China, Hollywood And The ‘Correct’ Point Of View

China, Hollywood

And The ‘Correct’ Point Of View

by

R.E. Prindle

 

A very interesting story about China and Hollywood appeared in the Wall Street Journal of today (4/19/17). It confirms the continuing marginalization of the US and the threat to the survival of its Constitution.

It seems that Part 8 of Fast and Furious opened in China to 169 million compared to about 70 million in the US. (Inflated to 99 million in the reporting by including Canadian receipts, so China can now dwarf North America. (US, Canada, Mexico). Thus, implications go far beyond mere Box Office considerations. China has now surpassed the US in screens adding 25 a day, that is, 25 a day! Chinese admissions are half the US so the Fast and Furious receipts could be doubled to 338 million. China soon will have a bigger annual gross than North America with plenty of room to grow.

Anent political considerations the WSJ story makes two very revealing admissions:

Tensions between China and the White House have accelerated since the presidential election. Mr. Xi is seeking to strike a contrast with President Donald Trump as a champion of globalism, and he appears eager to advance China’s narrative- both by pressuring Hollywood studios to portray the nation favorably and in the long term, by adopting Western filmmaking techniques for China’s own industry.

So, what kind of favorable portrayal do the Chinese insist upon, which is actually a form of censorship, because they won’t show US movies that might be critical. For instance in a movie portraying the Trump, Xi, Kim Jong Un situation it would be necessary to show China as the moral and ‘correct’ champion with the US and Korea as squabbling brats. Hollywood will have to accept an inferior position for the US.

Here Mr. Xi should horrify US Liberals and have them condemn him and China as Neo-Nazis. Indeed, as Mr. Xi states:

We must make patriotism into the main melody of literature and art creation, guide the people to establish and hold correct views of history, views of the nation, views of the country, and views of culture, and strengthen their fortitude and resolve to be Chinese,” said Mr. Xi at the Beijing Forum on Literature and Art in October 2014.

So, there you have it, conditions no Liberal will tolerate in the US but are acceptable to them when imposed by China. In pleasing the Chinese to retain access to the Chinese market Hollywood does violence to everything the US professes to believe as guaranteed by our Constitution. In point of fact, as far as movies go Hollywood is now the tail and China is the dog. The Hollywood tail is not going to be able to wag the Chinese dog.

In fact Hollywood’s relationship to the market now becomes like that of France, Germany or Japan to the US market. i.e. foreign films. China within perhaps as little as a year or two may produce more movies than the entire West let alone Hollywood.

The mass market in the US has then disappeared. With the mass market gone the way is open for other cities than Hollywood to produce movies designed specifically for the US domestic market or US-European markets. In any event Chinese control of ‘correct history, culture and mores’ must not be allowed to control US filmmaking.

As Mr. Xi’s comment indicates his notion of globalism is simply Chinese domination of the globe. Foolish Americans if they allow that to happen.

A Discussion Of Crispin Sartwell: How We Got This Way

How We Got This Way

A Discussion Of Crispin Sartwell’s

The Postmodern Intellectual Roots

Of Today’s Campus Mobs.

by

R.E. Prindle

 

The major problem in discussing today’s political affairs is dealing with the authoritarian position of the Liberals as to the indisputable certainty of their views. They are so certain that they are willing to use physical violence to enforce this view on everyone. One is reminded of the Communist Soviet Union of the 1920s and 30s.

Crispin Sartwell examines the development of this state of mind in the above referenced essay. Unfortunately the essay appeared in the Wall Street Journal of 3/25/17 and the Journal’s policy prevents its republication; hence no link.

Sartwell attributes the attitude’s rise to what he calls ‘the second great era of speech repression in academia.’ Apparently his professor, Richard Rorty was instrumental in propagating the attitude. In 1998 Rorty published his views in book form: Achieving Our Country: Leftist Thought In Twentieth Century America.

Sartwell quotes Rorty, ‘objectivity is a matter of intersubjective consensus among human beings, not of accurate representation of something nonhuman.’ A perhaps interesting opinion but that leaves us with the task of explaining what ‘intersubjective consensus’ is and how it is to be obtained. We’re dealing with a lot of alchemical air here in which subjective thought is transmuted into objective thought by being shared by humans and Rorty means the whole of humanity. To me it sounds like something along the lines of J.G. Jung’s ‘collective unconscious’ in which the racial subconscious is somehow transmitted from generation to generation, and just as subjective.

