Tunnel Vision over at the Occidental Observer

Avatar, James Cameron's feel-good adventure story is wholly unoriginal on the Storytelling Front, but very imaginative in the visual department. Since it was a such a huge production with the highest budget thus far allotted for a movie project and the biggest box office intake as of this date with some $2.5 billion in Worldwide earnings, it speaks a good deal about what today's audience likes: elaborate sights and sounds with simplistic story arcs.

The BS Gentiles at The Occidental Observer reviewed this film and that was really just a continuation of their fixation on white race preservation as can be read in this review of the blockbuster film. Replace "white" with "Jew" and you'll have a typically racist, rabbi written op-ed.

In the article, Kevin MacDonald writes: 

"So, in a nutshell, Whites from Earth are colonizing another planet whose indigenous wonderful hominids with primitive technology but great butts and neural connections to plants and animals, are in the way of The Company which wants its precious mineral called Unobtainium. (This was the only in joke in the movie I think.) There are a couple of social workers trying to get the natives to move and save Precious Life. They are of course outmaneuvered by the capitalists who want their unobtainium and start to bulldoze the magic forest."

If all MacDonald can observe about this film is that certain white characters are greedy and unpleasant, than he is missing much of point due to his skin-pigmentation fixation. He also misses the satire on Judeo-economics... "unobtanium" is quite the way to put it.

In the film, there are mixed characters on both sides. Good humans aren't all white and neither are the evil humans. Though, the commander of the mercenary unit deployed to protect The Company is white, as is the main representative of the evil corporation, and it is from these two bits that MacDonald's main concern springs: evil white people. Odd that a professor of psychology would evaluate character's based on their skin-color. How about delving into their... *ahem* ....psychology? Meaning, looking at the characters' intentions, goals, means to achieve these things, and the like. From this we can see that the commander and the corporate officer are slimy, arrogant bastards and deserve no sympathy from noble people.

Practically all of the main Zionists in Israel have light skin that could be called "white," so does this mean that MacDonald sympathizes with those war criminals? And does he find any news report that points out Israeli criminality as offensive, since it criticizes "white" people? It would seem so. MacDonald decidedly prefers the shallow end of the pool. His allegiance to his "white" skin is like the Jews' allegiance to the Law of the Rabbis - what's good for (my group's name here) is good in all senses of the word.

More from MacDonald's article:

"So, the Good pseudo-native , like in The Last Samurai, goes native and war is begun with the CapitalistImperialistWhitePigs. Spectacular battle scenes with the Good natives mounted on the backs of flying Teradactyl like birds beating the White Man’s machines. As in Tarzan movies, the animals also come to the aid of the natives, after having sensed that the White Man is a greater danger.

In the battle, the chief Bad Guy is a jarhead (Marines) colonel who wants to kill all the Good Natives. Blue eyes and a very White Marine, he of course, is beaten by bows and arrows and big scary animals (a la Tarzan). As he is about to kill our pseudo-native hero, who has of course betrayed the mission of The Company, the colonel yells, “How does it feel to be a race traitor?” With that, two arrows from the love-interest native female sink into his chest."

MacDonald's race-themed defensive posture is virtually identical the ever-apologetic Jew, who will always find a way to mask or excuse his deeds - from cries of "anti-Semitism" and "blood libel" to the quintessential racist attitude of "We're the Chosen People." The BS Gentiles at TOO simply substitute "White" for "Jew." In their eyes, criticizing whites is "anti-White" or maybe "anti-Occidentalism."

By the time the reader reaches this part of the article, it comes as no surprise that MacDonald chose to end his piece with the most overt racism - a saving the "best" for last sort of thing via the BS Gentile mindset.

"Like Bladerunner’s replicants, the natives are more human than homo sapiens — Whites that is. The few other folks who help the natives are Earthlings — Blacks and browns, who of course, side with the natives. They recognize a brother when they see one."

Oh boy. Quite the absurdity, in addition to the racism.

