Tuesday, March 09, 2010

A Day That Will Live in Infamy for American Conservatives

Evil? What evil?

When I heard about last night’s self-righteous little LGF moment at Fox News, the only video link I had was for Glenn Beck’s dire warning about an imminent fascist takeover in Europe. My first response was, “Oh, well, that’s just Glenn Beck.”

So Glenn Beck chucked our johnson — no big deal; we get our johnson chucked every day of the week.

But then I heard that Bill Kristol and Charles Krauthammer were part of the anti-fascist Greek chorus. That brought me up short — these guys are supposed to be a little more serious than TV talk-show hosts. It’s true Bill Kristol is the attack dog for the neoconservatives. But what about Dr. Krauthammer, who has long been regarded as the moral compass of American conservative punditry?

It was harder to just brush them away as just another couple of talking-head TV bozos. So my initial response morphed into something stronger: How dare they?

These three gentlemen, ensconced on their peacock thrones in the comfortable precincts of a major cable news channel, saw fit to condemn all of the European anti-Islamization movements in one fell swoop.

Charles Krauthammer, of all people, should know better. It was jaw-dropping to hear him issue a summary judgment on European nationalists based on knowledge as shallow as the kiddie wading pool in McIntire Park.

The Ranting ManIt’s not as if the evidence is hidden or obscure. The information is out there in multiple locations for anyone to read. And I’m not talking about screeds like this one, but real historical research and scholarly analysis.

The anti-fascist pundits could start with the books of Dr. Andrew Bostom, or Robert Spencer, or Ibn Warraq, or Bat Ye’or, or Srdja Trifkovic. Yes, I suppose they could dismiss Messrs. Trifkovic and Spencer as “fascists”. But what about Bat Ye’or? Or especially Ibn Warraq?

Dr. Krauthammer: I defy you to find any evidence that Ibn Warraq is a fascist, or supports fascists, or apologizes for fascists, or tolerates fascists. Moreover, Ibn Warraq is supremely qualified to inform you about the real fascist threat to Europe: an unaccountable EU superstate acting in concert with the totalitarian political ideology known as Islam.

Dr. Krauthammer, you have failed to do due diligence, and your ill-informed and ill-considered words have contributed to the Big Lie about Europe. You have aided and abetted the destructive “neo-fascist” meme which does such grave damage to courageous Europeans who dare to resist the Islamization of their countries.

Once again: How dare you?

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Don’t waste your time in the comments telling me that I’m wasting my time. I know that.
- - - - - - - - -
Not only am I a voice crying in the wilderness, but this blog is an amoeba in the food chain of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy. What I say makes no difference whatsoever, but still — it needs to be said.

Fox News is bespoke, as is the majority of the United States government and the upper echelons of the Pentagon. The people who make national policy and control the flow of information in this country are bought and paid for by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

In particular, the distinguished Prince al-Waleed bin Talal owns significant chunks of CITIGROUP, the Four Seasons, News Corp, and Time Warner. News Corp means BSkyB in the UK, and Fox News and the Wall Street Journal in the USA. Time-Warner means AOL, which means CNN.

Prince bin Talal’s influence over the media is no secret. In fact, he has bragged about it:

When I meet Mr Murdoch of News Corp, that owns Fox News, and BSkyB, or when I meet Mr Parsons, who controls CNN, Fortune magazine, People, Time, America Online, I don’t intrude into the management of these companies. However, I do convey to them the message about where I believe they went wrong. It’s their discretion to decide what to do. My job is to open their eyes to things they may not have seen. [emphasis added]

The prince was not being entirely accurate in the above description: his job is to close the eyes of his media minions to the things they should not see.

The order of the day? Eyes Wide Shut.

69 comments:

Fjordman said...

Saudi Arabia is an enemy nation today every bit as much as Nazi Germany or Imperial Japan were during WW2, perhaps more so. Nobody allowed the Goebbels' family to buy parts of the BBC at that time, nor should members of the Saudi royal family or people associated with any Muslim state or organization be allowed to invest in Western media or academia. This should be banned by law if necessary.

The United States is not a superpower but a defeated nation. The Saudis literally own you. They and the Chinese. What little money you have you spend on importing illegal Mexican welfare recipients.

EscapeVelocity said...

Before you get your panties in a wad about conspiracies Baron.

A much more simpler answer is that Kristol and Krauthammer are both Jews, and thus they have the fear of European Nationalism that almost all Jews have.

Though Krauthammer is a bit of a disappointment...depending on what was said.

Anybody got the video?


I talk to Jews everyday that are extreme critics of Islam and supporters of Ethno-Religious Israeli Jewish Nationalism, but they are fearful of Euro Christian Nationalism.

It is their biggest bugaboo...and it is what brings them so much deserved criticism.

Avery Bullard said...

It’s true Bill Kristol is the attack dog for the neoconservatives. But what about Dr. Krauthammer, who has long been regarded as the moral compass of American conservative punditry?

Krauthammer has always hated Europeans, especially the French.

The kind of Euro-nationalism espoused by Wilders is very pro-Israel. He's been there something like 40 times, even spending part of his younger years there. He's made support for Israel a litmus test. Yet even he can't get neocons and the main Jewish organisations on board with nationalism or even just immigration control.

The people who make national policy and control the flow of information in this country are bought and paid for by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

If that were so then surely much of the media with considerable Saudi ownership wouldn't be so dominated by staunchly pro-Israel commentators like Krauthammer and Kristol. Of course the Saudis don't really care about the Palestinians but do seem to care about spreading Islam beyond the MidEast. Neocons in the media generally hate Europeans and equate Islamophobia in Europe with past anti-Semitism. Maybe on second thought the neocons and the Saudis have more in common than each would have the public believe?

Baron Bodissey said...

EV --

Don't bruise yourself jumping to conclusions (again).

My panties, wadded or otherwise, are not arranged that way due to any belief in a "conspiracy".

This doesn't require a conspiracy. It's all out in the open. Bin Talal brags about what he does: he influences editorial policy at our news organizations. That is one factor that helps persuade people like Krauthammer to avert their eyes from some of the nasty facts about Islam in Europe.

As for Jews -- Beck isn't a Jew. How do you explain him? Except for the fact that he's an airhead, that is.

J. Hank Rearden said...

So, those who should be our natural allies are now found to be really working against freedom from islamization. Krauthammer, Kristol, Beck ... useful idiots ... or worse? I don't know, but I do now know we are in a much deeper in the hole than I realized. This was really a bad day.

EscapeVelocity said...

Baron, Im not saying that the some influential Saudis dont own (and therefore have influence) part of Newscorp.

I dont think that Krauthammer sold his soul to the Saudis or will refrain from criticizing Islam, as he has in the past.

Jews however have their psychological pathologies...not that every single one thinks alike, but they are certainly scarred as regards European Nationalism.

Its a much simpler answer.

Id like to see a video before I condemn Krauthammer though.


As you yourself said, Beck is a less serious person than Krauthammer.

I dont see a talking points memo for anti European Nationalism and pro Islamization of Europe propaganda issued Fox News wide that Beck and Krauthammer and Kristol congenially acquiesced to.

I apologize for the use of conspiracy, but from my perspective you took a well known fact and then extended it a bit too far, conjecturing motive.

EscapeVelocity said...

PS- Ive been known to jump to conclusions, but I think you yourself did in the non-conspiracy theory you presented.

Avery Bullard said...

A couple of years ago I had Beck's TV programme on (I think it was on Headline News). I heard him say he didn't pay any attention to politics or current events until 9/11 and that he's learning as he goes. If true that means he's about as politically sophisticated as most of us were when we were a couple of years out of school. No wonder he's so erratic. Add to that his emotionalism, immaturity, and evident joy at being in the spotlight and there's no telling where on the political spectrum he will end up.

EscapeVelocity said...

Glenn Beck interviews Geert Wilders on Islam and the Koran

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FuZn-e0yaNA

Baron Bodissey said...

Escape Velocity --

With all due respect, I think you are mistaken. This is not a conspiracy theory, but a case of using many billions of petrodollars to buy influence and subvert our government through the use of Muslim Brotherhood front groups. I am in the process of editing a lengthy and thoroughly-sourced book on this subject, so I have some of the facts at my fingertips. That’s why I could pull out the Bin Talal quote without having to look for it.

Bin Talal is just the self-promoting tip of the iceberg. Much of what happens is quiet, even if it isn’t secret. It’s the stealth jihad, and it’s about the gradual imposition of sharia law in the United States.

Start with the publicly available documents from the Holy Land Foundation case. You’ll learn about the obvious ones like CAIR — which is pretty much a spent scene now — and ISNA. But check out the North American Islamic Trust, NAIT. How much money flows into it and where it is used. What mosques it owns — which is most of them — and what they preach. Follow the trail to Major Hasan, Awlaki, Adam Gadahn, and dozens of other home-grown mujahideen.

Also look at IIIT. Then you’ll discover what is being inserted in to our schools’ textbooks. Check out the guidelines for the Society of Professional Journalists. Look at who endows schools at Harvard and Georgetown. Follow the law cases where de facto sharia is used. And above all, follow the money.

Read up on it. It’s not a secret conspiracy, but it’s a massive case of illegal foreign influence, and it goes on right under the noses of people who are supposed to prevent it. Those who aren’t bought are duped and cowed by all the “diversity” cant.

Bin Talal is just a bit part. The play is much, much bigger than him and Fox News.

Takuan Seiyo said...

Krauthammer is not what people think he is. He is a neocon. It makes all the difference. I wrote about him here .

EscapeVelocity said...

Baron, Im as anti Islam as they come.

I know all about the Muslim Brotherhood's vast web of front groups (and fellow travelers) and penetration into Western institutions, and also the strategy of financial corruption of the system.

Im just not gonna throw Krauthammer under the bus...or Kristol for that matter.

I havent seen any direct quotes, transcript or video. Just group quotes attributed to a group which included others besides Krauthammer and Kristol.

The only one, I have seen directly attributed to Krauthammer was a distinction between Islam and Islamism, which many people hold, and which is wishful thinking or rather an shallow understanding about the complexity of the situation. But I understand that mindset, because I once held it myself. That wasnt a marker that I was enthralled to the Saudi's, Islam, or the Muslim Brotherhood though.

There is absolutely no evidence that Krauthammer is propagandizing in exchange for Saudi petrodollars.

Two hard core Neo Conservative Pro Israel Jews, lest you forget.

Baron Bodissey said...

EV --

I'll try one more time, and then I'm giving up. You are not reading me closely.

I do not assert that Krauthammer is bought by Saudi petrodollars. Not at all.

I assert that Fox News itself is demonstrably influenced in its editorial policies by the voting rights and influence bought by bin Talal along with his 5.46% share of NewsCorp.

Those editorial policies trickle down and influence most of the staff and talking heads, sometimes in subtle ways that they may not even realize. That's how the MB works.

That's it. That's the entirety of what I assert. The rest is what you decided to read into it.

Robin Shadowes said...

It's very scary. The saudis supposedly owns a lot of estates, companies and land in my country and they are financing universities and it just goes on and on. This is probably the answer on how they have taken over our countries by all this secret infiltration into every useful organisation there is. They already own us and they know it.

PatriotUSA said...

I am in the camp with Baron on this one. I will do alot more studying and reading but from this American Jew: I Fear Islam much more than European nationalism and those who sell out my country through jihad, stealth jihad and not so stealth jihad.

NAIT is a quite nasty bunch
of Islamofascist trolls. They
are very active and are
mentioned all throughout
the book "Muslim Mafia"
which I have just started.

BTW: a bit off topic but "Son of Hamas" was very good. Very fast read and may not be breaking a ton of new ground but worth one's time.

Takuan Seiyo said...

Re: Saudis (+Emirates)
I don’t think they own Beck. He is a multimillionaire already, and seems a genuine patriot. He is just too mushy and too ignorant of these matters. It’s the same neocon Achilles heel that makes them shy away from issues generally known as “race-realists” and that propels them to a reflexive anti-Europeanism and American triumphalism and Wilsonianism, even when hardly warranted.

Avery Bullard said...

Looks like Mark Steyn is dissenting.

Out of Dutch

These aren't words one has cause to type terribly often, but I think Charles Krauthammer is being deeply naïve in his observations on Geert Wilders...

Wilders does not need to be lectured condescendingly about distinctions within Islam, because he lives with them every day. And he has concluded, notwithstanding Dr. Krauthammer's views on the precise "minority" that identifies as "Islamist," that Islam itself is the issue — and that, therefore, regardless of the "moderation" of the "overwhelming majority" of Muslims, the more Islam the less Netherlands in any recognizable sense. Are the gangs of gay bashers on the streets of Amsterdam "Islamist" by Krauthammer's definition? Maybe, maybe not. But, either way, they make the running, and the rest of the community is either indifferent or quiescent.

As for whether Wilders is "extremist," his views on the cultural compatibility of immigrants were routine and unexceptional until the 1960s, not only in Europe, but also in the U.S. And, even in North America today, they are the stated policy of the Government of Quebec. One can certainly disagree with that, but does that make Quebec also "fascist" (Beck) or even "extreme" (Krauthammer)?


There's more at the link.

EscapeVelocity said...

Geert Wilders is the equivalent of an American neocon.

Thorkell the Tall said...

Irregardless of the conspiracy discussion, I understand what the lord Baron is saying. Jews do seem to view anti-Islam the same way they view anti-antisemitism. As for Beck, much of what is said here makes sense and some slack should be cut him. However, it is important to not that Beck is of German decent and if there's one group that tries to avoid anything like antisemitism more than Jews its Germans.

I cut him some slack, because I only found out about what Islam is about through this site and only in the last month or two. I'd never heard of Geert, though I've come to admire him for his strength of character. I'm not so happy with his pro-christian thing, being a pagan myself, but I'd rather live under the cross than the crescent. At least the cross can be made moderate and livable.

Sadly, any nationalism based on European heritage is viewed as fascism, true or not. I understand the fear behind it, because Europe has proven its power in the past. Yet it is in spite of that fear that people have to work together to stop this threat.

As an aside, I've come to wonder how long people can be called racists/fascists/etc before they finally decide to embrace the names and actually become them.

bartholomewscross said...

I don't think EV is inclined to anti-Semitism (wasn't he accusing of Rebellious Vanilla of racism just the other day?), so I trust I am not encouraging any pathology in giving his opinion some qualified support.

Liberals--Jews, white Christians, non-whites, everyone alike--have observed a simple truism: only organized white Christians can resurrect Nazism.

Because everyone (especially Jews) thinks Nazism is absolute evil, then no measure to prevent it is too extreme (by definition no policy can be worse than absolute evil).

If Europeans must organize as Europeans before they can become Nazis, then it makes sense for Jews, liberals, etc. to fight as if it were Nazism itself any organization of Europeans qua Europeans, regardless of the organization's purpose. After all, if European organization is the first prerequisite of Absolute Evil, why chance it? You're going to want to nip that in the bud. Hence, pulling a johnson.

And, since Jews have the most to fear from resurgent Nazism, they have the strongest motive to fight against anything that might allow it, including white Christians organizing as white Christians (remember The Passion and dire prophecies of pogroms sweeping across America?).

Except that they're wrong: Nazism isn't absolute evil. Satan is absolute evil and Satan alone. Nazism is merely one (very bad) manifestation of a far more ancient evil. And when Krauthammer, Kristol, Beck et al are surrounded by hostile anti-whites and Muslims, perhaps they'll see that Evil wears many masks.

bartholomewscross said...

I didn't mean to imply in my first paragraph that being an official "anti-racist" automatically clears you of anti-Semitism.

I just meant that I hadn't seen any signs that EV reduces all the evil in the world to the Jewish people, and since people who do are usually obvious about it, I thought it safe to conclude he is not an anti-Semite.

Natalie said...

The situation is more grave than I thought. I am extremely disappointed in the American right as a whole. There really is no hope, is there?

You New said...

There's hope. You can pester these people. And Mark Steyn's column today:

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZDk2ODI2OGEwMjAzOWFlMzQxMzUxNTE3NmVkOWU3M2U=

Takuan Seiyo said...

@Natalie
There is always hope. It was far more hopeless for George Washington & Continental Army. The key is to recognize the situation for what it is, adjust course continuously, and keep going.

PatriotUSA said...

EscapeVelocity said...
Geert Wilders is the equivalent of an American neocon.

The I will take seventy times seven Geert Wilders any day. This man is a hero unlike so many who cower in Islam's shadow, roll over
and play dead.

Natalie, Never lose hope!
Takaun Seiyo is absolutely correct.
That is what the
Islamofascists want us
to think.

Free Hal said...

Baron,

This must be tough -- all the work you put in, and being right, only to see people fib for money. And how much worse it feels coming from compatriots!

Sadly, I think you should prepare for more of this kind of thing in America.

And I think it's only partly about Saudi money. It's also about market positioning. Beck, Krauthammer, and Kristol are foreseeing what violent ethnic division will do in an ethnically violent continent. And they are distancing themselves from it so as to maintain their domestic audiences.

They've chosen to condemn the conflict rather than take the unpleasant job of working out if someone in it has right on their side. It would lose them their audiences anyway for "not believing in democracy". There's just no mileage in pointing out that one side of the conflict is justified.

Democracy is going to crash in Europe, and the multicultural orthodoxies will go out of the window. But democracy will survive in America, and American commentators will need to carry on with the all-inclusive shibboleths without which democracy can't really function. If you were more craven and materialistic, what line would you take?

Condemning Europe as a fascist continent is going to go mainstream. And it will feel right if the violence gets as vicious as some of us think it will. I fear this will make things even lonelier than they currently are for you and Dymphna. But right and decency have a habit of prevailing -- that will sometimes be your only comfort, and no less significant for that!

1389 said...

If anything, GOV is the moral compass of American conservative punditry.

Redbad said...

What do you expect from neo-con idiots like Kristol and Krauthammer?

They are not genuine conservatives in any sense.

The self proclaimed leaders of the American 'con$ervative' movement' are a joke and do not represent the grassroots at all.

Papa Whiskey said...

The United States is not a superpower but a defeated nation. ...

Fjordman -- you are a most erudite fellow and I've learned much from your writings, but when it comes to my country your scorn is exceeded only by your ignorance.

Richard in Chicago said...

Just a personal observation on Charles Krauthammer: I realized long ago that he never says anything that hasn’t been said a week earlier by half a dozen writers who are at least as intelligent and much more humble. In the fall of 2008 he predicted that Obama would serve two brilliant terms (not that he would ever admit being wrong). Today being the real thing is not as important as playing it on television. There is a curious symbiosis at work here--a man who grew up believing he was a genius, and thousands of people who desire a one-stop source of instant wisdom.

Escovado said...

"The United States is not a superpower but a defeated nation. The Saudis literally own you. They and the Chinese. What little money you have you spend on importing illegal Mexican welfare recipients."

Fjordman: You are only half right. The United States Government is a parliament of whores who are owned by the Saudis and the Chinese, but the American taxpayers are not. That sleeping giant is waking up--and it's very pissed off. We're in for a rough ride, but you ain't seen nothin' yet, pal!

"The situation is more grave than I thought. I am extremely disappointed in the American right as a whole. There really is no hope, is there?"

Natalie: Most of what is known as "the American right" is not. The Glenn Becks of this world are Johnny-come-latelies who pay lip service to the U.S. Constitution when it makes good TV for them, but abandon it when it brings up issues they find embarrassing (e.g. the so-called "birthers").

Remember, after the 2008 election, when I told you that the Democrats were going to have a full-on meltdown? Well, they're having one right on cue. We may be due for a Jeffersonian revolution, but it is far from over. Never give up hope!

Armance said...

Geert Wilders is the equivalent of an American neocon.

In many aspects, yes. But after winning the local elections in Almere, Wilders stated that headscarves should be banned in public institutions, but NOT the symbols of Christianity and Judaism. Thus he committed the capital sin against the first and most sacred commandment of the new world order: "You shall not discriminate". This is something outrageous and unprecedented in the eyes of both Euro-crats and American neocons - because they are used either to allow all religious symbols as equally deserving the public space or to ban them entirely (the French model).

I guess that declaration in Almere was the moment that determined the neocon establishment to turn in full force against him and rank him in the "fascist" category.

Armance said...

And Wilders offered as a reason for banning the headscarves but not crosses and yarmulkes the fact that the latter ones belong to "our Dutch culture". Which means that he acknowledges the existence of a historical, established culture in a country with a white majority. Again: this is something that both American neocons and Euro-crats will not tolerate.

Baron Bodissey said...

Fjordman, Armance, et al. --

You are right in what you say, but only partially. Beware of making the same error that Americans make about Europe! You think you know your topic, but you only know part of the truth.

If I spend some time learning about Norway or Romania, in a few years I might be able to say, "Norwegians do such-and-such," or "Romanians believe so-and-so", and be mostly right, because both countries are small and relatively homogeneous.

But the USA is huge and various, and the variation is not just geographic. There are light years of difference between the culture I live in and that of the rarefied talking-head Valhallas in New York, DC, and LA, where people like Krauthammer and Kristol live. Likewise, there are enormous differences between Central Virginia and, say, Texas.

The America you learn about in your schools and from your media is mostly the effete liberal bicoastal subset of the country. And when you come to visit us, that is mostly the part of the country you experience. You would be unlikely to spend a month in Des Moines or Chattanooga, much less the small towns and rural areas that make up the vast bulk of the United States. Yet the majority of Americans live and work in those areas, and hold to the culture and values of them, which are more traditional and boring than the big cities.

I was born in a small Virginia town, but I spent most of my childhood and young adult years (when I wasn't in England) in the DC area. I had to move out here to the boonies to understand the other side of America. It has been more than thirty years, and I have still only partially grasped it.

In other words, be careful of making generalizations about my country.

What you say is mostly true now, because the bicoastal people run the government and our foreign policy. But they are only a thin unrepresentative slice of America, and their reign is almost over. Their hegemony will disappear when the dollar collapses, and then a different order will emerge.

That order will be familiar to me, because it will be built upon ordinary Americans, but it may be strange and puzzling to the rest of the world, which has grown accustomed to the America that Hollywood and CNN display to it.

Sean O'Brian said...

BB,

Their hegemony will disappear when the dollar collapses, and then a different order will emerge...but it may be strange and puzzling to the rest of the world, which has grown accustomed to the America that Hollywood and CNN display to it.

Do you think that such a new order would be any more well-disposed towards (traditional) Europe and Europeans than the strictly ideological neoconservative establishment?

Baron Bodissey said...

Sean --

That question would require an entire doctoral thesis to answer!

Short version: it will depend on how much transatlantic traffic still exists, and whether the new version of the USA (or its fragments) can project power abroad. If we are no longer trying to police the civilized world, Europe will become strange and exotic again, in turns repellent and fascinating. But we will have no more opinions about its politics than we do now about Borneo or Tuvalu.

Our ideological judgments are ultimately rooted in the fact that we were drawn into two world wars in Europe within the last century, and then the Cold War that followed. Once that period fades to a dim memory, and assuming that Europe no longer has any relevance to what we perceive as our national security, then we will lose interest entirely in the political trends of the Old World.

Rollory said...

Thorkell:

"As an aside, I've come to wonder how long people can be called racists/fascists/etc before they finally decide to embrace the names and actually become them."

Took me about five years.

Cobra said...

Escape and Baron,
You are both right. Your arguments are not mutually exclusive.
It is a well know "secret" that the jews are working against the white Christian majority of the US.
I would go one step further saying that this what they always do.
Some may say that is in response to previous discrimination against them. They would be right up to a point. In the US there was no discrimination against them, aux contraire.
In regards of Beck, he is out of his depth and the FOX channel has been bought by the Saudi money.

boru said...

As an English bilingual Quebecer(no k!) having lived through the "silent" revolution, the culture has prevailed in terms of curtailing English proliferation with extant language laws,mandatory French schooling for new immigrants,signage,(roads,stores,etc.),broadcasting quotas,workplace French only,even webpages. Is that fascism? If so it seems to be working out. There's no more FLQ bombs or murders. The English who couldn't handle it hit the road. Problem is it's largely a welfare state.

But protection was needed and Rene Levesque and his Parti Quebecois ensured that by enacting new laws. Geert Wilders is simply wanting to do just that. If that's "fascism" or perceived as such,then too bad. I didn't like it either. Adjust or leave. Beck's wimping out.If he's going to be that way he can do sports.

I realise it's "religion" being dealt with and not language,but the fact remains, "it ain't workin' out" and it never will.

Luke said...

Baron Bodissey I agree with you 100%. Bill Kristol should also know better. I am very disappointed in Charles Krauthammer.

I remember a piece by Christoper Hitchens when he also complained that Charles did not voice any contrary word against the Ayatollah's fatwa against Salmon Rusdie but rather implied that he is to blame for the fatwa for his writing.

So maybe there is more to this then we thought. Is Charles a closet muslim ?

laine said...

What a tangled web.

Beck is a loose cannon, as likely to be wrong as right. He's ruled by his emotions, not facts and logic and therefore incapable of being a dependable conservative.

The vast majority of diaspora Jews vote for and fund leftist parties, most of which now have a strong anti-Israel slant. That is to say, their leftism trumps their Jewishness. This has happened before, with Russian Jewish Bolsheviks.

Of the minority of diaspora Jews who claim to be conservative, when push comes to shove, they are Jewish first as messieurs Krauthammer and Kristol have just demonstrated and share the permanent Jewish animus toward Euro Christians. Call it post-traumatic (Holocaust) syndrome, whatever, it exists and animates Jews much more than the much fresher and realistic threat Muslims now pose to them both in and out of Israel. Michael Medved was trashed when he said recently in a round table on Podhoretz's book "Why Are Jews Liberal" (including Kristol incidentally) that Jews hate Christians.

His words have explanatory power (e.g. Jewish promotion of multicult to break up Euro Christian blocs) and therefore should be considered as a real possibility.

EscapeVelocity said...

PatriotUSA, it wasnt meant as an insult.

Armance said...

Baron,

I didn't make any judgement regarding Americans as a nation, that's why I emphasized almost every time in my posts on this thread "American neocons". I know it's a big country, complex and complicated. But the parts of the American society you are talking about are no longer represented in the power structures of your country - on the contrary, the power structures of your country work against them, demonize them and try to displace them from their position as a legitimate majority of the US. The American political class, media and intelligentsia - both Democrat and Republican - represent the interests of the Americans as much as the Dutch socialists and christian-democrats represent the interests of the Dutch people (to choose a random example).

Baron Bodissey said...

Armance --

Yes, that is what I mean about where you are right. The people in charge are the same Americans you learn aboout on your TV.

But those who run the country, and the elite culturati who define the zeitgeist, are a passing phenomenon. The current regime is relatively recent -- since WW2 -- and will wither away along with the hegemonic dollar. Wait and see.

Armance said...

I think the fall of the US as a multicultural empire will be beneficial first and foremost for the patriotic Americans. They will have the option to secede from the union and form their own state based on their European, founding-fathers heritage. After all, every sane person would prefer to live in Chattanooga instead of nightmarish Detroit or Mexifornia.

PatriotUSA said...

Escape Velocity,
Thanks and appreciated. I have a 'slight' tendency to get irritated. Especially as I
do not even come close to the
typical Amercian Jew or JINO.
They actually hate me. I
like Jesus, gave my life to him
over 24 years ago, I am a
staunch supporter of the 2nd
amendment, own lots of guns and
am sick of both Europe, the west
and the USA cowtowing to Islam and Muslims.

Super Turma do said...

Baron, I'd like to focus on what you said about America and ask you a question so that I may understan America somewhat better:


So, in your little rant you divided America grossly in two parts:
The big cities vs the rural regions
Or the Northeasten shore and the West Cost on one side and the rest of America in the other.

Is this true? Are people from Los Angeles / Los Angeles culture more similar to that of New York or Boston or Washington than to that of another Californian small town or rural comunity (not Mexican)??

Another question is, you see... Americans vote with their feet. That is so, so odd to me. I believe that Europeans don't do so.
Well... As Americans vote with their feet, I see that American big cities differ widely from the "American soul". This is so because:
1) American cities suffered a great invasion of non whites: First blacks, then Mexicans in some places and then immigrants from all over the world.
2) Leftist Americans go to the cities because it is trendy
3) Rich Americans fled the cities to live in afluent Suburbs from which they can hit the town whenever they want.

So, what does this mean? Is it because of these factors I presented that the cities differ so widely from their neighbouring areas and are so related to each other across the United States?

If so, it seems to me that all American Cities are soul-less despite the image full of sex and the city New York soul or the O.C. Los Angeles soul.

Thanks.

bernie said...

As I wrote in Charles Krauthammer is an Idiot: As an immigrant Jew who lost more than 98% of his relatives to genocide in WWII and ethnic cleansing pogroms in Russia, one would expect me to be the first to condemn the anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant stance by the quickly rising far-right parties in Europe such as the Vlaams Belang of Belgium, however one would be wrong. In this instance I side with the far-right parties.

Takuan Seiyo said...

There are questions here (e.g. Super Turma do) that require a book to answer. Good luck, Baron. As a little peek into the “Other America” I offer this website. The person behind it is a writer and firearms expert who calls himself Boston T. Party. One of his books, a novel, is called Molôn Labé. Cogitation on the meaning of that title, and how it expresses the feelings of the non-urban population of the United States, is warranted.

Europe needs much more of the Molôn Labé spirit. I am astonished that Holland could not yield a crowd of at least 20,000 to demonstrate in front of that courthouse for Wilders.

Baron Bodissey said...

Super Turma do --

It’s hard to answer your question succinctly, because the situation is a lot more complicated than just cities vs. rural areas. Yes, the major East Coast and West Coast cities are very similar in their trendy cultural leftism — New York, Boston, DC, LA, San Francisco (the worst of all), etc. But also places like Chicago, Ann Arbor, Minneapolis, and others are similar. Most large cities are now hollowed out, with a degraded black or Latino underclass in their centers, surrounded by working-class areas, usually also “ethnic”, and then the middle class (white and otherwise, but largely white) in the suburbs.

Suburban culture is distinctly different from downtown culture. I grew up in the suburbs, so I’m not a farm boy, but I wasn’t a city kid either. Suburban culture is the backbone of modern America, but it allows itself to be ruled by the urban elite, and the city avant-gardes set the cultural trends.

Rural and small-town culture is quite different, and varies quite a bit from region to region. But even a relatively small city like Charlottesville can be an effete lefty preserve, because it has a university to anchor it in the dominant paradigm. We sometimes call C’ville Berkeley East.

Towns of comparable size but without universities are much more interesting. They have a character of their own, and some kind of genuine economic base such as manufacturing, rather than serving as nothing more than a bedroom and shopping mall for effete college kids.

Southern cities are to some extent different from Northern cities. Charleston, Savannah, Charlotte, and Augusta are distinct from their counterparts in the “Rust Belt” of the Northeast.

But the largest distinction is the three-way one: Downtown vs. Suburbs vs. Small town/rural. And the differences are not symmetrical: the small town and rural people usually understand all too well the culture of the cities and the suburbs, but not vice versa. It took me a number of years to unlearn my preconceptions about the countryside after I moved out here.

I hope that answers your question, at least somewhat.

Afonso Henriques said...

WTF? Damned you Super Turma!

Well people, I am not a specialist on the Internet and that's why these things happen. Super Turma is Portuguese for Super Class.
Super Turma does not exist, Super Turma is just the old me: Afonso Henriques. It refers to a new account I made with my class, sorry about it. It really sounds very stupid. In Portuguese, at least.

By the way, I have not read your answers yet so I'll probabily post another comment soon. Yet, thanks for answering.

Super Turma is me Afonso Henriques. Sorry for that!

Cobra said...

I know I have ZERO chances to be heard or to have an impact, but I beg the patriotic and rational Jews to bury their animosity against the white Christian world and work with them for the good of the western civilization and against the looming Armageddon brought by the murderous Islam and Red China.

That implies for them not being extreme leftists, because the progressive/marxist movement is the enemy within the Western world.

The Jewish civilization has far more in common with the Christian world than Islam or the far eastern (red chinese) fanaticism.

What are the chances for that to happen?

Afonso Henriques said...

Well, now as Afonso and in a more serious tone:

Thank you for your answers. I am now going to ask you if there is a big difference between Europe and the Americas. Okay, of course it is. You don't even need to answer.

Okay there are three Americas: Downtown / Suburban / Rural.
Daily Show / Desperate Housewives / True Blood.
I get it. It makes sense.

So, is there no friction across "American Nations"?
Because I think it would be natural to talk of these "Culturally different American regions". I have a friend who speaks of Yankeeland and Dixieland and California...

The problem is that, while I feel this friction is great, I don't see the spirit of this in big cities which would be the capitals of these regions. Wasn't it Thomas Jefferson who distrusted cities? It seems to me that cities in America went from a wonderfull experiment into a very bad one.

Concerning last paragraph: As a city boy, or better, as a not-so-wealthy-suburb boy, I also think that people of the rural areas are... well... you know! But I still like them, more than everybody else. And I usually consider them to be better human beings although too simplistic and short sighted.

P.S. - You Baron, and people like you, always talk about the American giant that is going to wake up. I usually laugh inside because I don't see how there are more rural Americans than city+suburban Americans, or that the first are more powerfull.

But maybe what you want to say with that is that suburban Americans will side against the city elites? Is it?

What do you want to say with the giant, silent-majority, and other such terms? Which demographics?
Do the majority of whites live in suburbs?
Or the majority of whites "who matter", for that matter?

Takuan Seiyo said...

@Cobra
Please don’t take it as an expression of animosity, but you don’t know much about Jews. In a way, to use the term “Jews” is as misleading as what the Baron has written about “Americans.” Jews vary widely, including in opinions on issues such as support for Christian and ex-Christian (i.e. European) white society, and they fight each other vigorously on these points. They are far from being a unified tribe, even if they were so still in the 18th century.

Even if you take the 78% Jewish vote for BHO as an indication of the attitudes you refer to, you have to ask yourself, “What about the 22%?” Second, even in that 78% vote you have to separate the variables “Jew,” “urban,” and “university education.” I am not aware if any studies like this have been done, but I bet you that if there were, you’d find out that the % of Jewish votes that went to BHO, though still the majority, was not much higher than of practicing Catholics and Protestants who shared the other demographic characteristics.

There are fair reasons why you should think the way you do, and both Lawrence Auster (not a pal of mine) and I have expressed ourselves in a fair and objective way on this matter, while each acknowledging the bias he and I share along with tens of millions of American who have no Jewish genes: support for Israel. The sort of attacks that Auster and I have been subjected to by “White Christian patriots”, and the vocabulary used, including in this blog, leave one reeling.

The key to turning more Jews toward the causes you care about is not to stop criticizing negative Jewish contributions, as long as well-informed, but to stop doing so in a language ranging from intemperate to hateful/genocidal (the latter two not yours). Also, to stop vilifying such Jews or semi-Jews who are on your side as though they were plants of the Elders of Zion with nefarious plots to co-opt and destroy white people and peoples (not “Christian,” because in the particular case I am citing, both Auster and I are Christian).

Armance said...

Super Turma is Portuguese for Super Class.

Damn, Afonso, I believed that another Romanian commented on Gov, since "turma" means "herd, cattle" in Romanian. "Super herd", that is.
I bet both words originated in the Latin "turma" (swarm, squadron), but developed different senses. Different, but still related: a group (of people, animals, etc.) Funny, heh?

Baron Bodissey said...

Afonso --

Yes, there are major regional frictions. That’s what makes it so complicated to explain. The frictions that transcend region — urban vs. suburban vs. rural, or class differences — are easier to describe.

The biggest differences are between the South and the North, between the historic states of the Confederacy and the rest. Northerners — because their attitudes, preferences, and values form the dominant culture — often don’t even realize their superior and condescending attitude towards Southerners, but a Southerner is always aware of it. Northerners communicate their superiority even when they visit the South — in that way they’re a lot like Europeans. As we say down here: “There are good Yankees and bad Yankees. The bad Yankee comes South, and the good Yankee goes home.”

This is why Southerners generally feel a kind of comfort visiting other parts of the South — Tennessee and Georgia seem enough like Virginia to be home-like. However, to people in the deep South, Virginians are so far north that they’re suspiciously like Yankees.

I don’t know if Northerners feel the same way about their region. As I said, they are the inherently superior people, thanks to their being from the victorious culture, so they may not experience the same regional solidarity.

My Daddy was a Yankee, and I have kin up North, so I have feet in both camps, although I was raised here, so my sympathies lie with the South. My great-great granddaddy fought for the Confederacy, but, funnily enough, I don’t think anyone on the other side of the family fought for the Union — they were wealthy back then, and probably bought their way out of the draft, which Northerners were allowed to do.

There are also some tensions between East and West, and Texans are a special breed. They look upon themselves as different from just about everyone else except maybe Oklahomans, whom they consider Lesser Texans.

You Baron, and people like you, always talk about the American giant that is going to wake up.

If I ever said that, I take it back. What is happening is that we are waking up to what has been done to our precious heritage, and we will reclaim it. But that will be on a state-by-state basis, not as the United States.

But maybe what you want to say with that is that suburban Americans will side against the city elites? Is it?

That one is hard to answer. I don’t know.

What do you want to say with the giant, silent-majority, and other such terms? Which demographics?

When the economy collapses, the people who will do the best will be the “silent majority” folks, those who have actual life-skills: farmers, engineers, mechanics, plumbers, electricians, etc. People who have a useful skill that will help hold the remnants of the system together. The government bureaucrats, financial wizards, symbolic analysts — and that last group includes me — etc. will have a hard time. We will have to rely on the native Christian charity of our redneck neighbors.

Do the majority of whites live in suburbs?

Probably. I haven’t checked the statistics.

Baron Bodissey said...

Takuan --

In a way, to use the term “Jews” is as misleading as what the Baron has written about “Americans.”

I hope you mean “as misleading as what the Baron has described among those who talk about ‘Americans’ as a homogeneous lump.”

Because one of my main points here has been the persistent tendency among many Europeans to ignore the vast differences among people within the United States. Texans and New Yorkers differ more than Germans and Swedes (except, of course, for the fact that they can understand one another’s language if they try real hard).

Cobra said...

@Takuan,
You have my deep appreciation for your work, with which I am quite familiar.
As for my familiarity with Jewish affairs, I know much more than you think. My father in law was a holocaust survival and a Jew.
Besides I absolutely love history and the relationship between religions and history.
I think I read a lot and I am from Eastern Europe, which means I have the cultural scars to be wise (I hope, at least).
But, to get to my original point, I feel (more than I think in this case) that we are very close to an inflection point in our (Western) history.
Which can turn to be a positive one or a (very) negative one.
It is up to us to decide.

Cobra said...

Correction: "survivor".

EscapeVelocity said...

"When the economy collapses, the people who will do the best will be the “silent majority” folks, those who have actual life-skills: ....We will have to rely on the native Christian charity of our redneck neighbors." --- Baron

You can see this with regards to weathering hurricanes.

The city folks dont do as well as the rural folks. The rural folks tend to be more jack of all trades, having to rely on themselves more, for everything...and just general basic survival skills.

This was and is true for the blacks....as it is for whites. The rural black farmers did much better getting by after the storm.

--------

Southerners are seen as ignorant backwards rednecks, still believing in God, by Northerners.

Interestingly enough, after the US Civil War, the North East became the imperial power that controlled the US economically and culturally. Greece's financial and economic problems....were experienced in the South...due to monetary policy being set more to the advantage of the Northern industrial power and elites....though perhaps lessened by better integration. They none the less, hampered Southern development for decades, perhaps a century.

Takuan Seiyo said...

Correction:
What happens what one does more than one thing at a time. When I wrote "In a way, to use the term 'Jews' is as misleading as what the Baron has written about “Americans.”' I meant to refer to the post where Baron explained that "Americans" is a heterogeneous term encompassing a wide variety of very different people .

Afonso Henriques said...

Yeah, it probabily developed from Latin.
And I can't understand how easily the Romanians here speak Portuguese, specially the non gypsy ones. Really, when asked how they can learn it so rapidly they say it is easy because it is a Latin language.

Damn! I don't consider Romanian or French "pure" latin languages. Maybe because I can understand a substantial part of Spanish or Italian just from hearing it out but can't do the same for Romanian and French. Well, now I am familiarised with French so it is much easier. But Romanian... I simply can't. But it sounds much more "latin" than Bulgarian, which sounds like Russian or Ukrainian (much more so than Czech and a little bit more than Polish).

However I am currently learning German, or pretending to learn, catching some things here and others there.
It sounds surprisingly more latin than I would ever expect. With it's latin being fewer but "more pure" than that of French, and sorry, but it seems more Latin than Romanian.

Probabily I say this of German because I can relate it somewhat to English and pick up from there. However I thought this would be much more common and I thought German had no latin sounding ... well, sound.
It certainly is an exageration on my part.

-----------------------------------

Baron, thanks for your answer. It enlighted me somewhat.
The only person I've known to have been in the South of the States was a sailor/marine here who went to Virginia once. He claims that America is great and such but that they have "an interior and a South that is as retarded as Africa". I was shocked. But he's a far leftist anyways, so...

But now, after reading your words, it seems a lot different from what I thought. Since I've tryed to "understand" the United States, I've imagined it as a loose federation of different groups of State that would be like Spain or Germany: One Bavaria here, another Catalonia there.
But it didn't fit well. Now I have a very confused view. Which is better than the certainties I believe I had when I had not.

But your South seems to be... seems to have no reason to resent the North. It seems our Alentejo: One third of the country and 7% of the population. Plus, it is in the south.
People here say that they are soft and lazy.
Even the ministers call it a desert from times to times.
They answering is "The Alentejo is a desert, because our past time is to see the camels from Lisbon passing by towards the Algarve."

Thank you.

Afonso Henriques said...

P.S. - I like the Texans! Or at least their image here.

It's like anapologetic Southerns with the stamina of Yankees and the sunny Spanish flavour of California...

Takuan Seiyo said...

@ Cobra
Sounds like you and I are paysani in more ways than one. These things are touchy, and people often jump before they thought about what’s been said. Here is an example, and a good one to bolster your previous point:

James Howard Kunstler is a very intelligent man whose views about Peak Oil and the American consumer/urban/suburban culture are worthy of discussion in view of the Baron’s above predictions for America’s future. But he is also a New York Jew, and as such prone to the pro-Democrat, anti-“redneck” slant of his group. He has a syndicated column in which he recently wrote derisively about Tea Party members sitting in a basement somewhere and discussing “...the Bilderberg conspiracy, and the suspicious numbers of Jews in the bonus-padded upper echelons of the Wall Street banks, and what might be done about that.“

The websites that carry Kunstler’s column got angry emails from Jewish subscribers asking to drop their subscriptions, using hysterical words like Nazi etc. That is of course total BS. These people reacted as though Kunstler’s stupid, prejudiced libel of the Tea Party was not only the actual opinion of its members but even of those websites that carried Kunstler’s column.

There is much to be done to address Jewish leftism and hysteria. I just wanted to say that it’s not a uniform picture.

TC said...

I cannot comprehend how you fail to see that the goal of this whole stir is to create an additional rift among Whites.

Once more, Europe is made to be a potential threat to the US and the white Europeans will hate Americans for their arrogance. Same old game. Cui bono? Who has an interest in destroying the White Race?

The same influential out group in the media has historically prepared the American People for war against Europe in the 30s and early 40s of the past century.

The results are well known and have contributed greatly to the decline of Western Culture.

Takuan Seiyo said...

Re: Homogeneity
Today is not my day; I am still unhappy with my correction. I meant to say that the Baron's opinion is correct with respect to the heterogeneity of Americans. People who see "Americans" as a single monolith are wrong. So are those who see "Jews" as a monolith, let alone who make such insinuations as "cui bono" etc. But I am done debating them; it's a waste of time.

EscapeVelocity said...

Afonso,

search for "electoral map county" on Google Images.

RonL said...

Kristol and Krauthammer are neoconservatives. They are ideologically wed to global democracy. If the problem is Islam, then their belief system collapses. Thus like they act like their hated Neville Chamberlain in hating our modern Churchill more than the new Hitler.

Tanstaafl said...

Takuan Seiyo writes:

There are fair reasons why you should think the way you do, and both Lawrence Auster (not a pal of mine) and I have expressed ourselves in a fair and objective way on this matter, while each acknowledging the bias he and I share along with tens of millions of American who have no Jewish genes: support for Israel. The sort of attacks that Auster and I have been subjected to by “White Christian patriots”, and the vocabulary used, including in this blog, leave one reeling.

The key to turning more Jews toward the causes you care about is not to stop criticizing negative Jewish contributions, as long as well-informed, but to stop doing so in a language ranging from intemperate to hateful/genocidal (the latter two not yours). Also, to stop vilifying such Jews or semi-Jews who are on your side as though they were plants of the Elders of Zion with nefarious plots to co-opt and destroy white people and peoples (not “Christian,” because in the particular case I am citing, both Auster and I are Christian).


I know that the posting policy on this blog requires comments that are civil, temperate, on-topic, and show decorum, so I'd like to know which "attacks" you refer to.

I think it's clear you're not fair or objective when it comes to jews. On the one hand you find no criticism of jews complete without a thorough rumaging through history that always arrives at the conclusion that they're only reacting to vilification by "nutjobs". On the other are those "nutjobs", "White Power people", "White Cuckoos", "White Christian patriots", etc. (How such pejoratives make it past comment moderation is separate question, but I assume it has to do with you being a regular here, and that you're demonizing some vague group rather than directly addressing whoever last got you reeling.) The point is, you show an obvious deference to jews, and an obvious hate for anyone you think doesn't.

Is it hateful/genocidal to say that? Is it even intemperate? Is this what your mind interprets as "plants of the Elders of Zion with nefarious plots to co-opt and destroy white people and peoples", or did somebody actually accuse you of that?

I ask because "We support Israel" is the explicit stand of this blog. I get the strong impression "We support jews" is too, though I don't see it plainly stated anywhere. Is it hateful/genocidal/intemperate to note this? How about, "I'm not jewish and I can see support for jews sometimes interferes with supporting my own people"? How about, "I'm not jewish and I support my own people, not jews"? I'd like to know where exactly, in your mind, this line of thinking crosses the line into "nutjob".