What it amounts to is that a number of ‘human beings’ get together and agree to agree that something is so whether it is or is not and having once ‘objectified’ their subjectivity by agreeing with other they are willing to punish anyone who disturbs their pleasant utopian fantasy. In other words, twenty-first century Communism by another name with new terminology by a collectivity promoting their unsubstantiated viewpoint.

Something like Des Cartes: I think, therefore I am. While this formula takes the young by storm and they go around repeating it as though irrefutable truth actually I am therefor I think is more logical. A thought requires a thinker to think it not the other way around. I am, therefore I think.

Thus adherents to Rorty’s viewpoint having devised this reformulation of Communism have set about to impose their utopia by force.

Rorty condemns any opposition as heretical:

It is doubtful whether the current critics of the universities who are called ‘conservative intellectuals’ deserve this description, for intellectuals are supposed to be aware of, and speak to issues of social justice.

So, the ‘intersubjective consensus’ controls the narrative while determining the rules of the game. We may understand ‘social justice’ to be the Party line and any deviants don’t the name of ‘intellectuals’ or thinkers. To the outer darkness with them.

And then Sartwell says: ‘By that logic it is defensible to eliminate such people from graduate programs, to deny them tenure, even to shout them down.’

Yea, verily, even to beat them up, prevent their entry to campus and deny them voice. Eventually to murder them as the Soviet Communists did to dissenters in the nineteen twenties and thirties.

Thus, we have the attitude towards President Trump in which any objective view that looks outward at the object instead of inward at wishes is denied validity. One doesn’t describe the situation per se but the utopian, that is the Communist political correct diktat.

The real problem with President Trump and the Liberals then is not Donald Trump himself but the fact that he denies the ‘the intersubjective consensus’ viewpoint. He points derisively at the naked emperor. This cannot be tolerated by them. He must be impeached before he opens his mouth.

During the campaign then you saw criminal violence committed against the Trump voter. Many were beaten fairly seriously while the disruption of Trump’s rallies was so severe that his Chicago rally was cancelled by the Communist mayor for ‘fear that Trump’s rally would cause rioting.’ That shows how violent these people are prepared to be supported by the authorities. Of course the rioting and burning of cars after the inauguration confirms this. Other examples…but they are well known.

Let us hope the President can defuse this situation without having to resort to equally repressive measures. Let us just say that the Liberals are tempting fate.

The Lunacy Of Our Political Situation

The Lunacy Of Our Political Situation

by

R.E. Prindle

 

For anyone who expected differently our political situation should be clarifying. It is clear that President Trump has aborted the Post ’45 Liberal Agenda. His approach follows a different narrative. Always fanatical the Liberal reaction has intensified. Like all reactionaries they wish to destroy the new order.

The street reactionaries are obvious but while noisy they should be able to be subverted and cauterized. The only question is how quickly the President can build up his own street organization. Yes, this gets more reminiscent of Weimar Germany. More important is the resistance embedded in governmental departments.

They have been staffed and led by members of the Council On Foreign Affairs for decades. As such they are committed to the ideology of the Post ’45 agenda that President Trump’s ideology cuts across. It should come as no surprise that all his appointments have come from outside the CFR framework. It should also come as no surprise that four leading members of the State Department quit in an attempt to sabotage the President’s administration. Undoubtedly more key civil servants will depart in the attempt to paralyze that administration. If one checks they will probably be CFR or connected to it.

Most people probably are unaware of the what and who the CFR is. The CFR arose out of the wreckage of the League of Nations fight. Having lost that battle the CFR was established in 1921 to gain control of the electoral process. Every candidate for president beginning in 1924 has been vetted to conform with CFR ideology. After ’45, of course, it became the political agenda until the President’s election.

Today, you can read the CFR magazine, Foreign Affairs, for the official line. On the internet you can call up a list or a partial list of the CFR membership. Not only have all the presidents been CFR vetted but a very large proportion of key governmental post have been filled by CFR members. Johnson’s administration was the high point at 57%

Thus, President Trump who is the first elected president since 1921 who is not CFR has to free himself from CFR sabotage. It was a gift to him when those four key State Department employees quit.

