The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Jonathan Revusky Archive
The Show Must Go On
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
shutterstock_327635864

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

A Night at the Theater

One evening a gentleman decides to go to the theater. There is a play showing that is reputed to be a very funny comedy. It’s hilarious, people are raving about it.

At various points in the middle of the performance, hecklers disrupt the play, shouting disparaging insults at the actors on stage. At first, the actors on stage ignore this and carry on in their roles, but then, at some point, some of them lose patience with this, and respond to the hecklers. Let’s say it begins when an actress on the stage, who is portraying a very prim, proper lady in the play, goes completely out of character and responds to the hecklers with salty language worthy of a sailor. The audience bursts out laughing. Then other actors go out of character as well and there is hilarious repartee between actors on stage and the hecklers in the audience insulting one another.

Truth told, the whole thing is actually very entertaining, but our upstanding gentleman is kind of annoyed. He would very much like to the see the play as it is intended to be seen. But also, the whole thing is rather strange. He wonders: what is going on here? Why are these hecklers allowed to do this? Why aren’t they kicked out of the theater?

Well, this is known to be a very fine theatrical production with some superb actors and he would very much like to see it properly without any interruptions from hecklers. So, at a later date, he goes back to the theater. He buys his ticket, finds his seat…. Amazingly, at the same key moments in the play, the very same hecklers disrupt the performance, just like the first time. And there is the very same repartee between the actors and the hecklers in the audience.

Now, this man is completely perplexed. He cannot understand why the theater continually allows these hecklers to disrupt the performance. He is utterly confused. At this point, the lady sitting in the seat next to him leans over to him, smiles, and whispers: “I love this. It’s my favorite part of the show.”

The man smiles back sheepishly. He is feeling a little bit embarrassed that he was so slow to figure it out. But, of course it now dawns on him what is really going on. By jove, he’s got it!

This “Night at the Theater” story that I have outlined provides some framework for thinking about the pervasive propaganda matrix and we shall return to it. However, first, we need to go over some basics.

Shit happens. Organic versus synthetic events.

When you turn on the television and watch the news, there are, very broadly speaking, two types of news being reported: organic and synthetic events.

The concept of an organic event was perhaps best characterized by Forrest Gump, when he said: “Shit happens.” Indeed it does, a neverending flow of it. Just offhand, on the national and international levels, there is usually some sort of ongoing natural disaster somewhere: an earthquake, a hurricane, floods, forest fires… In these cases we get all the typical news reporting on the devastation and the ongoing humanitarian relief efforts… In the more local news, there are random accidents. In particular, traffic accidents happen continually. A truck collides with a bus and there are a number of fatalities. They dispatch a reporter to the scene who interviews various witnesses…

Such things make up your basic “shit happens” news. We could make the following two observations about organic events:

  1. It is not unreasonable to assume that the reporting of an organic event is broadly honest.
  2. The level of attention that an organic event receives is about commensurate with its scale.

I actually worded these points a bit carefully. For example, regarding point 1, I am quite aware that mainstream news reporting is pretty unreliable. They certainly get all kinds of things wrong continually. Still, one’s reasonable baseline assumption is that what they are telling you happened is pretty similar to what really happened. Or, in other words, the things they get wrong tend to be within the range of honest error — that is, in the case of an organic event.

As for point 2 above, just consider the fact that, on a typical day in the United States alone, about a hundred people die in traffic accidents, more or less. As such, unless it is something pretty spectacular or somebody famous is involved, a traffic accident will only be news locally. Moreover, it will only receive media attention for a short period of time. Soon, some other shit happens and then the focus shifts over to that.

Now, obviously, when it comes to understanding the propaganda matrix, it is not the organic events that we are interested in. It’s the other kind, the synthetic event. However, on occasion, it is easier to define things negatively, not by what they are, but rather, by what they are not. With a non-organic, or synthetic event, the above two observations do not apply. It is quite the opposite. Thus:

When it comes to synthetic events, the baseline assumption is that everything they are telling you and showing you is fake, at least in the absence of strong evidence. Moreover, it is utterly naive to assume that the reporting on a synthetic event is honest.

In other words, point 1 above definitely does not apply! Nor does point 2. Very typically, the first strong clue that something is a synthetic event will be that it receives a level of attention that is not at all in proportion to what one would expect. I suspect that this is an analytical tool that has been valid for a good while. For example, consider the break-in at the Watergate Hotel on 6/17/1972. This crime (though more the subsequent cover-up admittedly) is the event that led to the Watergate scandal that caused Richard Nixon to resign the presidency in disgrace. Look at the scale of the crime. Did it not receive an outrageous level of attention when compared to so many other cases of high-level criminality? Hmm…. Now, this actually works both ways. Sometimes an event receives far more attention than one would expect, but other times far less. For example, the perfectly symmetrical implosion of WTC Building 7 never being mentioned in the mainstream media is a perfect example of a key event that receives suspiciously little attention.

Let us now examine a more recent narrative that should elicit warning bells precisely due to how much attention it has received.

Is this shit for real? The case of Pastor Terry Jones

Consider the following video, a news segment from the year 2010.

I suppose most readers will remember this, at least vaguely. It is part of a saga that received an immense amount of attention over a number of years. The central character, one Terry Jones, was purportedly the spiritual leader of some 50 people in Gainesville, Florida — a dozen families more or less. (I suspect that this was a high-ball estimate of his following, since they have every reason to exaggerate this man’s importance. But certainly, he did not have more than 50 followers, most likely fewer. Like, zero maybe?) In any case, Mr. Jones would not figure in a Who’s Who of the Christian religion. He is not the Pope and he ain’t the Archbishop of Canterbury neither. As far as I can tell, the “evangelical” church that he was leading at the time is not a part of, nor is it recognized by, any major Christian denomination.

Nonetheless, as we see in the video, this man gained national and international attention via his threats to burn a Koran. Or Korans in the plural. Yes, the President of the United States was imploring this man not to burn any Korans. Hillary Clinton as well. Apparently, the Pope in Rome also pleaded with him not to do this. (I assume His Holiness did not call collect…)

The whole thing is really quite extraordinary. General David Petraeus later appears in this news segment claiming that this man’s burning of a Koran in Florida will “make his job very difficult” and will “endanger the lives of American servicemen”. It is hard to know even where to begin deconstructing the lunacy of this whole narrative. Just for starters, why does nobody ask the most obvious question about this?

How would the people in Afghanistan even know that this old geezer in Florida is burning any Korans?

Now, I have never been to Aghanistan and have no plans to visit. However, I think it is a very safe bet that the people in Afghanistan do not know about Pastor Terry Jones and his Burn-A-Koran day. I would venture the guess that you could travel the entire length and breadth of that country and ask people if they knew about this and none would. Of course not. This whole synthetic event is entirely constructed for a Western audience! The people in faroff Afghanistan would know nothing about it.

Actually, I was intrigued to learn, a few years back, that the majority of people in Afghanistan do not even know about the attacks of 9/11. Consider this report or this one. Apparently, around 92% of the Afghan people have no idea about 9/11! You show them a photograph of the twin towers burning and they have no idea where or when this occurred. And they certainly make no connection between that and the U.S. invasion of their country. I found the whole thing really quite intriguing. What this really goes to show is that the whole purpose of the 9/11 synthetic event was to establish a narrative for a Western audience. The population of Afghanistan does not, by and large, even know the official pretext for the invasion of their country. No, nobody ever bothered to tell them! I have absolutely no idea how many Iraqis know what the official reason for the invasion of their country was. (Remember that? Saddam’s non-existent WMD?) I would not be surprised if it was similar to the Afghan case, where the majority of the people in Iraq do not know what the reasons for the invasion were. Or, more precisely, they may have no idea what reasons were given to the American people to justify the war.

In any case, if fewer than 10% of the Afghans even know about the towers going down on 9/11, then what percentage would know about Terry Jones burning a Koran in Gainesville, Florida? So what on earth is David Petraeus talking about? It’s as if he lives in a mental universe in which the people in Afghanistan all have cable and watch CNN and FOX News. Maybe some underling should inform him. Like so:

“Sir, these are very culturally deprived people we’re talking about, General Petraeus, Sir.”

“How bad is it? Tell me the worst.”

“Sir, this here is the veritable Heart of Darkness, Sir. Sir, most of them have never even seen Kim Kardashian’s ass, Sir.”

“My God! The Horror! The Horror…”

“Sir, yes, Sir.”

Now, to be clear, I do not believe that Petraeus really is such a fool. He knows this whole story is bullshit but is playing along. He pretends to be so concerned that the Florida pastor burning a Koran will put American troops in Afghanistan in extra danger. He understands that he is supposed to go along with this narrative. It is what is expected of him.

The way the story then developed was that Mr. Jones first relented and did not burn any Korans as planned, on 9/11/2010, but then he did burn a Koran (or maybe more than one Koran) on 3/20/2011. As we see, General Petraeus had warned of dire consequences if Pastor Jones went ahead and burned a Koran and it turns out he was right! We are then told in the various mainstream news sources that this led to riots in Afghanistan, in particular in the northern city of Mazar-i-Sharif. There, on 4/1/2011 (is the April 1 date a coincidence?) the New York Times, America’s “newspaper of record” reports:

MAZAR-I-SHARIF, Afghanistan — Stirred up by three angry mullahs who urged them to avenge the burning of a Koran at a Florida church, thousands of protesters on Friday overran the compound of the United Nations in this northern Afghan city, killing at least 12 people, Afghan and United Nations officials said.

The version of events in Wikipedia is:

A riot erupted in Mazar-i-Sharif on 1 April 2011 during the protest over the burning of the Qur’an in the US.[8] Estimates of the number of protesters ranged from “hundreds” to as many as 2,000.[8][9] The protest began near the city’s Blue Mosque shortly after Friday prayer,[9]with protesters chanting “Death to the USA, death to Israel.”[10] During the sermon, which is part of the Friday prayer, worshipers were told by three mullahs to begin protesting in favor of the arrest of Pastor Terry Jones, who led the Qur’an burning.[11]

So we are told that this riot in Mazar-i-Sharif, Afghanistan took place because Terry Jones finally burned a Koran. The Afghans are not rioting because their country has been invaded and occupied by foreign troops but rather, because some utterly insignificant individual on the other side of the world burned a Koran.

The saga does not end here. Over a year later, on 9/12/2012, the Chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey, called Pastor Terry Jones on the phone and asked him to withdraw his support for a film “whose portrayal of the Prophet Muhammad has sparked violent protests.” Now the focus of the narrative had shifted over to Libya. The Libyans are not angry, apparently, that their country has been “bombed back into the Stone Age” and tens of thousands of their people are dead and their country in a state of anarchy. No, they are angry about a film that “portrays Muhammad unfavorably”. And now, of course, the Koran-burning pastor who caused a deadly riot on the other side of the world the previous year is brought back into the story….

If a tree falls in the forest…

We could have a field day analyzing and ridiculing all of this synthetic narrative. Surely you understand the overall point. This whole Koran-burning saga already stands out as a synthetic news story simply by virtue of how much attention is devoted to this insignificant personage, Terry Jones. Unless you happen to be a very famous person reading these lines, I think it is safe to say that if you or I threatened to burn a Koran, it would not be an international news story, we would not receive phone calls from the President or the Pope. No, we would be ignored. In fact, in that video it is mentioned that various people sent Korans to Jones for him to burn. Think about that. The people who send him Korans to burn know perfectly well that if they themselves burn a Koran, it has no transcendence because nobody is paying any attention. So they send the Korans to him to burn. At least that’s what is claimed, that various people sent him Korans to burn, 200 of them…

The other funny thing about the whole story is that the entire media circus that they create around this individual pretty much obliges him to finally burn a Koran or two. After all, a sword swallower must eventually swallow a sword. He cannot just continually announce that he is going to do it, though he may wait until a sufficient crowd has gathered.

So, just as Evel Knievel must eventually do his announced motorcycle stunt, so the Koran-burning pastor must eventually burn a Koran. This man’s entire protracted “fifteen minutes of fame” is based on him burning the Koran, so he eventually does so. When you think about this whole story a bit, something occurs to you: if they really, really did not want this man to burn a Koran, wouldn’t they just stop devoting all this attention to him? If you did not want Evel Knievel to do his motorcycle stunt, you would just turn off the cameras and not film him and, presumably, he wouldn’t bother. The whole point of the stunt is to attract publicity so if you don’t give him the publicity…

Roger Rabbit Redux

In an earlier essay, I coined the term Roger Rabbit Narrative to refer to these kinds of synthetic news stories that have cartoonish elements. This is an allusion to the movie “Who Framed Roger Rabbit” in which human (i.e. real, organic) actors share the screen with cartoons, i.e. synthetic elements. So, an RRN is not a total fiction or a cartoon. Some of the elements in the story are perfectly real.

So, in this particular RRN, Mr. Jones finally burns a Koran, and 12 days later, there is a riot in northern Afghanistan in which a number of people are killed. Now, I have to assume that the riot in Mazar-i-Sharif, Afghanistan really took place. It was, I suppose, an organic event that happened for whatever local reasons and had no more to do with Pastor Jones burning a Koran than with the price of tea in China. However, news sources that so many people treat as reliable, such as the New York Times or Wikipedia, attribute this event to the Koran burning in Florida. In other words, they incorporate a real, organic event into an overall synthetic narrative. So, you see, not all the events in a synthetic story are fake. Not necessarily. However, the explanation for the event is frequently absurd, laughable. Cartoonish really. This happens because the organic event gets subsumed into the framework of the synthetic narrative. This is bound to have various glitches, which I have called RRA‘s, Roger Rabbit Artifacts.

The whole Terry Jones Koran-burning saga dates back six years and I was significantly less aware at that time. I looked at the whole thing again recently, and one of the first things I wondered was whether this Pastor Terry Jones is even a real person. It occurred to me that he might just be an actor playing the role, especially after it dawned on me that “Terry Jones” was also the name of one of the founding members of the Monty Python comedy troupe. That the Koran-burning pastor would have the same name as the director of The Life of Brian struck me as so exquisitely ironic that, initially, I thought this could not be a coincidence. Surely, I thought, this must be some kind of a little knowing wink from the people who created this narrative. Now, I am not so sure. I tend to think that it is a coincidence but, to be honest, I am hardly certain. (If another Koran-burning pastor shows up and his name “just happens to be” John Cleese or Eric Idle, then….)

Finally, what it comes down to is that, even if Pastor Terry Jones is not a completely fictitious personage played by an actor, he might as well be! I have no doubt that he was, somehow or other, recruited to play a role in a sort of Deep State Roger Rabbit production. The Koran-burning pastor doubtless has some cartoonish aspects, but the people most ludicrously caricatured in the story are surely the Muslims who run amok and kill people because they have heard that some insignificant person on the other side of the world is burning a Koran. It is as if one were to claim that Germans in 1945 were upset, not because their country had been bombed into rubble or that foreign armies were occupying their country, but rather, because somebody in Florida had burnt a copy of Mein Kampf! I don’t think that would fly. This led me to conclude that Muslims have, by now, been caricatured far more than even the Nazis have been. And that really is saying something!

So, of course the dominant narrative motif running through the story is just how batshit crazy Muslims supposedly are. Here it is their murderous reaction to the burning of a Koran. In another set of RRN‘s, mostly taking place in Europe, it is their reaction to offensive cartoons, culminating in the Charlie Hebdo false flag of 7/1/2015. The basic idea of the Muslims as being so irrational provides a general cover for all sorts of RRA‘s (Roger Rabbit Artifacts) that are visible. If the behavior of a character in the story is utterly implausible, the explanation is basically: “Waddya expect? We know dem Ay-Rabs are freakin’ crazy, so…” So, for example, in the event in San Bernardino of 12/2/2015, one of the alleged suicide attackers is a young wife with a newborn baby. This narrative is so extremely psychologically implausible that I have speculated that it must have been improvisational in nature. Probably they had planned a different story, but couldn’t use it and this was the best they could come up with under time pressure. In any case, all of these absurd plot lines are rendered plausible in the public’s mind if they can be convinced that Arabs, and Muslims generally, are just completely irrational lunatics. So, one could say that the whole “Dem Ay-Rabs are crazy” meme is sort of a general purpose prefiguration for a whole set of narratives.

All the world is a stage…

My suspicions about Pastor Jones being an actor may seem paranoid to some readers, but then again, once you study more of these synthetic events, you will come to see that such suspicions are actually well founded. You will see that, in many cases, indisputably actors really have been involved. Let us consider the case of Ms. Ginnie Watson, who was, it is claimed, present in the Bataclan Theater in Paris on 11/13/2015 when “Islamist terrorists” came in and murdered 89 people. This young lady is definitely an aspiring actress. Here is her IMDB page. Her acting career has not been terribly distinguished. For example, she had the role of “Bretonne #2″ in a French children’s film based on the popular Astérix comic book character. Consider this pastiche of some of Ms. Watson’s acting career:

Now, I would encourage everybody to watch this video and draw their own conclusions. In my view, it is an extreme understatement to say that Ms. Watson is a poor actress. It goes beyond that. When she was interviewed in the above video, she had supposedly witnessed very many people being brutally murdered only a short time before. I mean to say, it is not that she plays her part poorly; it is more like she does not even understand the role she is supposed to be playing, that of a poor girl who has just witnessed a horrific mass murder and just narrowly escaped herself. She should be completely traumatized, a total nervous wreck. No wonder her acting career never went anywhere.

If this is the first such case you have examined, you might think that Ms. Watson’s performance here is uniquely terrible. That, however, is not the case. These sorts of synthetic events are full of notorious cases of unconvincing crisis acting. In that same event in Paris, there was a girl from Australia, one Emma Parkinson, who supposedly received a bullet or two in the ass, who also gave an amazingly bizarre interview detailing her alleged experience. Just as in the case of Ginnie Watson, being trapped in a concert hall where 89 people were murdered, and herself being shot, did not seem to have much effect on her sunny disposition.

Terrible, unconvincing acting is par for the course. Consider these young people, whose mother was — so they say — gunned down by the racist white boy Dylann Roof about a year ago:

It’s part of the show!

I began this essay by telling a story about a man’s visit to the theater. For the life of him, he cannot figure out what is going on. Why are these “hecklers” allowed to disrupt the show?

In that story, the protagonist is definitely a bit on the slow side. He has to go back to the theater and see the show again to figure out what is going on. Surely most people catch on the first time round. Even so, we can be sure that people will vary quite a bit. Some will figure out that the “hecklers” are part of the show almost instantly, and the rest will take varying amounts of time.

You see, the show I described does break the normal model of how things work. Normally, there is a very clear-cut separation between two groups of people in the theater: the actors who are up there on the stage performing and the spectators who are in the audience watching the performance. Actually, there is a technical term for this in drama critique, the Fourth Wall. In this theater show, when an actor on stage directly responds to a heckler, the “fourth wall” has been breached. To realize fully what is really going on, however, the spectator must realize that this is deliberate, scripted; it’s part of the show! Until one makes that conceptual shift, one cannot really understand what is going on!

And, yes, some people will make that conceptual shift faster than others. Still, it is hard to imagine somebody going back to the theater again and again and simply never figuring it out. Yet, strangely, this is precisely what happens with Deep State theatrical productions. Most people simply never see through the various hoaxes and false narratives they are presented. In the terminology I introduced in an earlier essay, they never have their LPM, their Ludek Pachman moment.

Once you begin to perceive the propaganda matrix and perceive synthetic events and narratives, certain things that were incomprehensible become painfully obvious. For example, are you still wondering why Pastor Terry Jones receives such an inordinate level of attention over his pathetic Koran-burning stunt? Well, broadly speaking, it’s for the same reason that the “hecklers” are never thrown out of the theater in the above story. They are part of the show. If you or I go to that show and start heckling loudly, we likely will be thrown out of the theater, because we’re not part of the show!

Likewise, you or I can burn a stack of Korans and throw in some Talmuds and Bhagavad Gita’s to boot, and, most likely nobody will pay us any attention! We are not part of the show. That’s also why we can march down the street screaming “God hates fags!” at the top of our lungs and we will never receive any of the media attention that the Westboro Baptist Church does.

There are some notorious mosques in Britain that are reputed to be hotbeds of radical Islamism. One such place is the Finsbury Park Mosque in North London. Another is the Al Manaar Mosque in West London. There are in-depth journalistic exposés about this and they always ponder the question of why the imam who is preaching violent Jihad against the West is not shipped back to Saudi Arabia or wherever he came from. Well, surely it’s for the same reason that the “hecklers” aren’t thrown out of the theater. It’s all part of the show!

Exeunt Stage Right

Speaking of being part of the show, it looks like Pastor Terry Jones is no longer part of it. I did a bit of last-minute googling because I was wondering what that guy was up to, whether he was still at the church in Gainesville, whether he was still burning Korans. It turns out that, as of early 2015, Mr. Jones was running a fast-food concession in the food court of a shopping center in Bradenton, which is about 170 miles from the church in Gainesville. Yep, he leveraged his experience burning Korans to become one of the “Fry Guys” making “Gourmet Fries”.

The story was picked up by the Washington Post, which also reported that some Jihadist group had earlier put a 2.2 million dollar reward on Mr. Jones’s head. However, there was no mention of the shopping mall food court having any special security dispositions. (Maybe the reward was in Zimbabwe dollars.) The WP article actually has some fascinating tidbits. For example:

Notoriety has its benefits, he has learned, especially compared with obscurity, which he experienced in late summer when he set fire to hundreds of Korans at a protest rally and was largely ignored.

So, apparently, Jones, as recently as the summer of 2014, did set fire to a bunch of Korans. Hundreds of them. But he was ignored. (Poor fella, reminds me of when I invited everybody over for an orgy but nobody came…. Dontcha just hate that!?) Surprisingly (NOT) the article does not pose the obvious question: how come this person could merely threaten to burn a Koran in 2010 and receive national and international attention, yet four years later, in 2014, he actually does set fire to hundreds of Korans, and nobody bats an eyelid? He is kind of like a one-trick magician whose magic spell ceases to work. He sets fire to the books and thinks that he is going to get more phone calls from the President and the Pope. And then…. nothing happens… Did he just lose his mojo?

They don’t ask this question but I think there is a fairly simple answer: he is no longer part of the show! The Koran-burning schtick was getting old and the man had outlived his usefulness. (The “Muslims are nut-jobs” rhetoric is still going strong, but the “they really hate it when you burn a Koran” sub-plot seems to have given way to the “Muslims really, really hate homos” meme.) Anyway, the WP does not tell us that Pastor Jones is no longer in the show, because that would mean admitting that there is a show! The entire pretense of the mainstream media is that the show does not exist. The show is just a figment of the imagination of silly “conspiracy theorists” like myself.

Another fascinating thing was that the article casually mentions that Terry Jones does not himself eat any of the food items that he sells at “Fry Guys”. No, he himself apparently only eats organic food, does not drink soft drinks, but water and fresh fruit juice, though he does enjoy a glass of nice red wine now and then. This made me immediately wonder: if he does not himself eat the food he is selling at Fry Guys, maybe he also had no particular taste for the Islamophobic nonsense he was “selling” from his church back when he was part of the show. (Hey, I’m selling this shit to make a living, but I don’t eat the shit myself!)

“Show? What show?” The first rule of Fight Club is: You do not talk about Fight Club.

I mentioned above the concept of the Fourth Wall in drama theory, this notion of an invisible wall that separates the actors on stage from the audience. In a conventional, straight-laced dramatic production, the fourth wall always remains intact. Thus, in a John Wayne western, John Wayne never turns to the audience and says sarcastically: “Now, moviegoers, to your great surprise (knowing wink) I’m gonna git on that horse and go chase the bad guys.” Of course not. No matter how cliché-ridden the script is, it is well understood that the actors must not betray any consciousness that the whole thing is pretend. However corny your lines are, you must take your role seriously (or pretend to…) and stay in character — whether you’re the star of the show or have a very small bit part.

The mainstream media coverage of synthetic events follows the same approximate principle. In a live performance, all the performers must stay “in character”. That means that, even if somebody else in the show is screwing up, you still stay in character. For example, I linked above the video of Ms. Ginnie Watson. Ms. Watson is an actress pretending that she just survived a mass shooting. What I declined to mention was that the person interviewing her is also an actor basically; he is an actor pretending to be a journalist. Ginnie is flubbing her lines and giving a very poor performance. The interviewer does not call her out. He simply continues in his allotted role.

You see, anybody who is part of this mainstream media world, or aspires to be part of it, absolutely must maintain the pretense that these synthetic events are real. To admit that the people in the above-linked videos are just actors is essentially tantamount to admitting that these events are synthetic. A real, organic event does not have crisis actors on the scene.

Guarding the Gates

In a previous essay, I coined the term Taboo Induced Tortuous Thinking, or TITT for short. Taboo Induced Tortuous Thinking leads to Taboo Induced Tortuous Theories, i.e. TITTs, which are far-fetched explanations of events that are necessary because the correct explanation is taboo. The biggest overarching taboo in the mainstream media propagada matrix is that the propaganda matrix even exists. This is basically equivalent, in the terminology of this essay, to claiming that all events reported in the media are organic. Synthetic events do not exist. And that is largely what the whole weaponized “conspiracy theory” construct is about.

I referred to the “blowback theory of terrorism” as a TITT. The overall purpose of this TITT is to maintain the pretense that a series of synthetic events, such as 9/11 or 7/7 in London or the more recent things in Paris and Brussels, are real, organic events. Hey, they must be, since synthetic events, except in the minds of crazed “conspiracy theorists”, do not exist, right? Now, if you want to claim that something does not exist when it does, what you have to do is ignore, suppress, or somehow explain away all the evidence that this phenomenon really does exist. I wrote extensively about this, in the section which goes over a lot of the tactics they use — TMT‘s, TITT Monger Tactics.

The people whom I have called TITT mongers are more typically referred to, in the Truth community, as “controlled opposition” or “intellectual gatekeepers”. The term “gatekeeper” actually contains an interesting metaphor. Now, starting with first principles, somebody who guards a gate is there to keep you from going somewhere, right? In this case, they are very intent on preventing you from, as I put it earlier, escaping the Roger Rabbit Mental World.

Now, any metaphor or analogy is always imperfect. Still, even a very flawed analogy can be useful, because analyzing its flaws can be illuminating in itself. So let’s see…

If you really are in a prison and there is a front gate with one or more armed guards, you know you are in the prison and you know that you cannot leave — like, on account of the pesky little problem that the guards have guns and you don’t…. that kind of thing… In short, unlike the intellectual gatekeeper, these guys will prevent you from leaving the prison by physical force.

But also, the goals of the regular prison gatekeeper and the intellectual gatekeeper differ. Yes, both kinds of “gatekeeper” want to prevent you from leaving the prison. However, the intellectual gatekeeper has an additional goal: he wants you to believe that you are not imprisoned!

Or, in other words, he must, unlike an actual prison guard, maintain the pretense that the prison is not a prison. You know, I think this is more than a slight detail. It’s a very important difference here, where the analogy breaks down.

Finally, I was thinking about a different metaphor. Suppose you book a trip to an all-inclusive resort in some exotic foreign country, a Club Med sort of deal.

It’s a beautiful place with its own private beach, restaurants, bars, and all sorts of sports and recreational activities. Nonetheless, after a few days there, you are getting pretty bored. It’s starting to feel like a gilded cage. You think you will go out and experience the real country a bit. So you think you are going to go outside the resort complex and explore a bit. When you are about to go out the front gate, somebody engages you in conversation. They ask you what you want, what you need… It turns out that the whole point of the conversation is to tell you that you have everything you could conceivably want within the resort complex and have no reason to wander outside the gate. The person is also likely to tell you that there is nothing of any interest to see outside the resort anyway. Also, the world outside the resort is dangerous and crime-ridden. You suspect that he is exaggerating quite a bit, though you don’t know for absolutely sure.

It strikes me that this is much more like the intellectual gatekeeper than the prison guard. For starters, though they want you to stay in the complex, you actually are free to leave the place whenever you want. They have no legal means to stop you. There are really basically two ways they can get you to stay:

  1. They convince you that you have everything you need within the complex and there is no conceivable reason to leave.
  2. They convince you that something terrible will happen to you if you do leave. Only a silly, foolhardy person would ever want to walk outside the gate. In that vein, they work on you psychologically, insinuating that your interest in exploring the world outside the resort means there is something wrong with you.

As regards point 1, the intellectual gatekeepers must try to convince you that all the intellectual inquiry, debate, and critique that you need, or that is needed, is within the gates that they are “guarding”. Outside of that is just “crazy conspiracy theories”. And, yes, there is what seems to be an anti-Establishment discourse. Some of these gatekeepers mount a fierce critique of U.S. foreign policy, for example. However, what you should notice, eventually, is that the critique has very well defined limits. For example, you can question the entire “War on Terror” narrative, but you cannot question the synthetic events that make up the narrative! In fact, it is presumed that synthetic events do not exist. Things like 9/11 and 7/7 are organic events, and thus, the reporting on the events themselves is assumed to be broadly honest. This is ultimately quite self-defeating: how can you really oppose these synthetic narratives while assuming that their version of all these synthetic events is truthful?!

As for point 2 above, there is an acronym (not of my invention!) for this. FUD. Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt… You know, it’s a kind of emotional manipulation, where they try to create a sort of mental fog. For example, if you conclude that Ms. Ginnie Watson (speaking of TITTs…) is a false witness, it must be because you are a terrible, unfeeling person. This kind of thing. Well, the hell with that. Are you really going to let a bunch of neocon warmongers tell you that you are an unfeeling person?

Anyway, as I said, all metaphors are imperfect. I prefer this one, the Club Med gilded cage, because, unlike an actual prison, it is perfectly clear that you can walk out whenever you want to. So I say to you: just do it. Walk out the gate. There is a world out there to explore.

Oh, and I might add, though it is entirely optional… if you run into any “gatekeepers” on your way out, tell them to go f*** themselves!

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

 
Hide 214 CommentsLeave a Comment
214 Comments to "The Show Must Go On"
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    You’ve got a cloying writing style which lives up to your name: It elicits revulsion.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tom Welsh
    As an experienced professional editor and writer, I would like to say that I find Jonathan Revusky's writing clear, easy to read and attractive. While I have no idea what a "cloying writing style" would be, I have a sneaking suspicion that the anonymous commenter disagrees with the article's content rather than its form.
    , @CK
    I do not find his work too filling, too rich, too sweet.
    It does stick in the mind and cause some re-evaluation of the presented simulacrums of reality that we are fed and that are quite cloying.
    , @Jacques Sheete
    "Cloying?"
    , @AKAHorace
    I disagreed with almost everything that Ravusky said. But I rather liked his writing style.

    The distinction between synthetic and organic events is really useful. But I think that Ravusky has had this useful insight and then gone to town with it.

    The stuff about the Bataclan killing was offensive but well written. I don't think that you can predict someones reaction soon after going through an experience like that. Under stress you can tell slightly different versions of the same memory. So picking over the details as he did seemed ghoulish.

    I like going to a site where I can read intelligently written material that I disagree with.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    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
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /article/the-show-must-go-on/#comment-1468899
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. CanSpeccy says: • Website

    Brilliant.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  3. Why would you read it if you disliked it so much? Why then bother to comment on it? Funny that!

    I really enjoyed it, this and JR’s previous articles. I like that there’s a continuing thread through them all wound with logical reasoning towards probabilities and impossibilities . I’ve found them to be creative, informative and thought provoking but who cares what you or I think anyway?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  4. edNels [AKA "geoshmoe"] says:

    good points you make Ravuski,

    One thing I have noticed in the news industry, is that they always change the story just a little bit… no matter. I guess you might think of it as writer’s liscence… but it is in the deal, that we must always put something that makes the story our own… which means you must bend the truth a little bit… change a couple of details… I have witnessed an event and seen the way the report in the paper would always do this.

    If you everwanted to be a writer f0r any publication… this would be #1 that you need to cultivate in your approach… to learn how to lie or wtf.. to make interesting.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  5. Rehmat says:

    Same old anti-Islam shit – but in a new whisky bottle.

    The Israeli Hasbara member Washington Post is not expected to talk about Judeo-Christian crusade against Muslims but paint Israel’s ally pastor terry Jones as a victim of jihadists created by CIA, Mossad and MI6.

    Pastor Terry Jones made the ‘top ten Islamophobe’ list of the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), whose co-founder was Joe Levin (born 1943), a Zionist Jew. The others mentioned in the list included Bill French, Brigitte Gabriel, P. David Gaubatz (a Zionist Jew), Pamella Geller (born to Jewish parents, Reuben and Lillian Geller), David Horowitz (a Zionist Jew), John Joeph Jay, Debbie Schlussel (Polish Jewish descent), Robert Spencer and David Yerushalmi, a Supremacist Zionist Jew.

    And let’s not forgett, the good pastor prophesized death of Barack Obama by 2012 – but strangely the ‘First US Jewish President’ is still alive and killing more Muslims for Israel.

    https://rehmat1.com/2012/07/14/pastor-jones-obama-dead-in-2012/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  6. grmbl says:

    As a frequent commenter on unz.com, Revusky is a tireless, obsessive holocaust denier. Yet as a columnist, he skirts around the topic. (Though I admit that I don’t read his columns all the way through so may have missed some things). Why is that? A couple of possible explanations:

    – He is trying to build up credibility by developing initially somewhat plausible narratives. Subsequently he moves on to ever more far-fetched scenarios. If readers stay with him up to that point, he will eventually feel confident to spring his “holohoax” agenda.

    .– Ron Unz himself has told Revusky to keep holocaust denial out of his columns, as a condition of letting him publish. I consider that unlikely as Unz does not strike me as someone with a well-developed sense of shame or decency.

    Read More
    • Replies: @pink_point
    It'd be hard to make anyone believe your comment isn't intended to raise agreement to the article's author's whole theory.

    And yes, I agree, he is obsessed with free-thinking and truth-seeking.

    Does he "he skirts around the topic"? Not at all. Once readers realize what he says, they'll learn to question all mainstream-dictated "truths", and that will naturally included the full mythical set of 20th century "history", World War II's holocaust as it has been told included, as it's the centerpiece of the myth.

    It's about being serious theorists, not skirting around anything. Single cases follow from theory; theory is what the main focus must be on.

    I believe your comment is aimed at proving how right Revusky is, and that's a really subtle to do that, by the way.

    Or why else would someone making the claims you make come to the Unz Review, view this article's page, and care to comment? Anything but the explanation I give would sound openly inconstistent — just like the myths imparted by official history and mainstream "information" organs.
    I guess many of the readers here will catch the real purpose of that comment.

    , @SolontoCroesus

    It is as if one were to claim that Germans in 1945 were upset, not because their country had been bombed into rubble or that foreign armies were occupying their country, but rather, because somebody in Florida had burnt a copy of Mein Kampf! I don’t think that would fly. This led me to conclude that Muslims have, by now, been caricatured far more than even the Nazis have been. And that really is saying something!
     
    How sly that Revusky cat is: openly and with logic aforethought, flinging about irrefutable realities to trace a parallel between irrational, propagandistic demonization of Muslims in the present day and irrational, propaganda-driven demonization of Germans in the era of the great Jewish Exodus and Reconquista of the land of the Canaanites.
    , @Rehmat
    What's Holocaust denial?

    Have not Holocaust stories from holy Anne Frank diary to latest Joseph Hirt proved that the Zionist narrative of SIX MILLION DIED is based on lies. But that doesn't mean that European Jews were not persecuted by Catholic/Frankist Jewish Nazis during WWII.

    https://rehmat1.com/2016/06/12/joseph-hirt-the-latest-holocaust-imposter/
    , @Wally
    Debunking the impossible & laughable '6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers' is a piece of cake.
    Of course the usual enemies of free speech do not like it one bit. That's why free speech about the 'holocau$t' storyline is banned in so many counties.

    "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 / Revisionist Jew, son of famous violinist
     

    see the 'holocau$t' scam debunked here:
    www.codoh.com
    No name calling, level playing field debate here:
    http://forum.codoh.com

    We're talking about an alleged '6M Jews & 5M others' ... 11,000,000
    But note that there is not a single verifiable excavated mass grave that can actually be SHOWN, not just claimed, (recall the claim of 900,000 buried at Treblinka) even though Jews claim to know exactly where these allegedly enormous mass graves are.

     

    The massive numbers of so called "eyewitne$$es" are living testimony to fraudulence of the impossible '6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers'.

    The 'holocaust' storyline is one of the most easily debunked narratives ever contrived. That is why those who question it are arrested and persecuted. That is why violent, racist, & privileged Jewish supremacists demand censorship. What sort of truth is it that denies free speech and the freedom to seek the truth? Truth needs no protection from scrutiny.
     
    , @Clyde
    Ruvusky considers himself to be an expert in:
    Shoah business
    False flag operations
    Habara operations
    The above three are what he pumps out five thousand word essays on.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. Tom Welsh says:
    @anonymous
    You've got a cloying writing style which lives up to your name: It elicits revulsion.

    As an experienced professional editor and writer, I would like to say that I find Jonathan Revusky’s writing clear, easy to read and attractive. While I have no idea what a “cloying writing style” would be, I have a sneaking suspicion that the anonymous commenter disagrees with the article’s content rather than its form.

    Read More
    • Agree: tbraton
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. Mark Green says: • Website

    This was a brilliant and entertaining article. I was smiling the whole way through. Revusky really nails it on a range of levels. He delightfully unmasks the sometimes laughable artificiality of network news. Indeed, the ABC news segment about the knucklehead pastor was priceless. But it was the A-list journalists who inadvertently stole the show.

    How these media darlings could deliver a yarn about the dangerous repercussions of some hillbilly preacher threatening to burn Korans when US forces had already destroyed most of Iraq and much of Afghanistan is utterly beyond belief. (What about those wars of ours?) But there is was. Oh the magic of television! Synthetic theater in exquisite form. It was both hilarious and a total outrage.

    I’m not convinced that these infamous terror events are actually staged, but Revusky does effectively plant many seeds of doubt. Smartly executed.

    Thank you, Mr. Revusky, for a very clever and insightful exploration of the gate-less prison that surrounds us all.

    Read More
    • Replies: @helena
    "How these media darlings could deliver a yarn about the dangerous repercussions of some hillbilly preacher "

    Likewise
    - racist graffiti vs thousands of teenagers raped
    - Remain in EU because it has brought peace in Europe vs exterminating Arabs

    "gate-less prison"

    a narrative so strong that the youth of Europe are petrified of being ostracised from 'the (consensus) group' i.e. socially outcast.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. Che Guava says:

    Enjoyed reading this and the last one, although I already had a similar view.

    Personally liked the look of Cool World more than Roger Rabbit, so I’ve never seen the latter in full. RR was a copy of the concept. The bits I have seen are too annoying. RR itself was what you describe as synthetic news, viewing it was near-compulsory in my milieu at the time.

    In my opinion, The Kindness of Muslims phenomenon was an even better example than Terry Jones, the Koran incendiary.

    Here we have multiple layers of synthetic and organic.

    Synthetic
    Mass Islamic riots over the film.

    The director was a heinous person for pretending to be backed by Jews and implying that he was Jewish.

    Does it really exist as a completed work?
    I think it does, I’d love to see it, the excerpts I’ve seen are hilarious and masterfully B-grade.

    Organic
    The film was used as an excuse for the attack on the ‘consulate’ at Benghazi, where, under under the auspices of Hillary Clinton, the CIA was coordinating the export of weapons stolen from Libyan arsenals to very unsavoury groups in Syria and Iraq.

    Clinton (Hillary) swore to make trouble for the director, and violated his freedom of expression by having him jailed for making the film, although the charges avoided directly stating that, her statements at the time make it obvious.

    The director, as a Coptic Christian, likely had experiences similar to those depicted as happening in modern Egypt at the start of the film.

    I know there’s more, but will stop here.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Che Guava
    Replying to myself for correction. As far as I know, there is no refutation of the idea that the director of The Kindness of Muslims did have Jewish backing. B movie, but it looks like a good one.

    If so, that falls under a combination of synthetic and organic truth, he certainly did not have the means to make the film on his own money, B-grade excellence still requires cash.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. Rurik says: • Website

    another home run JR!

    your attempts to drag people ‘kicking and screaming’ from their lazy acquiescence to the lies and hysterical cartoon matrix that we’re all marinating in is down near heroic.

    And there’s bound to be a lot of hostility to you, for doing the job so well, from other’s who’re clearly envious of your insights.

    the stuff about the Florida preacher is priceless. :)

    You’re doing a great job of trying to point out to all these people that there’s a whole world out there of truth and reality behind the Roger Rabbit, Wizard of Oz matrix- all controlled by the man behind the curtain, pulling all those levers and twisting those dials. But like the man in the video above, many of them would prefer to cling to the comfort and familiarity of the synthetic reality. As the bombs drop and the Orwellian police state increasingly tightens its grip around our throats and our minds.

    Plato said that anyone who tried to tell the occupants of his cave, that the shadows on the wall were not reality, that they’d tried to kill them. Preferring to cling to the shadows, than face reality, even one as beautiful and liberating as the one outside the cave. I’ve known people like that. Many, many HIQI, who prefer the comfort and succor of assorted TITTs, to truths that are harsh, and often unpalatable.

    There is not a truth existing which I fear… or would wish unknown to the whole world.

    ~ Thomas Jefferson

    I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.

    ibid

    kudos JR

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  11. This article could have been boiled down to three or four paragraphs. And when you need to read half the article, which is already way too long, just to get to the main points, something is wrong. F.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Che Guava
    You shouldn't be so ADHD about reading. Ever considered dumping the Ritalin or reading a book?
    , @pink_point
    You wouldn't expect anything less of someone who doesn't understand the intransitivity of "to boil down to".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. alexander says:

    It strikes me ,Jonathan,

    That your article seems to belabor that which we already know….

    which is, quite simply, that we live in “The Age of Fraud.”

    Massive, systemic, heaving…. Fraud.

    I , for one , am tired of it.

    I am so tired of these Neocon warmongering “elites” and their pernicious addiction to fraud, war, terror and violence……all their bogus narratives…all their staged events……all the trillions they have pilfered from us in the process……all the suffering they have caused…

    How awful are they…… Really ?

    How pathetic ,too ?

    I wonder if they ever dream of doing something “real”, with their wealth,….something good…. as opposed to all their banal “concocting” for “perpetual war”?

    They seem so woefully addicted to their “Fraud Power”, (and so addicted to war) even today, when nearly everyone sees right through it.

    I wonder if they take “pride” in it? Maybe they do? I wonder if somewhere there was “backslapping” and “high five-ing” for the Underpants Bomber..or San Bernadino..or Pastor Terry…or Paris….or whatever else.?..

    Maybe they get off on it ?

    Maybe they don’t know what else to do ?

    Maybe it is , quite tragically, all they are capable of ?….Who knows ?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  13. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    When the Benghazi affair exploded government officials informed the public that it was due to some obscure YouTube movie which had enraged some Libyans into forming a riotous mob. I’d never heard of it and wondered how it became known to those Libyans. I went and watched it out of curiosity and was even more puzzled. This was a very low budget production with no commercial prospects so what was the point of even producing this unknown movie? Later on it emerged that it wasn’t just a spontaneous riot but rather an armed attack. The origins of the movie were suspicious and appears to have been the product of some government agency although it’s not entirely clear which government it was. How many more of such productions are being secretly produced to be unveiled, or not, at some other point? More, much more, was going on at Benghazi that they tried to cover up.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Che Guava
    For a lover of B movies, it was quite wonderful. What is on U-tub is an advert. It is in turns serious and then great.

    If the full feature film never existed, the complaints of cast members post Hillary's interventions (in Libya and on the film) don't make sense at all.

    I doubt that the feature-length movie never existed, there are records of screenings in theatres and halls.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. CK says:
    @anonymous
    You've got a cloying writing style which lives up to your name: It elicits revulsion.

    I do not find his work too filling, too rich, too sweet.
    It does stick in the mind and cause some re-evaluation of the presented simulacrums of reality that we are fed and that are quite cloying.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. Che Guava says:
    @Che Guava
    Enjoyed reading this and the last one, although I already had a similar view.

    Personally liked the look of Cool World more than Roger Rabbit, so I've never seen the latter in full. RR was a copy of the concept. The bits I have seen are too annoying. RR itself was what you describe as synthetic news, viewing it was near-compulsory in my milieu at the time.

    In my opinion, The Kindness of Muslims phenomenon was an even better example than Terry Jones, the Koran incendiary.

    Here we have multiple layers of synthetic and organic.

    Synthetic
    Mass Islamic riots over the film.

    The director was a heinous person for pretending to be backed by Jews and implying that he was Jewish.

    Does it really exist as a completed work?
    I think it does, I'd love to see it, the excerpts I've seen are hilarious and masterfully B-grade.

    Organic
    The film was used as an excuse for the attack on the 'consulate' at Benghazi, where, under under the auspices of Hillary Clinton, the CIA was coordinating the export of weapons stolen from Libyan arsenals to very unsavoury groups in Syria and Iraq.

    Clinton (Hillary) swore to make trouble for the director, and violated his freedom of expression by having him jailed for making the film, although the charges avoided directly stating that, her statements at the time make it obvious.

    The director, as a Coptic Christian, likely had experiences similar to those depicted as happening in modern Egypt at the start of the film.

    I know there's more, but will stop here.

    Replying to myself for correction. As far as I know, there is no refutation of the idea that the director of The Kindness of Muslims did have Jewish backing. B movie, but it looks like a good one.

    If so, that falls under a combination of synthetic and organic truth, he certainly did not have the means to make the film on his own money, B-grade excellence still requires cash.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Che Guava
    Stupid me, I forgot that the title was Innocence of Muslims, at least it came from memory and not a 'net search. If there really is a feature-length version, does anyone know where to find it?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. Che Guava says:
    @Epaminondas
    This article could have been boiled down to three or four paragraphs. And when you need to read half the article, which is already way too long, just to get to the main points, something is wrong. F.

    You shouldn’t be so ADHD about reading. Ever considered dumping the Ritalin or reading a book?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. Durruti says:

    Yes, Jonathan Revuski,

    The Zionist American Imperialist Show must go on!!!

    In America, we have the 2016 Election Circus Show.

    In this ongoing show, Two Zionist owned political gangs pretend to have fundamentally opposed politics. They engage in electoral Primaries that conclude with a November General election.

    As of this moment, we have Killery Clinton versus Casino Owner Trump. Democrat gangers support a Genocidal War Criminal Zionist agent, with a long record of committing bloody crimes Against humanity, and Republic gangers support a Casino Owner, who wishes to to commit (or at least Front For), the same crimes if he is allowed to obtain the puppet government position of Presidency.

    Those who advocate an alternate – moral – political code, are transformed into non-persons, (if they are lucky), by the simple expedient in a large nation of 320 million souls, of being denied mainstream media coverage. The unlucky ones, (those occupying political positions of power), are suffer a more immediate fate, they are assassinated.

    The Cure to the Disease:

    Telling the Gatekeepers ” to go f*** themselves!” is a step in the correct direction, but, not the solution to the illness.

    In America, we must restore our Democratic Republic, the Republic that was assassinated, along with our last Constitutional President, (and constitutional government), on November 22, 1963.
    We have been without a Republic for half a century.

    It is time we begin to Restore our Republic, and avenge the murder of John and Robert Kennedy, ML King, Malcolm X, Fred Hampton, John Lennon, 2 million Vietnamese, a million Indonesians-1965, 100,000 Guatemalans, and millions more around the world, including in the Middle East.

    The Pink Elephant that is ignored on this and all other websites, and media. The state of our State. Our 1984. Our Unspeakable \Horror that we fear to face.

    We most need to discuss the Restoration of the Republic!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik

    In America, we must restore our Democratic Republic, the Republic that was assassinated, along with our last Constitutional President, (and constitutional government), on November 22, 1963.
    We have been without a Republic for half a century.
     
    actually it started sooner, back on Dec, 23, 1913

    that is the infamous date when our Republic was sold out, fee simple, to a cabal of International Banksters and thieves, (the Fiend)

    the reason JFK was assassinated, was because with Executive Order 11110, he tried to restore the Republic, and was murdered by the Fiend for his temerity

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_11110

    ever since 1913 the US has been engaged in wars all over the planet, and increasingly turning Americans into little more than debt slaves to the Federal Reserve banksters. (a cabal of private bankers and Jewish supremacists who control and have the power to create [out of thin air] and issue and loan out a trillion or ten of the world's reserve currency on a whim, and buy any politician or media that gets in their way and turn them into their agents)

    the Fed is the root of our slavery

    it is the fount of the Eternal WarsⓊ and the all seeing eye of global human misery
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. @anonymous
    You've got a cloying writing style which lives up to your name: It elicits revulsion.

    “Cloying?”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. Che Guava says:
    @Che Guava
    Replying to myself for correction. As far as I know, there is no refutation of the idea that the director of The Kindness of Muslims did have Jewish backing. B movie, but it looks like a good one.

    If so, that falls under a combination of synthetic and organic truth, he certainly did not have the means to make the film on his own money, B-grade excellence still requires cash.

    Stupid me, I forgot that the title was Innocence of Muslims, at least it came from memory and not a ‘net search. If there really is a feature-length version, does anyone know where to find it?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. Rurik says:

    The origins of the movie were suspicious and appears to have been the product of some government agency although it’s not entirely clear which government it was. How many more of such productions are being secretly produced to be unveiled, or not, at some other point?

    the lines between the CIA and ‘news and entertainment’ seem almost to be nonexistent once you start to delve down the rabbit hole

    the most significant thing for me personally vis-a-vis that Benghazi anti-Islamic movie was that at first, I remember considering the accounts of that movie having pushed some Muslims over the edge as having merit.

    Perhaps that is one of Mr. Revusky’s more important insights and messages, is that we should always expect them to turn all news, (even organic events) into a cartoon version to suit their agenda(s).

    Not just the ones that they are synthetically constructed from the beginning to the end, like 911 or Sandy Hook. Like Mark Green, I too suspect that some (one?) of the terrorist and/or lone nut events are possibly real. But what we can all be absolutely certain beyond any doubt whatsoever about – is that they’re going to lie about it. And spin it. And lie some more. That much is 100% certain.

    So the next time I hear them (from virtually every single Newspeak media outlet in the West) talking about how the Muslims did this or some rightwing bigot shot some African American church ladies, or someone made an obscure movie (that nobody even ever saw), but it caused a terrorist attack that changed the course of history… well now, I’m not going to be so gullible next time.

    And that I suspect is one of Mr. Revusky’s main points. We’re far too gullible when it comes to the Western media.

    One of my favorite examples of just how ubiquitous is the Oligarch’s fetid hand when it comes to the uniform corruption of our Western world, was the video of the “dueling puppets’ during the debate to wage war on Iran for its WMD.

    the decision to wage war against a country, (especially one that is not threatening or harming anyone and is in total compliance with virtually every demand that has been placed upon it and has not harmed one hair on one head of the people who’re demanding that it comply, when it has already complied) is a very significant decision, perhaps the most grave and significant that there is. And yet, this decision, that should be wrestled with under the most severe considerations of every nation and every people, is all being decided at a level completely above all the nation’s leaders and people’s who’re expected to fight this war.

    You can’t get much more synthetic than that. And yet, people still watch the news and expect to be shown the truth.

    keep it up JR, keep hamming the realization into people that we’re all marinating in a matrix of lies and an agenda driven hate fest of the Jewish supremacist id.

    End the Fed!

    Read More
    • Agree: Kiza
    • Replies: @Qasim
    Hi Rurik.

    Like you, these articles by Mr. Revusky have given me a lot to think about. I am not sure to what extent I agree with his overall framework, but his overall point that the media is not to be blindly trusted in its presentation of events seems undeniable.

    You seem to agree with him on his views on 9/11, etc. And you note that these events are used to push a neo-con agenda you find repugnant.

    But while you show your sympathies to Muslims when it comes to foreign policy, you have made it clear how much you despise continued Muslim immigration into the West. (I don't have a problem with this by the way, I also think all immigration should be stopped because I fear Balkanization and the resurgence of white nationalism.) Anyway, you routinely bring up Rotterham and Cologne and similar events to show how 'dusky hordes" are coming to defile white women. I think it was you who posted that cartoon yesterday where some bin-Laden looking dudes are raping a white woman on the altar of multiculturalism.

    My question is "Do we know that these events are completely true either?' I mean, I have always assumed they were, but I assumed the same about 9/11 and San Bernardino until relatively recently as well. Perhaps the lurid reports of European women being unable to even walk the streets without being sexually assaulted by lascivious Arabs/Muslims are highly exaggerated/ synthetic as well??? They certainly don't seem congruous with my own experiences, but I live in the US, and maybe things are different in Europe.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. @Epaminondas
    This article could have been boiled down to three or four paragraphs. And when you need to read half the article, which is already way too long, just to get to the main points, something is wrong. F.

    You wouldn’t expect anything less of someone who doesn’t understand the intransitivity of “to boil down to”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. Rurik says:
    @Durruti
    Yes, Jonathan Revuski,

    The Zionist American Imperialist Show must go on!!!

    In America, we have the 2016 Election Circus Show.

    In this ongoing show, Two Zionist owned political gangs pretend to have fundamentally opposed politics. They engage in electoral Primaries that conclude with a November General election.

    As of this moment, we have Killery Clinton versus Casino Owner Trump. Democrat gangers support a Genocidal War Criminal Zionist agent, with a long record of committing bloody crimes Against humanity, and Republic gangers support a Casino Owner, who wishes to to commit (or at least Front For), the same crimes if he is allowed to obtain the puppet government position of Presidency.

    Those who advocate an alternate - moral - political code, are transformed into non-persons, (if they are lucky), by the simple expedient in a large nation of 320 million souls, of being denied mainstream media coverage. The unlucky ones, (those occupying political positions of power), are suffer a more immediate fate, they are assassinated.

    The Cure to the Disease:

    Telling the Gatekeepers " to go f*** themselves!" is a step in the correct direction, but, not the solution to the illness.

    In America, we must restore our Democratic Republic, the Republic that was assassinated, along with our last Constitutional President, (and constitutional government), on November 22, 1963.
    We have been without a Republic for half a century.

    It is time we begin to Restore our Republic, and avenge the murder of John and Robert Kennedy, ML King, Malcolm X, Fred Hampton, John Lennon, 2 million Vietnamese, a million Indonesians-1965, 100,000 Guatemalans, and millions more around the world, including in the Middle East.

    The Pink Elephant that is ignored on this and all other websites, and media. The state of our State. Our 1984. Our Unspeakable \Horror that we fear to face.

    We most need to discuss the Restoration of the Republic!

    In America, we must restore our Democratic Republic, the Republic that was assassinated, along with our last Constitutional President, (and constitutional government), on November 22, 1963.
    We have been without a Republic for half a century.

    actually it started sooner, back on Dec, 23, 1913

    that is the infamous date when our Republic was sold out, fee simple, to a cabal of International Banksters and thieves, (the Fiend)

    the reason JFK was assassinated, was because with Executive Order 11110, he tried to restore the Republic, and was murdered by the Fiend for his temerity

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_11110

    ever since 1913 the US has been engaged in wars all over the planet, and increasingly turning Americans into little more than debt slaves to the Federal Reserve banksters. (a cabal of private bankers and Jewish supremacists who control and have the power to create [out of thin air] and issue and loan out a trillion or ten of the world’s reserve currency on a whim, and buy any politician or media that gets in their way and turn them into their agents)

    the Fed is the root of our slavery

    it is the fount of the Eternal WarsⓊ and the all seeing eye of global human misery

    Read More
    • Replies: @Durruti
    Rurik,

    Thanks for your comments.

    There is a Clear Difference, a Clear Dividing Line between an American Republic (weak and shaky as it was by 1963), and post Republic America, working for Foreign Zionist Oligarchs, and drowning the world in blood.

    The Republic was dealt a mortal blow in 1913, (some imply the date for the destruction, or mortal injury, of our Republic was on the death of President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1945, toward the end of World War II).

    The essential strength of the American Republic (albeit a seriously weakened Republic), continued until, and allowed for the election of John F. Kennedy as America's last Constitutional President.

    A few of Kennedy's struggles:

    JF Kennedy refused to further aid the Terrorist attack against Cuba at Playa Giron. He refused a request from the CIA to conduct airstrikes against the Cuban Government, as the 1600-2000 'Freedom Fighter' CIA Terrorists were stuck on the beach, and close to surrender.
    Pay attention here. Kennedy pointed out that airstrikes against another country which the nation was not at war with was - unconstitutional. Does that remind anyone of more recent (unconstitutional terrorist airstrikes)?

    While John F. Kennedy lived and continued as the President, America was a Functional Republic. President JF Kennedy FIRED Allen Dulles, the head of the CIA, and trusted only his brother, Robert Kennedy, to lead the vital office of Attorney General. Kennedy confronted illegal unconstitutional powers who were operating within the American Government, and those who were operating within the American Nation.

    Kennedy zealously guarded our nation's Sovereignty, and for 1000 days he lead an enlightened and courageous, and competent Administration. He proposed and supported vast improvements in America's politics and intra human relations. Kennedy never spoke poorly of any ethnic or national group; he maintained, until the end a stiff upper lip and sharp biting humor. He was respected, internationally, and saved the world from a Nuclear Holocaust.

    J F Kennedy was a War Hero who could not be controlled by the Military Financial Complex.

    John Kennedy, the Naval Hero who saved his Ship's Crew during WW II, went down with his ship in 1963. He fought to save the Republic, against all odds. It was his brother Robert Kennedy, who attempted to restore the Republic and Constitutional Government. On June 6, 1968, Robert Kennedy joined his first 2 brothers, in Heaven.

    Recalling another Democratic Republic:

    In 1936, Buenaventura Durruti led his Spanish Anarchists to support the democratically elected Spanish Republic. He died in the early battles in Madrid, where he commanded a Brigade of 1300 Anarchist Partisans who had traveled from Catalonia (at the request of the Spanish Republic), to save their capital.

    Kennedy, as with Durruti, fought on the same side of the barricades. They suffered the same fate, as their Republics. They defended their Republics to the end.

    Hold their banners high!

    Peter J. Antonsen
    , @L.K
    Rurik:
    "the Fed is the root of our slavery, it is the fount of the Eternal Wars and the all seeing eye of global human misery".


    Amen to that but I have the feeling Sam shama(ful) would absolutely disagree with you! wink.

    “The new law will create inflation whenever the trusts want inflation. From now on depressions will be scientifically created.” (Congressman Charles A. Lindbergh, after the passage of the Federal Reserve act 1913.

    “The financial system has been turned over to the Federal Reserve Board. That Board administers the finance system by authority of a purely profiteering group. The system is Private, conducted for the sole purpose of obtaining the greatest possible profits from the use of other people’s money”
    -Charles A. Lindbergh Sr., 1923
     
    Congressman Louis Thomas McFadden, who served as Chairman of the Banking and Currency Committee for more than 10 years, stated, during the 1930s:

    "Mr. Chairman, we have in this Country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Banks, hereinafter called the Fed. The Fed has cheated the Government of these United States and the people of the United States out of enough money to pay the Nation's debt. The depredations and iniquities of the Fed has cost enough money to pay the National debt several times over.
    ...
    Some people who think that the Federal Reserve Banks United States Government institutions. They are private monopolies which prey upon the people of these United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers; foreign and domestic speculators and swindlers; and rich and predatory money lender. In that dark crew of financial pirates there are those who would cut a man's throat to get a dollar out of his pocket; there are those who send money into states to buy votes to control our legislatures; there are those who maintain International propaganda for the purpose of deceiving us into granting of new concessions which will permit them to cover up their past misdeeds and set again in motion their gigantic train of crime."
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. Che Guava says:
    @Anonymous
    When the Benghazi affair exploded government officials informed the public that it was due to some obscure YouTube movie which had enraged some Libyans into forming a riotous mob. I'd never heard of it and wondered how it became known to those Libyans. I went and watched it out of curiosity and was even more puzzled. This was a very low budget production with no commercial prospects so what was the point of even producing this unknown movie? Later on it emerged that it wasn't just a spontaneous riot but rather an armed attack. The origins of the movie were suspicious and appears to have been the product of some government agency although it's not entirely clear which government it was. How many more of such productions are being secretly produced to be unveiled, or not, at some other point? More, much more, was going on at Benghazi that they tried to cover up.

    For a lover of B movies, it was quite wonderful. What is on U-tub is an advert. It is in turns serious and then great.

    If the full feature film never existed, the complaints of cast members post Hillary’s interventions (in Libya and on the film) don’t make sense at all.

    I doubt that the feature-length movie never existed, there are records of screenings in theatres and halls.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. Finally, I was thinking about a different metaphor. Suppose you book a trip to an all-inclusive resort in some exotic foreign country, a Club Med sort of deal.

    It’s a beautiful place with its own private beach, restaurants, bars, and all sorts of sports and recreational activities. Nonetheless, after a few days there, you are getting pretty bored. It’s starting to feel like a gilded cage. You think you will go out and experience the real country a bit. So you think you are going to go outside the resort complex and explore a bit. When you are about to go out the front gate, somebody engages you in conversation. They ask you what you want, what you need… It turns out that the whole point of the conversation is to tell you that you have everything you could conceivably want within the resort complex and have no reason to wander outside the gate.

    One essential fact underlying this scenario, which is also the key to liberation from the propaganda matrix, is that people pay to go the the resort.

    Media brings the ‘resort’ into living rooms via tee vee; specifically, cable tv. For which the American people pay and pay and pay. It is so boring that they for whom 150 channels are not enough pay a premium to buy even more boring channels.

    People who profess to struggle to find a job, buy food, pay the rent, nevertheless shell out $59 – $89 – $179 a month to feed their addiction to propaganda.

    But it never occurs to them to stop paying for their own enslavement.

    Did the folks at the Jim Jones camp have to pay for the KoolAid before they fed it to their kids?

    UNPLUG!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  25. TheJester says:

    It is credible to claim that the “news” from the MSM are carefully crafted narratives … shows … that are mutually supportive to create the illusion of reality. This is similar to fictional storytelling.

    A few recent “shows” have been,

    1. “Donald Trump’s candidacy is going down the tubes … and we’re going to keep reporting that until you believe it ….”

    2. Frau Merkel is going to call a meeting of France, Italy, and Germany to discuss BREXIT to downplay the assumption that Germany is driving the show in the EU. However, if Germany wasn’t driving the show in the EU, why only three countries at the meeting? What happened to the other remaining 24 member countries in the EU? No protests? Or, perhaps no one dare cross Frau Merkel. Still, it is not the case, according to Frau Merkel, that one country can “manage” the EU so it’s not happening.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  26. @grmbl
    As a frequent commenter on unz.com, Revusky is a tireless, obsessive holocaust denier. Yet as a columnist, he skirts around the topic. (Though I admit that I don't read his columns all the way through so may have missed some things). Why is that? A couple of possible explanations:

    -- He is trying to build up credibility by developing initially somewhat plausible narratives. Subsequently he moves on to ever more far-fetched scenarios. If readers stay with him up to that point, he will eventually feel confident to spring his "holohoax" agenda.

