The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
A Feasible Zionist-Gentile Grand Bargain: Support for Israel in Return for Immigration Security
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

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

From my new column in Taki’s Magazine:

The hubbub over last week’s election in Israel is another reminder of why the Democrats have pinned all their 2016 hopes on Hillary Clinton. The Democrats are planning a coronation rather than a competitive donnybrook (like the one the Republicans seem to be ginning up) because a genuine battle in the primaries would expose the intraparty acrimony inherent in the Democrats being the Coalition of the Fringes. In particular, getting most Democrats to assume upfront that Hillary is inarguably the rightful heir to the throne in 2016 should paper over for four or, ideally, eight years the looming Democratic crack-up over Israel and Jews.

While not very significant as a voting bloc anymore, Jews have long furnished the Democrats with much of the Party’s campaign funds and media muscle. But a massive long-run problem for Democrats is that American Jews tend to be liberal about America but conservative about Israel. … As Israel comes ever more out of the closet as the successful right wing nationalist state that it is, that creates a massive PR problem for American Democrats.

Read the whole thing there.

 
Hide 167 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. OT: “Dzhokhar Tsarnaev had a cumulative college GPA of 1.094 and enrolled in an “Intro to Ethics” class the same semester of the attack.”

    He would have been happier in his own culture, doing things that he can be good at. But liberalism intervened…

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Southfarthing


    OT: “Dzhokhar Tsarnaev had a cumulative college GPA of 1.094 and enrolled in an “Intro to Ethics” class the same semester of the attack.”

    He would have been happier in his own culture, doing things that he can be good at. But liberalism intervened…
     
    I thought this is what he was doing. He turned to murdering Jews in Waltham and building bombs to kill innocent people enjoying the day. For Chechens this is considered turning your life around.
  2. [Logic would suggest that white gentile conservatives should instead demand of Israel’s Jewish backers that they use their media power to shift the Overton Window of respectable discourse to allow American citizens to achieve the same protections from excessive immigration that Israeli citizens enjoy.]

    The trouble starts with the word “demand”. Demanding something of an influential Jew already makes you an “anti-Semite”, because you have noticed his Jewishness and his influence in a context other than unqualified praise. Furthermore, any demand implies a threat, however mild, and that is even worse.

    • Replies: @anonymous-antimarxist
    @5371

    Yes, Steve is definitely engaging in wishful thinking here. While your analysis is consistent with observed Jewish macher behavior.

    If you are new here??? You need to post at the UNZ review more often!!!

    Here is what I believe what powerful Jews see as much more likely:

    The Neocons and Israel are only a couple of years away from engineering the US into a war with Iran regardless of what party wins the election in 2016, but especially if any Republican is elected. The best trigger for that war will be another major domestic terrorist attack that can conveniently blamed on Tehran. The goal here is simply spreading further chaos in the middle east requiring a permanent US boots on the ground presence and a no questions asked climate of patriotism at home. Meanwhile the US and European borders must remain open so as to facilitate the flood of more potential terrorists and refugees.

    Since Two State Solution is officially dead, the next move is to officially annex the West Bank while giving Palestinians every financial incentive to leave Israel while the getting is good. The Arabs and Christians who don't take the hint are going to be forcefully pressured to leave the West Bank and Israel proper a few years down the road. Once the Arab numbers significantly decline the remainder will be simply expelled Again the US and European borders must remain open so as to facilitate the flood of Palestinian emigrants and later refugees. Sure left wing Jews will make a minor fuss that Israel will become outwardly ethnocentric and the pretense to being a liberal Democracy will have evaporated. But it is taken as a given they will quickly fall into line if it ultimately means an expanded Israel that controls it own borders and is more demographically secure. Nothing I am stating here has not been promulgated as Likud party platform goals.

    In the meantime Jews in Europe and USA have every intention of passing hate speech and hate crime laws that they believe will effectively neuter the BDS movement. While Jews will be granted "super citizenship" that will make life for them more than tolerable until increasingly more Zionist territory is acquired. Conditions for Non-Jewish white Europeans and Americans may decline significantly but Jews don't care about them as long as the Jews will be protected. Once again keeping the borders open is key to making this happen.

    Whites are only a 3-4 election cycles from being permanently rendered minorities in their homelands and in the countries they settled. That is what Jews on both the left and right want and they are not going to just let anybody simply "demand" that they change their plans. Besides Open Borders are making Jews super rich at the expense of their only possible opposition the educated middle class that identifies with the historical American nation. For this to happen the Borders must remain Open!!!

    Last, Jews look at how easy it has been for them to manipulate the Christian Dispensationalist Goyim and laugh at the idea that NAMs can ever cause them trouble. They already fund NAACP and La Raza and hundreds of other Open Borders and identity politics groups. They have no reason to fear a Democratic coalition of the fringes as long as they are the puppet masters and control the media. The more NAMs the better, they are after all the best cudgel to keep the white Christian goyim in line. The Borders will remain Open!!!

    In short everything is going the Jews way, and 90%+ of whites in the USA and Europe are clueless as to who is pulling the strings.

    In short being polite and simply asking or even "demanding" some change in course from TWMNBN will accomplish nothing except still getting you labeled an anti-semite.

  3. Jews I speak with are always interested to learn that anti-Semitism is 600% higher among U.S. NAMs than among Whites and Asians:

    Less than 5% of whites, Asians, and “others” (including Native Americans) combined hold deeply entrenched anti-Semitic views, compared to over 30% of African Americans and Latinos. … Of the 12% of Americans who hold deeply entrenched anti-Semitic views, 9% or so [75%] are African Americans or Latinos.

    I find it to be actually easier to convince Jews of this stuff because their history makes them more capable of being paranoid about their survival.

    Michael Douglass and his son surely had an awakening when a Muslim immigrant cursed them out on a European vacation.

    • Replies: @Doug
    @Southfarthing

    > Jews I speak with are always interested to learn that anti-Semitism is 600% higher among U.S. NAMs than among Whites and Asians.

    I think any major ethnic group in the US tends in some way to keep operating like they're in the old country, even a century or more later. Nordic-Americans lean towards progressive welfare state policies, as if they're still in a highly homogenous, high-trust population (and hence Milwaukee blacks are the most criminal in the country). Italian-Americans remain clannish in business, preferring to deal with family, as if they're still in a country with a corrupt legal system.

    Jewish-Americans, most of whom's families immigrated from Tsarist Russia, still operate with the belief that old, rich conservative aristocrats want to kill them, by fanning the flames of populist pogroms. Of course this is absolutely true in Romanov Russia, where Orthodoxization was a cornerstone policy of solidifying the power of the weak state. The liberal urban intelligentsia, who make up the intellectual core of the left, are your natural ally.

    But nothing could be further from the truth in the US, where surveys show that old, rich, white conservatives are by far the most pro-semitic demographic. It's pretty much been this way for a long time. Even in 1850 the most pro-semitic group was probably wealthy plantation owners. If there's any natural wellspring of anti-semitism in this country it's almost certainly firmly entrenched in "Obama's nation", among the young, multi-cultural, low-income groups that generally fall outside the American core.

    , @Lot
    @Southfarthing


    Jews I speak with are always interested to learn that anti-Semitism is 600% higher among U.S. NAMs than among Whites and Asians:
     
    I think Latinos are willing to respond with "anti-Semitic answers" to polls not because of any actual hostility, but more because they are less aware of political correctness.

    I also don't believe that "12% of Americans hold deeply entrenched anti-Semitic views."

    Here is the poll, with 6+ yes answers making you an "antisemite" according to ADL:

    Jews stick together more than other Americans.
    Jews always like to be at the head of things.
    Jews are more loyal to Israel than America.
    Jews have too much power in the U.S. today.
    Jews have too much control and influence on Wall Street.
    Jews have too much power in the business world.
    Jews have a lot of irritating faults.
    Jews are more willing than others to use shady practices to get what they want.
    Jewish business people are so shrewd that others don’t have a fair chance at competition.
    Jews don’t care what happens to anyone but their own kind.
    Jews are (not) just as honest as other business people

    There's a big difference between feeling actual antipathy toward a group and giving "Yes" answers when asked if you agree with a mildly negative statement about a group. I can also see why they seem to get negative answers from NAMs, since the questions focus on resentment of Jewish economic success, and NAM resentment of Jewish success is just a proxy for their resentment of white success.

    I'm not trying to be critical here, I just don't think that "Mexicans are anti-semetic" is even on the top 10 list of reasons to restrict Mexican immigration, both as a factual and political matter, even for Jews.

    In my view, the best arguments politically center around concerns about crowded schools, mismatch between unskilled immigrants and high-skill economy, unfairness to American citizens who are out of work and looking for a job, and the burden on hospitals.

    These are all things that regular Americans can identify with and can be expressed without seeming racist to swing voter types. (You can never oppose immigration without being racist according to the far left of course, so no point in trying.)
  4. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Southfarthing
    OT: "Dzhokhar Tsarnaev had a cumulative college GPA of 1.094 and enrolled in an “Intro to Ethics” class the same semester of the attack."

    He would have been happier in his own culture, doing things that he can be good at. But liberalism intervened...

    Replies: @Anonymous

    OT: “Dzhokhar Tsarnaev had a cumulative college GPA of 1.094 and enrolled in an “Intro to Ethics” class the same semester of the attack.”

    He would have been happier in his own culture, doing things that he can be good at. But liberalism intervened…

    I thought this is what he was doing. He turned to murdering Jews in Waltham and building bombs to kill innocent people enjoying the day. For Chechens this is considered turning your life around.

  5. This talk of a bargain between gentile nationalists and Zionists seems more relevant to Europe than to the United States. In fact, it may already be happening there.

  6. I would only add that, in addition to immigration, our current free trade policies vis-a-vis China and other low-wage countries be on the table. In fact the Jewish American establishment needs to be seen as the friend of “labor” (how old fashioned that sounds!) all across the board. Fortunately labor comes in all colors so it’s not about race.

  7. RE: Rising awareness of Jewish power and influence ,

    Seems to me that Jewish elites think that indoctrination will solve the problem:

    The other episode took place in Lebanon. Hezbollah, the radical Muslim militia that dominates that country, has been working to keep The Diary of Anne Frank out of Lebanese schools. This kind of denialism, perpetrated in the Middle East, makes people susceptible to anti-Semitism when they grow up and emigrate to Europe. If you don’t grow up in a place that experienced the Holocaust, and if you don’t learn about the Holocaust in some other way, you’ll behave like somebody who doesn’t get it.

    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/foreigners/2015/03/how_can_we_help_jew_s_stay_in_europe_despite_anti_semitism_jeffrey_goldberg.html

    In other words, use the Holocaust (Hitler’s great gift to the Zionist project) to full advantage.

    Of course, some Jews have noticed that certain groups (Blacks, Muslims, etc) seem oddly immune to the spectre of the Holocaust.Indeed, in some cases they actually seem downright hostile. A colleague of mine (she teaches an undergrad class on literature and racism) has noted to me that Blacks in her class get rather surly when the Holocaust totems are introduced: Anne Frank, Schindler’s List, Wiesel’s Night, etc. To them, the Holocaust narrative is White Privilege in action.White corpses in Europe are enduring symbols of martyrdom, while POC corpses are footnotes.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @syonredux

    White corpses in Europe are enduring symbols of martyrdom, while POC corpses are footnotes.

    The truth is that it is only jewish corpses that are "enduring symbols of martyrdom," while all Gentile corpses are footnotes.

    70 million Gentiles killed in WW2, compared to 5 million jews. Yet only the loss of the latter is THE holocaust.

    , @Dave Pinsen
    @syonredux


    White corpses in Europe are enduring symbols of martyrdom, while POC corpses are footnotes.
     
    It's not so much that they're footnotes but that 3rd and 4th world POCs killing POCs is a dog-bites-man story, while the country that gave the world Goethe, Beethoven, Gauss, etc. committing genocide is man-bites-dog.

    Replies: @syonredux, @Anonymous

    , @Hersh
    @syonredux

    Re "Holocaust totems" - How about this movie "Woman in Gold?" I haven't seen the movie but there are plenty of TV advertisements. Its about a rich Jewish woman fighting in court to get back a painting that was taken by the Nazis. Its about "JUSTICE!" Ye Gads and they wonder why the Palestinians won't get over it. It seems like that's not the first movie with the same subject matter, return of artwork. In the 90's, Sen. D'Amato (R-NY) spent most of his time fretting about getting Jewish artwork back from the Swiss or whoever. Blacks and Hispanics are not wrong to resent Jewish self-entitlement to victim status; we all should resent it. Its never going to end when they're still making their movies about artwork 70 years after WWII.

  8. But there’s some hardheaded sense in my proposed Grand Bargain: We’ll support Israel for you in return for you supporting Israel-like immigration policies for America.

    This is a deal that can be struck.

    wont work. by supporting la raza amnesty, they (jewish americans) expect latinos to support israeli jews right to move to the USA in return just in case israel gets wiped of the face of the earth by iran’s nuke.

  9. Our local thrift shop dropped a cool $800 to the police department to buy earbuds and lapel mikes. And another local business raised $1000 to buy breathing apparatus for the firemen. It was all printed up in the local paper. Democracy at work, I guess.

  10. But Israel has an unwritten rule that it would be racial treason for a Jewish coalition to form a governing majority using Arabs, so Arab voters don’t really count in determining who gets to be prime minister.

    http://takimag.com/article/bargaining_with_zionists_steve_sailer/print#axzz3VOeGr3L7

    Whereas our White elites believe that racial treason is the highest virtue….

    Saban, the billionaire responsible for unleashing the Mighty Annoyin’ Power Rangers on America, puts on an annual gala at the Beverly Hilton hotel to raise money for the Israeli armed forces. Last November’s “Friends of the Israeli Defense Forces” fundraiser brought in $34 million. The Hollywood Reporter itemized the big givers:

    Notable donations made at the event included $10 million from Larry Ellison, co-founder and chairman of Oracle; $5 million from top Republican fundraisers Sheldon and Miriam Adelson (who received a standing ovation from the liberal Westside crowd); $5.2 million from brothers Maurice and Paul Marciano of Guess Jeans; $3.6 million from Saban and wife Cheryl; … In addition, first-time attendees and donors Michael and Susan Dell gave $1.8 million…

    Nationalism for me but not for thee…..

    For example, Ellison, who has $56 billion (making him America’s third richest man and the world’s richest Jewish man), has always cultivated an image of self-indulgent worldly hedonism. (Heck, Larry’s half-Italian racially, although he’s all-Jewish ethnically.) Only in recent years has Ellison become interested in Israel, not visiting it until 2007. But now he’s 70 and it’s back to blood, so he drops $10 million on Saban’s IDF fundraiser.

    The takeaway? Supporting Jewish supremacy in Israel is doubleplusgood. Supporting a European majority USA? Crimethink. Can anyone imagine Bill Gates donating to VDARE?

    Although Saban is a Democrat, he recently discussed with Republican mega-donor Sheldon Adelson their jointly buying the New York Times from the Sulzberger family and the Arab-Mexican monopolist Carlos Slim in order to ensure that Israel gets great coverage.

    They only disagree on insignificant stuff.On the important things (Israel, mass immigration to the USA) , they are in total accord.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @syonredux


    But Israel has an unwritten rule that it would be racial treason for a Jewish coalition to form a governing majority using Arabs…
     
    It would be racial treason for anybody, anywhere, to form a "governing coalition" with Arabs.

    They burst out of their worthless (until 1938) peninsula the day before yesterday to rob other peoples of land surpassing Canada in area, then force them at swordpoint to adopt the new overlords' religion and even their names.

    And we're supposed to deal with such characters? How'd that work out for the Maronites? The Assyrians? The Copts?
    , @Oscar Peterson
    @syonredux


    "But now he’s 70 and it’s back to blood, so he drops $10 million on Saban’s IDF fundraiser."
     
    Very insightful point. The dynamic you identify does seem to be widespread and it would be interesting to see it analyzed in some detail.

    Bob Dylan is an interesting example: From changing his name and helping to overthrow the old order in the 1960s, dabbling with Christianity and other universalist hobbies through the 70s and into the 80s, he now seems to have come almost full circle with his attachment to Orthodox Jewry, his own peculiar "blood libels:"

    “If you got a slave master or Klan in your blood, blacks can sense that. That stuff lingers to this day. Just like Jews can sense Nazi blood and the Serbs can sense Croatian blood.”

    As one analysis suggested,

    "[The album] Infidels represented a drift from his excursions into Christian spirituality. And if not an outright renunciation of Christianity, it did present him as been back among the fold of the Jewish tribe, as the inner jacket features him crouched and in contemplation while wearing a yarmulke on Jerusalem’s Mount of Olives.

    "[The song "Neighborhood Bully"] played in a rockabilly mode and sang with heavy irony, Dylan sets out Israel’s case amid the accusations of its iron-fisted dealings with its Arab neighbours. It is a song which is said to be particularly popular with the Likudniks as an after-party conference boogie-down number, and, according to the Jerusalem Post, “a favourite among Dylan-loving residents of the (Israeli-occupied) territories”.

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/israel-the-neighborhood-bully-deconstructing-the-lyrics-of-bob-dylan-in-the-light-of-the-gaza-crisis/5393652

    The pattern seems to be: Push a pseudo-universalist, "I-either-reject-or-don't-care-about-the-traditional-culture" line, and then, as you say, comes the "return to blood." How Homeric!

  11. You can either have Israel or you can have massive immigration into Europe. You cannot have both.

  12. But you don’t have anybody to deliver on your side of the bargain. All the billionaires of all persuasions are for massive immigration and cheap labor, even the Walton Clan, so far as I know. You’re asking Israel to throw itself into a buzz and arouse the active hostility of the entire American business class, in return for the support of Tom Tancredo and maybe Jeff Sessions. Why should they bother? And more to the point, why should they do your job for you? The job of forming an anti-immigration party that is effective surely is a job that Americans can and must do themselves.

    Or: get yourself your own billionaires first; then talk.

  13. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @syonredux
    RE: Rising awareness of Jewish power and influence ,

    Seems to me that Jewish elites think that indoctrination will solve the problem:

    The other episode took place in Lebanon. Hezbollah, the radical Muslim militia that dominates that country, has been working to keep The Diary of Anne Frank out of Lebanese schools. This kind of denialism, perpetrated in the Middle East, makes people susceptible to anti-Semitism when they grow up and emigrate to Europe. If you don’t grow up in a place that experienced the Holocaust, and if you don’t learn about the Holocaust in some other way, you’ll behave like somebody who doesn’t get it.
     
    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/foreigners/2015/03/how_can_we_help_jew_s_stay_in_europe_despite_anti_semitism_jeffrey_goldberg.html

    In other words, use the Holocaust (Hitler's great gift to the Zionist project) to full advantage.

    Of course, some Jews have noticed that certain groups (Blacks, Muslims, etc) seem oddly immune to the spectre of the Holocaust.Indeed, in some cases they actually seem downright hostile. A colleague of mine (she teaches an undergrad class on literature and racism) has noted to me that Blacks in her class get rather surly when the Holocaust totems are introduced: Anne Frank, Schindler's List, Wiesel's Night, etc. To them, the Holocaust narrative is White Privilege in action.White corpses in Europe are enduring symbols of martyrdom, while POC corpses are footnotes.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Dave Pinsen, @Hersh

    White corpses in Europe are enduring symbols of martyrdom, while POC corpses are footnotes.

    The truth is that it is only jewish corpses that are “enduring symbols of martyrdom,” while all Gentile corpses are footnotes.

    70 million Gentiles killed in WW2, compared to 5 million jews. Yet only the loss of the latter is THE holocaust.

  14. I usually enjoy your “pulling topics out of a top hat” approach, but it doesn’t always stand up to reading a second time.

    The underlying point, if I ferreted it out correctly, is that American Jewish billionaires will get less enthusiastic about harming America with Mexican immigration because in Europe, Muslim immigration is giving the Jews a hard time.

    I’m not sure why you think their thought process would go like that. I’d say that if are are devious enough to hold two contradictory political ideals between Israel and America, you’d just easily be capable of holding *three*.

    Mass immigration in America because diversity is strength. Also, slavery.
    Controlled immigration in Europe because Muslims are like Hitler now we think about it.
    No immigration in Israel because we can.

  15. But Israel has an unwritten rule that it would be racial treason for a Jewish coalition to form a governing majority using Arabs, so Arab voters don’t really count in determining who gets to be prime minister.

    No, minorities lists associated with the Labor Party were part of parliamentary majorities prior to 1977 and the Druze population has been a notable component of the electoral base of some parties (e.g. Shas). Since that time, Arabs in parliament have generally been found in the caucuses of communist or Arab nationalist parties only loyal to the state in adherence to law.

    It isn’t racial treason. Cabinet ministers have access to classified information. Some Arab politicians cannot be trusted and some would be put under considerable pressure by collateral relatives, &c.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Art Deco

    Has there ever been a case where Arab parties were used to tip the balance from a rightist to a leftist prime minister? I read that Rabin had a shaky majority in 1992 without Arabs and that was the closest thing to an exception to the unwritten rule?

    Replies: @matt, @Art Deco

    , @silviosilver
    @Art Deco


    It isn’t racial treason. Cabinet ministers have access to classified information. Some Arab politicians cannot be trusted and some would be put under considerable pressure by collateral relatives, &c.
     
    Just like in western democracies. Er, hang on...

    Replies: @Art Deco

  16. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Just won’t happen, Steve.
    The USA can no longer be described as real blood and soil nation founded by a real genetic homogenous population. The Wasps gave up the ghost years ago, the Act of 1924 was their last hurrah and attempt to hang on to their country. Thus came Hart-Cellar and the utter ruination of Kennedy/Johnson. There’s just no getting away from that, it’s a done deal. Time to grow up and face up to it. The chance to do anything about it passed with the old jowlhound himself.
    Look, the forces arranged against you are just too massive, too powerful and too overwhelming. The fact that ‘Hispanics’ multiplied their numbers 20 fold in 60 years should tell you that – and subcontinental immigration to the USA has only now started in earnest. Believe you me, *that* will make the mex deluge look like the proverbial vicarage tea party, complete with bucktoothed, absurd, buffoon C of E parson, the old bag blue rinse brigade, crust less cucumber sandwiches, Earl Grey and Battenberg cake. And then *will* come the sub Saharans, what? All 9 billion of them.
    Now, let’s all link arms for another round of Berkeley kumbaya, denounce the white privilege, and praise the yoni.

    • Replies: @Ghost of John Adams
    @Anonymous

    Ah, the counsel of despair - not only not a winning strategy, but one that our opponents would have invented, propagated and codified if they thought they could.

    If you believed what you have written you would have already taken your bow and shuffled off this mortal coil. Instead you work to drain the energy of those who can and enervate those who would. Are you for us or against us? If you are for us, then stop 'helping' us.

    , @LondonBob
    @Anonymous

    LBJ, first Jewish President. Crypto Texan on his maternal line.

  17. Steve you got the election math a little off. The arab party won 13 seats, not 14, and the leftwing jewish parties won 40 seats, not 39.

  18. a massive long-run problem for Democrats is that American Jews tend to be liberal about America but conservative about Israel.

    A massive long run problem for America is that American gentiles are far more zealous defenders of Jews and Israel than they are of America and Americans. If people like Walter Russell Mead were even half as concerned about the American people as they are about the Jewish people, then it simply would not matter what positions American Jews had.

  19. I don’t understand how this deal is supposed to work. Who are you supposed to make a deal with, the Elders of Zion? Who will serve as the bargaining representative of the Gentiles? The president of Skull and Bones? Will they meet in a secret room under the Washington Monument and seal their pact in blood?

    The Israeli government certainly doesn’t want to get involved in American domestic politics, and those here would (rightly) be the first to denounce it if they did. Israel has the immigration policy that it wants, selected for it by their own elected representatives and America has the immigration policy that it (apparently) wants, selected for it by its OWN elected representatives including its current 2 term President. American voter COULD have rejected Obama and his policies, especially in his 2nd term, but they didn’t want to. That’s how the chips fall in a democracy.

    And as Steve points out, Jews constitute less than 2% of American voters while white Christians still constitute the vast majority (not to mention blacks who really have nothing to gain and much to lose from immigration). If y’all don’t want immigration, then what’s stopping you? Do you REALLY need the Jews’ help this time? We know that you couldn’t have managed nuclear weapons without the Jews but that was a long time ago and the Jews have lost a lot of vitality since then – the current generation is becoming more assimilated and less Jewish, both in blood and culture, so don’t expect any fresh batches of Feynmans. It’s true that Jews still make up a disproportionate fraction of smart/rich people but even if they are 1/4 to 1/3 of influential Americans, that still leaves 2/3+ of wealth/influence in Gentile hands. C’mon goyim, you can do this yourself this time. Get your act together. Is MORE Jewish influence really what you want? Remember that when you ask the Godfather for a favor, you are indebted to him and he may call in his chit at any time. If you do this yourself, you won’t owe anyone any favors.

    • Replies: @IA
    @Jack D

    You are correct. We gentile white guys need to rethink human rights. After all, we created it. It's up to us to deconstruct it.

    , @Dave Pinsen
    @Jack D


    I don’t understand how this deal is supposed to work. Who are you supposed to make a deal with, the Elders of Zion?
     
    Someone like Jeff Sessions, if he decided to run for president, would be well-positioned to make Steve's deal with any one of the billionaires mentioned. That could be a win-win.

    Replies: @anonymous-antimarxist

  20. more poppycock from folks who had to switch to Poly Sci because they couldn’t get through Calculus 101.

    The cultural Marxist flavor of yids has never been in charge of the zoo. Not in North America, not in Israel.

    Haim Saban’s grandchildren aren’t in La Raza Youth; they’re in Shevet Chen, trying to make sure they can get into an fast-track-to-success outfit like Unit 8200, or the Engineering Academists program.

    The Cultural Marxist enterprise (prototype: Mattress Girl) is most certainly yid-enhanced, but those people are about as influential as Jesse Jackson Junior is. Right now, they are in severe panic mode about Hillary’s gmail-gate problem. Mattress Girl isn’t ever going to be put in charge of people who hold badges and guns. Sabrina Rubin Erdely was driven into hiding.

    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    @Karl

    I don't think Saban has any grandchildren yet.

  21. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    It’s a depressing idea that the great mass of whites out there have to go searching for allies to enable them to do what they’re supposed to be doing for themselves in the first place. Do we have to prove our love first by going to war with Iran? How do we know they’ll reciprocate? People are out for themselves to begin with, it might be thanks for all you’ve done but goodbye.

  22. @syonredux

    But Israel has an unwritten rule that it would be racial treason for a Jewish coalition to form a governing majority using Arabs, so Arab voters don’t really count in determining who gets to be prime minister.

    http://takimag.com/article/bargaining_with_zionists_steve_sailer/print#axzz3VOeGr3L7

     

    Whereas our White elites believe that racial treason is the highest virtue....

    Saban, the billionaire responsible for unleashing the Mighty Annoyin’ Power Rangers on America, puts on an annual gala at the Beverly Hilton hotel to raise money for the Israeli armed forces. Last November’s “Friends of the Israeli Defense Forces” fundraiser brought in $34 million. The Hollywood Reporter itemized the big givers:

    Notable donations made at the event included $10 million from Larry Ellison, co-founder and chairman of Oracle; $5 million from top Republican fundraisers Sheldon and Miriam Adelson (who received a standing ovation from the liberal Westside crowd); $5.2 million from brothers Maurice and Paul Marciano of Guess Jeans; $3.6 million from Saban and wife Cheryl; … In addition, first-time attendees and donors Michael and Susan Dell gave $1.8 million…

     

    Nationalism for me but not for thee.....

    For example, Ellison, who has $56 billion (making him America’s third richest man and the world’s richest Jewish man), has always cultivated an image of self-indulgent worldly hedonism. (Heck, Larry’s half-Italian racially, although he’s all-Jewish ethnically.) Only in recent years has Ellison become interested in Israel, not visiting it until 2007. But now he’s 70 and it’s back to blood, so he drops $10 million on Saban’s IDF fundraiser.
     
    The takeaway? Supporting Jewish supremacy in Israel is doubleplusgood. Supporting a European majority USA? Crimethink. Can anyone imagine Bill Gates donating to VDARE?

    Although Saban is a Democrat, he recently discussed with Republican mega-donor Sheldon Adelson their jointly buying the New York Times from the Sulzberger family and the Arab-Mexican monopolist Carlos Slim in order to ensure that Israel gets great coverage.
     
    They only disagree on insignificant stuff.On the important things (Israel, mass immigration to the USA) , they are in total accord.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Oscar Peterson

    But Israel has an unwritten rule that it would be racial treason for a Jewish coalition to form a governing majority using Arabs…

    It would be racial treason for anybody, anywhere, to form a “governing coalition” with Arabs.

    They burst out of their worthless (until 1938) peninsula the day before yesterday to rob other peoples of land surpassing Canada in area, then force them at swordpoint to adopt the new overlords’ religion and even their names.

    And we’re supposed to deal with such characters? How’d that work out for the Maronites? The Assyrians? The Copts?

  23. >> On the important things (Israel, mass immigration to the USA) , they are in total accord.

    I am not aware of EVIDENCE that Shelly is a USA-open-borders guy. His wife gives LOTS of interviews to the Hebrew press stringers in Vegas; this topic never comes up whatsoever.

    The Israelis with money aren’t looking for cheap Mexican househelp; they prefer Au Pairs from TelAviv. They DO NOT want their kids to grow up with an “Anglo” accent on their Hebrew, it’s bad for passing the gibbush into an elite unit in the IDF.

    This is all over the Israeli-moms-Hebrew-blogosphere in California and metro-NYC. They are very open about it.

    Hilariously, on the Israeli side, it’s the filipina caregivers who are carefully passed around from family to family. Israelis know better than to hire Jewish girls to take care of elderly parents or grandparents.

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @Karl


    I am not aware of EVIDENCE that Shelly is a USA-open-borders guy.
     
    MMM, well there was this:


    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/11/opinion/sheldon-adelson-warren-buffett-and-bill-gates-on-immigration-reform.html?_r=0

    Rather hard to imagine Adelson signing off on something like that in Israel....

    His wife gives LOTS of interviews to the Hebrew press stringers in Vegas; this topic never comes up whatsoever.
     
    Why would it? They know what her answer would be:"America is a nation of immigrants.Support for immigration is a Jewish value., etc"

    The Israelis with money aren’t looking for cheap Mexican househelp; they prefer Au Pairs from TelAviv. They DO NOT want their kids to grow up with an “Anglo” accent on their Hebrew, it’s bad for passing the gibbush into an elite unit in the IDF.
     
    On the other hand, Mexicans make great gardeners and docile cleaning staff at casinos.
  24. Mandatory E-Verify, and a Smoldering Radioactive Crater Where Iran Used to Be

    Vote Netanyahu/Cruz 2016

  25. @Southfarthing
    Jews I speak with are always interested to learn that anti-Semitism is 600% higher among U.S. NAMs than among Whites and Asians:

    Less than 5% of whites, Asians, and “others” (including Native Americans) combined hold deeply entrenched anti-Semitic views, compared to over 30% of African Americans and Latinos. … Of the 12% of Americans who hold deeply entrenched anti-Semitic views, 9% or so [75%] are African Americans or Latinos.
     
    I find it to be actually easier to convince Jews of this stuff because their history makes them more capable of being paranoid about their survival.

    Michael Douglass and his son surely had an awakening when a Muslim immigrant cursed them out on a European vacation.

    Replies: @Doug, @Lot

    > Jews I speak with are always interested to learn that anti-Semitism is 600% higher among U.S. NAMs than among Whites and Asians.

    I think any major ethnic group in the US tends in some way to keep operating like they’re in the old country, even a century or more later. Nordic-Americans lean towards progressive welfare state policies, as if they’re still in a highly homogenous, high-trust population (and hence Milwaukee blacks are the most criminal in the country). Italian-Americans remain clannish in business, preferring to deal with family, as if they’re still in a country with a corrupt legal system.

    Jewish-Americans, most of whom’s families immigrated from Tsarist Russia, still operate with the belief that old, rich conservative aristocrats want to kill them, by fanning the flames of populist pogroms. Of course this is absolutely true in Romanov Russia, where Orthodoxization was a cornerstone policy of solidifying the power of the weak state. The liberal urban intelligentsia, who make up the intellectual core of the left, are your natural ally.

    But nothing could be further from the truth in the US, where surveys show that old, rich, white conservatives are by far the most pro-semitic demographic. It’s pretty much been this way for a long time. Even in 1850 the most pro-semitic group was probably wealthy plantation owners. If there’s any natural wellspring of anti-semitism in this country it’s almost certainly firmly entrenched in “Obama’s nation”, among the young, multi-cultural, low-income groups that generally fall outside the American core.

  26. Why would they want to make this compromise? It is less than they have now, without any compromise at all. They don’t need us. They also have millions of evangelical Christian heretics that literally worship them.

  27. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    90 years ago Winston Churchill wrote that the struggle for the soul of the Jewish people was between Zionism and Bolshevism. American Jews are mostly Bolshevism, they couldn’t care less about Israel, actually, they wouldn’t be bothered if all those Mizrahi and Sephardi Jews who keep voting on Likud just went gone to the seas like Nasser promised. They didn’t care when Hitler killed the Orthodox Jews from Poland either and they were closer to them than to most Israeli Jews.

  28. What about the white elites who all seem to support open borders. From the Chambers of Commerce, major economists, think tanks, service industry and small business owners. It’s really hard to find anyone who is in business who doesn’t support illegal immigration.

    And about “free trade” – NAFTA and PNTR with China, these pacts have devastated the country economically and socially. Not to mention creating a class of permanent and underemployed unemployed whites that number into the millions. And oh yeah, making sure kids out of college can’t find decent paying jobs because we shipped them to China or imported a bunch of Bombay specials to take their jobs.

    In short before we start hammering the Jews we better damn well start hammering the white business and money classes who are backing this traitorous crap.

  29. But Israel has an unwritten rule that it would be racial treason for a Jewish coalition to form a governing majority using Arabs

    Not right.

    First, the Arab parties were willing to join the liberal coalition for the sole purpose of getting them into power and passing budgets, but not actually join in the sense of getting their fair share of cabinet positions and agreeing to party discipline. That’s still, de facto, being part of a governing majority. The willingness of the left parties to do this might be what killed them in the last election.

    It is also wrong it that the reason for this goes two-ways. The Israeli-Arab parties have a non-negotiable position favoring “right of return” and the redivision of Jerusalem, something that more than 90% of Israeli Jews oppose. One of the small “Arab” parties has both Arab and Jew members and is less extreme in its positions, and probably would be a full member of the coalition if it ever became large enough.

  30. a former member of the Israeli terrorist organization Irgun

    This is wrong too. Irgun was a military organization with ranks, organizations, discipline, etc. At most, a small part of its activity, for a small part of its existence, can be described as “terrorist.” I would not even go that far. For example, the bombing of the King David “Hotel” was actually a legitimate military target, as it housed the headquarters of the British military, which at the time was following an Arabist line (1) barring sales of land to Jews (2) restricting Jewish immigration to Israel (3) support an extremely favorable settlement of to Arabs of the Mandate of Palestine.

    • Replies: @fredyetagain aka superhonky
    @Lot

    "For example, the bombing of the King David “Hotel” was actually a legitimate military target"

    Notwithstanding your attempt to use parentheses to somehow alter reality, The King David Hotel was in fact a hotel. And no, it was not a legitimate military target. That the Irgun thought it was and that you agree says something about the Irgun and about you, but it does not in any way alter the fact that the bombing of the hotel (with 91 murdered therein) was an act of terrorism.

    Replies: @Lot

  31. WHEN WE HAVE settled the land, all the Arabs will be able to do about it will be to scurry around like drugged cockroaches in a bottle.” —Rafael Eitan

    Unfortunately these people are incredibly successful, and don’t think they need us. The original leader of the Israeli far right during WW2, Avrham Stern, thought the Poles were worse anti-Semites than the Nazis. The old hatreds still burn bright.

  32. [Logic would suggest that white gentile conservatives should instead demand of Israel’s Jewish backers that they use their media power to shift the Overton Window of respectable discourse to allow American citizens to achieve the same protections from excessive immigration that Israeli citizens enjoy.]

    Your proposal may be logical Steve, but it is in no way feasible. I remember reading an article years ago (wish I could find it, but I haven’t been able to) that mentioned a Jewish woman married to a gentile husband. If memory serves, the husband was of Christian background but not at all religious, and his only nod to his nominally Christian upbringing was to purchase and display a Christmas tree every holiday season. Well, I’m sure you can imagine the wailing, rending of garments, and gnashing of teeth this caused with the wife. In fact, the article quoted her as saying something along the lines of “Every time I see a Christmas tree, I see a potential Holocaust” – I kid you not. Anyway, do you see any possibility of any kind of logical discourse with people like these? And especially with us approaching them as “white gentile conservatives”? Dream on, ain’t happening.

    • Replies: @SFG
    @fredyetagain aka superhonky

    My dad was Christian, my mom Jewish.

    We had a tiny little Christmas tree with ornaments (hey, it was NYC). We had a small little menorah.

    No gnashing of teeth on either side.

    Replies: @fredyetagain aka superhonky

  33. But there’s some hardheaded sense in my proposed Grand Bargain: We’ll support Israel for you in return for you supporting Israel-like immigration policies for America.

    Who, exactly, would be making this offer? I can’t see W, Jeb, Mitch, or Boehner doing it. Wouldn’t it be easier to knock out the 15% of GOP house members and 30% of its Senators that favor a “path to citizenship” in primaries be a simpler task than gaining the support of mostly liberal Jews?

    • Replies: @Ghost of John Adams
    @Lot

    Okay Lot, describe how we can


    knock out the 15% of GOP house members and 30% of its Senators that favor a “path to citizenship” in primaries
     
    I lend you my ears.

    Replies: @syonredux, @syonredux

  34. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factor"] says:

    Okay…

    how would this bargaining begin?

    The deal would be: ‘white cons would support Israel IF American Jews will support end of massive immigration’.

    There are two elements to white cons.

    1. Elites and politicians.

    2. The masses.

    Elites and politicians are vetted and screened early on by AIPAC. The likes of Ron Paul almost have no chance of making it in politics. Also, to rise in government bureaucracy, academia, media, Wall Street, and etc. you have to be philosemitic.

    So, the ‘offer that Jews can’t refuse’ isn’t going to come from white con elites since most have been bought and sold by Jewish power from the outset.

    What about the masses? Masses are dummies. They are sheeple. They get their ideas from Fox News and Talk Radio. Fox News is totally Zionist. Talk Radio is totally Zionist. So, the masses follow along.
    What about Evangelicals. Religious folks don’t think rationally or calculatingly. They believe in the Bible, and it says Jews must return to Israel, blah blah.

    With white con elites and white con masses thinking/acting this way, how could they stop being whores and pose a challenge to Jews?

    But by some miracle, let’s say someone like Kevin MacDonald or Jared Taylor takes over the GOP or conservative establishment. Suppose they put forth an ultimatum to Jews. If Jews continue to push for massive immigration and anti-white rhetoric, then white conservatives will drop all support of Israel and may even oppose Israel.

    How will Jews react? Jews will feel that if they give into such a demand, it may embolden white conservatives to act in ‘white nationalist’ interest, and what if it grows stronger and stronger? No way Jews will accept that.

    But if indeed Jews do strike a bargain with white cons, Jews will make enemies of the Rise of Color and White Liberals who will really turn on the heat on Israel. After all, blacks and white Libs tend to be a helluva lot more vocal, angry, and aggressive than white cons.
    Also, as there are more white Libs in media, academia, government, urban centers(core areas of power), and etc, they can make more headache for Jews than white cons can.
    Also, Jews will earn the ire of the growing Hispanic population that aint much in quality but quantity does matter in elections in places like California and increasingly Texas. If all them browns in California, the most important state in the nation, vote anti-Jewish, it’s gonna matter.
    Also, Asian-Americans might turn anti-Jewish, and that might not be good for Jews either.

    Now, let’s suppose the hypothetical white conservative offer — white con support for Israel in exchange for Jewish opposition to immigration — is accepted by Neocons but not Jewish Libs. Will that be enough to enact change? Most of the Jewish power and wealth is with Jewish Libs, not with Neocons. Neocons can do a lot but that not nearly as much as Jewish Libs. Indeed, if the Jewish Lib-dominated media hadn’t favored Neocons as the new face of Conservatism, Neocons wouldn’t be so influential.

    This is why Jews promote the homo agenda. Homos are reliably pro-Jewish because they tend to be un-tribal about most issues. Homos all around the world feel estranged from their tribal cultures since most people are not homo and most cultures feel strange about homos. So, homos feel as homonomads. They are the ideal proxies, accomplices, and collaborators of Jews who are cosmopolitan, rootless, and global. Also, homos fear Arabs and Muslims.

    Also, homos make the culture of rich and privilege seem cool and hip. So, even though ‘white privilege’ is bad, ‘homo privilege’ is wonderful, and via the justification of homo privilege, Jewish and white privilege can find a backdoor entrance of justification-by-association. White privilege as white privilege is bad… but white privilege associated with ‘homo privilege’ is good. So, in big rich gentrified cities, you got homo ‘rainbow’ flags to send the message, ‘this is progressive zone; don’t hate or boycott us’.

    Homo agenda neutralizes not only conservatism but leftism. Many leftists stand for the Third World, but the Third World is anti-‘gay’. As long as Israel is seen more pro-homo than the Muslim world is, most white ‘progressives’ will feel closer to Jews and Israel.
    And as homos are so chummy with rich Jews in Hollywood, Silicon Valley, Wall Street, Las Vegas, fashion industry, media, and etc. they will foremost be loyal to Jews and will not join some grubby BDS movement filled with swarthy ‘losers’.

    It’s time white cons must admit reality and realize it’s over. They have no future and no chips to bargain with left.

    White Ship is sinking and the rats(white elites) are getting off to save themselves.

    It makes no sense for white cons to believe they are still in the game when they are not. They are mere cheerleaders and waterboys.

  35. Unfortunately for themselves, idealistic white American gentiles have been enthusiastic to give up their political support to Israel’s backers unconditionally. Not surprisingly, they get treated with contempt for being so sluttishly lacking in self-respect.

    Depending on how you think about it, Steve dynamites his own argument (or hides his whole argument) very nicely in the above paragraph. The kind of deal-making Steve contemplates can only happen “on the other side” of anti-semitism. To be a credible negotiating partner, you have to be willing to hurt your counterparty in the event of disagreement. Willingness to hurt Jews is called “anti-semitism” in US discourse. Thus, to be a credible negotiating partner, you have to be “anti-semitic.” Put another way:

    Hey, ah, Haim, I’d like to discuss the whole Mexodus thing with you. You see, the Mexodus is bad for my people. Why should I discuss this with you, Biff? Well, Haim, I think we could make a deal. You see, in return for not committing genocide against American whites, I’d be happy to deliver you massive white support for Israel, something you value. But, Biff, I already have massive white support for Israel. Yeah, but it could be taken away. How? Well, Haim, me and my buddies could put together a campaign to, like, inform the masses about how Israel mistreats Christians and how Jews are a prime mover behind the Mexodus and how Israel is an apartheid state and whatnot. But Biff, I would just call you an anti-semite and destroy you. Oh, OK, once you put it like that, Haim, I see a spot there on your shoe, would you like a shine?

    You need to be proof against the charge of anti-semitism. The only way to be proof against this charge is to survive a determined effort to use this charge against you. That means lots and lots of whites have to be willing to say “Well, maybe Biff is anti-semitic, but the thing I actually care about is whether Biff is anti-white. And, he’s not.” The US is far from this point.

    The other problem is that the people who are willing to stand up to Israel-firsters are almost all on the Cultural Marxist left. They *want* the Mexodus specifically and the end of the West generally. It’s their raison d’etre. They can’t negotiate with Haim, either. They are willing to stand up and be called anti-semites. They have a (small) base of support which is not bothered by the charge. But, the thing is, they don’t have any subject matter to negotiate with Haim over. They agree with him about everything but Israel. Well, maybe they could get slightly higher taxes on the rich out of him in return for knocking it off with the Israel bashing . . .

    I guess if you really like conspiracy theories, you could posit that the non-Jewish part of the Cultural Marxist left is a WASP/Masonic/CIA puppet show and that, behind the scenes, they (the WASPs) really are negotiating with Haim over knocking it off with the whole genocide business.

    tl;dr: Picking Bush over Buchanan in 1992 was a bad, bad plan for American whites.

  36. GOP Jewish outreach is already working pretty well. Most NYC Jews already vote for Republicans for state and local office, at Orthodox voters extend that all the way to Congress and President. (Lion showed this a while ago, showing Mitt won Brooklyn’s Orthodox neighborhoods but no other parts of Kings County.)

    Now there is a likely ceiling of secular Jewish support that corresponds to the white support that is matched demographically and spatially. In other words, how well does the GOP actually perform among metro-Boston college-educated white gentiles? I’m not sure they do comparatively worse among Boston-area Jews.

    • Replies: @Bill
    @Lot


    GOP Jewish outreach is already working pretty well.
     
    Yeah, the Jews are going to vote for that anti-immigration GOP candidate . . . ummmm, what was his name . . . Tom Tancredo? Yeah, that's it. Did well last year in the Colorado gubernatorial primary.

    Or is he dead? I can't keep track any more. Anyway, surely he or someone just like him will be the GOP nominee the Jews will be lovin on. Maybe that sheriff guy from Arizona or New Mexico or whatever. The one who feeds his prisoners bologna sandwiches before he deports them all to Chiapas or Guatemala or NachoLibre. One of them guys will surely win a majority of Jewish support. Problem solved!

