everything to lose are in the habit of giving full and free confessions, completely unprompted, during television interviews. Aren’t they?

    Well, nobody said anything about what people are in the habit of doing. It seems like the guy slipped up. He said they “pulled” the building which could only mean that it was pre-rigged for demolition beforehand. However, the official story was that the building imploded in a perfectly symmetrical manner from undirected fires — which is an impossibility.

    In any case, what is your explanation of the BBC reporting the collapse of the building before it happened? Do you really think there is nothing at all odd about that?

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  138. @Qasim

    ” The way atheists get to endlessly attack other worldviews and hardly ever have to answer for their own misdeeds boggles the mind”

    Okay so would you please afford me, a confirmed atheist,a list of my “Misdeeds” of which I am, inspite of my seventysix years on planet mirth, totally unaware.

    It puzzles me extremely to now hear that a guy such as myself, an innocuous jazz performer, who has only been dedicated to finally blowing the perfect solo, which has not yet happened even after sixty years of trying, it puzzles me now at this stage of the game to find out that I am guilty of horrendous “Misdeeds” of which I have no knowledge whatsoever, unless trying to acomplish a “Perfect” solo, as jazz player can be construed as a “Misdeed”.

    Aside from my atheist mind-set, I guess considering oneself ( myself) as a conservative and having voted for DT would perhaps afford me a lesser residence in limbo subsequent to my departure form this lunatic planet, you reckon?

    Authenticjazzman, “Mensa” society member of forty-plus years and pro jazz artist.

    • Replies: @Qasim
    , @Jonathan Revusky
  139. @Bruce Marshall

    Yes the left gatekeepers or the right gatekeepers….whose afraid of saying the truth?!

    Uhh, all of them are afraid of telling the truth — at least about the key third rail issues. That’s precisely what makes them gatekeepers. There is a set of things they will never tell the truth about. In my view, that’s not really a left/right issue.

    So here is today’s litmus, not 9/11 but rather who is willing to come right out and call Obama a Traitor per his arming of terrorists.

    I hope this doesn’t come across as too dismissive or anything, but for me, the problem with what you’re saying is that it’s based on their framing of the question. Terrorists, shmerrorists…. Of course the exact same people can be “terrorists” or they’re “freedom fighters” depending on shifting agendas. So the fact that the “freedom fighters” that the government is supporting today were labeled “terrorists” yesterday… well, that’s worth pointing out, I suppose, but just like all the bullshit and deceptions are worth calling out, but I don’t see it as a sine qua non either frankly.

    To be brutally honest, for me, this framing that Obama specifically is a “traitor” because Obama is supporting the “freedom fighters” who are really “terrorists”, I find the whole thing pretty hard to get excited about. Not just because Obama is a lame duck anyway. The thing is that it’s not Obama himself doing these things. He’s mostly just a puppet. Supporting whatever faction in ME politics, this is Deep State stuff. Talking as if this is all done by whatever front-man (Obama in this case) they’ve put in there — really, I feel it’s a very superficial analysis that doesn’t really get very far.

    • Replies: @Bruce Marshall
  140. Sam Shama says:
    @NoseytheDuke

    Are you upset being caught ignorant of common latin phrases you pretend to know?

  141. Qasim says:
    @Authenticjazzman

    Come on Mr. Mensa, just because you personally aren’t involved in Communism, Cultural Marxism, feminism etc., that means pinning these things on your belief system is completely invalid?

    Aside from my atheist mind-set, I guess considering oneself ( myself) as a conservative and having voted for DT would perhaps afford me a lesser residence in limbo subsequent to my departure form this lunatic planet, you reckon?

    I reckon :)

  142. Mr. Revusky gets alot points for being active in the comments section.

    Don’t agree with all parts of the article but still a good read. anything that provokes thinking on the part of the readers is good reading :)

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  143. @Mr. Anon

    The only use I ever had for a comic book, is for rolling-up and swatting pests like you.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  144. Mr. Anon says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    I did answer. I don’t care what you “think” I answered.

    I asked you this question before, but you never gave a straight answer: Did America land men on the moon between the years 1969-1972? I suspect that if you answered truthfully – with your actual opinion – you would alienate a lot of your fans, and that’s why you refuse to answer such a simple, straight-forward question.

    While we’re at it: Is the Earth flat?

  145. Mr. Anon says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    “He said they “pulled” the building which could only mean that it was pre-rigged for demolition beforehand.”

    I’d say you were deluded, as it fits with the tone of everything you’ve written, except that clearly you must know better. He did not say they “pulled the building”. You’re lying.

    The fixation on particular words is a bizarre kind of word-magic that you clowns seem to believe in. You are not sceptics. You are not “researchers”. You are shamans in an obscure cult.

    “In any case, what is your explanation of the BBC reporting the collapse of the building before it happened? Do you really think there is nothing at all odd about that?”

    I just explained what I thought it meant. Do I think it odd that a journalist misinterpereted a note handed to them? Do I think it odd that a journalist reported something that was not true? No. Do you think journalists get everything right?

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  146. Mr. Anon says:
    @Stonehands

    “The only use I ever had for a comic book, is for rolling-up and swatting pests like you.”

    Too many big words in comic books?

    I noticed you didn’t address my points above.

    • Replies: @Stonehands
  147. Mr. Anon says:
    @Bruce Marshall

    You don’t seem to understand people like Revusky. He doesn’t want political change. He wants to be a high-priest in a mystery-cult, in which only he and a few select others are privy to the true, secret knowledge. Only his secret version of history is real history. Everything that the rest of you believe is illusion and falsehood. If he has to make up a bunch of ridiculous twaddle to effect this, then he is cool with that.

    In short – he wants to be a gate-keeper.

    • Replies: @Bruce Marshall
    , @Anon
  148. @Mr. Anon

    Evidently in his wisdom, Dr. Cochran decided also to forsake this particular income stream because of his differences with Mr. Unz. Why are we to argue with his intellect?

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  149. Mr. Anon says:
    @Astuteobservor II

    “Mr. Revusky gets alot points for being active in the comments section.

    After you’ve written 12,000 words of obscure squid ink, what’re a few more?

    “anything that provokes thinking on the part of the readers is good reading.

    It’s a pity the author can’t write anything to provoke thinking by the author.

  150. @Mr. Anon

    I did answer.

    Ok, I must have missed that. Could you provide a link to where you answered?

    My impression was that I had previously posed (I think on more than one occasion) the most simple straightforward question. I asked you to outline the best available evidence that the attacks were orchestrated by Bin Laden/Al Qaeda, from Afghanistan. And I was pretty certain that you had simply not answered.

    Well, I try to give people maximal benefit of the doubt and assume they are not lying. But still, there are limits. If you did previously provide an answer to the question, there is an electronic record of it. Please provide a link.

    Did America land men on the moon between the years 1969-1972?

    As I recall, this is how you answered the question the last time, by posing the above irrelevant question.

    We’re discussing 9/11, aren’t we? What is the best available evidence for the government story? You say you previously answered. Well, again, provide the link.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  151. @Daniel Chieh

    Evidently in his wisdom, Dr. Cochran decided also to forsake this particular income stream because of his differences with Mr. Unz.

    I guess this could be a basic question for a BDQ test. (Bullshit Detection Quotient)

    A. Cochran kept receiving checks from Unz but Cochran stopped cashing the checks because Unz had pissed him off.

    B. Unz stopped sending the checks to Cochran because Cochran had pissed him off.

    Which of the above two statements would one identify as BULLSHIT?

    Of course, the other question is why we’re discussing this. Oh, I remember… because somebody was making some connection between Unz not publishing anything by Cochran yet publishing my articles. There is apparently some relationship between the two things. I myself don’t understand what the relationship is, but that is just further proof of what an imbecile I am.

    • Replies: @anon
  152. @Jonathan Revusky

    Thanks for the reply!

    First you have proven once again that I need to better proofread my posts, for “whose” should have been “those” in my line

    Yes the left gatekeepers or the right gatekeepers….whose afraid of saying the truth?!

    Of those afraid of telling the truth, I find your reply to the issue of “Obama’s Treason” reeks of an obfuscating fear that exactly resonates with the type of garbage that a Scahill or any one of the other 9/11 gatekeepers might blather.

    Yes of course Obama is a puppet, as I was a contributing author to Webster Tarpley’s pre-nomination book Obama: The Postmodern Coup-The Making of a Manchurian Candidate, that correctly identified Obama the Wall Street puppet, spawn of the Weather Underground and protege of Brzezinski, where we correctly stated that Obama would lead us to war against Russia and civil unrest in the U.S, so I am well aware of how this works. We did it before anyone else, in an emergency book whose mission was to stop his being elected.

    While you may think that it is a superficial analysis to call Obama a terrorist, the fact of the matter is that he is a terrorist, a warmonger with a t rack record, and thus a potential thermonuclear suicide bomber, as he is killer who prides himself on his killing acumen, the man who has laid to waste Libya, Syria, overthrew the legitimate government of the Ukraine and other nations utilizing privatized CIA “Color Revolution” and brute force when that fails, in order to further hegemony for the financial oligarchy. World War III is smoldering, with Obama putting logs on the fire for a full conflagration as the “Mau Mau” agent he is.

    So did you ever call for the impeachment of Obama? I would bet not. Why you probably did not even support the move to impeach Bush and Cheney, and would have run for the hills if
    asked to sign a document like the Kennebunkport Warning.

    The issue is that sometimes simple action based is more important than long winded analysis that ultimately does nothing.

    In the present circumstances, Obama is more than just a “puppet” which is an excuse, he is President. To use the excuse that he is a puppet, to not make him responsible for his crimes, beginning with honestly identifying what those crimes are, is to treaty Barack like
    a ‘Boy’, which is exactly why he was chosen and groomed by a faction of the “Deep State” to be immune from such actions by citizens and elected officials, of actually giving him the honor of being treated like a “Man” which means identifying his crimes and seeking action to protect ourselves from such a kidnappper and murderer who is holding the entire world hostage, perpetuating the situation with selected murders for everyone to watch and become entranced and unable to act, but to just call him a puppet of the deep state, but not to act.

    Thus the tragedy of Obama, his being but a “Boy”, is our tragedy, the audience the observers of
    this tragedy, and the tragic victims ourselves, who listen to that chorus who wants to say that we can do nothing, we can not make assertions of what is plain and obvious. To laugh at those of us willing to say that this is Misprision of Treason and Felony to our Congressional Representatives, to do their job, no matter if it might cost their life, for that is the same description they are sending the young, without work, to lose life and limb what are lies.

    To say “Terrorists, shmerrorists” is frankly indicative of an attitude of sophistry that keeps the lies going and going. Why the “Deep State” really loves you!

    • Replies: @utu
    , @Jonathan Revusky
  153. @Mr. Anon

    Do I think it odd that a journalist misinterpereted a note handed to them?

    Just to be clear: is this the official explanation from the BBC as to why they reported the event before it happened? Or is this just something that you made up?

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  154. @Authenticjazzman

    Okay so would you please afford me, a confirmed atheist,a list of my “Misdeeds” of which I am, inspite of my seventysix years on planet mirth, totally unaware.

    Hey, Mr. Certified Genius man, when you hear the sentence: “The Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor” does that for you mean that all the Japanese participated in the attack on Pearl Harbor?

    I suppose it must mean that, because when you hear “Atheists did X and atheists did Y” you take it to mean that you personally did those things. (Even things that happened before you were born, I suppose…)

    Authenticjazzman, “Mensa” society

    If you really were such a genius, you wouldn’t feel such a need to proclaim it. As the Bard said: “The lady doth protest too much.”

    • Replies: @Authenticjazzman
  155. Ron Unz says:

    I happened to notice that Gregory Cochran had unexpectedly become a repeated point of discussion in this thread. So here’s the story, which I’d previously provided:

    http://www.unz.com/announcement/expanding-our-science-and-history-coverage/#comment-1692032

    As I said, I’d probably be willing to feature Cochran’s writing in my webzine…just so long as he provides me a direct personal apology for his past misbehavior. So the ball is completely in his court, and any Cochran fans should be approaching him, not me.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  156. @Mr. Anon

    No, that can’t be right. No, he must be admitting on television, months after the fact, that he was a party to a vast and sinister conspiracy that murdered thousands of people. Because that’s what conspirators always do. That’s the only possible rational explanation for his choice of words.

    No. This video was done several years after 9/11. People were beginning to ask, ‘What about building 7′? So he had to try and come up with some kind of explanation as to why it went down. He was forced to concede our–I’m a truther–main point: namely, that WTC 7 could only have been brought down by controlled demo, since no plane had ever struck it. No one was buying the flying-débris theory anymore. He just had to invent some cock-and-bull story to explain why; nobody’s buying the new theory either. No demo-expert is going to volunteer to set up a building for CD while it’s on fire!

    So, we have now established that at least one of the 3 buildings that went down that day had to have been rigged for CD before 9/11.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  157. @Mr. Anon

    Who am I going to believe?

    You…

    … or my lying eyes.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  158. Rurik says:

    A masterful pièce de résistance in the spirit of Veritas and sanity JR,

    Kudos to you, and very well done!

    I’ve come to this party late, and haven’t read all the comments, but I shall peruse them for edification or grins, as the case may be.

    we’re all basically primates, yes. Even if so much more. And we’re understandable and tweakable at the basic level. Very smart behaviorist types have been studying us and learning exactly how to create narratives that act as our reality/matrix, (or the water to the fish in your analogy), for their own respective and myriad agendas.

    Consumerism, and materialism and the mantras du jour, like ARRF. They’re all foisted by the creators of popular culture who work for the Oligarchs, (cultural elites and entrenched PTB) who own the West and its institutions. Bankers mostly, and yes, mostly Jews.

    It suits them to have the populace acting as brain****** zombies parroting the memes that are carefully and systematically programmed into their subconsciences with scientific precision.

    They know what they’re doing.

    It’s not for nothing that Americans hail the great ‘good war’ defeat of ‘Nazi’ aggressors by the “greatest generation’, only to act exactly as ‘Nazis’ vis-a-vis Palestine (Iraq/Libya/Syria/Ukraine/etc..). All they have to do is use their media to carefully program the lemmingry and ‘poof’ they’ll act and believe in exactly (almost) the way they’re programmed to. It’s all very scientific.

    The key to un-programming the sheople is owning the media and other institutions like public “education” and the universities, etc.. And for that- you need to control the money- and for that- you need to control the central bank(s). There’s really no mystery why all the narratives and society-destroying mantras of the West are intended to bolster Israel while simultaneously destroying Western civilization and its people. It’s because ((they)) control the levers of our culture and institutions and media. So people dance to their tune, whether it be gay marriage or denigration of religion and ancient traditions.

    If you hold the $trings, the puppets will dance to your whims.

    your work here Jonathan is sublime and far reaching. It is insightful (as usual), and a pleasure to read.

    • Replies: @Anon
  159. Rurik says:
    @Mr. Anon

    Or do you think that multi-millionaires are in the habit of confessing to mass murder on PBS?

    wasn’t Osama Bin Laden a multi-millionaire?

    didn’t the CIA provide a video of ‘him’ confessing to 9/11 and destroying the buildings?

    if I had to pick, based on everything I know about the two men, in my opinion, Lucky Larry is seven billion times more likely to have perpetrated the crime than that man with a laptop and a cell phone in a cave thousands of miles away, who would have very little reason for wanting the US to slaughter and maim untold millions of Muslims the world over.

    But for Lucky Larry, who’s very good friends with (“it’s very good”) Bibi, they might consider such a crime a pretext to get Americans to destroy countries that Israel considers inconvenient. See?

    And Lucky Larry gets several billion dollars of insurance money. (perhaps the most audacious case of ‘Jewish lightning’ ever!) Such a deal!

    who had more means of planting explosives? Osama, or Lucky?

    who had more friends in high places, like Zionists and duel citizens at the Pentagon and CIA and at the highest levels of the Bush administration to shut down NORAD and SAC? Osama, or Lucky?

    who had more friends in the media?

    who had more friends in the intelligence communities?

    who had more means?

    who is more likely to be a murderous, lowlife POS who would cynically conspire to slaughter Americans out of greed and global supremacist agendas in order to get richer and foment Eternal Wars for Israel?

    those are just a few of the questions off the top of my head, for why I’d be more likely to figure it was more likely Lucky Larry who concocted a plan to get insurance cash, than Osama to strike at the Great Satan, who would no doubt rain down death and misery upon his people.

    at least in the context of a question of the character of the two men

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  160. Mr. Anon says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    “Ok, I must have missed that. Could you provide a link to where you answered?”

    I’m not your lackey. Look it up yourself.

    “As I recall, this is how you answered the question the last time, by posing the above irrelevant question. We’re discussing 9/11, aren’t we?”

    It isn’t irrelevant. If we didn’t land a man on the Moon, that would be a massive government conspiracy too, wouldn’t it? You seem to think that everything is the result of hidden forces. You have no opinion on that issue? I think you do. And I think you know that voicing it would make a lot of people tune you out permanently. It locates your place on the crank scale, and I’m betting you come in at a 10.

    And, by the way, for the record, you have implied here, not only that were no terrorists and no victims on the airplanes, but that their were no airplanes at all.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  161. Mr. Anon says:
    @Stonehands

    “Who am I going to believe?”

    Yes, the building fell down. That’s the way buildings fall. You seem to think this is remarkable somehow.

    • Replies: @Stonehands
  162. Mr. Anon says:
    @Seamus Padraig

    “No. This video was done several years after 9/11. People were beginning to ask, ‘What about building 7′? So he had to try and come up with some kind of explanation as to why it went down.”

    That is ridiculous. You mean he was insinuating that they rigged up demolition charges in a burning building on 9/11? When? During lunchtime? That is ludicrous. The point is, for Silverstein to admit that the building was “pulled” in the sense you guys use the term, would be for him to admit guilt in an enormous crime. He wasn’t doing that. It is spergy beyond belief to suggest that he was.

  163. Mr. Anon says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    You seem to think that everything is either “official” or it is not. You talk about the planes hitting the buildings being part of the “official” story. No, the planes hitting the buildings are historical events witnessed by thousands of people. I don’t subscribe to your strange, idiosyncratic use of language.

  164. @Mr. Anon

    You should stick to gabbing about Roman antiquity, when it comes to wet work you seem a tad naive…

    …Or perhaps “knave ” is more descriptive.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  165. @Mr. Anon

    Thanks….that is quite unfortunate concerning Mr. Revusky it would seem then that he is perhaps a follower of Leo Strauss. Note my response to him below, number 157.

  166. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Rurik

    “piece de resistance”, “veritas”, “du jour” “sublime”, ain’t you just writin’ spiffy new friench wurds!

    ARRF! ARRF! ARRF!!

    • Replies: @Rurik
  167. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Mr. Anon

    He wants to be a high-priest in a mystery-cult, in which only he and a few select others are privy to the true, secret knowledge.”

    More like the sasquatch hunters. Ever watch the show on animal planet, where the good ole hillbillies gather at dusk and into the night looking for bigfoot, feeding off of each other’s imagined reinforcements?

  168. Rurik says:
    @Anon

    spiffy new friench wurds!

    only two of those are French per se, and all of them are very much part and parcel of the Americana lexicona.

    k?

    and my girlfriend is French, so ..

    dufus

  169. @Jonathan Revusky

    ” If you really were such a genius”, you wouldn’t feel such a need to proclaim it”.

    So now you are “Knowing” what I should feel or should not feel, which indicates that you have somehow taken over or invaded my mind and you are aware of all of my motivations and ideals.

    How about this : I will do, or say what I please and I do not require your approval therefore.

    And regarding my “mensa” membership, well I still have somewhere in my personal belongings, the gold-embossed acceptance certificate dated 1973, (I can’t recall the precise date) and If you have any bones to pick with the Mensa society regarding such, I would advise you to contact them and inform them that they have been awarding membership to undeserving individuals according to your parameters, and that they therefore should alter their membership requirements to conform to your standards.

    Authenticjazzman, “Mensa” society member of forty-plus years and pro jazz artist.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  170. @Mr. Anon

    ” While we’re at it: Is the earth flat”.

    At the point in time or the era in which the earthly dwellers assumed/believed it was flat, it was flat.

    All of reality is based upon agreement and beliefs.

    Authenticjazzman, “Mensa” Society member of forty-plus years and pro jazz artist.

  171. Mr. Anon says:
    @Stonehands

    “You should stick to gabbing about Roman antiquity, when it comes to wet work you seem a tad naive…”

    Oh, and you’re an expert? Where did you learn the term “wet work” – from a Steven Seagal movie? A lot of posers in the world of fringe conspiracy theories.

    • Replies: @Stonehands
  172. Mr. Anon says:
    @Rurik

    “wasn’t Osama Bin Laden a multi-millionaire?”

    Yes, in Afghanistan. Slightly different context.

    “didn’t the CIA provide a video of ‘him’ confessing to 9/11 and destroying the buildings?”

    He didn’t view it as a crime. He viewed it as an attack – a lawful act of war. There would be nothing untoward in his view in claiming responsibility

    “who had more means of planting explosives? Osama, or Lucky?”

    There were no explosives.

    • Replies: @utu
    , @Rurik
  173. utu says:
    @Bruce Marshall

    I listened to some pre-Obama talks by Tarpley and I must agree that he had surprisingly good grip on what was going on and what to expect from Obama administration.

  174. utu says:
    @Mr. Anon

    “wet works” expression is a fairly recent adoption into English. It came from Russian but originally it is from Yiddish/Russian 19 century criminal slang.

  175. @Mr. Anon

    Oh, and you’re an expert? Where did you learn the term “wet work” – from a Steven Seagal movie?

    I am disinclined to give Hebrew/wood or Talmudvision my time or money.

    You think you’re smart? You’re not smart- you’re a crafty, unprincipled fellow.

    All the world has seen the mask ripped from the face of the Deep State in this Presidential election.

    The CIA and State Dept. run amok openly supplying wahhabi terrorists with WMD. The Traitor that is still in office just approved the arming of these radicals with MANPADS.

    Yet, you can’t see the connections between The Never Ending Fake War On Terror-[ and the terrorizing of citizens on 9/11 in order to manufacture consent] and The Deep State.

    That’s why you are a knave, Mr Anonstein.

    • Agree: utu
    • Replies: @Talha
    , @Mr. Anon
  176. @Bruce Marshall

    I find your reply to the issue of “Obama’s Treason” reeks of an obfuscating fear that exactly resonates with the type of garbage that a Scahill or any one of the other 9/11 gatekeepers might blather.

    Well, I think you’re completely misreading me, Bruce. In my last note to you, I just gave you my honest reaction to what you were saying. There’s no “obfuscating fear” there on my part. I’m really just telling you what I think. It just seems weird to me. You’re talking about impeaching Obama when there are 3 weeks left to his presidency anyway. But let’s say there were 3 years left instead of 3 weeks. If you impeach Obama, what do you get? You get Joe Biden, right? Why would that be any better? I suppose it wouldn’t be any worse either, but… it’s just the same thing. There’s no reason to think that this would cause any change in U.S. government policy. (Or maybe I’m wrong and there is, but you’d have to explain it to me because I just don’t get it.)

    My issue with the “Obama’s Treason” is not that I care to defend Obama particularly. It’s that, to my way of looking at things, you are attributing far too much agency to the person of Barack Obama. In the terms of my essay, it’s like you still believe too much in DM, so, since Obama is the “democratically” elected POTUS, we are supposed to believe that he’s really the guy running things.

    Yes of course Obama is a puppet, as I was a contributing author to Webster Tarpley’s pre-nomination book Obama: The Postmodern Coup-The Making of a Manchurian Candidate, that correctly identified Obama the Wall Street puppet,

    Yes, I read the book actually, but I think I read it later, like in 2011 or so. It was around when I discovered Webster Tarpley and started reading a lot of his different works. I have a pretty good opinion of Tarpley. I think I vaguely recognized your name. I’m perfectly happy that you are here, but I’m a bit perplexed at how personally you are taking what I am saying.

    So did you ever call for the impeachment of Obama? I would bet not.

    No, I never did. But what difference does that make? It’s flattering that you are talking to me like I actually am an important person and it matters what I “call for”. To me, what you are saying seems based on the idea that if you can impeach Obama, that you are going to get different policies. Are you talking about impeaching Obama AND Biden? Or just Obama? If all you get is Biden instead of Obama… But it’s something that is not going to happen anyway, so again…

    Bruce, I’m sure you’re a good guy, a patriot, and you mean well, but I think it’s misguided to get agitated at me the way you are. Well, I guess you’re looking at me as a cynic, and that could be true. From my point of view, you are saying things that seem really naive. You’re calling on the people in congress to impeach Obama, except the Congress critters are all bought and paid for by whatever special interests as well. You’re trying to convince a bunch of puppets on a string to impeach the head puppet on a string.

    Well, I am writing an answer because I feel you should get a reply, but I suddenly think that I’m probably just antagonizing you further. I really am trying to look at this question from your point of view, but kind of failing to get it. Maybe you should also try to understand my perspective that I am outlining.

  177. @Authenticjazzman

    How about this : I will do, or say what I please and I do not require your approval therefore.

    Look, I never told you what to do or not to do. My view is that what you do is in your nature so for me to ask you to stop would be like asking a swine to stop wallowing in its own excrement.

    My preference would simply be for you to do what you do elsewhere because it is mentally unhygienic and revolting. Why don’t you go somewhere else and do it? Why must you do it here? To what do I owe the honor?

    In principle, the purpose of the comments section is to discuss the article. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m pretty sure you haven’t even read the article. To be fair it’s not just you. There are trolls here who say proudly that they haven’t read the article that they are commenting under.

    There are countless articles on the net that I didn’t read and I don’t write comments under them saying proudly that (a) I didn’t read the article AND (b) that the article is shit.

    And regarding my “mensa” membership, well I still have somewhere in my personal belongings, the gold-embossed acceptance certificate dated 1973,

    Uhh, yeah, and I’ve got a platinum-embossed certificate that commemorates when I got my first piece of tail.

    Dude, you are so pathetic. If you were at all clever in any real sense, you would at least know that NOBODY gives a shit!

    Authenticjazzman, “Mensa” society member of forty-plus years

    NOBODY CARES!!! GO GET A LIFE!!!

  178. Talha says:
    @Stonehands

    just approved the arming of these radicals with MANPADS

    I just saw that – these people (both the givers and receivers) are crazy! I cannot believe they are doing this.

    Peace.

  179. @Ron Unz

    I happened to notice that Gregory Cochran had unexpectedly become a repeated point of discussion in this thread.

    Well, it’s just because there was the one Gregory Cochran fanboy who was doing Lloyd Bentsen to my Dan Quayle, I guess. Remember that?

    “I knew Greg Cochran. Greg Cochran was a friend of mine. I performed oral sex on Greg Cochran. You sir, are no Greg Cochran.”

    Dang, he really put me in my place. There I was thinking I was Greg Cochran and he cruelly shattered all my illusions…

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  180. @Mr. Anon

    “Ok, I must have missed that. Could you provide a link to where you answered?”

    I’m not your lackey. Look it up yourself.

    Uhh, how can I look up something that doesn’t exist? Everybody here including you knows that you were lying your ass off when you said you had answered the question. I was simply calling your bluff when I asked you to provide the link.

    Well, everybody who has interacted with you surely knows that you’re a chronic liar. At one point, you said you had read a lot of the conspiracist literature and it was all bullshit. I asked you to name some of the books you had read and you refused to answer. Because you were lying there too… you haven’t read anything. I knew you had never read any books on any of these topics. because you never bring any real knowledge into any discussion. You don’t really know anything. Your whole position is the classic shit eater position that whatever it is must be true because it’s the official story.

    This is a key point in this very article. You ask a religious fanatic for proof of some story that’s in the Bible and the answer is that the story is in the Bible. You ask a shit eater like you for the proof of some fantastical story like what the government says happened on 9/11. And the person just says it’s the official story. Claims it’s a “fact”. That’s what it always comes down to.

    It isn’t irrelevant.

    Well, this is what you always do when you’re getting cornered. You throw the “Hail Mary” pass of starting to talk about the Moon landings.

    Why should I switch from discussing 9/11 with you, a subject you know fuck-all about, to discussing the Moon landings, another topic you surely know fuck-all about.

    Hey, why don’t we discuss something you definitely do know something about? Like uhhh…. being a LYING TROLL SCUMBAG….

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  181. @Renoman

    Brevity! Learn about it.

    Brevity has its merits and, other things equal, it’s better to say the same thing in fewer words, I suppose.

    However, an ignoramus who has absolutely nothing to say preaching brevity is like a eunuch preaching chastity.

    • Agree: utu
  182. @Qasim

    Hi, Qasim. I’m glad you liked the article.

    I was hoping this article would have kept more of its focus on the New Atheists, or atheism in general.

    Well, as I said in my concluding remarks, the original intention actually was to write something more focused (and shorter) on the New Atheists. That was actually the origin of the ARRF acronym. But as the article evolved, the ARRF term actually came to mean more the civic religion of the West, which I describe.

    So ARRF is not the same thing as atheism. There are religious groups that have gone full-blown ARRF actually, like reform Judaism with lesbian rabbis and gay marriages. By the way, this meme that Islam needs to reform itself, to have a “reformation”, basically means that Islam should become ARRF compatible. So, if, one day you go into the mosque and you have a lesbian imam there who is preparing for an “Islamic gay wedding”, you will know that your religion just got ARRF-ized, while you weren’t looking, had it’s Reformation! (I suspect that in such case, you would probably go out and look for another mosque to join! One that hasn’t been ARRF-ized yet!) Oh, and note that the way they will frame it is that Islam is not compatible with…. DEMOCRACY! So it needs to be “reformed”…

    Anyway, the “New Atheists” are a just one virulent strand of ARRF that basically says that society would be better if we just eliminated all religion, so they don’t even want to ARRF-ize religion, just get rid of it completely.

    Well, another aspect of this is that these people go well beyond “atheism”. Strictly speaking, atheism wold just be the absence of theism, i.e. religiosity, not being religious oneself — which is anybody’s right in a free society. Their thing is extreme hostility towards religion and also blaming religion (pretty absurdly) for most of society’s ills. They are more like rabid ANTI-theists than A-theists.

    But when it is time to apportion blame for the current state of affairs, things seem to get out of whack.

    Yes, exactly right. One aspect of this whole thing that I did not even touch on (because even writing 12k words, I actually cut out things) is that, for the White nationalists going on and on about the extinction of the white race, well, the biggest A-1-A problem there is not actually immigration, it’s the fertility rate of the white people themselves! In Spain, it’s way below replacement level and this used to be a Catholic society where people had big families. But it’s the same story in Italy, for example. The French, I think, actually are still at close to replacement level for some reason, but Germany has totally cratered. A people that doesn’t reproduce itself dies off whether there is immigration or not! So if you’re a white nationalist, you should be much more anti-ARRF than anti-Islam.

    My view is that any society that drops its traditional religious culture for ARRF pretty much invariably has its birth rate crater. Actually, I thought finally I’d leave this for a later essay because it’s a big topic in itself. Do white nationalist types think that Islam is the reason that white European Christians are not having children? I actually am intending to write a follow-up in which I go through a series of issues like this and make the case that the issue is NOT Islam, it’s ARRF.

    Another key aspect of this is the whole synthetic narrative of this big conflict between Christianity and Islam. In reality, the conflict is between ARRF and Islam. And its not even that. It’s between ARRF and traditional religions. (If you’ve ARRF-ized your religion somehow, then it’s more or less okay, but if your religion is still saying these hateful things like that marriage is a man and a woman, then…)

    and that sincere religious belief is the strongest antidote to this B.S.

    Yeah, I agree. That was a point I touched on in the piece. I’m pretty sure that Vladimir Putin and that whole tendency in Russian politics basically understand this, and that is why they are interested in trying to revitalize Russia’s traditional religious culture of Orthodox Christianity. I suppose that after so many decades of communism, it was really in bad shape, but they’re trying to get a flame going out of the cinders, I think. But my sense is that this is the reasoning.

    That whole Pussy Riot thing was sort of a skirmish in the ARRF versus traditional religious culture conflict, though probably those silly girls did not really understand what they were part of.

    This reminds of the way Sam Harris attempted to explain away the hundreds of millions killed by state-sponsored atheism by saying Communism functions like a religion!!

    Yeah, I ran across that and it seems to me like Harris is scoring an “own goal” there. Because once you recognize that a secular ideology can be just as fanatical and murderous as any religion-based one, then how can you argue that getting rid of the traditional religions is going to make the world better?

    Actually, though, the secular fanaticism is much more murderous, it seems. According to Wikipedia (not the most reliable source, mind you), Torquemada was responsible for the deaths of approximately 2000 people. And that was in an entire decades long career of persecuting heretics and infidels. Okay, it’s a serious matter, 2000 people, but obviously the Spanish Inquisition is total chickenshit compared to atheist communists in the 20th century! And compared to the ARRF war of terror against the Islamic world, where it’s also MILLIONS killed. So WTF are these people talking about?

    However, if you look at history as a whole, atheists have proved themselves much more prone to fanaticism when they obtain power than any religion has.

    Yeah, I don’t see how any honest person could come to a different conclusion from that. Now, of course, again, I would make the point that the people in question do go way beyond just being atheistic, in the sense that they’re not into religion — like I myself am not religious, but I respect the people who are. These people are violently ANTI-theistic.

    But, surely you have noticed that the anti-religious ferver of Dawkins and the rest is, I think, at least 80% Islamophobia. I mean to say, if you hate religion, fine, okay, we get it, but then you should hate all religion, no? You hate Islam, okay, but you hate Christianity, you hate Hinduism and Buddhism… You just hate it all. In that case, I could actually respect them a bit more. But the fact that all their hatred of religion is concentrated on Islam does kind of tell you who is really behind this, what interests they are serving. Well, these people are total Zionist tools.

    • Replies: @Talha
    , @Rurik
    , @hyperbola
  183. Talha says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    Hey JR,

    Good article. Couple of points:

    “this meme that Islam needs to reform itself, to have a ‘reformation’”

    Lord Cromer, the British Consul to Egypt wrote (in ‘Modern Egypt’):
    “Islam cannot be reformed; that is to say, reformed Islam is Islam no longer ; it is something else: we cannot as yet tell what it will eventually be.”

    What these voices forget is that there is a reformation going on, just like ‘gay weddings’ are one side of the reformation, so are Salafi/Wahabbi extremists – but you can’t say that because the reformation is only supposed to go one way. There are not supposed to be side-effects for the wonderful pill they are asking us to swallow.

    But, as I said before; what is good for the lesbian imam goose may be good for the suicide-vest-strapping gander.

    I mean to say, if you hate religion, fine, okay, we get it, but then you should hate all religion, no?

    They do, and I’ve seen some of the most vicious attacks being hurled against Christianity (especially Hitchens and Dawkins). But, in a free-for-all-last-man-standing-in-the-ring situation – Islam is just the last one still swinging, though Catholicism does manage a few jabs time and again (good for them). The other ones are on the ropes. It is smart to concentrate on the guy on his feet.

    For instance, one of our local scholars forwarded this article* to everyone:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-38449822

    With the statement; “We refuse to shackle ourselves to the gender-deconstructed hell others have made for themselves. Allāh preserve the Ghayrat (honor/dignity) of the Ummah.”

    Peace.

    *Note: Yes, that is the heir of the Sokoto Caliphate established by The Shehu (Uthman Dan Fodi) [ra].

  184. Rurik says:
    @Mr. Anon

    “didn’t the CIA provide a video of ‘him’ confessing to 9/11 and destroying the buildings?”

    He didn’t view it as a crime. He viewed it as an attack – a lawful act of war. There would be nothing untoward in his view in claiming responsibility

    ahh, but you see, he didn’t claim responsibility. He said he had nothing to do with it. The fake video of ‘him’ confessing has been exhaustively debunked as a fake. Even the FBI admits it never had a shred of evidence to tie Osama to 9/11. Check it out..

    There were no explosives.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  185. Rurik says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    Hey JR,

    Do white nationalist types think that Islam is the reason that white European Christians are not having children? I actually am intending to write a follow-up in which I go through a series of issues like this and make the case that the issue is NOT Islam, it’s ARRF.

    well, I don’t consider myself a ‘white nationalist type’ per se, but rather just a sane human being lacking racial self-loathing who doesn’t want to see my particular phenotype blended out of existence for all time as the final solution to racism – with the uncontrolled and infinite importation of other races and cultures into the lands where my ancestors were forged out of tens of thousands of years of struggle.

    For some incomprehensible reason, (actually it is known and it’s called resentment) all white nations are supposed to consider their replacement by Muslims (and Africans and Asians and everyone else) as some kind of no-brainer. And if they have qualms, are pejoratively referred to as “white nationalists” or “white supremacists”.

    Do they demand the same thing of Japan, that it open its borders to infinite throngs of non-Japanese, and harangue any Japanese who object as being “Japanese supremacists” or “Japanese nationalists”?

    Do they call the Arabs of Saudi Arabia “Arab supremacists” for preventing unlimited immigration of others into *their* country? No, because they’re allowed to have a country of their own, and why not?!

    But when it comes to Sweden or Germany or N. America, all the white people are supposed to kneejerk prostrate themselves before the genocidal demon god of diversity/multiculturalism, filled with so much self-loathing and self-contempt, that they just can’t wait until their own race is wiped out and blended away; as has been done in every place where unlimited immigration has been the mantra of the day. No-go areas in England and Sweden and Muslim rape gangs. And if there’s a sane person paying attentions, whose spirit and love of his people have not been trampled and ground under by the politically correct armies of SJW and mantras of death and genocide, then it can only mean he must be a Nazi/racist/KKK/white supremacist/white nationalist, blah, blah, blah.

    For a Palestinian to demand that they too have a right to exist and to persevere as a distinct people in their own lands, with their own traditions and culture and identity, is considered laudable and commendable by people both on the left and on the right.

