The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewAndrew Anglin Archive
Are You Ready for Alex Jones?
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll 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 three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Is it really actually happening?

It feels like a dream.

I’m waiting to make my new account, because apparently Twitter mods are doing a “last watch” and still banning returning heroes.

There is no “except for Anglin” clause in Elon’s pitch, and at this point, he is in so deep there is no reason to back down. So yes, of course I’m making an account.

Tomorrow, I’m going to try to draw up something like an official proposal on block list subscriptions to create “safe spaces” for people who are afraid of having their feelings hurt. The original and initial claim for the bannings at Twitter was “harassment,” which was actually “people saying mean things that allegedly hurt people’s feelings.” Allowing people to subscribe to block lists to block out all right-wing content from their feed is the solution to this. Twitter already has block lists, but they’re fan-made, so if Elon introduces a new one he can say “anyone who is worried about seeing mean words or being misgendered can subscribe to one of the block lists to protect themselves from speech they feel is dangerous to their personal mental health.”

After that, there aren’t any real issues. The “hate speech” arguments are ridiculous, and the only way they made this work was appealing to hurt feelings.

The media is calling for Congress to pass laws to prevent free speech.

They call it “harmful content.”

They are going to run stories of women and colored people being driven towards suicide by internet bullies, and putting in the block list mutes this completely. “Anyone can subscribe to any of the various levels of block list to protect themselves as they see fit.”

Also, people are saying Elon wants everyone’s ID card to post – he’s not saying that.

He’s just saying that people who are real people can get their blue checks universally if they want them. The background on this is long and probably not known to people who weren’t directly involved in it, but the blue check mark – which was originally just designed to prove that some account was the official account of some person or organization – has been used politically. Before people were banned, they often lost their blue check, and it was like “wait so are you saying you’re no longer sure this is the official account of the person in question?”

Then of course there are a bunch of rando journalists no one has ever heard of who want blue checks and don’t get them because Twitter never made an effort to give anyone who asks for a check a check. So there will be some automated process of scanning your ID card or passport, instead of a team of Indians deciding if you deserve a check.

That doesn’t have anything to do with anon accounts. It’s a totally different subject. Nothing Elon has said has implied that you will be required to give an ID to post if you just want to post anonymously.

I think this is really happening, and the only possible thing that will stop it at this point is if Elon is thrown in prison or Congress rushes through some kind of hate speech legislation and the Supreme Court ends the First Amendment.

It’s happening.

(Republished from The Daily Stormer by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Ideology, Science • Tags: Censorship, Elon Musk, Twitter 
Hide 45 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. I got banned from Twitter and Facebook cuz I said Jews beat Palestinians.

  2. Pixo says:

    They will ban you promptly assuming you use your real identity.

    When people like Elon talk about free speech, they don’t mean for nazis.

    Elon may back out though. Today he lost more money than any human previously did in a single day. Tesla dropped 12%, and given his leverage he lost more like 15% of his net worth.

    Here’s manic or coked up or something now. Perhaps he’ll stay that way long enough to close on the deal. The fact twtr is 50 not 54 shows there’s still serious doubt he’ll do it.

  3. Anonymous[369] • Disclaimer says:

    I think Elon recognizes that Alex Jones is Socrates, Von Neumann, and Bill Hicks all rolled into one.

    • Thanks: RobinG
    • LOL: Si1ver1ock
  4. I made the mistake of referring to the coronavirus as a bioweapon on twitter yesterday, and today found that I had been banned for it. Twitter support said I violated their rule against spreading misinformation about covid. Hope musk comes through and unbans me, as twitter can be a very fun website and a good place to expose normal folk to radical fringe Unz-type thought, sometimes with explosive results. it will be interesting to see just how committed musk is to free speech. I have a suspicion that he may be stricter on “sinophobic” hate speech than on the sort of humorous extremism that anglin or alex jones espouse.

  5. Alex Jones is a successful marketer and anti-racist loudmouth who likes to rave about how much he loves negroes and Jeebus. He puts himself forward as a patriot appears to be a kind of role model for Anglin, at least as far as self-promotion and adoration of the crucified rabbi is concerned. Musk too is at least a cultural Christian, as he’s said that the sayings of Jeebus contain “great wisdom”. How this sort of lunacy is supposed to advance the cause of white survival remains obscure. It’s just more of the same “brotherhood of man” and “love your enemy” hogwash that caused the problem in the first place. I predict no great change as a result of the Twitter takeover, if it happens. The downward spiral will continue.

