Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old May 1st, 2009 #21
BryanVP
Señor Member
 
BryanVP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,183
Blog Entries: 1
BryanVP
Default

Sean Hannity is trashing Ahmadinejad for being a, "holocaust denier". He's also saying we need to bomb all of Iran's nuclear sites ASAP. Catch 22 really. If Sean Hannity promotes it, Obama's voters will definitely be against it. Though Politicians don't care about what their voters actually want. He's just buttering the Conservative lemmings up for Israel's continued terror, then the kwa undoubtedly backing them up should they bite off more than they can chew.

I can just see all these kike appeasers playing it off as Israel being the big heroes saving us from terrorism, and the conservatives lapping it up.

A funny note, one of his nigger guests actually said Ahmadinejad wasn't really denying it, but just saying issues of it need to be discussed.
__________________
This lot over at VNN... We're not right-wing extremists. We're extremely right about everything.
 
Old May 1st, 2009 #22
Julian Lüchow
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Kansas
Posts: 888
Julian Lüchow
Post

Ahmadinejad was interviewed by George Stephanopolous (sp?) last Sunday. His point vis-a-vis the Holyhoax was along the lines of "if the truth is as the Jews say it is, then why should they fear investigation?" Pretty much our own stance, in other words.
 
Old June 8th, 2009 #23
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,375
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

16Evan McLaren

Prozium–

Thanks for kindly linking to my blog. A heads up–I’m taking it down, and starting a new pseudonymous one to stay safe. Do you have a contact email?

Perhaps deleting this comment would make sense. Thanks again.

[Evan McLaren is a paleocon writer (Takimag), an acquaintance or friend of Prozium, on whose Occidental Dissent the above appeared. Nothing need really be said but...this is what conservatives have fallen to? When you subtract the fear, what of paleoconservatism remains? Things have indeed come to a pretty pass when a young guy with a big grin can't write what he really thinks under his own name; can't even link to his friends without fearing for his livelihood. Is there not something fundamentally wrong with this? How do paleoconservatives look at themselves in the mirror, of a morning? Have they no self respect at all? What would you call a doctor who, in exchange for income, agreed with the powers that be never to tell his patients the name of their real disease, and only to prescribe placebos? Wouldn't you call that man a quack? What would happen to the soul and psyche of the doctor who agreed to those terms? Would not it rot and blacken him?]
 
Old July 8th, 2009 #24
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,375
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Bill Marina, RIP
Posted by Lew Rockwell on July 7, 2009 10:43 AM

Revisionist historian William Marina died this morning of a heart attack, Gary North phones to say. Bill, who received his PhD from the University of Denver, was professor emeritus of history at Florda Atlantic University. Many years ago, I was his (and Nathaniel Weyl’s) editor for their book American Statesmen on Slavery and the Negro (New Rochelle, NY: Arlington House, 1971). I well remember when Bill Buckley personally vetoed our ads for it at National Review, since the book told the unpatriotic truth about what Lincoln and other state icons believed. Bill Marina was an adjunct scholar for the Mises Institute, and a teller of truth on the American Revolution, the warfare state, US foreign policy, and much else. He was also–about the highest accolade I can mention–a friend and admirer’s of Murray Rothbard’s.
 
Old August 20th, 2009 #25
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,375
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Kathleen Parker sells out her native South to curry favor with the kikes

http://www.lewrockwell.com/decoster/decoster160.html
 
Old November 16th, 2009 #26
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,375
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Then mysteriously the paleocon movement switched horses in mid-stream and started beating the drum against “Islamofascism” in a way that rendered it indistinguishable from Commentary or the Weekly Standard. I remember attending a Chronicles conference and listening to a talk by Srdja Trifkovich on the threat which Islam posed to the West. In the question and answer period following the talk I said, “I can understand your feelings toward Islam. If I were a Serb, I would feel the same way. But America has never been threatened by Islam, and the only reason we are threatened now is because of our support of Israel.”

Afterward Trifkovich admitted what I said was true, but he then added, “You can’t say that sort of thing in public.”

http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?p=1073315&posted=1
 
Old November 16th, 2009 #27
Serbian
Senior Member
 
Serbian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 11,930
Serbian
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
Then mysteriously the paleocon movement switched horses in mid-stream and started beating the drum against “Islamofascism” in a way that rendered it indistinguishable from Commentary or the Weekly Standard. I remember attending a Chronicles conference and listening to a talk by Srdja Trifkovich on the threat which Islam posed to the West. In the question and answer period following the talk I said, “I can understand your feelings toward Islam. If I were a Serb, I would feel the same way. But America has never been threatened by Islam, and the only reason we are threatened now is because of our support of Israel.”

