Saturday, 26 October 2013

It's very interesting to see the response of the so-called Counterjihad sites to this series of posts, or rather the lack thereof. If I had posted historical articles about African collaboration, or Chinese collaboration, or Coptic collaboration, or Socialist collaboration, or even Christian collaboration, with Muslims, you can be sure that some of these sites would pick them up and link to them. But post about Jewish collaboration and no one wants to hear.

I expect nothing better of the Jews or any other non-European people. We can assume that they will continue to do what everyone other than Europeans always has done, that is to say ruthlessly pursue their own ethnic interests regardless of truth or morality; and it is clearly not in their interests to have the truth about their past or present collaboration with Muslims or their intimate connection to destructive, left-wing, anti-European ideologies like Communism or multiculturalism to come to light. But those of you running Counterjihad websites who are not Jewish should be ashamed of yourselves for your cowardice.

This book was written by a Jewish historian who is obviously sympathetic to the Jews. It was translated from Hebrew by Jews and published by the Jewish Publication Society of America.
A month after the battle near Lago de Janda a troop of horsemen approached Cordova, the principal city of the province of Betica. The troop, numbering about seven hundred men, was led by Mughīth ar-Rūmī, an Arabic officer trained in the court of the caliph in Damascus. As he came near the city, which spread along the northern bank of the Guadalquivir River and was surrounded by a strong wall, he pitched his tent in a thicket on the southern bank and began to explore the environs of the city to search out a vulnerable spot. Moslem warriors marched around the city, while the Gothic forces on the walls watched them closely. The city was tightly shut; no one came out and no one entered. The governor of the city and his men had decided to fight to the last drop of blood and to sell their lives dearly. They were followers of King Roderick, who had formerly been the governor of this region, and were faithful to him even after his death.

All the while, numbers of Jews remained shut up in their houses, impatiently awaiting the outcome. Unlike the Goths and the clergy, they did not fear the invaders who besieged the city, but instead set their hopes on them. For the Visigothic kings had oppressed them sorely and had treated them with extreme cruelty. What memories must have passed through the minds of the Cordovan Jews on those nights as they sat in their houses and heard the footsteps of the guards on the walls....

The Jewish settlement on the Iberian peninsula was a very ancient one and in its early stages had prospered. Even after the Visigoths had established their rule over the land, the condition of the Jewish communities remained favorable for a long time. They earned their livelihood with dignity, and they fulfilled the laws of the Torah and observed its commandments without hindrance.

However, when the Visigothic rulers changed from Arianism to another form of Christianity,Catholicism, in 586, the situation of the Jews changed. A period of disturbances and persecutions began. The synods of the clergy that assembled from time to time in the capital determined the policy of the regime; as a result, at every council that convened, zealous bishops promulgated decrees against the Jews. For their part, the kings vied with the clergy and spurred them on to find ways and means to institute laws to eradicate Judaism from the land. Whether this came from sincere religious zeal or from the avarice with which they eyed the possessions of the Jews, kings and clergy were of one mind -- to embitter the lives of the Jews and to provoke them to change their faith.

In 613 King Sisebut decreed that all the Jews must convert or leave the land. This edict was carried out; thousands were converted to Christianity and thousands left the country. Swintila,who succeeded Sisebut, annulled the edict of conversion, permitted converts to revert to the faith of their fathers, and allowed those who had gone into exile to return. But when King Sisenand came into power, he was inclined to be severe. The council that met in Toledo in 633 decided that the Jews who had become Christians as an outcome of the laws of Sisebut must remain Christians and should be carefully watched, lest they treat any of the laws of the church with disrespect. The king gave this his sanction.

A synod of the clergy in 638, known as the sixth Council of Toledo, decreed that the Visigoths should not tolerate any person who did not believe in Catholicism. It also declared that upon ascending the throne each king should be obliged to swear that he would carry out the laws against Judaism. At that time the ruler was Chintila, who fulfilled the wishes of the clergy. Thus it came about that many were compelled to become Christians and to sign the proclamations requiring their observance of Christian customs. But Chindaswinth, who succeeded Chintila, removed these restrictions. It appears that during his reign the converts returned to their faith and even the exiles came back to their places of habitation.

Chindaswinth's successor, Receswinth, was more zealous than all his predecessors, however,and a veritable oppressor of the Jews. He appeared before the eighth Council of Toledo, which met in 653, and proposed that it renew the decrees of the council of 633 -- namely, that the converts must adhere to their new faith and, moreover, that converts who continued with Jewish observances should be put to death at the hands of other converts. But all this was not enough for this zealot king. He enacted additional laws that would deny to unconverted Jews the possibility to practice their religion and would limit their civil rights.

In their despair, the Jews began to join forces with those who rebelled against the government. In the days of King Wamba, the Jews cooperated with the governor of the province, Nimes,who promised them religious freedom. After the rebellion was put down, the Jews were expelled from the city of Narbonne, which, together with a large area of southern Gaul, belonged to the kingdom of the Visigoths. Three months after ascending the throne King Ervig convened the twelfth Council of Toledo and urged it to use all possible means to extirpate the Jewish religion from Spain. Acting on his proposal, the council decreed that every Jew must convert within a year. It was also declared that the clergy should teach the Jews the tenets and practices of Christianity; converts were obligated to inform the authorities of the names of any former coreligionists who might transgress the laws of the church. Not only were Jews forced to become converted, but the civil rights of even these converts were limited.

King Egica followed a different line. Instead of converting Jews by force, he sought to end their stubborn resistance by means of special privileges, which he offered to converts who would consent to be faithful to Christian practice. He annulled the limitations on the rights of converts but passed stringent laws against Jews who clung to their faith. They were required to sell to the king's exchequer all servants, houses, and land which they had bought from Christians -- all to be handed over to the clergy. The king also ordained that Jews were forbidden to trade with the Christian inhabitants of the Visigothic realm; nor were they to deal in commerce with foreign countries.

The very severity of these enactments is proof that they were not fully executed, and despite the decrees of kings and councils many Jews remained in Spain. Indeed, from the decisions of the councils we learn that Jews bribed the nobles who held the reins of government, and even the clergy themselves, not to enforce these laws strictly. Nevertheless, their plight worsened and they looked for a source of deliverance.

In 694 the Visigothic authorities unearthed a plot by the Jews who were preparing to overthrow the government. According to the Christian authorities, the Jews had joined forces with their coreligionists on the other side of the straits in North Africa and were planning a military invasion that would free them from their oppressors. The seventeenth Council of Toledo, which met at the end of that year, therefore determined to employ more stringent measures. All Jews were turned over to Christian masters as their slaves and were scattered throughout the kingdom. Their masters were obligated to insure that they would observe the practices of the church and to take an oath swearing that they would not set the Jews free. The council further decreed that children over the age of seven be taken from the Jews in order that they might be reared in the spirit of Christianity and married to Christians. Jewish properties were confiscated.

