|February 1st, 2011||#1|
Join Date: Nov 2003
Blog Entries: 34
Brendon Lee O'Connell (Australia)
Man jailed over anti-semitic video
Mon Jan 31, 2011
A 39-year-old Perth man has been sentenced to three years' jail for posting an anti-semitic video on the internet.
Brendon Lee O'Connell is the first person in Western Australia to be convicted under the state's racial vilification laws.
A jury found him guilty last week of six offences.
O'Connell posted a video on YouTube showing him insulting a young Jewish man in 2009.
The video also showed O'Connell standing in front of the Perth Bell Tower telling Jews their days were numbered.
Members of Western Australia's Jewish community were in court for the sentence and welcomed the jail term.
Steve Lieblich, who represents the Jewish community and is on the Australia-Israel and Jewish Affairs Council, says racial vilification must be stopped.
"This time it was the Jewish people that were the target, next time it could be Muslims, Asians or any other group," he said.
"So we should be pleased that we've had this result and this signal has been sent to Mr O'Connell and his supporters."
|February 1st, 2011||#2|
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Reykjavik, Iceland
O'Connel Sounds Like an Incredibly Dumb Person, or a Jewish Plant
1) Why would a guy who is on the fringe of society with minimal money and support, go out of his way to basically utter public threats against people who have the money presses under their control, not to mention, Courts, MassMedia, Police Sentiment, secret societies... and a whole host of other power nodes?
2) And why would he do it at a time in history when White people are just starting to get the picture of Jewish leadership rolls in the demise of the White race and the collapse of the Western World Banking System and the start of WW3?
3) And why would the Jews give such wide mass media coverage to this story so that every White who is getting damned fed up with the Government can see what happens when you open your mouth?
4) Who benefits?
|February 3rd, 2011||#3|
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: high rainfall coastal strip of the White Continent nation
got what he wanted?
His statements in support of Palestine are relevant.
He was the first person convicted under Western Australia State law regarding racial vilification. This is not a national law but only relates to those 2 million people in Western Australia.
His conduct at the trial, including his representation of himself was farcical and strange.
You could conclude that he wanted to become a speech martyr.
There are several other threads on Brendon O'Connell on VNNforums.
|February 8th, 2011||#4|
Join Date: Jul 2007
Brendon O’Connell’s Ordeal
February 6, 2011 — 77 Comments
Brendon O’Connell (here’s his blog) is a 40-year-old pro-Palestinian activist who is now serving a three-year prison sentence for violating Australian laws intended to suppress White concerns about the utopian multicultural future by restricting speech. His troubles began when he went to a protest at a store selling fruit from the occupied West Bank and got into a confrontation with a pro-Israel Chabadnik. O’ Connell videotaped the confrontation (see here and here). The only physical contact comes at 3:41 of the second link, but it’s difficult to see what’s happening and, in any case, that incident was not part of the criminal proceedings. It’s great video and definitely gives on a snapshot of Brendon’s very outgoing, colorful personality.
As I write at the end of my brief, we need more people like him — people willing to be assertive and in-your-face about the outrages surrounding us. Most White Americans would rather munch on snack food while watching TV and then move away when the neighborhood gets overrun by non-Whites. They cower in fear at the thought of offending the powers that be. Of course, Brendon is living proof that those fears are well founded.
Brendon sought out my support for his case and I agreed to participate. The idea was to have me testify live via a video hookup. However, in the end, he decided not to use the brief I had written on his behalf and he dismissed his lawyer as well. Things did not go well at the trial (here’s a newspaper account). The “victim” states that the three-year term “is not enough.” Presumably nothing short of a death sentence would satisfy him.
In my brief, I decided not to simply defend everything that Brendon had written but to defend what I felt comfortable defending and to attempt to cast his statements as reasonable and understandable given his circumstances. He was an active blogger, and his blogs became part of the case against him. Brendon sent me a compendium of the blogs that were involved in the trial (see here [pdf]). Whatever else one may say about him, he is a very entertaining writer. My brief was therefore focused on the blogs.
Finally, readers should realize that O’Connell is not at all a White advocate and, as he wrote in an email, has “zero ties with ‘neo-nazi’ or other such groups.” He describes himself as a Christian — “Catholic but with strong ties to the Russian Orthodox Christian Church.” Interestingly, he writes that “If I was in Ireland I would most definitely be a White Nationalist of some type. However, I still feel a stranger in this land — 3 generations on — I cannot bring myself to feel I have a right to this land while my fellow Australians refuse to acknowledge the injustices done to the native people’s. That being said…THANK GOD FOR THE BRITISH EMPIRE” (his emphasis). This relates to his political views: “My political bent is actually Monarchist/Constitutionalist with a great love for the British Empire and Parliamentary Democracy — Magna Carta, Common Law etc. … The best description would be ‘Conservative Liberal’.”
Obviously, he feels very deeply the plight of the Palestinians, and sees an analogy between what the Australians did to the Aborigines with what the Isrealis are doing to the Palestinians. I think that that is his main emotional motivator.
Photo from Brendon O'Connell's blog. His caption: Little Schlomo and Moshe - will it be special forces? Assassin? Intelligence? Where will they live? The U.S, France, Australia, U.K? Texas?