    • LOL: 36 ulster
    • Replies: @Dumbo
    , @Durruti
  6. It’ showtime!
    The show must go on.
    A new set is put up to renew the interest in “American Democracy”.
    And you fuckwits are all in it, apart from the offended orange liverwurst.
    He will need and get a very special, tremendous, big, real big, never seen before invitation, delivered in person from Jew to Jew, with love from the musk ox to the orange dog.

  7. Musk BUYS the motherfuckers. Its just too funny. I had to break out the ceremonial whisky.

  8. Yeah, right, unz-talk is radical-type talk. Check. I believe you.

  9. The blender Musk, the fake Jewish champion artificially put up to push the Jews hoaxes on just about anything and right now the freedom of speech hoax. Wait for the election hoax and Musk pumping people up to vote, to give up their voice; that is what this renewed Twitter BS is about.

    Never forget that Musk offered Russia’s Putin a personal punchup, that Musk is providing the Jewkrainian Army communication in the Jews’ war against white Russia.
    Twitter is also put into the Musk ox’ hands so that he can himself subdue the rising criticism of his violent engagement in the Ukraina, the climate hoax with the Tesla and gvt. funded Tesla solar hoax.
    For Musk to rise, the German remnants have been violently forced to forego half of the car industry.

    I hope the want maker Musk will force on you dumb Americans an electric Volkstesla. Everything the hypocrite Musk is popularised on is stolen (incl. the “Greenback” to buy out the other psychopath).

  10. repugnant says:

    If it’s against the law, then you shouldn’t be allowed to post it. To post opposing views, nothing wrong with it. If it hurts your feelings, too bad. Free Speech is a bitch, but what’s the alternative? The old saying, “I don’t support what you just posted, but I fully support your freedom to post it”. As for me, I’ve never owned a Twitter or Face Book account. But I do subscribe to Bastyon and I read it everyday. Most of what I post there, I would’ve been banned long ago by the “big tech” thugs. So it’s refreshing to read uncensored and different viewpoints of a given issue. To date, I’ve never seen any hate speech at all at this website. This is what the “big boys” should be striving for. If you disagree with something, so be it. It’s no big deal.

    • Replies: @Rogue
  11. Dumbo says:
    @Dr. Robert Morgan

    Did you forget to take your medication today, “Doctor”? LOL.

    • Replies: @Mac_
  12. Dumbo says:

    Since I don’t use Twitter, it doesn’t make any difference to me. But it’s odd that they freak out when ONE media thing moves out of their control, when they still control all the others — YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, Google, Bing, CNN, etc etc.

  13. Is Musk’s mother happy for hiz boy?
    https://t.me/fakingspace/18210

    • Replies: @Anon
  14. I hate to get my hopes up, but could this change in Twitter, coupled with the recent Disney pushback and Virginia governor election, signal a new turning point in America’s rotten culture? It’s hard to imagine that anyone sane will ever be nostalgic for the era we have been living in. And if sanity does return, one day a program for old millenials and Gen. Z may come out with this theme song:

    Boy the way that Lil Nas twirked
    And Miley’s pansexual smirk
    We thought Tucker was a jerk.
    Those were the gays.

    And you knew who you were then
    Men were girls and girls were men
    Sister we could use a they like Rachel Levine again.

    On Grinder I met my first date
    We doxxed all the online hate.
    Gee my purple hair was great
    Those were the gayssss!

    • LOL: Bro43rd
  15. Thank goodness for Elon … where else but from Mr. Jones are we going to get news about the water turning frogs gay?

    • LOL: Emslander
    • Replies: @Bill
  16. Rogue says:
    @repugnant

    If it’s against the law, then you shouldn’t be allowed to post it.

    Agreed. That is the only criteria that should be applied – nothing else.

    And it’s irritating to see the US media cite stuff in the EU about big tech regulation of speech, as if this is something for the USA to emulate.

    The USA either has a first amendment or it doesn’t. The most powerful country in the EU (and without it the EU wouldn’t exist) is Germany. In Germany you can go to prison for showing public support for Russia in the Ukrainian war.

    Is this what the MSM in the US thinks is a good thing?