At no point in the film is it so bluntly said that the Na'vi (the "natives" from Avatar) are "more human" than the humans. What is said, via the story, is that they are less overcome by greed and material desire. This makes them more noble and thus they are the story's good-guys.

"The material interest of mankind can prosper only in the
shade of the heroic virtues. The moment they become the primary considerations of life they wreck the basis of their own existence." ~Adolf Hitler

The human mission on planet Pandora is primarily concerned with material interests, while the Na'vi are heroically defending their homeland. That is why the humans and their corporation loses. However, by the end, a few humans, the noblest stock, joins the Na'vi. They do this to pursue ideals and probably didn't consider "race." In fact, in the film, it is only the bigoted Gentiles that bring up "race" and such terms. They cannot see past the end of their nose.

I do agree with MacDonald that Avatar paints a pessimistic portrait of humans, however, unlike him, I am not at all surprised. Just look at the day's news, mainstream source or not: there's violence, treachery, greed and hate that comes from people of all colors. Oddly, since MacDonald is so Euro-centric, he only sees the media point out evil white men and takes offense to this. That sort of arrogance and ignorance hand-in-hand is very Jewish.

The fact is, all peoples suffer and all peoples are to blame. The state of the World is decayed, decadent and filled with drudgery. The popular films that come out simply reflect this. Complaining about such a film is like complaining to a mirror for showing you a scar on your face - it's not the mirror's fault! You did something that gave you a scar and the complaints won't help heal it.

"Man has become great through perpetual struggle." ~Adolf Hitler

And he can become great again, but this means primarily proactive effort. This means seeing your own faults in addition to those of others, and this is something the Gentiles lack.

Taking a look at this essay is a good start for them to steadily veer away from simplistic bigotry and tunnel vision.

Alternate version of the rebuttal HERE

On Talmudic Methods as Tactics: Occidental Observer

The Boromir Syndrome (BS) is rampant over at The Accidentally Talmudic Observer. They recently published this article in effort to seem sound on the issue of violence. Little do they know, they are using definitions from history's most nefarious book and thus continue to spin in their goy wheel.

On Violence as a tactic
By Kevin MacDonald

A correspondent concerned about the connotations of some of the commentary on this site sent the following:

Some patriots, especially the young, become frustrated and angry and want to take direct action. That is understandable because we are facing a life-and-death threat to our national existence and our political class is demonstrably failing to show leadership; indeed, major elements are leading the attack on the American people. But it is both morally wrong and tactically counterproductive to advocate or practice violence.

SoE: So "taking direct action" and "advocating or practicing violence" are the same thing? If you are a BS Gentile than they sure seem to be! That illusion is part of the Paradigm Prison, which is ZC approved definitions for everything. Going by them will never lead to progress, they are designed to be ineffective.

The mentioning of "patriots" and "threats to our national existence" and other assorted tribalist vocabulary makes the failure of this article all the more plain. Failure when dealing with Zionists that is. Technically, the goal of this article is to present Babel, and in that, it succeeds.

Reasons:

Moral.
The rule of law is critical for the maintenance of civilization. In many ways, it IS civilization. We might not like some of those laws but unless we limit our protest to legal means, we contribute to the slide to barbarity that has done so much harm.

SoE: Again, they are trapped in the Paradigm Prison. The Aryan State (the true remedy for Jewish corruption) does not use the law as a "maintenance of civilization," but rather to progress civilization towards an ideal. Law, by itself, is in no way the actual civilization. By appealing to the corrupt laws that have allowed Zionist crime, how does MacDonald hope to stop it? Maybe next he'll recommend that an organized crime syndicate aide the police in catching a big time mobster, who may or may not be their boss.