As a quick read to verify this account I recommend Curtis B. Dall’s F.D.R. My Exploited Father-In-Law: An Intimate Account Of The Man, The Regime, And The Legacy. Dall was a close eye witness to these early proceedings from 1921 to 1941. As a member of the Wall Street fraternity he was also privy from that side as well as Roosevelt’s.

The Trump administration is going to be a battle for the soul of America, so bone up.

Red Star Over Hollywood

 

 

Red Star Over Hollywood

by

R.E. Prindle

 

Ye Editor of the WSJ blunders along in his (or her) 10/18/16 article entitled Red Stars Over Hollywood celebrating the Chinese cultural invasion of Hollywood buying up studios and theatre chains. Ye Editor opines ‘Chinese investment in US movies isn’t a security threat.’ Ye Editor is stone cold wrong. It is a security threat among others.

What is cheerily called Globalism is actually an asymmetrical cultural war for Global cultural supremacy. That is if you’re not too starry eyed to see it. Two of the most significant Communist texts are the Frenchman Montesquieu’s The Spirit Of The Laws and the American Graham Sumner’s Folkways, a study of mores. It is through the base of laws and mores that one subverts another culture. The Communists (Red Star is code for Communism) have known the importance of these two studies from the beginning and laws and mores are key elements in their strategy.

With the success of Freudianism and the rise of TV/movies the equivalent of cultural atom bombs their effectiveness is manifold. The Jews have successfully used the media to mold American mores and their lesson has apparently not been lost on the Chinese.

Ye Editor apparently realizes this as he says: The movie business is a competitive market with none of the immediate security risks of defense contractors or power-plant operators. The key word here is immediate. Correct, not immediate but long term. The corrosion of mores and laws is like rust; it is visible but you can’t see it working but it does 24/7/365. Ye Editor seems to accept the consequences of Chinese media control while totally opposing any resistance to it. We don’t know how much the Chinese are paying him.

He says: Chinese censors tightly control access to this market [in China] allowing in only 34 films a year, so Hollywood studios compete to curry favor by dumping Chinese for North Korean villains…including Chinese product placement…and having China save the day. Ye Editor apparently doesn’t realize these concessions are anti-American propaganda. He says: No authoritarian regime has ever had as much power to broadcast its narrative (not to mention the abominable Nazis) and silence or buying off its critics, (Ye Editor?) including the US and other open societies.

We have cognitive disconnect here. While seemingly admitting that Chinese propaganda is operating in the US, an attack on mores, he says: Americans (that is Deplorables, knuckle draggers and other reprobates) bothered by a filmmaker’s approach to China can take their entertainment dollars elsewhere and fund independent projects…. Well, up yours too, Ye Editor.

How disingenuous can the Journal and Ye Editor be? First, he, she, it, puts the entertainment industry in censorious Chinese hands including the power to distribute films then he says it is possible to buck the censoriness of the Chinese mores and work on independent projects. With no hope of distribution one adds.

Americans are not even able to buck censorious Liberal control over the media. The entire movie/TV/press opposition to Trump’s candidacy is such that he is reviled nonstop and this includes the ‘conservative’ Wall Street Journal.

So, in essence Ye Editor endorses and applauds the takeover by the Chinese of American culture and mores.

As no resistance has been permitted to Western Communist takeover of US laws and mores there is little reason to believe that there will be any resistance to Eastern Communisms’ efforts either. Americans either don’t know or they don’t care. They’ll take whatever comes along so long as it’s Red.

Let us hope Trump triumphs in November as I’m sure he will. It is necessary and I think inevitable. Let us hope, ‘the common man’ can live up to his reputation for wisdom and think straight.

 

Vote Trump.

An Incident In The Semitic Struggle For Supremacy

An Incident In

The Semitic Struggle For Supremacy

by

R.E. Prindle

 

A matter of importance occurred this Monday (10/2/16).

 

The first Monday of October is set for opening the new Supreme Court session. This year there was a conflict between Semitic Jewish law and that of US law. October 2 coincided with the Jewish holiday of Rosh Hashanah. This posed a problem for the three (3) Jewish members of the US, that is United States, Supreme Court: Ginsburg, Breyer and Kagan.