    You either have free speech or you don’t. Death threats or threats of violence – and hurling obscenities – are not free speech and shouldn’t be allowed. However, all other discourse should be.

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
  17. BuelahMan says:

    Twitter can suck an ass.

    • Thanks: fray juan crespi
  18. Emslander says:

    I don’t know how to use Twitter. Will I have to?

    • Replies: @Nervous in Stalingrad
  19. @Rogue

    Can you show where, specifically, the 1st amendment makes an exception for speech that’s against the law?

    Any law that makes some form of speech illegal, is itself violating the clear and unambiguous language in the 1st amendment. There can be no law that abridges speech of any kind that comports with the 1st amendment.

    That we have laws that violate the 1st and 2nd amendments is obvious. Just as obvious is that they are not in compliance with the Bill of Rights. That should indicate, to an intelligent person, that the laws are manufactured and enforced specifically to thwart the intent of the founders and that the legal system is itself a corrupt institution that lacks any moral authority.

    No one has any moral obligation to obey any law passed by a legislature and sanctioned by the courts that can boldly criminalize a natural right of free speech and self protection. That legislatures have invented laws to curtail human rights means we, the people, have absolutely no responsibility to obey any of the fatwas produced by that criminal gang.

    • Replies: @Rogue
    , @Kurt Knispel
  20. @Emslander

    I don’t know how to use Twitter. Will I have to?

    A better question might be: will you want to?

    There is a reason the epithet “hellsite” is often used to describe social media sites. I do not think it a coincidence that people who spend a lot of time on Twitter, TikTok, etc. have comparatively poorer mental health compared to those who do not.

    These sites are all about promoting the habit of giving into the less noble aspects of our natures (this is what makes them such a hit with the pitchforks-and-torches mob).

    You may want to take a good, hard look at the site before you spend any of your valuable time on it. I think it’s great that Elon Musk is buying the overpriced dump, but his doing so does nothing to convince me that Twitter isn’t merely another site run by the fast-buck types who want to sell my attention to others and give me nothing for it.

    • Replies: @Emslander
  21. Jiminy says:

    I wonder who’s backing Musk ? It’d be funny if he’s got a couple of silent Chinese partners.

    • Thanks: fray juan crespi
  22. Emslander says:
    @Nervous in Stalingrad

    You may want to take a good, hard look at the site before you spend any of your valuable time on it.

    I’ll take your advice. That was my plan, but more than that, I don’t even need to take a look. More time for prayer and golf. I already spend too much of my valuable time here and it is actually educational, for the most part.

  23. Rogue says:
    @RoatanBill

    Can you show where, specifically, the 1st amendment makes an exception for speech that’s against the law?

    I’m not American, so although I know about the 1st amendment, 2nd amendment etc, I’m certainly no expert on any of the details.

    But I would have presumed that certain speech cannot be legal.

    Such as issuing a death threat against someone. Or standing on a street corner and hurling loud obscenities at passers-by. Surely, that is not legal. And shouldn’t be if it is.

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
  24. Bill says:
    @The Alarmist

    Jones is obviously nuts, but it’s odd how this is the go-to proof. The only thing he got wrong was frogs instead of fish:

    https://www.ibtimes.com/study-birth-control-flushed-down-drains-creating-transgender-fish-2560992

  25. @Rogue

    Speech is vibrations in the air. It has no possible way of hurting anyone. There’s speech I don’t like and some you may not like, but to prevent another person from speaking is no one’s right. Speech is someones opinion, usually.

    It is the actions taken by people that do damage. The actions are the initiators attempt to cancel the speaker.

    Such as issuing a death threat against someone.

    This is fair warning in many cases. If a thief tries to steal my property I may decide to warn him before I kill him. His actions, not words, produce the warning. In the US there are laws against “brandishing” a weapon when showing someone a weapon hurts no one, and is used as a warning to try to stop some form of aggression, just as speech hurts no one.

    The laws are making things illegal that shouldn’t be and directly violate the clear wording of the primary law in the USA.