Afterward Trifkovich admitted what I said was true, but he then added, “You can’t say that sort of thing in public.”

http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?p=1073315&posted=1

I don't know about the entire Paleocon movement in America, of course it is only natural to assume that it has also been hijacked by jews but I think that Trifkovic is attempting to expose the hypocrisy of the American government which supports muslims in Serbia/Russia and those flooding into Europe, while at the same time attacking those in their own countries which are hostile to I$rael and ZOG. Of course he understands, just like the BNP, that you can't speak the full truth in public because of the jew.
Trifkovic from what I know didn't support the war in Iraq or the neocon agenda for regime changes in the Middle East. He has also exposed the neocon scum who 'warn' about radical Islam and push the 'war on Islamic terror' nonsense while actively supporting radical muslim in Serbia. William Kristol, Joe Liebermann, Tom Lantos, Illeana Ross-Lehtinen, Diane Feinstein, Arlen Specter, etc. These people were all actively involved in arming the Bosnian mujahadeen back in the 90s and in supporting albanian muslims in Kosovo.
__________________
Don Black's Stormfront ''Russians''
http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=456327
Russia Insider
https://russia-insider.com/en
 
Old November 16th, 2009 #28
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,375
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

All you T has to do, or anyone has to do, is say, the US supports Muslims destroying Europe and opposes Muslims angry at Israel. What reconciles the opposed policies? They're both seen as "good for jews" by the kikes operating the U.S.
 
Old April 21st, 2012 #29
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,375
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

[cowardice of James J. Kilpatrick. instead of standing up for the plain facts and the truth, he decided to go with the flow, and repeat things he knew to be lies, all in order to preserve and enhance his career. That's why we call him and the rest of the cowardly conseratives career girls. And it's hypocritical of the Grinning Trimmer to blast the tergiversations of others when he fawns over punch-puller Buchanan and apes him by replacing accurate jews with safely gemeralized liberals in at least one instance.]

Before the Purge
By James Edwards
Comments (46) Print
From The Political Cesspool
Article Comments

Does anyone remember James J. Kilpatrick? At one time, in the late 1970s to the mid 1980s he was apparently one of the most widely read columnists in the country. Do you know how he became famous? In the early 1950s he was an unknown editor/editorial writer for a newspaper in Richmond, Virginia. Then he began denouncing Brown vs. Board of Education, and championing states’ rights and segregation. He died in 2010. The following was printed in his obituary.

James J. Kilpatrick, a nationally syndicated columnist whose strongly conservative viewpoints on politics, law and language appeared in hundreds of newspapers over the last five decades and made him a popular, even parodied, television pundit, died Sunday at a Washington, D.C., hospital. He was 89.

The cause was congestive heart failure, said his son, Kevin.

Kilpatrick, who once described himself as “10 miles to the right of Ivan the Terrible,” was the editor of a Richmond, Va., newspaper in the 1950s. His anti-desegregation crusades gave him national prominence, eventually leading to a thrice-weekly syndicated political column called “A Conservative View.

His views on race especially impressed William F. Buckley, who asked him to write for National Review:

During this period he also became an outspoken opponent of desegregation. He editorialized against the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1954 ruling in Brown vs. Board of Education, which declared school segregation unconstitutional. The centerpiece of Kilpatrick’s opposition was a 19th century doctrine called “interposition,” which said that states had the right to override a federal mandate that encroached on their sovereign authority. Bolstered by Kilpatrick’s editorials, several Southern states used the interposition argument to pass laws favorable to segregation. Kilpatrick also wrote a book, “The Sovereign States” (1957), to drum up support for the doctrine outside the South, but it failed to gain traction.

Kilpatrick became well-known nationally, particularly after he participated in debates with prominent civil rights leaders, including one with the Rev. Martin Luther King in 1960. He became a contributing editor to William F. Buckley’s conservative journal, National Review, which led in 1964 to his debut as a syndicated columnist with the Newsday Syndicate.