    But for a Swede or Brit or (heavens no), an American- to question the wisdom of importing millions upon millions of people with very little (none) ties to his culture or heritage or traditions, let alone his ethnicity, and he’s supposed to hand it all over and beg their forgiveness for his racism and toss his children onto the flaming pyres of multiculturalism for his terrible guilt at being white, is rather incomprehensible to me. And I’d be called a “white nationalist” by these people. Who demand that all white nations open their borders to everyone else.

    It is insane. OK. It isn’t hostility to Muslims or Islam, so long as Muslims and Islam stay in their own countries!

    Wondering aloud at the curious antipathy some Europeans or Americans have for Muslims (and everyone else) who are pouring over their/our borders and creating hostility and strife, and scratching your head saying, what’s with these ‘white nationalist types”? Is the height of arrogance. *Of course!* people want to keep their lands and nations for their children and grandchildren to grow up in and thrive in and prosper in, without tribal hostilities and hatred.

    That is obvious to anyone with a properly functioning brain and a shred of respect for even, yes, those evil hated racist white people.

    look at New Zealand or Iceland and the quality of life of those places, and then ask yourself if those people looked at England or the rape capital of the world; Sweden today, and said ‘no thanks’- would you call those people ‘white nationalists”? Or simply sane people who like their culture and identity and feel no need to see it all destroyed and trampled under with tribal hatreds and strife by importing millions of non-Westerners into their lands?

    It has nothing to do with hate. It has everything to do with love. A love of one’s people and a normal human desire to see your people (whomever they are.. Muslim or Christian or white/black/brown or whatever) thrive and prosper and persevere. Just as you respect all other peoples to feel the same way about their children and culture and yes, ethnicity.

    • Agree: Stonehands
  186. @Rurik

    well, I don’t consider myself a ‘white nationalist type’ per se, but rather just a sane human being lacking racial self-loathing who doesn’t want to see my particular phenotype blended out of existence for all time as the final solution to racism –

    Excellent talking point, Rurik.

    May I add that no phenotype will ever survive if it educates its women in secular schools.
    The emasculation of men and the whoring of women are the direct results of this degenerate marxist college system. This American tradition of everyone going to university- not to learn- but,”to have a social experience”.

    In reality we have biological roles to fulfill, that are paramount.
    …not the pursuit of frivolous degrees.

    A real alpha man can support the stay- at- home wife of his children.
    This is the only definition I know.

    Maybe white women ain’t worth saving?

    Truth is dark.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  187. Mr. Anon says:
    @Rurik

    “The fake video of ‘him’ confessing has been exhaustively debunked as a fake. Even the FBI admits it never had a shred of evidence to tie Osama to 9/11. Check it out..”

    What fake video? Debunked by whom? What admission by the FBI? All you have to offer are a bunch of unsubstantiated assertions.

    “There were no explosives.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLJ1c9VVSH0″

    Explosions prior to the collapse of the buildings? Prior? Is it customary, when demolishing a building, to detonate charges 5 minutes prior to the building coming down?

    You guys talk about controlled demolitions without even understanding anything about them. The charges aren’t set off in stages over the course of minutes They’re set off almost all at once, and the building comes down immediately. God, there really is nothing so stupid that you guys won’t credit it.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  188. Mr. Anon says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    “Uhh, how can I look up something that doesn’t exist? Everybody here including you knows that you were lying your ass off when you said you had answered the question.

    I did answer your question. You are too lazy to look for it. I ain’t you lackey.

    “Well, everybody who has interacted with you surely knows that you’re a chronic liar.”

    That’s a lie. I’ve never said anything here that’s a lie. Name one. You’re lying now about that. You don’t even know what the truth is, befuddled as you are by your own dipshit beliefs.

    “Why should I switch from discussing 9/11 with you, a subject you know fuck-all about, to discussing the Moon landings, another topic you surely know fuck-all about.”

    I evidently know more about 9/11 than you do. And a lot more about the Moon landings, surely. Incidently, you’re still afraid to broach that topic aren’t you? Afraid of what intelligent people will think about you?

    Go on screaming your idiot nonsense into the void, preaching to the half-dozen people here who seemingly revere you as some kind of prophet. Write 20,000 word essays filled up with your witless drivel, for all I care. It won’t change what you are: a pathetic, irrelevant nobody who deludes himself that he is some kind of genius. You aren’t. You are a crank and a nitwit.

  189. Mr. Anon says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    “Well, it’s just because there was the one Gregory Cochran fanboy who was doing Lloyd Bentsen to my Dan Quayle, I guess. Remember that?”

    Not only are you not Gregory Cochran. You’re not even Dan Quayle.

  190. Mr. Anon says:
    @Stonehands

    “I am disinclined to give Hebrew/wood or Talmudvision my time or money.”

    But you didn’t lean such a term by being a secret operative in some shadowy organization. Did you? You learned it from a movie.

    “That’s why you are a knave, Mr Anonstein.”

    And……….of course. I must be jewish, mustn’t I be? Because I disagree with you? Maybe you’re a Jew – a hasbara troll, even. Can you prove you’re not?

    BTW, I agree with a lot of what you say, foreign-policy wise. I don’t like the things our government does in our name, but clearly not in our actual interest.

    But all of that doesn’t mean that your crazy story about the World Trade Centers is true.

    There are things that are true, and things that aren’t.

    • Replies: @Stonehands
  191. @Mr. Anon

    But you didn’t lean such a term by being a secret operative in some shadowy organization. Did you? You learned it from a movie.

    I work in a high volume industry, first in NYC, now Philly.

    Everything you hear in a movie reflects the hustle and bustle, and the froth, that rises to the top of our historical milieu.

    Art imitates LIFE!

    Hell, I might have synthesised the term “wet work”..in my younger salad days..bartending and then owning saloons in the City and restaurants on LI…I was certainly proximate to all sorts of “colorful” nice men.

    Well, I’ve read and agree with a lot of your stances, too, but in this instance we’ll just have to agree to disagree. I wouldn’t make the mistake of lumping those of us who have real qualms with 9/11- with flat earthers, moon landing deniers, etc…the term truthers, and conspiracy theories, I believe was coined by the CIA, who also have access to the hollywood bigs. I believe we are always propagandized by these organs, therefore I chose to reject the electronic culture long ago..

    I also firmly believe that our nation is under spiritual attack for its haughty promotion of feminism, homosexuality abortion, fornication and all things degenerate. Here in Philly they will roll out the King of Gluttony, sitting on top of a giant toilet bowl- cheered on by topless prostitutes, at an affair called Wing Bowl… A father and son “tradition”… Bah.

    So, as America swirls down the drain, silently- don’t say you weren’t warned.

    If the Bible ain’t right, then all we have is nature” red in tooth and claw” and your so called Civil Servants are really Hunters and we are their victims.

  192. @Talha

    Hey JR,

    Good article.

    Hi, Uncle Talha.

    I’m a simple-minded guy who thinks that the purpose of the comment space under the article is, broadly speaking, to discuss the article. Of course, I understand that conversations develop in whatever direction and so forth. But still, it is to discuss the article. So you have the trolls here openly saying that they never read the article (though also saying the article is shit!) and commenting here. I’m getting used to the utter shameless mendacity of some of the people one interacts with here but I still find that kind of thing a little bit shocking.

    So, first of all, I have a suspicion that you have not read the article. I am not sure and I obviously cannot demonstrate that. So I will just ask you to confirm that you have read the article. If you have, I would like you to summarize the main points I made that you are most in agreement with and the ones you most disagree with.

    Lord Cromer, the British Consul to Egypt wrote

    Okay, well, I made a point of googling who Lord Cromer was. I had no idea. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evelyn_Baring,_1st_Earl_of_Cromer

    What I am puzzled about is why you are quoting this rather obscure (at least by now) historical figure and saying what he said about Islam. You’re not providing any context as to why anybody should care what this guy says, nor are you really telling us who this person was, like even what century the dude lived in…

    WTF is the point of the above? This kind of throwing stuff out there to demonstrate your erudition or something, but without really developing an idea. Okay, this seems to be part of the Uncle Talha schtick, but it is rather intellectually unserious. If you want to talk with me, I would like you to refrain from that. If you want to develop an idea, and if developing that idea means telling us about this Cromer guy (who died 100 years ago) and how this fits in, by all means, but just throwing out some out-of-context random factoid to give an impression of your great erudition — it seems pretty masturbatory to me.

    What these voices forget is that there is a reformation going on, just like ‘gay weddings’ are one side of the reformation, so are Salafi/Wahabbi extremists

    Which “extremists”? The religious Muslims who destroyed World Trade Center?

    The ones in the fake beheading videos with the fake blood and everything?

    They do, and I’ve seen some of the most vicious attacks being hurled against Christianity (especially Hitchens and Dawkins).

    Well, what I said was that these people’s anti-religiosity is about 80% Islamophobia, so yes, you will find them shitting on Christianity too. However, what makes these people ideologically useful to the Zionists and is why they are promoted, is the Islamophobia part. If you don’t understand that, then you don’t understand very much. Ask Qasim. He’ll explain it. I’m sure he understands this.

    Look, you’re being willfully obtuse. Anybody can understand why they have to present themselves as being generically anti-religious and not solely as Islamophobes. It’s for the same reason that that Charlie Hebdo rag in Paris had to shit on Christianity once in a while too. But there, again, you would see if you looked at it that 80% of it was shitting on Muslims.

    You see, the basic problem here, Talha, is that if you are a Muslim, these people are your enemies. If you want to be so fucking stupid that you are unable to even know who the enemies of your people are, that is your business, but for me to characterize this as Uncle Tom behavior, or Uncle Talha behavior is, I think, quite accurate.

    I previously came to the conclusion this Uncle Talha was not at all a real person, but some sort of Zio Troll construct. This is because the whole Zionist propaganda line is this Good Muzzie versus Bad Muzzie dialectic. And you always seem to be pushing that. Also, you never show any consciousness of just how cartoonish and fake all these “Radical Islamic terrorists” we are being presented with are.

    Finally, I decided you were a real American Muslim who, in the terms of the above article, has his head full of ARRF. And it is probably true that ARRF and real Islam are incompatible, so you’ve got two incompatible world views floating around in your head and this is why basically you are, in the highly specalized, technical terminology of the article I wrote, so totally brainfucked. It is sad to see, but whatever route out of this you have to take, well, it’s your path, I can only help you very slightly.

    *Note: Yes, that is the heir of the Sokoto Caliphate established by The Shehu (Uthman Dan Fodi) [ra].

    Ah, yeah, there you go again with the Uncle Talha erudition schtick. If you want to keep talking with me (big “if”, I know) please cut that shit out. I don’t like it.

    By all means, bring relevant facts into the conversation, but at least explain how they relate to WTF we’re talking about.

    Thanks,

    JR

    • Replies: @Talha
  193. Talha says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    Dear Nephew JR,

    A few points:
    1) Yes, I did read the whole article – all of it. Thought it was pretty good.
    2) Yup, should have mentioned Lord Cromer was in charge of the modernization/reformation of Egypt (aka ‘White Man’s Burden’) and thus had intimate knowledge of Muslim people and religion – even if from a completely superior attitude.
    3) I think I’m going to go stand over there now – I learned from my mistake; believe me – it won’t happen again.

    Peace.

    P.S. You are still invited for Thanksgiving dinner because, well, that’s what Uncles are for.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  194. Rurik says:
    @Stonehands

    thanks Stonehands,

    May I add that no phenotype will ever survive if it educates its women in secular schools.

    I don’t know Stonehands, look at how it’s all those Christian organizations that are organizing the immigration of Somalis into Minnesota and others elsewhere. Look at how the Pope is demanding open borders for all white nations. Look at how there doesn’t seem to be one Christian leader who will go on record and say Europeans don’t need to be replaced with African and Middle Eastern and Asian Muslims and Jamaicans and everybody else. Where were the Christian leaders as the whites of Zimbabwe were being ethnically cleansed? Archbishop Desmond Tutu (to his credit) spoke out for the blacks, but where is the courageous voice in the Christian Church speaking out for the whites? as they’re racially persecuted and ethnically cleansed from their lands? Where are the Christian voices in opposition to massive and transformative immigration? All I hear is crickets Stonehands.

    If there is a strong and honorable and principled Christian who’s got the integrity to take on the ‘diversity/multiculturalism’ agents of genocide, then who is he/she? What church do they belong to?

    The only religious leaders I know of who’re defending their flocks right to exist are the Muslims and Jews and Hindus (and agnostics like myself). Even the Mormons are going all in for diversity/genocide.

    I just find it difficult to reconcile myself to a spirituality based on personal abasement. I’m not into turning the other cheek and loving my (deadly, genocidal) enemies. And I certainly don’t want to assist them with their grim agenda.

    I do very much consider of the words of Jesus Christ to be sublime (there’s that “French” word again) and beautiful and inspiring, His words about love and charity and peace and forgiveness and kindness and so forth are transcendental, but as for a spirituality that will serve a people as their enemies are driving them to the brink, and invading their lands and kicking their women down the subway stairs and raping their children, as was done recently in Austria~ and then the Christian Austrians say ‘no problem’, we forgive this man who just brutally raped a ten year old Austrian boy. I find such sniveling cowardice and abased spiritual rot to be most disconcerting in the extreme. If I were the Muslims or Jews, I too would figure the only thing worthy of such people, who allow for the rape of their children, would be to crush such sniveling cowards under my immigrant/invader boot with disgust.

    Where are the Christian voices of courage and integrity Stonehands? Why do they all sound so nauseatingly gutless and worm-like?

    look at the entire Christian world. Ireland embracing homosexual marriage, Angela Merkel’s Christian Democrats have not uniformly repudiated their leader, who’s destroying Christian Germany (Christendom) even as we speak. The Pope protects pedophile priests as does the entire Anglican Church in England where their flocks are being overrun and Muslims with gang rape gangs for British school children operate right under their Christian noses, with nary a word of Christian protest, and where I have yet to hear one of them complain about the British government and BCC being a den of paederastists and pedophiles, not to mention war criminals and mass-murderers.

    So, I hope you’ll forgive me if I find the Christian church today wanting when it comes to spiritual vigor and integrity- and uniformly lacking honest men or women willing to protect their flocks from degradation and depravement. They can’t even seem to muster the courage to condemn the Eternal Wars that are slaughtering and displacing millions of innocent souls.

    I swear if you listen, you can hear the shekels clinking under their frocks as they preach an anti-Christ, depraved suicidal surrender from their pulpits. And always, always mention Biblical ‘Israel’ in their sermons for some rea$on.

    now I have to go take a shower after writing about such ‘Christians’ and ‘Christianity’

    (I suspect the Christ is as appalled at the universal cowardice and use of His name by “Christians” to justify mass-murder as some of the rest of us are, if not much, much more so)

    also, I’m not trying to besmirch the good and beautiful Christian people, but rather their anti-Christ- thirty shekels under the frock- Satanic leadership leading them to slaughter. (often literally)

    • Replies: @Stonehands
  195. Rurik says:
    @Mr. Anon

    What fake video? Debunked by whom? What admission by the FBI?

    you’re the one claiming that Osama actually masterminded 9/11, not me. I’m saying that he didn’t, and never claimed to. And that ironically:

    All you have to offer are a bunch of unsubstantiated assertions.

    You guys talk about controlled demolitions without even understanding anything about them. The charges aren’t set off in stages over the course of minutes They’re set off almost all at once, and the building comes down immediately. God, there really is nothing so stupid that you guys won’t credit it.

    how many World Trade Center buildings have you demolished lately?

    are you saying the people in the videos are lying? That the sounds of explosions are faked? That it’s impossible for there to have been some preliminary detonations involved to ‘soften up’ parts of the buildings? Were you part of the team, and can vouch that there were no explosions on that day, and that all the videos and testimony are all a ruse, and Hollywood type actors?

    Just who’s the whack-job ‘conspiracy’ imbecile here anyways?

    First Osama shuts down NORAD, and then the whole government and air force and SACs and implodes building seven and blows up the Pentagon and makes an aircraft disappear in to the ground in Pennsylvania, and now he and his henchmen have created fake videos of NY firemen actors with faked explosions.

    I guess we just don’t give Osama enough credit, huh?

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  196. Mr. Anon says:
    @Rurik

    “You’re the one claiming that Osama actually masterminded 9/11, not me. I’m saying that he didn’t, and never claimed to. And that ironically:”

    I’m not the only one, am I? There are videos of him talking about “the operation” in laudatory terms. Was he in the habit of lauding US Government black-ops? Anyway, nobody ever said Osama bin Laden planned 9/11 – only that he ran the organization that planned it and carried it out.

    “are you saying the people in the videos are lying? That the sounds of explosions are faked?

    Some people think that car backfires are gunfire. A woman reporter said she heard an explosion – and she couldn’t possibly be wrong, could she? Blonde talking heads on TV know exactly what high-explosives sound like, don’t they? People might have misinterpereted any number of sounds as explosions. In any event, it’s possible some shit was exploding, given that big planes had just crashed into the building.

    Or do you deny that big airplanes even hit the building?

    “That it’s impossible for there to have been some preliminary detonations involved to ‘soften up’ parts of the buildings?”

    Yes. That’s likely impossible. Have you ever heard of a demolition job where that was done? Can you name one?

    “Were you part of the team,”

    The team I maintain doesn’t even exist? The team that is a figment of your febrile imagination? No, I was not a part of that team.

    “and can vouch that there were no explosions on that day, and that all the videos and testimony are all a ruse, and Hollywood type actors?”

    Can you vouch that you exist? I think you are a crisis actor.

    “Just who’s the whack-job ‘conspiracy’ imbecile here anyways?”

    You and your cohorts. Quite clearly.

    “First Osama shuts down NORAD, and then the whole government and air force and SACs and implodes building seven and blows up the Pentagon and makes an aircraft disappear in to the ground in Pennsylvania, and now he and his henchmen have created fake videos of NY firemen actors with faked explosions.”

    Quite apart from the other stuff, which you made up, you think all the video from that day was fake? There were no fireman killed? Was anybody killed? If not, why are you so bent out of shape about the whole thing? Was there even a World Trade Center? Or was that all part of some sinister conspiracy?

  197. @Rurik

    Hey, Rurik.

    I have stated often on these boards that the RC church is the end-time abomination- Mystery Babylon…

    The pontifex maximus is a title that the pope has inherited from the pagan mystery religion at Pergemum.

    When you think Christian- picture the Amish, or us independent fundamental Baptists. We are not an organization. We are not Rick Warren or some sort of Baptist convention. No one is in charge. We are not affiliated with any other churches. Just simple literal Bible exhortation among ourselves. Door to door soul winning. Righteous clean living through faith in Jesus Christ. Abundant prayer.

    And Rurik, the Bible eloquently states”that a strong Man cannot be assailed in his own home” -we shoot straight, brother!

    I am pecking away on my phone,very difficult…430 am new years morning, just had a record night At the Pizza joint, with my family…the best revenge is a life well lived..screw the NWO…and happy New year’s to all my anonymous friends and to Ron Unz for such an informative forum…peace!

    • Replies: @utu
    , @Rurik
  198. @ Mr Anon
    Free fall – gravity fall = 32.2 ft/sec/sec

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  199. Mr. Anon says:
    @Salford Lad

    Congratulations – you know a physical constant. So?

  200. utu says:
    @Stonehands

    You do not know what you are missing. The Catholic Church is the last redoubt. Still holding though very weakly being infiltrated by forces that want its destruction. The protestant brothers caved in long time ago. Look at Sweden, UK, Netherlands. They are always the first one to cave in to the forces that some call it modernity. Amish and Baptists will follow too when pressure will be increased. The former are left unmolested because they are inconsequential while the latter are tolerated because they are perfectly suited in the role of useful idiots that was written for them by Zionists.

  201. @utu

    Utu,

    Christ was put to death by the Jews because He proclaimed to be their Messiah- yet He would NOT fight back against their political arch-enemies, the Romans!
    The Jews expected a conquering King and consequently rejected the Prince of Peace.

    Salvation is predicated and efficient for ALL men on the notion that the perfect sinless life of Christ was a perfect atonal sacrifice- by the shedding of His royal blood on the cross and subsequent resurrection from the dead. God had such empathy for His creation that he came to earth as
    the man Jesus and suffered the vicissitudes and temptations and death that we all must go through.

    If man will humble himself and call on Jesus earnestly He will heal him and “graft them” on to the olive tree (Israel).

    When Christ’s work on the cross was finished, it indicated the end of the Levite intermediary necessity And this the completion of the Old covenant and the beginning of the New…

    Now, man is capable of communicating directly with God through a PERSONAL relationship with Jesus…

    There is no “corporate” salvation or protection through something called the “Vatican”, nor can performing their “works” (sacraments) earn your way into heaven…works are the fruit of belief, not vice- versa, lest man boast!

  202. @Laugh Track

    In summary, Orwell’s prose, 1500 words; ordinary prose, 3000 words; Revulsion prose, 12000 words. However, if one’s goal is to boggle the reader’s mind with hundreds of non-sequiturs, 3000 words is pretty limiting!

  203. @Talha

    1) Yes, I did read the whole article – all of it. Thought it was pretty good.

    “Pretty good”, huh? What does that mean, just “good” or “plusgood” without quite reaching the level of “doubleplusgood”?

    But okay, “good”. Well, what was “good” about it? The spacing of the paragraphs maybe?

    In my previous response to you, I said that the reason you were so brainfucked is because you are a Muslim whose head is full of ARRF. That is not a pure throwaway insult. I meant something very specific by that. Assuming you read the article, you ought to understand what I meant by that. In your opinion, what did I mean by that?

    2) Yup, should have mentioned Lord Cromer was in charge of the modernization/reformation of Egypt (aka ‘White Man’s Burden’) and thus had intimate knowledge of Muslim people and religion – even if from a completely superior attitude.

    Well, the problem here goes beyond the fact that Lord Cromer is a rather obscure historical figure and that nobody would have any notion of who that is, or why they should give a hoot what this guy says about anything.

    The deeper problem is that you are representing that you are a Muslim who cares very much about his religion, yet you are seemingly unable or afraid to present your own opinion on such a topic. So you start talking about what some obscure historical personage said instead.

    Of course the problem could be this issue that is endemic with people who read too much. They start to have a tendency just to repeat things they read rather than bring any of their own thinking into anything.

    But really, the real, core issue here is that if you believe in your religion and it comes from God, why would that religion, Islam in this case, need some sort of “reformation” to make it compatible with a secular ideology like ARRF? (Or liberal democracy, whatever the hell that really is….) Could you explain your thinking about this issue without making any reference to obscure historical figures like Lord Cromer and what they said? I don’t care what Lord Cromer thought about whatever it is. I’m asking you what you think.

    that’s what Uncles are for.

    Well, the reason I call you Uncle Talha is by analogy with the “Uncle Tom” term that African-Americans use. This a useful concept that is not unique to the American Negro by any means. An Uncle Tom or an Uncle Talha is somebody who feels a greater identification with his people’s oppressors than with his own people. It’s a psychological phenomenon probably related at least somewhat to Stockholm Syndrome.

    You are a sad case. For all of Rehmat’s evident faults, at least that is a Muslim who knows who his enemies are. And he doesn’t feel any pathological need to play kissy kissy with them and simply does not reflect the kind of boot-licking subservience that you feel is your lot, apparently — even on a web forum where you have anonymity.

    • Replies: @Talha
  204. @utu

    The Catholic Church is the last redoubt.

    Within a Western European Christian tradition, I think you’re probably right. At least in the big picture. The protestant sects have all gone full blown ARRF for the most part.

    But I think the Eastern Orthodox Church is still traditionalist and anti-ARRF.

    And then there is Islam, which is what is really under attack the most. This whole meme that Islam needs a “reformation” is just code that means that Islam should ARRF-ize. I asked Uncle Talha what he thought of that and he started quoting some obscure 19th century limey. I guess that is to evade giving any real opinion of his own.

    A really ARRF-ized religion is Reform Judaism, with lesbian rabbis and gay marriages and so forth. All the dietary laws are just optional and so on. What I wonder about current-day Reform Judaism is whether it is a branch of Judaism that has been made ARRF compatible or is it best understood as a branch of ARRF with vestigial Judaic elements?

  205. @Rurik

    Rurik, could you please focus on the following question and answer it?

    In terms of the basic issue you are talking about, the eventual disappearance of your “phenotype’ or whatever, which is the bigger problem?

    A. The refugee problem with so many Muslim refugees flooding into Europe.

    B. The fact that in a country like Germany, the average white female has 1.3 children.

    You are answering me as if I am saying that A is not an issue at all. But I am not saying that. I am saying that B is actually the BIGGER issue. Moreover, the reason for A is that the AngloZionists decided to gratuitously destroy all these Muslim countries — Iraq, Libya, Syria…

    Here is another question for you:

    How many Muslims do you think there are in the various European countries at this moment? Consider this article:

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2016/12/14/most-countries-hugely-overestimate-their-muslim-population-infographic/#5e319e762180

    I found the above very striking in terms of just how much people overestimate the size of the Muslim immigrant population, when asked.

    You seem to be very plugged into a very right-wing echo chamber and just be repeating talking points. There is no rape epidemic in these countries, you know. I’ve looked for evidence of this and it’s just not there. I don’t see any travel advisories telling women not to visit Sweden because they’ll get raped and so forth. The notion that Sweden is somehow the “Rape Capital of the World” is just not true.

    THe problem is that this kind of hysterical hyperbole just tends to discredit people because everybody who is not plugged into this right-wing echo chamber knows perfectly well that Sweden is not the “Rape Capital of the World”. These statements are so overblown that people with your viewpoint just tend to discredit yourselves. Can’t you see that? Apparently not, but you should try to.

    Now, okay, there are surely cases, but so much of this just turns out to be a hoaxes in the end. They say that last year at New Years, there was all this mass raping going on in the Cologne train station. Well, where’s the video footage? Everybody has a video camera in their pockets. How can there not be any video footage?

    https://www.rt.com/news/353911-cologne-woman-rape-allegations/

    Or there was this woman Marcia Adair who was in the Cologne railway station when all this mass raping was going on, and she didn’t see anything! How is that possible?

    http://news.nationalpost.com/news/world/i-was-in-cologne-on-new-years-theres-a-reason-to-be-afraid-and-its-because-of-other-peoples-fear

    Or consider:

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/31/teenage-girl-made-up-migrant-claim-that-caused-uproar-in-germany

    Rurik, you’re just letting them play you a fiddle with this stuff. Okay, there are surely some cases of crimes, but the high profile ones, as I see it, pretty much invariably turn out to be hoaxes. The whole story that Swedish or German girls are getting raped right left and center by mobs of swarthy Arab men — this doesn’t seem to be happening. It’s just a racist fantasy that goes into some echo chamber really.

    You express admiration for my articles but then you don’t seem to understand key parts of them. The part in this article about being “Partially Pregnant” — it’s about taking one issue and not being able to connect the dots and see the whole thing. The bigger issue with what I call ARRF is the cratering of the birth rate. Even if you reduce immigration to zero, you’re not going to solve the problem if the average white woman has 1.3 children!

    Can’t you see that?

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    , @Rurik
  206. Mr. Anon says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    “Even if you reduce immigration to zero, you’re not going to solve the problem if the average white woman has 1.3 children!”

    Sure you can. A nation’s population doesn’t need to expand without any limit, nor can it. Even a numerically smaller European population can defend their borders if they have the will to do it.

    By the way – do you favor reducing immigration into western lands?

    I hope everyone here has taken notice of what appears to be one of Revusky’s actual agendas – apologizing for the often loathesome behavior of muslim invaders in the West.

    Do you think Rotherham was a “hoax” too?

    And, why all of a sudden to you consider mainstream media sources like the National Post and the Guardian to be trustworthy on this matter that is evidently so near and dear to you?

  207. “Even if you reduce immigration to zero, you’re not going to solve the problem if the average white woman has 1.3 children!”

    Sure you can. A nation’s population doesn’t need to expand without any limit, nor can it.

    Hey, I got news for you, Genius Boy:

    Any ethnic/racial group — whether white people or black people or purple people — that has far less than 2 children per woman will face a collapse of its population.

    You got that?

    AND, since nature abhors a vacuum, will eventually be replaced by some other population. This point is essentially irrefutable, okay?

    Your whole shill agenda is to concentrate on Islamophobia. The only thing that we should care about is how beastly Muslims are. (“They stink and they make wanna puke blah blah blah blah”) and then pretend that it doesn’t matter that the birth rate has cratered, that the average German white woman has 1.3 offspring. “Oh, that doesn’t matter at all…. it’s these dirty Muslims, dirty Muslims, dirty Muslims….”

    By the way – do you favor reducing immigration into western lands?

    As a general proposition, yes, but in terms of the concerns of the person I was answering, I was pointing out that the larger problem is the cratering of the birth rate. It is not the fault of Syrian or Libyan refugees that (A) the AngloZionists destroyed their country OR (B) that the average White German female has 1.3 children.

    The agenda of a shill like you is to blow smoke to such an extent that people cannot see what the first order issues are.

    I hope everyone here has taken notice of what appears to be one of Revusky’s actual agendas – apologizing for the often loathesome behavior of muslim invaders in the West.

    No, it’s responding to the continual slanders. There were no mass rapes in the Cologne rail station last New Year’s Eve. If there had been there would be some video footage of it. Sweden is not the “Rape Capital of the World”.

    You’re a fucking shill. I see the agenda of people like you. It’s all about manipulating people to hate Muslims rather than analyzing what’s really going on. Somebody provides some comprehensive analysis and your response is going to be: “Muslims, muslims, muslims…”

    The whole issue is Muslims. This is the Gatestone Institute and Pamela Geller and the whole network of these outfits that spread hatred of Muslims.

    Do you think Rotherham was a “hoax” too?

    No, each thing has to be investigated on a case by case basis and no, I don’t think that Rotherham was a hoax. On the other hand, the mass rapes in the Cologne railway station were a hoax. That simply did not happen.

    But anyway, I can’t continue this conversation with you. It’s just too mentally unhygienic and disgusting because I’m dealing with somebody who just has no respect for the truth. You don’t care what is actually true or not. You’re like that Wizard of Oz scumbag. You just say anything. You’re just a complete degenerate.

    And you are particularly shameless. You get caught in a lie. Like, I earlier asked you what the best available proof of Bin Laden/Al Qaeda being behind 9/11 was. You never answered the question. I ask you again on this page and you claim that you answered the question. I say, show me the link where you answered the question and then you say the onus is on me to find it! The onus is on me to find something that I’m saying (correctly!) does not exist!

    Anyway, you say you answered. What was your answer? What is the strongest proof available that the attacks of 9/11 were orchestrated by this shadowy group called Al Qaeda from faroff Afghanistan? Tell us.

    And, why all of a sudden to you consider mainstream media sources like the National Post and the Guardian to be trustworthy on this matter that is evidently so near and dear to you?

    Well, I never said that it was impossible to glean any factual information from the MSM. Look, on a concrete thing like these girls making the false rape accusations, that seems to be the case. The rape accusations are false and that further implies that somebody put these girls up to it. I doubt very much that they came up with the idea of doing this themselves.

    That much is established. Specifically on the Cologne rail station thing, if you say something like that happened, then the onus is on you to provide some proof. Just the same as, when you say that Osama Bin Laden did 9/11, the onus is on you to tell us what the proof of this is.

    The problem, when you argue with a shit eating shill bastard like you is simply that your whole game is that you never recognize that there is any onus on you to demonstrate anything. So you claim that you answered a question, I ask you for the link of where you answered and the answer is that I am supposed to find it! The onus is ALWAYS on the other person to demonstrate something to you, never any onus on you to demonstrate anything. This is the game you shit eaters play. Continually.

    AND I documented it in at least one of my articles, the tactics you guys use. So why you think I’m the one who is going to fall for this, that is beyond me. But I can’t play any further at this. It’s just a waste of my time. I just point out the basic game you guys play and say that I decline to play it.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    , @Miro23
  208. Mr. Anon says:

    “Any ethnic/racial group — whether white people or black people or purple people — that has far less than 2 children per woman will face a collapse of its population.”

    Collapse? No. Reduction. Yes. It need only be temporary.

    “AND, since nature abhors a vacuum, will eventually be replaced by some other population. This point is essentially irrefutable, okay?”

    They can be replaced by their own people rather than another. – as the Japanese show every intent of doing. Something is not “irrefutable” simply because you say it is so.

    “No, it’s responding to the continual slanders. There were no mass rapes in the Cologne rail station last New Year’s Eve.”

    And nobody said there was. What was reported was mass sexual assault – groping, threatening, up to and perhaps including rape.

    “If there had been there would be some video footage of it.”

    Right, because:

    1.) The first instinct of a threatened woman is to photograph her attackers, and

    2.) You Tube would never dream of censoring any such videos, would they?

    ” Sweden is not the “Rape Capital of the World”.”

    Which has nothing to do with whether or not there has been a sharp increase of rapes due to foreigners.

    “It’s all about manipulating people to hate Muslims rather than analyzing what’s really going on. Somebody provides some comprehensive analysis and your response is going to be: “Muslims, muslims, muslims…””

    No, I don’t hate them. I just don’t want them here. However I’m not going to pretend and tell myself they’re something other than what they are.

    “Scumbag”. “Degenerate”. “Bastard”. “Shill”. “Troll”. “Scum”.

    Is use of such language part of your socratic method? Your reasoned search for truth? It is obvious that you consider anyone who disagrees with you a “shill” and a “troll”. As to the others, you’re a fine one to throw around words like that. You casually call people who have had loved ones murdered liars – say their relatives never existed even. You’re just like all those dead-voiced weirdo losers on YouTube promoting their false-flag videos.

    You seem to be a sick, deranged sociopath. You are certainly an ineffectual nobody – a loser who has no voice beyond a few marginal conspiracy sites. You influence nothing and nobody of any consequence. The world will not notice you when you are gone, any more than it notices you now. Your lifes’ work is worthless crap. Your legacy nothing but deluded ramblings archived on web pages no one will ever visit.

    Clown.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  209. Mr. Anon says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    ““It’s all about manipulating people to hate Muslims rather than analyzing what’s really going on. Somebody provides some comprehensive analysis and your response is going to be: “Muslims, muslims, muslims…”””

    And you excuse away virtually every crime committed by muslims by saying that they never even took place or were committed by shadowy unkown forces.

    “The problem, when you argue with a shit eating shill bastard like you is simply that your whole game is that you never recognize that there is any onus on you to demonstrate anything.”

    When have you ever offered proof for you contentions? What have you ever demonstrated? You just say: Well, 2500 architects and engineers say otherwise, so Nertz! Every post I’ve read by you (the ones I bothered to read anyway – you are not worth reading in any depth) are just about completely fact free. You just wave your arms and cry out “shill”, “troll”, “scum” or the like.

  210. @Mr. Anon

    “Any ethnic/racial group — whether white people or black people or purple people — that has far less than 2 children per woman will face a collapse of its population.”

    Collapse? No. Reduction. Yes. It need only be temporary.

    Well, it’s temporary insofar as the low birth rate is temporary. If it continues for a couple of generations, then… well, you do the math…

    Anyway, the same argument could be made regarding the high rate of immigration. It’s temporary and will reverse itself. Well, maybe. Maybe not. The point is that if you project forward, with current trends intact, it’s true that you eventually get population replacement, but the main reason for that is the low birth rate, not the immigration.

    “No, it’s responding to the continual slanders. There were no mass rapes in the Cologne rail station last New Year’s Eve.”

    And nobody said there was.

    Sure they said it. They even had some girls making up false rape accusations.

    What was reported was mass sexual assault – groping, threatening, up to and perhaps including rape.

    Well, even if it falls short of full rape, these are still serious accusations. Is there any proof of any of it? I scoured the internet, not just youtube, looking for any video. There’s nothing. How can all this mayhem occur in a wide open public place on New Year’s Eve and there be no video in 2016? Makes no sense. It didn’t happen.

    But okay, maybe I’m wrong, so produce some proof. Your whole game is that the onus is always on the other person to produce proof of whatever and nothing on you. You never bring anything into a discussion.

    I asked you what the proof was that there 9/11 was done by Osama Bin Laden, Al Qaeda etcetera. You refused to answer the question and then you lied claiming you already had answered the question.

    Basically, you have the basic shit eater modus operandi. The shit eater regurgitates whatever bullshit. You ask him what the proof is. He can’t produce any, so typically he just repeats the bullshit. And that’s about where it is. And then the shit eater continually asks you for proof of whatever, probably would ask you to prove that the sun rises in the east or that water is wet.

    ” Sweden is not the “Rape Capital of the World”.”

    Which has nothing to do with whether or not there has been a sharp increase of rapes due to foreigners.

    Well, that could be. But again, you never bring any actual facts or data into the discussion. It’s just repetition of whatever talking point. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if the crime rates are somewhat higher in Sweden than back when Sweden was a homogeneous ethnostate, but I assume that back when the crime rate was really extremely low. Current-day Sweden is not a crime-ridden place and is most certainly not the “Rape Capital of the World”. All this hysterical bullshit just gets tiresome because you can’t have a sane, reasonable conversation with anybody who is engaging in that.

    No, I don’t hate them. I just don’t want them here.

    Well, okay, that’s a viewpoint and you’re not the only person who feels that way. But that is no justification for making up hysterical bullshit.

    “Scumbag”. “Degenerate”. “Bastard”. “Shill”. “Troll”. “Scum”.

    Is use of such language part of your socratic method?

    No, it’s just my being completely open in terms of showing my utter contempt for a shit eating lying scumbag such as you.

    What’s your grievance, shit eater? You come to this page with this kind of smarmy, insolent demeanor. Everybody with a grain of sense knows you’re up to no good. You’re not here to discuss the article. You almost certainly have not even read the article. WTF are you doing here?

    And also, you just shamelessly lie. I asked you what the proof of the Osama BIn Laden story was and you claimed that you had already answered the question! This is just a lie!