But once again the wheel of fortune took a favorable turn. King Witiza was a more lenient ruler, and the clergy hated him. Christian writers of the Middle Ages claim that he annulled the enactments of Egica. But with the ascent of Roderick, the zealots -- that faction whose goal it was to obliterate Judaism from the soil of Spain -- came into power.

Such were the memories that passed through the minds of the Jews of Cordova. With all their hearts they sided with the Moslems at the gates of the city, but they were powerless to act. Gothic soldiers stood between them and the African besiegers.

One night the skies became overcast and the rains came, followed by hail. The guards on the wall sought refuge from the weather and abandoned their rounds. The Africans took advantage of the darkness, crossing the river at a shallow point. The southern wall of the city was built some fifteen yards or less from the river's edge. When Mughīth's men arrived at the northern bank of the river, they hastened to a point where there was a breach in the upper level of the wall. A fig tree grew near the breach. Quickly they climbed the tree and sprang onto the wall. The first man drew the second one up after him, and within moments a group of men stood on the wall. Immediately they dropped down inside, fell on the surprised guards of the nearest gate, and slew them. They opened the gate, and through it, with drawn swords, streamed the forces of Mughīth.

Here and there an individual sought to resist -- only to be beheaded. Most of the populace barred the doors of their houses and remained quietly within. However, the governor escaped with his forces to a church in the western quarter of the city and fortified himself inside. On the following morning, when the inhabitants of Cordova emerged from their houses into the streets of the city and saw that Mughīth had occupied the governor's palace, they felt the first taste of subjugation. The Jews of the city, on the other hand, exulted. This was the day they had hoped for. They immediately made contact with the Moslem officer, who mobilized them into his army and turned over to them the task of guarding the city.

Mughīth established his forces within the city and lay siege to the church in which the Gothic governor of the city had taken refuge. It was a sturdy edifice, and the Christians within, who numbered about four hundred, defended themselves courageously. The siege lasted three months; then the Moslems succeeded in cutting off the water supply of the Christians, who were compelled to surrender. They were put to death. The governor attempted to flee but was caught and later taken to the caliph in Damascus.

The events at Cordova were repeated in other Spanish cities. Everywhere the Jews rose up and volunteered aid to the Moslems in their war of conquest. Arab chroniclers only relate what happened in the principal cities, but it is quite likely that the same thing occurred in smaller cities and in villages. An early Arabic historian relates that wherever the Moslems came upon Jews, they appointed them as a militia and left a few of their own soldiers with them; then the majority continued on their march of conquest. Another Arabic historian, who (though writing at a later date) drew upon early and reliable sources, repeats these facts, but adds that where no Jews were available, the Moslems had to leave a greater number of their own forces.

From these historical records it is evident that the aid of the Jews was highly important for the Moslems. Since Ṭāriḳ had to leave behind soldiers in cities he had already taken while sending ahead troops to conquer other cities, the vanguard of whose forces threatened his lines of communication, the Moslem commander's small forces grew ever smaller as he penetrated deep into the heart of the country. The cooperation of the Jews was very advantageous to him, since it enabled him to release some of his soldiers from guard duty in the conquered cities and to utilize them as an attacking force in new conquests. It is clear that here and there the Jews gave the invaders important information and also acted as spies – as did the followers of Witiza, who themselves came to the aid of Ṭāriḳ's forces wherever they went.

So it was that in many cities small groups of Moslems, with the aid of their allies, the partisans of the House of Witiza and the Jews, set up the new order. Moreover, because as many of the nobles and officials, the wealthy, and the clergy fled to the north of the country, large numbers of houses and much property were abandoned, and it is certain that the Jews and everyone who helped in the conquest took possession of them.
But it was the desire for revenge that primarily motivated the Jews to help the armies of Ṭāriḳ The Moslem invasion gave them the opportunity to repay their oppressors for the wrongs that had been perpetrated upon them and their forebears for many generations.
Source: The Jews of Moslem Spain. Volume 1 by Eliyahu Ashtor, translated by Aaron Klein and Jenny Machlowitz Klein, published by the Jewish Publication Society of America.

I certainly find the story of the Cordoban fig tree curious. How likely is it that an army expecting an attack is going to leave standing a fig tree within jumping distance of the walls? On the other hand, there was, as this chronicler admits, a hostile population inside the walls. The story of the fig tree may well have been invented to serve as a - pardon the expression - fig leaf for what in reality was betrayal by this enemy within.

See parts 1 and 2 of this series here and here.

48 comments:

Anonymous said...

1) you are unable to define "European people".

2) in particular, you have no arguments against the viewpoint that both culturally, and genetically, (as well as historically, geographically, etc.), - Jews are Europeans.

3) you draw the example from early history of Europe, when the massacres were common. In July 22, 1209, thousands of Cathars were massacred. 1349, there was pogrom of Jews in Cologne. In 1572 at St. Bartholomew's Day massacre, thousands of Huguenots were massacred.
But nothing like this was ever done by Jews to non-Jews, never, not in Europe, not anywhere.

4) when confronted with evidence about persecution of Jews, you will likely mention "simplistic good-vs-evil narratives, persecution fantasies" that you attribute to Jews.
That, however, isn't an obstacle for you to put Jews systematically on the side of evil, while sideining uncomfortable facts of persecution.

5) your underlying conclusion is that the modern French people, the descendants of Franks who did massacre Cathars and Huguenotes in the past (as well as Germans, Ukraininans, Poles and Russians whose ancestors did massacre Jews), are today somehow more preferrable morally, culturally and genetically, and have more rights on Europe, than the Jews who never did anything like this.

Briefly, putting this material here has nothing to do with Counterjihad, and everything with classical antisemitism.
...

Cheradenine Zakalwe said...

The evidence presented in Kevin Macdonald's books show that Jews living in Europe maintained their own genetic distinctiveness to an astonishing degree, with only a tiny European genetic admixture, coming probably from incidents of rape.

Jews, as a people, originated in the Middle East. The Middle East is not in Europe. Therefore they are not European.

Even the Old Testament contains stories of Jews massacring non-Jews, never mind more modern examples from the recent history of Communism. In any case, if Jews brought about the extermination and enslavement of Europeans, it hardly matters whether they were the trigger men or the blade wielders themselves. It's like saying Hitler bears no guilt in the Holocaust because he didn't personally push Jews into the gas chambers.

I don't put Jews systematically on the side of evil. I simply say that, like every other people on earth, they have at times done wrong. Unlike European peoples, who acknowledge the wrongs they have done, express repentance for them, and seek to undergo moral betterment by contemplating their past failings, Jews simply refuse to acknowledge their own wrong-doing, refuse to express repentance for it, and refuse to seek their own moral improvement.

I have not said that modern Europeans are morally preferable to Jews. They certainly have more rights to Europe than Jews since Jews are non-European. Every people has the right to its own homeland. You demand that right for Jews in Israel but deny it to Europeans in Europe. In essence, you deny that European peoples exist, even though you would never dream of denying that the Jewish people exists. That is the intellectual genocide that forms the backdrop to our present predicament.

No matter how many times you or others try to cast the antisemitism/racism/islamophobia spell on me, it will never work. I simply laugh at your accusations of wickedness. The European mind seeks to understand truth by engaging in rational, evidence-based discourse; the Oriental mind seeks to obfuscate truth through irrational discourse based on emotive symbols and moral intimidation. The Oriental in you is showing.

Anonymous said...

I love the diversity and tolerance going on here. Many have a lot to learn from pale Europeans (melanin and attitude seem to go together like peanut butter and jelly) about how to be restrained in situations where chutzpah is absolutely not required for instance here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ha7smLPz2GY On the other hand, pale Europeans should learn when a mild intellectual reaction is inappropriate. Pro tip: it's when a Mohammedan is trying to rape you and take your money.

Also evolutionary psychology in general and Kevin McDonald in particular are a bit sketch. As is implying that anything in a religious text is historically true.

Anonymous said...

"Jews, as a people, originated in the Middle East. The Middle East is not in Europe. Therefore they are not European."

How about that:
"Hungarians, as a people, originated in the Asia. Asia is not in Europe. Therefore Hungarians are not European."

Again, your data about "genetic admixture" are obsolete.
Recent studies show that Ashkenazi Jews' maternal line is at least 80% from the ice-age Europe.
Original article:
http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2013/131008/ncomms3543/full/ncomms3543.html

It is also not clear what you meant by "rape".
How do you see it, technically?
Is it when Jewish women were raped by non-Jewish Europeans?
Or after the Jewish men raped non-Jewish women, they waited 9 months and then came again saying hey, here I am, now give me the child?
You don't even notice that you sink below any level of idiocy, in your blind hatred.

My defintion of "European" is - the one who has historical, cultural, and genetic ties to European civilization. According to that, both Hungarians and Jews are Europeans. But Albanians might be not, as their contribution to European culture is close to zero.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali who is African by birth, isn't a European.
I have no doubts that her son will be educated properly, so he might be - if comes to live here.

The white converts to Islam like Samantha Lewthwaite, - remain Europeans genetically but it doesn't matter anymore as they are inimical to the very spirit of Western civilization.

Thinking about more than one aspect of reality when talking about non-trivial issues, might help.
...

Cheradenine Zakalwe said...

You've made your point about Hungarians before and my response to it is no different. If you want to make the case that Hungarians are a non-European people, then make it. Don't just hint at the possibility. I haven't looked into the question carefully enough to make a serious judgement about it. Maybe you can convince me that the Hungarians really are a non-European people, like the Jews. To do that, you would have to demonstrate that they had maintained their own genetic identity almost completely distinct from the original inhabitants of that land, as the Jews have.

Rape undoubtedly applied in both cases. It is known that Jews were running slaves out of Eastern Europe and raped the females. Sometimes they would marry or adopt the children of their slaves. Although not mentioned in this text, that was one of the factors that led to the deterioration in relations between Jews and non-Jews in Spain.

On the genetic distinctiveness of Jews, the article you quote says:
"There is consensus that all Jewish Diaspora groups, including the Ashkenazim, trace their ancestry, at least in part, to the Levant, ~2,000–3,000 years ago..." The Europeanness is almost entirely from the female line, fully consistent with the enslavement, rape and incorporation of European females.

You claim you have deep ties to European civilisation but your whole culture was oriented around "sojourning", meaning temporary residence in other people's countries while maintaining your own genetic and cultural separateness from them. Macdonald mentions that on the eve of WW2, the majority of Jews in Poland could not speak Polish!

Perhaps one day you will develop a strong enough connection to European genes or culture to learn how to engage in rational discourse with levelling accusations of wickedness. When that glorious day comes, we can no doubt hope for acknowledgement of past wrong-doing and the moral improvement that comes with it.

The spirit of self-critique, the lowered tendencies towards kin group preference, the embrace of the alien implicit in the conduct of Samantha Lewthwaite, all of these are intrinsic parts of European culture and civilisation. That, tragically, is why so many of us take voodoo accusations of moral impurity from non-Europeans like you so seriously, in turn leading to our present difficulties with Islam.


Roni said...

Regarding the historical kollow up of the time, it was for the Jews very normal to join forces with the Islamic Moors. We can compare it to joining the allies’ forces against Nazi Germany. The Catholic church was extremely hostile against the Jews and every one else, who did not obey the Church rules. Living under the hegemony of the Roman Catholics meant for the Jews a certain death. The Moors were a bit more tolerant. After the fall of the last Islamic Caliphate of Granada in 1492 (reconquista), a hugh massacre had taken place in Spain. Muslims and Jews were slain or converted to Christianity. Especially blood thirsty were the duo Fredinand II of Aragon and Isabella I of Castilia who had turned the whole of Spain in one swimming pool of blood.

Anonymous said...

"enslavement and incorporation" of women - I agree with that, these were times when everyone did it to everyone else.
"rape" - is your sexual fantasy, the label that you stick only to Jews.

"on the eve of WW2, the majority of Jews in Poland could not speak Polish!" - so what is your point? that they deserved to die because of that?

"on the eve of WW2, the majority of Poles in Russia could not speak Russian" - was there something wrong with these Poles?

Every argument over-empahsizing the importance of genetics, would lead to race discussion. By itself it isn't productive, as all modern human tribes are eventually traced back to Africa.
http://www.bradshawfoundation.com/journey/

So where do you want to put a breakpoint?
150, 100, 50 or 10 thousand years ago? Could you justify your choice?

In my viewpoint, it is reasonable to think about start of European civilization ("civil" = "urban") at the time when first large cities were formed.
That, notably, coincided with the spread of first alphabet, so-called proto-Canaanite ("alphabet" is the word common in Greek and Hebrew).
It is dated just before 1200 BC, - and by modern PC reasons, is called today "Phoenician".

The Greeks got this alphabet from Canaanites through Medierranean trade.
Hebrew Bible was translated to Greek before 300-100 BC in Alexandria:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septuaginta

Europe as we perceive it now, was almost entirely formed by the Hellenic, Roman and then Christian cultures.
Judaic component, stating from alphabets and written knowledge, - was always present in all three.

So singling out Jews as the only evil invaders and infiltrators of Europe is the distorted view, and strictly the matter of your personal prejudice.
...

Anonymous said...

"I expect nothing better of the Jews or any other non-European people."

News Flash: Science Confirms What We See With Our Own Eyes -- Ashkenazi Jews Are White

The latest DNA research (Oct. 2013) on Ashkenazi Jews shows that they are white. The maternal (female) lineage is predominantly from Southern (Italy) and Western Europe. Not from Palestine. It is the paternal (male) lineage that shows partial origins in Palestine.

The research suggests that Jewish men who migrated to Europe from the Near East thousands of years ago married European women who converted to Judaism. Ashkenazi Jews are white and thoroughly European. More than 80 percent of the maternal lineages of the Ashkenazi Jews can be directly traced to Europe.

The "Khazar" theory is false.

See here, here, here, and here.

Anonymous said...

Are Jews above criticism? No, nobody is. Having said that, let's release a little truth in here. What you have posted is in fact true. I've said it before and I'll say it again, Ashkemazi Jews are NOT racial aliens. There DNA lineage goes back prehistorically to Europe.

I've cautioned about going too far with Kevin McDonald who has gone beyond his original analysis in CoC.

Are many Jews leftoids and on the cutting edge of promoting racial disolution? Yes, but so are Gentile whites!

The common enemy to both groups is liberalism. Jews should be critisised as fellow whites not as alien creatures and Jews should do the same with Gentile whites. Like it or not we are very closely genetically related.

Cheradenine Zakalwe said...

""enslavement and incorporation" of women - I agree with that, these were times when everyone did it to everyone else.
"rape" - is your sexual fantasy, the label that you stick only to Jews.

"on the eve of WW2, the majority of Jews in Poland could not speak Polish!" - so what is your point? that they deserved to die because of that?"

Nope. The claim was made that Jews had a deep cultural connection to Europe. If they could not even speak the language after living their for centuries, that claim is clearly absurd.

"on the eve of WW2, the majority of Poles in Russia could not speak Russian" - was there something wrong with these Poles?

No idea. But if they claimed a deep cultural connection to Russia without being able to speak the language, the claim would be laughable.

"The research suggests that Jewish men who migrated to Europe from the Near East thousands of years ago married European women who converted to Judaism."
This kind of imbalanced male/female genetic inheritance generally arises for one of two reasons: either a population of conquerors kills the males and enslaves/marries the surviving females; or simple enslavement of females. Since I don't know of any direct Jewish conquest of territory in Europe, we can assume it was the latter.

In any case, it is irrelevant. Jews have resolutely preserved their own genetic distinctiveness from Europeans for thousands of years and still do so today to a striking extent. They perceive themselves as having interests that are distinct from those of the surrounding peoples.

"I've cautioned about going too far with Kevin McDonald who has gone beyond his original analysis in CoC."

Can you point out any substantive flaws in his work?

Cheradenine Zakalwe said...

"Regarding the historical kollow up of the time, it was for the Jews very normal to join forces with the Islamic Moors. We can compare it to joining the allies’ forces against Nazi Germany."

So now the Muslims were liberators from Nazis? Those liberators established a conquest regime that led to centuries of murder, pillage, rape and enslavement of indigenous Europeans. No, then as now, the Muslims were the Nazis, and the Jews were collaborating with them.

As I've said before, if Jews didn't like the way they were treated in Europe, they should have left it. The sources make clear that they were offered the opportunity to depart. Collaborating with foreign aggressors, indeed inciting their invasion in the first place, is not a morally valid response to maltreatment, any more than it would be if Muslims currently resident in France collaborated with a foreign invasion force because they were angry about the French burka ban.

Cheradenine Zakalwe said...

"So singling out Jews as the only evil invaders and infiltrators of Europe is the distorted view, and strictly the matter of your personal prejudice."

Every other people that has entered European soil from outside has been absorbed into it. Other peoples have also tended to preserve an association with a specific territory. Only Jews have preserved their own distinctiveness from the surrounding population and developed a de-territorialised form of peoplehood. That is the key difference between them and others.

Any people that perceives itself to be distinct from that of the surrounding population will have divergent interests from it. Those divergent interests will cause it, at times, to act in ways that are inconsistent with the well-being of that surrounding population, as Jews have done historically and are doing today.

Jews feel threatened by the capacity of indigenous European ethnic groups to mobilise against them. Therefore they push the diversity agenda, demanding special protection for minorities, criminalisation of free expression and open-doors immigration to make the European majorities less numerically dominant. This policy agenda, at the very least, is a significant contributor to the islamisation of Europe.

Anonymous said...

"The claim was made that Jews had a deep cultural connection to Europe. If they could not even speak the language after living their for centuries, that claim is clearly absurd."

Some were better assimilated, some less.
Jews came to Poland only 200+ years ago.
They spoke another language - Yiddish - which is the European language. It was formed mostly in Germany, and combines German and Hebrew.
BTW it is very doubtful that "the majority of Jews in Poland could not speak Polish".

You try not to notice the reality of communal life in Europe.
Jewish communities were present in Mediterranen since pre-Hellenic times.
Western Slavs have spread to the land that is now Poland only in 5 AD.

"Jews have resolutely preserved their own genetic distinctiveness from Europeans for thousands of years and still do so today to a striking extent. They perceive themselves as having interests that are distinct from those of the surrounding peoples."

Again, you are unable to define what is "Europeans".
Reference to "interests" is another fantasy.
And BTW "preserving their own genetic distinctivenes" is the solution what you advocate as an ideal model for your new European antisemitic civilzation - at the same time, continuing to blame Jews exactly for the very same.
...


Cheradenine Zakalwe said...

"On the eve of the outbreak of WWII, barely 15% of the Jewish population had knowledge of the Polish language. "
Polish-Jewish Relations 1939-1945: Beyond the Limits of Solidarity by Ewa Kurek

Source

Europeans are the peoples that emerged within Europe.

There is nothing wrong with a people preserving its own genetic distinctiveness. Within its own territory. Indeed that is the optimal state of affairs. That is the arrangement that the principle of nationalism would lead to.

People preserving their own genetic distinctiveness while living in another people's country, or a land that is inhabited by a zoo of distinct peoples, can only lead to unpleasantness, however, of the kind described in the book extracts quoted in the main post. Inevitably, the peoples will plot against one another's interests and will end up harming one another. The way to preserve a harmonious world is for every people to live in its own territory.

Anonymous said...

"Europeans are the peoples that emerged within Europe"

what does it mean "emerged"?
like flies emerge from dirt?

Human history is the history of hostilities, that is right.
The question is, do we accept this as an eternal and unchanged law - TODAY.

Human history is also the history of achiements.
Jews have contributed to modern civilization much more than simply by providing a clumsy example of defensive isolationism in the face of persecution.

I repeat - from alphabet to Monotheism, to the structure of DNA, and then computers, nuclear fission and molecular dynamics. Just couple of days ago, there was another Nobel Prize.
If (Jewish) God forbid, you develop some serious illness, it will be cured most likely with drugs developed with the help of these Jewish-invented MD simulations.
Be grateful.
Be healthy.
And don't hate.
...

Cheradenine Zakalwe said...

"what does it mean "emerged"?
like flies emerge from dirt?"

Yet another expression of your contempt for Europeans. You are effectively denying that European peoples exist. This is the intellectual foundation of the genocide currently being inflicted on us. All of the lefists, diversity mongers and multiculturalists invoke it, claiming that the so-called European peoples are, in reality, just a bunch of different immigrants. Yet they would never dream of making this claim of any non-European people. The European peoples are the peoples whose identities coalesced into distinct forms in European territory and outsiders who were absorbed into them.

Since you quibble about the definition of European peoples, let's hear your definition of the Jewish people. Are the Arabs who call themselves Palestinians part of the Jewish people? If not, why not? They've been living in the historic homeland of the Jewish people for centuries. Something of Jewish culture must have rubbed off on them.

Cheradenine Zakalwe said...

"Human history is the history of hostilities, that is right.
The question is, do we accept this as an eternal and unchanged law - TODAY."

The question is what circumstances, what social models, tend to give rise to hostilities, and which are more conducive to peaceful relations. The model currently being pushed by dominant intellectual elites in the western world, namely that of distinct peoples living in the same territory, is the one that historically has given rise to an extraordinary degree of suffering. It is critically important that this model be challenged and the worth of an alternative model - nationalism - be affirmed. Millions and millions of lives are going to be lost unless we succeed in dethroning multiculturalist dogma.

Anonymous said...

Enslavement or rape of white females? haha, it is widely known that white women will wtap their legs around anything -- Congolese Africans, Arabs, you name it. And it gives me no pleasure in saying that. The savage African who murdered Mr. Rigby in Woolwich had a white girlfriend (whore) he was putting his primitive semen into with her utmost approval.

Anonymous said...

Florida, USA - You might think a web site named islam vs Europe would have stories centered on molech worshiping, inbred moron, bloodthirsty savages overrunning Europe. There are plenty of Jew hating web sites to vent your spleen on. Jews make up about 0.2 % of the world population, moslems make up 23.4 %. Which one is the greater threat? People need to focus on the real problem in the world, before the koranimals outbreed you in your homeland and take all your women.........that is the end game.

Anonymous said...

CZ:
“You are effectively denying that European peoples exist.”

This is obsession, I never said that.

If you look at that representation in Bradshaw – you will see that Europe started to be populated by modern humans about 60K years ago.
However, the centre of civilization started to emerge not there but in Mesopotamia about 10K ago, with the invention of agriculture. My understanding is that Jews were one of the nomadic tribes form there. History is complicated, with Babylon, Assyria, Egypt, but eventually Jews migrated to Palestine and became “civilized” there. King David - 1000 BC. On that more recent history, I have posted above. There were Jewish communities in South Europe, too, because of sea travel. Then came wars with Persians, Greeks and Romans.

ALL THIS TIME AND TILL NOW AND IN THE FUTURE - NORTH EUROPEAN PEOPLE EXISTED, AND WILL CONTINUE TO EXIST.
Calm down.

Ashkenazi Jews are ancestors of that tribe – in part, and in other part they have North-European ancestry (via Italy, etc.), as it was shown above.

Sephardi are another Jewish tribe, they came to Europe through Iberia, the last waveas escaping Muslim conquest of North Africa – there is little doubt that Sephardis are also substantially mixed with North Europeans. So the stories about “genetic distinctiveness” – one should take it with a pinch of salt.

You want clear-cut definition but that is how it was in reality – messy.

Modern-day Arabs are ancestors of nomadic Semitic tribe that spread through ME from Saudi Arabia with Islam – 700 AD.

I am not historian but such primitive factual framework is accessible to anyone with minimal curiosity. Unfortunately the PC Wikipedia tries to skew the picture in favour of Arabs and Muslims everywhere.

Anonymous said...

You keep pretending that a European cannot be easily defined. That is why you keep using quotes. Europeans are not defined by whoever makes a cultural contribution. LOL Your intent seems to be that Europe belongs to anyone who can park their butt there.

Uh, no. Not true. Every branch of science concerned with such things - Archeology, DNA research, as well as historic research shows conclusively that Europe has been continually occupied by one race of people. The white race. There are various subdivisions within the white race known as ethnicities - German English, and so on but they are of the same race.

You can offer no meaningful counterargument to this because there aren't any. It is the old Marxist dung about race being a social construct etc.

You clearly fear Nationalism and fail to recognise that your beliefs lead precisely to what we have now with the Islamic problem.

Cheradenine Zakalwe said...

"You might think a web site named islam vs Europe would have stories centered on molech worshiping, inbred moron, bloodthirsty savages overrunning Europe."

It does. Lots of them. It also has articles on the ideas that have allowed them to overrun Europe, who promoted those ideas, and how they came to have such cultural dominance. But, curiously, the people who claim to be concerned about the islamisation of Europe evince a complete lack of interest in how it came about, preferring to react only to the symptoms.

Anonymous said...

CZ:
“The question is what circumstances, what social models, tend to give rise to hostilities, and which are more conducive to peaceful relations. The model currently being pushed by dominant intellectual elites in the western world, namely that of distinct peoples living in the same territory, is the one that historically has given rise to an extraordinary degree of suffering. It is critically important that this model be challenged and the worth of an alternative model - nationalism - be affirmed. Millions and millions of lives are going to be lost unless we succeed in dethroning multiculturalist dogma.”

I don’t agree with that, but it seems that in the short term, nationalism might be the force counterweighting current invasion.

Multi-ethnic isn’t always multicultural.
Pre-invasion Switzerland, Belgium, Britain were multi-ethnic but, despite some tensions, rather unified culturally.

In my view, the solution is the promotion of international cooperation – in science, arts, technology, trade, manufacturing. But that should be made strictly conditional on human rights and policy.

Again, there is no problems with enlightened, healthy nationalism.
It is only natural to love your land, people, and be proud of achievements and heritage.

It is also natural to hate.

But:
“Nature, Mr. Allnut,” says the prim and proper Rose Sayer (Katherine Hepburn) in a truly great romance, 1951’s The African Queen, “is what we are put in this world to rise above.”
...

Anonymous said...

"Europeans are not defined by whoever makes a cultural contribution. LOL Your intent seems to be that Europe belongs to anyone who can park their butt there."

LOL
"to park your butt" - seemingly the only kind of "cultural contribution" that you can think of.

so the culture of your nation isn't important, only ancestry?
even Nazis were not that stupid.
...

jew'o'meter said...

The only ones hating are the jews, why don't they accept their black ethiopian jewish brothers?

Why is israel for jews only, but europe for all the 3rd worlders

Nobel prize giving is like the oscars, jews patting other jews on the back.

And stop using ghetto speak

Oh yes, jews invented the ghetto

So don't be hating 'ight

Anonymous said...

Not in McDonald's academic works but rather in his conversation and personal conduct. My point is that much of what McDonald has written about Jews could also be applied to Mormans and other religiously affiliated groups. Muslims too.