Here are a few samples of Kilpatrick’s work that William F. Buckley published in National Review:

The September 28, 1957 issue contained a piece by James Kilpatrick called “Right and Power in Arkansas,” in which he endorsed Arkansas Governor Orval Faubus’ call-up of the National Guard to prevent forced integration at Little Rock’s Central High School. Defending a community’s right to keep the peace, he wrote that “the State of Arkansas and Orval Faubus are wholly in the right; they have acted lawfully; they are entitled to those great presumptions of the law which underlie the whole of our judicial tradition.” Predicting a “storm” of white resistance he wrote, “Conceding, for the sake of discussion, that the Negro pupil has these new rights, what of the white community? Has it none?”

An article by James Kilpatrick in the September 24, 1963, issue argued that the Civil Rights Bill (eventually passed in 1964) should be voted down. He wrote, “I believe this bill is a very bad bill. In my view, the means here proposed are the wrong means… In the name of achieving certain ‘rights’ for one group of citizens this bill would impose some fateful compulsions on another group of citizens.” After it passed, an editorial declared: “The Civil Rights Act has been law for only a little over two months, yet it already promises to be the source of much legalistic confusion, civic chaos and bureaucratic malpractice.”

Mr. Kilpatrick also took aim at the 1965 Voting Rights Act in the April 20, 1965 issue. “Must We Repeal the Constitution to Give the Negro the Vote?” he asked, accusing the bill’s supporters of “perverting the Constitution.” He thought certain blacks should be given the right to vote but notes, “Over most of this century, the great bulk of Southern Negroes have been genuinely unqualified for the franchise.” He also defended segregation as rational for Southerners. “Segregation is a fact, and more than a fact; it is a state of mind. It lies in the Southern subconscious next to man’s most elementary instincts, for self-preservation, for survival, for the untroubled continuation of a not intolerable way of life.”

Yes, National Review used to be an “racist” honest magazine, well up into the 1970s. Today’s conservatives, in an effort to prove that they’re the good guys who love black people the most, love to scream that “Bull Connor was a Democrat!” and that “It was Democrats who opposed the Civil Rights movement!”

What they never mention is that it was conservatives who once opposed the “Civil Rights” movement, and they did it from the pages of National Review, the leading conservative magazine in the country back then.

Compare that to the National Review of today, an irrelevant publication that just fired John Derbyshire for writing common sense, elementary level truths about race.

http://www.alternativeright.com/main...#disqus_thread
 
Old April 21st, 2012 #30
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,375
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

[cowardice of James J. Kilpatrick. instead of standing up for the plain facts and the truth, he decided to go with the flow, and repeat things he knew to be lies, all in order to preserve and enhance his career. That's why we call him and the rest of the cowardly conseratives career girls. And it's hypocritical of the Grinning Trimmer to blast the tergiversations of others when he fawns over punch-puller Buchanan and apes him by replacing accurate jews with safely gemeralized liberals in at least one instance.]

Before the Purge
By James Edwards
Comments (46) Print
From The Political Cesspool
Article Comments

Does anyone remember James J. Kilpatrick? At one time, in the late 1970s to the mid 1980s he was apparently one of the most widely read columnists in the country. Do you know how he became famous? In the early 1950s he was an unknown editor/editorial writer for a newspaper in Richmond, Virginia. Then he began denouncing Brown vs. Board of Education, and championing states’ rights and segregation. He died in 2010. The following was printed in his obituary.

James J. Kilpatrick, a nationally syndicated columnist whose strongly conservative viewpoints on politics, law and language appeared in hundreds of newspapers over the last five decades and made him a popular, even parodied, television pundit, died Sunday at a Washington, D.C., hospital. He was 89.

The cause was congestive heart failure, said his son, Kevin.

Kilpatrick, who once described himself as “10 miles to the right of Ivan the Terrible,” was the editor of a Richmond, Va., newspaper in the 1950s. His anti-desegregation crusades gave him national prominence, eventually leading to a thrice-weekly syndicated political column called “A Conservative View.

His views on race especially impressed William F. Buckley, who asked him to write for National Review:

During this period he also became an outspoken opponent of desegregation. He editorialized against the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1954 ruling in Brown vs. Board of Education, which declared school segregation unconstitutional. The centerpiece of Kilpatrick’s opposition was a 19th century doctrine called “interposition,” which said that states had the right to override a federal mandate that encroached on their sovereign authority. Bolstered by Kilpatrick’s editorials, several Southern states used the interposition argument to pass laws favorable to segregation. Kilpatrick also wrote a book, “The Sovereign States” (1957), to drum up support for the doctrine outside the South, but it failed to gain traction.