    I don’t like liars. You have this idea that, because I call out all these lies about Muslims, I must be in favor of mass immigration. Well, no, not really. I just don’t like lies and I don’t like people repeating lies.

    That, by the way, is why I despise that Uncle Talha asshole. I mean, people just make up all these lies about his people and he won’t call them out. He has such a boot licking, lickspittle mentality, it’s genuinely disgusting. Well, that guy must be some sort of operator, but I haven’t figured it out…

    The thing about somebody like you is that you do not even rise to the level of being a liar. An actual liar knows what the truth is and consciously chooses to say something other than the truth. People like you actually live in a kind of post-Truth mental world of some sort. “Truthiness” or something. It’s creepy.

    Anyway, you never bring anything factual or real into a discussion. It’s just repeating shit. Oh, yes, it’s perfectly normal that the BBC reports the collapse of a steel-framed building 20 minutes before it happens. Oh, yes, it’s perfectly plausible that building 7 can implode with near-perfect symmetry as a result of untended fires. Oh, yes, the sun rose in the west this morning and a virgin immaculately conceived. Whatever.

    This really must be the end of the line now. I can’t waste any more time with your bullshit. You’re a shit eating scumbag. Go fuck yourself.

  211. alexander says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    I hate to use crude or offensive imagery, JR.

    But if you imagine our catastrophic foreign policies over the last 16 years as essentially, smashing, crushing and dismembering six countries in the middle east(that never actually attacked us) then one should also imagine enormous quantities of Blood from these heinous assaults…splattering all over the place.

    Although crude, this is not an unfair analogy to the massive swarms of refugees from the countries we have decimated.

    “Blood splatter” !

    Did anyone not anticipate it ?,……… that somehow our relentless “chopping up” of all these countries would not produce a refugee crisis of astounding proportions ?.

    If there is one more exclamation point to be put on the titanic failures of these Neocon foreign policies…it is the catastrophic hemorrhaging of all these people onto our shores.

    Just one more reason to hold them all in utter contempt.

    • Replies: @utu
  212. Mr. Anon says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    I didn’t bother to read your loghoreic screed. Why would I? Why would anybody? You ask for evidence of this and that, but you never offer any evidence for your fantastic claims. You apparently have no conception what truth even is.

    You are a mentally deranged sociopath and a vile piece of shit.

    Oh, and it goes without saying , you are a nothing – a hollow, empty nothing of a man. You seem to imagine yourself to be important, but you are just about the most useless, most unimportant thing one could imagine – yet another fevered conspiracy scribbler on the internet, banging out mental self-abuse on his keyboard. Just come to grips with the fact that you are irrelevant and that your life is of no consequence at all.

    • Replies: @jacques sheete
  213. Mr. Anon says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    “That, by the way, is why I despise that Uncle Talha asshole. I mean, people just make up all these lies about his people and he won’t call them out. He has such a boot licking, lickspittle mentality, it’s genuinely disgusting. Well, that guy must be some sort of operator, but I haven’t figured it out…”

    And you probably wonder why you have so few fans. Here a guy writes you a nice note, discusses things with you in a polite tone. He even says he liked your article. And so you call him an asshole and a lickspittle and imply that he is some kind of spy. I guess anyone who disagrees with you is a troll, a spy, an “operator”. You sound like a paranoid lunatic, as indeed you give every evidence of being.

    Well, I’m not going to say anything nice about you. You’re a deranged sociopath. You have a diseased mind.

    “The thing about somebody like you is that you do not even rise to the level of being a liar. An actual liar knows what the truth is and consciously chooses to say something other than the truth. People like you actually live in a kind of post-Truth mental world of some sort. “Truthiness” or something. It’s creepy.”

    You’re projecting quite a bit here. You’re the one with no concept of the truth. And if there is anything that practically defines the word “creepy” it is the casual way you dispense with any truth that contradicts your highly distorted view of the world.

    Fortunately you have no influence in the world. You are a demented crank – an irrelevant loser, howling into the wilderness. Nobody gives a shit what you think.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  214. Mr. Anon says:
    @Talha

    Hey Talha,

    See what your good opinions of and kind words to Mr. Revusky have bought you? He called you an asshole and a lickspittle. He shows such respectful regard for his readers, doesn’t he?

    • Replies: @Talha
  215. utu says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    Something tells me that Mr. Anon is Jewish. Of LIQJ variety.

  216. Talha says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    Hey Nephew,

    At the risk of getting more invective from you…

    But really, the real, core issue here is that if you believe in your religion and it comes from God, why would that religion, Islam in this case, need some sort of “reformation” to make it compatible with a secular ideology like ARRF?

    It needs no reformation – if you’ve been reading anything that I have written in my comments then you will know that I have no shame stating; Islam needs no reformation, it is sound and coherent in its beliefs and rock solid in its foundations.

    Muslims would do well to drop the reformation nonsense (which is the problem) and come back to its 14 century-old tradition.

    Peace – you are still invited to Thanksgiving because Uncle Talha loves all his nieces and nephews. I’m going to go stand over there again, because I don’t like getting my shirt wet.

  217. Talha says:
    @Mr. Anon

    Yeah – it’s the internet – meh – what’re you going to do? I’m responsible for my behavior, he’s responsible for his.

    This article is his ‘sandbox’ if he doesn’t want to let people play or share the tools, it’s his thing. Makes for a lonely sandbox though.

    To his credit – he is defending Islam from false attacks and that is super important to me and calling out people who BS. I try to refute with logic and evidence, but sometimes JR’s way is more direct even if I would never personally do it.

    He can tear me a new ear for all I care, insults don’t get to me much. It’s funny, but he has good intentions even when insulting me. I wish him the best, though I don’t agree with his approach.

    Peace.

    PS. I have learned to limit my interactions; his IFF seems to be off-kilter.

  218. Rurik says:
    @Stonehands

    Hey Stonehands,

    When you think Christian- picture the Amish,

    they can practice their passive ways only because they’re surrounded by men with guns who protect the lands that surround them. If they plopped an Amish or Mennonite community in the middle of Detroit or Iraq or Libya or Syria- they’re women would be raped and their men slaughtered in not time flat.

    Just simple literal Bible exhortation among ourselves. Door to door soul winning. Righteous clean living through faith in Jesus Christ. Abundant prayer.

    And Rurik, the Bible eloquently states”that a strong Man cannot be assailed in his own home” -we shoot straight, brother!

    well amen to defending you and yours! But I’m not too keen on “literal Bible” stuff. I respect your right to believe whatever buoys your soul, but I’m rather more into the ‘science stuff’.

    God bless Stonehands, you seem like one of the Christians for whom I have such respect – not braying fealty to men in (clinking) frocks

  219. Rurik says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    Hey JR,

    disappearance of your “phenotype’ or whatever, which is the bigger problem?

    A. The refugee problem with so many Muslim refugees flooding into Europe.

    B. The fact that in a country like Germany, the average white female has 1.3 children.

    I like the idea of a reduced number of sheer humans. I think there’s too many of us, and I’d be all for us returning the planet t0 a more pristine condition with a resurgent wild fauna. I suspect life is more satisfying when we share it with more of nature, rather than less.

    So obviously I’m not too concerned about the low birthrates. And consider the entire problem one of a mass spiritual castration of Western peoples with ubiquitous denigration of their right to exist by the forces of cultural Marxism and liberalism and multiculturalism = Western suicide/genocide.

    Moreover, the reason for A is that the AngloZionists decided to gratuitously destroy all these Muslim countries — Iraq, Libya, Syria…

    I don’t think so. They’ve [*Jews, liberals, non-whites] just used that as an excuse to further destroy Western civilization and its people. Western civilization didn’t destroy Africa and S. America. Indeed, it’s directly due to the medical and other advances that Western civilization has made available to the rest of the world that is directly responsible for the population explosion. And now they’re just coming to where the bennies are. The destabilisations and mass-murders in Syria and Libya and Iraq and others are a direct consequence of Zionists and other assorted criminals like the Saudis and Turks and super-Zionists like John McBloodstain. They should be the ones to pay for their crimes, not ten year old boys in Austria. (*no mater how many people consider such a child just another little Hitler in the making who got what he deserved)

    I found the above very striking in terms of just how much people overestimate the size of the Muslim immigrant population, when asked.

    first off, it isn’t about the numbers today, but the trajectory that is alarming. And it doen’t take too many of them (non-westerners, including Muslims) to destroy entire communities for the working class people who used to inhabit them, but are driven out, or worse, forced to stay and watch their school age daughters raped by Muslim gangs.

    Let me ask you, how many daughters do you think a nation should tolerate being raped and sold on the block by Muslim gangs of rapists before the Muslim immigrants become of dubious merit? (I’m talking about places like Rotherham of course)

    The notion that Sweden is somehow the “Rape Capital of the World” is just not true.

    according to Wiki it is beat out by S. Africa, but check out those numbers. Rape has more than doubled in Sweden in less than ten years to alarming levels. Because Sweden used to be such a safe and even almost utopian place. Now their rape statistics are almost off the charts, and certainly virtually all of that is coming from Muslim and African immigrants.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics

    Just consider the case of one Swedish girl, Elin Krantz. A Swede working in for the police leaked photos of her murder scene because he knew the authorities would never allow such pictures to be published. (They would negatively impact the Swedish people’s feelings about the joys of diversity!) Anyways, if you asked me how many victims like Elin did I consider worth it, in order to celebrate the joys of diversity and multiculturalism, I’d say exactly zero. And that if there were a probability that with every ten thousand or so immigrants, that there’d be at least one more Elin Krantz, then I’d send the whole lot packing home to where they belonged. (But that’s just me. ;)

    girls are getting raped right left and center by mobs of swarthy Arab men

    here are photos of Muslim men who were convicted of raping hundreds of British school girls

    You express admiration for my articles but then you don’t seem to understand key parts of them

    I do have admiration for your articles, and your insights and your intelligence and your principled stands on myriad issues of critical importance JR, and all the memes your creating like synthetic events and Roger Rabbit narratives and so much more. It’s just on this one issue that we don’t see things the same, and that’s not a question of truth so much as perspective. Next to the Eternal Wars, the immigration issue is the issue of the day. It’s the issue that drove the Brexit vote. It’s the issue that gave Trump the presidency and is driving the sanity movement all over Europe with Marine Le Pen and others. And it is one of perspective. If you’re a Somali living in Africa, then your lot in life is going to be materially advanced by immigrating to Minnesota. If you’re a Pakistani or Algerian or Indian, then you’d be a fool not to want to immigrate into Western Europe. But if you’re a German or Swede or Brit, then allowing millions of Muslims and Asians and African immigrant to immigrate into your countries and then start breeding like rabbits is going to bode very bad for the future of the German or British people. And it’s those people whom I sympathize with because they’re under an existential, civilizational and epic, era-ending siege by those who would see them genocided off the planet for all eternity. If I were a Muslim from Morocco, then I’d be advocating for unlimited immigration into England and everywhere else that was a heaven compared to my impoverished village in my own country. And also they get the added benefit of putting it to whitey, for whom a lot of Muslims and Jews and third worlders the world over have lots and lots of resentment for.

    Does that make sense?

  220. @utu

    Something tells me that Mr. Anon is Jewish. Of LIQJ variety.

    What is LIQJ? Likud?

    • Replies: @utu
  221. @Mr. Anon

    He even says he liked your article.

    Yeah, he said it was… uhhh…. fairly good

    I made love with Julia Roberts. How was it, you ask? Oh, it was uhh… fairly good

    Anyway, I asked Uncle Talha what was “good” about the article and he never answered…. Well, okay, fine, he answered…. it was fairly good…. I had gay sex with Gregory Cochran…. meh, it was uhhh… fairly good….

    Look, I used to play poker for a living. One has to get used to detecting when people are running a bluff. The difference between you and Talha in this regard is that Talha recognizes that he is supposed to have read the article, so he claims he read the article. But then, of course, when you ask him what was good about the article, he can’t answer because, well,… c’mon… he never read it!

    You, on the other hand, don’t even recognize that you are supposed to have read the article you are commenting under! You just say the article is garbage and shit and so forth and then casually say that you never read it! In poker terms, you’re like one of these compulsive bluffers, who is just always in there betting aggressively and everybody with any sense knows this guy just about never has any cards of any sort.

    You never have anything, no real argument to speak of. Because it’s not just that you didn’t read my article. You don’t really read anything. You don’t know anything. It’s just completely obvious in the conversation. You’re just a complete know-nothing. You’re like the compulsive bluffer who has no cards and thinks he’s going to bull his way through by sheer aggressiveness and the force of his personality or something.

    Look, why don’t you go do that somewhere else? You’re totally out of your league here trying to fuck around with me. Go look at the archives here. Nobody here has ever laid a glove on me in a debate and a mental midget like you is certainly not going to do so.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    , @Mr. Anon
  222. utu says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    LIQJ – low IQ Jew. I am aping you in creating acronyms.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  223. Mr. Anon says:
    @utu

    “Something tells me that Mr. Anon is Jewish. Of LIQJ variety.”

    Is everyone who disagrees with you Jewish?

    But in answer to you speculation, I am not an LIQJ, nor a HIQJ, nor even a J at all.

  224. Mr. Anon says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    “Yeah, he said it was… uhhh…. fairly good…”

    Wow. He committed the crime of Lese Majeste by tacitly insulting the world renowned (well – not really – mostly unkown actually) Jonathan Revusky.

    “I made love with Julia Roberts. How was it, you ask? Oh, it was uhh… fairly good…”

    You have the self-regard of a rap-singer. Well, if that’s your standard – you think your Julia Roberts – why don’t you just f**k yourself, and stop expecting other people to blow you.

    “You, on the other hand, don’t even recognize that you are supposed to have read the article you are commenting under! You just say the article is garbage and shit and so forth and then casually say that you never read it!”

    Everything I’ve ever read by you is shit. Why would I read this?

    “You’re just a complete know-nothing.”

    I know a lot more than you do – helluva lot more. But, whatever, I don’t care what a nobody like you thinks about me.

    “Look, why don’t you go do that somewhere else? You’re totally out of your league here trying to fuck around with me.”

    Totally out of the league of a deranged paranoid nitwit? Sounds good to me. I don’t want to be in that league.

    “Nobody here has ever laid a glove on me in a debate and a mental midget like you is certainly not going to do so.”

    You’ve got a pretty high opinion of yourself. Incompetents like you always overestimate their competence. You got chased out of the iSteve forum because you revealed yourself to be an ignoramus and a petulant clown. Now you only hang out here in your own little crank ghetto, where you can count on getting your ego stroked by your small coterie of fawning admirers.

    I’d say your pathetic, except that you engender no pity.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  225. Mr. Anon says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    “Yeah, he said it was… uhhh…. fairly good…

    I made love with Julia Roberts. How was it, you ask? Oh, it was uhh… fairly good…”

    For the benefit of your readers (who have already suffered enough) could you at least let them know how they are expected to reply to you?

    That reading your article was better than sex? More important than the birth of thier first child? A greater contribution to mankind than the Bible? Or should they just say “Me so horny. Me love you long-time!”?

    How exactly do you expect your readers to, metaphorically, suck you off?

  226. utu says:
    @Rurik

    On islam, islamophobia, muslims I side with JR. We are being played. It is possible that the ultimate goal is to destroy Western societies of Europe as you think but the immediate goal is to transform Europe into America with all its ills plus raise the level of support for the Zionist project to American level. The muslims will play the same role as Blacks in America which will turn all issue into racial/ethnic issue rendering them forever unsolvable.

    No decent social safety net because of Blacks (remember Welfare queens of Reagan?).
    No decent public housing because of Blacks.
    Most brutal and heavy handed police force in Western world. BLM was created so the problem of police brutality would be framed in racial terms rendering it unsolvable by turning Whites into idiots liking police brutality.

    A perfect society for the neoliberal master class that to succeed needs polarized society with low mutual empathy and police state level of law enforcement.

    On the other hand the acceptance of Zionist project may actually offer a temporary breather from the pressure of multi-ethnic integration (more so in Europe than in America). This is how we are being played by Zionists. Breivik was the harbinger of this project. Basically the Zionists tell us through unwitting spokesmen like Trump that they will ease the pressure form the Left (also Jews like Barbara Spectre) and let you wave national flags all f…ng day and talk about national pride on Fox news 24/7 and fantasize about immigration restrictions and about building the wall (like in Israel, right?) but you must support Israel with no questions asks. No more talks about boycotts, no more UN resolutions,… Israel is now the official center of the world with capital in Jerusalem awaiting for the Messiah that will rule over all nations. To get anything done in London or Moscow or Washington you will have to file you application or petition in Jerusalem. And don’t forget bringing the gifts.

    Marine Le Pen knows it so she made up with Israel lobby in France several years ago. The traditional Right (like that of her father) in Europe was suspicious of Jews and often openly anti-Semitic. But the New Right sees Israel as the bright light from which the salvation comes to stop the threat from muslims (a typical Steve Sailer’s schtick). Israel is the shining example for how to deal with muslims. And the hope for the salvation and the determination to support Israel increases with every rape committed or reportedly committed by muslims, every terrorist attack committed or reportedly committed by muslims and so on. The new right tossed anti-Semitism and replaced it with Islamophobia and adoration for Israel.

    They played a perfect pincer movement. From the Left we have Barbara Spectre and if you do not like what she has to offer you can turn right where Bibi Netanyahu is already waiting for you. That’s pretty much all the choice you got. And if you opt for Netanyahu do not delude yourself that Barbara Spectre will completely go away. She will be waiting for another swing of pendulum.

    Is it possible that they may overplay their game? Would New Right turn anti Jewish and eventually anti Israel? I doubt it. I think they know what they are doing. They are pretty confident. They even let Putin flex his muscles in Syria and temporary went against their plans. Apparently the plans are bigger than Syria. Syria can wait. And Trump is the part of the plan whether he knows it or not.

    • Replies: @jacques sheete
    , @Rurik
  227. @Rurik

    It’s a very rare occasion when you don’t make sense Rurik, I can’t think of any.

    I’ve had the pleasure of living in the UK, the US and Australia thanks to having two passports and a green card. I grew up in a lovely part of England that really had a great quality of life. I no longer recognise the place now and places that used to be safe for all are now quite dangerous to all.

    I travelled extensively in the ZUSA and used to visit Montana a couple of times a year. I remember the very first time I drove into beautiful Missoula and saw Mexican graffiti sprayed on walls there. LA was a nice place too (if you like that sort of sprawl). Most of the people were friendly and very laid back. That has all changed and for sure massive immigration has contributed more than just a little.

    Australia is fast heading down that path now. Whereas previous migrants were selected for their likelihood of being good contributors the most recent hordes are mostly from the third world, they get very generous benefits and will be on them for life. Australia even imports Africans whilst its indigenous people lag far behind. People come in as “refugees” escaping wars but as soon as they have Australian passports they go back to visit family.

    In all three of these locations the people are their own worst enemies because to voice any concerns results in being branded a racist.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  228. @utu

    LIQJ – low IQ Jew.

    Ah, I see. Kind of like a black man with a small penis. ;-)

    I am aping you in creating acronyms.

    That’s great. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

  229. @Mr. Anon

    “I made love with Julia Roberts. How was it, you ask? Oh, it was uhh… fairly good…”

    You have the self-regard of a rap-singer.

    Good grief. You are such a nitwit. Surely everybody understands that the sarcastic “I made love with Julia Roberts” means specifically that I DID NOT make love with Julia Roberts. (Unfortunately.)

    More specifically, it means that Talha did not read the article any more than I made love with Julia Roberts.

    Everything I’ve ever read by you is shit. Why would I read this?

    Well, if you hate my writing, then by all means, don’t read the article. But then what are you doing in the discussion underneath the article?

    WTF are you doing here? I’m here because I wrote the article obviously. What kind of pathetic fraud clown joins a discussion of an article that he NEVER READ!

    AND then proclaims proudly that he never read the article! Where do you turds come from? (I mean, aside from the obvious generic answer: out of your momma’s ass…)

    You got chased out of the iSteve forum

    I have no idea WTF you’re talking about. The reason you hardly ever see me there on iSteve is because I really just stopped reading that stuff. It’s a “truthiness” zone where people operate in a post-Truth mental world. There are a couple of incidents where I tried to tell Sailer or his acolytes that whatever they were talking about is some synthetic event that didn’t even happen and they get totally upset. “It’s in the newspaper. It must be true!”

    Well, really, the reason you don’t see me there is because it’s full of people like you and, finally, I’m not a masochist — or at least, not usually. I wouldn’t go somewhere seeking out turds like you to go talk to them. The reason I’m talking to you now is because you are here, proudly announcing that you are commenting on an article you didn’t even read! So, yeah, it’s very mildly amusing to point out what a dipshit you are, but it also gets boring pretty fast. It isn’t that entertaining any more really…

    But as for the torrent of iSteve stuff, I don’t go there commenting on all that shit because I stopped reading it! If I don’t read the shit, I certainly don’t comment on it. Actually, I don’t comment on most of the stuff I read either, for that matter. But I certainly don’t show up under an article that I declined to read and start writing shit about it. Well, nor do I claim that I answered questions that I never answered…. all the clown-ass stuff you do…

    Well, okay, I did claim that I had sex with Julia Roberts and I never did, but… uhh… everybody here (except you) understands that that’s a joke.

    • Replies: @Talha
    , @Mr. Anon
  230. @Mr. Anon

    Just come to grips with the fact that you are irrelevant and that your life is of no consequence at all.

    Now, if we could all internalize and extrapolate that concept…

  231. @utu

    Brilliant analysis written brilliantly.

    • Replies: @utu
  232. Talha says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    Hey Nephew,

    that Talha did not read the article any more than I made love with Julia Roberts

    For the record, I actually did read the article, the entire thing – which means – hubba, hubba – lucky you!

    Anyway, I’m not going to comment on likes of dislikes because I think either way you’re going to slap down what I’m saying.

    Peace – I’m going to go stand over there again with a rain coat.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  233. @Rurik

    Moreover, the reason for A is that the AngloZionists decided to gratuitously destroy all these Muslim countries — Iraq, Libya, Syria…

    I don’t think so.

    Rurik, taking the specific case of Libya, how many Libyans do you think there were in Europe before they decided to destroy the country back in 2011? Remember? “I came, I saw, he died” and giggling like a schoolgirl over a man getting sodomized with a knife. Libya was a perfectly good country for Libyans to live in. They were not trying to get to Europe at all. Now, with their country wrecked, hundreds of thousands of Libyans have poured into Europe. In a sane world, these would be perfectly good countries for people to live in.

    So, when you say “I don’t think so”, it is more like “I’m not thinking”. And the reason seems to be that connecting all the dots gets in the way of the rant that gives you so much emotional satisfaction.

    The problem is that your rant is largely unhinged from reality. The Elin Krantz thing in Sweden is one specific case and yes, a deranged Ethiopian immigrant murdered this girl in 2010. Metapedia, a white nationalist site, has a page on it here:

    http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Elin_Krantz

    This happened. Fine. Okay, the Elin Krantz page is part of a category on Metapedia entitled “People murdered by foreigners in Sweden”. I clicked on that. I figured that it would be a ton of people. Here’s the page:

    http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Category:People_murdered_by_foreigners_in_Sweden

    2 people!

    One kid by the name of Daniel Wretström who was murdered in 2000 and ten years after that, Elin Krantz in 2010. Metapedia has those two cases to show us from the last 17 years. Okay, maybe there are more. And, yes, two is too many. But c’mon, get a grip.

    I tried to find some crime statistics on Sweden. Sweden has a rate of 0.9 homicides per 100,000 people. So the whole country, of a population of nearly 10 million, in a typical year, has something a bit less than 100 homicides. I don’t know what these things are. Maybe jealous boyfriends, and so on. Consider:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

    This has a chart. You can order them. Sweden has one of the lowest violent crime rates in the world, Rurik. I was surprised to note that Spain actually has a somewhat lower homicide rate than Sweden, at 0.7 homicides per 100,000 people. But Spain is a pretty safe country too, you know.

    The surge in rape statistics in Sweden is, apparently, a statistical artifact, that resulted from a change in how the crimes were reported or catalogued or something. But anyway, I would suggest that you go to Sweden on holiday — maybe not now, ’cause it’s too goddamned cold, but in summer, which is prime raping season surely — and just try to get a sense of how crime-ridden Sweden is.

    You see, the problem is that when you start repeating all this stuff from the right-wing echo sphere, you just end up discrediting yourself — ranting hysterically about how crime-infested a country like Sweden is.

    Not just Sweden. You can look at Germany and Germany is a very safe country as well. It has the same homicide rate as Sweden. 0.9 per 100,000 people.

    There are these cases like Elin Krantz in Sweden and the gang in Rotherham, England, but what I find is that the majority of things where Muslims are accused, these are hoaxes. And false flags and shit. Like in this latest thing in Berlin, they find the patsy’s ID in the truck.

    AGAIN! AND AGAIN AND AGAIN! The dumbass Ay-rab leaving his ID in the vehicle! How many times in a row can they find the damned ID or passport on the crime scene before people like Derb and Sailer start realizing that there is something fishy going on?

    I find that in this kind of conversation, you basically go full blown autistic on me. I point out all the false accusations, all these bitches making false rape accusations, and that is DOCUMENTED. It cannot be disputed! If these refugees were really raping women right left and center, why would there be a need to get these twats to make false rape accusations?

    It’s a similar question with the fake beheading videos starring Jihadi John and Jihadi Joseph and all that. Maybe there are real jihadis chopping off people’s heads. I dunno. But I ask: if these “Jihadists” were really beheading all kinds of people, why is there the need to make fake beheading videos?

    Stop and think a second here, Rurik. WTF is going on with all this shit?

    I mean, in Germany, some liberal couple (I know…) has put up a site called hoaxmap, it’s at http://hoaxmap.org and okay, it’s in German. But you can still look at it and see, it’s like an interactive map of all the hoaxes involving false stories about Muslim refugees and so on. It’s just staggering. There are people who must have a full-time job making up all this shit. And they’re fucking around with absurd shit to see what people will believe!

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/trending/hoax-map-germany-refugees-1.3444503

    From the above article: “Among the rumours debunked are accusations that a Muslim threw a toilet out of a window because an unbeliever sat on it,…”

    This somehow reminds me of the claim that there was a deadly riot in Afghanistan because Pastor Terry Jones in Gainesville Florida burned a Koran. A muzzie threw a toilet out of a window because an “unbeliever” sat on it!

    “…one strange rumour from Oct. 2015 about refugees who stole, ate and grilled a whole horse.”

    “But they ate the horse’s penis raw to give them extra potency for their subsequent raping spree.”

    (Okay, I just made that last bit up. But if I had the job of making up the bullshit, I would have added that last bit in. It’s a nice touch, don’t you think?)

    here are photos of Muslim men who were convicted of raping hundreds of British school girls

    Okay, fine. I already stated on this page that Rotherham happened. The crimes that happened happened. That was a gang of British-born Pakistani ethnics. These weren’t Arab refugees from Syria or Libya or anywhere like that. Blonde haired, blue-eyed Jeffrey Dahmer killed a bunch of people and ate them. That happened too, but if somebody accuses you of killing people and eating them, I’m not going to start screaming about Jeffrey Dahmer. The issue still becomes whether you did this or not.

    It is clear as day that there is a massive slander campaign going on against Muslims in Europe. Okay, there are millions of Muslims and some of them did commit some crimes, but there is this level of hoaxes. They find the ID in the car yet again and they always shoot the patsy and case closed and so on.

    What there has to be with you, Rurik, is a greater commitment to the truth and wherever the truth leads you. The thing in Rotherham happened, but the mass rapes in the Cologne train station seems to be a hoax. But there are so many damned hoaxes that this German couple has this hobby keeping track of all of them! That site hoaxmap.org. What is up with that? Why all these hoaxes? Who is behind this?

    I’m not into this whole “truthiness” thing where it gives one emotional satisfaction to believe whatever it is, therefore it must be true. No, we have to discuss in a rigorous way what is actually true and what is actually not true. Can’t you see that? Okay, the Rotherham thing in England is true but so many other things are hoaxes. I don’t know how typical the Rotherham thing is. There are millions of Pakistani ethnics in the U.K. and very few of them are involved in anything like that. The Elin Krantz thing in Sweden happened, but is not part of any larger trend. Sweden has one of the lowest homicide rates in the world.

    Utu replied to you separately saying you were getting “played”. He’s right. You’re getting played like a fiddle. Not just you. Go to the iSteve crowd and tell them that any of these things are hoaxes and they’ll call you a cuck and so forth. Yes, the dumbass Ay-rab left his ID in the vehicle yet again….

    Time to grow up a bit, man. Leave the emotional rants behind and start dealing with complexity and nuance and moral ambiguity.

    • Replies: @Rurik
    , @Mr. Anon
  234. @Talha

    For the record, I actually did read the article, the entire thing

    Talha, let’s do some Logic 101. Regardless of whether you actually did read the article or not, what is the point of simply repeating the above claim? If you previously made the above claim and I did not believe you, why would I now believe you if you simply repeat the claim? What changed? Remember Einstein’s definition of insanity?

    Now, if you really have read the article, and you want to convince me of that, well, the easiest way is simply to write some general analysis of it that makes certain points about ideas in the article in such a way that…. okay, I would be forced to concede that you must have read it. But all you do is repeat the claim and that simply reinforces my previous impression that you did not read it.

    It stands to reason that you never read it. You have your Uncle Talha schtick like Mr Anon has his Mr Anon schtick and it doesn’t necessitate reading the article. The Uncle Talha schtick is the good muzzie who is like some sort of reincarnation of the Omar Sharif wise Muslim character or something.

    I find you to be about as phony as a six dollar bill.

    Anyway, I’m not going to comment on likes of dislikes because I think either way you’re going to slap down what I’m saying.

    Well, again, the purpose of this space under the article is to discuss the article, you know. It’s not to have a Monty Python argument sketch of: “You didn’t read the article.” “Yes, I did.” “No, you didn’t.” “I did too!” And so on. The way you would show that you read the article would be by… err…. discussing the article… i.e. by using this space for its intended purpose.

    So if you have read it and want to discuss it, have something to say, that would be great, but just more of this ridiculous good Muzzie Omar Sharif schtick, if you’re going to do more of that, I would prefer that you just take a hike and do that shit elsewhere. It really makes me want to puke.

    • Replies: @Talha
  235. Rurik says:
    @utu

    On islam, islamophobia, muslims I side with JR. We are being played. It is possible that the ultimate goal is to destroy Western societies of Europe as you think but the immediate goal is to transform Europe into America with all its ills plus raise the level of support for the Zionist project to American level. The muslims will play the same role as Blacks in America which will turn all issue into racial/ethnic issue rendering them forever unsolvable.

    I think that’s more or less exactly what I’ve been saying.

    Sure, it will take time before Muslim immigrants (and Africans and Asians and S. Americans and Caribbeans and everybody else) actually achieve the final solution on that glorious day when the last baby with blue eyes and fair hair is born, but in the mean time just think of all the strife and hatred and destruction of a way of life can all be achieved- with all of this massive immigration of non-Westerners into the West. A German (Nazi whore) won’t be able to walk down the subway stairs without wondering if she’s going to be kicked. Girls won’t be able to walk alone at night, some of them are going to be raped and some of them are going to be raped and then drowned in a local lake. The Fiend will be able to feed off of all of that increased fear and loathing in society. The Fiend verily thrives on hate. Pure, racial, tribal hatred of the kind that makes young men kick ladies down stairways or walk men out like dogs on a leash and then burn them alive. When you have that kind of hatred in society, it rips your way of life apart, and ushers in acceptance for total surveillance and police state tactics to control the orcs that have been unleashed upon your formerly civil and happy society, transforming it into war zones.

    The question is, does the Fiend do so in order to foment sympathy for Israel and Zionism, or for the sheer delight they feel at raw, human misery? I’m going with the latter.

    Trump that they will ease the pressure form the Left (also Jews like Barbara Spectre) and let you wave national flags all f…ng day and talk about national pride on Fox news 24/7 and fantasize about immigration restrictions and about building the wall (like in Israel, right?)

    there is a difference between Israel’s wall and Trump’s.

    Israel is a colonial power who’s genociding the indigenous inhabitants of Palestine and supplanting them with racial supremacists who murder, torture and sadistically humiliate their victims relentlessly.

    The West, and Europe in particular, are not colonizing anyone. But are being colonized. I prefer to error on the side of those who are being colonized and their struggle of resistance. We in the West are like the Palestinians who also suffer the infinite and singular hatred of the tribe. Israel’s wall is aggressive, Trumps (and Hungary’s and soon to be France’s) are defensive. I consider that a distinction of note.

    determination to support Israel increases with every rape committed or reportedly committed by muslims, every terrorist attack committed or reportedly committed by muslims and so on. The new right tossed anti-Semitism and replaced it with Islamophobia and adoration for Israel.

    OK, I don’t discount that many of these “terrorist attacks” are fake and intended to foment hatred for Islam. 9/11 being the most notorious of them all. And I also repudiate all the lies and treachery of the Zionists who commit these evil acts. But then who’s to blame?

    I sort of feel like there’s a kneejerk temptation to blame Americanus Bovinus for his seemingly infinite gullibility and cud chewing indifference/insouciance. But all people’s are subject to being lied to and led into the abyss. Russian, Germans, Jews, Brits, and all the rest of us. Human sheoplism is a universal phenomena. And all people’s are vulnerable. The trick is to pull the curtain back from the Fiend behind it standing there, and expose him for Dorathy and the Tin Man and Scarecrow to see in all his blood spattered gore, saying ‘pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!’

    That’s our job. To expose the Fiend, and thereby get the American people to pull their collective head out of the sand. Which is sort of what happening with the elction of Trump, who is the anti-war, anti-NATO, reset with Russia, trade with nations but stop bombing them, crush the orcs of ISIS, sanity. What’s wrong with that?

    Sure, he could turn out to be a ruse, and a war mongering pig, but we the people at least tried to stop the madness. We don’t want to bomb Muslim countries into the stone age no matter how many lies are told about them or how many false flag attacks occur, But neither do we want them all to come here and rape ten year old boys or daughters of EU commissars and drown them in lakes.

    The solution is to reject and repudiate the Eternal Wars for Israel. And reparations to rebuild Iraq and Libya and Syria and Ukraine and others. We need to repudiate the Likudniks and neocons who’re foisting all of this insanity. And reject their wars and stomp out the ISIS savages and restore order and normalcy to those people’s lives. Not use the crisis as an excuse to destroy people’s lives in Germany or Sweden. That is playing into the schemes of the Fiend.

    We all need to all respect all of our rights to self-determination and peace and sovereignty. Even the people of Germany and Europe and N. America. And that doesn’t just go for Muslims, but for all peoples. It’s all of us vs. the Fiend. But some of us would say, ‘yea, but immigration into Europe would be great for me and my buddies’, and so they make alliances with the Fiend, and say that yea, sure, the Fiend hates Assad and so do I, so Morsi was willing to get on the Fiend/Zionist’s bandwagon and hold hands with the Fiend and say, “all hail ISIS!’. because of some petty grievance he had with a fellow Arab and Muslim. Shame I say.

    It’s a matter of principle. We all have to repudiate the Zionist war pigs and their assorted hangers on. The MIC and the “sultan’ and the feculent House of Saud. It’s them vs. the rest of us. Not the people of Germany or us deplorables, who yes, don’t approve of the wars, but also don’t want our communities destroyed too, no matter how much you may blame us for everything Bush and Obama and Blair do.

    I feel I’m starting to rant and froth a little, so I’ll end this here. ;)

    • Replies: @L.K
    , @alexander
  236. Talha says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    Dear Nephew,

    Remember Einstein’s definition of insanity?

    Yes…yes indeed.

    I would prefer that you just take a hike and do that shit elsewhere.

    No problem, it is your sandbox – you don’t want people pooping in it, I understand.

    It really makes me want to puke.

    Hence the raincoat.

    Peace.

  237. L.K says:
    @Rurik

    Rurik: ” A German (Nazi whore) won’t be able to walk down the subway stairs without wondering if she’s going to be kicked. Girls won’t be able to walk alone at night, some of them are going to be raped and some of them are going to be raped and then drowned in a local lake.”

    Hey Rurik,

    After J.R correctly pointed out that you are exaggerating the whole Muslim rape thing in Europe, and he is correct, you just go on and write more of the same?! C’mon man!

    BTw, if you are referring to the woman who was kicked down a flight of stairs at a Berlin underground station, the individual responsible for it has been taken into custody and he is a Bulgarian(Svetoslav Stoykov, 27 years old), i.e., an European.
    Suspect arrested after Berlin underground attack on woman

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/dec/19/suspect-arrested-after-berlin-underground-attack-on-woman

    One can disagree with the immigration/refugee policies in effect in Europe – which I do – without resorting to this sort of thing.

    Take care

    • Agree: utu
    • Replies: @Rurik
    , @Jonathan Revusky
  238. alexander says:
    @Rurik

    Hey Rurik,

    I am in my mid fifties…from 1960 to 2001, I can tell you ,to a near certainty, that for these four decades there was not one concern….not one…about foreign immigration from the ME into the US.

    It was wholly non-existent…..Nobody was coming here….and if they were, it was in such infinitesimally small percentages as to be wholly inconsequential.

    Please check my post #216 on this thread….because it seems to me, this is the root cause of the immigration/refugee crisis from the ME the world is experiencing…

    I am interested in your feed back.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  239. utu says:
    @jacques sheete

    Thanks. I am glad that you liked but I do think it is brilliant and certainly my writing is not too good. English is not my language.

  240. utu says:
    @alexander

    “Blood splatter” !

    In 2003 just before the war on Iraq I heard somebody wondered whether Iraq’s cuisine was any good. Because at best the only benefit form the war Americans could count on would be Iraqi’s restaurants. It seems that we did not get even that.