Although sworn to uphold the laws and Constitution of the United States which means giving precedence to US laws and customs the three traitors chose to give precedence to Jewish Semitic law. Just as Moslem Semitic Sharia law has been rejected so should now we reject Jewish Semitic law.

The Trashy Trio should be removed from the Court now as they are unable and unwilling to fulfill the oath they swore upon voluntarily accepting, even lusting for, the appointment.

If Obama refuses to act responsibly by demanding the resignation of the Jewish trash then Trump when he is elected will have to act more responsibly than Obama or his acolyte Clinton are capable of.

The 21st Century Jewish War is on.

Obama Defends Kaepernick

 

 

Obama Defends Kaepernick’s Protest

by

R.E. Prindle

 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2016/09/05/obama-defends-kaepernicks-national-anthem-protest/89879478/

 

President Obama said Monday that NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick was “exercising his constitutional right: to bring attention to racial injustice by not taking part in the national anthem…

 

…Obama said he did not doubt Kaepernick’s sincerity to highlighting social issues and noted the player was the latest in a long line of professional sports figures to do so. The president also acknowledged that Kaepernick’s silent protest was a “tough thing” for many members of the military to accept.

 

“When it comes to the flag and the national anthem and the meaning that holds for our men and women in uniform and those who fought for us—that is a tough thing for them to get past.” Obama said. “but I don’t doubt his sincerity. I think he cares about some real, legitimate issues that have to be talked about. If nothing else, he’s generated more conversation about issues that have to be talked about.”

 

Our great Constitutional scholar has spoken. He says that there is a Constitutional right to bring attention to a racial matter. I don’t know what Barry was smoking or snorting but it’s not clear to me where he read there is a right to bring attention to any problem. In fact I don’t see a Constitutional question involved at all. Barry has invoked a right too far.

What we do have is the broader question of respect for others (frequently invoked as ‘offensive’) and following established mores. People don’t talk much about mores anymore but what is occurring now is an assault on mores to exchange established mores for more race based mores. Kaepernick launched an all out attack for Negro Supremacy by discarding mores followed by American citizens for a replacement of those mores by new Negro mores. Mores govern how a society functions.

For those with an ear to the ground, finger on the pulse and an eye for flashing changes being imposed on Americans by this traitorous president what is being attempted is clear. The Negro is rejecting White mores and the unpleasant past of slavery. Negro Revolutionaries form an entirely different set that displaces American mores. Thus disrespecting the flag that represents slavery and Jim Crow to them. Photos of revolutionaries of any color standing on the Flag or burning it is not so much disrespect for the Flag as a rejection of what Negroes think it stands for. There is no more outstanding image of the move to replace what some call ‘the historic American nation’. That nation, weird old America, and what they call White Supremacy is anathema to them.

If you’re really listening to the rhetoric, following the photo images this should require no explanation. What more do you need to see this clearly than the hate law that the coloreds and their ally passed making White heterosexual males second class citizens? I am amazed that there is no outcry against this. My voice is a solo coming from the wilderness.

Boy Obama himself shares this disrespect and hatred of White Americans. Just listen to the precedence he gives to the grumbling of this privileged multi-millionaire athlete over ‘those who fought for us.’

When it comes to the flag and the national anthem and the meaning it holds for our men and women in uniform and those who fought for it—that is a tough thing for them to get past, but I don’t doubt (Kaepernick’s) sinceri

Do you see the arrogance, hear the sneer of this nit picked off the streets of New York City, given a law degree from Harvard and pushed into the White House without a single qualification? He says to the returned vets of Viet Nam, that dirty little war, not all returned, tens of thousand of their spirits haunt Nam, says to them and their surviving brothers: Fuck y’all. Get over it. Why? Because he doesn’t doubt Kaepernick’s sincerity. He doesn’t doubt his sincerity!

And this arrogant buffoon, Barry Obama, places a football player’s sincerity over the sacrifice of a million or more men who put their bodies and sanity into the jungles and swamps of an ungrateful Viet Nam.

If you voted for him, shame on you. If you voted for him twice (two different elections) you should bury your head in the sand and leave it there. If you intend to vote for his surrogate, Hitler Clinton this time around you will have to do penance.

