Hmm if Jews are basically feminine, why would they excel at math and physics?

The men are autistically masculine, not brutish stereotypically masculine. Both on the male brain spectrum.

Netanyahu for all his faults is probably one of the smartest world leaders. Reportedly has an IQ around 140-150, graduate of MIT. While secular and reform Jews earn more than Orthodox Jews (as you call them, unassimilated), Orthodox Jews still earn more than non-Jewish Americans. There is no world in which being Jewish is an unhealthy thing. They’re doing just fine, much to the annoyance of antisemites everywhere.

“Being purely Jewish doesn’t seem like a healthy thing”

Then why are full Jews more successful and earn more money than non-Jews? Why is Israel one of the happiest countries (second happiest for youth) in the world? Why does Israel have higher birth rates (even secular Israelis have higher birth rates) than Western countries that are experiencing a birth rate collapse? Clearly Judaism and religion in general can be very good for people. Jewish culture also encourages education. There are not many things non-Jewish whites are superior at besides not having as many genetic diseases and being better at brawling.

“My analysis found that a typical huge media corporation nowadays might have at its top two executives one Jew and one Gentile. Having half the top positions is control? Forget it. We may as well say that Gentiles control that corporation.”

HELLO?? Per capita calling….

LOL Jews not hedonistic? Why did they run the porn business back in the day? I don’t buy your high IQ low hedonism argument. High IQ usually correlates with liberalism and openness to experience.

Maybe your stats are true for US Jews but I’ve seen stats before that show that Israelis lose their virginity at a younger age compared to other countries. Israeli Jews are more masculine than American Jews.

Here is the raw data for my figures above contradicting Ron’s comment about Jewish control of the US media. I do not agree with him that Jews control the US media. However, they do have a great deal of power in the US to the extent that they may “effectively control” it in a sense. Also it seems that Jewish media control and power in the US is collapsing. In 1995 in the book Jewish Power, the Jewish author said that 59% of the top positions in US media were manned by Jews. Now it is down to 23%, my figure here.

Google/Alphabet I didn’t consider them media. Maybe social media?

Facebook/Meta I considered them social media.

Comcast/NBC Actually 1 Jew, 1 Gentile.
Brian L. Roberts (chairman & CEO)
Michael J. Cavanagh (president)

NBCUniversal, includes MSNBC: 1 Jew, 1 Gentile.
Mike Cavanagh (president, Comcast)
Bonnie Hammer (vice chairman)

Paramount/CBS 1 Jew, 1 Gentile.
Shari Redstone (chairwoman)
Chris McCarthy (interim principal executive officer)

CBS itself: 4 Gentiles, 1 Jewish.
George Cheeks (President and CEO, CBS Entertainment Group)
Amy Reisenbach (President, CBS Entertainment)
David Berson (President and CEO, CBS Sports)
Ingrid Ciprián-Matthews (President, CBS News)
Wendy McMahon (President and CEO, CBS News and Stations)

Fox (Non-Jewish) 3 Gentiles
Rupert Murdoch (Chairman emeritus)
Lachlan Murdoch (Chairman and CEO)
John P. Nallen (COO)

Fox Broadcasting Company 3 Gentiles, 1 Jew
Founders Rupert Murdoch and Barry Diller
Rob Wade (President and CEO, Fox Entertainment)
Michael Thorn (President, Fox Broadcasting Company Entertainment)

New York Times 2 Jews, 2 Gentiles
Publisher A. G. Sulzberger
Editor-in-chief Joseph Kahn
Managing editors Marc Lacey and Carolyn Ryan

Los Angeles Times: 1 Gentile.
President Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong

Chicago Tribune: 5 Gentiles.
Editor-in-chief Mitch Pugh
General manager Par Ridder
Opinion editor Chris Jones
Sports editor Amanda Kaschube
Photo editor Todd Panagopoulos

Washington Post: Owned by Gentile Bezos, Gentile.
Paper itself: 2 Gentiles.
Publisher William Lewis
Editor-in-chief Matt Murray

Boston Globe: 3 Gentiles.
Publisher John W. Henry
Editor Nancy Barnes
Opinion editor James Dao

San Fransisco Chronicle: 1 Gentile.
Publisher Bill Nagel

Wall Street Journal: 5 Gentiles.
Publisher Almar Latour
Editor-in-chief Emma Tucker
Deputy editor Charles Forelle
Managing editor Liz Harris
Opinion editor Paul A. Gigot

Time magazine: Jewish owned since 2018.
Marc Benioff, owner
Before that owned by Gentile Meredith.
Editor in chief: Gentile.
Editor-in-chief Sam Jacobs

Newsweek: 2 Gentiles.
Dev Pragad, President and CEO
Editor-in-chief Nancy Cooper

US News and World Report: Jewish owned.
Mortimer Zuckerman, owner
Top people: 2 Jews, 1 Gentile (classic old style Jewish media corporation).
Eric Gertler (CEO)
Bill Holiber (President)
Dafna Linzner (Editorial Director)

Bloomberg LTD.: 3 Jews, 1 Gentile (classic old style Jewish media corporation)
Founders: Michael Bloomberg, Thomas Secunda, Duncan MacMillan, Charles Zegar

Key people: 3 Gentiles.
Mark Carney (chair)
Vladimir Kliatchko (CEO)
Jean-Paul Zammitt (president)

USA Today: 1 Gentile.
Publisher and President: Maribel Perez Wadsworth

Meredith Corporation: 2 Gentiles.
Steve Lacy (Executive Chairman)
Tom Harty (President and CEO)

Gray Television: 2 Gentiles.
Hilton H Howell, Jr. (executive chairman, CEO)
Pat LaPlatney (president, co-CEO)

Disney: 1 Jew, 1 Gentile. Mostly just Hollywood and movies.
Mark Parker (chairman)
Bob Iger (CEO)

ABC: 2 Gentiles.
Dana Walden
Craig Erwich

Warner Brothers Discovery: 1 Jew, 1 Gentile.
Samuel DiPiazza (chairman)
David Zaslav (president and CEO)

CNN itself: 7 Gentiles. One woman is married to a Jew.
Sir Mark Thompson (Chairman and CEO)
David Leavy (COO)
Michael Bass (EVP of Programming, CNN-US)
Brad Ferrer (EVP/CFO)
Amy Entelis (EVP)[1]
Ken Jautz (EVP, CNN-US and HLN)
Andrew Morse (EVP/Chief Digital Officer)

IAC: Very Jewish, but not a news corporation.

Associated Press: 2 Gentiles.
Steven R. Swartz (chairman)
Daisy Veerasingham (president and chief executive officer)

Hearst Corporation: 3 Gentiles
William Randolph Hearst III (chairman)
Frank A. Bennack Jr. (executive vice chairman)
Steve Swartz (president and CEO)

Totals: Top positions in US media
Jews 16 or 23%
Gentiles 54 or 77%

I find it hard to argue that Jews control the media when Gentiles have 77% of the top positions. However, Jews are 2.5% of the population. They should have at most 2 of the top 70 positions. Instead, they have 16, so at 23% they are represented at fully 10 TIMES their numbers in the population.

You write: “Now Duke is a bad person but mostly just an idiot, a racist and an antisemite, but I do like one thing about him. He is scrupulously honest when it comes to history.”

My response: David Duke is certainly not a saint, but I don’t consider him to be a bad person. He is much more of a scholar than most people give him credit for.

If anyone has an interest, you can listen to David Duke’s debate with Alex Jones at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPa1wLvCovE.
Video Link

A good short interview of David Duke with Wolf Blitzer is at https://vimeo.com/34646600.

Finally, I do recommend David Duke’s book “Jewish Supremacism.” This book is a good introduction to the Zionist/Jewish control of our society.

At least two of the top 8 US banks have jew CEO’s (25% is disproportionate to their numbers). Another two CEO’s aren’t jews, but might as well be given their actions. 50% jew or heavily jew influenced CEO’s means at least 50% of US banking is controlled by jews, not to mention companies like Black Rock and Schwab, plus all the cabinet, executive and fed positions held by jews. Such corruption should not be allowed.

What else – TV? You want to talk about the big networks? Mostly Jewish executive teams.

That’s false. My research found that.

Sure they’re overrepresented. Of course they are. But it’s not a case of “most” at all. A lot of the time you have two people at the very top, often one Jew and one Gentile. That’s not “most.” However, as I noted these corporations, while not necessarily run by Jews or having “mostly” Jewish anything, are nevertheless stacked top to bottom with Jews.

There are so many Jews, yes over-represented vastly, that they may exercise “effective control.” As a commenter above noted, if an executive board has six Christians and nine seculars, the board is effectively controlled by Christians. At least the seculars are not going to say anything to upset them, so anti-Christian anything is off the table. That’s “effective control.”