    .-- Ron Unz himself has told Revusky to keep holocaust denial out of his columns, as a condition of letting him publish. I consider that unlikely as Unz does not strike me as someone with a well-developed sense of shame or decency.

    It’d be hard to make anyone believe your comment isn’t intended to raise agreement to the article’s author’s whole theory.

    And yes, I agree, he is obsessed with free-thinking and truth-seeking.

    Does he “he skirts around the topic”? Not at all. Once readers realize what he says, they’ll learn to question all mainstream-dictated “truths”, and that will naturally included the full mythical set of 20th century “history”, World War II’s holocaust as it has been told included, as it’s the centerpiece of the myth.

    It’s about being serious theorists, not skirting around anything. Single cases follow from theory; theory is what the main focus must be on.

    I believe your comment is aimed at proving how right Revusky is, and that’s a really subtle to do that, by the way.

    Or why else would someone making the claims you make come to the Unz Review, view this article’s page, and care to comment? Anything but the explanation I give would sound openly inconstistent — just like the myths imparted by official history and mainstream “information” organs.
    I guess many of the readers here will catch the real purpose of that comment.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    I believe your comment is aimed at proving how right Revusky is, and that’s a really subtle to do that, by the way.

    Nothing but a stack of retarded 88 drivel.

    Pull some subtly out of that and flip it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. @grmbl
    As a frequent commenter on unz.com, Revusky is a tireless, obsessive holocaust denier. Yet as a columnist, he skirts around the topic. (Though I admit that I don't read his columns all the way through so may have missed some things). Why is that? A couple of possible explanations:

    -- He is trying to build up credibility by developing initially somewhat plausible narratives. Subsequently he moves on to ever more far-fetched scenarios. If readers stay with him up to that point, he will eventually feel confident to spring his "holohoax" agenda.

    .-- Ron Unz himself has told Revusky to keep holocaust denial out of his columns, as a condition of letting him publish. I consider that unlikely as Unz does not strike me as someone with a well-developed sense of shame or decency.

    It is as if one were to claim that Germans in 1945 were upset, not because their country had been bombed into rubble or that foreign armies were occupying their country, but rather, because somebody in Florida had burnt a copy of Mein Kampf! I don’t think that would fly. This led me to conclude that Muslims have, by now, been caricatured far more than even the Nazis have been. And that really is saying something!

    How sly that Revusky cat is: openly and with logic aforethought, flinging about irrefutable realities to trace a parallel between irrational, propagandistic demonization of Muslims in the present day and irrational, propaganda-driven demonization of Germans in the era of the great Jewish Exodus and Reconquista of the land of the Canaanites.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. Jake Saga says:

    This essay is the best yet.
    It sparkles with humor, intelligence, wit and confidence. Keep them coming!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  29. Rehmat says:
    @grmbl
    As a frequent commenter on unz.com, Revusky is a tireless, obsessive holocaust denier. Yet as a columnist, he skirts around the topic. (Though I admit that I don't read his columns all the way through so may have missed some things). Why is that? A couple of possible explanations:

    -- He is trying to build up credibility by developing initially somewhat plausible narratives. Subsequently he moves on to ever more far-fetched scenarios. If readers stay with him up to that point, he will eventually feel confident to spring his "holohoax" agenda.

    .-- Ron Unz himself has told Revusky to keep holocaust denial out of his columns, as a condition of letting him publish. I consider that unlikely as Unz does not strike me as someone with a well-developed sense of shame or decency.

    What’s Holocaust denial?

    Have not Holocaust stories from holy Anne Frank diary to latest Joseph Hirt proved that the Zionist narrative of SIX MILLION DIED is based on lies. But that doesn’t mean that European Jews were not persecuted by Catholic/Frankist Jewish Nazis during WWII.

    https://rehmat1.com/2016/06/12/joseph-hirt-the-latest-holocaust-imposter/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. Durruti says:
    @Rurik

    In America, we must restore our Democratic Republic, the Republic that was assassinated, along with our last Constitutional President, (and constitutional government), on November 22, 1963.
    We have been without a Republic for half a century.
     
    actually it started sooner, back on Dec, 23, 1913

    that is the infamous date when our Republic was sold out, fee simple, to a cabal of International Banksters and thieves, (the Fiend)

    the reason JFK was assassinated, was because with Executive Order 11110, he tried to restore the Republic, and was murdered by the Fiend for his temerity

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_11110

    ever since 1913 the US has been engaged in wars all over the planet, and increasingly turning Americans into little more than debt slaves to the Federal Reserve banksters. (a cabal of private bankers and Jewish supremacists who control and have the power to create [out of thin air] and issue and loan out a trillion or ten of the world's reserve currency on a whim, and buy any politician or media that gets in their way and turn them into their agents)

    the Fed is the root of our slavery

    it is the fount of the Eternal WarsⓊ and the all seeing eye of global human misery

    Rurik,

    Thanks for your comments.

    There is a Clear Difference, a Clear Dividing Line between an American Republic (weak and shaky as it was by 1963), and post Republic America, working for Foreign Zionist Oligarchs, and drowning the world in blood.

    The Republic was dealt a mortal blow in 1913, (some imply the date for the destruction, or mortal injury, of our Republic was on the death of President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1945, toward the end of World War II).

    The essential strength of the American Republic (albeit a seriously weakened Republic), continued until, and allowed for the election of John F. Kennedy as America’s last Constitutional President.

    A few of Kennedy’s struggles:

    JF Kennedy refused to further aid the Terrorist attack against Cuba at Playa Giron. He refused a request from the CIA to conduct airstrikes against the Cuban Government, as the 1600-2000 ‘Freedom Fighter’ CIA Terrorists were stuck on the beach, and close to surrender.
    Pay attention here. Kennedy pointed out that airstrikes against another country which the nation was not at war with was – unconstitutional. Does that remind anyone of more recent (unconstitutional terrorist airstrikes)?

    While John F. Kennedy lived and continued as the President, America was a Functional Republic. President JF Kennedy FIRED Allen Dulles, the head of the CIA, and trusted only his brother, Robert Kennedy, to lead the vital office of Attorney General. Kennedy confronted illegal unconstitutional powers who were operating within the American Government, and those who were operating within the American Nation.

    Kennedy zealously guarded our nation’s Sovereignty, and for 1000 days he lead an enlightened and courageous, and competent Administration. He proposed and supported vast improvements in America’s politics and intra human relations. Kennedy never spoke poorly of any ethnic or national group; he maintained, until the end a stiff upper lip and sharp biting humor. He was respected, internationally, and saved the world from a Nuclear Holocaust.

    J F Kennedy was a War Hero who could not be controlled by the Military Financial Complex.

    John Kennedy, the Naval Hero who saved his Ship’s Crew during WW II, went down with his ship in 1963. He fought to save the Republic, against all odds. It was his brother Robert Kennedy, who attempted to restore the Republic and Constitutional Government. On June 6, 1968, Robert Kennedy joined his first 2 brothers, in Heaven.

    Recalling another Democratic Republic:

    In 1936, Buenaventura Durruti led his Spanish Anarchists to support the democratically elected Spanish Republic. He died in the early battles in Madrid, where he commanded a Brigade of 1300 Anarchist Partisans who had traveled from Catalonia (at the request of the Spanish Republic), to save their capital.

    Kennedy, as with Durruti, fought on the same side of the barricades. They suffered the same fate, as their Republics. They defended their Republics to the end.

    Hold their banners high!

    Peter J. Antonsen

    Read More
    • Agree: Rurik
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. Cyrano says:

    Why do the terrorists stage attacks against the west in the west? They try to show the true face of the west to the world. The true face of the west is not how they act at home – it’s how they act when they invade a 3rd world country – like savages. Even Putin said few years ago – “How can the west act like monsters abroad and pretend to be so nice domestically.”

    One of those 2 faces is phony – either the image of the “nice” guy domestically – or of the acting monster abroad. The terrorists are betting that the image of the nice guy is fake and they are trying to prove it. They know about the depravities that the west is capable of domestically – from history – the holocaust. The terrorists are trying to prove that when it comes to savagery – the west is no better than them, and they are trying to force the west to act their savagery not only abroad, but also at home. It looks like they are not that far from succeeding.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus

    They know about the depravities that the west is capable of domestically – from history – the holocaust.
     
    Is that why Israelists feel compelled to destroy Iran, which so far has resisted the tender seductions of TITT to the extent of staging such effronteries as a Holocaust Conference, and the Hebdoesque holocaust cartoon contest, prefiguring Revusky's RRN acronym. The West no-likey when Iran does Hebdo: Newsweek's Stav Ziv wrote THE BIGGEST LOSER IN TEHRAN'S HOLOCAUST CARTOON CONTEST: IRAN.
    Stav doth protest too much methinks.

    Speaking of the "depravities that the west is capable of" -- Iran has some first=hand knowledge, based on reality, not relentless RRN framing a la holohoax:

    ~ In WWI the British used Iran to supply its troops, causing famine in Iran that cost the lives of about 40% of Iran's population, "the biggest calamity of World War I and one of the worst genocides of the 20th century."

    ~ Iran was the West's plaything in WWII, used and abused by the British, Americans and Russians as a staging ground for troops and materiel to destroy Germany. Iranians at the highest level were closely networked with what was going on in Germany and in rapidly zionizing Palestine.

    ~After enduring years of rule under the puppet-shah and finally gathering enough steam to revolt, Zbigniew Brzezinski induced Jimmee Carter to foment a war between Iraq and Iran. In the course of the war, US and Germany supplied to Saddam's Iraq precursor chemicals and strategic intelligence on where to drop those chemicals that killed approx. 100,000 Iranian civilians. Iran's government appealed to the oh-so-civilized United Nations to halt the use of chemical weapons but their letters and diplomatic overtures were ignored.

    ~ Since 1995 when AIPAC wrote the Executive Order that Bill Clinton signed, sanctioning Iran and Libya; which AIPAC followed up by enshrining in law the D'Amato Amendment, Iran's economy has been undergoing the "Judea Declares War on Germany" treatment -- the attempt to destroy Iran by destroying its economy, preparatory to the actual, physical destruction of Iran for which so many Jews are "orgasmic," to borrow Avigail Abarbanel's term --

    http://www.avigailabarbanel.me.uk/gaza-2009-01-04.html
    Sunday 4th January 2009

    One of the things that is not being discussed much in the media is how much talk there is in Israel about attacking Iran. Word on the (Israeli) street is that an air attack on Iran’s nuclear reactors is imminent.

    Israel has been itching for a ‘good war’ for a while now. The botched attack on Lebanon in 2006 was a psychological disappointment that did not fulfil its purpose, and only led to a deepening chasm between the political and military arms in Israel. An Israeli friend told me in disgust the other day, that there is an atmosphere of ‘national orgasm’ in Israel about the prospect of attacking Iran. While people are being bombed in Gaza, all Israelis can talk about is the coming attack on Iran.
     
    In summ, Cyrano, stfu about the holocaust fraud. We are sick of it. The whole narrative is such a patent fraud that it's a wonder Jews don't collapse of embarrassment at it's B-grade qualities. We've all been led to believe you were so much smarter than that.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. iffen says:
    @pink_point
    It'd be hard to make anyone believe your comment isn't intended to raise agreement to the article's author's whole theory.

    And yes, I agree, he is obsessed with free-thinking and truth-seeking.

    Does he "he skirts around the topic"? Not at all. Once readers realize what he says, they'll learn to question all mainstream-dictated "truths", and that will naturally included the full mythical set of 20th century "history", World War II's holocaust as it has been told included, as it's the centerpiece of the myth.

    It's about being serious theorists, not skirting around anything. Single cases follow from theory; theory is what the main focus must be on.

    I believe your comment is aimed at proving how right Revusky is, and that's a really subtle to do that, by the way.

    Or why else would someone making the claims you make come to the Unz Review, view this article's page, and care to comment? Anything but the explanation I give would sound openly inconstistent — just like the myths imparted by official history and mainstream "information" organs.
    I guess many of the readers here will catch the real purpose of that comment.

    I believe your comment is aimed at proving how right Revusky is, and that’s a really subtle to do that, by the way.

    Nothing but a stack of retarded 88 drivel.

    Pull some subtly out of that and flip it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. @Cyrano
    Why do the terrorists stage attacks against the west in the west? They try to show the true face of the west to the world. The true face of the west is not how they act at home – it’s how they act when they invade a 3rd world country – like savages. Even Putin said few years ago – “How can the west act like monsters abroad and pretend to be so nice domestically.”

    One of those 2 faces is phony – either the image of the “nice” guy domestically – or of the acting monster abroad. The terrorists are betting that the image of the nice guy is fake and they are trying to prove it. They know about the depravities that the west is capable of domestically - from history – the holocaust. The terrorists are trying to prove that when it comes to savagery – the west is no better than them, and they are trying to force the west to act their savagery not only abroad, but also at home. It looks like they are not that far from succeeding.

    They know about the depravities that the west is capable of domestically – from history – the holocaust.

    Is that why Israelists feel compelled to destroy Iran, which so far has resisted the tender seductions of TITT to the extent of staging such effronteries as a Holocaust Conference, and the Hebdoesque holocaust cartoon contest, prefiguring Revusky’s RRN acronym. The West no-likey when Iran does Hebdo: Newsweek’s Stav Ziv wrote THE BIGGEST LOSER IN TEHRAN’S HOLOCAUST CARTOON CONTEST: IRAN.
    Stav doth protest too much methinks.

    Speaking of the “depravities that the west is capable of” — Iran has some first=hand knowledge, based on reality, not relentless RRN framing a la holohoax:

    ~ In WWI the British used Iran to supply its troops, causing famine in Iran that cost the lives of about 40% of Iran’s population, “the biggest calamity of World War I and one of the worst genocides of the 20th century.”

    ~ Iran was the West’s plaything in WWII, used and abused by the British, Americans and Russians as a staging ground for troops and materiel to destroy Germany. Iranians at the highest level were closely networked with what was going on in Germany and in rapidly zionizing Palestine.

    ~After enduring years of rule under the puppet-shah and finally gathering enough steam to revolt, Zbigniew Brzezinski induced Jimmee Carter to foment a war between Iraq and Iran. In the course of the war, US and Germany supplied to Saddam’s Iraq precursor chemicals and strategic intelligence on where to drop those chemicals that killed approx. 100,000 Iranian civilians. Iran’s government appealed to the oh-so-civilized United Nations to halt the use of chemical weapons but their letters and diplomatic overtures were ignored.

    ~ Since 1995 when AIPAC wrote the Executive Order that Bill Clinton signed, sanctioning Iran and Libya; which AIPAC followed up by enshrining in law the D’Amato Amendment, Iran’s economy has been undergoing the “Judea Declares War on Germany” treatment — the attempt to destroy Iran by destroying its economy, preparatory to the actual, physical destruction of Iran for which so many Jews are “orgasmic,” to borrow Avigail Abarbanel’s term –

    http://www.avigailabarbanel.me.uk/gaza-2009-01-04.html
    Sunday 4th January 2009

    One of the things that is not being discussed much in the media is how much talk there is in Israel about attacking Iran. Word on the (Israeli) street is that an air attack on Iran’s nuclear reactors is imminent.

    Israel has been itching for a ‘good war’ for a while now. The botched attack on Lebanon in 2006 was a psychological disappointment that did not fulfil its purpose, and only led to a deepening chasm between the political and military arms in Israel. An Israeli friend told me in disgust the other day, that there is an atmosphere of ‘national orgasm’ in Israel about the prospect of attacking Iran. While people are being bombed in Gaza, all Israelis can talk about is the coming attack on Iran.

    In summ, Cyrano, stfu about the holocaust fraud. We are sick of it. The whole narrative is such a patent fraud that it’s a wonder Jews don’t collapse of embarrassment at it’s B-grade qualities. We’ve all been led to believe you were so much smarter than that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jacques Sheete
    Awesome comment.

    I was aware of the WW2 Persian Corridor which was initiated by a Pearl Harbor like attack on Iran by Britain and Russia 3 months prior to the attack on Pearl, and through which the US supplied the butcher Stalin with enough materiel to supply 60 Soviet divisions, but I never heard of the WW1 famine. Good stuff to be aware of and I'll be checking it out.

    Thanks!
    , @Cyrano
    The reason why I don’t buy conspiracy theories is because they have at least one major fundaMENTAL problem (besides being MENTAL as the block capitals suggests) - and that is that conspiracies are too labor intensive. When trying to explain any event – go for the simplest explanation – it works 99% of the time.

    Logic follows the path of least resistance, not some elaborate devious, genius approaching schemes which are stuff of sci-fi books. Reality is usually bland and simple, it is not designed in Hollywood, it doesn’t have intricate plots and twists, it’s not a complicated mind bending puzzle that can be deciphered only by men of “superior” intelligence like Solonto fancies himself to possess. In short there’s no Jewish conspiracy of any kind – there never was. Jews only play by the rules written by someone else – it’s only they are better players than those who wrote the rules.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. Wally [AKA "BobbyBeGood"] says: • Website
    @grmbl
    As a frequent commenter on unz.com, Revusky is a tireless, obsessive holocaust denier. Yet as a columnist, he skirts around the topic. (Though I admit that I don't read his columns all the way through so may have missed some things). Why is that? A couple of possible explanations:

    -- He is trying to build up credibility by developing initially somewhat plausible narratives. Subsequently he moves on to ever more far-fetched scenarios. If readers stay with him up to that point, he will eventually feel confident to spring his "holohoax" agenda.

    .-- Ron Unz himself has told Revusky to keep holocaust denial out of his columns, as a condition of letting him publish. I consider that unlikely as Unz does not strike me as someone with a well-developed sense of shame or decency.

    Debunking the impossible & laughable ’6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers’ is a piece of cake.
    Of course the usual enemies of free speech do not like it one bit. That’s why free speech about the ‘holocau$t’ storyline is banned in so many counties.

    “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 / Revisionist Jew, son of famous violinist

    see the ‘holocau$t’ scam debunked here:
    http://www.codoh.com
    No name calling, level playing field debate here:

    http://forum.codoh.com

    We’re talking about an alleged ’6M Jews & 5M others’ … 11,000,000
    But note that there is not a single verifiable excavated mass grave that can actually be SHOWN, not just claimed, (recall the claim of 900,000 buried at Treblinka) even though Jews claim to know exactly where these allegedly enormous mass graves are.

    The massive numbers of so called “eyewitne$$es” are living testimony to fraudulence of the impossible ’6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers’.

    The ‘holocaust’ storyline is one of the most easily debunked narratives ever contrived. That is why those who question it are arrested and persecuted. That is why violent, racist, & privileged Jewish supremacists demand censorship. What sort of truth is it that denies free speech and the freedom to seek the truth? Truth needs no protection from scrutiny.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. Svigor says:

    Amazing that Unz publishes this fruitcake.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  36. Qasim says:
    @Rurik

    The origins of the movie were suspicious and appears to have been the product of some government agency although it’s not entirely clear which government it was. How many more of such productions are being secretly produced to be unveiled, or not, at some other point?
     
    the lines between the CIA and 'news and entertainment' seem almost to be nonexistent once you start to delve down the rabbit hole

    the most significant thing for me personally vis-a-vis that Benghazi anti-Islamic movie was that at first, I remember considering the accounts of that movie having pushed some Muslims over the edge as having merit.

    Perhaps that is one of Mr. Revusky's more important insights and messages, is that we should always expect them to turn all news, (even organic events) into a cartoon version to suit their agenda(s).

    Not just the ones that they are synthetically constructed from the beginning to the end, like 911 or Sandy Hook. Like Mark Green, I too suspect that some (one?) of the terrorist and/or lone nut events are possibly real. But what we can all be absolutely certain beyond any doubt whatsoever about - is that they're going to lie about it. And spin it. And lie some more. That much is 100% certain.

    So the next time I hear them (from virtually every single Newspeak media outlet in the West) talking about how the Muslims did this or some rightwing bigot shot some African American church ladies, or someone made an obscure movie (that nobody even ever saw), but it caused a terrorist attack that changed the course of history... well now, I'm not going to be so gullible next time.

    And that I suspect is one of Mr. Revusky's main points. We're far too gullible when it comes to the Western media.

    One of my favorite examples of just how ubiquitous is the Oligarch's fetid hand when it comes to the uniform corruption of our Western world, was the video of the "dueling puppets' during the debate to wage war on Iran for its WMD.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFEudf8NOuY

    the decision to wage war against a country, (especially one that is not threatening or harming anyone and is in total compliance with virtually every demand that has been placed upon it and has not harmed one hair on one head of the people who're demanding that it comply, when it has already complied) is a very significant decision, perhaps the most grave and significant that there is. And yet, this decision, that should be wrestled with under the most severe considerations of every nation and every people, is all being decided at a level completely above all the nation's leaders and people's who're expected to fight this war.

    You can't get much more synthetic than that. And yet, people still watch the news and expect to be shown the truth.

    keep it up JR, keep hamming the realization into people that we're all marinating in a matrix of lies and an agenda driven hate fest of the Jewish supremacist id.

    End the Fed!

    Hi Rurik.

    Like you, these articles by Mr. Revusky have given me a lot to think about. I am not sure to what extent I agree with his overall framework, but his overall point that the media is not to be blindly trusted in its presentation of events seems undeniable.

    You seem to agree with him on his views on 9/11, etc. And you note that these events are used to push a neo-con agenda you find repugnant.

    But while you show your sympathies to Muslims when it comes to foreign policy, you have made it clear how much you despise continued Muslim immigration into the West. (I don’t have a problem with this by the way, I also think all immigration should be stopped because I fear Balkanization and the resurgence of white nationalism.) Anyway, you routinely bring up Rotterham and Cologne and similar events to show how ‘dusky hordes” are coming to defile white women. I think it was you who posted that cartoon yesterday where some bin-Laden looking dudes are raping a white woman on the altar of multiculturalism.

    My question is “Do we know that these events are completely true either?’ I mean, I have always assumed they were, but I assumed the same about 9/11 and San Bernardino until relatively recently as well. Perhaps the lurid reports of European women being unable to even walk the streets without being sexually assaulted by lascivious Arabs/Muslims are highly exaggerated/ synthetic as well??? They certainly don’t seem congruous with my own experiences, but I live in the US, and maybe things are different in Europe.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik
    Hello Qasim,

    You seem to agree with him on his views on 9/11, etc. And you note that these events are used to push a neo-con agenda you find repugnant.
     
    you said it brother!

    you have made it clear how much you despise continued Muslim immigration into the West.
     
    not just Muslim immigration, but all non-Western immigration. I'll tell ya what - when all countries accept all immigrants from all other countries, then perhaps there'd be an argument for the West to do the same. But since that would be suicidaly insane for those countries to do so, then I don't think it's all that preposterous for the West to simply want to maintains its identity- just as Japan or Saudi Arabia or Mexico or virtually every other nation does out of an obvious lack of self-hatred. We in the West are supposed to consider self-hatred as a given, and consider it obvious that we all must surly want to disappear from the pages of time. I mean, how could not, right? By what sort of racist disease of the psyche (xenophobia) could we possibly want to endure as a phenotype, being as beyond the pale contemptible as we obviously are, huh? ;)

    (I don’t have a problem with this by the way, I also think all immigration should be stopped because I fear Balkanization and the resurgence of white nationalism.)
     
    I agree, only I don't fear white nationalism, I long for it. Not as some kind of resurgence of imperial colonialism, but simply the will to exist. To not march over the cliff of the Jewish and liberals pied piper of genocide ~ 'diversity and multiculturalism'.

    Is that so much to ask Qasim?


    Anyway, you routinely bring up Rotterham and Cologne and similar events to show how ‘dusky hordes” are coming to defile white women.
     
    no, not coming to 'defile white women'. But they are coming and they are raping women and boys (do you want links?) and they are imposing their ways upon the (always working class communities) that the Zionists (and liberals) are ramming them into.

    So I think that's a good thing for those working class communities and their children and their futures? No, I do not. I think that the poor of the West are being ground up in a hate fest of Middle Eastern centuries-old tribal and religious hatreds, that they have nothing to do with and no understanding of. I think it's beyond evil and malicious and morally heinous to impose on these powerless people a balkanized world of misery and despair, to mollify the infinite capacity for tribal hatred in the black heart of Zionists and the smug snark of white liberals everywhere (who themselves live in lily-white gated communities and safe neighborhoods)


    I think it was you who posted that cartoon yesterday where some bin-Laden looking dudes are raping a white woman on the altar of multiculturalism.

    My question is “Do we know that these events are completely true either?’
     

    Absolutely I did. It was spot on exactly what's going on.

    Here's a link to some of the perps of the Rotherham scandal, (that is a microcosm of the festering sickness that the Zios and liberals are imposing upon a people that are reeling from the genocidal hatred and insanity: (and from Wiki that is a organ of the Zio-NWO no less)

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

    these are some of the men (sub-human dogs) that were arrested for taking part in the exploit of British school girl sex slavery, where the underage girls were threatened with being burned alive if they spoke to the authorities

    http://www.countingcats.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Rotherham-Child-Abuse-Scandal-Ring-A-1024x663.jpg

    http://d.ibtimes.co.uk/en/full/1396005/rotherham-grooming.jpg

    http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2ya5MsYMppY/U_4ev2cXORI/AAAAAAAAlCo/oWD8T10VYVg/s1600/imams-promote-sex-rape-gangs-17_5_2013.png

    this was going on for years and their victims were virtually all British, (they didn't victimize Muslim girls)

    and there were over 1500 of these girls being thus abused (raped and gang raped and threated with violence and sold to other Muslims like chattel) in one town alone- Rotherham.

    And no one said anything about it because they were all to afraid of the Zio-apparatchiks and kommissars and assorted liberals who ran the town.

    So yes, Qasim, it is all very much real and not a 'conspiracy theory' of right wing neo-Nazis and tin-foil hat wearing nutjobs.

    And it happens if England just as it's happening in Sweden and Norway and Australia, where they call the widespread incidence of gang rape of Australian girls by Muslims a 'cultural misunderstanding'.

    It's all on the Internet in its sickening and lurid details for anyone with the stomach to do the research.


    European women being unable to even walk the streets without being sexually assaulted by lascivious Arabs/Muslims are highly exaggerated/ synthetic as well??? They certainly don’t seem congruous with my own experiences, but I live in the US, and maybe things are different in Europe.
     
    they would if you lived in Detroit of Philly or other towns where minorities (far out of all percentages in the population) target unsuspecting females for assult or worse.

    I don't have time right now to belabor this issue, and have done so here and there on this site and others, but it isn't my raison d'etre for posting here or even any kind of obsession of mine, but since you asked, that is the truth of it.

    It isn't just Muslims, and it it's true that the Muslim world has been severely victimized by my country- under the thrall of some very sinister and evil forces, that hate our world's with an otherworldly obsession. So much so I almost pity them- to marinate in hatred and bile all their pathetic lives. (almost ; )

    Cheers for your thoughtful and well stated query. Qasim.

    As-salamu alaykum

    ps, pardon the typos, I don't have time to edit

    , @Jonathan Revusky

    Perhaps the lurid reports of European women being unable to even walk the streets without being sexually assaulted by lascivious Arabs/Muslims are highly exaggerated/ synthetic as well???
     
    My sense of things is that this is the case, almost certainly. In fact, a huge amount of the news items that you see about this can be traced back to an outfit called the Gatestone Institute, which is just a pure Zionist/Neocon group. Their whole raison d'être is just to vilify Muslims, it seems. Just look at the wikipedia page on these people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gatestone_Institute and look at who the key people are.

    A huge amount of the stuff about how women in Sweden, say, can't walk down the street without being molested seems to originate from Gatestone. There is this other group that is related, a similar sort of neocon/zionist outfit, called the Clarion project, and you can see that a lot of the synthetic disinfo about the Jihadis comes from them, all this nonsense about the dangers of Radical Islam and how they want to impose Sharia law on the West and all this crap. That's the Clarion Project. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarion_Project

    There's really an interlaced network of these foundations or think-tanks, or whatever they are called, and it's really entirely a Zionist/neocon sort of thing.

    Anyway, on New Year's Eve, there were supposedly these mass sexual assaults in Cologne, Germany, in and around the Cologne Hauptbanhof, the main rail station. I have scoured the net looking for any film footage of any sexual assaults and I can find no credible evidence that any of that happened -- I mean specifically the mass sexual assaults around the Cologne Hauptbanhof. When you find something, it turns out to be video from some other time and place.

    This occurred supposedly a half year ago, at a point in time, when everybody has a video camera in their pockets (a phone). I don't think it is possible for an event of the scale they are claiming happened to occur and for there to be no video footage.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. Priss Factor [AKA "Anonymny"] says: • Website

    “The Koran-burning pastor doubtless has some cartoonish aspects, but the people most ludicrously caricatured in the story are surely the Muslims who run amok and kill people because they have heard that some insignificant person on the other side of the world is burning a Koran.”

    Dumb Muslims and dumb Christians are just pawns in the game.

    The real new religion of the West is homomania. How did this come about?

    Most Liberals want to be members of the elite. They want the good life and privileges.
    But ‘elitism’ is a dirty word. The so-called ‘progressive’ whose secular faith is ‘equality’ must seek a way to be elitist without seeming elitist.

    Since it is no longer fashionable to take pride in being higher-up or more elevated than the rest of humanity, the neo-elitism consists of avant-garde-ism expounding that the ‘radicals’ are way ahead of the curve of everyone else.
    So, while one cannot be ABOVE humanity, one can be AHEAD of humanity. Being AHEAD of humanity, one enjoys being part of the neo-elite, but such privilege is rationalized on grounds that one is forging ahead as a navigator of justice to bring about greater equality for everyone.

    Of course, the globalist-capitalists understand what this conceit is really about. They understand that the radical intellectuals don’t want to be part of humanity with regular jobs and hassles of life. The rads want to be professors, curators, critics, artists, authors, celebrities, ‘creative’ folks, agents of NGO’s, and etc.

    So, the globalist-capitalist and ‘radicals’ struck up a bargain whereby the former would fund the latter who would mainly redefine ‘equality’ in terms of homomania, transmania, and gender-bender obsessions.

    This is wonderful for the super-capitalist class since the homo/tranny community consists only of 3%(if that) of humanity.
    So, if the ultimate goal of ‘progressive leftism’ is about making all of humanity bow down to the vanity and narcissism of a small percentage of people who indulge in fecal penetration, cross-dressing, and genital mutilation, it really means that neo-equality consists of the 97% serving the vainglory of the sexually deviant 3%.

    This is great for the super-rich since homos and trannies, in all their self-glorifying vanity, love to rub shoulders with the men and women of privilege.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    "So, while one cannot be ABOVE humanity, one can be AHEAD of humanity."

    In other words, you can't be more ELEVATED but you can be more EVOLVED.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. Barbara says:

    Imagine if a virus, that only infects and kills the evil ones, takes out the whole fascist lot. The citizens (who never strode beyond the gate) wake up, turn on their boob tubes, and instead of actors see the crazed conspiracy theorists and hear what has actually transpired since the date of their birth and beyond! I hope to live to see it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    infects and kills the evil ones, takes out the whole fascist lot... see the crazed conspiracy theorists

    The union of these two is quite large, if you kill off one the other might not exist.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. Rurik says:
    @Qasim
    Hi Rurik.

    Like you, these articles by Mr. Revusky have given me a lot to think about. I am not sure to what extent I agree with his overall framework, but his overall point that the media is not to be blindly trusted in its presentation of events seems undeniable.

    You seem to agree with him on his views on 9/11, etc. And you note that these events are used to push a neo-con agenda you find repugnant.

    But while you show your sympathies to Muslims when it comes to foreign policy, you have made it clear how much you despise continued Muslim immigration into the West. (I don't have a problem with this by the way, I also think all immigration should be stopped because I fear Balkanization and the resurgence of white nationalism.) Anyway, you routinely bring up Rotterham and Cologne and similar events to show how 'dusky hordes" are coming to defile white women. I think it was you who posted that cartoon yesterday where some bin-Laden looking dudes are raping a white woman on the altar of multiculturalism.

    My question is "Do we know that these events are completely true either?' I mean, I have always assumed they were, but I assumed the same about 9/11 and San Bernardino until relatively recently as well. Perhaps the lurid reports of European women being unable to even walk the streets without being sexually assaulted by lascivious Arabs/Muslims are highly exaggerated/ synthetic as well??? They certainly don't seem congruous with my own experiences, but I live in the US, and maybe things are different in Europe.

    Hello Qasim,

    You seem to agree with him on his views on 9/11, etc. And you note that these events are used to push a neo-con agenda you find repugnant.

    you said it brother!

    you have made it clear how much you despise continued Muslim immigration into the West.

    not just Muslim immigration, but all non-Western immigration. I’ll tell ya what – when all countries accept all immigrants from all other countries, then perhaps there’d be an argument for the West to do the same. But since that would be suicidaly insane for those countries to do so, then I don’t think it’s all that preposterous for the West to simply want to maintains its identity- just as Japan or Saudi Arabia or Mexico or virtually every other nation does out of an obvious lack of self-hatred. We in the West are supposed to consider self-hatred as a given, and consider it obvious that we all must surly want to disappear from the pages of time. I mean, how could not, right? By what sort of racist disease of the psyche (xenophobia) could we possibly want to endure as a phenotype, being as beyond the pale contemptible as we obviously are, huh? ;)

    (I don’t have a problem with this by the way, I also think all immigration should be stopped because I fear Balkanization and the resurgence of white nationalism.)

    I agree, only I don’t fear white nationalism, I long for it. Not as some kind of resurgence of imperial colonialism, but simply the will to exist. To not march over the cliff of the Jewish and liberals pied piper of genocide ~ ‘diversity and multiculturalism’.

    Is that so much to ask Qasim?

    Anyway, you routinely bring up Rotterham and Cologne and similar events to show how ‘dusky hordes” are coming to defile white women.

    no, not coming to ‘defile white women’. But they are coming and they are raping women and boys (do you want links?) and they are imposing their ways upon the (always working class communities) that the Zionists (and liberals) are ramming them into.

    So I think that’s a good thing for those working class communities and their children and their futures? No, I do not. I think that the poor of the West are being ground up in a hate fest of Middle Eastern centuries-old tribal and religious hatreds, that they have nothing to do with and no understanding of. I think it’s beyond evil and malicious and morally heinous to impose on these powerless people a balkanized world of misery and despair, to mollify the infinite capacity for tribal hatred in the black heart of Zionists and the smug snark of white liberals everywhere (who themselves live in lily-white gated communities and safe neighborhoods)

    I think it was you who posted that cartoon yesterday where some bin-Laden looking dudes are raping a white woman on the altar of multiculturalism.

    My question is “Do we know that these events are completely true either?’

    Absolutely I did. It was spot on exactly what’s going on.

    Here’s a link to some of the perps of the Rotherham scandal, (that is a microcosm of the festering sickness that the Zios and liberals are imposing upon a people that are reeling from the genocidal hatred and insanity: (and from Wiki that is a organ of the Zio-NWO no less)

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

    these are some of the men (sub-human dogs) that were arrested for taking part in the exploit of British school girl sex slavery, where the underage girls were threatened with being burned alive if they spoke to the authorities

    this was going on for years and their victims were virtually all British, (they didn’t victimize Muslim girls)

    and there were over 1500 of these girls being thus abused (raped and gang raped and threated with violence and sold to other Muslims like chattel) in one town alone- Rotherham.

    And no one said anything about it because they were all to afraid of the Zio-apparatchiks and kommissars and assorted liberals who ran the town.

    So yes, Qasim, it is all very much real and not a ‘conspiracy theory’ of right wing neo-Nazis and tin-foil hat wearing nutjobs.

    And it happens if England just as it’s happening in Sweden and Norway and Australia, where they call the widespread incidence of gang rape of Australian girls by Muslims a ‘cultural misunderstanding’.

    It’s all on the Internet in its sickening and lurid details for anyone with the stomach to do the research.

    European women being unable to even walk the streets without being sexually assaulted by lascivious Arabs/Muslims are highly exaggerated/ synthetic as well??? They certainly don’t seem congruous with my own experiences, but I live in the US, and maybe things are different in Europe.

    they would if you lived in Detroit of Philly or other towns where minorities (far out of all percentages in the population) target unsuspecting females for assult or worse.

    I don’t have time right now to belabor this issue, and have done so here and there on this site and others, but it isn’t my raison d’etre for posting here or even any kind of obsession of mine, but since you asked, that is the truth of it.

    It isn’t just Muslims, and it it’s true that the Muslim world has been severely victimized by my country- under the thrall of some very sinister and evil forces, that hate our world’s with an otherworldly obsession. So much so I almost pity them- to marinate in hatred and bile all their pathetic lives. (almost ; )

    Cheers for your thoughtful and well stated query. Qasim.

    As-salamu alaykum

    ps, pardon the typos, I don’t have time to edit

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jake Saga
    Rurik:
    I am also an ethno-nationalist, and believe that Europeans and European Americans have a right to a homeland of our own
    There is no doubt that Jonathan is correct on the idea that many of these terror attacks are false-flags, with a sinister agenda.

    However, it is also true that diversity and multiculturalism kill and destroy ALL cultures. Even where I live in Minnesota, there is real, documented violence between ethnic groups. There are stupid, naive Somali kids that are provocateured into joining terror groups. Others commit heinous crimes. Not on the scale of Cologne (which may indeed be fake), but significant, nonetheless.

    The main issue, though, is that our cultural unity and genetic heritage are being destroyed by multiple factors: low-birth rates, miscegenation, psychological depression on a mass scale due to economic forces of globalism, etc. We are toast unless we fight back, and do to that, we simply need to develop some kind of identity movement which will inevitable be called racist.

    To survive, we will need to be comfortable with being called racists.
    I'd like to connect on a private communications channel, if possible. I am also a friend of the author of this article, if you need a reference.

    Best,
    Jake
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. utu says:

    Mr. JR, Congratulations! This one was the best of the three. Thank you.

    P. S. However I am not sure about the two clips from Paris and Charleston that you have attached. They do not work for me at all. The editing and commentaries are irritating. They turn me off. I would like to see a raw footage and then read some commentary. Perhaps it would be better to stay away from various YT conspiracy yahoos. Many of them are well intentioned but because of their lack of professionalism and simplemindedness they are indistinguishable from the real hecklers, cognitive infiltrators.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
    Hi, Utu,

    I'm glad you liked the article.

    Perhaps it would be better to stay away from various YT conspiracy yahoos.
     
    Well, I would be reluctant to be so disparaging of these people's work. I'm pretty conscious that I didn't pay them for it, and I think such people are providing a public service making these videos. As for some of it being amateurish, well, in a more sane world, we'd have a functioning fourth estate and the people who are supposedly professional journalists would suss these things out and what these independent people are doing would be unnecessary, BUT that is not the case...

    Now, I can understand that people might not like the sarcastic voice-over style of RedSilverJ. I actually enjoy it myself usually, but I can see where people would think that he's laying it on too thick. But, regardless, these are presentational issues. In terms of the information he's presenting, I don't see much of an issue with it. There is simply no way, for example, that the black kids in the last video I linked really lost their mother 24 hours before. So, basically, I find the sneering sarcasm that he expresses regarding this fake bullshit to be appropriate.

    The first embedded video from the "Paulstal Service" includes footage from two interviews with Ginnie Watson interspersed with highlights of Ms. Watson's acting career. I assume that he downloaded the acting reels quickly before it got taken down. I guess those snippets are from some sort of promotional reel. If this guy hadn't acted quickly in grabbing that stuff, I would never have seen it. And, again, I never paid for his work, so I would be reluctant to put it down.
    If you want a more straight-up version of the interview she gave on Fox News, that is here:

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

    I don't find her credible at all. And the fact that she is an actress could be a coincidence, but it ain't likely.

    In retrospect, looking at it again, it may be that this other girl, Emma Parkinson, from Australia, is an even more glaring fake than Ginnie Watson is. Here are a couple of videos from some... "conspiracy yahoo", to use your term...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XZ7Tz7fmDc
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEfuLfAIc8c

    Unlike Ginnie Watson, this girl claims she actually was shot in the ass, and she is just smiling away...

    This whole business of presenting things that are so blatantly fake and pretending they're real, there is this incredible nerve they show. (Chutzpah?) Like the fake beheading videos and all that...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. Priss Factor [AKA "Anonymny"] says: • Website

    PC has gotten away with its neo-control-freakism by offering limitless freedom for those who choose the ‘correct’ path. It offers blinkered anarchy for those who play by the rules.

    So, if you choose anti-white-male rhetoric, you can be as wild and crazy as you want to be, even making up rape hoaxes to smear college fraternities.
    If you choose the way of Slut Pride, you can skank yourself out totally as an imitation Miley Cyrus.
    If you choose the way of tattoos and body-piercing, you can turn yourself into a completely hideous-looking freak.
    If you choose homo ‘pride’, you can act in ways that trample all over rules of decency and propriety. You can also work with the Globalists to push for WWIII against Russia because it won’t cave to homo poo-ride parades.
    If you choose gender-fluidity, you can come up with new nano-gender-identities against ‘heteronormativity’.
    If you choose black rage, you can fume all you want against the white gentile devil.
    If you choose the mantra of Diversity or the bogeyman of ‘white privilege’,
    you can howl all you want to the moon until the cows come home.

    So, if you choose the correct cause or agenda, there is no limit to your freedom to hate, berate, throw tantrums, and act crazy.
    This creates the impression that freedom is everywhere in our so-called ‘liberal democracy’.
    Freedom becomes problematic ONLY IF you question, critique, and counter the holy writ of PC.

    Indeed, the globo-elites who control PC say that ‘hate speech’ isn’t free speech. If you practice free speech to counter the PC agenda, you are said to be ‘threatening’ the freedom of the PC crowd by making them feel ‘unsafe’.

    So, if you practice free speech against PC and if the PC crowd attacks you, YOU are to blame for aggressing against them because you made them feel ‘threatened’ even though they are the ones who attacked you physically.

    According to PC, verbal criticism of ‘progressives’ and certain ‘peoples of color’ violates their right not to feel ‘threatened’(which means to be challenged or offended because the PC crybullies have been raised from cradle to flip out over anything that offends their tender feelings and righteous conceits).

    So, if violence is done to you by the PC gang, their right not to be offended or ‘threatened’ trumps your right of free speech to challenge and counter their delusions and manias.

    It’s not unlike the logic of the Cultural Revolution in China. The Red Guards could exercise and enjoy unlimited freedom, even to assault and murder, as long as they stuck to the ideological script provided by Mao.

    As long as they claimed to serve the revolution and destroy the capitalist-roaders, there was no restraint on their madness.
    Such blinkered anarchy that allows total freedom and aggression in one direction creates the false impression of liberty.

    It’s like the freedom of dogs that can never attack the master but can act with total savagery against the targets chosen by the master. Dogs feel totally free in their unrestrained bloodlust as they tear apart a boar or deer chosen by their master, but aren’t they mere tools of their master?

    Mao tricked the Red Guards the same way. By giving the Red Guards unlimited freedom to attack and destroy Mao’s rivals, real or imagined, the impression of youth power was created.

    Many people assume that PC must be against the Powers-That-Be.
    After all, PC opposes ‘white privilege’ in a society that is presumably ruled by Privileged Whites.
    This is a sleight-of-hand trick because, in truth, the West is under globalist-imperialist rules of Jewish Supremacists(who chose homos and white Liberals & Cuckservatives as their collaborators agents).

    White elites in the West don’t serve White People. They serve the Jewish Globalists to further dispossess and displace the white masses.
    Just look at worthless ‘white leaders’ like Jeb Bush, John McCain, and Mitt Romney.

    All this emphasis on ‘white privilege’ is a smoke-and-mirrors trick to obfuscate and distract us from the real power that is Jewish Supremacist Power.

    So, PC doesn’t challenge and oppose the Real Power. It is essentially a means by which the Real Power, that of Jewish Globalists, manipulates the ideology of ‘radicalism’ to redirect the fury of the rising tide of color against white gentiles who are really living under Jewish-Homo-Globalist Imperialism served by the collaboration of white Liberal elites and Cuckservatives who get to keep their personal privileges as long as they serve the Globalist Elites than their own peoples.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  42. Reading the article brought to mind the climate alarmist demanding an apology from a “skeptic” scientist if temperatures increase next year because, you see, somehow this poor fellow considers an apology to be a proportionate response to the “greatest threat humanity has ever faced”.

    So, yes, indeed, it is a fact that lack of sense of proportion is at the heart of many of the hashtagged-trending delusions in the wild. Take your pick. From the Trump/Clinton duet to the newly erected force-field around the UK, from identity to immigration, from… well, that’s enough to upset most of the folks around here. No, hold on, there is one more, guns!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  43. Art says:

    Oh my – congratulations are in order – how did he do it – 6629 words talking about America’s dishonest intellectual culture – and not one of them “Jew.”

    My guess is that Mr. Revusky has a very bloody tongue.

    Wiz will be happy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    Just shows what a clever fellow is JR, huh, Art, wink, wink, winkity, wink.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    As a journalist of over three decades (who has never before made a comment about a piece on-line) I would have to rate this as THE BEST analysis of the absurdities of the media I have ever read. I have watched first hand exactly what is described. The only question that I usually can’t answer about ‘synthetic events’ is whether they are created by spin doctors (usually) or journalistic beat up merchants (sometimes).
    Absolutely brilliant analysis.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  45. RodW says:

    These ‘crisis actor’ claims are a very thin reed to hang anything on. There are some fairly straightforward reasons why these interviews don’t look exactly as we might expect them too, and why they contain inconsistencies. The nature of the news cycle guarantees that masses of trivial content is going to get hyped, and various players are going to exploit that, including the deep state.

    This kind of amateur sleuthing gets really tiresome. The author should do some proper investigation if he wants to be taken seriously–interview Terry Jones for example, audition as a ‘crisis actor’ and get hold of the employment contract, expose one of the ‘Wag The Dog’ studios of which there must be a few if his theory is correct–anything to provide a bit of substance.

    Read More
    • Replies: @alexander
    You state that the very "nature" of the news cycle guarantees that masses of trivial content is going to get hyped......but you don't say why.

    Isn't the whole purpose of a news cycle, at least ostensibly, to edit out the dearth of triviality for its viewers, and get to the core of what really matters ?

    Isn't that our expectation..."its important because it makes the news"...and "its news because it is important" ?

    It seems the entire Point, Mr Revusky is making ,,,,is how manipulative and contrived the media is, in disseminating information.

    For example , the media did NOT choose to spend three weeks on the "dancing Israelis", plastering their faces on every news screen, and pointing out how suspicious their behavior was ,on that fateful day.

    Instead, the media VANISHES the entire"Dancing Israeli " story.....but goes long and heavy on Pastor Jones and his Koran burning escapades...

    As if to implicate, by proxy, the Muslim faith with 9-11 culpability,.... I suppose,substituting the Koran for the" Dancing Israelis" as the suspects we should all be "focusing" on ?

    Do you see that ?

    This is grotesquely manipulative, and substitutes a fraudulent , irrational "hate mantra" for what Americans simply wanted in the first place....to bring the REAL perpetrators of 9-11, to justice.

    Whoever they were.

    The Pastor Terry Antics, and the media's fixation on it, persuades the viewers, quite subliminally, that hating Muslims is big news....important stuff.......but, on the other hand, the back slapping , high five-ing dancing Israelis who were falling over themselves with glee when the towers got hit.......is completely edited out of ALL media and government discourse.

    It is not discussed....and it simply never happened at all.

    Do you have an explanation for this disparity ?....One which is more than just a "thin reed" to hang on?
    , @Jonathan Revusky

    There are some fairly straightforward reasons why these interviews don’t look exactly as we might expect them too, and why they contain inconsistencies.
     
    Well, sure there's a simple straightforward reason why the interviews look fake. Because they are COMPLETELY OBVIOUSLY FAKE! Period.

    My honest sense of things is that if you watch, for example, the BBC interview with those black kids that I linked above and you sincerely believe that those kids' momma was murdered senselessly 24 hours earlier, then there is something wrong with you. The same applies to those interviews with that woman Ginnie Watson, and this other girl, Emma Parkinson. These things are pretty obviously fake.

    Now, okay, maybe you have some genuine incontrovertible proof that these people are, despite all outward appearances, credible witnesses giving credible testimony. In that case, you really ought to share that information. However, I get the feeling that the basic argument you are making is that this is on the TV, therefore it's true.

    Or are you making, at root, a different argument from that? If so, what specific argument is it?

    The author should do some proper investigation if he wants to be taken seriously
     
    I note that, in a debate with a certain kind of commenter here, there is always an onus on me to demonstrate something, but my interlocutor never accepts any obligation to demonstrate anything himself.

    Well, I obviously don't accept that there is only ever an onus on me to demonstrate anything. No, you say this phony-looking shit is real. You provide some proof.

    interview Terry Jones for example,
     
    Hmm, that's an interesting idea. What do you propose that I ask this man?

    I don't have any particular question I want to ask him. If you do have any questions for him that would clarify whatever, why don't you interview him?

    audition as a ‘crisis actor’ and get hold of the employment contract
     
    Oh, you mean, if I cannot show you an official "crisis actor" employment contract, then there are no crisis actors? So, I suppose that, since I can't produce an example of an actual written contract to kill somebody, therefore contract killers, a.k.a. hit-men, do not exist, right?

    Look, a "crisis actor" is just somebody who, for whatever money or reward, is there on the scene at one of these synthetic events, and says whatever is supposed to be said to support the synthetic narrative. I believe that this exists. Moreover, the clips I provided are a pretty clear example of this.

    If I'm wrong about this, then provide me some proof that I'm wrong.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. Great article, and none of it should surprise us since Mark Twain, who worked as both a newspaper correspondent and also a newspaper editor in Nevada, told many amusing stories about “synthesizing” stories for the newspapers when the real news was slow.

    One of the funniest was his fabricated news report that appeared in the [Nevada]Territorial Enterprise in 1862 which described the discovery of a petrified human body. The story was even reprinted in many Eastern newspapers.

    Another was the Empire City Massacre hoax which Twain wrote telling of a man who lost “an immense amount [of money]” and who in a deranged fit kills and scalps his wife and nine children. There were indictors that the story was fake yet other newspapers in the region picked up the story and presented it as factual.

    Here are a few relevant snippets from Twain’s “License of the Press” speech if 1873.:

    “There are laws to protect the freedom of the press’s speech, but none that are worth anything to protect the people from the press.”

    “It seems to me that just in the ratio that our newspapers increase, our morals decay. The more newspapers the worse morals. Where we have one newspaper that does good, I think we have fifty that do harm. We ought to look upon the establishment of a newspaper of the average pattern in a virtuous village as a calamity.”

    “It has become a sarcastic proverb that a thing must be true if you saw it in a newspaper. That is the opinion intelligent people have of that lying vehicle in a nutshell. But the trouble is that the stupid people–who constitute the grand overwhelming majority of this and all other nations–do believe and are moulded and convinced by what they get out of a newspaper, and there is where the harm lies.”

    “That awful power, the public opinion of a nation, is created in America by a horde of ignorant, self-complacent simpletons who failed at ditching and shoemaking and fetched up in journalism on their way to the poorhouse.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  47. AKAHorace says:
    @anonymous
    You've got a cloying writing style which lives up to your name: It elicits revulsion.

    I disagreed with almost everything that Ravusky said. But I rather liked his writing style.

    The distinction between synthetic and organic events is really useful. But I think that Ravusky has had this useful insight and then gone to town with it.

    The stuff about the Bataclan killing was offensive but well written. I don’t think that you can predict someones reaction soon after going through an experience like that. Under stress you can tell slightly different versions of the same memory. So picking over the details as he did seemed ghoulish.

    I like going to a site where I can read intelligently written material that I disagree with.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. @SolontoCroesus

    They know about the depravities that the west is capable of domestically – from history – the holocaust.
     
    Is that why Israelists feel compelled to destroy Iran, which so far has resisted the tender seductions of TITT to the extent of staging such effronteries as a Holocaust Conference, and the Hebdoesque holocaust cartoon contest, prefiguring Revusky's RRN acronym. The West no-likey when Iran does Hebdo: Newsweek's Stav Ziv wrote THE BIGGEST LOSER IN TEHRAN'S HOLOCAUST CARTOON CONTEST: IRAN.
    Stav doth protest too much methinks.

    Speaking of the "depravities that the west is capable of" -- Iran has some first=hand knowledge, based on reality, not relentless RRN framing a la holohoax:

    ~ In WWI the British used Iran to supply its troops, causing famine in Iran that cost the lives of about 40% of Iran's population, "the biggest calamity of World War I and one of the worst genocides of the 20th century."

    ~ Iran was the West's plaything in WWII, used and abused by the British, Americans and Russians as a staging ground for troops and materiel to destroy Germany. Iranians at the highest level were closely networked with what was going on in Germany and in rapidly zionizing Palestine.

    ~After enduring years of rule under the puppet-shah and finally gathering enough steam to revolt, Zbigniew Brzezinski induced Jimmee Carter to foment a war between Iraq and Iran. In the course of the war, US and Germany supplied to Saddam's Iraq precursor chemicals and strategic intelligence on where to drop those chemicals that killed approx. 100,000 Iranian civilians. Iran's government appealed to the oh-so-civilized United Nations to halt the use of chemical weapons but their letters and diplomatic overtures were ignored.

    ~ Since 1995 when AIPAC wrote the Executive Order that Bill Clinton signed, sanctioning Iran and Libya; which AIPAC followed up by enshrining in law the D'Amato Amendment, Iran's economy has been undergoing the "Judea Declares War on Germany" treatment -- the attempt to destroy Iran by destroying its economy, preparatory to the actual, physical destruction of Iran for which so many Jews are "orgasmic," to borrow Avigail Abarbanel's term --

    http://www.avigailabarbanel.me.uk/gaza-2009-01-04.html
    Sunday 4th January 2009

    One of the things that is not being discussed much in the media is how much talk there is in Israel about attacking Iran. Word on the (Israeli) street is that an air attack on Iran’s nuclear reactors is imminent.

    Israel has been itching for a ‘good war’ for a while now. The botched attack on Lebanon in 2006 was a psychological disappointment that did not fulfil its purpose, and only led to a deepening chasm between the political and military arms in Israel. An Israeli friend told me in disgust the other day, that there is an atmosphere of ‘national orgasm’ in Israel about the prospect of attacking Iran. While people are being bombed in Gaza, all Israelis can talk about is the coming attack on Iran.
     
    In summ, Cyrano, stfu about the holocaust fraud. We are sick of it. The whole narrative is such a patent fraud that it's a wonder Jews don't collapse of embarrassment at it's B-grade qualities. We've all been led to believe you were so much smarter than that.

    Awesome comment.

    I was aware of the WW2 Persian Corridor which was initiated by a Pearl Harbor like attack on Iran by Britain and Russia 3 months prior to the attack on Pearl, and through which the US supplied the butcher Stalin with enough materiel to supply 60 Soviet divisions, but I never heard of the WW1 famine. Good stuff to be aware of and I’ll be checking it out.

    Thanks!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. alexander says:
    @RodW
    These 'crisis actor' claims are a very thin reed to hang anything on. There are some fairly straightforward reasons why these interviews don't look exactly as we might expect them too, and why they contain inconsistencies. The nature of the news cycle guarantees that masses of trivial content is going to get hyped, and various players are going to exploit that, including the deep state.

    This kind of amateur sleuthing gets really tiresome. The author should do some proper investigation if he wants to be taken seriously--interview Terry Jones for example, audition as a 'crisis actor' and get hold of the employment contract, expose one of the 'Wag The Dog' studios of which there must be a few if his theory is correct--anything to provide a bit of substance.

    You state that the very “nature” of the news cycle guarantees that masses of trivial content is going to get hyped……but you don’t say why.

    Isn’t the whole purpose of a news cycle, at least ostensibly, to edit out the dearth of triviality for its viewers, and get to the core of what really matters ?

    Isn’t that our expectation…”its important because it makes the news”…and “its news because it is important” ?

    It seems the entire Point, Mr Revusky is making ,,,,is how manipulative and contrived the media is, in disseminating information.

    For example , the media did NOT choose to spend three weeks on the “dancing Israelis”, plastering their faces on every news screen, and pointing out how suspicious their behavior was ,on that fateful day.

    Instead, the media VANISHES the entire”Dancing Israeli ” story…..but goes long and heavy on Pastor Jones and his Koran burning escapades…

    As if to implicate, by proxy, the Muslim faith with 9-11 culpability,…. I suppose,substituting the Koran for the” Dancing Israelis” as the suspects we should all be “focusing” on ?

    Do you see that ?

    This is grotesquely manipulative, and substitutes a fraudulent , irrational “hate mantra” for what Americans simply wanted in the first place….to bring the REAL perpetrators of 9-11, to justice.

    Whoever they were.

    The Pastor Terry Antics, and the media’s fixation on it, persuades the viewers, quite subliminally, that hating Muslims is big news….important stuff…….but, on the other hand, the back slapping , high five-ing dancing Israelis who were falling over themselves with glee when the towers got hit…….is completely edited out of ALL media and government discourse.

    It is not discussed….and it simply never happened at all.

    Do you have an explanation for this disparity ?….One which is more than just a “thin reed” to hang on?

    Read More
    • Replies: @RodW
    > Isn’t the whole purpose of a news cycle, at least ostensibly, to edit out the dearth of triviality for its viewers, and get to the core of what really matters ?

    I think the point of news is to make money for the organizations that provide it and to cement their power, which is why it's necessary for those with an interest in getting an approximation of the truth to approach it with acute scepticism.

    Alternative theories to the official conspiracy theories also need to be considered with rigour, but suggesting for example that 'Terry Jones' is a Pythonesque hint is not sufficiently rigorous.

    The author has had a small and very commonplace insight and is trading very heavily on it. I hope not to see any further elaboration on it without much stronger justification.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. iffen says:
    @Art
    Oh my – congratulations are in order – how did he do it - 6629 words talking about America’s dishonest intellectual culture - and not one of them "Jew."

    My guess is that Mr. Revusky has a very bloody tongue.

    Wiz will be happy.

    Just shows what a clever fellow is JR, huh, Art, wink, wink, winkity, wink.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. Art says:

    Why are we wasting our time on these serious matters?

    Nothing to fear – get in line folks – good times are coming – the answer is just feel good – dancing old white ladies will lead us forward.

    Nurse Ratchet and Missy Pocahontas where on the job today – weren’t they inspiring?

    Men not needed, intellect not needed, only feel good – get your two step mojo working – dance your way to prosperity America!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  52. Clyde says:
    @grmbl
    As a frequent commenter on unz.com, Revusky is a tireless, obsessive holocaust denier. Yet as a columnist, he skirts around the topic. (Though I admit that I don't read his columns all the way through so may have missed some things). Why is that? A couple of possible explanations:

    -- He is trying to build up credibility by developing initially somewhat plausible narratives. Subsequently he moves on to ever more far-fetched scenarios. If readers stay with him up to that point, he will eventually feel confident to spring his "holohoax" agenda.

    .-- Ron Unz himself has told Revusky to keep holocaust denial out of his columns, as a condition of letting him publish. I consider that unlikely as Unz does not strike me as someone with a well-developed sense of shame or decency.

    Ruvusky considers himself to be an expert in:
    Shoah business
    False flag operations
    Habara operations
    The above three are what he pumps out five thousand word essays on.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. Cyrano says:
    @SolontoCroesus

    They know about the depravities that the west is capable of domestically – from history – the holocaust.
     
    Is that why Israelists feel compelled to destroy Iran, which so far has resisted the tender seductions of TITT to the extent of staging such effronteries as a Holocaust Conference, and the Hebdoesque holocaust cartoon contest, prefiguring Revusky's RRN acronym. The West no-likey when Iran does Hebdo: Newsweek's Stav Ziv wrote THE BIGGEST LOSER IN TEHRAN'S HOLOCAUST CARTOON CONTEST: IRAN.
    Stav doth protest too much methinks.

    Speaking of the "depravities that the west is capable of" -- Iran has some first=hand knowledge, based on reality, not relentless RRN framing a la holohoax:

    ~ In WWI the British used Iran to supply its troops, causing famine in Iran that cost the lives of about 40% of Iran's population, "the biggest calamity of World War I and one of the worst genocides of the 20th century."

    ~ Iran was the West's plaything in WWII, used and abused by the British, Americans and Russians as a staging ground for troops and materiel to destroy Germany. Iranians at the highest level were closely networked with what was going on in Germany and in rapidly zionizing Palestine.

    ~After enduring years of rule under the puppet-shah and finally gathering enough steam to revolt, Zbigniew Brzezinski induced Jimmee Carter to foment a war between Iraq and Iran. In the course of the war, US and Germany supplied to Saddam's Iraq precursor chemicals and strategic intelligence on where to drop those chemicals that killed approx. 100,000 Iranian civilians. Iran's government appealed to the oh-so-civilized United Nations to halt the use of chemical weapons but their letters and diplomatic overtures were ignored.

    ~ Since 1995 when AIPAC wrote the Executive Order that Bill Clinton signed, sanctioning Iran and Libya; which AIPAC followed up by enshrining in law the D'Amato Amendment, Iran's economy has been undergoing the "Judea Declares War on Germany" treatment -- the attempt to destroy Iran by destroying its economy, preparatory to the actual, physical destruction of Iran for which so many Jews are "orgasmic," to borrow Avigail Abarbanel's term --

    http://www.avigailabarbanel.me.uk/gaza-2009-01-04.html
    Sunday 4th January 2009

    One of the things that is not being discussed much in the media is how much talk there is in Israel about attacking Iran. Word on the (Israeli) street is that an air attack on Iran’s nuclear reactors is imminent.

    Israel has been itching for a ‘good war’ for a while now. The botched attack on Lebanon in 2006 was a psychological disappointment that did not fulfil its purpose, and only led to a deepening chasm between the political and military arms in Israel. An Israeli friend told me in disgust the other day, that there is an atmosphere of ‘national orgasm’ in Israel about the prospect of attacking Iran. While people are being bombed in Gaza, all Israelis can talk about is the coming attack on Iran.
     
    In summ, Cyrano, stfu about the holocaust fraud. We are sick of it. The whole narrative is such a patent fraud that it's a wonder Jews don't collapse of embarrassment at it's B-grade qualities. We've all been led to believe you were so much smarter than that.

    The reason why I don’t buy conspiracy theories is because they have at least one major fundaMENTAL problem (besides being MENTAL as the block capitals suggests) – and that is that conspiracies are too labor intensive. When trying to explain any event – go for the simplest explanation – it works 99% of the time.

    Logic follows the path of least resistance, not some elaborate devious, genius approaching schemes which are stuff of sci-fi books. Reality is usually bland and simple, it is not designed in Hollywood, it doesn’t have intricate plots and twists, it’s not a complicated mind bending puzzle that can be deciphered only by men of “superior” intelligence like Solonto fancies himself to possess. In short there’s no Jewish conspiracy of any kind – there never was. Jews only play by the rules written by someone else – it’s only they are better players than those who wrote the rules.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Art
    In short there’s no Jewish conspiracy of any kind – there never was.