  241. Rurik says:
    @NoseytheDuke

    Thanks Duke,

    Australia is fast heading down that path now. Whereas previous migrants were selected for their likelihood of being good contributors the most recent hordes are mostly from the third world, they get very generous benefits and will be on them for life. Australia even imports Africans whilst its indigenous people lag far behind.

    and wasn’t it in Australia a few years ago that they had an epidemic of gang rapes by Muslims?

    The Sydney gang rapes were a series of gang rape attacks committed by a group of up to fourteen Lebanese Australian youths led by Bilal Skaf against Anglo-Celtic Australian women and teenage girls, as young as 14, in Sydney Australia in 2000. The crimes, described as ethnically motivated hate crimes … According to court transcripts Judge Michael Finnane described the rapes as events that “you hear about or read about only in the context of wartime atrocities”.[4]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_gang_rapes

    “I’m going to fuck you Leb-style”.

    charming

    now I’ll be harangued by those who consider such rapes as negligible and ‘worth it’ when you consider all the obvious benefits of Muslim and African and Asian and Indonesian and well… anybody and everybody that wants to come and live in formerly peaceable and harmonious (putatively) white countries.

    I guess I just have trouble seeing all the benefits. I have this sense that when you have people with intractable differences, that it causes problems. Like religious differences. (Can you say Balkanization or Syrian war or Kashmir or Palestine or Darfur?) or a thousand other cases where people who are different often don’t get along and often fight and often slaughter each other.

    but somehow I’m just being narrow minded and not looking at the big picture where diversity is a blessing.

    where is this place where diversity is a blessing? I want to see it!

    I live in a very diverse place. The people are “turtled up”, as they always are the more diverse a place becomes. There is mutual distain and hostility and even, yes, hatred. It bubbles over and blacks attack whites and brown and yellows vent their steam at each other’s attempts at hegemony.

    I don’t have to list them. All the wars and atrocities the world over throughout history have been over some differences that competing peoples have. Whether it’s religious or racial or cultural or whatever. Iceland is peaceable and pleasant because it’s homogeneous. Same with every place that’s considered one of the best places on earth to live. The worst places are where there is religious or racial differences and consequent strife and hostility. but I’m assured that this is all in my fevered and (probably “racist”) imagination.

    what do people think is going to be the end result of millions of Muslim immigrating into Europe? Huh? WTF do you think is going to result from all of that? Do you guys think the Muslims are going to just assimilate and see their daughters twerking like Miley to some hip-hop rappers and with their tongues all sticking out? Eh Talha? utu? What do you say JR?

    Do you think that the white men and women of Europe and Scandinavia will just learn to submit to Islam and there will be the peace?

    or is the solution to just pretend that is will all work out for the best and just keep the immigrants coming who ever they are and from wherever they’re coming from regardless of tribal or cultural or spiritual differences, because diversity is our strength, eh? As no-go zones explode all over England and Sweden and Norway.

    how well did sticking their head in the sand to Muslim immigration work out for the Serbs of Kosovo? How well did Jewish immigration work out for the Palestinians?

    anyone who has read my posts here know I’m not anti-Muslim in any way, shape or form. Or anti-Mexican or black or Jew or anyone else! My mantra is simply that ALL! people are entitled to self-determination, and that includes, yes even the hated and despised and resented (“racist”) white people too, who yes, want to preserve a place for their children to grow up sans the strife and hatred. They also have every right, just like everybody else to preserve a land for their posterity to grow up in and thrive as white people. And no, such sentiments are not racist or bigoted or hateful. What they are is sane. And anyone who loves his own, just as a Muslim from Pakistan or Jews from Brooklyn or blacks from Chicago are going to have an affection for their own- more than for strangers. That is obvious and taken for granted even for the president of the “United” States, who belonged to an African centric church.

    My opinions on all of this have exactly zero to do with all the fake news and false flag attacks attributed to Muslims. I have no animosity for Muslims whatsoever. Why should I? It has been my country that has been destroying Muslim countries for the last decades or so, and doing so on behalf of Zionist Jews, while getting young Americans killed and earning the well-deserved hatred of the entire Muslim world. I have sympathy for these people, not antipathy. But I also have a normal and healthy love for my own people, who’re also under siege by the Fiend. And so I just want for us all to find a way forward for a peaceable coexistence, that IMHO requires that we all have our separate living spaces to realize our own unique expressions of our genes. The Zionists want us to blend into a brown race of slaves. They make music videos for the youth of Sweden called ‘blend it up’, or some shit like that. It’s doesn’t bode well, my friends. It will not end well.

    But to speak of sanity in an insane (universally anti-white) time, I guess is heretical these days.

  242. Rurik says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    Hey JR,

    Moreover, the reason for A [refugee immigration into Germany and Europe] is that the AngloZionists decided to gratuitously destroy all these Muslim countries — Iraq, Libya, Syria…

    I don’t think so.

    Rurik, taking the specific case of Libya, how many Libyans do you think there were in Europe before they decided to destroy the country back in 2011?

    who is they?

    the European people?

    or the Zionists and their myriad stooges in NATO and elsewhere? Like the gorgon war sow

    and nothing the Fiend does in Syria or elsewhere should have an effect on Germany’s immigration policies. If Germany wanted to try to put a stop to the wars or help the refugees find safety and succor, I’m all for that. But just because the Fiend is destroying countres willy-nilly, is no reason to think Germany or Japan is responsible to take in refugees as immigrants.

    Libya was a perfectly good country for Libyans to live in. They were not trying to get to Europe at all. Now, with their country wrecked, hundreds of thousands of Libyans have poured into Europe. In a sane world, these would be perfectly good countries for people to live in.

    are you suggesting the Libyans and Germans are interchangeable people? And that a million or two Libyans ought to just be able to move into Germany and settle down without any real notice or issues? Really?

    how many JR? In a “sane world”, how many Libyans should Germany accept as a perfectly good country for them to live in? Is there a number at all? Ten million? Twenty?

    war or no war, if Germany doesn’t have the right to have borders and keep people out, eventually every single soul from Africa would move in, until Germany looked like Africa. (Actually that is exactly what some people are hoping for)

    I’ll tell you what I suspect. I suspect that there are a lot of people who are sooo pissed off at the Eternal Wars and the sheer evil of it all, that they want someone to pay for it. What I find curious, is that there are people who would like to see the average German pay for the crimes of the Zionists and treasonous politicians like Tony Blair and Bush and Obama. But they can’t get at those guys, so they turn their attention to who they can get. The working class German on the street. A guy so hated and maligned by decades of denigration and demonization, that he’s too spiritually castrated to defend himself. So the world has its perfect scapegoat. Consider me the scapegoat patron saint then.

    So, when you say “I don’t think so”, it is more like “I’m not thinking”.

    nope. It’s more like a way of saying ‘I don’t agree with you on this’

    2 people!

    2 too many!

    there should never have been even two, (if that’s all there was, and we all know there are far more)

    The surge in rape statistics in Sweden is, apparently, a statistical artifact, that resulted from a change in how the crimes were reported or catalogued or something.

    forgive me, but it sort of sounds like you’re dissembling JR

    — and just try to get a sense of how crime-ridden Sweden is.

    that would depend on which neighborhood I visited.

    http://dailycaller.com/2014/11/02/swedish-police-release-extensive-report-detailing-control-of-55-no-go-zones-by-muslim-criminal-gangs/

    that report may be a bit hyperbolic, but I suspect some of it is based on reality

    you just end up discrediting yourself — ranting hysterically about how crime-infested a country like Sweden is.

    I’ve said it before JR. It’s not how crime infested it is today. It’s all about the trajectory my friend. Before it had the immigrants (from wherever) it was nearly crime and strife and hatred free. A veritable utopia. And sure, it still is, but it won’t be for long when that critical mass is achieved and they start demanding call to prayers and minurets and asserting themselves, as they will. And then there’s going to be push-back, and strife. Come on man, you know this is true!

    get these twats to make false rape accusations?

    It’s a similar question with the fake beheading videos starring Jihadi John

    you see the issues as the same, and I don’t.

    recently there was an Austrian girl who was raped and murdered by a Muslim immigrant. Now it was only that one girl on that night, and sure, one Austrian girl is not the end of the world. But it wasn’t just her horrible death. It was the reverberations among Austrian society that there are refugee men out there that are very dangerous, and that their society is changing, and that they’re now going to have to be more careful and circumspect. You see?

    But I have this sense that that is exactly what some people want. That for the daughters of Europe too to know what it’s like to live in fear. Because that’s what they’ve done to the daughters of Iraq and Libya and Syria! And so why should they too not pay for what they’ve done?!

    yea? perhaps just a little?

    all these bitches making false rape accusations

    uuhhg

    Pastor Terry Jones in Gainesville Florida burned a Koran

    equating the alarm people feel over immigration is not the same as Pastor Terry with his Koran. The lies told about Muslim terrorist attacks are often if not usually fake. The strife people feel over Muslim immigration into Europe is very real indeed, and justified.

    Okay, fine. I already stated on this page that Rotherham happened. The crimes that happened happened. That was a gang of British-born Pakistani ethnics. These weren’t Arab refugees from Syria or Libya or anywhere like that.

    oh! thank goodness. I was afraid there for a moment

    Blonde haired, blue-eyed Jeffrey Dahmer killed a bunch of people and ate them. That happened too, but if somebody accuses you of killing people and eating them, I’m not going to start screaming about Jeffrey Dahmer.

    apples and oranges

    No, we have to discuss in a rigorous way what is actually true and what is actually not true. Can’t you see that?

    I agree absolutely

    I don’t know how typical the Rotherham thing is.

    this is the thing JR, it’s not that this event happened. Rather it’s the way it was reacted to. The fact that all those people were soooo fucking pissing their pants at the fear of being called a racist, that they let their children be victimized by the hundreds and did nothing.

    It’s like that ten year old Austrian boy who was brutally raped, but because it was by a Muslim immigrant with brown skin, they have to say it’s OK. Because if they complained about a brown man raping one of their children, that someone somewhere might say that they were just being racist for punishing the man. And so they’d rather send the message that they won’t even punish a predatory child rapist if he has brown skin. Because that’s how spiritually castrated they are. Because Hitler was an Austrian after all! and so they all feel guilty. And believe me, that is all orchestrated by you know who. And as that Muslim walks free for raping an Austrian boy, you know who is ‘giggling like a schoolgirl’.

    Leave the emotional rants behind and start dealing with complexity and nuance and moral ambiguity.

    I can’t stop ranting. It’s part of my bloviating style, and it just bursts forth, damn the torpedoes. Nothing I can do about that. As for the rest, for me it’s all about the truth. Pure and simple.

  243. Mr. Anon says:
    @Rurik

    Are you starting to maybe get the idea that Revusky is an active apologist for the despoilation of your country? Hey, if a european woman accuses a foreigner of raping her, she’s a “bitch making false rape accusations”. Because – after all – arabs never rape women, do they? Revusky seems far more concerned with you taking notice of crimes against your people, than with the crimes themselves (and those crimes are indeed taking place, despite what he says).

    But, you shouldn’t ask questions of the mighty Revusky. His word is simply to be believed, never questioned. He’s liable to start treating you the way he treated Talha.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
    , @Rurik
  244. Mr. Anon says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    “Surely everybody understands that the sarcastic “I made love with Julia Roberts” means specifically that I DID NOT make love with Julia Roberts. (Unfortunately.)”

    Yes, I understood clearly. Clearly you can’t understand a simple sentence. I noted that you used an example that compared reading one of your articles to making love to Julia Roberts. Which subconsciously at least, indicates you have pretty high opinion of yourself. Well, you might as well – no one else will.

    “More specifically, it means that Talha did not read the article any more than I made love with Julia Roberts.”

    That what you meant? You don’t write very well.

    “Well, if you hate my writing, then by all means, don’t read the article. But then what are you doing in the discussion underneath the article?”

    Attacking you. Trying to convince other people not to waste their time either.

    “I have no idea WTF you’re talking about. The reason you hardly ever see me there on iSteve is because I really just stopped reading that stuff. It’s a “truthiness” zone where people operate in a post-Truth mental world. There are a couple of incidents where I tried to tell Sailer or his acolytes that whatever they were talking about is some synthetic event that didn’t even happen and they get totally upset.”

    No, they are just not as credulous and stupid as you are. Also, you get pushback there. People actually criticize you there – which criticisms you evidently could not answer.

    Sailer actually influences people. His writings over the years have influenced a sizeable number of people who themselves have real influence (or even power); he has contributed to national affairs in a very real way. Which is why he is the biggest draw at this site.

    You, on the other hand – just googling your name reveals the influence you have – zilch. You are a nothing. Deservedly so.

    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
  245. Mr. Anon says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    “Sweden has a rate of 0.9 homicides per 100,000 people.”

    And from 2000 on, there has been an increase in the murder rate by about 10-15 %. Are Swedes just murdering each other more? I suppose it’s completely impossible that Swedish authorities might downplay crime by immigrants? After all, in America, we have such an open and honest conversation about the nature of crime – about who’s doing it and to what degree.

  246. @Mr. Anon

    Mr. Anon, But why are you attacking JR? I’d be interested to know?

    Why are you wasting your time trying to convince other people not to waste their time? Could you please, at the very least, explain your logic to me on that?

    You state that you don’t like his writing. Fine. Look around, there are other articles on unz for you to comment on. Lots of good ones too so why expend so much time and anger on this? That is not a rhetorical question. I truly would like to know.

    JR has contributed some very worthwhile articles here at unz. You cannot deny that. Read through the comments under his articles. Not everyone likes or agrees with him but many do. Who cares anyway if you don’t?

    The Unz Review has some really good articles AND commenters and thanks to the smart software we can more easily follow the threads that interest us and gain valuable information. Some of us are actually learning something here. Then a commenter such as you attempts to clog the whole thread up with your convoluted, nonsensical attacks that just go on and on ad nauseam.

    It’s like you are driving through somebody else’s neighbourhood, on a lovely, well-kept street where nice people feel comfortable interacting and socialising but you roll up with your awful music pounding out of your open windows and then you stop your vehicle every couple of houses or so and either throw some trash onto peoples front lawns or take multiple shits along the footpath. It’s terrible. Please stop and desist, please.

    I really would appreciate some answers to the questions I have asked you in my post, thank you.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    , @Mr. Anon
  247. Mr. Anon says:
    @NoseytheDuke

    “JR has contributed some very worthwhile articles here at unz. You cannot deny that.”

    I can deny it. I do deny it. I haven’t seen him write anything that was any good.

    I criticize him because I think he shows a callous disregard for the truth. He retails the same old tired 911 tropes that are ultimately the result of ignorance (I don’t know how something like that could happen, therefore it could not happen). He ignores evidence when pointed out to him. He seemingly believes that everything is a false-flag, and seems to have a near meglomaniacal belief in his own correctness. Is there any attack carried out by muslims that he thinks isn’t a fiction? He simply states that people who died in such attacks never even existed. Can you imagine how the actual relatives of the actual people who were victims might recieve that? Apparently, muslims never carry out terrorist attacks. Now you might agree with him. But I don’t. And I don’t see why I shouldn’t bring it up.

    Apart from it being wrong – factually wrong – is it in our interest? Is it in yours? Do you want to promote a narrative that muslim immigration presents no problem to our society? Because – make no mistake – that IS the official narrative – the narrative of our elites – the narrative that THEY want us to believe, and it is a narrative that the false-flag narrative supports (hey, don’t worry, there not a problem, etc.). People who push it may not realize it, but it is in fact the effect it has on the national views on immigration. Do you think it doesn’t?

    Have you ever considered the possibility that such false-flag narratives are themselves………….false flags? What would better serve the interests of powerful elites than to lead people to believe that powerful elites are well nigh omnipotent, unbeatable even – that they control all things and they always get thier way. It promotes apathy and political disengagement. Consider for example: has Revusky ever recommended a course of action? A politician to support? Or to oppose? No, it’s just the same old lament – it’s all a big sham, everybody’s a sheep, everything you know is wrong. If he were more successful, like Alex Jones for example, he’d at least be able to make some coin by selling survival food. Actually, even Alex Jones is going mainstream, and might actually be making a difference nowadays.

  248. Mr. Anon says:
    @NoseytheDuke

    “Then a commenter such as you attempts to clog the whole thread up with your convoluted, nonsensical attacks that just go on and on ad nauseam. ”

    I don’t think they are convoluted or non-sensical. I think the “official” truther narrative about 911 is convoluted and non-sensical.

    By the way, I hope my previous post answered some of your questions. I appreciate your concerns about the tenor and content of this thread – that this is a thread for people of like mind, that it’s your space and you have a right to it. I can respect that.

    And I appreciate you being decent and respectful in your comments toward me here. I may have said some snarky things toward you in the past. If so, my apologies.

  249. I hate to be the one to break it to you but it really isn’t all about you. It doesn’t matter if his writing hasn’t impressed you. There are countless posts from commenters who’ve stated that they found the articles to be worthwhile and even valuable to them and that’s enough.

    I don’t want your apologies either and I really only asked for you to explain your logic to me but instead there was just more emotional ranting and anger stuff.

    Let it go. I expect that in time JR will get over it. Time is a great healer.

    I also asked you to stop crapping on the sidewalk and here you’ve gone and done it again.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  250. Rurik says:
    @L.K

    Hey L.K.,

    After J.R correctly pointed out that you are exaggerating the whole Muslim rape thing in Europe, and he is correct, you just go on and write more of the same?! C’mon man!

    I don’t agree with you LK. JR seems to suggest that the entire Cologne New Years Eve attacks were all a ruse made up by ‘twats’ and ‘bitches’ who sullied themselves by lying about attacks that never happened. His claim seems to be that if there are not adequate videos posted to YouTube as proof, then that is proof that it didn’t happen. I disagree. I suspect that for a German woman to go to the authorities and take the time and trouble to place an official complaint, that in all probability, there’s some there there. Also from what I’ve noticed in my short time on this planet, is that when crimes are committed against white people by minorities, it is almost invariably covered up and hushed up. (have you noticed that trend?) So if reports are coming out, then it seems to me to have been so egregious an incident, that they couldn’t manage to keep a lid on it. You see the PTB hate Germans and Germany, just like they hate the white working class in England and N. America and everywhere else. They want us all denigrated and heavily taxed so that money can be spent for immigrants in order for us to see our communities overrun and replaced with minorities. That is a huge ‘duh’ from my experience, and so when news comes out that is inconvenient to that agenda, IOW that shows that ‘diversity’ isn’t always something to be celebrated, then the msm can invariably be counted on to hush such news up.

    At least that has been my experience my whole life. And continues to be. Even now, in Germany and Austria there is a roiling under the surface for why the rape and murder of Maria Ladenburger seems to have been pushed under the radar by the media, with some of them not reporting on the crime at all. And it’s the same for all savage crimes committed by minorities against white folks. Here in the states this phenomena is very well known. Travon Martin is a household name, but hardly anyone has ever heard of Channon Christian. The Duke Lacrosse “rapists” were excoriated from every media outlet. ‘Something has to be done to control these white rapists who rape black girls, like Tawana Brawley and so many others!’ (none, none of it ever happened). But when it comes to the Wichita Massacre, you’d be lucky to find one in a thousand people that have heard of it. And this double standard is ubiquitous and all pervasive, from every single land of the dying (murdered) West. It is very well known that the police in S. Africa don’t keep records on the races of certain crimes, like the epidemic of white farmers being murdered, and so forth.

    so

    when I hear of a crime in Germany involving white Germans and minorities, (the same minorities that George Soros is promoting an invasion by) and it puts the minorities in a less than sterling light, then I’m surprised that such news even made it’s way past the authorities at all, let alone was made up. Not that I couldn’t be wrong, I wasn’t there. But if it’s all a ruse, then the obvious question become ‘who benefits?’ So ask yourself, by promoting a case of Muslim refugees attacking German girls, why would they do that? So they can get Germans to dislike Muslims so they’ll be more willing to go to war against them? That seems like a stretch to me LK. Rather I suspect that the attacks did in fact happen, and that if anything, they were downplayed by the msm and PTB. As always.

    and then consider the case of the ten year old boy that was yes, brutally raped by a Muslim immigrant at a public pool. The boy is traumatized and inconsolable. But his rapist was set free, because we’re all supposed to consider such incidents as simply cases of cultural misunderstandings. And adjust ourselves to the ways of our replacements. The old ways we’re used to are now considered reactionary and bigoted. These newcomers have different cultural practices and we’ve got to adjust. Like that five year old that was sexually assaulted and then pissed on by young Muslim immigrants in Idaho recently. Have you heard about that? It’s not made up LK, it’s all too real, and people in Idaho are not used to having their five year olds being sexually assaulted. These new cultural embellishments to our lives are going to take some getting used to, I’ll tell ya.

    now, of course there are crimes committed by white men too. Obviously, but this is a reality that all races and tribes suffer to one degree or another. But when you open your doors to throngs of fleeing ‘refugees’ and give them succor and food and shelter, only to have them repay your generosity by raping your ten year old son at the pool, it begs the question.. why the fuck are we letting these people transform our communities?

    Sure, the guy who kicked the lady down the stairs wasn’t a Syrian refugee, but I’d argue that he and his buddies, who didn’t seem to give the slightest rip that he just kicked a woman down the stairs- as if it were just oh so routine that they’d seen it a dozen times before- have no fucking business being in Germany, or any civilized country. Rather they belong in a cage or worse, for the kind of “men” those guys are. How many German men kick their women down the stairs LK? If you saw an acquaintance kick a woman like that down the stairs, would you consider such an act as ho-hum as those guys did? I’d have knocked his worthless arse to the next world and back, and he’d have known that he did something (that some men at least) consider wildly unacceptable, but then, perhaps that’s just me. ;)

    One can disagree with the immigration/refugee policies in effect in Europe – which I do – without resorting to this sort of thing.

    what kind of thing?

    telling the truth?

    • Replies: @L.K
    , @Jonathan Revusky
  251. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    Presumably Mr. Chieh is being sarcastic.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  252. L.K says:
    @Rurik

    Hey Rurik,

    I’d have knocked his worthless arse to the next world and back, and he’d have known that he did something (that some men at least) consider wildly unacceptable, but then, perhaps that’s just me.

    No, it is not just you. In fact, I’ve been in many scraps for less than that shit… and my fists have never let me down, haha.
    Thing is… that was not my point at all.
    You seemed to think the guy was a non-Euro, I’m telling ya he is an ethnic European, ethnic Bulgarians are Europeans and mostly Orthodox Christians.

    Moi: ‘One can disagree with the immigration/refugee policies in effect in Europe – which I do – without resorting to this sort of thing.’

    Rurik: ‘what kind of thing? telling the truth?’

    No, exaggerating certain trends.
    Listen, i’m aware there are crimes committed by immigrants/refugees and that some of this, for the reasons you mention, go undereported. There is that.

    Then, there is the fact too that Euro Nationalists – and probably these so called ‘white’ nativists or whatever in ZUSA too – find it too tempting not to blow these things out of proportion as a way to get more support and spread their cause.
    It is the usual tactic of using fear as a weapon.
    Gotta go, more later.

    Take care

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
    , @Rurik
  253. @L.K

    One can disagree with the immigration/refugee policies in effect in Europe – which I do – without resorting to this sort of thing.

    Well, this is surely the key issue here. If I don’t want to invite somebody to come live in my house (and certainly not indefinitely!) must I make up a bunch of stories about that person being a rapist and murderer and so on? Why can’t I just say: “Sorry, you are an okay person, but this is my house and I’ve decided that I can’t let any more people come and live here.”

    It’s like people (Rurik is not the only one) believe that they have to buy into all this stuff in order to be against the immigration policies. And meanwhile, they’ll argue that if I decline to believe all the Islamophobic bullshit, I must be in favor of mass immigration of Muslims into Europe. Well, no, not necessarily so.

    I have to write a reply to Rurik on some of the things he’s saying, but the whole thing is really getting on my nerves frankly.

    • Agree: utu
    • Replies: @Rurik
  254. @L.K

    Then, there is the fact too that Euro Nationalists – and probably these so called ‘white’ nativists or whatever in ZUSA too – find it too tempting not to blow these things out of proportion as a way to get more support and spread their cause.
    It is the usual tactic of using fear as a weapon.

    Well, some of it is “blowing things out of proportion” but some of it is also just making up shit out of whole cloth. Like, some Muslim threw a toilet out the window because an “unbeliever” had used it. How much does a toilet weigh anyway? How strong do you have to be to pick up a toilet and throw it out of the window? Even leaving aside the fact that it’s connected to whatever it’s connected to.

    The guy rips the toilet out of the wall and tosses it through the window… must be one strong fucker, strong like an ox… There are people who must be paid to sit down and just make up this shit. If he picked up a chair and threw it out the window because an “infidel” sat on it, well… but a toilet!!!???

    There must also be the problem that the anti-immigration side of the debate, people can just discredit themselves by repeating these sorts of things. Some of this stuff is such hyperbole that even people who feel that the immigration should be curtailed, they would be turned off by all the hyperbole. People who actually live in Sweden surely know that the country is basically pretty safe. So these people start these memes like “Sweden is the rape capital of the world” and all this stuff that is totally unhinged from reality…

    I mean to say, people who are on the anti-immigration side of the debate, by rising to all the bait and believing all these crazy stories, ultimately make themselves appear ridiculous. And that also may be part of the game. There is the real need to calm down and assess what is really going on.

  255. @Mr. Anon

    (Note to the gallery: In general, we should just ignore these trolls, but I am answering him because it suits my purposes to do so. In general, though, the preferable thing is to ignore these kinds of assholes.)

    Hey, if a european woman accuses a foreigner of raping her, she’s a “bitch making false rape accusations”.

    Well, in the cases where the accusations are false, then yes, she is a bitch making false accusations. If she really was raped, then, in that case, it’s not a false accusation. All these things must be examined on a case by case basis.

    BUT… I was specifically referring to cases of false accusation that are pretty indisputable. AND I provided links. Here:

    https://www.rt.com/news/353911-cologne-woman-rape-allegations/

    AND HERE:

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/31/teenage-girl-made-up-migrant-claim-that-caused-uproar-in-germany

    These bitches clearly made up false rape claims. You object to my referring to these females as “bitches”?

    Because – after all – arabs never rape women, do they?

    Pathetic straw-man argument. I never said that. Obviously, I would never say that Arabs (or any other ethnic group) NEVER rape women. That would be ridiculous.

    Now that I’ve clarified that…. Do you think women never falsely accuse men of rape?

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  256. @anon

    Presumably Mr. Chieh is being sarcastic.

    Yeah, I figure, but I did think it was a good BDQ Test question.

  257. Rurik says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    I have to write a reply to Rurik on some of the things he’s saying, but the whole thing is really getting on my nerves frankly.

    don’t sweat it JR. It’s a side issue on this thread. One I consider (and as I said, is driving the entire Brexit movement and put Trump into office- it’s that immediate and pertinent to current events for a lot of people, especially as Europe is reeling from the invasion), but I certainly don’t feel the need to belabor the point here

    sometimes people just meander to the issues they find most salient at a given moment. But it’s all good.

    cheers

  258. Rurik says:
    @alexander

    Hey Alex,

    Please check my post #216 on this thread….because it seems to me, this is the root cause of the immigration/refugee crisis from the ME the world is experiencing…

    I am interested in your feed back.

    yes Alex, the Fiend did create a lot of “blood splatter”, to be sure. But I don’t see why anything the Fiend does means that Germany (or any other innocent party) has to open their gates.

    the way I see it is the Fiend is trying to kill two birds with one stone. They hate the Muslims and they hate the Germans. So if blowing up the Muslim nations will give them an excuse to destroy Germany as well, why then all you can say is ‘such a deal!

    But I’ve agreed to desist from dragging this thread down into a discussion about immigration.

    cheers

    • Replies: @alexander
  259. Rurik says:
    @Mr. Anon

    Revusky seems far more concerned with you taking notice of crimes against your people, than with the crimes themselves

    JR has a different perspective than I do, and I respect his right to do so

    we often don’t agree on many things, but I also respect his tenacious and herculean labors to flesh out the psychology of sheoplism in people, and why they cling to feel-good narratives no matter how patently absurd or discredited. He’s a master at that, and I consider his contributions to be invaluable, even if he has his idiosyncrasies

    . He’s liable to start treating you the way he treated Talha.

    well, “uncle” Talha is certainly up to the task of representing for himself (and Islam when he has a wont). Few do nearly as well in that regard.

    And I like that JR is extremely skeptical of everything and everyone. If you’re slogging down that hard road to get at the truth of things, then you want someone like JR as a sieve, to scrutinize and prod. It also makes for occasionally amusing diversion, if at other times it’s a little rancorous for my tender sensibilities.

    (I’ll volunteer here that when things get a little too vituperative- so to speak, like they do between Mr. Revusky and yourself, that I simply skim it for tidbits and skip over most of the vitriol)

    • Agree: Talha
  260. Rurik says:
    @L.K

    Hey L.K.,

    You seemed to think the guy was a non-Euro, I’m telling ya he is an ethnic European, ethnic Bulgarians are Europeans and mostly Orthodox Christians.

    from what I understand he’s a Roma/gypsy. why is that relevant? because the Nazis were accused of gassing gypsies weren’t they? And so that would give the man a grudge against the ‘Nazi whore’

    regardless, he had a criminal record and had no business being in Germany. Not so much for his race or questionable past, but clearly because he’s a sub-human thug, and he has no compassion for German women. Just like a lot of people who consider all Germans as Nazis who gassed their relatives and who don’t deserve any compassion.

    Euro Nationalists – and probably these so called ‘white’ nativists or whatever in ZUSA too – find it too tempting not to blow these things out of proportion as a way to get more support and spread their cause.

    OMG, trying not to be genocided and overrun and treated like the whites of Zimbabwe or S. Africa is ‘blowing things out of proportion’?!

    we are hated and maligned and scourged by every media outlet 24/7

    we’re ordered to the back of every line for promotions or jobs or university slots, because we’re white men, the underprivileged kind, who need jobs and some kind of opportunities. But as the throngs and hoards of Third Worlders come marching in and demanding their place in front of us in every line, if we complain about anything; the crime, the (very real) rapes, the unfair treatment and destruction of our communities and all the attendant hatred and strife, then we’re just ‘blowing things all out of proportion’, eh?

    I said I was going to stop writing about this but I wanted to at least answer your reply, only to get started frothing again. >>sigh<<

  261. alexander says:
    @Rurik

    Hey Rurik,

    I believe its the law in many “civilized” countries.(including Germany)…that refugees from “war torn” regions may not be turned away…..

    The idea of not giving them “safe haven” when they are in a state of utter destitution is recognized ,( more or less universally), as a form of cruelty unbefitting of advanced societies.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  262. Rurik says:
    @alexander

    Hey Alex,

    “civilized” countries.(including Germany)…that refugees from “war torn” regions may not be turned away…..

    I have no problem with that Alex. And indeed, I’d go much, much further!

    I’d demand an end to the illegal and immoral funding and arming of the terrorists who’re destabilizing Syria. I’d even assist Putin and Assad with crushing the stone-age sub-humans who burn men alive and rend their bastions of power into mini-Carthages, where such inhuman abominations to decency would never again raise their orc heads.

    And I’d provide immediate aid to all the people reeling from all of that horror and madness, and give them all succor and assistance even on German soil.

    But what I wouldn’t do is set about using the refugee crisis as a pretext and excuse for replacing the German stock of Germany with anyone and everyone they can possibly find to replace them.

    Germany is in the center of ancient Christendom and the birthplace of Europa. If the children of Europe give up their sacred homelands to others, then they will not have one of their own, which is the very point of the people (George Soros and others) that are demanding that Germany (and Europe) do just that.

    here a short clip of one such German politician at a rare moment of candor

    I’m not being heartless and racist Alex, I’m being reasonable and simply failing to be racist against Germany and others, when of course these days we’re all supposed to be racist against the eternal Nazis of Germany, huh?

    how many people are demanding that Israel accept some of these refugees, eh? After all, this entire adventure is all on behalf of Israel in the first place, no? Isn’t that brutally obvious by now? So why is there this strange double standard that demands of Germany and Europe and the West that they and they alone suffer the permanent and culture, ethnic destroying massive and transformational immigration of Arabs and Muslims (and everyone else) into their countries and communities?

    why isn’t anyone demanding the Saudis or Turkey (also very much responsible for the war and strife in Syria) open their gates to the refugees? They’re right there after all, and could do so with relative ease, as the Syrians are Arabs and often Muslims too. But no, no one demands that any other nations allow these people as immigrants, except Europe and the West, today slated for blending out of existence because someone (who I won’t name) is afraid that Germany and the West might one day be ascendant, and won’t follow orders like the ‘good’ Germans under Merkel.

    Actually if any Western nation should be obliged to take the Syrian refugees it should be the United States, because it is my government that has destroyed all of those people’s lives, by destroying Iraq and then Libya and using the general destabilization and all those orcs to destroy Syria too. And all of it, every bit of it, on Israel’s behalf. And then who should bear the brunt of the sacrifice, well Germany of course, who’re still and always will be guilty of the Holocaust!

    And there you have it.

    • Agree: utu
    • Replies: @alexander
  263. Mr. Anon says:
    @NoseytheDuke

    “I hate to be the one to break it to you but it really isn’t all about you. It doesn’t matter if his writing hasn’t impressed you.”

    It matters to me that he is wrong.

    “I don’t want your apologies either.”

    Okay. Retracted.

    “I also asked you to stop crapping on the sidewalk and here you’ve gone and done it again.”

    It ain’t crap, and it ain’t your sidewalk.

  264. Mr. Anon says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    Plenty of Swedes seem to think that muslims are disproportionately committing rapes in Sweden. But what do they know? They just live there. You, however, are a 9/11 “researcher”. Or actually, maybe not even that – maybe just a quoter of such. Also, you ignored by point about the uptick in murder in Sweden – but, no surprises – facts aren’t your strong suit, obviously.

    “(Note to the gallery: In general, we should just ignore these trolls, but I am answering him because it suits my purposes to do so.”

    No, you’re answering me because you’re pissed off at the temerity of anyone to disagree with you. Which you’ve made eminently clear by insulting anyone who disagrees with you even a little – even your fans (which I, most definitely, am not).

    Apparently it is not enough for people to agree with you. They must agree with you absolutely. They must agree with you in the right way. You know, if you want your dick sucked, perhaps you should try a filipino massage parlor instead of writing a blog.

    Have a nice meaningless life as an obscure nobody, clown.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  265. @Rurik

    JR has a different perspective than I do, and I respect his right to do so

    Okay, stop this crap right now, Rurik. Stop it. Stop the “I’m OK, you’re OK” crap.

    The gloves have to come off at some point here, now, because what you’re doing in this conversation is simply unacceptable. If you want to behave like this, go hang out with the Derbyshire and Sailer crowd and they’ll eat up all your shit and you can be a leading light there.

    The problem on this issue of the Cologne railway station event is that you are seemingly incapable of focusing on a narrow question. I ask you what the proof of this is and you start talking about ROTHERHAM!!!!

    I know you’re not some Okie from Muskokie who doesn’t know that England and Germany are completely different countries! You have no proof of the Cologne thing but don’t want to simply admit that so you start talking about Rotherham! That is completely sleazy and dishonest and you must not do that. There is no “I’m OK, you’re OK” crap here. What you have been doing in this conversation is NOT OK!

    My reference to Jeffrey Dahmer was completely valid. It’s as if you were accused of killing and eating people and there was no evidence and I start screaming about Jeffrey Dahmer. That a criminal gang made up of British born Pakistani ethnics did what they did in Rotherham, England has basically ZERO bearing on whether a bunch of Syrian refugees in Cologne, Germany did some other thing.

    But the other thing about the Cologne thing that drives me nuts is that this is a wide-open public space. As far as I can see, it is impossible for all these sexual assaults at that scale to go on there and for there to be no photographic or video evidence. Here, look at the space (or set of spaces) where this supposedly happened.

    https://www.google.es/search?q=k%C3%B6ln+hauptbahnhof&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi2pOCZ1azRAhWHOBoKHcxKAyIQ_AUICSgC&biw=1024&bih=480

    Where did all the raping occur? On the train platforms? In the large square outside the station? In the indoor part where you buy your tickets and there are some various concessions that sell food and other things? WHERE?

    How did all this raping happen and nobody made any video? The whole thing is ridiculous. The people who made up this shit are just laughing at us. The most minimal investigation into this with a skeptical mindset would cause any reasonable person to have extreme doubts about this narrative — to say the least!

    But I’m in the position where I pose a question like the above and what do you answer? ROTHERHAM!!!!

    Or…. ELIN KRANTZ…. In Sweden… which is not the same country as Germany either. Next time some white people are accused of doing something and we ask what the evidence is, why not just answer…. JEFFREY DAHMER!!! OR CHARLES MANSON!!!!

    You can’t use an incident that occurred in a completely separate country and was perpetrated by completely different people anyway as proof of something!!! Can’t you see that???

    In my writing, I talk about different moments of realization somebody can have. You know, like in the first essay, I made this term LPM, the Ludek Pachman moment — kinda for fun because I named it after a not even very important chessplayer. In this essay, I made up the AWANPM, the All work and no play moment, based on Jack Nicholson endlessly typing “All work and no play…”. In the Shining. That’s the moment where you think to yourself: “Shit… WTF is wrong with this person?”

    When I ask you what the proof is on the Cologne thing and you talk to me about Rotherham, I have that moment with you. I think…. WTF is wrong with this guy?

    But look, everybody develops at the rate they develop. Some kids stop believing in Santa Claus at one age and others take longer and so on. And these things take time. So I am not optimistic that you will process immediately what I am trying to tell you. I will just finish this note by saying that this is not this “I’m OK, you’re OK”, “agree to disagree” moment. NO. If I ask you what the proof of the Cologne thing is, you cannot start screaming about Rotherham or some other thing. That is unacceptable! You really have to stop this. It’s just too aggravating.