My research showed Jews didn’t run the media anymore. I think there are only two old style Jewish-run corporations where most if not all of the top management is Jewish. 30 years ago, there were a number of them. The classic old style Jewish-run corporation of the old days (often a family enterprise) is headed out and these are now just gigantic faceless and maybe mindless corporations who change hands every few years and get entirely new owners and management.

Nevertheless, despite the lack of Jewish control, the media is still wildly pro-Israel. What’s up with that? I could not explain that and this sent me on my journey. It’s seems the pro-Israel bias is about something more than pure Jewish control. I feel that the old style Gentile Establishment of the US (boomers and Gen X’ers) is very pro-Jewish and extremely pro-Israel. That’s just the way it is. New generations will form a new Establishment that may be more Jewish-critical instead of fawningly Judeophilic and will probably be quite critical of Israel.

The main thing that explains pro and anti-Israel bias in the US is age. The Gen X’ers and Boomers and any Silents and Greatest that are still with us are very pro-Israel basically out of habit. I was myself until age 43. Then I realized that the media and Establishment had been lying to me for 43 years and it really pissed me off. I dove into a black hole of research on the Israel/Palestine question and was amazed at all the information that had been kept from me. And I’m very intelligent, with an advanced degree and extremely widely read and self-educated. And they even fooled me.

Millennials and Gen Z is much less pro-Israel and in some respects is even anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian.

Age explains opinions on this issue more than any other factor.

The piece is about Jewish media control, not Jewish control of the US state on a couple of issues only.

I don’t know much about the Federal Reserve Board but I don’t understand how what (((Alan Greenspan))) (may his name be cursed) does benefits Jewish people over any other group. Want to clue me in.

The (((Rothschilds))) (may a curse be upon their name for all of time) are not that big in banking anymore. Even in Europe alone there are much bigger names in banking. Most banking is out of the city of London where it’s all financialized and I do not believe particularly Jewish, and Germany, where it’s all run by former Nazis and their ancestors.

I was curious about this “Jews run the banks” thing. I looked up the Top 30 or 50 banks in the world and went through the names. A lot were out of Germany, a few out of New York, some in London and a whole lot out of Asia. Actually world banking was concentrated more in Asia now than anywhere else.

Yeah Jews used to run the banks in Europe. And partly as a consequence of that, a thing called the Holocaust happened and wa-la! Automagically the Jews didn’t own the banks anymore! Isn’t that amazing?

Most of the big US commercial chain banks whose names you see on your credit cards are not run by Jews. If you go to Europe, the banks on your credit cards are not run by Jews. If you go to Asia, no banks are run by Jews and they’re all run by Asians in Hong Kong and Singapore.

Look, I’ve been studying this for 20 years. But one day I heard David Duke say, “The Jews never ran the banks in the US and they don’t even run them in the world anymore.” Now Duke is a bad person but mostly just an idiot, a racist and an antisemite, but I do like one thing about him. He is scrupulously honest when it comes to history.

And when history goes against his White Supremacist bullshit, he comes right out and says it. Duke also said the Jews took over the press and Hollywood in a coordinated action not to be the octopus that controls the world but because they were paranoid that that racist papers and Hollywood would go beyond it’s standard racism and become antisemitic.

Jews are not stupid and a lot of times they’re dead on honest. Jews know that every time a bunch of White people get together and say, “Go Whites!” or some White nation gets nationalist and says, “Go White nation!” it won’t be long before they somehow figure out a way to go after the Jews. Hence as the White Supremacists note, Jews are very hostile to their movement. That’s why. They’re all suspicious if not hostile to all nationalist movements in White countries. That’s why.

Duke said in the 1880’s, Jews were getting alarmed at how racist the media was. I have read Californian and national papers extensively from 1850-1880 as part of a job I was doing working for an Indian tribe. Let me tell you, the US press was insanely racist in those days. Like off the charts racist. Against Blacks (niggers), Indians, South Indians (Hindoos), and Polynesians (kanakas). They thought none of these people should have the right to vote. They didn’t like the Chinese either.

The Jews got alarmed at these racist papers and figured they would go after the Jews sooner or later so the Jews bought the New York Times as a result of an actual conspiracy. The conspiracy expanded over the next 20-30 years where they bought up much of the newspapers in the US (except the Dearborn Independent LOL).

He said Jews were very alarmed at the success of Birth of a Nation and hatched a conspiracy to buy up Hollywood, and within 10 years five Jews from a 50 mile radius in Galicia had bought up all of Hollywood.

The Jews bought up the media and Hollywood to keep it out of the hands of the antisemites. This paranoia actually motivates a lot of their behavior. They didn’t do it to be the Octopus and control the world and there is no Jewish world or national agenda anyway other than Israel and antisemitism, the only two things they can agree on. So they use Hollywood and the media to promote Israel and fight antisemitism and for no other reason.

What on Earth does Warren Buffet have to do with the Jews?

Almost all of those companies who demanded pulled their advertisements from Musk’s Twitter were run by Gentiles. Gentile corporate America doesn’t dig antisemitism. Now you riddle me that. Any racist anything gets its payment systems and use of credit cards cut off because it’s racist, not because it’s anti-Jewish.

Are you downplaying the truth to sound more like a normie or a blue-pill? Or less like the raging antisemite every gentile should be if they knew the truth about Jewish nature?

Obviously there is some truth to this, and good job reading my mind. Congrats. On the other hand, I believe in what I am writing here. 30 years ago, Jews had very serious control over the media. Now, in 2024, this control has diminished significantly. It went from 59% in 1996 to at most 41% (Hollywood and media combined) and surely less because Hollywood is way more Jewish than the media.

I’ve been studying the issue for 20 years and this is what I have found. The Gentile-run media is just as pro-Israel as the Jewish media. Now you riddle me that. Also I saw papers go from Jewish to Gentile control and vice versa and the Israel reporting stayed the same. I thought, “There’s a lot more to this pro-Israel stuff than “Jewish control.” That’s why I wrote this piece. If Jewish control doesn’t explain the pro-Israel bias, what does?

Perfect response from someone with a IQ of ZERO and behavioral pattern of a FIVE YEAR OLD. Congrats!!

WAAAAA MOMMY THE BAD MAN MADE A SWEAR MAKE HIM STOPPPPPPP

HE IS FIVE YEARS OLD NOT MEEEEEEE

Thank you for publicly admitting you have no idea what the Constitution or First Amendment say.
Thank you for publicly admitting you have no right to spam lies here in perpetuity.
Thank you for publicly admitting you are only here to post falsehoods.

Lindsay is a Jewge, i.e., a Jew’s Stooge

Make It A MEME!

Lindsay has a point, It’s under his hat!

Lindsay has a point, It’s under his hat!

> “I think either of those scenarios is far more plausible than that she’s “terrified”. Likewise with the others in media. Either they’re sincere, or just advancing their careers, prostituting themselves, whorishly offering their audiences what sells.”

First of all, I extend you my warmest welcome to this cyber abode – although I have only seen your return thanks to Chechar.
https://westsdarkesthour.com/2024/07/12/he-is-back/

Second, indeed, as prescient as always. I would add that the very idea of excuses reeks of an incorrect model. It just so happens that the State of Israel is not teetering on the brink due to a volcanic eruption of Jewish anti-Zionism, is it? Or the Syrian Arab Republic curiously had not a single front that was explicitly blasphemous, or anti-Islamic, in the years of its ruinous and anarchic civil war?

And yet, all the fruits of the Occidental civilisation have constantly been – female rights, Negro rights, trans rights, and indeed Jewish rights! Everywhere from Alaska to Chukotka. So much so that cuckoldry is virtually the only common characteristic of the Aryan race at this point. Affluent American liberals and traditional Russo-Ukrainian Bolsheviks all can agree on one thing – that all humanoids are created equal, and that discriminating in one’s treatment of one’s neighbour is the most heinous crime imaginable – right there with rape and Hitler-worship.

What I’m saying is that it’s all excuses made by the myopic to hide their embarrassment. Chechar is correct in diagnosing that the only other option would be way too destructive and painful to them – a full rejection of all Christendom, of all nationalism, of all cultural heritage of the past 200 years at least, and in many respects the whole 2000. And they lack the ire of the vigorous races such as the Mongoloids who starved a gorillion million of themselves to death at the cost of purging the land of Christian malaise.

At this rate, even Jew-free media wouldn’t salvage what’s left of the native American people. They would kill themselves anyway just to show they’re not fascist like those proud Israelis. Only a nuclear hecatomb could possibly rejuvenate this dog breed – and even then, possibly only in Russia.