    Isn't it great how pretty much all problems can be solved via the GOP winning elections! That and Jewish outreach. Can't go wrong with those two.
  37. Gilad Atzmon recorded a wide-ranging interview on Red Ice Radio a few weeks ago http://www.redicecreations.com/radio/2015/03/RIR-150306.php

    Among other things, he discussed how Israelis/Jews/zionists/antii-zionists make use of identity politics — actually, attach themselves and their minority group to some other identity group in order to gain majority status, majority strength, majority cover.

    Atzmon used the example of a Jewish writer Sarah Schulman who, purportedly speaking on behalf of Palestinians, wrote a book about gays in Palestine under the title, Israel/Palestine and the Queer International

    How is Sailer’s proposal different from that example, and how should Americans view the oh-so-generous offer to allow Americans to define their own immigration standards in return for supporting Israeli apartheid anything other than moral blackmail?

    Keep your money.
    Return American representative government to the American people, not the billionaires.
    Selling out is what got USA in the mess it is today.

    Anyway, We’re all rooting for Jim Webb.

    • Replies: @Oscar Peterson
    @SolontoCroesus

    Great points. The idea that there can be anything like the "grand bargain" that Steve Sailer imagines, is just absurd.

    I like a lot of what Steve writes, but he suffers, in a peculiar and idiosyncratic way, from the same thing that the American Renaissance people do: The Great White Hope that organized Jewry can somehow be prevailed on to accept a "bargain" of some kind that preserves the primacy of European/Christian/Classical culture. Such a grand bargain could never be deemed to be "good for the Jews." Any meaningful preservation of European/Christian traditional culture will never be acceptable from the perspective of aggressive organized Jewry. Pursuing such a bargain is sheer delusion.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @silviosilver

    , @Anonymous
    @SolontoCroesus

    How is Sailer’s proposal different from that example, and how should Americans view the oh-so-generous offer to allow Americans to define their own immigration standards in return for supporting Israeli apartheid anything other than moral blackmail?

    Keep your money.
    Return American representative government to the American people, not the billionaires.
    Selling out is what got USA in the mess it is today.

    Anyway, We’re all rooting for Jim Webb.


    Great post.

    (I do not wish to distract from it, but, merely to elaborate on one of the threads therein: something many of our own intellectuals do not seem to understand is that we are a highly moral people. We choose to do that which we think, or are led to believe, is right. The jews understand this about us. Ironically, many of our own do not. We won't be galvanized by an option that is presented as screwing someone over (in this case, the Gentiles in Palestine)..)

  38. Changing the views of American Jews on immigration is not an easy task. While you talk about golf course membership policy a lot, this is a much bigger issue in the collective memory:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89vian_Conference

    The Nuremberg Laws made German Jews, who were already persecuted by the Hitler regime, stateless refugees in their own country. By 1938, some 450,000 of about 900,000 German Jews had fled Germany, mostly to British Mandate Palestine, though the British had a white paper barring Jews from Palestine during the war, (a number which also included over 50,000 German Jews who had taken advantage of the Haavara, or “Transfer” Agreement between German Zionists and the Nazis), but British immigration quotas prevented many from migrating. In March 1938, Hitler annexed Austria and made the 200,000 Jews of Austria stateless refugees. In September, Britain and France granted Hitler the right to occupy the Sudetenland of Czechoslovakia, and in March 1939, Hitler occupied the remainder of the country, making a further 200,000 Jews stateless.

    In 1939 the British White Paper capped Jewish immigration to Palestine at 75,000 over the next five years, after which the country was to become an independent state …

    Before the Conference the United States and Great Britain made a critical agreement, to wit: the British promised not to bring up the fact that the United States was not filling its immigration quotas, and any mention of Palestine as a possible destination for Jewish refugees was excluded from the agenda.

    And this:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS_St._Louis

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @Lot


    Changing the views of American Jews on immigration is not an easy task. While you talk about golf course membership policy a lot, this is a much bigger issue in the collective memory:
     
    Oh, yeah.One has to keep in mind that it's always 1939-45 in the Jewish collective memory*.Of course, a prominent Frenchwoman has recently noted that Jewish thinking needs to adjust to current realities:

    “The reality is that there exist in France associations that are supposedly representative of French Jews, which have stuck with a software that came out of the Second World War,” she said, meaning that members of the Jewish leadership are still preoccupied with the threat of Nazi-like fascism. “For decades they have continued to fight against an anti-Semitism that no longer exists in France, for reasons of—how should I say this?—intellectual laziness. And by a form of submission to the politically correct. And while they were doing this, while they were fighting against an enemy that no longer existed, an anti-Semitism was gaining force in France stemming notably from the development of fundamentalist Islamist thought.”

    http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/03/is-it-time-for-the-jews-to-leave-europe/386279/

     

    And as for the people dying in Europe, why no tears for the three million or so who died in the 1932-33 Terror Famine in Ukraine? Or the 682,691 official victims of the Great Terror in 1937-38, many of whom (cf the 111,091 killed in the Polish Action) were targeted on strictly racial grounds?



    *Although it really should be the Summer of 1941-1945, seeing as how the Germans didn't start killing Jews wholesale until the invasion of the Soviet Union.
  39. iSteveFan says:

    In order to strike some sort of bargain, we would need the Israelis themselves to intervene. Sheldon Adelson and Adam (11-million-immigrants-per-year) Davidson are not going to strike a deal with the American right. They would, however, listen if the Israeli government intervened.

    For example, the Israelis could refuse to allow Adelson, Davidson and other like minded Jews entry into Israel. The rationale would be simple. The Jewish State could not afford to put itself at risk by allowing entry to people who advocate for open borders. Just like the UK banned Michael Savage because of the threat they feared his views would pose to public order, Israel could not risk allowing in people whose ideas could threaten the demographic balance of the Jewish State.

    It would behoove the Israelis to do this because it is in their long term interests for a strong America to be their ally. They need to convince their brethren in America that a European America is not a threat to them. After all, the same George Washington who told the Jews they would be welcome in this new nation was also the same President Washington who signed the very restrictive Naturalization Act of 1790 into law.

    Once the Israelis intervened I am sure Adelson would fall in line. Can you imagine how he would feel if he were considered unwelcome in Israel? And what other way could he respond? So he raises $34 million per year for the IDF. The US gives Israel $3 billion per year that they don’ t even need. So how much leverage would $34 million get you?

    No, Adelson and others would come around. I’d make book on that.

  40. @Southfarthing
    Jews I speak with are always interested to learn that anti-Semitism is 600% higher among U.S. NAMs than among Whites and Asians:

    Less than 5% of whites, Asians, and “others” (including Native Americans) combined hold deeply entrenched anti-Semitic views, compared to over 30% of African Americans and Latinos. … Of the 12% of Americans who hold deeply entrenched anti-Semitic views, 9% or so [75%] are African Americans or Latinos.
     
    I find it to be actually easier to convince Jews of this stuff because their history makes them more capable of being paranoid about their survival.

    Michael Douglass and his son surely had an awakening when a Muslim immigrant cursed them out on a European vacation.

    Replies: @Doug, @Lot

    Jews I speak with are always interested to learn that anti-Semitism is 600% higher among U.S. NAMs than among Whites and Asians:

    I think Latinos are willing to respond with “anti-Semitic answers” to polls not because of any actual hostility, but more because they are less aware of political correctness.

    I also don’t believe that “12% of Americans hold deeply entrenched anti-Semitic views.”

    Here is the poll, with 6+ yes answers making you an “antisemite” according to ADL:

    Jews stick together more than other Americans.
    Jews always like to be at the head of things.
    Jews are more loyal to Israel than America.
    Jews have too much power in the U.S. today.
    Jews have too much control and influence on Wall Street.
    Jews have too much power in the business world.
    Jews have a lot of irritating faults.
    Jews are more willing than others to use shady practices to get what they want.
    Jewish business people are so shrewd that others don’t have a fair chance at competition.
    Jews don’t care what happens to anyone but their own kind.
    Jews are (not) just as honest as other business people

    There’s a big difference between feeling actual antipathy toward a group and giving “Yes” answers when asked if you agree with a mildly negative statement about a group. I can also see why they seem to get negative answers from NAMs, since the questions focus on resentment of Jewish economic success, and NAM resentment of Jewish success is just a proxy for their resentment of white success.

    I’m not trying to be critical here, I just don’t think that “Mexicans are anti-semetic” is even on the top 10 list of reasons to restrict Mexican immigration, both as a factual and political matter, even for Jews.

    In my view, the best arguments politically center around concerns about crowded schools, mismatch between unskilled immigrants and high-skill economy, unfairness to American citizens who are out of work and looking for a job, and the burden on hospitals.

    These are all things that regular Americans can identify with and can be expressed without seeming racist to swing voter types. (You can never oppose immigration without being racist according to the far left of course, so no point in trying.)

  41. This is a terrific column and proposal. I don’t have a single quarrel with what you’ve written. However, as I have been endeavoring to point out, you leave out a party essential to such a grand bargain, anti-Israel Paleo-Conservatives. In other words, no such grand bargain can hope to succeed unless Jews can be convinced they are not supposed to reach an agreement with those who view the Jewish State and its Jewish supporters in the US as “Firth Columnists” and pretty much the focus of evil in the modern world.

    This is why I’ve implored that Immigration Restrictionists must make everything besides moving the immigration ball in the right direction secondary, including their intractable jihad against the Jewish State and all other oft-repeated collective calumnies about Jews.

    The salient question has long been how do we explain the break or interruption of the previous pattern of periods of mass immigration inevitably followed by periods of restriction. The short but rather obvious, at least to me, answer is that with the decline of industrial labor unions there was no longer any institutional force with an economic interest in immigration restriction. It is all on the other side. Those — not you — who shout about a plan, by Jews or other “Cultural Marxists”, to destroy the country are a noisy effective distraction, and intentionally so.

    You previously sort of laughed at my suggestion that Immigration Restrictionists will begin to succeed when we focus on behavior modification of billionaire and captains of industry pushing for further immigration and amnesty. But they are motivated by self-interest, not ideology. Thus they are more easily scared off the field of battle, and “Gentile Conservatives” have been equally cheap dates for corporate interests and billionaires as they have for Israel.

    • Replies: @Bill
    @MLK


    This is why I’ve implored that Immigration Restrictionists must make everything besides moving the immigration ball in the right direction secondary, including their intractable jihad against the Jewish State and all other oft-repeated collective calumnies about Jews.
     
    Completely backwards. You can't "negotiate" by first giving your counterparty everything he wants! Those things which put your panties in a twist are absolutely essential in order for any negotiation to occur.

    Replies: @MLK

    , @anonymous-antimarxist
    @MLK

    Your comment is nonsense. If only the Paleo-cons would pucker up and smooch TWMNBN ass then everything would be fine and perhaps Jewish globalist billionaires would come to their senses and reject Open Borders. Yeah Sure!!!!

    For the last couple of decades the only political group who do not view Americans as just another commodity whose well being and standard of living is not to be arbitraged way are the Paleo-Cons. And the only political group not to have any delusions about or to have been corrupted by TWMNBN are the Paleo-Cons.

    Furthermore it was the Marxists who abandoned traditional labor unions when they did not go all in for the international revolution of the proletariat. That signalled the rise of Cultural Marxism which from its inception has been very hostile to the native white populations of the west and quite open and specific concerning its globalist agenda of electing a new people.

    Last the immigration restriction movement of the 1920's was a coalition of non Marxist labor unions,(the Marxist IWW was delusionally pro Open Borders), old school Darwinian Progressives(Not the Boazian variety), white moderates and conservatives, and last most Blacks. Eastern European Jews were strongly for Open Borders then as they are today.


    Now go get your shinebox!!!!

    Replies: @MLK

  42. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factor"] says:

    Maybe the association with the GOP is having a Clouseau effect on Israel.

    Netanyahu is like Dreyfus jinxed by Clouseau.

  43. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factor"] says:

    Comparing US and Israel isn’t really fair since US is so big and Israel is so small.

    There is a lot of room for new immigrants to the US whereas Israel is geographically very small.

    Not that Americans should welcome more immigration for this reason, but comparing US and Israel doesn’t make much sense.

    However, Jews don’t just target the US for massive immigration but small European nations as well. In that regard, Jews are indeed hypocrites. Sweden, for instance, isn’t the most habitable place(though sizable) and has a small population. With massive immigration, the native Swedes could easily be outnumbered by new arrivals. And yet, Jews say MORE MORE MORE.

    So, Jews don’t distinguish between big white nations and small white nations. They want all white nations to be drowned in the tide of color.

    They urge it on East Asia too.

    If the West and East Asia are facing demographic collapse, why don’t Jews recommend the Israel policy of natalism. Instead, Jews say whites and yellows should make for declining white/yellow numbers with more immigrants.

    Crazy.

  44. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factor"] says:

    If the grand bargain is to be made between Neocons/Zionists/Israelis and white American Conservatives, then people like Bibi Netanyahu will have to denounce the domestic positions of Jewish Liberals.
    There will have to be a Jew vs Jew war.
    There is no way that even the most right-wing Jews are going to side with goyim against fellow Jews. Right-wing Jews may hate left-wing Jews, but they are Jews first and still prefer leftist Jews over right-wing goyim. And the ideas of joining with white conservatives to bash fellow Jews is sickening to Jews.

    Even Meir Kahane denounced the American Right for going after Jewish leftists during the ‘McCarthy Era’.

    When Vietnam persecuted the Chinese capitalists in the Boat People fiasco, communist China was awful angry about how their fellow ethnics were treated.
    Chinese commies didn’t side with Vietnamese commies against Cochin-Chinese capitalists.

    Some things are thicker than ideology.
    The idea of right-wing Jews attacking left-wing Jews to serve the white nationalism of American conservatives seems far-fetched.

    Besides, while it’s permissible for Liberal Jews to attack White/Christian Conservatives as ‘whites’ and ‘Christians, American politics only allows attack on Jewish Liberals/Leftists on ideological grounds, not tribal grounds. They can be called ‘bad Liberals’ and ‘bad Leftists’ but never as ‘bad Jews’.

    Jewish Liberals can go ethnic in their attack,but white conservatives can’t. And if white conservatives did go ethnic and called out on JEWISH Leftists and Liberals, Jewish Rightists will defend their fellow Jews cuz the idea of any attack on Jews(even leftist ones) is sickening to Rightwing Jews.

    • Replies: @SFG
    @Priss Factor

    I'd be happy to help you go after Shelly Adelson if I didn't think I'd wind up in a concentration camp after you'd killed him. That's the problem with race wars.

    As it is, I prefer to donate to FAIR, etc. I'm fine with America staying white. But brown in either sense of the word, not so much.

  45. @syonredux

    But Israel has an unwritten rule that it would be racial treason for a Jewish coalition to form a governing majority using Arabs, so Arab voters don’t really count in determining who gets to be prime minister.

    http://takimag.com/article/bargaining_with_zionists_steve_sailer/print#axzz3VOeGr3L7

     

    Whereas our White elites believe that racial treason is the highest virtue....

    Saban, the billionaire responsible for unleashing the Mighty Annoyin’ Power Rangers on America, puts on an annual gala at the Beverly Hilton hotel to raise money for the Israeli armed forces. Last November’s “Friends of the Israeli Defense Forces” fundraiser brought in $34 million. The Hollywood Reporter itemized the big givers:

    Notable donations made at the event included $10 million from Larry Ellison, co-founder and chairman of Oracle; $5 million from top Republican fundraisers Sheldon and Miriam Adelson (who received a standing ovation from the liberal Westside crowd); $5.2 million from brothers Maurice and Paul Marciano of Guess Jeans; $3.6 million from Saban and wife Cheryl; … In addition, first-time attendees and donors Michael and Susan Dell gave $1.8 million…

     

    Nationalism for me but not for thee.....

    For example, Ellison, who has $56 billion (making him America’s third richest man and the world’s richest Jewish man), has always cultivated an image of self-indulgent worldly hedonism. (Heck, Larry’s half-Italian racially, although he’s all-Jewish ethnically.) Only in recent years has Ellison become interested in Israel, not visiting it until 2007. But now he’s 70 and it’s back to blood, so he drops $10 million on Saban’s IDF fundraiser.
     
    The takeaway? Supporting Jewish supremacy in Israel is doubleplusgood. Supporting a European majority USA? Crimethink. Can anyone imagine Bill Gates donating to VDARE?

    Although Saban is a Democrat, he recently discussed with Republican mega-donor Sheldon Adelson their jointly buying the New York Times from the Sulzberger family and the Arab-Mexican monopolist Carlos Slim in order to ensure that Israel gets great coverage.
     
    They only disagree on insignificant stuff.On the important things (Israel, mass immigration to the USA) , they are in total accord.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Oscar Peterson

    “But now he’s 70 and it’s back to blood, so he drops $10 million on Saban’s IDF fundraiser.”

    Very insightful point. The dynamic you identify does seem to be widespread and it would be interesting to see it analyzed in some detail.

    Bob Dylan is an interesting example: From changing his name and helping to overthrow the old order in the 1960s, dabbling with Christianity and other universalist hobbies through the 70s and into the 80s, he now seems to have come almost full circle with his attachment to Orthodox Jewry, his own peculiar “blood libels:”

    “If you got a slave master or Klan in your blood, blacks can sense that. That stuff lingers to this day. Just like Jews can sense Nazi blood and the Serbs can sense Croatian blood.”

    As one analysis suggested,

    “[The album] Infidels represented a drift from his excursions into Christian spirituality. And if not an outright renunciation of Christianity, it did present him as been back among the fold of the Jewish tribe, as the inner jacket features him crouched and in contemplation while wearing a yarmulke on Jerusalem’s Mount of Olives.

    “[The song “Neighborhood Bully”] played in a rockabilly mode and sang with heavy irony, Dylan sets out Israel’s case amid the accusations of its iron-fisted dealings with its Arab neighbours. It is a song which is said to be particularly popular with the Likudniks as an after-party conference boogie-down number, and, according to the Jerusalem Post, “a favourite among Dylan-loving residents of the (Israeli-occupied) territories”.

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/israel-the-neighborhood-bully-deconstructing-the-lyrics-of-bob-dylan-in-the-light-of-the-gaza-crisis/5393652

    The pattern seems to be: Push a pseudo-universalist, “I-either-reject-or-don’t-care-about-the-traditional-culture” line, and then, as you say, comes the “return to blood.” How Homeric!

  46. @5371
    [Logic would suggest that white gentile conservatives should instead demand of Israel’s Jewish backers that they use their media power to shift the Overton Window of respectable discourse to allow American citizens to achieve the same protections from excessive immigration that Israeli citizens enjoy.]

    The trouble starts with the word "demand". Demanding something of an influential Jew already makes you an "anti-Semite", because you have noticed his Jewishness and his influence in a context other than unqualified praise. Furthermore, any demand implies a threat, however mild, and that is even worse.

    Replies: @anonymous-antimarxist

    Yes, Steve is definitely engaging in wishful thinking here. While your analysis is consistent with observed Jewish macher behavior.

    If you are new here??? You need to post at the UNZ review more often!!!

    Here is what I believe what powerful Jews see as much more likely:

    The Neocons and Israel are only a couple of years away from engineering the US into a war with Iran regardless of what party wins the election in 2016, but especially if any Republican is elected. The best trigger for that war will be another major domestic terrorist attack that can conveniently blamed on Tehran. The goal here is simply spreading further chaos in the middle east requiring a permanent US boots on the ground presence and a no questions asked climate of patriotism at home. Meanwhile the US and European borders must remain open so as to facilitate the flood of more potential terrorists and refugees.

    Since Two State Solution is officially dead, the next move is to officially annex the West Bank while giving Palestinians every financial incentive to leave Israel while the getting is good. The Arabs and Christians who don’t take the hint are going to be forcefully pressured to leave the West Bank and Israel proper a few years down the road. Once the Arab numbers significantly decline the remainder will be simply expelled Again the US and European borders must remain open so as to facilitate the flood of Palestinian emigrants and later refugees. Sure left wing Jews will make a minor fuss that Israel will become outwardly ethnocentric and the pretense to being a liberal Democracy will have evaporated. But it is taken as a given they will quickly fall into line if it ultimately means an expanded Israel that controls it own borders and is more demographically secure. Nothing I am stating here has not been promulgated as Likud party platform goals.

    In the meantime Jews in Europe and USA have every intention of passing hate speech and hate crime laws that they believe will effectively neuter the BDS movement. While Jews will be granted “super citizenship” that will make life for them more than tolerable until increasingly more Zionist territory is acquired. Conditions for Non-Jewish white Europeans and Americans may decline significantly but Jews don’t care about them as long as the Jews will be protected. Once again keeping the borders open is key to making this happen.

    Whites are only a 3-4 election cycles from being permanently rendered minorities in their homelands and in the countries they settled. That is what Jews on both the left and right want and they are not going to just let anybody simply “demand” that they change their plans. Besides Open Borders are making Jews super rich at the expense of their only possible opposition the educated middle class that identifies with the historical American nation. For this to happen the Borders must remain Open!!!

    Last, Jews look at how easy it has been for them to manipulate the Christian Dispensationalist Goyim and laugh at the idea that NAMs can ever cause them trouble. They already fund NAACP and La Raza and hundreds of other Open Borders and identity politics groups. They have no reason to fear a Democratic coalition of the fringes as long as they are the puppet masters and control the media. The more NAMs the better, they are after all the best cudgel to keep the white Christian goyim in line. The Borders will remain Open!!!

    In short everything is going the Jews way, and 90%+ of whites in the USA and Europe are clueless as to who is pulling the strings.

    In short being polite and simply asking or even “demanding” some change in course from TWMNBN will accomplish nothing except still getting you labeled an anti-semite.

  47. @MLK
    This is a terrific column and proposal. I don't have a single quarrel with what you've written. However, as I have been endeavoring to point out, you leave out a party essential to such a grand bargain, anti-Israel Paleo-Conservatives. In other words, no such grand bargain can hope to succeed unless Jews can be convinced they are not supposed to reach an agreement with those who view the Jewish State and its Jewish supporters in the US as "Firth Columnists" and pretty much the focus of evil in the modern world.

    This is why I've implored that Immigration Restrictionists must make everything besides moving the immigration ball in the right direction secondary, including their intractable jihad against the Jewish State and all other oft-repeated collective calumnies about Jews.

    The salient question has long been how do we explain the break or interruption of the previous pattern of periods of mass immigration inevitably followed by periods of restriction. The short but rather obvious, at least to me, answer is that with the decline of industrial labor unions there was no longer any institutional force with an economic interest in immigration restriction. It is all on the other side. Those -- not you -- who shout about a plan, by Jews or other "Cultural Marxists", to destroy the country are a noisy effective distraction, and intentionally so.

    You previously sort of laughed at my suggestion that Immigration Restrictionists will begin to succeed when we focus on behavior modification of billionaire and captains of industry pushing for further immigration and amnesty. But they are motivated by self-interest, not ideology. Thus they are more easily scared off the field of battle, and "Gentile Conservatives" have been equally cheap dates for corporate interests and billionaires as they have for Israel.

    Replies: @Bill, @anonymous-antimarxist

    This is why I’ve implored that Immigration Restrictionists must make everything besides moving the immigration ball in the right direction secondary, including their intractable jihad against the Jewish State and all other oft-repeated collective calumnies about Jews.

    Completely backwards. You can’t “negotiate” by first giving your counterparty everything he wants! Those things which put your panties in a twist are absolutely essential in order for any negotiation to occur.

    • Replies: @MLK
    @Bill

    You're a little confused. I am saying that any true Immigration Restrictionist will make everything else secondary. The organizational analogue is the National Rifle Association.

    Your way of thinking is most akin to the Palestinians -- who have spent decades clinging to their official sweet thoughts about the Jews.

    I'm always dispirited when I am forced to acknowledge that there are many like you on my team. Or at least seemingly so since some emanations are so dumb I often think they derive from either useful idiocy or even provocation. No tribe is collectively dumb when it comes to self-preservation and protection. But it any are it ain't Jews. Yet there are many like you who have a brilliant plan to get them into a transactional bargain with those who cannot even stop themselves from reminding their counter-party the ills they wish upon them.

    Replies: @anonymous-antimarxist, @Bill

  48. @syonredux
    RE: Rising awareness of Jewish power and influence ,

    Seems to me that Jewish elites think that indoctrination will solve the problem:

    The other episode took place in Lebanon. Hezbollah, the radical Muslim militia that dominates that country, has been working to keep The Diary of Anne Frank out of Lebanese schools. This kind of denialism, perpetrated in the Middle East, makes people susceptible to anti-Semitism when they grow up and emigrate to Europe. If you don’t grow up in a place that experienced the Holocaust, and if you don’t learn about the Holocaust in some other way, you’ll behave like somebody who doesn’t get it.
     
    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/foreigners/2015/03/how_can_we_help_jew_s_stay_in_europe_despite_anti_semitism_jeffrey_goldberg.html

    In other words, use the Holocaust (Hitler's great gift to the Zionist project) to full advantage.

    Of course, some Jews have noticed that certain groups (Blacks, Muslims, etc) seem oddly immune to the spectre of the Holocaust.Indeed, in some cases they actually seem downright hostile. A colleague of mine (she teaches an undergrad class on literature and racism) has noted to me that Blacks in her class get rather surly when the Holocaust totems are introduced: Anne Frank, Schindler's List, Wiesel's Night, etc. To them, the Holocaust narrative is White Privilege in action.White corpses in Europe are enduring symbols of martyrdom, while POC corpses are footnotes.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Dave Pinsen, @Hersh

    White corpses in Europe are enduring symbols of martyrdom, while POC corpses are footnotes.

    It’s not so much that they’re footnotes but that 3rd and 4th world POCs killing POCs is a dog-bites-man story, while the country that gave the world Goethe, Beethoven, Gauss, etc. committing genocide is man-bites-dog.

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @Dave Pinsen


    It’s not so much that they’re footnotes but that 3rd and 4th world POCs killing POCs is a dog-bites-man story, while the country that gave the world Goethe, Beethoven, Gauss, etc. committing genocide is man-bites-dog.
     
    That's not the POC perspective.Again, drawing on an anecdote from my colleague, take this famous scene from Schindler's List, the girl in the red coat:



    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1VL-y9JHuI

    After viewing the film, the Black students responded with real anger to the scene.They noted that no one cared about Black children being slaughtered....But show one cute little White girl , and White people collapse in heaps of tears. According to her, they deployed the full arsenal of theory on the scene, noting how the girl's fair skin and Caucasoid hair made her an image of White racial perfection.Black children, in contrast, with their dark skin and kinky hair, were the "Other" (Hegel has much to answer for), permanently excluded from sympathy, etc.

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen

    , @Anonymous
    @Dave Pinsen

    White corpses in Europe are enduring symbols of martyrdom, while POC corpses are footnotes.

    In point of fact, it is jewish corpses in Europe which are enduring symbols of martyrdom, while Gentile corpses are footnotes. 5 million Jews killed in World War 2 versus 70 million Gentiles killed, yet where is the focus?

  49. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Steve, don’t you get it yet?

    Jewish Democrats do not care about Israel. All rhetoric to the contrary is just that – rhetoric, which is mostly intended to reassure out of touch elderly Jews who still care fervently about Israel. Even now, it is reported that Senate Democrats – no doubt including Schumer, Feinstein, the washed up comedian from Minnesota, the phony war hero from Connecticut, and other Senators supposedly of the Mosaic persuasion – are blocking a NON-BINDING resolution that would call for re-imposition of sanctions on Iran in the event Iran CHEATS on the deal Obama is negotiating with them now. In other words, the deal being done is not even intended to be enforceable, and Senate Democrats, no doubt including most of the Jews among them, are just fine with that.

    Even after his serial blow-ups with Israel during his first term, Obama got just under 70% of the Jewish vote in 2012. Of course, some might say that was because he dialed back his rage at Israel and went on a “charm” offensive toward Jewish voters, but what if he hadn’t? My guess is, his support from Jews would have dropped . . . to about 65%.

    FWIW, I applaud you for noticing that there’s no logical connection between supporting Israel and wanting open borders for the US. I myself strongly support both Israel (I mean, the part of Israeli society that is not suicidal, namely, the Israeli Right) and restricting immigration to the US. Unfortunately, the deal you propose is of no interest to the people you propose addressing it to.

  50. @syonredux
    RE: Rising awareness of Jewish power and influence ,

    Seems to me that Jewish elites think that indoctrination will solve the problem:

    The other episode took place in Lebanon. Hezbollah, the radical Muslim militia that dominates that country, has been working to keep The Diary of Anne Frank out of Lebanese schools. This kind of denialism, perpetrated in the Middle East, makes people susceptible to anti-Semitism when they grow up and emigrate to Europe. If you don’t grow up in a place that experienced the Holocaust, and if you don’t learn about the Holocaust in some other way, you’ll behave like somebody who doesn’t get it.
     
    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/foreigners/2015/03/how_can_we_help_jew_s_stay_in_europe_despite_anti_semitism_jeffrey_goldberg.html

    In other words, use the Holocaust (Hitler's great gift to the Zionist project) to full advantage.

    Of course, some Jews have noticed that certain groups (Blacks, Muslims, etc) seem oddly immune to the spectre of the Holocaust.Indeed, in some cases they actually seem downright hostile. A colleague of mine (she teaches an undergrad class on literature and racism) has noted to me that Blacks in her class get rather surly when the Holocaust totems are introduced: Anne Frank, Schindler's List, Wiesel's Night, etc. To them, the Holocaust narrative is White Privilege in action.White corpses in Europe are enduring symbols of martyrdom, while POC corpses are footnotes.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Dave Pinsen, @Hersh

    Re “Holocaust totems” – How about this movie “Woman in Gold?” I haven’t seen the movie but there are plenty of TV advertisements. Its about a rich Jewish woman fighting in court to get back a painting that was taken by the Nazis. Its about “JUSTICE!” Ye Gads and they wonder why the Palestinians won’t get over it. It seems like that’s not the first movie with the same subject matter, return of artwork. In the 90’s, Sen. D’Amato (R-NY) spent most of his time fretting about getting Jewish artwork back from the Swiss or whoever. Blacks and Hispanics are not wrong to resent Jewish self-entitlement to victim status; we all should resent it. Its never going to end when they’re still making their movies about artwork 70 years after WWII.

  51. @Dave Pinsen
    @syonredux


    White corpses in Europe are enduring symbols of martyrdom, while POC corpses are footnotes.
     
    It's not so much that they're footnotes but that 3rd and 4th world POCs killing POCs is a dog-bites-man story, while the country that gave the world Goethe, Beethoven, Gauss, etc. committing genocide is man-bites-dog.

    Replies: @syonredux, @Anonymous

    It’s not so much that they’re footnotes but that 3rd and 4th world POCs killing POCs is a dog-bites-man story, while the country that gave the world Goethe, Beethoven, Gauss, etc. committing genocide is man-bites-dog.

    That’s not the POC perspective.Again, drawing on an anecdote from my colleague, take this famous scene from Schindler’s List, the girl in the red coat:

    After viewing the film, the Black students responded with real anger to the scene.They noted that no one cared about Black children being slaughtered….But show one cute little White girl , and White people collapse in heaps of tears. According to her, they deployed the full arsenal of theory on the scene, noting how the girl’s fair skin and Caucasoid hair made her an image of White racial perfection.Black children, in contrast, with their dark skin and kinky hair, were the “Other” (Hegel has much to answer for), permanently excluded from sympathy, etc.

    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    @syonredux

    Spielberg may have been taking a page from Otto Preminger there, who cast Jill Haworth as the Nordic Jewish teen in whom Eva Marie Saint's gentile nurse character takes a maternal interest in Exodus.

  52. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Dave Pinsen
    @syonredux


    White corpses in Europe are enduring symbols of martyrdom, while POC corpses are footnotes.
     
    It's not so much that they're footnotes but that 3rd and 4th world POCs killing POCs is a dog-bites-man story, while the country that gave the world Goethe, Beethoven, Gauss, etc. committing genocide is man-bites-dog.

    Replies: @syonredux, @Anonymous

    White corpses in Europe are enduring symbols of martyrdom, while POC corpses are footnotes.

    In point of fact, it is jewish corpses in Europe which are enduring symbols of martyrdom, while Gentile corpses are footnotes. 5 million Jews killed in World War 2 versus 70 million Gentiles killed, yet where is the focus?

  53. @Bill
    @MLK


    This is why I’ve implored that Immigration Restrictionists must make everything besides moving the immigration ball in the right direction secondary, including their intractable jihad against the Jewish State and all other oft-repeated collective calumnies about Jews.
     
    Completely backwards. You can't "negotiate" by first giving your counterparty everything he wants! Those things which put your panties in a twist are absolutely essential in order for any negotiation to occur.

    Replies: @MLK

    You’re a little confused. I am saying that any true Immigration Restrictionist will make everything else secondary. The organizational analogue is the National Rifle Association.

    Your way of thinking is most akin to the Palestinians — who have spent decades clinging to their official sweet thoughts about the Jews.

    I’m always dispirited when I am forced to acknowledge that there are many like you on my team. Or at least seemingly so since some emanations are so dumb I often think they derive from either useful idiocy or even provocation. No tribe is collectively dumb when it comes to self-preservation and protection. But it any are it ain’t Jews. Yet there are many like you who have a brilliant plan to get them into a transactional bargain with those who cannot even stop themselves from reminding their counter-party the ills they wish upon them.

    • Replies: @anonymous-antimarxist
    @MLK

    You’re a little confused. I am saying that any true Immigration Restrictionist will make everything else secondary. The organizational analogue is the National Rifle Association.


    What a load of horse poop!!!!

    Yes, the National Rifle Association is held out as a outstanding example of a successful single issue political organization. However you have recently listened to any uncensored open phones talk radio show? NRA members increasingly understand that the Second Amendment is unlikely to survive the day that white Christian Europeans become a minority in the USA. Rush echoes this point increasingly on his show and so does guest host Mark Steyn. If new legal and illegal aliens had the same culture, traditions, personalities, temperament, intelligence.... as the historical US population then this would not be an issue, but they clearly do not.

    Therefore you can not discuss immigration restrictionism without mentioning Multiculturalism and its ideological roots in Cultural Marxism.

    Immigration is many things but it sure as hell is not a "single issue" issue. It touches on every aspect of out daily life and future.

    Replies: @MLK

    , @Bill
    @MLK


    You’re a little confused. I am saying that any true Immigration Restrictionist will make everything else secondary.
     
    Everything except Israel worship.

    I’m always dispirited when I am forced to acknowledge that there are many like you on my team. Or at least seemingly so since some emanations are so dumb I often think they derive from either useful idiocy or even provocation.
     
    Yeah, praising the tribe has gotten us . . . and then there was . . . and, uh, . . . and let's not forget . . . Derbyshire's philosemitism has certainly served him well. No way Taki would have picked him up without that. Oh wait, isn't Taki an officialbadperson? Well, I'm sure I'll think of something.

    Yet there are many like you who have a brilliant plan to get them into a transactional bargain with those who cannot even stop themselves from reminding their counter-party the ills they wish upon them.
     
    You are so dumb it is painful. Sadat fought an actual war with Israel. With guns and tanks and dead people and everything. And, yet, mysteriously to you, the Israelis managed to enter into a transactional bargain with an officialbadperson with officialbadwishes like him. In politics, entering into transactional bargains with people you don't like is kinda the job description.

    You can't bargain with someone if you have nothing to offer. You can't bargain with someone if the only thing you disagree with them on is the thing you want from them. That's the Whole. F%#@ing. Point. of Steve's column.
  54. @MLK
    This is a terrific column and proposal. I don't have a single quarrel with what you've written. However, as I have been endeavoring to point out, you leave out a party essential to such a grand bargain, anti-Israel Paleo-Conservatives. In other words, no such grand bargain can hope to succeed unless Jews can be convinced they are not supposed to reach an agreement with those who view the Jewish State and its Jewish supporters in the US as "Firth Columnists" and pretty much the focus of evil in the modern world.

    This is why I've implored that Immigration Restrictionists must make everything besides moving the immigration ball in the right direction secondary, including their intractable jihad against the Jewish State and all other oft-repeated collective calumnies about Jews.

    The salient question has long been how do we explain the break or interruption of the previous pattern of periods of mass immigration inevitably followed by periods of restriction. The short but rather obvious, at least to me, answer is that with the decline of industrial labor unions there was no longer any institutional force with an economic interest in immigration restriction. It is all on the other side. Those -- not you -- who shout about a plan, by Jews or other "Cultural Marxists", to destroy the country are a noisy effective distraction, and intentionally so.

    You previously sort of laughed at my suggestion that Immigration Restrictionists will begin to succeed when we focus on behavior modification of billionaire and captains of industry pushing for further immigration and amnesty. But they are motivated by self-interest, not ideology. Thus they are more easily scared off the field of battle, and "Gentile Conservatives" have been equally cheap dates for corporate interests and billionaires as they have for Israel.

    Replies: @Bill, @anonymous-antimarxist

    Your comment is nonsense. If only the Paleo-cons would pucker up and smooch TWMNBN ass then everything would be fine and perhaps Jewish globalist billionaires would come to their senses and reject Open Borders. Yeah Sure!!!!

    For the last couple of decades the only political group who do not view Americans as just another commodity whose well being and standard of living is not to be arbitraged way are the Paleo-Cons. And the only political group not to have any delusions about or to have been corrupted by TWMNBN are the Paleo-Cons.

    Furthermore it was the Marxists who abandoned traditional labor unions when they did not go all in for the international revolution of the proletariat. That signalled the rise of Cultural Marxism which from its inception has been very hostile to the native white populations of the west and quite open and specific concerning its globalist agenda of electing a new people.

    Last the immigration restriction movement of the 1920’s was a coalition of non Marxist labor unions,(the Marxist IWW was delusionally pro Open Borders), old school Darwinian Progressives(Not the Boazian variety), white moderates and conservatives, and last most Blacks. Eastern European Jews were strongly for Open Borders then as they are today.

    Now go get your shinebox!!!!

    • Replies: @MLK
    @anonymous-antimarxist

    Uh huh. It is Sailer's Grand Plan, not mine. I am critiquing it, and every one of the commenters who pushes back, including you, substantiates my points.


    TWMNBN
     
    I haven't the foggiest idea what this means. Nor will I expend a kilocalorie trying to figure it out. It is enough for me to note that it is emblematic of why people like you are of less than zero value in service of the cause of an overdue Immigration Moratorium.

    Jewish Billionaires, along with pretty much all other billionaires, along with pretty much the rest of what we could call the commanding heights of the American economy, are in favor of unending mass immigration and amnesty too. In short, the entire American economy is predicated on it, along with increasing private and public debt. Meanwhile, characters like you are carrying on about Jewish Billionaire and Cultural Marxists.

    Until and unless Immigration Restrictionists abandon what amounts to magical thinking -- and that is about as generous as I can be as to the prospects of this "Grand Bargain," even if people like you could somehow be consigned to the children's table for the period of negotiations -- it will be further Immigration Surges and Amnesties.

    There are ways to move the ball forward. Unfortunately, many Immigration Restrictionists are like you. If sticking it to the Jews is central to the plan there is little interest.

    Conservatives need to learn from the Left. Most especially in terms of deploying the coercive and harassing power of government toward the right ends. For example, I've long thought getting a Proposition on the California Ballot, giving immigrants, including illegals, the right to sue employers individually and via Class Action, for failure to pay wages and benefits equal to that of citizens, would pass and fix their little red wagons.

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen, @anonymous-antimarxist

  55. @Art Deco
    But Israel has an unwritten rule that it would be racial treason for a Jewish coalition to form a governing majority using Arabs, so Arab voters don’t really count in determining who gets to be prime minister.
    --
    No, minorities lists associated with the Labor Party were part of parliamentary majorities prior to 1977 and the Druze population has been a notable component of the electoral base of some parties (e.g. Shas). Since that time, Arabs in parliament have generally been found in the caucuses of communist or Arab nationalist parties only loyal to the state in adherence to law.

    It isn't racial treason. Cabinet ministers have access to classified information. Some Arab politicians cannot be trusted and some would be put under considerable pressure by collateral relatives, &c.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @silviosilver

    Has there ever been a case where Arab parties were used to tip the balance from a rightist to a leftist prime minister? I read that Rabin had a shaky majority in 1992 without Arabs and that was the closest thing to an exception to the unwritten rule?

    • Replies: @matt
    @Steve Sailer

    The Arab parties voted with the Rabin government on matters of confidence, but they weren't allowed into the coalition. But even if that happened this time, it wouldn't have mattered. The Zionist Camp couldn't have formed a government without Kulanu's 10 seats, and Kulanu went with Likud.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    , @Art Deco
    @Steve Sailer

    Not that I can remember. The religious parties are useful as coalition partners for both sides because their priorities are discrete and can be met with deals and accommodation. After 1982, constitutionally Arab parties were all pretty much hostile to Israel as a political entity, something which would impede coalition building quite apart from public policy differences (between the Communist Party and the Labor Party, to take one exampe).

    Replies: @Anon

  56. anon • Disclaimer says:

    Israel needs at least mild ethno-nationalism to be the global default and so the looming conflict of interest between Zionists on the one hand and globalist banking mafia on the other has been visible on the horizon for a long time. It’s also been clear for a while the banking mafia were prepared to abandon the Zionist wing if it came to a crunch.

  57. Modern day danegeld.

    Unz: Please use some other existing content management system.

  58. American Jews are mostly Bolshevism, they couldn’t care less about Israel, actually, they wouldn’t be bothered if all those Mizrahi and Sephardi Jews who keep voting on Likud just went gone to the seas like Nasser promised. They didn’t care when Hitler killed the Orthodox Jews from Poland either and they were closer to them than to most Israeli Jews.

    Zionist hysterics. 100% support for Israel = “sufficient” 99.9% support for Israel = “utter indifference”

    Princess and the pea, politics of the spoiled rotten.

  59. @Karl
    >> On the important things (Israel, mass immigration to the USA) , they are in total accord.

    I am not aware of EVIDENCE that Shelly is a USA-open-borders guy. His wife gives LOTS of interviews to the Hebrew press stringers in Vegas; this topic never comes up whatsoever.

    The Israelis with money aren't looking for cheap Mexican househelp; they prefer Au Pairs from TelAviv. They DO NOT want their kids to grow up with an "Anglo" accent on their Hebrew, it's bad for passing the gibbush into an elite unit in the IDF.

    This is all over the Israeli-moms-Hebrew-blogosphere in California and metro-NYC. They are very open about it.

    Hilariously, on the Israeli side, it's the filipina caregivers who are carefully passed around from family to family. Israelis know better than to hire Jewish girls to take care of elderly parents or grandparents.

    Replies: @syonredux

    I am not aware of EVIDENCE that Shelly is a USA-open-borders guy.

    MMM, well there was this:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/11/opinion/sheldon-adelson-warren-buffett-and-bill-gates-on-immigration-reform.html?_r=0

    Rather hard to imagine Adelson signing off on something like that in Israel….

    His wife gives LOTS of interviews to the Hebrew press stringers in Vegas; this topic never comes up whatsoever.

    Why would it? They know what her answer would be:”America is a nation of immigrants.Support for immigration is a Jewish value., etc”

    The Israelis with money aren’t looking for cheap Mexican househelp; they prefer Au Pairs from TelAviv. They DO NOT want their kids to grow up with an “Anglo” accent on their Hebrew, it’s bad for passing the gibbush into an elite unit in the IDF.

    On the other hand, Mexicans make great gardeners and docile cleaning staff at casinos.

  60. In short before we start hammering the Jews we better damn well start hammering the white business and money classes who are backing this traitorous crap.

    True, but let’s be honest about where the groups stand. Jews are much more supportive of open borders and mass immigration than whites are, and the opposition to same is much more white than Jewish. There’s a pair of links I keep handy that give a survey of how US senators and reps voted some years back, breaking them down into Euro and Jewish categories, but Steve doesn’t like me dropping it here. Short version, Euros voted about 45/55 for open borders, while Jews were like 90/10, or something.

  61. “Seems to me that Jewish elites think that indoctrination will solve the problem…”
    “Whereas our White elites believe that racial treason is the highest virtue….”

    Indoctrination is certainly the flavor of the day by Christian elites, libertarian elites, alpha-male elites (redundancy?), labor elites, government elites, working class elites, etc.

    Syon, what elite do you represent? Who do you seek to indoctrinate?

    “A colleague of mine (she teaches an undergrad class on literature and racism) has noted to me that Blacks in her class get rather surly when the Holocaust totems are introduced: Anne Frank, Schindler’s List, Wiesel’s Night, etc. To them, the Holocaust narrative is White Privilege in action. White corpses in Europe are enduring symbols of martyrdom, while POC corpses are footnotes.”

    Since you are speaking anecdotally, I will offer this nugget—when I was in college and took a class on the Holocaust, there were six black students (out of 40). Every single one of them viewed the Holocaust as exactly as it was—a series of horrific events committed by human beings who happened to be German, not white.

    “The takeaway? Supporting Jewish supremacy in Israel is doubleplusgood. Supporting a European majority USA? Crimethink. Can anyone imagine Bill Gates donating to VDARE?”

    Conversely, supporting a European majority USA is doubleplusgood. Supporting America as a multicultural society? Crimethink, especially if you are an American citizen who [gasps] believes in such a notion. Race traitor!

    Listen, if you are a white person, a black person, a Jew, and want to tout your whiteness, or blackness, or Jewedness, go ahead. White power! Black power! Joo power!

    It’s just that the EXTREMISTS in your tribe will take it one step further and demand their agenda be front and center compared to the other groups. In this case, expect blowback. White Christian males, the founders of Western Civilization, are naturally taken aback when THEIR institutions come under “attack” by inferior groups for their past jackbooting of black and Jewish males. Black and Jewish males, in turn, demand over-the-top reparations in response to “white privilege”.

    The terms “racism” and “elitism” use to mean something tangible and substantial. Not anymore. They are merely Pavolian buzzwords that elicit over-the-top reactions by the acolytes at V-Dare and Al Sharpton race baiters at the world.