Kilpatrick became well-known nationally, particularly after he participated in debates with prominent civil rights leaders, including one with the Rev. Martin Luther King in 1960. He became a contributing editor to William F. Buckley’s conservative journal, National Review, which led in 1964 to his debut as a syndicated columnist with the Newsday Syndicate.

Here are a few samples of Kilpatrick’s work that William F. Buckley published in National Review:

The September 28, 1957 issue contained a piece by James Kilpatrick called “Right and Power in Arkansas,” in which he endorsed Arkansas Governor Orval Faubus’ call-up of the National Guard to prevent forced integration at Little Rock’s Central High School. Defending a community’s right to keep the peace, he wrote that “the State of Arkansas and Orval Faubus are wholly in the right; they have acted lawfully; they are entitled to those great presumptions of the law which underlie the whole of our judicial tradition.” Predicting a “storm” of white resistance he wrote, “Conceding, for the sake of discussion, that the Negro pupil has these new rights, what of the white community? Has it none?”

An article by James Kilpatrick in the September 24, 1963, issue argued that the Civil Rights Bill (eventually passed in 1964) should be voted down. He wrote, “I believe this bill is a very bad bill. In my view, the means here proposed are the wrong means… In the name of achieving certain ‘rights’ for one group of citizens this bill would impose some fateful compulsions on another group of citizens.” After it passed, an editorial declared: “The Civil Rights Act has been law for only a little over two months, yet it already promises to be the source of much legalistic confusion, civic chaos and bureaucratic malpractice.”

Mr. Kilpatrick also took aim at the 1965 Voting Rights Act in the April 20, 1965 issue. “Must We Repeal the Constitution to Give the Negro the Vote?” he asked, accusing the bill’s supporters of “perverting the Constitution.” He thought certain blacks should be given the right to vote but notes, “Over most of this century, the great bulk of Southern Negroes have been genuinely unqualified for the franchise.” He also defended segregation as rational for Southerners. “Segregation is a fact, and more than a fact; it is a state of mind. It lies in the Southern subconscious next to man’s most elementary instincts, for self-preservation, for survival, for the untroubled continuation of a not intolerable way of life.”

Yes, National Review used to be an “racist” honest magazine, well up into the 1970s. Today’s conservatives, in an effort to prove that they’re the good guys who love black people the most, love to scream that “Bull Connor was a Democrat!” and that “It was Democrats who opposed the Civil Rights movement!”

What they never mention is that it was conservatives who once opposed the “Civil Rights” movement, and they did it from the pages of National Review, the leading conservative magazine in the country back then.

Compare that to the National Review of today, an irrelevant publication that just fired John Derbyshire for writing common sense, elementary level truths about race.

http://www.alternativeright.com/main...#disqus_thread
 
Old August 5th, 2012 #31
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,375
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

[boy am i glad guys like Fleming exist - every time i need an example of how cowardly and useless conservatives are, he steps up and supplies three. Say, dinky, how many enemies did we have in the 'middle east' before 1948. yeah. idiot.]

Thomas Fleming
July 27, 2012 • 7:53 AM

No, it is quite wrong even to suggest that McCain's undoubted evils could cause an otherwise sane person to consider, even for a fleeting second, voting for Obama, much less giving him public support as some conservatives did. Those who pretended that the wars were a big issue should have, would have known better if they had paused for a moment to consider the actions of earlier candidates who had campaigned against a US war. Anyone remember Lyndon Johnson? Obama did exactly what any sane person knew he would do, that is, he carried out the Bush-Cheney policy. Then why would any supposedly anti-war person have supported Obama? I think everyone knows the answer:

It is either because they are incorrigibly stupid or because they hate Israel far more than they love their own country. Having been candid on the sins of Israel, I do not have to apologize to anyone when I say that as much as I dislike the Israeli leadership, I am forced to acknowledge Israel as an ally--admittedly an unreliable and even faithless ally--in a part of the world that hates us. Of course, some of that hatred--though by no means all--stems from our support for Israel, which led us into three wars in recent years. Yes, we should force the Israeli government to toe the line, but to subordinate all notions of national interest and justice to one overriding concern--hatred of Israel because it is supported by the Neocons who got you fired or hindered your career--is to be a jackass. In the fable of Apuleius, the sinful man who got turned into a jackass is returned by Isis to his human form. In America, however, conservative jackassitude--whether of the libertarian, anti-war, Neocon or NeoChristian variety--is a permanent and indelible condition.

http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/20...thers-country/
 
Old August 5th, 2012 #32
America First
Senior Member
 
America First's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Earth
Posts: 3,699
America First
Default

Putting Twig in the position of POTUS was done with forethought, malice and planning to get an absolute piece of garbage with out honor who would be so hated after all the money thefts, wars, and etc., that the regime masters could get your dogs elected, as TV people were pissed !