    You do not believe that.

    There is no AIPAC, no ADL, no 100's of national Jew organizations - no Israeli hasbara.

    You insult us - go away!
    , @SolontoCroesus
    Charming sermonette on how logic is like electricity, but to what does it respond? Nothing I wrote has anything to do with conspiracy theories. I stated historical realities debunking your woe-is-we claim that Jews have unique experience of the west's "depravity."

    wrt:

    Jews only play by the rules written by someone else – it’s only they are better players than those who wrote the rules.
     
    Key Israeli leaders are on record stating precisely the opposite:

    It is, however, hard to find any principle of due process, the several Geneva Conventions, or the Nuremberg trials that has not been systematically violated in the Holy Land. Examples of criminal conduct include mass murder, extra-judicial killing, torture, detention without charge, the denial of medical care, the annexation and colonization of occupied territory, the illegal expropriation of land, ethnic cleansing, and the collective punishment of civilians, including the demolition of their homes, the systematic reduction of their infrastructure, and the de-development and impoverishment of entire regions. These crimes have been linked to a concerted effort to rewrite international law to permit actions that it traditionally prohibited, in effect enshrining the principle that might makes right.

    As the former head of the Israeli Defense Forces’ (IDF) Legal Department has argued:

    If you do something for long enough the world will accept it. The whole of international law is now based on the notion that an act that is forbidden today becomes permissible if executed by enough countries . . . . International law progresses through violations.

    A colleague of his has extended this notion by pointing out that:

    The more often Western states apply principles that originated in Israel to their own non-traditional conflicts in places like Afghanistan and Iraq, then the greater the chance these principles have of becoming a valuable part of international law.

    These references to Iraq and Afghanistan underscore the extent to which the United States, once the principal champion of a rule-bound international order, has followed Israel in replacing legal principles with expediency as the central regulator of its interaction with foreign peoples. The expediently amoral doctrine of preemptive war is such an Israeli transplant in the American neo-conservative psyche. Chas Freeman, 2011 Sharabi Lecture
     
    In stark contrast, in his Farewell Address George Washington urged his countrymen to hew closely to the Constitution of the United States --

    [It is my hope] that the free constitution, which is the work of your hands, may be sacredly maintained; that its administration in every department may be stamped with wisdom and virtue; that, in fine, the happiness of the people of these States, under the auspices of liberty, may be made complete, by so careful a preservation and so prudent a use of this blessing, as will acquire to them the glory of recommending it to the applause, the affection, and adoption of every nation, which is yet a stranger to it. https://www.varsitytutors.com/earlyamerica/milestone-events/george-washingtons-farewell-address-full-text
     
    , @utu
    "In short there’s no Jewish conspiracy of any kind " - What about the circumcision in the US?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. helena says:
    @Mark Green
    This was a brilliant and entertaining article. I was smiling the whole way through. Revusky really nails it on a range of levels. He delightfully unmasks the sometimes laughable artificiality of network news. Indeed, the ABC news segment about the knucklehead pastor was priceless. But it was the A-list journalists who inadvertently stole the show.

    How these media darlings could deliver a yarn about the dangerous repercussions of some hillbilly preacher threatening to burn Korans when US forces had already destroyed most of Iraq and much of Afghanistan is utterly beyond belief. (What about those wars of ours?) But there is was. Oh the magic of television! Synthetic theater in exquisite form. It was both hilarious and a total outrage.

    I'm not convinced that these infamous terror events are actually staged, but Revusky does effectively plant many seeds of doubt. Smartly executed.

    Thank you, Mr. Revusky, for a very clever and insightful exploration of the gate-less prison that surrounds us all.

    “How these media darlings could deliver a yarn about the dangerous repercussions of some hillbilly preacher ”

    Likewise
    - racist graffiti vs thousands of teenagers raped
    - Remain in EU because it has brought peace in Europe vs exterminating Arabs

    “gate-less prison”

    a narrative so strong that the youth of Europe are petrified of being ostracised from ‘the (consensus) group’ i.e. socially outcast.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. Art says:
    @Cyrano
    The reason why I don’t buy conspiracy theories is because they have at least one major fundaMENTAL problem (besides being MENTAL as the block capitals suggests) - and that is that conspiracies are too labor intensive. When trying to explain any event – go for the simplest explanation – it works 99% of the time.

    Logic follows the path of least resistance, not some elaborate devious, genius approaching schemes which are stuff of sci-fi books. Reality is usually bland and simple, it is not designed in Hollywood, it doesn’t have intricate plots and twists, it’s not a complicated mind bending puzzle that can be deciphered only by men of “superior” intelligence like Solonto fancies himself to possess. In short there’s no Jewish conspiracy of any kind – there never was. Jews only play by the rules written by someone else – it’s only they are better players than those who wrote the rules.

    In short there’s no Jewish conspiracy of any kind – there never was.

    You do not believe that.

    There is no AIPAC, no ADL, no 100′s of national Jew organizations – no Israeli hasbara.

    You insult us – go away!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Clyde
    AIPAC and ADL live in your mind rent free.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. […] event driven by grassroots nationalism; there is a constant need to be wary of synthetic events –http://www.unz.com/article/the-show-must-go-on/) due to the internet allowing the propaganda immune working class a chance at organizing around […]

    Read More
  57. @Cyrano
    The reason why I don’t buy conspiracy theories is because they have at least one major fundaMENTAL problem (besides being MENTAL as the block capitals suggests) - and that is that conspiracies are too labor intensive. When trying to explain any event – go for the simplest explanation – it works 99% of the time.

    Logic follows the path of least resistance, not some elaborate devious, genius approaching schemes which are stuff of sci-fi books. Reality is usually bland and simple, it is not designed in Hollywood, it doesn’t have intricate plots and twists, it’s not a complicated mind bending puzzle that can be deciphered only by men of “superior” intelligence like Solonto fancies himself to possess. In short there’s no Jewish conspiracy of any kind – there never was. Jews only play by the rules written by someone else – it’s only they are better players than those who wrote the rules.

    Charming sermonette on how logic is like electricity, but to what does it respond? Nothing I wrote has anything to do with conspiracy theories. I stated historical realities debunking your woe-is-we claim that Jews have unique experience of the west’s “depravity.”

    wrt:

    Jews only play by the rules written by someone else – it’s only they are better players than those who wrote the rules.

    Key Israeli leaders are on record stating precisely the opposite:

    It is, however, hard to find any principle of due process, the several Geneva Conventions, or the Nuremberg trials that has not been systematically violated in the Holy Land. Examples of criminal conduct include mass murder, extra-judicial killing, torture, detention without charge, the denial of medical care, the annexation and colonization of occupied territory, the illegal expropriation of land, ethnic cleansing, and the collective punishment of civilians, including the demolition of their homes, the systematic reduction of their infrastructure, and the de-development and impoverishment of entire regions. These crimes have been linked to a concerted effort to rewrite international law to permit actions that it traditionally prohibited, in effect enshrining the principle that might makes right.

    As the former head of the Israeli Defense Forces’ (IDF) Legal Department has argued:

    If you do something for long enough the world will accept it. The whole of international law is now based on the notion that an act that is forbidden today becomes permissible if executed by enough countries . . . . International law progresses through violations.

    A colleague of his has extended this notion by pointing out that:

    The more often Western states apply principles that originated in Israel to their own non-traditional conflicts in places like Afghanistan and Iraq, then the greater the chance these principles have of becoming a valuable part of international law.

    These references to Iraq and Afghanistan underscore the extent to which the United States, once the principal champion of a rule-bound international order, has followed Israel in replacing legal principles with expediency as the central regulator of its interaction with foreign peoples. The expediently amoral doctrine of preemptive war is such an Israeli transplant in the American neo-conservative psyche. Chas Freeman, 2011 Sharabi Lecture

    In stark contrast, in his Farewell Address George Washington urged his countrymen to hew closely to the Constitution of the United States –

    [It is my hope] that the free constitution, which is the work of your hands, may be sacredly maintained; that its administration in every department may be stamped with wisdom and virtue; that, in fine, the happiness of the people of these States, under the auspices of liberty, may be made complete, by so careful a preservation and so prudent a use of this blessing, as will acquire to them the glory of recommending it to the applause, the affection, and adoption of every nation, which is yet a stranger to it. https://www.varsitytutors.com/earlyamerica/milestone-events/george-washingtons-farewell-address-full-text

    Read More
    • Replies: @Cyrano
    As much as I find your argument riveting, I am afraid I am a wrong audience for you, sport. Here is what I suggest you do instead. Take a selected group of your fellow conspiracy theorists from this site and go on a goodwill tour of the greater middle east – where you country has performed some of the most outstanding (exceptional might be a better word) humanitarian work over the last few decades.

    And when you get there, declare yourself loud and clear as Americans. Then when you get kidnapped and tortured – as one suspect you might – tell your Muslim brothers and co-sufferers – that you are both victims of Jewish conspiracy. See how well that sits with your fellow co-sufferers – the Muslims. And if you don’t make it back alive – that’s OK – the US could use a break. It has too many of your kind anyway.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. RodW says:
    @alexander
    You state that the very "nature" of the news cycle guarantees that masses of trivial content is going to get hyped......but you don't say why.

    Isn't the whole purpose of a news cycle, at least ostensibly, to edit out the dearth of triviality for its viewers, and get to the core of what really matters ?

    Isn't that our expectation..."its important because it makes the news"...and "its news because it is important" ?

    It seems the entire Point, Mr Revusky is making ,,,,is how manipulative and contrived the media is, in disseminating information.

    For example , the media did NOT choose to spend three weeks on the "dancing Israelis", plastering their faces on every news screen, and pointing out how suspicious their behavior was ,on that fateful day.

    Instead, the media VANISHES the entire"Dancing Israeli " story.....but goes long and heavy on Pastor Jones and his Koran burning escapades...

    As if to implicate, by proxy, the Muslim faith with 9-11 culpability,.... I suppose,substituting the Koran for the" Dancing Israelis" as the suspects we should all be "focusing" on ?

    Do you see that ?

    This is grotesquely manipulative, and substitutes a fraudulent , irrational "hate mantra" for what Americans simply wanted in the first place....to bring the REAL perpetrators of 9-11, to justice.

    Whoever they were.

    The Pastor Terry Antics, and the media's fixation on it, persuades the viewers, quite subliminally, that hating Muslims is big news....important stuff.......but, on the other hand, the back slapping , high five-ing dancing Israelis who were falling over themselves with glee when the towers got hit.......is completely edited out of ALL media and government discourse.

    It is not discussed....and it simply never happened at all.

    Do you have an explanation for this disparity ?....One which is more than just a "thin reed" to hang on?

    > Isn’t the whole purpose of a news cycle, at least ostensibly, to edit out the dearth of triviality for its viewers, and get to the core of what really matters ?

    I think the point of news is to make money for the organizations that provide it and to cement their power, which is why it’s necessary for those with an interest in getting an approximation of the truth to approach it with acute scepticism.

    Alternative theories to the official conspiracy theories also need to be considered with rigour, but suggesting for example that ‘Terry Jones’ is a Pythonesque hint is not sufficiently rigorous.

    The author has had a small and very commonplace insight and is trading very heavily on it. I hope not to see any further elaboration on it without much stronger justification.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. iffen says:
    @Barbara
    Imagine if a virus, that only infects and kills the evil ones, takes out the whole fascist lot. The citizens (who never strode beyond the gate) wake up, turn on their boob tubes, and instead of actors see the crazed conspiracy theorists and hear what has actually transpired since the date of their birth and beyond! I hope to live to see it.

    infects and kills the evil ones, takes out the whole fascist lot… see the crazed conspiracy theorists

    The union of these two is quite large, if you kill off one the other might not exist.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. Rehmat says:

    Gen. David Petraeus has always been a hero in the pro-Israel Mafia – from Iraq to having sex with his biographer.

    Dr. James Petras called the General “Zionism’s military poodle”.

    On January 31, 2015, the Pentagon decided not to “punish” disgraced Gen. David Petraeus (with Jewish family roots) further on recommendations of Defense secretary Ashton Carter, Jewish lobby favorite.

    “Given the Army review, secretary Carter considers this matter closed,” Washington Post quoted Stephen Hedger (Zionist Jew), assistant secretary of defense, as saying in a three-sentence letter.

    The letter was sent out to individuals who asked Carter not to consider any more reprimands against Petraeus, including Senate Armed Service Committee Chairman Senator John McCain (Christian Zionist), Senator Jack Reed (Jewish) and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (Jewish). According to military law, the Pentagon had the right to seek further punishment.

    In July 2010 Philip Giraldi, former CIA official, claimed that David Petraeus had close ties with Israel Lobby through Max Boot and two Kagans, Kimberly and Fred.

    Gen. David Petraeus, also known as General Betray US, was declared a war hero by the Jewish press while commanding US occupation force in Iraq in 2007 and 2008.

    https://rehmat1.com/2016/02/02/jewish-lobby-gets-gen-petraeus-off-the-hook/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  61. @Qasim
    Hi Rurik.

    Like you, these articles by Mr. Revusky have given me a lot to think about. I am not sure to what extent I agree with his overall framework, but his overall point that the media is not to be blindly trusted in its presentation of events seems undeniable.

    You seem to agree with him on his views on 9/11, etc. And you note that these events are used to push a neo-con agenda you find repugnant.

    But while you show your sympathies to Muslims when it comes to foreign policy, you have made it clear how much you despise continued Muslim immigration into the West. (I don't have a problem with this by the way, I also think all immigration should be stopped because I fear Balkanization and the resurgence of white nationalism.) Anyway, you routinely bring up Rotterham and Cologne and similar events to show how 'dusky hordes" are coming to defile white women. I think it was you who posted that cartoon yesterday where some bin-Laden looking dudes are raping a white woman on the altar of multiculturalism.

    My question is "Do we know that these events are completely true either?' I mean, I have always assumed they were, but I assumed the same about 9/11 and San Bernardino until relatively recently as well. Perhaps the lurid reports of European women being unable to even walk the streets without being sexually assaulted by lascivious Arabs/Muslims are highly exaggerated/ synthetic as well??? They certainly don't seem congruous with my own experiences, but I live in the US, and maybe things are different in Europe.

    Perhaps the lurid reports of European women being unable to even walk the streets without being sexually assaulted by lascivious Arabs/Muslims are highly exaggerated/ synthetic as well???

    My sense of things is that this is the case, almost certainly. In fact, a huge amount of the news items that you see about this can be traced back to an outfit called the Gatestone Institute, which is just a pure Zionist/Neocon group. Their whole raison d’être is just to vilify Muslims, it seems. Just look at the wikipedia page on these people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gatestone_Institute and look at who the key people are.

    A huge amount of the stuff about how women in Sweden, say, can’t walk down the street without being molested seems to originate from Gatestone. There is this other group that is related, a similar sort of neocon/zionist outfit, called the Clarion project, and you can see that a lot of the synthetic disinfo about the Jihadis comes from them, all this nonsense about the dangers of Radical Islam and how they want to impose Sharia law on the West and all this crap. That’s the Clarion Project. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarion_Project

    There’s really an interlaced network of these foundations or think-tanks, or whatever they are called, and it’s really entirely a Zionist/neocon sort of thing.

    Anyway, on New Year’s Eve, there were supposedly these mass sexual assaults in Cologne, Germany, in and around the Cologne Hauptbanhof, the main rail station. I have scoured the net looking for any film footage of any sexual assaults and I can find no credible evidence that any of that happened — I mean specifically the mass sexual assaults around the Cologne Hauptbanhof. When you find something, it turns out to be video from some other time and place.

    This occurred supposedly a half year ago, at a point in time, when everybody has a video camera in their pockets (a phone). I don’t think it is possible for an event of the scale they are claiming happened to occur and for there to be no video footage.

    Read More
    • Disagree: Che Guava
    • Replies: @Rurik
    Hey JR,

    this on Drudge right now

    http://www.wnd.com/2016/06/idaho-rape-obama-prosecutor-silencing-americans-with-threats-of-arrest/#!

    little 5-year-old 'special-needs girl' is forced into a bathroom by Muslim refugee boys and at least one of them pisses in her mouth

    small price to pay for the joys and wonderful benefits of diversity?

    do you (or anyone actually believe that once America and Europe have enough Muslim majority areas (and Hispanic and Asian and African and everything else) that the world will finally, at long last be free of racism and ethnic and religious strife?

    because this is the mantra that the Zionists are demanding is the solution to the intractable "racism" of the white, Western world. That they simply have to be forced into diversity to the point that it will overwhelm the racist element and then we'll all have our utopia!

    even if a few eggs have to be broken in the process, huh?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/12088341/Two-teenage-girls-gang-raped-by-four-Syrian-nationals-in-southern-Germany.html

    just as with monstrous crimes committed against whites by blacks in America (including gang rapes and murders so savage and vicious that they numb the soul), so too all accounts of rape or assault by Muslims (or any of the fist-class immigrants) are spiked by the Zio-media, because just like the tragic story of the 5 year old girl, news of that kind of thing has an effect on the people that the PTB do not approve of.

    Hence the Brexit vote- that was in large part due to the violence and intractable strife that the Muslims and everybody else is bringing with them into England (and everywhere else they go), because through no fault of their own, their countries have been destroyed by the same Zionist fiend that is foisting the refugees upon Western communities that are not Muslim, and don't want to become Muslim. All to the great amusement of assorted Zionists and liberals and hate-consumed Jewish supremacists everywhere.

    Make no mistake, if it were possible for Obama and Bush and Tony Blair and Killary and Merkel and all the other demon stooges of the Fiend to host every single refugee from their terror wars upon these Muslim countries, then I'd be all for it.

    But I don't think some family in Idaho should be paying the price for the Zionists and their stooge's evil wars. That five year old (or her parents) had nothing to do with those wars.
    , @Qasim
    Thanks for the reply Mr. Revusky, I was hoping you would notice my comment and respond.

    This is an alt-right sort of website, and a lot of people here oppose US foreign policy, and therefore are primed to question the narratives about 9/11, WMD in Iraq, various terrorist attacks etc., which are mendaciously used to justify our interventionist foreign policy.

    But these same people are generally nationalists/anti-multiculturalism, and they accept these reports about Muslims sexually assaulting every chick in sight or trying to ram Sharia down everyone's throats as incontrovertible proof of the catastrophic consequences of immigration.

    But it seems to me that if you are going to question one aspect of the neocon narrative, it makes sense to question all of it.

    Again, I want to point out that I have no problem with people like Rurik (whose long and thoughtful reply I appreciated) who want to maintain the White or Christian character of the West; all self-respecting people want to maintain their ethnic/religious dominance in the lands they currently control. I just wonder if justifiable attempts to secure one's tribal interests are being supported via specious methods.

    P.S. Mr. Revusky, are you planning to write about what happened in Orlando? After reading your articles, I find myself wondering how a single man can shoot 100 people and take the time to call TV stations without getting jumped from behind or hit by a bottle or something.
    , @pink_point
    The Gatestone Institute possible aims don't turn all what they say into falsehood automatically.

    It seems to me the points they make are about opposite to the real neocons in the USA: for one, they are against free uncontrolled immigration.

    And that's why, probably, they are a minor voice in Sweden's mediatic landscape.
    One of them was censored for reporting naked statistics about rape.

    I don't know what they say on other matters, but insofar as they deal with rape, they just expose statistics nobody can really find fault with — and that's why Sweden mainstream media ignores them, instead of shaming them.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. Rurik says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    Perhaps the lurid reports of European women being unable to even walk the streets without being sexually assaulted by lascivious Arabs/Muslims are highly exaggerated/ synthetic as well???
     
    My sense of things is that this is the case, almost certainly. In fact, a huge amount of the news items that you see about this can be traced back to an outfit called the Gatestone Institute, which is just a pure Zionist/Neocon group. Their whole raison d'être is just to vilify Muslims, it seems. Just look at the wikipedia page on these people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gatestone_Institute and look at who the key people are.

    A huge amount of the stuff about how women in Sweden, say, can't walk down the street without being molested seems to originate from Gatestone. There is this other group that is related, a similar sort of neocon/zionist outfit, called the Clarion project, and you can see that a lot of the synthetic disinfo about the Jihadis comes from them, all this nonsense about the dangers of Radical Islam and how they want to impose Sharia law on the West and all this crap. That's the Clarion Project. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarion_Project

    There's really an interlaced network of these foundations or think-tanks, or whatever they are called, and it's really entirely a Zionist/neocon sort of thing.

    Anyway, on New Year's Eve, there were supposedly these mass sexual assaults in Cologne, Germany, in and around the Cologne Hauptbanhof, the main rail station. I have scoured the net looking for any film footage of any sexual assaults and I can find no credible evidence that any of that happened -- I mean specifically the mass sexual assaults around the Cologne Hauptbanhof. When you find something, it turns out to be video from some other time and place.

    This occurred supposedly a half year ago, at a point in time, when everybody has a video camera in their pockets (a phone). I don't think it is possible for an event of the scale they are claiming happened to occur and for there to be no video footage.

    Hey JR,

    this on Drudge right now

    http://www.wnd.com/2016/06/idaho-rape-obama-prosecutor-silencing-americans-with-threats-of-arrest/#!

    little 5-year-old ‘special-needs girl’ is forced into a bathroom by Muslim refugee boys and at least one of them pisses in her mouth

    small price to pay for the joys and wonderful benefits of diversity?

    do you (or anyone actually believe that once America and Europe have enough Muslim majority areas (and Hispanic and Asian and African and everything else) that the world will finally, at long last be free of racism and ethnic and religious strife?

    because this is the mantra that the Zionists are demanding is the solution to the intractable “racism” of the white, Western world. That they simply have to be forced into diversity to the point that it will overwhelm the racist element and then we’ll all have our utopia!

    even if a few eggs have to be broken in the process, huh?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/12088341/Two-teenage-girls-gang-raped-by-four-Syrian-nationals-in-southern-Germany.html

    just as with monstrous crimes committed against whites by blacks in America (including gang rapes and murders so savage and vicious that they numb the soul), so too all accounts of rape or assault by Muslims (or any of the fist-class immigrants) are spiked by the Zio-media, because just like the tragic story of the 5 year old girl, news of that kind of thing has an effect on the people that the PTB do not approve of.

    Hence the Brexit vote- that was in large part due to the violence and intractable strife that the Muslims and everybody else is bringing with them into England (and everywhere else they go), because through no fault of their own, their countries have been destroyed by the same Zionist fiend that is foisting the refugees upon Western communities that are not Muslim, and don’t want to become Muslim. All to the great amusement of assorted Zionists and liberals and hate-consumed Jewish supremacists everywhere.

    Make no mistake, if it were possible for Obama and Bush and Tony Blair and Killary and Merkel and all the other demon stooges of the Fiend to host every single refugee from their terror wars upon these Muslim countries, then I’d be all for it.

    But I don’t think some family in Idaho should be paying the price for the Zionists and their stooge’s evil wars. That five year old (or her parents) had nothing to do with those wars.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
    Hi Rurik,

    First of all, I have meant to point this out to you but not got around to it. I think you are engaging in a basic logical fallacy in much of what you say. You point out cases where the authorities understate the frequency of certain kinds of crimes. And then you go to a completely separate context and just assume that the authorities are understating in a similar manner there.

    In other words, you assume that if they are caught fibbing in one case, in a separate case, they will be fibbing in the same direction. That is not necessarily so.

    For example, if I am trying to impress some woman (because I want to get in her knickers) I could well think it makes sense for me to exaggerate how rich I am. If I am haggling about the price of something, like a car or house or whatever, I could well choose to pretend that I am much poorer than I am. So in one context, I could lie in one direction and in another context, I will lie in another direction. You seem to be reasoning that because they lie in one direction in a given context, they are always lying in that same direction. But I think that is fallacious. If it suits their purposes in one context, to hush up whatever raping is really going on, then they'll do that, but if it suits their purposes to greatly exaggerate and claim that women are getting raped by Arabs right left and center, then they'll claim that!

    Well, your basic logical fallacy, IMHO, is that you assume that liars are consistent in their lies! But, no, not necessarily. In fact, that's what tends to be the undoing of liars, is that their lies start contradicting one another. It's the truth that is always consistent!

    Now, in my last note about this, I specifically brought up the mass sexual assaults in Cologne and I just cannot find any proof that this really happened! I simply reason that it is basically impossible for something of that scale to have happened at this juncture, without there being some video footage available, simply because EVERYBODY has a video cam in their pockets!

    Now, specifically, on the link you provide, I am not at all sure that I trust the information source. The specific story, people urinating in the mouth of a five-year-old, I don't know what to make of it, since it's such a bizarre thing already. Even if this really happened, I am not willing to believe that this is something that happens very often, it's so kinky and weird that... I mean to say, it's something so freaky and bizarre that I would be reluctant to reason from the specific to the general on the basis of this story. (If it was some more "normal" narrative where the lads dragged off some local teenage girl and fucked her silly, then... but this is just so bizarre that I can't even think about really generalizing about it...)

    Another thing about this is that the most notorious single case possibly that happened in Germany was this Russian girl, 13 years old, claimed that Arab migrants raped her and so on, and it became something of an international incident, since Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister openly accused the Germans of covering it up. Then, finally, the girl herself admitted that it was bullshit. So Lavrov, normally a very serious guy to be respected, really got egg on his face over this, it seems to me.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/31/teenage-girl-made-up-migrant-claim-that-caused-uproar-in-germany

    Anyway:

    (1) Did these mass sexual assaults in Cologne, Germany, on New Year's Eve really happen? If so, why is there no video evidence?

    (2) Is there really a rape epidemic going on in Sweden? If so, why is it that if you google "Sweden rape epidemic" the stuff that comes up is (indirectly or directly) from the Gatestone Institute? Have you looked at who the Gatestone Institute are? If not, you really should. If this is the only information source for that, then I think we can say that it's almost certainly a hoax.

    But, look, my current position on this is NOT that no rapes ever happened. If you have hundreds of thousands of these people, a certain number will be rapists or whatever. However, I am extremely unconvinced by these reports of a mass rape, sexual assault epidemic going on. I cannot find convincing proof of it. The biggest single case was what allegedly happened in and around the main train station in Cologne, Germany, on New Year's Eve, and it looks to me like this is a hoax, didn't happen. Where's the video footage?

    As for the overall immigration issue, I am not an advocate of mass immigration myself, but I strongly feel that the anti-immigration case has to be made honestly. Trying to say that all these people are rapists when they're not, that's not how I roll. I've got a problem with that....
    , @SolontoCroesus
    Look Homeward Angel, by Thomas Wolfe, 1929

    But they guarded what they had against the barbarians. Eugene,
    Max, and Harry ruled their little neighborhood: they made war upon
    the negroes and the Jews, who amused them, and upon the Pigtail
    Alley people, whom they hated and despised. Catlike they prowled
    about in the dark promise of night, sitting at times upon a wall in
    the exciting glare of the corner lamp, which flared gaseously,
    winking noisily from time to time.

    Or, crouched in the concealing shrubbery of Gant's yard, they
    waited for romantic negro couples climbing homewards, jerking by a
    cord, as their victims came upon the spot, a stuffed black snake-
    appearing stocking. And the dark was shrill with laughter as the
    loud rich comic voices stammered, stopped, and screamed.

    Or they stoned the cycling black boy of the markets, as he swerved
    down gracefully into an alley. Nor did they hate them: clowns are
    black. They had learned, as well, that it was proper to cuff these
    people kindly, curse them cheerfully, feed them magnanimously. Men
    are kind to a faithful wagging dog, but he must not walk habitually
    upon two legs. They knew that they must "take nothin' off a
    nigger," and that the beginnings of argument could best be scotched
    with a club and a broken head. Only, you couldn't break a nigger's
    head.

    They spat joyously upon the Jews. Drown a Jew and hit a nigger.

    The boys would wait on the Jews, follow them home shouting "Goose
    Grease! Goose Grease!" which, they were convinced, was the chief
    staple of Semitic diet; or with the blind acceptance of little boys
    of some traditional, or mangled, or imaginary catchword of abuse,
    they would yell after their muttering and tormented victim:
    "Veeshamadye Veeshamadye!" confident that they had pronounced the
    most unspeakable, to Jewish ears, of affronts.

    Eugene had no interest in pogroms, but it was a fetich with Max.
    The chief object of their torture was a little furtive-faced boy,
    whose name was Isaac Lipinski. They pounced cattishly at him when
    he appeared, harried him down alleys, over fences, across yards,
    into barns, stables, and his own house; he moved with amazing speed
    and stealth, escaping fantastically, teasing them to the pursuit,
    thumbing his fingers at them, and grinning with wide Kike constant
    derision.

    Or, steeped catlike in the wickedness of darkness, adrift in the
    brooding promise of the neighborhood, they would cluster silently
    under a Jew's home, grouped in a sniggering huddle as they listened
    to the rich excited voices, the throaty accentuation of the women;
    or convulsed at the hysterical quarrels which shook the Jew-walls
    almost nightly.

    Once, shrieking with laughter, they followed a running fight
    through the streets between a young Jew and his father-in-law, in
    which each was pursued and pummelled, or pursuing and pummelling;
    and on the day when Louis Greenberg, a pale Jew returned from
    college, had killed himself by drinking carbolic acid, they stood
    curiously outside the dingy wailing house, shaken by sudden glee as
    they saw his father, a bearded orthodox old Jew, clothed in rusty,
    greasy black, and wearing a scarred derby, approach running up the
    hill to his home, shaking his hands in the air, and wailing
    rhythmically:


    "Oi, yoi yoi yoi yoi,
    Oi yoi yoi yoi yoi,
    Oi yoi yoi yoi yoi."
     
    What is the point of this extended quote?

    Just this: It is not a new phenomenon that minorities, or people who are alien to, or less powerful than, one's own perceived status, are harassed by those imbued with their own sense of superior rights or entitlements.
    Nor is it a new phenomenon that the fantasies that percolate in a poorly developed mind are sometimes given a substance in writing that they do not possess in reality.
    Nor is it a new phenomenon that fantasies of working evil and degrading thing are acted upon in fact.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. @RodW
    These 'crisis actor' claims are a very thin reed to hang anything on. There are some fairly straightforward reasons why these interviews don't look exactly as we might expect them too, and why they contain inconsistencies. The nature of the news cycle guarantees that masses of trivial content is going to get hyped, and various players are going to exploit that, including the deep state.

    This kind of amateur sleuthing gets really tiresome. The author should do some proper investigation if he wants to be taken seriously--interview Terry Jones for example, audition as a 'crisis actor' and get hold of the employment contract, expose one of the 'Wag The Dog' studios of which there must be a few if his theory is correct--anything to provide a bit of substance.

    There are some fairly straightforward reasons why these interviews don’t look exactly as we might expect them too, and why they contain inconsistencies.

    Well, sure there’s a simple straightforward reason why the interviews look fake. Because they are COMPLETELY OBVIOUSLY FAKE! Period.

    My honest sense of things is that if you watch, for example, the BBC interview with those black kids that I linked above and you sincerely believe that those kids’ momma was murdered senselessly 24 hours earlier, then there is something wrong with you. The same applies to those interviews with that woman Ginnie Watson, and this other girl, Emma Parkinson. These things are pretty obviously fake.

    Now, okay, maybe you have some genuine incontrovertible proof that these people are, despite all outward appearances, credible witnesses giving credible testimony. In that case, you really ought to share that information. However, I get the feeling that the basic argument you are making is that this is on the TV, therefore it’s true.

    Or are you making, at root, a different argument from that? If so, what specific argument is it?

    The author should do some proper investigation if he wants to be taken seriously

    I note that, in a debate with a certain kind of commenter here, there is always an onus on me to demonstrate something, but my interlocutor never accepts any obligation to demonstrate anything himself.

    Well, I obviously don’t accept that there is only ever an onus on me to demonstrate anything. No, you say this phony-looking shit is real. You provide some proof.

    interview Terry Jones for example,

    Hmm, that’s an interesting idea. What do you propose that I ask this man?

    I don’t have any particular question I want to ask him. If you do have any questions for him that would clarify whatever, why don’t you interview him?

    audition as a ‘crisis actor’ and get hold of the employment contract

    Oh, you mean, if I cannot show you an official “crisis actor” employment contract, then there are no crisis actors? So, I suppose that, since I can’t produce an example of an actual written contract to kill somebody, therefore contract killers, a.k.a. hit-men, do not exist, right?

    Look, a “crisis actor” is just somebody who, for whatever money or reward, is there on the scene at one of these synthetic events, and says whatever is supposed to be said to support the synthetic narrative. I believe that this exists. Moreover, the clips I provided are a pretty clear example of this.

    If I’m wrong about this, then provide me some proof that I’m wrong.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RodW
    As soon as you put someone in front of a camera and start an interview, you already have a fake situation. People being interviewed on TV are encouraged to burble, and burble they do, except when they can't think of anything else to say. Oh you say, they're not emoting enough! Or oh, they're emoting too much! Well, exactly how much is natural in a situation to which most normal people aren't accustomed? Logically, you'd expect real actors to do a better job.

    Some of the people in the videos have clearly been interviewed several times and have a bit of a schtick going. "I'm reeely reeely angry!". Well maybe they are, but the interview thing is by its nature fake, so their schtick comes across as cheesy.

    Another thing you may not know is that intensely religious people can actually be happy that their loved ones have gone to their Maker. They do genuinely feel comforted by the thought, to the extent that normal people without these fantasies are genuinely disturbed by their lack of distress. The black community that was shot up by that white kid appear to have been intensely religious as well as self-disciplined, which is why the survivors weren't emoting all over the place.

    > Oh, you mean, if I cannot show you an official “crisis actor” employment contract, then there are no crisis actors?
    That sort of logic is about the same level as "an actress witnessed a terror event therefore the whole thing was staged". Contract killings have been adequately documented through legal proceedings, but the evidence for 'crisis actors' seems to be remarkably scant considering what a popular career option it apparently is today.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. Qasim says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    Perhaps the lurid reports of European women being unable to even walk the streets without being sexually assaulted by lascivious Arabs/Muslims are highly exaggerated/ synthetic as well???
     
    My sense of things is that this is the case, almost certainly. In fact, a huge amount of the news items that you see about this can be traced back to an outfit called the Gatestone Institute, which is just a pure Zionist/Neocon group. Their whole raison d'être is just to vilify Muslims, it seems. Just look at the wikipedia page on these people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gatestone_Institute and look at who the key people are.

    A huge amount of the stuff about how women in Sweden, say, can't walk down the street without being molested seems to originate from Gatestone. There is this other group that is related, a similar sort of neocon/zionist outfit, called the Clarion project, and you can see that a lot of the synthetic disinfo about the Jihadis comes from them, all this nonsense about the dangers of Radical Islam and how they want to impose Sharia law on the West and all this crap. That's the Clarion Project. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarion_Project

    There's really an interlaced network of these foundations or think-tanks, or whatever they are called, and it's really entirely a Zionist/neocon sort of thing.

    Anyway, on New Year's Eve, there were supposedly these mass sexual assaults in Cologne, Germany, in and around the Cologne Hauptbanhof, the main rail station. I have scoured the net looking for any film footage of any sexual assaults and I can find no credible evidence that any of that happened -- I mean specifically the mass sexual assaults around the Cologne Hauptbanhof. When you find something, it turns out to be video from some other time and place.

    This occurred supposedly a half year ago, at a point in time, when everybody has a video camera in their pockets (a phone). I don't think it is possible for an event of the scale they are claiming happened to occur and for there to be no video footage.

    Thanks for the reply Mr. Revusky, I was hoping you would notice my comment and respond.

    This is an alt-right sort of website, and a lot of people here oppose US foreign policy, and therefore are primed to question the narratives about 9/11, WMD in Iraq, various terrorist attacks etc., which are mendaciously used to justify our interventionist foreign policy.

    But these same people are generally nationalists/anti-multiculturalism, and they accept these reports about Muslims sexually assaulting every chick in sight or trying to ram Sharia down everyone’s throats as incontrovertible proof of the catastrophic consequences of immigration.

    But it seems to me that if you are going to question one aspect of the neocon narrative, it makes sense to question all of it.

    Again, I want to point out that I have no problem with people like Rurik (whose long and thoughtful reply I appreciated) who want to maintain the White or Christian character of the West; all self-respecting people want to maintain their ethnic/religious dominance in the lands they currently control. I just wonder if justifiable attempts to secure one’s tribal interests are being supported via specious methods.

    P.S. Mr. Revusky, are you planning to write about what happened in Orlando? After reading your articles, I find myself wondering how a single man can shoot 100 people and take the time to call TV stations without getting jumped from behind or hit by a bottle or something.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky

    Thanks for the reply Mr. Revusky, I was hoping you would notice my comment and respond.
     
    Well, you're welcome. So far in my contributions to this site, I've tried to engage with people who have legitimate comments to make. People who discuss things in good faith, as I'm pretty sure you are. Actually, truth told, I've also wasted far too much time and energy responding to bad-faithed people. I'm really pretty set on not wasting time with trolls now.

    This is an alt-right sort of website
     
    This site is pretty eclectic actually, but yeah, there is a big sort of locus that is strongly ideological that way here, yes. I don't fit into that rubric, I wouldn't say, perhaps mainly because I am currently mostly just focused on what is true and what is not true, as opposed to ideology.

    But these same people are generally nationalists/anti-multiculturalism, and they accept these reports about Muslims sexually assaulting every chick in sight or trying to ram Sharia down everyone’s throats as incontrovertible proof of the catastrophic consequences of immigration.
     

    Yeah, what you see with strongly ideological people is that, for them, though I suppose they won't ever say it explicitly, their ideology is more important than the facts. They decide something is true or not based on whether it supports their belief system.

    Another way of expressing this is that it is as if they believe that reality is constrained or influenced by what causes them emotional satisfaction. So, somehow, for them, these Islamophobic narratives of mass sexual assaults provide them emotional satisfaction, so they just believe it. There is no attempt to figure out whether it is true or not, and frankly, I find that pretty appalling.

    And, really, this is the road to perdition for a real intellectual for the very simple reason that objective reality simply exists. It is not at all constrained or affected by what causes us emotional satisfaction. Now, obviously, it does not cause me any emotional satisfaction to believe that these Arab refugees are raping women all over the place, but if there was really strong evidence that this is true, I would have to accept it.

    BUT... I looked for it, and cannot find it. It looks like these are synthetic narratives. There might be a handful of actual organic events, but the overall narrative looks synthetic to me.

    As for the whole alt-right thing, my own views have evolved over the last few years, and I am more sympathetic to that view than I ever was before. However, my position is that the case must be made honestly. If you don't want mass immigration, especially from countries with a very different culture (and yes, race too...) make the case honestly. To just start saying that all these people are rapists and murderers and so forth when they aren't.... now, of course, if you bring in a million immigrants from anywhere, a handful will be rapists or whatever sort of criminal, just by a statistical law of large numbers, but by and large, they really aren't. That's my honest impression.

    So, if I don't want you to come live in my house, I don't have to start making up stories that you're a rapist and so on. I just can say: You're a perfectly good person, but it's my house and I'm not inviting you to come live here.


    P.S. Mr. Revusky, are you planning to write about what happened in Orlando?
     
    I have a start on a few different articles that I started before the Orlando thing. What happened then is that I was thinking about this whole quatrième mur, fourth wall thing in drama theory, and I started writing the night at the theater parable and this article sort of coalesced quickly. Well, I had been thinking about the Terry Jones thing, but I didn't know how to introduce the whole issue and I thought about the "fourth wall" concept and it sort of meshed, and I wrote this article, even though I had started these other articles already, that I've been a bit blocked on, like three of them! So the articles I'm working don't mention Orlando because it hadn't happened yet! Those articles are unfinished and I can't tell you at the moment whether I'll end up offering any analysis on the Orlando thing.

    The Orlando thing is fairly obviously some sort of synthetic event. Just for a simple reason: how many talking points/agendas intersect here? You've got Afghanistan, ISIS, Islam, gun control, the homos.... It's as if the story was written by a damned committee where every member could get in his talking points. What is the likelihood of an organic event hitting all these agenda/talking points by chance?

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. grmbl says:

    Crazy

    Evil

    Stupid

    It’s the eternal question with nutcases like Revusky and Roberts and a thousand others like them.

    Are they in the throes of paranoid schizophrenia? Are they psychopaths deriving sadistic pleasure from denying survivors of some of the worst crimes in history even the recognition that what happened, happened? Greedy con-men exploiting centuries-old prejudices? Are they gullible fools, drooling imbeciles who will fall for the simplest tricks in the book?

    Until they improve imaging techniques for the brain to the point where we can actually read the thoughts of people, an answer will remain elusive. However, the way that their obsessions cluster in a certain area provides a clue.

    (1) Holocaust denial: there was no holocaust, the Jews made it up for personal gain, it’s a holohoax

    (2) 9/11 Trutherism: Pre-planted explosives, Jewish owner, Jews did not show up for work that day, dancing Israelis

    (3) Exorbitant crimes committed by Muslim immigrants to West are faked, the Jews are spreading this disinfo to further their agenda. (Alternatively: Not faked but real; part of the sinister plan of the Jews to flood the West with Muslims.)

    Spot the common element, it’s not hard. Probably a good idea to let them rant and rave to their heart’s content. If left unopposed, eventually they will turn against each other over doctrinal differences between their various crazinesses. Maybe they will kill each other. Most Aryan/Nazi activists who are violently killed do not die in shootouts with the police; they are murdered by other Aryan/Nazi activists :)

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    Roberts is not on the same ward as Revusky.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. Priss Factor [AKA "Anonymny"] says: • Website
    @Priss Factor
    "The Koran-burning pastor doubtless has some cartoonish aspects, but the people most ludicrously caricatured in the story are surely the Muslims who run amok and kill people because they have heard that some insignificant person on the other side of the world is burning a Koran."

    Dumb Muslims and dumb Christians are just pawns in the game.

    The real new religion of the West is homomania. How did this come about?


    Most Liberals want to be members of the elite. They want the good life and privileges.
    But 'elitism' is a dirty word. The so-called ‘progressive’ whose secular faith is ‘equality’ must seek a way to be elitist without seeming elitist.

    Since it is no longer fashionable to take pride in being higher-up or more elevated than the rest of humanity, the neo-elitism consists of avant-garde-ism expounding that the ‘radicals’ are way ahead of the curve of everyone else.
    So, while one cannot be ABOVE humanity, one can be AHEAD of humanity. Being AHEAD of humanity, one enjoys being part of the neo-elite, but such privilege is rationalized on grounds that one is forging ahead as a navigator of justice to bring about greater equality for everyone.

    Of course, the globalist-capitalists understand what this conceit is really about. They understand that the radical intellectuals don’t want to be part of humanity with regular jobs and hassles of life. The rads want to be professors, curators, critics, artists, authors, celebrities, ‘creative’ folks, agents of NGO’s, and etc.

    So, the globalist-capitalist and ‘radicals’ struck up a bargain whereby the former would fund the latter who would mainly redefine ‘equality’ in terms of homomania, transmania, and gender-bender obsessions.

    This is wonderful for the super-capitalist class since the homo/tranny community consists only of 3%(if that) of humanity.
    So, if the ultimate goal of ‘progressive leftism’ is about making all of humanity bow down to the vanity and narcissism of a small percentage of people who indulge in fecal penetration, cross-dressing, and genital mutilation, it really means that neo-equality consists of the 97% serving the vainglory of the sexually deviant 3%.

    This is great for the super-rich since homos and trannies, in all their self-glorifying vanity, love to rub shoulders with the men and women of privilege.

    “So, while one cannot be ABOVE humanity, one can be AHEAD of humanity.”

    In other words, you can’t be more ELEVATED but you can be more EVOLVED.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. Jake Saga says:
    @Rurik
    Hello Qasim,

    You seem to agree with him on his views on 9/11, etc. And you note that these events are used to push a neo-con agenda you find repugnant.
     
    you said it brother!

    you have made it clear how much you despise continued Muslim immigration into the West.
     
    not just Muslim immigration, but all non-Western immigration. I'll tell ya what - when all countries accept all immigrants from all other countries, then perhaps there'd be an argument for the West to do the same. But since that would be suicidaly insane for those countries to do so, then I don't think it's all that preposterous for the West to simply want to maintains its identity- just as Japan or Saudi Arabia or Mexico or virtually every other nation does out of an obvious lack of self-hatred. We in the West are supposed to consider self-hatred as a given, and consider it obvious that we all must surly want to disappear from the pages of time. I mean, how could not, right? By what sort of racist disease of the psyche (xenophobia) could we possibly want to endure as a phenotype, being as beyond the pale contemptible as we obviously are, huh? ;)

    (I don’t have a problem with this by the way, I also think all immigration should be stopped because I fear Balkanization and the resurgence of white nationalism.)
     
    I agree, only I don't fear white nationalism, I long for it. Not as some kind of resurgence of imperial colonialism, but simply the will to exist. To not march over the cliff of the Jewish and liberals pied piper of genocide ~ 'diversity and multiculturalism'.

    Is that so much to ask Qasim?


    Anyway, you routinely bring up Rotterham and Cologne and similar events to show how ‘dusky hordes” are coming to defile white women.
     
    no, not coming to 'defile white women'. But they are coming and they are raping women and boys (do you want links?) and they are imposing their ways upon the (always working class communities) that the Zionists (and liberals) are ramming them into.

    So I think that's a good thing for those working class communities and their children and their futures? No, I do not. I think that the poor of the West are being ground up in a hate fest of Middle Eastern centuries-old tribal and religious hatreds, that they have nothing to do with and no understanding of. I think it's beyond evil and malicious and morally heinous to impose on these powerless people a balkanized world of misery and despair, to mollify the infinite capacity for tribal hatred in the black heart of Zionists and the smug snark of white liberals everywhere (who themselves live in lily-white gated communities and safe neighborhoods)


    I think it was you who posted that cartoon yesterday where some bin-Laden looking dudes are raping a white woman on the altar of multiculturalism.

    My question is “Do we know that these events are completely true either?’
     

    Absolutely I did. It was spot on exactly what's going on.

    Here's a link to some of the perps of the Rotherham scandal, (that is a microcosm of the festering sickness that the Zios and liberals are imposing upon a people that are reeling from the genocidal hatred and insanity: (and from Wiki that is a organ of the Zio-NWO no less)

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

    these are some of the men (sub-human dogs) that were arrested for taking part in the exploit of British school girl sex slavery, where the underage girls were threatened with being burned alive if they spoke to the authorities

    http://www.countingcats.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Rotherham-Child-Abuse-Scandal-Ring-A-1024x663.jpg

    http://d.ibtimes.co.uk/en/full/1396005/rotherham-grooming.jpg

    http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2ya5MsYMppY/U_4ev2cXORI/AAAAAAAAlCo/oWD8T10VYVg/s1600/imams-promote-sex-rape-gangs-17_5_2013.png

    this was going on for years and their victims were virtually all British, (they didn't victimize Muslim girls)

    and there were over 1500 of these girls being thus abused (raped and gang raped and threated with violence and sold to other Muslims like chattel) in one town alone- Rotherham.

    And no one said anything about it because they were all to afraid of the Zio-apparatchiks and kommissars and assorted liberals who ran the town.

    So yes, Qasim, it is all very much real and not a 'conspiracy theory' of right wing neo-Nazis and tin-foil hat wearing nutjobs.

    And it happens if England just as it's happening in Sweden and Norway and Australia, where they call the widespread incidence of gang rape of Australian girls by Muslims a 'cultural misunderstanding'.

    It's all on the Internet in its sickening and lurid details for anyone with the stomach to do the research.


    European women being unable to even walk the streets without being sexually assaulted by lascivious Arabs/Muslims are highly exaggerated/ synthetic as well??? They certainly don’t seem congruous with my own experiences, but I live in the US, and maybe things are different in Europe.
     
    they would if you lived in Detroit of Philly or other towns where minorities (far out of all percentages in the population) target unsuspecting females for assult or worse.

    I don't have time right now to belabor this issue, and have done so here and there on this site and others, but it isn't my raison d'etre for posting here or even any kind of obsession of mine, but since you asked, that is the truth of it.

    It isn't just Muslims, and it it's true that the Muslim world has been severely victimized by my country- under the thrall of some very sinister and evil forces, that hate our world's with an otherworldly obsession. So much so I almost pity them- to marinate in hatred and bile all their pathetic lives. (almost ; )

    Cheers for your thoughtful and well stated query. Qasim.

    As-salamu alaykum

    ps, pardon the typos, I don't have time to edit

    Rurik:
    I am also an ethno-nationalist, and believe that Europeans and European Americans have a right to a homeland of our own
    There is no doubt that Jonathan is correct on the idea that many of these terror attacks are false-flags, with a sinister agenda.

    However, it is also true that diversity and multiculturalism kill and destroy ALL cultures. Even where I live in Minnesota, there is real, documented violence between ethnic groups. There are stupid, naive Somali kids that are provocateured into joining terror groups. Others commit heinous crimes. Not on the scale of Cologne (which may indeed be fake), but significant, nonetheless.

    The main issue, though, is that our cultural unity and genetic heritage are being destroyed by multiple factors: low-birth rates, miscegenation, psychological depression on a mass scale due to economic forces of globalism, etc. We are toast unless we fight back, and do to that, we simply need to develop some kind of identity movement which will inevitable be called racist.

    To survive, we will need to be comfortable with being called racists.
    I’d like to connect on a private communications channel, if possible. I am also a friend of the author of this article, if you need a reference.

    Best,
    Jake

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik
    Hey Jake,

    To survive, we will need to be comfortable with being called racists.
     
    I'm not too sure about that. I think first it has to be decided what exactly that word means. Does it mean there are differences between the races just like there are differences between the breeds of dogs for instance? Or does it mean something else?

    For instance, there are extreme perspectives on racism that I find abhorrent. Like for instance the way uber-Zionists treat Palestinians as less than human and worse. Or the way the West treats white people as second class citizens who it's encouraged to discriminate against at every turn and opportunity. I find that kind of racism morally repugnant. I feel all peoples are entitled to self-determinations, and in places like the West, where we have so-called Constitutional Republics, I think that all citizens, regardless of race, are entitled to be treated equally before the law. (a concept our treasonous supreme court just made a mockery of with its recent decision on Affirmative Action). So I don't want to be considered the kind of 'racist' that would treat someone differently than others just based on their race alone.

    But today, in the West, if you demand that all races, including the maligned and scourged white race- be treated equally, they'll call you Adolf Hitler.

    skol !
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. iffen says:
    @grmbl
    Crazy

    Evil

    Stupid

    It's the eternal question with nutcases like Revusky and Roberts and a thousand others like them.

    Are they in the throes of paranoid schizophrenia? Are they psychopaths deriving sadistic pleasure from denying survivors of some of the worst crimes in history even the recognition that what happened, happened? Greedy con-men exploiting centuries-old prejudices? Are they gullible fools, drooling imbeciles who will fall for the simplest tricks in the book?

    Until they improve imaging techniques for the brain to the point where we can actually read the thoughts of people, an answer will remain elusive. However, the way that their obsessions cluster in a certain area provides a clue.

    (1) Holocaust denial: there was no holocaust, the Jews made it up for personal gain, it's a holohoax

    (2) 9/11 Trutherism: Pre-planted explosives, Jewish owner, Jews did not show up for work that day, dancing Israelis

    (3) Exorbitant crimes committed by Muslim immigrants to West are faked, the Jews are spreading this disinfo to further their agenda. (Alternatively: Not faked but real; part of the sinister plan of the Jews to flood the West with Muslims.)

    Spot the common element, it's not hard. Probably a good idea to let them rant and rave to their heart's content. If left unopposed, eventually they will turn against each other over doctrinal differences between their various crazinesses. Maybe they will kill each other. Most Aryan/Nazi activists who are violently killed do not die in shootouts with the police; they are murdered by other Aryan/Nazi activists :)

    Roberts is not on the same ward as Revusky.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. @Rurik
    Hey JR,

    this on Drudge right now

    http://www.wnd.com/2016/06/idaho-rape-obama-prosecutor-silencing-americans-with-threats-of-arrest/#!

    little 5-year-old 'special-needs girl' is forced into a bathroom by Muslim refugee boys and at least one of them pisses in her mouth

    small price to pay for the joys and wonderful benefits of diversity?

    do you (or anyone actually believe that once America and Europe have enough Muslim majority areas (and Hispanic and Asian and African and everything else) that the world will finally, at long last be free of racism and ethnic and religious strife?

    because this is the mantra that the Zionists are demanding is the solution to the intractable "racism" of the white, Western world. That they simply have to be forced into diversity to the point that it will overwhelm the racist element and then we'll all have our utopia!

    even if a few eggs have to be broken in the process, huh?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/12088341/Two-teenage-girls-gang-raped-by-four-Syrian-nationals-in-southern-Germany.html

    just as with monstrous crimes committed against whites by blacks in America (including gang rapes and murders so savage and vicious that they numb the soul), so too all accounts of rape or assault by Muslims (or any of the fist-class immigrants) are spiked by the Zio-media, because just like the tragic story of the 5 year old girl, news of that kind of thing has an effect on the people that the PTB do not approve of.

    Hence the Brexit vote- that was in large part due to the violence and intractable strife that the Muslims and everybody else is bringing with them into England (and everywhere else they go), because through no fault of their own, their countries have been destroyed by the same Zionist fiend that is foisting the refugees upon Western communities that are not Muslim, and don't want to become Muslim. All to the great amusement of assorted Zionists and liberals and hate-consumed Jewish supremacists everywhere.

    Make no mistake, if it were possible for Obama and Bush and Tony Blair and Killary and Merkel and all the other demon stooges of the Fiend to host every single refugee from their terror wars upon these Muslim countries, then I'd be all for it.

    But I don't think some family in Idaho should be paying the price for the Zionists and their stooge's evil wars. That five year old (or her parents) had nothing to do with those wars.

    Hi Rurik,

    First of all, I have meant to point this out to you but not got around to it. I think you are engaging in a basic logical fallacy in much of what you say. You point out cases where the authorities understate the frequency of certain kinds of crimes. And then you go to a completely separate context and just assume that the authorities are understating in a similar manner there.

    In other words, you assume that if they are caught fibbing in one case, in a separate case, they will be fibbing in the same direction. That is not necessarily so.

    For example, if I am trying to impress some woman (because I want to get in her knickers) I could well think it makes sense for me to exaggerate how rich I am. If I am haggling about the price of something, like a car or house or whatever, I could well choose to pretend that I am much poorer than I am. So in one context, I could lie in one direction and in another context, I will lie in another direction. You seem to be reasoning that because they lie in one direction in a given context, they are always lying in that same direction. But I think that is fallacious. If it suits their purposes in one context, to hush up whatever raping is really going on, then they’ll do that, but if it suits their purposes to greatly exaggerate and claim that women are getting raped by Arabs right left and center, then they’ll claim that!

    Well, your basic logical fallacy, IMHO, is that you assume that liars are consistent in their lies! But, no, not necessarily. In fact, that’s what tends to be the undoing of liars, is that their lies start contradicting one another. It’s the truth that is always consistent!

    Now, in my last note about this, I specifically brought up the mass sexual assaults in Cologne and I just cannot find any proof that this really happened! I simply reason that it is basically impossible for something of that scale to have happened at this juncture, without there being some video footage available, simply because EVERYBODY has a video cam in their pockets!

    Now, specifically, on the link you provide, I am not at all sure that I trust the information source. The specific story, people urinating in the mouth of a five-year-old, I don’t know what to make of it, since it’s such a bizarre thing already. Even if this really happened, I am not willing to believe that this is something that happens very often, it’s so kinky and weird that… I mean to say, it’s something so freaky and bizarre that I would be reluctant to reason from the specific to the general on the basis of this story. (If it was some more “normal” narrative where the lads dragged off some local teenage girl and fucked her silly, then… but this is just so bizarre that I can’t even think about really generalizing about it…)

    Another thing about this is that the most notorious single case possibly that happened in Germany was this Russian girl, 13 years old, claimed that Arab migrants raped her and so on, and it became something of an international incident, since Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister openly accused the Germans of covering it up. Then, finally, the girl herself admitted that it was bullshit. So Lavrov, normally a very serious guy to be respected, really got egg on his face over this, it seems to me.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/31/teenage-girl-made-up-migrant-claim-that-caused-uproar-in-germany

    Anyway:

    (1) Did these mass sexual assaults in Cologne, Germany, on New Year’s Eve really happen? If so, why is there no video evidence?

    (2) Is there really a rape epidemic going on in Sweden? If so, why is it that if you google “Sweden rape epidemic” the stuff that comes up is (indirectly or directly) from the Gatestone Institute? Have you looked at who the Gatestone Institute are? If not, you really should. If this is the only information source for that, then I think we can say that it’s almost certainly a hoax.

    But, look, my current position on this is NOT that no rapes ever happened. If you have hundreds of thousands of these people, a certain number will be rapists or whatever. However, I am extremely unconvinced by these reports of a mass rape, sexual assault epidemic going on. I cannot find convincing proof of it. The biggest single case was what allegedly happened in and around the main train station in Cologne, Germany, on New Year’s Eve, and it looks to me like this is a hoax, didn’t happen. Where’s the video footage?

    As for the overall immigration issue, I am not an advocate of mass immigration myself, but I strongly feel that the anti-immigration case has to be made honestly. Trying to say that all these people are rapists when they’re not, that’s not how I roll. I’ve got a problem with that….

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik
    >>sigh<<

    Ok, here we go..

    I guess I'm sort of going to address this one to all three of you, Qasim, JR, and SC,

    First off, I certainly never claimed anything as hyperbolic as Muslims are "sexually assaulting every chick in sight or trying to ram Sharia down everyone’s throats".

    Did anyone ever claim something so outrageous?

    No, as far as I know, no one ever did.

    what has been said- is that there are some of us in the West who don't feel the imperative that white, Western people obviously need to be overrun and replaced through a program of massive immigration of non-Westerners into the countries of the West. OK?

    And we also think that it's beyond hypocritical (and vile and discussing) that those who feel otherwise, never advocate for massive immigration into Saudi Arabia or Japan [or Iran] for anyone and everyone who wants to go there. There are billions of starving Indians and Ethiopians and Indonesians that would love to be Kuwaiti citizens, but they're not allowed to, now are they? And why is that? Well, because the people of Kuwait don't want to commit national and ethnic suicide. And well they shouldn't. DUH! But when it comes to the West, there's this idiocy and malignant stupidity (and quite frankly genocidal determination) that the people of the West are uniquely slated for annihilation by inundation. Not unlike what was done to the Amerindian, who today is a shadow of what he was on the continent before the European came- and through immigration, ran him over. I guess there are lots and lots of people who simply feel that this is simply what the West has coming to them, perhaps because of the 'sins of the father'; because of colonialism and slavery and the Holocaust, we no longer have a moral right to exist, and it's all a n0-brainer to all these people that the West surely must perish. Huh?

    And if they don't agree, it can only be because they're some kind of "white nationalists" or some other crazed 'alt-white or 'alt-right' types. Not simply that we're just exactly like every one else and don't want to give our only lands up to others.

    They don't make land anymore. Once you lose yours, now you have no place left to live or raise a family. And for all the world this is taken as an obvious reality. But for whites, we're supposed to be suicidaly full of self-loathing, and it we're not, we must be 'racists' or "Xenophobic' or something, looking for some darkies to call names and hit with sticks.

    But I don't see it that way, thankyouverymuch. And for that I see SC has compared me to some pissy-ant little bullies who torment others because they're different. Nice. Not

    Then, on to the joys of diversity and multiculturalism. How is that working out for Syria today? How many immigrants from foreign countries are making their diversity felt today in Syria? Now the way I see it, is that there are some people who have an (almost understandable) resentment of the nations of the West for what they're doing in Syria and elsewhere. The Syrain people are suffering, and so as they see it, why shouldn't some people of the West suffer too? Why should white-bread families in Idaho be protected from the assorted ravages of strife and hatreds that are being imposed by the Zio-governments of the West on the Syrians and Iraqis and so many others, right?

    Well, I just don't buy that argument. I don't blame the people of Turkey for what the sultan is doing. And I don't blame the people of England for what Tony Blair did. And I don't blame the people of N. America and Germany for what their treasonous and Zio govenments are doing in the world. America voted in Obama to end the wars. England voted for Brexit as a repudiation of the wars, among other reasons. We hate the wars, and we hate what our Zio-Fiend has been doing. So I just don't buy the (unstated) argument that the people of the West deserve to suffer for what their treasonous governments are doing without their consent. OK?

    >>whew<<

    Now as to the rapes and strife and sharia law.

    If you, at this point don't realize or believe that Muslims are causing a rape wave in Sweden and Norway and England and else where, I'm going to have to put that down to a kind of myopia. An intellectual dishonestly of sorts. I mean for Christ's sake, I posted a link to a town in England where the Muslims were raping under age school girls by the hundreds, and this was an international scandal when it came out. You'd have to have your head so buried in the sand, ten feet deep to pretend that it didn't happen. Or you'd have to be ideologically myopic. Huh JR?

    Sweden is the rape capital of Europe today, and virtually all of it is from immigrants.

    Norway too.

    Recently a Muslim immigrant was sentenced for raping a ten year old boy in a public pool in Austria.

    Now you could say that isn't all Muslims, and you'd be right. But tell that to the parents of that boy. Or tell it to the boy himself, that the imperative that all of the West be overrun, is so strong, that yes, you poor lad, were just one of the unlucky ones, ya know. Too bad about that.

    But from where I sit, this Zio-imperative that all the lands of the West absolutely have to be overrun, just doesn't seem to strike a chord with me. I mean I understand the desire of those who want to come from places like the Sudan and the Congo to Minnesota and Idaho, but unless all the other coutries of the world open their arms too, then I have no problem whatsoever saying that it's the worst kind of racism to have some kind of double standard that say only the West must welcome everyone. Fuck that shit raw.

    Yours, Rurik the "racist" ;)
    , @Jacques Sheete
    "I think you are engaging in a basic logical fallacy in much of what you say."

    Very true. He likes to set up straw men to knock down as well. It would be amusing if there weren't a veritable flood of it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. @Qasim
    Thanks for the reply Mr. Revusky, I was hoping you would notice my comment and respond.

    This is an alt-right sort of website, and a lot of people here oppose US foreign policy, and therefore are primed to question the narratives about 9/11, WMD in Iraq, various terrorist attacks etc., which are mendaciously used to justify our interventionist foreign policy.

    But these same people are generally nationalists/anti-multiculturalism, and they accept these reports about Muslims sexually assaulting every chick in sight or trying to ram Sharia down everyone's throats as incontrovertible proof of the catastrophic consequences of immigration.

    But it seems to me that if you are going to question one aspect of the neocon narrative, it makes sense to question all of it.

    Again, I want to point out that I have no problem with people like Rurik (whose long and thoughtful reply I appreciated) who want to maintain the White or Christian character of the West; all self-respecting people want to maintain their ethnic/religious dominance in the lands they currently control. I just wonder if justifiable attempts to secure one's tribal interests are being supported via specious methods.