You can take this type of reasoning too far and demonise a people to the point that murder seems to be an appropriate response. The Nazis took it that far.

Given the history that Jews have lived through and the religious beliefs that many of them follow as well as their small numbers among the masses, their actions and worldview become understandable in many ways. Not agreeable but understandable.

I think many Jews (not all) cling to leftist ideals for the same reasons that millions of Gentile whites do. I do not believe that there is some massive conspiracy to control the world that all Jews across the planet are cooperating in as McDonald seems to.

Liberalism is our common enemy. Liberalism practiced by Jew or Gentile is destroying our nations. If we cannot live peacefully together and cooperate against our common enemies then let the Jews have their own homeland and let us have ours. We have every right and a responsibility to preserve our homelands for our own prodigy. This overflowing of our nations with people alien to us in race and creed has got to stop. This would destroy any people. The Jews in Israel know this and so do we.

The Muslims bring with them an alien ideology that they insist upon forcing on everyone. The Africans bring their high rates of crime and sexually promiscuous behaviors and are totally alien genetically. They all have their own homelands and we demand ours.

Anonymous said...

This is a good article series. Which clearly illustrates that the counter-jihad movement is made up of hypocrites who do their best to avoid or ignore the jewish role in promoting cultural marxism and multiculturalism.

Now I wont deny that there are several other major factors involved besides the jews. But clearly the jews have played a major role, as Kevin MacDonald has documented it in his trilogy on judaism.

So I say keep up the good work Cheradenine. Im reading your blog with great interest.

Anonymous said...

What is wrong with the author? We should not be antisemitists. Ofcourse the Old Testament is a nazzi book and yes, the Jews were behaving ethnocentric in the past,but nowadays,the Jews are liberal and Israel is democracy.

Anonymous said...

Italian liberal raped by a cultural enricher she met at a diversity celebration:

http://www.ilmessaggero.it/primopiano/cronaca/stupro_reggio_emilia_assistente_sociale_arresto/notizie/344466.shtml

chimoio said...

Sterling stuff CZ !!

Anonymous said...

here is some more on that
"on the eve of WW2, the majority of Jews in Poland could not speak Polish!"

consider this:
"on the eve of the Algerian war, the majority of French in Algeria could not speak Arabic"

so the "pede-noir" had no "deep cultural connection" to Algeria.
do you justify the Arab violence and persecution of French during Algerian war?

just nowadays -
"the majority of Whites South Africans can not speak Zulu"
so the Afrikaners don't have "deep cultural connection" to black Africa.
do you justify the ongoing genocide of Whites in South Africa?

or, your mental constructions are made exclusively for blaming the Jews?
...

Anonymous said...

@26 Oct. 10.42
White Advocate
Anti-whites always seek to delegitimise the white race by claiming there is no such thing as the white race. There are a number of dna markers that can be tested for to identify whites as distinct from all other racial groups. To claim there is no such thing as Europeans goes dangerously close to breaking the law -- the denial of the existence of whites is racist and often a precursor to genocide.
Just as whites can be tested for Jews can also be tested for- no one here is claiming there is no such thing as the Jewish race - many influential Jews will affirm this.

Dringo said...

"consider this:
"on the eve of the Algerian war, the majority of French in Algeria could not speak Arabic""

Well in general colonization is a bad thing, and
the french gauls dont really belong in a place like Algeria. They should have kept out of northafrica in the first place. I wont condone genocide, but Algeria was really a lost cause, and has never been part of the french homeland.

South africa is really a different case, since the zulus are not an indigenous population of SA. They really are late colonizers. And come to think of it, apartheid is at heart a form of multicultural state, where the separation of race and culture is forcefully upheld. It illustrates well that this system is unworkable in the long run, and that demography ultimately is destiny.
If anything it is actually the zulus who have not adapted well to European culture.

Several commenters have argued that it is not possible for the jews collectively to have a detrimental effect on European society, since their numbers are so few relatively speaking.
And it is true that it will never be possible for the jews to take over European society demographically. And their cultural influence will be met with resistance from the masses in the long run. History shows this time after time.
But this does not rule out that the jews compose substantial numbers of the elite, and that they overall are pushing for internationalist ideas to be adopted. They have a strongly disproportionate influence on the media, higher culture, finance and ultimately also the political system. If you have lots of wealth, have access to the media, and form part of strong international networks, then naturally you are powerful as a group.

And many jews have actually been pushing for third world immigration to the western World for decades. It is only recently that many "counter jihad jews" have started to oppose this immigration, and then primarily muslim immigration.
As if african or east asian mass-immigration wont disposses the indigenous Europeans of their native homelands?

The jewish led counter-jihad movement does not support any form of ethnic nationalism among Europeans, but support some variant of liberal internationalism without muslims.
I view it as a fraudulent movement designed to garner the support of the useful idiot goys.

But if it can pave the way for a true nationalist movement, then it has been far from useless.

Anonymous said...

@26 Oct. 10.42
White Advocate

One can spent a life looking for specific "dna markers" to satisfy any arbitrary definition of "Europeans", "Whites", "Jews" or whatever.

If that is about white skin only, - Ashkenazi Jews have the same genetics for white skin as North Europeans. That is before everyone's eyes, actually.
It is very likely that African Albinos have the same genetics too, and all other white-skinned people inherited it or from them, or from light-skinned Neanderthals.

As I said above, modern humans have spread to Northern Europe about 60K years ago.
It is quite possible to look for corresponding ancient groups of genes.
But, because of genetic diversity, every particular European person will have only a SUBSET of these ancient North European genes.
Albeit I'm almost sure that there is no method to tell with 100% certainty if the single gene was there 60K years ago or came later.
So how do you make a definition? There are about 22000 human genes.
Will you calculate percentages of genes by differernt lineages?
Do you need an international committee that will define these percentages?
How do you ensure that the members of a committee are themselves "White Europeans" (otherwise how can you trust them?) - BEFORE they defined what it is?

Are you sure everybody will agree on established percentages?
What if someone has just 0.5% less of that precious genes, and rejected the privileged status of "White European"?
What if that will be you - before the definition, you have no clue if you "pass".

Do you need all this racist crap, really?
Isn't it more reasonable to judge every person simply by merit?
...

Dringo said...

Concerning the C-J movement. It is rather quite astonishing that this movement does not concern itself much more with the whole post ww2 holocaust secular religion.

Considering that the Holocaust narrative is one of the major tools used to instill guilt in Europeans. Thereby preparing them for the mass colonization of their homelands, and at the same time making sure that the jews actions are never questioned.

And it really is a quite devious strategy. On the one hand the propaganda makes sure that the europeans associate jews with eternal victims, and on the other hand it is insured that any idea of true ethnic nationalism(apart from jewish nationalism offcourse) is deemed morally bankrupt.

the use of christian guilt as a tool of jewish domination is a creative move. But in the long haul this strategy will surely backfire, at some point the well of guilt will dry up as time goes by and the memory fades.

Anonymous said...

Dringo 27 October 2013 10:51
"Well in general colonization is a bad thing"

Was the colonization of America, Australia by Europeans - a bad thing?
(yes contrary to you, I can define what "European" is. It isn't only genetic but also a cultural allegiance)

So the moon landings weren't right thing, it was historical distortion - but who would do it rightfully, then? American Indians?
Would they invent a light bulb for you, an airplane, atomic energy, a computer?

Was a "colonization" of the ice-age Europe by the ancestors of todays' North Europeans 60K years ago - a bad thing? They did came from Middle East BTW. The result was the extermination of Neanderthals who lived there before, and "enslavement, rape and incorporation of Neanderthal females. "

You guys have not a clue about simple facts of history and human population genetics - and yet try to pontificate about "Whites", "Jews", "Europeans", waving the conspiracy theories, trying to assert your supremacy - without any creadible justification.

I am awfuly sorry but you behave just like the bunch of clowns.
...

Anonymous said...

Skin colour is simply the most obvious physical manifestation of one's racial genetics. What your argument implies is that all people are basically the same regardless of their physical appearance. Who cares about something as meaningless as skin colour?

And you would be wrong in using such a trivial surface analysis of what we are dealing with here. Racial differences among people have profound consequences with regard to the civilisations we live in, how they are built and maintained.

Compare the advanced civilisations built by those of European descent -- the marvels of modern medicine, the technological advances, art, music, literature, government, and legal systems with those of African descent. What contributions to the advancement of mankind have they made? Which of their countries would you prefer to live in?

The point is that racial genetics matter. No other race of people are genetically capable of creating what our people have. Are you aware that sub Saharan Africans have an average IQ that borders on mental retardation? Would you put these people in charge of your country's space program?

The reason this is important is because people radically different than you and I are being massively imported into our nations. Our nations, any nations, will come to reflect the dominant peoples within those nations. China is a relection of the Chinese people. If enough Chinese people were imported into Ireland, Ireland would become Chinese. Period. Getting the drift here? You need to learn more...

parisclaims said...

I don't care where they originated from, but Jews are massively overrepresented in those who support mass third world immigration into western lands. Nobody is saying all Jews are involved, or even a majority are involved, but overrepresented they are.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 27 October 2013 13:45
"What your argument implies is that all people are basically the same regardless of their physical appearance"

I agree with most of what you say about race etc., - but not with that.
I repeat - judge people strictly by merit.
If you do, the number of African and Muslim immigrants won't rise but rather fall among technocratic elite and intellectual establishment, where they are now placed by positive discrimination.

With Chinese it is another story. Their IQ is highest, and they are serious competitors. However, in the West they are exclusively benevolent part of immigrant population.
Chinese are very interested in science, arts, music, technology - in progress, briefly.
They are competitors in a good sense, but also natural allies of the West.

It is good to know truth and be realistic on race, but also it is good to be humane to anyone without reference to race.
...

Roni said...

@Cheradenine 26 October, 18.13
‘Jews feel threatened by the capacity of indigenous European ethnic groups to mobilise against them”.
Not everywhere. In the Top European countries, Denmark and the Netherlands, the Jews were not threatened by the capacity of indigenous European ethnic groups to mobilise against them. Both countries are inhabited by tolerant people. The Jews came to the Netherlands in 1492 – 1495; directly from Portugal and Spain; who were mainly ruled by the Inquisition. The cruel bloodthirsty way the indigenous Indians of South America were handled, gives a good insight how nice it was to live under the rule of the Catholoc church. The first Jews of Denmark were Portuguese Jews from the Netherlands. They were invited some 150 years later by the Danish king. Both countries were an island of safety in a sea of hostility and hate. After the Reformation Catholics, Protestants and Jews had lived side by side. They did not interferre with each other internal business; but had worked together to save their lives and homes from river floods and rough sea. Becouse the countries were so nice, it was for the Jews very difficult to keep their diversity. In all the centuries that had passed, they (especially women) had married locals. The theory of man from the Middle East marrying European women, does not realy go for the Danish Jews. A DNA test will point out that the Y chromosome of a many of them, belongs to some Larsen or Nielsen who was sailing 1000 years ago on a Viking ship across the Atlantic Ocean and the North Sea.
From all European Jewry, the Dutch Jews is suffering (till the day of today) the most of traumatic experiences due to WWII. In other European countries hostility and cruel behaviour against them were the normal way of living. In the Netherlands, after 450 years of free quite life in a country full of flowers, beauty and friendly people, it was a blow that they had not recovered of. Till the day of today.

Dringo said...

@Anonymous 27 October 2013 13:37

"Was the colonization of America, Australia by Europeans - a bad thing?
(yes contrary to you, I can define what "European" is. It isn't only genetic but also a cultural allegiance)"

Well not all bad. But in general pretty bad for the indigenous populations of AUS and the US. Today they are marginalized and have lost their way of life. They lost control of their destiny. So in general colonization has Winners and losers. At the moment Europeans are losing against various third World countries.

And for the record, i have never claimed that "European" is only a genetic concept. This is a strawman on your part. The concept is based both on race/genetics and spirit. And although jews have recieved a lot of European genetic input, their mindset is culturally alien to the European spirit. Judaism is a semitic religion, completely different from European folk religion and spirit.

Hell even christianity was alien to Europeans before the incorporation into the folk/state church.

"So the moon landings weren't right thing, it was historical distortion - but who would do it rightfully, then? American Indians?
Would they invent a light bulb for you, an airplane, atomic energy, a computer?"

I am not sure what it is that you are implying here. But I wont justify genocide or colonization on the basis of Scientific or technological development. Would you on the other hand justify the extermination of jews if a cure for cancer was developed along the way? Probably not would be my guess.

"Was a "colonization" of the ice-age Europe by the ancestors of todays' North Europeans 60K years ago - a bad thing? They did came from Middle East BTW. The result was the extermination of Neanderthals who lived there before, and "enslavement, rape and incorporation of Neanderthal females. ""

This is mostly speculation on your part, as it is not evident that the neanderthals were exterminated, or that their females were raped or enslaved.
But if it were true, it would most likely have been quite bad on the part of the neanderthals. But offcourse I am somewhat biased regarding this question, since Europeans are my ancestors.

"You guys have not a clue about simple facts of history and human population genetics - and yet try to pontificate about "Whites", "Jews", "Europeans", waving the conspiracy theories, trying to assert your supremacy - without any creadible justification.I am awfuly sorry but you behave just like the bunch of clowns."

You dont know anything about me, apart from my critical stance towards jews. And I probably know alot more about these various subjects then you think I know.
And alot of my information is based on scholarly sources, even some jewish ones!