    • Replies: @Rurik
    , @utu
  266. There is a video I came across the other day that I liked quite a bit. The guy in it is one Dr. Steve Pieczenik.

    I would add to this: “We don’t want anybody telling us that Sweden is the rape capital of the world or that a Muslim threw a toilet out of a window and all this other stupid shit.”

    Like the person in the video, I feel that the first step has to be reclaiming reality and rejecting all the bullshit. Pieczenik is much more optimistic about Trump than I am, certainly, but the overall idea is right. First, just let’s stop with all the damned bullshit. All of it. That includes all the Islamophobic stuff. We don’t want to pretend to believe that Muslims always leave their ID’s in the vehicle and shout “Allahu Akhbar” at the key moment and all this cartoonish shit. And so on…

    I said in the essay that all of this is part of a whole. You can’t just reject some of the bullshit and then keep eating up all the rest of the bullshit.

    NO! REJECT ALL OF THE BULLSHIT!

    You want to curtail immigration. Fine, I largely agree, but debate the question in an HONEST way. To buy into all sorts of bullshit because, somehow, you think it’s expedient to do so is to just fall into their game. The first step must be to reject the bullshit. ALL OF IT.

    • Agree: utu
    • Replies: @Rurik
  267. Mr. Anon says:
    @Rurik

    “Okay, stop this crap right now, Rurik. Stop it. Stop the “I’m OK, you’re OK” crap.

    The gloves have to come off at some point here, now, because what you’re doing in this conversation is simply unacceptable. If you want to behave like this, go hang out with the Derbyshire and Sailer crowd and they’ll eat up all your shit and you can be a leading light there.”

    Like I said, above. Only Revusky is pure enough to be inducted into the faith of Revuskyism.

    He’s a meglomaniacal ass-hat.

  268. @Rurik

    I don’t agree with you LK. JR seems to suggest that the entire Cologne New Years Eve attacks were all a ruse made up by ‘twats’ and ‘bitches’ who sullied themselves by lying about attacks that never happened.

    It’s time for somebody in this conversation to stop being such a doofus. And that person is not me.

    I provided the links regarding two separate bitches who made up false accusations. One of them was this one:

    https://www.rt.com/news/353911-cologne-woman-rape-allegations/

    The woman herself finally admitted that she had made it all up. Well, obviously, it’s just some silly girl and some other people put her up to it. But this is established, okay?

    So you want to go play this sensitive feminist card and act like you’re shocked that I refer to this woman as a “bitch”, then go fuck yourself, Rurik. To call this female a “bitch” or a “twat” is very mild. This kind of thing is done to incite hatred and violence. If some bitch like this starts screaming that people raped her when it didn’t happen, this could incite a bloody lynch mob.

    In fact, I would like an apology for this. I provided a link on this and it’s pretty clear that the person in question was not even in Cologne. She was probably hundreds of miles away, says she was in the rail station, says she was raped, says she got pregnant and had to get an abortion. All a pack of vicious lies.

    You take umbrage that I refer to this lying piece of shit German bitch as a bitch. Well, it’s incidental that she’s German. If an Arab woman falsely claimed that a German raped her, you know perfectly well that my reaction would be the same. I’d call her a bitch and a twat.

    The point is if you want to play this PC card that I am not supposed to say that some bitch who falsely says she was raped is a bitch, then you can really just go fuck yourself. You want to be such a pussy whipped shithead, that’s your own business, but don’t expect me to respect you any more.

    You are completely out of line here. I did as much of a reasonable investigation about this Cologne thing as I can. Even you look at the google images that come up of the space where this happened and it is not very credible. I asked you what the proof was that this happened and you started ranting about Rotherham.

    You don’t want to believe that some sweet-looking German girl falsely claimed she was raped even when it’s pretty much an established fact, well, that’s your problem, but don’t come at me with this politically correct shit that I’m not supposed to call a spade a spade or a piece of shit lying bitch what she is. I have no time for that.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    , @Rurik
  269. @Mr. Anon

    Hey, shit eater troll, I answered your question. You asked me whether I think that Arabs NEVER rape women. I answered the question.

    I then asked you whether you think that women never falsely accuse men of rape.

    Of course, you did not answer. Just typical dishonest scumbag shill shit eater tactics. You insistently demand answers to questions — frequently irrelevant, poorly formulated questions — and then if somebody asks you a question, you just ignore it.

    If the official story on 9/11 is so clearly true, then why do you shit eaters always run away when I pose the obvious question: What is the strongest evidence available for it? That these attacks were planned by Al Qaeda from Afghanistan… What’s the evidence for this? Lay it out. You affect that you believe the case is overwhelming, but if I ask that question, not just to you, but to any of your fellow shit eaters, it’s like waving kryptonite in front of Superman. Why is that?

    If you believe that everything I say in the articles is wrong, write a systematic rebuttal. It ought to be easy. You could see if Ron Unz would publish it. If not, post your rebuttal somewhere and point to it. If everything I say is wrong, it ought to be easy to write a rebuttal. So why don’t any of you shit eaters ever do that?

    But anyway, why don’t you go troll in some lower end place? Develop your skilz somewhere else and then come back and try to troll me. You are just so completely out of your league here.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  270. alexander says:
    @Rurik

    How about a simple trade, Rurik

    For every “ten” refugees from these war torn regions we are forced to take in, “one” Neocon Oligarch (responsible for this entire titanic debacle) is arrested, has all their assets seized, and is remaindered permanently to either federal prison of Guantanamo Bay?

    • Replies: @Rurik
  271. @Rurik

    Rurik, I have to respond to this long comment. I feel I have to, but I resent it because you’re basically forcing me to waste my time responding to your crap. It is just half-baked crap. A lot of it is based on willfully misunderstanding and misrepresenting things that I said. I really resent that. I find it disrespectful. If I respond to somebody, I really try to understand what that person was actually saying. That is because I actually do take these sorts of conversations seriously. I think you should as well.

    Rurik, taking the specific case of Libya, how many Libyans do you think there were in Europe before they decided to destroy the country back in 2011?

    who is they?

    the European people?

    What is your point here, Rurik? Do you have a point really? Obviously, the European people did not collectively decide to destroy Libya. And, yes, I think we converge approximately on who did decide to do it. But, in reference to what I was saying, WHAT IS YOUR POINT?

    My point was that the Libyans, the ones who currently are refugees, like apparently half a million in Italy alone, were perfectly well and happy in Libya! So, when I said that, in a sane world, Libya (as well as Syria and Iraq) would be perfectly okay countries for the people there to live in, I meant the OPPOSITE of what you seem to think I meant. I meant the Libyans should be in Libya and the Syrians should be in Syria and so forth. Okay, if there is a bit of movement back and forth at the margins, that’s not a big deal, but there would be no reason for there to be half a million Libyan refugees there in Italy, or for there to be all these Syrians and Iraqis and so forth in Germany and other countries. It’s because these countries were deliberately wrecked.

    But you didn’t really read what I wrote because you get too much damned emotional satisfaction out of your stupid rant. You start ranting as if I was saying the opposite of what I was saying. It’s just really unacceptable and annoying.

    ….before it had the immigrants (from wherever) it was nearly crime and strife and hatred free. A veritable utopia. And sure, it still is, but it won’t be for long when that critical mass is achieved and they start demanding call to prayers and minurets and asserting themselves, as they will.

    So you say, “And sure, it still is…”. So you are admitting that Sweden is not currently the “Rape capital of the world”. You think one day it will be… except, uhh… how do you know that? Don’t you realize that you’re talking out of both sides of your mouth now? I mean these people making this claim about Sweden are not claiming that, one day Sweden WILL BE the rape capital of the world. They are saying that Sweden is CURRENTLY the rape capital of the world!

    But really, your rant reflects rather confused thinking. In the article, I mentioned this synthetic “burkini” controversy in France. And some idiot above, who I did not even respond to, starts ranting about not having any Muslims in France. Well, look, if you don’t think there should be any Muslims in France, fine, that’s a viewpoint. BUT… there is a basic problem: There are Muslims in France and there will be for the indefinite future.

    Even if I were to say I hate the fact that there are Muslims in France, I STILL say that given that they are there, they have the right to wear whatever swimming outfit they want!

    You could hate the fact that your mother-in-law is living in your house, and really want her to go live somewhere else, but given the fact that she is there, you should make a best effort to get along with her.

    Given the fact that whatever Muslims are in Europe are there, there must be an attempt to get along. And making up a bunch of synthetic narratives that Muslims are raping every woman in sight when it is simply not happening — that IS NOT A WAY TO GET ALONG WITH PEOPLE!

    The other thing that is really creeping me out about this whole conversation is that you just seem to have zero empathy with the refugees. Imagine that your country is wrecked and you have to walk all the way to Canada with some friends and the Canadian government puts you in a refugee shelter there. Now, some bitches in Canada are claiming falsely (because somebody put them to it) that you and your friends are serial rapists.

    How would this make you feel?

    Imagine further that there are Canadians going around saying that all the Americans refugees are rapists and so forth. I ask you to try to consider the situation from this angle. But again, in all of this conversation, you have not shown an iota of empathy for these people who got their countries destroyed. You just want to say that the European people didn’t do this. Well, fine, the Japanese people as a whole did not bomb Pearl Harbor but we still say “The Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor.”

    Okay, fine. I already stated on this page that Rotherham happened. The crimes that happened happened. That was a gang of British-born Pakistani ethnics. These weren’t Arab refugees from Syria or Libya or anywhere like that.

    oh! thank goodness. I was afraid there for a moment

    Look, what you’re doing in this conversation is so slimy and dishonest that you really have to stop. The point is that I specifically asked you what the evidence on Cologne was. You then started ranting about Rotherham.

    You can’t do that. What you’re doing is that you’re taking unrelated incidents and trying to force them into some kind of trend.

    The whole mental process that you are engaging in here is totally intellectually corrupt. You decide what you want to believe and then go around cherry-picking incidents to support what you already decided to believe. It’s exactly like if I decided that white people are horrible and dangerous and just started grabbing Jeffrey Dahmer and Charlie Manson and a few others and weaving a narrative out of these disparate things that really are one-off things that are unconnected.

    Like, at one point, you start talking about somebody who kicked a woman down some stairs and it’s not an Arab or anything. It’s somebody from Bulgaria, likely a Gypsy, okay, but what’s that got to do with Arab refugees in Cologne? NOTHING. A deranged Ethiopian in 2010 killed a Swedish girl. Okay, it seems that this definitely happened. Did any other Ethiopian immigrant do that ever? I don’t think so. It’s like you’re going around cherry-picking all these different one-off things and waving your hand and saying there’s a trend there. But there’s no trend, Rurik. A bunch of Pakistani ethnic criminals who were born in England and did what they did has NOTHING to do with what they say happened in Cologne railway station. And it has nothing to do with the Ethiopian nutcase in Sweden, which in turn has nothing to do with the Bulgarian gypsy.

    And plenty of crimes were committed by white bread Europeans too. This is all just totally separate shit that happened that does not form any trend. What you’re doing is totally mentally unhygienic and you should come to grips with this and STOP.

    As for the surge in Swedish rape statistics being due to a change in how rape was reported, that is the case. Go google it.

    As for all of this stuff that the Europeans are letting brown-skinned people get away with mass rape because they are afraid of being called racists, you should really look into this and figure out whether this is really true. I pointed you to that hoaxmap.org thing, which, okay, is in German, but there must be other things. I would have to bet that a lot of the anecdotal stuff you’re repeating are known hoaxes that are documented on hoaxmap.

    But I really am getting utterly sick and tired of your fucking bullshit. I specifically said that the Libyans were fine in Libya and Libya (and the other places) ought to be perfectly good places for the people from there to live in. That means that the Libyans SHOULD basically be in Libya and the Syrians in Syria and it is NATO AngloZionist policy that has created this mess.

    And then you take this to mean that I am saying that it is somehow good that all these Arabs are flooding into Europe! WHEN DID I EVER SAY THAT? NEVER!!!

    Now, I am saying that given that the Arabs are here, well, we shouldn’t make up a bunch of bullshit about them all being rapists and so forth. But that is another issue really…

    What I am saying is that we need to analyze WHY this is happening, that’s all. But I am offended when I take the time to carefully say things and have you wilfully misunderstand them. That kind of passive aggressive shit is unacceptable. I’m not passive-aggressive, as you seem to be at times. I just get aggressive-aggressive and tell you in no uncertain terms now to knock it off.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  272. Rurik says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    Ooookey

    I’m going to tiptoe here and be as gracious as a Rurik can be..

    The problem on this issue of the Cologne railway station event is that you are seemingly incapable of focusing on a narrow question. I ask you what the proof of this is and you start talking about ROTHERHAM!!!!

    because JR, I’m not at all concerned about Cologne per se. At all. If Cologne were some isolated incident, (whether it happened or not) I couldn’t care less. It’d be the last thing on my mind. But that’s not how I see it. The reason I’m sitting here typing about it at all is because I consider what happen in Cologne and Rotherham and the rapes of the five year old and the ten year old boy and the daughter of the EU official… as all a direct consequence of the suicide/death of a civilization. My civilization. One I consider sublime and ineffable and worthy of defending and persevering.

    Perhaps I’m completely wrong about that JR, and I’m imagining things and this so-called “trajectory” that I keep harping on is just the natural evolution of mankind, and I should embrace it. Perhaps. But my point in pointing this out is that I see a general trend where all white, Western nations are supposed to use immigration and guilt over racism and liberalism to commit suicide and embrace an invasion by Muslims and Mexicans and Africans and Asians and everybody else. Been to London lately? Paris? Last time I was in Paris I was hard pressed to see one person of French ethnicity. Perhaps that’s just progress and a reason for optimism, but I personally consider it troubling. That’s all JR. It’s really just my perspective on things. I would expect that all the people coming into France from wherever, would disagree with me and say they think liberalism and French guilt for being racists is too little, too late, but at least it’s progress.

    That a criminal gang made up of British born Pakistani ethnics did what they did in Rotherham, England has basically ZERO bearing on whether a bunch of Syrian refugees in Cologne, Germany did some other thing.

    you don’t see it JR. You don’t see this whole thing as civilizational. I consider the Muslim rapes at Rotherham of British school girls and the Muslim rapes in Australia of Australian school girls as being a consequence of exactly the same thing: the spiritual evisceration, emasculation and castration of a people. My people. Western, white people. Who’re reminded of how racist and vile they are every time they turn on the Jewish cathode death ray- television.

    It’s exactly the same with the wars. Have you ever watched the video called the ‘dueling puppets’?

    what’s going on isn’t just happening in Canada or Australia, but the entire length and breath of the Western world and beyond. Rothschild’s minions were even in Russia, and were/are known as the “Russian” oligarchs. So this plague has been festering and metastasizing from London to Moscow and everywhere in between. That’s what I’m on about JR. Not some isolated incident somewhere in Germany.

    Next time some white people are accused of doing something and we ask what the evidence is, why not just answer…. JEFFREY DAHMER!!! OR CHARLES MANSON!!!!

    we’re always going to have criminals and lunatics bubble up from inside our gene pool. All peoples do. My point is that we don’t need to bring in everybody else’s criminals and lunatics, especially if they’re from religious and cultural and ethnic backgrounds that are wildly incongruous with our own. And in whom probably lingers some deep-seated resentments of our ethnic and culture and religious identity. We’re the ‘oppressors’ don’t ya know. We’ve enslaved and genocided and gassed and persecuted their ancestors since the beginning of time- don’t ya know. Now’s the time of whitey’s comeuppance. I just don’t happen to agree with that.

    Is that so wrong? To want what every single people on the planet want.. a country of our own? To prosper in and persevere in and raise children of our own in, without tribal hatreds and strife and cultural and ethnic hostility? (I was born and grew up near Detroit)

    It doesn’t matter whether it’s Sweden or Zimbabwe, the West is in a death spiral. You may not see it that way, and you may say ‘why the fuck are your mentioning Sweden and Zimbabwe in the same sentence?!!!’ You may see what’s happening in those countries as being completely unrelated, but I don’t. I see what happened to Elin Krantz and the farmers of Zimbabwe as a result of the EXACT SAME THING. Just like the dueling puppets and the way it is the West that is expected to take in all the worlds refugees and resettle them and kill all Israel’s enemies and blame Putin and teach your daughters to twerk, and if anyone complains anywhere from one end New Zealand to the tip of Norway, well then the shrieking and howls coming from the controlled media and whore politicians and all the organs of Jewish domination will screech with one voice: RACIST!

    Perhaps you’ve not noticed that JR, or don’t really care. And that’s fine. I don’t expect everyone to care, and like I said, for a lot of people, it’s advantageous that the West is committing suicide. How can the Somalis living in Minnesota complain when their own countries are festering shit holes of misery.

    in the first essay, I made this term LPM, the Ludek Pachman moment

    that’s my favorite one JR. And what I confess I’d like to see, is more people having their own LPM, and discovering that Rurik has a point, and that the media is nothing more than a device of psychological control, being used as a weapon to carefully and systematically destroy a people’s will to exist. My people, JR. That’s how I see it. Right or wrong, that’s how I see it all.

    When I read the Protocols so long ago, sure, it’s a forgery, but it was exactly what is going on. And it’s being done to the entire Western world. The reason the white denizens of Zimbabwe were convinced to hand over the nation that their ancestors carved out of the jungle and created through incredible levels of hard work and struggle, was because the plague of political correctness had infected their will to persevere. They were called ‘racists’, and heaps of sanctimony were hurled at them from every corner of the British (Rothschild’s) empire, until they simply lost the will to fight. And surrendered. And that’s what I see happening all over the place, as Germany is too terrified of being called Nazi, to the point that they’ll hand over their ancient, sacred homelands out of guilt.

    I don’t know if you don’t see any of that, or you just don’t care. Or you consider it all progress. Either way, I’m not demanding you see things my way, or even that I have a point. I’m just typing here and trying in earnest to at least allow you to glimmer at least why I write what I write. Right or wrong.

    I will just finish this note by saying that this is not this “I’m OK, you’re OK”, “agree to disagree” moment. NO. If I ask you what the proof of the Cologne thing is, you cannot start screaming about Rotherham or some other thing. That is unacceptable! You really have to stop this. It’s just too aggravating.

    do you at least see why I brought up Rotherham now? Did I (hopefully) make my case?

    and being ‘I’m OK, you’re OK, is exactly how I feel. I absolutely do honestly feel that if there are people who are all for unlimited immigration of third world peoples into the West, then hey, that is their right! And really, who could blame them?

    my problem isn’t with them, but with ignorance and dishonestly. My point is simply to point things out that perhaps people haven’t considered, to try to get them to have their own LPM

  273. Rurik says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    The first step must be to reject the bullshit. ALL OF IT.

    do you consider every single Islamic ‘terrorist attack’ as a false flag?

    that’s an honest question (and indeed, when I try to think of a terrorist attack that was perpetrated by Muslims on Western soil, I’m hard pressed [I don't consider Turkey or Israel as part of the West])

    looking, here are some I consider likely true

    The Moscow theater hostage crisis was the seizure of the crowded Dubrovka Theater by Islamists.

    February 2004 Moscow Metro bombing.

    The murder of Theo van Gogh by Amsterdam-born jihadist Mohammed Bouyeri.[36]


    Fort Hood shooting, at Fort Hood near Killeen, Texas. 13 dead, 33 injured.

    anyways, there’s a lot of them that I have no idea about.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Islamist_terrorist_attacks

    and a lot of them that I’m reasonably certain were pure BULLSHIT, like 9/11 and the Boston bombings, and others like 7/7

    >>><<<

    do you consider every single act of "rape" of a Western women by a Muslim immigrant as a hoax (with the notable exception of Rotherham)?

    You have to concede some of them are true. The rape of the ten year old Austrian boy by the Muslim immigrant is very well documented. And even that case isn’t so notable except insofar as the way the authorities treated it.

    so how are we expected to know which incidents are BULLSHIT, and which are true? You see in many ways I agree with you JR, like the truck attacks and the toilet and 9/11. But then when it comes to others, I’m willing to entertain the possibility that some of them might be true.

    am I being a dupe when I do so?

    • Replies: @L.K
    , @Jonathan Revusky
  274. Mr. Anon says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    If the official story on 9/11 is so clearly true, then why do you shit eaters always run away when I pose the obvious question: What is the strongest evidence available for it? That these attacks were planned by Al Qaeda from Afghanistan… ”

    1.) I have answered that. Lots of people have. You refuse to listen to or acknowledge any answer.

    2.) You deceitfully conflate two separate issues whenever you discuss this. Somebody talks about the buildings – the ridiculous scenarios that your lot always bring up about the destruction of the World Trade Centers – and you ask your little socratic question about Osama bin Laden. Fuck your stupid little socratic question. You ain’t Socrates. You studiously ignore any evidence contrary to your insane little delusions. You might as well just admit you believe in magic. Magic would be required to make true what your demented little brain imagines to be true.

    “But anyway, why don’t you go troll in some lower end place? Develop your skilz somewhere else and then come back and try to troll me. You are just so completely out of your league here.”

    Any place where you post becomes “a lower end place” by definition. And given that your league is the League of Deranged Nitwits – yeah, I am out of that league.

    You’re a ridiculous nobody who has to construct a dreamworld in which you are somehow relevant or important. You aren’t, as a casual googling of your name makes clear. Nobody gives a shit what you think, clown. You’re just a loud, dull-minded bunch of nothing.

  275. Mr. Anon says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    “You don’t want to believe that some sweet-looking German girl falsely claimed she was raped even when it’s pretty much an established fact, well, that’s your problem, but don’t come at me with this politically correct shit that I’m not supposed to call a spade a spade or a piece of shit lying bitch what she is.”

    You seem to have a real problem with pretty young white women. What’s the matter? Don’t they like you? Is that why you are such an angry, hostile asshole? Rejection? Repressed homosexuality, maybe? Perhaps that’s why you’re so keen on defending your muslim pets. Something about your tone tells me you ain’t quite right in the head.

    There are medications available now. Maybe you should try one. Try several.

  276. Rurik says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    So you want to go play this sensitive feminist card and act like you’re shocked that I refer to this woman as a “bitch”, then go fuck yourself, Rurik. To call this female a “bitch” or a “twat” is very mild. This kind of thing is done to incite hatred and violence. If some bitch like this starts screaming that people raped her when it didn’t happen, this could incite a bloody lynch mob.

    In fact, I would like an apology for this.

    IF JR, if a women or girl falsely claimed rape, then I wouldn’t just be for calling such a “woman” a bitch, I’d call her a rancid POS and lower than a snake in the grass. And if she falsely accused an actual person in an attempt to get that person punished for something they didn’t do, I’d want to see the vicious skank do as much hard time as she tried to condemn the innocent person to.

    but I don’t dismiss all these women’s clams of rape as a hoax. I consider probably most of them as true. Most rapes in fact don’t even get reported, and so the ones that do, when the woman or girl is subject to the trauma of reporting the rape and reliving it, so to speak, is a very difficult thing, and I suspect that in most cases, (and even yes, cases of Muslim (and other) immigrants raping German or Swedish or British or Australian or Norwegian, etc.. girls) do in fact happen (all the time and at epidemic levels). And that, I suspect is where we disagree. And so when it sounds to me like a blanket condemnation of all or most of the girls and women who reported sexual assaults and rapes by Muslim (and other) immigrants, as “bitches” and “twats”, is where I wince.

    But perhaps I misread you, and you weren’t giving out a blanket condemnation of all or most these women and girls.

    OR

    You’re right, and they’re all lying, in which case I’d agree with you that they’re lower than slime, and it would be a slander to female dogs to call such women ‘bitches’, because they’re far, far worse.

    OK?

    on reflection, I’ll tell you what it seems to me JR. It seems to me that you found an example of a German woman or women lying about a rape or assault that didn’t happen. (They do lie about such things at times, it’s true), but it seems to me that just as you suggest I bring up Rotherham as evidence that such things are happening all over the place, it seems to me that you’re bringing up Cologne and a potential case of fraud, to suggest that these things almost never happen anywhere. And that the ‘bitches’ are usually if not always lying about it.

    that’s my sense of it anyways.

  277. Rurik says:
    @alexander

    For every “ten” refugees from these war torn regions we are forced to take in, “one” Neocon Oligarch (responsible for this entire titanic debacle) is arrested,

    how about we arrest them all and send them all to the last bastion of the ISIS stronghold for ISIS to deal with. I don’t approve of the way ISIS treats its enemies to be sure, but if there’s anyone on the planet who deserves to answer for all the horrors and enormities that have been visited upon the people of that region, it is certainly our den of neocon traitors and Satanic fiends. For some reason I always think of John McCain as being the very worst of them. Not sure why.. he’s certainly up there among the worst, but I just keep coming back to him as being the very worst. I guess it’s probably for the sheer belligerence and infinite venality of the vile little scumbag of a “man”.

    (I was reading this to edit it, and realized that if we sent McBloodstain to ISIS, that they’d all hail him as their greatest benefactor. So that ruins that plan).

  278. Rurik says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    My point was that the Libyans, the ones who currently are refugees, like apparently half a million in Italy alone, were perfectly well and happy in Libya! So, when I said that, in a sane world, Libya (as well as Syria and Iraq) would be perfectly okay countries for the people there to live in, I meant the OPPOSITE of what you seem to think I meant.

    well ok, if I misread you, I apologize. But I will say in my defense that pointing out that Libya was a great place (relatively) for the Libyans to live in before the Fiend destroyed it, seems to me a no-brainer.

    They are saying that Sweden is CURRENTLY the rape capital of the world!

    I suppose you could say it’s the rape capital of Europe and Scandinavia, but not the world, because there is S. Africa that beats it for the time being.

    Given the fact that whatever Muslims are in Europe are there, there must be an attempt to get along. And making up a bunch of synthetic narratives that Muslims are raping every woman in sight when it is simply not happening — that IS NOT A WAY TO GET ALONG WITH PEOPLE!

    they are guests JR

    Europe is not a Muslim place OK? It is for the guests in those countries to accommodate themselves to the mores and customs and cultures of the host nations that have generously allowed them to live there. The second they start demanding that the French people have to accommodate themselves to Islam and Muslim culture and ways, is the very second that I’d show them the fucking door, OK?

    The other thing that is really creeping me out about this whole conversation is that you just seem to have zero empathy with the refugees. Imagine that your country is wrecked and you have to walk all the way to Canada with some friends and the Canadian government puts you in a refugee shelter there. Now, some bitches in Canada are claiming falsely (because somebody put them to it) that you and your friends are serial rapists.

    How would this make you feel?

    and I feel you have zero empathy for the people of France and Sweden and Germany who must suffer these things (including rape) that are a consequence of forces and crimes that they are not responsible for. Of course I have sympathy for the refugees. Jesus Christ, I’m not a monster. But I just don’t feel like it’s my fault or the fault of some ten year old boy whose parents have to deal with the fact that he may never recover. Or just the cultural and ethnic strife. It’s all fucked up and they should not be coming into Europe and the West JR. But you just don’t get that and never will. I respect your right to want them to come into the West, but you don’t seem to respect my position that these people in Germany and France have a right to their own counties and cultures and yes, future for their white children. This is the rift you see, that the world thinks that all white countries, (and only white countries) are obliged to take on an unlimited number of non-white immigrants, because not to do so would be callous and racist and lack empathy. I just don’t agree. If these people have a right to go anywhere, it would be straight into Israel, where all of this is emanating out from. I’d be all for that in a NY second!

    I gotta go. I’ll get back to this later ;)

  279. Mr. Anon says:

    “IF JR, if a women or girl falsely claimed rape, then I wouldn’t just be for calling such a “woman” a bitch, I’d call her a rancid POS and lower than a snake in the grass. And if she falsely accused an actual person in an attempt to get that person punished for something they didn’t do, I’d want to see the vicious skank do as much hard time as she tried to condemn the innocent person to. ”

    Honestly, you sound like your grovelling to this guy Revusky. How about instead you take your own side in a racial/cultural argument. White women are our people. Muslim men are not. JR wants you to take the side of “The Other”, rather than take the side of your own people. And he does so in the most insulting way possible – deriding them as “bitches”, etc., and insulting you too for defending your own kind. So, how exactly is Revusky any different than the left-wing social justice warriors who villify white people at every opportunity and encourage white people to undermine their own societies? Perhaps that is the primary purpose of his false-flag narrative – to make excuses for muslims and other invaders and undermine our race and culture.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  280. Mr. Anon says:
    @Rurik

    “Of course I have sympathy for the refugees. Jesus Christ, I’m not a monster. But I just don’t feel like it’s my fault or the fault of some ten year old boy whose parents have to deal with the fact that he may never recover. Or just the cultural and ethnic strife.”

    There are wealthy muslim countries: Saudi Arabia, Oman, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar. Why don’t they take in these refugees? Muslims are always talking about how they are all brothers. Why don’t they act like it?

    Qatar is going to spend 200 billion dollars on the FIFA World Cup, which they are hosting in 2022. Nearly a quarter trillion dollars for Soccer. How many refugees could they accomodate with that much money?

    Saudi Arabia has a permament tent-city they maintain to accomodate pilgrims making the Haj; it can accomodate 100,000 people. The tents are even air-conditioned. Where is thier charity toward their brother muslims? The Saudi government has billions of dollars to buy up weapons they never use and even to buy up whole major industrial enterprises. Oh, they’re shelling out a small amount of money for Korans and Imams for the refugees in Germany, to tend to their spiritual needs………..and, of course, to stir them up.

    And it’s not as if these countries are blameless for the situation in Syria: Saudi Arabia and at least some of the Gulf States are thought (known) to have been supporting ISIS, just as Israel and The U.S. have been thought (known) to do.

    So why do we hear hardly anybody bringing this up? Why does it fall to Europe to take in these muslim “refugees” (actually, many of them are not refugees – many of them are not even Syrian), rather than their pious and rich brothers in Islam?

    • Replies: @Talha
  281. @Mr. Anon

    You seem to have a real problem with pretty young white women.

    Uhh, no. I like pretty young white women. I really do. Very much so. Actually, I like pretty young women of all colors. Yes, you are right that I wish more of them liked me back, but I’m realistic. I’m getting a bit long in the tooth and even in my prime, I was never any Brad Pitt.

    No, what I specifically have a problem with is the ones who falsely shout RAPE! That should have been clear. The ones I am specifically calling bitches and twats are the false accusers, saying they got raped when they didn’t! For example, here:

    https://www.rt.com/news/353911-cologne-woman-rape-allegations/

    and here:

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/31/teenage-girl-made-up-migrant-claim-that-caused-uproar-in-germany

    I guess you don’t have a problem with that, girls falsely claiming they were raped. That’s A-OK for you. You’re a pathological scumbag liar so, in fact, you love girls who also are pathological scumbag liars, because like pertains to like, I guess. I can only shudder at the thought of what human scum specimens would result if you did assortative mating with them… Ooohh…. That would be reverse eugenics for sure…

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  282. @Mr. Anon

    Honestly, you sound like your grovelling to this guy Revusky. How about instead you take your own side in a racial/cultural argument. White women are our people. Muslim men are not.

    OMG. Holy shit. You’re really saying that if a white girl says that some Arabs raped her, we should take her side even if she is LYING!!!!???

    Well, if anybody has not already had an AWANPM vis-a-vis this Mr Anon character, I think it’s time, isn’t it?

    “Oh, no, it doesn’t matter if the rape accusation is false. We have to take the side of the white girl against these beastly Arabs.”

    EVEN IF THE ACCUSATION IS FALSE!!!????

    HOLY FUCK!!!

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  283. Mr. Anon says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    “Uhh, no. I like pretty young white women. I really do.”

    And you like to heap abuse on them too – calling them bitches, twats – even a 13 year-old girl who apparently has psychological problems.

    “Yes, you are right that I wish more of them liked me back, but I’m realistic.”

    Maybe it would help if you didn’t give off a creepy woman-hating vibe. Or if you didn’t talk about “shit-eating” all the time. Projection? On second thought, never mind. We really don’t want to know.

    And you seem to think that two particular stories – stories that support your narrative – invalidate claims leveled by hundreds of others. By the way, from that first link you posted was this link:

    https://www.rt.com/news/349784-german-migrants-assault-lie/

    She was raped by muslims, but covered up the identity of her attackers, for fear of stigmatizing muslims. I suppose you think she is lying now, and that it never happened at all.

    And I suppose this never happened either, did it?

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/iraqi-refugee-raped-10-year-old-boy-swimming-pool-vienna-austria-sentence-conviction-overturned-a7377491.html

    Are their any other muslim rapists or pederasts you’d like to carry water for there, chief? Goat-rapers, maybe? I’m sure they appreciate you sticking up for them. Why maybe they’ll even excuse you from paying the Jizya.

  284. @Mr. Anon

    Mr.(Troll)Anon, your efforts are wasted here. Thanks to Ron Unz’ clever software anyone can easily follow all of the interesting conversations and either just ignore yours completely or, as I prefer, glance at them momentarily for a laugh and to see just how much lower your intellectually downward spiral as taken you.

    One doesn’t have to agree with everything JR writes to know that he was absolutely right to describe you as belonging in a lower place, with your lower IQ, lower level of understanding and “reasoning” and not to omit at all your lower level of interaction. YOU have established these facts, YOU!

    I chuckle when such a nobody as you calls other, more accomplished people nobodies. It is as though you are the only one who doesn’t see it. There you are typing away, wasting your own time when you’d be better off masturbating yourself, if only to prevent passing on your lower order genes.

    By all means keep your comedy coming, I’m having a larf at you

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    , @Mr. Anon
  285. Mr. Anon says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    “Well, if anybody has not already had an AWANPM vis-a-vis this Mr Anon character, I think it’s time, isn’t it?”

    Your tendency to talk in acronyms makes it difficult to understand you. But, given that there is not much of any value there to understand, it doesn’t really detract from your posts. Perhaps you should write entirely in acronyms – maybe you could squeeze the word-count of your articles down to four figures. And it would give you the chance to WRITE EVERYTHING ALL CAPS ALL THE TIME, as sputtering, raving loonies on the web are wont to do.

    And as to what I said. Yes, I’ll take my own people’s side over that of foreign invaders. I’ll give them the benefit of doubt. I’ll tend to believe them over “the Other”. And, if a 13 year old girl with mental problems makes a false allegation, I won’t just write her off as a “bitch” and a “twat”, and subsequently assume that all white women are lying when they claim they’ve been raped by muslims – as you are doing here.

  286. Talha says:
    @Mr. Anon

    Muslim countries are top 5 out of the top ten hosts in the world:
    Jordan, Turkey, Pakistan, Lebanon, Iran

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/refugee-crisis-amnesty-international-10-countries-host-more-half-uk-needs-to-do-more-a7344171.html

    They are doing quite a bit and being squeezed to the breaking point. Maybe the Saudis and others could do more, but I don’t expect much from them in the first place.

    Peace – standing over there again, with umbrella.

  287. Mr. Anon says:

    “Muslim countries are top 5 out of the top ten hosts in the world:
    Jordan, Turkey, Pakistan, Lebanon, Iran”

    Turkey was mostly a pass-through for a lot of refugees early on.

    “They are doing quite a bit and being squeezed to the breaking point. Maybe the Saudis and others could do more, but I don’t expect much from them in the first place.”

    Why not? They are relatively wealthy, certainly more so than Jordan or Pakistan.

    • Replies: @Talha
  288. utu says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    “If you want to behave like this, go hang out with the Derbyshire and Sailer crowd and they’ll eat up all your shit and you can be a leading light there.”

    Agree. His primitive islamophobia is irritating. There is something that I find in Rurik character that rubs me wrong way. I can’t put finger on it. Is it being way to ingratiating? Is his islamophobia a result of needing to fit in? Certainly he would fit with Derbyshire and Sailer crowd but they might be way too pro-Zion for his taste. Also I do not have time or energy to read his way too long comments that really are repetitious.

    Perhaps Ron Unz, should institute the limit on comment length and the limit on number of comments you can post in one hour or one day.

    Then there is Mr. Anon who clearly is trolling you. What is his agenda baseline: (1) Islamophobia, (2) 9/11 Muslims did it, right? Then while he is fairly eloquent the level of his intensity is a notch too high. Fo this reason earlier I suggested LIQJ. Perhaps of Israeli kind.

    • Replies: @Rurik
    , @Jonathan Revusky
  289. Mr. Anon says:
    @NoseytheDuke

    “One doesn’t have to agree with everything JR writes…….”.

    No, apparently you do. If you have a minor disagreement with him, he’ll start hurling invective at you. Ask Talha or Rurik.

    “I chuckle when such a nobody as you calls other, more accomplished people nobodies.”

    He is a nobody. Google his name sometime. He influences nobody save a few people in the conspiracy-ghetto.

    And he’s certainly not more accomplished than I am. He’s a dullard.

    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
  290. Mr. Anon says:
    @NoseytheDuke

    What has this clown Revusky accomplished?

    • Replies: @Rurik
    , @L.K
  291. Talha says:
    @Mr. Anon

    Turkey was mostly a pass-through for a lot of refugees early on.

    Yup – geography.

    Why not?

    Because they are part of the problem, why would I expect them to magically be part of the solution?

    Peace.

  292. Rurik says:
    @utu

    Agree. His primitive islamophobia is irritating

    ‘primitive Islamophobia?

    lol

    ‘submit’ much utu?

    There is something that I find in Rurik character that rubs me wrong way. I can’t put finger on it

    perhaps it’s that his arguments are irrefutable? And that you find that hurtful when he demolishes some of your deeply felt but erroneous precepts? Hmm..

    Is his islamophobia a result of needing to fit in?

