^^^Well based on your chocolate example the easy solution is to discuss the dangers of radical Muslim in terms of food and then every metrosexual, fat ass SJW and millennial would get it.

(11-17-2015 09:48 AM)samsamsam Wrote:  ^^^Well based on your chocolate example the easy solution is to discuss the dangers of radical Muslim in terms of food and then every metrosexual, fat ass SJW and millennial would get it.

Or just give them the chocolates.

(11-16-2015 01:31 PM)Killer Joe Wrote:  Best comment on the YT page:

Quote:........

Sorry John, this is nothing more than a demographic scheme by the global capitalist class whose economic model relies on endless growth. They want to plug more people into the aging European workforce, and they don't care who those people are, where they come from, and what effect they have on the local population because they live far away on high hills behind high walls and they don't have to deal with the fallout. I know this because I live in a place that has also been subjected to mass immigration of poor people from the third world and I've watched as cities crumbled, crime rates went up, gangs became prolific, and entire areas became unsafe for me to go to because of my ethnicity. The people running the country got the big influx of cheap labor they wanted, and I got to deal with the fallout. It's bullshit, and I will never support it happening to anyone else.

For some reason over the past few days I got interested in the so called "Russian Revolution" and began to read up on the details of the events that led up to it, and more importantly, the stories and backgrounds of the key players. Then, once I had finished with researching who made it happen, I read about the consequences of this most momentous of human events. As I am sure is true for most people, I had the vague understanding that millions died or were imprisoned, but it was eye opening to learn the macabre specifics of the insane bloody terror visited on the Russian people by these "Russian revolutionaries."

What's that got to do with anything? Well, a lot of pieces fell into place in my mental schema of the world and I saw how deep the rabbit hole goes. I think I finally understand the point of Marxism and why it was created. Marxism is nothing more than an effort to create a constituency by a group that has never had one. No matter how deep is your control of finance or the media, there is only so much you can accomplish without a large, majority constituency that you can direct to carry out your bidding. The brain is nothing without the arm. In fact, so much the better if it's not just an arm, but a hammer and sickle, as the millions of dead Russians found to their horror.

So Marxism was used as a tool in an era of homogeneous peoples. How does a small alien group that is not of any people, exert the purest form of political power in a Russia full only of Russians or a Germany composed only of Germans? You sow discord. You convince a mass of Russians, or Germans, or French, that not only are they a separate group within the mass of their own people, part of some hallowed "proletariat" that holds precedence over blood ties, but also that they are being oppressed and exploited by their own ethnic brethren. You create hatred out of petty jealousies and swoop in as revolutionary messiahs, ready to lead the masses to the promised land and seize what is rightly theirs. Then, once you have swooped into power on the backs of the ignorant masses, you eradicate any possible threat to your rule by exterminating the entirety of the native intelligentsia and entrench your position through bloody atrocities directed at the very "proletariat" that brought you to power.

Mass immigration is no different. It has nothing to do with labor markets or (especially!) bolstering the welfare state. Sure, some petty farmers may rejoice at their cheap fruit pickers, but none would be so deluded as to think they hold any influence over national immigration policy. As for the big corporations, they employ hardly any illiterate third world masses, and do not benefit from their presence in any but the most marginal of ways.

So why are our masters importing them? To create their new Red Army. The elites can brainwash the West's native population into self hatred, but the power of the narrative is not infinite. I can maybe trick you with propaganda and lies that the best thing for your career is to get a degree in English Literature, but I cannot use mere suggestion to make you kill your family and kin. If I want to kill your family and kin, I will have to create or import people who hate them and sic them on you.

In the end, that is the reason we are importing masses of bloodthirsty Muslims into Europe and why the narrative is being whipped into an anti-white genocidal frenzy in the United States while more and more minorities are brought in. In 1917, it was Bolsheviks ushering in a bright new era at the head of a workers uprising against "Capitalist exploitation." In 20XX, it will be Bolsheviks by any other name leading their new, recently arrived constituency against the evils of White racist oppression so that Social Justice may triumph.