    “The USA can no longer be described as real blood and soil nation founded by a real genetic homogenous population.”



    That’s because America was actually founded by different groups of people who happened to be primarily of European descent. Their religion? Protestant, Catholic, Baptist, Methodist. Their ethnic backgrounds? English, Irish, German, African, Jewish, Spanish. Heterogenous, baby, heterogeneous.

    “The Cultural Marxist enterprise…”

    

Yet another term (along with “white privilege”) that has absolutely no meaning.

    “It would be racial treason for anybody, anywhere, to form a “governing coalition” with Arabs.”

    Says who? Do people have the liberty to form associations of their own choosing without someone labeling it as being “racial treason”? Thanks, David Duke. Thanks, Louis Farrahkan.

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @Corvinus


    Seems to me that Jewish elites think that indoctrination will solve the problem…”
    “Whereas our White elites believe that racial treason is the highest virtue….”

    Indoctrination is certainly the flavor of the day by Christian elites, libertarian elites, labor elites, government elites,
     
    And, in the USA, all of those elites are in favor of mass immigration/race replacement

    working class elites, etc.
     
    Contradiction in terms, I should think

    Syon, what elite do you represent?
     
    None.Sadly, no elites in the USA share my opinions.Now, if I were in Israel, it would be a different story.There I would be the mainstream.

    Who do you seek to indoctrinate?
     
    Whom, not who.Something of a lost cause, I fear.

    Since you are speaking anecdotally, I will offer this nugget—when I was in college and took a class on the Holocaust, there were six black students (out of 40). Every single one of them viewed the Holocaust as exactly as it was—a series of horrific events committed by human beings who happened to be German, not white.
     
    Care to trade anecdote for anecdote? This one comes from personal experience.We were talking about the Holocaust in class, and the La Raza and Black students started complaining about the Holocaust Museum in Washington.A monument to dead White people.To their way of thinking, it was simply a matter of Hitler doing in Europe what White people had done for centuries in the Americas, Australia, Africa, etc.Of course, they said, since it was done in Europe it became an event that scandalized the world....

    Conversely, supporting a European majority USA is doubleplusgood.
     
    And who would say that in public, dear fellow? Not I.That would squelch my chances at tenure.In contrast, my PC colleagues extol the coming end of European America at conference after conference...

    Supporting America as a multicultural society? Crimethink, especially if you are an American citizen who [gasps] believes in such a notion.
     
    Where? Not in the Ivy League.Or within the corridors of power in Washington.

    Race traitor!
     
    The highest honor that a European person can attain in contemporary society.Why, I've attended conferences where the White speaker proudly proclaimed his status as a "race traitor." To thunderous applause.

    Listen, if you are a white person, a black person, a Jew, and want to tout your whiteness, or blackness, or Jewedness, go ahead. White power! Black power! Joo power!
     
    Dear fellow, If a said anything remotely similar to "White Power" in public, I would lose my job.In contrast, a colleague down the hall has pasted on his door various projected dates for the end of European dominance in the USA.With a smiley face after each date.
  62. @Steve Sailer
    @Art Deco

    Has there ever been a case where Arab parties were used to tip the balance from a rightist to a leftist prime minister? I read that Rabin had a shaky majority in 1992 without Arabs and that was the closest thing to an exception to the unwritten rule?

    Replies: @matt, @Art Deco

    The Arab parties voted with the Rabin government on matters of confidence, but they weren’t allowed into the coalition. But even if that happened this time, it wouldn’t have mattered. The Zionist Camp couldn’t have formed a government without Kulanu’s 10 seats, and Kulanu went with Likud.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @matt

    So there has never been a single example in Israel's history where Arab members of the Knesset made a difference in who was prime minister, right?

    Replies: @matt

  63. @Lot

    a former member of the Israeli terrorist organization Irgun
     
    This is wrong too. Irgun was a military organization with ranks, organizations, discipline, etc. At most, a small part of its activity, for a small part of its existence, can be described as "terrorist." I would not even go that far. For example, the bombing of the King David "Hotel" was actually a legitimate military target, as it housed the headquarters of the British military, which at the time was following an Arabist line (1) barring sales of land to Jews (2) restricting Jewish immigration to Israel (3) support an extremely favorable settlement of to Arabs of the Mandate of Palestine.

    Replies: @fredyetagain aka superhonky

    “For example, the bombing of the King David “Hotel” was actually a legitimate military target”

    Notwithstanding your attempt to use parentheses to somehow alter reality, The King David Hotel was in fact a hotel. And no, it was not a legitimate military target. That the Irgun thought it was and that you agree says something about the Irgun and about you, but it does not in any way alter the fact that the bombing of the hotel (with 91 murdered therein) was an act of terrorism.

    • Replies: @Lot
    @fredyetagain aka superhonky

    Can you explain your reasoning by which the "military headquarters" is not "a legitimate military target"


    In 1946, the Secretariat occupied most of the southern wing of the hotel, with the military headquarters occupying the top floor of the south wing and the top, second and third floors of the middle of the hotel.[13] The military telephone exchange was situated in the basement.[5][6] An annexe housed the military police and a branch of the Criminal Investigation Department of the Palestine Police.[12]

    Rooms had first been requisitioned in the hotel in late 1938, on what was supposed to be a temporary basis. Plans had already been made to erect a permanent building for the Secretariat and Army GHQ, but these were cancelled after the Second World War broke out, at which point more than two-thirds of the hotel's rooms were being used for government and army purposes.[5]

    In March 1946, British Labour Party MP Richard Crossman gave the following description of activity at the hotel: "private detectives, Zionist agents, Arab sheiks, special correspondents, and the rest, all sitting around about discreetly overhearing each other."[14] Security analyst Bruce Hoffman has written that the hotel "housed the nerve centre of British rule in Palestine".[15]
     
    Also:

    The Irgun sent warnings by telephone, including one to the hotel's own switchboard, which the staff decided to ignore, but none directly to the British authorities.[6] A possible reason why the warning was ignored was that hoax bomb warnings were rife at the time.[6] From the fact that a bomb search had already been carried out, it appears that a hoax call or tip-off had been received at the hotel earlier that day.[5] Subsequent telephone calls from a concerned Palestine Post staff member and the police caused increasing alarm, and the hotel manager was notified. In the closing minutes before the explosion, he called an unknown British officer, but no evacuation was ordered.[6] The ensuing explosion caused the collapse of the western half of the southern wing of the hotel.
     

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

  64. @matt
    @Steve Sailer

    The Arab parties voted with the Rabin government on matters of confidence, but they weren't allowed into the coalition. But even if that happened this time, it wouldn't have mattered. The Zionist Camp couldn't have formed a government without Kulanu's 10 seats, and Kulanu went with Likud.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    So there has never been a single example in Israel’s history where Arab members of the Knesset made a difference in who was prime minister, right?

    • Replies: @matt
    @Steve Sailer

    Rabin formed a government with his own Labor Party, the newly formed left-wing Zionist party Meretz, and the right-wing Mizrachi party Shas, for total of 62/120. The six Shas MKs left the coalition in 1993 over Oslo, but three members of the now defunct right-wing Tzomet party joined the government in their place.

    But that still left Rabin's coalition with only 58 seats. They needed the five members of the Arab Democratic Party and the (Communist, partially Jewish) Hadash party in order to hold on to power and negotiate Oslo. But they weren't going to actually let them into the government and give them cabinet-level posts, so they let them support the government from the outside.

    When Rabin was assassinated in 1995, Peres took over, and the Arab parties continued to support the government for the next sixth months until Netanyahu won the 1996 elections.

    So, without the confidence votes of the Palestinian parties, Rabin (and Peres for 6 months) couldn't have been PM in the 90s. The Arab parties are responsible for the Oslo Accords.

    To their eternal shame.

  65. I don’t understand how this deal is supposed to work. Who are you supposed to make a deal with, the Elders of Zion? Who will serve as the bargaining representative of the Gentiles? The president of Skull and Bones? Will they meet in a secret room under the Washington Monument and seal their pact in blood?

    Same fuckers who put the open-borders, mass immigration policies in place? I love the obtuse act when it comes time to do something somebody else wants.

    Your comment is nonsense. If only the Paleo-cons would pucker up and smooch TWMNBN ass then everything would be fine and perhaps Jewish globalist billionaires would come to their senses and reject Open Borders. Yeah Sure!!!!

    I love this one. It’s very common, and seems tailored to third-graders: “now, boy, you just be good until further notice, and stop trying to escape, and I promise, one day I’ll set you free. There’s a good boy! Now go fetch me some iced tea.” *pats head*

  66. @Lot
    Changing the views of American Jews on immigration is not an easy task. While you talk about golf course membership policy a lot, this is a much bigger issue in the collective memory:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89vian_Conference

    The Nuremberg Laws made German Jews, who were already persecuted by the Hitler regime, stateless refugees in their own country. By 1938, some 450,000 of about 900,000 German Jews had fled Germany, mostly to British Mandate Palestine, though the British had a white paper barring Jews from Palestine during the war, (a number which also included over 50,000 German Jews who had taken advantage of the Haavara, or "Transfer" Agreement between German Zionists and the Nazis), but British immigration quotas prevented many from migrating. In March 1938, Hitler annexed Austria and made the 200,000 Jews of Austria stateless refugees. In September, Britain and France granted Hitler the right to occupy the Sudetenland of Czechoslovakia, and in March 1939, Hitler occupied the remainder of the country, making a further 200,000 Jews stateless.

    In 1939 the British White Paper capped Jewish immigration to Palestine at 75,000 over the next five years, after which the country was to become an independent state ...

    Before the Conference the United States and Great Britain made a critical agreement, to wit: the British promised not to bring up the fact that the United States was not filling its immigration quotas, and any mention of Palestine as a possible destination for Jewish refugees was excluded from the agenda.
     
    And this:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS_St._Louis

    Replies: @syonredux

    Changing the views of American Jews on immigration is not an easy task. While you talk about golf course membership policy a lot, this is a much bigger issue in the collective memory:

    Oh, yeah.One has to keep in mind that it’s always 1939-45 in the Jewish collective memory*.Of course, a prominent Frenchwoman has recently noted that Jewish thinking needs to adjust to current realities:

    “The reality is that there exist in France associations that are supposedly representative of French Jews, which have stuck with a software that came out of the Second World War,” she said, meaning that members of the Jewish leadership are still preoccupied with the threat of Nazi-like fascism. “For decades they have continued to fight against an anti-Semitism that no longer exists in France, for reasons of—how should I say this?—intellectual laziness. And by a form of submission to the politically correct. And while they were doing this, while they were fighting against an enemy that no longer existed, an anti-Semitism was gaining force in France stemming notably from the development of fundamentalist Islamist thought.”

    http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/03/is-it-time-for-the-jews-to-leave-europe/386279/

    And as for the people dying in Europe, why no tears for the three million or so who died in the 1932-33 Terror Famine in Ukraine? Or the 682,691 official victims of the Great Terror in 1937-38, many of whom (cf the 111,091 killed in the Polish Action) were targeted on strictly racial grounds?

    *Although it really should be the Summer of 1941-1945, seeing as how the Germans didn’t start killing Jews wholesale until the invasion of the Soviet Union.

  67. @MLK
    @Bill

    You're a little confused. I am saying that any true Immigration Restrictionist will make everything else secondary. The organizational analogue is the National Rifle Association.

    Your way of thinking is most akin to the Palestinians -- who have spent decades clinging to their official sweet thoughts about the Jews.

    I'm always dispirited when I am forced to acknowledge that there are many like you on my team. Or at least seemingly so since some emanations are so dumb I often think they derive from either useful idiocy or even provocation. No tribe is collectively dumb when it comes to self-preservation and protection. But it any are it ain't Jews. Yet there are many like you who have a brilliant plan to get them into a transactional bargain with those who cannot even stop themselves from reminding their counter-party the ills they wish upon them.

    Replies: @anonymous-antimarxist, @Bill

    You’re a little confused. I am saying that any true Immigration Restrictionist will make everything else secondary. The organizational analogue is the National Rifle Association.

    What a load of horse poop!!!!

    Yes, the National Rifle Association is held out as a outstanding example of a successful single issue political organization. However you have recently listened to any uncensored open phones talk radio show? NRA members increasingly understand that the Second Amendment is unlikely to survive the day that white Christian Europeans become a minority in the USA. Rush echoes this point increasingly on his show and so does guest host Mark Steyn. If new legal and illegal aliens had the same culture, traditions, personalities, temperament, intelligence…. as the historical US population then this would not be an issue, but they clearly do not.

    Therefore you can not discuss immigration restrictionism without mentioning Multiculturalism and its ideological roots in Cultural Marxism.

    Immigration is many things but it sure as hell is not a “single issue” issue. It touches on every aspect of out daily life and future.

    • Replies: @MLK
    @anonymous-antimarxist

    Perhaps I should have been a little clearer on my mention of the NRA. The NRA came under a lot of pressure from Republicans to abandon its endorsement of Democrats who had long offered steadfast support for gun rights. The NRA told the Republican Party to tell their story walking.


    Immigration is many things but it sure as hell is not a “single issue” issue. It touches on every aspect of out daily life and future.
     
    Immigration is indeed a "single issue," and more so in the most important respects than gun rights. You will note that I've alluded to moving the ball forward (or not) on Immigration. Whether a Moratorium or simply policies that restrict immigration, the proof is in the pudding. Interpreting the data would only take a moment away from your jibber jabber about Multiculturalism and Cultural Marxism.

    It touches on every aspect of out daily life and future.
     
    On this we wholeheartedly agree. Which is why I cannot think of a single programmatic goal I wouldn't delay or sacrifice in pursuit of a Moratorium or 1920s-1965 restrictionism.
  68. “But there’s some hardheaded sense in my proposed Grand Bargain: We’ll support Israel for you in return for you supporting Israel-like immigration policies for America”

    To quote the captain in the old British sitcom Dad’s Army “I think you’re getting into the realms of fantasy there, Jones”. Diversity for thee and not for me, though the heavens fall.

  69. matt says:
    @Steve Sailer
    @matt

    So there has never been a single example in Israel's history where Arab members of the Knesset made a difference in who was prime minister, right?

    Replies: @matt

    Rabin formed a government with his own Labor Party, the newly formed left-wing Zionist party Meretz, and the right-wing Mizrachi party Shas, for total of 62/120. The six Shas MKs left the coalition in 1993 over Oslo, but three members of the now defunct right-wing Tzomet party joined the government in their place.

    But that still left Rabin’s coalition with only 58 seats. They needed the five members of the Arab Democratic Party and the (Communist, partially Jewish) Hadash party in order to hold on to power and negotiate Oslo. But they weren’t going to actually let them into the government and give them cabinet-level posts, so they let them support the government from the outside.

    When Rabin was assassinated in 1995, Peres took over, and the Arab parties continued to support the government for the next sixth months until Netanyahu won the 1996 elections.

    So, without the confidence votes of the Palestinian parties, Rabin (and Peres for 6 months) couldn’t have been PM in the 90s. The Arab parties are responsible for the Oslo Accords.

    To their eternal shame.

  70. @anonymous-antimarxist
    @MLK

    Your comment is nonsense. If only the Paleo-cons would pucker up and smooch TWMNBN ass then everything would be fine and perhaps Jewish globalist billionaires would come to their senses and reject Open Borders. Yeah Sure!!!!

    For the last couple of decades the only political group who do not view Americans as just another commodity whose well being and standard of living is not to be arbitraged way are the Paleo-Cons. And the only political group not to have any delusions about or to have been corrupted by TWMNBN are the Paleo-Cons.

    Furthermore it was the Marxists who abandoned traditional labor unions when they did not go all in for the international revolution of the proletariat. That signalled the rise of Cultural Marxism which from its inception has been very hostile to the native white populations of the west and quite open and specific concerning its globalist agenda of electing a new people.

    Last the immigration restriction movement of the 1920's was a coalition of non Marxist labor unions,(the Marxist IWW was delusionally pro Open Borders), old school Darwinian Progressives(Not the Boazian variety), white moderates and conservatives, and last most Blacks. Eastern European Jews were strongly for Open Borders then as they are today.


    Now go get your shinebox!!!!

    Replies: @MLK

    Uh huh. It is Sailer’s Grand Plan, not mine. I am critiquing it, and every one of the commenters who pushes back, including you, substantiates my points.

    TWMNBN

    I haven’t the foggiest idea what this means. Nor will I expend a kilocalorie trying to figure it out. It is enough for me to note that it is emblematic of why people like you are of less than zero value in service of the cause of an overdue Immigration Moratorium.

    Jewish Billionaires, along with pretty much all other billionaires, along with pretty much the rest of what we could call the commanding heights of the American economy, are in favor of unending mass immigration and amnesty too. In short, the entire American economy is predicated on it, along with increasing private and public debt. Meanwhile, characters like you are carrying on about Jewish Billionaire and Cultural Marxists.

    Until and unless Immigration Restrictionists abandon what amounts to magical thinking — and that is about as generous as I can be as to the prospects of this “Grand Bargain,” even if people like you could somehow be consigned to the children’s table for the period of negotiations — it will be further Immigration Surges and Amnesties.

    There are ways to move the ball forward. Unfortunately, many Immigration Restrictionists are like you. If sticking it to the Jews is central to the plan there is little interest.

    Conservatives need to learn from the Left. Most especially in terms of deploying the coercive and harassing power of government toward the right ends. For example, I’ve long thought getting a Proposition on the California Ballot, giving immigrants, including illegals, the right to sue employers individually and via Class Action, for failure to pay wages and benefits equal to that of citizens, would pass and fix their little red wagons.

    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    @MLK


    Jewish Billionaires, along with pretty much all other billionaires, along with pretty much the rest of what we could call the commanding heights of the American economy, are in favor of unending mass immigration and amnesty too.
     
    Crazy thought, but what if they're not all 100% committed to that? What if a relatively small percentage are, and the rest assume that position because, in their social circle, that's the accepted one?

    Just because they're billionaires doesn't mean they aren't sensitive to social pressure.

    Replies: @MLK

    , @anonymous-antimarxist
    @MLK



    TWMNBN
     
    I haven’t the foggiest idea what this means. Nor will I expend a kilocalorie trying to figure it out. It is enough for me to note that it is emblematic of why people like you are of less than zero value in service of the cause of an overdue Immigration Moratorium.
     
    Oh Please!!! The frail little soul must need his fainting couch.

    You most certainly know what it means; "Those Who Must Not Be Named" in reference to the old saying attributed to many but most often to Voltaire, "To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize:"

    Anyone who voices opposition to Open Borders no matter how intelligently, calmly, persuasively, effectively, logically....... is going to be viciously attacked as a xenophobe, racist, bigot, nativistm Nazi ..... And you very well know that the organizations who make these attacks are overwhelming staffed, lead and financed by Jews, the SPLC being the prime example but there are literally hundreds of others. The one thing that may never be discussed in the "MSM" or what I refer to as the Cultural Marxist Media is that Jews are overwhelmingly behind the Open Borders movement. Hence TWMNBN!!!!

    Heaven help the poor fellow who naively openly mentions the role Jews have played in destroying our nation's sovereignty. Using TWMNBN serves to remind one to never be so foolish as ever drop one's guard and point out the obvious.

    Conservatives need to learn from the Left. Most especially in terms of deploying the coercive and harassing power of government toward the right ends. For example, I’ve long thought getting a Proposition on the California Ballot, giving immigrants, including illegals, the right to sue employers individually and via Class Action, for failure to pay wages and benefits equal to that of citizens, would pass and fix their little red wagons.
     
    Oy Vey!!! What a load of BS!!!

    Arguing for the extension of extra-judicial rights to law breaking illegal aliens is a favorite tactic of the Open Borders zealots at the ACLU, AILA, and NLG. That you would even remotely think this would be a good idea testifying to your alleged immigration restrictionist bonafides is hysterical. Now illegals can stay or at least enter and re-enter the US as long as they need legal counsel or have their day in court.
  71. @Jack D
    I don't understand how this deal is supposed to work. Who are you supposed to make a deal with, the Elders of Zion? Who will serve as the bargaining representative of the Gentiles? The president of Skull and Bones? Will they meet in a secret room under the Washington Monument and seal their pact in blood?

    The Israeli government certainly doesn't want to get involved in American domestic politics, and those here would (rightly) be the first to denounce it if they did. Israel has the immigration policy that it wants, selected for it by their own elected representatives and America has the immigration policy that it (apparently) wants, selected for it by its OWN elected representatives including its current 2 term President. American voter COULD have rejected Obama and his policies, especially in his 2nd term, but they didn't want to. That's how the chips fall in a democracy.

    And as Steve points out, Jews constitute less than 2% of American voters while white Christians still constitute the vast majority (not to mention blacks who really have nothing to gain and much to lose from immigration). If y'all don't want immigration, then what's stopping you? Do you REALLY need the Jews' help this time? We know that you couldn't have managed nuclear weapons without the Jews but that was a long time ago and the Jews have lost a lot of vitality since then - the current generation is becoming more assimilated and less Jewish, both in blood and culture, so don't expect any fresh batches of Feynmans. It's true that Jews still make up a disproportionate fraction of smart/rich people but even if they are 1/4 to 1/3 of influential Americans, that still leaves 2/3+ of wealth/influence in Gentile hands. C'mon goyim, you can do this yourself this time. Get your act together. Is MORE Jewish influence really what you want? Remember that when you ask the Godfather for a favor, you are indebted to him and he may call in his chit at any time. If you do this yourself, you won't owe anyone any favors.

    Replies: @IA, @Dave Pinsen

    You are correct. We gentile white guys need to rethink human rights. After all, we created it. It’s up to us to deconstruct it.

  72. @Corvinus
    “Seems to me that Jewish elites think that indoctrination will solve the problem…”
    “Whereas our White elites believe that racial treason is the highest virtue….”

    Indoctrination is certainly the flavor of the day by Christian elites, libertarian elites, alpha-male elites (redundancy?), labor elites, government elites, working class elites, etc.

    Syon, what elite do you represent? Who do you seek to indoctrinate?



    “A colleague of mine (she teaches an undergrad class on literature and racism) has noted to me that Blacks in her class get rather surly when the Holocaust totems are introduced: Anne Frank, Schindler’s List, Wiesel’s Night, etc. To them, the Holocaust narrative is White Privilege in action. White corpses in Europe are enduring symbols of martyrdom, while POC corpses are footnotes.”

    Since you are speaking anecdotally, I will offer this nugget—when I was in college and took a class on the Holocaust, there were six black students (out of 40). Every single one of them viewed the Holocaust as exactly as it was—a series of horrific events committed by human beings who happened to be German, not white.


    “The takeaway? Supporting Jewish supremacy in Israel is doubleplusgood. Supporting a European majority USA? Crimethink. Can anyone imagine Bill Gates donating to VDARE?”

    Conversely, supporting a European majority USA is doubleplusgood. Supporting America as a multicultural society? Crimethink, especially if you are an American citizen who [gasps] believes in such a notion. Race traitor!

    Listen, if you are a white person, a black person, a Jew, and want to tout your whiteness, or blackness, or Jewedness, go ahead. White power! Black power! Joo power!

    It’s just that the EXTREMISTS in your tribe will take it one step further and demand their agenda be front and center compared to the other groups. In this case, expect blowback. White Christian males, the founders of Western Civilization, are naturally taken aback when THEIR institutions come under “attack” by inferior groups for their past jackbooting of black and Jewish males. Black and Jewish males, in turn, demand over-the-top reparations in response to “white privilege”.

    The terms “racism” and “elitism” use to mean something tangible and substantial. Not anymore. They are merely Pavolian buzzwords that elicit over-the-top reactions by the acolytes at V-Dare and Al Sharpton race baiters at the world.



    “The USA can no longer be described as real blood and soil nation founded by a real genetic homogenous population.”



    That’s because America was actually founded by different groups of people who happened to be primarily of European descent. Their religion? Protestant, Catholic, Baptist, Methodist. Their ethnic backgrounds? English, Irish, German, African, Jewish, Spanish. Heterogenous, baby, heterogeneous.


    “The Cultural Marxist enterprise…”

    

Yet another term (along with “white privilege”) that has absolutely no meaning.


    “It would be racial treason for anybody, anywhere, to form a “governing coalition” with Arabs.”

    Says who? Do people have the liberty to form associations of their own choosing without someone labeling it as being “racial treason”? Thanks, David Duke. Thanks, Louis Farrahkan.

    Replies: @syonredux

    Seems to me that Jewish elites think that indoctrination will solve the problem…”
    “Whereas our White elites believe that racial treason is the highest virtue….”

    Indoctrination is certainly the flavor of the day by Christian elites, libertarian elites, labor elites, government elites,

    And, in the USA, all of those elites are in favor of mass immigration/race replacement

    working class elites, etc.

    Contradiction in terms, I should think

    Syon, what elite do you represent?

    None.Sadly, no elites in the USA share my opinions.Now, if I were in Israel, it would be a different story.There I would be the mainstream.

    Who do you seek to indoctrinate?

    Whom, not who.Something of a lost cause, I fear.

    Since you are speaking anecdotally, I will offer this nugget—when I was in college and took a class on the Holocaust, there were six black students (out of 40). Every single one of them viewed the Holocaust as exactly as it was—a series of horrific events committed by human beings who happened to be German, not white.

    Care to trade anecdote for anecdote? This one comes from personal experience.We were talking about the Holocaust in class, and the La Raza and Black students started complaining about the Holocaust Museum in Washington.A monument to dead White people.To their way of thinking, it was simply a matter of Hitler doing in Europe what White people had done for centuries in the Americas, Australia, Africa, etc.Of course, they said, since it was done in Europe it became an event that scandalized the world….

    Conversely, supporting a European majority USA is doubleplusgood.

    And who would say that in public, dear fellow? Not I.That would squelch my chances at tenure.In contrast, my PC colleagues extol the coming end of European America at conference after conference…

    Supporting America as a multicultural society? Crimethink, especially if you are an American citizen who [gasps] believes in such a notion.

    Where? Not in the Ivy League.Or within the corridors of power in Washington.

    Race traitor!

    The highest honor that a European person can attain in contemporary society.Why, I’ve attended conferences where the White speaker proudly proclaimed his status as a “race traitor.” To thunderous applause.

    Listen, if you are a white person, a black person, a Jew, and want to tout your whiteness, or blackness, or Jewedness, go ahead. White power! Black power! Joo power!

    Dear fellow, If a said anything remotely similar to “White Power” in public, I would lose my job.In contrast, a colleague down the hall has pasted on his door various projected dates for the end of European dominance in the USA.With a smiley face after each date.

  73. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factor"] says:

    Since GOP and American Conservatism are totally pro-Israel, they can only withdraw support than lend support. The support is already 100% there.

    But by withdrawing support, the GOP and American Conservatism will lose the last protection to their current status. In the US, ‘racism’ is the biggest sin. It is by their total support of Israel that the GOP and American Conservatism are half-way forgiven for their ‘racism’ by the Liberal Jewish Establishment.
    The idea is that the American Right is bad but not totally bad because, at the very least, it supports Israel, the land of Holocaust Survivors. But, suppose GOP and American Cons were to threaten withdrawal of support of Israel. Then, they would lose their only shield against charges of ‘racism’ from the Jewish Establishment. The deal that currently exists goes like this: Neocons go to the GOP and say, “Look, as long as you guys totally support Israel, we Neocon Jews will talk to our Lib Jew brothers and tell them to go a bit easy on you guys being a bunch of ‘racist’, ‘xenophobic’, ‘homophobic’, and ‘sexist’ neanderthal shitheads.” So, the GOP clings to Neocons as protection from the full brunt of hatred from the media, academia, Wall Street, and federal government that are largely monopolized by Liberal Jewish power. It’s an extortion racket. It’s like Paulie promises to protect the restaurant owner in GOODFELLAS from Tommy if Paulie is taken in as a partner.

    So, if the GOP threatens to withdraw support of Israel, then all the Liberal Jewish Tommies will go after GOP with full force. In a way, Neocons love how Lib Jews are always attacking the GOP. It is because of that constant barrage of hatred that the GOP desperately pleads with Neocons to served as middlemen between itself and Liberal Jews. Putin relies on Jews for the same reason. He figures the powerful World Jewry hates Russia, but if he won’t support Israel and really turns against Jews, then the FULL FORCE of World Jewry will kick into gear to totally destroy Russia. (Japan also treated Jews nice during WWII in hope that American Jews would be appreciative and use their influence to go easier on Japan. Well, Japan got Hiroshima and Nagasaki from Jewish atom bomb makers.)

    The fact is the GOP controls very few weapons of firepower in the political discourse. All big cities, all colleges, all big media, most political organizations, most big industries, and etc are dominated by Libs, especially Jewish Libs. Indeed, Cons are so afraid of Liberal power that they even recruit homo agents to gain protection from full brunt of Lib attack. If GOP has prominent homo agents, then Lib Power will bash it but not totally destroy it.

    Anyway, the Lib Jewish Power has to keep pushing the GOP/American Conservatism against the ropes for the latter to plead with Neocons to ask Lib Jews to not beat them so bad.
    The best Neocon can offer is “You guys keep supporting Israel 100% and we’ll ask our Lib Jew brethren to hit you 5o times than 100 times.”
    Neocons are really middlemen between GOP/American Conservatism and Lib Jewish Power than firmly on the Conservative side. Neocons actually delight in the Lib Jewish Power’s bashing of the GOP since without such hostile pressure from the Lib Jewish power bloc, the GOP would have no need to rely on Neocons to act as middleman. It is because GOP allows Neocons to use the GOP partially(or mainly) to support Israel that Lib Jews have sometimes pulled their punches.

    In media, academia, entertainment, culture, and government, what power does the GOP have in a political firefight? GOP can get a bunch of politicians elected in local elections, but the main opinion-moving institutions are all owned by Libs. Even Talk Radio is owned mostly by Jews, which is why 50% of all the yammering is about Israel, Israel, Israel, and those bad bad Muslims and Russians.

    And let’s be realistic. Heritage Foundation couldn’t even stand up for Richwine. NR got rid of Derbyshire. Sailer is a pariah in the world of Conservative Inc. Even Ann Coulter has recently been disinvited to CPAC for some of her more strident stuff. National Review, American Spectator, Weekly Standard, and etc are all totally Neocon dominated. The minute anyone dares to whisper SIS — Sailer’s Israel Strategy — , they’re gonna get the ax.

    Stuff like American Conservative Magazine, Lew Rockwell,and etc are on the fringe. As for Vdare and American Renaissance, American Conservative Inc treat them like radioactive toxic material. Jews of all stripes are as afraid of white conservatives gaining pride & unity as they are of Iran getting nukes.
    Even neocons prefer American Conservatism to feel guilty, shameful, and self-loathing. After all, if white cons really felt proud and confident, why would they feel a need to redeem themselves and prove themselves worthy? Why would they need to seek protection of Neocons(and Nice Negroes like Ben Carter) to win moral credits? It’s because American Conservatism has allowed itself to be tainted as having been all about ‘racism’, ‘anti-semitism’, ‘xenophobia’, and ‘homophobia’ that it feels a need to clean up its image as the New Good Conservatives. Since most blacks, homos, and immigrants(the symbolic victims) are with the Democrats and since the GOP is mostly a white party(and since whites are associated with ‘white privilege’ and an assortment of ‘historical sins’), the only hope that GOP has to gain ‘anti-racist’ credit is to work with Neocons and brand the GOP as the ‘pro-Israel’ party that is supposedly trying to save Jews from ‘another Holocaust’. (At least when terrorist attacks were rife in Israel in the 80s and 90s, constant news of Jewish deaths made Americans feel sympathy for Jews. But the big walls have made terrorist attacks within Israel and even in Occupied West Bank exceedingly rare. So, more and more people on the Left notice that it’s now mostly about Jews crushing Palestinians. Because the attacks on Jews in Israel/Palestine are at an all-time low, it’s harder to maintain the narrative of Jews existentially threatened by dangerous Arabs. If anything, Neocon-led wars in the Middle East seem to have led to Arabs killing Arabs and the total demise of the Christian Arab community. There had once been a time when Israel was indeed justified in the eyes of many as the refuge for Holocaust survivors. But as Israel is now safer than ever and as the Occupation goes on, Zionists are seen less as Holocaust survivors but the children of Holocaust Survivors who have ironically become like the Nazis who are treating Palestinians like the Nazis treated Jews in places like the Warsaw Ghetto. And indeed, things are pretty grim in Gaza especially.)

    Here is the problem for Jews. If they openly side with the GOP for the sake of Israel, it may actually do more harm to Israel. Why? Because Jews will officially declare Israel as an American Conservative cause. As of now, it’s true that Netanyahu is seen as being allied with the GOP, but Israel is still pushed as a nation that deserve the support of both Libs and Cons. But if most Jews openly side with GOP’s position on Israel, then most Democrats and Libs will see Israel as the cause of the other side.

    They will become more anti-Israel and more pro-Palestinian. As the media are owned by oligarchs, it can continue to favor pro-Jewish pundits and journalists. But the academia doesn’t quite work that way. True, universities are mindful of their donors. But many academics are chosen and promoted for ideological reasons. So, if a whole bunch of department run by radicals and leftists favor pro-Palestinian voices, then the academia will turn more ‘left’ and anti-Israel, and these professors will teach a new generation of morons to call out on the ‘racism’ of Israel. And these academics cannot be fired if they get tenure. With more and more such academics taking over the campus, Liberal Jewish academics will come under pressure to support ‘justice for Palestinians’ or ‘tribal unity with Jews’.

    The fact is your average non-Jewish academic admires Norman Finkelstein(whose liberalism/leftism is consistent) and utterly despises Alan Dershowitz(who stands for liberalism in America but rightism in Israel).
    Though the media are private and can hire only the people they want, they nevertheless often depend on the academia for information, opinion, and etc. So, as the academia increasingly turns pro-Palestinian, journalism schools will reflect that, and the media won’t be able to totally suppress it either. Indeed, more and more Liberal Jews will come under the pressure of choosing universal Liberalism or selective Liberalism(that somehow doesn’t apply to Jews and Israelis).

    Anyway, if Jews openly side with the GOP, they won’t get anymore from it than what they do already. GOP and American Conservatism are totally pro-Israel, but the fact is Israel is still facing mounting pressures and problems. Indeed, it appears Israel is becoming especially hated in some circles precisely because it is so closely associated with the GOP and American Conservatism.
    From that angle, it might actually be better for Jews to lower the level of American Conservatism’s support of Israel. Indeed, that was the whole point of supporting Obama. The much loathed Bush and Cheney(and Bolton the dolton) were so pro-Israel that it gave Israel a bad name among American Libs and Europeans(and Africans, Asians, Latin Americans).
    Indeed, all this “Obama hates Israel and loves Iran” is a kind of boon to Israel. It creates the illusion that US government and foreign policy are independent of Jewish power and Israeli pressure when, in fact, Obama is just a tool of Liberal Jewish power. The way I see it, he is merely the ‘good cop’ used by Jews in negotiations with Iran while Netanyahu plays the role of ‘bad cop’.

    In a strange way, the GOP has done more harm to Israel in recent years by supporting it so totally and mindlessly. It got so whoreish and over-the-top that people really begin to murmur, “Shiite, maybe Jews do control everything.” Bush and his Wars for Israel. Bush and Cheney’s total support of every Israeli action, even the wrecking of Lebanon over the abduction of two Israeli soldiers.

    Here the Lib Jews are trying to make the GOP the shit party, but the shit party hugs Israel and smears its shit all over Israel. Now, if Netanyahu weren’t such a shameless egomaniac, maybe he would have played this a bit smarter. Indeed, he has done such with Putin. Netanyahu is friendly with Putin but no more. He also keeps a certain distance. But he just can’t hold back his ego at the prospect of traveling to the US and give big speeches like he’s king of the hill. He can’t help it. But as the GOP gives him endless applause, it’s giving Israel a bad name.
    So, why would smart Jews want Israel to be even more closely associated with the GOP and American Conservatism? How will Israel’s reputation get better as Netanyahu dances with the likes of Sarah Palin, John the Crazy McCain, Jeb Bush, Ted Cruz, Newt Gingrich, and Sheldon Adelson?

    So, what is to be done about the rising Tide of Color and the Millennial ‘progressives’ who grew up at a time when there’s been very little terrorist bombing in Israel/Palestine and whose image of the conflict is that of the continued Occupation in the West Bank(that looks like Apartheid) and the continuing wreckage in Gaza(that looks like the Warsaw Ghetto)?

    Jews need to look at the real source of frustration from non-Jewish college kids and millennials. It’s the super-duper rise of the 1%, especially the 0.1% or o.o1%.
    A lot of college kids and college grads are becoming aware that some of their friends will make fabulous amounts of money while most of them won’t make that much or very little.
    The new grumbling about ‘socialism’ is NOT about the 99% vs the 1%.
    It’s really the 10% vs the 1%.
    Children of the 10% are bitter about the success of the children of the 1%.
    And many college kids can’t help feel that many of the 1% are Jewish. So, it is envy and resentment that are really behind the BDS movement.

    So, what Lib Jews should do is call for higher taxes on the 1%, create more state-run jobs for the children of the 10%, and then most of them will think “I got mine too”, and they will shut up and just go on with life.

  74. @Jack D
    I don't understand how this deal is supposed to work. Who are you supposed to make a deal with, the Elders of Zion? Who will serve as the bargaining representative of the Gentiles? The president of Skull and Bones? Will they meet in a secret room under the Washington Monument and seal their pact in blood?

    The Israeli government certainly doesn't want to get involved in American domestic politics, and those here would (rightly) be the first to denounce it if they did. Israel has the immigration policy that it wants, selected for it by their own elected representatives and America has the immigration policy that it (apparently) wants, selected for it by its OWN elected representatives including its current 2 term President. American voter COULD have rejected Obama and his policies, especially in his 2nd term, but they didn't want to. That's how the chips fall in a democracy.

    And as Steve points out, Jews constitute less than 2% of American voters while white Christians still constitute the vast majority (not to mention blacks who really have nothing to gain and much to lose from immigration). If y'all don't want immigration, then what's stopping you? Do you REALLY need the Jews' help this time? We know that you couldn't have managed nuclear weapons without the Jews but that was a long time ago and the Jews have lost a lot of vitality since then - the current generation is becoming more assimilated and less Jewish, both in blood and culture, so don't expect any fresh batches of Feynmans. It's true that Jews still make up a disproportionate fraction of smart/rich people but even if they are 1/4 to 1/3 of influential Americans, that still leaves 2/3+ of wealth/influence in Gentile hands. C'mon goyim, you can do this yourself this time. Get your act together. Is MORE Jewish influence really what you want? Remember that when you ask the Godfather for a favor, you are indebted to him and he may call in his chit at any time. If you do this yourself, you won't owe anyone any favors.

    Replies: @IA, @Dave Pinsen

    I don’t understand how this deal is supposed to work. Who are you supposed to make a deal with, the Elders of Zion?

    Someone like Jeff Sessions, if he decided to run for president, would be well-positioned to make Steve’s deal with any one of the billionaires mentioned. That could be a win-win.

    • Replies: @anonymous-antimarxist
    @Dave Pinsen

    Assuming Sessions decides to run, one can be assured that Jews from across the political spectrum, will be lined up in full throated attack mode. You will be able to count the number of Jewish Sessions supporters on your fingers and toes. It will be a thousand times more virulent than anything Sarah Palin faced.

    No Jewish Billionaire that I can think of will sit down and talk about Open Borders or Israel with Sessions. Any "conversation" would be one way with Sessions being lectured to on the importance of Open Borders to Jews.

    If you have any idea of the hostility that could be coming Session's way take a look at his wikipedia page

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Sessions#Failed_nomination_to_the_district_court


    U.S. Attorney

    Sessions was an Assistant United States Attorney in the Office of the United States Attorney for the Southern District of Alabama beginning in 1975. In 1981, President Reagan nominated Sessions to be the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Alabama. The Senate confirmed him and he held that position for 12 years.
    Failed nomination to the district court

    In 1986, Reagan nominated Sessions to be a judge of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama.[5] Sessions's judicial nomination was recommended and actively backed by Republican Alabama Senator Jeremiah Denton.[6] A substantial majority of the American Bar Association Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary, which rates nominees to the federal bench, rated Sessions "qualified," with a minority voting that Sessions was "not qualified."[7]

    At Sessions' confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, four Department of Justice lawyers who had worked with Sessions testified that he had made several racist statements. One of those lawyers, J. Gerald Hebert, testified that Sessions had referred to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) as "un-American" and "Communist-inspired" because they "forced civil rights down the throats of people."[8]

    Thomas Figures, a black Assistant U.S. Attorney, testified that Sessions said he thought the Klan was "OK until I found out they smoked pot." Sessions later said that the comment was not serious, but apologized for it.[9] Figures also testified that on one occasion, when the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division sent the office instructions to investigate a case that Sessions had tried to close, Figures and Sessions "had a very spirited discussion regarding how the Hodge case should then be handled; in the course of that argument, Mr. Sessions threw the file on a table, and remarked, 'I wish I could decline on all of them,'" by which Figures said Sessions meant civil rights cases generally. After becoming Ranking Member of the Judiciary Committee, Sessions was asked in an interview about his civil rights record as a U.S Attorney. He denied that he had not sufficiently pursued civil rights cases, saying that "when I was [a U.S. Attorney], I signed 10 pleadings attacking segregation or the remnants of segregation, where we as part of the Department of Justice, we sought desegregation remedies."[10]

    Figures also said that Sessions had called him "boy."[5] He also testified that "Mr. Sessions admonished me to 'be careful what you say to white folks.'"[11]

    Sessions responded to the testimony by denying the allegations, saying his remarks were taken out of context or meant in jest, and also stating that groups could be considered un-American when "they involve themselves in un-American positions" in foreign policy. Sessions said during testimony that he considered the Klan to be "a force for hatred and bigotry." In regards to the marijuana quote, Sessions said the comment was a joke but apologized.[9]

    In response to a question from Joe Biden on whether he had called the NAACP and other civil rights organizations "un-American", Sessions replied "I'm often loose with my tongue. I may have said something about the NAACP being un-American or Communist, but I meant no harm by it."[7]

    On June 5, 1986, the Committee voted 10–8 against recommending the nomination to the Senate floor, with Republican Senators Charles Mathias of Maryland and Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania voting with the Democrats. It then split 9–9 on a vote to send Sessions' nomination to the Senate floor with no recommendation, this time with Specter in support. A majority was required for the nomination to proceed.[12] The pivotal votes against Sessions came from Democratic Senator Howell Heflin of Alabama. Although Heflin had previously backed Sessions, he began to oppose Sessions after hearing testimony, concluding that there were "reasonable doubts" over Sessions' ability to be "fair and impartial." The nomination was withdrawn on July 31, 1986.

    Sessions became only the second nominee to the federal judiciary in 48 years whose nomination was killed by the Senate Judiciary Committee.[9]

    Sessions was quoted then as saying that the Senate on occasion had been insensitive to the rights and reputation of nominees.[13][14]

    One law clerk from the U.S. District Court in Mobile who had worked with Sessions later acknowledged the confirmation controversy, but stated that he observed Sessions as "a lawyer of the highest ethical and intellectual standards."[15]

    After joining the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sessions remarked that his presence there, alongside several of the members who voted against him, was a "great irony."[13] When Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania left the GOP to join the Democratic Party on April 28, 2009, Sessions was selected to be the Ranking Member on the Senate Judiciary Committee. At that time, Specter said that his vote against Sessions' nomination was a mistake, because he had "since found that Sen. Sessions is egalitarian."[1

     

  75. @Karl
    more poppycock from folks who had to switch to Poly Sci because they couldn't get through Calculus 101.

    The cultural Marxist flavor of yids has never been in charge of the zoo. Not in North America, not in Israel.

    Haim Saban's grandchildren aren't in La Raza Youth; they're in Shevet Chen, trying to make sure they can get into an fast-track-to-success outfit like Unit 8200, or the Engineering Academists program.

    The Cultural Marxist enterprise (prototype: Mattress Girl) is most certainly yid-enhanced, but those people are about as influential as Jesse Jackson Junior is. Right now, they are in severe panic mode about Hillary's gmail-gate problem. Mattress Girl isn't ever going to be put in charge of people who hold badges and guns. Sabrina Rubin Erdely was driven into hiding.

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen

    I don’t think Saban has any grandchildren yet.

  76. @syonredux
    @Dave Pinsen


    It’s not so much that they’re footnotes but that 3rd and 4th world POCs killing POCs is a dog-bites-man story, while the country that gave the world Goethe, Beethoven, Gauss, etc. committing genocide is man-bites-dog.
     
    That's not the POC perspective.Again, drawing on an anecdote from my colleague, take this famous scene from Schindler's List, the girl in the red coat:



    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1VL-y9JHuI

    After viewing the film, the Black students responded with real anger to the scene.They noted that no one cared about Black children being slaughtered....But show one cute little White girl , and White people collapse in heaps of tears. According to her, they deployed the full arsenal of theory on the scene, noting how the girl's fair skin and Caucasoid hair made her an image of White racial perfection.Black children, in contrast, with their dark skin and kinky hair, were the "Other" (Hegel has much to answer for), permanently excluded from sympathy, etc.

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen

    Spielberg may have been taking a page from Otto Preminger there, who cast Jill Haworth as the Nordic Jewish teen in whom Eva Marie Saint’s gentile nurse character takes a maternal interest in Exodus.

  77. @MLK
    @anonymous-antimarxist

    Uh huh. It is Sailer's Grand Plan, not mine. I am critiquing it, and every one of the commenters who pushes back, including you, substantiates my points.


    TWMNBN
     
    I haven't the foggiest idea what this means. Nor will I expend a kilocalorie trying to figure it out. It is enough for me to note that it is emblematic of why people like you are of less than zero value in service of the cause of an overdue Immigration Moratorium.

    Jewish Billionaires, along with pretty much all other billionaires, along with pretty much the rest of what we could call the commanding heights of the American economy, are in favor of unending mass immigration and amnesty too. In short, the entire American economy is predicated on it, along with increasing private and public debt. Meanwhile, characters like you are carrying on about Jewish Billionaire and Cultural Marxists.

    Until and unless Immigration Restrictionists abandon what amounts to magical thinking -- and that is about as generous as I can be as to the prospects of this "Grand Bargain," even if people like you could somehow be consigned to the children's table for the period of negotiations -- it will be further Immigration Surges and Amnesties.

    There are ways to move the ball forward. Unfortunately, many Immigration Restrictionists are like you. If sticking it to the Jews is central to the plan there is little interest.

    Conservatives need to learn from the Left. Most especially in terms of deploying the coercive and harassing power of government toward the right ends. For example, I've long thought getting a Proposition on the California Ballot, giving immigrants, including illegals, the right to sue employers individually and via Class Action, for failure to pay wages and benefits equal to that of citizens, would pass and fix their little red wagons.

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen, @anonymous-antimarxist

    Jewish Billionaires, along with pretty much all other billionaires, along with pretty much the rest of what we could call the commanding heights of the American economy, are in favor of unending mass immigration and amnesty too.

    Crazy thought, but what if they’re not all 100% committed to that? What if a relatively small percentage are, and the rest assume that position because, in their social circle, that’s the accepted one?

    Just because they’re billionaires doesn’t mean they aren’t sensitive to social pressure.

    • Replies: @MLK
    @Dave Pinsen

    "Just because they’re billionaires doesn’t mean they aren’t sensitive to social pressure."

    This has been my essential point, less the "social" qualifier. That should have been clear when I wrote of modifying their behavior. Per Eddie Murphy's character in Trading Places to the effect that the way to get even with rich people is to turn them into poor people, billionaires and corporate guys collectively need to be told what time it is. Otherwise they will have to rely on their Open Borders Party Friends to protect their private property. We all know how that will go. About ten minutes of foot stomping from the Libertarians, followed by a series of votes to take it away.

  78. @anonymous-antimarxist
    @MLK

    You’re a little confused. I am saying that any true Immigration Restrictionist will make everything else secondary. The organizational analogue is the National Rifle Association.


    What a load of horse poop!!!!

    Yes, the National Rifle Association is held out as a outstanding example of a successful single issue political organization. However you have recently listened to any uncensored open phones talk radio show? NRA members increasingly understand that the Second Amendment is unlikely to survive the day that white Christian Europeans become a minority in the USA. Rush echoes this point increasingly on his show and so does guest host Mark Steyn. If new legal and illegal aliens had the same culture, traditions, personalities, temperament, intelligence.... as the historical US population then this would not be an issue, but they clearly do not.

    Therefore you can not discuss immigration restrictionism without mentioning Multiculturalism and its ideological roots in Cultural Marxism.

    Immigration is many things but it sure as hell is not a "single issue" issue. It touches on every aspect of out daily life and future.

    Replies: @MLK

    Perhaps I should have been a little clearer on my mention of the NRA. The NRA came under a lot of pressure from Republicans to abandon its endorsement of Democrats who had long offered steadfast support for gun rights. The NRA told the Republican Party to tell their story walking.

    Immigration is many things but it sure as hell is not a “single issue” issue. It touches on every aspect of out daily life and future.

    Immigration is indeed a “single issue,” and more so in the most important respects than gun rights. You will note that I’ve alluded to moving the ball forward (or not) on Immigration. Whether a Moratorium or simply policies that restrict immigration, the proof is in the pudding. Interpreting the data would only take a moment away from your jibber jabber about Multiculturalism and Cultural Marxism.

    It touches on every aspect of out daily life and future.

    On this we wholeheartedly agree. Which is why I cannot think of a single programmatic goal I wouldn’t delay or sacrifice in pursuit of a Moratorium or 1920s-1965 restrictionism.

  79. @MLK
    @anonymous-antimarxist

    Uh huh. It is Sailer's Grand Plan, not mine. I am critiquing it, and every one of the commenters who pushes back, including you, substantiates my points.


    TWMNBN
     
    I haven't the foggiest idea what this means. Nor will I expend a kilocalorie trying to figure it out. It is enough for me to note that it is emblematic of why people like you are of less than zero value in service of the cause of an overdue Immigration Moratorium.

    Jewish Billionaires, along with pretty much all other billionaires, along with pretty much the rest of what we could call the commanding heights of the American economy, are in favor of unending mass immigration and amnesty too. In short, the entire American economy is predicated on it, along with increasing private and public debt. Meanwhile, characters like you are carrying on about Jewish Billionaire and Cultural Marxists.

    Until and unless Immigration Restrictionists abandon what amounts to magical thinking -- and that is about as generous as I can be as to the prospects of this "Grand Bargain," even if people like you could somehow be consigned to the children's table for the period of negotiations -- it will be further Immigration Surges and Amnesties.

    There are ways to move the ball forward. Unfortunately, many Immigration Restrictionists are like you. If sticking it to the Jews is central to the plan there is little interest.

    Conservatives need to learn from the Left. Most especially in terms of deploying the coercive and harassing power of government toward the right ends. For example, I've long thought getting a Proposition on the California Ballot, giving immigrants, including illegals, the right to sue employers individually and via Class Action, for failure to pay wages and benefits equal to that of citizens, would pass and fix their little red wagons.

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen, @anonymous-antimarxist

    TWMNBN

    I haven’t the foggiest idea what this means. Nor will I expend a kilocalorie trying to figure it out. It is enough for me to note that it is emblematic of why people like you are of less than zero value in service of the cause of an overdue Immigration Moratorium.

    Oh Please!!! The frail little soul must need his fainting couch.

    You most certainly know what it means; “Those Who Must Not Be Named” in reference to the old saying attributed to many but most often to Voltaire, “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize:”

    Anyone who voices opposition to Open Borders no matter how intelligently, calmly, persuasively, effectively, logically……. is going to be viciously attacked as a xenophobe, racist, bigot, nativistm Nazi ….. And you very well know that the organizations who make these attacks are overwhelming staffed, lead and financed by Jews, the SPLC being the prime example but there are literally hundreds of others. The one thing that may never be discussed in the “MSM” or what I refer to as the Cultural Marxist Media is that Jews are overwhelmingly behind the Open Borders movement. Hence TWMNBN!!!!

    Heaven help the poor fellow who naively openly mentions the role Jews have played in destroying our nation’s sovereignty. Using TWMNBN serves to remind one to never be so foolish as ever drop one’s guard and point out the obvious.

    Conservatives need to learn from the Left. Most especially in terms of deploying the coercive and harassing power of government toward the right ends. For example, I’ve long thought getting a Proposition on the California Ballot, giving immigrants, including illegals, the right to sue employers individually and via Class Action, for failure to pay wages and benefits equal to that of citizens, would pass and fix their little red wagons.

    Oy Vey!!! What a load of BS!!!

    Arguing for the extension of extra-judicial rights to law breaking illegal aliens is a favorite tactic of the Open Borders zealots at the ACLU, AILA, and NLG. That you would even remotely think this would be a good idea testifying to your alleged immigration restrictionist bonafides is hysterical. Now illegals can stay or at least enter and re-enter the US as long as they need legal counsel or have their day in court.

  80. @Dave Pinsen
    @MLK


    Jewish Billionaires, along with pretty much all other billionaires, along with pretty much the rest of what we could call the commanding heights of the American economy, are in favor of unending mass immigration and amnesty too.
     
    Crazy thought, but what if they're not all 100% committed to that? What if a relatively small percentage are, and the rest assume that position because, in their social circle, that's the accepted one?

    Just because they're billionaires doesn't mean they aren't sensitive to social pressure.

    Replies: @MLK

    “Just because they’re billionaires doesn’t mean they aren’t sensitive to social pressure.”

    This has been my essential point, less the “social” qualifier. That should have been clear when I wrote of modifying their behavior. Per Eddie Murphy’s character in Trading Places to the effect that the way to get even with rich people is to turn them into poor people, billionaires and corporate guys collectively need to be told what time it is. Otherwise they will have to rely on their Open Borders Party Friends to protect their private property. We all know how that will go. About ten minutes of foot stomping from the Libertarians, followed by a series of votes to take it away.

  81. Right-wing Zionist Jews probably wouldn’t mind if a patriotic U.S. government began kicking out Mexicans. They could get along with such a government, just as they got along with Apartheid South Africa and Pinochet’s Chile. They were also friendly towards Milosevic’s Yugoslavia.

    The problem is that right-wing Zionist Jews are not numerous, not wealthy, and not influential outside of Israel. These aren’t the Jews you need to talk to if you’re interested in reducing immigration to the U.S.

    • Replies: @matt
    @Fish Food

    It wasn't just "right-wing Zionist Jews" who got along with Apartheid South Africa. The Israel-South Africa special relationship began in the early 70s under Labor PM Golda Meir, after Israel lost much of its support in Sub-Saharan Africa after the 1967 war. The Saintly-Martyr-for-Peace Yitzhak Rabin further cemented the relationship in the mid-70s. Shimon Peres was a particularly committed supporter of South African apartheid.

    The newspaper of Mapam (the ancestor of Meretz, the furthest left Zionist party in the Knesset today), even published racist articles in the 1980s that wouldn't be out of place here, including one that explained why blacks and Arabs are genetically inferior to whites and Jews, which is why Jewish fighter pilots are the best in the world, and blacks in the US are only good for short-distance running.

    Maybe this grand bargain idea really could work...

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Art Deco, @Art Deco

    , @Art Deco
    @Fish Food

    They could get along with such a government, just as they got along with Apartheid South Africa and Pinochet’s Chile.
    --
    Does it occur to anyone that whether or not countries of modest dimensions who do not project power outside their immediate environs 'get along' is generally an idle question?

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

  82. Steve, you’ve made a number of factual errors and a couple of IMHO predictive ones.

    Factually, the US foreign policy summed up in the Carter Doctrine has mostly been complimentary with Israel’s security goal but has at times been in opposition to it. Famously, Ariel Sharon opposed removing Saddam because it upset the balance of powers between Saddam and Iran. W and his people wanted an alternative client petro state with the ability to pump out ultra cheap oil (this is important) to the House of Saud after 9/11. That however left the counterweight to Iran entirely the US military and Sharon accurately foresaw that the changing American demographics would not support that.

    NOW, the US interest (cheap oil and gas from the Gulf) is in accordance with the Israelis (they don’t get nuked out of existence as a demonstration of Iran’s nuclear power). Unfortunately for everyone Obama is on the side of the Iranians making that moot.

    Secondly, Zionist Union (re-branded Labor) WAS in fact in cahoots with Arab List. This is why polling suggesting a Zionist Union victory was so off — voters responded to the cries from Bibi that NGOs from Obama were busing in Arab voters (this has been denounced as RACIST!!!!111eleventy!111!!!! by the media and Dems but I repeat myself) and that there would be no Palestinian State while Bibi was Prime Minister. While Arab List had ruled out formal participation, they made no secret of wanting to form an informal margin of confidence with Zionist Union, who in turn were in favor of: A. Open Borders; B. Right of Return for Palestinians; C. A Palestinian State (which would have as Bibi said resulted in Hamasistan on the West Bank).

    More broadly, the FT and other outlets have dissected the election results. Ashkenazi Jews living in the “Tel Aviv Bubble” voted heavily for Zionist Union. One playwright called Bibi voters a bunch of idol kissers (referring to some ritual where observant Jews kiss some symbol or something — not Jewish so I don’t get it but it was meant as insult like Bible thumpers). Those who voted Bibi were Mizrahi or from Russia, and were often rocketed or victims of terrorism (neither applies in the Tel Aviv Bubble).

    I think your error in assumptions are that power follows money. That Jewish Oligarchs have power. Russia suggests that they do not — that they do what they are told by people with power and thus are allowed to keep their money. The power in America rests with the non-White functional majority: Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Muslims. This shift has allowed the Trustafarians to run rampant from Occupy Wall Street to the anti-War movement to BDS in both forms: Bush Derangement Syndrome or anti-Israel.

    You also assume a coronation which seems unlikely. It is Barack Obama’s party now, not the Clintons. If he does not want her, she won’t get the nod. He might run again, cancel elections, choose a puppet like Cory Booker, there is no real check on him.

    Yes I agree Jews form the core of money and people in the media backing Dems. But so what, Putin’s Russia is at least a good a model for Obama’s America as anything else. Obama will tell Haim Saban and Larry Ellison what to do — or put them in jail for whatever he wants to charge them with and strip them of their money. There’s not a damn thing they can do about it. Any more than Russian Oligarchs could resist Putin. Jewish Oligarchs will put out the money for say, a Corey Booker promising to invade Israel and establish a Palestinian State because they have no other choice in keeping their freedom and billions.

    Which means long term you will get Jessica Valenti, Al Sharpton, and Keith Ellison as the prime media movers of the Democratic Party.

    Even if Hillary! comes to some agreement with Obama and is allowed to get the nomination, can you see her undoing the agreement for nuclear weapons with Iran that Obama has reached? Really? Obama’s whole foreign policy has been: A. Get Whitey. B. Get Whitey real good. C. Make America weak to … D. Get Whitey. E. Get those ultra White Whiteys, Jews. F. Make substitute Mommy Valerie happy. Jarret of course is a Farsi speaking, Iranian born, Black woman with an attitude.

    My guess is that very soon now the Democratic Party will “no Whites need apply” and immensely hostile to Israel and Jews. And that Israel and the House of Saud will team up to pre-emptively strike Iran before they are victims of Anschluss and Lebensraum respectively.

    The Iranians are dangerous because they are organized and over-confident. They are not a rabble like ISIS. They can think and plan and create nukes and launch satellites already. They just are over-confident against a decadent West.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Whiskey

    Again with the Obama cancelling the elections shtick. Please give it a rest. It just calls into question the rest of what you say. Some of the rest ALMOST makes sense but when you throw in that Obama is going to become our dictator for life then EVERYTHING you say can be dismissed as tinfoil hat ranting.

    , @Oscar Peterson
    @Whiskey


    "It is Barack Obama’s party now, not the Clintons. If he does not want her, she won’t get the nod. He might run again, cancel elections, choose a puppet like Cory Booker, there is no real check on him."

     

    What planet are you on? Obama's WH is like Fort Apache with the Indians whooping and hollering and firing flaming arrows at him. The Democratic establishment maintains a distance from him, and the vast majority of Democratic congressmen showed up for Bibi's and Boehner's attempt to humiliate him (once again.)

    "His party?'' Obama is just trying to fight his way to the finish line. He knows he can never have the post-presidiential high life that Bill Clinton has enjoyed. He'll just have to salvage what he can. The decision on who gets nominated in 2016 is certainly not his.

    I have suspicions about the significance of your name, "Whiskey." Time to stop hitting the bottle.

    , @Bill
    @Whiskey


    The power in America rests with the non-White functional majority: Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Muslims.
     
    We can put this next to "The WASPs run Hollywood" in Whiskey's Hall of Curious Observations.
  83. @Dave Pinsen
    @Jack D


    I don’t understand how this deal is supposed to work. Who are you supposed to make a deal with, the Elders of Zion?
     
    Someone like Jeff Sessions, if he decided to run for president, would be well-positioned to make Steve's deal with any one of the billionaires mentioned. That could be a win-win.

    Replies: @anonymous-antimarxist

    Assuming Sessions decides to run, one can be assured that Jews from across the political spectrum, will be lined up in full throated attack mode. You will be able to count the number of Jewish Sessions supporters on your fingers and toes. It will be a thousand times more virulent than anything Sarah Palin faced.

    No Jewish Billionaire that I can think of will sit down and talk about Open Borders or Israel with Sessions. Any “conversation” would be one way with Sessions being lectured to on the importance of Open Borders to Jews.

    If you have any idea of the hostility that could be coming Session’s way take a look at his wikipedia page

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Sessions#Failed_nomination_to_the_district_court

    U.S. Attorney

    Sessions was an Assistant United States Attorney in the Office of the United States Attorney for the Southern District of Alabama beginning in 1975. In 1981, President Reagan nominated Sessions to be the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Alabama. The Senate confirmed him and he held that position for 12 years.
    Failed nomination to the district court

    In 1986, Reagan nominated Sessions to be a judge of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama.[5] Sessions’s judicial nomination was recommended and actively backed by Republican Alabama Senator Jeremiah Denton.[6] A substantial majority of the American Bar Association Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary, which rates nominees to the federal bench, rated Sessions “qualified,” with a minority voting that Sessions was “not qualified.”[7]

    At Sessions’ confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, four Department of Justice lawyers who had worked with Sessions testified that he had made several racist statements. One of those lawyers, J. Gerald Hebert, testified that Sessions had referred to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) as “un-American” and “Communist-inspired” because they “forced civil rights down the throats of people.”[8]

    Thomas Figures, a black Assistant U.S. Attorney, testified that Sessions said he thought the Klan was “OK until I found out they smoked pot.” Sessions later said that the comment was not serious, but apologized for it.[9] Figures also testified that on one occasion, when the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division sent the office instructions to investigate a case that Sessions had tried to close, Figures and Sessions “had a very spirited discussion regarding how the Hodge case should then be handled; in the course of that argument, Mr. Sessions threw the file on a table, and remarked, ‘I wish I could decline on all of them,’” by which Figures said Sessions meant civil rights cases generally. After becoming Ranking Member of the Judiciary Committee, Sessions was asked in an interview about his civil rights record as a U.S Attorney. He denied that he had not sufficiently pursued civil rights cases, saying that “when I was [a U.S. Attorney], I signed 10 pleadings attacking segregation or the remnants of segregation, where we as part of the Department of Justice, we sought desegregation remedies.”[10]

    Figures also said that Sessions had called him “boy.”[5] He also testified that “Mr. Sessions admonished me to ‘be careful what you say to white folks.’”[11]

    Sessions responded to the testimony by denying the allegations, saying his remarks were taken out of context or meant in jest, and also stating that groups could be considered un-American when “they involve themselves in un-American positions” in foreign policy. Sessions said during testimony that he considered the Klan to be “a force for hatred and bigotry.” In regards to the marijuana quote, Sessions said the comment was a joke but apologized.[9]

    In response to a question from Joe Biden on whether he had called the NAACP and other civil rights organizations “un-American”, Sessions replied “I’m often loose with my tongue. I may have said something about the NAACP being un-American or Communist, but I meant no harm by it.”[7]

    On June 5, 1986, the Committee voted 10–8 against recommending the nomination to the Senate floor, with Republican Senators Charles Mathias of Maryland and Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania voting with the Democrats. It then split 9–9 on a vote to send Sessions’ nomination to the Senate floor with no recommendation, this time with Specter in support. A majority was required for the nomination to proceed.[12] The pivotal votes against Sessions came from Democratic Senator Howell Heflin of Alabama. Although Heflin had previously backed Sessions, he began to oppose Sessions after hearing testimony, concluding that there were “reasonable doubts” over Sessions’ ability to be “fair and impartial.” The nomination was withdrawn on July 31, 1986.

    Sessions became only the second nominee to the federal judiciary in 48 years whose nomination was killed by the Senate Judiciary Committee.[9]

    Sessions was quoted then as saying that the Senate on occasion had been insensitive to the rights and reputation of nominees.[13][14]

    One law clerk from the U.S. District Court in Mobile who had worked with Sessions later acknowledged the confirmation controversy, but stated that he observed Sessions as “a lawyer of the highest ethical and intellectual standards.”[15]

    After joining the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sessions remarked that his presence there, alongside several of the members who voted against him, was a “great irony.”[13] When Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania left the GOP to join the Democratic Party on April 28, 2009, Sessions was selected to be the Ranking Member on the Senate Judiciary Committee. At that time, Specter said that his vote against Sessions’ nomination was a mistake, because he had “since found that Sen. Sessions is egalitarian.”[1

  84. @fredyetagain aka superhonky
    [Logic would suggest that white gentile conservatives should instead demand of Israel’s Jewish backers that they use their media power to shift the Overton Window of respectable discourse to allow American citizens to achieve the same protections from excessive immigration that Israeli citizens enjoy.]

    Your proposal may be logical Steve, but it is in no way feasible. I remember reading an article years ago (wish I could find it, but I haven't been able to) that mentioned a Jewish woman married to a gentile husband. If memory serves, the husband was of Christian background but not at all religious, and his only nod to his nominally Christian upbringing was to purchase and display a Christmas tree every holiday season. Well, I'm sure you can imagine the wailing, rending of garments, and gnashing of teeth this caused with the wife. In fact, the article quoted her as saying something along the lines of "Every time I see a Christmas tree, I see a potential Holocaust" - I kid you not. Anyway, do you see any possibility of any kind of logical discourse with people like these? And especially with us approaching them as "white gentile conservatives"? Dream on, ain't happening.

    Replies: @SFG

    My dad was Christian, my mom Jewish.

    We had a tiny little Christmas tree with ornaments (hey, it was NYC). We had a small little menorah.

    No gnashing of teeth on either side.

    • Replies: @fredyetagain aka superhonky
    @SFG

    I'm glad your mom, unlike the woman in the article I read, didn't get verklempt at the sight of homicidal antisemitic pine trees.

    Replies: @Southfarthing

  85. @Priss Factor
    If the grand bargain is to be made between Neocons/Zionists/Israelis and white American Conservatives, then people like Bibi Netanyahu will have to denounce the domestic positions of Jewish Liberals.
    There will have to be a Jew vs Jew war.
    There is no way that even the most right-wing Jews are going to side with goyim against fellow Jews. Right-wing Jews may hate left-wing Jews, but they are Jews first and still prefer leftist Jews over right-wing goyim. And the ideas of joining with white conservatives to bash fellow Jews is sickening to Jews.

    Even Meir Kahane denounced the American Right for going after Jewish leftists during the 'McCarthy Era'.

    When Vietnam persecuted the Chinese capitalists in the Boat People fiasco, communist China was awful angry about how their fellow ethnics were treated.
    Chinese commies didn't side with Vietnamese commies against Cochin-Chinese capitalists.

    Some things are thicker than ideology.
    The idea of right-wing Jews attacking left-wing Jews to serve the white nationalism of American conservatives seems far-fetched.

    Besides, while it's permissible for Liberal Jews to attack White/Christian Conservatives as 'whites' and 'Christians, American politics only allows attack on Jewish Liberals/Leftists on ideological grounds, not tribal grounds. They can be called 'bad Liberals' and 'bad Leftists' but never as 'bad Jews'.

    Jewish Liberals can go ethnic in their attack,but white conservatives can't. And if white conservatives did go ethnic and called out on JEWISH Leftists and Liberals, Jewish Rightists will defend their fellow Jews cuz the idea of any attack on Jews(even leftist ones) is sickening to Rightwing Jews.

    Replies: @SFG

    I’d be happy to help you go after Shelly Adelson if I didn’t think I’d wind up in a concentration camp after you’d killed him. That’s the problem with race wars.

    As it is, I prefer to donate to FAIR, etc. I’m fine with America staying white. But brown in either sense of the word, not so much.

  86. Won’t work. The real problem, IMHO, as others have said, is that billionaires like immigration–it mostly hurts poor people and middle-class people. Jews tend to be both more likely to be pro-immigration and billionaires, so this is why you see what you see.

    Here’s what I think you should do. (Take it or leave it; I claim no backup other than my arguments.) If there’s one thing Jews are afraid of, it’s anti-Semitism. You need to find ways of spreading the meme that ‘vibrant’ types don’t like Jews, see them as whites, and a browner America is dangerous to Jews. (Look at what’s happening in Europe, or at ‘polar bear hunting’ in Brooklyn.) A scare campaign might move a few into the anti-immigration column.

    Of course, what you really need is your own billionaire. But that, I have no solution for. Ron, any ideas?

    • Replies: @Anon
    @SFG


    If there’s one thing Jews are afraid of, it’s anti-Semitism.
     
    Does that fear factor at all into their being pro immigration?
  87. @Lot
    GOP Jewish outreach is already working pretty well. Most NYC Jews already vote for Republicans for state and local office, at Orthodox voters extend that all the way to Congress and President. (Lion showed this a while ago, showing Mitt won Brooklyn's Orthodox neighborhoods but no other parts of Kings County.)

    Now there is a likely ceiling of secular Jewish support that corresponds to the white support that is matched demographically and spatially. In other words, how well does the GOP actually perform among metro-Boston college-educated white gentiles? I'm not sure they do comparatively worse among Boston-area Jews.

    Replies: @Bill

    GOP Jewish outreach is already working pretty well.

    Yeah, the Jews are going to vote for that anti-immigration GOP candidate . . . ummmm, what was his name . . . Tom Tancredo? Yeah, that’s it. Did well last year in the Colorado gubernatorial primary.

    Or is he dead? I can’t keep track any more. Anyway, surely he or someone just like him will be the GOP nominee the Jews will be lovin on. Maybe that sheriff guy from Arizona or New Mexico or whatever. The one who feeds his prisoners bologna sandwiches before he deports them all to Chiapas or Guatemala or NachoLibre. One of them guys will surely win a majority of Jewish support. Problem solved!

    Isn’t it great how pretty much all problems can be solved via the GOP winning elections! That and Jewish outreach. Can’t go wrong with those two.

  88. @Whiskey
    Steve, you've made a number of factual errors and a couple of IMHO predictive ones.

    Factually, the US foreign policy summed up in the Carter Doctrine has mostly been complimentary with Israel's security goal but has at times been in opposition to it. Famously, Ariel Sharon opposed removing Saddam because it upset the balance of powers between Saddam and Iran. W and his people wanted an alternative client petro state with the ability to pump out ultra cheap oil (this is important) to the House of Saud after 9/11. That however left the counterweight to Iran entirely the US military and Sharon accurately foresaw that the changing American demographics would not support that.

    NOW, the US interest (cheap oil and gas from the Gulf) is in accordance with the Israelis (they don't get nuked out of existence as a demonstration of Iran's nuclear power). Unfortunately for everyone Obama is on the side of the Iranians making that moot.

    Secondly, Zionist Union (re-branded Labor) WAS in fact in cahoots with Arab List. This is why polling suggesting a Zionist Union victory was so off -- voters responded to the cries from Bibi that NGOs from Obama were busing in Arab voters (this has been denounced as RACIST!!!!111eleventy!111!!!! by the media and Dems but I repeat myself) and that there would be no Palestinian State while Bibi was Prime Minister. While Arab List had ruled out formal participation, they made no secret of wanting to form an informal margin of confidence with Zionist Union, who in turn were in favor of: A. Open Borders; B. Right of Return for Palestinians; C. A Palestinian State (which would have as Bibi said resulted in Hamasistan on the West Bank).

    More broadly, the FT and other outlets have dissected the election results. Ashkenazi Jews living in the "Tel Aviv Bubble" voted heavily for Zionist Union. One playwright called Bibi voters a bunch of idol kissers (referring to some ritual where observant Jews kiss some symbol or something -- not Jewish so I don't get it but it was meant as insult like Bible thumpers). Those who voted Bibi were Mizrahi or from Russia, and were often rocketed or victims of terrorism (neither applies in the Tel Aviv Bubble).

    I think your error in assumptions are that power follows money. That Jewish Oligarchs have power. Russia suggests that they do not -- that they do what they are told by people with power and thus are allowed to keep their money. The power in America rests with the non-White functional majority: Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Muslims. This shift has allowed the Trustafarians to run rampant from Occupy Wall Street to the anti-War movement to BDS in both forms: Bush Derangement Syndrome or anti-Israel.

    You also assume a coronation which seems unlikely. It is Barack Obama's party now, not the Clintons. If he does not want her, she won't get the nod. He might run again, cancel elections, choose a puppet like Cory Booker, there is no real check on him.

    Yes I agree Jews form the core of money and people in the media backing Dems. But so what, Putin's Russia is at least a good a model for Obama's America as anything else. Obama will tell Haim Saban and Larry Ellison what to do -- or put them in jail for whatever he wants to charge them with and strip them of their money. There's not a damn thing they can do about it. Any more than Russian Oligarchs could resist Putin. Jewish Oligarchs will put out the money for say, a Corey Booker promising to invade Israel and establish a Palestinian State because they have no other choice in keeping their freedom and billions.

    Which means long term you will get Jessica Valenti, Al Sharpton, and Keith Ellison as the prime media movers of the Democratic Party.

    Even if Hillary! comes to some agreement with Obama and is allowed to get the nomination, can you see her undoing the agreement for nuclear weapons with Iran that Obama has reached? Really? Obama's whole foreign policy has been: A. Get Whitey. B. Get Whitey real good. C. Make America weak to ... D. Get Whitey. E. Get those ultra White Whiteys, Jews. F. Make substitute Mommy Valerie happy. Jarret of course is a Farsi speaking, Iranian born, Black woman with an attitude.

    My guess is that very soon now the Democratic Party will "no Whites need apply" and immensely hostile to Israel and Jews. And that Israel and the House of Saud will team up to pre-emptively strike Iran before they are victims of Anschluss and Lebensraum respectively.

    The Iranians are dangerous because they are organized and over-confident. They are not a rabble like ISIS. They can think and plan and create nukes and launch satellites already. They just are over-confident against a decadent West.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Oscar Peterson, @Bill

    Again with the Obama cancelling the elections shtick. Please give it a rest. It just calls into question the rest of what you say. Some of the rest ALMOST makes sense but when you throw in that Obama is going to become our dictator for life then EVERYTHING you say can be dismissed as tinfoil hat ranting.

  89. @SolontoCroesus
    Gilad Atzmon recorded a wide-ranging interview on Red Ice Radio a few weeks ago http://www.redicecreations.com/radio/2015/03/RIR-150306.php

    Among other things, he discussed how Israelis/Jews/zionists/antii-zionists make use of identity politics -- actually, attach themselves and their minority group to some other identity group in order to gain majority status, majority strength, majority cover.

    Atzmon used the example of a Jewish writer Sarah Schulman who, purportedly speaking on behalf of Palestinians, wrote a book about gays in Palestine under the title, Israel/Palestine and the Queer International

    How is Sailer's proposal different from that example, and how should Americans view the oh-so-generous offer to allow Americans to define their own immigration standards in return for supporting Israeli apartheid anything other than moral blackmail?

    Keep your money.
    Return American representative government to the American people, not the billionaires.
    Selling out is what got USA in the mess it is today.

    Anyway, We're all rooting for Jim Webb.

    Replies: @Oscar Peterson, @Anonymous

    Great points. The idea that there can be anything like the “grand bargain” that Steve Sailer imagines, is just absurd.

    I like a lot of what Steve writes, but he suffers, in a peculiar and idiosyncratic way, from the same thing that the American Renaissance people do: The Great White Hope that organized Jewry can somehow be prevailed on to accept a “bargain” of some kind that preserves the primacy of European/Christian/Classical culture. Such a grand bargain could never be deemed to be “good for the Jews.” Any meaningful preservation of European/Christian traditional culture will never be acceptable from the perspective of aggressive organized Jewry. Pursuing such a bargain is sheer delusion.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Oscar Peterson

    Such a grand bargain could never be deemed to be “good for the Jews.” Any meaningful preservation of European/Christian traditional culture will never be acceptable from the perspective of aggressive organized Jewry. Pursuing such a bargain is sheer delusion.

    Which raises this question: Would Tribal Jews, if they had to choose, rather see the destruction of the European gene pool or the maintenance of the Zionist project in Palestine?

    , @silviosilver
    @Oscar Peterson


    Pursuing such a bargain is sheer delusion.
     
    For its direct or purported benefits, yes. But the indirect benefit is that Jewish power structure's refusal to bargain can open the eyes of people who could otherwise never, by any existent means, be persuaded to so much as consider the conflict of interests between Jews and white gentiles (and its one-sided outcomes), let alone take their own side in it.
  90. @MLK
    @Bill

    You're a little confused. I am saying that any true Immigration Restrictionist will make everything else secondary. The organizational analogue is the National Rifle Association.

    Your way of thinking is most akin to the Palestinians -- who have spent decades clinging to their official sweet thoughts about the Jews.

    I'm always dispirited when I am forced to acknowledge that there are many like you on my team. Or at least seemingly so since some emanations are so dumb I often think they derive from either useful idiocy or even provocation. No tribe is collectively dumb when it comes to self-preservation and protection. But it any are it ain't Jews. Yet there are many like you who have a brilliant plan to get them into a transactional bargain with those who cannot even stop themselves from reminding their counter-party the ills they wish upon them.

    Replies: @anonymous-antimarxist, @Bill

    You’re a little confused. I am saying that any true Immigration Restrictionist will make everything else secondary.

    Everything except Israel worship.

    I’m always dispirited when I am forced to acknowledge that there are many like you on my team. Or at least seemingly so since some emanations are so dumb I often think they derive from either useful idiocy or even provocation.

    Yeah, praising the tribe has gotten us . . . and then there was . . . and, uh, . . . and let’s not forget . . . Derbyshire’s philosemitism has certainly served him well. No way Taki would have picked him up without that. Oh wait, isn’t Taki an officialbadperson? Well, I’m sure I’ll think of something.

    Yet there are many like you who have a brilliant plan to get them into a transactional bargain with those who cannot even stop themselves from reminding their counter-party the ills they wish upon them.

    You are so dumb it is painful. Sadat fought an actual war with Israel. With guns and tanks and dead people and everything. And, yet, mysteriously to you, the Israelis managed to enter into a transactional bargain with an officialbadperson with officialbadwishes like him. In politics, entering into transactional bargains with people you don’t like is kinda the job description.

    You can’t bargain with someone if you have nothing to offer. You can’t bargain with someone if the only thing you disagree with them on is the thing you want from them. That’s the Whole. F%#@ing. Point. of Steve’s column.

  91. @Whiskey
    Steve, you've made a number of factual errors and a couple of IMHO predictive ones.

    Factually, the US foreign policy summed up in the Carter Doctrine has mostly been complimentary with Israel's security goal but has at times been in opposition to it. Famously, Ariel Sharon opposed removing Saddam because it upset the balance of powers between Saddam and Iran. W and his people wanted an alternative client petro state with the ability to pump out ultra cheap oil (this is important) to the House of Saud after 9/11. That however left the counterweight to Iran entirely the US military and Sharon accurately foresaw that the changing American demographics would not support that.

    NOW, the US interest (cheap oil and gas from the Gulf) is in accordance with the Israelis (they don't get nuked out of existence as a demonstration of Iran's nuclear power). Unfortunately for everyone Obama is on the side of the Iranians making that moot.

    Secondly, Zionist Union (re-branded Labor) WAS in fact in cahoots with Arab List. This is why polling suggesting a Zionist Union victory was so off -- voters responded to the cries from Bibi that NGOs from Obama were busing in Arab voters (this has been denounced as RACIST!!!!111eleventy!111!!!! by the media and Dems but I repeat myself) and that there would be no Palestinian State while Bibi was Prime Minister. While Arab List had ruled out formal participation, they made no secret of wanting to form an informal margin of confidence with Zionist Union, who in turn were in favor of: A. Open Borders; B. Right of Return for Palestinians; C. A Palestinian State (which would have as Bibi said resulted in Hamasistan on the West Bank).

    More broadly, the FT and other outlets have dissected the election results. Ashkenazi Jews living in the "Tel Aviv Bubble" voted heavily for Zionist Union. One playwright called Bibi voters a bunch of idol kissers (referring to some ritual where observant Jews kiss some symbol or something -- not Jewish so I don't get it but it was meant as insult like Bible thumpers). Those who voted Bibi were Mizrahi or from Russia, and were often rocketed or victims of terrorism (neither applies in the Tel Aviv Bubble).

    I think your error in assumptions are that power follows money. That Jewish Oligarchs have power. Russia suggests that they do not -- that they do what they are told by people with power and thus are allowed to keep their money. The power in America rests with the non-White functional majority: Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Muslims. This shift has allowed the Trustafarians to run rampant from Occupy Wall Street to the anti-War movement to BDS in both forms: Bush Derangement Syndrome or anti-Israel.

    You also assume a coronation which seems unlikely. It is Barack Obama's party now, not the Clintons. If he does not want her, she won't get the nod. He might run again, cancel elections, choose a puppet like Cory Booker, there is no real check on him.

    Yes I agree Jews form the core of money and people in the media backing Dems. But so what, Putin's Russia is at least a good a model for Obama's America as anything else. Obama will tell Haim Saban and Larry Ellison what to do -- or put them in jail for whatever he wants to charge them with and strip them of their money. There's not a damn thing they can do about it. Any more than Russian Oligarchs could resist Putin. Jewish Oligarchs will put out the money for say, a Corey Booker promising to invade Israel and establish a Palestinian State because they have no other choice in keeping their freedom and billions.

    Which means long term you will get Jessica Valenti, Al Sharpton, and Keith Ellison as the prime media movers of the Democratic Party.

    Even if Hillary! comes to some agreement with Obama and is allowed to get the nomination, can you see her undoing the agreement for nuclear weapons with Iran that Obama has reached? Really? Obama's whole foreign policy has been: A. Get Whitey. B. Get Whitey real good. C. Make America weak to ... D. Get Whitey. E. Get those ultra White Whiteys, Jews. F. Make substitute Mommy Valerie happy. Jarret of course is a Farsi speaking, Iranian born, Black woman with an attitude.

    My guess is that very soon now the Democratic Party will "no Whites need apply" and immensely hostile to Israel and Jews. And that Israel and the House of Saud will team up to pre-emptively strike Iran before they are victims of Anschluss and Lebensraum respectively.

    The Iranians are dangerous because they are organized and over-confident. They are not a rabble like ISIS. They can think and plan and create nukes and launch satellites already. They just are over-confident against a decadent West.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Oscar Peterson, @Bill

    “It is Barack Obama’s party now, not the Clintons. If he does not want her, she won’t get the nod. He might run again, cancel elections, choose a puppet like Cory Booker, there is no real check on him.”

    What planet are you on? Obama’s WH is like Fort Apache with the Indians whooping and hollering and firing flaming arrows at him. The Democratic establishment maintains a distance from him, and the vast majority of Democratic congressmen showed up for Bibi’s and Boehner’s attempt to humiliate him (once again.)

    “His party?” Obama is just trying to fight his way to the finish line. He knows he can never have the post-presidiential high life that Bill Clinton has enjoyed. He’ll just have to salvage what he can. The decision on who gets nominated in 2016 is certainly not his.

    I have suspicions about the significance of your name, “Whiskey.” Time to stop hitting the bottle.

  92. matt says:
    @Fish Food
    Right-wing Zionist Jews probably wouldn't mind if a patriotic U.S. government began kicking out Mexicans. They could get along with such a government, just as they got along with Apartheid South Africa and Pinochet's Chile. They were also friendly towards Milosevic's Yugoslavia.

    The problem is that right-wing Zionist Jews are not numerous, not wealthy, and not influential outside of Israel. These aren't the Jews you need to talk to if you're interested in reducing immigration to the U.S.

    Replies: @matt, @Art Deco

    It wasn’t just “right-wing Zionist Jews” who got along with Apartheid South Africa. The Israel-South Africa special relationship began in the early 70s under Labor PM Golda Meir, after Israel lost much of its support in Sub-Saharan Africa after the 1967 war. The Saintly-Martyr-for-Peace Yitzhak Rabin further cemented the relationship in the mid-70s. Shimon Peres was a particularly committed supporter of South African apartheid.

    The newspaper of Mapam (the ancestor of Meretz, the furthest left Zionist party in the Knesset today), even published racist articles in the 1980s that wouldn’t be out of place here, including one that explained why blacks and Arabs are genetically inferior to whites and Jews, which is why Jewish fighter pilots are the best in the world, and blacks in the US are only good for short-distance running.

    Maybe this grand bargain idea really could work…

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @matt

    And then there was that big bang 1,000 miles south of Cape Town in 1978.

    , @Art Deco
    @matt

    after Israel lost much of its support in Sub-Saharan Africa after the 1967 war.

    No. The public antagonism of the Tropical African governments dates from 1973, when they were promised special deals by Arab governments during the oil embargo and subsequent periods. Israel had had fairly congenial dealings with African governments prior to that, with technical crews working here and there on development projects. After 7 or 8 years, African governments began restoring relations with Israel in dribs and drabs.

    , @Art Deco
    @matt

    The Israel-South Africa special relationship

    There was no 'special relationship'. They had diplomatic relations and some trade.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @syonredux

  93. I can’t quite get my mind around how Steve even thinks this could work.

    Kevin MacDonald made a Grand Bargain offer straight-up to Organized Jewry that if they’d knock it off with the mass immigration agitating, he himself would advocate for U.S. support of Israel, even if at some cost to ourselves.

    Did it accomplish anything? Did Org Jewry agree to this good deal? Did it even get the Jews to stop bashing him as the Most Horrible Person in America? Nope.

    Getting an Immigration Moratorium is just going to have to be a job that us American-Americans will have to do ourselves.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @JSM

    Getting an Immigration Moratorium is just going to have to be a job that us American-Americans will have to do ourselves.

    Yep. Core Americans are going to have to revive that can-do attitude they've been such exemplars of in the past.

  94. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Oscar Peterson
    @SolontoCroesus

    Great points. The idea that there can be anything like the "grand bargain" that Steve Sailer imagines, is just absurd.

    I like a lot of what Steve writes, but he suffers, in a peculiar and idiosyncratic way, from the same thing that the American Renaissance people do: The Great White Hope that organized Jewry can somehow be prevailed on to accept a "bargain" of some kind that preserves the primacy of European/Christian/Classical culture. Such a grand bargain could never be deemed to be "good for the Jews." Any meaningful preservation of European/Christian traditional culture will never be acceptable from the perspective of aggressive organized Jewry. Pursuing such a bargain is sheer delusion.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @silviosilver

    Such a grand bargain could never be deemed to be “good for the Jews.” Any meaningful preservation of European/Christian traditional culture will never be acceptable from the perspective of aggressive organized Jewry. Pursuing such a bargain is sheer delusion.

    Which raises this question: Would Tribal Jews, if they had to choose, rather see the destruction of the European gene pool or the maintenance of the Zionist project in Palestine?

  95. @Whiskey
    Steve, you've made a number of factual errors and a couple of IMHO predictive ones.

    Factually, the US foreign policy summed up in the Carter Doctrine has mostly been complimentary with Israel's security goal but has at times been in opposition to it. Famously, Ariel Sharon opposed removing Saddam because it upset the balance of powers between Saddam and Iran. W and his people wanted an alternative client petro state with the ability to pump out ultra cheap oil (this is important) to the House of Saud after 9/11. That however left the counterweight to Iran entirely the US military and Sharon accurately foresaw that the changing American demographics would not support that.

    NOW, the US interest (cheap oil and gas from the Gulf) is in accordance with the Israelis (they don't get nuked out of existence as a demonstration of Iran's nuclear power). Unfortunately for everyone Obama is on the side of the Iranians making that moot.

    Secondly, Zionist Union (re-branded Labor) WAS in fact in cahoots with Arab List. This is why polling suggesting a Zionist Union victory was so off -- voters responded to the cries from Bibi that NGOs from Obama were busing in Arab voters (this has been denounced as RACIST!!!!111eleventy!111!!!! by the media and Dems but I repeat myself) and that there would be no Palestinian State while Bibi was Prime Minister. While Arab List had ruled out formal participation, they made no secret of wanting to form an informal margin of confidence with Zionist Union, who in turn were in favor of: A. Open Borders; B. Right of Return for Palestinians; C. A Palestinian State (which would have as Bibi said resulted in Hamasistan on the West Bank).

    More broadly, the FT and other outlets have dissected the election results. Ashkenazi Jews living in the "Tel Aviv Bubble" voted heavily for Zionist Union. One playwright called Bibi voters a bunch of idol kissers (referring to some ritual where observant Jews kiss some symbol or something -- not Jewish so I don't get it but it was meant as insult like Bible thumpers). Those who voted Bibi were Mizrahi or from Russia, and were often rocketed or victims of terrorism (neither applies in the Tel Aviv Bubble).

    I think your error in assumptions are that power follows money. That Jewish Oligarchs have power. Russia suggests that they do not -- that they do what they are told by people with power and thus are allowed to keep their money. The power in America rests with the non-White functional majority: Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Muslims. This shift has allowed the Trustafarians to run rampant from Occupy Wall Street to the anti-War movement to BDS in both forms: Bush Derangement Syndrome or anti-Israel.

    You also assume a coronation which seems unlikely. It is Barack Obama's party now, not the Clintons. If he does not want her, she won't get the nod. He might run again, cancel elections, choose a puppet like Cory Booker, there is no real check on him.

    Yes I agree Jews form the core of money and people in the media backing Dems. But so what, Putin's Russia is at least a good a model for Obama's America as anything else. Obama will tell Haim Saban and Larry Ellison what to do -- or put them in jail for whatever he wants to charge them with and strip them of their money. There's not a damn thing they can do about it. Any more than Russian Oligarchs could resist Putin. Jewish Oligarchs will put out the money for say, a Corey Booker promising to invade Israel and establish a Palestinian State because they have no other choice in keeping their freedom and billions.

    Which means long term you will get Jessica Valenti, Al Sharpton, and Keith Ellison as the prime media movers of the Democratic Party.

    Even if Hillary! comes to some agreement with Obama and is allowed to get the nomination, can you see her undoing the agreement for nuclear weapons with Iran that Obama has reached? Really? Obama's whole foreign policy has been: A. Get Whitey. B. Get Whitey real good. C. Make America weak to ... D. Get Whitey. E. Get those ultra White Whiteys, Jews. F. Make substitute Mommy Valerie happy. Jarret of course is a Farsi speaking, Iranian born, Black woman with an attitude.

    My guess is that very soon now the Democratic Party will "no Whites need apply" and immensely hostile to Israel and Jews. And that Israel and the House of Saud will team up to pre-emptively strike Iran before they are victims of Anschluss and Lebensraum respectively.

    The Iranians are dangerous because they are organized and over-confident. They are not a rabble like ISIS. They can think and plan and create nukes and launch satellites already. They just are over-confident against a decadent West.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Oscar Peterson, @Bill

    The power in America rests with the non-White functional majority: Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Muslims.

    We can put this next to “The WASPs run Hollywood” in Whiskey’s Hall of Curious Observations.

  96. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @SolontoCroesus
    Gilad Atzmon recorded a wide-ranging interview on Red Ice Radio a few weeks ago http://www.redicecreations.com/radio/2015/03/RIR-150306.php

    Among other things, he discussed how Israelis/Jews/zionists/antii-zionists make use of identity politics -- actually, attach themselves and their minority group to some other identity group in order to gain majority status, majority strength, majority cover.

    Atzmon used the example of a Jewish writer Sarah Schulman who, purportedly speaking on behalf of Palestinians, wrote a book about gays in Palestine under the title, Israel/Palestine and the Queer International

    How is Sailer's proposal different from that example, and how should Americans view the oh-so-generous offer to allow Americans to define their own immigration standards in return for supporting Israeli apartheid anything other than moral blackmail?

    Keep your money.
    Return American representative government to the American people, not the billionaires.
    Selling out is what got USA in the mess it is today.

    Anyway, We're all rooting for Jim Webb.

    Replies: @Oscar Peterson, @Anonymous

    How is Sailer’s proposal different from that example, and how should Americans view the oh-so-generous offer to allow Americans to define their own immigration standards in return for supporting Israeli apartheid anything other than moral blackmail?

    Keep your money.
    Return American representative government to the American people, not the billionaires.
    Selling out is what got USA in the mess it is today.

    Anyway, We’re all rooting for Jim Webb.

    Great post.

    (I do not wish to distract from it, but, merely to elaborate on one of the threads therein: something many of our own intellectuals do not seem to understand is that we are a highly moral people. We choose to do that which we think, or are led to believe, is right. The jews understand this about us. Ironically, many of our own do not. We won’t be galvanized by an option that is presented as screwing someone over (in this case, the Gentiles in Palestine)..)

  97. @matt
    @Fish Food

    It wasn't just "right-wing Zionist Jews" who got along with Apartheid South Africa. The Israel-South Africa special relationship began in the early 70s under Labor PM Golda Meir, after Israel lost much of its support in Sub-Saharan Africa after the 1967 war. The Saintly-Martyr-for-Peace Yitzhak Rabin further cemented the relationship in the mid-70s. Shimon Peres was a particularly committed supporter of South African apartheid.

    The newspaper of Mapam (the ancestor of Meretz, the furthest left Zionist party in the Knesset today), even published racist articles in the 1980s that wouldn't be out of place here, including one that explained why blacks and Arabs are genetically inferior to whites and Jews, which is why Jewish fighter pilots are the best in the world, and blacks in the US are only good for short-distance running.

    Maybe this grand bargain idea really could work...

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Art Deco, @Art Deco

    And then there was that big bang 1,000 miles south of Cape Town in 1978.

  98. @Steve Sailer
    @Art Deco

    Has there ever been a case where Arab parties were used to tip the balance from a rightist to a leftist prime minister? I read that Rabin had a shaky majority in 1992 without Arabs and that was the closest thing to an exception to the unwritten rule?

    Replies: @matt, @Art Deco

    Not that I can remember. The religious parties are useful as coalition partners for both sides because their priorities are discrete and can be met with deals and accommodation. After 1982, constitutionally Arab parties were all pretty much hostile to Israel as a political entity, something which would impede coalition building quite apart from public policy differences (between the Communist Party and the Labor Party, to take one exampe).

    • Replies: @Anon
    @Art Deco


    Not that I can remember. The religious parties are useful as coalition partners for both sides because their priorities are discrete and can be met with deals and accommodation. After 1982, constitutionally Arab parties were all pretty much hostile to Israel as a political entity, something which would impede coalition building quite apart from public policy differences (between the Communist Party and the Labor Party, to take one exampe).
     
    You sure know a lot about Israel. How did you come by the knowledge?

    Replies: @matt

  99. @SFG
    Won't work. The real problem, IMHO, as others have said, is that billionaires like immigration--it mostly hurts poor people and middle-class people. Jews tend to be both more likely to be pro-immigration and billionaires, so this is why you see what you see.

    Here's what I think you should do. (Take it or leave it; I claim no backup other than my arguments.) If there's one thing Jews are afraid of, it's anti-Semitism. You need to find ways of spreading the meme that 'vibrant' types don't like Jews, see them as whites, and a browner America is dangerous to Jews. (Look at what's happening in Europe, or at 'polar bear hunting' in Brooklyn.) A scare campaign might move a few into the anti-immigration column.

    Of course, what you really need is your own billionaire. But that, I have no solution for. Ron, any ideas?

    Replies: @Anon

    If there’s one thing Jews are afraid of, it’s anti-Semitism.

    Does that fear factor at all into their being pro immigration?

  100. @JSM
    I can't quite get my mind around how Steve even thinks this could work.

    Kevin MacDonald made a Grand Bargain offer straight-up to Organized Jewry that if they'd knock it off with the mass immigration agitating, he himself would advocate for U.S. support of Israel, even if at some cost to ourselves.

    Did it accomplish anything? Did Org Jewry agree to this good deal? Did it even get the Jews to stop bashing him as the Most Horrible Person in America? Nope.

    Getting an Immigration Moratorium is just going to have to be a job that us American-Americans will have to do ourselves.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    Getting an Immigration Moratorium is just going to have to be a job that us American-Americans will have to do ourselves.

    Yep. Core Americans are going to have to revive that can-do attitude they’ve been such exemplars of in the past.

  101. @matt
    @Fish Food

    It wasn't just "right-wing Zionist Jews" who got along with Apartheid South Africa. The Israel-South Africa special relationship began in the early 70s under Labor PM Golda Meir, after Israel lost much of its support in Sub-Saharan Africa after the 1967 war. The Saintly-Martyr-for-Peace Yitzhak Rabin further cemented the relationship in the mid-70s. Shimon Peres was a particularly committed supporter of South African apartheid.

    The newspaper of Mapam (the ancestor of Meretz, the furthest left Zionist party in the Knesset today), even published racist articles in the 1980s that wouldn't be out of place here, including one that explained why blacks and Arabs are genetically inferior to whites and Jews, which is why Jewish fighter pilots are the best in the world, and blacks in the US are only good for short-distance running.

    Maybe this grand bargain idea really could work...

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Art Deco, @Art Deco

    after Israel lost much of its support in Sub-Saharan Africa after the 1967 war.

    No. The public antagonism of the Tropical African governments dates from 1973, when they were promised special deals by Arab governments during the oil embargo and subsequent periods. Israel had had fairly congenial dealings with African governments prior to that, with technical crews working here and there on development projects. After 7 or 8 years, African governments began restoring relations with Israel in dribs and drabs.

  102. @matt
    @Fish Food

    It wasn't just "right-wing Zionist Jews" who got along with Apartheid South Africa. The Israel-South Africa special relationship began in the early 70s under Labor PM Golda Meir, after Israel lost much of its support in Sub-Saharan Africa after the 1967 war. The Saintly-Martyr-for-Peace Yitzhak Rabin further cemented the relationship in the mid-70s. Shimon Peres was a particularly committed supporter of South African apartheid.

    The newspaper of Mapam (the ancestor of Meretz, the furthest left Zionist party in the Knesset today), even published racist articles in the 1980s that wouldn't be out of place here, including one that explained why blacks and Arabs are genetically inferior to whites and Jews, which is why Jewish fighter pilots are the best in the world, and blacks in the US are only good for short-distance running.

    Maybe this grand bargain idea really could work...

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Art Deco, @Art Deco

    The Israel-South Africa special relationship

    There was no ‘special relationship’. They had diplomatic relations and some trade.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Art Deco

    South Africa's mining industry was perhaps half-controlled by Jewish interests. It made for lots of important ties.

    Replies: @syonredux, @Art Deco

    , @syonredux
    @Art Deco




    The impetus for the blossoming relationship between Israel and South Africa was the 1967 Six Day War. Israel's victory in the war, and subsequent occupation of the Sinai and West Bank, alienated it diplomatically from much of the Third World, and African states. As well as this many movements around the world, including the Black nationalist movements, now began to see it as a colonial state.[11] At the same time, in South Africa, Israel became the object of widespread admiration, particularly among the country's political and military leadership. The editorial of Die Burger, then the mouthpiece of the South African Nationalist Party declared: "Israel and South Africa are engaged in a struggle for existence... The anti-Western powers have driven Israel and South Africa into a community of interests which had better be utilized than denied."[11] Israel continued to denounce apartheid, but it privately began to cultivate relations in secret. This approach was similar to many Western nations at the time.[13][14] Israel's condemnation of apartheid was based on opposition to the racist nature of the practice, and its maintenance of mutually beneficial commercial and military ties was rooted in a concern for South African Jews and a realpolitik attitude that Israel was too isolated to be selective about partners in trade and arms deals.[13][11] Within less than a decade, South Africa would be one of Israel's closest military and economic allies, whilst Israel would occupy the position of South Africa's closest military ally, and Israel had become the most important foreign arms supplier to the South African Defence Force.[3]:117–19 In the wake of the Yom Kippur War, to put additional diplomatic and military pressure on Israel, Arab oil-producing countries threatened to impose an oil embargo on countries with international relations with Israel. As a result, many African countries broke ties with Israel. [15]

    Most African states had fully broken ties after the 1973 Yom Kippur War, and Israel increased its cultivation of ties with the similarly isolated government in Pretoria.[16] Israeli ties and trade with South Africa became more extensive. According to Ethan A. Nadelmann, the relationship developed due to the fact that many African countries broke diplomatic ties with Israel during the 1970s following Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza during the Arab–Israeli wars, causing Israel to deepen relations with other isolated countries.[17] Israel remained officially opposed to the apartheid system, but it also opposed international embargoes. Israeli officials sought to coordinate ties with South Africa within a tripartite framework between Israel, the United States, and South Africa.[18]



    By 1973, an economic and military alliance between Israel and South Africa was in the ascendancy. The military leadership of both countries was convinced that both nations faced a fundamentally similar predicament, fighting for their survival against the common terrorist enemy of the PLO and the ANC.[11]

    In 1975, the Israel–South Africa Agreement was signed, and increasing economic co-operation between Israel and South Africa was reported, including the construction of a major new railway in Israel, and the building of a desalination plant in South Africa.[19] In April 1976 South African Prime Minister John Vorster was invited to make a state visit, meeting Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin.[16][20] Later in 1976, the 5th Conference of Non-Aligned Nations in Colombo, Sri Lanka, adopted a resolution calling for an oil embargo against France and Israel because of their arms sales to South Africa.[19] In 1977, South African Foreign Minister Pik Botha visited Israel to discuss South African issues with Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin and Foreign Minister Moshe Dayan.

    Israeli and South African intelligence czars held regular conferences with each other to share information on enemy weapons and training.[11] The co-ordination between the Israel Defense Forces and the South African Defense Force was unprecedented, with Israeli and South African generals giving each other unfettered access to each other's battlefields and military tactics, and Israel sharing with South Africa highly classified information about its missions, such as Operation Opera, which had previously only been reserved for the United States.[11]

    The South African government's yearbook of 1976 wrote: "Israel and South Africa have one thing above all else in common: they are both situated in a predominantly hostile world inhabited by dark peoples."[16]

    From the mid-1970s, the two countries were allegedly involved in joint nuclear-weapons development and testing. According to Seymour Hersh, for example, the 1979 Vela Incident was the third joint Israeli–South African nuclear test in the Indian Ocean.[21] Richard Rhodes concludes the incident was an Israeli nuclear test, conducted in cooperation with South Africa, and that the United States administration deliberately obscured this fact in order to avoid complicating relations with Israel.[22]

    By 1980, a sizeable contingent of South African military and government officials were living permanently in Israel, to oversee the numerous joint projects between the countries, while their children attended local Israeli schools.[11] Scientific collaboration also continued to increase, with many scientists working in each other's countries. Perhaps most sensitive was the large group of Israeli scientists working at South Africa's Pelindaba nuclear facility.[11]

    During Operation Protea in 1981, the South African Defence Force made military history, as arguably the first user of modern drone technology, when it operated the Israeli IAI Scout drones in combat in Angola. They would only be used in combat by the Israel Defence Forces a year later during the 1982 Lebanon War and Operation Mole Cricket 19.[23]

    In 1981, Israeli Defence Minister Ariel Sharon visited South African forces in Namibia for 10 days,[24] later saying that South Africa needed more weapons to fight Soviet infiltration in the region.

    In 1984, Pik Botha again visited Israel but this time only for an unofficial meeting with Israeli Foreign Minister Yitzhak Shamir.[25]
     
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel%E2%80%93South_Africa_relations
  103. @Fish Food
    Right-wing Zionist Jews probably wouldn't mind if a patriotic U.S. government began kicking out Mexicans. They could get along with such a government, just as they got along with Apartheid South Africa and Pinochet's Chile. They were also friendly towards Milosevic's Yugoslavia.

    The problem is that right-wing Zionist Jews are not numerous, not wealthy, and not influential outside of Israel. These aren't the Jews you need to talk to if you're interested in reducing immigration to the U.S.

    Replies: @matt, @Art Deco

    They could get along with such a government, just as they got along with Apartheid South Africa and Pinochet’s Chile.

    Does it occur to anyone that whether or not countries of modest dimensions who do not project power outside their immediate environs ‘get along’ is generally an idle question?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Art Deco

    It wasn't an idle question to Israel's various governments, that's for sure.

    Replies: @Art Deco

  104. @Art Deco
    @Fish Food

    They could get along with such a government, just as they got along with Apartheid South Africa and Pinochet’s Chile.
    --
    Does it occur to anyone that whether or not countries of modest dimensions who do not project power outside their immediate environs 'get along' is generally an idle question?

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    It wasn’t an idle question to Israel’s various governments, that’s for sure.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    @Steve Sailer

    Let go of my leg. What are the implications of Chile and Israel not 'getting along'? They are thousands of miles apart and neither expects to influence the immediate environs of the other. Israeli manufacturers would have to buy copper from some other locus if they were really antagonistic. That's about it.

  105. @Art Deco
    @matt

    The Israel-South Africa special relationship

    There was no 'special relationship'. They had diplomatic relations and some trade.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @syonredux

    South Africa’s mining industry was perhaps half-controlled by Jewish interests. It made for lots of important ties.

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @Steve Sailer


    South Africa’s mining industry was perhaps half-controlled by Jewish interests. It made for lots of important ties.
     
    The joke went that Apartheid was fascism for the Blacks, socialism for the Afrikaners, and capitalism for the English and the Jews.

    RE: Israel's relationship with South Africa,

    Very interesting how that never seemed to bother liberal, anti-Apartheid Jews in the USA.Also interesting how it doesn't get brought up very often...

    The Vela Incident, also known as the South Atlantic Flash, was an unidentified "double flash" of light detected by an American Vela Hotel satellite on September 22, 1979, near the Prince Edward Islands off Antarctica, which many believe was of nuclear origin. The most widespread theory among those who believe the flash was of nuclear origin is that it resulted from a joint South African and Israeli nuclear test.[1][2][3] The topic remains highly disputed today.


    Well before the Vela Incident, American intelligence agencies had made the assessment that Israel probably possessed its own nuclear weapons.[31] According to journalist Seymour Hersh, the detection was the third joint Israeli-South African nuclear test in the Indian Ocean, and the Israelis had sent two IDF ships and "a contingent of Israeli military men and nuclear experts" for the test.[1] Author Richard Rhodes also concludes the incident was an Israeli nuclear test, conducted in cooperation with South Africa, and that the United States administration deliberately obscured this fact in order to avoid complicating relations with South Africa.[2] Likewise, Leonard Weiss offers a number of arguments to support the test being Israeli, and claims that successive US administrations continue to cover up the test to divert unwanted attention that may portray its foreign policy in a bad light.[3] In the 2008 book The Nuclear Express: A Political History of the Bomb and its Proliferation Thomas C. Reed and Danny B. Stillman stated their opinion that the "double flash" was the result of a joint South African-Israeli nuclear bomb test.[32] David Albright stated in his article about the "double flash" event in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists that "If the 1979 flash was caused by a test, most experts agree it was probably an Israeli test".[33]

    In 2010, it was reported that, on February 27, 1980, President Jimmy Carter wrote in his diary, "We have a growing belief among our scientists that the Israelis did indeed conduct a nuclear test explosion in the ocean near the southern end of Africa."[34]

    Leonard Weiss, of the Center for International Security and Cooperation at Stanford University writes: "The weight of the evidence that the Vela event was an Israeli nuclear test assisted by South Africa appears overwhelming."[35]

    Thomas C. Reed writes that he believes the Vela incident was an Israeli neutron bomb test.[36] The test would have gone undetected as the Israelis specifically chose a window of opportunity when, according to the published data, no active Vela satellites were observing the area. Additionally, the Israelis chose to set off the test during a typhoon. However, the Israelis and their South African partners had miscalculated as the over a decade-old Vela satellite which detected the blast had been officially listed by the US government as 'retired', although nonetheless was still able to receive data.[37] By 1984, according to Mordechai Vanunu, Israel was mass-producing neutron bombs.[38]
     
    , @Art Deco
    @Steve Sailer

    What's so important about it? The Oppenheimer family is Jewish. This means what in context? Keep in mind that the Oppenheimer family was for decades in public opposition to baaskap and apartheid. They do not seem to have influenced the contours of the social order much at all in those years, much less influencing international relations.

    --

    The motormouth who wastes everyone's time quoting Wikipedia to me seems to fancy it's a matter of note that the South African foreign minister visited Israel (as if foreign ministers visiting foreign capitals was unusual), that South Africa bought a piece of military equipment off of Israel, that an unspecified number of South African nationals resided in Israel for a time, blah blah. All of which indicates that Israel treated South Africa as a normal country. Prior to 1985, so did the United States. Nothing remarkable about that.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @syonredux, @syonredux

  106. “And, in the USA, all of those elites are in favor of mass immigration/race replacement”

    Immigration? Yes. Race replacement? No. Regardless, do not these “elites” have the liberty to promote an agenda that decidedly benefits them, just like the course of actions that the “elites” you support?

    “Contradiction in terms, I should think”

    You should think not. The elites are groups of people that hold power and make concerted efforts to sway public opinion–labor unions, heads of corporations, conservative pundits, ethnic nationalists (e.g. pro-white, pro-black, pro-Hispanic).

    “None. Sadly, no elites in the USA share my opinions.”

    
You have clearly demonstrated you are an advocate of the pro-white elite and of the conservative elite, which our dear host is part and parcel to.

    “Whom, not who.Something of a lost cause, I fear.”



    Well, take SFG’s advice–You need to find ways of spreading the meme that ‘vibrant’ types don’t like Jews, see them as whites, and a browner America is dangerous to Jew.

    “We were talking about the Holocaust in class, and the La Raza and Black students started complaining about the Holocaust Museum in Washington.”

    
Yet, somehow, in the class I was in, those same students asked relevant questions about how and why such atrocities could be committed.

    “Not I. That would squelch my chances at tenure.”
    “In contrast, my PC colleagues extol the coming end of European America at conference after conference…”

    Then you are a chicken-shit. Stand up for something you believe in. (Tsk, tsk) I thought playing the victim card was only reserved for feminists and minorities. Take heart, my friend. Even liberals would support you.

    http://www.mu-warrior.blogspot.com/2015/03/marquette-in-academic-freedom-hall-of.html

    
“Where? Not in the Ivy League. Or within the corridors of power in Washington.”



    Where? Crimethink among the conservative intelligentsia and within some populations of the American South.

    “The highest honor that a European person can attain in contemporary society.”

    See, the Al Sharptons of the world would yell “race traitor” to blacks who call out his nonsense.

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/12/23/black-woman-unleashes-blistering-tirade-against-sharpton-obama-and-de-blasio-race-baiting-tired-pathetic/

    See, the David Dukes of the world would yell “race traitor” to whites who call out his nonsense.

    http://www.therefinersfire.org/david_duke.htm

    The liberal media has its narrative–white nationalists are a threat. Reporters dare not put forth anyone who criticizes their story. Similarly, the conservative media has its narrative–feminists and minorities and immigrants are a threat. Reporters dare not put forth anyone who criticizes their story. One in the same, my friend, one in the same–elitist race baiters who deem anyone who challenges the narrative as race traitors.

    “If a said anything remotely similar to “White Power” in public, I would lose my job.”

    
Depends what you say and how you say it. Besides, you know full well that in some positions you have to tow the company line. Bullshit? Absolutely. But it is YOUR choice whether or not to play by those rules, try to skirt them, or outright “violate” them. I suggest you follow the lead of Professor Adams at Marquette. Fight black power! Fight brown power! Fight Jew power! Yeah, white power!


    “In contrast, a colleague down the hall has pasted on his door various projected dates for the end of European dominance in the USA.”

    Well, the truth of the matter, from his point of view, Europeans did piss off a lot of people off with their air of superiority and imperialistic tendencies. It is in their DNA as the “builders of Western Civilization”. What did you expect?

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @Corvinus


    “And, in the USA, all of those elites are in favor of mass immigration/race replacement”

    Immigration? Yes. Race replacement? No.
     
    Mass immigration means race replacement, dear fellow.Last time I checked, the immigrants are not coming from Europe.

    Regardless, do not these “elites” have the liberty to promote an agenda that decidedly benefits them, just like the course of actions that the “elites” you support?
     
    There are no elites who believe what I believe, dear fellow.

    The elites are groups of people that hold power and make concerted efforts to sway public opinion–
    labor unions, heads of corporations, conservative pundits, ethnic nationalists (e.g. pro-white, pro-black, pro-Hispanic).
     
    And there are no elites who hold White nationalist views.Well, maybe one or two do.But they keep their crimethink to themselves

    “None. Sadly, no elites in the USA share my opinions.”

    
You have clearly demonstrated you are an advocate of the pro-white elite
     
    There is no "pro-White elite," dear fellow

    and of the conservative elite, which our dear host is part and parcel to.
     
    If only Steve were a member of the elite....

    “We were talking about the Holocaust in class, and the La Raza and Black students started complaining about the Holocaust Museum in Washington.”

    
Yet, somehow, in the class I was in, those same students asked relevant questions about how and why such atrocities could be committed.
     
    MMMM, perhaps you know more Uncle Toms than I do....

    “Not I. That would squelch my chances at tenure.”
    “In contrast, my PC colleagues extol the coming end of European America at conference after conference…”

    Then you are a chicken-shit.
     
    Never said that I was brave, dear fellow

    Stand up for something you believe in.
     
    Wouldn't do any good, dear fellow.The elite are against me.

    (Tsk, tsk) I thought playing the victim card was only reserved for feminists and minorities.
     
    It is.They get to play the card.People like me are simply forced to remain silent.

    Take heart, my friend. Even liberals would support you.
     
    Not the Leftists at my university.To them, liberal is a term of abuse.

    See, the David Dukes of the world would yell “race traitor” to whites who call out his nonsense.
     
    Dear fellow, David Duke (a genuine moron, incidentally) is totally powerless and irrelevant

    Similarly, the conservative media has its narrative–feminists and minorities and immigrants are a threat.
     
    What "conservative media," dear fellow?

    If a said anything remotely similar to “White Power” in public, I would lose my job.”

    
Depends what you say and how you say it.
     
    Precisely.The discourse is policed by the elite.And the elite want mass immigration/open borders

    What did you expect?
     
    What he did, dear fellow.Anti-European/anti-Anglo attitudes are encouraged by the elite.

    Replies: @Ghost of John Adams, @ben tillman

  107. You can’t negotiate with Jews over politics. They’re liberal therefore crazy.

  108. @Steve Sailer
    @Art Deco

    South Africa's mining industry was perhaps half-controlled by Jewish interests. It made for lots of important ties.

    Replies: @syonredux, @Art Deco

    South Africa’s mining industry was perhaps half-controlled by Jewish interests. It made for lots of important ties.

    The joke went that Apartheid was fascism for the Blacks, socialism for the Afrikaners, and capitalism for the English and the Jews.

    RE: Israel’s relationship with South Africa,

    Very interesting how that never seemed to bother liberal, anti-Apartheid Jews in the USA.Also interesting how it doesn’t get brought up very often…

    The Vela Incident, also known as the South Atlantic Flash, was an unidentified “double flash” of light detected by an American Vela Hotel satellite on September 22, 1979, near the Prince Edward Islands off Antarctica, which many believe was of nuclear origin. The most widespread theory among those who believe the flash was of nuclear origin is that it resulted from a joint South African and Israeli nuclear test.[1][2][3] The topic remains highly disputed today.

    Well before the Vela Incident, American intelligence agencies had made the assessment that Israel probably possessed its own nuclear weapons.[31] According to journalist Seymour Hersh, the detection was the third joint Israeli-South African nuclear test in the Indian Ocean, and the Israelis had sent two IDF ships and “a contingent of Israeli military men and nuclear experts” for the test.[1] Author Richard Rhodes also concludes the incident was an Israeli nuclear test, conducted in cooperation with South Africa, and that the United States administration deliberately obscured this fact in order to avoid complicating relations with South Africa.[2] Likewise, Leonard Weiss offers a number of arguments to support the test being Israeli, and claims that successive US administrations continue to cover up the test to divert unwanted attention that may portray its foreign policy in a bad light.[3] In the 2008 book The Nuclear Express: A Political History of the Bomb and its Proliferation Thomas C. Reed and Danny B. Stillman stated their opinion that the “double flash” was the result of a joint South African-Israeli nuclear bomb test.[32] David Albright stated in his article about the “double flash” event in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists that “If the 1979 flash was caused by a test, most experts agree it was probably an Israeli test”.[33]

    In 2010, it was reported that, on February 27, 1980, President Jimmy Carter wrote in his diary, “We have a growing belief among our scientists that the Israelis did indeed conduct a nuclear test explosion in the ocean near the southern end of Africa.”[34]

    Leonard Weiss, of the Center for International Security and Cooperation at Stanford University writes: “The weight of the evidence that the Vela event was an Israeli nuclear test assisted by South Africa appears overwhelming.”[35]

    Thomas C. Reed writes that he believes the Vela incident was an Israeli neutron bomb test.[36] The test would have gone undetected as the Israelis specifically chose a window of opportunity when, according to the published data, no active Vela satellites were observing the area. Additionally, the Israelis chose to set off the test during a typhoon. However, the Israelis and their South African partners had miscalculated as the over a decade-old Vela satellite which detected the blast had been officially listed by the US government as ‘retired’, although nonetheless was still able to receive data.[37] By 1984, according to Mordechai Vanunu, Israel was mass-producing neutron bombs.[38]

  109. Krystol penned the letter that Cotton cliamed to have written to Iran. Did he write this article also? Must be a very busy man trying to finagle two birds kill each other and him not losing the stone.

  110. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Art Deco
    @Steve Sailer

    Not that I can remember. The religious parties are useful as coalition partners for both sides because their priorities are discrete and can be met with deals and accommodation. After 1982, constitutionally Arab parties were all pretty much hostile to Israel as a political entity, something which would impede coalition building quite apart from public policy differences (between the Communist Party and the Labor Party, to take one exampe).

    Replies: @Anon

    Not that I can remember. The religious parties are useful as coalition partners for both sides because their priorities are discrete and can be met with deals and accommodation. After 1982, constitutionally Arab parties were all pretty much hostile to Israel as a political entity, something which would impede coalition building quite apart from public policy differences (between the Communist Party and the Labor Party, to take one exampe).

    You sure know a lot about Israel. How did you come by the knowledge?

    • Replies: @matt
    @Anon


    You sure know a lot about Israel.
     
    He doesn't, actually.
  111. @Anonymous
    Just won't happen, Steve.
    The USA can no longer be described as real blood and soil nation founded by a real genetic homogenous population. The Wasps gave up the ghost years ago, the Act of 1924 was their last hurrah and attempt to hang on to their country. Thus came Hart-Cellar and the utter ruination of Kennedy/Johnson. There's just no getting away from that, it's a done deal. Time to grow up and face up to it. The chance to do anything about it passed with the old jowlhound himself.
    Look, the forces arranged against you are just too massive, too powerful and too overwhelming. The fact that 'Hispanics' multiplied their numbers 20 fold in 60 years should tell you that - and subcontinental immigration to the USA has only now started in earnest. Believe you me, *that* will make the mex deluge look like the proverbial vicarage tea party, complete with bucktoothed, absurd, buffoon C of E parson, the old bag blue rinse brigade, crust less cucumber sandwiches, Earl Grey and Battenberg cake. And then *will* come the sub Saharans, what? All 9 billion of them.
    Now, let's all link arms for another round of Berkeley kumbaya, denounce the white privilege, and praise the yoni.

    Replies: @Ghost of John Adams, @LondonBob

    Ah, the counsel of despair – not only not a winning strategy, but one that our opponents would have invented, propagated and codified if they thought they could.

    If you believed what you have written you would have already taken your bow and shuffled off this mortal coil. Instead you work to drain the energy of those who can and enervate those who would. Are you for us or against us? If you are for us, then stop ‘helping’ us.

  112. @Anon
    @Art Deco


    Not that I can remember. The religious parties are useful as coalition partners for both sides because their priorities are discrete and can be met with deals and accommodation. After 1982, constitutionally Arab parties were all pretty much hostile to Israel as a political entity, something which would impede coalition building quite apart from public policy differences (between the Communist Party and the Labor Party, to take one exampe).
     
    You sure know a lot about Israel. How did you come by the knowledge?

    Replies: @matt

    You sure know a lot about Israel.

    He doesn’t, actually.

  113. @Corvinus
    “And, in the USA, all of those elites are in favor of mass immigration/race replacement”

    Immigration? Yes. Race replacement? No. Regardless, do not these “elites” have the liberty to promote an agenda that decidedly benefits them, just like the course of actions that the "elites" you support?


    “Contradiction in terms, I should think”

    You should think not. The elites are groups of people that hold power and make concerted efforts to sway public opinion--labor unions, heads of corporations, conservative pundits, ethnic nationalists (e.g. pro-white, pro-black, pro-Hispanic).


    “None. Sadly, no elites in the USA share my opinions.”

    
You have clearly demonstrated you are an advocate of the pro-white elite and of the conservative elite, which our dear host is part and parcel to.


    “Whom, not who.Something of a lost cause, I fear.”



    Well, take SFG’s advice--You need to find ways of spreading the meme that ‘vibrant’ types don’t like Jews, see them as whites, and a browner America is dangerous to Jew.


    “We were talking about the Holocaust in class, and the La Raza and Black students started complaining about the Holocaust Museum in Washington.”

    
Yet, somehow, in the class I was in, those same students asked relevant questions about how and why such atrocities could be committed.


    “Not I. That would squelch my chances at tenure.”
    “In contrast, my PC colleagues extol the coming end of European America at conference after conference…”

    Then you are a chicken-shit. Stand up for something you believe in. (Tsk, tsk) I thought playing the victim card was only reserved for feminists and minorities. Take heart, my friend. Even liberals would support you.

    http://www.mu-warrior.blogspot.com/2015/03/marquette-in-academic-freedom-hall-of.html


    
“Where? Not in the Ivy League. Or within the corridors of power in Washington.”



    Where? Crimethink among the conservative intelligentsia and within some populations of the American South.


    “The highest honor that a European person can attain in contemporary society.”

    See, the Al Sharptons of the world would yell “race traitor” to blacks who call out his nonsense.

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/12/23/black-woman-unleashes-blistering-tirade-against-sharpton-obama-and-de-blasio-race-baiting-tired-pathetic/

    See, the David Dukes of the world would yell “race traitor” to whites who call out his nonsense.

    http://www.therefinersfire.org/david_duke.htm

    The liberal media has its narrative--white nationalists are a threat. Reporters dare not put forth anyone who criticizes their story. Similarly, the conservative media has its narrative--feminists and minorities and immigrants are a threat. Reporters dare not put forth anyone who criticizes their story. One in the same, my friend, one in the same--elitist race baiters who deem anyone who challenges the narrative as race traitors.


    “If a said anything remotely similar to “White Power” in public, I would lose my job.”

    
Depends what you say and how you say it. Besides, you know full well that in some positions you have to tow the company line. Bullshit? Absolutely. But it is YOUR choice whether or not to play by those rules, try to skirt them, or outright “violate” them. I suggest you follow the lead of Professor Adams at Marquette. Fight black power! Fight brown power! Fight Jew power! Yeah, white power!



    “In contrast, a colleague down the hall has pasted on his door various projected dates for the end of European dominance in the USA.”

    Well, the truth of the matter, from his point of view, Europeans did piss off a lot of people off with their air of superiority and imperialistic tendencies. It is in their DNA as the “builders of Western Civilization”. What did you expect?

    Replies: @syonredux

    “And, in the USA, all of those elites are in favor of mass immigration/race replacement”

    Immigration? Yes. Race replacement? No.

    Mass immigration means race replacement, dear fellow.Last time I checked, the immigrants are not coming from Europe.

    Regardless, do not these “elites” have the liberty to promote an agenda that decidedly benefits them, just like the course of actions that the “elites” you support?

    There are no elites who believe what I believe, dear fellow.

    The elites are groups of people that hold power and make concerted efforts to sway public opinion–
    labor unions, heads of corporations, conservative pundits, ethnic nationalists (e.g. pro-white, pro-black, pro-Hispanic).

    And there are no elites who hold White nationalist views.Well, maybe one or two do.But they keep their crimethink to themselves

    “None. Sadly, no elites in the USA share my opinions.”

    
You have clearly demonstrated you are an advocate of the pro-white elite

    There is no “pro-White elite,” dear fellow

    and of the conservative elite, which our dear host is part and parcel to.

    If only Steve were a member of the elite….

    “We were talking about the Holocaust in class, and the La Raza and Black students started complaining about the Holocaust Museum in Washington.”

    
Yet, somehow, in the class I was in, those same students asked relevant questions about how and why such atrocities could be committed.

    MMMM, perhaps you know more Uncle Toms than I do….

    “Not I. That would squelch my chances at tenure.”
    “In contrast, my PC colleagues extol the coming end of European America at conference after conference…”

    Then you are a chicken-shit.

    Never said that I was brave, dear fellow

    Stand up for something you believe in.

    Wouldn’t do any good, dear fellow.The elite are against me.

    (Tsk, tsk) I thought playing the victim card was only reserved for feminists and minorities.

    It is.They get to play the card.People like me are simply forced to remain silent.

    Take heart, my friend. Even liberals would support you.

    Not the Leftists at my university.To them, liberal is a term of abuse.

    See, the David Dukes of the world would yell “race traitor” to whites who call out his nonsense.

    Dear fellow, David Duke (a genuine moron, incidentally) is totally powerless and irrelevant

    Similarly, the conservative media has its narrative–feminists and minorities and immigrants are a threat.

    What “conservative media,” dear fellow?

    If a said anything remotely similar to “White Power” in public, I would lose my job.”

    
Depends what you say and how you say it.

    Precisely.The discourse is policed by the elite.And the elite want mass immigration/open borders

    What did you expect?

    What he did, dear fellow.Anti-European/anti-Anglo attitudes are encouraged by the elite.

    • Replies: @Ghost of John Adams
    @syonredux

    syon, even though I frequently endorse your positions, I find your use of 'dear fellow' to be at least a needless distraction, sometimes a disgusting disparagement and occasionally a damnable impediment to our shared objectives.

    If your goal is to belittle your opponents, (which I assume it is), it is perhaps effective in elevating your emotional state if you are a narcissist, or possibly a solipsist.

    If your goal is persuasion then your arguments fail. Put aside your cynical impulses and swear to never write again until you appreciate the elementary conditions of human reasoning. Your missives are often counterproductive though they need not be. If your arguments must include the implicit ad hominem component, you just aren't trying hard enough.

    , @ben tillman
    @syonredux


    Dear fellow, David Duke (a genuine moron, incidentally)
     
    Insulting David Duke is an obligatory expression of obeisance to the forces of political correctness. Never mind that none of his publically expressed policy prescriptions are in any way morally objectionable. Never mind that his writings show that he is more perspicacious than 99% of the electorate.

    He is a heretic, and if you do not denounce the heretic, you too are a heretic.
  114. @Art Deco
    @matt

    The Israel-South Africa special relationship

    There was no 'special relationship'. They had diplomatic relations and some trade.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @syonredux

    The impetus for the blossoming relationship between Israel and South Africa was the 1967 Six Day War. Israel’s victory in the war, and subsequent occupation of the Sinai and West Bank, alienated it diplomatically from much of the Third World, and African states. As well as this many movements around the world, including the Black nationalist movements, now began to see it as a colonial state.[11] At the same time, in South Africa, Israel became the object of widespread admiration, particularly among the country’s political and military leadership. The editorial of Die Burger, then the mouthpiece of the South African Nationalist Party declared: “Israel and South Africa are engaged in a struggle for existence… The anti-Western powers have driven Israel and South Africa into a community of interests which had better be utilized than denied.”[11] Israel continued to denounce apartheid, but it privately began to cultivate relations in secret. This approach was similar to many Western nations at the time.[13][14] Israel’s condemnation of apartheid was based on opposition to the racist nature of the practice, and its maintenance of mutually beneficial commercial and military ties was rooted in a concern for South African Jews and a realpolitik attitude that Israel was too isolated to be selective about partners in trade and arms deals.[13][11] Within less than a decade, South Africa would be one of Israel’s closest military and economic allies, whilst Israel would occupy the position of South Africa’s closest military ally, and Israel had become the most important foreign arms supplier to the South African Defence Force.[3]:117–19 In the wake of the Yom Kippur War, to put additional diplomatic and military pressure on Israel, Arab oil-producing countries threatened to impose an oil embargo on countries with international relations with Israel. As a result, many African countries broke ties with Israel. [15]

    Most African states had fully broken ties after the 1973 Yom Kippur War, and Israel increased its cultivation of ties with the similarly isolated government in Pretoria.[16] Israeli ties and trade with South Africa became more extensive. According to Ethan A. Nadelmann, the relationship developed due to the fact that many African countries broke diplomatic ties with Israel during the 1970s following Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza during the Arab–Israeli wars, causing Israel to deepen relations with other isolated countries.[17] Israel remained officially opposed to the apartheid system, but it also opposed international embargoes. Israeli officials sought to coordinate ties with South Africa within a tripartite framework between Israel, the United States, and South Africa.[18]

    By 1973, an economic and military alliance between Israel and South Africa was in the ascendancy. The military leadership of both countries was convinced that both nations faced a fundamentally similar predicament, fighting for their survival against the common terrorist enemy of the PLO and the ANC.[11]

    In 1975, the Israel–South Africa Agreement was signed, and increasing economic co-operation between Israel and South Africa was reported, including the construction of a major new railway in Israel, and the building of a desalination plant in South Africa.[19] In April 1976 South African Prime Minister John Vorster was invited to make a state visit, meeting Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin.[16][20] Later in 1976, the 5th Conference of Non-Aligned Nations in Colombo, Sri Lanka, adopted a resolution calling for an oil embargo against France and Israel because of their arms sales to South Africa.[19] In 1977, South African Foreign Minister Pik Botha visited Israel to discuss South African issues with Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin and Foreign Minister Moshe Dayan.

    Israeli and South African intelligence czars held regular conferences with each other to share information on enemy weapons and training.[11] The co-ordination between the Israel Defense Forces and the South African Defense Force was unprecedented, with Israeli and South African generals giving each other unfettered access to each other’s battlefields and military tactics, and Israel sharing with South Africa highly classified information about its missions, such as Operation Opera, which had previously only been reserved for the United States.[11]

    The South African government’s yearbook of 1976 wrote: “Israel and South Africa have one thing above all else in common: they are both situated in a predominantly hostile world inhabited by dark peoples.”[16]

    From the mid-1970s, the two countries were allegedly involved in joint nuclear-weapons development and testing. According to Seymour Hersh, for example, the 1979 Vela Incident was the third joint Israeli–South African nuclear test in the Indian Ocean.[21] Richard Rhodes concludes the incident was an Israeli nuclear test, conducted in cooperation with South Africa, and that the United States administration deliberately obscured this fact in order to avoid complicating relations with Israel.[22]

    By 1980, a sizeable contingent of South African military and government officials were living permanently in Israel, to oversee the numerous joint projects between the countries, while their children attended local Israeli schools.[11] Scientific collaboration also continued to increase, with many scientists working in each other’s countries. Perhaps most sensitive was the large group of Israeli scientists working at South Africa’s Pelindaba nuclear facility.[11]

    During Operation Protea in 1981, the South African Defence Force made military history, as arguably the first user of modern drone technology, when it operated the Israeli IAI Scout drones in combat in Angola. They would only be used in combat by the Israel Defence Forces a year later during the 1982 Lebanon War and Operation Mole Cricket 19.[23]

    In 1981, Israeli Defence Minister Ariel Sharon visited South African forces in Namibia for 10 days,[24] later saying that South Africa needed more weapons to fight Soviet infiltration in the region.

    In 1984, Pik Botha again visited Israel but this time only for an unofficial meeting with Israeli Foreign Minister Yitzhak Shamir.[25]

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel%E2%80%93South_Africa_relations

  115. @SFG
    @fredyetagain aka superhonky

    My dad was Christian, my mom Jewish.

    We had a tiny little Christmas tree with ornaments (hey, it was NYC). We had a small little menorah.

    No gnashing of teeth on either side.

    Replies: @fredyetagain aka superhonky

    I’m glad your mom, unlike the woman in the article I read, didn’t get verklempt at the sight of homicidal antisemitic pine trees.

    • Replies: @Southfarthing
    @fredyetagain aka superhonky

    There's some data on Jews and Christmas trees in the 2013 Pew survey:


    About a third of Jews (32%) say they had a Christmas tree in their home last year, including 27% of Jews by religion and 51 % of Jews of no religion.
     

    Erecting a Christmas tree is especially common among Jews who are married to non-Jews [71% of the non-Orthodox]; 71% of this group says they put up a tree last year.
     

    Compared with younger Jews, those 65 and older are somewhat less likely to have had a Christmas tree last year. And relatively few Orthodox Jews, including just 1% of Ultra-Orthodox Jews, say there was a Christmas tree in their home last year.
     
    So 71% of intermarried Jews and 1% of ultra-Orthodox Jews have Christmas trees. Pretty varied.

    Replies: @5371

  116. “The joke went that Apartheid was fascism for the Blacks, socialism for the Afrikaners, and capitalism for the English and the Jews.”

    Fascism. Another word that is utterly devoid of any meaning. My turn. Diversity is fascism for pro-whites. See how easy it is?

    “Mass immigration means race replacement, dear fellow.Last time I checked, the immigrants are not coming from Europe.”



    No, my friend. Mass immigration means ETHNIC replacement. Historical trends is a mother. Indeed, the immigrant are not coming from Europe, they are coming from other countries. Again, do not American citizens have the liberty to make those decisions? Regardless, immigrants that come here become Americans.

    FWIW, I actually support limiting immigration from all places.

    “There are no elites who believe what I believe, dear fellow.”

    [Laughs] the elites on this here blog you observably champion their causes.

    “And there are no elites who hold White nationalist views.”
    “There is no “pro-White elite,” dear fellow.”\

    
Now you’re just getting nasty. The crew at V-Dare is the media. They are part of the elite.

    “MMMM, perhaps you know more Uncle Toms than I do….”

    No, I happen to know less race baiters.

    “Wouldn’t do any good, dear fellow. The elite are against me.”

    
Then you are a victim. Sad you would let yourself be steamrolled in that fashion.

    “People like me are simply forced to remain silent.”

    

No one is forcing you do to anything. You are making a choice.

    “Not the Leftists at my university.”

    
We are not talking about SOME of the leftists at your university. Did you not read the money quote from the Marquette post–”The fact that a liberal website would post such an article underlines an important fact: among liberals, there is still a substantial number of old-style traditionalists who favor free speech and expression.”

    “Dear fellow, David Duke (a genuine moron, incidentally) is totally powerless and irrelevant.”

    Elected to the Louisiana’s House of Representative. A prominent pro-white who is decidedly against the Jooish agenda. Why are you shaming him? He supports your causes.


    “What “conservative media,” dear fellow?”

    
Fox News. V-Dare. National Review. Washington Examiner. Drudge Report. Legal Insurrection. Please, stop being a fool.

    “The discourse is policed by the elite. And the elite want mass immigration/open borders”

    Some among the corporatist elite. The pro-white elite think differently.

    “Anti-European/anti-Anglo attitudes are encouraged by the elite.”

    Pro-European/anti-Anglo attitudes are also encouraged by the elite–conservative media pundits, pro-white groups for starters.

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @Corvinus


    “The joke went that Apartheid was fascism for the Blacks, socialism for the Afrikaners, and capitalism for the English and the Jews.”

    Fascism. Another word that is utterly devoid of any meaning. My turn. Diversity is fascism for pro-whites. See how easy it is?
     
    Actually, no.The old joke about South African Apartheid was quasi-educational.Your joke was rather lame.

    Mass immigration means race replacement, dear fellow.Last time I checked, the immigrants are not coming from Europe.”



    No, my friend. Mass immigration means ETHNIC replacement.
     
    Seeing as how the majority of immigrants coming to the USA at present are Hispanic Amerinds and Mestizos, mass immigration means race replacement

    Historical trends is a mother.
     
    In this case, it’s a trend that our elites are allowing

    Indeed, the immigrant are not coming from Europe, they are coming from other countries. Again, do not American citizens have the liberty to make those decisions?
     
    American elites do.Peons like myself have no say in the matter

    Regardless, immigrants that come here become Americans.
     
    Whatever that means these days.When my Jewish grandfather immigrated from Latvia, becoming an American meant something.Nowadays....

    “There are no elites who believe what I believe, dear fellow.”

    [Laughs] the elites on this here blog you observably champion their causes.

     

    There are no elites on this blog, dear fellow

    “And there are no elites who hold White nationalist views.”
    “There is no “pro-White elite,” dear fellow.”\

    
Now you’re just getting nasty. The crew at V-Dare is the media. They are part of the elite.
     
    Dear fellow, I dearly wish that VDARE were part of the elite.That would be a cause for hope.Unfortunately, VDARE is not part of the elite.They have no influence in the corridors of power.

    “MMMM, perhaps you know more Uncle Toms than I do….”

    No, I happen to know less race baiters.
     
    Dear fellow, attacking Whites is the mainstream these days

    “Wouldn’t do any good, dear fellow. The elite are against me.”

    
Then you are a victim.
     
    Just like the rest of the non-elite Whites in America

    Sad you would let yourself be steamrolled in that fashion.
     
    When the elite are against you, options are non-existent

    “People like me are simply forced to remain silent.”

    

No one is forcing you do to anything. You are making a choice.
     
    Sure.I choose not to commit career suicide.

    “Not the Leftists at my university.”

    
We are not talking about SOME of the leftists at your university.
     
    No, we are talking about all of them.

    “Dear fellow, David Duke (a genuine moron, incidentally) is totally powerless and irrelevant.”

    Elected to the Louisiana’s House of Representative.
     
    Where he had no power, no influence

    A prominent pro-white
     
    Prominent as a bogeyman for the Left, someone that the SPLC talks up during fund-raisers.A clown.

    who is decidedly against the Jooish agenda.
     
    Whatever that means

    Why are you shaming him?
     
    Because he’s an idiot

    He supports your causes.

     
    Actually, he’s far more useful to the POC Left.

    “What “conservative media,” dear fellow?”

    
Fox News. V-Dare. National Review. Washington Examiner. Drudge Report. Legal Insurrection.
     
    Fox News supports mass immigration. VDARE has no influence.National Review kicked out the people who are against race replacement.Washington Examiner: Neo-con rag.Drudge Report:dog and pony show.Legal Insurrection:Another dog and pony show

    Please, stop being a fool.
     
    Dear fellow, I’m simply being a realistic.”Respectable” conservatives (like the National Review) are in favor destroying European America

    “The discourse is policed by the elite. And the elite want mass immigration/open borders”

    Some among the corporatist elite.
     
    Can you name some White billionaires who are shelling out massive wads of cash in an attempt to end mass immigration?

    The pro-white elite think differently.
     
    There is no pro-White elite, dear fellow.Back in the day of Henry Cabot Lodge, yes.But not now.
    , @syonredux
    @Corvinus


    “The joke went that Apartheid was fascism for the Blacks, socialism for the Afrikaners, and capitalism for the English and the Jews.”

    Fascism. Another word that is utterly devoid of any meaning. My turn. Diversity is fascism for pro-whites. See how easy it is?
     
    Actually, no.The old joke about South African Apartheid was quasi-educational.Your joke was rather lame.

    Mass immigration means race replacement, dear fellow.Last time I checked, the immigrants are not coming from Europe.”



    No, my friend. Mass immigration means ETHNIC replacement.
     
    Seeing as how the majority of immigrants coming to the USA at present are Hispanic Amerinds and Mestizos, mass immigration means race replacement

    Historical trends is a mother.
     
    In this case, it’s a trend that our elites are allowing

    Indeed, the immigrant are not coming from Europe, they are coming from other countries. Again, do not American citizens have the liberty to make those decisions?
     
    American elites do.Peons like myself have no say in the matter

    Regardless, immigrants that come here become Americans.
     
    Whatever that means these days.When my Jewish grandfather immigrated from Latvia, becoming an American meant something.Nowadays....

    “There are no elites who believe what I believe, dear fellow.”

    [Laughs] the elites on this here blog you observably champion their causes.

     

    There are no elites on this blog, dear fellow

    “And there are no elites who hold White nationalist views.”
    “There is no “pro-White elite,” dear fellow.”\

    
Now you’re just getting nasty. The crew at V-Dare is the media. They are part of the elite.
     
    Dear fellow, I dearly wish that VDARE were part of the elite.That would be a cause for hope.Unfortunately, VDARE is not part of the elite.They have no influence in the corridors of power.

    “MMMM, perhaps you know more Uncle Toms than I do….”

    No, I happen to know less race baiters.
     
    Dear fellow, attacking Whites is the mainstream these days

    “Wouldn’t do any good, dear fellow. The elite are against me.”

    
Then you are a victim.
     
    Just like the rest of the non-elite Whites in America

    Sad you would let yourself be steamrolled in that fashion.
     
    When the elite are against you, options are non-existent

    “People like me are simply forced to remain silent.”

    

No one is forcing you do to anything. You are making a choice.
     
    Sure.I choose not to commit career suicide.

    “Not the Leftists at my university.”

    
We are not talking about SOME of the leftists at your university.
     
    No, we are talking about all of them.

    “Dear fellow, David Duke (a genuine moron, incidentally) is totally powerless and irrelevant.”

    Elected to the Louisiana’s House of Representative.
     
    Where he had no power, no influence

    A prominent pro-white
     
    Prominent as a bogeyman for the Left, someone that the SPLC talks up during fund-raisers.A clown.

    who is decidedly against the Jooish agenda.
     
    Whatever that means

    Why are you shaming him?
     
    Because he’s an idiot

    He supports your causes.

     
    Actually, he’s far more useful to the POC Left.

    “What “conservative media,” dear fellow?”

    
Fox News. V-Dare. National Review. Washington Examiner. Drudge Report. Legal Insurrection.
     
    Fox News supports mass immigration. VDARE has no influence.National Review kicked out the people who are against race replacement.Washington Examiner: Neo-con rag.Drudge Report:dog and pony show.Legal Insurrection:Another dog and pony show

    Please, stop being a fool.
     
    Dear fellow, I’m simply being a realistic.”Respectable” conservatives (like the National Review) are in favor destroying European America

    “The discourse is policed by the elite. And the elite want mass immigration/open borders”

    Some among the corporatist elite.
     
    Can you name some White billionaires who are shelling out massive wads of cash in an attempt to end mass immigration?

    The pro-white elite think differently.
     
    There is no pro-White elite, dear fellow.Back in the day of Henry Cabot Lodge, yes.But not now.
    , @syonredux
    @Corvinus


    “The joke went that Apartheid was fascism for the Blacks, socialism for the Afrikaners, and capitalism for the English and the Jews.”

    Fascism. Another word that is utterly devoid of any meaning. My turn. Diversity is fascism for pro-whites. See how easy it is?
     
    Actually, no.The old joke about South African Apartheid was quasi-educational.Your joke was rather lame.

    Mass immigration means race replacement, dear fellow.Last time I checked, the immigrants are not coming from Europe.”



    No, my friend. Mass immigration means ETHNIC replacement.
     
    Seeing as how the majority of immigrants coming to the USA at present are Hispanic Amerinds and Mestizos, mass immigration means race replacement

    Historical trends is a mother.
     
    In this case, it’s a trend that our elites are allowing

    Indeed, the immigrant are not coming from Europe, they are coming from other countries. Again, do not American citizens have the liberty to make those decisions?
     
    American elites do.Peons like myself have no say in the matter

    Regardless, immigrants that come here become Americans.
     
    Whatever that means these days.When my Jewish grandfather immigrated from Latvia, becoming an American meant something.Nowadays....

    “There are no elites who believe what I believe, dear fellow.”

    [Laughs] the elites on this here blog you observably champion their causes.

     

    There are no elites on this blog, dear fellow

    “And there are no elites who hold White nationalist views.”
    “There is no “pro-White elite,” dear fellow.”\

    
Now you’re just getting nasty. The crew at V-Dare is the media. They are part of the elite.
     
    Dear fellow, I dearly wish that VDARE were part of the elite.That would be a cause for hope.Unfortunately, VDARE is not part of the elite.They have no influence in the corridors of power.

    “MMMM, perhaps you know more Uncle Toms than I do….”

    No, I happen to know less race baiters.
     
    Dear fellow, attacking Whites is the mainstream these days

    “Wouldn’t do any good, dear fellow. The elite are against me.”

    
Then you are a victim.
     
    Just like the rest of the non-elite Whites in America

    Sad you would let yourself be steamrolled in that fashion.
     
    When the elite are against you, options are non-existent

    “People like me are simply forced to remain silent.”

    

No one is forcing you do to anything. You are making a choice.
     
    Sure.I choose not to commit career suicide.

    “Not the Leftists at my university.”

    
We are not talking about SOME of the leftists at your university.
     
    No, we are talking about all of them.

    “Dear fellow, David Duke (a genuine moron, incidentally) is totally powerless and irrelevant.”

    Elected to the Louisiana’s House of Representative.
     
    Where he had no power, no influence

    A prominent pro-white
     
    Prominent as a bogeyman for the Left, someone that the SPLC talks up during fund-raisers.A clown.

    who is decidedly against the Jooish agenda.
     
    Whatever that means

    Why are you shaming him?
     
    Because he’s an idiot

    He supports your causes.

     
    Actually, he’s far more useful to the POC Left.

    “What “conservative media,” dear fellow?”

    
Fox News. V-Dare. National Review. Washington Examiner. Drudge Report. Legal Insurrection.
     
    Fox News supports mass immigration. VDARE has no influence.National Review kicked out the people who are against race replacement.Washington Examiner: Neo-con rag.Drudge Report:dog and pony show.Legal Insurrection:Another dog and pony show

    Please, stop being a fool.
     
    Dear fellow, I’m simply being a realistic.”Respectable” conservatives (like the National Review) are in favor destroying European America

    “The discourse is policed by the elite. And the elite want mass immigration/open borders”

    Some among the corporatist elite.
     
    Can you name some White billionaires who are shelling out massive wads of cash in an attempt to end mass immigration?

    The pro-white elite think differently.
     
    There is no pro-White elite, dear fellow.Back in the day of Henry Cabot Lodge, yes.But not now.
  117. @Lot

    But there’s some hardheaded sense in my proposed Grand Bargain: We’ll support Israel for you in return for you supporting Israel-like immigration policies for America.

     

    Who, exactly, would be making this offer? I can't see W, Jeb, Mitch, or Boehner doing it. Wouldn't it be easier to knock out the 15% of GOP house members and 30% of its Senators that favor a "path to citizenship" in primaries be a simpler task than gaining the support of mostly liberal Jews?

    Replies: @Ghost of John Adams

    Okay Lot, describe how we can

    knock out the 15% of GOP house members and 30% of its Senators that favor a “path to citizenship” in primaries

    I lend you my ears.

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @Ghost of John Adams


    “The joke went that Apartheid was fascism for the Blacks, socialism for the Afrikaners, and capitalism for the English and the Jews.”

    Fascism. Another word that is utterly devoid of any meaning. My turn. Diversity is fascism for pro-whites. See how easy it is?
     
    Actually, no.The old joke about South African Apartheid was quasi-educational.Your joke was rather lame.

    Mass immigration means race replacement, dear fellow.Last time I checked, the immigrants are not coming from Europe.”



    No, my friend. Mass immigration means ETHNIC replacement.
     
    Seeing as how the majority of immigrants coming to the USA at present are Hispanic Amerinds and Mestizos, mass immigration means race replacement

    Historical trends is a mother.
     
    In this case, it's a trend that our elites are allowing

    Indeed, the immigrant are not coming from Europe, they are coming from other countries. Again, do not American citizens have the liberty to make those decisions?
     
    American elites do.Peons like myself have no say in the matter

    Regardless, immigrants that come here become Americans.
     
    Whatever that means these days

    “There are no elites who believe what I believe, dear fellow.”

    [Laughs] the elites on this here blog you observably champion their causes.

     

    There are no elites on this blog, dear fellow

    “And there are no elites who hold White nationalist views.”
    “There is no “pro-White elite,” dear fellow.”\

    
Now you’re just getting nasty. The crew at V-Dare is the media. They are part of the elite.
     
    Dear fellow, I dearly wish that VDARE were part of the elite.That would be a cause for hope.Unfortunately, VDARE is not part of the elite.They have no influence in the corridors of power.

    “MMMM, perhaps you know more Uncle Toms than I do….”

    No, I happen to know less race baiters.
     
    Dear fellow, attacking Whites is the mainstream these days

    “Wouldn’t do any good, dear fellow. The elite are against me.”

    
Then you are a victim.
     
    Just like the rest of the non-elite Whites in America

    Sad you would let yourself be steamrolled in that fashion.
     
    When the elite are against you, options are non-existent

    “People like me are simply forced to remain silent.”

    

No one is forcing you do to anything. You are making a choice.
     
    Sure.I choose not to commit career suicide.

    “Not the Leftists at my university.”

    
We are not talking about SOME of the leftists at your university.
     
    No, we are talking about all of them.

    “Dear fellow, David Duke (a genuine moron, incidentally) is totally powerless and irrelevant.”

    Elected to the Louisiana’s House of Representative.
     
    Where he had no power, no influence

    A prominent pro-white
     
    Prominent as a bogeyman for the Left, someone that the SPLC talks up during fund-raisers.A clown.

    who is decidedly against the Jooish agenda.
     
    Whatever that means

    Why are you shaming him?
     
    Because he's an idiot

    He supports your causes.

     
    Actually, he's far more useful to the POC Left.

    “What “conservative media,” dear fellow?”

    
Fox News. V-Dare. National Review. Washington Examiner. Drudge Report. Legal Insurrection.
     
    Fox News supports mass immigration. VDARE has no influence.National Review kicked out the people who are against race replacement.Washington Examiner: Neo-con rag.Drudge Report:dog and pony show.Legal Insurrection:Another dog and pony show

    Please, stop being a fool.
     
    Dear fellow, I'm simply being a realistic."Respectable" conservatives (like the National Review) are in favor destroying European America

    “The discourse is policed by the elite. And the elite want mass immigration/open borders”

    Some among the corporatist elite.
     
    Can you name some White billionaires who are shelling out massive wads of cash in an attempt to end mass immigration?

    The pro-white elite think differently.
     
    There is no pro-White elite, dear fellow.Back in the day of Henry Cabot Lodge, yes.But not now.
    , @syonredux
    @Ghost of John Adams

    Sorry, I accidentally posted something to you that was meant for another

    RE: Dear Fellow,

    Bit of a tick.General rule is that dear fellow is reserved for a minor annoyance, but dear boy is deployed against those who are being quite foolish.

  118. @syonredux
    @Corvinus


    “And, in the USA, all of those elites are in favor of mass immigration/race replacement”

    Immigration? Yes. Race replacement? No.
     
    Mass immigration means race replacement, dear fellow.Last time I checked, the immigrants are not coming from Europe.

    Regardless, do not these “elites” have the liberty to promote an agenda that decidedly benefits them, just like the course of actions that the “elites” you support?
     
    There are no elites who believe what I believe, dear fellow.

    The elites are groups of people that hold power and make concerted efforts to sway public opinion–
    labor unions, heads of corporations, conservative pundits, ethnic nationalists (e.g. pro-white, pro-black, pro-Hispanic).
     
    And there are no elites who hold White nationalist views.Well, maybe one or two do.But they keep their crimethink to themselves

    “None. Sadly, no elites in the USA share my opinions.”

    
You have clearly demonstrated you are an advocate of the pro-white elite
     
    There is no "pro-White elite," dear fellow

    and of the conservative elite, which our dear host is part and parcel to.
     
    If only Steve were a member of the elite....

    “We were talking about the Holocaust in class, and the La Raza and Black students started complaining about the Holocaust Museum in Washington.”

    
Yet, somehow, in the class I was in, those same students asked relevant questions about how and why such atrocities could be committed.
     
    MMMM, perhaps you know more Uncle Toms than I do....

    “Not I. That would squelch my chances at tenure.”
    “In contrast, my PC colleagues extol the coming end of European America at conference after conference…”

    Then you are a chicken-shit.
     
    Never said that I was brave, dear fellow

    Stand up for something you believe in.
     
    Wouldn't do any good, dear fellow.The elite are against me.

    (Tsk, tsk) I thought playing the victim card was only reserved for feminists and minorities.
     
    It is.They get to play the card.People like me are simply forced to remain silent.

    Take heart, my friend. Even liberals would support you.
     
    Not the Leftists at my university.To them, liberal is a term of abuse.

    See, the David Dukes of the world would yell “race traitor” to whites who call out his nonsense.
     
    Dear fellow, David Duke (a genuine moron, incidentally) is totally powerless and irrelevant

    Similarly, the conservative media has its narrative–feminists and minorities and immigrants are a threat.
     
    What "conservative media," dear fellow?

    If a said anything remotely similar to “White Power” in public, I would lose my job.”

    
Depends what you say and how you say it.
     
    Precisely.The discourse is policed by the elite.And the elite want mass immigration/open borders

    What did you expect?
     
    What he did, dear fellow.Anti-European/anti-Anglo attitudes are encouraged by the elite.

    Replies: @Ghost of John Adams, @ben tillman

    syon, even though I frequently endorse your positions, I find your use of ‘dear fellow’ to be at least a needless distraction, sometimes a disgusting disparagement and occasionally a damnable impediment to our shared objectives.

    If your goal is to belittle your opponents, (which I assume it is), it is perhaps effective in elevating your emotional state if you are a narcissist, or possibly a solipsist.

    If your goal is persuasion then your arguments fail. Put aside your cynical impulses and swear to never write again until you appreciate the elementary conditions of human reasoning. Your missives are often counterproductive though they need not be. If your arguments must include the implicit ad hominem component, you just aren’t trying hard enough.

  119. @fredyetagain aka superhonky
    @Lot

    "For example, the bombing of the King David “Hotel” was actually a legitimate military target"

    Notwithstanding your attempt to use parentheses to somehow alter reality, The King David Hotel was in fact a hotel. And no, it was not a legitimate military target. That the Irgun thought it was and that you agree says something about the Irgun and about you, but it does not in any way alter the fact that the bombing of the hotel (with 91 murdered therein) was an act of terrorism.

    Replies: @Lot

    Can you explain your reasoning by which the “military headquarters” is not “a legitimate military target”

    In 1946, the Secretariat occupied most of the southern wing of the hotel, with the military headquarters occupying the top floor of the south wing and the top, second and third floors of the middle of the hotel.[13] The military telephone exchange was situated in the basement.[5][6] An annexe housed the military police and a branch of the Criminal Investigation Department of the Palestine Police.[12]

    Rooms had first been requisitioned in the hotel in late 1938, on what was supposed to be a temporary basis. Plans had already been made to erect a permanent building for the Secretariat and Army GHQ, but these were cancelled after the Second World War broke out, at which point more than two-thirds of the hotel’s rooms were being used for government and army purposes.[5]

    In March 1946, British Labour Party MP Richard Crossman gave the following description of activity at the hotel: “private detectives, Zionist agents, Arab sheiks, special correspondents, and the rest, all sitting around about discreetly overhearing each other.”[14] Security analyst Bruce Hoffman has written that the hotel “housed the nerve centre of British rule in Palestine”.[15]

    Also:

    The Irgun sent warnings by telephone, including one to the hotel’s own switchboard, which the staff decided to ignore, but none directly to the British authorities.[6] A possible reason why the warning was ignored was that hoax bomb warnings were rife at the time.[6] From the fact that a bomb search had already been carried out, it appears that a hoax call or tip-off had been received at the hotel earlier that day.[5] Subsequent telephone calls from a concerned Palestine Post staff member and the police caused increasing alarm, and the hotel manager was notified. In the closing minutes before the explosion, he called an unknown British officer, but no evacuation was ordered.[6] The ensuing explosion caused the collapse of the western half of the southern wing of the hotel.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Lot

    So the 9/11 terrorists who flew into the Pentagon weren't terrorists?

    Replies: @Lot, @Reg Cæsar

  120. @fredyetagain aka superhonky
    @SFG

    I'm glad your mom, unlike the woman in the article I read, didn't get verklempt at the sight of homicidal antisemitic pine trees.

    Replies: @Southfarthing

    There’s some data on Jews and Christmas trees in the 2013 Pew survey:

    About a third of Jews (32%) say they had a Christmas tree in their home last year, including 27% of Jews by religion and 51 % of Jews of no religion.

    Erecting a Christmas tree is especially common among Jews who are married to non-Jews [71% of the non-Orthodox]; 71% of this group says they put up a tree last year.

    Compared with younger Jews, those 65 and older are somewhat less likely to have had a Christmas tree last year. And relatively few Orthodox Jews, including just 1% of Ultra-Orthodox Jews, say there was a Christmas tree in their home last year.

    So 71% of intermarried Jews and 1% of ultra-Orthodox Jews have Christmas trees. Pretty varied.

    • Replies: @5371
    @Southfarthing

    Shrubs draped in electric lights don't necessarily bear any Christian symbolism.

  121. @Lot
    @fredyetagain aka superhonky

    Can you explain your reasoning by which the "military headquarters" is not "a legitimate military target"


    In 1946, the Secretariat occupied most of the southern wing of the hotel, with the military headquarters occupying the top floor of the south wing and the top, second and third floors of the middle of the hotel.[13] The military telephone exchange was situated in the basement.[5][6] An annexe housed the military police and a branch of the Criminal Investigation Department of the Palestine Police.[12]

    Rooms had first been requisitioned in the hotel in late 1938, on what was supposed to be a temporary basis. Plans had already been made to erect a permanent building for the Secretariat and Army GHQ, but these were cancelled after the Second World War broke out, at which point more than two-thirds of the hotel's rooms were being used for government and army purposes.[5]

    In March 1946, British Labour Party MP Richard Crossman gave the following description of activity at the hotel: "private detectives, Zionist agents, Arab sheiks, special correspondents, and the rest, all sitting around about discreetly overhearing each other."[14] Security analyst Bruce Hoffman has written that the hotel "housed the nerve centre of British rule in Palestine".[15]
     
    Also:

    The Irgun sent warnings by telephone, including one to the hotel's own switchboard, which the staff decided to ignore, but none directly to the British authorities.[6] A possible reason why the warning was ignored was that hoax bomb warnings were rife at the time.[6] From the fact that a bomb search had already been carried out, it appears that a hoax call or tip-off had been received at the hotel earlier that day.[5] Subsequent telephone calls from a concerned Palestine Post staff member and the police caused increasing alarm, and the hotel manager was notified. In the closing minutes before the explosion, he called an unknown British officer, but no evacuation was ordered.[6] The ensuing explosion caused the collapse of the western half of the southern wing of the hotel.
     

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    So the 9/11 terrorists who flew into the Pentagon weren’t terrorists?

    • Replies: @Lot
    @Steve Sailer

    If they were part of an organization with specific military goals, took steps to minimize civilian casualties, and bombed the Pentagon directly rather than by hijacking and crashing a civilian plane--no that would be not be terrorism.

    Another difference is that when Irgun won, it disbanded into the armed forces of a liberal democracy, just as the Continental Army did. al Queda jihadis just keep killing people wherever they come into power locally.

    , @Reg Cæsar
    @Steve Sailer



    So the 9/11 terrorists who flew into the Pentagon weren’t terrorists?

     

    They came to spend the rest of their lives in America. That makes them immigrants.
  122. I hate to disappoint you, Steve, but Israel is not nearly as determined to get its own illegal immigration under control, as you seem to think. There are about 70,000 Eritreans, Somalis and Sudanese firmly ensconced now in south Tel Aviv. (Scaled for population that would be like having 3.5 million of those guys in the USA.) Netanyahu would like them gone, the mayor of Tel Aviv would like them gone, most of all the majority of the citizenry would like them gone. And yet they stick around thanks to “civil rights” lawyers, European Union pressure, and a sympathetic Israeli Supreme Court.

    The best thing going for Israel on this front is that the fence has almost totally eliminated the inflow of illegals.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @International Jew

    Unlike any EU nation, Israel is a sovereign state, ultimately answerable to its parliament and its parliament alone. I take it that apart from the very big constitutional issues, the Israeli parliament has the power to abrogate or pass any law it wishes.
    Therefore, if Netanyahu was really determined to get rid of the Africans, he has potentially the full powers to do so.

    Replies: @International Jew

  123. Reading the comment threads on my website is even better than watching an old Monty Pyton movie on Netflix. I get the impression that about 99% of the commenters are monomaniacal anti-immigrationists, with most of them being totally delusional ones.

    Dave Pinsen:

    Someone like Jeff Sessions, if he decided to run for president, would be well-positioned to make Steve’s deal with any one of the billionaires mentioned. That could be a win-win.

    Bill:

    Yeah, the Jews are going to vote for that anti-immigration GOP candidate . . . ummmm, what was his name . . . Tom Tancredo? Yeah, that’s it. Did well last year in the Colorado gubernatorial primary.

    Or is he dead? I can’t keep track any more. Anyway, surely he or someone just like him will be the GOP nominee the Jews will be lovin on.

    JSM:

    Kevin MacDonald made a Grand Bargain offer straight-up to Organized Jewry that if they’d knock it off with the mass immigration agitating, he himself would advocate for U.S. support of Israel, even if at some cost to ourselves.

    Okay, so there’s the big negotiating sit-down over Immigration and Israel in the back room of a restaurant between the key players: Sheldon Adelson, Haim Saban, and Peter Brimelow. Tough bargaining aimed at maybe closing a “Feasible Zionist-Gentile Grand Bargain”

    Adelson: “If you give me what I want, I can deliver the Republican Party.”

    Saban: “If you give me what I want, I can deliver the Democratic Party.”

    Brimelow: “And if you give me what I want, I can deliver VDare.com…plus I’ll even throw in Kevin MacDonald’s endorsement!”

    Somebody told me that Joe, the clerk who works the overnight shift down at the local 7-11, dropped a note to Adelson last week, saying that in exchange for a hundred million in cash, he’d promise to become a straight down the line pro-Israel advocate…

    • Replies: @matt
    @Ron Unz

    Ron, you've been refuting the ideas of your bloggers too often lately. It's not nice.

    , @Lot
    @Ron Unz

    Why so coy? What issue is more important to America's future?

    Also while I can't speak for others, I am a selectionist above a restrictionist.

    , @reiner Tor
    @Ron Unz

    Steve probably meant that as a proposal for the anti-immigrationist wing of the Republican Party. Steve's influence might not be too large, but some people do notice him. Ann Coulter reads him, and if you followed the UVA rape hysteria, his influence might have been even larger - probably some mainstream journalists are also reading him. But in any event this idea was more of a thought experiment.

    As to MacDonald, he didn't think it was realistic to begin with, and he's quite conscious of his limited influence. He was only giving a theoretical reason why he doesn't support Israel, i.e. also a thought experiment. That's important because some people accused him that he's critical of Jews in the US and elsewhere (so he doesn't want Jews in the Galut), but that he's also critical of Israel, i.e. he doesn't want Jews in Israel either. In other words, he was accused of proposing the extermination of Jews. Obviously he perceives that the organized Jewish community (i.e. Jewish organizations) leave no room for him, pushing for both destructive wars and unlimited immigration. This in turns leaves him under no obligation not to criticize Jews both here and in Israel. (His critique of Israel always seemed to me an exposition of double standards - he never really cared for Palestinians, but he always wanted to destroy any moral high ground pro-Israel "Liberals" might have enjoyed vis-à-vis White ethnonationalists like himself.)

    , @syonredux
    @Ron Unz


    I get the impression that about 99% of the commenters are monomaniacal anti-immigrationists,
     
    Well, Ron, when you couple demographic projections:

    The Hispanic population is expected to reach about 106 million in 2050, about double what it is today, according to new U.S. Census Bureau population projections.
     
    http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/12/16/with-fewer-new-arrivals-census-lowers-hispanic-population-projections-2/

    To stuff like this:

    As a means of comparison, 64 percent of millennials in the U.S. performed below the minimum standard (below level 3) in numeracy, compared to 47 percent of millennials in the OECD average. Fifty-four percent of White millennials and 52 percent of Asian millennials performed below this level, as compared to 83 percent of Hispanic and 88 percent of Black millennials.
     
    http://www.ets.org/s/research/30079/asc-millennials-and-the-future.pdf


    It's hard not to be "monomaniacal" about ending the mass immigration of Hispanic Mestizos and Amerinds.

    with most of them being totally delusional ones.
     
    Sadly true.The American elite are committed to "Mestizocizing" America .And once that well runs dry, they will invite in hundreds of millions of Sub-Saharan Africans.Nothing can stop this.What billionaires want, billionaires get.
    , @Anonymous
    @Ron Unz

    I get the impression that about 99% of the commenters are monomaniacal anti-immigrationists

    You write as if there were something wrong with that.

  124. @Ron Unz
    Reading the comment threads on my website is even better than watching an old Monty Pyton movie on Netflix. I get the impression that about 99% of the commenters are monomaniacal anti-immigrationists, with most of them being totally delusional ones.

    Dave Pinsen:

    Someone like Jeff Sessions, if he decided to run for president, would be well-positioned to make Steve’s deal with any one of the billionaires mentioned. That could be a win-win.
     
    Bill:

    Yeah, the Jews are going to vote for that anti-immigration GOP candidate . . . ummmm, what was his name . . . Tom Tancredo? Yeah, that’s it. Did well last year in the Colorado gubernatorial primary.

    Or is he dead? I can’t keep track any more. Anyway, surely he or someone just like him will be the GOP nominee the Jews will be lovin on.
     
    JSM:

    Kevin MacDonald made a Grand Bargain offer straight-up to Organized Jewry that if they’d knock it off with the mass immigration agitating, he himself would advocate for U.S. support of Israel, even if at some cost to ourselves.
     
    Okay, so there's the big negotiating sit-down over Immigration and Israel in the back room of a restaurant between the key players: Sheldon Adelson, Haim Saban, and Peter Brimelow. Tough bargaining aimed at maybe closing a "Feasible Zionist-Gentile Grand Bargain"

    Adelson: "If you give me what I want, I can deliver the Republican Party."

    Saban: "If you give me what I want, I can deliver the Democratic Party."

    Brimelow: "And if you give me what I want, I can deliver VDare.com...plus I'll even throw in Kevin MacDonald's endorsement!"

    Somebody told me that Joe, the clerk who works the overnight shift down at the local 7-11, dropped a note to Adelson last week, saying that in exchange for a hundred million in cash, he'd promise to become a straight down the line pro-Israel advocate...

    Replies: @matt, @Lot, @reiner Tor, @syonredux, @Anonymous

    Ron, you’ve been refuting the ideas of your bloggers too often lately. It’s not nice.

  125. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @International Jew
    I hate to disappoint you, Steve, but Israel is not nearly as determined to get its own illegal immigration under control, as you seem to think. There are about 70,000 Eritreans, Somalis and Sudanese firmly ensconced now in south Tel Aviv. (Scaled for population that would be like having 3.5 million of those guys in the USA.) Netanyahu would like them gone, the mayor of Tel Aviv would like them gone, most of all the majority of the citizenry would like them gone. And yet they stick around thanks to "civil rights" lawyers, European Union pressure, and a sympathetic Israeli Supreme Court.

    The best thing going for Israel on this front is that the fence has almost totally eliminated the inflow of illegals.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    Unlike any EU nation, Israel is a sovereign state, ultimately answerable to its parliament and its parliament alone. I take it that apart from the very big constitutional issues, the Israeli parliament has the power to abrogate or pass any law it wishes.
    Therefore, if Netanyahu was really determined to get rid of the Africans, he has potentially the full powers to do so.

    • Replies: @International Jew
    @Anonymous


    Therefore, if Netanyahu was really determined to get rid of the Africans, he has potentially the full powers to do so.
     
    You'd be surprised how leftist, and how powerful, the Israeli Supreme Court is. Netanyahu doesn't even get to nominate/appoint new justices the way a US Pres does. New members of Israel's Supreme Court are nominated by the existing members (with some input from the bar association)!
  126. @Southfarthing
    @fredyetagain aka superhonky

    There's some data on Jews and Christmas trees in the 2013 Pew survey:


    About a third of Jews (32%) say they had a Christmas tree in their home last year, including 27% of Jews by religion and 51 % of Jews of no religion.
     

    Erecting a Christmas tree is especially common among Jews who are married to non-Jews [71% of the non-Orthodox]; 71% of this group says they put up a tree last year.
     

    Compared with younger Jews, those 65 and older are somewhat less likely to have had a Christmas tree last year. And relatively few Orthodox Jews, including just 1% of Ultra-Orthodox Jews, say there was a Christmas tree in their home last year.
     
    So 71% of intermarried Jews and 1% of ultra-Orthodox Jews have Christmas trees. Pretty varied.

    Replies: @5371

    Shrubs draped in electric lights don’t necessarily bear any Christian symbolism.

  127. @Steve Sailer
    @Lot

    So the 9/11 terrorists who flew into the Pentagon weren't terrorists?

    Replies: @Lot, @Reg Cæsar

    If they were part of an organization with specific military goals, took steps to minimize civilian casualties, and bombed the Pentagon directly rather than by hijacking and crashing a civilian plane–no that would be not be terrorism.

    Another difference is that when Irgun won, it disbanded into the armed forces of a liberal democracy, just as the Continental Army did. al Queda jihadis just keep killing people wherever they come into power locally.

  128. @Ron Unz
    Reading the comment threads on my website is even better than watching an old Monty Pyton movie on Netflix. I get the impression that about 99% of the commenters are monomaniacal anti-immigrationists, with most of them being totally delusional ones.

    Dave Pinsen:

    Someone like Jeff Sessions, if he decided to run for president, would be well-positioned to make Steve’s deal with any one of the billionaires mentioned. That could be a win-win.
     
    Bill:

    Yeah, the Jews are going to vote for that anti-immigration GOP candidate . . . ummmm, what was his name . . . Tom Tancredo? Yeah, that’s it. Did well last year in the Colorado gubernatorial primary.

    Or is he dead? I can’t keep track any more. Anyway, surely he or someone just like him will be the GOP nominee the Jews will be lovin on.
     
    JSM:

    Kevin MacDonald made a Grand Bargain offer straight-up to Organized Jewry that if they’d knock it off with the mass immigration agitating, he himself would advocate for U.S. support of Israel, even if at some cost to ourselves.
     
    Okay, so there's the big negotiating sit-down over Immigration and Israel in the back room of a restaurant between the key players: Sheldon Adelson, Haim Saban, and Peter Brimelow. Tough bargaining aimed at maybe closing a "Feasible Zionist-Gentile Grand Bargain"

    Adelson: "If you give me what I want, I can deliver the Republican Party."

    Saban: "If you give me what I want, I can deliver the Democratic Party."

    Brimelow: "And if you give me what I want, I can deliver VDare.com...plus I'll even throw in Kevin MacDonald's endorsement!"

    Somebody told me that Joe, the clerk who works the overnight shift down at the local 7-11, dropped a note to Adelson last week, saying that in exchange for a hundred million in cash, he'd promise to become a straight down the line pro-Israel advocate...

    Replies: @matt, @Lot, @reiner Tor, @syonredux, @Anonymous

    Why so coy? What issue is more important to America’s future?

    Also while I can’t speak for others, I am a selectionist above a restrictionist.

  129. @Art Deco
    But Israel has an unwritten rule that it would be racial treason for a Jewish coalition to form a governing majority using Arabs, so Arab voters don’t really count in determining who gets to be prime minister.
    --
    No, minorities lists associated with the Labor Party were part of parliamentary majorities prior to 1977 and the Druze population has been a notable component of the electoral base of some parties (e.g. Shas). Since that time, Arabs in parliament have generally been found in the caucuses of communist or Arab nationalist parties only loyal to the state in adherence to law.

    It isn't racial treason. Cabinet ministers have access to classified information. Some Arab politicians cannot be trusted and some would be put under considerable pressure by collateral relatives, &c.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @silviosilver

    It isn’t racial treason. Cabinet ministers have access to classified information. Some Arab politicians cannot be trusted and some would be put under considerable pressure by collateral relatives, &c.

    Just like in western democracies. Er, hang on…

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    @silviosilver

    What, you fancy Jewish cabinet secretaries are guilty of espionage or treason or think the United States should be dissolved in favor of some other political entity? Which ones did you have in mind?

    Replies: @silviosilver

  130. @Oscar Peterson
    @SolontoCroesus

    Great points. The idea that there can be anything like the "grand bargain" that Steve Sailer imagines, is just absurd.

    I like a lot of what Steve writes, but he suffers, in a peculiar and idiosyncratic way, from the same thing that the American Renaissance people do: The Great White Hope that organized Jewry can somehow be prevailed on to accept a "bargain" of some kind that preserves the primacy of European/Christian/Classical culture. Such a grand bargain could never be deemed to be "good for the Jews." Any meaningful preservation of European/Christian traditional culture will never be acceptable from the perspective of aggressive organized Jewry. Pursuing such a bargain is sheer delusion.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @silviosilver

    Pursuing such a bargain is sheer delusion.

    For its direct or purported benefits, yes. But the indirect benefit is that Jewish power structure’s refusal to bargain can open the eyes of people who could otherwise never, by any existent means, be persuaded to so much as consider the conflict of interests between Jews and white gentiles (and its one-sided outcomes), let alone take their own side in it.

  131. @Ron Unz
    Reading the comment threads on my website is even better than watching an old Monty Pyton movie on Netflix. I get the impression that about 99% of the commenters are monomaniacal anti-immigrationists, with most of them being totally delusional ones.

    Dave Pinsen:

    Someone like Jeff Sessions, if he decided to run for president, would be well-positioned to make Steve’s deal with any one of the billionaires mentioned. That could be a win-win.
     
    Bill:

    Yeah, the Jews are going to vote for that anti-immigration GOP candidate . . . ummmm, what was his name . . . Tom Tancredo? Yeah, that’s it. Did well last year in the Colorado gubernatorial primary.

    Or is he dead? I can’t keep track any more. Anyway, surely he or someone just like him will be the GOP nominee the Jews will be lovin on.
     
    JSM:

    Kevin MacDonald made a Grand Bargain offer straight-up to Organized Jewry that if they’d knock it off with the mass immigration agitating, he himself would advocate for U.S. support of Israel, even if at some cost to ourselves.
     
    Okay, so there's the big negotiating sit-down over Immigration and Israel in the back room of a restaurant between the key players: Sheldon Adelson, Haim Saban, and Peter Brimelow. Tough bargaining aimed at maybe closing a "Feasible Zionist-Gentile Grand Bargain"

    Adelson: "If you give me what I want, I can deliver the Republican Party."

    Saban: "If you give me what I want, I can deliver the Democratic Party."

    Brimelow: "And if you give me what I want, I can deliver VDare.com...plus I'll even throw in Kevin MacDonald's endorsement!"

    Somebody told me that Joe, the clerk who works the overnight shift down at the local 7-11, dropped a note to Adelson last week, saying that in exchange for a hundred million in cash, he'd promise to become a straight down the line pro-Israel advocate...

    Replies: @matt, @Lot, @reiner Tor, @syonredux, @Anonymous

    Steve probably meant that as a proposal for the anti-immigrationist wing of the Republican Party. Steve’s influence might not be too large, but some people do notice him. Ann Coulter reads him, and if you followed the UVA rape hysteria, his influence might have been even larger – probably some mainstream journalists are also reading him. But in any event this idea was more of a thought experiment.

    As to MacDonald, he didn’t think it was realistic to begin with, and he’s quite conscious of his limited influence. He was only giving a theoretical reason why he doesn’t support Israel, i.e. also a thought experiment. That’s important because some people accused him that he’s critical of Jews in the US and elsewhere (so he doesn’t want Jews in the Galut), but that he’s also critical of Israel, i.e. he doesn’t want Jews in Israel either. In other words, he was accused of proposing the extermination of Jews. Obviously he perceives that the organized Jewish community (i.e. Jewish organizations) leave no room for him, pushing for both destructive wars and unlimited immigration. This in turns leaves him under no obligation not to criticize Jews both here and in Israel. (His critique of Israel always seemed to me an exposition of double standards – he never really cared for Palestinians, but he always wanted to destroy any moral high ground pro-Israel “Liberals” might have enjoyed vis-à-vis White ethnonationalists like himself.)

  132. @Ghost of John Adams
    @Lot

    Okay Lot, describe how we can


    knock out the 15% of GOP house members and 30% of its Senators that favor a “path to citizenship” in primaries
     
    I lend you my ears.

    Replies: @syonredux, @syonredux

    “The joke went that Apartheid was fascism for the Blacks, socialism for the Afrikaners, and capitalism for the English and the Jews.”

    Fascism. Another word that is utterly devoid of any meaning. My turn. Diversity is fascism for pro-whites. See how easy it is?

    Actually, no.The old joke about South African Apartheid was quasi-educational.Your joke was rather lame.

    Mass immigration means race replacement, dear fellow.Last time I checked, the immigrants are not coming from Europe.”



    No, my friend. Mass immigration means ETHNIC replacement.

    Seeing as how the majority of immigrants coming to the USA at present are Hispanic Amerinds and Mestizos, mass immigration means race replacement

    Historical trends is a mother.

    In this case, it’s a trend that our elites are allowing

    Indeed, the immigrant are not coming from Europe, they are coming from other countries. Again, do not American citizens have the liberty to make those decisions?

    American elites do.Peons like myself have no say in the matter

    Regardless, immigrants that come here become Americans.

    Whatever that means these days

    “There are no elites who believe what I believe, dear fellow.”

    [Laughs] the elites on this here blog you observably champion their causes.

    There are no elites on this blog, dear fellow

    “And there are no elites who hold White nationalist views.”
    “There is no “pro-White elite,” dear fellow.”\

    
Now you’re just getting nasty. The crew at V-Dare is the media. They are part of the elite.

    Dear fellow, I dearly wish that VDARE were part of the elite.That would be a cause for hope.Unfortunately, VDARE is not part of the elite.They have no influence in the corridors of power.

    “MMMM, perhaps you know more Uncle Toms than I do….”

    No, I happen to know less race baiters.

    Dear fellow, attacking Whites is the mainstream these days

    “Wouldn’t do any good, dear fellow. The elite are against me.”

    
Then you are a victim.

    Just like the rest of the non-elite Whites in America

    Sad you would let yourself be steamrolled in that fashion.

    When the elite are against you, options are non-existent

    “People like me are simply forced to remain silent.”

    

No one is forcing you do to anything. You are making a choice.

    Sure.I choose not to commit career suicide.

    “Not the Leftists at my university.”

    
We are not talking about SOME of the leftists at your university.

    No, we are talking about all of them.

    “Dear fellow, David Duke (a genuine moron, incidentally) is totally powerless and irrelevant.”

    Elected to the Louisiana’s House of Representative.

    Where he had no power, no influence

    A prominent pro-white

    Prominent as a bogeyman for the Left, someone that the SPLC talks up during fund-raisers.A clown.

    who is decidedly against the Jooish agenda.

    Whatever that means

    Why are you shaming him?

    Because he’s an idiot

    He supports your causes.


    Actually, he’s far more useful to the POC Left.

    “What “conservative media,” dear fellow?”

    
Fox News. V-Dare. National Review. Washington Examiner. Drudge Report. Legal Insurrection.

    Fox News supports mass immigration. VDARE has no influence.National Review kicked out the people who are against race replacement.Washington Examiner: Neo-con rag.Drudge Report:dog and pony show.Legal Insurrection:Another dog and pony show

    Please, stop being a fool.

    Dear fellow, I’m simply being a realistic.”Respectable” conservatives (like the National Review) are in favor destroying European America

    “The discourse is policed by the elite. And the elite want mass immigration/open borders”

    Some among the corporatist elite.

    Can you name some White billionaires who are shelling out massive wads of cash in an attempt to end mass immigration?

    The pro-white elite think differently.

    There is no pro-White elite, dear fellow.Back in the day of Henry Cabot Lodge, yes.But not now.

  133. @Corvinus
    “The joke went that Apartheid was fascism for the Blacks, socialism for the Afrikaners, and capitalism for the English and the Jews.”

    Fascism. Another word that is utterly devoid of any meaning. My turn. Diversity is fascism for pro-whites. See how easy it is?


    “Mass immigration means race replacement, dear fellow.Last time I checked, the immigrants are not coming from Europe.”



    No, my friend. Mass immigration means ETHNIC replacement. Historical trends is a mother. Indeed, the immigrant are not coming from Europe, they are coming from other countries. Again, do not American citizens have the liberty to make those decisions? Regardless, immigrants that come here become Americans.

    FWIW, I actually support limiting immigration from all places.


    “There are no elites who believe what I believe, dear fellow.”

    [Laughs] the elites on this here blog you observably champion their causes.


    “And there are no elites who hold White nationalist views.”
    “There is no “pro-White elite,” dear fellow.”\

    
Now you’re just getting nasty. The crew at V-Dare is the media. They are part of the elite.


    “MMMM, perhaps you know more Uncle Toms than I do….”

    No, I happen to know less race baiters.


    “Wouldn’t do any good, dear fellow. The elite are against me.”

    
Then you are a victim. Sad you would let yourself be steamrolled in that fashion.


    “People like me are simply forced to remain silent.”

    

No one is forcing you do to anything. You are making a choice.


    “Not the Leftists at my university.”

    
We are not talking about SOME of the leftists at your university. Did you not read the money quote from the Marquette post--”The fact that a liberal website would post such an article underlines an important fact: among liberals, there is still a substantial number of old-style traditionalists who favor free speech and expression.”


    “Dear fellow, David Duke (a genuine moron, incidentally) is totally powerless and irrelevant.”

    Elected to the Louisiana's House of Representative. A prominent pro-white who is decidedly against the Jooish agenda. Why are you shaming him? He supports your causes.



    “What “conservative media,” dear fellow?”

    
Fox News. V-Dare. National Review. Washington Examiner. Drudge Report. Legal Insurrection. Please, stop being a fool.


    “The discourse is policed by the elite. And the elite want mass immigration/open borders”

    Some among the corporatist elite. The pro-white elite think differently.


    “Anti-European/anti-Anglo attitudes are encouraged by the elite.”

    Pro-European/anti-Anglo attitudes are also encouraged by the elite--conservative media pundits, pro-white groups for starters.

    Replies: @syonredux, @syonredux, @syonredux

    “The joke went that Apartheid was fascism for the Blacks, socialism for the Afrikaners, and capitalism for the English and the Jews.”

    Fascism. Another word that is utterly devoid of any meaning. My turn. Diversity is fascism for pro-whites. See how easy it is?

    Actually, no.The old joke about South African Apartheid was quasi-educational.Your joke was rather lame.

    Mass immigration means race replacement, dear fellow.Last time I checked, the immigrants are not coming from Europe.”



    No, my friend. Mass immigration means ETHNIC replacement.

    Seeing as how the majority of immigrants coming to the USA at present are Hispanic Amerinds and Mestizos, mass immigration means race replacement

    Historical trends is a mother.

    In this case, it’s a trend that our elites are allowing

    Indeed, the immigrant are not coming from Europe, they are coming from other countries. Again, do not American citizens have the liberty to make those decisions?

    American elites do.Peons like myself have no say in the matter

    Regardless, immigrants that come here become Americans.

    Whatever that means these days.When my Jewish grandfather immigrated from Latvia, becoming an American meant something.Nowadays….

    “There are no elites who believe what I believe, dear fellow.”

    [Laughs] the elites on this here blog you observably champion their causes.

    There are no elites on this blog, dear fellow

    “And there are no elites who hold White nationalist views.”
    “There is no “pro-White elite,” dear fellow.”\

    
Now you’re just getting nasty. The crew at V-Dare is the media. They are part of the elite.

    Dear fellow, I dearly wish that VDARE were part of the elite.That would be a cause for hope.Unfortunately, VDARE is not part of the elite.They have no influence in the corridors of power.

    “MMMM, perhaps you know more Uncle Toms than I do….”

    No, I happen to know less race baiters.

    Dear fellow, attacking Whites is the mainstream these days

    “Wouldn’t do any good, dear fellow. The elite are against me.”

    
Then you are a victim.

    Just like the rest of the non-elite Whites in America

    Sad you would let yourself be steamrolled in that fashion.

    When the elite are against you, options are non-existent

    “People like me are simply forced to remain silent.”

    

No one is forcing you do to anything. You are making a choice.

    Sure.I choose not to commit career suicide.

    “Not the Leftists at my university.”

    
We are not talking about SOME of the leftists at your university.

    No, we are talking about all of them.

    “Dear fellow, David Duke (a genuine moron, incidentally) is totally powerless and irrelevant.”

    Elected to the Louisiana’s House of Representative.

    Where he had no power, no influence

    A prominent pro-white

    Prominent as a bogeyman for the Left, someone that the SPLC talks up during fund-raisers.A clown.

    who is decidedly against the Jooish agenda.

    Whatever that means

    Why are you shaming him?

    Because he’s an idiot

    He supports your causes.


    Actually, he’s far more useful to the POC Left.

    “What “conservative media,” dear fellow?”

    
Fox News. V-Dare. National Review. Washington Examiner. Drudge Report. Legal Insurrection.

    Fox News supports mass immigration. VDARE has no influence.National Review kicked out the people who are against race replacement.Washington Examiner: Neo-con rag.Drudge Report:dog and pony show.Legal Insurrection:Another dog and pony show

    Please, stop being a fool.

    Dear fellow, I’m simply being a realistic.”Respectable” conservatives (like the National Review) are in favor destroying European America

    “The discourse is policed by the elite. And the elite want mass immigration/open borders”

    Some among the corporatist elite.

    Can you name some White billionaires who are shelling out massive wads of cash in an attempt to end mass immigration?

    The pro-white elite think differently.

    There is no pro-White elite, dear fellow.Back in the day of Henry Cabot Lodge, yes.But not now.

  134. @Corvinus
    “The joke went that Apartheid was fascism for the Blacks, socialism for the Afrikaners, and capitalism for the English and the Jews.”

    Fascism. Another word that is utterly devoid of any meaning. My turn. Diversity is fascism for pro-whites. See how easy it is?


    “Mass immigration means race replacement, dear fellow.Last time I checked, the immigrants are not coming from Europe.”



    No, my friend. Mass immigration means ETHNIC replacement. Historical trends is a mother. Indeed, the immigrant are not coming from Europe, they are coming from other countries. Again, do not American citizens have the liberty to make those decisions? Regardless, immigrants that come here become Americans.

    FWIW, I actually support limiting immigration from all places.


    “There are no elites who believe what I believe, dear fellow.”

    [Laughs] the elites on this here blog you observably champion their causes.


    “And there are no elites who hold White nationalist views.”
    “There is no “pro-White elite,” dear fellow.”\

    
Now you’re just getting nasty. The crew at V-Dare is the media. They are part of the elite.


    “MMMM, perhaps you know more Uncle Toms than I do….”

    No, I happen to know less race baiters.


    “Wouldn’t do any good, dear fellow. The elite are against me.”

    
Then you are a victim. Sad you would let yourself be steamrolled in that fashion.


    “People like me are simply forced to remain silent.”

    

No one is forcing you do to anything. You are making a choice.


    “Not the Leftists at my university.”

    
We are not talking about SOME of the leftists at your university. Did you not read the money quote from the Marquette post--”The fact that a liberal website would post such an article underlines an important fact: among liberals, there is still a substantial number of old-style traditionalists who favor free speech and expression.”


    “Dear fellow, David Duke (a genuine moron, incidentally) is totally powerless and irrelevant.”

    Elected to the Louisiana's House of Representative. A prominent pro-white who is decidedly against the Jooish agenda. Why are you shaming him? He supports your causes.



    “What “conservative media,” dear fellow?”

    
Fox News. V-Dare. National Review. Washington Examiner. Drudge Report. Legal Insurrection. Please, stop being a fool.


    “The discourse is policed by the elite. And the elite want mass immigration/open borders”

    Some among the corporatist elite. The pro-white elite think differently.


    “Anti-European/anti-Anglo attitudes are encouraged by the elite.”

    Pro-European/anti-Anglo attitudes are also encouraged by the elite--conservative media pundits, pro-white groups for starters.

    Replies: @syonredux, @syonredux, @syonredux

    “The joke went that Apartheid was fascism for the Blacks, socialism for the Afrikaners, and capitalism for the English and the Jews.”

    Fascism. Another word that is utterly devoid of any meaning. My turn. Diversity is fascism for pro-whites. See how easy it is?

    Actually, no.The old joke about South African Apartheid was quasi-educational.Your joke was rather lame.

    Mass immigration means race replacement, dear fellow.Last time I checked, the immigrants are not coming from Europe.”



    No, my friend. Mass immigration means ETHNIC replacement.

    Seeing as how the majority of immigrants coming to the USA at present are Hispanic Amerinds and Mestizos, mass immigration means race replacement

    Historical trends is a mother.

    In this case, it’s a trend that our elites are allowing

    Indeed, the immigrant are not coming from Europe, they are coming from other countries. Again, do not American citizens have the liberty to make those decisions?

    American elites do.Peons like myself have no say in the matter

    Regardless, immigrants that come here become Americans.

    Whatever that means these days.When my Jewish grandfather immigrated from Latvia, becoming an American meant something.Nowadays….

    “There are no elites who believe what I believe, dear fellow.”

    [Laughs] the elites on this here blog you observably champion their causes.

    There are no elites on this blog, dear fellow

    “And there are no elites who hold White nationalist views.”
    “There is no “pro-White elite,” dear fellow.”\

    
Now you’re just getting nasty. The crew at V-Dare is the media. They are part of the elite.

    Dear fellow, I dearly wish that VDARE were part of the elite.That would be a cause for hope.Unfortunately, VDARE is not part of the elite.They have no influence in the corridors of power.

    “MMMM, perhaps you know more Uncle Toms than I do….”

    No, I happen to know less race baiters.

    Dear fellow, attacking Whites is the mainstream these days

    “Wouldn’t do any good, dear fellow. The elite are against me.”

    
Then you are a victim.

    Just like the rest of the non-elite Whites in America

    Sad you would let yourself be steamrolled in that fashion.

    When the elite are against you, options are non-existent

    “People like me are simply forced to remain silent.”

    

No one is forcing you do to anything. You are making a choice.

    Sure.I choose not to commit career suicide.

    “Not the Leftists at my university.”

    
We are not talking about SOME of the leftists at your university.

    No, we are talking about all of them.

    “Dear fellow, David Duke (a genuine moron, incidentally) is totally powerless and irrelevant.”

    Elected to the Louisiana’s House of Representative.

    Where he had no power, no influence

    A prominent pro-white

    Prominent as a bogeyman for the Left, someone that the SPLC talks up during fund-raisers.A clown.

    who is decidedly against the Jooish agenda.

    Whatever that means

    Why are you shaming him?

    Because he’s an idiot

    He supports your causes.


    Actually, he’s far more useful to the POC Left.

    “What “conservative media,” dear fellow?”

    
Fox News. V-Dare. National Review. Washington Examiner. Drudge Report. Legal Insurrection.

    Fox News supports mass immigration. VDARE has no influence.National Review kicked out the people who are against race replacement.Washington Examiner: Neo-con rag.Drudge Report:dog and pony show.Legal Insurrection:Another dog and pony show

    Please, stop being a fool.

    Dear fellow, I’m simply being a realistic.”Respectable” conservatives (like the National Review) are in favor destroying European America

    “The discourse is policed by the elite. And the elite want mass immigration/open borders”

    Some among the corporatist elite.

    Can you name some White billionaires who are shelling out massive wads of cash in an attempt to end mass immigration?

    The pro-white elite think differently.

    There is no pro-White elite, dear fellow.Back in the day of Henry Cabot Lodge, yes.But not now.

  135. @Corvinus
    “The joke went that Apartheid was fascism for the Blacks, socialism for the Afrikaners, and capitalism for the English and the Jews.”

    Fascism. Another word that is utterly devoid of any meaning. My turn. Diversity is fascism for pro-whites. See how easy it is?


    “Mass immigration means race replacement, dear fellow.Last time I checked, the immigrants are not coming from Europe.”



    No, my friend. Mass immigration means ETHNIC replacement. Historical trends is a mother. Indeed, the immigrant are not coming from Europe, they are coming from other countries. Again, do not American citizens have the liberty to make those decisions? Regardless, immigrants that come here become Americans.

    FWIW, I actually support limiting immigration from all places.


    “There are no elites who believe what I believe, dear fellow.”

    [Laughs] the elites on this here blog you observably champion their causes.


    “And there are no elites who hold White nationalist views.”
    “There is no “pro-White elite,” dear fellow.”\

    
Now you’re just getting nasty. The crew at V-Dare is the media. They are part of the elite.


    “MMMM, perhaps you know more Uncle Toms than I do….”

    No, I happen to know less race baiters.


    “Wouldn’t do any good, dear fellow. The elite are against me.”

    
Then you are a victim. Sad you would let yourself be steamrolled in that fashion.


    “People like me are simply forced to remain silent.”

    

No one is forcing you do to anything. You are making a choice.


    “Not the Leftists at my university.”

    
We are not talking about SOME of the leftists at your university. Did you not read the money quote from the Marquette post--”The fact that a liberal website would post such an article underlines an important fact: among liberals, there is still a substantial number of old-style traditionalists who favor free speech and expression.”


    “Dear fellow, David Duke (a genuine moron, incidentally) is totally powerless and irrelevant.”

    Elected to the Louisiana's House of Representative. A prominent pro-white who is decidedly against the Jooish agenda. Why are you shaming him? He supports your causes.



    “What “conservative media,” dear fellow?”

    
Fox News. V-Dare. National Review. Washington Examiner. Drudge Report. Legal Insurrection. Please, stop being a fool.


    “The discourse is policed by the elite. And the elite want mass immigration/open borders”

    Some among the corporatist elite. The pro-white elite think differently.


    “Anti-European/anti-Anglo attitudes are encouraged by the elite.”

    Pro-European/anti-Anglo attitudes are also encouraged by the elite--conservative media pundits, pro-white groups for starters.

    Replies: @syonredux, @syonredux, @syonredux

    “The joke went that Apartheid was fascism for the Blacks, socialism for the Afrikaners, and capitalism for the English and the Jews.”

    Fascism. Another word that is utterly devoid of any meaning. My turn. Diversity is fascism for pro-whites. See how easy it is?

    Actually, no.The old joke about South African Apartheid was quasi-educational.Your joke was rather lame.

    Mass immigration means race replacement, dear fellow.Last time I checked, the immigrants are not coming from Europe.”



    No, my friend. Mass immigration means ETHNIC replacement.

    Seeing as how the majority of immigrants coming to the USA at present are Hispanic Amerinds and Mestizos, mass immigration means race replacement

    Historical trends is a mother.

    In this case, it’s a trend that our elites are allowing

    Indeed, the immigrant are not coming from Europe, they are coming from other countries. Again, do not American citizens have the liberty to make those decisions?

    American elites do.Peons like myself have no say in the matter

    Regardless, immigrants that come here become Americans.

    Whatever that means these days.When my Jewish grandfather immigrated from Latvia, becoming an American meant something.Nowadays….

    “There are no elites who believe what I believe, dear fellow.”

    [Laughs] the elites on this here blog you observably champion their causes.

    There are no elites on this blog, dear fellow

    “And there are no elites who hold White nationalist views.”
    “There is no “pro-White elite,” dear fellow.”\

    
Now you’re just getting nasty. The crew at V-Dare is the media. They are part of the elite.

    Dear fellow, I dearly wish that VDARE were part of the elite.That would be a cause for hope.Unfortunately, VDARE is not part of the elite.They have no influence in the corridors of power.

    “MMMM, perhaps you know more Uncle Toms than I do….”

    No, I happen to know less race baiters.

    Dear fellow, attacking Whites is the mainstream these days

    “Wouldn’t do any good, dear fellow. The elite are against me.”

    
Then you are a victim.

    Just like the rest of the non-elite Whites in America

    Sad you would let yourself be steamrolled in that fashion.

    When the elite are against you, options are non-existent

    “People like me are simply forced to remain silent.”

    

No one is forcing you do to anything. You are making a choice.

    Sure.I choose not to commit career suicide.

    “Not the Leftists at my university.”

    
We are not talking about SOME of the leftists at your university.

    No, we are talking about all of them.

    “Dear fellow, David Duke (a genuine moron, incidentally) is totally powerless and irrelevant.”

    Elected to the Louisiana’s House of Representative.

    Where he had no power, no influence

    A prominent pro-white

    Prominent as a bogeyman for the Left, someone that the SPLC talks up during fund-raisers.A clown.

    who is decidedly against the Jooish agenda.

    Whatever that means

    Why are you shaming him?

    Because he’s an idiot

    He supports your causes.


    Actually, he’s far more useful to the POC Left.

    “What “conservative media,” dear fellow?”

    
Fox News. V-Dare. National Review. Washington Examiner. Drudge Report. Legal Insurrection.

    Fox News supports mass immigration. VDARE has no influence.National Review kicked out the people who are against race replacement.Washington Examiner: Neo-con rag.Drudge Report:dog and pony show.Legal Insurrection:Another dog and pony show

    Please, stop being a fool.

    Dear fellow, I’m simply being a realistic.”Respectable” conservatives (like the National Review) are in favor destroying European America

    “The discourse is policed by the elite. And the elite want mass immigration/open borders”

    Some among the corporatist elite.

    Can you name some White billionaires who are shelling out massive wads of cash in an attempt to end mass immigration?

    The pro-white elite think differently.

    There is no pro-White elite, dear fellow.Back in the day of Henry Cabot Lodge, yes.But not now.

  136. @Ghost of John Adams
    @Lot

    Okay Lot, describe how we can


    knock out the 15% of GOP house members and 30% of its Senators that favor a “path to citizenship” in primaries
     
    I lend you my ears.

    Replies: @syonredux, @syonredux

    Sorry, I accidentally posted something to you that was meant for another

    RE: Dear Fellow,

    Bit of a tick.General rule is that dear fellow is reserved for a minor annoyance, but dear boy is deployed against those who are being quite foolish.

  137. @Ron Unz
    Reading the comment threads on my website is even better than watching an old Monty Pyton movie on Netflix. I get the impression that about 99% of the commenters are monomaniacal anti-immigrationists, with most of them being totally delusional ones.

    Dave Pinsen:

    Someone like Jeff Sessions, if he decided to run for president, would be well-positioned to make Steve’s deal with any one of the billionaires mentioned. That could be a win-win.
     
    Bill:

    Yeah, the Jews are going to vote for that anti-immigration GOP candidate . . . ummmm, what was his name . . . Tom Tancredo? Yeah, that’s it. Did well last year in the Colorado gubernatorial primary.

    Or is he dead? I can’t keep track any more. Anyway, surely he or someone just like him will be the GOP nominee the Jews will be lovin on.
     
    JSM:

    Kevin MacDonald made a Grand Bargain offer straight-up to Organized Jewry that if they’d knock it off with the mass immigration agitating, he himself would advocate for U.S. support of Israel, even if at some cost to ourselves.
     
    Okay, so there's the big negotiating sit-down over Immigration and Israel in the back room of a restaurant between the key players: Sheldon Adelson, Haim Saban, and Peter Brimelow. Tough bargaining aimed at maybe closing a "Feasible Zionist-Gentile Grand Bargain"

    Adelson: "If you give me what I want, I can deliver the Republican Party."

    Saban: "If you give me what I want, I can deliver the Democratic Party."

    Brimelow: "And if you give me what I want, I can deliver VDare.com...plus I'll even throw in Kevin MacDonald's endorsement!"

    Somebody told me that Joe, the clerk who works the overnight shift down at the local 7-11, dropped a note to Adelson last week, saying that in exchange for a hundred million in cash, he'd promise to become a straight down the line pro-Israel advocate...

    Replies: @matt, @Lot, @reiner Tor, @syonredux, @Anonymous

    I get the impression that about 99% of the commenters are monomaniacal anti-immigrationists,

    Well, Ron, when you couple demographic projections:

    The Hispanic population is expected to reach about 106 million in 2050, about double what it is today, according to new U.S. Census Bureau population projections.

    http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/12/16/with-fewer-new-arrivals-census-lowers-hispanic-population-projections-2/

    To stuff like this:

    As a means of comparison, 64 percent of millennials in the U.S. performed below the minimum standard (below level 3) in numeracy, compared to 47 percent of millennials in the OECD average. Fifty-four percent of White millennials and 52 percent of Asian millennials performed below this level, as compared to 83 percent of Hispanic and 88 percent of Black millennials.

    http://www.ets.org/s/research/30079/asc-millennials-and-the-future.pdf

    It’s hard not to be “monomaniacal” about ending the mass immigration of Hispanic Mestizos and Amerinds.

    with most of them being totally delusional ones.

    Sadly true.The American elite are committed to “Mestizocizing” America .And once that well runs dry, they will invite in hundreds of millions of Sub-Saharan Africans.Nothing can stop this.What billionaires want, billionaires get.

  138. @Steve Sailer
    @Art Deco

    South Africa's mining industry was perhaps half-controlled by Jewish interests. It made for lots of important ties.

    Replies: @syonredux, @Art Deco

    What’s so important about it? The Oppenheimer family is Jewish. This means what in context? Keep in mind that the Oppenheimer family was for decades in public opposition to baaskap and apartheid. They do not seem to have influenced the contours of the social order much at all in those years, much less influencing international relations.

    The motormouth who wastes everyone’s time quoting Wikipedia to me seems to fancy it’s a matter of note that the South African foreign minister visited Israel (as if foreign ministers visiting foreign capitals was unusual), that South Africa bought a piece of military equipment off of Israel, that an unspecified number of South African nationals resided in Israel for a time, blah blah. All of which indicates that Israel treated South Africa as a normal country. Prior to 1985, so did the United States. Nothing remarkable about that.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Art Deco

    Nuclear bombs.

    Replies: @Art Deco

    , @syonredux
    @Art Deco


    The motormouth who wastes everyone’s time quoting Wikipedia to me seems to fancy it’s a matter of note that the South African foreign minister visited Israel (as if foreign ministers visiting foreign capitals was unusual), that South Africa bought a piece of military equipment off of Israel,
     
    Rather more than that, dear fellow.Joint nuclear project:

    From the mid-1970s, the two countries were allegedly involved in joint nuclear-weapons development and testing. According to Seymour Hersh, for example, the 1979 Vela Incident was the third joint Israeli–South African nuclear test in the Indian Ocean.[21] Richard Rhodes concludes the incident was an Israeli nuclear test, conducted in cooperation with South Africa, and that the United States administration deliberately obscured this fact in order to avoid complicating relations with Israel.[22]

    By 1980, a sizeable contingent of South African military and government officials were living permanently in Israel, to oversee the numerous joint projects between the countries, while their children attended local Israeli schools.[11] Scientific collaboration also continued to increase, with many scientists working in each other’s countries. Perhaps most sensitive was the large group of Israeli scientists working at South Africa’s Pelindaba nuclear facility.[11]
     

    The Vela Incident, also known as the South Atlantic Flash, was an unidentified “double flash” of light detected by an American Vela Hotel satellite on September 22, 1979, near the Prince Edward Islands off Antarctica, which many believe was of nuclear origin. The most widespread theory among those who believe the flash was of nuclear origin is that it resulted from a joint South African and Israeli nuclear test.[1][2][3] The topic remains highly disputed today.

    Well before the Vela Incident, American intelligence agencies had made the assessment that Israel probably possessed its own nuclear weapons.[31] According to journalist Seymour Hersh, the detection was the third joint Israeli-South African nuclear test in the Indian Ocean, and the Israelis had sent two IDF ships and “a contingent of Israeli military men and nuclear experts” for the test.[1] Author Richard Rhodes also concludes the incident was an Israeli nuclear test, conducted in cooperation with South Africa, and that the United States administration deliberately obscured this fact in order to avoid complicating relations with South Africa.[2] Likewise, Leonard Weiss offers a number of arguments to support the test being Israeli, and claims that successive US administrations continue to cover up the test to divert unwanted attention that may portray its foreign policy in a bad light.[3] In the 2008 book The Nuclear Express: A Political History of the Bomb and its Proliferation Thomas C. Reed and Danny B. Stillman stated their opinion that the “double flash” was the result of a joint South African-Israeli nuclear bomb test.[32] David Albright stated in his article about the “double flash” event in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists that “If the 1979 flash was caused by a test, most experts agree it was probably an Israeli test”.[33]

    In 2010, it was reported that, on February 27, 1980, President Jimmy Carter wrote in his diary, “We have a growing belief among our scientists that the Israelis did indeed conduct a nuclear test explosion in the ocean near the southern end of Africa.”[34]

    Leonard Weiss, of the Center for International Security and Cooperation at Stanford University writes: “The weight of the evidence that the Vela event was an Israeli nuclear test assisted by South Africa appears overwhelming.”[35]

    Thomas C. Reed writes that he believes the Vela incident was an Israeli neutron bomb test.[36] The test would have gone undetected as the Israelis specifically chose a window of opportunity when, according to the published data, no active Vela satellites were observing the area. Additionally, the Israelis chose to set off the test during a typhoon. However, the Israelis and their South African partners had miscalculated as the over a decade-old Vela satellite which detected the blast had been officially listed by the US government as ‘retired’, although nonetheless was still able to receive data.[37] By 1984, according to Mordechai Vanunu, Israel was mass-producing neutron bombs.[38]

     

    Replies: @Art Deco

    , @syonredux
    @Art Deco

    The Unspoken Alliance: Israel's Secret Relationship with Apartheid South Africa
    by Sasha Polakow-Suransky

    A revealing account of how Israel’s booming arms industry and apartheid South Africa’s international isolation led to a secretive military partnership between two seemingly unlikely allies.

    Prior to the Six-Day War, Israel was a darling of the international left: socialist idealists like David Ben-Gurion and Golda Meir vocally opposed apartheid and built alliances with black leaders in newly independent African nations. South Africa, for its part, was controlled by a regime of Afrikaner nationalists who had enthusiastically supported Hitler during World War II.

    But after Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories in 1967, the country found itself estranged from former allies and threatened anew by old enemies. As both states became international pariahs, their covert military relationship blossomed: they exchanged billions of dollars’ worth of extremely sensitive material, including nuclear technology, boosting Israel’s sagging economy and strengthening the beleaguered apartheid regime.

    By the time the right-wing Likud Party came to power in 1977, Israel had all but abandoned the moralism of its founders in favor of close and lucrative ties with South Africa. For nearly twenty years, Israel denied these ties, claiming that it opposed apartheid on moral and religious grounds even as it secretly supplied the arsenal of a white supremacist government.

    Sasha Polakow-Suransky reveals the previously classified details of countless arms deals conducted behind the backs of Israel’s own diplomatic corps and in violation of a United Nations arms embargo. Based on extensive archival research and exclusive interviews with former generals and high-level government officials in both countries, The Unspoken Alliance tells a troubling story of Cold War paranoia, moral compromises, and Israel’s estrangement from the left. It is essential reading for anyone interested in Israel’s history and its future.


    http://www.amazon.com/Unspoken-Alliance-Israels-Relationship-Apartheid-ebook/dp/B0036S4AR2/ref=la_B002WNCFBU_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1427384297&sr=1-1


    It wasn’t long before Israel initiated defense cooperation with some of the world’s most notoriously brutal regimes, including Argentina’s military dictatorship, Pinochet’s Chile, and apartheid South Africa.

    At its core, the Israeli–South African relationship was a marriage of interests and ideologies. Israel profited handsomely from arms exports and South Africa gained access to cutting-edge weaponry at a time when the rest of the world was turning against the apartheid state. For the next twenty years, a Janus- faced Israel denied its ties with South Africa, claiming that it opposed apartheid on moral and religious grounds even as it secretly strengthened the arsenal of a white supremacist government.

    Israel and South Africa joined forces at a precarious and auspicious time. The alliance began in earnest after the October 1973 Yom Kippur War, and shared military and economic interests drove the relationship for the next three years. Though both countries were receiving varying degrees of support from the United States, neither enjoyed a defense pact with Washington and both were wary of relying too heavily on the Americans for their survival— especially in the early 1970s, when unconditional U.S. support for Israel was by no means assured. This alliance exposed Israel to great risks in the realm of public relations, especially when the Jewish state’s legitimacy was already under attack at the U.N. from pro-Palestinian groups and aligning itself with the hated apartheid regime threatened to tarnish its reputation further.

    [....]

    The U.S. government feared that South Africa’s white minority regime, driven by a siege mentality and militant anticommunism, might resort to the nuclear option when faced with Soviet proxies on its borders. The U.S. government had by 1970 accepted that Israel was a member of the nuclear club, but Washington worked tirelessly in the late 1970s to prevent South Africa from joining it. As hard as officials in Jimmy Carter’s administration tried, their nonproliferation policy failed to prevent South Africa from acquiring the bomb soon after Carter left office, and subsequent U.S. administrations couldn’t stop Israel from helping the apartheid state develop more advanced components of its nuclear arsenal.

    These two isolated states formed an alliance that allowed South Africa to develop advanced nuclear missile technology and provided Israel with the raw material and testing space it needed to expand its existing arsenal of missiles and nuclear weapons. All of this occurred in the face of intense international criticism, surveillance by U.S. and Soviet intelligence agencies, and constant condemnation by the United Nations General Assembly.

    This mutually beneficial relationship was forged outside the jurisdiction of international conventions such as the Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), the cornerstones of Western efforts to prevent the spread of weapons of mass destruction. The two countries developed and improved their respective weapons systems under such secrecy that not even American intelligence agencies knew the full extent of their cooperation.

    The Israeli–South African relationship was not only about profit and battlefield bravado, however. After Menachem Begin’s Likud Party came to power in 1977, these economic interests converged with ideological affinities to make the alliance even stronger. Many members of the Likud Party shared with South Africa’s leaders an ideology of minority survivalism that presented the two countries as threatened outposts of European civilization defending their existence against barbarians at the gates.


    Indeed, much of Israel’s top brass and Likud Party leadership felt an affinity with South Africa’s white government, and unlike Peres and Rabin they did not feel a need to publicly denounce apartheid while secretly supporting Pretoria. Powerful military figures, such as Ariel Sharon and Rafael (Raful) Eitan, drew inspiration from the political tradition of Revisionist Zionism—a school of thought that favored the use of military force to defend Jewish sovereignty and encouraged settlement of the biblical lands of Greater Israel, including the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Sharon, Eitan, and many of their contemporaries were convinced that both nations faced a fundamentally similar predicament as embattled minorities under siege, fighting for their survival against what they saw as a common terrorist enemy epitomized by Nelson Mandela’s African National Congress (ANC) and Yasser Arafat’s Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). The ANC may have never employed indiscriminate violence to the extent that the PLO did, but in the eyes of the generals in Tel Aviv and Pretoria, Mandela and Arafat were one and the same: terrorist leaders who wished to push them into the sea. And for the top brass in both countries, the only possible solution was tight control and overwhelming force.

    Foreign Ministry officials in Israel did not always approve of close ties with South Africa, but it was the defense establishments— not the diplomatic corps— that managed the alliance. The military’s dominance was so complete that the Israeli embassy in Pretoria was divided by a wall through which no member of the diplomatic corps was allowed to pass. Only when opponents of apartheid within the Israeli government sought to bring down that wall in the late 1980s did the alliance begin to crumble.

     

    http://mondoweiss.net/2013/12/alliance-relationship-apartheid
  139. @Steve Sailer
    @Art Deco

    It wasn't an idle question to Israel's various governments, that's for sure.

    Replies: @Art Deco

    Let go of my leg. What are the implications of Chile and Israel not ‘getting along’? They are thousands of miles apart and neither expects to influence the immediate environs of the other. Israeli manufacturers would have to buy copper from some other locus if they were really antagonistic. That’s about it.

  140. @silviosilver
    @Art Deco


    It isn’t racial treason. Cabinet ministers have access to classified information. Some Arab politicians cannot be trusted and some would be put under considerable pressure by collateral relatives, &c.
     
    Just like in western democracies. Er, hang on...

    Replies: @Art Deco

    What, you fancy Jewish cabinet secretaries are guilty of espionage or treason or think the United States should be dissolved in favor of some other political entity? Which ones did you have in mind?

    • Replies: @silviosilver
    @Art Deco

    Actually I didn't have in mind Jewish politicians or functionaries. I think it goes without saying they'll share information with Israel (or anyone else they deem it in their interests too). Of course, that's anti-semitic, which means it can't possibly be true.

    No, what I had in mind was that in Israel the ethnic background/interests of a politician is allowed to matter. In western democracies it's considered meaningless, and anyone who'd think otherwise is simply sick in the head. In other words, it's just another in a long list of Jewish/gentile double standards and just another way in which Israeli democracy is very unlike western democracy.

  141. @Art Deco
    @Steve Sailer

    What's so important about it? The Oppenheimer family is Jewish. This means what in context? Keep in mind that the Oppenheimer family was for decades in public opposition to baaskap and apartheid. They do not seem to have influenced the contours of the social order much at all in those years, much less influencing international relations.

    --

    The motormouth who wastes everyone's time quoting Wikipedia to me seems to fancy it's a matter of note that the South African foreign minister visited Israel (as if foreign ministers visiting foreign capitals was unusual), that South Africa bought a piece of military equipment off of Israel, that an unspecified number of South African nationals resided in Israel for a time, blah blah. All of which indicates that Israel treated South Africa as a normal country. Prior to 1985, so did the United States. Nothing remarkable about that.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @syonredux, @syonredux

    Nuclear bombs.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    @Steve Sailer

    What nuclear bombs? South Africa's productive capacity in 1980 exceeded that of Israel by a factor of 4; why would it seem plausible to you they were dependent on Israeli technology no one knows squat about? Whence comes your habit of treating poorly sourced contentions about secret programs as if they were well-known established facts?

    Replies: @syonredux, @reiner Tor, @syonredux, @syonredux, @Reg Cæsar

  142. @Art Deco
    @Steve Sailer

    What's so important about it? The Oppenheimer family is Jewish. This means what in context? Keep in mind that the Oppenheimer family was for decades in public opposition to baaskap and apartheid. They do not seem to have influenced the contours of the social order much at all in those years, much less influencing international relations.

    --

    The motormouth who wastes everyone's time quoting Wikipedia to me seems to fancy it's a matter of note that the South African foreign minister visited Israel (as if foreign ministers visiting foreign capitals was unusual), that South Africa bought a piece of military equipment off of Israel, that an unspecified number of South African nationals resided in Israel for a time, blah blah. All of which indicates that Israel treated South Africa as a normal country. Prior to 1985, so did the United States. Nothing remarkable about that.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @syonredux, @syonredux

    The motormouth who wastes everyone’s time quoting Wikipedia to me seems to fancy it’s a matter of note that the South African foreign minister visited Israel (as if foreign ministers visiting foreign capitals was unusual), that South Africa bought a piece of military equipment off of Israel,

    Rather more than that, dear fellow.Joint nuclear project:

    From the mid-1970s, the two countries were allegedly involved in joint nuclear-weapons development and testing. According to Seymour Hersh, for example, the 1979 Vela Incident was the third joint Israeli–South African nuclear test in the Indian Ocean.[21] Richard Rhodes concludes the incident was an Israeli nuclear test, conducted in cooperation with South Africa, and that the United States administration deliberately obscured this fact in order to avoid complicating relations with Israel.[22]

    By 1980, a sizeable contingent of South African military and government officials were living permanently in Israel, to oversee the numerous joint projects between the countries, while their children attended local Israeli schools.[11] Scientific collaboration also continued to increase, with many scientists working in each other’s countries. Perhaps most sensitive was the large group of Israeli scientists working at South Africa’s Pelindaba nuclear facility.[11]

    The Vela Incident, also known as the South Atlantic Flash, was an unidentified “double flash” of light detected by an American Vela Hotel satellite on September 22, 1979, near the Prince Edward Islands off Antarctica, which many believe was of nuclear origin. The most widespread theory among those who believe the flash was of nuclear origin is that it resulted from a joint South African and Israeli nuclear test.[1][2][3] The topic remains highly disputed today.

    Well before the Vela Incident, American intelligence agencies had made the assessment that Israel probably possessed its own nuclear weapons.[31] According to journalist Seymour Hersh, the detection was the third joint Israeli-South African nuclear test in the Indian Ocean, and the Israelis had sent two IDF ships and “a contingent of Israeli military men and nuclear experts” for the test.[1] Author Richard Rhodes also concludes the incident was an Israeli nuclear test, conducted in cooperation with South Africa, and that the United States administration deliberately obscured this fact in order to avoid complicating relations with South Africa.[2] Likewise, Leonard Weiss offers a number of arguments to support the test being Israeli, and claims that successive US administrations continue to cover up the test to divert unwanted attention that may portray its foreign policy in a bad light.[3] In the 2008 book The Nuclear Express: A Political History of the Bomb and its Proliferation Thomas C. Reed and Danny B. Stillman stated their opinion that the “double flash” was the result of a joint South African-Israeli nuclear bomb test.[32] David Albright stated in his article about the “double flash” event in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists that “If the 1979 flash was caused by a test, most experts agree it was probably an Israeli test”.[33]

    In 2010, it was reported that, on February 27, 1980, President Jimmy Carter wrote in his diary, “We have a growing belief among our scientists that the Israelis did indeed conduct a nuclear test explosion in the ocean near the southern end of Africa.”[34]

    Leonard Weiss, of the Center for International Security and Cooperation at Stanford University writes: “The weight of the evidence that the Vela event was an Israeli nuclear test assisted by South Africa appears overwhelming.”[35]

    Thomas C. Reed writes that he believes the Vela incident was an Israeli neutron bomb test.[36] The test would have gone undetected as the Israelis specifically chose a window of opportunity when, according to the published data, no active Vela satellites were observing the area. Additionally, the Israelis chose to set off the test during a typhoon. However, the Israelis and their South African partners had miscalculated as the over a decade-old Vela satellite which detected the blast had been officially listed by the US government as ‘retired’, although nonetheless was still able to receive data.[37] By 1984, according to Mordechai Vanunu, Israel was mass-producing neutron bombs.[38]

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    @syonredux

    Syon, the mainstream press who once employed him gave up on Seymour Hersh 30 years ago. By 1996, his work was being ridiculed in those outlets (see reviews thereof by Garry Wills in the Washington Post). An aspect of that was incredible claims he would make about process (for example, claiming to have interviewed '1,000' people for one book but listing only a small fraction in his bibliography "Hersh is known for the harsh and hectoring phone call") and another aspect was testimony from former research assistants of Hersh about the sort of material he was willing to use. At least quote someone reputable if we're all to hear about what the purveyors of scandal literature 'believe'.

    Replies: @syonredux, @syonredux

  143. @Art Deco
    @Steve Sailer

    What's so important about it? The Oppenheimer family is Jewish. This means what in context? Keep in mind that the Oppenheimer family was for decades in public opposition to baaskap and apartheid. They do not seem to have influenced the contours of the social order much at all in those years, much less influencing international relations.

    --

    The motormouth who wastes everyone's time quoting Wikipedia to me seems to fancy it's a matter of note that the South African foreign minister visited Israel (as if foreign ministers visiting foreign capitals was unusual), that South Africa bought a piece of military equipment off of Israel, that an unspecified number of South African nationals resided in Israel for a time, blah blah. All of which indicates that Israel treated South Africa as a normal country. Prior to 1985, so did the United States. Nothing remarkable about that.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @syonredux, @syonredux

    The Unspoken Alliance: Israel’s Secret Relationship with Apartheid South Africa
    by Sasha Polakow-Suransky

    A revealing account of how Israel’s booming arms industry and apartheid South Africa’s international isolation led to a secretive military partnership between two seemingly unlikely allies.

    Prior to the Six-Day War, Israel was a darling of the international left: socialist idealists like David Ben-Gurion and Golda Meir vocally opposed apartheid and built alliances with black leaders in newly independent African nations. South Africa, for its part, was controlled by a regime of Afrikaner nationalists who had enthusiastically supported Hitler during World War II.

    But after Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories in 1967, the country found itself estranged from former allies and threatened anew by old enemies. As both states became international pariahs, their covert military relationship blossomed: they exchanged billions of dollars’ worth of extremely sensitive material, including nuclear technology, boosting Israel’s sagging economy and strengthening the beleaguered apartheid regime.

    By the time the right-wing Likud Party came to power in 1977, Israel had all but abandoned the moralism of its founders in favor of close and lucrative ties with South Africa. For nearly twenty years, Israel denied these ties, claiming that it opposed apartheid on moral and religious grounds even as it secretly supplied the arsenal of a white supremacist government.

    Sasha Polakow-Suransky reveals the previously classified details of countless arms deals conducted behind the backs of Israel’s own diplomatic corps and in violation of a United Nations arms embargo. Based on extensive archival research and exclusive interviews with former generals and high-level government officials in both countries, The Unspoken Alliance tells a troubling story of Cold War paranoia, moral compromises, and Israel’s estrangement from the left. It is essential reading for anyone interested in Israel’s history and its future.

    It wasn’t long before Israel initiated defense cooperation with some of the world’s most notoriously brutal regimes, including Argentina’s military dictatorship, Pinochet’s Chile, and apartheid South Africa.

    At its core, the Israeli–South African relationship was a marriage of interests and ideologies. Israel profited handsomely from arms exports and South Africa gained access to cutting-edge weaponry at a time when the rest of the world was turning against the apartheid state. For the next twenty years, a Janus- faced Israel denied its ties with South Africa, claiming that it opposed apartheid on moral and religious grounds even as it secretly strengthened the arsenal of a white supremacist government.

    Israel and South Africa joined forces at a precarious and auspicious time. The alliance began in earnest after the October 1973 Yom Kippur War, and shared military and economic interests drove the relationship for the next three years. Though both countries were receiving varying degrees of support from the United States, neither enjoyed a defense pact with Washington and both were wary of relying too heavily on the Americans for their survival— especially in the early 1970s, when unconditional U.S. support for Israel was by no means assured. This alliance exposed Israel to great risks in the realm of public relations, especially when the Jewish state’s legitimacy was already under attack at the U.N. from pro-Palestinian groups and aligning itself with the hated apartheid regime threatened to tarnish its reputation further.

    [….]

    The U.S. government feared that South Africa’s white minority regime, driven by a siege mentality and militant anticommunism, might resort to the nuclear option when faced with Soviet proxies on its borders. The U.S. government had by 1970 accepted that Israel was a member of the nuclear club, but Washington worked tirelessly in the late 1970s to prevent South Africa from joining it. As hard as officials in Jimmy Carter’s administration tried, their nonproliferation policy failed to prevent South Africa from acquiring the bomb soon after Carter left office, and subsequent U.S. administrations couldn’t stop Israel from helping the apartheid state develop more advanced components of its nuclear arsenal.

    These two isolated states formed an alliance that allowed South Africa to develop advanced nuclear missile technology and provided Israel with the raw material and testing space it needed to expand its existing arsenal of missiles and nuclear weapons. All of this occurred in the face of intense international criticism, surveillance by U.S. and Soviet intelligence agencies, and constant condemnation by the United Nations General Assembly.

    This mutually beneficial relationship was forged outside the jurisdiction of international conventions such as the Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), the cornerstones of Western efforts to prevent the spread of weapons of mass destruction. The two countries developed and improved their respective weapons systems under such secrecy that not even American intelligence agencies knew the full extent of their cooperation.

    The Israeli–South African relationship was not only about profit and battlefield bravado, however. After Menachem Begin’s Likud Party came to power in 1977, these economic interests converged with ideological affinities to make the alliance even stronger. Many members of the Likud Party shared with South Africa’s leaders an ideology of minority survivalism that presented the two countries as threatened outposts of European civilization defending their existence against barbarians at the gates.

    Indeed, much of Israel’s top brass and Likud Party leadership felt an affinity with South Africa’s white government, and unlike Peres and Rabin they did not feel a need to publicly denounce apartheid while secretly supporting Pretoria. Powerful military figures, such as Ariel Sharon and Rafael (Raful) Eitan, drew inspiration from the political tradition of Revisionist Zionism—a school of thought that favored the use of military force to defend Jewish sovereignty and encouraged settlement of the biblical lands of Greater Israel, including the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Sharon, Eitan, and many of their contemporaries were convinced that both nations faced a fundamentally similar predicament as embattled minorities under siege, fighting for their survival against what they saw as a common terrorist enemy epitomized by Nelson Mandela’s African National Congress (ANC) and Yasser Arafat’s Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). The ANC may have never employed indiscriminate violence to the extent that the PLO did, but in the eyes of the generals in Tel Aviv and Pretoria, Mandela and Arafat were one and the same: terrorist leaders who wished to push them into the sea. And for the top brass in both countries, the only possible solution was tight control and overwhelming force.

    Foreign Ministry officials in Israel did not always approve of close ties with South Africa, but it was the defense establishments— not the diplomatic corps— that managed the alliance. The military’s dominance was so complete that the Israeli embassy in Pretoria was divided by a wall through which no member of the diplomatic corps was allowed to pass. Only when opponents of apartheid within the Israeli government sought to bring down that wall in the late 1980s did the alliance begin to crumble.

    http://mondoweiss.net/2013/12/alliance-relationship-apartheid

  144. @Ron Unz
    Reading the comment threads on my website is even better than watching an old Monty Pyton movie on Netflix. I get the impression that about 99% of the commenters are monomaniacal anti-immigrationists, with most of them being totally delusional ones.

    Dave Pinsen:

    Someone like Jeff Sessions, if he decided to run for president, would be well-positioned to make Steve’s deal with any one of the billionaires mentioned. That could be a win-win.
     
    Bill:

    Yeah, the Jews are going to vote for that anti-immigration GOP candidate . . . ummmm, what was his name . . . Tom Tancredo? Yeah, that’s it. Did well last year in the Colorado gubernatorial primary.

    Or is he dead? I can’t keep track any more. Anyway, surely he or someone just like him will be the GOP nominee the Jews will be lovin on.
     
    JSM:

    Kevin MacDonald made a Grand Bargain offer straight-up to Organized Jewry that if they’d knock it off with the mass immigration agitating, he himself would advocate for U.S. support of Israel, even if at some cost to ourselves.
     
    Okay, so there's the big negotiating sit-down over Immigration and Israel in the back room of a restaurant between the key players: Sheldon Adelson, Haim Saban, and Peter Brimelow. Tough bargaining aimed at maybe closing a "Feasible Zionist-Gentile Grand Bargain"

    Adelson: "If you give me what I want, I can deliver the Republican Party."

    Saban: "If you give me what I want, I can deliver the Democratic Party."

    Brimelow: "And if you give me what I want, I can deliver VDare.com...plus I'll even throw in Kevin MacDonald's endorsement!"

    Somebody told me that Joe, the clerk who works the overnight shift down at the local 7-11, dropped a note to Adelson last week, saying that in exchange for a hundred million in cash, he'd promise to become a straight down the line pro-Israel advocate...

    Replies: @matt, @Lot, @reiner Tor, @syonredux, @Anonymous

    I get the impression that about 99% of the commenters are monomaniacal anti-immigrationists

    You write as if there were something wrong with that.

  145. “Mondoweiss”? Why not just cut to the chase and send me to the PLO press office?

    The problem with literature like this (which John Prados and Seymour Hersch have been producing for decades) is that if there is no scandal, you’ve got no book, and you took an advance. There commonly is not a competing set of authors or anything you can check readily or (given the use of off-the-record interviews, check at all), which leaves the authors a great deal of leeway to con you.

    And general characterizations of what your political enemies ‘think’ about x, y, or z are not of any value.

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @Art Deco


    “Mondoweiss”? Why not just cut to the chase and send me to the PLO press office?
     