You should know better. You think Wicked Jewish Action is the product of the Talmud? In reality, both the Talmud and Jewish Action are products of Jewish Nature, which is universal to All Jews.

Jews don’t exercise major influence in banking? So you’re just going to ignore the entire history of the Federal Reserve? The Rothschild family? Warren Buffett?
Seriously? Even in a world where you can’t contradict the ADL and still process credit card payments?
Are you downplaying the truth to sound more like a normie or a blue-pill? Or less like the raging antisemite every gentile should be if they knew the truth about Jewish nature?
…
You also completely gloss over the issue of Judeo-Masonry.
Still, decent article, to be fair.

The Jews control Congress… they are W_ to their funders. How else do you explain a $4 billion dollar a year standard contribution to Israel…every yr for the past 20 yrs + ?

No real argumentation but only Cussing? Easy to see that you are of low IQ level. Just like a 5 year old when he gets mad.

> Wasn’t the Tsar present at the opera house with Stolypin?

So what? Bogrov had been employed by the secret police for years.

> Nicholas II,

Barely knew anything about what was going on around him. If there was a conspiracy with the secret police to get rid of Stolypin, as is plausible, then there is no reason to believe that Nicholas II would have known anything about it.

> In any event, the fact remains that a Russian statesman was assassinated by a Jew,

A Jew who had been employed by the secret police to spy on revolutionary organizations such as the Social Revolutionary Party. You simply draw broad lines connecting anyone with a smidgeon of Jewish background in a grand conspiracy. It’s not warranted by evidence.

> The statistical improvement which resulted from the reforms in the five years before Stolypin was assassinated implies that there was the potential for these programmes of reforms to be successful and for Tsarism to be saved.

You can always theorize about how Czarism might have limped along. The fact is that most Russian peasants rejected Stolypin’s brand of reform, which they saw as an attempt to preserve the gentry by manipulating the smaller peasants against each other. What should properly have been done is that the Social Revolutionaries who were elected to the Duman in 1906 should have been allowed to carry through their own program for the peasantry. It’s not obvious that their program of land redistribution would have delivered all of the goods that it was expected to. But it would have been a program with popular support and if it turned out that something more needed to be done, then that could be argued about at the right time. Stolypin’s dismissal of the Duma and his attempt to save the landed gentry simply alienated the peasants who would have to be the backbone of any serious program.

> I know damn well Jews act on behalf of Jewish interests everywhere.

That’s an overblown ideological statement. The information we have on Bogrov shows that he was prone towards gambling and ended up hiring himself out to the secret police in order to pat debts. There’s nothing in his profile which suggests any grand racial agenda.

> the loans had been made only to Kerensky

Obviously, none of the loans were made to Kerensky personally. They were made to the Russian state, at a time when Kerensky was the government in the Russian state. Then Lenin took power, and now he was the head of government of the state.

> Would have? Or, did he?

Of course he did, insofar as he was able.

—–
Western Jewish leaders favored a liberal rather than an extreme or revolutionary movement among Russian Jews. They more readily supported the League for the Attainment of Full Right for the Jewish People of Russia than they did the Bund. The League was founded in March 1905 without socialist participation. In matters of general Russian politics the League, like the Western leaders, favored the Cadets–the Russian Constitutional Democratic Party.
—–
— Zosa Szajkowski, “Paul Nathan, Lucien Wolf, Jacob H. Schiff and the Jewish Revolutionary Movements in Eastern Europe 1903-1917,” Jewish Social Studies, Volume 29, Number 1, p. 11.

It was the League for the Attainment of Full Right for the Jewish People of Russia which was the main organizational tool for dispensing aid. Not that one should exaggerate the degree to which outside forces could dictate outcomes within Russia. The Constitutional Democrats won big in the first election of 1906, when the Left abstained from the elections. The monarchy was dissatisfied with the results and held new elections. This time the Left participated and won, so Stolypin dismissed the Duma and reworked the system to jigger it for conservative benefit. Schiff was in no position to alter that.

> Yes, I read that the organization was on paper only.

More important is the reason that it remained on paper only. It stopped at that because Zinoviev and Kamenev led the opposition to Lenin and Trotsky over the issue of whether or not to seize power. Therefore, the latter two figures dismissed this politburo and carried out the seizure of power through a different apparatus. Zinoviev and Kamenev continued their protest for some time and were further expelled from other committees, but ultimately it was Admiral Kolchak who made the whole thing moot.

—–
I think that even though the Bolsheviks have few positive sides, the disbandment of that Constituent Assembly is truly to their credit. This, one should consider their positive asset.
—–
— Vladimir Brovkin, Behind the Front Lines of the Civil War: Political Parties and Social Movements in Russia, 1918-1922, p. 195, Princeton University Press, 1994.

Kolchak’s approval of the Assembly’s dismissal made the whole argument by Zinoviev and Kamenev moot.

> but ultimately they act as a nation within a nation everywhere they settle.

No, the historical evidence shows that only outside restrictions tended to induce such behavior. You can find examples of Jewish leaders who welcomed restrictions on Jews because they wished to maintain a community. But when Hitler came to power, many people in Germany who had not thought of Jewish identity in a long time were suddenly reminded of it. Certainly, Hitler’s 12 years in power did a lot to create a new type of Jewish identity which lasted through the end of the 20th century. But even that shows signs of crumbling with growing inter-marriage rates.

You have no clue what the Constitution or First Amendment say or are for. You’re completely delusional. You’re literally advocating for communist rule. Fuck off, dipshit.

While having no right to claim self-defense in response of an act of resistance by the occupied, the occupiers have a responsibility for the health and well-being of the occupied.

This seems like it was written by an intern at the ADL.

Jew or Crypto-Jew makes no difference and to claim that the media isn’t under Jewish control is to simply ignore and discount who runs (not merely who OWNS) all of the mega corporations. META owns roughly 2/3 of “social media” and it is not just OWNED by but also RAN by a Jew. That’s 2/3 of the discourse on the internet under solid control. What else – TV? You want to talk about the big networks? Mostly Jewish executive teams. Vastly disproportionate. Go look at the roster of any media corporation or masthead of any newspaper or magazine board, and its vastly vastly overrepresented by Jews. There should be 1 per 50, so basically at most executive teams you’d expect to see ZERO, since they don’t even have 50 people total on the executive team. Instead, its like half. Or roughly 50x to 100x as many as expected.

An agent of the Czarist secret police.

Really? Your source conveys nothing but innuendo. Whom did he tell? Wasn’t the Tsar present at the opera house with Stolypin? I wonder why the secret police would allow an armed man near the Tsar? Maybe you’re right, Pretzel – Nicholas II, who preferred playing dominoes with his family to incessant political intrigues, wouldn’t just fire his prime minister, who was certainly guilty of not being very warm and fuzzy; he would rather allow an armed Jew to shoot him at the opera house in his very presence.

In any event, the fact remains that a Russian statesman was assassinated by a Jew, and said Russian was attempting to bring about political and economic reforms to benefit the Russian populace, in general –

Nevertheless, only fifteen per cent of peasants became kulaks (a relatively affluent farmer) albeit that was fifteen per cent of peasant that were loyal to the Tsar (BBC, 2012) thus meaning that Stolypin’s reforms had limited success however such a small number of peasants improved thus falling short of Stolypin’s aims of creating a peasant class which consisted of a kulak majority.
The statistical improvement which resulted from the reforms in the five years before Stolypin was assassinated implies that there was the potential for these programmes of reforms to be successful and for Tsarism to be saved. After all, the reforms were in their infancy having only been implemented for five of the ‘twenty years of peace which Stolypin considered necessary for them to become established’ (Hite, 2004, p. 52) and had it not been for his assassination in 1911 and the First World War in 1914 it is possible that Tsarism could have survived.
[BBC, 2012. Attempts to Strengthen Tsarism, 1905-1914. [Online] 
Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/education/guides/z2prcdm/revision/5
 and Hite, J., 2004. Tsarist Russia 1801-1917. s.l.:Causeway Press.]

The suspicions are only increased by the phony stories spread about Bogrov after his arrest: – The most likely source of the claim that Bogrov acted as a Jew and on behalf of Jewish interests is a false report in the right-wing daily

I don’t know anything about phony stories on Bogrov, nor do I care. I know damn well Jews act on behalf of Jewish interests everywhere. That’s precisely why “German/American” Jew Jacob Schiff had a bee in his bonnet over the Jews in Russia.

You don’t need to “cut off” loans or funds never provided.

Duh! The loans were given to Kerensky’s government before Lenin took power. Schiff tried to demand that the Bolsheviks should pay back what had been donated to the Provisional Government which they had overthrown.