    I’m pretty sure that’s it. If you’ve read my ‘repetitive’ posts, you’ll surely find that I’m basically a sycophantic sheep who’s looking to fit in. Yea, that’s it for sure. ;)

    Perhaps Ron Unz, should …

    … make him stop telling the truth that hurts my ears and eviscerates my precious delusional fallacies’

    just put me on ignore utu if it hurts so much. Trust me, if I want to stop sounding “ingratiating” to you, I’m is perfectly capable of accommodating you in that regard.

    but rather, I’d prefer to assume the tone of our friend Talha here, and emulate his forbearance.

    is that too ingratiating for you utu?

  293. Rurik says:
    @Mr. Anon

    What has this clown Revusky accomplished?

    a lot

    he’s written some rather remarkable tomes on human folly and exposed the underbelly of some platitudinous funk that permeates the dank corners of [American especially] societal-wide masturbatory mendacity

    that he’s at times tempestuously wrathful is one his charms, and should be mitigated as a quirk of his tumultuous if occasionally quarrelsome nature

    sometimes he’s in error, but then no one’s perfect

    • Replies: @alexander
    , @Mr. Anon
  294. L.K says:
    @Rurik

    Rurik:

    “It’s all fucked up and they should not be coming into Europe and the West JR. But you just don’t get that and never will. I respect your right to want them to come into the West, but you don’t seem to respect my position that these people in Germany and France have a right to their own counties and cultures and yes, future for their white children.”

    Rurik, you are being less than honest here. Where the fuck did JR say that he wants all these refugees/migrants in Europe?? I have heard the man say the opposite of that more than once.
    He’s just asked that the debate be framed honestly. I really don’t get why you r doing this…

    Rurik:

    I suppose you could say it’s the rape capital of Europe and Scandinavia, but not the world, because there is S. Africa that beats it for the time being.

    I doubt that it is even the rape capital of Europe, let alone second place only after S.Africa.
    As JR pointed out, it all depends on how these stats are arrived at.
    This is NOT to say that immigration in Sweden has not made rape crimes – and other crime -more serious.
    It is also r-i-d-i-c-u-l-o-u-s when u claim there r hardly any French or Brits in Paris and London.
    Plus, Paris ain’t representative of France as a whole, far too many immigrants go there.
    IMO, there far too many foreigners in these cities, but that is a different story.

    Rurik:

    “It doesn’t matter whether it’s Sweden or Zimbabwe, the West is in a
    death spiral.”

    Ok, possibly the West is in a death spiral but your comparison is ludicrous. Sweden is part of Europe & Europe is the ancestral homeland of European peoples – liberal rants notwithstanding -, Zimbabwe never was and never will be.
    Interestingly, white S.Africans are, of course, “third worlders(using your terminology here)”, not that I think you would have a problem with them coming into your country, ZUSA( which is also very different from Europe – you whites from Zusa keep comparing ZUSA and Europe as they r the same and they are not, thank god! ).

    Gotta go, more later.

    Take care

    • Replies: @Rurik
  295. @Mr. Anon

    Don’t quit your day job! Oh I forgot, this IS your day job. How sad…

    • LOL: utu
  296. L.K says:
    @Mr. Anon

    Good Grief,

    What a sodding pest you are!
    You have totally spammed the comment section under the article with nothing but pure shite.
    Ok, congrats, you have earned the Spam König title for this thread!

    You r like this giant pile of shit clogging the toilet! Just piss off already.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  297. @utu

    Agree. His primitive islamophobia is irritating.

    I’m not sure it’s so much islamophobia. I think what it is more is that he has some grand narrative in his head about the so-called “White Race” and that, in turn, causes him to fall for all these islamophobic synthetic narratives.

    And then he’s a stubborn ass, so he just won’t admit that he got played. Something like that.

    There is something that I find in Rurik character that rubs me wrong way. I can’t put finger on it. Is it being way to ingratiating?

    Well, I’m taking a pretty hard stand in this iteration because I have sort of pulled punches in the past and let him get away with murder in certain conversations. This business of my trying to get to the bottom of the Cologne thing and the other mass rape stories in Germany or Sweden, and he starts going on and on about Rotherham, England. That finally just infuriated me and I decided I had to get him to recognize that there is a problem here. But I dunno, trying to get anybody to admit they were wrong about something on the Internet, that’s…. and somebody that stubborn to boot!

    But there is something a tad autistic. For example, I keep telling him that I am not an advocate of mass immigration to Europe, of Arabs or anybody else. I really am not. I say this again and again and the fucker keeps on answering me as if I was advocating mass immigration! That really pisses me off.

    But, to be 100% fair, it’s not just Rurik. Actually, among the white nationalist types, he’s among the more reasonable, based on some of my interactions with the iSteve crowd. I mean, you tell these fuckers that whatever given thing is a synthetic narrative and it didn’t happen and they start all this shit about how you are advocating mass immigration to destroy Europe or something. At least Rurik realizes that when they find the patsy’s passport or ID at the crime scene for the 57th time, something is fishy. I mean, these Sailer fans (as well as Sailer himself) they’ll just never get it! It’s just amazing!

    Some guy in Paris or Brussels has all the explosives strapped to him, blows himself into smithereens and his indestructible passport (which, inexplicably, he took along with him) is found on the scene! And it’s immaculate!

    Then there is Mr. Anon who clearly is trolling you.

    That guy’s persistence is just incredible. He has nothing to sink his teeth into and now is trying to make hay with my having called these bitches who made the false rape accusations “bitches”. He’s started saying that we should side with white girls making rape accusations regardless of whether the accusations are true or not!

    The guy is truly demented! He openly admits he hasn’t even read the article after ranting about what shit it is.

    As for whether the guy is a Zio shill, it’s hard to say. I’m beginning to suspect it. The thing about the Zionist shills is that they have this incredible loathing of Arabs that, I guess, is part of Israeli culture. And so much of their thing is wanting the Goyim to hate Arabs as much as they do.

    There’s a viciousness to it, the kinds of just constant slanders about Arabs and Muslims generally. But the thing is, that if you’re not into that, and you just basically see Arabs as just people, then these people just end up seeming so demented. “Arabs are all rapists” and blah blah blah. Like, for them, saying you are an Arab lover is this great insult or something. When you see these people getting into that kind of talk, I think it’s a dead giveaway that these are Zio shills, very likely sitting in some office in Tel Aviv or some place.

    But that’s still just speculation. I honestly am not sure at all who all these assholes are.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  298. alexander says:
    @Rurik

    Rurik,

    I think you forgot to mention that Jonathan Revusky (however gruff at times)is, indeed, an honest person.

    Something that is entirely in short supply these days, especially given the “‘proven” propensity for fraud of our big media and all its sordid (and dubious) disseminations.

    If “fraud” has been the essential and exceptional tool of the powers-that-be over the last sixteen years, then Mr Revusky, in challenging it at every turn, has been its nemesis.

    We should all thank him for his willingness to question the incessant “perception management” of the status quo….that seems to circumscribe our thinking, and has led us all where none of us had ever wished to go.

    Had we all known better, before hand.

    Long live JR !!

    May his scrutiny , intelligence, and curiosity help us all navigate through the perfidious debacles which may, as yet, be “sent ” our way.

  299. @Rurik

    do you consider every single Islamic ‘terrorist attack’ as a false flag?

    Rurik, a reasonable person (and I try to be that) is going to be cagey about answering such a question.

    I would say, based on what knowledge I have, that the baseline assumption when these things happens is that they are false flags of some sort. I mean, the ones in Western countries. The stuff that happens in Iraq or Syria is more likely to be for real, I think.

    Certainly, if you’ve got the indestructible passport or they left their ID in the car, then that’s a dead giveaway. Certainly, if there are drills at the same time, that’s another one. If there are obvious crisis actors getting exposed…

    In terms of what you specifically bring up, the stuff involving Chechens in Russia, I don’t know very much about it. I’ve heard that there are strong suspicions about it being false flag. But I don’t know.

    As for Theo Van Gogh, that stinks to high heaven. The Moroccan who supposedly did it, I dunno, might be something like Sirhan Sirhan, some hypnotized patsy. Not sure. My gut sense is: >90% likelihood that it was a deep State operation.

    Fort Hood, I don’t know too much about it, but it looks like some sort of psy-op to me as well.

    do you consider every single act of “rape” of a Western women by a Muslim immigrant as a hoax (with the notable exception of Rotherham)?

    Well, that’s a loaded question that a reasonable person would hesitate to answer. Every single one? Why not look at these things in a sober way and figure out what is real and what is not real?

    What I have said is that if I specifically ask you what the proof is regarding Cologne, Germany, let’s say, it is completely unacceptable for you to start ranting about Rotherham, England as your answer! Again, I want an apology for that! I’ve basically decided to stand my ground. You cannot do that and I would like you to finally take the responsible step of recognizing that that is out of line.

    But okay, I’ve answered as well as I can. So, look, Rurik, I posed a question earlier and why don’t you answer me this. All this raping (or maybe just molesting) that supposedly happened in Cologne rail station last New Years eve… where did it happen? I mean, where? Look here:

    https://www.google.es/search?q=k%C3%B6ln+hauptbahnhof&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjKuOCj7q7RAhXCShQKHYINDp4Q_AUICSgC&biw=1024&bih=480

    In the plaza? Near where they sell the tickets? On the train platforms?

    This old lady Ursula Haverbeck asked similar questions about where all this gassing of Jews took place. And they sentenced her to prison (though I don’t think she actually went because she’s too old) for asking these questions. Why? Because they could not answer the questions she posed. So you want to be like them?

    So where precisely did all this raping or molesting take place? I mean, in the images above of the Cologne train station…

    Okay, “I don’t know” is a valid answer.

    But now, answer this: Can you conceive of something of the scale they are claiming happening in that space without there being any photographic or video evidence? I mean, this is like Grand Central Station. Tons of people. Everybody has got a video camera in their pocket.

    Could you answer the above? Or are you going to start ranting about Rotherham some more?

    Can you not understand why I would get infuriated if you now start ranting about Rotherham some more?

  300. Mr. Anon says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    You think you “played” me? You can’t even make a coherent argument.

    And you’re a fine one to call someone else “demented”, given that you’re a seemingly insane nitwit. Demented fits you pretty well, which is why I previously called you that, among other things.

    And, for those of you who make the knee-jerk assumption that I am jewish: No, I am entirely non-jewish, as far as I know. But if it makes you happy – hey, knock yourselves out. If you ever read more widely at unz.com, rather than just hang out in your secret false-flag treehouse club (no girlz allowed!), you would probably not conclude that I am a hasbara troll.

  301. Mr. Anon says:
    @L.K

    “You r like this giant pile of shit clogging the toilet! Just piss off already.”

    U R like – an idiot who can’t even spell, dipshit.

    By the way, does JR make you guys swallow, or are you allowed to spit?

  302. Mr. Anon says:
    @Rurik

    “he’s written some rather remarkable tomes on human folly and exposed the underbelly of some platitudinous funk that permeates the dank corners of [American especially] societal-wide masturbatory mendacity”

    He’s also insulted you numerous times. Don’t forget that.

    You think his writings are remarkable tomes? Okay. They read like wordy, poorly thought-out, crappy essays to me.

  303. @Rurik

    Given the fact that whatever Muslims are in Europe are there, there must be an attempt to get along. And making up a bunch of synthetic narratives that Muslims are raping every woman in sight when it is simply not happening — that IS NOT A WAY TO GET ALONG WITH PEOPLE!

    they are guests JR

    WTF is your point, Rurik? Okay, fine. The refugees from Syria and Libya and so forth are guests. Therefore if people start this stuff that they committed all these rapes, we must automatically believe it???!! That’s what that great genius Mr. Anon thinks. He thinks we should support women who make false rape accusations because they are white! Doesn’t matter if the accusations are even false!!?? A white woman accuses Arabs of raping her, we should just automatically believe her. I suppose, even some bitch who, it turns out was not even in Cologne on the day in question. We should take her word that she was raped in the Cologne railway station because… SHE’S WHITE DAMMIT!

    WTF is this????

    And then, in your other response, you start saying that you would condemn these people IF the accusation turned out to be false. WTF you mean “IF”, white boy? It is established that there are various false accusations. I provided the links!

    HERE: https://www.rt.com/news/353911-cologne-woman-rape-allegations/

    AND HERE: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/31/teenage-girl-made-up-migrant-claim-that-caused-uproar-in-germany

    Did you simply refuse to look at the above because they don’t fit in with your desired narrative? That’s what I think, and that’s completely deplorable.

    And then you try to make hay about me specifically referring to these females as “bitches” and “twats”. Obviously, I’m not referring to people who really got raped (however many or few there may be.) OBVIOUSLY, I’m referring to the above well documented cases of false accusers. I call them bitches and twats, yes. Moreover, any man who does not share my disgust, loathing, and fear (yes, fear) of these girls who will make false rape accusations is a complete fool!

    Mr. Anon thinks that’s all okay, because they’re just accusing some dirty Ay-rabs of raping them. And who cares about some dirty Ay-rabs, right? Yeah, well, fool, if these bitches will falsely accuse an Arab of raping them if you give them a few bucks, for another few bucks, they’ll falsely accuse YOU or ME of raping them! What’s the difference to them?

    and I feel you have zero empathy for the people of France and Sweden and Germany who must suffer these things (including rape)

    Okay, this kind of bullshit has to stop right here. If I am expressing serious doubts that all the mass rapes occurred, ON PURELY LOGICAL GROUNDS, you cannot come at me laying some guilt trip that I don’t feel sufficient empathy for the rape victims! This, when I am expressing severe doubt that these rapes, by and large, even occurred!

    Just logically, FIRST, you must convince me that the rapes even occurred. If I express doubts that mass rapes in the Cologne rail station occurred, you cannot come at me saying that I am not expressing empathy for the victims of crimes when I doubt they occurred! This is simple logic, Rurik. Can’t you see that?

    This is like this business with the fake beheading videos. Like, I’m being terribly callous and lacking empathy if I don’t feel sympathy for the victims of these beheadings. BUT the beheadings are FAKE! If I’m increasingly certain that the crimes in question did not even take place, how can you be getting on with this nonsense about my lack of empathy for the victims. FIRST, convince me that the crimes took place!

    As regards the destruction of Libya and Syria, and thus, feeling empathy for the victims, there is no dispute that the crimes took place. You’re saying that I should have the same empathy for victims of crimes in Europe when I am skeptical (increasingly skeptical) that the crimes in question even took place!

    And then I want to get into the question of what the proof is that these events happened in Germany, and…. Goddammit! You start ranting about Rotherham. In ENGLAND!!!!! And I get infuriated. Of course. And then it’s like you’re going to affect that you don’t even understand why I’m getting pissed off.

    I ask you what the proof is of the crimes in Cologne and you start talking to me about something that happened in England! You cannot do that!

    You are being completely impossible in this conversation. Probably in your own mind you are being reasonable, and I am the one being unreasonable, but I am satisfied that this is not the case. You really need to grasp how batshit crazy some of the positions you are taking are. And who is on your side here anyway? Mr. Anon who says my article is shit and then admits he never read it. Or who thinks that we should support these girls in their rape accusations because they’re white even if the accusations are false!

    I cannot let this slide. We are reaching a point here where you MUST recognize that this is a problem. You wrote me back trying to explain why you engage in this kind of bullshit.

    I kind of understand why you do this, but on another level, I don’t really care either. The point is that YOU MUST STOP!

    Or, if you won’t stop, then at least don’t bother me any more. Go hang with the Derb and Sailer crowd.

    • Replies: @Rurik
    , @Mr. Anon
  304. Rurik says:
    @L.K

    Rurik, you are being less than honest here. Where the fuck did JR say that he wants all these refugees/migrants in Europe??

    well L.K., that seem to be his entire shtick. ‘I lack compassion for these people and believe all these totally false things about them. Like they bring their habits and customs with them and cause strife and occasionally assault and even rape and murder women and girls and ten year old boys at times. How could I possibly believe these things?! What’s wrong with me?’ blah blah blah

    You get a vibe after enough time at where a person’s sympathies lie. I feel that Europe and the West are turning suicidaly insane after decades of Marxist Jewish liberalism that has deliberately rotted out their will to exist. This is the work of their eternal enemies who hate them with an otherworldly passion and want to see them genocided off the planet. Since they can’t do it with force of arms, they’re doing it with ‘compassion’. You see they all have to have more ‘compassion’ for all the suffering “refugees” the world over, and bring them by the millions into their formerly peaceful and relatively harmonious communities so those communities can be sent reeling into hells on earth. I see it happening all over the place, and in JR’s case, I sense he’s obsessed with Muslim immigration, but I don’t care where it’s coming from, I just don’t think my people need to be blended out of existence. OK?

    Now I’ve sort of given up trying to make that case here, because I suspect that there are just too many people here who agree that all white lands must be overrun and the racists bread out. Or forced out through sheer numbers of hostile ‘others’ moving in. Perhaps too many here are one of those ‘others’ themselves, and are thrilled to death that whitey’s being driven to the brink. Or perhaps a few of them have had their will to exist rotted away by a university “education” or whatever. But I’m done trying to make my case here, since here it seems that the horrific death of someone like Elin Krantz is a good start. ‘Blend it up!’

    I doubt that it is even the rape capital of Europe, let alone second place only after S.Africa.

    you see, for someone like me, if even one girl is raped and savaged by a non-Swedish immigrant, that’s all it takes. Close the fucking door man. Ship all the young males home to where they belong. But for you, it doesn’t seem to be any kind of worry at all. I mean sure, of course the Swedish girls and society are all living in a kind of terror where they don’t dare walk alone at night in some neighborhoods, sure. And there are growing numbers of no-go areas for the police and such, but this is all just part of the process of genociding the Swedes out of Sweden! (and soon to be all the rest of Western civilization) and so we all just need to get used to it, huh LK? There’s nothing we can do about it, it’s going to happen anyways, so we may as well all just relax and enjoy it, huh?

    Tell me more about how it’s no big deal, and that sure, maybe’s there’s a few rapes and such, but it’s not like Sweden is the rape capital of Europe! (even if it is) and that even when push comes to shove, you can get JR to concede, however reluctantly, that yea, sure, I guess I suppose that they do have some kind of right to a border, sure, if they want to prove how uncompassionate they are!

    but you know what LK? I have this suspicion that most of the people who demand open borders for all white nations are not doing so out of compassion for the immigrants, but rather are motivated by a deep and visceral hatred for whites, and want to see them raped and overrun and genocided off the planet. For the record, I don’t see JR that way, I see JR as sympathetic to the Muslims, and lacking sympathy for the girls of Sweden who, sure, some of them might be getting raped, but when you calculate the importance of allowing Muslims to immigrate in huge and transformational numbers into places like Sweden, then the rapes are just inconsequential. That’s how I see JR ~ and others.

    People can say all they want to that they have gone on record and stated that they do concede that Sweden should be able to control immigration into Sweden, but then if they downplay the rapes and strife and genocidal trajectory of all that immigration, I just have my suspicions vis-a-vis their love of Swedish society and people. There are a lot of people in this world that would like to see every single Swedish girl pumped with brown and black man seed until there wasn’t one fucking, God damn racist white devil Swede (German, white American, etc..) left on the planet. That there are lots and lots of people like that LK, I can absolutely promise you. But they never say it like that. They always talk about whitey has to be more compassionate, and where is our guilt over what *we’ve* done? Don’t we realize that it is *us* who destroyed Syria?!

    and this plays directly into the scheme of the Fiend, who likes it that Muslim countries are being destroyed right and left, but who verily cums in his pants at the idea of Germany being destroyed.

    It is also r-i-d-i-c-u-l-o-u-s when u claim there r hardly any French or Brits in Paris and London.

    I’ve never been to London, but I understand they have a Muslim mayor, and I’ve heard that Muhammad is the most popular name for baby boys. But I have been to Paris, and what I said LK, is that when I was there, I was hard pressed to see people of ethnic French stock. I saw a lot of what I’d describe as American black thugs and tones and tones of Asians, and lots of Arabs, but relatively few white people. Now sure, I may have been in the wrong neighborhoods, but that was my impression, and that’s what I said. What I didn’t say is that there “r hardly any French or Brits in Paris and London”, but then again, LK…

    This is the thing.

    Paris and London have been radically transformed in the last few decades by *massive immigration* from the non-Western world.

    OK?

    and I see that transformation, and especially- it’s trajectory- and what that bodes, as alarming.

    OK? And I’m not alone in that. But when I bring it up, and I’m told that I’m being reactionary and lacking compassion and even perhaps… racist? Then what I figure is that the person I’m talking to is just another person who can’t wait until the last God damn racist white Brit has been bread off the planet for all eternity. There are millions and millions of people who feel that way LK, and a lot of them are heading straight into London as we speak. Indeed, the main people who feel that way are Rothschild himself, who’s orchestrating the genocide. Duh.

    Plus, Paris ain’t representative of France as a whole, far too many immigrants go there.

    did I say that it was? for a guy who’s writing about how I misrepresented something, you sure are misrepresenting everything I said. The French countryside is glorious and beautiful. For now!

    IMO, there far too many foreigners in these cities, but that is a different story.

    how is that a different story?! It’s my whole fucking point!!!

    Ok, possibly the West is in a death spiral but your comparison is ludicrous. Sweden is part of Europe & Europe is the ancestral homeland of European peoples – liberal rants notwithstanding -, Zimbabwe never was and never will be.

    you know for someone who’s otherwise intelligent, you sure can come off as a dumb ass.

    if you can’t see that the fate of Sweden and Zimbabwe are directly tied by the death spiral of the West, then it can only mean that you’re either too dumb, or deliberately obtuse.

    I guess you’re trrying to make the point that the whites of Zimbabwe (and of course N. America by extension) have no right to exist in the first place. And if they’re slaughtered or genocided, then it’s what they deserve. OK, fine. But for hundreds of years the whites of Zimbabwe and S. Africa and N. America were all ascendant and thriving and had hope for the future. OK. Then LK, what happened was a civilizational change, and we were all told ((by our media and universities and politicians)) from the length and breath of the entire Western world, that we all lacked compassion and were racists and guilty and had to do more for the non-whites of the world. And this is true for the entire Western world that you correctly stated is in a death spiral. because that is ultimately what all of the compassion is and has always been about from day one. OK? Duh fucking Duh!

    I feel like I’m talking to a kindergartener here, and being forced to point out the obvious.

    you whites from Zusa keep comparing ZUSA and Europe as they r the same and they are not, thank god! ).

    your rhetoric betrays a lot LK. You obviously have a lot of hostility for the whites of the US.

    Funny because all the nations of Western Europe are in exactly the ((same boat)). And it was us whites in the US that just had the giant nads to vote out the Fiend. Just like the Brits recently did. We are ALL under the thumb of the Fiend LK, and if there’s any hope for us getting out from under it, then it will hinge on the whites of the US repudiating the Fiend by electing hopefully a man who will do just that, and if so, it will free Europe too, who has been living and acting like a sniveling little lapdog to the drooling Fiend in Washington DC.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
    , @L.K
    , @L.K
  305. Rurik says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    WTF is your point, Rurik? Okay, fine. The refugees from Syria and Libya and so forth are guests. Therefore if people start this stuff that they committed all these rapes, we must automatically believe it???!!

    is that what I said?

    I suppose, even some bitch who, it turns out was not even in Cologne on the day in question. We should take her word that she was raped in the Cologne railway station because… SHE’S WHITE DAMMIT!

    WTF is this????

    is that what I said (dumb-ass)

    And then, in your other response, you start saying that you would condemn these people IF the accusation turned out to be false. WTF you mean “IF”, white boy? It is established that there are various false accusations. I provided the links!

    dumb-ass,

    one case of a girl making up an accusation does not equal ALL of the reported rapes. OK dumb-ass?

    Did you simply refuse to look at the above because they don’t fit in with your desired narrative? That’s what I think, and that’s completely deplorable.

    no dumb-ass, I concede that these deplorable false charges are real, and occasionally happen, but it means nothing further. I don’t concede that one girl making a false charge means that there have been zero rapes. That is so fucking stupid as to be off the charts. We know there have been rapes. A teen was just recently raped and drowned in a lake in Austria by a Muslim immigrant, OK? (dumb-ass)

    OBVIOUSLY, I’m referring to the above well documented cases of false accusers. I call them bitches and twats, yes. Moreover, any man who does not share my disgust, loathing, and fear (yes, fear) of these girls who will make false rape accusations is a complete fool!

    well dumb-ass, didn’t I already concede that very point in no uncertain terms? Jesus

    Mr. Anon thinks

    why the fuck are you writing to me about what Mr. Anon thinks?

    you cannot come at me laying some guilt trip that I don’t feel sufficient empathy for the rape victims! This, when I am expressing severe doubt that these rapes, by and large, even occurred!

    case in point

    you bring up some obscure case of some girls lying, and try to use that as a blanket condemnation of all the women and girls and ten year old boys- that most of them must also be lying. I consider such dishonesty and craven hatred to be unconscionable.

    it is beyond dispute that Muslim immigrants have been raping white girls (and only white girls) in every place that they congregate in large numbers from Norway to Australia. OK dumb-ass? Your sympathies betray a very one-sided narrative and that narrative is intended to make Europeans and others be more inclined to open their gates even further to Muslim immigration. Huh JR? That’s fucking obvious by now. I’ve been reading your stuff for quite a while now, and I’m convinced that you really are not all that worried about a few white girls (bitches?) getting raped here or there, because I think you consider the hegemony of Muslims over white countries like Spain and Sweden to be to your liking. That’s my impression JR. And trust me, you’re not the only one!

    Just logically, FIRST, you must convince me that the rapes even occurred. If I express doubts that mass rapes in the Cologne rail station…

    Jesus fucking Christ! I CONCEDE THAT I HAVE NO EVIDENCE OF RAPES AT THE COLOGN RAIL STATION, OK?!!!

    In fact I’m reasonably certain that you’ve done exhaustive research making certain of exactly that JR. And then you’re cynically trying to use that dearth of evidence to extrapolate that none of the other rapes happened either, and that all those bitches and twats are all making it all up. Huh JR? Isn’t that exactly your point?

    This is like this business with the fake beheading videos

    fuck the beheading videos. What about the burning videos. Those burning videos do a thousand times more to prove that those Muslims are sub-human savages that need to be wiped from the face of the earth, than any beheading videos, faked or otherwise.

    empathy for victims of crimes in Europe when I am skeptical (increasingly skeptical) that the crimes in question even took place!

    that’s because of how you’re wired JR. You’re seeing what you want to see.

    in Germany, and…. Goddammit! You start ranting about Rotherham. In ENGLAND!!!!! And I get infuriated.

    that’s because you’re too fucking stupid to comprehend what I wrote. And that is that the rapes in Rotherham are directly connected to all the other rapes by immigrants happening all over the dying ((murdered)) Western world. It is because in the West, white people are terrified of being smeared as a “racist”. From Germany to England to Sweden, being a “racist” is just the most terrible thing ever! And that is why they’re all expected to open their gates and allow for the floods in non-whites to come in and transform their communities and countries. And if any complain, someone somewhere will simply call them a “racist”, and that will shut them down. And I suspect that you know that as well, and that you’re not actually that fucking stupid, but rather you’re just dishonest JR, which belies what Alex said about you earlier, that you’re honest. Well I just don’t agree. Because I just can’t accept that your so monumentally stupid that you can’t comprehend what I said about the rapes in Rotherham being part of a civilizational surrender to the forces of political correctness. In Germany and in England. So, you’re either too fucking stupid to see that, or you’re dishonest.

    I ask you what the proof is of the crimes in Cologne

    blah blah blah “proof of Cologne” blah blah blah

    I conceded that I have no proof, and I’ve conceded that some girl may have lied. What I don’t concede is that a dearth of proof means that all those “bitches” and “twats” were all lying. And presumably not just in Cologne, but in perhaps every single case of a Muslim raping a white girl somewhere in the Western world, where they would just never, ever do such a thing. (except in that one isolated case in England that doesn’t matter at all and where they weren’t even Syrian, but Pakistani!!! Muslims, and they were even born in England!!!)

    And who is on your side here anyway? Mr. Anon

    oh great

    now Rurik = Mr. Anon

    is that because he agreed with something I wrote? I guess that’s’ like of like Russia is glad that Trump got elected! That means Trump = Russia! Putin is in the White House!

    whoo boy

    we should support these girls in their rape accusations because they’re white even if the accusations are false!

    I cannot let this slide. We are reaching a point here where you MUST recognize that this is a problem.

    listen dumb-ass, I’m not Mr. Anon, OK dumb-ass? I condemned any woman lying about rape in very strident terms, and then like some kind of dishonest dumb-ass, you keep plopping this shit at my door. What’s with you anyways?

    The point is that YOU MUST STOP!

    fine

    I’m done. I will not reply to this thread again, unless it’s to answer any more dishonest smears and slanders made against me. And set the record straight.

    In parting, I still maintain you’re a guy with gifted insights into some things, and kudos for your accomplishments. But on the other hand you can be an insufferable asshole.

    Rurik ~ the ingratiating

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  306. Mr. Anon says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    It is becoming exceedingly clear what end your false-flag narrative serves. You seek to excuse the ongoing colonization of western lands by foreign invaders. You are an apologist for muslim bad behavior. You support the narrative of the elites that these people are not a problem – that it is we – western people living in western countries – that are the problem for not being sufficiently solicitous of these aliens among us.

    For all you do, you might as well be Barbara Lerner Spectre. You council submission and defeat. Your traitorousness is only mitigated by your irrelevancy – the fact that you are a nobody and a loser with no influence.

    You might as well go out and buy yourself some big floppy shoes, baggy pants, and a big red plastic nose. That’s what clowns wear.

  307. @Rurik

    Rurik, what I am about to say is maybe nasty and it’s not too politically correct either, but… you’re starting to remind me of some hysterical female. Like, I’m thinking of some feminist bitch from hell that you could have the misfortune to get involved with.

    Let’s say you ask this woman a simple yes/no question, like “Are you planning to cook some dinner tonight?” and instead of answering yes or no, she rants for half an hour about women’s rights and patrimony and equal pay for equal work, bringing in the whole trajectory of world history and her feelings about all this, and all this shit — without even answering your question!

    You just wrote 1700 (!) more words ranting about all this typical stuff you rant about and, by now, it’s a real imposition on people. I don’t have moderating power. If I did, I would just delete that.

    Now, you may feel that if I pose a concrete question like: “Did these mass sexual assaults occur in Cologne railway station on 12/31/2015?” that it makes sense for you to start ranting about something else that happened in Rotherham, England. Or something involving some white settlers in Zimbabwe… or somebody kicked a woman down some stairs… But the reason you think that makes sense is mostly because you’re fucked up in the head. That is becoming increasingly clear.

    Now, to be clear about some things, you are right that the fact that some of these females are clearly making false accusations does not imply that they ALL are. That’s true, but, on the other hand, if I go house hunting and I see a couple of cockroaches in a house I visit, it stands to reason that those are not the only cockroaches. Very likely, the house is infested. For example, here is another case of a false accusation:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/police-say-13-year-old-girl-made-up-refugee-sex-attack-at-swimming-pool-in-austria-a7120556.html

    I came across that looking for something else. I reason that there are more out there and most probably have not come to light like this. This doesn’t prove that all other such accusations are false, but it certainly doesn’t prove that they are true either! In my view, a sane, reasonable person, once he starts running into all these cases, is going to start wondering WTF is really going on with all this?

    Now, in general, when it comes to accusing people of crimes, the onus is on the accuser to prove the case. To say that I have failed to prove that all of the accusations are false is kind of silly.

    Look, the right-wing echo-sphere version of things is that these Muslims are raping women right left and center and the authorities are just allowing it to happen out of political correctness or something. Now, think about that. Is that very believable? Do you really believe that German cops in a city like Cologne are just okay with Muslims molesting local German girls?

    Well, there is an alternative explanation. Maybe the authorities are getting deluged with reports and every time they look into these things, they discover that the allegations have very little credibility, like maybe the stories aren’t even logically consistent, and thus, there is no further investigation. That is an alternative explanation that fits the facts as well. Frankly, it is the one that I lean towards.

    In another response, you are trying to pretend that I am being “cynical” by trying to figure out whether the Cologne thing actually happened or not! This really shows that you are quite possibly very seriously psychologically disturbed. The basic idea is that you get so much emotional satisfaction out of believing this narrative that you get infuriated at me for looking into it and trying to figure out whether it is actually true or not! I mean, c’mon, that’s looney tunes stuff there.

    It’s true that there are other allegations in other places and so on, but if you are going to investigate these things, you have to start somewhere, don’t you? So if we start with the most well-known such incident and discover that it’s a hoax, that does not prove that all the other ones are hoaxes, but it makes one inclined to think that at least they might be.

    I was actually quite careful to say that some of the more deranged things that Mr. Anon said were said by him, i.e. NOT by you. But the problem is that you are part of the way towards that crazy position. Your idea seems to be that the Arabs in question are presumed guilty and the onus is on me, let’s say, to prove their innocence. This turns all of the tradition of Western jurisprudence on its head! There is presumption of innocence and if you say these guys did these things, the onus is on you to prove the case.

    In any case, we know that there is a massive ongoing campaign to vilify Arabs and Muslims generally. That’s what all these false flags are about. I am satisfied that my approach of being extremely skeptical about all these claims regarding mass rapes and so on is the ONLY sane approach to the situation.

    But this inability on your part to discuss actual events in a concrete way is, frankly shocking. There really is something unmanly about this constant hyper-emotionalism.

    Anyway, aside from it being effeminate and at least mildly revolting, it’s just horrendously pointless. If I bring up the Cologne thing and your response is thousands of words tying in Zimbabwe settlers with something else that happened in England and some other thing in Sweden and somebody else got kicked down the stairs by a Bulgarian national. And then, after all this crap, you end up having to admit that you have no proof of the Cologne thing and we have some pretty flagrant cases here of girls making false accusations.

    It’s like the hysterical feminist ranting about the rights of women and finally after an hour, you get her to answer that, no, she’s not making dinner. If you want to waste your time being an hysterical bitch, it’s your own business, but it’s a real imposition on other people at this point. You really ought to get a grip and stop.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  308. Mr. Anon says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    “You just wrote 1700 (!) more words ranting about all this typical stuff you rant about…..”

    That’s funny, as it is part of a rebuttal that is nearly as long as his. Is your objection that he wrote too much? Or too little? We’re all familiar with your prose style: why use 100 words when a 1,000 words will do?

    Maybe, in future, you’ll find a way to alienate and insult your fans more succinctly.

  309. Mr. Anon says:
    @Rurik

    Are you aware that Revusky is not white? At least, that seems to be the case based on a cursory Google image search (try it). Maybe that partially explains why he doesn’t care about white people or white nations.

  310. In other matters, I did an Internet radio interview with Kevin Barrett a couple of weeks ago, mostly discussing the above article and some related things. That was here, in case anybody is interested:

    http://noliesradio.org/archives/124033

    It slipped my mind to mention this earlier.

    • Replies: @utu
  311. utu says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    This anecdote of Hitchens about the atheist of Protestant or Catholic kind is the same level argument as the one absolving Jews for Bolshevik Revolution. Jewish communists who were responsible for Bolshevik revolution and countless mass murders were not Jewish because they were communists, ergo they were atheist, so they could not be Jewish, ergo Jews do not need to apologize for them.

    • Replies: @L.K
    , @Jonathan Revusky
  312. L.K says:
    @utu

    That is true.
    Conversely, if a Jew does anything of merit, even if such Jew is an atheist, organized Jewry makes sure to point out that the person is Jewish and celebrate him/her.

  313. L.K says:
    @Rurik

    Listen, just as you have done to JR, you have come heavily at me trying to lay some guilt trip that I don’t feel empathy or care for some rape/murder victims in Sweden or wherever and insinuating that I am probably some open borders/multicult type of guy.
    Despite my position being the exact opposite of that.

    During past disagreements on other issues, even when you pissed me off with nonsensical or inaccurate crap, I remained civil bc you seemed to be an ok guy.
    But I really resent you for these gutter level dirty tactics.
    Go fuck yourself.

    Rurik:

    I guess you’re trrying to make the point that the whites of Zimbabwe (and of course N. America by extension) have no right to exist in the first place. And if they’re slaughtered or genocided, then it’s what they deserve.

    You ‘guess’ wrong, dimwit. The point is just that you are comparing very different animals as if they are the same, they are not.
    Rodhesia never had more than a tiny, tiny white minority in Black African land.
    Sweden is historically European.
    To go from there and claim that I’m saying whites in Zimbabwe – or ZUSA where whites r a majority! – have no right to exist or should be ‘genocided’ is 100% dishonest BS from you, another cheap below the belt shot… Again, my extended middle finger to you.

    • Replies: @Rurik
    , @Jonathan Revusky
  314. L.K says:
    @Rurik

    rurik: ‘your rhetoric betrays a lot LK. You obviously have a lot of hostility for the whites of the US’

    My hostility is towards ZUSA, not so much zamericans, white or otherwise( though they are part of the problem).
    ZUSA is a depraved rogue state that has been at war, wars of choice and Empire, for 93% of its existence. That is probably an unmatched record.
    ‘America Has Been At War 93% of the Time – 222 Out of 239 Years – Since 1776′

    http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/02/america-war-93-time-222-239-years-since-1776.html

    Not to mention all the coups, economic warfare and meddling in the internal affairs of nearly every country in the World.
    An ‘anonymous’ individual wrote a brilliant summary of ZUSAs history:

    All US wars have been wars of choice triggered by the smell of weakness and the opportunity for easy pickings. Cutting through the thick fog of high-minded rhetoric and other mumbo-jumbo it’s apparent the US is a bandit state cruising the world for victims to waylay. That’s it in a nutshell, it’s a gangster state that has smaller accomplices such as Britain, roaming around looking for the next score. This is the history of the US; once it consolidated itself territorially it saw the weakness of Spain and moved in, grabbing properties such as the Philippines which thus inserted it into Asia and made it an Asian power also. From that point on it’s been on the move ever since, whenever the chance presented itself. Here and there it’s suffered a bloody rebuff such as in Korea and Vietnam when it miscalculated it’s strength and underestimated the other. The US is a country that’s been almost continually at war or actively interfering in other countries just about every single year since 1898.
    The average American of course desires peace, stability and an increasing standard of living. They’ve been propagandized into thinking that the US is a peaceful state that has to protect itself now and then. The truth is the very opposite, that war is the natural state of being for the US and it is an aggressive country always on the march. Always was, is now, and will continue to be so until it hits the wall of resistance of other countries big enough to defend themselves. Force is what it understands and respects, nothing else. Once people realize this then it all becomes very clear.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  315. Miro23 says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    Any ethnic/racial group — whether white people or black people or purple people — that has far less than 2 children per woman will face a collapse of its population.