    P.S. Mr. Revusky, are you planning to write about what happened in Orlando? After reading your articles, I find myself wondering how a single man can shoot 100 people and take the time to call TV stations without getting jumped from behind or hit by a bottle or something.

    Thanks for the reply Mr. Revusky, I was hoping you would notice my comment and respond.

    Well, you’re welcome. So far in my contributions to this site, I’ve tried to engage with people who have legitimate comments to make. People who discuss things in good faith, as I’m pretty sure you are. Actually, truth told, I’ve also wasted far too much time and energy responding to bad-faithed people. I’m really pretty set on not wasting time with trolls now.

    This is an alt-right sort of website

    This site is pretty eclectic actually, but yeah, there is a big sort of locus that is strongly ideological that way here, yes. I don’t fit into that rubric, I wouldn’t say, perhaps mainly because I am currently mostly just focused on what is true and what is not true, as opposed to ideology.

    But these same people are generally nationalists/anti-multiculturalism, and they accept these reports about Muslims sexually assaulting every chick in sight or trying to ram Sharia down everyone’s throats as incontrovertible proof of the catastrophic consequences of immigration.

    Yeah, what you see with strongly ideological people is that, for them, though I suppose they won’t ever say it explicitly, their ideology is more important than the facts. They decide something is true or not based on whether it supports their belief system.

    Another way of expressing this is that it is as if they believe that reality is constrained or influenced by what causes them emotional satisfaction. So, somehow, for them, these Islamophobic narratives of mass sexual assaults provide them emotional satisfaction, so they just believe it. There is no attempt to figure out whether it is true or not, and frankly, I find that pretty appalling.

    And, really, this is the road to perdition for a real intellectual for the very simple reason that objective reality simply exists. It is not at all constrained or affected by what causes us emotional satisfaction. Now, obviously, it does not cause me any emotional satisfaction to believe that these Arab refugees are raping women all over the place, but if there was really strong evidence that this is true, I would have to accept it.

    BUT… I looked for it, and cannot find it. It looks like these are synthetic narratives. There might be a handful of actual organic events, but the overall narrative looks synthetic to me.

    As for the whole alt-right thing, my own views have evolved over the last few years, and I am more sympathetic to that view than I ever was before. However, my position is that the case must be made honestly. If you don’t want mass immigration, especially from countries with a very different culture (and yes, race too…) make the case honestly. To just start saying that all these people are rapists and murderers and so forth when they aren’t…. now, of course, if you bring in a million immigrants from anywhere, a handful will be rapists or whatever sort of criminal, just by a statistical law of large numbers, but by and large, they really aren’t. That’s my honest impression.

    So, if I don’t want you to come live in my house, I don’t have to start making up stories that you’re a rapist and so on. I just can say: You’re a perfectly good person, but it’s my house and I’m not inviting you to come live here.

    P.S. Mr. Revusky, are you planning to write about what happened in Orlando?

    I have a start on a few different articles that I started before the Orlando thing. What happened then is that I was thinking about this whole quatrième mur, fourth wall thing in drama theory, and I started writing the night at the theater parable and this article sort of coalesced quickly. Well, I had been thinking about the Terry Jones thing, but I didn’t know how to introduce the whole issue and I thought about the “fourth wall” concept and it sort of meshed, and I wrote this article, even though I had started these other articles already, that I’ve been a bit blocked on, like three of them! So the articles I’m working don’t mention Orlando because it hadn’t happened yet! Those articles are unfinished and I can’t tell you at the moment whether I’ll end up offering any analysis on the Orlando thing.

    The Orlando thing is fairly obviously some sort of synthetic event. Just for a simple reason: how many talking points/agendas intersect here? You’ve got Afghanistan, ISIS, Islam, gun control, the homos…. It’s as if the story was written by a damned committee where every member could get in his talking points. What is the likelihood of an organic event hitting all these agenda/talking points by chance?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    "Well, you're welcome. So far in my contributions to this site, I've tried to engage with people who have legitimate comments to make. People who discuss things in good faith, as I'm pretty sure you are. Actually, truth told, I've also wasted far too much time and energy responding to bad-faithed people. I'm really pretty set on not wasting time with trolls now."

    What's your line of behaviour with respects to the unsound of mind (specially the kind of paranoiae stemming from obsessive supremacy, belonging to a group that holds too much power, and so on)?

    I see some people with such problems are wonted to use your comment sections for their relief (relief that, of course, can never come, until they don't get rid of their supremacist obsessions).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. utu says:
    @Cyrano
    The reason why I don’t buy conspiracy theories is because they have at least one major fundaMENTAL problem (besides being MENTAL as the block capitals suggests) - and that is that conspiracies are too labor intensive. When trying to explain any event – go for the simplest explanation – it works 99% of the time.

    Logic follows the path of least resistance, not some elaborate devious, genius approaching schemes which are stuff of sci-fi books. Reality is usually bland and simple, it is not designed in Hollywood, it doesn’t have intricate plots and twists, it’s not a complicated mind bending puzzle that can be deciphered only by men of “superior” intelligence like Solonto fancies himself to possess. In short there’s no Jewish conspiracy of any kind – there never was. Jews only play by the rules written by someone else – it’s only they are better players than those who wrote the rules.

    “In short there’s no Jewish conspiracy of any kind ” – What about the circumcision in the US?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. @Rurik
    Hey JR,

    this on Drudge right now

    http://www.wnd.com/2016/06/idaho-rape-obama-prosecutor-silencing-americans-with-threats-of-arrest/#!

    little 5-year-old 'special-needs girl' is forced into a bathroom by Muslim refugee boys and at least one of them pisses in her mouth

    small price to pay for the joys and wonderful benefits of diversity?

    do you (or anyone actually believe that once America and Europe have enough Muslim majority areas (and Hispanic and Asian and African and everything else) that the world will finally, at long last be free of racism and ethnic and religious strife?

    because this is the mantra that the Zionists are demanding is the solution to the intractable "racism" of the white, Western world. That they simply have to be forced into diversity to the point that it will overwhelm the racist element and then we'll all have our utopia!

    even if a few eggs have to be broken in the process, huh?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/12088341/Two-teenage-girls-gang-raped-by-four-Syrian-nationals-in-southern-Germany.html

    just as with monstrous crimes committed against whites by blacks in America (including gang rapes and murders so savage and vicious that they numb the soul), so too all accounts of rape or assault by Muslims (or any of the fist-class immigrants) are spiked by the Zio-media, because just like the tragic story of the 5 year old girl, news of that kind of thing has an effect on the people that the PTB do not approve of.

    Hence the Brexit vote- that was in large part due to the violence and intractable strife that the Muslims and everybody else is bringing with them into England (and everywhere else they go), because through no fault of their own, their countries have been destroyed by the same Zionist fiend that is foisting the refugees upon Western communities that are not Muslim, and don't want to become Muslim. All to the great amusement of assorted Zionists and liberals and hate-consumed Jewish supremacists everywhere.

    Make no mistake, if it were possible for Obama and Bush and Tony Blair and Killary and Merkel and all the other demon stooges of the Fiend to host every single refugee from their terror wars upon these Muslim countries, then I'd be all for it.

    But I don't think some family in Idaho should be paying the price for the Zionists and their stooge's evil wars. That five year old (or her parents) had nothing to do with those wars.

    Look Homeward Angel, by Thomas Wolfe, 1929

    [MORE]

    But they guarded what they had against the barbarians. Eugene,
    Max, and Harry ruled their little neighborhood: they made war upon
    the negroes and the Jews, who amused them, and upon the Pigtail
    Alley people, whom they hated and despised. Catlike they prowled
    about in the dark promise of night, sitting at times upon a wall in
    the exciting glare of the corner lamp, which flared gaseously,
    winking noisily from time to time.

    Or, crouched in the concealing shrubbery of Gant’s yard, they
    waited for romantic negro couples climbing homewards, jerking by a
    cord, as their victims came upon the spot, a stuffed black snake-
    appearing stocking. And the dark was shrill with laughter as the
    loud rich comic voices stammered, stopped, and screamed.

    Or they stoned the cycling black boy of the markets, as he swerved
    down gracefully into an alley. Nor did they hate them: clowns are
    black. They had learned, as well, that it was proper to cuff these
    people kindly, curse them cheerfully, feed them magnanimously. Men
    are kind to a faithful wagging dog, but he must not walk habitually
    upon two legs. They knew that they must “take nothin’ off a
    nigger,” and that the beginnings of argument could best be scotched
    with a club and a broken head. Only, you couldn’t break a nigger’s
    head.

    They spat joyously upon the Jews. Drown a Jew and hit a nigger.

    The boys would wait on the Jews, follow them home shouting “Goose
    Grease! Goose Grease!” which, they were convinced, was the chief
    staple of Semitic diet; or with the blind acceptance of little boys
    of some traditional, or mangled, or imaginary catchword of abuse,
    they would yell after their muttering and tormented victim:
    “Veeshamadye Veeshamadye!” confident that they had pronounced the
    most unspeakable, to Jewish ears, of affronts.

    Eugene had no interest in pogroms, but it was a fetich with Max.
    The chief object of their torture was a little furtive-faced boy,
    whose name was Isaac Lipinski. They pounced cattishly at him when
    he appeared, harried him down alleys, over fences, across yards,
    into barns, stables, and his own house; he moved with amazing speed
    and stealth, escaping fantastically, teasing them to the pursuit,
    thumbing his fingers at them, and grinning with wide Kike constant
    derision.

    Or, steeped catlike in the wickedness of darkness, adrift in the
    brooding promise of the neighborhood, they would cluster silently
    under a Jew’s home, grouped in a sniggering huddle as they listened
    to the rich excited voices, the throaty accentuation of the women;
    or convulsed at the hysterical quarrels which shook the Jew-walls
    almost nightly.

    Once, shrieking with laughter, they followed a running fight
    through the streets between a young Jew and his father-in-law, in
    which each was pursued and pummelled, or pursuing and pummelling;
    and on the day when Louis Greenberg, a pale Jew returned from
    college, had killed himself by drinking carbolic acid, they stood
    curiously outside the dingy wailing house, shaken by sudden glee as
    they saw his father, a bearded orthodox old Jew, clothed in rusty,
    greasy black, and wearing a scarred derby, approach running up the
    hill to his home, shaking his hands in the air, and wailing
    rhythmically:

    “Oi, yoi yoi yoi yoi,
    Oi yoi yoi yoi yoi,
    Oi yoi yoi yoi yoi.”

    What is the point of this extended quote?

    Just this: It is not a new phenomenon that minorities, or people who are alien to, or less powerful than, one’s own perceived status, are harassed by those imbued with their own sense of superior rights or entitlements.
    Nor is it a new phenomenon that the fantasies that percolate in a poorly developed mind are sometimes given a substance in writing that they do not possess in reality.
    Nor is it a new phenomenon that fantasies of working evil and degrading thing are acted upon in fact.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    Read More
    • Replies: @alexander
    Anonymous,

    Is this the same N Y Times that sold the entire world the wholly bogus story it was Saddams' anthrax in Tom Brokaws and Senator Leahys office ?

    When it wasn't.

    And in so doing, defrauded the American taxpayer out of trillions of dollars to engage in the supreme international crime of aggressive war on a country that never attacked us ?

    Is this the same N Y Times...or a different one ?

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. Rurik says:
    @Jake Saga
    Rurik:
    I am also an ethno-nationalist, and believe that Europeans and European Americans have a right to a homeland of our own
    There is no doubt that Jonathan is correct on the idea that many of these terror attacks are false-flags, with a sinister agenda.

    However, it is also true that diversity and multiculturalism kill and destroy ALL cultures. Even where I live in Minnesota, there is real, documented violence between ethnic groups. There are stupid, naive Somali kids that are provocateured into joining terror groups. Others commit heinous crimes. Not on the scale of Cologne (which may indeed be fake), but significant, nonetheless.

    The main issue, though, is that our cultural unity and genetic heritage are being destroyed by multiple factors: low-birth rates, miscegenation, psychological depression on a mass scale due to economic forces of globalism, etc. We are toast unless we fight back, and do to that, we simply need to develop some kind of identity movement which will inevitable be called racist.

    To survive, we will need to be comfortable with being called racists.
    I'd like to connect on a private communications channel, if possible. I am also a friend of the author of this article, if you need a reference.

    Best,
    Jake

    Hey Jake,

    To survive, we will need to be comfortable with being called racists.

    I’m not too sure about that. I think first it has to be decided what exactly that word means. Does it mean there are differences between the races just like there are differences between the breeds of dogs for instance? Or does it mean something else?

    For instance, there are extreme perspectives on racism that I find abhorrent. Like for instance the way uber-Zionists treat Palestinians as less than human and worse. Or the way the West treats white people as second class citizens who it’s encouraged to discriminate against at every turn and opportunity. I find that kind of racism morally repugnant. I feel all peoples are entitled to self-determinations, and in places like the West, where we have so-called Constitutional Republics, I think that all citizens, regardless of race, are entitled to be treated equally before the law. (a concept our treasonous supreme court just made a mockery of with its recent decision on Affirmative Action). So I don’t want to be considered the kind of ‘racist’ that would treat someone differently than others just based on their race alone.

    But today, in the West, if you demand that all races, including the maligned and scourged white race- be treated equally, they’ll call you Adolf Hitler.

    skol !

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    "Or the way the West treats white people as second class citizens who it’s encouraged to discriminate against at every turn and opportunity. "

    Where? Are you smoking dope?
    , @Jake Saga
    Rurik,
    I agree. I don't advocate treating other ethnicities poorly, unless mere self-defense against crime or riots etc. is considered "poorly."

    What I meant is that to simply advocate for the survival of your group, if it happens to be "white" or European, will be called racist.

    To state that we have a right to a homeland of our own, where we are a majority, will be called racist.

    To state that we are unwilling to subsidize other groups that are less successful, or that we should enjoy our achievements and take pride in them, is called racist.

    Therefore, in order to survive, we will need to be fine with being called "racist."

    The definition of "racism" is a moot point: it's already been turned into a weaponized word. We can't win that debate. Trying to redefine it is a waste of effort. All we can do is to ignore it, and show by our actions that we will firmly defend our self-interests (while acting in as fair a manner as we can in the circumstances). Even so, the odds are against us. Our sociopathic elite have chosen to participate in our demise.

    Jake
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. @utu
    Mr. JR, Congratulations! This one was the best of the three. Thank you.

    P. S. However I am not sure about the two clips from Paris and Charleston that you have attached. They do not work for me at all. The editing and commentaries are irritating. They turn me off. I would like to see a raw footage and then read some commentary. Perhaps it would be better to stay away from various YT conspiracy yahoos. Many of them are well intentioned but because of their lack of professionalism and simplemindedness they are indistinguishable from the real hecklers, cognitive infiltrators.

    Hi, Utu,

    I’m glad you liked the article.

    Perhaps it would be better to stay away from various YT conspiracy yahoos.

    Well, I would be reluctant to be so disparaging of these people’s work. I’m pretty conscious that I didn’t pay them for it, and I think such people are providing a public service making these videos. As for some of it being amateurish, well, in a more sane world, we’d have a functioning fourth estate and the people who are supposedly professional journalists would suss these things out and what these independent people are doing would be unnecessary, BUT that is not the case…

    Now, I can understand that people might not like the sarcastic voice-over style of RedSilverJ. I actually enjoy it myself usually, but I can see where people would think that he’s laying it on too thick. But, regardless, these are presentational issues. In terms of the information he’s presenting, I don’t see much of an issue with it. There is simply no way, for example, that the black kids in the last video I linked really lost their mother 24 hours before. So, basically, I find the sneering sarcasm that he expresses regarding this fake bullshit to be appropriate.

    The first embedded video from the “Paulstal Service” includes footage from two interviews with Ginnie Watson interspersed with highlights of Ms. Watson’s acting career. I assume that he downloaded the acting reels quickly before it got taken down. I guess those snippets are from some sort of promotional reel. If this guy hadn’t acted quickly in grabbing that stuff, I would never have seen it. And, again, I never paid for his work, so I would be reluctant to put it down.
    If you want a more straight-up version of the interview she gave on Fox News, that is here:

    I don’t find her credible at all. And the fact that she is an actress could be a coincidence, but it ain’t likely.

    In retrospect, looking at it again, it may be that this other girl, Emma Parkinson, from Australia, is an even more glaring fake than Ginnie Watson is. Here are a couple of videos from some… “conspiracy yahoo”, to use your term…

    Unlike Ginnie Watson, this girl claims she actually was shot in the ass, and she is just smiling away…

    This whole business of presenting things that are so blatantly fake and pretending they’re real, there is this incredible nerve they show. (Chutzpah?) Like the fake beheading videos and all that…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Rurik
    Hey Jake,

    To survive, we will need to be comfortable with being called racists.
     
    I'm not too sure about that. I think first it has to be decided what exactly that word means. Does it mean there are differences between the races just like there are differences between the breeds of dogs for instance? Or does it mean something else?

    For instance, there are extreme perspectives on racism that I find abhorrent. Like for instance the way uber-Zionists treat Palestinians as less than human and worse. Or the way the West treats white people as second class citizens who it's encouraged to discriminate against at every turn and opportunity. I find that kind of racism morally repugnant. I feel all peoples are entitled to self-determinations, and in places like the West, where we have so-called Constitutional Republics, I think that all citizens, regardless of race, are entitled to be treated equally before the law. (a concept our treasonous supreme court just made a mockery of with its recent decision on Affirmative Action). So I don't want to be considered the kind of 'racist' that would treat someone differently than others just based on their race alone.

    But today, in the West, if you demand that all races, including the maligned and scourged white race- be treated equally, they'll call you Adolf Hitler.

    skol !

    “Or the way the West treats white people as second class citizens who it’s encouraged to discriminate against at every turn and opportunity. “

    Where? Are you smoking dope?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. Jake Saga says:
    @Rurik
    Hey Jake,

    To survive, we will need to be comfortable with being called racists.
     
    I'm not too sure about that. I think first it has to be decided what exactly that word means. Does it mean there are differences between the races just like there are differences between the breeds of dogs for instance? Or does it mean something else?

    For instance, there are extreme perspectives on racism that I find abhorrent. Like for instance the way uber-Zionists treat Palestinians as less than human and worse. Or the way the West treats white people as second class citizens who it's encouraged to discriminate against at every turn and opportunity. I find that kind of racism morally repugnant. I feel all peoples are entitled to self-determinations, and in places like the West, where we have so-called Constitutional Republics, I think that all citizens, regardless of race, are entitled to be treated equally before the law. (a concept our treasonous supreme court just made a mockery of with its recent decision on Affirmative Action). So I don't want to be considered the kind of 'racist' that would treat someone differently than others just based on their race alone.

    But today, in the West, if you demand that all races, including the maligned and scourged white race- be treated equally, they'll call you Adolf Hitler.

    skol !

    Rurik,
    I agree. I don’t advocate treating other ethnicities poorly, unless mere self-defense against crime or riots etc. is considered “poorly.”

    What I meant is that to simply advocate for the survival of your group, if it happens to be “white” or European, will be called racist.

    To state that we have a right to a homeland of our own, where we are a majority, will be called racist.

    To state that we are unwilling to subsidize other groups that are less successful, or that we should enjoy our achievements and take pride in them, is called racist.

    Therefore, in order to survive, we will need to be fine with being called “racist.”

    The definition of “racism” is a moot point: it’s already been turned into a weaponized word. We can’t win that debate. Trying to redefine it is a waste of effort. All we can do is to ignore it, and show by our actions that we will firmly defend our self-interests (while acting in as fair a manner as we can in the circumstances). Even so, the odds are against us. Our sociopathic elite have chosen to participate in our demise.

    Jake

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik

    What I meant is that to simply advocate for the survival of your group, if it happens to be “white” or European, will be called racist.

    To state that we have a right to a homeland of our own, where we are a majority, will be called racist.
     
    yes Jake, you're right about that of course

    they used to have to invade using swords or guns, but now they just use a word; 'racist' to force submission and conquer our lands. Indeed, I say "our lands", and they'd say 'what lands?' You're racists, you have no claim to any lands!'

    All we can do is to ignore it
     
    I prefer to mock it ;)

    Our sociopathic elite have chosen to participate in our demise.
     
    one of white people's biggest errors is in thinking all the rest of the world think as we do. We harbor no ill-will towards anyone. We live and let live. But our mistake is in thinking they feel the same.

    for myself, I like all peoples. I've been to many countries and like all the different peoples )not necessarily individuals ; ) I've known and have met. Muslims, blacks, Hispanics, Jews.. are all nice and pleasant people to be around, when you're dealing with the typical ones who're working or middle or even upper class. But that doesn't mean that I want all of them to come here and replace us. And so that makes me some kind of Adolf Hitler Nazi. It's amazing really.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. Rurik says:
    @Jonathan Revusky
    Hi Rurik,

    First of all, I have meant to point this out to you but not got around to it. I think you are engaging in a basic logical fallacy in much of what you say. You point out cases where the authorities understate the frequency of certain kinds of crimes. And then you go to a completely separate context and just assume that the authorities are understating in a similar manner there.

    In other words, you assume that if they are caught fibbing in one case, in a separate case, they will be fibbing in the same direction. That is not necessarily so.

    For example, if I am trying to impress some woman (because I want to get in her knickers) I could well think it makes sense for me to exaggerate how rich I am. If I am haggling about the price of something, like a car or house or whatever, I could well choose to pretend that I am much poorer than I am. So in one context, I could lie in one direction and in another context, I will lie in another direction. You seem to be reasoning that because they lie in one direction in a given context, they are always lying in that same direction. But I think that is fallacious. If it suits their purposes in one context, to hush up whatever raping is really going on, then they'll do that, but if it suits their purposes to greatly exaggerate and claim that women are getting raped by Arabs right left and center, then they'll claim that!

    Well, your basic logical fallacy, IMHO, is that you assume that liars are consistent in their lies! But, no, not necessarily. In fact, that's what tends to be the undoing of liars, is that their lies start contradicting one another. It's the truth that is always consistent!

    Now, in my last note about this, I specifically brought up the mass sexual assaults in Cologne and I just cannot find any proof that this really happened! I simply reason that it is basically impossible for something of that scale to have happened at this juncture, without there being some video footage available, simply because EVERYBODY has a video cam in their pockets!

    Now, specifically, on the link you provide, I am not at all sure that I trust the information source. The specific story, people urinating in the mouth of a five-year-old, I don't know what to make of it, since it's such a bizarre thing already. Even if this really happened, I am not willing to believe that this is something that happens very often, it's so kinky and weird that... I mean to say, it's something so freaky and bizarre that I would be reluctant to reason from the specific to the general on the basis of this story. (If it was some more "normal" narrative where the lads dragged off some local teenage girl and fucked her silly, then... but this is just so bizarre that I can't even think about really generalizing about it...)

    Another thing about this is that the most notorious single case possibly that happened in Germany was this Russian girl, 13 years old, claimed that Arab migrants raped her and so on, and it became something of an international incident, since Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister openly accused the Germans of covering it up. Then, finally, the girl herself admitted that it was bullshit. So Lavrov, normally a very serious guy to be respected, really got egg on his face over this, it seems to me.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/31/teenage-girl-made-up-migrant-claim-that-caused-uproar-in-germany

    Anyway:

    (1) Did these mass sexual assaults in Cologne, Germany, on New Year's Eve really happen? If so, why is there no video evidence?

    (2) Is there really a rape epidemic going on in Sweden? If so, why is it that if you google "Sweden rape epidemic" the stuff that comes up is (indirectly or directly) from the Gatestone Institute? Have you looked at who the Gatestone Institute are? If not, you really should. If this is the only information source for that, then I think we can say that it's almost certainly a hoax.

    But, look, my current position on this is NOT that no rapes ever happened. If you have hundreds of thousands of these people, a certain number will be rapists or whatever. However, I am extremely unconvinced by these reports of a mass rape, sexual assault epidemic going on. I cannot find convincing proof of it. The biggest single case was what allegedly happened in and around the main train station in Cologne, Germany, on New Year's Eve, and it looks to me like this is a hoax, didn't happen. Where's the video footage?

    As for the overall immigration issue, I am not an advocate of mass immigration myself, but I strongly feel that the anti-immigration case has to be made honestly. Trying to say that all these people are rapists when they're not, that's not how I roll. I've got a problem with that....

    >>sigh<<

    Ok, here we go..

    I guess I'm sort of going to address this one to all three of you, Qasim, JR, and SC,

    First off, I certainly never claimed anything as hyperbolic as Muslims are "sexually assaulting every chick in sight or trying to ram Sharia down everyone’s throats".

    Did anyone ever claim something so outrageous?

    No, as far as I know, no one ever did.

    what has been said- is that there are some of us in the West who don’t feel the imperative that white, Western people obviously need to be overrun and replaced through a program of massive immigration of non-Westerners into the countries of the West. OK?

    And we also think that it’s beyond hypocritical (and vile and discussing) that those who feel otherwise, never advocate for massive immigration into Saudi Arabia or Japan [or Iran] for anyone and everyone who wants to go there. There are billions of starving Indians and Ethiopians and Indonesians that would love to be Kuwaiti citizens, but they’re not allowed to, now are they? And why is that? Well, because the people of Kuwait don’t want to commit national and ethnic suicide. And well they shouldn’t. DUH! But when it comes to the West, there’s this idiocy and malignant stupidity (and quite frankly genocidal determination) that the people of the West are uniquely slated for annihilation by inundation. Not unlike what was done to the Amerindian, who today is a shadow of what he was on the continent before the European came- and through immigration, ran him over. I guess there are lots and lots of people who simply feel that this is simply what the West has coming to them, perhaps because of the ‘sins of the father’; because of colonialism and slavery and the Holocaust, we no longer have a moral right to exist, and it’s all a n0-brainer to all these people that the West surely must perish. Huh?

    And if they don’t agree, it can only be because they’re some kind of “white nationalists” or some other crazed ‘alt-white or ‘alt-right’ types. Not simply that we’re just exactly like every one else and don’t want to give our only lands up to others.

    They don’t make land anymore. Once you lose yours, now you have no place left to live or raise a family. And for all the world this is taken as an obvious reality. But for whites, we’re supposed to be suicidaly full of self-loathing, and it we’re not, we must be ‘racists’ or “Xenophobic’ or something, looking for some darkies to call names and hit with sticks.

    But I don’t see it that way, thankyouverymuch. And for that I see SC has compared me to some pissy-ant little bullies who torment others because they’re different. Nice. Not

    Then, on to the joys of diversity and multiculturalism. How is that working out for Syria today? How many immigrants from foreign countries are making their diversity felt today in Syria? Now the way I see it, is that there are some people who have an (almost understandable) resentment of the nations of the West for what they’re doing in Syria and elsewhere. The Syrain people are suffering, and so as they see it, why shouldn’t some people of the West suffer too? Why should white-bread families in Idaho be protected from the assorted ravages of strife and hatreds that are being imposed by the Zio-governments of the West on the Syrians and Iraqis and so many others, right?

    Well, I just don’t buy that argument. I don’t blame the people of Turkey for what the sultan is doing. And I don’t blame the people of England for what Tony Blair did. And I don’t blame the people of N. America and Germany for what their treasonous and Zio govenments are doing in the world. America voted in Obama to end the wars. England voted for Brexit as a repudiation of the wars, among other reasons. We hate the wars, and we hate what our Zio-Fiend has been doing. So I just don’t buy the (unstated) argument that the people of the West deserve to suffer for what their treasonous governments are doing without their consent. OK?

    >>whew<<

    Now as to the rapes and strife and sharia law.

    If you, at this point don't realize or believe that Muslims are causing a rape wave in Sweden and Norway and England and else where, I'm going to have to put that down to a kind of myopia. An intellectual dishonestly of sorts. I mean for Christ's sake, I posted a link to a town in England where the Muslims were raping under age school girls by the hundreds, and this was an international scandal when it came out. You'd have to have your head so buried in the sand, ten feet deep to pretend that it didn't happen. Or you'd have to be ideologically myopic. Huh JR?

    Sweden is the rape capital of Europe today, and virtually all of it is from immigrants.

    Norway too.

    Recently a Muslim immigrant was sentenced for raping a ten year old boy in a public pool in Austria.

    Now you could say that isn't all Muslims, and you'd be right. But tell that to the parents of that boy. Or tell it to the boy himself, that the imperative that all of the West be overrun, is so strong, that yes, you poor lad, were just one of the unlucky ones, ya know. Too bad about that.

    But from where I sit, this Zio-imperative that all the lands of the West absolutely have to be overrun, just doesn't seem to strike a chord with me. I mean I understand the desire of those who want to come from places like the Sudan and the Congo to Minnesota and Idaho, but unless all the other coutries of the world open their arms too, then I have no problem whatsoever saying that it's the worst kind of racism to have some kind of double standard that say only the West must welcome everyone. Fuck that shit raw.

    Yours, Rurik the "racist" ;)

    Read More
    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus

    They don’t make land anymore. Once you lose yours, now you have no place left to live or raise a family. And for all the world this is taken as an obvious reality. But for whites, we’re supposed to be suicidaly full of self-loathing, and it we’re not, we must be ‘racists’ or “Xenophobic’ or something, looking for some darkies to call names and hit with sticks.
     
    List of Indian reservations in the United States

    Conquest of the Americas by Professor Marshall C. Eakin, Ph.D., Vanderbilt University
    Prof.. Eakiins argues that Christopher Columbus's voyage to the Americas in 1492 arguably the most important event in the history of the world because it gave birth to the distinct identity of the Americas today by creating a collision between three distinct peoples and cultures: European, African, and Native American.


    As the inheritors of this legacy, some 500 years hence, we forget how radically the discovery of the Americas transformed the view of the world on both sides of the Atlantic.

    A People Unknown, A Land Unmentioned

    When Columbus completed his "enterprise of the Indies" he found a people unlike any he had ever known and a land unmentioned in any of the great touchstones of Western knowledge.

    Animated by the great dynamic forces of the day, Christianity and commercial capitalism, the European world reacted to Columbus's discovery with voyages of conquest—territorial, cultural, and spiritual.

    For the native peoples of the Americas, the consequences were no less dramatic.

    When Hernán Cortés arrived to conquer Mexico, the Aztecs feared he was a god, returned from exile to claim his ancient lands.

    For all intents and purposes, he may well have been.

    Within half a century, Old World germs and diseases had reduced native populations by as much as 90 percent.
    The great empires of the Aztecs, Mayas, and Incas, which had developed over centuries, were undone in a matter of years.
    The religious orders of the Dominicans, Franciscans, and Jesuits undertook to convert the native peoples to Christianity.
    Finally, the engine of European capitalism, embodied in the great plantation estates and mining complexes in Mexico and Peru, transformed the day-to-day life of the native peoples.
    Enormous and Tragic Consequences

    This collision of cultures also had enormous consequences for the peoples of Africa. The transatlantic slave trade, the largest forced migration in human history, changed the lives of millions of Africans and initiated one of the most tragic chapters in the history of the Americas.
     
    ----

    The other day a Senate committee heard testimony on the threat of ISIS.
    It occurred to me that ISIS = Islamic zionism. Like zionism in its early days, a majority of Jews were opposed to the violence associated with Judaism by zionists, and also to the very project itself. So it is with "radical Islam" and the larger Islamic community.

    The senators called upon leaders in the Islamic community to speak out against extremist expressions of Islam, and to join in the fight to "degrade and destroy" ISIS --that is, to kill their co-religionists.

    No such demand was ever made of Jews with respect to zionism.

    The conquest of the natives who dwelt on the North American continent for 3000 years before the advent of White Men are not different from Palestinians whose lands are being taken from them by zionists. We cavil and kvetch at zionists and Jews, but we are the equivalent of Settlers on the lands of the indigenous people of the Americas, and not only do we not acknowledge that reality, we claim as our right that Other people, alien people, non-White people not come and expect to dwell on OUR land -- the land that we stole fair and square, no differently from the way the Hebrews stole Jericho or Jabotinsky and Sharon oppressed and killed Palestinians.

    re:

    some of us in the West who don’t feel the imperative that white, Western people obviously need to be overrun and replaced through a program of massive immigration of non-Westerners into the countries of the West. OK?
     
    I think that works for Western European states, but it doesn't apply to Americans. We are not the native people here, we are the colonizers; we're settlers -- one or three or ten generations removed, but still settlers.


    But for the quiescence of American Indians, relegated as they are to second-class citizenship on the West Bank reservations, would a reincarnated Helen Thomas tell white Americans that they should return to the places they came from?
    , @Jonathan Revusky

    First off, I certainly never claimed anything as hyperbolic as Muslims are "sexually assaulting every chick in sight or trying to ram Sharia down everyone’s throats".

    Did anyone ever claim something so outrageous?
     
    Well, as a matter of fact, there are hysterical people out there claiming these things. That's precisely why there is a need to just narrow down factually what is really true!

    Now, okay, you never said anything quite so extreme, but on the other hand, did I ever say that I was in favor of mass immigration of Muslims or anybody else? (Answer: no, I never did. I know I didn't.) So why are you continually answering as if I was advocating this?

    What has to happen in this conversation if it is going to continue, and I say this as somebody who generally likes to talking to you and thinks you're good guy is... Rurik, you've got to demonstrate that you are capable of discussing this topic in a concrete, factual way -- I mean, emotionally capable. Like all the ranting about the great conspiracy to destroy the white race, I decline to talk about that at this exact moment. I want to concentrate on whether what they are saying ("they" being the right-wing echo chamber commentariat) is factually true. Specifically:

    1. These incidents on New Year's Eve in Cologne, Germany. Did this really happen?
    2. Is there really a "rape epidemic" in Sweden by any reasonable measure taking place?

    I am not 100.0% sure, but my sense of things is that the answer to the above two questions is: no. (And it's not enough to point to one or two news stories where somebody got raped. That does not prove that there is any real "rape epidemic".)

    All that said, that does not mean that indigenous Europeans should not want to maintain the racial character of their country and so forth. I just don't want to talk about that right now, because I want to know whether these things are true factually.

    If you, at this point don't realize or believe that Muslims are causing a rape wave in Sweden and Norway and England and else where, I'm going to have to put that down to a kind of myopia.
     
    I don't think so. The problem is that I don't accept "proof by repetition" or proof by "everybody knows that...".

    I posted a link to a town in England where the Muslims were raping under age school girls by the hundreds, and this was an international scandal when it came out.
     
    Yes, I know about that, but that was some criminal ring involving maybe 10 people, who were of Pakistani origin, yes, quite scandalous case of sex trafficking involving underage girls. Still, you can take a specific crime committed by people of whatever origin and that does not prove that there is some sort of general epidemic going on.

    Look, Rurik, as I said in the article above, on a typical day in the U.S. about 100 people die in traffic accidents, more or less. With photos from just one day's worth of car accidents, you can create a ghastly collage. BUT the fact still remains that you actually have to be pretty unlucky to get killed in a traffic accident. I was thinking about this the other day and I think I only ever really knew one person in my entire life who died in a traffic accident. (I know more people who were in accidents and maybe were hurt, but only one person who died in my entire life.)

    You can take whatever grisly specific cases and rant about them hysterically just the same as you could rant to me about horrid traffic accidents, a bus falling off a cliff or whatever, but it is not, in itself, proof that there really is some huge overall problem.

    It is very hard to get to the bottom of this. I was looking for information today and, apparently, there is some leaked report from Germany about the scale of the sexual assaults:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/refugees-responsible-for-tiny-proportion-of-sex-crimes-in-germany-despite-far-right-claims-following-a6884166.html

    A detailed report seen by Germany’s Bild newspaper listed a total of 1,688 sex crimes committed by asylum seekers, refugees and illegal immigrants in 2015 – 3.6 per cent of the nationwide total of almost 47,000.

    Of those, 458 were rapes or sexual assaults.

    Refugees make up roughly 2 per cent of Germany’s population, the The Local reported, meaning the rate of sexual offences is disproportionately high.

    But the website pointed out that the figure was “skewed” by the fact the vast majority of sexual offences are committed by men, who also make up the majority of recent migrants arriving in Germany.

     

    Now, maybe you think this is disinfo and maybe you're right, but the case is very far from clear. Unless these figures above are totally cooked (which I can't exclude, leaked report.... probably deliberately... I dunno...) it is hardly grounds for this kind of hysterical discourse. I mean, okay, 458 rapes or sexual assaults, and some were probably particularly heinous, but relative to the baseline of how much shit happens anyway in a country of 80 million or so...

    You know, Rurik, even if you establish your 100% lily white ethno/racial country, there's still going to be some raping and other crimes and so forth. Okay, possibly somewhat less, it has to be quantified seriously, but.... just to say that these crimes occur and point to a few and then say, therefore there's an epidemic....

    Another article I came across was this one:

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/swedens-rape-crisis-isnt-what-it-seems/article30019623/

    That's an opinion piece in the Canadian paper, the Globe and Mail, and the guy is saying that the supposed rape epidemic in Sweden is based on a change in how "sex crimes" were reported. I mean, maybe now if you stare at a woman's tits too much in Sweden, and she doesn't like it, that's a rape... (Okay, don't quote me on that! :-))

    In general, I have not heard of anybody canceling a trip to Sweden or Germany because there's a rape epidemic. I have not heard of any travel agency here (in Spain actually) discouraging people from visiting these countries for this reason. I don't get the feeling this is real. All of this stuff about a rape epidemic in these countries seems to come from a certain sort of right-wing echo chamber. And it almost entirely seems to originate from news sources that have this neocon/Zionist islamophobe agenda. In particular, this Gatestone Institute looks to be really egregious.

    But, look, let me close this by posing a question:

    Did the mass sexual assaults in Cologne on last New Year's Eve really take place? If so, why is there no video footage at all?

    If you do not even attempt to answer this last question, and just start ranting some more about the plot to destroy the white race, I'm going to have to withdraw from the conversation.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. Rurik says:
    @Jake Saga
    Rurik,
    I agree. I don't advocate treating other ethnicities poorly, unless mere self-defense against crime or riots etc. is considered "poorly."

    What I meant is that to simply advocate for the survival of your group, if it happens to be "white" or European, will be called racist.

    To state that we have a right to a homeland of our own, where we are a majority, will be called racist.

    To state that we are unwilling to subsidize other groups that are less successful, or that we should enjoy our achievements and take pride in them, is called racist.

    Therefore, in order to survive, we will need to be fine with being called "racist."

    The definition of "racism" is a moot point: it's already been turned into a weaponized word. We can't win that debate. Trying to redefine it is a waste of effort. All we can do is to ignore it, and show by our actions that we will firmly defend our self-interests (while acting in as fair a manner as we can in the circumstances). Even so, the odds are against us. Our sociopathic elite have chosen to participate in our demise.

    Jake

    What I meant is that to simply advocate for the survival of your group, if it happens to be “white” or European, will be called racist.

    To state that we have a right to a homeland of our own, where we are a majority, will be called racist.

    yes Jake, you’re right about that of course

    they used to have to invade using swords or guns, but now they just use a word; ‘racist’ to force submission and conquer our lands. Indeed, I say “our lands”, and they’d say ‘what lands?’ You’re racists, you have no claim to any lands!’

    All we can do is to ignore it

    I prefer to mock it ;)

    Our sociopathic elite have chosen to participate in our demise.

    one of white people’s biggest errors is in thinking all the rest of the world think as we do. We harbor no ill-will towards anyone. We live and let live. But our mistake is in thinking they feel the same.

    for myself, I like all peoples. I’ve been to many countries and like all the different peoples )not necessarily individuals ; ) I’ve known and have met. Muslims, blacks, Hispanics, Jews.. are all nice and pleasant people to be around, when you’re dealing with the typical ones who’re working or middle or even upper class. But that doesn’t mean that I want all of them to come here and replace us. And so that makes me some kind of Adolf Hitler Nazi. It’s amazing really.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. alexander says:
    @Anonymous
    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/29/us/after-orlando-shooting-false-flag-and-crisis-actor-conspiracy-theories-surface.html

    Anonymous,

    Is this the same N Y Times that sold the entire world the wholly bogus story it was Saddams’ anthrax in Tom Brokaws and Senator Leahys office ?

    When it wasn’t.

    And in so doing, defrauded the American taxpayer out of trillions of dollars to engage in the supreme international crime of aggressive war on a country that never attacked us ?

    Is this the same N Y Times…or a different one ?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. @Jonathan Revusky
    Hi Rurik,

    First of all, I have meant to point this out to you but not got around to it. I think you are engaging in a basic logical fallacy in much of what you say. You point out cases where the authorities understate the frequency of certain kinds of crimes. And then you go to a completely separate context and just assume that the authorities are understating in a similar manner there.

    In other words, you assume that if they are caught fibbing in one case, in a separate case, they will be fibbing in the same direction. That is not necessarily so.

    For example, if I am trying to impress some woman (because I want to get in her knickers) I could well think it makes sense for me to exaggerate how rich I am. If I am haggling about the price of something, like a car or house or whatever, I could well choose to pretend that I am much poorer than I am. So in one context, I could lie in one direction and in another context, I will lie in another direction. You seem to be reasoning that because they lie in one direction in a given context, they are always lying in that same direction. But I think that is fallacious. If it suits their purposes in one context, to hush up whatever raping is really going on, then they'll do that, but if it suits their purposes to greatly exaggerate and claim that women are getting raped by Arabs right left and center, then they'll claim that!

    Well, your basic logical fallacy, IMHO, is that you assume that liars are consistent in their lies! But, no, not necessarily. In fact, that's what tends to be the undoing of liars, is that their lies start contradicting one another. It's the truth that is always consistent!

    Now, in my last note about this, I specifically brought up the mass sexual assaults in Cologne and I just cannot find any proof that this really happened! I simply reason that it is basically impossible for something of that scale to have happened at this juncture, without there being some video footage available, simply because EVERYBODY has a video cam in their pockets!

    Now, specifically, on the link you provide, I am not at all sure that I trust the information source. The specific story, people urinating in the mouth of a five-year-old, I don't know what to make of it, since it's such a bizarre thing already. Even if this really happened, I am not willing to believe that this is something that happens very often, it's so kinky and weird that... I mean to say, it's something so freaky and bizarre that I would be reluctant to reason from the specific to the general on the basis of this story. (If it was some more "normal" narrative where the lads dragged off some local teenage girl and fucked her silly, then... but this is just so bizarre that I can't even think about really generalizing about it...)

    Another thing about this is that the most notorious single case possibly that happened in Germany was this Russian girl, 13 years old, claimed that Arab migrants raped her and so on, and it became something of an international incident, since Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister openly accused the Germans of covering it up. Then, finally, the girl herself admitted that it was bullshit. So Lavrov, normally a very serious guy to be respected, really got egg on his face over this, it seems to me.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/31/teenage-girl-made-up-migrant-claim-that-caused-uproar-in-germany

    Anyway:

    (1) Did these mass sexual assaults in Cologne, Germany, on New Year's Eve really happen? If so, why is there no video evidence?

    (2) Is there really a rape epidemic going on in Sweden? If so, why is it that if you google "Sweden rape epidemic" the stuff that comes up is (indirectly or directly) from the Gatestone Institute? Have you looked at who the Gatestone Institute are? If not, you really should. If this is the only information source for that, then I think we can say that it's almost certainly a hoax.

    But, look, my current position on this is NOT that no rapes ever happened. If you have hundreds of thousands of these people, a certain number will be rapists or whatever. However, I am extremely unconvinced by these reports of a mass rape, sexual assault epidemic going on. I cannot find convincing proof of it. The biggest single case was what allegedly happened in and around the main train station in Cologne, Germany, on New Year's Eve, and it looks to me like this is a hoax, didn't happen. Where's the video footage?

    As for the overall immigration issue, I am not an advocate of mass immigration myself, but I strongly feel that the anti-immigration case has to be made honestly. Trying to say that all these people are rapists when they're not, that's not how I roll. I've got a problem with that....

    “I think you are engaging in a basic logical fallacy in much of what you say.”

    Very true. He likes to set up straw men to knock down as well. It would be amusing if there weren’t a veritable flood of it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. Art says:

    All the words in this article are really about one thing “brain stem politics.”

    If the left can come up with a set of words that appeal to our emotions, then they can win and carry the political day. The Jew controlled media will do the dirty work and propagandize America. The Jew controlled media will slam those low level emotions down our throats.

    That is how America is controlled today – make an appeal to a base emotion and win the political fight. Gay rights, women’s rights, and black rights are brain stem appeals.

    The idea of “liberty” is a high level brain function. Abundant food, health, security are products of liberty. “Liberty” is needed to produce food, health, and security.

    Everything that sustains our lives is a product of our upper brain functions – not our lower level brain stem.

    The “liberty” types have to ridicule “brain stem politics” truthfully saying “that emotions produce nothing.”

    “If one wants goods, then one must be free to produce.”

    We must get back to high level thinking.

    “Brain stem politics” must become dirty words.

    p.s. Nurse Ratchet and Pocahontas are the epitome of brain stem politics.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    Art,

    Where do you copy this shit from?

    I like nurse Ratchet. She was doing the best that she could and doing what she thought would work.

    Who told you that the brain was divisible?
    , @helena
    Well bad news because I've heard a key liberal opinion-maker using exactly that argument about Brexiters (as in Brexit=Far Right). What you're up against is 2-3 generations of people who believe that the liberal agenda is not just morally correct but rational, scientific (stats!) and logically accurate. It is truly scary. Like Stepford Wives. Not only are young people not thinking, they don't want to think; they don't want to break from the group. They are literally immature.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. @Rurik
    >>sigh<<

    Ok, here we go..

    I guess I'm sort of going to address this one to all three of you, Qasim, JR, and SC,

    First off, I certainly never claimed anything as hyperbolic as Muslims are "sexually assaulting every chick in sight or trying to ram Sharia down everyone’s throats".

    Did anyone ever claim something so outrageous?

    No, as far as I know, no one ever did.

    what has been said- is that there are some of us in the West who don't feel the imperative that white, Western people obviously need to be overrun and replaced through a program of massive immigration of non-Westerners into the countries of the West. OK?

    And we also think that it's beyond hypocritical (and vile and discussing) that those who feel otherwise, never advocate for massive immigration into Saudi Arabia or Japan [or Iran] for anyone and everyone who wants to go there. There are billions of starving Indians and Ethiopians and Indonesians that would love to be Kuwaiti citizens, but they're not allowed to, now are they? And why is that? Well, because the people of Kuwait don't want to commit national and ethnic suicide. And well they shouldn't. DUH! But when it comes to the West, there's this idiocy and malignant stupidity (and quite frankly genocidal determination) that the people of the West are uniquely slated for annihilation by inundation. Not unlike what was done to the Amerindian, who today is a shadow of what he was on the continent before the European came- and through immigration, ran him over. I guess there are lots and lots of people who simply feel that this is simply what the West has coming to them, perhaps because of the 'sins of the father'; because of colonialism and slavery and the Holocaust, we no longer have a moral right to exist, and it's all a n0-brainer to all these people that the West surely must perish. Huh?

    And if they don't agree, it can only be because they're some kind of "white nationalists" or some other crazed 'alt-white or 'alt-right' types. Not simply that we're just exactly like every one else and don't want to give our only lands up to others.

    They don't make land anymore. Once you lose yours, now you have no place left to live or raise a family. And for all the world this is taken as an obvious reality. But for whites, we're supposed to be suicidaly full of self-loathing, and it we're not, we must be 'racists' or "Xenophobic' or something, looking for some darkies to call names and hit with sticks.

    But I don't see it that way, thankyouverymuch. And for that I see SC has compared me to some pissy-ant little bullies who torment others because they're different. Nice. Not

    Then, on to the joys of diversity and multiculturalism. How is that working out for Syria today? How many immigrants from foreign countries are making their diversity felt today in Syria? Now the way I see it, is that there are some people who have an (almost understandable) resentment of the nations of the West for what they're doing in Syria and elsewhere. The Syrain people are suffering, and so as they see it, why shouldn't some people of the West suffer too? Why should white-bread families in Idaho be protected from the assorted ravages of strife and hatreds that are being imposed by the Zio-governments of the West on the Syrians and Iraqis and so many others, right?

    Well, I just don't buy that argument. I don't blame the people of Turkey for what the sultan is doing. And I don't blame the people of England for what Tony Blair did. And I don't blame the people of N. America and Germany for what their treasonous and Zio govenments are doing in the world. America voted in Obama to end the wars. England voted for Brexit as a repudiation of the wars, among other reasons. We hate the wars, and we hate what our Zio-Fiend has been doing. So I just don't buy the (unstated) argument that the people of the West deserve to suffer for what their treasonous governments are doing without their consent. OK?

    >>whew<<

    Now as to the rapes and strife and sharia law.

    If you, at this point don't realize or believe that Muslims are causing a rape wave in Sweden and Norway and England and else where, I'm going to have to put that down to a kind of myopia. An intellectual dishonestly of sorts. I mean for Christ's sake, I posted a link to a town in England where the Muslims were raping under age school girls by the hundreds, and this was an international scandal when it came out. You'd have to have your head so buried in the sand, ten feet deep to pretend that it didn't happen. Or you'd have to be ideologically myopic. Huh JR?

    Sweden is the rape capital of Europe today, and virtually all of it is from immigrants.

    Norway too.

    Recently a Muslim immigrant was sentenced for raping a ten year old boy in a public pool in Austria.

    Now you could say that isn't all Muslims, and you'd be right. But tell that to the parents of that boy. Or tell it to the boy himself, that the imperative that all of the West be overrun, is so strong, that yes, you poor lad, were just one of the unlucky ones, ya know. Too bad about that.

    But from where I sit, this Zio-imperative that all the lands of the West absolutely have to be overrun, just doesn't seem to strike a chord with me. I mean I understand the desire of those who want to come from places like the Sudan and the Congo to Minnesota and Idaho, but unless all the other coutries of the world open their arms too, then I have no problem whatsoever saying that it's the worst kind of racism to have some kind of double standard that say only the West must welcome everyone. Fuck that shit raw.

    Yours, Rurik the "racist" ;)

    They don’t make land anymore. Once you lose yours, now you have no place left to live or raise a family. And for all the world this is taken as an obvious reality. But for whites, we’re supposed to be suicidaly full of self-loathing, and it we’re not, we must be ‘racists’ or “Xenophobic’ or something, looking for some darkies to call names and hit with sticks.

    List of Indian reservations in the United States

    [MORE]

    Conquest of the Americas by Professor Marshall C. Eakin, Ph.D., Vanderbilt University
    Prof.. Eakiins argues that Christopher Columbus’s voyage to the Americas in 1492 arguably the most important event in the history of the world because it gave birth to the distinct identity of the Americas today by creating a collision between three distinct peoples and cultures: European, African, and Native American.

    As the inheritors of this legacy, some 500 years hence, we forget how radically the discovery of the Americas transformed the view of the world on both sides of the Atlantic.

    A People Unknown, A Land Unmentioned

    When Columbus completed his “enterprise of the Indies” he found a people unlike any he had ever known and a land unmentioned in any of the great touchstones of Western knowledge.

    Animated by the great dynamic forces of the day, Christianity and commercial capitalism, the European world reacted to Columbus’s discovery with voyages of conquest—territorial, cultural, and spiritual.

    For the native peoples of the Americas, the consequences were no less dramatic.

    When Hernán Cortés arrived to conquer Mexico, the Aztecs feared he was a god, returned from exile to claim his ancient lands.

    For all intents and purposes, he may well have been.

    Within half a century, Old World germs and diseases had reduced native populations by as much as 90 percent.
    The great empires of the Aztecs, Mayas, and Incas, which had developed over centuries, were undone in a matter of years.
    The religious orders of the Dominicans, Franciscans, and Jesuits undertook to convert the native peoples to Christianity.
    Finally, the engine of European capitalism, embodied in the great plantation estates and mining complexes in Mexico and Peru, transformed the day-to-day life of the native peoples.
    Enormous and Tragic Consequences

    This collision of cultures also had enormous consequences for the peoples of Africa. The transatlantic slave trade, the largest forced migration in human history, changed the lives of millions of Africans and initiated one of the most tragic chapters in the history of the Americas.

    —-

    The other day a Senate committee heard testimony on the threat of ISIS.
    It occurred to me that ISIS = Islamic zionism. Like zionism in its early days, a majority of Jews were opposed to the violence associated with Judaism by zionists, and also to the very project itself. So it is with “radical Islam” and the larger Islamic community.

    The senators called upon leaders in the Islamic community to speak out against extremist expressions of Islam, and to join in the fight to “degrade and destroy” ISIS –that is, to kill their co-religionists.

    No such demand was ever made of Jews with respect to zionism.

    The conquest of the natives who dwelt on the North American continent for 3000 years before the advent of White Men are not different from Palestinians whose lands are being taken from them by zionists. We cavil and kvetch at zionists and Jews, but we are the equivalent of Settlers on the lands of the indigenous people of the Americas, and not only do we not acknowledge that reality, we claim as our right that Other people, alien people, non-White people not come and expect to dwell on OUR land — the land that we stole fair and square, no differently from the way the Hebrews stole Jericho or Jabotinsky and Sharon oppressed and killed Palestinians.

    re:

    some of us in the West who don’t feel the imperative that white, Western people obviously need to be overrun and replaced through a program of massive immigration of non-Westerners into the countries of the West. OK?

    I think that works for Western European states, but it doesn’t apply to Americans. We are not the native people here, we are the colonizers; we’re settlers — one or three or ten generations removed, but still settlers.

    But for the quiescence of American Indians, relegated as they are to second-class citizenship on the West Bank reservations, would a reincarnated Helen Thomas tell white Americans that they should return to the places they came from?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik
    exactly my point SC, exactly my point

    but then again, one wonders.. did SC post the info on the fate of the Indians as reminder that :

    'But for whites, we’re supposed to be suicidaly full of self-loathing'


    ?

    where's RTW when you need him ;)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. iffen says:
    @Art
    All the words in this article are really about one thing “brain stem politics.”

    If the left can come up with a set of words that appeal to our emotions, then they can win and carry the political day. The Jew controlled media will do the dirty work and propagandize America. The Jew controlled media will slam those low level emotions down our throats.

    That is how America is controlled today – make an appeal to a base emotion and win the political fight. Gay rights, women’s rights, and black rights are brain stem appeals.

    The idea of “liberty” is a high level brain function. Abundant food, health, security are products of liberty. “Liberty” is needed to produce food, health, and security.

    Everything that sustains our lives is a product of our upper brain functions – not our lower level brain stem.

    The “liberty” types have to ridicule “brain stem politics” truthfully saying “that emotions produce nothing.”

    “If one wants goods, then one must be free to produce.”

    We must get back to high level thinking.

    “Brain stem politics” must become dirty words.

    p.s. Nurse Ratchet and Pocahontas are the epitome of brain stem politics.

    Art,

    Where do you copy this shit from?

    I like nurse Ratchet. She was doing the best that she could and doing what she thought would work.

    Who told you that the brain was divisible?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Art

    I like nurse Ratchet. She was doing the best that she could and doing what she thought would work.
     
    So our Little Jew Wanabe loves nurse Ratchet – he likes the control she has over the folks – how typical.

    Hmm – this godless atheist has no empathy. He likes that the authorities can control people with drugs. Dumbed down is good.


    p.s. “One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest” – a great movie – an ageless story worth seeing again.

    p.s. YouTube has it.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. Art says:
    @iffen
    Art,

    Where do you copy this shit from?

    I like nurse Ratchet. She was doing the best that she could and doing what she thought would work.

    Who told you that the brain was divisible?

    I like nurse Ratchet. She was doing the best that she could and doing what she thought would work.

    So our Little Jew Wanabe loves nurse Ratchet – he likes the control she has over the folks – how typical.

    Hmm – this godless atheist has no empathy. He likes that the authorities can control people with drugs. Dumbed down is good.

    p.s. “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest” – a great movie – an ageless story worth seeing again.

    p.s. YouTube has it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    All due respect Art but the place to start is the book by Ken Keysy and yes, it is a great story.

    Nurse Ratchet was doing the best that her twisted mind told her was what she thought would work. Iffen doesn't get it that in one of life's ironies here is a woman who is sick in the head (Ratchet) and is in charge of the asylum. She is mean, spiteful and cruel.

    Randle makes it clear that many of the inmates are as sane as those on the outside. Cheers.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. Sam J. says:

    I really liked this article. What did it for me was the Synthetic vs. Organic label. This is an outstanding “meme” that I congratulate you on. It very quickly encapsulates the ideas at hand. Very clever.

    As for those that are still trying to pretend 9-11 wasn’t a controlled demolition look at building #7. The building fell for roughly 108 feet the same speed as a rock dropped in mid-air. At the time it fell only three or four floors were on fire and most all the glass, melting point vastly less than steel, was in place. To fall with no resistance the for 108 feet 11 or more floors would have to have the same density as air. This is impossible.

    Read More
    • Replies: @alexander
    I agree with you ..it is a good "meme", and Jonathan makes his points very clearly......but if you stop to consider what "synthetic" really stands for, and refuse to sugar coat it.....the proper word is FRAUD.

    It really is.

    The use of the word "synthetic" by Jonathan, as something being "made up", does not really carry the day in my book because it comes across as neutral in its emphasis on the moral hazard of such undertakings..., when for all intensive purposes the Moral hazard, as well as Fiscal hazard, of such forms of "synthesizing".are at the core of why this is all so malevolent.

    Think about it.

    These people are actually taking your TAX dollars to fabricate this crap, so they can CON you out of even more tax dollars to fight more belligerent wars...and kill a lot more people who never attacked us.

    This is so F#cking evil....It is beyond the pale.

    Excuse my French, but it truly is.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  88. Notice how “They hate us because we are free”, has now been changed to “They will hate us if we shut down Muslim Immigration” and because of the term “Radical Islam”. Yes I’m sure that the average Muslim thousands of miles away in a war zone is worried that the US isn’t allowing in enough Muslims and dares to call some of them bad names (if they are even aware of it at all). It has nothing at all to do with the death and destruction that we have unleashed on them and their loved ones. After all wouldn’t it bother you more to be called a radical than to have your wife and children blown to pieces?

    Conversely you are supposed to call it patriotic when young American men and women enlist in the military after events like 9/11 or these latest attacks, yet it’s inconceivable that the same kind of death and destruction would have the same effect in other nations.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  89. Clyde says:
    @Art
    In short there’s no Jewish conspiracy of any kind – there never was.

    You do not believe that.

    There is no AIPAC, no ADL, no 100's of national Jew organizations - no Israeli hasbara.

    You insult us - go away!

    AIPAC and ADL live in your mind rent free.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. alexander says:
    @Sam J.
    I really liked this article. What did it for me was the Synthetic vs. Organic label. This is an outstanding "meme" that I congratulate you on. It very quickly encapsulates the ideas at hand. Very clever.

    As for those that are still trying to pretend 9-11 wasn't a controlled demolition look at building #7. The building fell for roughly 108 feet the same speed as a rock dropped in mid-air. At the time it fell only three or four floors were on fire and most all the glass, melting point vastly less than steel, was in place. To fall with no resistance the for 108 feet 11 or more floors would have to have the same density as air. This is impossible.

    I agree with you ..it is a good “meme”, and Jonathan makes his points very clearly……but if you stop to consider what “synthetic” really stands for, and refuse to sugar coat it…..the proper word is FRAUD.

    It really is.

    The use of the word “synthetic” by Jonathan, as something being “made up”, does not really carry the day in my book because it comes across as neutral in its emphasis on the moral hazard of such undertakings…, when for all intensive purposes the Moral hazard, as well as Fiscal hazard, of such forms of “synthesizing”.are at the core of why this is all so malevolent.

    Think about it.

    These people are actually taking your TAX dollars to fabricate this crap, so they can CON you out of even more tax dollars to fight more belligerent wars…and kill a lot more people who never attacked us.

    This is so F#cking evil….It is beyond the pale.

    Excuse my French, but it truly is.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. @Art

    I like nurse Ratchet. She was doing the best that she could and doing what she thought would work.
     
    So our Little Jew Wanabe loves nurse Ratchet – he likes the control she has over the folks – how typical.

    Hmm – this godless atheist has no empathy. He likes that the authorities can control people with drugs. Dumbed down is good.


    p.s. “One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest” – a great movie – an ageless story worth seeing again.

    p.s. YouTube has it.

    All due respect Art but the place to start is the book by Ken Keysy and yes, it is a great story.

    Nurse Ratchet was doing the best that her twisted mind told her was what she thought would work. Iffen doesn’t get it that in one of life’s ironies here is a woman who is sick in the head (Ratchet) and is in charge of the asylum. She is mean, spiteful and cruel.

    Randle makes it clear that many of the inmates are as sane as those on the outside. Cheers.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    Art,

    YouTube has it.
    Don’t need it; have my own DVD, one of my favorite movies.
    A minor point, but aren’t all atheists considered Godless? Are there atheists somewhere that I don’t know about that are Godful?

    NTD,

    I haven’t read the book.
    Based on the movie, I have to differ with you about nurse Ratchet.
    She is a stand-in for conventional wisdom, the status quo, she was doing what she had been taught as to best practices and procedures.
    , @Art

    Nurse Ratchet was doing the best that her twisted mind told her was what she thought would work. Iffen doesn’t get it that in one of life’s ironies here is a woman who is sick in the head (Ratchet) and is in charge of the asylum. She is mean, spiteful and cruel.
     
    Nurse Ratchet is a good analogy for Hillary – she has a mean character – and she has the dumb down pills for America. She is a true brain stem politician playing to base human emotions.

    She said “she knows how to handle men that get off the reservation.” The secret service guy with the new book on her White House days with Bill can attest to that.

    Here is the wiki plot on the film.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Flew_Over_the_Cuckoo%27s_Nest_(film)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. RodW says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    There are some fairly straightforward reasons why these interviews don’t look exactly as we might expect them too, and why they contain inconsistencies.
     
    Well, sure there's a simple straightforward reason why the interviews look fake. Because they are COMPLETELY OBVIOUSLY FAKE! Period.

    My honest sense of things is that if you watch, for example, the BBC interview with those black kids that I linked above and you sincerely believe that those kids' momma was murdered senselessly 24 hours earlier, then there is something wrong with you. The same applies to those interviews with that woman Ginnie Watson, and this other girl, Emma Parkinson. These things are pretty obviously fake.

    Now, okay, maybe you have some genuine incontrovertible proof that these people are, despite all outward appearances, credible witnesses giving credible testimony. In that case, you really ought to share that information. However, I get the feeling that the basic argument you are making is that this is on the TV, therefore it's true.

    Or are you making, at root, a different argument from that? If so, what specific argument is it?

    The author should do some proper investigation if he wants to be taken seriously
     
    I note that, in a debate with a certain kind of commenter here, there is always an onus on me to demonstrate something, but my interlocutor never accepts any obligation to demonstrate anything himself.

    Well, I obviously don't accept that there is only ever an onus on me to demonstrate anything. No, you say this phony-looking shit is real. You provide some proof.

    interview Terry Jones for example,
     
    Hmm, that's an interesting idea. What do you propose that I ask this man?