Well, Pretzel, if that was the point – duh! – that the loans had been made only to Kerensky, then why was there a delineation between the “further loans to the Bolsheviks” and the loans to Kerensky? Was that snake Schiff buttering both sides of his toast? I can’t imagine that a Jewish banker would seek to profit from multiple parties of the same conflict, as if there was no real loyalty or principles amongst the lender.

Schiff would have supported the Constitutional Democrats because he agreed with their politics.

Would have? Or, did he? The ethnicity of the leaders of the Constitutional Democrats would have prevented any sort of alliance with Schiff, as we all know that, in general, Jewry allies with European Gentiles on a superficial, zero-sum level. Schiff’s primary objective was the emancipation of Jewry in Russia, as at that time, Russia was the last Gentile stronghold in Europe. He may have objected to the savage, animalistic tactics of the Bolsheviks/Soviets inasmuch as it made the Jews look bad, as the Jewish hand in Bolshevism was obvious to everyone at that time. (Hence the necessity of controlling media and publishing; no one in mainstream America knows anything of substance about the Bolsheviks or the Holodomor, nor the outrageous allegations against NS Germany. When I describe the ridiculous statements made by Dario Gabbai, et al, nearly everyone says there is no way the entire Holocaust narrative could be based on such outlandish tales, but of course, they certainly are thusly based.)

But there is no evidence that this precursor of the Politburo ever functioned.

Yes, I read that the organization was on paper only. It was an idea, yes? An idea of mostly Jewish leadership in Russia, with a few Useful Idiots in tow. Just like they say about America these days – a country based on an Idea, not a People. Unlike Israel….President Robinette is a Useful Idiot; That Goblin Mayorakas has a definite idea about who can be an American. It’s the same process, always.

Rather than serving as evidence of Jewish unity,

I am well aware of conflicts within the Jewish community. In that respect, they are like everyone else – they fight amongst themselves and they occasionally betray their own, but ultimately they act as a nation within a nation everywhere they settle. The secular big-wig Jews support and defend the shtetl Jews, and they ALL seek to weaken non-Jewish/Amalek/Edom society to their ultimate benefit, and you, BolshevikPretzel, are no different, so you’re either a Jew or a Useful Idiot.

> The Dearborn Independent

In regard to the latter, it’s worth noting an instance of false citation which Ford made in 1920 of The American Hebrew & Jewish Messenger. The original article which Ford claimed to be referencing was this:

https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_American_Hebrew_Jewish_Messenger/M1xAAQAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PA434&printsec=frontcover

https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_American_Hebrew_Jewish_Messenger/M1xAAQAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PA507&printsec=frontcover

“Jews in World Reconstruction by Svetozar Tonjoroff”

Ford (and later Coughlin) misrepresented what the article said. An author who does this can’t be trusted.

More generally, even when Ford may not have been deliberately lying, he committed the error of trusting the Sisson documents.

https://wiki.istmat.org/_media/%D0%B4%D0%BE%D0%BA:sisson:the_sisson_documents.pdf

The Sisson documents were debunked by George Kennan in 1957. Before that, historians had been generally wary of them, but lots of journalistic commentators freely used them. The Sisson documents were the basis for the publication of The German-Bolshevik Conspiracy. Many charges made by contemporary Rightists against Max Warburg typically rested on the Sisson documents. So, Kennan’s debunking of the Sisson documents in 1957 affects the assessment of any journalist who may have used the Sisson documents.

> who killed Pyotr Stolypin

An agent of the Czarist secret police.

—–
A young man named Dimitri Bogrov, who had been agent of the secret police for several years, told them that there was a plan to assassinate Stolypin in the opera house and the police allowed him into the building that evening although they knew he had a revolver… Stolypin sat in the stalls, where during the second interval Bogrov shot him twice… The behavior of the police created suspicion that they had been involved in Stolypin’s murder. The investigation into the assassination was stopped on Tsar Nicholas’s 0rders for reasons that remain unknown.
—–
— Richard Cavendish, “Pyotr Stolypin assassinated in Kiev,” History Today, September 2011, p. 9.

The suspicions are only increased by the phony stories spread about Bogrov after his arrest:

—–
Although well paid for by doting parents, he often ran out of money because of his passion for gambling and it is fairly certain that it was financial need that drove him to become a police agent… The most likely source of the claim that Bogrov acted as a Jew and on behalf of Jewish interests is a false report in the right-wing daily, Novoe vremia, of September 13, 1911, that prior to his execution Bogrov told a rabbi he had “struggled for the welfare and happiness of the Jewish people” … In reality, he had refused to see a rabbi before his execution…
—–
— Richard Pipes, The Russian Revolution, pp. 188-9.

> known as the greatest reformer of Russian society and economy, whose reforms caused unprecedented growth of the Russian state, which was halted by his assassination in 1911?

That’s a silly myth which was created after the assassination. In comparison with most of the other fools who held authority in Czarist Russia, Stolypin can seem like a mental giant. But that says more about his rivals than himself.

—–
His methods aroused fierce opposition and only a minority of the Russian peasantry took advantage of the opportunities he offered them.
—–
— Cavendish, ibid.

—–
Stolypin’s legislation of 1906, 1910, and 1911 … aimed at breaking up the peasant commune and at creating a strong class of peasant proprietors… But critics have also been numerous and by no means limited to populists or other defenders of the commune as such. They have pointed, for example, to the limited scope of Stolypin’s reforms which represented, in a sense, one more effort to save gentry land by making the peasants redivide what they already possessed…
—–
— Nicholas Riasanovsky, A History of Russia, 4th edition, pp. 433-4.

What needed to be allowed for was the electoral results of 1906 should have been allowed to stand. Stolypin should not have dismissed the Duma. The Social Revolutionary Party would then have enacted into law its own brand of Leftist land reform. They would have done this with the popular support of the peasantry. Stolypin’s conservative attempt to preserve the landed gentry by making the lesser peasants redivide the land never aroused any popular enthusiasm from peasants, and so it fell on deaf ears. It’s only comparison with an idiot like Nicholas II that Stolypin appears to stand out.

> I looked up information on the founding members of the Constitutional Democrats, and not a single one was Jewish

There’s no evidence that Schiff was ever interested in supporting Jewish personnel in any capacity. He supported Kolchak initially in the Russian Civil War and was disbelieving of the reports of White pogroms. Schiff would have supported the Constitutional Democrats because he agreed with their politics.

> You don’t need to “cut off” loans or funds never provided.

Duh! The loans were given to Kerensky’s government before Lenin took power. Schiff tried to demand that the Bolsheviks should pay back what had been donated to the Provisional Government which they had overthrown.

> Who comprised the Central Committee in August 1917

You can find the authentic list here:

http://holocaust.skeptik.net/misc/party.htm

Just scroll down until you hit the date of August 16, 1917.

> or the Political Bureau, a forerunner of the Politburo?

Now you’re back to repeating tall tales again. That politburo never met and never and did anything simply because Zinoviev and Kamenev were leading the opposition against Lenin and Trotsky where they argued that the Bolsheviks could not and should not attempt to seize power.

—–
When the party’s Central Committee met in secret session during the night of October 10 [old style], Lenin slipped into town to take part in its deliberations. He insisted that the putsch be carried out immediately. Kamenev and Zinoviev opposed this proposal most resolutely, but the others also had doubts. Subsequently, Kamenev gave an interview to a Menshevik newspaper in which he revealed this disagreement. Lenin, in white hot fury, called him and Zinoviev traitors to the revolution.
—–
— Richard Pipes, Three “Whys” of the Russian Revolution, pp. 52-3, Vintage Books, 1997.

—–
The meeting of the Central Committee of 23 October [new style] also set up a Political Bureau, intended as a temporary measure until the rising. Lenin, Zinoviev, Kamenev (the last two in spite of, or because of, their adverse vote), Trotsky, Stalin, Sokol’nikov and Bubnov were elected. But there is no evidence that this precursor of the Politburo ever functioned.
—–
— Leonard Schapiro, The Communist Party of the Soviet Union, p. 173, Vintage Books, 1960

—–
The political bureau in its October membership never once assembled, and it was soon simply forgotten–as were other organizations created ad hoc in the whirlpool of events.
—–
— Leon Trotsky, History of the Russian Revolution, Volume 3, p. 155, Simon and Schuster, 1932. Republished by University of Michigan Press, 1960.

The reason that this politburo did not ever function was because of the split which Zinoviev and Kamenev led within it. Lenin and Trotsky were the only 2 members of this “politburo” who were firmly in favor of attempting a seizure of power. Zinoviev and Kamenev were firmly opposed, while the others (Stalin, Sokol’nikov, Bubnov) also showed doubts. For this reason, that politburo never met, played absolutely no role in the organization of the uprising, and was disbanded immediately with the seizure of power. Instead, it was the Military Revolutionary Committee of the Petrograd Soviet which organized the rising.