Tactical.
Violence or its advocacy would allow our enemies to call down the full power of the state apparatus upon us. Even if we were strong and had a chance to win elections, it would be fatal to become outlaws. Many many Whites would feel compelled to withdraw their support. A movement that had taken decades to build would be dismantled overnight, its assets liquidated, its leaders jailed. And even if violence had a good chance of accelerating victory, going down that path would soil the vision of our New America. We want the freedom we seek to last; we want to set an example to other Western peoples and to other civilizations that will make our liberation permanent by setting it within a compatible international order. We can only do that by appealing to the highest personalities, to the natural aristocracy of other countries. Only then will they gain the moral courage to act in their people’s interests. We can only do that by being demonstrably decent, by being the sort of people they want to be. This is one of the practical implication of being a cultural Christian.

SoE: The bold faced emphasis (added by me) is MacDonald's solution. Close, but no cigar, MacDonald. "Aristocracy" not only has elitist and un-Aryan connotation, but the current ruling classes, to which MacDonald suggests that his readers appeal to in order to find a solution, are the ones most likely to be most corrupted by the current system. MacDonald does not offer radicalism (the Aryanist definition) and seek allies outside of the current establishment, thus the ones most likely to have true Noble motivation.

The only thing that MacDonald gets right is by saying that those who want to enact change should be decent, but he doesn't lay out how they can also be effective and thus this is another TOO dead end.

Programming Language

"Ctrl-Alt-Delete" is Restart, not Revolution.

The Boromirs Among Us: Occidental Observer

Response to this 12/26/2010 article by Edmund Connelly in The Occidental Observer.

Connelly makes some accurate observations about Zionist crime that is intrinsically tied to the supremacist and hate perpetuating ideology of Judaism, but his article is only a brushing on the dirty surface and not an exposing of the rotten core.

Connelly begins by clearly pointing out that the United States should in no way consider Israel an allied nation and names the Lavon Affair (with a link to the Wikipedia article, nonetheless) as the reason. From reading about such an event we can assume that most truly inquisitive readers (as are those who veer away from mainstream information) will then go on to see that the Lavon Affair was but the start of an era of hidden Israeli aggression against the United States and the West.

Connelly then suggests that there is actually a far more constant and far more subtle war going on and that is one of "laying the mental threads." Citing several example of documentary works that have investigated the portrayal of Arabs (and all Muslims, really) in film, as well as referring to the 1998 movie The Siege, which is likely a part of this grand anti-Arab propaganda campaign, Connelly makes his point that Hollywood is actually a "Jewish fiefdom" that is working to manipulate all Americans into hating Arabs and Muslims.

Now, is Connelly genuinely concerned about the racism that is directed at these people? One would think so, but unfortunately Connelly then fumbles with the following contradiction:

"The issue is not really whether these images have a substantial element of truth. Muslims are indeed the most likely people on the planet these days to be terrorists."

And so, Connelly has not only spotted racist propaganda, but he has also eaten his fair share - he bought it hook, line and sinker!

First off, Connelly is going by the ZC prescribed definition of terrorist, which essentially means "angry looking Muslim." If we look at the word "terrorist" with a bit of rationalism we can come to the simple conclusion that a "terrorist" is simply someone who frightens people. Fear of death is the most effective way to do this, thus they result to displays of large-scale violence and make sure that those casualty figures are well publicized. This definition fits a whole lot better with the Israeli Defense Forces than it does with a group of rebels who launch flimsy homemade rockets at their oppressors that have starved and occupied them since 1948. However, those oppressive criminals have a well oiled PR machine and media backing them up and shifting blame, thus Connelly should have said: "Muslims are indeed the most likely people on the planet to be shown as terrorists." This is the Zionists' most effective weapon of mass destruction.

Connelly seems to, more or less, acknowledge this fact in the article when he shows the 2008 film Taken and the popular television show 24 to be nothing more than Jewish manipulations to get Westerners to hate Muslims. This is, by and large, true: Taken had a Jewish screenwriter and 24, a Jewish producer. They were just doing their part to get Westerners to despise Muslims. So, Connelly is back to pointing out Jewish crimes and he even points out the sly inversion presented in Taken: the slave trade is actually more of a Jewish crime, than it is a Muslim one. He uses this story from the Jerusalem Post to point out a key aspect of Jewish racist double-standard: in Israel, slavery is legal if it involves non-Jews. The main victims are young Slavic women who are conned into going to Israel with bogus job prospects. Connelly also mentions that Jews, a disproportionately influential minority, seem to not mention themselves in the movies and stories that they produce.