Statement on Brendon O’Connell
I can easily see why Jews would be offended at some of the things that Brendon O’Connell has said and written. His statements and written work are filled with outrage, mainly focused on the behavior of the Israelis toward the Palestinians and the hypocrisy of Diaspora Jews who portray themselves as exemplifying moral virtue while supporting or at least turning a blind eye to the reality of ethnic cleansing and apartheid in Israel. My view as a psychologist is that people like Mr. O’Connell see this brutality and the hypocrisy. They become very angry and frustrated at their powerlessness to change things or even get a fair hearing in the media. They suffer all sorts of harassment that not only results in well-grounded fears for their personal safety and the safety of people close to them, but also threatens their ability to make a living. The resulting anger leads them at times to go beyond the evidence and to make accusations that are not true or are at least overly general. Mr. O’Connell also has a very blunt, street-fighter style that doubtless makes his statements offensive and unappealing to educated people. For example, in the video, he repeatedly calls his accuser “a racist, homicidal maniac.” Nevertheless, a careful perusal of Mr. O’Connell’s work shows that he is well-informed on the issues. Many of the links he uses are, in my view, entirely appropriate and show someone who has thought long and hard about these issues. And he is aware that whatever his sufferings, they pale in comparison to the suffering inflicted on the Middle East where, as he notes, “1500 Gazans are dead; 1 million plus Iraqis.”
There is no question that some of his statements are unfounded. For example, his theory that Israelis were responsible for the murders at the Texas army base is not credible from anything I have read. His statement that Jews have “total domination of the planet” is the type of exaggeration typical of someone who is aware that Jews are indeed quite influential and powerful but goes beyond the available evidence. On the other hand, despite such statements, Mr. O’Connell is quite correct to call attention to the power of the Israel Lobby in the United States and how that affects what happens in the Middle East; see, for example, The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy, by John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt. Another common failing of many people attempting to comprehend Jewish influence is to over-attribute Jewishness to people he sees as enemies. For example, he incorrectly claims that American leftist radical Bill Ayers is Jewish.
His alleged stated intent in a phone call to a Jewish day school that we would “finish off the kids” or his allegedly saying he wanted Jews “wiped out” are the sorts of thing that, if true (and, of course, he denies it) are completely unacceptable.
Further, Mr. O’Connell’s use of the term “Holohoax” is needlessly offensive and is an example of the tendency to overattribute malevolence, resulting in misstatements of fact. On the other hand, his reference to “Holocaustianity” and “HolocaustTM” may be seen as a clever way of getting at the central role of the Holocaust as a cultural icon in the West analogous to a new religion brought about by Jewish activism. This is well-grounded in fact; see, e.g., Michael Novick’s The Holocaust in American Life and Norman Finkelstein’s The Holocaust Industry.
In addition, his claim that some Holocaust memoirs have been fabricated is certainly accurate (e.g., Binjamin Wilkomirski’s Fragments, Shocken Books (US edition, 1996). And his claim that Simon Wiesenthal was a liar relies on an article from a reputable source, the Times (London), which begins: “His is reputation is built on sand. … He was a liar — and a bad one at that.” (See here.)
Harassment of critics of Israel is a well-known phenomenon likely to motivate more extreme statements and behavior by its victims. O’Connell links to a video of Alison Weir (see here) in which she was subjected to a phone message death threat. Ms. Weir is a very effective activist against the oppression of the Palestinians. She specializes in how the mainstream media systematically distorts the facts about what is going on in the Middle East. (This is her website.) I have absolute confidence in Weir’s integrity and have often cited her work in my own writing. She is an honest leftist universalist—that is, she abhors ethnic hatred and longs for a world free of ethnic strife. She correctly sees that the Israelis have established a racialist, apartheid state bent on ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians.
I therefore accept that it is common for critics of Israel to be harassed, and I take at face value Mr. O’Connell’s claims that he and his friends have had to put up with death threats, “brake-line cutting, break ins, computer hacking” and “gang-stalking.” I accept it as quite possibly true that in fact Mr. Mike Mazzone “directly threatened to rape, torture, ‘gut’, and hang by a ‘meat hook’, an American female friend of [O’Connell’s].” This is the sort of thing that might lead anyone to extreme hostility toward his perceived enemies, even to the point of exaggerating or over-generalizing their negative traits and saying and doing things that he would not ordinarily do.
O’Connell’s comments on Jewish influence are not fabricated out of thin air. For example, he links to an article in the Los Angeles Times by Jewish writer Joel Stein who concludes, “I don’t care if Americans think we’re running the news media, Hollywood, Wall Street or the government. I just care that we get to keep running them.” (See here.) One can certainly sympathize with O’Connell’s views when they are supported by a well-known and respected Jewish columnist writing in the mainstream media. In my opinion, an adequate account of Jewish influence would require a much longer and more detailed account. Much of my writing has attempted to assess Jewish influence in an honest and factually based manner (e.g., my book, The Culture of Critique: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in 20th-Century Intellectual and Political Movements). Jews do not have “total domination” but they are indeed influential in exactly the areas mentioned by Mr. O’Connell.