Is it really that hard to believe that someone could paint a less flattering picture of jews, compared with the "jews are eternal victims" narrative? Apparently so. If you have a problem with my perspective, I propose that you take it up with Kevin Macdonalds trilogy on judaism.

That is instead of writing me off as a conspiracy theorist or a "clown". You are fully exposing yourself with your failure to keep your composure.

And another thing, if you want to debate get a username instead of hiding behind anonymety


Anonymous said...

Damn, I fought that the Muslims are faschists,since the Quran is worse than Mein kampf,but it turned out that there are fascists here also! The skin colour means just nothing. There were hilarious,glory moments for the African kingdoms also, the Nubian,or the Ethiopian example..in those days,the pail semitic people,or even the white Hitites were their slaves. Education determines the quality of the soul and deeds. Just,please focus on the Islamofascists and fight them with the human rights ideas,which are opposite of Islam and the greatest achivement of the west. Fight Islam! Fight fascism!

Dringo said...

Anonymous 27 October 2013 19:32

"The skin colour means just nothing."

And the next you will tell us is that "race is only skin deep"? Or a "social construct"? Get out of here with your crazy left wing ideas.

"There were hilarious,glory moments for the African kingdoms also, the Nubian,or the Ethiopian example..in those days,the pail semitic people,or even the white Hitites were their slaves"

And what is you point? And muslims held European slaves. So what. Are Europeans supposed to look up to modern day africans?

"Education determines the quality of the soul and deeds"

Nonsens. General character and talent is far more important in determining the quality of deeds. You can throw lots of education towards imbecils and it wont make a difference.
This is yet more leftwing ideology.

"Just,please focus on the Islamofascists and fight them with the human rights ideas,which are opposite of Islam and the greatest achivement of the west. Fight Islam! Fight fascism!"

Look where your cherished human rights has brought the western World! The radical cult of human rights has led to mass colonization, dispossesion, gay rights, feminism etc.
Its bringing the western World Down!

This has nothing to do with "fascism" as you claim, this is yet more leftwing scaremongering.

The West is in the process of being overrun by hordes from the third World, the "camp of the saints" is becoming reality. And all you can think about is preserving "human rights"?

Whos side are you on?

Anonymous said...

"You dont know anything about me, apart from my critical stance towards jews."

One can learn a lot from just this sentence.
"Jews" are both ethnic groups, and the religion.
Among people, there are secular and religious.
Things aren't simple but you are ready to generalize on negative things only.

I never said that "I am critical of non-Jews", or "Christians".
I never blamed all non-Jews for persecution.
I never applied double-standard logic.
I never tried to put labels on non-Jews as a whole.

There are undeniable facts showing that we are the part of the same civilization.
I proporsed several times to be rational and stop hostility.

I assume our common humanity.
You assume your superiority.

You are so dull and devoid of humour, that it is easy to provoke you to discuss racial conflicts involving Neanderthals! - 60K years ago.
Who the fuck cares about 60K years ago.
At that time, everyone was half animal and bloody wrong.
But no, you want to stand with one foot in the time of cavemen, at any price!

Wake up man.
...

Anonymous said...

I think all this discussion of Jewish genetics misses the mark. Race and DNA are irrelevant to the current problem. The problems relate to beliefs and ideology. Muslims believe that Allah commands them to subjugate the non-Islamic the world. Jews believe that God has chosen them as a people to be the leaders of the world. Both beliefs are fatal to objectivity and fair play. The evils that derive from Islamic arrogance are well covered on this site, and I am glad to see that the ethnic revenge motive of some Jewish Marxists is discussed here as well. Let us not forget that the explicit goal of the Frankfort Group, the original cultural Marxists, was to replace the thinking of Thomas Jefferson and Adam Smith with the thinking of Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud. (No righteous world could look to a pantheon of primarily Goyish philosophers! A righteous world must be governed by Jewish (even if non-practicing) thinkers! ) - Let's face it - all groups, even persecuted groups, have racist, or at least ethno-supremacist tendencies. And all groups should be called out on it, even when that supremacism is a foundational tenet of their religion. Here in America, we could start by addressing supremacism in college admissions. A few years ago, the Jewish student union at Princeton University protested about inadequate numbers of Jewish admissions. Inadequate, at least, in comparison to other Ivy League schools where Jewish students make up 20% of the student body. That's right. 20%! In a country that is less than 2% Jewish. Smart white and Asian students already have their chances unfairly reduced in order to privilege impoverished blacks and Hispanics. They are not even aware of how they are being discriminated against in order to privilege wealthy and successful Jews! And one cannot even discuss the topic without being accused of anti-Semitism.

Anonymous said...

The Jewish religion is as fanatical as the Muslim one and anyone that cares to study the subject will see that.
The real issue for Jews is the destruction of European nations without having to face the threat of Islam when the. Live in multi cultural Europe, ttherefore the support the multi cult but support the anti Islam camp.

Anonymous said...

It is a fact also, that the Jews are mostly secular and not religious fanatics (except for the haredi jews)...Leave the Jews out of the stories. Their numbers and influences are irrelevant to the problem of the Islamic jihadists and fascists. Nazism felt down and communism collapsed. Now it`s time for Islam to go to hell. The skin color is a state of mind. I`m white, but I would not mind if I was a Tahitian for example...as long as there is a civilized environment to integrate in.

lakshmi dixit said...

Indian Office boss Fucking a baby On the Home




A Beautiful young sexy girl beach fucking outdoor Picture




Kareena Kapoor hot fuck xxx HD photos and naked fucking pics




Gorgeous girl spreading their legs and showing juicy pussy




Dellhi Poor Girl Fucking On Camera For Money




deepika padukone nude fucking hd photos




Indian Sexy Pornstars Fucked Hard Big Dicks




mallika sherawat sexy hot without dress without cloth




Priya Rai spreading and toying her sweet pussy




Download Indian Desi Famous Homemade Hottest Sex Scandal




Mumbai Hot Girl 3 Star Hotel Room Fucking Sex Scandal Download




Sexy Indian Aunty Taking Bath After Having Sex




Cow boy Fucking a Girl Friend On the place




Indian College Students Fucking in public park




Angelina Jolie xxx with her boy friends viseos




Laila Aunty Showing Her Dark Pussy And Busty Boobs




Indian Desi Girl Painful Anal Fuck Homemade Video




Sexy Social Babes 23 Selfshot Hotties Nude Images!




Pakistani College Girls Oral Sex With Her Bad Teacher HD Wallpapers




Various style of ass fuck photos free download




Mumbai prostitutes caught having sex in public places




sex love fuck whore teen pussy sucking fucking ass boobs




Most Beautiful Indian girl Jisha Doing all perfect Body




South Indian aunty wided her legs and showing her hairy big pussy




Teen schoolgirl Hot Sex Video free Download




Namita's hot ass Getting fucked by a group of desi boys

Search

Loading...

Blog Archive

Powered by Blogger.

Blog Archive

Total Pageviews