My guess is after Clitooon not going for all their wars and refusing to be pushed out by the joowinsky scheme like Nixon caused the TPTB to not be able to trust Albert, and got the courts to install the man with the smaller vote count. jooish lightening, itz !

Interesting that Al's daughter married Jacob Shifts great grandson !

Khonservative's of the media never once said wait a minute about 23 year old Oswald, honorably discharged from the Marine Corps and recommended for reenlistment, got shot by Jacob Rubenstein after being accused of being the Miracle shooter of history !

The Media Knew his real name way back, oh yeah.



It took am expensive Hot war in Vietnam that was fostered by Khonservatives, while at the same time a racial war with new Laws against our race and Freedoms were installed with open borders.

All of above distracting people from JFK and that really big magic bullet story.

Look at the cheap cunt trolls that post today on the 911 thread and else where, these people are what they are.

No, Khonservatives are not White peoples friends believe it.



Are you laughing yet ?
__________________
Isn't it strange that we talk least about the things we think about most?

We cannot allow the natural passions and prejudices of other peoples
to lead our country to destruction.

-Charles A. Lindbergh
http://www.fff.org/freedom/0495c.asp

Last edited by America First; August 5th, 2012 at 03:29 AM.
 
Old November 25th, 2013 #33
Karl Brown
Junior Member
 
Karl Brown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Limbo
Posts: 14
Karl Brown
Default

Faileocon Jack "Southern Avenger" Hunter bends over real good for the kike machine:

Confessions of a Right-Wing Shock Jock

http://www.politico.com/magazine/sto...html?ml=m_u1_1

Real real real good, as if that'll save him from the leftturds and their masters.
 
Old March 24th, 2014 #34
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,375
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

‘Non-Neocon’ Cal Thomas Attacks Ron Paul’s ‘Isolationism’
Daniel McAdams

Cal Thomas is a survivor. “America’s most widely syndicated op-ed columnist” understands that to go against the rising tide of opinion in the US is to say goodbye to an enormously lucrative paycheck for relatively little work.

The question Thomas struggles with is how to continue to push a neocon agenda in US foreign policy while not alienating the majority of Americans who have clearly stated their preference for Ron Paul’s foreign policy of non-interventionism.

The answer, he has concluded, is simply to lie.

Witness today’s column, titled “America’s Missing Foreign Policy.” In the column, Thomas humbly offers that: “Somewhere between Ron Paul’s isolationism and neo-con interventionism is what the U.S. should be modeling to the world.”

Clever deception, as he thinks he can trick the reader into believing that he is about to offer up an alternative to the neocon interventionism that doesn’t cross his third rail of Ron Paul’s “isolationism.”

What a moderate!

Thomas then goes on to explain his non-neocon foreign policy suggestion with examples from — wait for it — John McCain and John Bolton!

Thomas bemoans the current administration’s “retreat from the world and pressuring Israel to give up more land to its enemies,” and is furious that “President Obama has retreated on everything from Iraq and Afghanistan, to Iran’s nuclear program and his ‘red line,’ which Syria crossed and paid no price when it used chemical weapons against its own people.”

He shrieks that, “Tyrants, terrorists and dictators watch an indecisive president and take note.”

His recommendation: “Action matters far more than words.”

Action action attack attack!

Yes, that’s Cal Thomas, the anti-neocon.
 
Old August 4th, 2014 #35
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,375
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Monday, August 04, 2014
American Conservative magazine wants you to know they are not anti-Semitic

By Michael Hoffman

Some quotes from Mr. Scott McConnell, founding editor of The American Conservative magazine (the publication which has banned advertising for our book Usury in Christendom), July-August 2014, pp. 22 and 24:

“(William F.) Buckley is rightly credited with pushing hardcore anti-Semitism out of the American right. As recently as the 1950s, it was widespread on the right: one of the most popular conservative books of that decade was The Iron Curtain Over America, which purported to describe how Khazar Jews were taking over the Democratic Party. It went through 14 printings. National Review (Buckley’s magazine), founded in 1955, sought to break from this kind of nuttiness.”

Mr. McConnell’s words remind us of a statement by Mr. Buckley’s son, Christopher, that Gore Vidal had the “tiresome” habit of saying that President Franklin Roosevelt had foreknowledge of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.