    I don't have any particular question I want to ask him. If you do have any questions for him that would clarify whatever, why don't you interview him?

    audition as a ‘crisis actor’ and get hold of the employment contract
     
    Oh, you mean, if I cannot show you an official "crisis actor" employment contract, then there are no crisis actors? So, I suppose that, since I can't produce an example of an actual written contract to kill somebody, therefore contract killers, a.k.a. hit-men, do not exist, right?

    Look, a "crisis actor" is just somebody who, for whatever money or reward, is there on the scene at one of these synthetic events, and says whatever is supposed to be said to support the synthetic narrative. I believe that this exists. Moreover, the clips I provided are a pretty clear example of this.

    If I'm wrong about this, then provide me some proof that I'm wrong.

    As soon as you put someone in front of a camera and start an interview, you already have a fake situation. People being interviewed on TV are encouraged to burble, and burble they do, except when they can’t think of anything else to say. Oh you say, they’re not emoting enough! Or oh, they’re emoting too much! Well, exactly how much is natural in a situation to which most normal people aren’t accustomed? Logically, you’d expect real actors to do a better job.

    Some of the people in the videos have clearly been interviewed several times and have a bit of a schtick going. “I’m reeely reeely angry!”. Well maybe they are, but the interview thing is by its nature fake, so their schtick comes across as cheesy.

    Another thing you may not know is that intensely religious people can actually be happy that their loved ones have gone to their Maker. They do genuinely feel comforted by the thought, to the extent that normal people without these fantasies are genuinely disturbed by their lack of distress. The black community that was shot up by that white kid appear to have been intensely religious as well as self-disciplined, which is why the survivors weren’t emoting all over the place.

    > Oh, you mean, if I cannot show you an official “crisis actor” employment contract, then there are no crisis actors?
    That sort of logic is about the same level as “an actress witnessed a terror event therefore the whole thing was staged”. Contract killings have been adequately documented through legal proceedings, but the evidence for ‘crisis actors’ seems to be remarkably scant considering what a popular career option it apparently is today.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky

    Another thing you may not know is that intensely religious people can actually be happy that their loved ones have gone to their Maker.
     
    Well, sure. That's the case in particular if somebody was dying a slow, painful death of cancer or something. Even a non-religious person could see the person's death as a deliverance. Moreover, in such a case, the person's passing has usually been expected for some time. A good friend of mine lost his father and mother within a few months of each other not too long ago. He was not terribly affected, because his parents were 93 and 89 years old respectively and had both been invalids, needing constant care, for at least year prior to their deaths.

    The scenario with these black kids getting interviewed is that their mother was in perfectly good health, and was comparatively young, and some nutcase came to her church and blew her away along with 8 of her church-going friends. This was something totally unexpected and it is hard to even conceive of the shock that this would be to somebody. These kids simply show no sign of having been subjected to such an emotional impact a mere 24 hours earlier.

    Frankly, this whole explanation of yours, that these kids look so happy because it's so wonderful that their momma is now with Jaysus, it's pathetic, dude. What it manifests is the most classic HIQI syndrome, which is this sort of pathetic, desperate need to delude oneself. Anybody who does not suffer from that syndrome who watches this segment knows perfectly well that this is impossible and that these kids are definitely fakers.


    Contract killings have been adequately documented through legal proceedings, but the evidence for ‘crisis actors’ seems to be remarkably scant
     
    Look, a "crisis actor" is the same thing as a false witness. You know the Ten Commandments in the Bible? What's the 9th commandment? "Thou shalt not bear false witness..."

    The whole idea that somebody, in exchange for 30 pieces of silver, or whatever, would give false testimony -- this is NOT exactly a novel concept. Like, it was already old hat centuries before Christ, okay?

    And this utter pathetic nonsense that I'm suppose to produce the employment contract.... next, you'll be telling me that men never pay hookers for sex because I can't show you the written contract.

    But there's nothing I can do for you, I suppose. This pathetic need to delude oneself probably most resembles the desperate need of the passive homosexual to be roughly sodomized, and as such, is basically incurable. If I were religious, I could pray for you, I guess.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. @Rurik
    >>sigh<<

    Ok, here we go..

    I guess I'm sort of going to address this one to all three of you, Qasim, JR, and SC,

    First off, I certainly never claimed anything as hyperbolic as Muslims are "sexually assaulting every chick in sight or trying to ram Sharia down everyone’s throats".

    Did anyone ever claim something so outrageous?

    No, as far as I know, no one ever did.

    what has been said- is that there are some of us in the West who don't feel the imperative that white, Western people obviously need to be overrun and replaced through a program of massive immigration of non-Westerners into the countries of the West. OK?

    And we also think that it's beyond hypocritical (and vile and discussing) that those who feel otherwise, never advocate for massive immigration into Saudi Arabia or Japan [or Iran] for anyone and everyone who wants to go there. There are billions of starving Indians and Ethiopians and Indonesians that would love to be Kuwaiti citizens, but they're not allowed to, now are they? And why is that? Well, because the people of Kuwait don't want to commit national and ethnic suicide. And well they shouldn't. DUH! But when it comes to the West, there's this idiocy and malignant stupidity (and quite frankly genocidal determination) that the people of the West are uniquely slated for annihilation by inundation. Not unlike what was done to the Amerindian, who today is a shadow of what he was on the continent before the European came- and through immigration, ran him over. I guess there are lots and lots of people who simply feel that this is simply what the West has coming to them, perhaps because of the 'sins of the father'; because of colonialism and slavery and the Holocaust, we no longer have a moral right to exist, and it's all a n0-brainer to all these people that the West surely must perish. Huh?

    And if they don't agree, it can only be because they're some kind of "white nationalists" or some other crazed 'alt-white or 'alt-right' types. Not simply that we're just exactly like every one else and don't want to give our only lands up to others.

    They don't make land anymore. Once you lose yours, now you have no place left to live or raise a family. And for all the world this is taken as an obvious reality. But for whites, we're supposed to be suicidaly full of self-loathing, and it we're not, we must be 'racists' or "Xenophobic' or something, looking for some darkies to call names and hit with sticks.

    But I don't see it that way, thankyouverymuch. And for that I see SC has compared me to some pissy-ant little bullies who torment others because they're different. Nice. Not

    Then, on to the joys of diversity and multiculturalism. How is that working out for Syria today? How many immigrants from foreign countries are making their diversity felt today in Syria? Now the way I see it, is that there are some people who have an (almost understandable) resentment of the nations of the West for what they're doing in Syria and elsewhere. The Syrain people are suffering, and so as they see it, why shouldn't some people of the West suffer too? Why should white-bread families in Idaho be protected from the assorted ravages of strife and hatreds that are being imposed by the Zio-governments of the West on the Syrians and Iraqis and so many others, right?

    Well, I just don't buy that argument. I don't blame the people of Turkey for what the sultan is doing. And I don't blame the people of England for what Tony Blair did. And I don't blame the people of N. America and Germany for what their treasonous and Zio govenments are doing in the world. America voted in Obama to end the wars. England voted for Brexit as a repudiation of the wars, among other reasons. We hate the wars, and we hate what our Zio-Fiend has been doing. So I just don't buy the (unstated) argument that the people of the West deserve to suffer for what their treasonous governments are doing without their consent. OK?

    >>whew<<

    Now as to the rapes and strife and sharia law.

    If you, at this point don't realize or believe that Muslims are causing a rape wave in Sweden and Norway and England and else where, I'm going to have to put that down to a kind of myopia. An intellectual dishonestly of sorts. I mean for Christ's sake, I posted a link to a town in England where the Muslims were raping under age school girls by the hundreds, and this was an international scandal when it came out. You'd have to have your head so buried in the sand, ten feet deep to pretend that it didn't happen. Or you'd have to be ideologically myopic. Huh JR?

    Sweden is the rape capital of Europe today, and virtually all of it is from immigrants.

    Norway too.

    Recently a Muslim immigrant was sentenced for raping a ten year old boy in a public pool in Austria.

    Now you could say that isn't all Muslims, and you'd be right. But tell that to the parents of that boy. Or tell it to the boy himself, that the imperative that all of the West be overrun, is so strong, that yes, you poor lad, were just one of the unlucky ones, ya know. Too bad about that.

    But from where I sit, this Zio-imperative that all the lands of the West absolutely have to be overrun, just doesn't seem to strike a chord with me. I mean I understand the desire of those who want to come from places like the Sudan and the Congo to Minnesota and Idaho, but unless all the other coutries of the world open their arms too, then I have no problem whatsoever saying that it's the worst kind of racism to have some kind of double standard that say only the West must welcome everyone. Fuck that shit raw.

    Yours, Rurik the "racist" ;)

    First off, I certainly never claimed anything as hyperbolic as Muslims are “sexually assaulting every chick in sight or trying to ram Sharia down everyone’s throats”.

    Did anyone ever claim something so outrageous?

    Well, as a matter of fact, there are hysterical people out there claiming these things. That’s precisely why there is a need to just narrow down factually what is really true!

    Now, okay, you never said anything quite so extreme, but on the other hand, did I ever say that I was in favor of mass immigration of Muslims or anybody else? (Answer: no, I never did. I know I didn’t.) So why are you continually answering as if I was advocating this?

    What has to happen in this conversation if it is going to continue, and I say this as somebody who generally likes to talking to you and thinks you’re good guy is… Rurik, you’ve got to demonstrate that you are capable of discussing this topic in a concrete, factual way — I mean, emotionally capable. Like all the ranting about the great conspiracy to destroy the white race, I decline to talk about that at this exact moment. I want to concentrate on whether what they are saying (“they” being the right-wing echo chamber commentariat) is factually true. Specifically:

    1. These incidents on New Year’s Eve in Cologne, Germany. Did this really happen?
    2. Is there really a “rape epidemic” in Sweden by any reasonable measure taking place?

    I am not 100.0% sure, but my sense of things is that the answer to the above two questions is: no. (And it’s not enough to point to one or two news stories where somebody got raped. That does not prove that there is any real “rape epidemic”.)

    All that said, that does not mean that indigenous Europeans should not want to maintain the racial character of their country and so forth. I just don’t want to talk about that right now, because I want to know whether these things are true factually.

    If you, at this point don’t realize or believe that Muslims are causing a rape wave in Sweden and Norway and England and else where, I’m going to have to put that down to a kind of myopia.

    I don’t think so. The problem is that I don’t accept “proof by repetition” or proof by “everybody knows that…”.

    I posted a link to a town in England where the Muslims were raping under age school girls by the hundreds, and this was an international scandal when it came out.

    Yes, I know about that, but that was some criminal ring involving maybe 10 people, who were of Pakistani origin, yes, quite scandalous case of sex trafficking involving underage girls. Still, you can take a specific crime committed by people of whatever origin and that does not prove that there is some sort of general epidemic going on.

    Look, Rurik, as I said in the article above, on a typical day in the U.S. about 100 people die in traffic accidents, more or less. With photos from just one day’s worth of car accidents, you can create a ghastly collage. BUT the fact still remains that you actually have to be pretty unlucky to get killed in a traffic accident. I was thinking about this the other day and I think I only ever really knew one person in my entire life who died in a traffic accident. (I know more people who were in accidents and maybe were hurt, but only one person who died in my entire life.)

    You can take whatever grisly specific cases and rant about them hysterically just the same as you could rant to me about horrid traffic accidents, a bus falling off a cliff or whatever, but it is not, in itself, proof that there really is some huge overall problem.

    It is very hard to get to the bottom of this. I was looking for information today and, apparently, there is some leaked report from Germany about the scale of the sexual assaults:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/refugees-responsible-for-tiny-proportion-of-sex-crimes-in-germany-despite-far-right-claims-following-a6884166.html

    A detailed report seen by Germany’s Bild newspaper listed a total of 1,688 sex crimes committed by asylum seekers, refugees and illegal immigrants in 2015 – 3.6 per cent of the nationwide total of almost 47,000.

    Of those, 458 were rapes or sexual assaults.

    Refugees make up roughly 2 per cent of Germany’s population, the The Local reported, meaning the rate of sexual offences is disproportionately high.

    But the website pointed out that the figure was “skewed” by the fact the vast majority of sexual offences are committed by men, who also make up the majority of recent migrants arriving in Germany.

    Now, maybe you think this is disinfo and maybe you’re right, but the case is very far from clear. Unless these figures above are totally cooked (which I can’t exclude, leaked report…. probably deliberately… I dunno…) it is hardly grounds for this kind of hysterical discourse. I mean, okay, 458 rapes or sexual assaults, and some were probably particularly heinous, but relative to the baseline of how much shit happens anyway in a country of 80 million or so…

    You know, Rurik, even if you establish your 100% lily white ethno/racial country, there’s still going to be some raping and other crimes and so forth. Okay, possibly somewhat less, it has to be quantified seriously, but…. just to say that these crimes occur and point to a few and then say, therefore there’s an epidemic….

    Another article I came across was this one:

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/swedens-rape-crisis-isnt-what-it-seems/article30019623/

    That’s an opinion piece in the Canadian paper, the Globe and Mail, and the guy is saying that the supposed rape epidemic in Sweden is based on a change in how “sex crimes” were reported. I mean, maybe now if you stare at a woman’s tits too much in Sweden, and she doesn’t like it, that’s a rape… (Okay, don’t quote me on that! :-))

    In general, I have not heard of anybody canceling a trip to Sweden or Germany because there’s a rape epidemic. I have not heard of any travel agency here (in Spain actually) discouraging people from visiting these countries for this reason. I don’t get the feeling this is real. All of this stuff about a rape epidemic in these countries seems to come from a certain sort of right-wing echo chamber. And it almost entirely seems to originate from news sources that have this neocon/Zionist islamophobe agenda. In particular, this Gatestone Institute looks to be really egregious.

    But, look, let me close this by posing a question:

    Did the mass sexual assaults in Cologne on last New Year’s Eve really take place? If so, why is there no video footage at all?

    If you do not even attempt to answer this last question, and just start ranting some more about the plot to destroy the white race, I’m going to have to withdraw from the conversation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik
    OK JR,

    I don't want to mussy up this excellent article with anymore distractions not directly related to the points of the article. You've brought up some very insightful paradigms that give us all tools for seeing though their lies, and they're worth discussing on their own merits.

    I just have a hard time when someone suggests that people who're concerned about things like mass-immigration and its consequences, are motivated by less than noble concerns - (they're insecure people worried about nothing of consequence, and exaggerate things like rape for its emotional appeal) - no, that's not true ;)

    As for videos of assaults, I've seen some. (like of guys lifting girls skirts and gabbing their asses) I'll leave you with this video produced by anti-immigration folks.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJblxS358sI

    Just check out the German politician at 7:10 into the video, and you can see a very real, agenda driven man speaking for a lot of Germans and others. It is because of guys like that and their (genocidal) agenda, that guys like me are motivated to speak out against that (very real and very dire and epic, indeed civilization ending) agenda. (and that's not hyperbole)


    Cheers JR
    , @alexander
    Jonathan,

    There was a moment during the film "No Country for Old Men" which comes to mind in discussing the alleged "rampages of rapes" by incoming Muslims against the dear ladies of Cologne.

    It centers on how our mendacious "elites" may use "Terror Fraud" as a tool for Deflection and Distraction,not just in generating fear, contempt, hatred and war-mongering.

    The scene in the film, is where the newly wounded psychopathic hit man (played by Javier Barden) needs Meds from a pharmacy to treat his buck-shot leg.....So he stages a terrorist act and blows up this Chevy Impala right in front of the Pharmacy.....it is such a shocking explosion, that everyone, including all the pharmacists, race outside to see what is going on....he then uses the moment of their absence from the store....to hop behind the counter and pilfer the Meds he needs.

    "Terror Fraud" as DEFLECTION.

    How is this germane to the rapes in Cologne, (and a host of other terror events) ?

    As a distraction from the REAL NEWS at the time.....which was that the Neocon wars of aggression in the middle east arena...had generated close to 60 MILLION displaced people.


    Not a good issue for the belligerent elites to take on....as a matter of fact it is such disgraceful mud in their face.....that perhaps they needed something to talk about which made their enemies look bad...and deflect from the horror show their wars have created.

    Bingo....like a rabbit out of a hat....switch to..... "Savage Muslim refugees brutally gang rape scores of Cologne girls"......and .....there you go..

    The big switch.

    The absolutely catastrophic refugee crisis their heinous wars have created...is segued into smearing the very refugees those wars produced....

    "Deflection and Distraction".....Keeping the HATE ON...and always deflected away from their failures, their criminality and their utter culpability...

    Ugly...Ugly...business..

    Clever...but oh so low.
    , @utu
    Thank you for your response to my comment and adding new video clips. Watching them I can see that the interlocutors are somewhat off on the emotional level. But then I ask myself off from what baseline. I have never seen real people after traumas like these before. The only people I have watched who were responding to big recent traumas were actors in theater productions or Hollywood movies. So I am biting my own tail at this point. It is possible I might be tone deaf in this department.

    Few unrelated remarks:

    (1) I like your discussion with Rurik. I share your sentiments. While reading your responses I was thinking about Sailers's crowd.
    (2) In Daily Mail few days ago was a strange article related to Orlando. The participants, actually the heroes don't want to be in media! No interviews, no comments!
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3662290/How-19-British-exchange-students-heroes-Orlando-massacre-helping-wounded-routine-ride-cops-university-wants-rescue-effort-SECRET.html
    , @L.K
    J.R,
    As with Utu, I also liked your discussion with Rurik and I feel it is a necessary one.
    There are things about the discussion I agree with you and things I agree with Rurik.
    Briefly now, due to lack of time, you wrote in response to Ruriks post:

    1. These incidents on New Year’s Eve in Cologne, Germany. Did this really happen?
    2. Is there really a “rape epidemic” in Sweden by any reasonable measure taking place?

    As to the first, I think yes, though the scale may have been exaggerated. But even if the specific incidents on New Year's Eve were entirely synthetic, it is more than clear that admitting 100s of thousands of mostly male migrants from various countries with a very different culture is creating a LOT of very real problems in Europe. The later video by Rurik illustrates this well enough. Though one assault scene shown actually took place in the US.

    As to point.2; perhaps “rape epidemic” is too strong a term, but what seems clear enough is that immigrants/asylum seekers in Sweden are disproportionately responsible for rape( and other serious crimes ).
    Take a look at this presentation by 'Angry Foreigner', an immigrant himself, though an European one from the Balkans, living in Sweden. He presents some statistics from Swedish studies, which have since several years ago been discontinued, due to PC.
    Immigrant rape statistics in Sweden
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nA9yjrqtWG0

    Take care
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. Rurik says:
    @SolontoCroesus

    They don’t make land anymore. Once you lose yours, now you have no place left to live or raise a family. And for all the world this is taken as an obvious reality. But for whites, we’re supposed to be suicidaly full of self-loathing, and it we’re not, we must be ‘racists’ or “Xenophobic’ or something, looking for some darkies to call names and hit with sticks.
     
    List of Indian reservations in the United States

    Conquest of the Americas by Professor Marshall C. Eakin, Ph.D., Vanderbilt University
    Prof.. Eakiins argues that Christopher Columbus's voyage to the Americas in 1492 arguably the most important event in the history of the world because it gave birth to the distinct identity of the Americas today by creating a collision between three distinct peoples and cultures: European, African, and Native American.


    As the inheritors of this legacy, some 500 years hence, we forget how radically the discovery of the Americas transformed the view of the world on both sides of the Atlantic.

    A People Unknown, A Land Unmentioned

    When Columbus completed his "enterprise of the Indies" he found a people unlike any he had ever known and a land unmentioned in any of the great touchstones of Western knowledge.

    Animated by the great dynamic forces of the day, Christianity and commercial capitalism, the European world reacted to Columbus's discovery with voyages of conquest—territorial, cultural, and spiritual.

    For the native peoples of the Americas, the consequences were no less dramatic.

    When Hernán Cortés arrived to conquer Mexico, the Aztecs feared he was a god, returned from exile to claim his ancient lands.

    For all intents and purposes, he may well have been.

    Within half a century, Old World germs and diseases had reduced native populations by as much as 90 percent.
    The great empires of the Aztecs, Mayas, and Incas, which had developed over centuries, were undone in a matter of years.
    The religious orders of the Dominicans, Franciscans, and Jesuits undertook to convert the native peoples to Christianity.
    Finally, the engine of European capitalism, embodied in the great plantation estates and mining complexes in Mexico and Peru, transformed the day-to-day life of the native peoples.
    Enormous and Tragic Consequences

    This collision of cultures also had enormous consequences for the peoples of Africa. The transatlantic slave trade, the largest forced migration in human history, changed the lives of millions of Africans and initiated one of the most tragic chapters in the history of the Americas.
     
    ----

    The other day a Senate committee heard testimony on the threat of ISIS.
    It occurred to me that ISIS = Islamic zionism. Like zionism in its early days, a majority of Jews were opposed to the violence associated with Judaism by zionists, and also to the very project itself. So it is with "radical Islam" and the larger Islamic community.

    The senators called upon leaders in the Islamic community to speak out against extremist expressions of Islam, and to join in the fight to "degrade and destroy" ISIS --that is, to kill their co-religionists.

    No such demand was ever made of Jews with respect to zionism.

    The conquest of the natives who dwelt on the North American continent for 3000 years before the advent of White Men are not different from Palestinians whose lands are being taken from them by zionists. We cavil and kvetch at zionists and Jews, but we are the equivalent of Settlers on the lands of the indigenous people of the Americas, and not only do we not acknowledge that reality, we claim as our right that Other people, alien people, non-White people not come and expect to dwell on OUR land -- the land that we stole fair and square, no differently from the way the Hebrews stole Jericho or Jabotinsky and Sharon oppressed and killed Palestinians.

    re:

    some of us in the West who don’t feel the imperative that white, Western people obviously need to be overrun and replaced through a program of massive immigration of non-Westerners into the countries of the West. OK?
     
    I think that works for Western European states, but it doesn't apply to Americans. We are not the native people here, we are the colonizers; we're settlers -- one or three or ten generations removed, but still settlers.


    But for the quiescence of American Indians, relegated as they are to second-class citizenship on the West Bank reservations, would a reincarnated Helen Thomas tell white Americans that they should return to the places they came from?

    exactly my point SC, exactly my point

    but then again, one wonders.. did SC post the info on the fate of the Indians as reminder that :

    ‘But for whites, we’re supposed to be suicidaly full of self-loathing’

    ?

    where’s RTW when you need him ;)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. Rurik says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    First off, I certainly never claimed anything as hyperbolic as Muslims are "sexually assaulting every chick in sight or trying to ram Sharia down everyone’s throats".

    Did anyone ever claim something so outrageous?
     
    Well, as a matter of fact, there are hysterical people out there claiming these things. That's precisely why there is a need to just narrow down factually what is really true!

    Now, okay, you never said anything quite so extreme, but on the other hand, did I ever say that I was in favor of mass immigration of Muslims or anybody else? (Answer: no, I never did. I know I didn't.) So why are you continually answering as if I was advocating this?

    What has to happen in this conversation if it is going to continue, and I say this as somebody who generally likes to talking to you and thinks you're good guy is... Rurik, you've got to demonstrate that you are capable of discussing this topic in a concrete, factual way -- I mean, emotionally capable. Like all the ranting about the great conspiracy to destroy the white race, I decline to talk about that at this exact moment. I want to concentrate on whether what they are saying ("they" being the right-wing echo chamber commentariat) is factually true. Specifically:

    1. These incidents on New Year's Eve in Cologne, Germany. Did this really happen?
    2. Is there really a "rape epidemic" in Sweden by any reasonable measure taking place?

    I am not 100.0% sure, but my sense of things is that the answer to the above two questions is: no. (And it's not enough to point to one or two news stories where somebody got raped. That does not prove that there is any real "rape epidemic".)

    All that said, that does not mean that indigenous Europeans should not want to maintain the racial character of their country and so forth. I just don't want to talk about that right now, because I want to know whether these things are true factually.

    If you, at this point don't realize or believe that Muslims are causing a rape wave in Sweden and Norway and England and else where, I'm going to have to put that down to a kind of myopia.
     
    I don't think so. The problem is that I don't accept "proof by repetition" or proof by "everybody knows that...".

    I posted a link to a town in England where the Muslims were raping under age school girls by the hundreds, and this was an international scandal when it came out.
     
    Yes, I know about that, but that was some criminal ring involving maybe 10 people, who were of Pakistani origin, yes, quite scandalous case of sex trafficking involving underage girls. Still, you can take a specific crime committed by people of whatever origin and that does not prove that there is some sort of general epidemic going on.

    Look, Rurik, as I said in the article above, on a typical day in the U.S. about 100 people die in traffic accidents, more or less. With photos from just one day's worth of car accidents, you can create a ghastly collage. BUT the fact still remains that you actually have to be pretty unlucky to get killed in a traffic accident. I was thinking about this the other day and I think I only ever really knew one person in my entire life who died in a traffic accident. (I know more people who were in accidents and maybe were hurt, but only one person who died in my entire life.)

    You can take whatever grisly specific cases and rant about them hysterically just the same as you could rant to me about horrid traffic accidents, a bus falling off a cliff or whatever, but it is not, in itself, proof that there really is some huge overall problem.

    It is very hard to get to the bottom of this. I was looking for information today and, apparently, there is some leaked report from Germany about the scale of the sexual assaults:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/refugees-responsible-for-tiny-proportion-of-sex-crimes-in-germany-despite-far-right-claims-following-a6884166.html

    A detailed report seen by Germany’s Bild newspaper listed a total of 1,688 sex crimes committed by asylum seekers, refugees and illegal immigrants in 2015 – 3.6 per cent of the nationwide total of almost 47,000.

    Of those, 458 were rapes or sexual assaults.

    Refugees make up roughly 2 per cent of Germany’s population, the The Local reported, meaning the rate of sexual offences is disproportionately high.

    But the website pointed out that the figure was “skewed” by the fact the vast majority of sexual offences are committed by men, who also make up the majority of recent migrants arriving in Germany.

     

    Now, maybe you think this is disinfo and maybe you're right, but the case is very far from clear. Unless these figures above are totally cooked (which I can't exclude, leaked report.... probably deliberately... I dunno...) it is hardly grounds for this kind of hysterical discourse. I mean, okay, 458 rapes or sexual assaults, and some were probably particularly heinous, but relative to the baseline of how much shit happens anyway in a country of 80 million or so...

    You know, Rurik, even if you establish your 100% lily white ethno/racial country, there's still going to be some raping and other crimes and so forth. Okay, possibly somewhat less, it has to be quantified seriously, but.... just to say that these crimes occur and point to a few and then say, therefore there's an epidemic....

    Another article I came across was this one:

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/swedens-rape-crisis-isnt-what-it-seems/article30019623/

    That's an opinion piece in the Canadian paper, the Globe and Mail, and the guy is saying that the supposed rape epidemic in Sweden is based on a change in how "sex crimes" were reported. I mean, maybe now if you stare at a woman's tits too much in Sweden, and she doesn't like it, that's a rape... (Okay, don't quote me on that! :-))

    In general, I have not heard of anybody canceling a trip to Sweden or Germany because there's a rape epidemic. I have not heard of any travel agency here (in Spain actually) discouraging people from visiting these countries for this reason. I don't get the feeling this is real. All of this stuff about a rape epidemic in these countries seems to come from a certain sort of right-wing echo chamber. And it almost entirely seems to originate from news sources that have this neocon/Zionist islamophobe agenda. In particular, this Gatestone Institute looks to be really egregious.

    But, look, let me close this by posing a question:

    Did the mass sexual assaults in Cologne on last New Year's Eve really take place? If so, why is there no video footage at all?

    If you do not even attempt to answer this last question, and just start ranting some more about the plot to destroy the white race, I'm going to have to withdraw from the conversation.

    OK JR,

    I don’t want to mussy up this excellent article with anymore distractions not directly related to the points of the article. You’ve brought up some very insightful paradigms that give us all tools for seeing though their lies, and they’re worth discussing on their own merits.

    I just have a hard time when someone suggests that people who’re concerned about things like mass-immigration and its consequences, are motivated by less than noble concerns – (they’re insecure people worried about nothing of consequence, and exaggerate things like rape for its emotional appeal) – no, that’s not true ;)

    As for videos of assaults, I’ve seen some. (like of guys lifting girls skirts and gabbing their asses) I’ll leave you with this video produced by anti-immigration folks.

    Just check out the German politician at 7:10 into the video, and you can see a very real, agenda driven man speaking for a lot of Germans and others. It is because of guys like that and their (genocidal) agenda, that guys like me are motivated to speak out against that (very real and very dire and epic, indeed civilization ending) agenda. (and that’s not hyperbole)

    Cheers JR

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  96. iffen says:
    @NoseytheDuke
    All due respect Art but the place to start is the book by Ken Keysy and yes, it is a great story.

    Nurse Ratchet was doing the best that her twisted mind told her was what she thought would work. Iffen doesn't get it that in one of life's ironies here is a woman who is sick in the head (Ratchet) and is in charge of the asylum. She is mean, spiteful and cruel.

    Randle makes it clear that many of the inmates are as sane as those on the outside. Cheers.

    Art,

    YouTube has it.
    Don’t need it; have my own DVD, one of my favorite movies.
    A minor point, but aren’t all atheists considered Godless? Are there atheists somewhere that I don’t know about that are Godful?

    NTD,

    I haven’t read the book.
    Based on the movie, I have to differ with you about nurse Ratchet.
    She is a stand-in for conventional wisdom, the status quo, she was doing what she had been taught as to best practices and procedures.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. alexander says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    First off, I certainly never claimed anything as hyperbolic as Muslims are "sexually assaulting every chick in sight or trying to ram Sharia down everyone’s throats".

    Did anyone ever claim something so outrageous?
     
    Well, as a matter of fact, there are hysterical people out there claiming these things. That's precisely why there is a need to just narrow down factually what is really true!

    Now, okay, you never said anything quite so extreme, but on the other hand, did I ever say that I was in favor of mass immigration of Muslims or anybody else? (Answer: no, I never did. I know I didn't.) So why are you continually answering as if I was advocating this?

    What has to happen in this conversation if it is going to continue, and I say this as somebody who generally likes to talking to you and thinks you're good guy is... Rurik, you've got to demonstrate that you are capable of discussing this topic in a concrete, factual way -- I mean, emotionally capable. Like all the ranting about the great conspiracy to destroy the white race, I decline to talk about that at this exact moment. I want to concentrate on whether what they are saying ("they" being the right-wing echo chamber commentariat) is factually true. Specifically:

    1. These incidents on New Year's Eve in Cologne, Germany. Did this really happen?
    2. Is there really a "rape epidemic" in Sweden by any reasonable measure taking place?

    I am not 100.0% sure, but my sense of things is that the answer to the above two questions is: no. (And it's not enough to point to one or two news stories where somebody got raped. That does not prove that there is any real "rape epidemic".)

    All that said, that does not mean that indigenous Europeans should not want to maintain the racial character of their country and so forth. I just don't want to talk about that right now, because I want to know whether these things are true factually.

    If you, at this point don't realize or believe that Muslims are causing a rape wave in Sweden and Norway and England and else where, I'm going to have to put that down to a kind of myopia.
     
    I don't think so. The problem is that I don't accept "proof by repetition" or proof by "everybody knows that...".

    I posted a link to a town in England where the Muslims were raping under age school girls by the hundreds, and this was an international scandal when it came out.
     
    Yes, I know about that, but that was some criminal ring involving maybe 10 people, who were of Pakistani origin, yes, quite scandalous case of sex trafficking involving underage girls. Still, you can take a specific crime committed by people of whatever origin and that does not prove that there is some sort of general epidemic going on.

    Look, Rurik, as I said in the article above, on a typical day in the U.S. about 100 people die in traffic accidents, more or less. With photos from just one day's worth of car accidents, you can create a ghastly collage. BUT the fact still remains that you actually have to be pretty unlucky to get killed in a traffic accident. I was thinking about this the other day and I think I only ever really knew one person in my entire life who died in a traffic accident. (I know more people who were in accidents and maybe were hurt, but only one person who died in my entire life.)

    You can take whatever grisly specific cases and rant about them hysterically just the same as you could rant to me about horrid traffic accidents, a bus falling off a cliff or whatever, but it is not, in itself, proof that there really is some huge overall problem.

    It is very hard to get to the bottom of this. I was looking for information today and, apparently, there is some leaked report from Germany about the scale of the sexual assaults:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/refugees-responsible-for-tiny-proportion-of-sex-crimes-in-germany-despite-far-right-claims-following-a6884166.html

    A detailed report seen by Germany’s Bild newspaper listed a total of 1,688 sex crimes committed by asylum seekers, refugees and illegal immigrants in 2015 – 3.6 per cent of the nationwide total of almost 47,000.

    Of those, 458 were rapes or sexual assaults.

    Refugees make up roughly 2 per cent of Germany’s population, the The Local reported, meaning the rate of sexual offences is disproportionately high.

    But the website pointed out that the figure was “skewed” by the fact the vast majority of sexual offences are committed by men, who also make up the majority of recent migrants arriving in Germany.

     

    Now, maybe you think this is disinfo and maybe you're right, but the case is very far from clear. Unless these figures above are totally cooked (which I can't exclude, leaked report.... probably deliberately... I dunno...) it is hardly grounds for this kind of hysterical discourse. I mean, okay, 458 rapes or sexual assaults, and some were probably particularly heinous, but relative to the baseline of how much shit happens anyway in a country of 80 million or so...

    You know, Rurik, even if you establish your 100% lily white ethno/racial country, there's still going to be some raping and other crimes and so forth. Okay, possibly somewhat less, it has to be quantified seriously, but.... just to say that these crimes occur and point to a few and then say, therefore there's an epidemic....

    Another article I came across was this one:

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/swedens-rape-crisis-isnt-what-it-seems/article30019623/

    That's an opinion piece in the Canadian paper, the Globe and Mail, and the guy is saying that the supposed rape epidemic in Sweden is based on a change in how "sex crimes" were reported. I mean, maybe now if you stare at a woman's tits too much in Sweden, and she doesn't like it, that's a rape... (Okay, don't quote me on that! :-))

    In general, I have not heard of anybody canceling a trip to Sweden or Germany because there's a rape epidemic. I have not heard of any travel agency here (in Spain actually) discouraging people from visiting these countries for this reason. I don't get the feeling this is real. All of this stuff about a rape epidemic in these countries seems to come from a certain sort of right-wing echo chamber. And it almost entirely seems to originate from news sources that have this neocon/Zionist islamophobe agenda. In particular, this Gatestone Institute looks to be really egregious.

    But, look, let me close this by posing a question:

    Did the mass sexual assaults in Cologne on last New Year's Eve really take place? If so, why is there no video footage at all?

    If you do not even attempt to answer this last question, and just start ranting some more about the plot to destroy the white race, I'm going to have to withdraw from the conversation.

    Jonathan,

    There was a moment during the film “No Country for Old Men” which comes to mind in discussing the alleged “rampages of rapes” by incoming Muslims against the dear ladies of Cologne.

    It centers on how our mendacious “elites” may use “Terror Fraud” as a tool for Deflection and Distraction,not just in generating fear, contempt, hatred and war-mongering.

    The scene in the film, is where the newly wounded psychopathic hit man (played by Javier Barden) needs Meds from a pharmacy to treat his buck-shot leg…..So he stages a terrorist act and blows up this Chevy Impala right in front of the Pharmacy…..it is such a shocking explosion, that everyone, including all the pharmacists, race outside to see what is going on….he then uses the moment of their absence from the store….to hop behind the counter and pilfer the Meds he needs.

    “Terror Fraud” as DEFLECTION.

    How is this germane to the rapes in Cologne, (and a host of other terror events) ?

    As a distraction from the REAL NEWS at the time…..which was that the Neocon wars of aggression in the middle east arena…had generated close to 60 MILLION displaced people.

    Not a good issue for the belligerent elites to take on….as a matter of fact it is such disgraceful mud in their face…..that perhaps they needed something to talk about which made their enemies look bad…and deflect from the horror show their wars have created.

    Bingo….like a rabbit out of a hat….switch to….. “Savage Muslim refugees brutally gang rape scores of Cologne girls”……and …..there you go..

    The big switch.

    The absolutely catastrophic refugee crisis their heinous wars have created…is segued into smearing the very refugees those wars produced….

    “Deflection and Distraction”…..Keeping the HATE ON…and always deflected away from their failures, their criminality and their utter culpability…

    Ugly…Ugly…business..

    Clever…but oh so low.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. utu says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    First off, I certainly never claimed anything as hyperbolic as Muslims are "sexually assaulting every chick in sight or trying to ram Sharia down everyone’s throats".

    Did anyone ever claim something so outrageous?
     
    Well, as a matter of fact, there are hysterical people out there claiming these things. That's precisely why there is a need to just narrow down factually what is really true!

    Now, okay, you never said anything quite so extreme, but on the other hand, did I ever say that I was in favor of mass immigration of Muslims or anybody else? (Answer: no, I never did. I know I didn't.) So why are you continually answering as if I was advocating this?

    What has to happen in this conversation if it is going to continue, and I say this as somebody who generally likes to talking to you and thinks you're good guy is... Rurik, you've got to demonstrate that you are capable of discussing this topic in a concrete, factual way -- I mean, emotionally capable. Like all the ranting about the great conspiracy to destroy the white race, I decline to talk about that at this exact moment. I want to concentrate on whether what they are saying ("they" being the right-wing echo chamber commentariat) is factually true. Specifically:

    1. These incidents on New Year's Eve in Cologne, Germany. Did this really happen?
    2. Is there really a "rape epidemic" in Sweden by any reasonable measure taking place?

    I am not 100.0% sure, but my sense of things is that the answer to the above two questions is: no. (And it's not enough to point to one or two news stories where somebody got raped. That does not prove that there is any real "rape epidemic".)

    All that said, that does not mean that indigenous Europeans should not want to maintain the racial character of their country and so forth. I just don't want to talk about that right now, because I want to know whether these things are true factually.

    If you, at this point don't realize or believe that Muslims are causing a rape wave in Sweden and Norway and England and else where, I'm going to have to put that down to a kind of myopia.
     
    I don't think so. The problem is that I don't accept "proof by repetition" or proof by "everybody knows that...".

    I posted a link to a town in England where the Muslims were raping under age school girls by the hundreds, and this was an international scandal when it came out.
     
    Yes, I know about that, but that was some criminal ring involving maybe 10 people, who were of Pakistani origin, yes, quite scandalous case of sex trafficking involving underage girls. Still, you can take a specific crime committed by people of whatever origin and that does not prove that there is some sort of general epidemic going on.

    Look, Rurik, as I said in the article above, on a typical day in the U.S. about 100 people die in traffic accidents, more or less. With photos from just one day's worth of car accidents, you can create a ghastly collage. BUT the fact still remains that you actually have to be pretty unlucky to get killed in a traffic accident. I was thinking about this the other day and I think I only ever really knew one person in my entire life who died in a traffic accident. (I know more people who were in accidents and maybe were hurt, but only one person who died in my entire life.)

    You can take whatever grisly specific cases and rant about them hysterically just the same as you could rant to me about horrid traffic accidents, a bus falling off a cliff or whatever, but it is not, in itself, proof that there really is some huge overall problem.

    It is very hard to get to the bottom of this. I was looking for information today and, apparently, there is some leaked report from Germany about the scale of the sexual assaults:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/refugees-responsible-for-tiny-proportion-of-sex-crimes-in-germany-despite-far-right-claims-following-a6884166.html

    A detailed report seen by Germany’s Bild newspaper listed a total of 1,688 sex crimes committed by asylum seekers, refugees and illegal immigrants in 2015 – 3.6 per cent of the nationwide total of almost 47,000.

    Of those, 458 were rapes or sexual assaults.

    Refugees make up roughly 2 per cent of Germany’s population, the The Local reported, meaning the rate of sexual offences is disproportionately high.

    But the website pointed out that the figure was “skewed” by the fact the vast majority of sexual offences are committed by men, who also make up the majority of recent migrants arriving in Germany.

     

    Now, maybe you think this is disinfo and maybe you're right, but the case is very far from clear. Unless these figures above are totally cooked (which I can't exclude, leaked report.... probably deliberately... I dunno...) it is hardly grounds for this kind of hysterical discourse. I mean, okay, 458 rapes or sexual assaults, and some were probably particularly heinous, but relative to the baseline of how much shit happens anyway in a country of 80 million or so...

    You know, Rurik, even if you establish your 100% lily white ethno/racial country, there's still going to be some raping and other crimes and so forth. Okay, possibly somewhat less, it has to be quantified seriously, but.... just to say that these crimes occur and point to a few and then say, therefore there's an epidemic....

    Another article I came across was this one:

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/swedens-rape-crisis-isnt-what-it-seems/article30019623/

    That's an opinion piece in the Canadian paper, the Globe and Mail, and the guy is saying that the supposed rape epidemic in Sweden is based on a change in how "sex crimes" were reported. I mean, maybe now if you stare at a woman's tits too much in Sweden, and she doesn't like it, that's a rape... (Okay, don't quote me on that! :-))

    In general, I have not heard of anybody canceling a trip to Sweden or Germany because there's a rape epidemic. I have not heard of any travel agency here (in Spain actually) discouraging people from visiting these countries for this reason. I don't get the feeling this is real. All of this stuff about a rape epidemic in these countries seems to come from a certain sort of right-wing echo chamber. And it almost entirely seems to originate from news sources that have this neocon/Zionist islamophobe agenda. In particular, this Gatestone Institute looks to be really egregious.

    But, look, let me close this by posing a question:

    Did the mass sexual assaults in Cologne on last New Year's Eve really take place? If so, why is there no video footage at all?

    If you do not even attempt to answer this last question, and just start ranting some more about the plot to destroy the white race, I'm going to have to withdraw from the conversation.

    Thank you for your response to my comment and adding new video clips. Watching them I can see that the interlocutors are somewhat off on the emotional level. But then I ask myself off from what baseline. I have never seen real people after traumas like these before. The only people I have watched who were responding to big recent traumas were actors in theater productions or Hollywood movies. So I am biting my own tail at this point. It is possible I might be tone deaf in this department.

    Few unrelated remarks:

    (1) I like your discussion with Rurik. I share your sentiments. While reading your responses I was thinking about Sailers’s crowd.
    (2) In Daily Mail few days ago was a strange article related to Orlando. The participants, actually the heroes don’t want to be in media! No interviews, no comments!

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3662290/How-19-British-exchange-students-heroes-Orlando-massacre-helping-wounded-routine-ride-cops-university-wants-rescue-effort-SECRET.html

    Read More
    • Replies: @L.K
    Hey Utu,

    "I have never seen real people after traumas like these before."

    I have, and it looks nothing like the clowns in the vids linked to by J.R.

    But look, all you have to do is search for vids of everyday organic events, such as accidents and murder, and you'll see for yourself.

    Regards
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. Art says:
    @NoseytheDuke
    All due respect Art but the place to start is the book by Ken Keysy and yes, it is a great story.

    Nurse Ratchet was doing the best that her twisted mind told her was what she thought would work. Iffen doesn't get it that in one of life's ironies here is a woman who is sick in the head (Ratchet) and is in charge of the asylum. She is mean, spiteful and cruel.

    Randle makes it clear that many of the inmates are as sane as those on the outside. Cheers.

    Nurse Ratchet was doing the best that her twisted mind told her was what she thought would work. Iffen doesn’t get it that in one of life’s ironies here is a woman who is sick in the head (Ratchet) and is in charge of the asylum. She is mean, spiteful and cruel.

    Nurse Ratchet is a good analogy for Hillary – she has a mean character – and she has the dumb down pills for America. She is a true brain stem politician playing to base human emotions.

    She said “she knows how to handle men that get off the reservation.” The secret service guy with the new book on her White House days with Bill can attest to that.

    Here is the wiki plot on the film.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Flew_Over_the_Cuckoo%27s_Nest_(film)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. L.K says:
    @utu
    Thank you for your response to my comment and adding new video clips. Watching them I can see that the interlocutors are somewhat off on the emotional level. But then I ask myself off from what baseline. I have never seen real people after traumas like these before. The only people I have watched who were responding to big recent traumas were actors in theater productions or Hollywood movies. So I am biting my own tail at this point. It is possible I might be tone deaf in this department.

    Few unrelated remarks:

    (1) I like your discussion with Rurik. I share your sentiments. While reading your responses I was thinking about Sailers's crowd.
    (2) In Daily Mail few days ago was a strange article related to Orlando. The participants, actually the heroes don't want to be in media! No interviews, no comments!
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3662290/How-19-British-exchange-students-heroes-Orlando-massacre-helping-wounded-routine-ride-cops-university-wants-rescue-effort-SECRET.html

    Hey Utu,

    “I have never seen real people after traumas like these before.”

    I have, and it looks nothing like the clowns in the vids linked to by J.R.

    But look, all you have to do is search for vids of everyday organic events, such as accidents and murder, and you’ll see for yourself.

    Regards

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    This is an internet discussion. The topic of the discussion is about not trusting what we see and what we hear and what we read. So, I can't take accept your assurance that you have seen something on the face value. Perhaps you could suggest some videos?
    , @utu
    I found some videos from 9/11:

    What do you think about emotional reaction, facial expressions and delivery of the text by the Asian girl at 1:43 or the guy at 2:48
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCwvBUezumA

    Or here the guy at 0:04 or the lady at 1:02
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfmH9em_5FY

    Don't you think that they are very calm, coherent, focus? Is that what you expect from people who just went through the greatest trauma in their lives? If they were the only witnesses you saw and if 9/11 was not televised would you become somewhat suspicious about their credibility and even suspect they might have been actors?

    I am on the same side of barricade where JR is and you but I am not convinced that we can easily discern acting from real behavior because we do not know how the real behavior of the witness or the survivor looks like. But we have some ideas how it suppose to look. The ideas based on fictional movies and plays. Because we saw tonnes of them in our lifetimes.

    Probably there is a wide range of real reactions. Some of which we have never seen in the movies because they would be considered as a bad or boring acting. For these reasons I consider the evidence attributed to the behavior of alleged witnesses during interviews as secondary. For me it is not decisive unlike for some youtube yahoos, whose work often is useful, but still they are yahoos.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. helena says:
    @Art
    All the words in this article are really about one thing “brain stem politics.”

    If the left can come up with a set of words that appeal to our emotions, then they can win and carry the political day. The Jew controlled media will do the dirty work and propagandize America. The Jew controlled media will slam those low level emotions down our throats.

    That is how America is controlled today – make an appeal to a base emotion and win the political fight. Gay rights, women’s rights, and black rights are brain stem appeals.

    The idea of “liberty” is a high level brain function. Abundant food, health, security are products of liberty. “Liberty” is needed to produce food, health, and security.

    Everything that sustains our lives is a product of our upper brain functions – not our lower level brain stem.

    The “liberty” types have to ridicule “brain stem politics” truthfully saying “that emotions produce nothing.”

    “If one wants goods, then one must be free to produce.”

    We must get back to high level thinking.

    “Brain stem politics” must become dirty words.

    p.s. Nurse Ratchet and Pocahontas are the epitome of brain stem politics.

    Well bad news because I’ve heard a key liberal opinion-maker using exactly that argument about Brexiters (as in Brexit=Far Right). What you’re up against is 2-3 generations of people who believe that the liberal agenda is not just morally correct but rational, scientific (stats!) and logically accurate. It is truly scary. Like Stepford Wives. Not only are young people not thinking, they don’t want to think; they don’t want to break from the group. They are literally immature.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Art

    Well bad news because I’ve heard a key liberal opinion-maker using exactly that argument about Brexiters (as in Brexit=Far Right). What you’re up against is 2-3 generations of people who believe that the liberal agenda is not just morally correct but rational, scientific (stats!) and logically accurate.
     
    Helena,

    Our brainstem politics vs. their brainstem politics.

    Clearly our brainstem politics are not working. Trump has had to back down over and over. On the other hand, his “make America great again” theme is winning. His talk of jobs and rebuilding are winning arguments. Clearly people want more of them.

    On the other political side, all they have are brainstem arguments.

    We should abandon our “brainstem arguments” and attack their “brainstem arguments.”

    Most all of Hillary’s (Nurse Ratchet’s) arguments are below the belt appeals, they are about sex, gender, tribe, and race. Her argument are about biological attributes not intellectual attributes. These below the belt issues are not making America better. They do not put food on the table, roofs over our heads, or give us more security.

    Trump must push intellectual attributes. Trump must keep his arguments to above the shoulder issues, like liberty, education, and the ability to produce a better tomorrow. These appeals are to people’s better side, to their upper level brain. They will work.

    Worried people are thinking people – people are coming to understand that the economic well is going dry. Hillary has NO answer to the economy.

    Trump must play to our happy traditional “can do American outlook on life.”

    Art

    p.s. We want to build another Panama Channel, go to the moon again, Hillary wants to build another toilet.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. Cyrano says:
    @SolontoCroesus
    Charming sermonette on how logic is like electricity, but to what does it respond? Nothing I wrote has anything to do with conspiracy theories. I stated historical realities debunking your woe-is-we claim that Jews have unique experience of the west's "depravity."

    wrt:

    Jews only play by the rules written by someone else – it’s only they are better players than those who wrote the rules.
     
    Key Israeli leaders are on record stating precisely the opposite:

    It is, however, hard to find any principle of due process, the several Geneva Conventions, or the Nuremberg trials that has not been systematically violated in the Holy Land. Examples of criminal conduct include mass murder, extra-judicial killing, torture, detention without charge, the denial of medical care, the annexation and colonization of occupied territory, the illegal expropriation of land, ethnic cleansing, and the collective punishment of civilians, including the demolition of their homes, the systematic reduction of their infrastructure, and the de-development and impoverishment of entire regions. These crimes have been linked to a concerted effort to rewrite international law to permit actions that it traditionally prohibited, in effect enshrining the principle that might makes right.

    As the former head of the Israeli Defense Forces’ (IDF) Legal Department has argued:

    If you do something for long enough the world will accept it. The whole of international law is now based on the notion that an act that is forbidden today becomes permissible if executed by enough countries . . . . International law progresses through violations.

    A colleague of his has extended this notion by pointing out that:

    The more often Western states apply principles that originated in Israel to their own non-traditional conflicts in places like Afghanistan and Iraq, then the greater the chance these principles have of becoming a valuable part of international law.

    These references to Iraq and Afghanistan underscore the extent to which the United States, once the principal champion of a rule-bound international order, has followed Israel in replacing legal principles with expediency as the central regulator of its interaction with foreign peoples. The expediently amoral doctrine of preemptive war is such an Israeli transplant in the American neo-conservative psyche. Chas Freeman, 2011 Sharabi Lecture
     
    In stark contrast, in his Farewell Address George Washington urged his countrymen to hew closely to the Constitution of the United States --

    [It is my hope] that the free constitution, which is the work of your hands, may be sacredly maintained; that its administration in every department may be stamped with wisdom and virtue; that, in fine, the happiness of the people of these States, under the auspices of liberty, may be made complete, by so careful a preservation and so prudent a use of this blessing, as will acquire to them the glory of recommending it to the applause, the affection, and adoption of every nation, which is yet a stranger to it. https://www.varsitytutors.com/earlyamerica/milestone-events/george-washingtons-farewell-address-full-text
     

    As much as I find your argument riveting, I am afraid I am a wrong audience for you, sport. Here is what I suggest you do instead. Take a selected group of your fellow conspiracy theorists from this site and go on a goodwill tour of the greater middle east – where you country has performed some of the most outstanding (exceptional might be a better word) humanitarian work over the last few decades.

    And when you get there, declare yourself loud and clear as Americans. Then when you get kidnapped and tortured – as one suspect you might – tell your Muslim brothers and co-sufferers – that you are both victims of Jewish conspiracy. See how well that sits with your fellow co-sufferers – the Muslims. And if you don’t make it back alive – that’s OK – the US could use a break. It has too many of your kind anyway.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus

    Here is what I suggest you do instead. Take a selected group of your fellow conspiracy theorists from this site and go on a goodwill tour of the greater middle east – where you country has performed some of the most outstanding (exceptional might be a better word) humanitarian work over the last few decades.

    And when you get there, declare yourself loud and clear as Americans. Then when you get kidnapped and tortured – as one suspect you might – tell your Muslim brothers and co-sufferers – that you are both victims of Jewish conspiracy.
     
    Didn't Rachel Corrie do pretty much the very thing you suggest, Cyrano?

    Photostory: Israeli bulldozer driver murders American peace activist

    The International Solidarity Movement followed your advice -- actually, ISM has been actively engaging in "goodwill tours" of the Levant for years.

    ISM draws participants -- or, in your jargon, "conspiracy theorists," from all over the world, including the United States. Emily Henochowicz, and American college student, sought to have her eyes opened to the goings on in the Middle East and returned from the venture with only one eye.

    Furkan Doğan was one of about 14 Americans aboard the Mavi Marmara when it attempted to visit Palestine. Doğan was assassinated by IDFers who boarded the ship in international waters and replayed the USS Liberty protocol.

    To be sure, not every American who visits the Jewish enclave in the Levant ends up dead: hundreds of US senators and congressmen have made goodwill tours of Israel, as guests of Israeli agents/operatives in the USA (unregistered agents, the conspiracy theorist in me clamors to report). Funny thing about those US politicians, though: rather than "declaring themselves loud and clear as Americans," often as not, they end up (figuratively) waving the flag of Israel and boasting of their loyalty to Israel and zionism.

    In contrast ---

    I watched the video that Rurik posted, about refugees, especially Muslim immigrants in Europe. Numerous nationalities were mentioned -- Afghanis, Syrians, Moroccans, Turks, etc., and their bad deeds and evil intentions depicted and decried.

    But I heard no mention of Iranians overrunning Europe, or of Iranian men raping European women, or of Persians voicing their intention to conquer Europe "not by war but by producing Muslim babies, either by Muslim women or by impregnating European women.

    I found that interesting: No Iranians among the bad actors besieging Europe.
    American lawmakers cannot stand within 20 feet of a microphone without blaring, "Iran is the No. One State Sponsor of Terrorism!"

    I spent over three weeks in Iran, traveling from Tehran to Keng, from Naishapour to Shiraz, from Mashad to Isfehan; I crossed one of Iran's great deserts, climbed the Tower of Silence in Yazd and drove past two of Iran's nuclear power plants, but the only moment of fear I experienced was when it was reported that Hillary Clinton, in an attempt to defeat John Kerry in Pennsylvania primaries, declared, "We will obliterate you, Iran!"

    But you're right: consequent to Hillary's bold statement of how she would engage my country with others in the world, I had a one-hour long conversation with a Iranian man who had previously worked for an American corporation in Iran. The conversation was sheer torture. I'd never before been ashamed to be an American.
    , @helena
    "Take a selected group of your fellow conspiracy theorists "

    I don't read all SC's posts but I've read a lot and all I've ever seen is extracts from documents. Are you saying these documents don't exist ?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. L.K says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    First off, I certainly never claimed anything as hyperbolic as Muslims are "sexually assaulting every chick in sight or trying to ram Sharia down everyone’s throats".

    Did anyone ever claim something so outrageous?
     
    Well, as a matter of fact, there are hysterical people out there claiming these things. That's precisely why there is a need to just narrow down factually what is really true!

    Now, okay, you never said anything quite so extreme, but on the other hand, did I ever say that I was in favor of mass immigration of Muslims or anybody else? (Answer: no, I never did. I know I didn't.) So why are you continually answering as if I was advocating this?

    What has to happen in this conversation if it is going to continue, and I say this as somebody who generally likes to talking to you and thinks you're good guy is... Rurik, you've got to demonstrate that you are capable of discussing this topic in a concrete, factual way -- I mean, emotionally capable. Like all the ranting about the great conspiracy to destroy the white race, I decline to talk about that at this exact moment. I want to concentrate on whether what they are saying ("they" being the right-wing echo chamber commentariat) is factually true. Specifically:

    1. These incidents on New Year's Eve in Cologne, Germany. Did this really happen?
    2. Is there really a "rape epidemic" in Sweden by any reasonable measure taking place?

    I am not 100.0% sure, but my sense of things is that the answer to the above two questions is: no. (And it's not enough to point to one or two news stories where somebody got raped. That does not prove that there is any real "rape epidemic".)

    All that said, that does not mean that indigenous Europeans should not want to maintain the racial character of their country and so forth. I just don't want to talk about that right now, because I want to know whether these things are true factually.

    If you, at this point don't realize or believe that Muslims are causing a rape wave in Sweden and Norway and England and else where, I'm going to have to put that down to a kind of myopia.
     
    I don't think so. The problem is that I don't accept "proof by repetition" or proof by "everybody knows that...".

    I posted a link to a town in England where the Muslims were raping under age school girls by the hundreds, and this was an international scandal when it came out.
     
    Yes, I know about that, but that was some criminal ring involving maybe 10 people, who were of Pakistani origin, yes, quite scandalous case of sex trafficking involving underage girls. Still, you can take a specific crime committed by people of whatever origin and that does not prove that there is some sort of general epidemic going on.

    Look, Rurik, as I said in the article above, on a typical day in the U.S. about 100 people die in traffic accidents, more or less. With photos from just one day's worth of car accidents, you can create a ghastly collage. BUT the fact still remains that you actually have to be pretty unlucky to get killed in a traffic accident. I was thinking about this the other day and I think I only ever really knew one person in my entire life who died in a traffic accident. (I know more people who were in accidents and maybe were hurt, but only one person who died in my entire life.)

    You can take whatever grisly specific cases and rant about them hysterically just the same as you could rant to me about horrid traffic accidents, a bus falling off a cliff or whatever, but it is not, in itself, proof that there really is some huge overall problem.

    It is very hard to get to the bottom of this. I was looking for information today and, apparently, there is some leaked report from Germany about the scale of the sexual assaults:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/refugees-responsible-for-tiny-proportion-of-sex-crimes-in-germany-despite-far-right-claims-following-a6884166.html

    A detailed report seen by Germany’s Bild newspaper listed a total of 1,688 sex crimes committed by asylum seekers, refugees and illegal immigrants in 2015 – 3.6 per cent of the nationwide total of almost 47,000.

    Of those, 458 were rapes or sexual assaults.

    Refugees make up roughly 2 per cent of Germany’s population, the The Local reported, meaning the rate of sexual offences is disproportionately high.

    But the website pointed out that the figure was “skewed” by the fact the vast majority of sexual offences are committed by men, who also make up the majority of recent migrants arriving in Germany.

     

    Now, maybe you think this is disinfo and maybe you're right, but the case is very far from clear. Unless these figures above are totally cooked (which I can't exclude, leaked report.... probably deliberately... I dunno...) it is hardly grounds for this kind of hysterical discourse. I mean, okay, 458 rapes or sexual assaults, and some were probably particularly heinous, but relative to the baseline of how much shit happens anyway in a country of 80 million or so...

    You know, Rurik, even if you establish your 100% lily white ethno/racial country, there's still going to be some raping and other crimes and so forth. Okay, possibly somewhat less, it has to be quantified seriously, but.... just to say that these crimes occur and point to a few and then say, therefore there's an epidemic....

    Another article I came across was this one:

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/swedens-rape-crisis-isnt-what-it-seems/article30019623/

    That's an opinion piece in the Canadian paper, the Globe and Mail, and the guy is saying that the supposed rape epidemic in Sweden is based on a change in how "sex crimes" were reported. I mean, maybe now if you stare at a woman's tits too much in Sweden, and she doesn't like it, that's a rape... (Okay, don't quote me on that! :-))

    In general, I have not heard of anybody canceling a trip to Sweden or Germany because there's a rape epidemic. I have not heard of any travel agency here (in Spain actually) discouraging people from visiting these countries for this reason. I don't get the feeling this is real. All of this stuff about a rape epidemic in these countries seems to come from a certain sort of right-wing echo chamber. And it almost entirely seems to originate from news sources that have this neocon/Zionist islamophobe agenda. In particular, this Gatestone Institute looks to be really egregious.

    But, look, let me close this by posing a question:

    Did the mass sexual assaults in Cologne on last New Year's Eve really take place? If so, why is there no video footage at all?

    If you do not even attempt to answer this last question, and just start ranting some more about the plot to destroy the white race, I'm going to have to withdraw from the conversation.

    J.R,
    As with Utu, I also liked your discussion with Rurik and I feel it is a necessary one.
    There are things about the discussion I agree with you and things I agree with Rurik.
    Briefly now, due to lack of time, you wrote in response to Ruriks post:

    1. These incidents on New Year’s Eve in Cologne, Germany. Did this really happen?
    2. Is there really a “rape epidemic” in Sweden by any reasonable measure taking place?

    As to the first, I think yes, though the scale may have been exaggerated. But even if the specific incidents on New Year’s Eve were entirely synthetic, it is more than clear that admitting 100s of thousands of mostly male migrants from various countries with a very different culture is creating a LOT of very real problems in Europe. The later video by Rurik illustrates this well enough. Though one assault scene shown actually took place in the US.

    As to point.2; perhaps “rape epidemic” is too strong a term, but what seems clear enough is that immigrants/asylum seekers in Sweden are disproportionately responsible for rape( and other serious crimes ).
    Take a look at this presentation by ‘Angry Foreigner’, an immigrant himself, though an European one from the Balkans, living in Sweden. He presents some statistics from Swedish studies, which have since several years ago been discontinued, due to PC.
    Immigrant rape statistics in Sweden

    Take care

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. Ron Unz says:

    Well, I’m no expert on these sorts of “conspiracy issues” but those video interviews seem *exceptionally* fake to me.

    On the other hand, given the large body-counts, it’s difficult to believe the massacres didn’t actually take place. After all, could’t a group of debunkers just put together a little money and pay someone to go out, track down, and interview the wounded or the relatives of the dead? And if such investigators found they didn’t exist, that would make an even more shocking YouTube video, and one very easily for other people to verify. Aren’t the names of most of the victims given in the newspapers?

    As a possible solution to this serious dilemma, might it be possible that a few of the most fake-sounding “victims” are just opportunists who pretended to be there in order to get interviewed on TV? People will make up all sorts of things to get on TV, especially if they’re struggling actresses. Also, I have the impression that after these sorts of high-profile events, eager TV stations will pay serious money to middlemen in order to quickly line up interviews with the victims. So maybe some of these dishonest middlemen will hire a few “crisis actors” and palm them off on gullible media outlets (This was roughly the plot of that film Nightcrawler).

    Just because the MSM is sometimes totally corrupt, dishonest, or incompetent doesn’t necessarily mean that the events it described didn’t actually happen…

    Read More
    • Replies: @alexander
    You are absolutely right, Mr Unz.

    The absence of reams of seemingly " authentic" testimony, or footage of ambulances and police trucks...the absence of all indoor videos during the shooting...etc etc...does not mean the crime did not occur..exactly as was reported.

    But even if forty nine people were slaughtered in cold blood, it certainly does not exclude the possibility of a staged attack meant to direct the public towards embracing certain "agendas"...and keeping the "War on Terror" alive for the security industries that benefit enormously when these seemingly sporadic "Terror events" occur..