If anything Obama has shown how easy it is to change the mores of a whole nation, however such rapid change makes them more fluid and even easier to direct the flow. For us it is to reject Obama’s mores and direct the flow into a better and more reasonable channel. Our Lives Matter. To do so requires the rejection of Liberal and Negro influence and their marginalization. As unpleasant as that task may be to our mores it must be taken up. Contempt for Obama is rising; it must be amplified.

As Obama himself says: ‘I’d rather have…people who are engaged in the argument and trying to think through how they can be part of our democratic process than people who are just sitting on the sidelines not paying attention at all.’   President Obama, you have found us.

Heil Obama! We are paying attention. Take up our arms, we’re marching again. Our democracy will be established with liberty and justice for all not just the Liberal few. Re-enfranchise the White heterosexual male – down with hate laws.

Vote Trump

Listen To Donald Trump; Your Lives Depend On It

 

 

Listen To Donald Trump: Your Life Depends On It

by

R.E. Prindle

 

Since Trump began being briefed for the presidency, no matter how badly, the tenor of his speeches has changed dramatically. Perhaps the FBI has disclosed their private information on the machinations of Obama that they were unable to disclose under Obama’s thumb.

When Trump now announced that Obama has strategically placed one hundred thousand Mexican paramilitaries (Trump doesn’t use this term) he, Trump, says that he will as his first move arrest the whole lot. My impression is that this accusation is very, very serious. As Trump says, you, we, are not bigots, we are good people and as such have every right to protect our lives, our loved ones lives and our children’s lives.

You may be sure that many Moslem communities as well have been strategically placed so that on the signal all will rise as one. Knowing the danger of predicting the event it is in all likelihood very close, perhaps on the eve of the election or alternatively the eve of Trump’s inauguration. Remember that Obama has categorically said that Trump will not be president; take him at his word.

It behooves you to listen to what Trump is saying; he is telling you something, as much as he dares.

Despite what you may have been led to believe Trump is an honest candidate. He cares for the United States and its survival. Put your prejudice behind you, discard all the slander of the MSM, Hillary and the administration. You have been taken. Put your support behind Trump now. He is putting his life on the line for you and for our country. Make no mistake the next four three months will be the most critical the country has ever experienced.

Evil times await you if you don’t support Trump. The abyss yawns.

The Birth Of Two Nations

 

 

The Birth Of Two Nations

by

R.E. Prindle

 

In 1915 D.W. Griffith and Thomas Dixon Jr. released what is perhaps the most famous movie, silent or talkie, ever made. The movie that depicts the aftermath of the Civil War, that is Reconstruction, was the biggest spectacle ever produced to that time, and also the highest grosser.

The movie was addressed to the North. For the North the Civil War was a war of extermination intended to kill all the White Southerners. That they didn’t succeed is a mere accident of history. For instance, read War Crimes Against Southern Civilians by Walter Brian Cisco. After a hundred and fifty years later Southerners finally feel free to tell the truth. The book will help you understand Griffith’s Birth of a Nation.

Thus the nation Griffith and Dixon referred to was the unity of the Aryan Nation. The Birth was its hoped for reunification after the horrors of the Civil War. The plea was never to kill each other again; especially avoiding the genocidal horrors of Generals William Tecumseh Sherman and Phil Sheridan among many other Northern commanders.

Naturally the movie was seen as racial and racist and a great hue and cry was raised by Negroes and Jews but not by the men who fought the war either North or South. While the movie in many cases was viewed by participants and survivors of that great conflict, and thought to accurately represent the situation a barrage of defamation was directed at D.W. Griffith, the director, and Thomas Dixon, the writer.

Dixon who was a best selling author of talent and a good story teller was gradually turned into a racist monster having no place in American literature or culture. Both he and Griffith’s careers began a precipitous decline following the movie and both died penniless and in obscurity.

Now, a hundred years later in an effort to co-opt history a new film also titled Birth of a Nation has been written, directed and acted by Nate Parker. Nate is a Negro. His film deals with a slave uprising led by Nat Turner in Southhampton County, Virginia in 1831. The rebellion was a murderous, bloody, rapefest that ended as it must have once the surprise was over and the Whites organized. But, what is meant by Nate Parker’s filming the movie? Is it merely to mock Griffith and Dixon or is he calling for a unification of the present Negroes to exterminate present Whites?   In other words, a serious call for the birth of a Negro United States or Nation? The film certainly excites the Negro people to do battle with the White Demons. And that at a time when the Negroes are already working themselves into a lather finding excuses to kill, burn and loot.