    AND, since nature abhors a vacuum, will eventually be replaced by some other population.

    There seems to some psychological block with regard to population numbers.

    Nicholas Wade in his book “Before the Dawn” talks about the ancestral human population:

    This people, which can be called the ancestral human population, was probably the first to have possessed fully modern speech, and the last from which all people on earth are descended. Since it dispersed so quickly after its formation, it may have endured only a few thousand years …. It lived sometime between 50.000 and 100.000 years ago, probably nearer the 50.000 year mark. …. Between 60.000 and 40.000 years ago, much of Africa was depopulated, and only in East Africa can archeologists detect a human presence. … The ancestral population itself, geneticists estimate, shrank to as few as 5.000 people.

    Their descendents now number 7.500.000.000 ( a 1,5 million times increase) and the earth’s wildlife is fast fading out as their habitats are destroyed with the human removal of whole continents of forest (e.g. Australia).

    Combine this with a clear trend towards the digitalization and automation of all kinds of work previously done by people (good book, Martin Ford’s “Lights in the Tunnel: Automation, Accelerating Technology and the Economy of the Future” https://www.amazon.com/Lights-Tunnel-Automation-Accelerating-Technology/dp/1448659817/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1484071148&sr=1-1&keywords=light+in+the+tunnel , and a natural reduction of human population doesn’t look so bad.

    And as far as Nature abhorring a vacuum, it’s good at rebuilding natural habitats if humans leave it alone for a while (e.g. the Chernobyl exclusion zone). But just taking the narrow immigration viewpoint, a reduction in a country’s population doesn’t have to imply porous frontiers. It’s just a question of political will, removal of incentives and solid enforcement – things that are lacking in Europe at present.

    • Replies: @utu
  316. L.K says:

    Rurik:

    …it was us whites in the US that just had the giant nads to vote out the Fiend. Just like the Brits recently did. We are ALL under the thumb of the Fiend LK, and if there’s any hope for us getting out from under it, then it will hinge on the whites of the US repudiating the Fiend by electing hopefully a man who will do just that, and if so, it will free Europe too, who has been living and acting like a sniveling little lapdog to the drooling Fiend in Washington DC.

    Hmm… US voters had ‘the choice’ to select an obviously terrible candidate, Killary, or this buffoon, Trump.
    There is NO new mass movement behind Trump, nothing new, he is an outsider, sure, but one who ran on the republican ticket. The entire bi-partisan system is rigged in Zamerica, and u seem to be pinning all hopes on one man. Expecting a Messiah, are you?

    RURIK:

    ‘electing hopefully a man who will do just that, and if so, it will free Europe too, who has been living and acting like a sniveling little lapdog to the drooling Fiend in Washington DC.’

    What does that say about modern European countries and their relation to ZUSA? Well, if they depend so much on some fucking bozo like Trump being selected by zamericanus bovinus in order for Euro anti-immigration parties to have a go in Europe, clealy euro states have no sovereignty at all and are zusas vassals, which they are and which in fact you have acknowledged.
    Not a very healthy relationship eh?
    In fact, Eurasian integration – but keeping an Europe of nations – presents the best economic opportunities for Europe and diminishes risks of war.
    Instead, euro countries constantly act against their national interests bc they are tools of Zusa’s Empire.
    Put it bluntly, Europe’s vassalage to ZUSA is directly linked to the current European condition and to European decline.
    The traitorous Euro elites of course, deserve special mention as well.
    You wanna help Europe, buddy? Here’s an idea;
    Start a campaign in ZUSA to dismantle NATO and remove US troops from Euro territories.
    Get out.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  317. Rurik says:
    @L.K

    Rodhesia never had more than a tiny, tiny white minority in Black African land.
    Sweden is historically European.

    if your point is not that the whites of Rhodesia are less deserving of a country of their own than the whites of Sweden, then what is your (fucking) point?!

    the whites of Rhodisa lost their country for the *EXACT SAME FUCKING REASON* that the whites of Sweden are losing theirs. Are you too stupid to see that?! Seriously. If you are too stupid, then perhaps I owe you an apology. Often I assign rational agency to people who I shouldn’t, and then judge them accordingly. If I’ve done so unfairly to you, then by all means my apologies.

    the whites of Rhodesia were not beaten militarily, they were beaten with ‘compassion’ and ‘white guilt’, ok, the same (Jewish) weapon that’s being used to destroy Sweden and the entire Western world. Duh, fucking DUH!

    To go from there and claim that I’m saying whites in Zimbabwe – or ZUSA where whites r a majority! – have no right to exist or should be ‘genocided’ is 100% dishonest BS from you,

    the whites of Rhodesia were genocided, OK?

    Now, what you do is point out that they were a small number of white people living on the African continent. Presumably you have a reason for pointing that out, no?

    if so, what might that reason be, eh?

    perhaps its the reason that all liberals have for demanding that the whites of Zimbabwe have to right to be there since it isn’t their continent. OK? Just like those very same liberals demand that evil whitey genocided the Indians and stole their land and have no right to be here. (perhaps they have a point).

    but if you’re going to make the case that the whites of Rhodesia/Zimbabwe were living on the African continent, then presumably you’d have a reason for doing so, or why would you waste the time and energy to say it?

    so I’m not being dishonest in the slightest way, but am simply pointing out the obvious

    rather it’s you that is being dishonest, and I think that’s obvious to anyone out there paying attention who isn’t jaded

  318. utu says:
    @Miro23

    “less than 2 children per woman will face a collapse of its population”

    A country may opt for reduction of population and have “less than 2 children per woman” for a limited time until it reaches the level of population it wants. But afterwards it must increase procreation to slightly more than 2 children if it wants to maintain the desired level of population.

    Less than 2 children per woman in a long run means zero population.

    Anyway I agree that, say Europe, could reduce its population and at the same time protect its borders and limit immigration to retain its ethnic mix.

    Population growth might be necessitated by usury, i.e., by the fact that monetary system is based on the interest carrying debt. New members of society (children + immigrants) are there so new debts (new money) are created by them so they are used to pay off the interest accrued by the previous generation.

    • Replies: @Miro23
    , @Jonathan Revusky
  319. Rurik says:
    @L.K

    Rurik: ‘your rhetoric betrays a lot LK. You obviously have a lot of hostility for the whites of the US’

    My hostility is towards ZUSA, not so much zamericans, white or otherwise( though they are part of the problem).

    so I was right (as usual)

    the American people voted for Woodrow Wilson because he promised to keep us out of that war, and then we were lied to and betrayed and our young men sent over to kill and die for Zion

    the American people voted for FDR because he promised to keep up out of that evil war, and then we were lied to and betrayed and our young men sent over to kill and die for Zion

    the American people were never consulted about any of the subsequent wars, and we always voted for the politicians who promised to keep us out of wars or end them. I voted for Dubya when he ran the first time because he said he wasn’t a “nation builder’, and I was pissed off about what Clinton had done in Serbia. But as usual I was lied to and betrayed and watched as that despicable traitor lied us into the Fiend’s wars. The same Fiend’s wars that all of NATO and the West are complicit in, in exactly the same way that the American people are complicit.

    I once posted a video of the “dueling puppets” where Canada and Australia’s prime ministers gave the moral justification to attack Iraq. The people of Canada and Australia are exactly as complicit with that war as the American people are. Aren’t they? But I don’t see you smearing the character of the Canadian people, now do I? Rather I see you heaping scourge upon a people who don’t want the wars, always vote against them, but always have them foisted upon us by liars and traitors. I am consistent, I blame the criminals and liars no matter what their nationality or race. You prefer to blame the innocent people out of shameless bigotry.

    • Replies: @L.K
  320. Rurik says:
    @L.K

    Expecting a Messiah, are you?

    no, *my point* is that we voted against the war hag, even if we had a poor alternative

    Not a very healthy relationship eh?

    yea, and it’s all the janitors and waitresses and plumbers in America that are causing all those European leaders to go along with the wars and caused France to bomb Libya and so forth. Those God damn American truck drivers and school teachers and librarians!!!

    You wanna help Europe, buddy? Here’s an idea;
    Start a campaign in ZUSA to dismantle NATO and remove US troops from Euro territories.
    Get out.

    exactly what Trump has been talking about doing, if you’d been paying attention

    and telling me that America should “get out” of Europe (and everywhere else), is the height of absurdity, since it has been my relentless mantra since I came to this site for America to do exactly that.

    it’s like you’re telling Ron Paul to ‘audit the Fed’

    now, JR does not like me playing in his sandbox, and has told me to stop

    so please allow me to accommodate him, and if you want to harangue me further with your nonsense and bigotry, then let’s please do so at some other venue, and it’d be my pleasure to set you straight

    • Replies: @L.K
    , @L.K
  321. Miro23 says:
    @utu

    I think that it’s more a historic view that a successful tribe (war, agriculture etc.) is a numerous tribe.

    It’s true that a tribe/country needs a certain size and organization to develop technology, but there was plenty of new invention and technology in the US and Europe between 1880 and 1914 with a population about 1/4 of the present size.

    The 1880 population was building on the base (knowledge and structure that had gone before) but if US had stayed at the 1900 level of 76 million, that’s enough people to provide the necessary scientists and technologists.

    The only difference that I can see is that corporate sales/profits, taxes and GNP would be a lot lower than at present ( with 337 million people) although American families could be just as well off and live in a much more attractive environment. The US could still be as powerful in a military nuclear weapons/technological sense.

    • Agree: utu
  322. @utu

    This anecdote of Hitchens about the atheist of Protestant or Catholic kind is the same level argument as the one absolving Jews for Bolshevik Revolution.

    Well, what they mainly do is that they just never mention it. It’s only in the past few years that I have come to grips with the out-sized role of Jewish ethnics in the Bolshevik revolution. Or the fact that most of the oligarchs who were looting Russia in the Yeltsin years were Jews. These things just aren’t mentioned in the West. The Solzhenytsin book “Two Hundred Years Together” was not even published in English!

    If they thought they could get away with simply never mentioning that Bernie Madoff was a Jew, that’s what they would do, I suppose. Of course, the funny thing (not ha ha funny) about the Madoff matter is that most of his victims were Jews and he made contact with them through Jewish networks, so the whole Jewish angle on the overall story was just utterly undeniable. It’s funny. Madoff even ripped off Elie Wiesel!

    The anecdote that Hitchens tells is sort of like him scoring an “own goal”. He’s trying to say how pernicious religion is but the anecdote actually suggests the opposite. The mess in Ireland is an ethnic conflict, so the guy couldn’t opt out by saying “I’m an atheist”. They just turn around and ask him whether he’s a protestant atheist or a catholic atheist!

    At another point, another one of these idiots, Sam Harris, also scores a major “own goal”. When it’s pointed out to him that the Bolsheviks killed far more people than any religious movement probably, he answers that communism, despite being atheistic, is really just like a religion.

    Well, if you concede that a secular, atheist ideology can be just as bloody (actually, far more so) as any traditional religion, then you’ve basically destroyed your own argument, because now there is no particular reason to think that abolishing religion and replacing it with a secular ideology is going to produce any improvement at all! In fact, history even suggests the opposite. The secular ideologies like communism, or ARRF, are actually far more violent and fanatical!

    So, this is all the sort of point I was making in that interview, and mostly just hinting at in the essay. I find it rather disappointing how little the actual article has been discussed here. But the space has come under troll attack, like this asshole “Mr. Anon” has written 62(!) comments here and openly says he never even read the article. Oh well, what can one do?

    • Replies: @utu
  323. @utu

    A country may opt for reduction of population and have “less than 2 children per woman” for a limited time until it reaches the level of population it wants. But afterwards it must increase procreation to slightly more than 2 children if it wants to maintain the desired level of population.

    I think the above is more true in the range of numbers around 2 children per woman. Like, if you had something like 1.9 on average for a good while, then you get some gradual tapering off of the population. However, I think (or suspect) that if you have a real cratering of the birth rate, like I’m encountering figures like 1.3 or so, then, as a practical matter, you’re going to have a lot of pressure to do something about it and if people don’t want to have kids, then there will be pressure to open up to more immigration. You end up with a population distribution that is increasingly skewed to being elderly and you have these business interests that, just for example, build houses, let’s say, and who are they going to sell the new houses to… that’s just one example. You end up shutting down schools because there are hardly any children and so on. The big growth business becomes taking care of the elderly, which is hard to automate, so again, there is pressure to bring in young people, immigrants.

    As regards the article, what I call ARRF, my conjecture would be that any society that abandons its traditional religion for ARRF is going to suffer an extreme drop in the birth rate. So, if you are a racialist sort of white nationalist person, then this is likely a bigger problem than the current levels of immigration. Both would be an issue, but the extreme drop in the birth rate of the native white European demographic seems to me like it would be the bigger issue. And then you have to think about why that is taking place, and I think that this issue of the decline of religion and erecting this substitute ideology that I call ARRF that, among other things, glorifies homosexuality and so forth…

    Well, I was trying to push the discussion into that a bit. As I said, I find the lack of discussion of the ideas in the article rather disappointing. On the other hand, that was also the case in some previous articles. They just became long 9/11 threads, whereas the first article where I coined the term “Roger Rabbit narrative” and so forth wasn’t really about 9/11 that much. I was talking about how people fall for the cartoonish narratives for whatever reason.

    This relates to some of what has been going on in this conversation. I finally realized that Rurik really does live in a cartoonish mental world. It’s like this is the Lord of the Rings and the Orcs are invading the Shire. So these alleged swarthy savages raping our women, the flower of white womanhood…. it’s really a kind of cartoon as well. There’s this propaganda machine emitting this cartoon. Like, this absurd meme that Sweden is the “rape capital of Europe”, this comes from an outfit called the Gatestone Institute, which is a completely neocon Zionist sort of operation.

    But ayway, to even begin to discuss anything, one has to re-engage with reality, and stop believing in cartoons. So that’s what the articles prior to this one were largely about, and so if I mentioned 9/11 or some other such thing, it wasn’t actually central to what I was getting at.

    Rurik expressed admiration for the articles, but I now realize he didn’t really understand them. He probably thought that the point of them was just to talk about 9/11 or something. But somehow he has this wooly-minded idea that, in order to be against immigration from the third world, you have to believe in these cartoons. But, actually, as you said, utu, to fall for this is to get played completely.

    • Replies: @utu
  324. @L.K

    During past disagreements on other issues, even when you pissed me off with nonsensical or inaccurate crap, I remained civil bc you seemed to be an ok guy.
    But I really resent you for these gutter level dirty tactics.

    Even just 24 hours ago, I was just infuriated at Rurik for some of this garbage. For example, I specifically mentioned these cases that are well documented of these females making false rape accusations and I referred to them as bitches and such. Obviously, I was referring to any females who were FALSELY saying they were raped, not anybody who actually was raped! That’s obviously a separate matter! And he willfully misunderstood, willfully — pretending to believe that I was saying that ALL women who said they were raped were “bitches”, trying to take me to task for that! But no, OBVIOUSLY, I meant the ones who made false claims, and I provided links to specific known cases. These are high profile cases that scandalized everybody and went into the right-wing echo-sphere, like one who claims she was raped in Cologne train station and got pregnant and had an abortion… and she wasn’t even in Cologne!

    But all this is part of a bigger problem, which is that I find that, whenever they are accusing Muslims of whatever vile thing, when you really look into it, it usually turns out to be some sort of hoax, whether it’s something of the scale of 9/11 or some other much smaller thing. Maybe not always, but usually these things are hoaxes or false flags. The strange thing about this is that Rurik even seems to know that! We’re clearly at a point where, when they accuse Muslims of something, the initial stance has to be skepticism and to ask whether there really is proof, because, with everything that has happened, it’s the only sensible approach. With the Cologne thing, you’ve got this wide open space where it doesn’t look possible that something of a huge scale could happen and there’s no photos or video or anything!

    Fine, you don’t want all these people coming in, but you can’t just go on and on about shit that never happened! And falsely claim people are rapists and we’re supposed to feel all this empathy for these Swedish girls who can’t go out the door without getting raped. Shit, the poor girls are getting raped 23 times every day…. you heartless person, with no empathy blah blah

    But, finally, I am not so angry about all this any more. Like, a few months ago, I was utterly livid at this Fred Reed character. He wrote that ghastly article about 9/11 “conspiracies” and the tin foil hats and he didn’t know anything about the topic. It was pure intellectual fraud. I was really angry and expressed it there. But now, I think about it and I don’t really feel much anger at Fred Reed over that. To explain…

    You see, what happened is that, finally, I just realized that being angry at Fred Reed amounts to taking the person seriously. Fred is not an intellectual or a serious critical thinker. Fred Reed is like somebody you could know at the local country club, an affable fellow who has his little anecdotes and his rants and a way with words, probably a bit to the right of Attila the Hun… So Fred writes his silly anti-conspiracy rant and comes under severe criticism from people (me among others) and what does Freddy boy do? He just runs away basically. He doesn’t engage with any of the criticisms. I found that scandalous and it made me very angry, but now I look at it, and I think…. well, what do you expect? This is not a serious intellectual or anything. And, what’s he going to do? Debate with me, for example? False modesty aside, can you imagine Fred Reed trying to debate with me? Of course not. He’s like the affable guy in the country club, with a few witty things he says and so on, but he’s not a genuine intellectual or a critical thinker or anything.

    So, with Rurik now, it’s something similar. What is amazing though is he has very little sense of the basic rules of a serious intellectual conversation. So, if I ask him what the evidence is on this Cologne thing, he just starts ranting about Rotherham, England. Or white settlers in Rhodesia or somebody got kicked down the stairs… It’s like if you ask somebody what the evidence regarding O.J. Simpson is and the person just starts talking about some other guy killed his wife. Or some other black man killed a white woman or… and just constructing some rant about all these things that are NOT the case in question! He won’t just say: “I honestly don’t know about the Cologne thing, because I haven’t looked into it enough…”. Or: “I heard there was a lot of testimony and believed it happened, but maybe I was mistaken…”. No! He just starts ranting about things that happened somewhere else! Like an Ethiopian killed a Swedish girl (in Sweden! A completely different country!) in 2010. WTF???

    At this point, my main concern is just the feeling that the article I wrote got discussed so little. Here we are well past 300 comments and hardly any discussion of the actual article!

    • Replies: @utu
  325. utu says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    “Of course, the funny thing (not ha ha funny) about the Madoff matter is that most of his victims were Jews and he made contact with them through Jewish networks, so the whole Jewish angle on the overall story was just utterly undeniable. It’s funny. Madoff even ripped off Elie Wiesel!”

    Do we really know that for sure that most of his victims were Jews? What if the opposite was true? What if that most of his beneficiaries were Jewish, i.e., the ones who get paid early in the scheme? I am not certain that the money got repaid from those who got paid. And actually where is the money? Who was behind him? He plead guilty to avoid trial and testimonies even though he would die in prison. Is that a good deal? Who was he forced to protect?

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  326. utu says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    “He’s like the affable guy in the country club, with a few witty things he says and so on, but he’s not a genuine intellectual or a critical thinker or anything.”

    Good image for Fred. However not for Rurik. I can’y see him being affable. He is rather a guy who everybody runs away from to avoid having a conversation with him.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  327. utu says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    Reduction of population would be interesting to discuss. What forces are against it? What unexpected consequences? Is usury, as I wrote above, a primary cause for the need to replenish population and keep it growing?

    I do not see how abandoning traditional religion must necessary lead to lower birth rate. Perhaps it depends on what we abandon it for or why we are abandoning the traditional religion in the first place.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  328. @utu

    He is rather a guy who everybody runs away

    On this page, yes, but he does have some other righteous rants about 9/11 and the Federal Reserve and things like that, that I have kind of enjoyed. That said, I’ve heard them all various times by now…

    This reminds me of something I remember some WW2 revisionist was saying. He pointed out that if the revisionists were saying that far fewer Jews died in Auschwitz than previously believed, then shouldn’t Jews be happy about that? Of course, if you say that, they are NOT happy. In fact, they might try to put you in prison for saying that!

    You’d think that if you told Rurik here that all these mass rapes in Europe didn’t really happen, or at least outrageously exaggerated, that he would similarly be happy. But again, just as in the previous case, he gets infuriated.

    The thing is that the whole outrage that people feel about whatever atrocity, maybe it produces adrenaline or something in the brain, I dunno, but they become very committed to this, and the whole process of working themselves up into some emotional state about it. But then there is no way to get through to that. This becomes a shell that is pretty much completely impervious to facts.

    That guy Stephen Colbert came up with the term “truthiness” to refer to this phenomenon. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truthiness

    It’s like something is true (or really “truthy”) because it gives you so much emotional satisfaction to believe it.

    Of course, the other aspect of all of this that really gets to me is just the way things become true via constant repetition. There is a need to stand up to it, I think. The best way that occurs to me is just to ask people what the best available evidence for something is. Arabs flew planes into buildings on 9/11? What is the best available evidence for that? This was planned and orchestrated from Afghanistan by Osama Bin Laden? What is the evidence for that?

    I asked Rurik about the Cologne railway station event (that I am increasingly certain simply did not happen) and he starts ranting about something that happened in England. Or completely separate things that happened (or not) somewhere else and have nothing to do with the Cologne. Just a continual refusal to engage factually in the case at hand. And I think that this kind of shit reached the point where one has to put one’s foot down. Either engage in the specific case factually or concede that you’re just repeating something for which there is no real proof. That’s the way it has to be, I think. These should be the basic rules, at least for anybody who wants to hang with me. And if you don’t agree, then no big deal, just go to truthiness land, where the likes of Derb and Sailer and Fred Reed are venerated.

  329. @utu

    Do we really know that for sure that most of his victims were Jews?

    That’s definitely the impression I got. I honestly don’t know about it in any great detail.

  330. @utu

    Is usury, as I wrote above, a primary cause for the need to replenish population and keep it growing?

    Yes, that is an interesting point. The rolling over of debt PLUS INTEREST from one generation to another might require the next generation to be larger than the previous one. As I said, my suspicion is that, in terms of a society that has very low birth rates, like closer to 1 than 2, that, as a practical question, there will be pressure to do something about it. It probably does have something to do with the way capitalism works, and yeah, financialized capitalism, i.e. the usury angle that you mention. I don’t really know either, just thinking out loud…

    I do not see how abandoning traditional religion must necessary lead to lower birth rate.

    I don’t suppose it’s a logical necessity, no. But if you do look at societies that used to be conservative Catholic countries, like Spain, just for example, the decline of religiosity and the plummeting of the birth rate are certainly correlated. Correlation does not even automatically mean causality, but I suspect there is causality.

  331. L.K says:
    @Rurik

    Rurik, going bloody hysterical:

    the whites of Rhodisa lost their country for the *EXACT SAME FUCKING REASON* that the whites of Sweden are losing theirs. Are you too stupid to see that?! Seriously.

    Take my hand, so you don’t stumble and fall flat on your hysterical face; After WWII, decolonisation took place fast – but it would have happened eventually anyway – and even if European countries had managed not to be taken over by cultural marxists, and therefore be in a position where they could be better resisting the pressures of immigration, the situation in Rodhesia would be totally different if only bc of the demographic realities there. Almost everyone is and was black African and that is bc that place is in Africa not in Europe.
    Are you too stupid and hysterical that you must fail to understand such basic facts? Apparently so.
    Even in South Africa, less than 10% are whites. Back in the early 1900s it was 20%, still a relatively small minority.
    Comparing European countries with Rodhesia or even S.Africa is just too idiotic.

    Rurik:

    if your point is not that the whites of Rhodesia are less deserving of a country of their own than the whites of Sweden, then what is your (fucking) point?!

    Sigh. Talking to you is like running head first against a sodding brick wall.
    What COUNTRY, fool??
    There are not enough Rodhesians – even adding the ones who left for S.A – to fill up a mid-sized town with them! So, again, what bloody country??
    What do you propose?
    A white reservation? wink, wink.
    I wish NO harm to the whites of Zimbabwe and S.Africa. I do NOT wish them expelled, much less killed. OK? Enough with this nonsense.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  332. L.K says:
    @Rurik

    Rurik:”exactly what Trump has been talking about doing, if you’d been paying attention”

    Sure I have, but it is one thing to say things during political campaigns and quite another to actually follow through with it and ACT on it. Trump said something about being fair on the Israel/Palestine issue, but has already moved in a different direction.
    Trump has no mass movement behind him, so even if he is as well intentioned as some think, he’d be one man against the ‘Fiend’.
    I hope I’m wrong, but I think I know how that ends.
    In your rant, you yourself admitted numerous past US presidents have promised one thing and then delivered another. This time it will be different, I’m sure. :-P

    Rurik: ‘your rhetoric betrays a lot LK. You obviously have a lot of hostility for the whites of the US’

    Moi: ‘My hostility is towards ZUSA, not so much zamericans, white or otherwise( though they are part of the problem).’

    Rurik: ‘so I was right (as usual)’.

    Nope, you were NOT right at all, what you are doing is again shamelessly misrepresenting my position.

  333. L.K says:
    @Rurik

    Rurik:

    “The people of Canada and Australia are exactly as complicit with that war as the American people are. Aren’t they? But I don’t see you smearing the character of the Canadian people, now do I? Rather I see you heaping scourge upon a people who don’t want the wars, always vote against them, but always have them foisted upon us by liars and traitors. I am consistent, I blame the criminals and liars no matter what their nationality or race. You prefer to blame the innocent people out of shameless bigotry.”

    I’ll get back on the issue of ‘the innocent people’ in a moment.
    But first things first. There is an obvious pecking order; ZUSA is the center of the Empire and Canada and Australia are mere client states.
    To compare them as if they are exactly the same, as you do, is pure BS. That is my view anyway, and I believe it warranted.
    Now, re ‘innocent people’; It just so happens that we do NOT agree on this issue.
    I see the ‘Deep State’(Fiend, whatever u wanna call it) as the MAIN culprit, by far.
    But, I also think that in Western “Democracies”, however fake, the people have their share of responsabilities too. As fake as these democracies are, there is some room to manouver, to assemble, organize, resist… what is lacking is the will to do so and, frankly, too many people just do not even care! As long as they can go on about their daily routines, etc. Also, I do not criticize only the Americans… in a recent reply to you – if memory serves – I heaped criticism on Italians for not protesting vigorously against Italy becoming entangled in the dirty war on Lybia. Obviously, the Italian stooge regime would have still gone along with ZUSA/NATO but the media would have had a hard time hiding it.
    Anyway, since ZUSA is such a bandit state, always at war, always meddling, year after year, I am of the opinion that the zamerican people are, in part, responsible for all this shit.
    Much less so than the Deep State, but still responsible. P.C.Roberts, clearly a US patriot, seems to think so too. Furthermore, Rurik, you are not representative of most zamericans, you are much better informed and you have, to your credit, a far more principled position on these issues than most.
    I believe the notion of the ‘innocent people’ of ZUSA to be a bit misleading, a bit of a myth. A countryman of yours, Michael Santomauro, has written an interesting essay on this, called “The Myth of the Innocent Civilian”. There is much truth to what the man wrote. Give it a try. Or don’t.
    Why I Won’t Apologize for my Essay “The Myth of the Innocent Civilian”
    By Michael Santomauro on September 13, 2006

    http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=5223

  334. Rurik says:
    @L.K

    the situation in Rodhesia would be totally different if only bc of the demographic realities there.

    you’re mistaken about that. The demographic realities there were the same when the white people carved Rhodesia from the jungle and built thriving farms and a sovereign nation. It would still be today but for the event you speak of; WWII, then the West lost and the Zio/commie/Bolshevik/Rothschild won [big]. As a consequence of that catastrophic war, England went from being an imperial empire, into a squalid, immoral gash to be humiliated by its former colonies. Rhodesia followed suit, but only from pressure from England and the other now culturally Marxist ‘five eyes’. The whites of S. Africa and Rhodesia would have been easily able to deal with the black Marxists like Mugabe on military terms, but they were pressured to hand over power by being called ‘racists’.

    The same smear word that is used to crumble any resistance to Sweden’s genocidal immigration policies, and indeed Germany’s and all the rest. Duh

    Comparing European countries with Rodhesia or even S.Africa is just too idiotic.

    you just can’t see it is all. You are unable to connect the dots. WWII was not just Germany losing, but Western civilization lost in that terrible war. They lost their spirit to exist because the Jews/cultural Marxists had prevailed, and had at their disposal TV and radio to promote their genocidal propaganda. I confess I’m really rather surprised you (and JR) can’t see that. Or, if you can, are fine with it, and perhaps like it. Many do.

    There are not enough Rodhesians – even adding the ones who left for S.A – to fill up a mid-sized town with them! So, again, what bloody country??

    are you really that stupid? I was going to address these posts, but this is just insulting.

    are you trying to suggest that Rhodesia was never a country?

    I can’t do this anymore.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
    , @L.K
  335. @Rurik

    I confess I’m really rather surprised you (and JR) can’t see that. Or, if you can, are fine with it, and perhaps like it. Many do.

    Uhh, Rurik, the record is absolutely clear on this. I NEVER expressed any particular view about Rhodesia AT ALL. I simply NEVER said ANYTHING about it. Or to the extent that I said anything, it was just that the topic had nothing to do with anything we were talking about, that’s all.

    WE SIMPLY WERE NOT TALKING ABOUT THAT. AND MY ARTICLE SIMPLY HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT.

    Not even peripherally really. This is just crank behavior on your part. Like, when somebody asks some pointed questions about what happened (if anything) in Cologne, Germany railway station on New Years Eve, you start ranting about Rhodesia. This is just whack job crank stuff. As L.K said, Rhodesia is in Africa, it’s not in Europe. It has nothing to do with what we were talking about. Nothing.

    Now, actually, my article doesn’t have anything much to do with what happened (or not) in Cologne either, but it came up somehow. What I find very very bothersome is that you just seem to be completely indifferent to the truth. This is a straight factual issue. Did all these sexual assaults really happen? Yes or no? I looked into it a certain amount and concluded that this didn’t really happen. NOT because I want mass migration of Muslims of Europe!

    NO! THE REASON IS THAT, UNLIKE YOU, I AM A SERIOUS INTELLECTUAL AND I CARE WHAT IS TRUE AND WHAT IS NOT TRUE!

    It is beyond your comprehension seemingly that somebody would actually just care about the truth. To you, if somebody is questioning whether these things happened, that must mean that they want mass migration of Muslims into Europe. For you, it’s like this story is ideologically convenient, so you don’t want to consider the possibility that it’s not true. It’s like you don’t even care what is true or not. You just want to rant, so you change the subject to something utterly different — LIKE RHODESIA!

    This kind of shit is not acceptable to me. If you don’t really care what is true and what is not true, you are simply not worth engaging in conversation with. It’s that simple.

    I can’t do this anymore.

    Well, I hope so. That would be good news.

    • Replies: @alexander
  336. alexander says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    JR,

    What is fascinating about all the alleged “tawdry” behavior of Muslim refugees in Europe is how well it serves to mask the Neocons tawdry behavior in manufacturing the wars that sent them there in the first place.

    What the issue can NEVER be, in our contrived media circus, is that our policies of neocon belligerence have not only defrauded Americans out of tens of trillions of tax dollars to utterly decimate several Middle Eastern countries(that never attacked us) but has created, in the process, a horrendous refugee crisis of epic proportions.

    Heaven forbid the Neocon culpability in all this is ever the ACTUAL discussion…..No No…We must”preempt that”(they say) by actually turning the contempt on the refugees..themselves..That’s it ! That’s the ticket….lets run at least a dozen faux expose’s on slimy dirty Muslim men raping our virginal 12 year old daughters in Cologne or Rotterdam or where have you…..Then everyone can focus on how slimy and awful THEY are..and not how slimy and awful WE are ,for having initiated the wars which sent them there…

    The more the refugees can be held in contempt for “lascivious” behavior, the less they are perceived as the ‘victims” of OUR crimes…and the more they are , in exquisite”pecepto-reverso” “deserving of punishment”….

    The Faux “rape” narratives are essential to perpetuating Neocon belligerence.

    And our Rurik, normally a bulwark against such machinations, fell for it …hook ,line and sinker.

    .

    • Replies: @Rurik
  337. L.K says:
    @Rurik

    Rurik:

    are you really that stupid? I was going to address these posts, but this is just insulting.
    are you trying to suggest that Rhodesia was never a country?
    I can’t do this anymore.

    Buddy, you are beginning to sound more and more like a cuckoo who just ran off the nearest wacky shack!
    Yes, there was a country called Rhodesia… it was a country in which a small number of white settlers ruled over an overwhelming majority of black Africans.
    Apparently, you are ok with that kind of shit. I am NOT.

    “A small number of people of European ethnicity first came to Southern Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) as settlers during the late 19th century. A steady immigration of white people continued for about the next 75 years. The white population of Zimbabwe reached a peak of about 296,000 in 1975, representing just over four percent of the population, but numbers then started to drop, to around 120,000 in 1999, and to no more than 50,000 in 2002, possibly much less.[7]”
    The Census of 3 May 1921 found that Southern Rhodesia had a total population of 899,187, of whom 33,620 were Europeans, 1,998 were Coloured (mixed races), 1,250 Asiatics, 761,790 Bantu natives of Southern Rhodesia, and 100,529 Bantu aliens.[10]“

    PS: I am glad the Brit Empire fell. I don’t like Empires.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  338. Rurik says:
    @alexander

    And our Rurik, normally a bulwark against such machinations, fell for it …hook ,line and sinker.

    I fell for nothing Alex

    and not how slimy and awful WE are

    as the ‘victims” of OUR crimes

    you may feel that way Alex, but I don’t. We’ve been lied to and our government and media usurped by our enemies.

    One of my mantras has always been that the Russian people were the victims of the Soviet horror. Not as some would claim, guilty for it.

    “This movement among the Jews is not new. From the days of Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kun (Hungary), Rosa Luxembourg (Germany), and Emma Goldman (United States), this world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilisation and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing. … …It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the Nineteenth Century; and now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the undisputed masters of that enormous empire.”

    ~ Churhill

    That is exactly what I see has happened to the West, and the US and England in particular, and for all practical purposes, France and Germany and all the rest of the Western nations.

    But because it’s the US that’s the super-power, there’s a kneejerk temptation to blame them more (or exclusively). Do I blame the people of Hungary for what Bela Kun did? Do I blame Russians for what Stalin did? Do I blame the people of Saudi Arabia for what the House of Saud does? The English people for what Tony Blair did?

    No, not for any of it. I blame Tony Blair and George Bush and Obama and Bibi and all the rest of the traitors and criminals and liars and war pigs. Not the *lied to* American people. Or the Russian people of yesterday.

    as for the Muslims, they’ve been terribly victimized by the Fiend, but I don’t think that gives the world the right to victimize Germans. Muslims don’t belong in the West in transformational numbers. This will cause bloodshed and hatred. But I do support massive and expensive efforts to rebuild their nations and homes. What the Fiend has wrought, will take a monumental effort to repair. But I don’t think we should be the Fiend’s willing dupes and foist even more strife and suffering and future blood in the streets by forcing incompatible people to live next to each other. That’s the Fiend’s shtick. It does it all the time. Like Michael Vick only with humans.

    I don’t feel the need to accommodate them Alex. You may think so, and you may think that because of what the Zio/neocons do, that the working class people of West should be made to suffer *rapes and strife and endemic hatred, but I just don’t agree, even if I respect all people the right to their opinions.

    *I suppose I need to point out that I have no video evidence of any rapes that may or may not have occurred in Cologne, Germany on New Years Eve. The significance of that dearth of evidence I consider means exactly nothing.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
    , @L.K
  339. @Rurik

    I fell for nothing Alex

    Sure you did. You kept referring to a hoax event as something that had actually happened.

    *I suppose I need to point out that I have no video evidence of any rapes that may or may not have occurred in Cologne, Germany on New Years Eve.

    Out of curiosity, when you say you have no video evidence, does that mean that you looked for it and failed to find any, or that you didn’t even look for it?

    The significance of that dearth of evidence I consider means exactly nothing.

    Well, the above statement indicates that we live in completely separate mental worlds. For me, the utter lack of evidence that people committed a crime means, at a bare minimum, that I should be very careful about repeating unfounded accusations. This has two components actually, one simply an intellectual component, that I don’t want to get involved talking about things that probably did not even happen. The other is the moral component, that it is simply immoral to go around repeating slanders.

    Now, more concretely, I earlier asked you to consider (along the lines of the old adage that a picture tells a thousand words) the following images of the overall Cologne rail station space:

    https://www.google.es/search?q=k%C3%B6ln+hauptbahnhof&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjb5IrI0b_RAhULtBQKHdQ3Cy0Q_AUICSgC&biw=1280&bih=717

    Where did all the raping occur? Is it possible for hundreds of women to be sexually assaulted in this space (or anywhere in this set of spaces) and there to be no video or photographic record of it? Please engage with the question. Is that really possible?

    • Replies: @Rurik
  340. @L.K

    I am glad the Brit Empire fell. I don’t like Empires.

    Ah, but don’t you realize that this logically implies that you are all in favor of German girls getting raped in the train station?