    Does it ?

    Perhaps the "horror" of that possibility is the greatest cloaking tool utilized by all "false flag" perpetrators ?


    Think about it for a moment.

    How many innocent people( or "people" for that matter) were actually killed in Iraq over the last 13 years ? You don't really have a definite number do you ? I don't...The number could be anywhere from several hundred thousand to several million...No?

    If these very same people were so "Gung ho" to kill millions of innocent Iraqis who never attacked us, why do you think they would care about killing fifty or so, Americans, back home ?

    Why would they care ?

    If it suits their agenda ..and they have all the power to get away with it...which they do ....by all means..No, Mr Unz.?..

    Isn't this the very definition of "ruthless" ?

    .Isn't contempt for human life, .... all human life,..... their very M.O. ?..

    Haven't they proven this to us ...over.... and over.... and over again ?.

    Haven't they, Mr. Unz .?
    , @utu
    "most fake-sounding “victims” are just opportunists who pretended to be there in order to get interviewed on TV?" - Here is one found out by Daily Mail

    Did Orlando attack survivor LIE about being at gay club during shooting?
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3653150/I-bar-happened-Man-claimed-Orlando-shooting-story-questioned-Facebook-post-suggests-wasn-t-there.html

    The presence of opportunists among Holocaust survivors is an issue.
    , @Jonathan Revusky

    On the other hand, given the large body-counts, it’s difficult to believe the massacres didn’t actually take place.
     
    Uhhh.... I'm not at all sure about this. This does relate to the "theory of the big lie", that the big lie is more readily believed than the little one, because nobody thinks that anybody would have the audacity to attempt the big one.

    After all, could’t a group of debunkers just put together a little money and pay someone to go out, track down, and interview the wounded or the relatives of the dead? And if such investigators found they didn’t exist, that would make an even more shocking YouTube video, and one very easily for other people to verify.
     
    Hmm... with all due respect, Ron, I wonder whether the above argument does not border a bit on the schizophrenic. I mean, like, stepping back from this a moment, the classic argument is that we live in a Democracy, or a Democratic Republic whatever the hell that is... but regardless, one component of this is that we have a functioning Fourth Estate, that is independent (well, more or less...) and honest (well, more or less...) and could be expected to investigate these things.

    So the argument is then:

    Thus, since we live in a Democracy and have a functioning Fourth Estate, therefore, any significant large-scale conspiracy or cover-up is impossible. Therefore, what the authorities say happened is what happened. QED.

    Now, you are obviously NOT making the above argument, because, you are talking about independent citizens mounting their own investigation. This would not be necessary in the first place if the media were doing their job. So you are tacitly accepting that, at least for a certain set of events, we do NOT have functioning independent investigative journalism. BUT, okay, you argue, that the citizenry could do the media's job for them.

    Okay, suppose they do. They independently investigate and provide incontrovertible proof that the whole thing is a hoax. What then? They go to that very same MSM that declined to investigate and hand them the incontrovertible proof. And then the MSM runs with it and blows the lid off the whole thing, right?

    Uhh, wrong... they just say: "That's all conspiracy theories" and ignore it.

    I mean, what did Sidney Schanberg do wrt the POW's left behind in Vietnam? What resulted from that?

    As for putting up youtube videos, what is more damning than the Danny Jowenko testimony regarding building 7? I mean, these are people that went to a demolitions expert, showed him the footage without telling him where and when it was taken, and the guy says: "This is a controlled demolition." Any reasonable person would conclude from this that the building implosion on the video is, in fact, a controlled demolition. Nonetheless, here we are, a decade and a half after the event, and that the CD is a CD, that's a "conspiracy theory".

    I mean, the whole thing is ludicrous. If somebody handed the two of us the right specialized tools for the job, the explosive devices, and said: "Here, Ron and Jon, set up a steel-framed skyscraper with these explosives for a CD", Ron, the two of us would have about as much chance of executing that perfectly symmetrical implosion as a monkey would have of typing a Shakespeare sonnet. (I know that, unlike me, you studied physics back when, but I am quite certain it would not help much. This is very specialized hands-on heuristic know-how.) The NIST claim that this happened due to the "uncontrolled burning of fires" is an utter insult to anybody's intelligence. As I say, even if they handed us (or anybody who is not a demolitions specialist) the actual specialized tools, we would not know how to make this happen. This requires very specialized knowledge of where to place the explosives and the exact timing. We would at best produce one of those flubbed CD's that you can look at on youtube.

    The above is really just totally cut and dry and how many videos have been put up on youtube outlining this? Just quite a few from Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth already. But, for me, the Anthony Lawson "This is an orange" video that I linked in the previous essay is about the best of the lot. In 2 minutes, he just gets straight to the heart of the issue. I mean, somebody shows you a picture of an orange and you say that's an orange and you're a "conspiracy theorist"?!

    Well, in short, the basic argument that people could put up a totally devastating youtube video and blow the lid off the whole thing -- this is not a great argument. There is this case and others where exactly that has happened and all these HIQIs will still just say: "This is all conspiracy thoeries nya nya."

    Aren’t the names of most of the victims given in the newspapers?
     
    Well, if this is a hoax, then these aren't real victims, but proving that involves proving a negative. If they produce more false witnesses saying: "Oh, that John Jones was a good friend of mine, how dare these horrible conspiracy theorist scum say that he never existed!" as well as forging documents here and there...

    It might well start becoming quite obvious that this is fake, but if the media will never say so, like with these fake interviews, and just keep bulling on, then what? Surely you understand that the people within that structure all know that if they denounce any of these hoaxes, they have just committed career suicide, so...

    Now, I understand that it is mind-boggling to contemplate that they could fabricate a few dozen phony victims, that this could be possible. But you wouldn't think they could execute a controlled demolition in lower Manhattan and have the National Institute of Standards and Technology make a report saying that this was the result of randomly burning fires. So I say, all bets are off on that.

    Well, this is getting too long, but if your basic argument is that we can dismiss a priori that they could mount a hoax with fake victims, I have to disagree.

    That, however, does not mean that I am claiming to know what happened. Again, I just honestly don't know. The argument that people could put out a youtube video is not convincing to me at all.
    , @L.K
    Mr.Unz wrote:

    "On the other hand, given the large body-counts, it’s difficult to believe the massacres didn’t actually take place. After all, could’t a group of debunkers just put together a little money and pay someone to go out, track down, and interview the wounded or the relatives of the dead? And if such investigators found they didn’t exist, that would make an even more shocking YouTube video, and one very easily for other people to verify. Aren’t the names of most of the victims given in the newspapers?"
     
    I don't know about Orlando, but some of what you are suggesting seems to have been done by independent investigators in regards to some other incidents, such as Sandy Hook and Boston.
    Are you familiar with James F. Tracy, a former tenured Professor of Journalism and Media Studies at Florida Atlantic University in Boca Raton from 2002 to 2015?
    After investigating some of these events he got fired from FAU in 2016.

    Re your "Aren’t the names of most of the victims given in the newspapers?" question, things are not always as simple as they seem, take a look at this article by Tracy re the body count and types of injuries suffered in the Boston Marathon bombing:
    "The Boston Marathon Bombing’s Inflated Injury Tallies"
    https://memoryholeblog.com/2015/04/15/the-boston-marathon-bombings-inflated-injury-tallies-2/
    , @NoseytheDuke
    It has to be considered also just how frequently exercise drills just happen to be being conducted at the very same time that the very event that is being drilled "actually happens". Sorry but that is a stretch. So called crisis actors are the same thing as role-play actors and they go together with drills like beans and rice.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. utu says:
    @L.K
    Hey Utu,

    "I have never seen real people after traumas like these before."

    I have, and it looks nothing like the clowns in the vids linked to by J.R.

    But look, all you have to do is search for vids of everyday organic events, such as accidents and murder, and you'll see for yourself.

    Regards

    This is an internet discussion. The topic of the discussion is about not trusting what we see and what we hear and what we read. So, I can’t take accept your assurance that you have seen something on the face value. Perhaps you could suggest some videos?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. @RodW
    As soon as you put someone in front of a camera and start an interview, you already have a fake situation. People being interviewed on TV are encouraged to burble, and burble they do, except when they can't think of anything else to say. Oh you say, they're not emoting enough! Or oh, they're emoting too much! Well, exactly how much is natural in a situation to which most normal people aren't accustomed? Logically, you'd expect real actors to do a better job.

    Some of the people in the videos have clearly been interviewed several times and have a bit of a schtick going. "I'm reeely reeely angry!". Well maybe they are, but the interview thing is by its nature fake, so their schtick comes across as cheesy.

    Another thing you may not know is that intensely religious people can actually be happy that their loved ones have gone to their Maker. They do genuinely feel comforted by the thought, to the extent that normal people without these fantasies are genuinely disturbed by their lack of distress. The black community that was shot up by that white kid appear to have been intensely religious as well as self-disciplined, which is why the survivors weren't emoting all over the place.

    > Oh, you mean, if I cannot show you an official “crisis actor” employment contract, then there are no crisis actors?
    That sort of logic is about the same level as "an actress witnessed a terror event therefore the whole thing was staged". Contract killings have been adequately documented through legal proceedings, but the evidence for 'crisis actors' seems to be remarkably scant considering what a popular career option it apparently is today.

    Another thing you may not know is that intensely religious people can actually be happy that their loved ones have gone to their Maker.

    Well, sure. That’s the case in particular if somebody was dying a slow, painful death of cancer or something. Even a non-religious person could see the person’s death as a deliverance. Moreover, in such a case, the person’s passing has usually been expected for some time. A good friend of mine lost his father and mother within a few months of each other not too long ago. He was not terribly affected, because his parents were 93 and 89 years old respectively and had both been invalids, needing constant care, for at least year prior to their deaths.

    The scenario with these black kids getting interviewed is that their mother was in perfectly good health, and was comparatively young, and some nutcase came to her church and blew her away along with 8 of her church-going friends. This was something totally unexpected and it is hard to even conceive of the shock that this would be to somebody. These kids simply show no sign of having been subjected to such an emotional impact a mere 24 hours earlier.

    Frankly, this whole explanation of yours, that these kids look so happy because it’s so wonderful that their momma is now with Jaysus, it’s pathetic, dude. What it manifests is the most classic HIQI syndrome, which is this sort of pathetic, desperate need to delude oneself. Anybody who does not suffer from that syndrome who watches this segment knows perfectly well that this is impossible and that these kids are definitely fakers.

    Contract killings have been adequately documented through legal proceedings, but the evidence for ‘crisis actors’ seems to be remarkably scant

    Look, a “crisis actor” is the same thing as a false witness. You know the Ten Commandments in the Bible? What’s the 9th commandment? “Thou shalt not bear false witness…”

    The whole idea that somebody, in exchange for 30 pieces of silver, or whatever, would give false testimony — this is NOT exactly a novel concept. Like, it was already old hat centuries before Christ, okay?

    And this utter pathetic nonsense that I’m suppose to produce the employment contract…. next, you’ll be telling me that men never pay hookers for sex because I can’t show you the written contract.

    But there’s nothing I can do for you, I suppose. This pathetic need to delude oneself probably most resembles the desperate need of the passive homosexual to be roughly sodomized, and as such, is basically incurable. If I were religious, I could pray for you, I guess.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. alexander says:
    @Ron Unz
    Well, I'm no expert on these sorts of "conspiracy issues" but those video interviews seem *exceptionally* fake to me.

    On the other hand, given the large body-counts, it's difficult to believe the massacres didn't actually take place. After all, could't a group of debunkers just put together a little money and pay someone to go out, track down, and interview the wounded or the relatives of the dead? And if such investigators found they didn't exist, that would make an even more shocking YouTube video, and one very easily for other people to verify. Aren't the names of most of the victims given in the newspapers?

    As a possible solution to this serious dilemma, might it be possible that a few of the most fake-sounding "victims" are just opportunists who pretended to be there in order to get interviewed on TV? People will make up all sorts of things to get on TV, especially if they're struggling actresses. Also, I have the impression that after these sorts of high-profile events, eager TV stations will pay serious money to middlemen in order to quickly line up interviews with the victims. So maybe some of these dishonest middlemen will hire a few "crisis actors" and palm them off on gullible media outlets (This was roughly the plot of that film Nightcrawler).

    Just because the MSM is sometimes totally corrupt, dishonest, or incompetent doesn't necessarily mean that the events it described didn't actually happen...

    You are absolutely right, Mr Unz.

    The absence of reams of seemingly ” authentic” testimony, or footage of ambulances and police trucks…the absence of all indoor videos during the shooting…etc etc…does not mean the crime did not occur..exactly as was reported.

    But even if forty nine people were slaughtered in cold blood, it certainly does not exclude the possibility of a staged attack meant to direct the public towards embracing certain “agendas”…and keeping the “War on Terror” alive for the security industries that benefit enormously when these seemingly sporadic “Terror events” occur..

    Does it ?

    Perhaps the “horror” of that possibility is the greatest cloaking tool utilized by all “false flag” perpetrators ?

    Think about it for a moment.

    How many innocent people( or “people” for that matter) were actually killed in Iraq over the last 13 years ? You don’t really have a definite number do you ? I don’t…The number could be anywhere from several hundred thousand to several million…No?

    If these very same people were so “Gung ho” to kill millions of innocent Iraqis who never attacked us, why do you think they would care about killing fifty or so, Americans, back home ?

    Why would they care ?

    If it suits their agenda ..and they have all the power to get away with it…which they do ….by all means..No, Mr Unz.?..

    Isn’t this the very definition of “ruthless” ?

    .Isn’t contempt for human life, …. all human life,….. their very M.O. ?..

    Haven’t they proven this to us …over…. and over…. and over again ?.

    Haven’t they, Mr. Unz .?

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    "If these very same people were so “Gung ho” to kill millions of innocent Iraqis who never attacked us, why do you think they would care about killing fifty or so, Americans, back home ?" Exactly my thoughts. But then I wonder why do they do hoaxes or semi-hoaxes and resort to actors, etc., etc. Don't they have guys to do a real wet job and then drop couple dead patsies? Instead they sometimes resort to Hollywood productions? Certainly it is not about them having scruples or lack of means. There must be some other reason. Could it be that coverage of the events is not synchronized with the actual events? The wet job and the coverage are run by two different departments?
    , @Jonathan Revusky

    The absence of reams of seemingly ” authentic” testimony, or footage of ambulances and police trucks…the absence of all indoor videos during the shooting…etc etc…does not mean the crime did not occur..exactly as was reported.
     
    I suppose, but it certainly does not mean that the crime did happen as reported.


    If these very same people were so “Gung ho” to kill millions of innocent Iraqis who never attacked us, why do you think they would care about killing fifty or so, Americans, back home ?

    Why would they care ?
     
    It is perfectly obvious to me that the neocon/warmongering faction that is behind these sorts of things would certainly kill 50 random people if it suited their purposes. Or even far more people. At this point, there is nothing that one could put past them. Nothing.

    That said, if they could perpetrate a pure hoax and achieve the same goals, then I assume they would be perfectly happy to do that.

    I honestly just don't know. I am leaning towards the Orlando thing being a hoax basically. It's hard to get one's head around either way, but finally, I just reason that it is easier to get key people to go along with a hoax than a real mass killing.

    For example, the thing in Paris in the Bataclan theater looks like it was just a pure hoax.

    That's my current bet, anyway. Of course, when they use this synthetic narrative to go off and bomb some country, then the victims are definitely real!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. @Cyrano
    As much as I find your argument riveting, I am afraid I am a wrong audience for you, sport. Here is what I suggest you do instead. Take a selected group of your fellow conspiracy theorists from this site and go on a goodwill tour of the greater middle east – where you country has performed some of the most outstanding (exceptional might be a better word) humanitarian work over the last few decades.

    And when you get there, declare yourself loud and clear as Americans. Then when you get kidnapped and tortured – as one suspect you might – tell your Muslim brothers and co-sufferers – that you are both victims of Jewish conspiracy. See how well that sits with your fellow co-sufferers – the Muslims. And if you don’t make it back alive – that’s OK – the US could use a break. It has too many of your kind anyway.

    Here is what I suggest you do instead. Take a selected group of your fellow conspiracy theorists from this site and go on a goodwill tour of the greater middle east – where you country has performed some of the most outstanding (exceptional might be a better word) humanitarian work over the last few decades.

    And when you get there, declare yourself loud and clear as Americans. Then when you get kidnapped and tortured – as one suspect you might – tell your Muslim brothers and co-sufferers – that you are both victims of Jewish conspiracy.

    Didn’t Rachel Corrie do pretty much the very thing you suggest, Cyrano?

    Photostory: Israeli bulldozer driver murders American peace activist

    The International Solidarity Movement followed your advice — actually, ISM has been actively engaging in “goodwill tours” of the Levant for years.

    ISM draws participants — or, in your jargon, “conspiracy theorists,” from all over the world, including the United States. Emily Henochowicz, and American college student, sought to have her eyes opened to the goings on in the Middle East and returned from the venture with only one eye.

    Furkan Doğan was one of about 14 Americans aboard the Mavi Marmara when it attempted to visit Palestine. Doğan was assassinated by IDFers who boarded the ship in international waters and replayed the USS Liberty protocol.

    To be sure, not every American who visits the Jewish enclave in the Levant ends up dead: hundreds of US senators and congressmen have made goodwill tours of Israel, as guests of Israeli agents/operatives in the USA (unregistered agents, the conspiracy theorist in me clamors to report). Funny thing about those US politicians, though: rather than “declaring themselves loud and clear as Americans,” often as not, they end up (figuratively) waving the flag of Israel and boasting of their loyalty to Israel and zionism.

    In contrast —

    I watched the video that Rurik posted, about refugees, especially Muslim immigrants in Europe. Numerous nationalities were mentioned — Afghanis, Syrians, Moroccans, Turks, etc., and their bad deeds and evil intentions depicted and decried.

    But I heard no mention of Iranians overrunning Europe, or of Iranian men raping European women, or of Persians voicing their intention to conquer Europe “not by war but by producing Muslim babies, either by Muslim women or by impregnating European women.

    I found that interesting: No Iranians among the bad actors besieging Europe.
    American lawmakers cannot stand within 20 feet of a microphone without blaring, “Iran is the No. One State Sponsor of Terrorism!”

    I spent over three weeks in Iran, traveling from Tehran to Keng, from Naishapour to Shiraz, from Mashad to Isfehan; I crossed one of Iran’s great deserts, climbed the Tower of Silence in Yazd and drove past two of Iran’s nuclear power plants, but the only moment of fear I experienced was when it was reported that Hillary Clinton, in an attempt to defeat John Kerry in Pennsylvania primaries, declared, “We will obliterate you, Iran!”

    But you’re right: consequent to Hillary’s bold statement of how she would engage my country with others in the world, I had a one-hour long conversation with a Iranian man who had previously worked for an American corporation in Iran. The conversation was sheer torture. I’d never before been ashamed to be an American.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jacques Sheete
    Excellent reply. It'll be interesting to see if it responds, and if so, how.
    , @Cyrano
    Who said anything about visiting Israel? Are you stupid or something? Of course you should stay clear of Israel. Everybody knows by now that they are the biggest enemies of US in the middle east.

    Go visit places like Iraq and Syria and Libya – an obvious beneficiaries of your country’s efforts to bring democracy to them. Don’t go as part of any organized group or anything. Just don’t forget to mention that you are Americans. I am sure that they’ll brake down in tears when they hear who their hostages – I mean visitors – are. Take with you your friends Helena and Jacues. They seem like a people who could use a trip like that too.

    And don’t worry about Iran either. Except for few sanctions from US they have hardly benefited from any real effort by your country to bring democracy to them. Now if anybody would have taken seriously McCain and his singing endorsement (Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran) that would have been something that Iranians could’ve been grateful about.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. helena says:
    @Cyrano
    As much as I find your argument riveting, I am afraid I am a wrong audience for you, sport. Here is what I suggest you do instead. Take a selected group of your fellow conspiracy theorists from this site and go on a goodwill tour of the greater middle east – where you country has performed some of the most outstanding (exceptional might be a better word) humanitarian work over the last few decades.

    And when you get there, declare yourself loud and clear as Americans. Then when you get kidnapped and tortured – as one suspect you might – tell your Muslim brothers and co-sufferers – that you are both victims of Jewish conspiracy. See how well that sits with your fellow co-sufferers – the Muslims. And if you don’t make it back alive – that’s OK – the US could use a break. It has too many of your kind anyway.

    “Take a selected group of your fellow conspiracy theorists ”

    I don’t read all SC’s posts but I’ve read a lot and all I’ve ever seen is extracts from documents. Are you saying these documents don’t exist ?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. @SolontoCroesus

    Here is what I suggest you do instead. Take a selected group of your fellow conspiracy theorists from this site and go on a goodwill tour of the greater middle east – where you country has performed some of the most outstanding (exceptional might be a better word) humanitarian work over the last few decades.

    And when you get there, declare yourself loud and clear as Americans. Then when you get kidnapped and tortured – as one suspect you might – tell your Muslim brothers and co-sufferers – that you are both victims of Jewish conspiracy.
     
    Didn't Rachel Corrie do pretty much the very thing you suggest, Cyrano?

    Photostory: Israeli bulldozer driver murders American peace activist

    The International Solidarity Movement followed your advice -- actually, ISM has been actively engaging in "goodwill tours" of the Levant for years.

    ISM draws participants -- or, in your jargon, "conspiracy theorists," from all over the world, including the United States. Emily Henochowicz, and American college student, sought to have her eyes opened to the goings on in the Middle East and returned from the venture with only one eye.

    Furkan Doğan was one of about 14 Americans aboard the Mavi Marmara when it attempted to visit Palestine. Doğan was assassinated by IDFers who boarded the ship in international waters and replayed the USS Liberty protocol.

    To be sure, not every American who visits the Jewish enclave in the Levant ends up dead: hundreds of US senators and congressmen have made goodwill tours of Israel, as guests of Israeli agents/operatives in the USA (unregistered agents, the conspiracy theorist in me clamors to report). Funny thing about those US politicians, though: rather than "declaring themselves loud and clear as Americans," often as not, they end up (figuratively) waving the flag of Israel and boasting of their loyalty to Israel and zionism.

    In contrast ---

    I watched the video that Rurik posted, about refugees, especially Muslim immigrants in Europe. Numerous nationalities were mentioned -- Afghanis, Syrians, Moroccans, Turks, etc., and their bad deeds and evil intentions depicted and decried.

    But I heard no mention of Iranians overrunning Europe, or of Iranian men raping European women, or of Persians voicing their intention to conquer Europe "not by war but by producing Muslim babies, either by Muslim women or by impregnating European women.

    I found that interesting: No Iranians among the bad actors besieging Europe.
    American lawmakers cannot stand within 20 feet of a microphone without blaring, "Iran is the No. One State Sponsor of Terrorism!"

    I spent over three weeks in Iran, traveling from Tehran to Keng, from Naishapour to Shiraz, from Mashad to Isfehan; I crossed one of Iran's great deserts, climbed the Tower of Silence in Yazd and drove past two of Iran's nuclear power plants, but the only moment of fear I experienced was when it was reported that Hillary Clinton, in an attempt to defeat John Kerry in Pennsylvania primaries, declared, "We will obliterate you, Iran!"

    But you're right: consequent to Hillary's bold statement of how she would engage my country with others in the world, I had a one-hour long conversation with a Iranian man who had previously worked for an American corporation in Iran. The conversation was sheer torture. I'd never before been ashamed to be an American.

    Excellent reply. It’ll be interesting to see if it responds, and if so, how.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. utu says:
    @L.K
    Hey Utu,

    "I have never seen real people after traumas like these before."

    I have, and it looks nothing like the clowns in the vids linked to by J.R.

    But look, all you have to do is search for vids of everyday organic events, such as accidents and murder, and you'll see for yourself.

    Regards

    I found some videos from 9/11:

    What do you think about emotional reaction, facial expressions and delivery of the text by the Asian girl at 1:43 or the guy at 2:48

    Or here the guy at 0:04 or the lady at 1:02

    Don’t you think that they are very calm, coherent, focus? Is that what you expect from people who just went through the greatest trauma in their lives? If they were the only witnesses you saw and if 9/11 was not televised would you become somewhat suspicious about their credibility and even suspect they might have been actors?

    I am on the same side of barricade where JR is and you but I am not convinced that we can easily discern acting from real behavior because we do not know how the real behavior of the witness or the survivor looks like. But we have some ideas how it suppose to look. The ideas based on fictional movies and plays. Because we saw tonnes of them in our lifetimes.

    Probably there is a wide range of real reactions. Some of which we have never seen in the movies because they would be considered as a bad or boring acting. For these reasons I consider the evidence attributed to the behavior of alleged witnesses during interviews as secondary. For me it is not decisive unlike for some youtube yahoos, whose work often is useful, but still they are yahoos.

    Read More
    • Replies: @L.K
    Hey Utu,

    I watched the first 1 you linked to, will watch the other one later, but no, the people in it look nothing like the people J.R linked to.

    To clarify, when I said I had experience with people grieving, I meant with the ordinary type of accident/ violence induced death/injuries, not alleged terrorist attacks of course.
    It serves as a termometer for me, though individuals do react differently, as to how people behave re losing close relatives/friends in sudden, unexpected, violent ways.

    Families of Russian plane crash victims comforted at Rostov airport
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xG4ROkJcZF8
    Malaysian plane shock: Families of MH370 passengers react to news about crashed jet
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBA95a5Fw5M
    Crash of flight 3054 in Brazil, go to 1:25
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4fp_97LgMo

    Utu; "For these reasons I consider the evidence attributed to the behavior of alleged witnesses during interviews as secondary. For me it is not decisive.."

    Don't get me wrong, it is not decisive for me either, just a little piece of the puzzle.
    My position is roughly the same as Ruriks:

    "Perhaps that is one of Mr. Revusky’s more important insights and messages, is that we should always expect them to turn all news, (even organic events) into a cartoon version to suit their agenda(s)."

     

    Take care
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. utu says:
    @Ron Unz
    Well, I'm no expert on these sorts of "conspiracy issues" but those video interviews seem *exceptionally* fake to me.

    On the other hand, given the large body-counts, it's difficult to believe the massacres didn't actually take place. After all, could't a group of debunkers just put together a little money and pay someone to go out, track down, and interview the wounded or the relatives of the dead? And if such investigators found they didn't exist, that would make an even more shocking YouTube video, and one very easily for other people to verify. Aren't the names of most of the victims given in the newspapers?

    As a possible solution to this serious dilemma, might it be possible that a few of the most fake-sounding "victims" are just opportunists who pretended to be there in order to get interviewed on TV? People will make up all sorts of things to get on TV, especially if they're struggling actresses. Also, I have the impression that after these sorts of high-profile events, eager TV stations will pay serious money to middlemen in order to quickly line up interviews with the victims. So maybe some of these dishonest middlemen will hire a few "crisis actors" and palm them off on gullible media outlets (This was roughly the plot of that film Nightcrawler).

    Just because the MSM is sometimes totally corrupt, dishonest, or incompetent doesn't necessarily mean that the events it described didn't actually happen...

    “most fake-sounding “victims” are just opportunists who pretended to be there in order to get interviewed on TV?” – Here is one found out by Daily Mail

    Did Orlando attack survivor LIE about being at gay club during shooting?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3653150/I-bar-happened-Man-claimed-Orlando-shooting-story-questioned-Facebook-post-suggests-wasn-t-there.html

    The presence of opportunists among Holocaust survivors is an issue.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. L.K says:
    @Rurik

    In America, we must restore our Democratic Republic, the Republic that was assassinated, along with our last Constitutional President, (and constitutional government), on November 22, 1963.
    We have been without a Republic for half a century.
     
    actually it started sooner, back on Dec, 23, 1913

    that is the infamous date when our Republic was sold out, fee simple, to a cabal of International Banksters and thieves, (the Fiend)

    the reason JFK was assassinated, was because with Executive Order 11110, he tried to restore the Republic, and was murdered by the Fiend for his temerity

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_11110

    ever since 1913 the US has been engaged in wars all over the planet, and increasingly turning Americans into little more than debt slaves to the Federal Reserve banksters. (a cabal of private bankers and Jewish supremacists who control and have the power to create [out of thin air] and issue and loan out a trillion or ten of the world's reserve currency on a whim, and buy any politician or media that gets in their way and turn them into their agents)

    the Fed is the root of our slavery

    it is the fount of the Eternal WarsⓊ and the all seeing eye of global human misery

    Rurik:
    “the Fed is the root of our slavery, it is the fount of the Eternal Wars and the all seeing eye of global human misery”.

    Amen to that but I have the feeling Sam shama(ful) would absolutely disagree with you! wink.

    “The new law will create inflation whenever the trusts want inflation. From now on depressions will be scientifically created.” (Congressman Charles A. Lindbergh, after the passage of the Federal Reserve act 1913.

    “The financial system has been turned over to the Federal Reserve Board. That Board administers the finance system by authority of a purely profiteering group. The system is Private, conducted for the sole purpose of obtaining the greatest possible profits from the use of other people’s money”
    -Charles A. Lindbergh Sr., 1923

    Congressman Louis Thomas McFadden, who served as Chairman of the Banking and Currency Committee for more than 10 years, stated, during the 1930s:

    “Mr. Chairman, we have in this Country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Banks, hereinafter called the Fed. The Fed has cheated the Government of these United States and the people of the United States out of enough money to pay the Nation’s debt. The depredations and iniquities of the Fed has cost enough money to pay the National debt several times over.

    Some people who think that the Federal Reserve Banks United States Government institutions. They are private monopolies which prey upon the people of these United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers; foreign and domestic speculators and swindlers; and rich and predatory money lender. In that dark crew of financial pirates there are those who would cut a man’s throat to get a dollar out of his pocket; there are those who send money into states to buy votes to control our legislatures; there are those who maintain International propaganda for the purpose of deceiving us into granting of new concessions which will permit them to cover up their past misdeeds and set again in motion their gigantic train of crime.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jacques Sheete
    Good comment.

    Many others predicted what would happen as a result of the creation of the Federal Reserve even before it was created and though correct, they've been lost down the memory hole.

    E.g., who's ever heard of Eustace Mullins? But of course, he was "crazy." Of course! Prolly some kinda conspiracy nut too!

    A few quotes from his "Secrets of the Federal Reserve"...


    "Our financial system is a false one and a huge burden on the people . . . This [Federal Reserve] Act establishes the most gigantic trust on earth."
    --Congressman Charles Augustus Lindbergh, Sr.

    The speeches of Senator LaFollette and Congressman Lindbergh became rallying points of opposition to the Aldrich Plan in 1912. They also aroused popular feeling against the Money Trust.

    Congressman Lindbergh said, on December 15, 1911,
    "The government prosecutes other trusts, but supports the money trust. I have been waiting patiently for several years for an opportunity to expose the false money standard, and to show that the greatest of all favoritism is that extended by the government to the money trust."

    Senator LaFollette publicly charged that a money trust of fifty men controlled the United States. George F. Baker, partner of J.P. Morgan, on being queried by reporters as to the truth of the charge, replied that it was absolutely in error. He said that he knew from personal knowledge that not more than eight men ran this country.


    http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_fed06b.htm
    , @Rurik
    Hey LK,

    Some people who think that the Federal Reserve Banks United States Government institutions. They are private monopolies which prey upon the people of these United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers; foreign and domestic speculators and swindlers; and rich and predatory money lender. In that dark crew of financial pirates there are those who would cut a man’s throat to get a dollar out of his pocket; there are those who send money into states to buy votes to control our legislatures; there are those who maintain International propaganda for the purpose of deceiving us into granting of new concessions which will permit them to cover up their past misdeeds and set again in motion their gigantic train of crime.”
     
    I'm reminded of that doctor in Detroit who was convicted of proscribing expensive (and highly profitable) chemo treatment for patients that didn't need it. Even killing (murdering) some of them. The meme is you have these highly paid people, sort of on a pedestal of respect, who are in these positions of ultimate trust, (like a doctor with your health or a banker with your money), and then they set about betraying that trust (and the people who trust them) do to them harm (prescribe poisons for the healthy or steal your wealth and prosperity, as the case may be)

    The Great Depression (that even Bernanke admitted was caused by the Fed) was just like the 2008 collapse. The Fed pumped up the bubble, (roaring 20s), and then popped it, and destroyed the economy, and then set about buying up people's property at pennies on the dollar in the purgatory that had just created, --having been created exactly to prevent exactly just such an event--. (such a deal !)

    Just like they pumped up the 2000's housing bubble, by making money cheap and easy to the banks, deliberately failing to regulate them, and then popped the bubble, and bought up people's property at pennies on the dollar in the carnage. (such a deal !)

    "If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered.... I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies.... "

    ~ T. J.

    the treason and lethality of the Fed can only be understood really in biblical terms. It is that momentous, and that iniquitous, and quite simply, that evil
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. Art says:
    @helena
    Well bad news because I've heard a key liberal opinion-maker using exactly that argument about Brexiters (as in Brexit=Far Right). What you're up against is 2-3 generations of people who believe that the liberal agenda is not just morally correct but rational, scientific (stats!) and logically accurate. It is truly scary. Like Stepford Wives. Not only are young people not thinking, they don't want to think; they don't want to break from the group. They are literally immature.

    Well bad news because I’ve heard a key liberal opinion-maker using exactly that argument about Brexiters (as in Brexit=Far Right). What you’re up against is 2-3 generations of people who believe that the liberal agenda is not just morally correct but rational, scientific (stats!) and logically accurate.

    Helena,

    Our brainstem politics vs. their brainstem politics.

    Clearly our brainstem politics are not working. Trump has had to back down over and over. On the other hand, his “make America great again” theme is winning. His talk of jobs and rebuilding are winning arguments. Clearly people want more of them.

    On the other political side, all they have are brainstem arguments.

    We should abandon our “brainstem arguments” and attack their “brainstem arguments.”

    Most all of Hillary’s (Nurse Ratchet’s) arguments are below the belt appeals, they are about sex, gender, tribe, and race. Her argument are about biological attributes not intellectual attributes. These below the belt issues are not making America better. They do not put food on the table, roofs over our heads, or give us more security.

    Trump must push intellectual attributes. Trump must keep his arguments to above the shoulder issues, like liberty, education, and the ability to produce a better tomorrow. These appeals are to people’s better side, to their upper level brain. They will work.

    Worried people are thinking people – people are coming to understand that the economic well is going dry. Hillary has NO answer to the economy.

    Trump must play to our happy traditional “can do American outlook on life.”

    Art

    p.s. We want to build another Panama Channel, go to the moon again, Hillary wants to build another toilet.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    I voted for Trump and I am a supporter like you. Shouldn't one of us reconsider?
    , @helena
    Brainstem politics - what a brilliant expression. That is exactly what is going on. It's so sad.

    But can the majority of new citizens respond to intellectual arguments?

    What I found really telling is that the demonstrations supporting Corbyn, who admittedly is probably the only possible break on war in the ME but, who is ideologically open-borders, was 95% white - in London!

    My conclusion is that the HBD hypothesis about altruism probably should also look at how territorialism operates because basically, white people supporting open borders is in effect a loss of instinct to protect territory.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. iffen says:
    @Art

    Well bad news because I’ve heard a key liberal opinion-maker using exactly that argument about Brexiters (as in Brexit=Far Right). What you’re up against is 2-3 generations of people who believe that the liberal agenda is not just morally correct but rational, scientific (stats!) and logically accurate.
     
    Helena,

    Our brainstem politics vs. their brainstem politics.

    Clearly our brainstem politics are not working. Trump has had to back down over and over. On the other hand, his “make America great again” theme is winning. His talk of jobs and rebuilding are winning arguments. Clearly people want more of them.

    On the other political side, all they have are brainstem arguments.

    We should abandon our “brainstem arguments” and attack their “brainstem arguments.”

    Most all of Hillary’s (Nurse Ratchet’s) arguments are below the belt appeals, they are about sex, gender, tribe, and race. Her argument are about biological attributes not intellectual attributes. These below the belt issues are not making America better. They do not put food on the table, roofs over our heads, or give us more security.

    Trump must push intellectual attributes. Trump must keep his arguments to above the shoulder issues, like liberty, education, and the ability to produce a better tomorrow. These appeals are to people’s better side, to their upper level brain. They will work.

    Worried people are thinking people – people are coming to understand that the economic well is going dry. Hillary has NO answer to the economy.

    Trump must play to our happy traditional “can do American outlook on life.”

    Art

    p.s. We want to build another Panama Channel, go to the moon again, Hillary wants to build another toilet.

    I voted for Trump and I am a supporter like you. Shouldn’t one of us reconsider?

    Read More
    • Replies: @helena
    Or maybe we should just be more open about who is controlling what instead of running away from fact. Iffen, I don't need conspiracy theories to see what is happening in EU - who is going into and out of meetings and who is ushering them and who is leading the meeting. I just need to watch TV. Why are we pretending Jewish intellectuals are not hugely important in all these political processes? The role of GS in EU affairs is becoming comical. The most recent episode is the British Govt interviewing GS reps because P Green says he wouldn't have sold BHS for £1 if GS hadn't advised him to do so - but it's not documented. Apparently that is something to do with M&A? deals and may lead to changes in the rules for M&A deals.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. @L.K
    Rurik:
    "the Fed is the root of our slavery, it is the fount of the Eternal Wars and the all seeing eye of global human misery".


    Amen to that but I have the feeling Sam shama(ful) would absolutely disagree with you! wink.

    “The new law will create inflation whenever the trusts want inflation. From now on depressions will be scientifically created.” (Congressman Charles A. Lindbergh, after the passage of the Federal Reserve act 1913.

    “The financial system has been turned over to the Federal Reserve Board. That Board administers the finance system by authority of a purely profiteering group. The system is Private, conducted for the sole purpose of obtaining the greatest possible profits from the use of other people’s money”
    -Charles A. Lindbergh Sr., 1923
     
    Congressman Louis Thomas McFadden, who served as Chairman of the Banking and Currency Committee for more than 10 years, stated, during the 1930s:

    "Mr. Chairman, we have in this Country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Banks, hereinafter called the Fed. The Fed has cheated the Government of these United States and the people of the United States out of enough money to pay the Nation's debt. The depredations and iniquities of the Fed has cost enough money to pay the National debt several times over.
    ...
    Some people who think that the Federal Reserve Banks United States Government institutions. They are private monopolies which prey upon the people of these United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers; foreign and domestic speculators and swindlers; and rich and predatory money lender. In that dark crew of financial pirates there are those who would cut a man's throat to get a dollar out of his pocket; there are those who send money into states to buy votes to control our legislatures; there are those who maintain International propaganda for the purpose of deceiving us into granting of new concessions which will permit them to cover up their past misdeeds and set again in motion their gigantic train of crime."
     

    Good comment.

    Many others predicted what would happen as a result of the creation of the Federal Reserve even before it was created and though correct, they’ve been lost down the memory hole.

    E.g., who’s ever heard of Eustace Mullins? But of course, he was “crazy.” Of course! Prolly some kinda conspiracy nut too!

    A few quotes from his “Secrets of the Federal Reserve”…

    “Our financial system is a false one and a huge burden on the people . . . This [Federal Reserve] Act establishes the most gigantic trust on earth.”
    –Congressman Charles Augustus Lindbergh, Sr.

    The speeches of Senator LaFollette and Congressman Lindbergh became rallying points of opposition to the Aldrich Plan in 1912. They also aroused popular feeling against the Money Trust.

    Congressman Lindbergh said, on December 15, 1911,
    “The government prosecutes other trusts, but supports the money trust. I have been waiting patiently for several years for an opportunity to expose the false money standard, and to show that the greatest of all favoritism is that extended by the government to the money trust.”

    Senator LaFollette publicly charged that a money trust of fifty men controlled the United States. George F. Baker, partner of J.P. Morgan, on being queried by reporters as to the truth of the charge, replied that it was absolutely in error. He said that he knew from personal knowledge that not more than eight men ran this country.

    http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_fed06b.htm

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. L.K says:
    @utu
    I found some videos from 9/11:

    What do you think about emotional reaction, facial expressions and delivery of the text by the Asian girl at 1:43 or the guy at 2:48
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCwvBUezumA

    Or here the guy at 0:04 or the lady at 1:02
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfmH9em_5FY

    Don't you think that they are very calm, coherent, focus? Is that what you expect from people who just went through the greatest trauma in their lives? If they were the only witnesses you saw and if 9/11 was not televised would you become somewhat suspicious about their credibility and even suspect they might have been actors?

    I am on the same side of barricade where JR is and you but I am not convinced that we can easily discern acting from real behavior because we do not know how the real behavior of the witness or the survivor looks like. But we have some ideas how it suppose to look. The ideas based on fictional movies and plays. Because we saw tonnes of them in our lifetimes.

    Probably there is a wide range of real reactions. Some of which we have never seen in the movies because they would be considered as a bad or boring acting. For these reasons I consider the evidence attributed to the behavior of alleged witnesses during interviews as secondary. For me it is not decisive unlike for some youtube yahoos, whose work often is useful, but still they are yahoos.

    Hey Utu,

    I watched the first 1 you linked to, will watch the other one later, but no, the people in it look nothing like the people J.R linked to.

    To clarify, when I said I had experience with people grieving, I meant with the ordinary type of accident/ violence induced death/injuries, not alleged terrorist attacks of course.
    It serves as a termometer for me, though individuals do react differently, as to how people behave re losing close relatives/friends in sudden, unexpected, violent ways.

    Families of Russian plane crash victims comforted at Rostov airport

    Malaysian plane shock: Families of MH370 passengers react to news about crashed jet

    Crash of flight 3054 in Brazil, go to 1:25

    Utu; “For these reasons I consider the evidence attributed to the behavior of alleged witnesses during interviews as secondary. For me it is not decisive..”

    Don’t get me wrong, it is not decisive for me either, just a little piece of the puzzle.
    My position is roughly the same as Ruriks:

    “Perhaps that is one of Mr. Revusky’s more important insights and messages, is that we should always expect them to turn all news, (even organic events) into a cartoon version to suit their agenda(s).”

    Take care

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. Cyrano says:
    @SolontoCroesus

    Here is what I suggest you do instead. Take a selected group of your fellow conspiracy theorists from this site and go on a goodwill tour of the greater middle east – where you country has performed some of the most outstanding (exceptional might be a better word) humanitarian work over the last few decades.

    And when you get there, declare yourself loud and clear as Americans. Then when you get kidnapped and tortured – as one suspect you might – tell your Muslim brothers and co-sufferers – that you are both victims of Jewish conspiracy.
     
    Didn't Rachel Corrie do pretty much the very thing you suggest, Cyrano?

    Photostory: Israeli bulldozer driver murders American peace activist

    The International Solidarity Movement followed your advice -- actually, ISM has been actively engaging in "goodwill tours" of the Levant for years.

    ISM draws participants -- or, in your jargon, "conspiracy theorists," from all over the world, including the United States. Emily Henochowicz, and American college student, sought to have her eyes opened to the goings on in the Middle East and returned from the venture with only one eye.

    Furkan Doğan was one of about 14 Americans aboard the Mavi Marmara when it attempted to visit Palestine. Doğan was assassinated by IDFers who boarded the ship in international waters and replayed the USS Liberty protocol.

    To be sure, not every American who visits the Jewish enclave in the Levant ends up dead: hundreds of US senators and congressmen have made goodwill tours of Israel, as guests of Israeli agents/operatives in the USA (unregistered agents, the conspiracy theorist in me clamors to report). Funny thing about those US politicians, though: rather than "declaring themselves loud and clear as Americans," often as not, they end up (figuratively) waving the flag of Israel and boasting of their loyalty to Israel and zionism.

    In contrast ---

    I watched the video that Rurik posted, about refugees, especially Muslim immigrants in Europe. Numerous nationalities were mentioned -- Afghanis, Syrians, Moroccans, Turks, etc., and their bad deeds and evil intentions depicted and decried.

    But I heard no mention of Iranians overrunning Europe, or of Iranian men raping European women, or of Persians voicing their intention to conquer Europe "not by war but by producing Muslim babies, either by Muslim women or by impregnating European women.

    I found that interesting: No Iranians among the bad actors besieging Europe.
    American lawmakers cannot stand within 20 feet of a microphone without blaring, "Iran is the No. One State Sponsor of Terrorism!"

    I spent over three weeks in Iran, traveling from Tehran to Keng, from Naishapour to Shiraz, from Mashad to Isfehan; I crossed one of Iran's great deserts, climbed the Tower of Silence in Yazd and drove past two of Iran's nuclear power plants, but the only moment of fear I experienced was when it was reported that Hillary Clinton, in an attempt to defeat John Kerry in Pennsylvania primaries, declared, "We will obliterate you, Iran!"

    But you're right: consequent to Hillary's bold statement of how she would engage my country with others in the world, I had a one-hour long conversation with a Iranian man who had previously worked for an American corporation in Iran. The conversation was sheer torture. I'd never before been ashamed to be an American.

    Who said anything about visiting Israel? Are you stupid or something? Of course you should stay clear of Israel. Everybody knows by now that they are the biggest enemies of US in the middle east.

    Go visit places like Iraq and Syria and Libya – an obvious beneficiaries of your country’s efforts to bring democracy to them. Don’t go as part of any organized group or anything. Just don’t forget to mention that you are Americans. I am sure that they’ll brake down in tears when they hear who their hostages – I mean visitors – are. Take with you your friends Helena and Jacues. They seem like a people who could use a trip like that too.

    And don’t worry about Iran either. Except for few sanctions from US they have hardly benefited from any real effort by your country to bring democracy to them. Now if anybody would have taken seriously McCain and his singing endorsement (Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran) that would have been something that Iranians could’ve been grateful about.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  119. utu says:
    @alexander
    You are absolutely right, Mr Unz.

    The absence of reams of seemingly " authentic" testimony, or footage of ambulances and police trucks...the absence of all indoor videos during the shooting...etc etc...does not mean the crime did not occur..exactly as was reported.

    But even if forty nine people were slaughtered in cold blood, it certainly does not exclude the possibility of a staged attack meant to direct the public towards embracing certain "agendas"...and keeping the "War on Terror" alive for the security industries that benefit enormously when these seemingly sporadic "Terror events" occur..

    Does it ?

    Perhaps the "horror" of that possibility is the greatest cloaking tool utilized by all "false flag" perpetrators ?


    Think about it for a moment.

    How many innocent people( or "people" for that matter) were actually killed in Iraq over the last 13 years ? You don't really have a definite number do you ? I don't...The number could be anywhere from several hundred thousand to several million...No?

    If these very same people were so "Gung ho" to kill millions of innocent Iraqis who never attacked us, why do you think they would care about killing fifty or so, Americans, back home ?

    Why would they care ?

    If it suits their agenda ..and they have all the power to get away with it...which they do ....by all means..No, Mr Unz.?..

    Isn't this the very definition of "ruthless" ?

    .Isn't contempt for human life, .... all human life,..... their very M.O. ?..

    Haven't they proven this to us ...over.... and over.... and over again ?.

    Haven't they, Mr. Unz .?

    “If these very same people were so “Gung ho” to kill millions of innocent Iraqis who never attacked us, why do you think they would care about killing fifty or so, Americans, back home ?” Exactly my thoughts. But then I wonder why do they do hoaxes or semi-hoaxes and resort to actors, etc., etc. Don’t they have guys to do a real wet job and then drop couple dead patsies? Instead they sometimes resort to Hollywood productions? Certainly it is not about them having scruples or lack of means. There must be some other reason. Could it be that coverage of the events is not synchronized with the actual events? The wet job and the coverage are run by two different departments?

    Read More
    • Replies: @alexander
    Utu,

    I cannot say, to a certainty, what really happened in Orlando....because I wasn't there.

    But I can tell you, to a certainty, our government has overspent what it has taken in, by 15 trillion dollars, fighting our "heroic" war on terror...and during this ungodly "spending spree" the amount of terror events and mass shootings have increased twenty fold .

    How do you explain that ?

    How do you explain that for the first four decades of my life, before 9-11, we spent almost "nothing" on our "war on terror"and there were almost no terror events or mass shootings at all. The ones that did occur were very few and far between.

    Throwing FIFTEEN THOUSAND BILLION DOLLARS at the problem, to eliminate it, has done nothing but increase the problem ......twenty fold.

    Is it just me....or is there something wrong with this picture ?


    Considering our governments "success rate", so far, wouldn't it mean, Utu, by extension, that if we spend FIFTY TRILLION on the problem we should be having a "mass shooting" and a "terror event"... almost every week ?



    I say "fire the bums"......the whole lot.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. Ron Unz says:

    Actually, I should probably mention that I’ve been involved in a heated ongoing debate regarding “conspiracy theories” in one of Steve Sailer’s threads:

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/how-many-millions-of-americans-were-internal-refugees-from-crime/#comment-1470293

    Read More
    • Replies: @alexander
    Perhaps, Mr. Unz,


    It would help if you clarify exactly what constitutes a "conspiracy theorist".


    If , for example, a "conspiracy theorist" is one who believes that our government, on the whole, is totally corrupt, dishonest, and has done a thoroughly piss-poor job ,..... If it is one who believes that Big media is full of malarky, especially on the key narratives which drive our policies.....then wouldn't that qualify nearly 300 million Americans as "conspiracy theorists"?

    Judging from the seven percent "approval" rating of congress, this would have to be the case.

    No?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. helena says:
    @iffen
    I voted for Trump and I am a supporter like you. Shouldn't one of us reconsider?

    Or maybe we should just be more open about who is controlling what instead of running away from fact. Iffen, I don’t need conspiracy theories to see what is happening in EU – who is going into and out of meetings and who is ushering them and who is leading the meeting. I just need to watch TV. Why are we pretending Jewish intellectuals are not hugely important in all these political processes? The role of GS in EU affairs is becoming comical. The most recent episode is the British Govt interviewing GS reps because P Green says he wouldn’t have sold BHS for £1 if GS hadn’t advised him to do so – but it’s not documented. Apparently that is something to do with M&A? deals and may lead to changes in the rules for M&A deals.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    Surely the Jewish Question and the Negro Question shall follow me all the days of my life; and I will dwell in the house of political impotence forever.

    Helena,

    It is never too late to have a happy childhood and one never gets too old to run away.

    I am not running away or avoiding facts. People of Jewish descent play, and have played, prominent roles in finance, in politics, and in the arts and sciences for a long time; in all fields that require major intellectual gifts. The degree of influence of Jews (does it approach control?) is debatable. Also debatable is whether this is benevolent or malevolent. This debate necessarily includes questions about the Lobby/lobby and the relationships of our countries to Israel. Also debatable is whether there is a “Jewish POV” to which they all, or most adhere to, and is that POV detrimental to non-Jews. (Basically, are Jews interchangeable?) One has to decide to what extend being “Jewish” is a controlling factor in the various actions of the actors involved. Primarily, these decisions will be driven by one’s priors on the Jewish Question.

    a loss of instinct to protect territory.

    I don’t think that we lose instinct, we modify or seek to control it, to a greater or lesser effect, through our intellect. There is a significant number of sincere people who think that it is time to move past the nation state model.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  122. helena says:
    @Art

    Well bad news because I’ve heard a key liberal opinion-maker using exactly that argument about Brexiters (as in Brexit=Far Right). What you’re up against is 2-3 generations of people who believe that the liberal agenda is not just morally correct but rational, scientific (stats!) and logically accurate.
     
    Helena,

    Our brainstem politics vs. their brainstem politics.

    Clearly our brainstem politics are not working. Trump has had to back down over and over. On the other hand, his “make America great again” theme is winning. His talk of jobs and rebuilding are winning arguments. Clearly people want more of them.

    On the other political side, all they have are brainstem arguments.

    We should abandon our “brainstem arguments” and attack their “brainstem arguments.”

    Most all of Hillary’s (Nurse Ratchet’s) arguments are below the belt appeals, they are about sex, gender, tribe, and race. Her argument are about biological attributes not intellectual attributes. These below the belt issues are not making America better. They do not put food on the table, roofs over our heads, or give us more security.

    Trump must push intellectual attributes. Trump must keep his arguments to above the shoulder issues, like liberty, education, and the ability to produce a better tomorrow. These appeals are to people’s better side, to their upper level brain. They will work.

    Worried people are thinking people – people are coming to understand that the economic well is going dry. Hillary has NO answer to the economy.

    Trump must play to our happy traditional “can do American outlook on life.”

    Art

    p.s. We want to build another Panama Channel, go to the moon again, Hillary wants to build another toilet.

    Brainstem politics – what a brilliant expression. That is exactly what is going on. It’s so sad.

    But can the majority of new citizens respond to intellectual arguments?

    What I found really telling is that the demonstrations supporting Corbyn, who admittedly is probably the only possible break on war in the ME but, who is ideologically open-borders, was 95% white – in London!

    My conclusion is that the HBD hypothesis about altruism probably should also look at how territorialism operates because basically, white people supporting open borders is in effect a loss of instinct to protect territory.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Art

    What I found really telling is that the demonstrations supporting Corbyn, who admittedly is probably the only possible break on war in the ME but, who is ideologically open-borders, was 95% white – in London!

    My conclusion is that the HBD hypothesis about altruism probably should also look at how territorialism operates because basically, white people supporting open borders is in effect a loss of instinct to protect territory.
     
    Helena,

    I have felt for a long time that the English are different – the English have a lot of different blood in them. They have been invaded genetically by many peoples. Romans, Scotts, Irish, Vikings, Germans, Normans are all part of the English gene pool. Genetically this has been to their benefit. They have received the dominant success traits of all these peoples. Their gene pool was not stagnant. Intellectually, the English contribution to science is unmatched in human history. Surly their diverse gene pool had something to do with this.

    The English have also benefited culturally – with all these different people among them they had to develop a system of fairness – a system to get along with each, other than strict tribalism. English common law and its system of individual responsibility (regardless of genetics) was the only way to have a sane society that wasn’t killing each other over blood identity.

    At its base America is also an open fairness society of many different peoples – perhaps that is why we are open to immigration.

    Fairness is the antidote to tribalism.

    Art
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  123. Priss Factor [AKA "Anonymny"] says: • Website

    “In his recently published book The Rhapsodes, seminal critic and film historian David Bordwell pays tribute to four groundbreaking film critics who were writing in the 1940s: Otis Ferguson, James Agee, Manny Farber, and Parker Tyler.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  124. @Ron Unz
    Well, I'm no expert on these sorts of "conspiracy issues" but those video interviews seem *exceptionally* fake to me.

    On the other hand, given the large body-counts, it's difficult to believe the massacres didn't actually take place. After all, could't a group of debunkers just put together a little money and pay someone to go out, track down, and interview the wounded or the relatives of the dead? And if such investigators found they didn't exist, that would make an even more shocking YouTube video, and one very easily for other people to verify. Aren't the names of most of the victims given in the newspapers?

    As a possible solution to this serious dilemma, might it be possible that a few of the most fake-sounding "victims" are just opportunists who pretended to be there in order to get interviewed on TV? People will make up all sorts of things to get on TV, especially if they're struggling actresses. Also, I have the impression that after these sorts of high-profile events, eager TV stations will pay serious money to middlemen in order to quickly line up interviews with the victims. So maybe some of these dishonest middlemen will hire a few "crisis actors" and palm them off on gullible media outlets (This was roughly the plot of that film Nightcrawler).

    Just because the MSM is sometimes totally corrupt, dishonest, or incompetent doesn't necessarily mean that the events it described didn't actually happen...

    On the other hand, given the large body-counts, it’s difficult to believe the massacres didn’t actually take place.

    Uhhh…. I’m not at all sure about this. This does relate to the “theory of the big lie”, that the big lie is more readily believed than the little one, because nobody thinks that anybody would have the audacity to attempt the big one.

    After all, could’t a group of debunkers just put together a little money and pay someone to go out, track down, and interview the wounded or the relatives of the dead? And if such investigators found they didn’t exist, that would make an even more shocking YouTube video, and one very easily for other people to verify.

    Hmm… with all due respect, Ron, I wonder whether the above argument does not border a bit on the schizophrenic. I mean, like, stepping back from this a moment, the classic argument is that we live in a Democracy, or a Democratic Republic whatever the hell that is… but regardless, one component of this is that we have a functioning Fourth Estate, that is independent (well, more or less…) and honest (well, more or less…) and could be expected to investigate these things.

    So the argument is then:

    Thus, since we live in a Democracy and have a functioning Fourth Estate, therefore, any significant large-scale conspiracy or cover-up is impossible. Therefore, what the authorities say happened is what happened. QED.

    Now, you are obviously NOT making the above argument, because, you are talking about independent citizens mounting their own investigation. This would not be necessary in the first place if the media were doing their job. So you are tacitly accepting that, at least for a certain set of events, we do NOT have functioning independent investigative journalism. BUT, okay, you argue, that the citizenry could do the media’s job for them.

    Okay, suppose they do. They independently investigate and provide incontrovertible proof that the whole thing is a hoax. What then? They go to that very same MSM that declined to investigate and hand them the incontrovertible proof. And then the MSM runs with it and blows the lid off the whole thing, right?

    Uhh, wrong… they just say: “That’s all conspiracy theories” and ignore it.

    I mean, what did Sidney Schanberg do wrt the POW’s left behind in Vietnam? What resulted from that?

    As for putting up youtube videos, what is more damning than the Danny Jowenko testimony regarding building 7? I mean, these are people that went to a demolitions expert, showed him the footage without telling him where and when it was taken, and the guy says: “This is a controlled demolition.” Any reasonable person would conclude from this that the building implosion on the video is, in fact, a controlled demolition. Nonetheless, here we are, a decade and a half after the event, and that the CD is a CD, that’s a “conspiracy theory”.

    I mean, the whole thing is ludicrous. If somebody handed the two of us the right specialized tools for the job, the explosive devices, and said: “Here, Ron and Jon, set up a steel-framed skyscraper with these explosives for a CD”, Ron, the two of us would have about as much chance of executing that perfectly symmetrical implosion as a monkey would have of typing a Shakespeare sonnet. (I know that, unlike me, you studied physics back when, but I am quite certain it would not help much. This is very specialized hands-on heuristic know-how.) The NIST claim that this happened due to the “uncontrolled burning of fires” is an utter insult to anybody’s intelligence. As I say, even if they handed us (or anybody who is not a demolitions specialist) the actual specialized tools, we would not know how to make this happen. This requires very specialized knowledge of where to place the explosives and the exact timing. We would at best produce one of those flubbed CD’s that you can look at on youtube.

    The above is really just totally cut and dry and how many videos have been put up on youtube outlining this? Just quite a few from Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth already. But, for me, the Anthony Lawson “This is an orange” video that I linked in the previous essay is about the best of the lot. In 2 minutes, he just gets straight to the heart of the issue. I mean, somebody shows you a picture of an orange and you say that’s an orange and you’re a “conspiracy theorist”?!

    Well, in short, the basic argument that people could put up a totally devastating youtube video and blow the lid off the whole thing — this is not a great argument. There is this case and others where exactly that has happened and all these HIQIs will still just say: “This is all conspiracy thoeries nya nya.”

    Aren’t the names of most of the victims given in the newspapers?

    Well, if this is a hoax, then these aren’t real victims, but proving that involves proving a negative. If they produce more false witnesses saying: “Oh, that John Jones was a good friend of mine, how dare these horrible conspiracy theorist scum say that he never existed!” as well as forging documents here and there…

    It might well start becoming quite obvious that this is fake, but if the media will never say so, like with these fake interviews, and just keep bulling on, then what? Surely you understand that the people within that structure all know that if they denounce any of these hoaxes, they have just committed career suicide, so…

    Now, I understand that it is mind-boggling to contemplate that they could fabricate a few dozen phony victims, that this could be possible. But you wouldn’t think they could execute a controlled demolition in lower Manhattan and have the National Institute of Standards and Technology make a report saying that this was the result of randomly burning fires. So I say, all bets are off on that.

    Well, this is getting too long, but if your basic argument is that we can dismiss a priori that they could mount a hoax with fake victims, I have to disagree.

    That, however, does not mean that I am claiming to know what happened. Again, I just honestly don’t know. The argument that people could put out a youtube video is not convincing to me at all.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz

    Now, you are obviously NOT making the above argument, because, you are talking about independent citizens mounting their own investigation. This would not be necessary in the first place if the media were doing their job.
     
    Certainly. I emphasized at the very beginning that even under a non-conspiracy scenario, the MSM is often lazy, incompetent, and corrupt.

    The NYT published a full-page list of all the supposed Orlando Massacre victims, including their names, photos, and some bio details. Presumably, they mostly have Facebook pages, and someone could review those, along with the pages of their Facebook friends. I don't much use Facebook myself, but we're talking about 100 pages that would have to be faked, plus all their friend pages.

    How much would it cost some activist to buy a plane ticket to Orlando and stay at a cheap motel for a week or two? Based on the published names of the victims, he'd be able to track down some of their addresses, drop by, and see what their neighbors said about them. Presumably, lots of curiosity-seekers or journalists are already doing this sort of thing, so there wouldn't be much reluctance to talk to one additional person, even "on camera." If the addresses or the neighbors didn't exist, that would make a great YouTube video.

    If no such YouTube debunkings exist, that's either because not a single debunker in America cares enough to make the effort, even the ones who live a short drive from Orlando, or (more likely) because almost all the victims, addresses, and neighbors checked out and the results weren't interesting enough to put on YouTube.

    Or consider those suspicious or fake-seeming victim interviews. Some of the massacres probably had 100 victims or victim-relatives, with massive wall-to-wall TV interviews of everyone connected with the massacre. Yet it looks like only 1 or 2 of the interviews were fake-seeming enough for debunkers to post on YouTube with sarcastic commentary. Doesn't that tend to imply that the other 99% of the interviews were *not* fake-seeming, but came across as totally legitimate? Otherwise, why aren't they also on YouTube? I'd be much more suspicious if e.g. the Orlando Massacre had 15 fake-seeming YouTube interviews of different victims rather than just that single fake-seeming aspiring actress.

    Either the debunkers are astonishingly lazy or the events really happened.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. @alexander
    You are absolutely right, Mr Unz.

    The absence of reams of seemingly " authentic" testimony, or footage of ambulances and police trucks...the absence of all indoor videos during the shooting...etc etc...does not mean the crime did not occur..exactly as was reported.

    But even if forty nine people were slaughtered in cold blood, it certainly does not exclude the possibility of a staged attack meant to direct the public towards embracing certain "agendas"...and keeping the "War on Terror" alive for the security industries that benefit enormously when these seemingly sporadic "Terror events" occur..

    Does it ?

    Perhaps the "horror" of that possibility is the greatest cloaking tool utilized by all "false flag" perpetrators ?


    Think about it for a moment.

    How many innocent people( or "people" for that matter) were actually killed in Iraq over the last 13 years ? You don't really have a definite number do you ? I don't...The number could be anywhere from several hundred thousand to several million...No?