This conflict recurred immediately after the initial seizure of power:

—–
Between October 29 [old style] and 31, when it seemed that Krasnov’s forces might retake the capital … Lenin and Trotsky … did not attend … the Vikzhel conference at which the character and program of a new government were discussed. In their absence, the views of Kamenev, Zinoviev, Rykov, Miliutin, and other Bolshevik moderates carried particular weight. Kamenev and his associates were fairly convinced that the only hope of defending … the revolution … lay in the creation of a broad socialist coalition government, which had been their position all along…

Bolshevik moderates continued to press for the formation of a government in which all socialist parties would be represented, even after the moderate position had been voted down in the Central Committee. Indeed, on November 3 Kamenev and Zinoviev secured the Central Executive Committee’s endorsement of continued efforts to form such a government. For Lenin, who a week earlier had urged that Kamenev and Zinoviev be ousted from the party for their public opposition to an insurrection, the moderates’ readiness to sabotage the revolution was maddening… Lenin’s ultimatum was presented formally on November 4, after which Kamenev, Zinoviev, Rykov, Nogin, and Miliutin resigned from the Central Committee in protest.
—–
— Alexander Rabinowitch, The Bolsheviks Come to Power: The Revolution of 1917 in Petrograd, pp. 310-1, W. W. Norton & Company, 1976.

Rather than serving as evidence of Jewish unity, the conflicts between Lenin and Trotsky versus Zinoviev and Kamenev are an example of how deep the internal conflicts were, right on the eve of the seizure of power.

https://twitter.com/DrLoupis/status/1809542710254030879?t=2Q2l5XwS_l8U6IotczsqFQ&s=19

Those circumstances allowed the Czarist monarchy to survive

Which is why, ultimately, the pesky members of the Czarist monarchy were assassinated.

By the way, Pretzel, who killed Pyotr Stolypin, known as the greatest reformer of Russian society and economy, whose reforms caused unprecedented growth of the Russian state, which was halted by his assassination in 1911? Was his assassin an all-Russian? Or a Jew?

Schiff did not support socialism. He supported constitutional government. That was why he aided the Constitutional Democrats aka Cadets.

Why was an “American” banker meddling in Russian state affairs?

I looked up information on the founding members of the Constitutional Democrats, and not a single one was Jewish, therefore I don’t believe your BS about general support from Schiff. Wikipedia does say he was disappointed that the Bolsheviks were behaving like feral savages, hell-bent on revenge against Russian gentiles, so in 1917, he “immediately rejected them, cut off further loans, started funding anti-Bolshevist groups, demands that the Bolsheviks pay back some of the money he had loaned Kerensky, and he joined a British-backed effort to appeal to fellow Jews in Russia to continue to fight against Germany.”

What loans, Pretzel? Loans for what, Pretzel? You don’t need to “cut off” loans or funds never provided.

Why were non-Russians meddling in the “Russian” Revolution?

Who comprised the Central Committee in August 1917 or the Political Bureau, a forerunner of the Politburo? The leading members were Lenin, Stalin, Zinoviev, Kamenev, Trotsky, Sokolnikov, Sverdlov and Bubnov.

1. 1/4 Jew/Mongol
2. Georgian married to Jewess, and –

3.Yakov Mikhailovich Sverdlov – Born in Nizhny Novgorod to a Jewish family active in revolutionary politics, Sverdlov joined the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party in 1902 and supported Vladimir Lenin’s Bolshevik faction from 1903…

4. Leon Trotsky – Lev Davidovich Bronstein… born into a wealthy Jewish family in Ukraine …was a Russian revolutionary, Soviet politician, and political theorist. He was a central figure in the 1905 Revolution, October Revolution, Russian Civil War, and establishment of the Soviet Union. Trotsky, with Vladimir Lenin, was widely considered one of the two most prominent Soviet figures…

5. Lev Borisovich Kamenev – born as Lev Rozenfeld in Moscow, the son of a Jewish railway worker…An Old Bolshevik, Kamenev was a leading figure in the early Soviet government…Kamenev joined the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party in 1901 and sided with Vladimir Lenin’s Bolshevik faction after the party’s 1903 split…

6. Grigory Yevseyevich Zinoviev – (born Ovsei-Gershon Aronovich Radomyslsky) – Born in Ukraine to a Jewish family, Zinoviev joined the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party in 1901 and sided with Vladimir Lenin’s Bolsheviks in the party’s 1903 split…

7. Grigori Yakovlevich Sokolnikov – was born Girsh Yankelevich Brilliant in Romny on 15 August 1888, the son of a Jewish doctor employed by the railways…He joined the Bolshevik faction of the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party in 1905.

Andrei Bubnov – was born in Ivanovo-Voznesensk in Vladimir Governorate (now Ivanovo, Ivanovo Oblast, Russia) into a local Russian merchant’s family….In 1903, he joined the Bolshevik wing of the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party. [An actual Russian? So, 75% of the Central Committee was All-Not Russian?)

I think, with the exception of Lenin/Stalin, all of the aforementioned “Russians” were purged. So, were the Soviets really an improvement over the Romanovs?

Speaking of forced confessions, which were perfectly acceptable, and frankly, mandatory, at Jewish tribunals like Nuremberg Kangaroo Kourt –

Wiki –
[Bubnov] He was then still a member of the Central Committee, which convened on 4 December, and received a message from Stalin saying that Bubnov had confessed to being ‘an enemy of the people’ and a German spy. He was expelled from the Party Central Committee.

The modus operandi of the Soviet regime was often to keep secret the fate of particular purged persons: whether they were sent to internal exile to a labor camp, sent to a psychiatric hospital (in which the regime disguised confinement and drugging as compassionate “health care”), or executed. This policy encouraged their families and the general public to believe that they were probably still alive in a camp or hospital somewhere. Bubnov was posthumously rehabilitated in March 1956 during the de-Stalinization of the Khrushchev thaw. The Soviet government did not make public the lists of the purged persons who had already long been executed. Thus, their relatives were often still searching for them in various psychiatric hospitals in the 1970s, as was the case with Bubnov…

I asked AI https://www.perplexity.ai/search/i-asked-you-by-the-way-i-notic-MpDsUC.VQ_i3ImvB4K9mhQ

> the 1905 Gapon-revolution failed

Duh! Because it has not been deliberately organized by anyone. It was a completely spontaneous outbreak which no in the existing revolutionary groups had any idea would happen. The uprising spread across the whole country and forced the monarchy to allow parliamentary elections for the first time. The existing Leftist groups, that means the Social Revolutionaries and Social Democrats primarily, were caught by surprise and abstained from the first elections. Instead, it was the newly formed Constitutional Democrats who carried that first vote. The monarchy tried to change things by having new election again in 1906, but this time the Leftist parties decided to participate, and they carried the election. But the momentum from early 1905 was already dying down and now the conflicts among the Leftists themselves became obvious and the ball was fumbled. Those circumstances allowed the Czarist monarchy to survive and even to rework the election laws which, after the Duma was dismissed, made it impossible for the Left to win the same way again. But the writing was on the wall in 1905. Any sane person could that discontent was spread across the whole country and ready to explode in the event of any new crisis. None of that was brought about Jacob Schiff, nor were any of the later events either.

> the weakening and impoverishment of the Russian Empire due to its humiliating defeat in the Russo-Japanese war

Which was brought on by the stupidity of the Czarist government. Sure, Schiff gave some war loans to Japan. France and Germany gave huge war credits to Russia. The decisive factor in this was not Jacob Schiff. That’s your delusion. The war began on February 8, 1904. Your own Wiki source dates Schiff meeting with Takahashi Kore to April 1894, when the war had been going on for two months. But it’s not as if Russia was somehow deprived of supporters. France gave Russia 30.4 million pounds and Germany another 24.5 million. Schiff’s loans to Japan were of the order 41.2 million pounds. It’s clear that the combined loans of Germany and France outclassed Schiff by about 13.2 million pounds. This was not the main source of the Czarist government’s disaster. It was a mess which brought upon themselves when they were poorly prepared.

> large propaganda efforts by Anti-Tzarist/socialist fraction

Total nonsense. After the January uprising had broken out on its own, without any involvement by any foreign sources whatsoever, there was an attempt by Schiff to support the Constitutional Democrats.

—–
Western Jewish leaders favored a liberal rather than an extreme or revolutionary movement among Russian Jews. They more readily supported the League for the Attainment of Full Right for the Jewish People of Russia than they did the Bund. The League was founded in March 1905 without socialist participation. In matters of general Russian politics the League, like the Western leaders, favored the Cadets–the Russian Constitutional Democratic Party.
—–
— Zosa Szajkowski, “Paul Nathan, Lucien Wolf, Jacob H. Schiff and the Jewish Revolutionary Movements in Eastern Europe 1903-1917,” Jewish Social Studies, Volume 29, Number 1, p. 11.