  341. Rurik says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    Sure you did. You kept referring to a hoax event as something that had actually happened.

    what so-called “hoax” are you talking about? The one YOU keep bringing up?

    I couldn’t give a rat’s ass about what did or didn’t exactly happen in Cologne on New Years Eve, except that I don’t believe that every single girl that reported an assault was a lying twat. OK? I just don’t see it that way. If you do, that’s fine man. You can see or think whatever you want to. It’s a free country. And if there are others out there who believe you that all the girls who reported assaults were lying about it, then kudos to you, you made your point.

    see how easy I am?

    Out of curiosity, when you say you have no video evidence, does that mean that you looked for it and failed to find any, or that you didn’t even look for it?

    check out videos for ‘Taharrush’

    maybe it’s all a hoax

    but we know that a ten year old boy was brutally raped by a Muslim immigrant, and more to the point, the authorities found no cause to punish the man. It is this JR that vexes me. The spiritual death (murder) of the West. My civilization, and it’s being systematically destroyed, and I simply don’t approve of that. You may, and that’s your right. But it’s my right to resist its destruction.

    Where did all the raping occur? Is it possible for hundreds of women to be sexually assaulted in this space (or anywhere in this set of spaces) and there to be no video or photographic record of it? Please engage with the question. Is that really possible?

    do you have any idea how obnoxious it is to keep hounding me with the same question I’ve answered ad nauseam?

    I tell you over and over and over that that I have no videos. I say it once, I say it ten times, I say it in all caps and try to say it in a way that any retard can see that I’m saying it. OK? But that’s never good enough for you, is it? What you want me to do is say that if I don’t have a video, then that means that all those bitches and twats were lying. And that there’s no Muslims raping girls in Sweden or Germany or anywhere else of any consequence. And that anyone who suggests otherwise had better come up with some videos of girls being raped in Cologne, Germany on New Years Eve at the train station, or just STFU. And I just don’t see it that way JR.

    You can. Like I said it’s a free country. You can believe whatever you want to.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  342. L.K says:
    @Rurik

    Rurik:

    One of my mantras has always been that the Russian people were the victims of the Soviet horror. Not as some would claim, guilty for it.

    I totally agree. But to compare the situation of the Russian people under Stalin with zamericans in ZUSA is simply absurd. Or for that matter Saudi Barbaria.
    Apples and oranges, and you know it.
    Under Stalin, if you said something against the regime you’d be lucky if you were just arrested and sent to the Gulag.
    In Saudi Barbaria, make a mildly critical tweet against the regime and see what happens to you. In ZUSA, people have a lot more freedom to protest and organize.
    You just simply cannot come to terms with this fact bc it is too convenient for you to put all of the blame on the ‘fiend’.

    rurik:

    ‘But because it’s the US that’s the super-power, there’s a kneejerk temptation to blame them more (or exclusively).’

    Exclusively, no, more, yes, and I think it is warranted.
    Here are some of those zamericans Rurik refers to, who work 5 jobs and just do not have the energy to go after any facts( funny that Rurik seems to get a lot of the info that is denied zamericans trough msm presstitutes! How does he manage and how come so few zamericans do as he does? Is it maybe that too many don’t give a damn? ):

    Rurik, despite all our disagreements, I’m at least hoping you’ll agree with me that the little blondie @1:36 in the vid is quite nice… wink, wink

    rurik:

    “Muslims don’t belong in the West in transformational numbers. This will cause bloodshed and hatred.”

    Finally something we can both agree on!

  343. @Rurik

    It’s a free country. And if there are others out there who believe you that all the girls who reported assaults were lying about it, then kudos to you, you made your point.

    see how easy I am?

    How “easy” you are? Well, what I see is that you simply are not a serious person. You’re simply not somebody worth talking to. This has become clear. Anybody who says basically “I don’t care whether there really is any evidence for something” is not a serious person.

    So, our relationship is pretty much over. You’re not somebody I can waste too much time talking to. I’m going to answer you simply as a public service, okay? Kind of like how I kept answering Geokat on his 9/11 obfuscation, and there, again, I just kept asking the same question and he kept trying to evade it and it was comical. Your behavior is not very different.

    Certain points need to be made and you probably (though surprise me if you want) are not capable of grasping them. So I answer as a public service.

    The first (and main) point is simply this:

    It does not matter how many people claim they saw something or experienced something if the thing in question is simply IMPOSSIBLE.

    Case in point: it does not matter if 300 people or 3000 people say they saw a flying pig because we know that pigs cannot fly. It’s absurd.

    The above is a simple basic principle, okay?

    So, when I say that, looking at the Cologne rail station, just the overall space, it appears to be impossible for hundreds of women to get sexually assaulted there and for nobody to have photographed or filmed it. Not on 12/31/2015, a point in time where EVERYBODY has a video camera (i.e. smartphone) in their pockets.

    As far as I can figure, this is simply impossible. If it is impossible, that means that it did not happen. It does not matter how many people claimed something happened if that something is simply IMPOSSIBLE.

    And that’s enough really. However, we also have, at this point, that it is clear that in one of the more notorious cases, the girl was, in fact, BY HER OWN ADMISSION, making it all up.

    https://www.rt.com/news/353911-cologne-woman-rape-allegations/

    Granted, this does not prove that all the other females in question were making it up, but we do know that, basically, the police did not act on any of this. I understand that the right-wing echo-sphere that you are plugged into claims that the cops in Germany don’t investigate sexual assaults because they are okay with German girls getting sexually assaulted. That is not impossible, but, in my view, is rather unlikely. What is far more likely is that they examined the allegations and finally, did not find them credible.

    do you have any idea how obnoxious it is to keep hounding me with the same question I’ve answered ad nauseam?

    Uh, do you have any idea how obnoxious it is that you ask somebody whether he has evidence for some specific thing and then he doesn’t answer you and starts ranting about things that happened in some other country???!!! That’s really not acceptable. You really ought to apologize for that.

    In any case, you don’t answer questions straightforwardly and that’s why I just keep hounding you on it. I keep asking questions because you KEEP TRYING TO EVADE LEGITIMATE QUESTIONS.

    So I keep asking them. How many times did I ask that Geokat asswipe what the best evidence was that Osama Bin Laden was behind 9/11? How many times did he refuse to answer?

    For example, I asked you whether you had no evidence because you didn’t look for it OR whether you had no video evidence because you looked for it but couldn’t find any.

    It’s a perfectly legitimate question and you have not answered it. So I’ll pose the question again. BECAUSE YOU EVADED IT. I ask the question again:

    You say you have no video evidence. Is this because you looked for it and failed to find it or because you never even looked for it?

    Are you going to answer that?

    Like I said it’s a free country. You can believe whatever you want to.

    Okay, look, what you are doing here is just proclaiming your God-given right to be a shit eater. They say something happened, you believe it. They toss the shit in your general direction and you eat it up, and if somebody asks you what the evidence is, you’ll get infuriated. You ate the shit. It tasted good…

    Yes, as you say, you have the right to be a shit eater. But then it would be preferable if you go hang out with the shit eaters. You know… BUT you might get used to saying that Arabs flew planes into buildings on 9/11 and so on, because that way you’ll fit in real good with the other shit eaters. There’s no evidence for that proposition either, but hey, what do you care?

    Just hang out with the shit eaters. I think the shit eaters must worship Arabs finally, the skills that they attribute to Arabs. Arabs who never flew the plane before can suddenly fly a Boeing 767 into a building at a faster speed than the plane can even fly at that altitude. Amazing. Arabs can rape hundreds of girls in the equivalent of Grand Central Station and there is no video or photographic record of it. Arabs can do some pretty fucking incredible things. The most incredible thing though is their passports. If you can get the passport of an Arab country, that passport is indestructible, man. You can blow yourself to smithereens and the passport in your pocket is untouched. (Though, admittedly, what good that would do you, I don’t know offhand… but hey, it is AMAZING!)

    Look, man, you’re backed into a corner now and you’re just like a petulant child. It’s time to assess things. If you really don’t want to be a shit eater, then you’re going to have to recognize that, in fact, it IS important whether there is evidence for things or not.

    This kind of thing of whining when somebody asks you what the evidence for something is, this isn’t the right place for that.

    • Replies: @L.K
    , @utu
  344. L.K says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    Hey J.R,

    J.R to Rurik:

    “In any case, you don’t answer questions straightforwardly and that’s why I just keep hounding you on it.”

    To be fair to Rurik, if only after evading the question re Cologne several times and getting ‘hounded’ by you for it, Rurik finally did admit he had no evidence.
    You may have missed his post, peruse his stuff above and you shall find it!

    Take care

    • Replies: @Rurik
    , @Jonathan Revusky
  345. Rurik says:
    @L.K

    first off it was silly to ask me for proof in the first place. I was never insisting that any rapes happened in Cologne at that time. Perhaps some did, perhaps not. I do suspect that a lot of assaults happened, tits and assess groped, that kind of thing. A general disrespecting of the ladies. But then again maybe not. It was never anything that I considered of consequence, in and of itself. So the hounding for proof, even after I insisted vociferously that I had none, seemed to me simply badgering.

    I get that JR is disgusted with the way Arabs and Muslims are maligned. I don’t agree with that, and have said so often and forcefully. But at the same time, just as Islam is under assault, so is the entire West. Not just Sweden or England or Germany. And that’s why I bring up places like Zimbabwe. But for some reason, I seem to be the only one that sees the situation from a civilizational point of view, and perhaps I’ve been too harsh on others that simply don’t, or can’t see it from that perspective.

    It’s kind of like the way the entire Muslim would is being attacked, and not just Iraq or Libya or Syria. Just think if Muslims were able to understand that, and rather than Sunni fighting Shiite, they all realized that they had a common enemy and rallied against Zionism.

    Anyways, I don’t hold out hope that they’ll see things that way any more than I hold out hope that my reasons for mentioning Rhodesia can be understood from the context of a war on the West in general.

    btw the blonde is hot, to be sure. We can at least agree on that.

    and I typed a couple of replies to this thread that somehow disappeared. Maybe I clicked on the wrong thing.

    Soon this thread will fall off the page, so just so you fellas know, I harbor no ill will, just frustration at an inability to convey my meaning in a comprehensible way.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  346. utu says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    Isn’t it that there was never an issue about rape in Cologne? Did Rurik claim woman were raped there on the New Year Eve? I am asking because i did not read all of his post. Somewhere above I stated why.

    I followed news and various blogs then and I got impression that there was a crowd of young men Muslim/Arab/refugee men who made access to railway station platforms for the returning women from New Year Eve events difficult by crowding them making them run the gauntlet and yes there were law level sexual assault (touching them, feeling them up…) but no rape. It is possible that many of the women were already drunk or tipsy. It was end of the party.

    You cannot say that nothing has happened there. There were no rapes but there was annoying mob of young men that was harassing the women.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  347. @L.K

    To be fair to Rurik, if only after evading the question re Cologne several times and getting ‘hounded’ by you for it, Rurik finally did admit he had no evidence.

    Yeah, actually, I know he finally answered it, but it took multiple iterations of me insisting that he answer the question. Initially, you’d ask him whether there was any evidence regarding the Cologne railway station thing and he’d “answer” by talking about Rotherham, England, or supposedly Sweden is the rape capital of the world and then it’s on to Rhodesia… round the world, baby…

    Or he’ll try to say that your wanting evidence for this must mean that you are in favor of mass immigration of third world people into Europe. It’s like it is alien to this person’s way of thinking that you would actually want to get to the bottom of a purely factual issue! And frankly, I find that kind of indifference to facts, to the truth, to be utterly loathsome.

    Now, he’s talking like the problem is my “hounding” him as opposed to his trying to evade answering a legitimate question.

    But okay, he eventually answered the question, even though it was like pulling teeth to get him to answer. Now, he’s trying to say that it doesn’t matter that there is no video evidence! So, now, the question he wants to evade is this one:

    How can hundreds of women be assaulted in Cologne railway station (and look at what the space looks like) and for there to be no video or photographic evidence?

    As far as I can figure, it’s simply impossible! I recognize that it’s hard to get one’s head around the idea that hundreds of women are lying about this. On the other hand, I have not personally seen all the police reports. Obviously not. Maybe it’s a much smaller number and certain people have chosen to blow up the figures. The media is not reliable. But, for the sake of argument, if hundreds of women say they were raped, or at least somehow assaulted, right in the middle of a completely open space like Cologne railway station and there is NO video or photographic evidence AT ALL, finally, what am I supposed to believe? It’s hard to imagine hundreds of women all lying but, it’s even harder for me to imagine all this happening and not a single person gets any of it on video. Not in the current-day context, no. So, finally, I figure it all just didn’t happen. It’s a hoax.

    Now, I could be wrong about that, I guess, but for me, in terms of this conversation, it’s just this kind of petulant, childish attitude on the part of Rurik, like “It’s a free country and I can believe whatever I want.” HUH? So it doesn’t matter that there is no evidence for something. Well, okay, it doesn’t matter. To him, anyway, it doesn’t matter. But, as I told him, if you want to operate in this kind of mode, then, well, it’s just too aggravating for me. I cannot accept this kind of attitude from somebody.

    • Replies: @utu
  348. @utu

    You cannot say that nothing has happened there.

    Well, it’s hard to be sure of things, but I’m now leaning towards the view that this is a purely synthetic event. To all intents and purposes, nothing happened.

    Or, to the extent that it happened, there may have been a criminal gang operating that did some pickpocketing or purse-snatching sorts of things. However, those people were not Syrian refugees. But this synthetic event was used to demonize refugees and this meme of calling the refugees “rapefugees”, I’m not sure whether it didn’t originate right after the Cologne thing.

    Also, I would doubt that, assuming some things did happen, that there really any sexual aspect to it. I mean, somebody could grab your ass looking to see where you keep your wallet and you could think there was a sexual meaning to it… There’s a lot of confusion. I mean, if it’s a gang of thieves, then these aren’t sexual assaults. The grabbing would have been to find their money, no? Not that such things are good, but there should be some attempt to figure out what really happened. But again, there is not a lot of evidence that very much happened.

    There were no rapes but there was annoying mob of young men that was harassing the women.

    There is not even any evidence of this either. And then there is some testimony that suggests the exact opposite. There’s this English teacher, Marcia Adair, who was there and wrote an article here:

    http://news.nationalpost.com/news/world/i-was-in-cologne-on-new-years-theres-a-reason-to-be-afraid-and-its-because-of-other-peoples-fear

    There was somebody who in anonymous comments somewhere also said he was there and didn’t see anything. There was some other guy also who was not anonymous who said he was there the whole time and didn’t see ANYTHING, but I can’t find the damned article when I look for it. But I remember it distinctly, and it seemed more unequivocal than Marcia Adair.

    I really am tending towards the view that the events of 12/31/2015 in Cologne railway station are a well constructed media hoax. Anyway, if you take a skeptical stance towards the whole thing and try to prove to yourself that it really happened, I think you fail.

    That, actually, reminds me of the whole no planes debate regarding 9/11. You take a skeptical stance and try to convince yourself that any planes flew into any buildings, and you will fail to convince yourself. At least I fail to convince myself. I lean increasingly towards the view that the entire airplanes component of 9/11 is a pure hoax. It’s not relevant exactly to what we’re talking about and is not important anyway in the overall picture, even regarding 9/11. BUT, there is a relationship, which is that people have a hard time getting their heads around a pure hoax. They think that something must have happened. Well… no necessarily…

    Here is another thing that bugs me about all this though. If a bunch of Mexican illegal immigrants were alleged to have done something similar to this, would the media go around saying that these people were all Roman Catholics. Or that they were Christians? They would never say that, right? Nobody would ever try to imply that this had anything to do with Christianity or catholicism, right? Yet, here, we have this emphasis that the alleged perpetrators of this are all “Muslims”. It’s like it’s a preset talking point.

    • Replies: @utu
  349. @Rurik

    first off it was silly to ask me for proof in the first place.

    Look, obviously, there is nothing “silly” about asking whether there is proof that an event even happened. In fact, it’s the most basic question you can ask about all sorts of things nowadays. Did Adam Lanza go to a primary school and shoot a bunch of little kids? As far as I can tell, no, this did not happen. I think it’s a synthetic event, and people who I respect who make a point of studying these things all say so. But to claim that asking what the proof is is a “silly” question…. No, what would be silly would be answering that question by saying that somebody else shot some kids a completely different incident in Texas, say. Or in a completely different country! Now, okay, you can have a big picture discussion and tie in different things, but if the question at hand is whether a specific event even happened, then you can’t just start screaming about things that are completely separate, like some woman got kicked down the stairs in the Berlin subway. Or Rhodesia… WTF? At some point, there has to be the ability to focus on what the evidence is that a specific thing even happened!

    But, look, please just fuck off now. It’s just too aggravating. I’ve reached a point with you, Rurik, that I understand that you have some rather deep issues. It’s probably part of a whole. I recollect all this “Will Rogers” stuff, endless extension of benefit of the doubt to OBVIOUS shills and liars. Meanwhile, if a bunch of Arabs are accused of all these sexual assaults, it is “silly” to ask what the evidence for this is???!! All of these aspects of your personality, the “Will Rogers” stuff along with constant twisting of what anybody says is just too exasperating. For example, just now, talking as if I had expressed a view about Rhodesia! When have I ever said anything about Rhodesia? NEVER! And then I am failing to understand your point about Rhodesia blah blah.

    At this point I realize that I’m here wasting my time engaging in conversation with somebody who is just a crank. Somebody who just wants to spew incoherent rants about disparate things and affects that it is “silly” to ask what the evidence is for a specific event even having happened — that’s a crank. You’re right that the conversation on this page is winding down and it is rather disappointing to me that the article basically was not discussed. But in the future, I do not anticipate engaging you in discussion any more. I’m a serious person and I should really only devote time to talking with other serious people.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  350. geokat62 says:

    “Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in!” – Michael Corleone

    Since my name was invoked in vain once again, let the record show the last exchange between us:

    [MORE]

    JR – It is simply untrue to say that I did not answer that question. I did answer the question. I said: I don’t know.

    That is an answer. I simply do not know why they did things the way did them. How would I know?

    geokat62 – As you well know, after responding “I don’t know,” I rephrased the question by asking you “how likely is it…,” to which you failed to provide a response. So, speaking of bad faith, why don’t you tell us:

    How likely is it that the planners [would] go to the extraordinary lengths they did to create the illusion (by using the top down approach and placing explosives just below predetermined impact zones) that airplanes brought down the TT but to then simply say “boy that was hard work, let’s just save some time/effort and wire bldg 7 in the classic bottom-up CD style,” undoing all their efforts to conceal their nefarious plans. It simply makes no sense.

    It’s as if the Japanese would use airplanes with Soviet markings while attacking 2 ships moored at Pearl Harbor to create the illusion that the Soviets were responsible for the attacks, and then for some strange reason attack the third ship using an airplane with Japanese markings. Makes zero sense. Bottom line: if you’re clever enough to create illusions to cover your tracks, how likely is it that you would cover only two of your tracks, but not all three?

    JR – Please answer the question I pose above. I asked it at least half a dozen times, I’m sure. Probably more like a dozen times. Never got an answer.

    geokat62 – L.K. recently put the same question to me. Here was my response:

    Maybe it wasn’t OBL & AQ who did it. Maybe it was the Mossad that orchestrated it all… and the 19 hijackers were merely patsies. I really don’t know. Neither do any of you. As I’ve repeatedly stated, if the TC is truly genuine about having an independent investigation opened, you don’t do it on the basis of speculation that the targets were all brought down by CD or missiles, you do it on the basis of the following hard evidence:

    1. the Israelis were shadowing the hijackers prior to the event;
    2. Urban Moving Systems was a Mossad front that supplied the vans in which Mossad agents were apprehended with maps of targets that suggested they were tied into the attacks;
    3. Carl Cameron’s 4-part special investigation that demonstrated the Israelis had tie-ins; and
    4. eyewitness testimony of a woman who spotted the dancing Israelis celebrating just after the first TT was hit but before the second one was hit… suggesting they knew the event was a terrorist attack, while everyone else thought it was an accident.

    Why not call for an independent investigation on the basis of these facts, rather than giving them the opportunity to dismiss it, as most Americans are not persuaded by the CD allegations and never will be. Once the investigation is opened, however, the investigators can then follow the evidence wherever it leads… explosions and all.

    So if the TC is truly interested in pursuing the truth, why not adopt the best path to discovering it?

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  351. utu says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Year’s_Eve_sexual_assaults_in_Germany

    On 25 November, it was reported that in 369 of the 509 crime cases, which were sexually motivated, no perpetrators could be identified. The prosecutor’s office could initiate 58 criminal investigations against 83 persons. Only 6 were convicted so far. The highest sentence was 1 year and 9 month due to sexual assault and robbery. 52 of the accused men had to be acquitted due to lack of unanimous identification. The investigators failed to convict more of the perpetrators because the vicinity of the station was “dark and overcrowded” and the CCTV recordings were of “miserable” quality.[2]

    According to the Cologne police report on 2 January, the suspects mostly used sexual assault (including groping) to distract victims while robbing them of mobile phones and wallets. Police initially said that the sizes of the groups ranged from 2 to 20 people.[57] According to a Bundeskriminalamt report released in June 2016, perpetrators acted mostly in groups of 9 up to 100 men. The offenders used the same method nearly everywhere: lone women were encircled and touched in the breasts, the bottom, and between the legs. In several cases, a finger was inserted into the vagina of the victim—which constitutes a rape under German law—after her clothes were torn from the body. Groping, insults, and rape were often combined with robbery and theft.[52]

  352. @geokat62

    Since my name was invoked in vain once again, let the record show the last exchange between us:

    I’m not going to waste any more time with you on these sorts of groundhog day conversations. All that stuff you’re quoting, I already answered it. And it becomes a complete waste of time. Everybody who looks into it minimally or even just thinks about it knows that a steel-framed building like WTC 7 cannot symmetrically implode in a way visually identical to a controlled demolition — except via a controlled demolition. What is on the video is not the result of untended fires, it’s an engineered implosion.

    To say that you want a new investigation but it should not investigate controlled demolition is like saying you want a new investigation of the JFK assassination but it should not investigate anybody being shot.

    In fact, I was making the comparison between Rurik’s recent pathetic behavior on this page with yours specifically to explain why I couldn’t continue the conversation with him. The minute he said that it doesn’t matter whether there is evidence of something or not, he was beyond the pale for me. Probably, more than being angry at him, I was angry at myself for wasting my time in the past talking to somebody like that and being nice to him.

    I felt it suited my purposes for a while to debate with you. But I have better things to do now, especially when all you can do is just keep copy-pasting the same garbage that I already responded to, probably more than once.

    Also, I am rather annoyed that all this utter crap crowds out any possibility of discussing the article I wrote. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I suppose you never read the article you are commenting under.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  353. @utu

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Year’s_Eve_sexual_assaults_in_Germany

    Utu, Wikipedia always backs the official version of everything. So wikipedia says that Arabs flew planes into buildings on 9/11, children were shot at Sandy Hook, and gives the official version of every single other hoax event that there is. There would really be the need to dig down a bit further to find out what really happened. Wikipedia is simply not reliable.

    The investigators failed to convict more of the perpetrators because the vicinity of the station was “dark and overcrowded” and the CCTV recordings were of “miserable” quality.[2]

    Well, I dunno, man. I’ve looked for things and I come up with stuff like this:

    It’s night time but the video is reasonably clear and it does not show anybody getting sexually assaulted. It really seems to me that the area is well lit enough that there ought to be video and probably the people editing the wikipedia page are trying to explain away the absence of any video evidence. Another story they put out in the days after this was that there was video but the authorities were suppressing it. Now, the claim is that there is video but the video is not clear enough. So I note a change of the story. When the story changes, it is not confidence inspiring.

    It’s not just the CCTV but the fact that there are no 3rd party videos that show anything either. I just ran across this from a British tabloid.

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2407734/cologne-new-years-eve-sex-attacks/

    This supposedly has new video footage of what happened. “Terrifying”, “dramatic” footage at that. Watch it. They’re claiming that this is dramatic new footage that has come out nearly a year after the event.

    I’m unimpressed. If they had anything to show us, they would show it, no? The article refers to the “harrowing cries” of the women there, but, for all I can know, maybe the audio of the women shouting was later added. You can’t see anything happening in any case. It’s just some people shouting.

    As for the various arrests and things for crimes, I have a suspicion that they are conflating things. Cologne is a city of a million, but the overall urban area is over 3 million people. It’s a big city. Things happen. It’s entirely possible that on New Years eve a lot of things were reported and things happened, possibly some of them in the vicinity of the train station. So they’re drawing all these things together and trying to claim that some major thing happened there. Yet the problem is that there is no video footage when there should be.

    If you want a really good laugh, check this out:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3433445/Female-reporter-sexually-assaulted-man-live-camera-reports-Cologne-festival.html

    Look at the first video on the page. The reporter getting “sexually assaulted”. Nobody was sexually assaulted and the “assailant” was a white drunk German anyway.

    But then Pamela Geller uses this video as an example of all the sexual assaults going on in Germany:

    http://pamelageller.com/2016/02/video-tv-reporter-is-sexually-assaulted-by-a-man-at-cologne-carnival-amid-scores-of-attacks.html/

    I mean, if she had any video footage of sexual assaults to show us, wouldn’t she show it?

    No, man, this whole thing that women are getting sexually assaulted right left and center in Europe, it’s a hoax basically, it just is… Even whatever crimes possibly did take place on New Years Eve, it was petty robberies and they were groping the women to find their money. It wasn’t really sexual. AND it was not refugees doing it. It’s criminal elements that were already in Germany anyway.

    • Replies: @utu
  354. Rurik says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    Rurik, that I understand that you have some rather deep issues.

    project much?

    But, look, please just fuck off now.

    what was it I called you before…?

    oh yea, an insufferable asshole

    yep, that was it ;)

  355. Rurik says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    In fact, I was making the comparison between Rurik’s recent pathetic behavior on this page with yours specifically to explain why I couldn’t continue the conversation with him. The minute he said that it doesn’t matter whether there is evidence of something or not, he was beyond the pale for me. Probably, more than being angry at him, I was angry at myself for wasting my time in the past talking to somebody like that and being nice to him.

    it doesn’t matter if there’s no bone of contention over whether or not it happened you idiotic cunt.

    my point was that I didn’t give a rip about the specific case of Cologne, fool. And that is why I didn’t give a fuck about your dearth of ‘evidence’.

    - that seems to prove, if I’m not mistaken, that nearly all of these “bitches” and “twats” are all just lying to make the Muslim “refugee” look bad. Huh JR?

    You know who makes them look bad? Fuckheads like you, that try to run cover for their occasionally bad behavior. If the Muslims and their myriad apologists would condemn the act of rape, (like the ten year old boy, or the rape and murder of that Austrian girl), in the most strident terms in their arsenal and condemn the child rapists to the depths of Muslim hell, then they’d do a lot of good. But instead the poor Muslims have cunts like you running around saying nothing happened, and all those filthy whores are all making it up, and they liked it anyways the dirty little twats!!!

    huh JR?

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  356. utu says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    “If a bunch of Mexican illegal immigrants were alleged to have done something similar to this, would the media go around saying that these people were all Roman Catholics. Or that they were Christians? They would never say that, right?”

    Wrong. They would in Poland. Most media there blames everything on Polish Catholicism.

  357. @Rurik

    it doesn’t matter if there’s no bone of contention over whether or not it happened you idiotic cunt.

    First of all, if you continue to insult me personally like this from behind the cloak of anonymity, I will probably out your name, since we have had private correspondence. It’s improper for you to insult me personally like this when I am open about who I am and you are hiding behind an alias. So do stop doing that. It is absolutely improper.

    my point was that I didn’t give a rip about the specific case of Cologne, fool.

    Well, fine, but that’s because you’re an idiot. I mean, this is like somebody telling you that they don’t care about WTC 7 because the other two larger buildings are what’s important because they were the ones that were hit by the planes (or so they say) and and that’s where all the people died. But of course, WTC 7 is of key importance, because if WTC 7 is a controlled demolition and was thus preset beforehand, that means that it is a odds-on bet that the other two buildings were controlled demolitions as well. They had to have been rigged beforehand and the whole thing is a staged event.

    Now, similarly, if the Cologne mass rape story is, in fact, a hoax, then it is a near certainty that very many, maybe even all of the similar narratives are also hoaxes. So, to claim that it doesn’t matter is either stupid or just dishonest or more likely both things at once.

    More generally speaking, we are definitely at a stage in history where we have to look at these sorts of things very soberly. What we have here, on the face of it, is a narrative that seems custom-made to push certain people’s buttons. Basically, it’s: “Look, these bands of swarthy savages are raping our white women…”

    This is the kind of that just glaringly looks like it could be a sort of synthetic narrative designed to affect people psychologically. As far as I can see, the only sensible response to a situation like this is to try to analyze soberly whether this really happened, or if it did, what the true extent of it was and so forth.

    All of this does keep coming back to the issue of 9/11 and all the rest of the false flag terrorism. It’s: “Look what those people did and we have to go kick ass and blah blah”. It’s a completely psychological manipulation. That you affect that you cannot even fathom I would feel the need to know what the actual evidence is on something like this — that is utterly exasperating. And then your whining that you are being harassed when I pose straightforward questions and you refuse to answer them. Oh, come to think of it, you didn’t answer this question, did you?

    How can hundreds of women be assaulted in Cologne railway station (and look at what the space looks like) and for there to be no video or photographic evidence?

    I have reflected on this question and I just don’t think it’s possible. I just cannot visualize this, not in 2016, in a wide open space with thousand of people around. If you think it is possible, then okay, but answer the question. It’s a legitimate question. In general, this whole mode of debate you engage in where you just ignore what somebody is saying and then start ranting about Rhodesia or something else that has nothing to do with the conversation, it’s just completely impossible to talk to somebody like this.

    - that seems to prove, if I’m not mistaken, that nearly all of these “bitches” and “twats” are all just lying to make the Muslim “refugee” look bad. Huh JR?

    Well, one has to go where the available facts lead. If they are bearing false witness, claiming that things happened that simply did not happen, then obviously, my assessment of these people’s character is bound to be extremely negative. But I was specifically talking about cases where there was false testimony. The one girl who said she was raped in Cologne and got pregnant and had an abortion, later, admitted that she was not even in Cologne at the time! So this kind of thing that I am saying negative things about somebody like that is rather bizarre.

    Again, any man who has that much sympathy for women who make false rape accusations is complete and utter pussy-whipped idiot.

    Anyway, look, one of us simply does not belong here ,in this conversation. That person, logically, cannot be me, because I wrote the article up top, so I definitely do belong here. So that means that, logically, the person who does not belong here is YOU.

    And more specifically, if you are openly writing comments saying that you have NOTHING to bring into the discussion, but that doesn’t matter because it doesn’t matter whether there is any evidence or not, because of… your emotions and feelings and blah blah. I find that pathetic and disgusting. There is something unmanly about all of your hysterical hyper-emotionalism and inability to discuss actual facts soberly. I might put up with this kind of hysterical stuff if I was getting some sex or there was some prospect of it, but since that it obviously not the case here, I’m not putting up with it.

  358. utu says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    On one side there is Pamela Geller and on the other is Barbara Spectre. If you try to debunk some attacks and show they are synthetic you are on the side of Barbara Spectre. If you want to amplify islamophobia to stop immigration you are on the side of Pamela Geller. Can you do both without playing the game of Spectre and Geller? Yes, go to the root of the problem. Go after Spectres and Gellers. Is there a chance for it to happen? No. But perhaps there is no point of fighting with Rurik.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  359. @utu

    If you try to debunk some attacks and show they are synthetic you are on the side of Barbara Spectre.

    Well, for somebody like Rurik that is the case. However, if one is not a brainfucked idiot, then one should be able to understand that it is important to determine what the truth about these things is.

    The massive power of the people behind all these synthetic narratives is that they create people’s mental world. So, simply trying to figure out in an objective way what is true, what available evidence there is and so forth — this is an act of resistance in itself! On the other hand, when Rurik says basically that this story is true because they say it is and there is no need to look for any evidence, he is doing the intellectual equivalent of dropping his pants and bending over and requesting to be roughly sodomized.

    In any case, I am increasingly convinced, certain really, that anybody who looks into this whole mass refugee rape narrative with a baseline of critical thinking, will realize that this is basically a synthetic hoax. What I think happened via the New Years Eve allegations is that this is a very rowdy time in Cologne and other cities in Germany. There are drunken crowds out and there may well be some professional thieves working the crowds and a lot of various shit typically happens. Okay, probably some drunks do get obnoxious with the women and shit like this, but it’s all just various chickenshit stuff and probably no more or less of it happened last New Years than any previous New Years. So what they did is they took a set of basically organic events of the sort that always happen on New Years Eve and they wove a synthetic narrative about Muslim refugees going on a raping spree. They also sprinkled it with some actual synthetic events, like girls being encouraged to make fake rape accusations. Only one girl got busted for specifically saying she was raped in Cologne (when she wasn’t even in Cologne) but surely there are more. I strongly suspect that nobody really got raped — at least by any sane definition of the term “rape”. And if they did, it wasn’t right there in a wide open space like the main train station!

    The reason that there is no video or photographic evidence of hundreds of girls being sexually assaulted in Cologne railway station, even with a thousand or more bystanders as well as the CCTV cameras is simply that the event basically did not happen. This is the simple, obvious explanation of the lack of evidence. It didn’t happen.

    Of course, realizing that this did not happen does not mean one agrees with Barbara Spectre about bringing in all sorts of people from the 3rd world. It just amounts, on the first pass, to realizing that this did not happen. Well, it also means that there are people who carefully (and successfully, by and large) mounted this mediatic hoax. Once you realize that this is a hoax, it’s important to look at who is behind it and what their agenda is.

    • Replies: @utu
  360. @utu

    In several cases, a finger was inserted into the vagina of the victim—which constitutes a rape under German law—after her clothes were torn from the body.

    You know, the last few days have been rather cold here where I live (and the next few days will be even colder apparently.) Nothing serious, like around 10 degrees Celsius during the day, but Spanish people think that’s really cold. So the other day, I was walking down the Rambla just looking at the women and thinking about the Cologne event. Almost all the women are wearing jeans. A few were wearing those stressed jeans with holes in them that is still fashionable, I guess, but underneath, there wasn’t skin. They had leggings underneath. I mean, everybody here was wearing multiple layers of clothing. Germany is much colder. At night, on New Years eve. It would be freezing level of lower.

    The business about clothes being torn from the body… well, finally, on reflection, it occurred to me that if I am going to take up raping as a new hobby, it’s basically going to be a summer hobby, man. In July or August, all the same women are wearing skimpy outfits and raping would just so much easier (though I guess if one is a real sportsman, one could enjoy a challenge…). Even just this fingering a girl’s you-know-what, which is, apparently “rape” under German law. That would be easy to do in the summer, but quite technically difficult in current conditions. Of course, if I do take up this new hobby, I don’t think I’ll do it on the Rambla or in the train station, amidst a crowd of people. But the thing is, I’m not an Arab, and thus lack the special power to rape women in a wide open public space without it being caught on camera! (My passport and ID also cannot survive fireballs or explosions either.)

    But look, if you tear off a woman’s clothing in a wide open public space, not only is there the act of ripping off her clothing, there is the fact that afterwards, she is going about with torn clothes and such, looking quite distraught… There is not a single photo or video of ANY of this. As far as I can tell, there are not even witnesses who claim that they saw traumatized women going about with torn clothing.

    This is clearly an orchestrated hoax, but then you get all this piling on. Like, there is this White Nationalist female author, whose name, a pen name, I assume, is Lasha Darkmoon, and she wrote a series of articles in the Occidental Observer, and it’s utterly demented stuff, I think. But finally, all the ranting (of which Rurik’s rants are just a drop in the ocean) are about a completely synthetic narrative, as far as I can see. I mean, I saw somebody claiming that the situation in Germany was similar to what there was in 1945 when the Red Army was there raping every female around. This kind of thing is clearly unhinged, like the stuff about Sweden being rape capital of the world.

    What is creepy about this dialogue with Rurik is that the guy clearly has some deep-seated emotional need to believe all this. If you tell him that women are not getting raped all over the place in Germany and Sweden, you’d think he’d be happy! “It’s completely irrelevant that there is no video evidence of this!” Sheesh, what a way to self-destruct in a serious discussion…

    But the real point is this, and it has nothing to do with our friend Rurik here specifically. There a whole bunch of people who have basically decided to believe this narrative and no matter what common-sense arguments you use, they will not reconsider it. Actually, getting back to a theme of the article above (remember that?) this basically becomes like a religious doctrine for them, so it doesn’t matter if there is no proof.

  361. @utu

    Fabulous comment. Monomaniacal bore indeed.

    • Replies: @utu
  362. utu says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    Why is that so hard for you to say “I do not know”, “I can’t have an opinion on that”? Because you always think you know. You are full of opinions.

    When being caught between Spectre and Geller I think the only strategy that could have a chance for success would be to: (1) Side with Geller and pretend islamophobia to stop immigration, (2) When it stop kick her in the ass and start supporting Palestinians, Hezbollah… to that point that Spectre will turn against you as well.

    Rurik might be write after all while you might be wrong and really on the side of Spectre. But what you expect from a man who lives in Barcelona.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  363. utu says:
    @Paul Humphries

    “Fabulous comment. Monomaniacal bore indeed.”

    Thank you. I forgot about it so I reread it and indeed I called him a monomaniacal bore. Later I felt bad about it but now after seeing his last two comments I do not feel bad anymore because he got on my nerves. He indeed is a monomaniacal bore. People like that are put on earth for a purpose which is not just to be a warning for us to not be like them but sometimes they accomplish something. He is quite fluent in using effective metaphors in arguments and can argue up to the point, the point when he loses it and becomes a little Torquemada. Then he just becomes homicidal and wants to kill his opponent.

    • Replies: