The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
 TeasersEric Striker Blogview

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
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
🔊 Listen RSS

Congregation Beth Jacob Ohev Shalom in Williamsburg, Brooklyn will be hosting one of the largest gatherings of “antifa” in New York City in recent memory this Saturday.

The event is being headlined by “antifa” punk band (A) Truth, whose lead singer and drummer Christian Erazo also runs its sponsors “EastRev” (an anarchist punk record label) and “Brigada 71,” a soccer hooligan gang affiliated with the New York Cosmos.

Organizations set to make official appearances include Marisa Holmes’ Metropolitan Anarchist Coordinating Council (MACC) and “antifa” prisoner support group NY Anarchist Black Cross (NYABC), whose members are based out of Bushwick and Brighton Beach.

Interestingly, a New York chapter of the Socialist Rifle Association will also be recruiting. Draconian laws in NYC make it almost impossible to own any kind of firearm. The SRA is a communist militia group that gained notoriety after it emerged that the Dayton mass shooter, Connor Betts, was an active member.

The groups are coming together to raise money for left-wing extremist David Campbell, who was sentenced last October to 18 months in prison for a brutal unprovoked 2018 assault against a middle aged man attending a Trump-themed event in Manhattan.

The Jewish community in Brooklyn has been in the national headlines lately, claiming that their houses of worship are unsafe. Massive marches, escalating NYPD surveillance and large federal grants to Jewish institutions have been dispatched in response.

The decision of a Synagogue to invite soccer hooligans to host an “antifa” punk rock concert featuring bands with lyrics calling for terrorism and murder to raise money for a violent criminal makes their claims of feeling unsafe suspect, to say the least. None of the organizations involved are hiding what they’re about.

Gentrification in Brooklyn has led to a massive uptick in anarchist paramilitary organizing in New York City, particularly in the neighborhoods of Bushwick, Williamsburg and Greenpoint. Members of the national media have close ties to these groups, such as Teen Vogue columnist Kim Kelly who is a member of MACC and likes to “report” on her own events, Right Wing Watch’s Jared Holt who has been spotted in the past socializing with members of these crews, and Kelly Weill of the Daily Beast who is sympathetic to them and a minor celebrity in their circles.

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Antifa, Jews, Political Correctness 
🔊 Listen RSS

Nationalists are on the rise in Slovakia.

The People’s Party – Our Slovakia, led by charismatic rebel Marian Kotleba, is polling at 14% ahead of parliamentary elections next February. This will almost double the seats they won in 2016, putting them ahead of all the competing conservative and liberal parties and making them second only to the ruling socialist party, Smer, which is polling at 18.7%.

Kotleba is campaigning against organized gypsy crime, Zionist power, American influence and the European Union. They have combined this with a pro-family socialist economic platform, which will reassert Slovakian sovereignty, defeat high finance, and put the economy back in the hands of the struggling Slovakian people. The group is known for its volunteer projects and high levels of civic engagement.

They also honor the memory of an important Slovak independence leader, the Catholic Priest Jozef Tiso, who aligned with Germany during World War II.

Their fight for public space and representation has not been easy. After breaking into the parliament in 2016, The People’s Party’s political rivals attempted to ban the organization as a “neo-Nazi” threat to “democracy.” The courts found that banning the group would risk shaking public faith in the system even further.

Kotleba himself has been prosecuted for refusing to mince words about gypsy violence. He was fined 10,000 Euros in 2016 over comments he made on the subject. Last year a member of the People’s Party was expelled from the parliament for “hate speech.”

Statistics on “Roma” crime are difficult to find in the West and concerns on the matter are dismissed by neo-liberals as mindless bigotry, but in the United Kingdom the influx of Slovakian gypsies has caused outcry from locals. In Sheffield, a multicultural district, they beat and rob random elderly people in the street, causing public terror that has even caused black and Pakistani residents to complain.

In Glasgow, a criminal ring led by gypsies with Slovakian citizenship outraged Scottish courts after being busted for kidnapping and selling Slovakian girls to local Pakistani men over a five year period.

Across the continent, the influx of gypsies from Eastern Europe to the West has fueled disenchantment with the European Union’s free movement clause, including in leftist and liberal municipalities. The crisis is real.

Slovak media is now consolidating and targeting Kotleba and his group with propaganda. One instance they are trying to use was when Kotleba introduced a Rock Against Communism band, Biely odpor, who sang a song called “White Slovakia.” This may not have the effect on popular opinion the system expects.

The vice chair of the Progressive Party, the gypsy Irena Biháriová, is planning to use litigation against The People’s Party in a quest to cheat the electoral system. The Progressive Party, a coalition of pro-EU social liberals known for their affluent “hipster” base, is the party represented by president Zuzana Čaputová. While Western media hailed her victory last summer, her party is as of now polling third behind The People’s Party.

 
🔊 Listen RSS

Many Americans are rightfully on guard when it comes to their Second Amendment rights. There is a whole subculture, lobby and multitude of groups dedicated to celebrating firearms, monitoring political attacks on gun rights and fighting against them.

On the other hand, another cherished freedom, the right to express your beliefs, has been totally ceded to Jewish dominated left-wing activist groups, like the ACLU.

Those ignorant of our nation’s history, and especially of Zionist mobilizations in the present, live with the comforting lie that free speech is an inviolable right.

Today, the Jewish community in the United States, which has wrongfully earned a reputation for harboring civil libertarian views, has been at war with the very concept of the First Amendment.

Whether it’s former CEO of the National Constitution Center Richard Stengel writing opinion pieces calling for hate speech laws, or Jonathan Greenblatt of the Anti-Defamation League calling on Congress to act against “anti-Semitic” opinions on the internet, it’s clear that the Jewish community no longer respects this freedom and is working tirelessly to abolish it.

The cultural taboo against questioning the sanctity of the First Amendment have quickly been eroded since the election of Donald Trump. Today, panels discussing calling for limits on free speech are no longer exclusively populated by communist academics or blue-haired “SJWs,” but by actual Attorney Generals supposedly tasked with upholding civil liberties, like Josh Shapiro.

The ACLU, which won a free speech absolutist reputation after its army of largely Jewish lawyers defended brownshirt wearing “Nazis” in Skokie, today has abandoned this role and largely refuses to defend comparatively less controversial “hate speech” and political assembly after realizing nationalists are now a serious political force.

Looking at the history of First Amendment cultural and legal battles, the pattern becomes clear: the Jews claiming to be fighting for free speech only did so to create space for unpopular left-liberal movements in the 1960s and 70s. Today, the Jews and the left have been absorbed by the neo-liberal establishment and no longer has any movements challenging the status quo, so they have lost interest in defending the right for citizens to assemble to try and effect social change, which has been disastrous for today’s dissidents since all advocacy groups are in their hands.

Don’t Assume Anything About Your Rights

Whitney v. California, decided in 1927, is seen by some as one of the most important contemporary affirmations of the right to belong to dissident political organizations and contribute to the marketplace of ideas.

Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis ruled with the majority in overturning the prosecution of Anita Whitney, who had founded a communist organization labeled a criminal syndicate in California, much to the chagrin of Herbert Hoover. Brandeis, a Zionist activist, made this decision at a time when the distinctions between Zionism and the heavily Jewish communist movement were not so cut-and-dry.

In his opinion, the Jewish justice Louis Brandeis wrote passionately about the moral importance of the free exchange of ideas in a liberal democracy, winning him the reputation as a Jewish pioneer of civil liberties. He was one of the first judges to promote the idea that open debate allows good to triumph over evil.

But Brandeis’ reputation as a lover of free speech and ideological diversity is brought into question when looking at a later ruling by another Jewish Justice, Felix Frankfurter, who Brandeis closely mentored and for years used as a personal mouthpiece.

In 1952, Frankfurter established one of the first precedents for European-style “hate speech” laws in American history.

The case of Beauharnais v. Illinois was remarkably similar to Whitney v. California. A man in Chicago posted leaflets in his city bringing attention to black crime, and called on whites to join his political advocacy movement. The materials did not express any violent sentiments.

Frankfurter, authoring the opinion in the 5-4 ruling upholding Beauharnais’ conviction under Illinois hate speech statutes, declared that Beauharnais was guilty of “group-libel” against blacks by referring to their role in the increased crime rate, and that libel was not protected by the First Amendment.

“Hate speech” laws in Europe are premised on this same assertion, that generalizations about groups constitute “libel” and can thus be prosecuted.

What is most disturbing about Beauharnais v. Illinois is that the Supreme Court has yet to overturn it.

The closest precedent some legal scholars cite as overruling it was New York Times v. Sullivan in 1964, where it is claimed that SCOTUS found in favor of free speech above libel law.

But here too, we find that the political nature of the dispute may have played a greater role than the principle of free speech itself.

In the case, the Jewish controlled New York Times ran an advertisement from of a pro-Martin Luther King organization making outlandish and slanderous claims against the police in Montgomery, Alabama. A recent article by the Los Angeles Review of Books meticulously documents how Jews were in charge of every nook and cranny of the “civil rights movement” as well.

L.B. Sullivan, the Montgomery Public Safety Commissioner, decided to take them to court to clear his police department’s name. It was broadly accepted that many of the claims in the ad were false and he won his case in the Alabama state court, but upon later Supreme Court challenge it found that libel statutes did not apply to the white policemen because they could not prove “malice” in the printing of said lies.

Today, the free speech law and the political conditions of their application remains opaque. While this author believes conservative anti-environmentalism is absurd, the Supreme Court’s refusal to clarify the National Review‘s right to give a subjective opinion in the Mann v. National Review defamation case last November suggests our higher courts don’t find our First Amendment to be as sacred as we once assumed.

In this case, a college professor is suing the National Review for libel over an opinion piece questioning his data on global warming. The National Review has so far spent millions of dollars defending itself over multiple years, often being dealt crushing defeats in lower courts. They have the support of many major think-tanks and big money over an issue far less “controversial” than race or Jewish power, and yet they still have been unable to find a court willing to unambiguously defend their right to weigh in on a hot-button political issue of the day.

 
🔊 Listen RSS

The FBI has since the summer been under immense political pressure to turn up “white supremacist domestic terrorists.” As with leftists and Muslims during previous political crackdowns, the FBI is dusting off the old playbook and manufacturing them.

The latest case is a group called The Base, a small organization that is considered the most extreme of all the right-wing groups. Their members have been raided across the country in the past few days. The latest is a man in Wisconsin who, for all the noise made in the media about terrorism, is only charge is in relation to breaking a Synagogue’s window.

The FBI Gets Tough on Illegal Immigration

The FBI released a press release celebrating its “bust” of three Base members in Maryland. According to the media, these three men, one an undocumented immigrant from Canada, were planning a terrorist attack at the upcoming Virginia gun right’s rally.

Governor Ralph Northam has alluded to this as the excuse for his decision to suspend his state’s open-carry laws at the demonstration, which gun rights groups have appealed on Constitutional grounds to no avail.

The actual criminal complaint, however, does not mention this supposed plot at all. According to the affidavit filed by FBI agent Rachid T. Harrison, the men in question are only being accused of immigration and gun crimes.

According to Harrison, Brian Mark Lemley and William Garfield Bilbrough broke the law when they picked Canadian Patrik Jordan Mathews up in Michigan after he crossed the Canadian border. Then they helped him rent a motel room, and later, Lemley allowed Mathews to stay with him in an apartment in Delaware. Finally, the men allegedly modified a rifle, went to the store to buy ammunition and paper targets, and then took the rifle to a gun range, where the FBI had set up a stationary camera to watch them shoot it.

After a long fishing expedition, the federal government was reduced to charging them with a multitude of immigration related crimes – an ironic political statement by them, to say the least – and a number of gun technicalities, partially relating to the modified firearms upper receiver and allowing “illegal alien” Patrik Mathews to fire it at the range.

There is nothing in the affidavit about any conspiracy to commit violence at the rally in Virginia. That story appears to be concocted to help Governor Northam stave off legal appeals for his unconstitutional “State of Emergency” rules.

FBI-Manufactured Georgia Murder Plot

The only serious charges related to “The Base” (which the media pretends is named after Al Qaeda) is the arrest of another group of three men in Georgia for an alleged plot to murder two anarchists belonging to the left-wing paramilitary group “Atlanta Antifa.”

According to the official criminal complaint, an undercover FBI agent had infiltrated the group, and got close to alleged Luke Austin Lane, Michael John Helterbrand, and Jacob Kaderli, whose ages range from teens to mid 20s. The FBI agent was instrumental in goading the young men, planning the murder, and providing important materials for the conspiracy.

It began in early October 2019, at a meeting of Base members, where a man not being charged or named referred to as “TB [The Base] Member” (in other words, an FBI informant) began talking to Kaderli about his idea to start killing local militants belonging to “antifa.”

Kaderli then tepidly agreed with the idea in theory, but went on to talk about his plan to join the French Foreign Legion. “TB Member” then began mocking him for his “escapism.”

“TB member,” then told him that if he wanted to engage in violence, he had a plan to kill “antifa” that he had been discussing with Lane, and then the undercover FBI agent. Kaderli and Lane did not pursue this idea further.

Weeks later, the undercover agent brought the idea up again to the men. Lane and Kaderli are cited as not wanting anything to do with “TB member’s” plot.

After putting their cellphones away, Lane confided to the undercover agent the details of the informant’s plan, and that he resolutely wanted nothing to do with it.

The federal agent, who presented himself as an experienced killer, continued to persist, until finally persuading Helterbrand, Lane and Kaderli to agree to the “plot” months later in December.

Throughout the entire planning phase, Lane expressed doubts, and kept putting it off, making all kinds of excuses along the way to not appear weak or unwilling.

The three men then joined the FBI agent in plotting the murder, including the house that was being targeted. Interestingly, Lane had expressed to the agent that he wanted to “kill” the other informant, though this is not extrapolated in the document. The agent obtained a car to drive them to the home of the anarchists, and later they were arrested.

Would the murder have ever happened without the FBI entrapping these men? No. If these men go to trial, the hasty, sloppy nature of this phony plot invented by law enforcement will be revealed.

The FBI Is a Political Actor

While the FBI expends massive amounts of resources trying to gin up phony murder plots by 19-year-old “white domestic terrorists,” actual homicides are going unresolved at record high rates. They are not a law enforcement body.

In the Soviet Union they rarely prosecuted people directly for political (non-violent) crimes alone. Alexander Solzhenitsyn for example was imprisoned under Article 58 of the Soviet constitution as a terrorist. This provided the NKVD with similar leeway to trample on civil liberties that the Department of Homeland Security and FBI enjoy after 9/11.

The United States at the moment does not have an exact equivalent to Article 58, so they are forced to dig deep in the bag for archaic and rarely prosecuted statutes to target people for their politics (“Riot Act,” “Harboring an Illegal Alien”), some which been thrown out of court and made them look like fools (the FBI has a 93% conviction rate).

To make up for this, the organization representing FBI employees has been lobbying the government for a new law that looks like a slightly reworded version of the Soviet law against “counter-revolutionaries.” They are frustrated that groups labeled “white supremacist” by and large go out of their way to obey the law. This is true even for the most extreme of the groups, like “The Base,” whose leader according to the affidavit instructs followers not to talk about illegal activity in the network.

So far the only mass shooter in the last few years who was a card-carrying member of a political group was Dayton gunman Connor Betts, who belonged to the communist Socialist Rifle Association, which marches besides “antifa” at demonstrations.

 
🔊 Listen RSS

According to the technocratic consensus, developed countries with high median ages and low birth rates need mass migration to pay for pensions.

What they don’t explain is how importing millions of people to gain employment as cleaners, Uber drivers and retail workers at reduced wages in big expensive cities is going to replenish the coffers with enough to cover the pensions of retired middle class Germans. 25% of job-seeking “refugees” have never even attended school. They consume less and are more likely to try and cheat the welfare system due to pressure to send money back to their families at home or pay back debts to smugglers.

The German economy is currently shrinking, so even the menial jobs immigrants are taking tend to be temp work. Many of them live as badly or worse as in their home countries.

Natives too are feeling the burden of these disastrous liberal-capitalist policies. A new, likely conservative estimate released last Thursday claims that more than 1 out of every 5 German pensioners live in poverty (19%). The numbers are projected to get worse in the future.

At the same time, the German government spent $26.6 billion dollars in 2018 to “integrate” millions of new migrants. This is enough to give every one of Germany’s 22.9 million pensioners a substantial pay bump. This is even more true if it were means-tested for middle and working class people.

Instead, the tragic irony of forced emigration has become increasingly normal for old people. While some Germans choose to retire abroad out of their own free will, a growing number are moving to the Balkans or Asia due to their inability to afford daily living expenses in their own land.

In response to this, Merkel’s conservative Christian Democratic Union begrudgingly agreed to a compromise with the Social-Democrats after the latter threatened to upend the country’s fragile ruling coalition. A paltry $1.5 billion will be allocated to deal with this crisis.

The state does not pinch pennies when it comes to paying Jewish pensioners abroad, however. German taxpayers are paying a record $560 million every year to so-called “Holocaust survivors,” which translates to about an extra $300 dollars every month for the beneficiaries, who number at about 225,000. In 2018, they bumped the usual yearly sum paid largely to Jews in Israel and America after accepting that Jews who spent the whole war in Algeria are “survivors” too.

The eligibility for this free money is pretty open ended: if you are Jewish and lived in any country the Axis powers ever had a presence in during World War II, you get paid. The asset limit is $500,000 to apply.

Advocating for a Germany that puts Germans first is illegal under the constitution the Allies imposed. While the first victims of this system tend to be the working class, the elderly and other politically invisible people, the comfortable middle classes who handed Merkel her narrow re-election in the name of “stability” should know that they will soon crumble into nothingness themselves.

 
• Category: Economics, Foreign Policy • Tags: Germany, Immigration, Jews 
🔊 Listen RSS

Last year, the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Lecia Brooks helped lead a group of heavily armed communist extremists through downtown Stone Mountain, Georgia.

According to reporting by the Springfield News Sun, out of the crowd of 150 or so Brooks marched with and then officially addressed, “many of the protesters had handkerchiefs over their faces, and several were armed.”

Brooks then identified herself with and lauded the hammer-and-sickle waving, assault rifle wielding mob, who held signs calling for violence: “We turned them back at Stone Mountain, and we can turn them back at every turn. We just have to show up,” she proclaimed.

Video of the rally leaves no room for plausible deniability about the nature of the militants. None of the groups at this rally were made up of MSNBC liberals or normal Democrats. The SPLC officials knowingly marched with people who want to impose communism and anarchism on America by the use of armed violence, and were proud to use them to terrorize their political opponents.

The display was so disturbing that the SPLC’s supporters in the mass media quickly memoryholed the supposed victory against Confederate heritage groups. The Huffington Post, which apparently sent journalists to cover the event, wrote one small article about it and did not mention the many Soviet flags or masked, armed men sporting red armbands.

In spite of her close ties with violent left-wing extremists, Brooks found herself testifying in Congress on behalf of the SPLC today, taking credit for financial and social media deplatforming of “hate groups” and demanding more government action against “hate groups.”

None of the “lone wolves” involved in attacks Brooks spoke about received any kind of organized funding for their weapons or plans, nor did they act on behalf of any specific organization, yet in her testimony she disingenuously ties them to the myriad of advocacy groups and 501(c)(3)’s on the SPLC’s arbitrary “hate group” list.

Brooks then condemned attempts at applying the law to “antifa” and “Black Identity Extremists,” instead urging the government to use all of its resources against law-abiding nationalists to prevent them from having the resources to exercise their constitutional rights to free speech and assembly.

According to Brooks, the SPLC has played an important role in Amazon, Paypal, and Facebook’s censoring of books, charities, ideas and opinions. In a 2018 poll, 72% of Americans stated that social media censorship is politically motivated, not a national security question. 51% said that the government should step in to protect political speech. The agenda of Silicon Valley, who today give the SPLC and Anti-Defamation League the power to decide who can and cannot use the internet public square, is extremely unpopular.

That the House of Representatives defers to Brooks on these matters is yet another brazen failure in actually representing the public, or protecting it from the wanton political violence and harassment of private citizens anarchists and communists commit in America all the time and brag about. Their close ties to the SPLC play a role in why the justice and legal system is applied differently to members of “antifa.”

Brooks is not the only person with extremist ties at the SPLC. One of its “senior investigative reporters,” a former BDSM writer named Michael Edison Hayden, was named by extremism researcher Dr Eoin Lenihan as a journalist with close ties with “antifa,” which is supported by threatening messages Hayden has sent in the past openly threatening to send his associates in “antifa” to their family’s home. Hayden has made a name for himself for stalking outside the homes of wives, children and elderly relatives of people targeted by the SPLC for their political views, in attempts to silence them.

Another SPLC employee, Hannah Gais, who attended the Congressional hearing with Brooks, also has significant ties to violent anarchist and communist groups.

These people do not belong anywhere near decisions made by the state or law enforcement. If you feel your basic rights as an American are being eroded, as 92% of Americans do, this is a big piece of the puzzle.

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: American Media, Antifa, Political Correctness, SPLC 
🔊 Listen RSS

The Red Guards are at it again.

Last October, the group of Maoist radicals crashed an “anti-fascist” meeting coordinated by the Democratic Socialists of America and various local anarchists.

Two days ago Heidi Sloan, a DSA hipster running for Congress in Austin, was shoved, egged, and covered in red paint by them in an alley. This came after they managed to disrupt a major DSA canvassing event for Bernie Sanders organized by Sloan.

For outsiders, the feud between Maoists and the DSA/Bernie movement is confusing, but it makes perfect sense when one looks at the class and racial composition of the respective organizations.

The Red Guards are unique among leftist groups due to their ability to recruit non-whites and criminal types who detest the nerdy, effeminate DSA, which is largely composed of affluent cosmopolitans working in the FTE (people who work in finance-technology-electronics) sector, who are broadly white and Jewish.

There are many more visible blacks in the MAGA movement than in the Bernie Sanders campaign and DSA, who have made the bourgeois obsession with “racism” one of their top issues in the last few years.

Further driving the antagonism is the DSA’s support for the US occupation in Syria, as well as various CIA concocted “regime change” astroturf protests in Lebanon, Hong Kong, Iran, and so on. Most “tankies” like the Red Guards, Party for Socialism and Liberation, and Workers World Party are principled anti-imperialists and oppose American meddling everywhere.

The main issue though is that Maoists reject electoral politics, preferring “protracted people’s war,” which includes shutting down left-liberals.

How much further the Red Guards will seek to escalate in Austin remains a mystery. But the left is gradually beginning to fracture.

History has shown that when anarchists and communists run out of “fascists” and “reactionaries” to attack, they end turning their brutality on one another. Let’s see if the liberals at The Intercept and The Guardian think “Nazi-punching” and “milkshaking” are still funny when these violent elements start targeting them.

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Antifa, Bernie Sanders 
🔊 Listen RSS

The national controlled media is celebrating the arrest of dissident lawyer Augustus Invictus, who is accused of kidnapping his wife and children. He is being stacked with charges and could face an eye-popping 65 years if convicted of all of them.

Invictus has been on the system’s radar for the past year due to his role in providing legal defense for political dissidents. If the charges themselves are not political, the media coverage attempting to convict before he even gets his court date certainly is.

Detective Matthew Beech was able to convince a judge that he was a risk and had to be denied bail by reading an online writing of his completely out of context: “The only aim is the destruction of buildings or person plaguing the earth.” These are the bad faith tactics law enforcement have been using after Charlottesville to punish people for their alleged or stated political beliefs.

A correspondent who visited Invictus told National Justice that while he could not legally discuss the case at all, he did complain about his horrific treatment in the Florida jail system. After having his bail rejected, he was automatically placed in solitary confinement, which the United Nations calls torture and an “extortion technique.” Putting defendants in solitary confinement is a tactic law enforcement uses to torture suspects into pleading guilty, even if they are innocent. Inside, he was denied his special religious diet. The journalist who interviewed him said he looked skinny and malnourished. He has now been transferred to South Carolina.

Evidence in Invictus’ case, as with many domestic disputes, is weak. Damning rumors about the nature of the accusations abound but cannot be officially verified. By and large, while he is suffering, Invictus appeared highly confident that his case would go nowhere, according to our source.

Unrelated to the case, many of the usual suspects are tripping over one another to try and do as much injustice to a “white nationalist” as possible. And make money in the process.

One bizarre case is a Go Fund Me put online by a Florida woman named Alexandria Fanella, who has capitalized on the media attention Invictus’ case has garnered to tap anarchists and liberals for free money.

So far, she has raised over $2,000 after supporters of “antifa” began circulating her appeal on social media. In her plea, she claims to have been hospitalized multiple times for mental illness and needs the public to pay her rent or else the imprisoned Augustus Invictus will “retaliate” against her.

According to Fanella, Invictus is a threat to her safety because he called the police on her for stalking him and then put a magic spell on her.

Fanella appears to be little more than an angry ex-girlfriend, who as recently as September 2018 identified herself as a prostitute and has repeatedly tried to profit from divulging intimate details related to her romantic relationship with “neo-Nazi” Invictus.

Augustus Invictus is expected to have his first court hearing in mid-February.

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Alt Right, Judicial System, White nationalism 
🔊 Listen RSS

Last year, AT&T got a $3 billion dollar tax break from the GOP’s “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act” giveaway to the rich.

During its push for the tax cut, the telecommunications giant promised it would create thousands of new middle class jobs. One thing they left out: not for Americans.

An excellent investigation conducted by Axios revealed that since the law passed, AT&T has teamed up with Indian outsourcing firms to replace thousands of its employees with H-1Bs. To add insult to injury, 90% of these laid off workers are being forced to personally train their replacements.

Insight into this decision making process can be seen by a public list of demands from the Jew Paul Singer’s hedge fund, Elliot Management, from last October. In it, Singer’s Jewish speculation network, which owns a large stake in AT&T, orders the company to use its big profits to boost stock buybacks, expand its corporate board, and “enhance operational efficiency” – code for laying workers off and replacing them with white collar immigrants. The GOP tax cut bill has further encouraged other forms of parasitism and abuse by incentivizing outsourcing.

The Republican party and Trump have played dead during this scandalous process, even though Trump famously campaigned alongside American tech workers victimized by rapacious capitalism and abuses of the H-1B immigration racket. Singer is one of the GOP’s top donors, and has also given millions to Trump after he won in 2016. This is bribery to get politicians to look away.

Trump’s new tune on H-1Bs is that America needs “smart people,” even as plenty of smart American workers are laid off by the thousands and wages in STEM jobs have continued to stagnate. His claim during his atrocious interview with Laura Ingraham is that foreign companies are dying to open up shop in America, but “can’t” find workers. Are tech jobs yet another sector full of work “Americans don’t want to do”?

From a purely market liberal point of view, Trump has a point. Wages must be watered down in the US if the country hopes to attract foreign capitalists and the easiest way to do that is via immigration. The problem with that is the increased investment provides no benefit to ordinary people if we are forced to become Bangladesh or Mexico in the process.

AT&T is using its tax-cuts like every other corporation has after Trump’s sole signature legislative achievement: stock buybacks, mergers, and paying middlemen to traffic immigrants to replace domestic workers. IBM and AT&T are now declaring that they are in a “multi-year strategic alliance.”

All the tax-cuts in the world will not compel AT&T to innovate. Most American technological advances are a product of government funded research and development, an idea borrowed from the Soviet and Third Reich planned economies to make up for the inefficient allocation of capital and human resources in our system. In 2018, the percentage of GDP allocated for R&D was the lowest since 1955.

China is coming close to matching the US dollar for dollar in the research and development field, with many of its companies owned and directed by the state anyway. Unsurprisingly the US is falling behind and this will inevitably get worse.

Instead of learning from the Chinese system, US plutocracy prefers to hand more money to AT&T, and indirectly the even worse vulture parasites at Elliot Management, so that they can surf the “record high” stock market index. Rather than seriously competing with state and worker-owned Chinese firms like Huawei, AT&T and the US government have been reduced to threatening and concern-trolling countries that choose to do business with the superior innovator.

America could win the global technology war with China simply by getting the state to harness and concentrate white genius and creativity. This has worked for the past 50 years. Instead, America’s tech workers have their wages cut and dignity trampled upon by greedy and useless CEOs and financiers.

After four years of GOP economic orthodoxy, it’s clear Trump has chosen to make the New York Stock Exchange Great Again. He’s proud of it too, just read his twitter.

 
• Category: Economics, Ideology • Tags: Donald Trump, H-1B, Immigration, Wall Street 
🔊 Listen RSS

Editor’s Note: I have corrected the article to reflect new information.

It all started yesterday evening when I arrived at Pittsburgh International Airport in the rustbelt township of Moon, Pennsylvania for a flight to Boston.

I approached the Kiosk to print my ticket and immediately got an error, asking I go get my boarding pass from the airline’s main booth. I followed the instructions.

There, the woman typed my information in and made a phone call. After a lengthy 20 minutes, she gave me the phone and asked me to “listen” while she briefly walked away. This most likely was a way to get whatever Department of Homeland Security surveillance team to identify me and watch me through the camera.

Shortly after, my ticket printed with the dreaded SSSS – Secondary Security Screening Selection. This is the first time it has ever happened to me (I last flew less than a year ago). The SSSS list is reserved for suspected terrorists and criminals, of which I am neither. There are millions of people on the list, with random samplings finding that up to 40% of people on it have inaccurately registered records. Furthermore, a federal judge last September found that the practice is unconstitutional. I’ve been traveling largely by bus and car to work on news stories or visit friends so I was caught off guard.

Little did I know I was in for an annoying and long night, but I didn’t expect how bad it would be. I have heard from other peaceful dissidents and journalists that they have been harassed like this at the airport for the past year.

I used the restroom then approached the TSA line. They took me to a separate, cordoned off section and began the invasive and downright ridiculous process.

As one man meticulously poked and prodded my frank-n-beans from every angle, a senior citizen checked every nook and cranny of my wallet along with the bristles of my toothbrush for…I’m not sure exactly. I made sure that none of my electronics (phones and laptops) were being illegally searched, which they didn’t, they only ask you to turn them on.

In the commotion (at least 7 TSA agents surrounded me) a woman was asking me for personal information, like my latest home address. My response to her was to ask whether it was mandatory to give it to her. She did not say whether it was mandatory, but kept asking over and over again for my information and I refused to give it. I don’t have anything to hide, but the principle stands.

When the search concluded (about 20-30 minutes), they found a secondary phone I use that happened to be out of batteries. They asked me to turn it on, which I agreed to but needed to charge it. The TSA supervisor told me it was against protocol, and escorted me with all of my stuff back outside to charge my phone, telling me that I would have to do the search all over again from scratch.

At this point I was going to miss my flight. I summoned the supervisor again, who was very polite and friendly to my face, to demand a place where I can complain for my atrocious treatment and that I be compensated for my airline ticket. I informed him that I was a journalist and that being treated like a member of Al Qaeda on my way to a domestic flight was confusing and humiliating.

He gave me a TSA card and in my frustration over the bullshit I had just endured, decided to leave the airport to find different transportation to my destination that would be free of these silly theatrics.

As I walked away, a female police officer named Deb Spotts approached me to ask me why I had gone into the TSA security and back out. I told her they had asked me to go out and charge my phone. She then demanded to know why I had used the bathroom, to which I responded “to take a piss.”

She asked me for identification, and my response was to ask her if I was being detained and was free to leave over and over again. She radio’d her Sergeant, Michael Kuma, who gave the order to arrest me. Multiple police officers, including one carrying an assault weapon, grabbed me and put me in handcuffs.

The entire time I was loudly asking in front of others in the airport lobby why I was being detained, what their probable cause was, and that I wanted to call a lawyer. The police officers transporting me told me that they did not know why I was being detained, which is absurd.

I specifically told the officers that I did not consent to any search of any of my belongings, which they mostly respected. My things were put in a bucket in front of my cell and I was in there for about an hour.

Finally, Sergeant Kuma emerges with his team. I asked him for an explanation.

According to Kuma, the TSA inspectors had “felt” two bullets in one of the tight sleeves of my flight jacket. I have never owned a firearm nor have been shooting.

I asked Kuma why I was not dogpiled and detained during the TSA special suspected terrorist screening process if they thought I was trying to bring bullets on board. Kuma’s response is that bringing bullets on a flight was not illegal, which is a flagrant lie!

I then gave Kuma permission to search my jacket and show me the supposed bullets in my possession. He took his time, briefly got the jacket out of my sight, then acted like he was struggling to get the “bullets” out.

Then, all the cops smiled at me while Kuma said “oh wow, they’re only pen caps!”

He then pulled out black bullet-shaped pen caps from my jacket as I looked on in disbelief. I don’t carry or use pens at all.

These are anti-puncture caps that come pre-installed in M1A1 flight jackets.

I then obtained the Sergeant’s business card, with a phone number on the back to be able to get the police report of my illegal arrest. He told me to wait a while because it takes time to get it in the system. I will be following up on this.

These kinds of shenanigans are so stupid I’m almost tempted to laugh about this myself. This would be a joke if it wasn’t part of a wider system the federal government has in place that has no law enforcement value and is intended solely to intimidate and inconvenience journalists and people with First Amendment protected opinions they don’t like.

The big question I have, and will be investigating, is how did I get on the SSSS list, along with many others I know who engage in peaceful advocacy or dissent? Why in the last year, and all of my life, have I flown without any problems prior to this?

The Department of Homeland Security keeps the criteria for being a “selectee” very private, likely due to the civil liberties ramifications of the system as they drastically expand how many people are targeted and why. As someone who hasn’t even been harassed by the FBI or accused of anything, occam’s razor tells me that in my case and others, they are using a purely political criteria. The only scenario for what just happened is that they are deferring to the Southern Poverty Law Center for names and adding them to the list uncritically. If it came out, it would be a scandal, as the SPLC is a highly discredited, agenda-ridden and universally despised organization.

There is a small chance that it is a case of mistaken identity, but I doubt it. I will be looking into applying for the DHS Traveler Redress Inquiry Program (TRIP) and will see what they tell me.

National Justice is over the target indeed!