    If these very same people were so "Gung ho" to kill millions of innocent Iraqis who never attacked us, why do you think they would care about killing fifty or so, Americans, back home ?

    Why would they care ?

    If it suits their agenda ..and they have all the power to get away with it...which they do ....by all means..No, Mr Unz.?..

    Isn't this the very definition of "ruthless" ?

    .Isn't contempt for human life, .... all human life,..... their very M.O. ?..

    Haven't they proven this to us ...over.... and over.... and over again ?.

    Haven't they, Mr. Unz .?

    The absence of reams of seemingly ” authentic” testimony, or footage of ambulances and police trucks…the absence of all indoor videos during the shooting…etc etc…does not mean the crime did not occur..exactly as was reported.

    I suppose, but it certainly does not mean that the crime did happen as reported.

    If these very same people were so “Gung ho” to kill millions of innocent Iraqis who never attacked us, why do you think they would care about killing fifty or so, Americans, back home ?

    Why would they care ?

    It is perfectly obvious to me that the neocon/warmongering faction that is behind these sorts of things would certainly kill 50 random people if it suited their purposes. Or even far more people. At this point, there is nothing that one could put past them. Nothing.

    That said, if they could perpetrate a pure hoax and achieve the same goals, then I assume they would be perfectly happy to do that.

    I honestly just don’t know. I am leaning towards the Orlando thing being a hoax basically. It’s hard to get one’s head around either way, but finally, I just reason that it is easier to get key people to go along with a hoax than a real mass killing.

    For example, the thing in Paris in the Bataclan theater looks like it was just a pure hoax.

    That’s my current bet, anyway. Of course, when they use this synthetic narrative to go off and bomb some country, then the victims are definitely real!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  126. alexander says:
    @utu
    "If these very same people were so “Gung ho” to kill millions of innocent Iraqis who never attacked us, why do you think they would care about killing fifty or so, Americans, back home ?" Exactly my thoughts. But then I wonder why do they do hoaxes or semi-hoaxes and resort to actors, etc., etc. Don't they have guys to do a real wet job and then drop couple dead patsies? Instead they sometimes resort to Hollywood productions? Certainly it is not about them having scruples or lack of means. There must be some other reason. Could it be that coverage of the events is not synchronized with the actual events? The wet job and the coverage are run by two different departments?

    Utu,

    I cannot say, to a certainty, what really happened in Orlando….because I wasn’t there.

    But I can tell you, to a certainty, our government has overspent what it has taken in, by 15 trillion dollars, fighting our “heroic” war on terror…and during this ungodly “spending spree” the amount of terror events and mass shootings have increased twenty fold .

    How do you explain that ?

    How do you explain that for the first four decades of my life, before 9-11, we spent almost “nothing” on our “war on terror”and there were almost no terror events or mass shootings at all. The ones that did occur were very few and far between.

    Throwing FIFTEEN THOUSAND BILLION DOLLARS at the problem, to eliminate it, has done nothing but increase the problem ……twenty fold.

    Is it just me….or is there something wrong with this picture ?

    Considering our governments “success rate”, so far, wouldn’t it mean, Utu, by extension, that if we spend FIFTY TRILLION on the problem we should be having a “mass shooting” and a “terror event”… almost every week ?

    I say “fire the bums”……the whole lot.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  127. Ron Unz says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    On the other hand, given the large body-counts, it’s difficult to believe the massacres didn’t actually take place.
     
    Uhhh.... I'm not at all sure about this. This does relate to the "theory of the big lie", that the big lie is more readily believed than the little one, because nobody thinks that anybody would have the audacity to attempt the big one.

    After all, could’t a group of debunkers just put together a little money and pay someone to go out, track down, and interview the wounded or the relatives of the dead? And if such investigators found they didn’t exist, that would make an even more shocking YouTube video, and one very easily for other people to verify.
     
    Hmm... with all due respect, Ron, I wonder whether the above argument does not border a bit on the schizophrenic. I mean, like, stepping back from this a moment, the classic argument is that we live in a Democracy, or a Democratic Republic whatever the hell that is... but regardless, one component of this is that we have a functioning Fourth Estate, that is independent (well, more or less...) and honest (well, more or less...) and could be expected to investigate these things.

    So the argument is then:

    Thus, since we live in a Democracy and have a functioning Fourth Estate, therefore, any significant large-scale conspiracy or cover-up is impossible. Therefore, what the authorities say happened is what happened. QED.

    Now, you are obviously NOT making the above argument, because, you are talking about independent citizens mounting their own investigation. This would not be necessary in the first place if the media were doing their job. So you are tacitly accepting that, at least for a certain set of events, we do NOT have functioning independent investigative journalism. BUT, okay, you argue, that the citizenry could do the media's job for them.

    Okay, suppose they do. They independently investigate and provide incontrovertible proof that the whole thing is a hoax. What then? They go to that very same MSM that declined to investigate and hand them the incontrovertible proof. And then the MSM runs with it and blows the lid off the whole thing, right?

    Uhh, wrong... they just say: "That's all conspiracy theories" and ignore it.

    I mean, what did Sidney Schanberg do wrt the POW's left behind in Vietnam? What resulted from that?

    As for putting up youtube videos, what is more damning than the Danny Jowenko testimony regarding building 7? I mean, these are people that went to a demolitions expert, showed him the footage without telling him where and when it was taken, and the guy says: "This is a controlled demolition." Any reasonable person would conclude from this that the building implosion on the video is, in fact, a controlled demolition. Nonetheless, here we are, a decade and a half after the event, and that the CD is a CD, that's a "conspiracy theory".

    I mean, the whole thing is ludicrous. If somebody handed the two of us the right specialized tools for the job, the explosive devices, and said: "Here, Ron and Jon, set up a steel-framed skyscraper with these explosives for a CD", Ron, the two of us would have about as much chance of executing that perfectly symmetrical implosion as a monkey would have of typing a Shakespeare sonnet. (I know that, unlike me, you studied physics back when, but I am quite certain it would not help much. This is very specialized hands-on heuristic know-how.) The NIST claim that this happened due to the "uncontrolled burning of fires" is an utter insult to anybody's intelligence. As I say, even if they handed us (or anybody who is not a demolitions specialist) the actual specialized tools, we would not know how to make this happen. This requires very specialized knowledge of where to place the explosives and the exact timing. We would at best produce one of those flubbed CD's that you can look at on youtube.

    The above is really just totally cut and dry and how many videos have been put up on youtube outlining this? Just quite a few from Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth already. But, for me, the Anthony Lawson "This is an orange" video that I linked in the previous essay is about the best of the lot. In 2 minutes, he just gets straight to the heart of the issue. I mean, somebody shows you a picture of an orange and you say that's an orange and you're a "conspiracy theorist"?!

    Well, in short, the basic argument that people could put up a totally devastating youtube video and blow the lid off the whole thing -- this is not a great argument. There is this case and others where exactly that has happened and all these HIQIs will still just say: "This is all conspiracy thoeries nya nya."

    Aren’t the names of most of the victims given in the newspapers?
     
    Well, if this is a hoax, then these aren't real victims, but proving that involves proving a negative. If they produce more false witnesses saying: "Oh, that John Jones was a good friend of mine, how dare these horrible conspiracy theorist scum say that he never existed!" as well as forging documents here and there...

    It might well start becoming quite obvious that this is fake, but if the media will never say so, like with these fake interviews, and just keep bulling on, then what? Surely you understand that the people within that structure all know that if they denounce any of these hoaxes, they have just committed career suicide, so...

    Now, I understand that it is mind-boggling to contemplate that they could fabricate a few dozen phony victims, that this could be possible. But you wouldn't think they could execute a controlled demolition in lower Manhattan and have the National Institute of Standards and Technology make a report saying that this was the result of randomly burning fires. So I say, all bets are off on that.

    Well, this is getting too long, but if your basic argument is that we can dismiss a priori that they could mount a hoax with fake victims, I have to disagree.

    That, however, does not mean that I am claiming to know what happened. Again, I just honestly don't know. The argument that people could put out a youtube video is not convincing to me at all.

    Now, you are obviously NOT making the above argument, because, you are talking about independent citizens mounting their own investigation. This would not be necessary in the first place if the media were doing their job.

    Certainly. I emphasized at the very beginning that even under a non-conspiracy scenario, the MSM is often lazy, incompetent, and corrupt.

    The NYT published a full-page list of all the supposed Orlando Massacre victims, including their names, photos, and some bio details. Presumably, they mostly have Facebook pages, and someone could review those, along with the pages of their Facebook friends. I don’t much use Facebook myself, but we’re talking about 100 pages that would have to be faked, plus all their friend pages.

    How much would it cost some activist to buy a plane ticket to Orlando and stay at a cheap motel for a week or two? Based on the published names of the victims, he’d be able to track down some of their addresses, drop by, and see what their neighbors said about them. Presumably, lots of curiosity-seekers or journalists are already doing this sort of thing, so there wouldn’t be much reluctance to talk to one additional person, even “on camera.” If the addresses or the neighbors didn’t exist, that would make a great YouTube video.

    If no such YouTube debunkings exist, that’s either because not a single debunker in America cares enough to make the effort, even the ones who live a short drive from Orlando, or (more likely) because almost all the victims, addresses, and neighbors checked out and the results weren’t interesting enough to put on YouTube.

    Or consider those suspicious or fake-seeming victim interviews. Some of the massacres probably had 100 victims or victim-relatives, with massive wall-to-wall TV interviews of everyone connected with the massacre. Yet it looks like only 1 or 2 of the interviews were fake-seeming enough for debunkers to post on YouTube with sarcastic commentary. Doesn’t that tend to imply that the other 99% of the interviews were *not* fake-seeming, but came across as totally legitimate? Otherwise, why aren’t they also on YouTube? I’d be much more suspicious if e.g. the Orlando Massacre had 15 fake-seeming YouTube interviews of different victims rather than just that single fake-seeming aspiring actress.

    Either the debunkers are astonishingly lazy or the events really happened.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky

    Yet it looks like only 1 or 2 of the interviews were fake-seeming enough for debunkers to post on YouTube with sarcastic commentary. Doesn’t that tend to imply that the other 99% of the interviews were *not* fake-seeming, but came across as totally legitimate?
     
    Uh, no, I don't think so, frankly. If I want to make the case that Death Valley is a bloody hot place, I might take video from the very hottest days of the year to make my case, film an egg frying on the sidewalk, that kind of thing. That does not imply that the other days are cool precisely. They're bloody hot as well, just somewhat less hot, since, yes, I did choose the most horridly hot days to use as an example, okay.

    By the same token, if the people making these videos are focusing on the most blatantly fake interviews, that does not imply that whatever other interviews they did not use "come across as totally legitimate". They might come across as pretty fake as well, but not quite as freaking blatant as the ones people are focusing on.

    So, with the Bataclan theater event in Paris, I find the most blatantly fake interviews are Ginnie Watson, and this Emma Parkinson, the Australian girl who was allegedly shot in the ass. True, the people making such videos may have concentrated on those two, as I chose to link them because I thought they were pretty blatantly fake. You yourself conceded that the interviews I linked in the article were really blatantly phony, so that much is not under debate. Again, I don't see how that implies that the other interviews were "totally legitimate". I think you'd have to look at them one by one and judge for yourself.

    I’d be much more suspicious if e.g. the Orlando Massacre had 15 fake-seeming YouTube interviews of different victims rather than just that single fake-seeming aspiring actress.
     
    Well, the aspiring actress, Ginnie Watson, that's from the Paris thing last November. There are other blatant phonies in the Orlando one. For example, this Christine Leinonen woman.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yb9FuyjaRYs

    How much would it cost some activist to buy a plane ticket to Orlando and stay at a cheap motel for a week or two?
     
    Well, Orlando is fairly recent and I don't know if there aren't people who have done precisely that. In the case of the Sandy Hook shooting of three and a half years ago, consider this:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Hook_Elementary_School_shooting_conspiracy_theories#Harassment_by_conspiracy_theorists

    The claim on Wikipedia is that "conspiracy theorists" were harassing people there in Sandy Hook. Now, read between the lines and tell me what you think is really going on. It looks to me like this guy Matthew Mills, did exactly what you are proposing. He went to the place and tried to get to the bottom of things. And they seem to have constructed some stitch-up to prosecute him for "harassing" these "poor people".

    Now, the fact is that I can't drop what I'm doing and go off to Florida and investigate this. (And I'm certainly not doing that in the month of July!) But here is my best guess as to what would happen. It would be something like this Matthew Mills case. And then there would probably end up being a section on the Wikipedia page devoted to this event saying that the notorious "conspiracy theorist" Jonathan Revusky was on the scene harassing the grieving survivors and whatnot. Of course, the person being harassed would be me!

    Now, in that above thing about Sandy Hook, some of the people allegedly being harassed by "conspiracy theorists" include this Gene Rosen character and also the father of one of the girls allegedly killed, one Robbie Parker. Have you seen the famous Robbie Parker video of him getting into character? This is well worth watching:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKr-av9jVx8

    Note also that Paul Craig Roberts wrote an article about Sandy Hook that appeared on this site. http://www.unz.com/proberts/sandy-hook-puzzles/

    The first photo in this article is of the Parker family and it is obviously photoshopped. My sense of things is that there is a huge accumulation of evidence that there is fakery in these events.

    But, anyway, specifically in the Sandy Hook case, you have this guy Matthew Mills who did what you propose! And look what happened! It is reasonable to suspect that if I went to Orlando and started approaching people and tried to get answers, something similar would happen to me.

    Either the debunkers are astonishingly lazy or the events really happened.
     
    Well, I should make the point that the normal usage in the independent research community is to use the word "debunker" to the people who try to debunk "conspiracy theories".

    In any case, I honestly don't know whether you are deliberately playing devil's advocate here. To me, what you're saying borders on sheer silliness, this idea being that the independent researchers (i.e. conspiracists) are too "lazy". It's like saying they didn't jump high enough and not realizing that no matter how high you jump, they'll just raise the bar higher.

    I don't know whether you ever read the Peanuts comic strip, but you probably did, and surely you know that Lucy (the little ballbreaker in training) is never going to let Charlie Brown kick that football. The whole idea that the problem is that the people in the Truth community are too lazy and if they did some incremental amount of extra work, they would convince all the HIQIs out there -- that's really just not what's going on, Ron.

    The evidence of fakery in these synthetic events is overwhelming. At San Bernardino, they were running a "live shooter drill" on the very day that the actual thing happened. Not only that, but they were running them on a monthly basis there. What is the probability of an actual live shooter scenario happening organically on the same day in the same place as a drill of the event? How bloody willfully stupid does somebody have to be to believe that this is a coincidence?

    Take this other idiot that I replied to just yesterday. He tried to tell me that those black kids who allegedly had had their mother murdered a day before in Charleston looked happy because they were very religious and would be happy that their mother was up in heaven with God. How do you deal with such willful obtuseness? Just how obviously fake would something have to be for this guy to realize that it's fake? It's mind-boggling!

    No matter what evidence you put in front of these people, it's just never enough. The first two articles on this site have very much gone over this sort of thing, the tactics that are used to rig the game. Your concept is that if you really put together utterly irrefutable proof, that you'll win the day. If Charlie Brown just concentrates and tries a bit harder, he will manage to kick that football.... (NOT!)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  128. alexander says:
    @Ron Unz
    Actually, I should probably mention that I've been involved in a heated ongoing debate regarding "conspiracy theories" in one of Steve Sailer's threads:

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/how-many-millions-of-americans-were-internal-refugees-from-crime/#comment-1470293

    Perhaps, Mr. Unz,

    It would help if you clarify exactly what constitutes a “conspiracy theorist”.

    If , for example, a “conspiracy theorist” is one who believes that our government, on the whole, is totally corrupt, dishonest, and has done a thoroughly piss-poor job ,….. If it is one who believes that Big media is full of malarky, especially on the key narratives which drive our policies…..then wouldn’t that qualify nearly 300 million Americans as “conspiracy theorists”?

    Judging from the seven percent “approval” rating of congress, this would have to be the case.

    No?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  129. iffen says:
    @helena
    Or maybe we should just be more open about who is controlling what instead of running away from fact. Iffen, I don't need conspiracy theories to see what is happening in EU - who is going into and out of meetings and who is ushering them and who is leading the meeting. I just need to watch TV. Why are we pretending Jewish intellectuals are not hugely important in all these political processes? The role of GS in EU affairs is becoming comical. The most recent episode is the British Govt interviewing GS reps because P Green says he wouldn't have sold BHS for £1 if GS hadn't advised him to do so - but it's not documented. Apparently that is something to do with M&A? deals and may lead to changes in the rules for M&A deals.

    Surely the Jewish Question and the Negro Question shall follow me all the days of my life; and I will dwell in the house of political impotence forever.

    Helena,

    It is never too late to have a happy childhood and one never gets too old to run away.

    I am not running away or avoiding facts. People of Jewish descent play, and have played, prominent roles in finance, in politics, and in the arts and sciences for a long time; in all fields that require major intellectual gifts. The degree of influence of Jews (does it approach control?) is debatable. Also debatable is whether this is benevolent or malevolent. This debate necessarily includes questions about the Lobby/lobby and the relationships of our countries to Israel. Also debatable is whether there is a “Jewish POV” to which they all, or most adhere to, and is that POV detrimental to non-Jews. (Basically, are Jews interchangeable?) One has to decide to what extend being “Jewish” is a controlling factor in the various actions of the actors involved. Primarily, these decisions will be driven by one’s priors on the Jewish Question.

    a loss of instinct to protect territory.

    I don’t think that we lose instinct, we modify or seek to control it, to a greater or lesser effect, through our intellect. There is a significant number of sincere people who think that it is time to move past the nation state model.

    Read More
    • Replies: @helena
    I don't have a Negro Question but I'm not American. There appears to be something very different and quite dysfunctional about America and African Americans. I don't mean that as an insult. I am in no position to judge. I mean only that any dysfunction obviates function.

    "The degree of influence of Jews (does it approach control?) is debatable. "

    because it is hidden but not because it is impossible to ascertain or measure

    "Also debatable is whether this is benevolent or malevolent. "

    Always depends on who's side you're on

    "This debate necessarily includes questions about the Lobby/lobby and the relationships of our countries to Israel. "

    Yes it does but those discussions are suppressed.

    "Also debatable is whether there is a “Jewish POV” to which they all, or most adhere to, and is that POV detrimental to non-Jews. (Basically, are Jews interchangeable?) "

    No. The Jewish community is complex and multifacted. But there is a group identity that can override other 'outside' considerations. The extent to which Jewish people are motivated by that group identity also varies.

    Jewish people are no different than any other group except that people outside the group are not allowed to study them.
    , @Jacques Sheete

    I am not running away or avoiding facts. People of Jewish descent play, and have played, prominent roles in finance, in politics, and in the arts and sciences for a long time; in all fields that require major intellectual gifts.
     
    Major intellectual gifts? Gimmee a break; it doesn't take a whole lotta chutzpah to stand in for "intellectual gifts."

    What do some ancient tribal texts have to say about pride and other forms of BS?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  130. helena says:
    @iffen
    Surely the Jewish Question and the Negro Question shall follow me all the days of my life; and I will dwell in the house of political impotence forever.

    Helena,

    It is never too late to have a happy childhood and one never gets too old to run away.

    I am not running away or avoiding facts. People of Jewish descent play, and have played, prominent roles in finance, in politics, and in the arts and sciences for a long time; in all fields that require major intellectual gifts. The degree of influence of Jews (does it approach control?) is debatable. Also debatable is whether this is benevolent or malevolent. This debate necessarily includes questions about the Lobby/lobby and the relationships of our countries to Israel. Also debatable is whether there is a “Jewish POV” to which they all, or most adhere to, and is that POV detrimental to non-Jews. (Basically, are Jews interchangeable?) One has to decide to what extend being “Jewish” is a controlling factor in the various actions of the actors involved. Primarily, these decisions will be driven by one’s priors on the Jewish Question.

    a loss of instinct to protect territory.

    I don’t think that we lose instinct, we modify or seek to control it, to a greater or lesser effect, through our intellect. There is a significant number of sincere people who think that it is time to move past the nation state model.

    I don’t have a Negro Question but I’m not American. There appears to be something very different and quite dysfunctional about America and African Americans. I don’t mean that as an insult. I am in no position to judge. I mean only that any dysfunction obviates function.

    “The degree of influence of Jews (does it approach control?) is debatable. ”

    because it is hidden but not because it is impossible to ascertain or measure

    “Also debatable is whether this is benevolent or malevolent. ”

    Always depends on who’s side you’re on

    “This debate necessarily includes questions about the Lobby/lobby and the relationships of our countries to Israel. ”

    Yes it does but those discussions are suppressed.

    “Also debatable is whether there is a “Jewish POV” to which they all, or most adhere to, and is that POV detrimental to non-Jews. (Basically, are Jews interchangeable?) ”

    No. The Jewish community is complex and multifacted. But there is a group identity that can override other ‘outside’ considerations. The extent to which Jewish people are motivated by that group identity also varies.

    Jewish people are no different than any other group except that people outside the group are not allowed to study them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    because it is hidden but not because it is impossible to ascertain or measure

    Not hidden, Jewish actors are readily identifiable and identified in all fields.

    Always depends on who’s side you’re on

    From the side that I am on, that should be obvious and not have to be explicitly stated.

    Yes it does but those discussions are suppressed.

    Yes, but it is just one of many taboos.

    Jewish people are no different than any other group except that people outside the group are not allowed to study them.

    We do, right here in front of God and everybody.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  131. Priss Factor [AKA "Anonymny"] says: • Website
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  132. iffen says:
    @helena
    I don't have a Negro Question but I'm not American. There appears to be something very different and quite dysfunctional about America and African Americans. I don't mean that as an insult. I am in no position to judge. I mean only that any dysfunction obviates function.

    "The degree of influence of Jews (does it approach control?) is debatable. "

    because it is hidden but not because it is impossible to ascertain or measure

    "Also debatable is whether this is benevolent or malevolent. "

    Always depends on who's side you're on

    "This debate necessarily includes questions about the Lobby/lobby and the relationships of our countries to Israel. "

    Yes it does but those discussions are suppressed.

    "Also debatable is whether there is a “Jewish POV” to which they all, or most adhere to, and is that POV detrimental to non-Jews. (Basically, are Jews interchangeable?) "

    No. The Jewish community is complex and multifacted. But there is a group identity that can override other 'outside' considerations. The extent to which Jewish people are motivated by that group identity also varies.

    Jewish people are no different than any other group except that people outside the group are not allowed to study them.

    because it is hidden but not because it is impossible to ascertain or measure

    Not hidden, Jewish actors are readily identifiable and identified in all fields.

    Always depends on who’s side you’re on

    From the side that I am on, that should be obvious and not have to be explicitly stated.

    Yes it does but those discussions are suppressed.

    Yes, but it is just one of many taboos.

    Jewish people are no different than any other group except that people outside the group are not allowed to study them.

    We do, right here in front of God and everybody.

    Read More
    • Replies: @helena
    "We do, right here in front of God and everybody."

    Have you any idea how far along the bell curve of free speech we are? Or how far from the mainstream; the polity and proletariat alike?
    , @Rurik


    ... depends on who’s side you’re on
     
    From the side that I am on, that should be obvious and not have to be explicitly stated.

     

    you're correct about that, it is obvious ;)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  133. Either the debunkers are astonishingly lazy or the events really happened.

    Do you really mean that, Ron?

    There are lots of reasons why debunkers and their output have not surfaced; JR offered one reason (@ 124): MSM would ignore it or relegate it to the conspiracy theory file; NYTimes has already performed that exercise in a pre-emptive fashion, relying on the uber-credible Chip Berlet for validation.

    In addition, the debunking community is a very small group, a majority of skeptics have a more heightened instinct for self-preservation against the successful campaign of the PTB to punish narratives that contradict the ordained narrative. see ADL. see David Irving. see Messrs Faurrison and Zundel, and Ms. Helen Thomas, Ursula Haverbeck, and even Gertrude Stein whose name was struck from the White House roll of Jewish artists. Potential Debunkers, therefore, have been trained to self-censor, to go with the flow in order to protect their pursuit of happiness.

    Furthermore, have you thought about the practicalities of “staying in a cheap hotel for several weeks and interviewing neighbors and friends of the (listed) victims?”

    Who pays for that?
    What do you tell your boss, and your wife, and the kids:
    “You dad thinks there’s something suspicious about the Orlando event so I’m cashing in the 401-K and taking a leave-without-pay from my job as an insurance salesman to fly to Orlando and check out the victims . . . My boss is 100% behind me on this, and so is the CEO at corporate headquarters — they even ran it past the legal team that back-stops our extensive lobby group. Sweetie, you can probably fit into last year’s prom dress, and Junior, certainly you can do wind sprints on your own and don’t need to pay to attend football camp this year. Anyway, when I get back, I’ll have enough explosive material to write a book that will sell a million copies! “[see #124.]

    One other thing, from the other side of the prism: If it would likely take several weeks for a debunker to suss out background on victims, how is it that MSM was able to produce such a consistent narrative, assigning culpabilities and motives and tying together so many conveniently hot-button issues, within hours of the purported event having happened? By 7:00 am on Jun 13, John McCardle, a C Span moderator, informed C Span’s Washington Journal audience on “the killer, the weapons, the motivation, . . . and the names of 21 victims.”

    And why is that consistent narrative so chock full of holes and inconsistencies that the MSM failed to notice or report upon
    – Why no reporting on forensics, such as whose bullets killed more victims — police bullets or shooter bullets?
    –What else is not being reported to the public? For example, are you aware that The Pulse is less than two miles from the campus of Central Florida University, and that there are at least half-a-dozen former IDF members, now aggressive pro-Israel activists, on that college campus who have, in the past, harassed pro-Palestinian Christian and Islamic peace activists? How many former US military personnel are on college campuses in Israel and use that platform to harass Israeli advocates?

    Here’s an interesting, authoritative report (or polemic) on the Orlando event, by Andrew McCarthy, who qualifies himself as the prosecutor of the first World Trade Center bombing,

    McCarthy says (first minutes of vid):

    “After killing and wounding scores of people, he took hostages in a restroom. He began calling police and media outlets, began crafting social-media posts, all for the point of announcing what was already clear to the nightclub denizens who’d heard him screaming, “Allahu Akbar!”

    McCarthy has reached a conclusion: Mateen shot 49 people because he was a “Sharia supremacist.”

    Ya, that’s the direction all the evidence points, Mr. Prosecutor, yes indeedy.
    No other agendas going down in Orlando, and pay no attention to that off-hand remark by Gilad Erdan at a Jerusalem Post conference in New York City on May 22, 2016, that G4s, shooter Mateen’s employer, would “pay” for withdrawing from contracts in Israel in what was perceived to be sympathy with the BDS movement.

    Prosecuter McCarthy indulged a righteous rant about radical Islam, but failed to ask basic prosecutor-ish questions, like
    How many people were in the nightclub?
    How many people did Mateen kill before he took hostages in the bathroom?
    How many hostages were there in the bathroom?

    Check out this graphic of the nightclub and its bathrooms — https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/orlando-shooting/
    Does it look to you like 250 people would fit in the two bathroom spaces? If not, what were all the people who were not being held hostage in the bathrooms doing?

    Why did it take 3 hours for police to respond?

    Assume that the gunman maintained a position at the single passageway that gave entrance to the two bathrooms; that means that the entire rest of the building was at his back — no one was able to clock him while he was engaged in one of “several” phone calls to 911?

    Why did police choose to break into the walls of the bathroom rather than walk into the doors of the club?

    Crisis actors, if such did appear on the scene (and you have offered plausible explanations for the use of crisis actors by MSM, Mr. Unz), are actually a very small part of the overall credibility problem with the Orlando event (and numerous similar hinky occurrences).

    The overarching problem is that the American democratic project was designed to run on “a well-informed citizenry,” but since at least the time of Woodrow Wilson and the inception of mass propaganda as an official function within the US government networked to communications and entertainment systems, information purveyed to the American citizenry is produced by an “invisible elite,” as Edward Bernays described them in 1928.

    Thus, to avoid either “a tragedy or a farce,” it seems to me it is every citizen’s duty to be a “conspiracy theorist;” to seek to expose the “invisible elite” who manipulate information; and to reveal and disseminate by whatever samizdat means possible information that more accurately reflects reality.jer

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz

    Furthermore, have you thought about the practicalities of “staying in a cheap hotel for several weeks and interviewing neighbors and friends of the (listed) victims?”

    Who pays for that?
     
    Well, America has over 300M people, and my impression is that there are many hundreds if not thousands of energetic and committed "Truthers." Would it really be so difficult for a couple of them who are college students or grad students to just take a couple of weeks off and drive to Orlando to interview some of the shooting victims or their relatives? I'd bet that quite a number of activists even live in the greater Orlando vicinity.

    Anyway, something all the names of the dead were published in the NYT and the rest of the MSM. Couldn't activists spend a few hours tracking down their Facebook pages or other Internet details via Google and see whether or not they seemed to be fake? Offhand, producing those professional-looking videos showing an interview or two and claiming that the events are therefore fake must take much, much more time and effort than that.

    I think this is a "dog that didn't bark" argument, namely that some activists probably did exactly what I suggested, discovered that nearly all the victims seemed to check out, and therefore moved on to some other conspiracy to investigate.

    Personally, the only suspicious thing I see in the Orlando Massacre is that one gunman supposedly controlled 300 people in the nightclub for 3 hours and killed or wounded 100 of them without anyone jumping him. That seems a pretty tall order for one guy without any automatic weapons, but hardly supports a hoax, since if it were just a hoax they would have invented 3 guys with automatic weapons or something else more plausible.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  134. Ron Unz says:
    @SolontoCroesus

    Either the debunkers are astonishingly lazy or the events really happened.
     
    Do you really mean that, Ron?

    There are lots of reasons why debunkers and their output have not surfaced; JR offered one reason (@ 124): MSM would ignore it or relegate it to the conspiracy theory file; NYTimes has already performed that exercise in a pre-emptive fashion, relying on the uber-credible Chip Berlet for validation.

    In addition, the debunking community is a very small group, a majority of skeptics have a more heightened instinct for self-preservation against the successful campaign of the PTB to punish narratives that contradict the ordained narrative. see ADL. see David Irving. see Messrs Faurrison and Zundel, and Ms. Helen Thomas, Ursula Haverbeck, and even Gertrude Stein whose name was struck from the White House roll of Jewish artists. Potential Debunkers, therefore, have been trained to self-censor, to go with the flow in order to protect their pursuit of happiness.

    Furthermore, have you thought about the practicalities of "staying in a cheap hotel for several weeks and interviewing neighbors and friends of the (listed) victims?"

    Who pays for that?
    What do you tell your boss, and your wife, and the kids:
    "You dad thinks there's something suspicious about the Orlando event so I'm cashing in the 401-K and taking a leave-without-pay from my job as an insurance salesman to fly to Orlando and check out the victims . . . My boss is 100% behind me on this, and so is the CEO at corporate headquarters -- they even ran it past the legal team that back-stops our extensive lobby group. Sweetie, you can probably fit into last year's prom dress, and Junior, certainly you can do wind sprints on your own and don't need to pay to attend football camp this year. Anyway, when I get back, I'll have enough explosive material to write a book that will sell a million copies! "[see #124.]

    One other thing, from the other side of the prism: If it would likely take several weeks for a debunker to suss out background on victims, how is it that MSM was able to produce such a consistent narrative, assigning culpabilities and motives and tying together so many conveniently hot-button issues, within hours of the purported event having happened? By 7:00 am on Jun 13, John McCardle, a C Span moderator, informed C Span's Washington Journal audience on "the killer, the weapons, the motivation, . . . and the names of 21 victims."

    And why is that consistent narrative so chock full of holes and inconsistencies that the MSM failed to notice or report upon
    -- Why no reporting on forensics, such as whose bullets killed more victims -- police bullets or shooter bullets?
    --What else is not being reported to the public? For example, are you aware that The Pulse is less than two miles from the campus of Central Florida University, and that there are at least half-a-dozen former IDF members, now aggressive pro-Israel activists, on that college campus who have, in the past, harassed pro-Palestinian Christian and Islamic peace activists? How many former US military personnel are on college campuses in Israel and use that platform to harass Israeli advocates?

    Here's an interesting, authoritative report (or polemic) on the Orlando event, by Andrew McCarthy, who qualifies himself as the prosecutor of the first World Trade Center bombing,

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dP9q2UCrhF4

    McCarthy says (first minutes of vid):

    "After killing and wounding scores of people, he took hostages in a restroom. He began calling police and media outlets, began crafting social-media posts, all for the point of announcing what was already clear to the nightclub denizens who'd heard him screaming, "Allahu Akbar!"
     
    McCarthy has reached a conclusion: Mateen shot 49 people because he was a "Sharia supremacist."

    Ya, that's the direction all the evidence points, Mr. Prosecutor, yes indeedy.
    No other agendas going down in Orlando, and pay no attention to that off-hand remark by Gilad Erdan at a Jerusalem Post conference in New York City on May 22, 2016, that G4s, shooter Mateen's employer, would "pay" for withdrawing from contracts in Israel in what was perceived to be sympathy with the BDS movement. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1kVfi1ksfM

    Prosecuter McCarthy indulged a righteous rant about radical Islam, but failed to ask basic prosecutor-ish questions, like
    How many people were in the nightclub?
    How many people did Mateen kill before he took hostages in the bathroom?
    How many hostages were there in the bathroom?

    Check out this graphic of the nightclub and its bathrooms -- https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/orlando-shooting/
    Does it look to you like 250 people would fit in the two bathroom spaces? If not, what were all the people who were not being held hostage in the bathrooms doing?

    Why did it take 3 hours for police to respond?

    Assume that the gunman maintained a position at the single passageway that gave entrance to the two bathrooms; that means that the entire rest of the building was at his back -- no one was able to clock him while he was engaged in one of "several" phone calls to 911?

    Why did police choose to break into the walls of the bathroom rather than walk into the doors of the club?

    Crisis actors, if such did appear on the scene (and you have offered plausible explanations for the use of crisis actors by MSM, Mr. Unz), are actually a very small part of the overall credibility problem with the Orlando event (and numerous similar hinky occurrences).

    The overarching problem is that the American democratic project was designed to run on "a well-informed citizenry," but since at least the time of Woodrow Wilson and the inception of mass propaganda as an official function within the US government networked to communications and entertainment systems, information purveyed to the American citizenry is produced by an "invisible elite," as Edward Bernays described them in 1928.

    Thus, to avoid either "a tragedy or a farce," it seems to me it is every citizen's duty to be a "conspiracy theorist;" to seek to expose the "invisible elite" who manipulate information; and to reveal and disseminate by whatever samizdat means possible information that more accurately reflects reality.jer

    Furthermore, have you thought about the practicalities of “staying in a cheap hotel for several weeks and interviewing neighbors and friends of the (listed) victims?”

    Who pays for that?

    Well, America has over 300M people, and my impression is that there are many hundreds if not thousands of energetic and committed “Truthers.” Would it really be so difficult for a couple of them who are college students or grad students to just take a couple of weeks off and drive to Orlando to interview some of the shooting victims or their relatives? I’d bet that quite a number of activists even live in the greater Orlando vicinity.

    Anyway, something all the names of the dead were published in the NYT and the rest of the MSM. Couldn’t activists spend a few hours tracking down their Facebook pages or other Internet details via Google and see whether or not they seemed to be fake? Offhand, producing those professional-looking videos showing an interview or two and claiming that the events are therefore fake must take much, much more time and effort than that.

    I think this is a “dog that didn’t bark” argument, namely that some activists probably did exactly what I suggested, discovered that nearly all the victims seemed to check out, and therefore moved on to some other conspiracy to investigate.

    Personally, the only suspicious thing I see in the Orlando Massacre is that one gunman supposedly controlled 300 people in the nightclub for 3 hours and killed or wounded 100 of them without anyone jumping him. That seems a pretty tall order for one guy without any automatic weapons, but hardly supports a hoax, since if it were just a hoax they would have invented 3 guys with automatic weapons or something else more plausible.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  135. L.K says:
    @Ron Unz
    Well, I'm no expert on these sorts of "conspiracy issues" but those video interviews seem *exceptionally* fake to me.

    On the other hand, given the large body-counts, it's difficult to believe the massacres didn't actually take place. After all, could't a group of debunkers just put together a little money and pay someone to go out, track down, and interview the wounded or the relatives of the dead? And if such investigators found they didn't exist, that would make an even more shocking YouTube video, and one very easily for other people to verify. Aren't the names of most of the victims given in the newspapers?

    As a possible solution to this serious dilemma, might it be possible that a few of the most fake-sounding "victims" are just opportunists who pretended to be there in order to get interviewed on TV? People will make up all sorts of things to get on TV, especially if they're struggling actresses. Also, I have the impression that after these sorts of high-profile events, eager TV stations will pay serious money to middlemen in order to quickly line up interviews with the victims. So maybe some of these dishonest middlemen will hire a few "crisis actors" and palm them off on gullible media outlets (This was roughly the plot of that film Nightcrawler).

    Just because the MSM is sometimes totally corrupt, dishonest, or incompetent doesn't necessarily mean that the events it described didn't actually happen...

    Mr.Unz wrote:

    “On the other hand, given the large body-counts, it’s difficult to believe the massacres didn’t actually take place. After all, could’t a group of debunkers just put together a little money and pay someone to go out, track down, and interview the wounded or the relatives of the dead? And if such investigators found they didn’t exist, that would make an even more shocking YouTube video, and one very easily for other people to verify. Aren’t the names of most of the victims given in the newspapers?”

    I don’t know about Orlando, but some of what you are suggesting seems to have been done by independent investigators in regards to some other incidents, such as Sandy Hook and Boston.
    Are you familiar with James F. Tracy, a former tenured Professor of Journalism and Media Studies at Florida Atlantic University in Boca Raton from 2002 to 2015?
    After investigating some of these events he got fired from FAU in 2016.

    Re your “Aren’t the names of most of the victims given in the newspapers?” question, things are not always as simple as they seem, take a look at this article by Tracy re the body count and types of injuries suffered in the Boston Marathon bombing:
    “The Boston Marathon Bombing’s Inflated Injury Tallies”

    https://memoryholeblog.com/2015/04/15/the-boston-marathon-bombings-inflated-injury-tallies-2/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz

    Are you familiar with James F. Tracy, a former tenured Professor of Journalism and Media Studies at Florida Atlantic University in Boca Raton from 2002 to 2015?
    After investigating some of these events he got fired from FAU in 2016.
     
    Yes, I'd read something about it in the NYT, and found his firing absolutely shocking.

    Clicking on your link, I think his skepticism about the true number of victims is very warranted, and that all people later coming forward and claiming mild "hearing loss" from the explosion are just being used to pad the numbers. Given all the explosions on a regular battlefield, combat troops would probably always suffer 100% casualties if mild hearing loss were included.

    So it wouldn't surprise me at all if the "true" number of honest-to-goodness injuries were more like the 25-30 that he claims. The MSM loves to exaggerate.

    Also, I know there have been various strong suspicions floating around on the Internet regarding the Boston Bombing and those supposedly guilty Chechen brothers, and it wouldn't totally surprise me if there were a significant false-flag/government element to the whole event. Didn't that Gessen woman repeatedly claim something like that in the MSM?

    But that's *very* different from suggesting that the bombing never actually occurred. I'd think that "hoax" conspiracies are vastly less plausible than false-flag conspiracies....
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  136. Ron Unz says:
    @L.K
    Mr.Unz wrote:

    "On the other hand, given the large body-counts, it’s difficult to believe the massacres didn’t actually take place. After all, could’t a group of debunkers just put together a little money and pay someone to go out, track down, and interview the wounded or the relatives of the dead? And if such investigators found they didn’t exist, that would make an even more shocking YouTube video, and one very easily for other people to verify. Aren’t the names of most of the victims given in the newspapers?"
     
    I don't know about Orlando, but some of what you are suggesting seems to have been done by independent investigators in regards to some other incidents, such as Sandy Hook and Boston.
    Are you familiar with James F. Tracy, a former tenured Professor of Journalism and Media Studies at Florida Atlantic University in Boca Raton from 2002 to 2015?
    After investigating some of these events he got fired from FAU in 2016.

    Re your "Aren’t the names of most of the victims given in the newspapers?" question, things are not always as simple as they seem, take a look at this article by Tracy re the body count and types of injuries suffered in the Boston Marathon bombing:
    "The Boston Marathon Bombing’s Inflated Injury Tallies"
    https://memoryholeblog.com/2015/04/15/the-boston-marathon-bombings-inflated-injury-tallies-2/

    Are you familiar with James F. Tracy, a former tenured Professor of Journalism and Media Studies at Florida Atlantic University in Boca Raton from 2002 to 2015?
    After investigating some of these events he got fired from FAU in 2016.

    Yes, I’d read something about it in the NYT, and found his firing absolutely shocking.

    Clicking on your link, I think his skepticism about the true number of victims is very warranted, and that all people later coming forward and claiming mild “hearing loss” from the explosion are just being used to pad the numbers. Given all the explosions on a regular battlefield, combat troops would probably always suffer 100% casualties if mild hearing loss were included.

    So it wouldn’t surprise me at all if the “true” number of honest-to-goodness injuries were more like the 25-30 that he claims. The MSM loves to exaggerate.

    Also, I know there have been various strong suspicions floating around on the Internet regarding the Boston Bombing and those supposedly guilty Chechen brothers, and it wouldn’t totally surprise me if there were a significant false-flag/government element to the whole event. Didn’t that Gessen woman repeatedly claim something like that in the MSM?

    But that’s *very* different from suggesting that the bombing never actually occurred. I’d think that “hoax” conspiracies are vastly less plausible than false-flag conspiracies….

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky

    I’d think that “hoax” conspiracies are vastly less plausible than false-flag conspiracies….
     
    A year ago, I probably would have agreed with you completely on that. Now I'm not sure at all.

    Just to focus this a bit, after my first article on the Matrix and Roger Rabbit, a pretty in-depth discussion of 9/11 (and false flags generally) developed. Rurik mentioned Betty Ong, who was this Chinese ethnic stewardess from San Francisco on one of the flights who made some phone call (allegedly) that established a lot of the official story.

    I hadn't given much thought to Betty Ong... well, ever... And then I looked at this and I wrote this comment:

    http://www.unz.com/article/battling-the-matrix-and-freeing-oneself-from-the-roger-rabbit-mental-world/#comment-1355862

    Again, I am reluctant to say this because it gives people fuel to call me a nut maybe, but I'd say I'm about 80% certain that Betty Ong never existed. A synthetic person created for this narrative. I could be wrong. Look at the biography page that there is on the site of the "Betty Ong foundation".

    http://www.bettyong.org/BettyOng.htm

    This text would have been written by Betty's sister, Cathie Ong-Herrera, who runs the Betty Ong Foundation. Do you think that this text was written by someone who knew this person, much less a sibling? (Assuming the person is real?) This Betty Ong is a complete cipher. Never married, no kids, despite being fairly attractive (airline stewardesses usually are) and no hobbies, just she loves children and old people, liked to take walks... blah blah.

    Now, maybe I'm crazy and it's easy to verify that this is a real person. Has anybody ever attempted to do so? Of course, why would anybody in the 9/11 Truth community bother to check if Betty Ong is a real person? Why focus on something so minor when you've got building 7 and so forth?

    My point is that I get the strong feeling that Betty Ong is a fake person that they constructed. The foundation could be a conduit for paying off phony family members for maintaining the pretense.

    Or maybe I'm nuts. I dunno. But if you look at this and also suspect that Betty Ong is a synthetic person, i.e. they could construct one synthetic victim, then... if you can create one, you can create ten or fifty in principle. It's just more work.

    If the people behind these operations discovered that they could get away with making up fake people, then maybe they would just do that. Not that they have any problems killing real people, mind you, but if you can just invent fake people then...

    Oh, and by the way, as for facebook and having friends on facebook, and all that jazz, I get friend requests frequently from people who I don't know and, well, normally, if I don't have a clue who this person is, I just ignore it, but I'm sure there are people who just automatically accept any friend request. There are people who take pride in having a humongous number of "friends" on facebook. You know, you create a fake profile on facebook and start requesting that people be your friend and.... Some fake account, Joe Blow, is your "friend" on facebook, and whoever controls the account gets notification that it's your birthday today and they write "Happy Birthday, Ron" on your page and, you write back "Thanks" even though you don't know who that is, and anybody would think that you really are friends with that "person"....

    Of course, there could be a hybrid operation. You claim 50 people died and you really kill, say, 5 real people, and then the other 45 are phony.

    Well, I don't know for sure, just sharing my thoughts. But look at Betty Ong and see if you can convince yourself this is (was) a real flesh and blood person.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  137. helena says:
    @iffen
    because it is hidden but not because it is impossible to ascertain or measure

    Not hidden, Jewish actors are readily identifiable and identified in all fields.

    Always depends on who’s side you’re on

    From the side that I am on, that should be obvious and not have to be explicitly stated.

    Yes it does but those discussions are suppressed.

    Yes, but it is just one of many taboos.

    Jewish people are no different than any other group except that people outside the group are not allowed to study them.

    We do, right here in front of God and everybody.

    “We do, right here in front of God and everybody.”

    Have you any idea how far along the bell curve of free speech we are? Or how far from the mainstream; the polity and proletariat alike?

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    I think we are out there where it all curves back into itself. I can see smart crazy people from here.

    Reducing it, do you want to replace the MSM or do you want the MSM to change?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  138. @Ron Unz

    Now, you are obviously NOT making the above argument, because, you are talking about independent citizens mounting their own investigation. This would not be necessary in the first place if the media were doing their job.
     
    Certainly. I emphasized at the very beginning that even under a non-conspiracy scenario, the MSM is often lazy, incompetent, and corrupt.

    The NYT published a full-page list of all the supposed Orlando Massacre victims, including their names, photos, and some bio details. Presumably, they mostly have Facebook pages, and someone could review those, along with the pages of their Facebook friends. I don't much use Facebook myself, but we're talking about 100 pages that would have to be faked, plus all their friend pages.

    How much would it cost some activist to buy a plane ticket to Orlando and stay at a cheap motel for a week or two? Based on the published names of the victims, he'd be able to track down some of their addresses, drop by, and see what their neighbors said about them. Presumably, lots of curiosity-seekers or journalists are already doing this sort of thing, so there wouldn't be much reluctance to talk to one additional person, even "on camera." If the addresses or the neighbors didn't exist, that would make a great YouTube video.

    If no such YouTube debunkings exist, that's either because not a single debunker in America cares enough to make the effort, even the ones who live a short drive from Orlando, or (more likely) because almost all the victims, addresses, and neighbors checked out and the results weren't interesting enough to put on YouTube.

    Or consider those suspicious or fake-seeming victim interviews. Some of the massacres probably had 100 victims or victim-relatives, with massive wall-to-wall TV interviews of everyone connected with the massacre. Yet it looks like only 1 or 2 of the interviews were fake-seeming enough for debunkers to post on YouTube with sarcastic commentary. Doesn't that tend to imply that the other 99% of the interviews were *not* fake-seeming, but came across as totally legitimate? Otherwise, why aren't they also on YouTube? I'd be much more suspicious if e.g. the Orlando Massacre had 15 fake-seeming YouTube interviews of different victims rather than just that single fake-seeming aspiring actress.

    Either the debunkers are astonishingly lazy or the events really happened.

    Yet it looks like only 1 or 2 of the interviews were fake-seeming enough for debunkers to post on YouTube with sarcastic commentary. Doesn’t that tend to imply that the other 99% of the interviews were *not* fake-seeming, but came across as totally legitimate?

    Uh, no, I don’t think so, frankly. If I want to make the case that Death Valley is a bloody hot place, I might take video from the very hottest days of the year to make my case, film an egg frying on the sidewalk, that kind of thing. That does not imply that the other days are cool precisely. They’re bloody hot as well, just somewhat less hot, since, yes, I did choose the most horridly hot days to use as an example, okay.

    By the same token, if the people making these videos are focusing on the most blatantly fake interviews, that does not imply that whatever other interviews they did not use “come across as totally legitimate”. They might come across as pretty fake as well, but not quite as freaking blatant as the ones people are focusing on.

    So, with the Bataclan theater event in Paris, I find the most blatantly fake interviews are Ginnie Watson, and this Emma Parkinson, the Australian girl who was allegedly shot in the ass. True, the people making such videos may have concentrated on those two, as I chose to link them because I thought they were pretty blatantly fake. You yourself conceded that the interviews I linked in the article were really blatantly phony, so that much is not under debate. Again, I don’t see how that implies that the other interviews were “totally legitimate”. I think you’d have to look at them one by one and judge for yourself.

    I’d be much more suspicious if e.g. the Orlando Massacre had 15 fake-seeming YouTube interviews of different victims rather than just that single fake-seeming aspiring actress.

    Well, the aspiring actress, Ginnie Watson, that’s from the Paris thing last November. There are other blatant phonies in the Orlando one. For example, this Christine Leinonen woman.

    How much would it cost some activist to buy a plane ticket to Orlando and stay at a cheap motel for a week or two?

    Well, Orlando is fairly recent and I don’t know if there aren’t people who have done precisely that. In the case of the Sandy Hook shooting of three and a half years ago, consider this:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Hook_Elementary_School_shooting_conspiracy_theories#Harassment_by_conspiracy_theorists

    The claim on Wikipedia is that “conspiracy theorists” were harassing people there in Sandy Hook. Now, read between the lines and tell me what you think is really going on. It looks to me like this guy Matthew Mills, did exactly what you are proposing. He went to the place and tried to get to the bottom of things. And they seem to have constructed some stitch-up to prosecute him for “harassing” these “poor people”.

    Now, the fact is that I can’t drop what I’m doing and go off to Florida and investigate this. (And I’m certainly not doing that in the month of July!) But here is my best guess as to what would happen. It would be something like this Matthew Mills case. And then there would probably end up being a section on the Wikipedia page devoted to this event saying that the notorious “conspiracy theorist” Jonathan Revusky was on the scene harassing the grieving survivors and whatnot. Of course, the person being harassed would be me!

    Now, in that above thing about Sandy Hook, some of the people allegedly being harassed by “conspiracy theorists” include this Gene Rosen character and also the father of one of the girls allegedly killed, one Robbie Parker. Have you seen the famous Robbie Parker video of him getting into character? This is well worth watching:

    Note also that Paul Craig Roberts wrote an article about Sandy Hook that appeared on this site. http://www.unz.com/proberts/sandy-hook-puzzles/

    The first photo in this article is of the Parker family and it is obviously photoshopped. My sense of things is that there is a huge accumulation of evidence that there is fakery in these events.

    But, anyway, specifically in the Sandy Hook case, you have this guy Matthew Mills who did what you propose! And look what happened! It is reasonable to suspect that if I went to Orlando and started approaching people and tried to get answers, something similar would happen to me.

    Either the debunkers are astonishingly lazy or the events really happened.

    Well, I should make the point that the normal usage in the independent research community is to use the word “debunker” to the people who try to debunk “conspiracy theories”.

    In any case, I honestly don’t know whether you are deliberately playing devil’s advocate here. To me, what you’re saying borders on sheer silliness, this idea being that the independent researchers (i.e. conspiracists) are too “lazy”. It’s like saying they didn’t jump high enough and not realizing that no matter how high you jump, they’ll just raise the bar higher.

    I don’t know whether you ever read the Peanuts comic strip, but you probably did, and surely you know that Lucy (the little ballbreaker in training) is never going to let Charlie Brown kick that football. The whole idea that the problem is that the people in the Truth community are too lazy and if they did some incremental amount of extra work, they would convince all the HIQIs out there — that’s really just not what’s going on, Ron.

    The evidence of fakery in these synthetic events is overwhelming. At San Bernardino, they were running a “live shooter drill” on the very day that the actual thing happened. Not only that, but they were running them on a monthly basis there. What is the probability of an actual live shooter scenario happening organically on the same day in the same place as a drill of the event? How bloody willfully stupid does somebody have to be to believe that this is a coincidence?

    Take this other idiot that I replied to just yesterday. He tried to tell me that those black kids who allegedly had had their mother murdered a day before in Charleston looked happy because they were very religious and would be happy that their mother was up in heaven with God. How do you deal with such willful obtuseness? Just how obviously fake would something have to be for this guy to realize that it’s fake? It’s mind-boggling!

    No matter what evidence you put in front of these people, it’s just never enough. The first two articles on this site have very much gone over this sort of thing, the tactics that are used to rig the game. Your concept is that if you really put together utterly irrefutable proof, that you’ll win the day. If Charlie Brown just concentrates and tries a bit harder, he will manage to kick that football…. (NOT!)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz

    Uh, no, I don’t think so, frankly. If I want to make the case that Death Valley is a bloody hot place, I might take video from the very hottest days of the year to make my case, film an egg frying on the sidewalk, that kind of thing.
     
    But here's the thing. In any situation, it's always easy to cherry-pick one or two very suspicious elements, and use those to make the entire situation seem much more suspicious than it really is.

    Suppose there are 100 witnesses to an attack interviewed on TV, and it turns out that 2 of them are actually hoaxers, who falsely claimed to have been witnesses for TV-exposure or money or mental illness or whatever, just like the groupies who used to follow around rock-stars. Ridiculing the testimony of just those two fake witnesses doesn't invalidate the event in question. But if 15-20 of the interviewed witnesses seemed like fakes, that would be much more serious. It's all a question of percentages, and to a very huge extent the burden of proof is on the people who claim the event never took place and all 100+ journalists going to Orlando and claiming to interview the hundreds of victims and other witnesses are lying.

    Again, the names of the 50 dead were in the NYT. Couldn't some activist just look at their Facebook pages or Google their names and try to find some plausible evidence that they never really existed or that their paper-trail is fake? If somebody has a somewhat unusual name, it should be easy to find massive evidence of their existence and activities on the web, much of it time-dated to before the attack.
    , @Cyrano

    Uh, no, I don’t think so, frankly. If I want to make the case that Death Valley is a bloody hot place, I might take video from the very hottest days of the year to make my case, film an egg frying on the sidewalk, that kind of thing. That does not imply that the other days are cool precisely. They’re bloody hot as well, just somewhat less hot, since, yes, I did choose the most horridly hot days to use as an example, okay.
     
    That’s just brilliant. Comparing the predictability of weather patterns based on observation of 2 days in a static weather zone to human behavior and likelihood that you can predict the veracity of replies of a large group of people based on statements from 2.

    According to your logic when parents have a child, they should let it live for 2 days and then shoot it. Because after letting it sample life for that amount of time, why let it go through the same drag over and over again – 2 days is enough to find out what life is all about.

    His/her life might prove more interesting than drooling and crying and sleeping like during the first 2 days, but then again it might not. Interviewing 2 people out of a 100 doesn’t prove anything one way or another. Interviewing all 100 of them might prove something but you still have to take into account their personalities. Your whole argument is bogus.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  139. Ron Unz says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    Yet it looks like only 1 or 2 of the interviews were fake-seeming enough for debunkers to post on YouTube with sarcastic commentary. Doesn’t that tend to imply that the other 99% of the interviews were *not* fake-seeming, but came across as totally legitimate?
     
    Uh, no, I don't think so, frankly. If I want to make the case that Death Valley is a bloody hot place, I might take video from the very hottest days of the year to make my case, film an egg frying on the sidewalk, that kind of thing. That does not imply that the other days are cool precisely. They're bloody hot as well, just somewhat less hot, since, yes, I did choose the most horridly hot days to use as an example, okay.

    By the same token, if the people making these videos are focusing on the most blatantly fake interviews, that does not imply that whatever other interviews they did not use "come across as totally legitimate". They might come across as pretty fake as well, but not quite as freaking blatant as the ones people are focusing on.

    So, with the Bataclan theater event in Paris, I find the most blatantly fake interviews are Ginnie Watson, and this Emma Parkinson, the Australian girl who was allegedly shot in the ass. True, the people making such videos may have concentrated on those two, as I chose to link them because I thought they were pretty blatantly fake. You yourself conceded that the interviews I linked in the article were really blatantly phony, so that much is not under debate. Again, I don't see how that implies that the other interviews were "totally legitimate". I think you'd have to look at them one by one and judge for yourself.

    I’d be much more suspicious if e.g. the Orlando Massacre had 15 fake-seeming YouTube interviews of different victims rather than just that single fake-seeming aspiring actress.
     
    Well, the aspiring actress, Ginnie Watson, that's from the Paris thing last November. There are other blatant phonies in the Orlando one. For example, this Christine Leinonen woman.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yb9FuyjaRYs

    How much would it cost some activist to buy a plane ticket to Orlando and stay at a cheap motel for a week or two?
     
    Well, Orlando is fairly recent and I don't know if there aren't people who have done precisely that. In the case of the Sandy Hook shooting of three and a half years ago, consider this:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Hook_Elementary_School_shooting_conspiracy_theories#Harassment_by_conspiracy_theorists

    The claim on Wikipedia is that "conspiracy theorists" were harassing people there in Sandy Hook. Now, read between the lines and tell me what you think is really going on. It looks to me like this guy Matthew Mills, did exactly what you are proposing. He went to the place and tried to get to the bottom of things. And they seem to have constructed some stitch-up to prosecute him for "harassing" these "poor people".

    Now, the fact is that I can't drop what I'm doing and go off to Florida and investigate this. (And I'm certainly not doing that in the month of July!) But here is my best guess as to what would happen. It would be something like this Matthew Mills case. And then there would probably end up being a section on the Wikipedia page devoted to this event saying that the notorious "conspiracy theorist" Jonathan Revusky was on the scene harassing the grieving survivors and whatnot. Of course, the person being harassed would be me!

    Now, in that above thing about Sandy Hook, some of the people allegedly being harassed by "conspiracy theorists" include this Gene Rosen character and also the father of one of the girls allegedly killed, one Robbie Parker. Have you seen the famous Robbie Parker video of him getting into character? This is well worth watching:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKr-av9jVx8

    Note also that Paul Craig Roberts wrote an article about Sandy Hook that appeared on this site. http://www.unz.com/proberts/sandy-hook-puzzles/

    The first photo in this article is of the Parker family and it is obviously photoshopped. My sense of things is that there is a huge accumulation of evidence that there is fakery in these events.

    But, anyway, specifically in the Sandy Hook case, you have this guy Matthew Mills who did what you propose! And look what happened! It is reasonable to suspect that if I went to Orlando and started approaching people and tried to get answers, something similar would happen to me.

    Either the debunkers are astonishingly lazy or the events really happened.
     
    Well, I should make the point that the normal usage in the independent research community is to use the word "debunker" to the people who try to debunk "conspiracy theories".

    In any case, I honestly don't know whether you are deliberately playing devil's advocate here. To me, what you're saying borders on sheer silliness, this idea being that the independent researchers (i.e. conspiracists) are too "lazy". It's like saying they didn't jump high enough and not realizing that no matter how high you jump, they'll just raise the bar higher.

    I don't know whether you ever read the Peanuts comic strip, but you probably did, and surely you know that Lucy (the little ballbreaker in training) is never going to let Charlie Brown kick that football. The whole idea that the problem is that the people in the Truth community are too lazy and if they did some incremental amount of extra work, they would convince all the HIQIs out there -- that's really just not what's going on, Ron.

    The evidence of fakery in these synthetic events is overwhelming. At San Bernardino, they were running a "live shooter drill" on the very day that the actual thing happened. Not only that, but they were running them on a monthly basis there. What is the probability of an actual live shooter scenario happening organically on the same day in the same place as a drill of the event? How bloody willfully stupid does somebody have to be to believe that this is a coincidence?

    Take this other idiot that I replied to just yesterday. He tried to tell me that those black kids who allegedly had had their mother murdered a day before in Charleston looked happy because they were very religious and would be happy that their mother was up in heaven with God. How do you deal with such willful obtuseness? Just how obviously fake would something have to be for this guy to realize that it's fake? It's mind-boggling!

    No matter what evidence you put in front of these people, it's just never enough. The first two articles on this site have very much gone over this sort of thing, the tactics that are used to rig the game. Your concept is that if you really put together utterly irrefutable proof, that you'll win the day. If Charlie Brown just concentrates and tries a bit harder, he will manage to kick that football.... (NOT!)

    Uh, no, I don’t think so, frankly. If I want to make the case that Death Valley is a bloody hot place, I might take video from the very hottest days of the year to make my case, film an egg frying on the sidewalk, that kind of thing.

    But here’s the thing. In any situation, it’s always easy to cherry-pick one or two very suspicious elements, and use those to make the entire situation seem much more suspicious than it really is.

    Suppose there are 100 witnesses to an attack interviewed on TV, and it turns out that 2 of them are actually hoaxers, who falsely claimed to have been witnesses for TV-exposure or money or mental illness or whatever, just like the groupies who used to follow around rock-stars. Ridiculing the testimony of just those two fake witnesses doesn’t invalidate the event in question. But if 15-20 of the interviewed witnesses seemed like fakes, that would be much more serious. It’s all a question of percentages, and to a very huge extent the burden of proof is on the people who claim the event never took place and all 100+ journalists going to Orlando and claiming to interview the hundreds of victims and other witnesses are lying.

    Again, the names of the 50 dead were in the NYT. Couldn’t some activist just look at their Facebook pages or Google their names and try to find some plausible evidence that they never really existed or that their paper-trail is fake? If somebody has a somewhat unusual name, it should be easy to find massive evidence of their existence and activities on the web, much of it time-dated to before the attack.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sam Shama
    [ It’s all a question of percentages, and to a very huge extent the burden of proof is on the people who claim the event never took place ]

    This is precisely the point that I, among others [ Geokat, Iffen etc] have attempted to get across to Jonathan Revusky, only to be pilloried with ad hominem and shouting.
    , @Jonathan Revusky

    Suppose there are 100 witnesses to an attack interviewed on TV, and it turns out that 2 of them are actually hoaxers, who falsely claimed to have been witnesses for TV-exposure or money or mental illness or whatever,
     
    Okay, maybe we're converging on an actual testable, empirical question here.

    In my article, I present the idea that there are two basic kinds of event, organic and synthetic. For example, suppose that tomorrow, there is a fairly major earthquake in California, causing a number of deaths and, probably leaving a significant number of people homeless. We assume that nobody could have known this was going to happen, so the event definitely did not occur to serve any synthetic narrative. It's indisputably an organic event.

    In your paradigm, the reason you have these hoaxers is just that people want TV exposure or they're fucked up in the head or whatever. So you should observe these sorts of hoaxers when there is an organic event, like that earthquake.

    My view is that you will pretty much only observe the hoaxers in a synthetic event. The synthetic event occurs to bolster some synthetic narrative, most frequently (at this point in time) the "Radical Islam" synthetic narrative. The purpose of the fake witness is to establish in the public mind the synthetic narrative. In your paradigm, these hoaxers are simply independent nutcases trying to get some publicity. in my paradigm, they're part of the show and, as a general rule, will only be observed in a synthetic event.

    It's like the parable in my article. You and I go to the theater and the hecklers start up. You say the hecklers are real hecklers. I say they're working for the show. One of us is right... one of us is wrong...