Schiff did not support socialism. He supported constitutional government. That was why he aided the Constitutional Democrats aka Cadets.

My response is more broad. I interpreted your question as asking how a confession or admission of guilt could be false. Most people in our society tend to elevate both eyewitness testimony and confessions to be on par or even above physical evidence, sometimes even DNA evidence, in terms of validity and accuracy. I believe this is a problem. There are many studies which show the fallibility and malleability of memories and personal claims, especially when a certain outcome is assumed or desired. For example, I recently shed light on how President Dwight D. Eisenhower changed his story about an alleged conversation he had with Henry Stimson regarding the use of the atomic bomb in Japan. It is possible he believed his own claim, even though the substance of his claim changed over time and cannot be corroborated, even indirectly, with anyone else’s recollection or other evidence.

When it comes to a crime, a lack of physical evidence can exacerbate the problem. The human element, or a particular bias, can even taint the interpretation of physical evidence when it is available. This is no doubt a significant factor in wrongful convictions, both today and especially in the past. For various reasons, people have admitted to crimes which they did not commit. And although environmental pressure and different types of physical and psychological influence often play a role in false confessions, they are not always a necessary factor. That said, what you believe is up to you. Confessions or admissions of guilt are certainly not always false. The takeaway from all the references I posted is really to understand the possibility of bias, the inherent accuracy or inaccuracy of claims, and to give different types of evidence a proper weight.

Clerical ‘Winston’ refuses to accept that two plus two equals five. This puts him in a minefield, but he fears neither death nor devil. https://linkmix.co/24396562

Thanks for replying. I’ve done some limited reading about the holocaust and many of the ‘denialist’ positions provoke intrigue to say the least. The parts that sway me towards the believers are the direct quotes from Goebbels and others which are cited on the “evidence for the holocaust” wiki page. When you have direct quotes from Nazi officers talking about exterminating/destroying/liquidating the Jews, I can only assume revisionists would say they are fabricated.

Research is rather easier now than it was in 1984. I must admit it took me no more than 5-10 minutes to discover all the references I used, though it takes rather longer to write down a theory that can be used by others.

All I did was Google the names of the mother, the father, and both sets of grandparents. Obituaries, wedding announcements, baptism records, and pre-compiled genealogies float immediately to the surface – the WikiTree entries run back to about 1800. I think the trees are complete because the Murdoch progenitors are British-ish and middle class.

I myself am satisfied that someone took a look at Rupert Greene and immediately thought j’accuse. My curiosity ended there. It is possible something interesting might emerge about the Greene family from before 1800. My impression is that the line is less well-established than the others, though perhaps it is only that Irish records are not yet as extensively digitized. I would not bother digging based on a sketch portrait of William Henry Greene alone – I don’t see much there, but a more motivated person might try.
https://peopleaustralia.anu.edu.au/biography/greene-william-henry-16241

Incidentally, the father Keith Arthur Murdoch was the son of a Presbyterian minister, Patrick John Murdoch. The Murdoch paternal line runs back to Scotland.
https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Murdoch-208
https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Murdoch-207

Dr. William Pierce performed an invaluable public service by meticulously compiling a succinct compilation of the Jewish controlled mass media conglomerates. The pamphlet is titled “Who Rules America”, and while you can purchase a copy from Amazon, I’ve provided a link to a free online, downloadable copy.

https://www.academia.edu/40165958/Who_rules_America

The ‘Holocaust’ isn’t the topic here, but it is related in that it serves as a sort of ‘get out of jail free’ card for Jews, and the media makes the most of it, whether you believe primarily Jews own or control the media or not.

Note 1) the ‘Holocaust’ is the planned/attempted extermination of Jews, especially via gas chambers located in ‘death camps’ specifically constructed (parts of them anyway) for that purpose, 2) in an adversarial court proceeding, both sides can present evidence, and have a chance to impeach evidence presented by the other side, and guilt to a ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’ standard must be established, and 3) today one can examine what evidence has been historically presented for the ‘Holocaust’ since the end of WWII in a more sober way than was possible (or done) just after the war.

Regarding 3), many revisionists have examined the record, and concluded that not only is there no forensic evidence, but other evidence, especially the documentary evidence, is far from convincing.

Evidence and documentation for the Holocaust

Rather than refer to the entire page, maybe you can point to particular things you see there that you find convincing — I’m not going to read the entire article, but right away I can tell you that the foto with the caption Corpses found at Klooga concentration camp by the Red Army is not evidence for the ‘Holocaust’ — nothing is said about how they died, and it’s known that the Germans were unable provide basics like food, clean water, and medical care to the camps at the end of the war, and many inmates weakened and died as a result — the German state had collapsed.

While popular understanding may suggest that innocent people simply do not confess to crimes (“I would never confess to doing something that I did not actually do!”), the surprising fact is that false confessions happen—and perhaps more frequently than we would like to believe.

According to the National Registry of Exonerations, there have been over 2,500 exonerations since 1989… Surprisingly, approximately 12% of these defendants had falsely confessed to committing the crime. This indicates not only that false confessions happen, but that hundreds of people have falsely confessed to crimes that they did not commit.

Source: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/so-sue-me/202009/the-psychology-false-confessions
———————————————————–

Thought Fox News was owned by Australian Jewish Murdock?

If the holocaust is fake, how does one explain the quotes attributed to various Nazi officers in which they seem to speak directly about exterminating the Jews? The Wikipedia article “Evidence for the holocaust” contains several such quotations.

I ask sincerely.

There’s no such thing as the Canadian Broadcasting Network. The CBC on the other hand is owned by the gummint. Suck less, won’t you?

It’s called the “Hannibal Directive” and has been a part of israeli policy since the inception of the (illegal) state of israel.
In fact, the Munich Olympics affair was a prime example of the “Hannibal Directive” in operation. It was successful as it demonized Palestinians for a very long time and got israel (unwarranted) sympathy from the world…

Robert Lindsay: “I don’t believe that all Israel supporters are bought off or terrorized into supporting them. … There seems to be a big tie-in with Christian Zionism too. … There are quite a few Gentiles out there who support Israel for this reason or that without some extraneous pressure being put upon them. ”

Yes, Jews only have as much power as whites give them. If whites are “brainwashed” or “controlled” it’s because they want to be.

The murmers of revenge are for the benefit of Magtards, Zion Don will not go after his enemies.

How do I know?

1. Not one enemy of Trump went to prison his first term, not even the weakest.

2. He is clearly on the same side as the people who persecuted him, different teams, but the same side.

3. Most of his talk regarding his persecution is reconcilatry “can’t we all just get along” bootlicking.

4. He spent 4 years groveling for the approval of his “enemies” as they attacked, we no reason to believe he won’t do it again….well, not the Magtards, Trump was playing 4d chess, he’s not a weak narcissist that’s wants back into the circles he once lived in.

Mark my words, every appointee in a crucial position will be what is good for the K mafia, the MIC, the PIC, ect.

He won’t be able to take revenge even if he wanted to.

Sir,
You contradict yourself right from the beginning of your article when you write:

Jews don’t own the media. 25-30 years ago you could say that, but it’s not true anymore.

Which you contradict when immediately writing:

Turns out they definitely own a substantial portion of it but not the whole thing by any means.

If you compare these numbers percentage wise with the % of the Jewish population then you should immediately realize it’s a contradiction.

They own not only the media and Hollywood but the brains of the average American not only the ruling class who are their in laws.

It’s all very suspicious. They moved this techno party right next to the Gaza fence and then the IDF slaughtered most of the party goers, who were presumably the least racist and least Zionist of Jews, just young people wanting to have some fun. Maybe they wanted to be rid of these types anyway and found a convenient way to sacrifice them while using their deaths to fire up support for Zionist Israel and turn even the more moderate Jews against the Palestinians. It was all rather convenient.

Some Hamas and rowdy Gazans may have joined in this or they could have been actors in scenes recorded in some desert location for propaganda purposes. Who knows if there even was a cross fence incursion and kidnappings of hostages? Gazans woke up to buildings falling on them and the pre-recorded videos and images of the supposed Hamas incursion were broadcast to the world to demonise the Palestinians victims. Not saying I know exactly what went down but this chain of events could be possible. I guess there could also be the possibility that the IDF didn’t kill any party goers as they could have been crisis actors too. As the old cowboy on the defunct nodisinfo site would say “Zionists did it”, whatever it may have been.