  26. @RoatanBill

    You are pointing to the crux of it all: The Law
    Jewmerica has in effect a sort of Roman Law, which is a personalised judges’ law favouring the afforder versus the Natural Law’s natural carrier (i.e. native inhabitant – germanic law: “Inhaber”).
    NL is a cooperative objektiv law of basic rights including natural land rights versus unrooted landpower of priests and nomades. Do you remember the standoff btw. federal agents and pasture right holders who claimed they had grazing rights for their cattle which are older than “the federation”?
    Right Law verus left handed law;
    Natural constitutes versus mingled powers;
    E.g. jurisdiction – judges – nominated by priests & politicians as selective (v. elective) subjects representing the lawmaker (as regular Roman like lawbreaker) and projecting his willful (subjectiv) rules onto natural objects (with a natural voice to keep and use).
    It is saying much that the First Amendment is called amendment – meaning that it is the first thing to amend when the selected judge of the priests & politicians needs to amend it? E.g. one is not allowed to talk, not allowed to process naturally with evidence (naturally carried in due diligence).
    Subjective rules versus communally agreed on law is also the current Russian complaint.

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
  27. @Kurt Knispel

    All the snowflakes that want the gov’t to “do something” every time they get upset are what keeps more and more laws being promulgated to take care of the after effects from the last set of idiotic laws. It’s a never ending process with the seed of the problem the first attempt to undermine natural law.

    The 1st and 2nd amendments got it right. No one, absolutely no one, has the right to limit a person’s speech and to limit their ability to protect themselves. That gov’t has abused their charter is obvious, or should be obvious, but there’s always some halfwit that wants the gov’t to step in when their feelings get hurt or their sense of propriety is offended.

    It’s the brain damaged voters that keep electing professional liars and thieves, the most organized criminal class in the country, to write the rules the rest of us are supposed to live by. I call bullshit on the whole affair.

    Just look at the big names in the Fed Gov. Pelosi, Schumer, Hillary, Trump, McConnell, etc. These are sociopaths that want to push people around for profit and the morons that vote give them cover to screw the population time and time again.

    • Replies: @Brutusk
  28. @Priss Factor

    “it feels like a dream”

    that’s some hella blatant controlled op

  29. @Priss Factor

    i got the boot for posting MAGA.

    dont worry, elon and his handlers won’t let you or i back on…they have your ip and phone number and ocular iris. you think that’s scary? well you scare them on twatter!

    re: twatter – quite frankly why go back to someone that never cared about you in the first place. if i want to watch monkeys flinging shit, i can go to the zoo. and it would be real. the fact this got blown up so big is sad indicator of our country.

    #freespeech

  30. RoatanBill: “… the laws are manufactured and enforced specifically to thwart the intent of the founders …”

    Yet the Founders recognized or at least claimed that natural rights could be forfeited through “due process of law” by trial of “a jury of one’s peers”. I’m not sure I agree, but that’s what they’d say. Even the right to life itself can be forfeited by committing treason, according to Article III of the Constitution. One of the first things they did after ratifying the Constitution was to pass the Alien and Sedition Acts, limiting free speech.

    If you want to argue for absolute free speech, you’d be better off with Lysander Spooner’s argument that we aren’t bound by the Constitution since we aren’t signatories to it and never agreed to it. Trying to reconcile society’s interests with individual rights is a difficult and likely insoluble problem. If “society” has interests it’s allowed to protect then it must be able to limit individual rights. But that slope is slippery, and once given that power, there’s no logical stopping point. It will inevitably be abused.

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
    , @Catiline
  31. I’ve been ignoring twitter since I started using online media long ago, but I’m happy to see the usual suspects getting busy giving libtards anxiety attacks and hypertension. I’m shadow banned on facebook but I’m grateful that I managed to reconnect with people I lost contact with through the years. Thanks, Zuck, I hope you only get prostate cancer!

    • LOL: Mario Partisan
  32. @Dr. Robert Morgan

    I’ll give credit where it’s due. The founders are responsible for the Bill of Rights and I think it was an excellent start to identifying things like the 1st and 2nd amendment that supersede gov’t ability to meddle with speech and self defense. Aside from that, the founders were just another gang that wanted power. They also came up with the ridiculous notion of a separation of powers all withing a monopoly gov’t. For anyone to believe in such nonsense requires the IQ of a turnip. That they came up with all the laws subsequent to the Constitution just shows their true nature as a mafia organization.

    The very idea that a charge of treason exists shows that the gov’t is superior to the people, at least in their minds and in practice, when the gov’t routinely lies to the public about serving them; all the servant of the people bullshit along with phony elections and being representatives of the people when in fact they are the people’s masters via theft, violence, fraud and coercion.

    Spooner, Nock, Mencken and others knew perfectly well what gov’t always is.