    But you see my point, right? The real test is whether the hoaxers are also present in events that we can agree for sure are organic in nature. So this is converging on an empirically resolvable question, no? How often is there an organic event like the earthquake or a multi-car collision on the interstate and you see obvious fakes getting interviewed on TV? This is observable. Can we find fakes equivalent to Ginnie Watson or those black kids in Charleston with events that are indisputably organic in nature?

    I really suspect not.

    Ridiculing the testimony of just those two fake witnesses doesn’t invalidate the event in question.
     
    If these kinds of obviously fake witnesses never show up in events that are clearly organic, yet they are very typical in events that seem synthetic, i.e. that serve a synthetic narrative, like "Radical Islamic terrorism", then I think certain conclusions can indeed be drawn.


    all 100+ journalists going to Orlando and claiming to interview the hundreds of victims and other witnesses are lying.
     
    Well, they may just be lying by omission mostly. You think the BBC interviewer talking to those black kids who supposedly lost their momma 24 hours earlier doesn't suspect something? Well, probably. Cripes, surely... But she knows that if she expresses any doubt about this, her career is over. My sense of things is that, to believe that these people in the MSM are going to expose synthetic events is utterly naive. People play their role. John Wayne is not going to admit that the frontier town he is riding into is just a Hollywood set. And these actors playing journalists on TV are not going to be any different.

    I mean, have you ever watched any of those ISIS beheading videos? I mean, they're so totally fake. The entire MSM pretends they're real. It's beyond the issue of just ordinary lying finally. It's like the John Wayne example, finally. This is the logic and structure of the situation.

    But, again, maybe we have an empirical question. Do we observe these fakers in the news coverage of events that are indisputably organic in nature?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  140. Art says:

    It is amazing how Orlando is off the mainstream media radar. Could there be a conspiracy to hide the inadequate actions of the FBI and the local police? It is clear, that neither covered themselves in glory. The FBI chief said they did all that could be expected – end of story. The media went dead – no follow up stories – no hard questions. It took three hours for the local cops and the FBI to take out the killer. How many stories in the MSM covered that in a negative way?

    Gee – would the Jew controlled media do that – would they cover up for government? Are the Jews conspiring to protect the government that they control? Are the Jews telling a “big lie” by ignoring the truth?

    There are two major elements to a “big lie.” The first is that the lie be repeated over and over. The human mind is lazy – it takes effort to counter a lie, it is hard work to fight a lie. The second element is that the lie be so “big” that no one can check it out – that the lie be impossible to verify one way or another. When a preacher tells us that god talks directly to him – he is telling a BIG lie – no one can possibly check it out. If someone tells everyone over and over that they have a meteor rock, in time people will believe it is meteor because they cannot check it out, they cannot verify it one way or the other. The human mind will just give into the lie.

    The Jew controlled media are telling a big lie about Orlando by ignoring the inadequate actions of the authorizes. We the People are unable to verify the right and wrong of what happened in Orlando because the Jew MSM is protecting the government. They are telling the “big lie” that government worked well. They get away with the big lie because they make it impossible for people to verify what really happened one way or another. Jews control ALL the news that people get.

    Jews conspire to control America by conspiring to control the MSM.

    As this evil situation has evolved, their main tool is to “not let the truth be spoken” by anyone.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    Jews conspire to control America by conspiring

    All this brilliant discourse on conspiracy leaves me constipated.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  141. @Ron Unz

    Are you familiar with James F. Tracy, a former tenured Professor of Journalism and Media Studies at Florida Atlantic University in Boca Raton from 2002 to 2015?
    After investigating some of these events he got fired from FAU in 2016.
     
    Yes, I'd read something about it in the NYT, and found his firing absolutely shocking.

    Clicking on your link, I think his skepticism about the true number of victims is very warranted, and that all people later coming forward and claiming mild "hearing loss" from the explosion are just being used to pad the numbers. Given all the explosions on a regular battlefield, combat troops would probably always suffer 100% casualties if mild hearing loss were included.

    So it wouldn't surprise me at all if the "true" number of honest-to-goodness injuries were more like the 25-30 that he claims. The MSM loves to exaggerate.

    Also, I know there have been various strong suspicions floating around on the Internet regarding the Boston Bombing and those supposedly guilty Chechen brothers, and it wouldn't totally surprise me if there were a significant false-flag/government element to the whole event. Didn't that Gessen woman repeatedly claim something like that in the MSM?

    But that's *very* different from suggesting that the bombing never actually occurred. I'd think that "hoax" conspiracies are vastly less plausible than false-flag conspiracies....

    I’d think that “hoax” conspiracies are vastly less plausible than false-flag conspiracies….

    A year ago, I probably would have agreed with you completely on that. Now I’m not sure at all.

    Just to focus this a bit, after my first article on the Matrix and Roger Rabbit, a pretty in-depth discussion of 9/11 (and false flags generally) developed. Rurik mentioned Betty Ong, who was this Chinese ethnic stewardess from San Francisco on one of the flights who made some phone call (allegedly) that established a lot of the official story.

    I hadn’t given much thought to Betty Ong… well, ever… And then I looked at this and I wrote this comment:

    http://www.unz.com/article/battling-the-matrix-and-freeing-oneself-from-the-roger-rabbit-mental-world/#comment-1355862

    Again, I am reluctant to say this because it gives people fuel to call me a nut maybe, but I’d say I’m about 80% certain that Betty Ong never existed. A synthetic person created for this narrative. I could be wrong. Look at the biography page that there is on the site of the “Betty Ong foundation”.

    http://www.bettyong.org/BettyOng.htm

    This text would have been written by Betty’s sister, Cathie Ong-Herrera, who runs the Betty Ong Foundation. Do you think that this text was written by someone who knew this person, much less a sibling? (Assuming the person is real?) This Betty Ong is a complete cipher. Never married, no kids, despite being fairly attractive (airline stewardesses usually are) and no hobbies, just she loves children and old people, liked to take walks… blah blah.

    Now, maybe I’m crazy and it’s easy to verify that this is a real person. Has anybody ever attempted to do so? Of course, why would anybody in the 9/11 Truth community bother to check if Betty Ong is a real person? Why focus on something so minor when you’ve got building 7 and so forth?

    My point is that I get the strong feeling that Betty Ong is a fake person that they constructed. The foundation could be a conduit for paying off phony family members for maintaining the pretense.

    Or maybe I’m nuts. I dunno. But if you look at this and also suspect that Betty Ong is a synthetic person, i.e. they could construct one synthetic victim, then… if you can create one, you can create ten or fifty in principle. It’s just more work.

    If the people behind these operations discovered that they could get away with making up fake people, then maybe they would just do that. Not that they have any problems killing real people, mind you, but if you can just invent fake people then…

    Oh, and by the way, as for facebook and having friends on facebook, and all that jazz, I get friend requests frequently from people who I don’t know and, well, normally, if I don’t have a clue who this person is, I just ignore it, but I’m sure there are people who just automatically accept any friend request. There are people who take pride in having a humongous number of “friends” on facebook. You know, you create a fake profile on facebook and start requesting that people be your friend and…. Some fake account, Joe Blow, is your “friend” on facebook, and whoever controls the account gets notification that it’s your birthday today and they write “Happy Birthday, Ron” on your page and, you write back “Thanks” even though you don’t know who that is, and anybody would think that you really are friends with that “person”….

    Of course, there could be a hybrid operation. You claim 50 people died and you really kill, say, 5 real people, and then the other 45 are phony.

    Well, I don’t know for sure, just sharing my thoughts. But look at Betty Ong and see if you can convince yourself this is (was) a real flesh and blood person.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz

    Again, I am reluctant to say this because it gives people fuel to call me a nut maybe, but I’d say I’m about 80% certain that Betty Ong never existed.
     
    Well, I've never closely investigated the 9/11 attacks, and therefore never even heard of Betty Ong, but offhand trying to determine her mere *existence* seems like a relatively easy thing to do on the Internet.

    Her rudimentary Wikipedia page gives her full name (including in Chinese characters), and her exact date and place of birth (San Francisco):

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

    A few seconds of Googling located an SF Chronicle story, providing names and images of several of her immediate relatives. Supposedly her mother's house contained 35 boxes of her various possessions. The story also quotes one of her alleged co-workers, Peg Ogonowski, whose alleged husband died as a pilot on the flight. And here are some additional details:

    Ong loved to skateboard while growing up in San Francisco, was a champion local bowler, adored children so much she'd take care of crying babies on flights, and visited the Chinese senior center near her home to take old folks for walks.

    Before she graduated from George Washington High School in 1974, and for some time afterward, Betty worked in the family beef jerky store on Jackson Street. An itchy traveling heel eventually steered her to American Airlines, where being a flight attendant took her all over the country. She'd worked there for 14 years by 2001.
     
    http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Betty-Ong-s-family-remembers-2310213.php

    If there never really was a Betty Ong, these seem like an *awful* lot of details to conveniently provide to someone trying to investigate her mere existence. If she supposedly graduated George Washington H.S. in 1974, wouldn't her name be in the yearbook or maybe even in the local newspaper? Via Facebook, wouldn't it be relatively easy to locate some random classmate from her year and ask a few basic questions?

    Didn't Freud say "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar..."
    , @utu
    "Of course, there could be a hybrid operation. You claim 50 people died and you really kill, say, 5 real people, and then the other 45 are phony. " - Why not just kill 50 people? Why do you need actors? Why complicate it? Get some wet job guys, organize a patsy and that's all? OK, perhaps you need to get some cooperation from a local police. Real FF should be real not a hoax. It would be full proof.

    Betty Ong served entirely different purpose. But even w/o her 9/11 as FF would be a success, because it was real not a hoax.

    Anyway you did not answer why do they do hoaxes? Do they have too much money and too much manpower?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  142. Sam Shama says:
    @Ron Unz

    Uh, no, I don’t think so, frankly. If I want to make the case that Death Valley is a bloody hot place, I might take video from the very hottest days of the year to make my case, film an egg frying on the sidewalk, that kind of thing.
     
    But here's the thing. In any situation, it's always easy to cherry-pick one or two very suspicious elements, and use those to make the entire situation seem much more suspicious than it really is.

    Suppose there are 100 witnesses to an attack interviewed on TV, and it turns out that 2 of them are actually hoaxers, who falsely claimed to have been witnesses for TV-exposure or money or mental illness or whatever, just like the groupies who used to follow around rock-stars. Ridiculing the testimony of just those two fake witnesses doesn't invalidate the event in question. But if 15-20 of the interviewed witnesses seemed like fakes, that would be much more serious. It's all a question of percentages, and to a very huge extent the burden of proof is on the people who claim the event never took place and all 100+ journalists going to Orlando and claiming to interview the hundreds of victims and other witnesses are lying.

    Again, the names of the 50 dead were in the NYT. Couldn't some activist just look at their Facebook pages or Google their names and try to find some plausible evidence that they never really existed or that their paper-trail is fake? If somebody has a somewhat unusual name, it should be easy to find massive evidence of their existence and activities on the web, much of it time-dated to before the attack.

    [ It’s all a question of percentages, and to a very huge extent the burden of proof is on the people who claim the event never took place ]

    This is precisely the point that I, among others [ Geokat, Iffen etc] have attempted to get across to Jonathan Revusky, only to be pilloried with ad hominem and shouting.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  143. Cyrano says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    Yet it looks like only 1 or 2 of the interviews were fake-seeming enough for debunkers to post on YouTube with sarcastic commentary. Doesn’t that tend to imply that the other 99% of the interviews were *not* fake-seeming, but came across as totally legitimate?
     
    Uh, no, I don't think so, frankly. If I want to make the case that Death Valley is a bloody hot place, I might take video from the very hottest days of the year to make my case, film an egg frying on the sidewalk, that kind of thing. That does not imply that the other days are cool precisely. They're bloody hot as well, just somewhat less hot, since, yes, I did choose the most horridly hot days to use as an example, okay.

    By the same token, if the people making these videos are focusing on the most blatantly fake interviews, that does not imply that whatever other interviews they did not use "come across as totally legitimate". They might come across as pretty fake as well, but not quite as freaking blatant as the ones people are focusing on.

    So, with the Bataclan theater event in Paris, I find the most blatantly fake interviews are Ginnie Watson, and this Emma Parkinson, the Australian girl who was allegedly shot in the ass. True, the people making such videos may have concentrated on those two, as I chose to link them because I thought they were pretty blatantly fake. You yourself conceded that the interviews I linked in the article were really blatantly phony, so that much is not under debate. Again, I don't see how that implies that the other interviews were "totally legitimate". I think you'd have to look at them one by one and judge for yourself.

    I’d be much more suspicious if e.g. the Orlando Massacre had 15 fake-seeming YouTube interviews of different victims rather than just that single fake-seeming aspiring actress.
     
    Well, the aspiring actress, Ginnie Watson, that's from the Paris thing last November. There are other blatant phonies in the Orlando one. For example, this Christine Leinonen woman.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yb9FuyjaRYs

    How much would it cost some activist to buy a plane ticket to Orlando and stay at a cheap motel for a week or two?
     
    Well, Orlando is fairly recent and I don't know if there aren't people who have done precisely that. In the case of the Sandy Hook shooting of three and a half years ago, consider this:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Hook_Elementary_School_shooting_conspiracy_theories#Harassment_by_conspiracy_theorists

    The claim on Wikipedia is that "conspiracy theorists" were harassing people there in Sandy Hook. Now, read between the lines and tell me what you think is really going on. It looks to me like this guy Matthew Mills, did exactly what you are proposing. He went to the place and tried to get to the bottom of things. And they seem to have constructed some stitch-up to prosecute him for "harassing" these "poor people".

    Now, the fact is that I can't drop what I'm doing and go off to Florida and investigate this. (And I'm certainly not doing that in the month of July!) But here is my best guess as to what would happen. It would be something like this Matthew Mills case. And then there would probably end up being a section on the Wikipedia page devoted to this event saying that the notorious "conspiracy theorist" Jonathan Revusky was on the scene harassing the grieving survivors and whatnot. Of course, the person being harassed would be me!

    Now, in that above thing about Sandy Hook, some of the people allegedly being harassed by "conspiracy theorists" include this Gene Rosen character and also the father of one of the girls allegedly killed, one Robbie Parker. Have you seen the famous Robbie Parker video of him getting into character? This is well worth watching:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKr-av9jVx8

    Note also that Paul Craig Roberts wrote an article about Sandy Hook that appeared on this site. http://www.unz.com/proberts/sandy-hook-puzzles/

    The first photo in this article is of the Parker family and it is obviously photoshopped. My sense of things is that there is a huge accumulation of evidence that there is fakery in these events.

    But, anyway, specifically in the Sandy Hook case, you have this guy Matthew Mills who did what you propose! And look what happened! It is reasonable to suspect that if I went to Orlando and started approaching people and tried to get answers, something similar would happen to me.

    Either the debunkers are astonishingly lazy or the events really happened.
     
    Well, I should make the point that the normal usage in the independent research community is to use the word "debunker" to the people who try to debunk "conspiracy theories".

    In any case, I honestly don't know whether you are deliberately playing devil's advocate here. To me, what you're saying borders on sheer silliness, this idea being that the independent researchers (i.e. conspiracists) are too "lazy". It's like saying they didn't jump high enough and not realizing that no matter how high you jump, they'll just raise the bar higher.

    I don't know whether you ever read the Peanuts comic strip, but you probably did, and surely you know that Lucy (the little ballbreaker in training) is never going to let Charlie Brown kick that football. The whole idea that the problem is that the people in the Truth community are too lazy and if they did some incremental amount of extra work, they would convince all the HIQIs out there -- that's really just not what's going on, Ron.

    The evidence of fakery in these synthetic events is overwhelming. At San Bernardino, they were running a "live shooter drill" on the very day that the actual thing happened. Not only that, but they were running them on a monthly basis there. What is the probability of an actual live shooter scenario happening organically on the same day in the same place as a drill of the event? How bloody willfully stupid does somebody have to be to believe that this is a coincidence?

    Take this other idiot that I replied to just yesterday. He tried to tell me that those black kids who allegedly had had their mother murdered a day before in Charleston looked happy because they were very religious and would be happy that their mother was up in heaven with God. How do you deal with such willful obtuseness? Just how obviously fake would something have to be for this guy to realize that it's fake? It's mind-boggling!

    No matter what evidence you put in front of these people, it's just never enough. The first two articles on this site have very much gone over this sort of thing, the tactics that are used to rig the game. Your concept is that if you really put together utterly irrefutable proof, that you'll win the day. If Charlie Brown just concentrates and tries a bit harder, he will manage to kick that football.... (NOT!)

    Uh, no, I don’t think so, frankly. If I want to make the case that Death Valley is a bloody hot place, I might take video from the very hottest days of the year to make my case, film an egg frying on the sidewalk, that kind of thing. That does not imply that the other days are cool precisely. They’re bloody hot as well, just somewhat less hot, since, yes, I did choose the most horridly hot days to use as an example, okay.

    That’s just brilliant. Comparing the predictability of weather patterns based on observation of 2 days in a static weather zone to human behavior and likelihood that you can predict the veracity of replies of a large group of people based on statements from 2.

    According to your logic when parents have a child, they should let it live for 2 days and then shoot it. Because after letting it sample life for that amount of time, why let it go through the same drag over and over again – 2 days is enough to find out what life is all about.

    His/her life might prove more interesting than drooling and crying and sleeping like during the first 2 days, but then again it might not. Interviewing 2 people out of a 100 doesn’t prove anything one way or another. Interviewing all 100 of them might prove something but you still have to take into account their personalities. Your whole argument is bogus.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  144. Ron Unz says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    I’d think that “hoax” conspiracies are vastly less plausible than false-flag conspiracies….
     
    A year ago, I probably would have agreed with you completely on that. Now I'm not sure at all.

    Just to focus this a bit, after my first article on the Matrix and Roger Rabbit, a pretty in-depth discussion of 9/11 (and false flags generally) developed. Rurik mentioned Betty Ong, who was this Chinese ethnic stewardess from San Francisco on one of the flights who made some phone call (allegedly) that established a lot of the official story.

    I hadn't given much thought to Betty Ong... well, ever... And then I looked at this and I wrote this comment:

    http://www.unz.com/article/battling-the-matrix-and-freeing-oneself-from-the-roger-rabbit-mental-world/#comment-1355862

    Again, I am reluctant to say this because it gives people fuel to call me a nut maybe, but I'd say I'm about 80% certain that Betty Ong never existed. A synthetic person created for this narrative. I could be wrong. Look at the biography page that there is on the site of the "Betty Ong foundation".

    http://www.bettyong.org/BettyOng.htm

    This text would have been written by Betty's sister, Cathie Ong-Herrera, who runs the Betty Ong Foundation. Do you think that this text was written by someone who knew this person, much less a sibling? (Assuming the person is real?) This Betty Ong is a complete cipher. Never married, no kids, despite being fairly attractive (airline stewardesses usually are) and no hobbies, just she loves children and old people, liked to take walks... blah blah.

    Now, maybe I'm crazy and it's easy to verify that this is a real person. Has anybody ever attempted to do so? Of course, why would anybody in the 9/11 Truth community bother to check if Betty Ong is a real person? Why focus on something so minor when you've got building 7 and so forth?

    My point is that I get the strong feeling that Betty Ong is a fake person that they constructed. The foundation could be a conduit for paying off phony family members for maintaining the pretense.

    Or maybe I'm nuts. I dunno. But if you look at this and also suspect that Betty Ong is a synthetic person, i.e. they could construct one synthetic victim, then... if you can create one, you can create ten or fifty in principle. It's just more work.

    If the people behind these operations discovered that they could get away with making up fake people, then maybe they would just do that. Not that they have any problems killing real people, mind you, but if you can just invent fake people then...

    Oh, and by the way, as for facebook and having friends on facebook, and all that jazz, I get friend requests frequently from people who I don't know and, well, normally, if I don't have a clue who this person is, I just ignore it, but I'm sure there are people who just automatically accept any friend request. There are people who take pride in having a humongous number of "friends" on facebook. You know, you create a fake profile on facebook and start requesting that people be your friend and.... Some fake account, Joe Blow, is your "friend" on facebook, and whoever controls the account gets notification that it's your birthday today and they write "Happy Birthday, Ron" on your page and, you write back "Thanks" even though you don't know who that is, and anybody would think that you really are friends with that "person"....

    Of course, there could be a hybrid operation. You claim 50 people died and you really kill, say, 5 real people, and then the other 45 are phony.

    Well, I don't know for sure, just sharing my thoughts. But look at Betty Ong and see if you can convince yourself this is (was) a real flesh and blood person.

    Again, I am reluctant to say this because it gives people fuel to call me a nut maybe, but I’d say I’m about 80% certain that Betty Ong never existed.

    Well, I’ve never closely investigated the 9/11 attacks, and therefore never even heard of Betty Ong, but offhand trying to determine her mere *existence* seems like a relatively easy thing to do on the Internet.

    Her rudimentary Wikipedia page gives her full name (including in Chinese characters), and her exact date and place of birth (San Francisco):

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

    A few seconds of Googling located an SF Chronicle story, providing names and images of several of her immediate relatives. Supposedly her mother’s house contained 35 boxes of her various possessions. The story also quotes one of her alleged co-workers, Peg Ogonowski, whose alleged husband died as a pilot on the flight. And here are some additional details:

    Ong loved to skateboard while growing up in San Francisco, was a champion local bowler, adored children so much she’d take care of crying babies on flights, and visited the Chinese senior center near her home to take old folks for walks.

    Before she graduated from George Washington High School in 1974, and for some time afterward, Betty worked in the family beef jerky store on Jackson Street. An itchy traveling heel eventually steered her to American Airlines, where being a flight attendant took her all over the country. She’d worked there for 14 years by 2001.

    http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Betty-Ong-s-family-remembers-2310213.php

    If there never really was a Betty Ong, these seem like an *awful* lot of details to conveniently provide to someone trying to investigate her mere existence. If she supposedly graduated George Washington H.S. in 1974, wouldn’t her name be in the yearbook or maybe even in the local newspaper? Via Facebook, wouldn’t it be relatively easy to locate some random classmate from her year and ask a few basic questions?

    Didn’t Freud say “Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar…”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky

    A few seconds of Googling located an SF Chronicle story, providing names and images of several of her immediate relatives.
     
    Well, Ron, I did quite a bit more than a few seconds Googling to come to the tentative conclusions I came to. And I stewed over it over a number of months thinking about it. AND my conclusion is that this is probably a synthetic identity constructed specifically so that there is very little need to fake anything. Consider...

    She died at the age of 45, was never married, no kids, so no need to fake any of that. There is no mention of any significant love interest in her life, ever. Aside from the family members, there is no mention of any close friend. The parents would be dead most likely and she has three siblings. One of them, Cathie Ong-Herrera, is the director of the Betty Ong Foundation and has a linkedin profile in which that is her ONLY professional experience of any sort.

    There is no mention of any religious affiliation. If she attended a church (or a Buddhist temple or whatever) there would be something to verify there. People would remember her from attending services.

    She never played a sport, team or individual. If she played on a volleyball or softball team, her teammates would remember her. If she played an individual sport like tennis or golf, she would be a member of a tennis club or a gold club, and you still have to play those games with somebody -- who would remember her. Her only "hobbies" are taking walks and that she loves children (though not enough to have any herself...) and old folks. Completely solitary and unverifiable activities. If she painted or drew, there would be a painting or a drawing they'd show you, no? If she sang in a glee club...

    No, she liked taking walks.

    In any case, I asked a specific question: do you believe the text on this page was written by somebody who knew Betty?

    http://www.bettyong.org/bettyong.htm

    I don't think so. This Betty Ong Foundation is run supposedly by her sister. You think the above text was written by somebody who knew her for 40-odd years?

    Ron, do you really not see why anybody would be suspicious of this? Note again, I'm not saying I'm certain either.


    Supposedly her mother’s house contained 35 boxes of her various possessions.
     
    OK, somebody says her mom's house had 35 boxes of all Betty's shit. You seen it? If she didn't have any hobbies besides taking long walks, what was in the 35 boxes? An Imelda Marcos scale shoe collection?

    The story also quotes one of her alleged co-workers, Peg Ogonowski, whose alleged husband died as a pilot on the flight.
     
    Okay, maybe one person you could ask. However, I'm pretty sure these flights didn't take place, so the person to vouch for her being the widow of a man who died on a non-existent flight.... that's problematic...

    Ron, this Betty Ong is a person who has very few real connections compared to most people who would die at the age of 45. Never married, no verifiable hobbies, did not attend a church. There are people like that, sure. But if you were going to construct a phony person, it would precisely be somebody like this!


    Ong loved to skateboard while growing up in San Francisco, was a champion local bowler, adored children so much she’d take care of crying babies on flights, and visited the Chinese senior center near her home to take old folks for walks.
     
    Skateboarding is not verifiable, I don't think. Okay, bowling is a sport of sorts. If you're a champion bowler, you play in a bowling league, right? I had missed that...

    I just did a google search (eagerly!) trying to find the bowling league that she played in and find nothing.

    She took care of crying babies on flights... yeah, okay, fine... visited the senior center to take old folks for walks. Can we talk to any of those old folks? Nope, too bad. They died of old age...


    If there never really was a Betty Ong, these seem like an *awful* lot of details to conveniently provide to someone trying to investigate her mere existence.
     
    Ron, to me it looks more like a minimal set. There's very little to grab onto for somebody who was 45 years old. Look at her biography on the wikipedia page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betty_Ong#Biography

    There are really only 2 things that ever happened in this woman's life. 1. She was born. 2. She made a phone call from an airplane.

    It is pretty clear that 2. never happened. So that means she was born. Maybe that never happened either!

    On the nearly opposite end of the scale, if somebody tried to claim that Ron Unz never existed...


    If she supposedly graduated George Washington H.S. in 1974, wouldn’t her name be in the yearbook or maybe even in the local newspaper?
     
    Well, I guess. She was born, so there ought to be a birth certificate/record. They say she graduated that high school in 1974, so there should be school records. That's about it. If the criminals have a mole on the inside, can they falsify these things? I don't know. In any case, has anybody tried to check them? I haven't!

    Oh, and, of course, there are the employment records at American Airlines. She only ever worked for one airline, 14 years. So she started at the age of 31, no mention of her ever working anywhere else. Up to the age of 31, what was she doing? The woman's life history is pretty thin.

    Social security records... Could an insider, a mole, create a fake person? I don't know.

    Oh, by the way, in some private correspondence, a person told me that the people who allegedly died in the towers, there are social security records for them, at least a fair number, but you look for social security records for the people who allegedly died in the flights, and you find nothing. I don't know if this is true. But if it is, that would include Betty Ong, I guess....

    Oh, IRS... maybe one could request her IRS records. I noticed something a couple of years ago. Lee Harvey Oswald's IRS records are still top-secret classified, or they were just a few years ago anyway... Go figure...


    Via Facebook, wouldn’t it be relatively easy to locate some random classmate from her year and ask a few basic questions?
     
    I suppose. Suppose nobody remembers her. Then what? She doesn't seem like a very memorable person....

    Didn’t Freud say “Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar…”
     
    So you don't see anything suspicious at all about Betty Ong?

    Or consider this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potemkin_village#Examples_of_Potemkin_villages

    How many of these would you be fooled by? I don't know personally in my case. I assume I'd be fooled by some. The idea that everything is straight up and nobody is trying to bullshit you in this life... I mean, just look at that list of Potemkin village operations.

    Hoaxes really do exist! I'm sure the above list of Potemkin village type things is very incomplete actually...

    Anyway, if you say it's easy to verify to one's satisfaction that this is a real person, then you can put that to the test. My position is that I just don't know. And I re-iterate that something constructed to have very few points of verification is suspicious, it's like dropping Bin Laden's body in the sea is very suspicious, because the body is the main thing you'd have to show you really killed the guy... so you drop that in the sea! Most women at 45 have a kid or two, especially Chinese ethnics, and most are, or have been married.

    This woman never married or had kids. No mention of close friends. She loved to travel, consistent with being an air hostess, but doesn't mention what countries she liked.

    I'm going on far too much. To me, this is the bottom line: try to find any text written about this woman that gives the impression that it was written by somebody who really knew her. I cannot find anything. It just feels fake. I look at all that you can find about this person and I simply cannot convince myself that this is a real person. I mean, in my bones. It just doesn't feel right.

    Can the Intel agencies, the spooks, create a fake person like this? I don't know for sure, but if I had to bet money, I'd say they can and that this Betty Ong is an example.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  145. Art says:
    @helena
    Brainstem politics - what a brilliant expression. That is exactly what is going on. It's so sad.

    But can the majority of new citizens respond to intellectual arguments?

    What I found really telling is that the demonstrations supporting Corbyn, who admittedly is probably the only possible break on war in the ME but, who is ideologically open-borders, was 95% white - in London!

    My conclusion is that the HBD hypothesis about altruism probably should also look at how territorialism operates because basically, white people supporting open borders is in effect a loss of instinct to protect territory.

    What I found really telling is that the demonstrations supporting Corbyn, who admittedly is probably the only possible break on war in the ME but, who is ideologically open-borders, was 95% white – in London!

    My conclusion is that the HBD hypothesis about altruism probably should also look at how territorialism operates because basically, white people supporting open borders is in effect a loss of instinct to protect territory.

    Helena,

    I have felt for a long time that the English are different – the English have a lot of different blood in them. They have been invaded genetically by many peoples. Romans, Scotts, Irish, Vikings, Germans, Normans are all part of the English gene pool. Genetically this has been to their benefit. They have received the dominant success traits of all these peoples. Their gene pool was not stagnant. Intellectually, the English contribution to science is unmatched in human history. Surly their diverse gene pool had something to do with this.

    The English have also benefited culturally – with all these different people among them they had to develop a system of fairness – a system to get along with each, other than strict tribalism. English common law and its system of individual responsibility (regardless of genetics) was the only way to have a sane society that wasn’t killing each other over blood identity.

    At its base America is also an open fairness society of many different peoples – perhaps that is why we are open to immigration.

    Fairness is the antidote to tribalism.

    Art

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  146. utu says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    I’d think that “hoax” conspiracies are vastly less plausible than false-flag conspiracies….
     
    A year ago, I probably would have agreed with you completely on that. Now I'm not sure at all.

    Just to focus this a bit, after my first article on the Matrix and Roger Rabbit, a pretty in-depth discussion of 9/11 (and false flags generally) developed. Rurik mentioned Betty Ong, who was this Chinese ethnic stewardess from San Francisco on one of the flights who made some phone call (allegedly) that established a lot of the official story.

    I hadn't given much thought to Betty Ong... well, ever... And then I looked at this and I wrote this comment:

    http://www.unz.com/article/battling-the-matrix-and-freeing-oneself-from-the-roger-rabbit-mental-world/#comment-1355862

    Again, I am reluctant to say this because it gives people fuel to call me a nut maybe, but I'd say I'm about 80% certain that Betty Ong never existed. A synthetic person created for this narrative. I could be wrong. Look at the biography page that there is on the site of the "Betty Ong foundation".

    http://www.bettyong.org/BettyOng.htm

    This text would have been written by Betty's sister, Cathie Ong-Herrera, who runs the Betty Ong Foundation. Do you think that this text was written by someone who knew this person, much less a sibling? (Assuming the person is real?) This Betty Ong is a complete cipher. Never married, no kids, despite being fairly attractive (airline stewardesses usually are) and no hobbies, just she loves children and old people, liked to take walks... blah blah.

    Now, maybe I'm crazy and it's easy to verify that this is a real person. Has anybody ever attempted to do so? Of course, why would anybody in the 9/11 Truth community bother to check if Betty Ong is a real person? Why focus on something so minor when you've got building 7 and so forth?

    My point is that I get the strong feeling that Betty Ong is a fake person that they constructed. The foundation could be a conduit for paying off phony family members for maintaining the pretense.

    Or maybe I'm nuts. I dunno. But if you look at this and also suspect that Betty Ong is a synthetic person, i.e. they could construct one synthetic victim, then... if you can create one, you can create ten or fifty in principle. It's just more work.

    If the people behind these operations discovered that they could get away with making up fake people, then maybe they would just do that. Not that they have any problems killing real people, mind you, but if you can just invent fake people then...

    Oh, and by the way, as for facebook and having friends on facebook, and all that jazz, I get friend requests frequently from people who I don't know and, well, normally, if I don't have a clue who this person is, I just ignore it, but I'm sure there are people who just automatically accept any friend request. There are people who take pride in having a humongous number of "friends" on facebook. You know, you create a fake profile on facebook and start requesting that people be your friend and.... Some fake account, Joe Blow, is your "friend" on facebook, and whoever controls the account gets notification that it's your birthday today and they write "Happy Birthday, Ron" on your page and, you write back "Thanks" even though you don't know who that is, and anybody would think that you really are friends with that "person"....

    Of course, there could be a hybrid operation. You claim 50 people died and you really kill, say, 5 real people, and then the other 45 are phony.

    Well, I don't know for sure, just sharing my thoughts. But look at Betty Ong and see if you can convince yourself this is (was) a real flesh and blood person.

    “Of course, there could be a hybrid operation. You claim 50 people died and you really kill, say, 5 real people, and then the other 45 are phony. ” – Why not just kill 50 people? Why do you need actors? Why complicate it? Get some wet job guys, organize a patsy and that’s all? OK, perhaps you need to get some cooperation from a local police. Real FF should be real not a hoax. It would be full proof.

    Betty Ong served entirely different purpose. But even w/o her 9/11 as FF would be a success, because it was real not a hoax.

    Anyway you did not answer why do they do hoaxes? Do they have too much money and too much manpower?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky

    Anyway you did not answer why do they do hoaxes?
     
    Well, in the article, I said that there are, broadly speaking, two kinds of event, the organic event and the synthetic event.

    The organic event just happens, of course, but the purpose of the synthetic event is to back a synthetic narrative. If you've got an overall synthetic narrative like that we in the West are under attack from something called "Radical Islam", then you need some synthetic events to reinforce the narrative.

    So, you have a false flag genuine terrorism event where you really kill some folks. Or, you mount a hoax in which the whole thing is fake. Or maybe some in-between situation is possible. Some victims would be real and some fake. Actually, that seems to be the case with 9/11.

    Ron's position is that it must be the former because the latter is not feasible. And I am very far from certain. I mean, either way, it's tough to get one's head around. If they really kill a large number of people and can get away with it, that's a big conceptual leap for some people. I understand. But then you can study some history and read about operation Gladio and that they blew up the Bologna train station and killed 85 people in a false flag. And other cases that are thoroughly researched and not under much dispute...

    But, if it is feasible to simply mount a hoax and achieve the same psychological effect, that's probably preferable. At times the local authorities, there can be people with some integrity, and they may not be willing to go along with this, and maybe it's easier to get them to play along with a hoax. It's all mind-boggling, I admit. In this specific sub-thread of discussion, Ron is saying basically that you can exclude the possibility of a hoax. IOW, it's not feasible for them to create fake victims. My position is that I am not at all convinced of that.


    Betty Ong served entirely different purpose.
     
    The purpose of the Betty Ong narrative, the phone call she allegedly made from the plane, is to establish key elements of the official story. This phone call did not take place, I think we can be quite certain, there is a real body of independent serious research that these phone calls from the planes are BS.

    To be clear, it actually does not matter all that much in the big picture whether Betty Ong was a real person or not. If she was a real person, they could claim she made the phone call and then died in the plane, but then Betty would have to be "disappeared" separately. My only point in bringing it up was regarding the issue of whether it is feasible to invent a fake person.

    Again, Betty Ong just feels fake. There is no text written about Betty that you can find anywhere that passes the smell test, nothing that gives the impression that it was written by somebody who actually knew her. I would like to ask you. Do you believe the following text was written by this woman's sister?

    http://www.bettyong.org/BettyOng.htm

    To me, this reminds me of a eulogy given by some priest who never really knew the deceased, the vague language.... Ron claims that he doesn't see any problem with this, is maintaining (AFAICS) that he cannot understand why anybody has any doubts about this.... What do you think?

    As I said, my position is that I don't know for sure, but it feels fake. Gut feeling.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  147. iffen says:
    @Art
    It is amazing how Orlando is off the mainstream media radar. Could there be a conspiracy to hide the inadequate actions of the FBI and the local police? It is clear, that neither covered themselves in glory. The FBI chief said they did all that could be expected – end of story. The media went dead – no follow up stories – no hard questions. It took three hours for the local cops and the FBI to take out the killer. How many stories in the MSM covered that in a negative way?

    Gee - would the Jew controlled media do that – would they cover up for government? Are the Jews conspiring to protect the government that they control? Are the Jews telling a “big lie” by ignoring the truth?

    There are two major elements to a “big lie.” The first is that the lie be repeated over and over. The human mind is lazy – it takes effort to counter a lie, it is hard work to fight a lie. The second element is that the lie be so “big” that no one can check it out – that the lie be impossible to verify one way or another. When a preacher tells us that god talks directly to him – he is telling a BIG lie – no one can possibly check it out. If someone tells everyone over and over that they have a meteor rock, in time people will believe it is meteor because they cannot check it out, they cannot verify it one way or the other. The human mind will just give into the lie.

    The Jew controlled media are telling a big lie about Orlando by ignoring the inadequate actions of the authorizes. We the People are unable to verify the right and wrong of what happened in Orlando because the Jew MSM is protecting the government. They are telling the “big lie” that government worked well. They get away with the big lie because they make it impossible for people to verify what really happened one way or another. Jews control ALL the news that people get.

    Jews conspire to control America by conspiring to control the MSM.

    As this evil situation has evolved, their main tool is to “not let the truth be spoken” by anyone.

    Jews conspire to control America by conspiring

    All this brilliant discourse on conspiracy leaves me constipated.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  148. @Ron Unz

    Again, I am reluctant to say this because it gives people fuel to call me a nut maybe, but I’d say I’m about 80% certain that Betty Ong never existed.
     
    Well, I've never closely investigated the 9/11 attacks, and therefore never even heard of Betty Ong, but offhand trying to determine her mere *existence* seems like a relatively easy thing to do on the Internet.

    Her rudimentary Wikipedia page gives her full name (including in Chinese characters), and her exact date and place of birth (San Francisco):

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

    A few seconds of Googling located an SF Chronicle story, providing names and images of several of her immediate relatives. Supposedly her mother's house contained 35 boxes of her various possessions. The story also quotes one of her alleged co-workers, Peg Ogonowski, whose alleged husband died as a pilot on the flight. And here are some additional details:

    Ong loved to skateboard while growing up in San Francisco, was a champion local bowler, adored children so much she'd take care of crying babies on flights, and visited the Chinese senior center near her home to take old folks for walks.

    Before she graduated from George Washington High School in 1974, and for some time afterward, Betty worked in the family beef jerky store on Jackson Street. An itchy traveling heel eventually steered her to American Airlines, where being a flight attendant took her all over the country. She'd worked there for 14 years by 2001.
     
    http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Betty-Ong-s-family-remembers-2310213.php

    If there never really was a Betty Ong, these seem like an *awful* lot of details to conveniently provide to someone trying to investigate her mere existence. If she supposedly graduated George Washington H.S. in 1974, wouldn't her name be in the yearbook or maybe even in the local newspaper? Via Facebook, wouldn't it be relatively easy to locate some random classmate from her year and ask a few basic questions?

    Didn't Freud say "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar..."

    A few seconds of Googling located an SF Chronicle story, providing names and images of several of her immediate relatives.

    Well, Ron, I did quite a bit more than a few seconds Googling to come to the tentative conclusions I came to. And I stewed over it over a number of months thinking about it. AND my conclusion is that this is probably a synthetic identity constructed specifically so that there is very little need to fake anything. Consider…

    She died at the age of 45, was never married, no kids, so no need to fake any of that. There is no mention of any significant love interest in her life, ever. Aside from the family members, there is no mention of any close friend. The parents would be dead most likely and she has three siblings. One of them, Cathie Ong-Herrera, is the director of the Betty Ong Foundation and has a linkedin profile in which that is her ONLY professional experience of any sort.

    There is no mention of any religious affiliation. If she attended a church (or a Buddhist temple or whatever) there would be something to verify there. People would remember her from attending services.

    She never played a sport, team or individual. If she played on a volleyball or softball team, her teammates would remember her. If she played an individual sport like tennis or golf, she would be a member of a tennis club or a gold club, and you still have to play those games with somebody — who would remember her. Her only “hobbies” are taking walks and that she loves children (though not enough to have any herself…) and old folks. Completely solitary and unverifiable activities. If she painted or drew, there would be a painting or a drawing they’d show you, no? If she sang in a glee club…

    No, she liked taking walks.

    In any case, I asked a specific question: do you believe the text on this page was written by somebody who knew Betty?

    http://www.bettyong.org/bettyong.htm

    I don’t think so. This Betty Ong Foundation is run supposedly by her sister. You think the above text was written by somebody who knew her for 40-odd years?

    Ron, do you really not see why anybody would be suspicious of this? Note again, I’m not saying I’m certain either.

    Supposedly her mother’s house contained 35 boxes of her various possessions.

    OK, somebody says her mom’s house had 35 boxes of all Betty’s shit. You seen it? If she didn’t have any hobbies besides taking long walks, what was in the 35 boxes? An Imelda Marcos scale shoe collection?

    The story also quotes one of her alleged co-workers, Peg Ogonowski, whose alleged husband died as a pilot on the flight.

    Okay, maybe one person you could ask. However, I’m pretty sure these flights didn’t take place, so the person to vouch for her being the widow of a man who died on a non-existent flight…. that’s problematic…

    Ron, this Betty Ong is a person who has very few real connections compared to most people who would die at the age of 45. Never married, no verifiable hobbies, did not attend a church. There are people like that, sure. But if you were going to construct a phony person, it would precisely be somebody like this!

    Ong loved to skateboard while growing up in San Francisco, was a champion local bowler, adored children so much she’d take care of crying babies on flights, and visited the Chinese senior center near her home to take old folks for walks.

    Skateboarding is not verifiable, I don’t think. Okay, bowling is a sport of sorts. If you’re a champion bowler, you play in a bowling league, right? I had missed that…

    I just did a google search (eagerly!) trying to find the bowling league that she played in and find nothing.

    She took care of crying babies on flights… yeah, okay, fine… visited the senior center to take old folks for walks. Can we talk to any of those old folks? Nope, too bad. They died of old age…

    If there never really was a Betty Ong, these seem like an *awful* lot of details to conveniently provide to someone trying to investigate her mere existence.

    Ron, to me it looks more like a minimal set. There’s very little to grab onto for somebody who was 45 years old. Look at her biography on the wikipedia page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betty_Ong#Biography

    There are really only 2 things that ever happened in this woman’s life. 1. She was born. 2. She made a phone call from an airplane.

    It is pretty clear that 2. never happened. So that means she was born. Maybe that never happened either!

    On the nearly opposite end of the scale, if somebody tried to claim that Ron Unz never existed…

    If she supposedly graduated George Washington H.S. in 1974, wouldn’t her name be in the yearbook or maybe even in the local newspaper?

    Well, I guess. She was born, so there ought to be a birth certificate/record. They say she graduated that high school in 1974, so there should be school records. That’s about it. If the criminals have a mole on the inside, can they falsify these things? I don’t know. In any case, has anybody tried to check them? I haven’t!

    Oh, and, of course, there are the employment records at American Airlines. She only ever worked for one airline, 14 years. So she started at the age of 31, no mention of her ever working anywhere else. Up to the age of 31, what was she doing? The woman’s life history is pretty thin.

    Social security records… Could an insider, a mole, create a fake person? I don’t know.

    Oh, by the way, in some private correspondence, a person told me that the people who allegedly died in the towers, there are social security records for them, at least a fair number, but you look for social security records for the people who allegedly died in the flights, and you find nothing. I don’t know if this is true. But if it is, that would include Betty Ong, I guess….

    Oh, IRS… maybe one could request her IRS records. I noticed something a couple of years ago. Lee Harvey Oswald’s IRS records are still top-secret classified, or they were just a few years ago anyway… Go figure…

    Via Facebook, wouldn’t it be relatively easy to locate some random classmate from her year and ask a few basic questions?

    I suppose. Suppose nobody remembers her. Then what? She doesn’t seem like a very memorable person….

    Didn’t Freud say “Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar…”

    So you don’t see anything suspicious at all about Betty Ong?

    Or consider this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potemkin_village#Examples_of_Potemkin_villages

    How many of these would you be fooled by? I don’t know personally in my case. I assume I’d be fooled by some. The idea that everything is straight up and nobody is trying to bullshit you in this life… I mean, just look at that list of Potemkin village operations.

    Hoaxes really do exist! I’m sure the above list of Potemkin village type things is very incomplete actually…

    Anyway, if you say it’s easy to verify to one’s satisfaction that this is a real person, then you can put that to the test. My position is that I just don’t know. And I re-iterate that something constructed to have very few points of verification is suspicious, it’s like dropping Bin Laden’s body in the sea is very suspicious, because the body is the main thing you’d have to show you really killed the guy… so you drop that in the sea! Most women at 45 have a kid or two, especially Chinese ethnics, and most are, or have been married.

    This woman never married or had kids. No mention of close friends. She loved to travel, consistent with being an air hostess, but doesn’t mention what countries she liked.

    I’m going on far too much. To me, this is the bottom line: try to find any text written about this woman that gives the impression that it was written by somebody who really knew her. I cannot find anything. It just feels fake. I look at all that you can find about this person and I simply cannot convince myself that this is a real person. I mean, in my bones. It just doesn’t feel right.

    Can the Intel agencies, the spooks, create a fake person like this? I don’t know for sure, but if I had to bet money, I’d say they can and that this Betty Ong is an example.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz
    Well, I think the problem with Betty Ong's Wikipedia entry being so thin is that she'd never done anything important in her life prior to her 9/11 phone call. The SF Chronicle article seemed reasonably detailed about her life, but none of the details were very interesting, so the person who casually added her Wikipedia page didn't bother including them, e.g. mentioning that she'd spent years working in the family beef jerky store on Jackson St. before joining American Airlines. Nothing in the Betty Ong website seemed at all suspicious to me either, just boring and bland.

    But here's the thing. The details about her---name, date and place of birth, H.S. and year of graduation, employment history, names of various friends and relatives---should certainly be enough for anyone to verify her *existence.* And if someone put in a little effort and found reasonable evidence that she didn't exist, the results would be *gigantically* explosive, probably the most astonishing piece of ultra-hard evidence surrounding the 9/11 attacks to ever come out. All at once, our entire framework of reality would crumble, given the forces it would have taken to create a totally fictitious individual called Betty Ong.

    For that reason, I can't believe that any half-sane 9/11 conspirators would produce such an enormous vulnerability in their 9/11 conspiracy for such trivial benefit.

    After all, people can argue about micro-Thermite residue until they're blue in the face without persuading anyone, but if someone just locates a 1974 graduation album for George Washington H.S. and if there's no Betty Ong listed---Wow!

    Or how about this. The SF Chronicle article gives the names of her close relatives, and it sounds like both her parents were dead. So why not try to locate her parents' obituaries in the news archives from years earlier and see if one of their survivors was a daughter named Betty?

    I could certainly see intelligence services creating "fake people" and "fake histories", but that probably takes a lot of work and effort, and would therefore be reserved only in especially important cases. Sure, Bin Laden's "burial at sea" seems very suspicious to me, and who knows what really happened. But "creating" lots and lots and lots of different non-existent people---including some as obscure as Betty Ong---seems just like creating massive, unnecessary vulnerabilities to me. When the NYT publishes the names, photos, and backgrounds of the 50 Orlando Massacre victims, I think they probably existed, and someone would have to provide a huge amount of hard evidence to the contrary before I started doubting.

    Frankly, I'd never even heard of Betty Ong before today, and based on that SF Chronicle article, I'd bet a lot of money that she really existed. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. And imagine blowing open the entire gigantic 9/11 conspiracy merely by locating a 1974 graduation album for George Washington H.S....
    , @pink_point
    "Well, I guess. She was born, so there ought to be a birth certificate/record. They say she graduated that high school in 1974, so there should be school records. That’s about it. If the criminals have a mole on the inside, can they falsify these things? I don’t know. In any case, has anybody tried to check them? I haven’t!"

    They can falsify those things, and, if what you suggest were true, they'd no doubt have falsified those. (Including the birth register, and anything you may think of.)

    "Social security records… Could an insider, a mole, create a fake person? I don’t know."

    That's a rhetorical question, is that not?

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  149. iffen says:
    @helena
    "We do, right here in front of God and everybody."

    Have you any idea how far along the bell curve of free speech we are? Or how far from the mainstream; the polity and proletariat alike?

    I think we are out there where it all curves back into itself. I can see smart crazy people from here.

    Reducing it, do you want to replace the MSM or do you want the MSM to change?

    Read More
    • Replies: @helena
    I'm not likely to get a chance to do either! I haven't watched a Hollywood movie for years. Sometimes I try but after watching really good TV productions, H films seem very lame even if full of amazing car chases and groovy dudes. Plots and dialogues are second rate. I've been watching BBC, SKY, CNBC News over Brexit because it's essential to know what's going on - ideologically, generationally, nationally, internationally, financially. But ordinarily, 'ordinary News' is easy to digest from the internet - hurricaines, kick-offs, strikes, 'incidents'.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  150. @utu
    "Of course, there could be a hybrid operation. You claim 50 people died and you really kill, say, 5 real people, and then the other 45 are phony. " - Why not just kill 50 people? Why do you need actors? Why complicate it? Get some wet job guys, organize a patsy and that's all? OK, perhaps you need to get some cooperation from a local police. Real FF should be real not a hoax. It would be full proof.

    Betty Ong served entirely different purpose. But even w/o her 9/11 as FF would be a success, because it was real not a hoax.

    Anyway you did not answer why do they do hoaxes? Do they have too much money and too much manpower?

    Anyway you did not answer why do they do hoaxes?

    Well, in the article, I said that there are, broadly speaking, two kinds of event, the organic event and the synthetic event.

    The organic event just happens, of course, but the purpose of the synthetic event is to back a synthetic narrative. If you’ve got an overall synthetic narrative like that we in the West are under attack from something called “Radical Islam”, then you need some synthetic events to reinforce the narrative.

    So, you have a false flag genuine terrorism event where you really kill some folks. Or, you mount a hoax in which the whole thing is fake. Or maybe some in-between situation is possible. Some victims would be real and some fake. Actually, that seems to be the case with 9/11.

    Ron’s position is that it must be the former because the latter is not feasible. And I am very far from certain. I mean, either way, it’s tough to get one’s head around. If they really kill a large number of people and can get away with it, that’s a big conceptual leap for some people. I understand. But then you can study some history and read about operation Gladio and that they blew up the Bologna train station and killed 85 people in a false flag. And other cases that are thoroughly researched and not under much dispute…

    But, if it is feasible to simply mount a hoax and achieve the same psychological effect, that’s probably preferable. At times the local authorities, there can be people with some integrity, and they may not be willing to go along with this, and maybe it’s easier to get them to play along with a hoax. It’s all mind-boggling, I admit. In this specific sub-thread of discussion, Ron is saying basically that you can exclude the possibility of a hoax. IOW, it’s not feasible for them to create fake victims. My position is that I am not at all convinced of that.

    Betty Ong served entirely different purpose.

    The purpose of the Betty Ong narrative, the phone call she allegedly made from the plane, is to establish key elements of the official story. This phone call did not take place, I think we can be quite certain, there is a real body of independent serious research that these phone calls from the planes are BS.

    To be clear, it actually does not matter all that much in the big picture whether Betty Ong was a real person or not. If she was a real person, they could claim she made the phone call and then died in the plane, but then Betty would have to be “disappeared” separately. My only point in bringing it up was regarding the issue of whether it is feasible to invent a fake person.

    Again, Betty Ong just feels fake. There is no text written about Betty that you can find anywhere that passes the smell test, nothing that gives the impression that it was written by somebody who actually knew her. I would like to ask you. Do you believe the following text was written by this woman’s sister?

    http://www.bettyong.org/BettyOng.htm

    To me, this reminds me of a eulogy given by some priest who never really knew the deceased, the vague language…. Ron claims that he doesn’t see any problem with this, is maintaining (AFAICS) that he cannot understand why anybody has any doubts about this…. What do you think?

    As I said, my position is that I don’t know for sure, but it feels fake. Gut feeling.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  151. Rurik says:
    @L.K
    Rurik:
    "the Fed is the root of our slavery, it is the fount of the Eternal Wars and the all seeing eye of global human misery".


    Amen to that but I have the feeling Sam shama(ful) would absolutely disagree with you! wink.

    “The new law will create inflation whenever the trusts want inflation. From now on depressions will be scientifically created.” (Congressman Charles A. Lindbergh, after the passage of the Federal Reserve act 1913.

    “The financial system has been turned over to the Federal Reserve Board. That Board administers the finance system by authority of a purely profiteering group. The system is Private, conducted for the sole purpose of obtaining the greatest possible profits from the use of other people’s money”
    -Charles A. Lindbergh Sr., 1923
     
    Congressman Louis Thomas McFadden, who served as Chairman of the Banking and Currency Committee for more than 10 years, stated, during the 1930s:

    "Mr. Chairman, we have in this Country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Banks, hereinafter called the Fed. The Fed has cheated the Government of these United States and the people of the United States out of enough money to pay the Nation's debt. The depredations and iniquities of the Fed has cost enough money to pay the National debt several times over.
    ...
    Some people who think that the Federal Reserve Banks United States Government institutions. They are private monopolies which prey upon the people of these United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers; foreign and domestic speculators and swindlers; and rich and predatory money lender. In that dark crew of financial pirates there are those who would cut a man's throat to get a dollar out of his pocket; there are those who send money into states to buy votes to control our legislatures; there are those who maintain International propaganda for the purpose of deceiving us into granting of new concessions which will permit them to cover up their past misdeeds and set again in motion their gigantic train of crime."
     

    Hey LK,

    Some people who think that the Federal Reserve Banks United States Government institutions. They are private monopolies which prey upon the people of these United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers; foreign and domestic speculators and swindlers; and rich and predatory money lender. In that dark crew of financial pirates there are those who would cut a man’s throat to get a dollar out of his pocket; there are those who send money into states to buy votes to control our legislatures; there are those who maintain International propaganda for the purpose of deceiving us into granting of new concessions which will permit them to cover up their past misdeeds and set again in motion their gigantic train of crime.”

    I’m reminded of that doctor in Detroit who was convicted of proscribing expensive (and highly profitable) chemo treatment for patients that didn’t need it. Even killing (murdering) some of them. The meme is you have these highly paid people, sort of on a pedestal of respect, who are in these positions of ultimate trust, (like a doctor with your health or a banker with your money), and then they set about betraying that trust (and the people who trust them) do to them harm (prescribe poisons for the healthy or steal your wealth and prosperity, as the case may be)

    The Great Depression (that even Bernanke admitted was caused by the Fed) was just like the 2008 collapse. The Fed pumped up the bubble, (roaring 20s), and then popped it, and destroyed the economy, and then set about buying up people’s property at pennies on the dollar in the purgatory that had just created, –having been created exactly to prevent exactly just such an event–. (such a deal !)

    Just like they pumped up the 2000′s housing bubble, by making money cheap and easy to the banks, deliberately failing to regulate them, and then popped the bubble, and bought up people’s property at pennies on the dollar in the carnage. (such a deal !)

    “If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered…. I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies…. “

    ~ T. J.

    the treason and lethality of the Fed can only be understood really in biblical terms. It is that momentous, and that iniquitous, and quite simply, that evil

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  152. Ron Unz says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    A few seconds of Googling located an SF Chronicle story, providing names and images of several of her immediate relatives.
     
    Well, Ron, I did quite a bit more than a few seconds Googling to come to the tentative conclusions I came to. And I stewed over it over a number of months thinking about it. AND my conclusion is that this is probably a synthetic identity constructed specifically so that there is very little need to fake anything. Consider...

    She died at the age of 45, was never married, no kids, so no need to fake any of that. There is no mention of any significant love interest in her life, ever. Aside from the family members, there is no mention of any close friend. The parents would be dead most likely and she has three siblings. One of them, Cathie Ong-Herrera, is the director of the Betty Ong Foundation and has a linkedin profile in which that is her ONLY professional experience of any sort.

    There is no mention of any religious affiliation. If she attended a church (or a Buddhist temple or whatever) there would be something to verify there. People would remember her from attending services.

    She never played a sport, team or individual. If she played on a volleyball or softball team, her teammates would remember her. If she played an individual sport like tennis or golf, she would be a member of a tennis club or a gold club, and you still have to play those games with somebody -- who would remember her. Her only "hobbies" are taking walks and that she loves children (though not enough to have any herself...) and old folks. Completely solitary and unverifiable activities. If she painted or drew, there would be a painting or a drawing they'd show you, no? If she sang in a glee club...

    No, she liked taking walks.

    In any case, I asked a specific question: do you believe the text on this page was written by somebody who knew Betty?

    http://www.bettyong.org/bettyong.htm

    I don't think so. This Betty Ong Foundation is run supposedly by her sister. You think the above text was written by somebody who knew her for 40-odd years?

    Ron, do you really not see why anybody would be suspicious of this? Note again, I'm not saying I'm certain either.


    Supposedly her mother’s house contained 35 boxes of her various possessions.
     
    OK, somebody says her mom's house had 35 boxes of all Betty's shit. You seen it? If she didn't have any hobbies besides taking long walks, what was in the 35 boxes? An Imelda Marcos scale shoe collection?

    The story also quotes one of her alleged co-workers, Peg Ogonowski, whose alleged husband died as a pilot on the flight.
     
    Okay, maybe one person you could ask. However, I'm pretty sure these flights didn't take place, so the person to vouch for her being the widow of a man who died on a non-existent flight.... that's problematic...

    Ron, this Betty Ong is a person who has very few real connections compared to most people who would die at the age of 45. Never married, no verifiable hobbies, did not attend a church. There are people like that, sure. But if you were going to construct a phony person, it would precisely be somebody like this!


    Ong loved to skateboard while growing up in San Francisco, was a champion local bowler, adored children so much she’d take care of crying babies on flights, and visited the Chinese senior center near her home to take old folks for walks.
     
    Skateboarding is not verifiable, I don't think. Okay, bowling is a sport of sorts. If you're a champion bowler, you play in a bowling league, right? I had missed that...

    I just did a google search (eagerly!) trying to find the bowling league that she played in and find nothing.

    She took care of crying babies on flights... yeah, okay, fine... visited the senior center to take old folks for walks. Can we talk to any of those old folks? Nope, too bad. They died of old age...


    If there never really was a Betty Ong, these seem like an *awful* lot of details to conveniently provide to someone trying to investigate her mere existence.
     
    Ron, to me it looks more like a minimal set. There's very little to grab onto for somebody who was 45 years old. Look at her biography on the wikipedia page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betty_Ong#Biography

    There are really only 2 things that ever happened in this woman's life. 1. She was born. 2. She made a phone call from an airplane.

    It is pretty clear that 2. never happened. So that means she was born. Maybe that never happened either!

    On the nearly opposite end of the scale, if somebody tried to claim that Ron Unz never existed...


    If she supposedly graduated George Washington H.S. in 1974, wouldn’t her name be in the yearbook or maybe even in the local newspaper?
     
    Well, I guess. She was born, so there ought to be a birth certificate/record. They say she graduated that high school in 1974, so there should be school records. That's about it. If the criminals have a mole on the inside, can they falsify these things? I don't know. In any case, has anybody tried to check them? I haven't!

    Oh, and, of course, there are the employment records at American Airlines. She only ever worked for one airline, 14 years. So she started at the age of 31, no mention of her ever working anywhere else. Up to the age of 31, what was she doing? The woman's life history is pretty thin.

    Social security records... Could an insider, a mole, create a fake person? I don't know.

    Oh, by the way, in some private correspondence, a person told me that the people who allegedly died in the towers, there are social security records for them, at least a fair number, but you look for social security records for the people who allegedly died in the flights, and you find nothing. I don't know if this is true. But if it is, that would include Betty Ong, I guess....

    Oh, IRS... maybe one could request her IRS records. I noticed something a couple of years ago. Lee Harvey Oswald's IRS records are still top-secret classified, or they were just a few years ago anyway... Go figure...


    Via Facebook, wouldn’t it be relatively easy to locate some random classmate from her year and ask a few basic questions?
     
    I suppose. Suppose nobody remembers her. Then what? She doesn't seem like a very memorable person....

    Didn’t Freud say “Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar…”
     
    So you don't see anything suspicious at all about Betty Ong?

    Or consider this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potemkin_village#Examples_of_Potemkin_villages

    How many of these would you be fooled by? I don't know personally in my case. I assume I'd be fooled by some. The idea that everything is straight up and nobody is trying to bullshit you in this life... I mean, just look at that list of Potemkin village operations.

    Hoaxes really do exist! I'm sure the above list of Potemkin village type things is very incomplete actually...

    Anyway, if you say it's easy to verify to one's satisfaction that this is a real person, then you can put that to the test. My position is that I just don't know. And I re-iterate that something constructed to have very few points of verification is suspicious, it's like dropping Bin Laden's body in the sea is very suspicious, because the body is the main thing you'd have to show you really killed the guy... so you drop that in the sea! Most women at 45 have a kid or two, especially Chinese ethnics, and most are, or have been married.

    This woman never married or had kids. No mention of close friends. She loved to travel, consistent with being an air hostess, but doesn't mention what countries she liked.

    I'm going on far too much. To me, this is the bottom line: try to find any text written about this woman that gives the impression that it was written by somebody who really knew her. I cannot find anything. It just feels fake. I look at all that you can find about this person and I simply cannot convince myself that this is a real person. I mean, in my bones. It just doesn't feel right.

    Can the Intel agencies, the spooks, create a fake person like this? I don't know for sure, but if I had to bet money, I'd say they can and that this Betty Ong is an example.

    Well, I think the problem with Betty Ong’s Wikipedia entry being so thin is that she’d never done anything important in her life prior to her 9/11 phone call. The SF Chronicle article seemed reasonably detailed about her life, but none of the details were very interesting, so the person who casually added her Wikipedia page didn’t bother including them, e.g. mentioning that she’d spent years working in the family beef jerky store on Jackson St. before joining American Airlines. Nothing in the Betty Ong website seemed at all suspicious to me either, just boring and bland.

    But here’s the thing. The details about her—name, date and place of birth, H.S. and year of graduation, employment history, names of various friends and relatives—should certainly be enough for anyone to verify her *existence.* And if someone put in a little effort and found reasonable evidence that she didn’t exist, the results would be *gigantically* explosive, probably the most astonishing piece of ultra-hard evidence surrounding the 9/11 attacks to ever come out. All at once, our entire framework of reality would crumble, given the forces it would have taken to create a totally fictitious individual called Betty Ong.

    For that reason, I can’t believe that any half-sane 9/11 conspirators would produce such an enormous vulnerability in their 9/11 conspiracy for such tri