Wednesday, 6 November 2013

Where the invaders come from. These fucking orientals. Troubling the peace of Europe for thousands of years with their fanatic creeds, driving out the old European gods of hearth and home. Telling us we need them. Ridiculously boasting about their inventions. Disregarding factual truth, expressing disagreement instead through emotional and physical attack. Insisting that anyone who points out their failings is motivated by irrational hatred. Why couldn't these fucking primitives stay in the deserts that spawned them?


Anonymous said...

Well, the old european gods were demons just like Allah. So something good came over that sea: The fishermen of Christ!

Anonymous said...

When moochers see better organized (and therefore wealthier) societies within reach, they move there if they are permitted. That's why there are millions of unwanted Mexicans residing in the US.

BW in California

Anonymous said...

one can't be "primitive" and bring "inventions" at the same time.

things from the Near East - like agriculture, division of labour, cities, sea travel, alphabet, written law, monotheism, - benefited all, gave rise to European states, Greek philosophy, and eventually Christianity and modern science.

some of it came to Europe with Jews, just get over.
Europeans are the mix, both culturally an genetically.
to the point of absurd sometimes - Albert Einsten's haplogroup is the same as Adolf Hitler's.

so why do you need prejudice today.
that is where "irrational" is.

when I look at non-Jewish actress, like Ingrid Bergman or Deborah Kerr - I simply see a beautiful woman.
when you look at Jewish actress, like Liz Taylor or Nathalie Portman, you see a dirty Jew.

when I hear about a book of non-Jewish author like Camus or James Joyce or Tolstoy, I simply read and appreciate the genius.
when you hear about a book of Jewish author like Kafka or Proust or Pasternak, you simply dismiss without reading.

this is the difference between us - in the very basic perception of reason and goodwill.

BTW Deborah is Hebrew name (The Bee)
as well as British Queen's name (Elisabeth)
nice argument to blame the bloody Joos for infiltrating the "European" culture. :}

Anonymous said...

Can I have some of that space coke you're snorting?

Cheradenine Zakalwe said...

The point is that the inventions are more mythical than real, or the Oriental role in creating them is overstated, or their significance to the development of western civilisation is overblown. A good rule of thumb is: if you need to keep insisting on how important you are, you're not very important. Both Jews and Muslims rewrite history to claim that western civilisation would have been impossible without them.

I didn't know most of those people you mentioned were Jewish until you pointed it out. Nor do I care now that I do know. You are the one so obsessed with his own ethnicity that you meticulously research the origins of every actress you see on the screen, every musician you hear play, every writer whose words you read. You urge on us an ethical standard according to which we shouldn't care about ethnicity; yet your own actions belie your words. You not only care about your ethnicity; it obsesses you; it dominates every aspect of your life.

You act like a typical Oriental by launching emotional attacks on your opponents, instead of engaging in evidence-based argumentation, as Europeans do. Paradoxically these emotional attacks, cast in the form of moralistic accusations, usually involve accusing your opponents of themselves being motivated by strong emotions. As I have said before, this is the phenomenon called projection, in which you attribute your own emotional outlook to others.

It is possible to admire the beauty of a Jewish woman, or the well-written prose of a Jewish writer, and, still, in a state of complete serenity, conclude that Jews have had a corrosive effect on European nations and civilisation by acting to undermine their cohesiveness, by promoting a political culture based on emotive, moralistic accusation rather than evidence-based argumentation and by disseminating anti-nationalism as a moral ideal.

Anonymous said...

on emotions - re-read you own article, you are grumpy and swearing.

on "obsession" - I am of mixed ethnicity so I'd prefer to consider all this as folklore.
unfortunately I see the same pattern - absurd dichotomy "Jews-Europeans", absurd conflating Jews with Muslims, unsubstantiated "corrosive effects" etc.

in the parallel thread, another thinker like you is accusing Jews of "usury", and then - in the same sentence - for inventing Communism.

your "evidence-based argumentation" and "criticism of Jews" are simply the code words for muddying the waters and dehumanizing.

and then, how is that "usury" (even if true), and publishing books, might be compared with pogroms and gas chambers?
were all 35 thousands civilian Jews murdered in Babi Yar near Kiev, all poisonous Marixsts involved in "usury"?

I have no intentions to blame people who live today for the issues of the past.

but if someone implies that these things are somehow comparable, or/and that the persecution of Jews was - at the same time - non-existent, and justified by their mythical misdeeds - this is simply wrong.

BTW look at how the MSM reports the news from Israel - they strictly broadcast or something neutral, or negative.
nothing good is reported from Israel.
the cow gave birth to a healthy calf - even that never happens.
only endless "Israeli forces" against "Palestinian people".
and after that, the local "evidence-based" nightingales are singing here about "Jewish controlled MSM"?

Anonymous said...

Do you even know what usury is? Did you know usury is against canon law?

Good god, you really are a hysterical bleating beast, and like a beast all you do is scream in pain rather than have the ability to form words and thoughts.

Cheradenine Zakalwe said...

"and then, how is that "usury" (even if true), and publishing books, might be compared with pogroms and gas chambers?"

Let's consider three Jewish interventions in the history of European civilisation. There may be others I haven't yet come across.

1) Inciting the Arabs to invade Spain and collaborating with them as occupiers.
2) Communism in eastern Europe.
3) Multiculturalism/immigrationism in western Europe.

Each of these interventions came close, or in the case of the third of them, which is still active, has come close, to bringing western civilisation to an end.

1) If Charles Martel hadn't defeated the invaders at Tours, all of western Europe might have been islamised: Michelangelo, Shakespeare, Beethoven, all snuffed out in advance, replaced by Mohammedan darkness.
2) Communism took the world to the brink of ruin. There were moments where a nuclear exchange was possible and the tension between the Communist powers and those resisting them disrupted almost the entire world and provoked numerous wars that entailed the loss of millions of lives.
3) Western Europe being repopulated by Asians and Africans. In the Greater Paris region, between 60% and 70% of newborns are of non-European origin. A similar pattern of demographic replacement is apparent in most west European capitals, if not at quite an advanced stage. How can our civilisation survive unimpaired if all of our capitals and countries are repopulated by non-Europeans?

Extinguishing an entire civilisation is far more morally significant, represents a far greater atrocity, than just killing a few thousand or even million people. And for all of this, there is not the slightest acknowledgement of guilt or expression of repentance, only the whining insistence that anyone who points it out must be motivated by irrational hatred.

Anonymous said...

=> CZ 8 November 2013 04:33

>>"Inciting the Arabs to invade Spain and collaborating with them as occupiers".

That is highly suspicious.
1) Arabs and Islam forcefully spread from Saudi Arabia in all directions, but somehow they needed “Jewish incitement” to invade Spain. Why?
2) Mohammed started his career from slaughtering Jews. They called “children of apes and pigs” in Koran, or something like this. It is hard to imagine a reason for “collaborating” with such enemy.

>>"Communism in eastern Europe."

1) Why one of the first things Communists did in Soviet Russia was closing synagogues and yeshivas, confiscating Jewish property, forbidding printing in Yiddish, effectively closing Jewish culture.
2) Why "Jewish-controlled" USSR collaborated with Nazi Germany in 1939-1941
3) Ever heard about “Anticosmopolitain campaign”?
4) Why Jews were thrown out of post-WW2 Poland.
5) Why Stalin sent Jews to Far East ("Jewish Autonomous Area")
6) Why there was mass Jewish immigration from USSR to Israel and US.
7) Why Communist USSR supported - by arms, money and diplomatically for 30+ years - each and every anti-Israeli Arab regime and terrorist organization.

>>"Multiculturalism/immigrationism in western Europe".

1) Why Western MSM (supposedly ZOG controlled) are systematically anti-Israeli
2) Why EU (also supposedly ZOG pets) sends money to Hamas, imposes trade limitations on Israel
3) Why instead of “collaborating with Jews”, Muslim immigrants on arrival to Europe start persecuting them.
4) Name at least one Jewish group or politician involved in practical MC/PC activity, not simply throwing words.
5) Why absolute majority of Counterjihad movement in US and Europe supports Israel.

Other words, - you live in fantasies, paying attention neither to historical facts, nor to the everyday reality.

Cheradenine Zakalwe said...

There have been a series of posts on these subjects. Please go and read them. I'm not going to repeat the same material every time. There is no dispute that the Muslim invasion of Spain, Communism, multiculturalism ended or will end badly for the Jews. Their manipulations often go awry or provoke hostile reactions.

I would say that the majority of Counterjihad sites support Israel because they are run by Jews and/or it is natural to support anyone successfully resisting Islam. I support Israel myself. It is diaspora Jews who are the problem, not Jews living in their own country.

Anonymous said...

=> CZ 8 November 2013 08:13
"diaspora Jews who are the problem"

diaspora Jews were the problem for Pharaoh.
diaspora Jews were the problem for Aman.
diaspora Jews were the problem for Russian Tzar.
diaspora Jews were the problem for Hitler.
diaspora Jews were the problem for Stalin.
diaspora Jews were the problem for Saddam Hussein.

diaspora Jews are the problem for Cheradenine Zakalwe.

something tells me that disapora Jews will be just fine.

Cheradenine Zakalwe said...

In other words, you have no real interest in the question of whether Jews have harmed the societies they have lived in. Thanks for confirming yet again that Jewish morality consists of simply defending the interests of Jews and disregarding every other consideration. That's as much morality as you can find in a pack of wild animals.

In any case, Hitler killed half the Jews in Europe, so that's a curious definition of being "just fine".

Anonymous said...

that is the story of survival against all odds.
why it causes such fury? - albeit you are advocating the same for your group, whatever it is.

morality is the dynamic process.
modern Jewish morality is rather "tikkun ulam" - "repairing the world", and the Golden Rule understood as applicable to all humans.

single-nation's individualism, aiming to help yourself via helping mankind.

and why is that "disregarding every other consideration" - just disregarding considerations of the enemies.

you are promoting nationalist agenda, and at the same time calling it "morality as you can find in a pack of wild animals".
or the one, or the other.
(or is it only bad when applied to Joos).

Cheradenine Zakalwe said...

"Disregarding the considerations of the enemies." Sure, and the "enemies" are the people in whose countries you are living.

It causes fury because Jewish actions have harmed European societies. It is natural to feel anger when people inflict harm on you, even more so when those people fail to acknowledge that harm or express any repentance for it, simply claiming that you were the "enemy" and therefore deserved to be disregarded and harmed.

And then to "cap it all" there is the gross hypocrisy of claiming that while ruthlessly advancing their own ethnic interests and harming the interests of other ethnic groups, they were actually doing it all for the greater good and "repairing the world".

I promote a nationalist agenda because I believe that there are such things as peoples, that those peoples have the right to exist, and that the only way they can exist is to have lands of their own. And that when this principle is violated, and different peoples live in the same land, bad things start to happen. The history of the Jews is the clearest proof of that. It is a story of harm being inflicted on the Jews and the Jews inflicting harm on the Gentiles.

My nationalist agenda does not disregard more abstract notions of justice by simply ruthlessly advancing the interests of European peoples and disregarding every other consideration, however, so it is not the equivalent of Jewish morality. In any case, your false moral equation leaves out the association of a people with a land. People are morally entitled to defend their own homelands, even by ruthless means. The Jewish machinations referred to were offensive, not defensive, in that they took place in other peoples' homelands.

Anonymous said...

=> CZ "The Jewish machinations"

thank you Dr. Goebbels!

but, as above - you neither have proof that Jews aren't Europeans, nor proof of "ruthlessness" or "machinations" exceeding the harm non-Jews did to each other (or to Jews).

absolutely none.
reposting the same lies, repackaging the same vague and wordy sentences again and again - won't make it true.

=> CZ "machinations referred to were offensive, not defensive, in that they took place in other peoples' homelands."

and what about Americas, Australia, South Africa - is there something wrong in Whites forcefully occupying and living "in other peoples' homelands"?

then, you talk about morality.
if not the morals of Torah, Commandments and Testaments, your morality today would be a jungle law.

anyway, someone call zoologists, the patient is hopeless.

Cheradenine Zakalwe said...

"Exceeding the harm non-Jews did to each other". That's an interesting cop-out. The harm non-Jews did to each other generally took place through land-based powers competing against one another. Their hostile interactions are clearly recorded in history and acknowledged by everyone. In addition, this mechanism of aggression is well-known and people are ready, psychologically and physically, to respond to it. Those people lived in that land, were committed to it and felt an ultimate loyalty to it. Jewish destructiveness was more subtle, however, based on influence and, yes, machination, rather than direct authority. They felt no commitment to the land and no loyalty to the people who lived there. They were quite happy to radically and destructively transform it.

" is there something wrong in Whites forcefully occupying and living "in other peoples' homelands"?"

Yes, there is. Europeans have acknowledged their historical wrong-doing, expressed repentance for it and undergone moral improvement by contemplating it. Jews have yet to acknowledge their historical wrong-doing, express repentance for it or undergo moral improvement by contemplating it. In fact, they cannot do so because, like Muslims, they are incapable of acknowledging fault.

The fact that you cannot acknowledge your own culpability, despite overwhelming proof, is the clearest sign of your moral debasement.

Anonymous said...

OK you admitted it.
"Jewish destructiveness was more subtle" simply means it is a fairytale.

certainly there was Jewish influence and ethnocentrism but there is nothing about "radically and destructively transforming" the world of Gentiles in Judaism, one only can get such ideas from Jew-haters.

no I don't think Europeans (and that includes Jews) should be only ashamed of "historical wrong-doings" in colonies. Initially they were motivated by self-interest but in the end brought civilization to these lands.

there is no slightest analogy between nonviolent, civil attempts of Jewish self-preservation in Europe and bloody global-scale territorial conquest of Islam.

and again as usual, no sign of "overwhelming proof" despite overwhelming.

you have no authority to attack me personally by lecturing on "my" culpability.
I don't put any labels on non-Jews and I'm not interested in exploiting their guilt.

I do see your personal culpability - not becasue you are non-Jew and there is "historical wrong-doing" of non-Jews - but because you attempt demonizing Jewish people, today, for such things as the alleged misdeeds of some of their ancestors 1300 years ago.

Cheradenine Zakalwe said...

I gave you three examples in which movements with a strong Jewish influence threatened the very existence of western civilisation. I have made a series of posts about the Muslim invasion of Spain. The evidence of Jewish complicity is overwhelming and acknowledged even by Jewish historians. The evidence of Jewish involvement in Bolshevism is likewise overwhelming and beyond serious dispute. Read McDonald's book Culture of Critique for evidence of this and evidence of their involvement in pushing expansive immigration policies more recently.

Or here for a discussion of Jewish involvement in enforcing multiculturalism on Sweden.

My presentation of historical episodes in which Jews have harmed Europeans is, very simply, a response to claims that they have never done so. When it is generally acknowledged that Jews have, at times, harmed the societies they have lived in; when they express repentance for it; and show that they have learned some moral lesson by contemplating it, there will be no need to keep insisting on it. But your posts make it clear that that isn't going to happen any time soon.

You talk of Jew-haters. Why would there ever be such a thing as Jew-haters? Is there such a thing as Belgian haters? Swede haters? Greek haters? The very idea that anyone could feel a motiveless hatred for a certain people is an extremely bizarre one. Are there any other examples of this phenomenon in history, or is "antisemitism" the only "hatred" that is completely divorced from the actions of the "hated" group?

As always, like a good Oriental, you try and turn the debate from fact to emotion, from the objective realm to the subjective realm, swatting away evidence with claims that the person citing it has an impure motivation.

Anonymous said...

You go rounds.

All 3 examples – negative role Jews played in prehistoric Spain, Revolutionary Eastern Europe, and modern MC/PC West, are far from presenting overwhelming evidence.

Jews in your opinion invented and supported Capitalism and Communism at the same time, promoted multiculturalism and ethnocentrism at the same time, and were through the history, primitive and intellectually potent at the same time.
That tells more about your propensity to fairytales than about subject.

Certainly there were and even now still is, lot of hatred in Europe.
Nationalist Poles, Russians and Ukrainians do hate each other, Romanians and Hungarians as well.

You might find interesting John Derbyshire’s opinion.
He even read Kevin Macdonald’s book and agrees with some of what is said there.

On Jewish suspiciousness, there is movie “A Serious Man” by Cohen brothers.
It is sometimes satirical to the point of self-hating, but very funny.

Cheradenine Zakalwe said...

I've never said anything about capitalism and Communism at the same time. It's beyond dispute that a Jew invented Communism. You have pushed diversity on others while obsessing about your own genetic purity, advocating immigration and multiculturalism for European societies while deporting Africans from Israel and applying genetic tests to determine the Jewishness of prospective immigrants to Israel. You developed a culture that valorised scholarship applied to essentially absurd and primitive superstitious subject matter.

These are factual truths. To the European, facts matter. To the Oriental, not much.

Oh, and I hardly think post-Roman Spain qualifies as prehistoric.

Anonymous said...

I took the course on Marxist-Leninist philosophy.

it pointed at 3 sources - Utopian Communism (More, Campanella), German classical philosophy (Kant, Hegel) and English political economics (Smith).
a bit of deception here, as there was also an influence of French Enlightenment and frankly, simply of the mainstream Christianity.
hardly the work of a single Jew.

I have no clue why you decided to blame me for "pushing diversity on others".
I never advocated anything like that.
be as pure or as diverse as you wish, it isn't my business.
just don't push your ways on others, - your self-appointed status of Sterling White European, your arrogance, your instinctive derogatory language are repulsive.

the next one - every repatriation law, in any country, demands showing proof of ancestry.
these "genetic tests" in Israel - if true, they can't be a mainstream. Israeli society is multi-ethnic. 20% of citizens are Arabs.
if true, I don't like that, it stinks. but you, most probably, will heil the idea.

on "deporting Africans" - every state has right to deport illegal immigrants.

Jews "advocating immigration and multiculturalism for European societies" - you can't support that by any substantial evidence.
there are several MC/PC newspapers in Israel, but their focus is strictly internal. they want MC/PC for Israel.

facts matter for the one who is honest, whatever genetcs is.
to presume that any "Oriental" is by definition dishonest, - that is stereotyping.
no serious man would listen to this.

yeah post-Roman Spain wasn't prehistoric.
that was - scerzo.
your way of thinking is.



Blog Archive

Powered by Blogger.

Blog Archive

Total Pageviews