Connelly then ends his article with a bit of xenophobia by saying that the film Taken "provides a useful function by again alerting Americans, French, and other Westerners to the risk posed by the presence of alien elements amongst us." He is back to buying the propaganda that the Jew never ceases to sell. Oddly, in the same paragraph he seems to scold many of the aforementioned Westerners for "worshipping" Jews and Israel.

In the end, Connelly's article is an uncoordinated blast off into the general right direction - he recognizes his enemy, but doesn't realize many of his potential allies. He also doesn't attack the core of Jewish thinking, but rather just presents empirical observations about how Jews manipulate the world - that fact that he doesn't attack Jewry on ideological ground is his article's great fault. Added to the fact is that he is, in effect, using Jewry's methods against Jewry, thus will never really change anything. Things are doomed to forever be done in the immoral and nefarious Talmudic way unless those very methods are destroyed.

Connelly is a fine example of the Boromir Syndrome - "Let's use the enemy's weapon against him!" That's like saying you don't agree with Israelite usury and then round up all your friends so as to out-compete the moneychangers. Even if you win, the Beast lives on in you.

Connelly also writes, "While terrorism is one clear risk, it is not the only one, as Taken shows." Again, not fully false, but not fully true. Even Boromir realized that Sauron must be destroyed, but he just didn't see the correct way how to do it. "Terrorism" is a problem, yes, but does Connelly see the bulk of it as a Jewish media created mirage and/or Israeli false flags? He mentions skepticism for the official 9/11 story and the Lavon Affair, yet at the same time he still seems to believe the official hogwash stories and "explanations" - Connelly sees Taken as propaganda, but then actually buys its Jewish message.

With the examples of Jewish double-standards that Connelly provides, it is really hard to grasp why he doesn't wrap up the article with the point that Judaism is fundamentally immoral. It is the oldest lie-to-get-ahead scheme in the World. He doesn't mention that Jews view all non-Jews as "goys" - an exploitable resource in the form of sentient beings. He opposes the Jew, yet he doesn't hit him where it will deal the most effective strike to the Jewish lies. From this, we can see that he is, in all probability, being led by the Jew and doesn't even know it.

---------------------------

A Spoke in the Goy Wheel
---------------------------

Alternate version of the rebuttal HERE

One Example of Idiocy in the Mass Media

One of my dense Polish-American kin, Alex Storozynski, wrote this article on his Huffington Post blog. I used to respect Storozynski as he is passionate promoter of Polish culture in the New York area. He usually tries to get Polish-Americans to reconnect with their native land and culture without too much in your face nationalist pandering. However, with this little number, he has proven himself to be a hopeless goy, doomed to delusion.

The media's slander of Poland: Ignorance, lazy editing, or malicious libel?
By Alex Storozynski

The New York-born Chief Rabbi of Poland, Michael Schudrich, says, "Accusing Poles of participation in the Holocaust is a sin." Yet on a regular basis, American journalists do just that by calling Auschwitz a "Polish concentration camp." This is Holocaust revisionism.

SoE: The correct term here would be "incorrect" or "inaccurate Holocaust revisionism." The reasons for this are, of course, way above Storozynski's head which is packed with gas chamber myths and other assorted nightmares. Also it is worth noting that Storozynski automatically assumes revisionism is a bad thing.

The Nazi concentration camps were built by Germans, run by Germans, and guarded by Germans. The victims of those camps were Polish. Newspaper editors justify use of the term "Polish concentration camp" as geographical shorthand for "a German concentration camp in occupied Poland." But this shorthand is Orwellian doublespeak that turns victim into perpetrator and distorts history. It perpetuates ignorance about the Holocaust and gives impressionable readers the idea that Poles built the camps. The Auschwitz killing factory was a product of German engineering, and both Polish Jews and Catholics were murdered there.