  33. Brutusk says:
    @RoatanBill

    I agree with you.

    So what if someone yells “Fire” in a crowded theater? Does that exonerate those theater patrons from assessing the truth of the statement? So, if someone perceives one’s statement as dangerous it can be deemed unlawful, with someone going to prison? That seems to be a very slippery slope.

    If I were in a movie house, and someone yelled “FIRE”, I would merely assess the situation to try to determine what, if anything, I should do.

    I could yell: “Woman!”, in a Turkish Bathhouse. Some “bathers” could be frightened in the fear that they could be exposed, or “doxed” as the degenerates that they may be (I think I’d like to visit an old bathhouse – sans the penetration and fluid exchanges). “Fear” of something by someone, is now a criteria for what constitutes a criminal act?

    In my opinion, there is no crime if there is no “injury” to someone else, associated with mens rea, a depraved heart.

    The “State” now claims injury if you violate their edicts, the injury being no more that noncompliance with those edicts. Preposterous nonsense.

    Now, in my state of Washington,USA, the vile tyrant Jay Inslee considers an “emergency” to consist of a situation wherein he cannot get money from the federal government.

    If I can build a nuclear weapon in my shop, I submit that it is my right to have it. And, it is my right to use it as I will. If I have the ability to fabricate a nuclear weapon on my own, doesn’t it follow that I would have the wherewithal to be responsible with it?

    I can solve all of the worlds problems in an afternoon, if I can simply cobble together one of those “evaporators” shown an episode of “Star Trek”, where I find someone on a satellite feed. and press a button. I have fun thinking of who would get “evaporated” first. Certainly no one who had good will toward their fellow man.

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
    , @simple mind
  34. @Brutusk

    There’s a concept in law called “prior restraint” and once upon a time, it was used as the argument to strike down insane laws. The vast majority of laws fall into that category today, but most people can’t see how vicious that is.

    Gun ownership, guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, is legislated away so that one needs state permission to own or carry a gun, jumping through hoops that I consider an infringement expressly prohibited in the 2nd. The law considers the average person guilty of some malicious intent and uses the safety canard to get the shallow thinkers to agree.

    Speeding and other traffic laws are concocted for the fine money they provide the municipality, but are sold as a safety issue. There were many times I asked the cop to show me the injured party or property and just got blank stares. I even asked a trial judge to reveal the injured party or property and his retort was that the law had been injured; a practiced comment.

    Getting on a plane assumes you’re a bad guy. The covid nonsense assumed you were going to kill people by breathing. The list of inane laws designed to reduce our natural freedoms to privileges conferred by the bureaucracy grows unrelentingly. The voters that provide the veil of legitimacy to the gov’t mafia are co conspirators with the sociopaths that get elected.

  35. Someone should inform Elon Musk and the ignoramous Andrew Anglin that a close reading of the US Constitution makes clear that the original intent of the Founders was that one day a fat Paki bitch would be empowered to force white men to keep their cracker face holes shut.

  36. Durruti says:
    @Dr. Robert Morgan

    crucified rabbi

    I am unaware that Jesus Christ was a “rabbi.” Some, historians suggest he was of Greek ancestorage. Most write he came from the Tribe. I vote for Greek.

    The Story in the New Testament account contains all we know of Jesus. We must understand that our religious Belief/s are based on Faith, not hard, Primary Source evidence. We are free (I hope), to believe the accounts in the Bible, Old &, or, New Testament, or in other Religious works, or not.

    I am a Christian of the New Testament. A Deist. The New Testament contains accounts of the kindness of Jesus (as compared to the Genocidal acts of Moses & Abraham in the Old). The extermination of all but one in Jericho (as an example), including animals, & children & elderly, & women, was the first Holocaust (story). And which group receives the credit for committing this Holocaust? Which group is proud of this storied deed, and gladly takes credit for it? They, and some misguided ‘Christians’ sing the songs commemorating this extermination of an entire Nation, the “Battle of Jericho.”

    Jesus created food, taught mercy, overturned some tables, and saved lives. Those are the stories I like.

    The song below:

    https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Mahailia+Jackson%2c+Battle+of+Jericho+song&qpvt=Mahailia+Jackson%2c+Battle+of+Jericho+song&FORM=VDRE

    Or Elvis:

    https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=song+battle+of+jericho+elvis&qpvt=song+battle+of+jericho+elvis&FORM=VDRE

    Apologies for this digression.