Let's be clear on one thing: at no point did the Bolsheviks, prior to taking power, ever proclaim a desire to carry out insane atrocities or speak of vengeance. Their words mirrored those of today: justice, fairness, equality. Immediately upon seizing absolute power, they implemented a reign of the most bloodthirsty terror ever seen before or since. An estimated 9m people died in the immediate aftermath (2 or 3 years) of the Bolshevik takeover, with untold tens of millions following in the next two decades until Stalin's purges and WWII intervened. There is no telling what these guys have in mind this time around. This guy, Lev Davidovich Bronstein, aka Leon Trotsky, original Bolshevik and First Commissar of the Red Army, would not look out of place as an SJW activist on today's college campus.

(11-17-2015 12:01 PM)Fast Eddie Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 01:31 PM)Killer Joe Wrote:  Best comment on the YT page:

Quote:........

Sorry John, this is nothing more than a demographic scheme by the global capitalist class whose economic model relies on endless growth. They want to plug more people into the aging European workforce, and they don't care who those people are, where they come from, and what effect they have on the local population because they live far away on high hills behind high walls and they don't have to deal with the fallout. I know this because I live in a place that has also been subjected to mass immigration of poor people from the third world and I've watched as cities crumbled, crime rates went up, gangs became prolific, and entire areas became unsafe for me to go to because of my ethnicity. The people running the country got the big influx of cheap labor they wanted, and I got to deal with the fallout. It's bullshit, and I will never support it happening to anyone else.

For some reason over the past few days I got interested in the so called "Russian Revolution" and began to read up on the details of the events that led up to it, and more importantly, the stories and backgrounds of the key players. Then, once I had finished with researching who made it happen, I read about the consequences of this most momentous of human events. As I am sure is true for most people, I had the vague understanding that millions died or were imprisoned, but it was eye opening to learn the macabre specifics of the insane bloody terror visited on the Russian people by these "Russian revolutionaries."

What's that got to do with anything? Well, a lot of pieces fell into place in my mental schema of the world and I saw how deep the rabbit hole goes. I think I finally understand the point of Marxism and why it was created. Marxism is nothing more than an effort to create a constituency by a group that has never had one. No matter how deep is your control of finance or the media, there is only so much you can accomplish without a large, majority constituency that you can direct to carry out your bidding. The brain is nothing without the arm. In fact, so much the better if it's not just an arm, but a hammer and sickle, as the millions of dead Russians found to their horror.

So Marxism was used as a tool in an era of homogeneous peoples. How does a small alien group that is not of any people, exert the purest form of political power in a Russia full only of Russians or a Germany composed only of Germans? You sow discord. You convince a mass of Russians, or Germans, or French, that not only are they a separate group within the mass of their own people, part of some hallowed "proletariat" that holds precedence over blood ties, but also that they are being oppressed and exploited by their own ethnic brethren. You create hatred out of petty jealousies and swoop in as revolutionary messiahs, ready to lead the masses to the promised land and seize what is rightly theirs. Then, once you have swooped into power on the backs of the ignorant masses, you eradicate any possible threat to your rule by exterminating the entirety of the native intelligentsia and entrench your position through bloody atrocities directed at the very "proletariat" that brought you to power.

Mass immigration is no different. It has nothing to do with labor markets or (especially!) bolstering the welfare state. Sure, some petty farmers may rejoice at their cheap fruit pickers, but none would be so deluded as to think they hold any influence over national immigration policy. As for the big corporations, they employ hardly any illiterate third world masses, and do not benefit from their presence in any but the most marginal of ways.

So why are our masters importing them? To create their new Red Army. The elites can brainwash the West's native population into self hatred, but the power of the narrative is not infinite. I can maybe trick you with propaganda and lies that the best thing for your career is to get a degree in English Literature, but I cannot use mere suggestion to make you kill your family and kin. If I want to kill your family and kin, I will have to create or import people who hate them and sic them on you.