SoE: Actually they were built by prisoners of the Germans, which included Poles and Jews. Victims (of the typhus epidemic) were everyone, though the Polish Jews with their fear of showering and general lack of cleanliness succumbed to disease more than others in the supposed "killing factory" that they helped build.

Ironically, Storozynski is the victim and perpetuator of Orwellian doublespeak as he holds myth as reality and fails to see it. Goy.

On Sept. 1, 1939, the German blitzkrieg stormed into Poland to burn down cities, enslave the populace, build gas chambers to murder Jews and execute Christian Poles that helped them. Two weeks later, Soviet Russia sent tanks into eastern Poland to execute the leadership and destroy its capitalist system. Poland fought Nazi Germany longer than any other country and the Germans used Auschwitz to kill Polish soldiers and political prisoners, before constructing gas chambers to murder Jews.

SoE: So now the Germans invaded Poland just so they could build gas chambers? Despite the fact that they had their own, ones they NEVER used for murder. Read up on the German company Degesch that manufactured large gas chambers for fumigating rail cars and then see that those small stone rooms in Auschwitz, Majdanek and other camps look nothing like them.

At least, Storozynski is right in saying that the USSR invaded Poland, it's true, but he fails to see why the great Western Allies didn't declare war on the Soviet invader like they did on the German.

And actually, the USSR fought Germany longer than Poland, as did the Western Allies, but maybe Storozynski just used shorthand for "Poland fought Nazi Germany longer than any other country at the start of war" despite the fact that he admitted to not approving of shorthand due to the inaccuracies it causes.

Adolf Hitler wrote in Mein Kampf, "in the big lie there is a certain force of credibility, because the broad masses of a nation are easily corrupted ... and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie."

SoE: Yes, Hitler did write that, but maybe you'd care for context and accuracy? That part of the quote DOES NOT end with a period, there is a comma and the quote continues:

"...since they themselves lie in little things, but would be ashamed of lies that were too big. Such a falsehood will never enter their heads and they will not be able to believe in the possibility of such monstrous effrontery and infamous misrepresentation in others; yes, even when enlightened on the subject, they will long doubt and waver, and continue to accept at least one of these causes as true. Therefore, something of even the most insolent lie will always remain and stick-a fact which all the great lie-virtuosi and lying-clubs in this world know only too well and also make the most treacherous use of.

The foremost connoisseurs of this truth regarding the possibilities in the use of falsehood and slander have always been the Jews; for after all, their whole existence is based on one single great lie, to wit, that they are a religious community."

Der Fuhrer was talking about the Jew's method of lying and not about his own Noble Kampf. Goys never learn.

Hitler vowed to get rid of "Jews, Polacks and riff-raff." He would be pleased that today American newspapers blame Poles for his Nazi death camps rather than the Germans. The Nazis themselves gave the camp a German name, "Auschwitz" and then hung a sign over the entrance in German, "Arbeit Macht Frei." Calling it Polish is either lazy or malicious.

This past week, on Oct. 20, The New York Times ran an obituary of Dr. George Mathe, which said that he had been sent to "a Polish concentration camp in a cattle car." The shifting blame is getting so bad that in June, The Los Angeles Times even ran a piece in which its "Culture Monster" reviewer F. Kathleen Foley used the phrase "Nazi Poland." This is libelous. The Los Angeles Times corrected the mistake on its web site. In May, The Wall Street Journal used the phrase "Polish concentration camp." Polish-Americans protested outside the newspaper's offices, however The Wall Street Journal refuses to remove the defamatory phrase from its web site. The Polish Consul General in New York, Ewa Junczyk-Ziomecka wrote a letter to the editor saying that the Journal is "indicating that Poland was a participant in the Nazi crime. In reality, my country was Hitler's most brutalized victim with more than six million Polish citizens losing their lives during the war."

Of the six million Poles killed during World War II, about half were Jewish while the rest were Christian. German soldiers also transported Jews from 27 other countries into Nazi occupied-Poland to be murdered in deaths camps like Auschwitz. Because Poland resisted Germany, Hitler ordered his army to bomb and burn Warsaw to the ground.