O’Connell’s citation to a website that has detailed the role of the ADL in advancing hate-crime legislation in the U.S. is also entirely appropriate. Indeed, the ADL is quite proud of its preeminent role in enacting such laws at the state and federal level in America, and other Jewish organizations (e.g., the Board of Deputies of British Jews) have played the same function elsewhere—a point that I have noted in my writing (see, e.g., here). And, as Mr. O’Connell notes, it is well-known that the ADL in America has been actively involved in spying on and violating the civil rights of its perceived enemies.
Moreover, his statement that the “Middle East … must be ‘reshaped’ for the jews [sic] benefit” reflects an accurate understanding of the actions of American neoconservatives who successfully lobbied for the war in Iraq and are now fomenting a war with Iran. The idea that American neoconservatives were a critical force in bringing about the war in Iraq is an entirely mainstream idea; see, for example, The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy cited above. This is not to say that all Jews were in favor of the war in Iraq (far from it). But it is a legitimate statement of the influence on U.S. foreign policy of a group of strongly identified Jews with close ties to the Likud wing of Israeli politics.
On the other hand, I did not see any support for his claims that Jews dominate the Information Technology industry, including “the design and fabrication of computer chips, surveillance technology – data intercepts, voice recognition–internet security, database collation–storage, linking, analysis.” His comments on the Sayanim are well-founded, but that’s a far cry from making the case that, for example, Leon Wende has compromised the Australian military because of his loyalty to Israel.
A critical issue for Mr. O’Connell is whether Jews are correctly seen as an ethnic group. To begin, it should be noted that Jews have not had a consistent view on whether they want to be classified as a race or a religion. For example, in the United States in1909, Jews successfully lobbied Congress to reject a recommendation of the U.S. Census Bureau to have the category of ‘Jew’ for recording immigrants. For strategic reasons (e.g., avoiding classification as “Mongolian” and therefore not eligible for immigration), Jewish lobbyists insisted that Jews were a religion, not a race, despite heated arguments to the contrary in the U.S. Senate (See Eric Goldstein, “Contesting the categories: Jews and government racial classification in the United States,” Jewish History, 19(1), 107–131). As Goldstein notes, “When contemporary readers encounter the term “race” as applied to the Jews, they normally understand it as a relic of nineteenth- and early-twentieth- century antisemitism. Despite its use by antisemites, however, the notion of a ‘racial’ Jewishness was often embraced by Jews living in Western societies in the period before World War II” (p. 81). “During the 1870s, 1880s and 1890s, rabbis and communal spokesmen had used racial discourse freely to describe themselves and their community. By the early twentieth century, however, many leading ﬁgures, like philanthropist Jacob H. Schiﬀ and American Jewish Committee activist Louis Marshall, began to deny, at least publicly, the existence of a distinct Jewish racial identity” (p. 86).
However, as a result of the success of their lobbying campaign, Jews were categorized by Americans as a religion on a par with Protestantism and Catholicism rather than as a race on a par with Blacks and Whites. Jews actively sought and succeeded in being allowed to perform the functions of other religions at public events, such as leading prayers at Congressional sessions or other civic events along with mainstream Protestant sects and Catholics. As a result, the vast majority of Americans would say that Judaism is one of the three traditional American religions: Protestant, Catholic, and Jewish.
On the other hand, within the contemporary Australian context, it is clearly advantageous for Jews to be classified as an ethnic group because the hate crime laws are framed in terms of race and ethnicity, not religion. I am sure that if the organized Jewish community thought that it would benefit by rejecting a racial or ethnic classification, it would have no difficulty summoning arguments in favor, as they did in the United States, and at least some of them would be identical to those used by Mr. O’ Connell.
The question of whether in fact Jews are properly considered an ethnic group is complex. My writing (e.g., my book, A People That Shall Dwell Alone: Judaism as a Group Evolutionary Strategy) and more recent genetic studies have emphasized several points:
· Population genetic evidence clearly shows that there is an ethnic coherence to Judaism. Widely dispersed Jewish groups (e.g., Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews) are far more closely related to each other than to the peoples they have lived among since the beginning of the Jewish Diaspora.
· Jewish groups have been very concerned to severely limit the influx of non-Jewish genes. In traditional societies and in the more conservative and fundamentalist Jewish groups today, Jews who married non-Jews were forced to leave the Jewish community and their families were discriminated against within the Jewish community.
· Beginning in the 19th century, the Jewish concern with excluding and discriminating against people of non-Jewish ancestry has led to the perception by many that Jews, especially traditional Jews, are deeply concerned to retain their ethnic purity.
· Nevertheless, there are groups of people who are regarded as Jews despite rather tenuous ethnic connections to Judaism. The fact that conversion is possible within Judaism is a prime argument that has been used by Jews to defuse the idea that Jews are an ethnic group when such a move is seen to be in their strategic interest. In contemporary Israel, the Orthodox Jewish establishment has control over conversions. This ensures that conversions will be rare and difficult so that they do not threaten the ethnic integrity of Judiasm. However, in the Diaspora in Western countries, more liberal versions of Judaism are common, such as Reform Judaism. In these countries, conversions not recognized as valid by Orthodox Jews are common and these people are legitimately seen as Jews. Moreover, groups like the Lemda and Ethiopian Jews which resulted from mating between Jewish traders and local women are considered Jews despite a very large genetic admixture from non-Middle Eastern peoples.