The very people who denounce Griffith and Dixon now applaud Parker as the auteur of a fantastic picture. They little know that they are the projected victims of the film.

However Nate Parker has complicated the matter by having been tried for raping a White girl in college, sort of following Griffith and Dixon’s script that was denounced as defamatory.   The White girl is described as being unconscious, thus one imagines drugged, hence unable to give consent as Parker claims while having gratified his hatred of Whites on the girl’s body. Having gratified his hatred Parker invited his Black roommate into the room to have some too. So we have a gang rape.

So the Griffith film in which a Negro gratifies his lust on a White girl seems to have been reenacted by Parker even though the scene in Griffith’s film was called inaccurate and racist.

Parker, of course, represenst his rape of the girl as a mere youthful indiscretion and he’s put all that behind him; convenient for him although his victim subsequently committed suicide at the age of thirty. Collateral damage.   So let’s forget about the mistake and concentrate on Parker’s movie that calls for lots more murder and rape.

Let’s try to place Parker and his movie into a historical continuum. The Nat Turner uprising occurred in South Hampton County, Virginia in 1831 as noted. The uprising was not too far distant in time from the 1804 revolt of Toussaint L’Ouverture in Haiti which established the independence of Haiti from the French. Haiti was a major event in the consciousness of nineteenth century history. While Toussaint did not in any sense defeat Napoleon as some historians claim he did defeat troops of the Empire. The reaction among Whites was stupendous. Some feared an uprising in the US like that of Nat Turner other lauded Toussaint as the greatest military figure of all time surpassing Washington, Napoleon, Caesar and whoever. Just the greatest and that because he was a Negro. Matthew Clavin in his fine book Toussaint L’Ouverture and the American Civil War details the reaction to Toussaint’s victory. All the White men were massacred while the White women were given the choice of a horrible death or marriage to Negroes, but a real marriage not a mockery of one. Most women chose to submit to the Negroes.

The Whites not murdered during the Haitian Revolution fled to the nascent United States. While France had sold Louisiana to the US in 1803 New Orleans was still considered a French colony to which many of the slave owners repaired bringing their slaves with them. Many of the slave owners were mulattoes and Negroes thus New Orleans had a large corps of Negro slave owners at the time of the Civil War.

Others landed along the Gulf Coast so news of Haiti was general in the South among both slave owners and slaves. This Haitian rebellion then both incited Nat Turner and terrified the Whites. So, the result was murder, theft and rapine what it would seem Nate Parker is inciting with his movie. As far as rape goes he knows what he’s talking about.

Efforts are being made to prevent the theater release in October, not only by Whites but by Negroes also. This would seem wise. In the event of a Negro uprising that could occur before election time or at least inauguration that might seem to justify martial law and the continuation of Obama rule. Some worry about this and their worries may be justified. We’ll see. I fear that the US is now two nations and not one.

Vote Trump anyway.

Brexit Breaks It

 

 

Brexit Breaks It

by

R.E. Prindle

 

The rejection of the EU by Britain means the Europeans may have found an entrance to defeat the Semitic takeover of Europe. The key to the European problem, of course, is Sweden. A couple decades back a Jewish woman by the name of Barbara Spectre founded a key subversive organization she named Paideia. Paideia is a Greek term for education. So the Jews purloined an Aryan term to disguise Semitic purposes.

Spectre not only formed the organization in Sweden she got the Swedish government to fund its own demise. Why Sweden would fund a Jewish organization when Jews are not only quite capable of funding their own organizations but all of Sweden.

The purpose of Spectre’s Paideia is to undermine European culture thereby continuing Freud’s work. This is its announced goal. Spectre is revolted by the magnificent scientific achievements of nineteenth century Europe and is determined to stop Aryan superiority.

Her announced goal then, in her terms, is to put ‘Jewish knowledge’ on a par with European knowledge. That is, she admits Jewish intellectual inferiority. Put in European terms what Spectre want is to give the Jewish Talmud equal credence with European Science. One almost dies laughing at the notion of placing Jewish superstition on the same level as Science.

Is it a coincidence then that by funding Spectre’s Paideia Sweden has been led to embrace unlimited third world immigration? Having been befuddled by Spectre’s Paideia Sweden then led the European movement to take in all of South-East Asian Semites and Africa thus diluting European culture to the vanishing point while what passes for Jewish culture remains as undiluted as ever. Quite an achievement for Spectre in only twenty years or so. Spectre is a general who has out generaled Napoleon. Napoleon failed to conquer Europe while losing armies while this looney little Jewish lady is on the verge of taking Europe without armies and without losing a single person. One can only say: Bravo!

To have won an election is not to have won the war. Nothing will be implemented for three or four years which leaves plenty of room for maneuvering. There is time to run around end, weaken and defeat the will of the people. Cameron says he is resigning but that won’t take place until October, if it actually happens. These people are as slippery as eels.

Hopefully Britain’s move will be reinforced by the departure of others and perhaps the dissolution of the EU. That would leave each country free to deal with Afro-Asian invasions as they choose. There will undoubtedly by some terrible bloody fighting before the invaders can be killed or expelled but having come that far there is no other choice.

The point is to defeat this latest Jewish attempt to take over Europe. There will be no peace in Europe or the West until the Jews are neutralized, call it quarantined, or what you will.

Carry the good fight forward.

Mexico, Trump And The Holocaust

 

 

Mexico, Trump And The Holocaust

by

R.E. Prindle

 

John Bussey wrote a WSJ column (6/17/16) ‘The Nazi-Era Papers My ‘Mexican’ Mother Kept.’ It’s meant to tug at our heartstrings and show what beasts we are if we don’t go along with John. Being the WSJ it is an anti-Trump article. The Journal misses no chance to defame Trump.   The article condemns Trump’s questioning of Judge Curiel’s qualifications to try the Trump U case.

Bussey, as with all of the Left, condemns Trump as an unreasonable racist and bigot for doing so. Me smelteth hypocrisy. Just as a point of reference I know I know a retired Federal judge. His opinion is that a judge does not belong to an organization such as La Raza or the KKK and that on that basis Curiel ought to have refused the assignment, born in Indiana as an anchor baby or not. On the bench it would be something like Eichmann being tried by the Jews.

Trump, myself and all concerned citizens should demand that Curiel remove himself from the suit. Obviously he was appointed to be a Mexican version of Judge Roy Bean.

To compound his error, Mr. Bussey somehow associates Trump with Hitler. Bussey himself is an anchor baby, his mother having slipped over the border behind her limping father in 1939. Hence Bussey associates her with Mexicans doing the same. Bussey compares Mexicans fleeing the tyranny of Mexico with his mother fleeing Nazi Germany. Hitler and Trump are compared in Bussey’s line: But even an enlightened society, one ruled by law, can quickly cut across tribal lines, as we see again (my italics) in the dust-up over Judge Curiel and more broadly in this presidential campaign.

I would like to point out to Mr. Bussey that Germany was a very law abiding country; Hitler was law abiding and broke no laws which is something that can’t be said about our current president Barry ‘Executive Order’ Obama. Further the civil war in Germany was between Tribal Jews and Tribal Germans. Think, Mr. Bussey, think.

Nor need I mention that the atrocities committed against the native population of Palestine have all been committed under Jewish laws. The law can be used for good or evil depending on the human legislators, Mr. Bussey.

And then, Mr. Bussey wheels out the tear jerker about his mother speaking English with a heavy German accent nevertheless fighting her way through high school and then courageously attacking the college curriculum ending her life uttering her last words in five different languages.

In clearing her safe deposit box among the few items saved was her old German passport stamped with a big yellow J, we all know what that means, in fact, the story is getting stale. The facts are that neither she nor her parents suffered in any concentration camps. They lived well and comfortably in the US while not only Jews were being killed but White American men were being slaughtered in Africa, Europe and the whole Pacific and the US was consuming all its resources.

While Mr. Bussey will not acknowledge it there is a whole school of scholarship that attributes both WWI and WWII to the machinations of Jewish schemers. Roosevelt, handled by Jews, maneuvered the US into the Pacific war to draw the US into the European or Jewish War. The latter was the ‘Good War’, you know.

But, what does all this have to do with Judge Curiel and Mexico? I don’t really know. You’ll have to write Mr. Bussey at the WSJ to find out. Or, perhaps, there is a Part 2.

Vote Trump