In the end, that is the reason we are importing masses of bloodthirsty Muslims into Europe and why the narrative is being whipped into an anti-white genocidal frenzy in the United States while more and more minorities are brought in. In 1917, it was Bolsheviks ushering in a bright new era at the head of a workers uprising against "Capitalist exploitation." In 20XX, it will be Bolsheviks by any other name leading their new, recently arrived constituency against the evils of White racist oppression so that Social Justice may triumph.

Let's be clear on one thing: at no point did the Bolsheviks, prior to taking power, ever proclaim a desire to carry out insane atrocities or speak of vengeance. Their words mirrored those of today: justice, fairness, equality. Immediately upon seizing absolute power, they implemented a reign of the most bloodthirsty terror ever seen before or since. An estimated 9m people died in the immediate aftermath (2 or 3 years) of the Bolshevik takeover, with untold tens of millions following in the next two decades. There is no telling what these guys have in mind this time around. This guy, Lev Davidovich Bronstein, aka Leon Trotsky, original Bolshevik and First Commissar of the Red Army, would not look out of place as an SJW activist on today's college campus.

Fantastic post. What in many regards is more shocking is the way in which every Leftist intellectual since Marx, and since the Soviet Union, has declined to tackle the issues of socialist atrocities. From EP Thompson and Hobspawm, to Satre, Foucault, Said, and the other darlings of the Left, all have found ways to excuse genocide and 'reinterpret Marxism' without ever deviating from it, that they might finally achieve the 'totalized totality', as Satre himself called it, and achieve personal meaning (Satre defines it as completeness) through the realisation of their ideology. What any thorough examination of Leftist philosophy will show is that theirs is a profoundly selfish ideology, which forces them to perform acts of intellectual contortion so grotesque as to be perverse. If you are interested, Roger Scruton has written a fascinating book on the subject, called 'Fools, Frauds, and Firebrands', which is an exploration of how these nasty, sick philosophies have infected our national and political conscious.

(11-17-2015 08:48 AM)spalex Wrote:  

(11-17-2015 12:44 AM)N°6 Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 11:54 PM)samsamsam Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 09:59 PM)Hades Wrote:  From the video Rich posted........the transcript.......

“There are 1.2 billion Muslims in the world today - of course not all of them are radicals. The majority of them are peaceful people.

The radicals are estimated to be 15-25 percent…...you are looking at 180-300 million people dedicated to the destruction of western civilization…...It is the radicals that kill. It is the radicals that behead and massacre.

Just using this data and putting in in perspective.

5.5% of all Muslims (using 1.2B) is the size of France's population (66M).
1.41% Netherlands (16.9M)
.93% Belgium (11.2M)
.81% Sweden (9.7M)

How many people do you need to wage war against soft targets?

Most people fighting ISIS/ Daesh on the ground would describe themselves as Muslim.

This contrasts to the source of much of Daesh's US' military support.

However if the 15-25% of Muslims are radicals, then that number is high enough to stop any further Muslim immigration to the West. A basic risk analyses would point to this (severity of hazard coming to pass x likelihood of it coming to pass in relation to the benefit of migrants if the severe events did not come to pass).

Pareto is what leads crowds especially if they have greater conviction than the 'moderate' 80%.

Somebody else posted on here a while back "If you had a box of chocolates and you knew that 1 in 10 were poisonous and would kill you. Would you still eat from the box of chocolates?"


But yeah, the 80% of "moderate" muslims are terrified of the extremists anyway. They are cucked themselves.

The most delicious irony is that a bunch of feminists a year ago were actually using this exact same analogy in response to guys complaining about the dumb #NotAllMen hashtag.



Above image is taken from this feminist blog post here: http://www.handbagmafia.net/yeah-i-know-...t-all-men/

Time to throw this back into their faces. Remember, use the tactics of the enemy against them.