    Welcome! Alex Jones!

    • Replies: @simple mind
  37. Mac_ says:
    @Dumbo

    ~ au contraire, in my opinion as most dokturz pump pharma, doctor Morgan uses something more akin to true herbs and dispenses them with side dose of right smarm.

  38. Durruti: “I am unaware that Jesus Christ was a “rabbi.” ”

    Then you are like most Christians and haven’t read the Bible. Jesus is addressed by his disciples as “rabbi” in many verses.

    Examples:

    Mark 11:21
    Being reminded, Peter *said to Him, “Rabbi, look, the fig tree which You cursed has withered.”

    John 1:49
    Nathanael answered Him, “Rabbi, You are the Son of God; You are the King of Israel.”

    John 3:2
    this man came to Jesus by night and said to Him, “Rabbi, we know that You have come from God as a teacher; for no one can do these signs that You do unless God is with him.”

    Matthew 26:25
    And Judas, who was betraying Him, said, “Surely it is not I, Rabbi?” Jesus *said to him, “You have said it yourself.”

    Matthew 26:49
    Immediately Judas went to Jesus and said, “Hail, Rabbi!” and kissed Him.

    Durruti: “The New Testament contains accounts of the kindness of Jesus …”

    According to the gospels, he takes the typical attitude of a Jewish rabbi toward non-Jews, i.e., he considers them “dogs”. Cf. Mark 7:24-30 where the Prince of Peace sadistically forces a white woman to say she is a dog before he will grant her a miracle.

    • LOL: simple mind
  39. Amasius says:

    According to the gospels, he takes the typical attitude of a Jewish rabbi toward non-Jews, i.e., he considers them “dogs”. Cf. Mark 7:24-30 where the Prince of Peace sadistically forces a white woman to say she is a dog before he will grant her a miracle.

    They’ve never made a secret about hating us, which is what makes jewlove so sad. Some Christians actually know about this episode and have referred to it positively, like Martin Luther for instance:

    He speaks highly of the Jews as having been chosen by God as the instruments for the promulgation of His message to the world. “The Jews,” he says, “are of the best blood on earth” (Luther, l.c. xxv. 409); “through them alone the Holy Ghost wished to give all books of Holy Scripture to the world; they are the children and we are the guests and the strangers; indeed, like the Canaanitish woman, we should be satisfied to be the dogs that eat the crums which fall from their master’s table” (xxv. 260).

    https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/10196-luther-martin?msclkid=ffc7bbf3c6dc11ec909c78449a8a1728

    Only after being scorned by those he fetishized did this weird idiot go on the warpath as the infamous “anti-Semitic” Luther. Meanwhile the jewish “scriptures” had been placed at the center of Western Cultural life thanks to his earlier labors and philosemitism– even LARPing as jews like the Puritans or claiming to be the “true jews” like in the British Israelism and Christian Identity movements– has remained a constant tendency to present.

  40. As the trial lawyer Gerry Spence one said, “Free Speech is available to those that can afford it.”

  41. Anon[150] • Disclaimer says:
    @Kurt Knispel

    Kurt Knispel, the Oberster SA-Führer posting from a Tel Aviv bunker while licking matzo balls. Why don’t you tell the truth about yourself, Krispy?

  42. @Priss Factor

    Jews always beat Palestinians, I’ll take a Jew over an Arab any day of the week.

    They also beat the Palestinians (beside other Arabs), in like 50 wars in 50 years,

  43. @Durruti

    If Jesus was Greek, why did he speak Aramaic?

    Were all the other Aramaic Galileans also Greek? So all the Disciples, Apostles, and the millions of people around them were really Greeks? Maybe we are all Greeks.

    Funny that Greek boy, hanging around the Jewish Temple, debating with priests and elders. Look like we need to change the New Testament:

    “there is neither J̶e̶w̶ Greek nor Greek in Christ”

    Pass the Kalamatas and Bakalava!

  44. @Brutusk

    If I can build a nuclear weapon in my shop, I submit that it is my right to have it. And, it is my right to use it as I will. If I have the ability to fabricate a nuclear weapon on my own, doesn’t it follow that I would have the wherewithal to be responsible with it?

    You sound like the right to be mentally ill, or a lifetime child

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
$
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Andrew Anglin Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
Becker update V1.3.2