Imperial personalities write this way. No data need be advanced concerning what makes The Iron Curtain Over America qualify as being both the epitome of “nuttiness” and "hardcore anti-Semitism.” Mr. McConnell says it is so and that’s all “Conservatives" need to know.

Christopher Buckley finds the idea that FDR let Pearl Harbor be bombed, “tiresome.” My, my, old boy, so sorry to have disturbed your cocktail hour with the thought of it. Let’s dismiss all historical revisionism when we find it tiresome. Truth can be a bit of bore, you know.

Mr. McConnell writes: “(Joe) Sobran’s career subsequently deteriorated into the indefensible.”

Those are strong words about a dead man known for his nobility of soul and coming from a magazine that claims to be independent of the Israeli (if not the Talmudic) agenda. May we trouble Mr. McConnell for the slightest evidence of Joe’s indefensibility? No such luck. We’re just supposed to believe it because the "founding editor” has decreed it.

The same issue of the magazine contains an undistinguished essay by Samuel Goldman, “What Would Jeremiah Do?,” the publication of which seems intended to show that The American Conservative is not “anti-Semitic.” On p. 29 Mr. Goldman quotes from the erstwhile Chief Rabbi of England, Jonathan Sacks, who is on record applauding the Talmudic claim that the rabbis defeated God and God admitted it. The author doesn’t mention that part of Sacks’ writing. Rather, he advertises the rabbi’s supposed unique insights into the Book of Jeremiah.

Mr. Goldman goes on to state, “At least in the diaspora, Jews have demanded to live as Jews — but not the imposition of Jewish law or practices on others.”

Really, Mr. Goldman? If that is the case why is so much of my food here in the U.S. marked with a small letter “K” or a letter “U” inside a circle, representative of the fact that my victuals have been blessed by a rabbi, rendering it kashrut (kosher)? Consumers pay the rabbis for this privilege. It’s a hidden tax on our food.

The freedom to abort unborn children in America is in accordance with rabbinic halacha, which determines that an unborn child may be killed at any time in the womb, if it is determined that it is a rodef (“pursuer”) — a baby seeking to kill its mother. Talk about nuttiness!

What of the activist Supreme Court justices who make law by judicial decision? This is a traditional form of Talmudic legislation.

Why is the U.S. Congress occupied Israeli territory?

Why do I see a Chanukah menorah on Union Square in San Francisco in December, but no Nativity Scene?

The Talmudic Noahide Laws (these have no connection to the Biblical Noah), have been enshrined in Federal Law as part of "Education Day USA.” One of those laws provides for the execution of idolaters. Rabbi Maimonides, a hallowed halachic authority for Ashkenazi Judaism, defined idolater as one who worships Jesus Christ as God.

How is it that I am likely to lose my employment and my reputation if I object to Orthodox Judaism with the same zeal that tens of thousands of pundits, preachers, priests and politicians object to Islam?

Mr. Goldman’s amusing writing serves as a means for the frightened editors at The American Conservative magazine to point to when they themselves are accused of the perpetual charge of anti-Semitism. They can reply, “No we’re not — we smeared Sobran, and held Samuel Goldman and Rabbi Sacks aloft. How can we be anti-Semites?”

How can you be Conservatives?

Hoffman is the author of Judaism Discovered.

***

Posted by Michael Hoffman at 8/04/2014 05:26:00 PM

Labels: Christopher Buckley, Joseph Sobran, Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, Scott McConnell, The American Conservative magazine, William F. Buckley Jr.

http://revisionistreview.blogspot.co...ine-wants.html
 
Old September 18th, 2015 #36
Robbie Key
Senior Member
 
Robbie Key's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 3,910
Robbie Key
Default

Cuck Writes Book About the Frankfort School, Forgets to Mention Jews

William Martel
Daily Stormer
September 18, 2015


Quote:
According to Michael Walsh of PJ Media, in the above interview about his new book The Devil’s Pleasure Palace, the Frankfort School was a bunch of “Leftwing German Philosophers who fell afoul of the Nazis.”

Not once in the interview did he make any mention of the Chosenites. Perhaps ol’ Walsh actually wrote about the Frankfort School being a bunch of Communist Jews in the book but just forgot to mention it in the interview – I haven’t read the book, so I can’t say for certain.
http://www.dailystormer.com/cuck-wri...-mention-jews/
 
Reply

Tags
cowardice, paleocons, takimag

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:12 AM.
Page generated in 0.14585 seconds.