Also looks like Huckabee is using the same line.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/17/politics/c...index.html

"If you bought a 5 lb. bag of peanuts and you knew that in the 5 lb. bag of peanuts there were about 10 peanuts that were deadly poisonous, would you feed them to your kids? The answer is no," Huckabee said on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" on Tuesday."

(11-17-2015 12:20 PM)H1N1 Wrote:  Fantastic post. What in many regards is more shocking is the way in which every Leftist intellectual since Marx, and since the Soviet Union, has declined to tackle the issues of socialist atrocities. From EP Thompson and Hobspawm, to Satre, Foucault, Said, and the other darlings of the Left, all have found ways to excuse genocide and 'reinterpret Marxism' without ever deviating from it, that they might finally achieve the 'totalized totality', as Satre himself called it, and achieve personal meaning (Satre defines it as completeness) through the realisation of their ideology. What any thorough examination of Leftist philosophy will show is that theirs is a profoundly selfish ideology, which forces them to perform acts of intellectual contortion so grotesque as to be perverse. If you are interested, Roger Scruton has written a fascinating book on the subject, called 'Fools, Frauds, and Firebrands', which is an exploration of how these nasty, sick philosophies have infected our national and political conscious.

And that is not even the most pathetic thing. The most pathetic thing is that these so called intellectuals, at least the ones you mentioned, who fall entirely on the "Christian" spectrum of our civilization, take the abomination that is Marxism and swallow it at face value, without realizing that for its very creators, it was only ever a tool to achieve power and empty of any inherent intellectual value. Once economic Marxism had played itself out as a way to overthrow the established order and push them into power, its real creators and backers dropped it with a quickness and moved on to "cultural Marxism" as a different road to to the same destination. But some dolts continue to worship at the altar of economic Marxism, this decrepit red-herring, even as its creators privately laugh at them in hilarious contempt.

You are correct Fast Eddie. But Communism is not the only historical parallel although it is the most recent. There are thousands of records of dictators and tyrants betraying their people to stay in power. It's how I know massive death and killing is coming to West Europe. Just too fuckin obvious.

(11-16-2015 11:55 PM)Walker Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 11:36 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 11:10 PM)Walker Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 08:34 PM)Yagibozan Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 07:36 PM)Walker Wrote:  Put guns in the hands of a bunch of migrants, give them training, then tell them "btw your lot in life is to go back to Syria and engage in lethal combat with ISIS"

WHAT COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG

Large scale bloodbath scenarios sound unlikely to me but if there's one way such a thing could happen it's this

Half of the "refugees" aren't even from Syria.

Syrian immigrants are the ones who choose to leave their country to the hands of brutal jihadists.

Let me repeat, some hairy allahu akbar guy will rape and kill his relatives and he will chase pussy in Europe.

If I, or any men I know turn out to be like this guys, I hope they die suffering.

Better to be alive and away from the brutal jihadists than dead.

Dying for a cause is retard behavior, even if the cause is just. There's no such thing as something worth dying for.

What if someone is trying to kill you? Is defending yourself a cause worth dying for?

No, if someone's trying to kill you, you maximize your chances of living, not your chances of dying.

Someone trying to kill you means you've been cornered by someone who has a grudge against you personally, or by an armed group who has physically surrounded and sieged your community. If there's a lot of violence going on in your homeland but the bad guys don't care about you specifically, then you don't grab a weapon and pick a fight with them and make them care about you. You get away from them while the getting's good.

It's not inconceivable for fight to be preferable to flight, it just means the one time to fight is when your back is against the wall, you have nowhere to run and no hope of negotiating.

And here's why your argument contradicts itself.

If everyone was to run away at the first sign of conflict, like you suggest, then the end result would be everyone being slaughtered individually. However, if everyone stands together and fights, they will be much stronger and able to defeat the enemy.

United we stand, divided we fall.

Therefore, if you were truly interested in survival you would run. But since you're not interested in survival, just in being a selfish pussy, I could see guys like you joining the enemy and converting to Islam or Talmudism (if given the chance).

Men who are willing to run from their homes are no different than traitors and must be handled appropriately.

(11-17-2015 01:03 PM)Samseau Wrote:  You are correct Fast Eddie. But Communism is not the only historical parallel although it is the most recent. There are thousands of records of dictators and tyrants betraying their people to stay in power. It's how I know massive death and killing is coming to West Europe. Just too fuckin obvious.

Ha,well my point was a bit different.

There's nothing in it for me if I die fighting the enemy. All the big picture stuff is pointless minutia compared to that.

(11-17-2015 01:15 PM)Walker Wrote:  There's nothing in it for me if I die fighting the enemy. All the big picture stuff is pointless minutia compared to that.

You'll be killed solo guaranteed, and you might survive if you work together. Called the prisoner's dilemma. Game theory. Pretty simple stuff.

To other men besides Walker:

Walker is not uncommon among the West today. There are many, many pussies in the West who are no better than traitors.

If, and when, the Big War comes, one of the things we need to use the War for is to overhaul voting rights. Men who refuse to fight for survival should not have any voting rights. If the army demands this they can get it; who will stop them?

Same goes for women. Women who do not help the state by providing strong children should also have no voting rights. Alternatively, women could have their voting rights taken away completely. I'd be fine with either but I see good use in giving voting rights to mothers as it incentivizes motherhood and keeps women slightly happy by showing they can be part of the boys club if they work hard too.

(11-17-2015 01:10 PM)Fast Eddie Wrote:  

(11-17-2015 01:03 PM)Samseau Wrote:  You are correct Fast Eddie. But Communism is not the only historical parallel although it is the most recent. There are thousands of records of dictators and tyrants betraying their people to stay in power. It's how I know massive death and killing is coming to West Europe. Just too fuckin obvious.

Ha,well my point was a bit different. I purposely chose not to explicitly spell out one very major aspect of the story in order to avoid controversy and with the knowledge that those who are aware of it will read between the lines, while those who are not aware would anyway not be convinced by me mentioning it.

You're talking about the JQ. I actually wrote a lot about Talmudic subversion of Christian societies over the centuries in this same thread:

https://www.rooshvforum.com/thread-50253...pid1148044

(11-17-2015 07:15 AM)Yagibozan Wrote:  

(11-17-2015 12:44 AM)N°6 Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 11:54 PM)samsamsam Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 09:59 PM)Hades Wrote:  From the video Rich posted........the transcript.......

“There are 1.2 billion Muslims in the world today - of course not all of them are radicals. The majority of them are peaceful people.

The radicals are estimated to be 15-25 percent…...you are looking at 180-300 million people dedicated to the destruction of western civilization…...It is the radicals that kill. It is the radicals that behead and massacre.

Just using this data and putting in in perspective.

5.5% of all Muslims (using 1.2B) is the size of France's population (66M).
1.41% Netherlands (16.9M)
.93% Belgium (11.2M)
.81% Sweden (9.7M)

How many people do you need to wage war against soft targets?

Most people fighting ISIS/ Daesh on the ground would describe themselves as Muslim.

This contrasts to the source of much of Daesh's US' military support.

However if the 15-25% of Muslims are radicals, then that number is high enough to stop any further Muslim immigration to the West. A basic risk analyses would point to this (severity of hazard coming to pass x likelihood of it coming to pass in relation to the benefit of migrants if the severe events did not come to pass).

Pareto is what leads crowds especially if they have greater conviction than the 'moderate' 80%.

I am fully aware what a Zionist wants me to think about Muslims because Israel is on its way out without the Western cash cow and military pawns.

(11-17-2015 08:48 AM)spalex Wrote:  

(11-17-2015 12:44 AM)N°6 Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 11:54 PM)samsamsam Wrote:  

(11-16-2015 09:59 PM)Hades Wrote:  From the video Rich posted........the transcript.......

“There are 1.2 billion Muslims in the world today - of course not all of them are radicals. The majority of them are peaceful people.

The radicals are estimated to be 15-25 percent…...you are looking at 180-300 million people dedicated to the destruction of western civilization…...It is the radicals that kill. It is the radicals that behead and massacre.

Just using this data and putting in in perspective.

5.5% of all Muslims (using 1.2B) is the size of France's population (66M).
1.41% Netherlands (16.9M)
.93% Belgium (11.2M)
.81% Sweden (9.7M)

How many people do you need to wage war against soft targets?

Most people fighting ISIS/ Daesh on the ground would describe themselves as Muslim.

This contrasts to the source of much of Daesh's US' military support.

However if the 15-25% of Muslims are radicals, then that number is high enough to stop any further Muslim immigration to the West. A basic risk analyses would point to this (severity of hazard coming to pass x likelihood of it coming to pass in relation to the benefit of migrants if the severe events did not come to pass).

Pareto is what leads crowds especially if they have greater conviction than the 'moderate' 80%.

Somebody else posted on here a while back "If you had a box of chocolates and you knew that 1 in 10 were poisonous and would kill you. Would you still eat from the box of chocolates?"


But yeah, the 80% of "moderate" muslims are terrified of the extremists anyway. They are cucked themselves.

I wouldn't eat any of the chocolates.

My concern is multiculturalism and the deliberate importing of highly incompatible groups in large numbers and at a high rate of population replacement.

Muslims in their own countries were no threat to the West without Israel and NATO. The Jihad was revived by the US State Department and the CIA. I should not need to go through this.

https://twitter.com/ecetoksabay/status/6...3924216832

'Istanbul fans boo minute of silence for Paris attacks, chant "Allahu akbar" before Turkey vs Greece soccer friendly'

These are supposed to be the 'peaceful and moderate' muslims, r-right? The Turks on /r/soccer are defending it: https://www.reddit.com/r/soccer/comments.../?sort=new

^ nothing to do with Paris. Turks are not really known for Islamic extremism.

(11-17-2015 02:35 PM)BambiNotForLong Wrote:  ^ nothing to do with Paris. Turks are not really known for Islamic extremism.

Even on this forum people still believe in 'moderate' Islam and 'extremist' Islam. There is no such thing. Islam is Islam and a Muslim is a Muslim.

Though it is true that:

1) Not every Muslim is a terrorist (obviously)
2) Turks are better (or better: less worse) immigrants than Arabs, their Muslim colleagues.

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/11/...-robinson/

Czech president addresses PEGIDA rally in Prague.

As many of us have said, Eastern Europe is where there is hope.

I mean that Turks haven't really been involved in terrorist attacks in Europe. I think the only Islamist attack by a Turk was in Istanbul at a Jewish synagogue.

Really and truly, Western Turks are more or less European. They themselves hate the Syrian refugees etc. The Turkish immigrants you meet are mainly from the Eastern shit hole side and full of devout Muslims.

(11-17-2015 01:10 PM)Fast Eddie Wrote:  

(11-17-2015 01:03 PM)Samseau Wrote:  You are correct Fast Eddie. But Communism is not the only historical parallel although it is the most recent. There are thousands of records of dictators and tyrants betraying their people to stay in power. It's how I know massive death and killing is coming to West Europe. Just too fuckin obvious.

Ha,well my point was a bit different. I purposely chose not to explicitly spell out one very major aspect of the story in order to avoid controversy and with the knowledge that those who are aware of it will read between the lines, while those who are not aware would anyway not be convinced by me mentioning it.

Jewish creation of Bolshevism and their atrocities during the Holomodor should be common knowledge, even Winston Churchill wrote about it in a famous article:



"Zionism vs Bolshevism - a struggle for the soul of the jewish people"

Yes everyone knew the jews were behind Bolshevism and their atrocities back then - everyone.

Henry Ford tried to tell the American people but became a pariah as a result.

To name the jew will become a secret handshake in years to come. Yes, I realize it sounds awfully unpleasent. What I mean by it is not blind anti-semittism, not at all (even if some won't believe me), but that you simply can't trust or deal with people who refuse to accept the reality of the world.

And the reality of the world is that jewish internationalism has almost destroyed the world in one century.

As said Churchill, a battle for the soul of the jewish people, and unfortunately Bolshevism won. Zionism or the right to live in their own ethnostate, fine with me, not the best idea for it to be Israel, but fundamentally right wing should not have problems with true Israelies, only with those who claim to be one but are another.

(11-17-2015 02:35 PM)BambiNotForLong Wrote:  ^ nothing to do with Paris. Turks are not really known for Islamic extremism.

Shouting Allah Akbar during a minute of silence makes it pretty clear where these people stand. They are all "moderates" until they aren't anymore.

They weren't just chanting "snackbar"

They were chanting Ya Istiklal, Ya Olum, Allah Ekber"

That means, independence or death, God is great. It's typically used by Nationalist groups such as MHP. Typically this is chanted in retaliation to PKK attacks.

In all fairness, I think booing is disgraceful.

@nomadbrah:

Thanks much for posting that info about the Churchill article that appeared in 1920. It's a good read for getting the mood of the times. I Googled it and came up with this, the complete text of the article.

I can't believe this is not more widely known. I'm sure Sir Winston tried to disavow it later in his life.

__________________________________________________________________________

Zionism versus Bolshevism: A Struggle for the Soul of the Jewish People

by Winston Churchill


Some people like Jews and some do not; but no thoughtful man can doubt the fact that they are beyond all question the most formidable and the most remarkable race which has ever appeared in the world.
And it may well be that this same astounding race may at the present time be in the actual process of producing another system of morals and philosophy, as malevolent as Christianity was benevolent, which, if not arrested would shatter irretrievably all that Christianity has rendered possible. It would almost seem as if the gospel of Christ and the gospel of Antichrist were destined to originate among the same people; and that this mystic and mysterious race had been chosen for the supreme manifestations, both of the divine and the diabolical.

The National Russian Jews, in spite of the disabilities under which they have suffered, have managed to play an honourable and successful part in the national life even of Russia. As bankers and industrialists they have strenuously promoted the development of Russia's economic resources, and they were foremost in the creation of those remarkable organisations, the Russian Co-operative Societies. In politics their support has been given, for the most part, to liberal and progressive movements, and they have been among the staunchest upholders of friendship with France and Great Britain.


International Jews

In violent opposition to all this sphere of Jewish effort rise the schemes of the International Jews. The adherents of this sinister confederacy are mostly men reared up among the unhappy populations of countries where Jews are persecuted on account of their race. Most, if not all, of them have forsaken the faith of their forefathers, and divorced from their minds all spiritual hopes of the next world. This movement among the Jews is not new. From the days of Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kun (Hungary), Rosa Luxembourg (Germany), and Emma Goldman (United States), this world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilisation and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing. It played, as a modern writer, Mrs. Webster, has so ably shown, a definitely recognisable part in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the Nineteenth Century; and now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the undisputed masters of that enormous empire.

Terrorist Jews

There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution by these international and for the most part atheistical Jews. It is certainly a very great one; it probably outweighs all others. With the notable exception of Lenin, the majority of the leading figures are Jews. Moreover, the principal inspiration and driving power comes from the Jewish leaders. Thus Tchitcherin, a pure Russian, is eclipsed by his nominal subordinate Litvinoff, and the influence of Russians like Bukharin or Lunacharski cannot be compared with the power of Trotsky, or of Zinovieff, the Dictator of the Red Citadel (Petrograd), or of Krassin or Radek -- all Jews. In the Soviet institutions the predominance of Jews is even more astonishing. And the prominent, if not indeed the principal, part in the system of terrorism applied by the Extraordinary Commissions for Combating Counter-Revolution has been taken by Jews, and in some notable cases by Jewesses.
The same evil prominence was obtained by Jews in the brief period of terror during which Bela Kun ruled in Hungary. The same phenomenon has been presented in Germany (especially in Bavaria), so far as this madness has been allowed to prey upon the temporary prostration of the German people. Although in all these countries there are many non-Jews every whit as bad as the worst of the Jewish revolutionaries, the part played by the latter in proportion to their numbers in the population is astonishing.


"Protector of the Jews"

Needless to say, the most intense passions of revenge have been excited in the breasts of the Russian people. Wherever General Denikin's authority could reach, protection was always accorded to the Jewish population, and strenuous efforts were made by his officers to prevent reprisals and to punish those guilty of them. So much was this the case that the Petlurist propaganda against General Denikin denounced him as the Protector of the Jews. The Misses Healy, nieces of Mr. Tim Healy, relating their personal experiences in Kieff, have declared that to their knowledge on more than one occasion officers who committed offences against Jews were reduced to the ranks and sent out of the city to the front. But the hordes of brigands by whom the whole vast expanse of the Russian Empire is becoming infested do not hesitate to gratify their lust for blood and for revenge at the expense of the innocent Jewish population whenever an opportunity occurs. The brigand Makhno, the hordes of Petlura and of Gregorieff, who signalised their every success by the most brutal massacres, everywhere found among the half-stupefied, half-infuriated population an eager response to anti-Semitism in its worst and foulest forms. The fact that in many cases Jewish interests and Jewish places of worship are excepted by the Bolsheviks from their universal hostility has tended more and more to associate the Jewish race in Russia with the villainies which are now being perpetrated.

A Home for the Jews

Zionism offers the third sphere to the political conceptions of the Jewish race. In violent contrast to international communism.
Zionism has already become a factor in the political convulsions of Russia, as a powerful competing influence in Bolshevik circles with the international communistic system. Nothing could be more significant than the fury with which Trotsky has attacked the Zionists generally, and Dr. Weissmann in particular. The cruel penetration of his mind leaves him in no doubt that his schemes of a world-wide communistic State under Jewish domination are directly thwarted and hindered by this new ideal, which directs the energies and the hopes of Jews in every land towards a simpler, a truer, and a far more attainable goal. The struggle which is now beginning between the Zionist and Bolshevik Jews is little less than a struggle for the soul of the Jewish people.

Illustrated Sunday Herald, February 8, 1920, page 5.

(11-17-2015 04:03 PM)BambiNotForLong Wrote:  They weren't just chanting "snackbar"

They were chanting Ya Istiklal, Ya Olum, Allah Ekber"

That means, independence or death, God is great. It's typically used by Nationalist groups such as MHP. Typically this is chanted in retaliation to PKK attacks.

In all fairness, I think booing is disgraceful.

It's disgraceful. But, it's also not appropriating ISIS attacks etc.

1-Terrorist attacks have lost their shock effect on Turkish society
2-French have been dicks to us, especially about Armenian stuff

They probably thought it was some banter. You never know with hooligans, at least 3/4 of them are drunk out of their minds.

Edit: Just checked the video, they are chanting "şehitler ölmez vatan bölünmez", wick translates to "martyrs don't die, fatherland can't be divided", nothing to do with islamic extremism.

(11-17-2015 02:42 PM)RaccoonFace Wrote:  

(11-17-2015 02:35 PM)BambiNotForLong Wrote:  ^ nothing to do with Paris. Turks are not really known for Islamic extremism.

Even on this forum people still believe in 'moderate' Islam and 'extremist' Islam. There is no such thing. Islam is Islam and a Muslim is a Muslim.

Though it is true that:

1) Not every Muslim is a terrorist (obviously)
2) Turks are better (or better: less worse) immigrants than Arabs, their Muslim colleagues.

I like to think of "islamism" as Islam in action. The so called "moderates" are just not active, like a sleeping entity.