SoE: More "death camp" nonsense. Also, it's a tough pill to swallow, but Poland could have saved herself by not ignoring Hitler and actually negotiating with him on his demands. Love him or hate him, Hitler was your neighboring leader and instead of making shady deals with Churchill and DeGaulle, my dear and beloved, but sometimes painfully naive Homeland, you should have not ignored your neighbor. One who proved to be very capable and who could have helped you fend off Soviet aggression.

This issue of historic accuracy was taken up by the United Nations, and in 2007, UNESCO officially changed the name of the Auschwitz to "The Auschwitz-Birkenau German Nazi Concentration and Extermination Camp (1940-1945)."

SoE: Well that's an unpleasant mouthful that the Jews force fed us.

Jewish leaders have also spoken out on this issue. In Jan. 2005, Executive Director of the American Jewish Committee, David A. Harris, issued a statement which said in part, "We would also like to remind those who are either unaware of the facts or careless in their choice of words, as has been the case with some media outlets, that Auschwitz-Birkenau and the other death camps, including Belzec, Chelmno, Majdanek, Sobibor and Treblinka, were conceived, built and operated by Nazi Germany and its allies. The camps were located in German-occupied Poland, the European country with by far the largest Jewish population, but they were most emphatically not 'Polish camps'. This is not a mere semantic matter. Historical integrity and accuracy hang in the balance."

SoE: LOL! A nightmare perpetuating Zionist Jew talking about "historical accuracy." This may very well have just made my day.

In April 2006, Executive Director of the Anti-Defamation League, Abraham H. Foxman, wrote: "As an agency which prioritizes remembrance of the Holocaust, we share Poland's concerns over the frequent description of the camp as a "Polish" camp. Such a description implies that the camp was built in the name of the Polish people. As you know, this is manifestly not the truth. Auschwitz stands as a monument to the barbarity of Nazi Germany. We therefore respectfully request that the camp be officially referred to as the 'Former Nazi German Extermination Camp, Auschwitz-Birkenau.' "

While there were Poles who committed atrocities against Jews during and after World War II, the Polish government convicted and executed those who killed Jews. The Polish underground established the Council to Aid Jews, Zegota, which rescued thousands of Jews. Irena Sendler saved 2,500 Jewish children from the Warsaw ghetto. Jan Karski sneaked through enemy lines to beg Churchill & Roosevelt to stop the Holocaust. They did nothing. Polish Army Captain Witold Pilecki volunteered to be arrested by the Germans and sent to Auschwitz to try to organize a prison break. The Germans executed thousands of Poles who tried to save Jews. The phrase "Polish concentration camp" desecrates their memory.

SoE: Goy Storozynski has been effectively conditioned to believe that disgust with Jews is completely unfounded and irrational. He also thinks that ethnic Russians (albeit Soviets) were responsible for the massacre at Katyn, which decapitated the leadership of Poland. It was, in fact, atheistic Jews that were the majority of Soviet Commissars. He also fails to see that Germans could have easily done the same kind of mass-killing in their half of newly conquered Poland, but didn't.

The Polish newspaper Rzeczpospolita has published editorials calling for legal action against newspapers that use these defamatory phrases. But it doesn't have to end this way. Newspaper publishers and the Associated Press can easily rectify this situation by changing their stylebooks to banish the phrase "Polish concentration camps."

Some editors justify the use of this phrase as a geographic location of the camps. But while editors can find lots of reasons to avoid doing the right thing and banning these phrases from news stories, there are six million reasons why they should.

SoE: The only reason these phrases are "defamatory" is because your perception of WW2 is hopelessly misguided. The phrases should be corrected, yes, but not to stop defamation, but to make them accurate. This also involves getting rid of death camp lore. Six million lies is enough.

---------------------------------------------------------
Article originally published on October 24th, 2010 in the blog section of The Huffington Post.
---------------------------------------------------------