· Mr. O’Connell’s point about Ethiopian Jews is therefore well taken. On the other hand, the genetic evidence provides scant support for the Khazar hypothesis which Mr. O’Connell supports. Nevertheless, Mr. O’Connell cites a very respectable and influential source, Arthur Koestler’s The Thirteenth Tribe, in support of his views, so they must be at least regarded as reasonable.
Mr. O’Connell often refers to Jews as a “kult” and as “racist.” Regarding “kult” he writes, “ALL of these doctrines revolve around this basic “promise” given to them by their god…“you (jews) shall rule from Jerusalem over the Goy (non jew) as masters and they as slaves.” Now I understand that such statements are correctly seen as not accurately characterizing Judaism as a whole. Nevertheless, such sentiments are within the mainstream of contemporary Jewish thinking. For example, as widely reported (see for example, the article by the Jewish Telegraph Agency), Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, the head Sephardic rabbi in Israel and spiritual head of the Shas political party, recently said in a sermon, “Goyim were born only to serve us. Without that, they have no place in the world; only to serve the People of Israel. Why are gentiles needed? They will work, they will plow, they will reap. We will sit like an effendi and eat.”
Mr. O’Connell is being reasonable when he highlights similar statements by Jews within the mainstream because these statements are based on passages in the Old Testament and other canonical Jewish writing. Even though such attitudes may not reflect the opinion of most Jews, they form a component of the Jewish mainstream. Again, Rabbi Ovadia is a very central figure in Israeli religious and political circles. Attitudes like those of Rabbi Ovadia are particularly common in Israel which now has by far the most right-wing, expansionist government in its history—a government that has systematically oppressed the Palestinians and treated them as second class citizens.
Similarly, Mr. O’Connell writes, “What you saw in Gaza was the ‘essence’ of so called “judaism” [sic] – crush, destroy, maim and slaughter ALL who get in you’re [sic] way” (emphasis in text). He further writes about his accuser Stanley Elliot “Keyser belonging to a long tradition of homicide, hatred and ethnic cleansing.” In support, Mr. O’Connell refers to a document by an Israeli academic discussing the legitimacy of applying the concept of Amalek to the contemporary enemies of Israel. The Old Testament (1 Samuel 15:2-4) states the appropriate behavior toward those designated as Amalek: “Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.” Indeed, the Old Testament contains numerous such passages. They would mean nothing except that they are an aspect of the ideology of a significant mainstream Jewish movement in the Diaspora and especially in Israel.
Again, such statements surely do not characterize Judaism in general. Nevertheless, they do characterize the attitudes of a significant proportion of mainstream ethnonationalist and religiously fundamentalist Jews, particularly among the settler movement that is on the front lines of creating an apartheid, racialist, and expansionist Israel. Just recently, as noted in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, 300 Israeli rabbis endorsed a “written religious ban on selling or renting homes, apartments, and lots to non-Jews, particularly Arabs” (see here). Indeed, Carroll Bogert, deputy executive director of Human Rights Watch recently noted that “Palestinians face systematic discrimination merely because of their race, ethnicity, and national origin, depriving them of electricity, water, schools, and access to roads, while nearby Jewish settlers enjoy all of these state-provided benefits. While Israeli settlements flourish, Palestinians under Israeli control live in a time warp — not just separate, not just unequal, but sometimes even pushed off their lands and out of their homes” (see here). Indeed, so powerful are the ethnonationalist and religious fundamentalist Jews within Israel that Gideon Levy, writing in Haaretz, has noted that there is no “meaningful political activity” by Israelis on the left able to challenge the ethnonationalist status quo (see here).
Because of the particular nature of these charges, Mr. O’Connell is quite reasonable to point to a video in which a former Israeli minister and activist on the left Shulamit Aloni notes that critics of Israel are routinely portrayed as anti-Semites. (See here). He is also quite reasonable in pointing to the fact that Israel was built on homicide and ethnic cleansing. No one would deny that the United States was built on ethnic cleansing of Native Americans. But the reality of ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians both in 1948 and since 1967 on the West Bank and East Jerusalem is routinely greeted with charges of anti-Semitism.
Ethnonationalist and religiously fundamentalist Jews are the main force behind the current Israeli government and their influence is sure to grow in the future because they have by far the highest fertility of any Jewish group. Discussing the views of these Jews is therefore highly pertinent to understanding how very powerful groups entirely within the mainstream of the Israeli political spectrum see the Palestinians and how they conceptualize the project of settlement expansion and ethnic cleansing. To a considerable extent, their thinking is framed by the Old Testament where God gave the descendants of Abraham all the land from the Nile to the Euphrates, certainly including the presently contested areas of the West Bank. I gather that this is apparently the view of Stanley Elliot Keyser, one of Mr. O’Connell’s accusers. Such an ideology is a recipe for continued Israeli expansionism and war with its neighbors.
Generalizing such beliefs to all Jews is certainly incorrect, and Mr. O’Connell is careful to deny that he has characterized all Jews as racist. However, ignoring the extent to which such beliefs are a prominent part of mainstream Jewish thinking with a very large influence on Israeli politics is also a gross oversimplification.
Mr. O’Connell emphasizes the connections his accusers have with Chabad Lubavitch and he characterizes this group as “racist” and one rabbi in particular as “racist homicidal.” Mr. O’Connell is referring to an article in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz describing the views of Rabbi Manis Friedman who, when asked how to deal with Arabs, stated, “The only way to fight a moral war is the Jewish way: Destroy their holy sites. Kill men, women and children (and cattle).” If Israel acted in his manner, there would be “no civilian casualties, no children in the line of fire, no false sense of righteousness, in fact, no war.” “I don’t believe in Western morality. Living by Torah values will make us a light unto the nations who suffer defeat because of a disastrous morality of human invention.” (See here.)
Again, I want to emphasize that such views are not typical of all Jews. Nevertheless, the Lubavitchers are a prominent part of the very mainstream ethnonationalist, religiously fundamentalist Jewish mainstream in Israel as well as the Diaspora. It is therefore noteworthy that Mr. O’Connell’s accusers are openly identified with this group. Indeed, the Lubavitchers are well known to be very racist. Here is the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, a putative Jewish messiah and the unquestioned leader of the group until his death in 1994, describing the difference between Jews and non-Jews:
We do not have a case of profound change in which a person is merely on a superior level. Rather we have a case of . . . a totally different species. . . . The body of a Jewish person is of a totally different quality from the body of [members] of all nations of the world . . . The difference of the inner quality [of the body] . . . is so great that the bodies would be considered as completely different species. This is the reason why the Talmud states that there is an halachic difference in attitude about the bodies of non-Jews [as opposed to the bodies of Jews]: “their bodies are in vain”. . . . An even greater difference exists in regard to the soul. Two contrary types of soul exist, a non-Jewish soul comes from three satanic spheres, while the Jewish soul stems from holiness. (In I. Shahak and N. Mezvinsky, Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel, pp. 59–60.)
One can readily understand Mr. O’Connell’s attributions about this group. ‘Racist’ almost seems too mild a term.
Fundamentally, Brandon O’Connell is outraged by the brutality and aggression he sees being perpetrated in Israel against the Palestinians. He is outraged by the hypocrisy that he sees in so many Jews who are very much in favor of ethnic tolerance in the Diaspora while ignoring or facilitating apartheid and ethnic cleansing in Israel. I believe he performed his actions because he feels that is the only way that he will be heard.
Mr. O’Connell is accused of very serious crimes which carry the possibility of a long prison sentence that would effectively ruin his life. He should not be convicted if in fact many of statements are well-founded, as indeed they are. He should not be convicted when there is reasonable suspicion that he was subjected to harassment that would have the natural effect of hardening his attitudes and making him angry and frustrated, especially when it has proved impossible for him to get a fair hearing in the media. Such anger and frustration easily explain the instances where Mr. O’Connell has gone beyond the evidence in particular cases. And, as he would doubtless note, his transgressions amount to nothing compared to the crimes that are daily being committed against the Palestinians.
We need to keep voices like Brandon O’Connell in the public square because, quite literally, such voices have been completely shut out of the mainstream media.
Professor of Psychology
Department of Psychology
California State University–Long Beach
Long Beach, CA 90840-0901
|February 8th, 2011||#5|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: QLD Australia
Men like this only serve to humiliate and embarrass the nationalist movement. They also serve to discredit any one who isn't socially liberal.
For example, take the debate on homosexuality. People like me base their opposition on homosexuality on scientific evidence. But, instead of focusing on us, the mass media focuses their attention on the religious freaks. And what is their reason for opposing homosexuality? "THE BIBLE SAYS THAT HOMOSEXUALITY IS.........IT SAYS SO IN THE BIBLE SO IT MUST BE TRUE. JESUS LOVES ME!!!!!!". That is the level of their intelligence.
The religious freak in question based his opposition of Zionism purely on religion.
|February 8th, 2011||#6|
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Reykjavik, Iceland
Herr Doktor Professor (leader of A3p) Kevin MacDonald's Assessment of Brendan O'Connell is given a "B+" by Me!
Not being one for pointing to the correct and accurate conclusions that the esteemed Hr. Doktor Professor MacDonald draws w.r.t. Mr. O'Connell, because God knows there are many and they are largely self-evident, I would instead like to focus on the niggling or hair splitting points where I do not really disagree, but am also not able to wholeheartedly agree either.
1) Regarding Hr. Dr. Prof. K. MacDonald's (hereafter referred to as "Mr. President" or "Dr. MacDonald") statement (highlight is by me);
"...Further, Mr. O’Connell’s use of the term “Holohoax” is needlessly offensive and is an example of the tendency to overattribute malevolence, resulting in misstatements of fact. On the other hand, his reference to “Holocaustianity” and “HolocaustTM” may be seen as a clever way of getting at the central role of the Holocaust as a cultural icon in the West analogous to a new religion brought about by Jewish activism. This is well-grounded in fact; see, e.g., Michael Novick’s The Holocaust in American Life and Norman Finkelstein’s The Holocaust Industry."
To my knowledge, Dr. Faurisson has made available a $50,000
(sum may not be quite correct as I quote from memory, but it is considerable from a WNist perspective)
award for anyone who is able to provide any type of forensic evidence that proves the Holocaust, or as Mr. O'Connell IMO correctly terms it, the "holohoax", did in fact occur.
This sum, to be awarded to anyone providing forensic evidence (biological or documentary) for the so called "holocaust of 6 million Jews", or even evidence of a premeditated strategy to genocidally wipe out the Jewish Race, has been a standing offer for over 20 years now,
and not a single believer in the Holocaust lie has come to claim it.
Moreover, based on the forensic evidence that is available, if one dares to look for it, it clearly shows that "the Jews" have largely made up the whole Holocaust myth.
This is one statement that O'Connell makes that I would never go so far as to call offensive, because it negates the millions upon millions of ethnic Germans (and others) who WERE deliberately incinerated by the "Jewish Bankers" who overwhelmingly underpinned and engineered the entirety of the 2nd World War.
Again, I assume that for reasons of lack of expertise in the area of Holocaustianity and the unwillingness to risk overall academic credibility should he go so far as to characterize the "Jewish Race" as having a "Liar-murder-re-verso nature"
(blaming the victims of crimes they themselves HAVE committed upon the off-spring or survivors of those crimes)
and then it turning out to be incorrect in one small instance, the future Mr. President is unwilling to "go the full mile" in calling a spade a spade when it comes to the Holocaust Lie of the Jews.
"Jews" are never shy of pouncing upon their enemies and pro/per-secuting them (the trial often being worse than the punishment) to the maximum extent of the law for the smallest infractions and, in the future Mr. President's case, the consequences would be needless entanglements with a cunning pack of ruthless killers at a time when utmost delicacy is required if he is to succeed in becoming the future President of these United States of America.
Nevertheless, from what I recall, during the many court trials involving "Jew" created Hate Laws infractions the world over, not the least being the Zundel trials of the mid 1980's, every single so called "eyewitness" to the Holocaust that the "Jews" were able to produce has crumbled on the stand and been proven to be a liar!
So the quote below,
"...In addition, his claim that some Holocaust memoirs have been fabricated is certainly accurate (e.g., Binjamin Wilkomirski’s Fragments, Shocken Books (US edition, 1996). And his claim that Simon Wiesenthal was a liar relies on an article from a reputable source, the Times (London), which begins: “His is reputation is built on sand. … He was a liar — and a bad one at that.” (See here.) "
about Simon Weisenthal is not only factual, but it applies, as far as I know, to every single "eye witness" who has ever been cross examined under oath by experts in the various forensic sciences and have researched the "Jewish Lies" of the so called Holocaust.
The word "Holocaust" does not even rightly characterize what happened to "Jews" during the second world war and more aptly applies to all those non-Jews who were victimized by the fratricidal conflagration.
So in this particular case one might say that O'Connell's claim is a vast understatement and the highlighted part of the Professor's quote should probably read more like, "...the overwhelming majority..." or "...every memoir and eyewitness's testimony...".
Succinctly put, there has yet to be found an eyewitness to the Holocaust lie of the Jews that has not been proven to be telling a largely pack of lies mixed with a few truths.
IMO, this is one place where O'Connell was understating reality instead of overstating it and often made me think twice about his authenticity.!
Again, since I am for classification purposes, a homeless, poverty stricken, uneducated, and largely destitute person, I need not be the Professor or the Academic in my writings but leave what I regard as trivial the tasks of bibliographing my statements with respect to the overall heinous nature of the "Jews" to those who wish to persecute me further.
But I have read that the communications network in use in the Twin Towers at the time of 9-11, where Jews were called in advance and told not to show up for work, was controlled by Jews (an Israeli company).
As well, the security system in place in the London subway system (7-7), Montreal Metro (attempted psy-op), and indeed many sub-way systems and airport terminals of the western world are even now controlled by Israeli or Jewish owned companies. In fact, if I am further correct, it was O'Connell himself who helped uncover this information and disseminate it.
So although I do not refute the esteemed Herr Dr. Professor, I would ask if some peer review can be done and some commentary on the correctness of the quote below can be added.
It is even widely known the the Diebold (USA computerized voting) machines were developed and sold by a Jewish owner from Israel, if I am not mistaken. This was a key issue when calling into question general election fraud in the US federal elections since 2002 (?).
"...On the other hand, I did not see any support for his claims that Jews dominate the Information Technology industry, including “the design and fabrication of computer chips, surveillance technology – data intercepts, voice recognition–internet security, database collation–storage, linking, analysis.” His comments on the Sayanim are well-founded, but that’s a far cry from making the case that, for example, Leon Wende has compromised the Australian military because of his loyalty to Israel."
To wind down on a pleasant and jovial note, I am inclined to say..., "You don't say ! One look at most every "filthy liar Kike" on the planet would tell you what's quoted below!" LOL
·"...Population genetic evidence clearly shows that there is an ethnic coherence to Judaism. Widely dispersed Jewish groups (e.g., Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews) are far more closely related to each other than to the peoples they have lived among since the beginning of the Jewish Diaspora."
I think the Ultra Orthodox Rabbis have it right when they that Jews are a completely different animal from the rest of us!
I sure as hell wouldn't want to be related to them.
Lastly, and this quote below is the only reason why I was at first inclined to be skeptical regarding Mr. O'Connell,
"...Mr. O’Connell emphasizes the connections his accusers have with Chabad Lubavitch and he characterizes this group as “racist” and one rabbi in particular as “racist homicidal.” Mr. O’Connell is referring to an article in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz describing the views of Rabbi Manis Friedman who, when asked how to deal with Arabs, stated, “The only way to fight a moral war is the Jewish way: Destroy their holy sites. Kill men, women and children (and cattle).” If Israel acted in his manner, there would be “no civilian casualties, no children in the line of fire, no false sense of righteousness, in fact, no war.” “I don’t believe in Western morality. Living by Torah values will make us a light unto the nations who suffer defeat because of a disastrous morality of human invention.” (See here.)"
What is stated above is IMO completely correct. It is also the reason why I largely do not waste my time even talking to "Jews", unless they have proven themselves to be of the variety that can stand in a public forum and be fulsome in their debates with a non-Jew without resorting to post-debate persecutory lawsuits where they hold all the cards from cash for la-i-wye-rs and corrupt judges to unethical mass media.
However after reading Hr. Professors MacDonald's comments, I have moved in O'Connell's direction.
Nevertheless, I still believe it is not worth engaging a Jew directly as long as the playing field and the umpires/referees are grossly under their control.
One is far better to engage your own kind and let the Jews self-destruct themselves and be prepared for that day to exact true Western Style Justice.
However, now that O'Connell has gone and confronted a small fry Jew in a technically over-reaching manner IMO, we may as well stand with him to help bring attention to the problem and not abandon him.
The Professor does make a good case for Mr. O'Connell's over-reaching nature based on past grievances and harm inflicted by the cunning Kike Bastards.
So if O'Connell did overstep the letter of the law, he may well have had legitimate psychological stress related reasons for his behavior and, since no real harm was done, should be freed without blemish on his record.
Last edited by Roy Albrecht; February 9th, 2011 at 03:00 AM. Reason: spelling grammer usual
|February 9th, 2011||#7|
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Reykjavik, Iceland
Herr Doktor Professor K. MacDonald, Brendan O'Connell and Hr. Dr. Prof. Frederic Toben of Australia's Adelaide Institute
RE: Herr Doktor Professor Kevin MacDonald,
Brendan O'Connell and
Hr. Dr. Prof. Frederic Toben of Australia's Adelaide Institute;
Similarities, differences, the Jew World Order of Subjugated Cattle-Humans and why the Holocaust Lie of the Jew World Order is so important!
Below is a link to an excellent essay at Marc Lemire's Freedomsite website that highlights the differences and similarities in the debate between the topics of Revisionism and the Genocide of Serbs in Kossovo and Revisionism and the Genocide of the Jews in Germany (not).
I would go so far as to say, if there ever comes a time when the Holocaust Lie of the God Forsaken Kike Bastard is ever allowed to come to light, as to also include the topic of "Jews as a Liar-Murderer-Reverso-Blame-Perpetrator-Race of Miscreants" in any open debate on this general Holocaust topic.
For not to do so would just be more of the same defensive posturing that leaves the onus on Germans/Whites to prove that Germans did not commit a crime instead of showing that Jews are a Race of Transcendental "Reverso-Criminals .
Think of the ramifications for the Jew World Order if the Holocaust myth is destroyed:
1) The magnitude of the hypnotic propaganda machine at the disposal of the Jews and what they have been able to accomplish with it. If the Holocaust was a lie, then how many other (the list, as we all know, is very very long) stories were a lie? And in how many non-Jewish deaths did these lies result in? How should the Jews and the Israeli state be made to compensate?
2) The money and power amassed from so many countries using this powerful psychological sympathy card both directly
(German reparations, company extortion, present day deflection of crimes by Jews, etc..) and indirectly
(Foreign aid to Israel, "underdog" assistance, passivity in the face of mass media and other infrastructural node take overs and conversions to tools of subversion, etc...) and the resulting ransom at which the Nuclear armed State of Israel and the Jew World Order now hold the rest world as a result.
This was brought up because it highlights another possible reason why Prof. MacDonald may not be willing to "affirm the Liar Murderer Reverso Nature" of Jews w.r.t. the Holocaust lie. The heat in this area becomes unbearable.
The Holocaust is, as Revisionists have been saying all along (most notably Ernst Zundel) is the pivotal lynch pin that will totally derail the Jew World Order and send this train in a wreck careening off the tracks into the lake of fire where it belongs.
Moreover, it might be presumptuous of me to think that a copy of my insignificant little critique of Dr. Prof. MacDonald's work, posted on an enemy termed, "Neo-Nazi" web site, might land on the desk of the esteemed Professor were it not for the fact that I have seen, from the http://www.thepoliticalcesspool.org website discussion board, similar comments of mine w.r.t. Prof. MacDonald's other works receive 100 times the hits that normal threads on James Edward's board had received.
In that light, I wonder what the good Professor MacDonald has to say about the case of Dr.Tobin?
I am not sure if Dr. Tobin is a naturalized Australian or a German with landed immigrant status in Australia, nevertheless, it might be a wee bit disingenuous for Prof. MacDonald to side step the issue based on this niggling point, because the impediments he faces in his immediate environment in attempts at forming a White identity and a Political Party (A3P) that represents the expressed interests of Whites,
is fundamentally opposed by the same "tail" that wags every anti-nationalist dog on the planet (except Israel's of course).
Moreover, Professor MacDonald's expertise and viewpoint from a psychologists perspective is most enlightening, always informative and very rewarding no matter what the topic.
Last edited by Roy Albrecht; February 9th, 2011 at 04:45 PM. Reason: spelling, grammer, clarification insertions..., the usual post posting editing..
|November 1st, 2014||#8|
Join Date: Nov 2003
Blog Entries: 34
ARRESTED BY STATE COUNTER TERRORISM
I was arrested on the 30th of October, 2014. A Thursday, at approximately 16:30 hrs.
Now, this is going to get extremely interesting.
6 detectives from State Security came through the door - no warrant.
I am charged with "threat to kill" and publishing a private telephone conversation. That charge is from when I rang Julie Bishops office and spoke with "Tess" the secretary.
It all stems from this blog posting made 20 days ago -
My laptop, phones, hard drives, video camera etc... all gone. I have just got this borrowed laptop going.
The "no warrant" fact is interesting. They claim it is allowed under a clause in the criminal investigation act. That "clause" is to do with an event like a suspect running from their car into their house with police in hot pursuit. So how are they going to explain that one?The "threat" was made 20 days ago? I emailed the blog post to every MP in the State. Its called a "cry for help".
Its funny how things turn out - back on the 10th of October, 2 hours after the blog post was put up with my "threat to kill" - I was rung by the minister him self. He promised to look into my case personally and meet with me personally two weeks from then. I thought all was well.
Instead, he palmed me back off to the corrupt Justice Intelligence Service who wanted to speak with me. I ended up refusing to see them. Last time I went in I was treated with utter contempt and a physical altercation erupted. I was too scared to go in their alone without a witness and I couldn't get anyone to come with me.
I said to the minister back on the 10th that I would take the blog down as now I had someone listening to me. The minister said something along the lines of "whatever". Hence, I just left it up and forgot about it and you can read the following blog posting -
So, nearly three weeks later - after I sent out the blog posting to nearly every MP in the state including the Premieres office - I am raided by 6 detectives - with no warrant - and charged with "threats to kill" and "publishing a private phone call"? Dear God, here we go again. What do I do?
I told the main detective - who was nice about things - that I found the raid interesting as I had spoken twice with the minister previous to it all and all was well. What gives? The detective new nothing about the conversations I had had with the Minister.
Interesting thing happened two days after I spoke with the minister - Inspector Steve Jancec appeared on the telly assuring West Australians that freemasons are lovely people. Apparently he looked nervous. You can see Steve in these two posts -
Then the minister - Joe Francis - was approached by a notorious sex offender near parliament house. A possible breach of security. When Minister Joe Francis first took on the corruption in WA prisons his house was burgled. The Minister is not liked - he is the "Brubaker" of Western Australia.
Interestingly, Detective Gordon Bertwhistle said to a friend of mine in 2005 that, "the pedophile rings in Perth go all the way to the top." Bertwhislte is the head of the child sex assault unit. He should know. To understand more about this subject please get to know Cathy O'Brian and her story of just how deep and high the child sex abuse goes -
Can you imagine what it will be like in jail for me? Maybe that's the plan?
Minister Joe Francis and his Commissioner John McMahon are honorable men. I hope this can be sorted quickly.
If anyone thinks I have recorded the phone call I had with the minister - you can rest easy. I don't record people who I think will treat me with honesty and integrity.
It was certainly a very interesting conversation though.
So, will Mr Cashman be allowed to get away with having me bashed or is the department of corrective services going to do its job? A prisoner - who I knew well - was beaten to death at Wooroloo Prison Farm a month after I left. That could very easily have been me. Am I just supposed to forget about Mr Cashman? Do I just forget about the fact I was warned I was being set up to be bashed and I told the Senior Officer I wasn't happy about it. I was told to go back to my cell and 5 minutes later I was brutally beaten unconscious? My arm was badly broken - and despite complaining for a month I was ignored. Just how bad does it have to get? Seriously, how bad does it have to get?
I emailed Brian Steels at Curtain University about what I saw in the prisons and he assured me he knew all about it and prison officers setting prisoners up to be bashed and paying prisoners a pouch of tobacco. You can read some of Brians work here - http://www.academia.edu/2344559/Rest..._Prison_Reform - Brian says people are slowly working towards reform. Thats lovely.
I ask Hami from Press TV to please notify his social network.
If the Western Australian establishment want me to leave the state they will need to give me some money and I will go.
I cant fight them any more. Western Australia is untouchable. They are above the law. They arrest whistle blowers and torment those who seek justice.
I will most likely simply plead guilty to he charges and leave the State. But they may give me serious prison time - this is Western Australia after all.
Its funny, but I was just organizing a large meeting to explain my case to people. I had also contacted the Islamic Council of Western Australia and they said they were willing to speak with me.
I wonder if that upset anyone?
Thats all I have to say on the subject. I simply don't have the will to fight anymore and I cannot bear the thought of more prison time. They win. They always win.
My conditions on bail are not to "threaten" anyone via electronic means.
Does me reporting what has happened constitute a "threat"?
For the first time in my life I just have to accept defeat.
People can email me here for now - [email protected] - my other emails have not been set up by me on this computer yet.
If anyone knows a lawyer for some advice that doesn't charge let me know.
I would ask the Perth Islamic Community if they can help me with some basic legal advice. I have a few hundred dollars I was saving for advertising for a meeting.
The entire back ground to my case is here -
Posted 4 hours ago by Brendon O'Connell