If the spectacle of the world’s richest man being tarred and feathered and forced to bend the knee to Jewish power doesn’t convince you that Zionist Jews are the rulers of America, nothing will. The question of whether there is gentile representation in some editorial board or not is irrelevant, as long as Jews can combine and focus their media and economic extremely disproportionate influence to create what is in essence control of every aspect of American policy that they deem relevant to their interests:

https://www.unz.com/runz/elon-musk-goes-to-canossa/

You raise some good points but in the end you get wishy washy. One point about Canada up there, where a Cousin is a Professor. Research a company called Post Media and its history and who owns and controls it now…like de facto. They own and 100% control all of the major dailies in Canada amongst other things. Jews. Woe betide anyone who bad mouths Israel going back decades…deleted, banned , fired etc.

Twitter – not Jewish owned, but as you brilliantly recounted in your article, the naive Elon Musk was briskly introduced to the real rulers of America and under a threat of advertisers ban / negative press / who knows what else – quickly sojourned to Kanossa and bent the knee. Since then, virtually all pro-Palestinian anti-genocide voices report their reach has been curtailed and Twitter overflows with Zio-bots promoted posts.

Tik-Tok – not Jewish owned, and we all know how this one ends (pretty straight forward: ZOG already mandated: sell to Jews or be banned).

Jews don’t own the media.

Turns out they definitely own a substantial portion of it …

Is it worth reading this article past two of the first four sentences contradicting each other?

Because the second sentence agrees with the actual claim, while the first is a strawman placed to sow confusion and refute the second, which doesn’t fool a careful reader.

Nobody claims Jews own the media. Many people claim Jews disproportionally own the media.

It is amazing to me the extent to which Zionism has displaced and replaced Bible-based Christianity in many churches. I used to attend a Baptist church where this bizarre ideology has taken root.

When I protested to the Pastor about pursing this belief system and explained my objections owing to leftist Jewish influence in/ownership of western banking/usury and in shaping US domestic as well as foreign policies, he’d either tune me out or look at me as if I was speaking Saami. When I asked him, “how would you feel if they conscripted and sent your grandson off to the Middle East as a soldier, there to die in wars that only benefit Israel?” his answer was, “is there something wrong with that?”

Worship of the modern state of Israel and worship of Jewish people seems to have taken the place of worshipping the Lord Jesus Christ as Savior and as Lord.

It’s idolatry, nothing less.

Excellent summary and analysis. Last paragraph is a tour de force.

Anthropogenic climate destabilisation is stark reality, is accelerating, and it takes a true imbecile or some sort of vicious, brainwashed, Rightwing psychopath to deny it as weather and climate disasters proliferate and worsen.

Lying swine. Hamas committed an act of RESISTANCE, protected under International Law. Hamas killed mostly military, and it was Zionazi ‘friendly fire’ and Hannibal Procedure deliberate murder that killed most of the civilians.
‘Defence’ does NOT confer a right to genocide and mass child murder, no matter how central these are to your Judaic religious practise. So shut your sniveling, genocide approving, mouth, you accomplice to genocide. And the vast majority of humanity, including much of Western publics, you lying pos, does NOT acquiesce in this genocide, although you, you vicious thug, plainly do.

As far as we know, Judaism’s injunctions to commit genocide are the oldest extant such tracts. Some ‘moral instruction’, and, as ever, the Gods Upon the Earth act as if China, India, Mesopotamia etc do not exist.

I don’t believe that all Israel supporters are bought off or terrorized into supporting them.

My theory for some time now has been that the Republican Party’s support for Israel is ideological. They don’t get that much money from Jewish interests. Most Jewish money goes to Democrats.

Of course now that they support Israel so enthusiastically, they all get campaign contributions from AIPAC, but which came first. Perhaps they came out as strong Israel supporters and then AIPAC gave them money to stay that way. I’m not getting the impression that Republicans would love to vote against Israel except that AIPAC is pointing a gun to their head and forcing them not to. Strong, over the top support for Israel looks to be a part of the Republican Party’s ideological package. There seems to be a big tie-in with Christian Zionism too.

My liberal Democrat father was a strong Israel supporter his whole life. Was he bought off or terrorized. There are quite a few Gentiles out there who support Israel for this reason or that without some extraneous pressure being put upon them.

I don’t believe that all Israel supporters are bought off or terrorized into supporting them.

My theory for some time now has been that the Republican Party’s support for Israel is ideological. They don’t get that much money from Jewish interests. Most Jewish money goes to Democrats.

Of course now that they support Israel so enthusiastically, they all get campaign contributions from AIPAC, but which came first. Perhaps they came out as strong Israel supporters and then AIPAC gave them money to stay that way. I’m not getting the impression that Republicans would love to vote against Israel except that AIPAC is pointing a gun to their head and forcing them not to. Strong, over the top support for Israel looks to be a part of the Republican Party’s ideological package. There seems to be a big tie-in with Christian Zionism too.

My liberal Democrat father was a strong Israel supporter his whole life. Was he bought off or terrorized. There are quite a few Gentiles out there who support Israel for this reason or that without some extraneous pressure being put upon them.

Yes I did. My list above is mostly of top executives. Where available, I also listed top editorship positions.

Israel had been committing on a daily basis the worst televised massacre in the history of the world, while trying to incite a regional war involving the US and Iran, and virtually no one in the MSM has the courage to criticize what is happening.

Well, Bernie Sanders has been on the MSM saying it’s time to cut off weapons sales to Israel. And twenty Democrats in Congress also said it’s time to cut off weapons sales. That was reported. That many Congressmen advocating cutting off Israel is a watershed, as Phil Weiss has pointed out.

Also the MSM or at least MSNBC and CNN keep playing up the angle that it would be a terrible idea for Israel to expand the war to Iran or Lebanon and how Biden is trying to stop the expansion of the war, which is probably a correct analysis. Also you leave out that MSNBC, which is almost a Democratic party outlet, hardly wants to cover this war as they think it’s a disaster for the Democratic Party electorally so they’re mostly avoiding coverage of it.

Several Jewish billionaires managed to purge the presidents of two Ivy League schools for being insufficiently pro-Jewish, something unprecedented in all of American academic history, and virtually no one in the MSM dared criticize this action.

There was some criticism of this in the MSM, but it was framed as “Republicans going after liberals.” Also quite a few liberal Blacks in the media were very upset about how the Jews went after that Black woman. It was framed as “bad Republicans going after a good liberal Black woman.”

Stefanik was a Republican so the Democrats were playing it up as Republicans wielding antisemitism cynically. So there was some push back on that. Also some people noted that the thing Stefanik kept pushing, “Would it be legal to call for the extermination of Jews on your campus?” had never actually occurred, and she made it out like this was being called for all the time.

It’s curious to me that after all the talk about Jewish control/influence of the Western Media, one item is almost never mentioned. The people who own the MSM–Jewish or not–want to control the Narrative of what the Elites want the Public to hear AND what these Elites do NOT want their audiences to hear. Both of these objectives are crucial to the Elites maintaining Power. For Propaganda to work, you can’t just promote your Propaganda, you have to prevent anyone from challenging your false Narratives. This is why the tiny group of Jewish Billionaires who own the media do not allow dissenting views. Except for some lukewarm, tightly controlled Opposing Views. For the whole thing to work, you have to have a gullible, non thinking General Public. No Critical Thinking abilities allowed; Propaganda fails if the Public has some Critical Thinking skills.

Conveniently posted today at Strategic-Culture.org:

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2024/07/05/rupert-murdoch-israels-most-powerful-supporter/

Well Ron, let’s take s look at what Stalin had in common with the current administration in Israel – lots and lots and lots of killing. Fact is people who are obsessively driven to kill and commit other crimes are drawn, like as if by a powerful magnet, to others that also are. So wherever people are getting away with murder and human rights abuses one will find these types gravitating towards. What country hasn’t had organized crime groups? These types of psychos can infiltrate and “hide” in any field (medical, military, finance, judicial, mental health, politics, media, or religion, etc.) that allows them to get away with murder and shun personal responsibility. When one sees large numbers of them in a particular area or zone, it is because they have been able or allowed to get away with it. People have been either prevented from speaking out about it and taking actions against it, or too compromised or gullible about it to confront it, until it is too late. Instead of blaming or putting responsibility on the individual psychotics in favor of murder and human rights abuse, it is all too easy to blame all or any of the zones mentioned above. But all of the zones above could be useful, helpful and beneficial to humanity if not under the manipulative orchestrations of psychotics. If you haven’t already, watch FROM JFK TO 9/11, EVERYTHING IS A RICH MAN’S TRICK :

Video Link
Actually, I would much rather it was titled FROM JFK TO 9/11, EVERYTHING IS A DIRTY RICH MANS TRICK, mainly because I have never observed money killing anyone. Just like guns which don’t go off by themselves unless someone programs them to, or pulls the trigger, they won’t kill. But psychos like lots of money because it enables them to do more killing with impunity. Money can be used for good. It’s all too rare.

*Govett

“What if? – If Donald Trump is elected POTUS will the President of Ukraine be willing to tell Trump, and his team, where all of the Biden Family dirt is in Ukraine?”

What a delicious prospect!

Back to Square One, but on a different game board.

…acknowledges that Hamas committed an act of war against Israel…’

…but dearest, they weren’t at peace to begin with.

You overlook the minor detail that Israel has been committing ‘acts of war’ against the Palestinians for seventy five years. In 2023 alone, they had already killed two hundred by October 7th. They then began violating their own agreements concerning al Aqsa in a deliberate effort to bait Hamas into responding.

So Hamas responded. Nu? Deir Yassin, Kfar Kassem, Sabra and Chantila are fine — but God forbid the victims retaliate? They should just obediently sit there and let the Jews kill them whenever they find it amusing?

The hypocrisy is beyond disgusting — it’s absurd. It’s like condemning the Doolittle Raid as an outrageous atrocity.

“Ridiculous. The Czarist state collapsed on its own because it had no popular support from Russians. It was Father Gapon and Sergei Zubatov who set of the 1905 revolution. Schiff had nothing to do with this.”

– Wow, what a nonsensical superficial comment….sorry, but really makes me wonder how much you have actually studied the topic?

Firstly of course -not sure if you know this?-, but the 1905 Gapon-revolution failed….
and secondly exactly that “lack of popular support” you talk about which only made its limited initial uprising possible was achieved mainly thanks to 2 things:

a) the weakening and impoverishment of the Russian Empire due to its humiliating defeat in the Russo-Japanese war

b) large propaganda efforts by Anti-Tzarist/socialist fraction

in both of which -as even such horrid mainstream sources like Wikipedia, the Jewish Encyclopedia and Schiff autobiographers like Ackerman tell us (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_Schiff)- it was no other than Jacob Schiff who played a central role.

It was his single handed giant loan of (todays value)5.3 billion Dollars, standing for half of the entire war`s cost, which made the war (and Russias defeat) possible for Japan -earning him the Emperor`s Gold and Silver Star Order of the Rising Sun Award-and his contributions to the Propaganda-distribution activities of the Society Of Friends Of Russian Freedom which helped the 1905 uprising considerably.

But as said, this revolution failed, it was first the catastrophic entry and then loss of WW1 which brought the widespread public impoverishment and dissatisfaction needed for a this time succesfull revolt against and downfall of the Tzarist Empire.

And again as even mainstream Wikipedia and Orthodoxy tell us, Schiff was a major player by:

– sabotaging the Russian war, forbidding any loans to be given to Russia during its time of dire need for funding 1915-1917 and

– floating large loans to the 1917 revolt and Kerensky regime.

“Nothing to do with this”…….

Brilliant reply. Thanks.

Good and bad people everywhere but yes the Talmudic Jews are wicked evil insidious.
Majority of Jews have no clue what’s in their holy books so in a way they are innocent.

The Talmudic Jews playin divide and conquer and loving it …..

Re “For refutation of the Jew’s claims to having brought moral instruction unto mankind, read the works of Frans de Waal among others. Primatologists at the Max Planck devised experiments which showed that chimps were capable of reasoning morally. If one chimp were given a reward of lesser value for behavior for which a neighbor chimp received something of greater value, both chimps responded in a way that showed that they understood that some elemental notion of Justice had been violated.

And so on.

Our moral nature is rooted deeply in our primates-living-in-social-groups evolutionary adaptive strategy.”

I love Franz de Waal but have read just one of his books, Are We Smart Enough to Know How Smart Animals Are? Wonderful. I agree completely with his observations, and the idea, that elemental notions of justice are deep-wired in primates and possibly also “lower” animals.

I just saw that de Waal died a couple of months ago.
No! Very sad to learn of this loss to humanity.
I shall definitely put some of his other books on my “to read” list.

It doesn’t take 2300 words to explain what we already know…
JEWS DO CONTROL THE U. S. MEDIA.

Re ” but I’ve explained the rationale for what’s going on a number of times before, e.g. here: most of the rest of the world, including ‘the West’, acknowledges that Hamas committed an act of war against Israel, and Israel has a right to defend itself and secure its existence by attempting to eliminate a sworn, mortal enemy (it’s in the charter of Hamas).”

Too bad you are so mentally inept as to think that “most of the West” believing something makes it a fact.

It has been explained to you repeatedly here and I am sure elsewhere that under international law as framed in the UN charter Israel, an occupying power, has no right to self-defense to prolong its illegal occupation, whereas Hamas as the legal representative of the occupied entity has, in international law, a right to struggle for self-determination, including armed struggle.

There, there, I know it’s hard.

Now that this has been explained to you, you can stop the pompous, gaslighting multiple chauvinims you have put on display with your “genderizing” of an acknowledged genocidal shit show.

Wow. Thanks for the info. WHAT a pathetic cuck.

“Climate Change Lie Explained” & “Nurse: Jews Prioritized
For Organ Transplants” https://linkmix.co/24353471

Evil has a race.

Le Pen expelled the entire AfD fraction from her EUSSR fake “parliament” association, ostensibly because Krah idiotically answered an MSM journo question instead of wisely remaining silent.

Yet her own people are far more inept. Condemning Ms. Daoudi for jokingly wearing a Luftwaffe cap (instead for her Moroccan married name) shows the course of this joke party under its scheming “leader”.

Now Le Pen openly and shamelessly colludes with the globalist traitor Meloni, who in turn colludes with both Zelenskyy and von der Leyen.

Her much more honorable niece Marion, btw, was just kicked out by Jew Zemmour because she called on voters to strategically vote for her aunt’s party.

https://www.france24.com/en/france/20240704-black-sheep-embarrass-the-national-rally-ahead-of-decisive-parliamentary-vote

The hollow head of the criminal Pangburn, who is too stupid to wear a cap (or simply let his hair grow) in “enemy territory”, is indeed a single insult to the SS. He should have a “Star of David” tattooed on his forehead instead.

An unmistakable Jew named Mueller (pic) had “detected” it, and ADL Jew Levine then presumes, as usual, to determine what is “acceptable” on behalf of Americans. https://www.fox13now.com/news/local-news/fan-with-nazi-symbol-tattoo-removed-from-real-salt-lake-game

It’s all about culture. We are in the middle of a cultural war. The Talmudic Jews are attacking western civilization. Can’t you see it ? The holocaust is their wall of defense. The Talmud is their calendar , the agenda , the planning.

Yes. The heart of the issue.

For refutation of the Jew’s claims to having brought moral instruction unto mankind, read the works of Frans de Waal among others. Primatologists at the Max Planck devised experiments which showed that chimps were capable of reasoning morally. If one chimp were given a reward of lesser value for behavior for which a neighbor chimp received something of greater value, both chimps responded in a way that showed that they understood that some elemental notion of Justice had been violated.

And so on.

Our moral nature is rooted deeply in our primates-living-in-social-groups evolutionary adaptive strategy.

Jewish claims to superiority due to having midwifed some universal concerns is, on the contrary, their typical shifty, scheming way to cheat, gain a leg up on and put their opponents on their back foot. And, since, in the eyes of Jews everyone is an opponent, this makes them the enemy of mankind, not its benefactor.

>It is incomprehensible.

This isn’t the topic here — but I’ve explained the rationale for what’s going on a number of times before, e.g. here: most of the rest of the world, including ‘the West’, acknowledges that Hamas committed an act of war against Israel, and Israel has a right to defend itself and secure its existence by attempting to eliminate a sworn, mortal enemy (it’s in the charter of Hamas).

None of what I’ve said about this should be taken as my personal opinion about the military campaign of the Jews against Hamas in Gaza: whether they’ve shown enough concern about civilian casualties and the destruction of civilian infrastructure, the reasonableness of their goal of eliminating Hamas, etc — it just explains the rationale for the war, which with the Jews is accentuated by the ‘Holocaust’ extermination story (‘never again’), as well as why most of the rest of the world, including ‘the West’, acquiesces in it.

Now that it has been explained to you, can stop the plaintive, effeminate posting about how it’s all so ‘incomprehensible’ to you.

> No gentile magnat/financier could bring down the Russian Empire almost single-handedly, Schiff could.

Ridiculous. The Czarist state collapsed on its own because it had no popular support from Russians. It was Father Gapon and Sergei Zubatov who set of the 1905 revolution. Schiff had nothing to do with this.