    Don't worry, dear fellow.Just stick your fingers in your ears and close your eyes and hope that the truth will somehow vanish.

    Barring that, point and sputter.

  146. @syonredux
    @Art Deco


    The motormouth who wastes everyone’s time quoting Wikipedia to me seems to fancy it’s a matter of note that the South African foreign minister visited Israel (as if foreign ministers visiting foreign capitals was unusual), that South Africa bought a piece of military equipment off of Israel,
     
    Rather more than that, dear fellow.Joint nuclear project:

    From the mid-1970s, the two countries were allegedly involved in joint nuclear-weapons development and testing. According to Seymour Hersh, for example, the 1979 Vela Incident was the third joint Israeli–South African nuclear test in the Indian Ocean.[21] Richard Rhodes concludes the incident was an Israeli nuclear test, conducted in cooperation with South Africa, and that the United States administration deliberately obscured this fact in order to avoid complicating relations with Israel.[22]

    By 1980, a sizeable contingent of South African military and government officials were living permanently in Israel, to oversee the numerous joint projects between the countries, while their children attended local Israeli schools.[11] Scientific collaboration also continued to increase, with many scientists working in each other’s countries. Perhaps most sensitive was the large group of Israeli scientists working at South Africa’s Pelindaba nuclear facility.[11]
     

    The Vela Incident, also known as the South Atlantic Flash, was an unidentified “double flash” of light detected by an American Vela Hotel satellite on September 22, 1979, near the Prince Edward Islands off Antarctica, which many believe was of nuclear origin. The most widespread theory among those who believe the flash was of nuclear origin is that it resulted from a joint South African and Israeli nuclear test.[1][2][3] The topic remains highly disputed today.

    Well before the Vela Incident, American intelligence agencies had made the assessment that Israel probably possessed its own nuclear weapons.[31] According to journalist Seymour Hersh, the detection was the third joint Israeli-South African nuclear test in the Indian Ocean, and the Israelis had sent two IDF ships and “a contingent of Israeli military men and nuclear experts” for the test.[1] Author Richard Rhodes also concludes the incident was an Israeli nuclear test, conducted in cooperation with South Africa, and that the United States administration deliberately obscured this fact in order to avoid complicating relations with South Africa.[2] Likewise, Leonard Weiss offers a number of arguments to support the test being Israeli, and claims that successive US administrations continue to cover up the test to divert unwanted attention that may portray its foreign policy in a bad light.[3] In the 2008 book The Nuclear Express: A Political History of the Bomb and its Proliferation Thomas C. Reed and Danny B. Stillman stated their opinion that the “double flash” was the result of a joint South African-Israeli nuclear bomb test.[32] David Albright stated in his article about the “double flash” event in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists that “If the 1979 flash was caused by a test, most experts agree it was probably an Israeli test”.[33]

    In 2010, it was reported that, on February 27, 1980, President Jimmy Carter wrote in his diary, “We have a growing belief among our scientists that the Israelis did indeed conduct a nuclear test explosion in the ocean near the southern end of Africa.”[34]

    Leonard Weiss, of the Center for International Security and Cooperation at Stanford University writes: “The weight of the evidence that the Vela event was an Israeli nuclear test assisted by South Africa appears overwhelming.”[35]

    Thomas C. Reed writes that he believes the Vela incident was an Israeli neutron bomb test.[36] The test would have gone undetected as the Israelis specifically chose a window of opportunity when, according to the published data, no active Vela satellites were observing the area. Additionally, the Israelis chose to set off the test during a typhoon. However, the Israelis and their South African partners had miscalculated as the over a decade-old Vela satellite which detected the blast had been officially listed by the US government as ‘retired’, although nonetheless was still able to receive data.[37] By 1984, according to Mordechai Vanunu, Israel was mass-producing neutron bombs.[38]

     

    Replies: @Art Deco

    Syon, the mainstream press who once employed him gave up on Seymour Hersh 30 years ago. By 1996, his work was being ridiculed in those outlets (see reviews thereof by Garry Wills in the Washington Post). An aspect of that was incredible claims he would make about process (for example, claiming to have interviewed ‘1,000’ people for one book but listing only a small fraction in his bibliography “Hersh is known for the harsh and hectoring phone call”) and another aspect was testimony from former research assistants of Hersh about the sort of material he was willing to use. At least quote someone reputable if we’re all to hear about what the purveyors of scandal literature ‘believe’.

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @Art Deco

    It's not just Hersh, dear fellow.....

    Replies: @matt

    , @syonredux
    @Art Deco


    It is crucially important to remember that Rabin the army chief of staff, ambassador and prime minister of the 1970s and defense minister of the 1980s was not Rabin the defense minister and prime minister of the 1990s — after the end of the Cold War, when South Africa was transitioning from minority to majority rule. This holds for Shimon Peres as well. Today, as Israel's president, he eulogizes Nelson Mandela, but in that distant time — the “past accounts” Peres so loathes — as defense minister after the Yom Kippur War he played a central role in Israel's clandestine relations with South Africa.

    It was in this period, according to documentary evidence, that the Israel South Africa Agreement was established. Meetings were held in Zurich and in Lisbon, among senior officers and government officials from both countries. (Israel was represented by Defense Ministry Director General Yitzhak Ironi and his deputy, Yaakov Shapira).

    The lessons of October 1973 were still fresh for Israel. The sense of existential distress and the dependence on the American military airlift led the government to seek regional alliances with states that had abundant resources and were eager for military cooperation. The main candidates were Iran and South Africa. These relationships were important for funding Israel's development of advanced military systems for the Israel Defense Forces and reducing per-unit costs through mass production, not to mention the crucial role in party politics played by the local defense industry.

    [.....]


    It was easy for the Israeli establishment to hold their noses and identify with the strategy. They saw Africa as a group of whites that was under attack. The few against the many there, the few against the Arabs here. Dozens of African states — states that even back in the day of Prime Minister Golda Meir had received much agricultural and industrial aid from Mashav, Israel’s Agency for International Development Cooperation — betrayed Israel as they liberated themselves from the rule of England and France, Belgium and Portugal. They succumbed to the pressure of the petroleum countries and severed ties with Israel. In secret, contrary to the declarations of their leaders, many of these states preserved economic and other ties with South Africa.

    Rabin and Peres were not alone in maintaining ties with Pretoria. When South Africa's official archives were opened, first to diligent researchers before publication in books and databases, they disclosed the web of clandestine contacts between every Israeli defense minister and chief of staff and their South African counterparts.

    In that era of alliance between isolated states, relations were built on blood, race and money. Security was what mattered — and money, lots of money, at least for one side — and to hell with segregation. The Israelis did such a good job of teaching the South Africans the meaning of inequality that in the spring of 1983, when Defense Minister Ariel Sharon was ousted and Moshe Arens replaced him, their South African opposite number, Magnus Malan, became tired of the pretense.

    Israel wanted South Africa to purchase more military equipment. Pretoria agreed, but its local defense industry demanded reciprocity — partial, specific, not wholly balanced, but nevertheless recognition that after years of backwardness, South African factories had something to offer. For example, a telephone exchange. Malan explained to Arens that the defense deal in effect depended on South Africa's being awarded an Israeli government tender for a telephone exchange. Arens was evasive: There are standards, an irrevocable tender has already been awarded, more's the pity.


    Malan tried very hard to stay polite. “We,” he said, “have bought more than a billion dollars of goods from you. You have purchased less than $10 million from us.”

    South African interest whet Israel’s appetite. Peres suggested selling up to half the production of Merkava tanks, 10 a month, at $810,000 each for an order of at least 1,000 tanks. The South Africans were impressed by the performance of the tank, but wanted to wait until it began operating as a weapons system. At the height of the clandestine alliance there were plans to build a school “on the Haifa outskirts” for the children of the South Africans who were expected to come to work in a joint program in a nearby defense plant.

    The South African documents, which are freely available on the website of the Wilson Center Digital Archive, record various aspects of the relations between the governments. The availability of uranium in South Africa is described, along with the construction of the Israeli nuclear reactor in Dimona and the transfer of knowledge and technology from Israel. There are hints, although no specifics, about Israeli partnership in South Africa’s nuclear program, which was suspended and eventually dismantled, with its six bombs, by President F.W. De Klerk toward the last decade of the 20th century.

    The South African documents indicate that Israeli and South African defense officials frequently discussed intermediate range ground-to-ground missiles. According to the papers, these were Jericho missiles, or Chalet missiles, as the South Africans called them. For example, a report by South African Maj. Gen. Gleeson about his mission in Israel in February 1979. The subject of the visit: a ground-to-ground missile with a range of 185 to 510 kilometers. Gleeson followed the testing of the missile and reported its size: “diameter 0.8 meters, length 13 meters, weight 7 tons, payload 980 kilograms, circular error probable at the summit of the range 200 meters, maximum speed 5.7 Mach.

    On a previous occasion, in 1975, Peres tried to convince his South African counterpart, P.W. Botha, to unfreeze negotiations on a joint defense program, presumably on the same matter. Botha refused and suggested that Peres should make a proposal. Peres came back with a suggestion that Botha consider contributing 10 percent to 15 percent of the funds already spent on developing a lightweight fighter plane (the successor to the Kfir and an early and less ambitious version of the Lavi) and other equipment. Botha said he would consider the offer but wasn't willing to commit himself to the entire program and that he insisted on being able to proceed in phases.

    The South African summary of the discussion said that “Botha expressed interest in a certain number of Chalets, if the right payload was accessible, but we don’t have aggressive intentions and therefore the Burglar model for a range of 3,000 km. is superfluous. He was told that a range of thousands of kilometers was the idea of the South African government.”

    In order to impress the South Africans, a meeting was arranged for them with the employees of one of the departments in Lakam, the Bureau of Scientific Relations in the Defense Ministry, headed by Lt. Col. Dudu Benaya, who boasted of the talents of his research officers — all of whom excelled in initiative, high intelligence, language proficiency and military experience in the field and at headquarters. All those talents did not prevent the office from later inflicting the Jonathan Pollard affair on Israel. After the conversation with Benaya the guests were taken to see war booty from the Yom Kippur War — tanks, cannons, other combat vehicles, Katyusha rockets and even Frug missiles, which according to the hosts could be armed with nuclear warheads.

    http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.562796
     
  147. @Steve Sailer
    @Art Deco

    Nuclear bombs.

    Replies: @Art Deco

    What nuclear bombs? South Africa’s productive capacity in 1980 exceeded that of Israel by a factor of 4; why would it seem plausible to you they were dependent on Israeli technology no one knows squat about? Whence comes your habit of treating poorly sourced contentions about secret programs as if they were well-known established facts?

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @Art Deco


    What nuclear bombs? South Africa’s productive capacity in 1980 exceeded that of Israel by a factor of 4; why would it seem plausible to you they were dependent on Israeli technology no one knows squat about?
     
    Just to be clear, you're surely not implying that Israel doesn't have nuclear weaponry?Or do you regard that as rumor mongering by journalists seeking a book sale?

    As for the arrangement between Israel and South Africa, what's so hard to understand? Two states with a few things in common pooling resources....
    , @reiner Tor
    @Art Deco

    I'd like to ask the same question as syon. Do you think there could be reasonable doubt as to whether Israel has nuclear weapons?

    , @syonredux
    @Art Deco


    The South African documents, which are freely available on the website of the Wilson Center Digital Archive, record various aspects of the relations between the governments. The availability of uranium in South Africa is described, along with the construction of the Israeli nuclear reactor in Dimona and the transfer of knowledge and technology from Israel. There are hints, although no specifics, about Israeli partnership in South Africa’s nuclear program, which was suspended and eventually dismantled, with its six bombs, by President F.W. De Klerk toward the last decade of the 20th century.
     
    http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.562796
    , @syonredux
    @Art Deco


    As bureau chief for the Washington Post in Southern Africa and Jerusalem in the 1980s, I squandered a lot of hours trying to pierce the iron curtain that the two countries carefully drew around their strategic partnership. I reported the various estimates that the arms trade between the two amounted to anywhere from $125 million to $400 million annually — far beyond the $100 million that the International Monetary Fund reported as total imports and exports in the mid 1980s. Soon after arriving in Jerusalem in 1986, I asked Ezer Weizman, a former Israeli defense minister and champion of the secret partnership, about the uncanny resemblance between Israel’s Kfir fighter jet — itself patterned on the French Mirage — and South Africa’s newly minted Cheetah. He just smiled at me and replied, "I’ve noticed that as well."
     

    Polakow-Suransky puts Israel’s annual military exports to South Africa between 1974 and 1993 at $600 million, which made South Africa Israel’s second or third largest trading partner after the United States and Britain. Military aircraft updates in the mid-1980s alone accounted for some $2 billion, according to correspondence he obtained. He puts the total military trade between the countries at well above $10 billion over the two decades.
     

    David Ben-Gurion, Israel’s founding father, understood this, routinely condemned apartheid and sought to ally his country with the new black-governed nations of sub-Saharan Africa that emerged from colonial rule in the late 1950s and early 1960s. But the balance of forces began to change dramatically after the 1967 Six-Day War, when Israel seized control of East Jerusalem, the West Bank, and Gaza. Ben-Gurion’s heirs — Yitzhak Rabin, Shimon Peres, and Moshe Dayan, second-generation leaders of the ruling Labor Party — worked to transform Israel into a mini super power and had no qualms about cooperating with South Africa to get there. "It was not a shotgun marriage," writes Polakow-Suransky.

    The 1973 Yom Kippur War put the seal on the shift. Egypt succeeded in framing the war as a Zionist invasion of the African continent, and more than 20 African states severed diplomatic ties with Israel. South Africa, by contrast, furnished Israel with spare parts for its Mirage jet fighters, and South Africa’s substantial Jewish community, encouraged by its government, poured money and support into the Zionist state. The two countries were on their way to becoming, in Polakow-Suranskys words, "brothers in arms."
     

    Peres had been Ben-Gurion’s gifted protégé and a key architect in building Israel’s defense establishment and its nuclear capability during his years as director general of the Defense Ministry. When he became defense minister after the Yom Kippur War, he sought to grow the military-industrial complex in part with millions from the arms export market, which Polakow-Suransky reports increased 15-fold between 1973 and 1981. Early on his new role, Peres secretly visited Pretoria. In a memo afterward, he told his South African hosts that their mutual cooperation was based not only on common interest, "but also on the unshakeable foundations of our common hatred of injustice and our refusal to submit to it." That same year the two governments began holding biannual gatherings for Defense Ministry officials and arms industry exporters and an annual strategic cooperation conference between intelligence officials.
     

    By 1979, Polakow-Suransky writes, South Africa was Israel’s single largest arms customer, accounting for 35 percent of its military exports. South Africa supplied Israel a 500-ton stockpile of uranium for its nuclear program. In turn, Israel sold South Africa 30 grams of tritium, a radioactive substance that helped increase the explosive power of its thermonuclear weapons. The extent of Israeli-South African cooperation was symbolized in September 1979 by a double flash over the South Atlantic that analysts believed came from an Israeli nuclear bomb test, undertaken with South African cooperation. To this day the details remain classified.
     

    In the early days of the arms supply pact, Israel could argue that many Western countries, including the United States, had similar surreptitious relationships with the apartheid regime. But by 1980 Israel was the last major violator of the arms embargo. It stuck with South Africa throughout the 1980s when the regime clung to power in the face of international condemnation and intense rounds of political unrest in the black townships.

    By 1987 the apartheid regime was struggling to cope with the combination of internal unrest and international condemnation to the point where even Israel was forced to take notice. A key motivator was Section 508, an amendment to the anti-apartheid sanctions bill that passed the U.S. Congress in 1986 and survived President Ronald Reagan’s veto. It required the State Department to produce an annual report on countries violating the arms embargo. The first one, issued in April 1987, reported that Israel had violated the international ban on arm sales "on a regular basis." The report gave South Africa’s opponents within the Israeli government and their American Jewish allies ammunition to force Israel to adapt a mild set of sanctions against South Africa. I was in Jerusalem when Israel admitted publicly for the first time that it had significant military ties with South Africa and pledged not to enter into any new agreements — which meant, of course, that existing agreements would be maintained. It was, writes Polakow-Suransky, "little more than a cosmetic gesture."
     

    From the start, spokesmen for American Jewish organizations acted as apologists or dupes for Israel’s arms sales. Moshe Decter, a respected director of research for the American Jewish Committee, wrote in the New York Times in 1976 that Israel’s arms trade with South Africa was "dwarfed into insignificance" compared to that of other countries and said that to claim otherwise was "rank cynicism, rampant hypocrisy and anti-Semitic prejudice." In a March 1986 debate televised on PBS, Rabbi David Saperstein, a leader of the Reform Jewish movement and outspoken opponent of apartheid, claimed Israeli involvement with South Africa was negligible. He conceded that there may have been arms sales during the rightist Likud years in power from 1977 to 1984, but stated that under Shimon Peres, who served as prime minister between 1984 and 1986, "there have been no new arms sales." In fact, some of the biggest military contracts and cooperative ventures were signed during Peres’s watch.
     

    The Anti-Defamation League participated in a blatant propaganda campaign against Nelson Mandela and the ANC in the mid 1980s and employed an alleged "fact-finder" named Roy Bullock to spy on the anti-apartheid campaign in the United States — a service he was simultaneously performing for the South African government. The ADL defended the white regime’s purported constitutional reforms while denouncing the ANC as "totalitarian, anti-humane, anti-democratic, anti-Israel, and anti-American." (In fairness, the ADL later changed its tune. After his release in 1990, Mandela met in Geneva with a number of American Jewish leaders, including ADL president Abe Foxman, who emerged to call the ANC leader "a great hero of freedom.")
     
    http://foreignpolicy.com/2010/05/24/israels-most-illicit-affair/
    , @Reg Cæsar
    @Art Deco


    What nuclear bombs? South Africa’s productive capacity in 1980 exceeded that of Israel by a factor of 4; why would it seem plausible to you they were dependent on Israeli technology no one knows squat about?
     
    Except for gigantic China and India, no nation without a significant Jewish minority (majority in one case) has been able to join the nuclear club until very recently. Seems to be an important ingredient.

    Thus, the German bomb of the 1940s was as much a ghost as the Iraqi bomb of the 2000s.

    Replies: @reiner Tor

  148. @Art Deco
    "Mondoweiss"? Why not just cut to the chase and send me to the PLO press office?

    The problem with literature like this (which John Prados and Seymour Hersch have been producing for decades) is that if there is no scandal, you've got no book, and you took an advance. There commonly is not a competing set of authors or anything you can check readily or (given the use of off-the-record interviews, check at all), which leaves the authors a great deal of leeway to con you.

    And general characterizations of what your political enemies 'think' about x, y, or z are not of any value.

    Replies: @syonredux

    “Mondoweiss”? Why not just cut to the chase and send me to the PLO press office?

    Don’t worry, dear fellow.Just stick your fingers in your ears and close your eyes and hope that the truth will somehow vanish.

    Barring that, point and sputter.

  149. @Art Deco
    @Steve Sailer

    What nuclear bombs? South Africa's productive capacity in 1980 exceeded that of Israel by a factor of 4; why would it seem plausible to you they were dependent on Israeli technology no one knows squat about? Whence comes your habit of treating poorly sourced contentions about secret programs as if they were well-known established facts?

    Replies: @syonredux, @reiner Tor, @syonredux, @syonredux, @Reg Cæsar

    What nuclear bombs? South Africa’s productive capacity in 1980 exceeded that of Israel by a factor of 4; why would it seem plausible to you they were dependent on Israeli technology no one knows squat about?

    Just to be clear, you’re surely not implying that Israel doesn’t have nuclear weaponry?Or do you regard that as rumor mongering by journalists seeking a book sale?

    As for the arrangement between Israel and South Africa, what’s so hard to understand? Two states with a few things in common pooling resources….

  150. @Art Deco
    @Steve Sailer

    What nuclear bombs? South Africa's productive capacity in 1980 exceeded that of Israel by a factor of 4; why would it seem plausible to you they were dependent on Israeli technology no one knows squat about? Whence comes your habit of treating poorly sourced contentions about secret programs as if they were well-known established facts?

    Replies: @syonredux, @reiner Tor, @syonredux, @syonredux, @Reg Cæsar

    I’d like to ask the same question as syon. Do you think there could be reasonable doubt as to whether Israel has nuclear weapons?

  151. @Art Deco
    @syonredux

    Syon, the mainstream press who once employed him gave up on Seymour Hersh 30 years ago. By 1996, his work was being ridiculed in those outlets (see reviews thereof by Garry Wills in the Washington Post). An aspect of that was incredible claims he would make about process (for example, claiming to have interviewed '1,000' people for one book but listing only a small fraction in his bibliography "Hersh is known for the harsh and hectoring phone call") and another aspect was testimony from former research assistants of Hersh about the sort of material he was willing to use. At least quote someone reputable if we're all to hear about what the purveyors of scandal literature 'believe'.

    Replies: @syonredux, @syonredux

    It’s not just Hersh, dear fellow…..

    • Replies: @matt
    @syonredux

    Art Deco is not worth engaging on this topic. Everyone has their brain-eating memetic parasites, Arty just happens to have a different one than you and most of the rest of the commenters here.

  152. @syonredux
    @Art Deco

    It's not just Hersh, dear fellow.....

    Replies: @matt

    Art Deco is not worth engaging on this topic. Everyone has their brain-eating memetic parasites, Arty just happens to have a different one than you and most of the rest of the commenters here.

  153. I know you know that. I asked Art Deco’s opinion on this question.

  154. @Art Deco
    @syonredux

    Syon, the mainstream press who once employed him gave up on Seymour Hersh 30 years ago. By 1996, his work was being ridiculed in those outlets (see reviews thereof by Garry Wills in the Washington Post). An aspect of that was incredible claims he would make about process (for example, claiming to have interviewed '1,000' people for one book but listing only a small fraction in his bibliography "Hersh is known for the harsh and hectoring phone call") and another aspect was testimony from former research assistants of Hersh about the sort of material he was willing to use. At least quote someone reputable if we're all to hear about what the purveyors of scandal literature 'believe'.

    Replies: @syonredux, @syonredux

    It is crucially important to remember that Rabin the army chief of staff, ambassador and prime minister of the 1970s and defense minister of the 1980s was not Rabin the defense minister and prime minister of the 1990s — after the end of the Cold War, when South Africa was transitioning from minority to majority rule. This holds for Shimon Peres as well. Today, as Israel’s president, he eulogizes Nelson Mandela, but in that distant time — the “past accounts” Peres so loathes — as defense minister after the Yom Kippur War he played a central role in Israel’s clandestine relations with South Africa.

    It was in this period, according to documentary evidence, that the Israel South Africa Agreement was established. Meetings were held in Zurich and in Lisbon, among senior officers and government officials from both countries. (Israel was represented by Defense Ministry Director General Yitzhak Ironi and his deputy, Yaakov Shapira).

    The lessons of October 1973 were still fresh for Israel. The sense of existential distress and the dependence on the American military airlift led the government to seek regional alliances with states that had abundant resources and were eager for military cooperation. The main candidates were Iran and South Africa. These relationships were important for funding Israel’s development of advanced military systems for the Israel Defense Forces and reducing per-unit costs through mass production, not to mention the crucial role in party politics played by the local defense industry.

    […..]

    It was easy for the Israeli establishment to hold their noses and identify with the strategy. They saw Africa as a group of whites that was under attack. The few against the many there, the few against the Arabs here. Dozens of African states — states that even back in the day of Prime Minister Golda Meir had received much agricultural and industrial aid from Mashav, Israel’s Agency for International Development Cooperation — betrayed Israel as they liberated themselves from the rule of England and France, Belgium and Portugal. They succumbed to the pressure of the petroleum countries and severed ties with Israel. In secret, contrary to the declarations of their leaders, many of these states preserved economic and other ties with South Africa.

    Rabin and Peres were not alone in maintaining ties with Pretoria. When South Africa’s official archives were opened, first to diligent researchers before publication in books and databases, they disclosed the web of clandestine contacts between every Israeli defense minister and chief of staff and their South African counterparts.

    In that era of alliance between isolated states, relations were built on blood, race and money. Security was what mattered — and money, lots of money, at least for one side — and to hell with segregation. The Israelis did such a good job of teaching the South Africans the meaning of inequality that in the spring of 1983, when Defense Minister Ariel Sharon was ousted and Moshe Arens replaced him, their South African opposite number, Magnus Malan, became tired of the pretense.

    Israel wanted South Africa to purchase more military equipment. Pretoria agreed, but its local defense industry demanded reciprocity — partial, specific, not wholly balanced, but nevertheless recognition that after years of backwardness, South African factories had something to offer. For example, a telephone exchange. Malan explained to Arens that the defense deal in effect depended on South Africa’s being awarded an Israeli government tender for a telephone exchange. Arens was evasive: There are standards, an irrevocable tender has already been awarded, more’s the pity.

    Malan tried very hard to stay polite. “We,” he said, “have bought more than a billion dollars of goods from you. You have purchased less than $10 million from us.”

    South African interest whet Israel’s appetite. Peres suggested selling up to half the production of Merkava tanks, 10 a month, at $810,000 each for an order of at least 1,000 tanks. The South Africans were impressed by the performance of the tank, but wanted to wait until it began operating as a weapons system. At the height of the clandestine alliance there were plans to build a school “on the Haifa outskirts” for the children of the South Africans who were expected to come to work in a joint program in a nearby defense plant.

    The South African documents, which are freely available on the website of the Wilson Center Digital Archive, record various aspects of the relations between the governments. The availability of uranium in South Africa is described, along with the construction of the Israeli nuclear reactor in Dimona and the transfer of knowledge and technology from Israel. There are hints, although no specifics, about Israeli partnership in South Africa’s nuclear program, which was suspended and eventually dismantled, with its six bombs, by President F.W. De Klerk toward the last decade of the 20th century.

    The South African documents indicate that Israeli and South African defense officials frequently discussed intermediate range ground-to-ground missiles. According to the papers, these were Jericho missiles, or Chalet missiles, as the South Africans called them. For example, a report by South African Maj. Gen. Gleeson about his mission in Israel in February 1979. The subject of the visit: a ground-to-ground missile with a range of 185 to 510 kilometers. Gleeson followed the testing of the missile and reported its size: “diameter 0.8 meters, length 13 meters, weight 7 tons, payload 980 kilograms, circular error probable at the summit of the range 200 meters, maximum speed 5.7 Mach.

    On a previous occasion, in 1975, Peres tried to convince his South African counterpart, P.W. Botha, to unfreeze negotiations on a joint defense program, presumably on the same matter. Botha refused and suggested that Peres should make a proposal. Peres came back with a suggestion that Botha consider contributing 10 percent to 15 percent of the funds already spent on developing a lightweight fighter plane (the successor to the Kfir and an early and less ambitious version of the Lavi) and other equipment. Botha said he would consider the offer but wasn’t willing to commit himself to the entire program and that he insisted on being able to proceed in phases.

    The South African summary of the discussion said that “Botha expressed interest in a certain number of Chalets, if the right payload was accessible, but we don’t have aggressive intentions and therefore the Burglar model for a range of 3,000 km. is superfluous. He was told that a range of thousands of kilometers was the idea of the South African government.”

    In order to impress the South Africans, a meeting was arranged for them with the employees of one of the departments in Lakam, the Bureau of Scientific Relations in the Defense Ministry, headed by Lt. Col. Dudu Benaya, who boasted of the talents of his research officers — all of whom excelled in initiative, high intelligence, language proficiency and military experience in the field and at headquarters. All those talents did not prevent the office from later inflicting the Jonathan Pollard affair on Israel. After the conversation with Benaya the guests were taken to see war booty from the Yom Kippur War — tanks, cannons, other combat vehicles, Katyusha rockets and even Frug missiles, which according to the hosts could be armed with nuclear warheads.

    http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.562796

  155. @Art Deco
    @Steve Sailer

    What nuclear bombs? South Africa's productive capacity in 1980 exceeded that of Israel by a factor of 4; why would it seem plausible to you they were dependent on Israeli technology no one knows squat about? Whence comes your habit of treating poorly sourced contentions about secret programs as if they were well-known established facts?

    Replies: @syonredux, @reiner Tor, @syonredux, @syonredux, @Reg Cæsar

    The South African documents, which are freely available on the website of the Wilson Center Digital Archive, record various aspects of the relations between the governments. The availability of uranium in South Africa is described, along with the construction of the Israeli nuclear reactor in Dimona and the transfer of knowledge and technology from Israel. There are hints, although no specifics, about Israeli partnership in South Africa’s nuclear program, which was suspended and eventually dismantled, with its six bombs, by President F.W. De Klerk toward the last decade of the 20th century.

    http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.562796

  156. @Art Deco
    @Steve Sailer

    What nuclear bombs? South Africa's productive capacity in 1980 exceeded that of Israel by a factor of 4; why would it seem plausible to you they were dependent on Israeli technology no one knows squat about? Whence comes your habit of treating poorly sourced contentions about secret programs as if they were well-known established facts?

    Replies: @syonredux, @reiner Tor, @syonredux, @syonredux, @Reg Cæsar

    As bureau chief for the Washington Post in Southern Africa and Jerusalem in the 1980s, I squandered a lot of hours trying to pierce the iron curtain that the two countries carefully drew around their strategic partnership. I reported the various estimates that the arms trade between the two amounted to anywhere from $125 million to $400 million annually — far beyond the $100 million that the International Monetary Fund reported as total imports and exports in the mid 1980s. Soon after arriving in Jerusalem in 1986, I asked Ezer Weizman, a former Israeli defense minister and champion of the secret partnership, about the uncanny resemblance between Israel’s Kfir fighter jet — itself patterned on the French Mirage — and South Africa’s newly minted Cheetah. He just smiled at me and replied, “I’ve noticed that as well.”

    Polakow-Suransky puts Israel’s annual military exports to South Africa between 1974 and 1993 at $600 million, which made South Africa Israel’s second or third largest trading partner after the United States and Britain. Military aircraft updates in the mid-1980s alone accounted for some $2 billion, according to correspondence he obtained. He puts the total military trade between the countries at well above $10 billion over the two decades.

    David Ben-Gurion, Israel’s founding father, understood this, routinely condemned apartheid and sought to ally his country with the new black-governed nations of sub-Saharan Africa that emerged from colonial rule in the late 1950s and early 1960s. But the balance of forces began to change dramatically after the 1967 Six-Day War, when Israel seized control of East Jerusalem, the West Bank, and Gaza. Ben-Gurion’s heirs — Yitzhak Rabin, Shimon Peres, and Moshe Dayan, second-generation leaders of the ruling Labor Party — worked to transform Israel into a mini super power and had no qualms about cooperating with South Africa to get there. “It was not a shotgun marriage,” writes Polakow-Suransky.

    The 1973 Yom Kippur War put the seal on the shift. Egypt succeeded in framing the war as a Zionist invasion of the African continent, and more than 20 African states severed diplomatic ties with Israel. South Africa, by contrast, furnished Israel with spare parts for its Mirage jet fighters, and South Africa’s substantial Jewish community, encouraged by its government, poured money and support into the Zionist state. The two countries were on their way to becoming, in Polakow-Suranskys words, “brothers in arms.”

    Peres had been Ben-Gurion’s gifted protégé and a key architect in building Israel’s defense establishment and its nuclear capability during his years as director general of the Defense Ministry. When he became defense minister after the Yom Kippur War, he sought to grow the military-industrial complex in part with millions from the arms export market, which Polakow-Suransky reports increased 15-fold between 1973 and 1981. Early on his new role, Peres secretly visited Pretoria. In a memo afterward, he told his South African hosts that their mutual cooperation was based not only on common interest, “but also on the unshakeable foundations of our common hatred of injustice and our refusal to submit to it.” That same year the two governments began holding biannual gatherings for Defense Ministry officials and arms industry exporters and an annual strategic cooperation conference between intelligence officials.

    By 1979, Polakow-Suransky writes, South Africa was Israel’s single largest arms customer, accounting for 35 percent of its military exports. South Africa supplied Israel a 500-ton stockpile of uranium for its nuclear program. In turn, Israel sold South Africa 30 grams of tritium, a radioactive substance that helped increase the explosive power of its thermonuclear weapons. The extent of Israeli-South African cooperation was symbolized in September 1979 by a double flash over the South Atlantic that analysts believed came from an Israeli nuclear bomb test, undertaken with South African cooperation. To this day the details remain classified.

    In the early days of the arms supply pact, Israel could argue that many Western countries, including the United States, had similar surreptitious relationships with the apartheid regime. But by 1980 Israel was the last major violator of the arms embargo. It stuck with South Africa throughout the 1980s when the regime clung to power in the face of international condemnation and intense rounds of political unrest in the black townships.

    By 1987 the apartheid regime was struggling to cope with the combination of internal unrest and international condemnation to the point where even Israel was forced to take notice. A key motivator was Section 508, an amendment to the anti-apartheid sanctions bill that passed the U.S. Congress in 1986 and survived President Ronald Reagan’s veto. It required the State Department to produce an annual report on countries violating the arms embargo. The first one, issued in April 1987, reported that Israel had violated the international ban on arm sales “on a regular basis.” The report gave South Africa’s opponents within the Israeli government and their American Jewish allies ammunition to force Israel to adapt a mild set of sanctions against South Africa. I was in Jerusalem when Israel admitted publicly for the first time that it had significant military ties with South Africa and pledged not to enter into any new agreements — which meant, of course, that existing agreements would be maintained. It was, writes Polakow-Suransky, “little more than a cosmetic gesture.”

    From the start, spokesmen for American Jewish organizations acted as apologists or dupes for Israel’s arms sales. Moshe Decter, a respected director of research for the American Jewish Committee, wrote in the New York Times in 1976 that Israel’s arms trade with South Africa was “dwarfed into insignificance” compared to that of other countries and said that to claim otherwise was “rank cynicism, rampant hypocrisy and anti-Semitic prejudice.” In a March 1986 debate televised on PBS, Rabbi David Saperstein, a leader of the Reform Jewish movement and outspoken opponent of apartheid, claimed Israeli involvement with South Africa was negligible. He conceded that there may have been arms sales during the rightist Likud years in power from 1977 to 1984, but stated that under Shimon Peres, who served as prime minister between 1984 and 1986, “there have been no new arms sales.” In fact, some of the biggest military contracts and cooperative ventures were signed during Peres’s watch.

    The Anti-Defamation League participated in a blatant propaganda campaign against Nelson Mandela and the ANC in the mid 1980s and employed an alleged “fact-finder” named Roy Bullock to spy on the anti-apartheid campaign in the United States — a service he was simultaneously performing for the South African government. The ADL defended the white regime’s purported constitutional reforms while denouncing the ANC as “totalitarian, anti-humane, anti-democratic, anti-Israel, and anti-American.” (In fairness, the ADL later changed its tune. After his release in 1990, Mandela met in Geneva with a number of American Jewish leaders, including ADL president Abe Foxman, who emerged to call the ANC leader “a great hero of freedom.”)

    http://foreignpolicy.com/2010/05/24/israels-most-illicit-affair/

  157. @Art Deco
    @silviosilver

    What, you fancy Jewish cabinet secretaries are guilty of espionage or treason or think the United States should be dissolved in favor of some other political entity? Which ones did you have in mind?

    Replies: @silviosilver

    Actually I didn’t have in mind Jewish politicians or functionaries. I think it goes without saying they’ll share information with Israel (or anyone else they deem it in their interests too). Of course, that’s anti-semitic, which means it can’t possibly be true.

    No, what I had in mind was that in Israel the ethnic background/interests of a politician is allowed to matter. In western democracies it’s considered meaningless, and anyone who’d think otherwise is simply sick in the head. In other words, it’s just another in a long list of Jewish/gentile double standards and just another way in which Israeli democracy is very unlike western democracy.

  158. @Steve Sailer
    @Lot

    So the 9/11 terrorists who flew into the Pentagon weren't terrorists?

    Replies: @Lot, @Reg Cæsar

    So the 9/11 terrorists who flew into the Pentagon weren’t terrorists?

    They came to spend the rest of their lives in America. That makes them immigrants.

  159. @Art Deco
    @Steve Sailer

    What nuclear bombs? South Africa's productive capacity in 1980 exceeded that of Israel by a factor of 4; why would it seem plausible to you they were dependent on Israeli technology no one knows squat about? Whence comes your habit of treating poorly sourced contentions about secret programs as if they were well-known established facts?

    Replies: @syonredux, @reiner Tor, @syonredux, @syonredux, @Reg Cæsar

    What nuclear bombs? South Africa’s productive capacity in 1980 exceeded that of Israel by a factor of 4; why would it seem plausible to you they were dependent on Israeli technology no one knows squat about?

    Except for gigantic China and India, no nation without a significant Jewish minority (majority in one case) has been able to join the nuclear club until very recently. Seems to be an important ingredient.

    Thus, the German bomb of the 1940s was as much a ghost as the Iraqi bomb of the 2000s.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    @Reg Cæsar

    That's a rather bizarre theory. South Africa was simply too small and without any expertise to build a bomb, unlike Israel, which had some Manhattan Project talent and probably some informal help from that talent pool. But they needed raw materials. South Africa might have managed to build simple gun-design bombs, but apparently they were aiming higher. In any event Israeli expertise helped them and the in turn helped the Israelis with raw materials.

  160. @Reg Cæsar
    @Art Deco


    What nuclear bombs? South Africa’s productive capacity in 1980 exceeded that of Israel by a factor of 4; why would it seem plausible to you they were dependent on Israeli technology no one knows squat about?
     
    Except for gigantic China and India, no nation without a significant Jewish minority (majority in one case) has been able to join the nuclear club until very recently. Seems to be an important ingredient.

    Thus, the German bomb of the 1940s was as much a ghost as the Iraqi bomb of the 2000s.

    Replies: @reiner Tor

    That’s a rather bizarre theory. South Africa was simply too small and without any expertise to build a bomb, unlike Israel, which had some Manhattan Project talent and probably some informal help from that talent pool. But they needed raw materials. South Africa might have managed to build simple gun-design bombs, but apparently they were aiming higher. In any event Israeli expertise helped them and the in turn helped the Israelis with raw materials.

  161. “Actually, no. The old joke about South African Apartheid was quasi-educational.Your joke was rather lame.”

    
If you are a professor, you are being rather obtuse. I was not joking, I was offering an observation. Do you project onto your students how the world ought to work or seek to indoctrinate them?

    “Seeing as how the majority of immigrants coming to the USA at present are Hispanic Amerinds and Mestizos, mass immigration means race replacement.”

    They are a mix of European and native blood. Multi-racial. Some could reasonably argue they are white. Then again, damn those Europeans for intermingling with Central and South Americans. Race traitors!

    “In this case, it’s a trend that our elites are allowing.”

    You are purposely avoiding the key question—Do not American citizens have the liberty to make those decisions?

    “Peons like myself have no say in the matter”

    If indeed you are professor, you are an integral part of the elite, that being higher educational institution.

    “Dear fellow, I dearly wish that VDARE were part of the elite.That would be a cause for hope. Unfortunately, VDARE is not part of the elite.They have no influence in the corridors of power.”

    
Lord knows why you are outright being intellectually dishonest. VDARE and conservative new sites are part of the media. The media directly influences citizens. Some of those citizens seek elected office, who use VDARE and other media outlets as the sounding board and springboard to push their agenda.

    
“Dear fellow, attacking Whites is the mainstream these days”

    So is race baiting by whites, blacks, Asians, etc., my friend.

    “When the elite are against you, options are non-existent”

    Observably false. Refer to the Marquette case I cited.

    “Where he had no power, no influence.”

    David Duke wielded power in his district and could work to push his agenda, the same one that you support.

    “Respectable” conservatives (like the National Review) are in favor destroying European America.”

    First, it depends on how one defines “destroy”. Again, do not American citizens have the liberty to make those decisions?

    
Second, from your perspective, does conservative = exclusively champion European-American? Seriously, I would like to know IF you would support this narrow definition on what constitutes a conservative.

    “The American elite are committed to “Mestizocizing” America”

    The same argument was made in the 1850’s. Nativists—who happened to be white—in the clearly labeled the Irish as “savage” and “uncivilized” as they arrived to America and made the distinction that the Irish were other than white. Irish-Americans were referred to as “white
    ni——“. Similarly, nativists in the 1890’s referred to Italians as vile creatures utterly incapable of becoming assimilated. They advanced pseudo scientific theories that alleged that “Mediterranean” types were inherently inferior to people of northern European heritage.

    
So, how did the Irish and Italians magically become “white”, “civilized”, and “tamed”? Were the nativists wrong in their assessment?

  162. @Anonymous
    Just won't happen, Steve.
    The USA can no longer be described as real blood and soil nation founded by a real genetic homogenous population. The Wasps gave up the ghost years ago, the Act of 1924 was their last hurrah and attempt to hang on to their country. Thus came Hart-Cellar and the utter ruination of Kennedy/Johnson. There's just no getting away from that, it's a done deal. Time to grow up and face up to it. The chance to do anything about it passed with the old jowlhound himself.
    Look, the forces arranged against you are just too massive, too powerful and too overwhelming. The fact that 'Hispanics' multiplied their numbers 20 fold in 60 years should tell you that - and subcontinental immigration to the USA has only now started in earnest. Believe you me, *that* will make the mex deluge look like the proverbial vicarage tea party, complete with bucktoothed, absurd, buffoon C of E parson, the old bag blue rinse brigade, crust less cucumber sandwiches, Earl Grey and Battenberg cake. And then *will* come the sub Saharans, what? All 9 billion of them.
    Now, let's all link arms for another round of Berkeley kumbaya, denounce the white privilege, and praise the yoni.

    Replies: @Ghost of John Adams, @LondonBob

    LBJ, first Jewish President. Crypto Texan on his maternal line.

  163. @Anonymous
    @International Jew

    Unlike any EU nation, Israel is a sovereign state, ultimately answerable to its parliament and its parliament alone. I take it that apart from the very big constitutional issues, the Israeli parliament has the power to abrogate or pass any law it wishes.
    Therefore, if Netanyahu was really determined to get rid of the Africans, he has potentially the full powers to do so.

    Replies: @International Jew

    Therefore, if Netanyahu was really determined to get rid of the Africans, he has potentially the full powers to do so.

    You’d be surprised how leftist, and how powerful, the Israeli Supreme Court is. Netanyahu doesn’t even get to nominate/appoint new justices the way a US Pres does. New members of Israel’s Supreme Court are nominated by the existing members (with some input from the bar association)!

  164. @syonredux
    @Corvinus


    “And, in the USA, all of those elites are in favor of mass immigration/race replacement”

    Immigration? Yes. Race replacement? No.
     
    Mass immigration means race replacement, dear fellow.Last time I checked, the immigrants are not coming from Europe.

    Regardless, do not these “elites” have the liberty to promote an agenda that decidedly benefits them, just like the course of actions that the “elites” you support?
     
    There are no elites who believe what I believe, dear fellow.

    The elites are groups of people that hold power and make concerted efforts to sway public opinion–
    labor unions, heads of corporations, conservative pundits, ethnic nationalists (e.g. pro-white, pro-black, pro-Hispanic).
     
    And there are no elites who hold White nationalist views.Well, maybe one or two do.But they keep their crimethink to themselves

    “None. Sadly, no elites in the USA share my opinions.”

    
You have clearly demonstrated you are an advocate of the pro-white elite
     
    There is no "pro-White elite," dear fellow

    and of the conservative elite, which our dear host is part and parcel to.
     
    If only Steve were a member of the elite....

    “We were talking about the Holocaust in class, and the La Raza and Black students started complaining about the Holocaust Museum in Washington.”

    
Yet, somehow, in the class I was in, those same students asked relevant questions about how and why such atrocities could be committed.
     
    MMMM, perhaps you know more Uncle Toms than I do....

    “Not I. That would squelch my chances at tenure.”
    “In contrast, my PC colleagues extol the coming end of European America at conference after conference…”

    Then you are a chicken-shit.
     
    Never said that I was brave, dear fellow

    Stand up for something you believe in.
     
    Wouldn't do any good, dear fellow.The elite are against me.

    (Tsk, tsk) I thought playing the victim card was only reserved for feminists and minorities.
     
    It is.They get to play the card.People like me are simply forced to remain silent.

    Take heart, my friend. Even liberals would support you.
     
    Not the Leftists at my university.To them, liberal is a term of abuse.

    See, the David Dukes of the world would yell “race traitor” to whites who call out his nonsense.
     
    Dear fellow, David Duke (a genuine moron, incidentally) is totally powerless and irrelevant

    Similarly, the conservative media has its narrative–feminists and minorities and immigrants are a threat.
     
    What "conservative media," dear fellow?

    If a said anything remotely similar to “White Power” in public, I would lose my job.”

    
Depends what you say and how you say it.
     
    Precisely.The discourse is policed by the elite.And the elite want mass immigration/open borders

    What did you expect?
     
    What he did, dear fellow.Anti-European/anti-Anglo attitudes are encouraged by the elite.

    Replies: @Ghost of John Adams, @ben tillman

    Dear fellow, David Duke (a genuine moron, incidentally)

    Insulting David Duke is an obligatory expression of obeisance to the forces of political correctness. Never mind that none of his publically expressed policy prescriptions are in any way morally objectionable. Never mind that his writings show that he is more perspicacious than 99% of the electorate.

    He is a heretic, and if you do not denounce the heretic, you too are a heretic.

  165. You’d be surprised how leftist, and how powerful, the Israeli Supreme Court is. Netanyahu doesn’t even get to nominate/appoint new justices the way a US Pres does. New members of Israel’s Supreme Court are nominated by the existing members (with some input from the bar association)!

    Which is how it should be.

  166. “Never mind that none of his publically expressed policy prescriptions are in any way morally objectionable.”

    To certain Southrons, exactly. Otherwise, to Christians, Duke’s policies are out of touch with observable reality.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS