Crucifixion of Bill O’Reilly

by Andrew Anglin

Don’t celebrate it. Yes, everyone hates Bill O’Reilly, but this is not about him. It is about the war on men.

And this is a major victory for the anti-male forces. This man—the most-watched television news anchor in the history of television—is having his entire career destroyed for flirting with women.

This is utterly insane.

Old Bill has now got the whole of international kike feminism lined up against him. None of these accusations even involve any kind of assault. They are all just hoax “sexual harassment” charges.

As covered in F. Roger Devlin’s epic essay “Sexual Utopia in Power” (pdf link: here, buy the book, which has a bunch more essays: here), “sexual harassment” is just a way to frame normal male flirting behavior as deviant or oppressive.

If women don’t want men to flirt with them, they should stay home or wear burkas. The idea you can have your career destroyed for flirting with co-workers is totally and completely insane.

Anyway, whatever. Bill O’Reilly sucks anyway. And he is definitely fired. Flirting with a woman is, in our present climate of social justice, equivalent to calling for the extermination of Jews.

Published in: on April 19, 2017 at 11:57 pm  Comments (1)  

Historic broadcast

pierce

Listen to Pierce’s
1998 broadcast
“A Question of Sanity.”

Published in: on August 18, 2016 at 5:09 pm  Comments (1)  

The suppressed book

Eye For An Eye — The Story of Jews Who Sought Revenge For the HolocaustMost of the below text is from Amazon Books:

Not for sixty years has a book been so brutally suppressed as An Eye for an Eye: The Untold Story of Jewish Revenge Against Germans in 1945. One major newspaper, one major magazine, and three major publishers paid $40,000 for it but were scared off. One printed 6,000 books, then pulped them.

Two dozen publishers read An Eye for an Eye and praised it. “Shocking, “Startling,” “Astonishing,” “Mesmerizing,” “Extraordinary,” they wrote to Author John Sack. “I was rivited,” “I was bowled over,” “I love it,” they wrote, but all two dozen rejected it.

Finally, BasicBooks published An Eye for an Eye. It “sparked a furious controversy,” said Newsweek. It became a best-seller in Europe but was so shunned in America that it also became, in the words of New York Magazine, “The Book They Dare Not Review.”

Since then, both 60 Minutes and The New York Times have corroborated what Sack wrote: that at the end of World War II, thousands of Jews sought revenge for the Holocaust. They set up 1,255 concentration camps for German civilians—German men, women, children and babies. There they beat, whipped, tortured and murdered the Germans.

But presently, in this world of white cowards Sack’s book is out of print…

Game of Thrones

A year ago I posted “On genuine spirituality,” featuring a Game of Thrones character, the High Sparrow: one of the seven articles I wrote about GOT in the main site.

RamsayToday, I am dismayed by the many YouTube videos commenting on GOT. All commenters I’ve seen hate the High Sparrow. The guy on the right here (who, by the way, some time ago hanged up the phone to Jared Taylor and called him an idiot on live TV) says he prefers much seeing the Sparrow crushed than Ramsay, who in the show has skinned alive men, women and children. Another GOT pundit said this week something similar by comparing favorably Ramsay’s methods to those who have not dispatched the sparrows.

Make no mistake: I no longer identify myself with the High Sparrow. The guy believes in equality for all men (“We’re all equal in the eyes of the Seven”). But that is not the point. These critics, and a dozen more I’ve seen on YouTube, apparently hate the Faith Militant, or “sparrows”, for their bigotry (for a couple of kikes commenting about this phenomenon, click: here).

I purposely left some specific entries frozen at main site, and I promised not adding more until something big happens. One of those posts is a quotation of Roger Devlin: “When I began writing and talking about sex in racialist circles a few years ago, even some very intelligent people did not understand the relevance of what I was saying to their concerns. The relevance is, of course, that races reproduce sexually. Feminism in all its aspects is as much an attack on our race as Boasian egalitarian dogma, and the same struggle must be waged against both.”

Many white nationalists are unable to wrap their heads around something so simple. Forget the Sparrow if you wish. Use other GOT or LOTR models for inspiration. The point is that whites are morally dead. All healthy cultures know that eroticism is a legitimate source of joy and fertility. Nowadays eroticism is vice, the cult of immorality and GOT fans share it. In the last episode for example Yara is out of the closet boasting her lesbianism, and none of the online commenters is complaining the least bit. On the contrary: she’s admired by still another pundit. (Her castrated brother Theon, “the broken man” is depicted as stupid and Yara as masculine and smart.)

In one of my seven WDH articles I complained about other inversion of the sexual roles, such as:

• The wildling Ygritte (physically beautiful) who goes to war
• The non-white, masculinized female warriors at Dorne
• A female knight (!), Brienne of Tarth
• The bimbo Daenerys who lusts to conquer the Iron Throne, and
• Arya Stark, who is training to become an assassin.

The next episode, “No One” will probably be about this adolescent Arya. What is infuriating is that, in real life, a young girl who wanted to become a professional assassin would get raped, killed or both. Even Arya’s sister, Lady Sansa Stark, originally an ultra-feminine character of the series is now becoming a leader among the feudal lords of the North. Another important example can be added to the above list. Lady Olenna Tyrell is depicted as a master of court politics and intrigue, but the male figure of the same family, Mace Tyrell, as rather silly.

I cannot imagine worse messages for the Aryan psyche than what HBO usually does. I remember so well Rome, the historical drama television series broadcasted between 2005 and 2007: the first of other HBO “historical” series. In Rome the screenwriters invented history: that some patrician ladies, like Augustus’ mother, were extremely powerful. Now they are doing the same with fiction. And they are doing it big time while adapting George R.R. Martin’s novels.

Back to the real world. Recently Hillary Clinton has become the presumptive nominee of the Democratic Party. In a sense I wish she wins the presidency so that Americans learn the hard way why violating the laws of Nature is suicidal.

Update of June 21

And now I’ve watched the “epic” Episode 9, supposedly the best of the entire series. (See a YouTube clip here, which includes interviews of the actors who played Jon Snow and Ramsay.) It shows Sansa giving rational advice to Jon that he fails to follow and, in a rash decision to save his half-brother Rickon, he lost the battle and almost got killed. (Jon and his comrades in arms were rescued by the Knights of the Vale, who surprisingly appeared in the last minute.)

The Sansa and Jon roles are thus reversed. In real life it’s women who generally think with their emotions and men who rather use the left hemisphere of the brain.

Also, it’s very symbolic to see the half-man Tyrion Lannister, the Hand of Daenerys, advising her while she’s agreeing to an alliance with a Yara advised by her (literally) castrated brother. The subliminal message is that men are advisers and the women are the ones who make the big political decisions.

After minute 8 of this clip a well-known GOT pundit said: “The show has been fateful to four major themes of the book: 1. War is bad, 2. Feudalism and slavery are bad, 3. Feminism is good and 4. Religion is nuts.” I have not read Martin’s books but if the commenter is right George R.R. Martin is our enemy. This season has been very heavy with a major theme, that feminism is good.

Listen to a didactic YouTube class explaining why, if women’s sexual preferences go unchecked by men, they destroy civilizations (here).

Published in: on June 10, 2016 at 10:28 am  Comments (1)  

Isildur’s mess

“What I failed to realize for many years was the depth of the evil and the resistance to individual redemption. Obviously, if people are evil when evil people rule, and good only when good people rule, they are not really good.” –Andrew Hamilton


This morning [April 13, 2013] I reread my “Dies Irae,” the sharpest piece I have written about how I feel about my own species.

In a postscript to that piece I said that Andrew Hamilton’s November article, “Flawed Racism,” was potentially the most worldview-shattering article that has been written to understand the West’s darkest hour “without the knowledge of its readership including the author himself.” By the end of my postscript I added that Hamilton’s words (see epigraph), which include the overwhelming majority of whites, demonstrate that humans “are not really good.”

That Hamilton still doesn’t get the implications of his discovery is manifest in his most recent article, which reminded me what William Pierce always said about the “controlled media” and also Kevin MacDonald’s chapter in The Culture of Critique demonstrating that Jews own it. In today’s article Hamilton writes:

It makes no sense to scratch one’s head, perplexed, wondering, “Why don’t whites wake up?” That’s not the way the world works. Everything boils down to this one-sided power distribution.

Hamilton is afraid of taking a step further and ask the question that Tom Sunic has been asking for some time: “One can naturally concur that Americans are influenced by Jews, but then the question arises as to how did it happen?”

But Hamilton already answered that question in his November essay, which is worth rephrasing here: If whites are evil when evil people rule—Americans watching several hours per day a TV controlled by the subversive tribe—, and good only when good people rule—young Germans in the 1930s reading Hitler’s Youth booklets—, whites are not really good.

That’s the crux of the whole issue in this darkest hour of us.

The fact is that the Jews in America who control the media did not drop from the Moon. Deracinated Anglo-Saxons empowered them. And they did it because, like the rest of whites, they are not good people.

That’s the whole point in a recent post on bicausalism. I used an image of Isildur to show, in a single visual stroke, that if this darkest of all ages is menacing us it’s because our own sin, a pure Aryan sin. The sin that marked a whole Era: allowing the subversive tribe to infect our minds through their holy book offering a new testament as a bait.

isildur_tries_to_use_one_ring

Isildur, corrupted by the Ring’s power, refuses to destroy it. Later Isildur is killed by Orcs as a result of his betrayal.

I know that the way I have expanded Hamilton’s insightful phrase goes far beyond everything and anything that is acceptable for nationalists and non-nationalists alike: that most people are not good (hence my wild, exterminationist fantasies in “Dies Irae”). But if you really want ultimate answers to ultimate questions, there is no way to avoid philosophizing along these lines.

Postscript of March 1, 2015:

Originally posted at WDH on April 13, 2013, I moved it here just because the Isildur pic combines better with the blue background of this addenda.

Also, I have now reread William Pierce’s novels and discovered that the sentence that whites are not really good is Pierce’s; Hamilton was just rephrasing or quoting him.

Published in: on March 1, 2015 at 8:13 pm  Comments (2)  

The dishonest Seiyo

In a recent article at the Western Rifle Shooters Association, half-Jew “Takuan Seiyo” said:


I found this discussion late and so can contribute late. There is much to be said against the Jews—as a group—and there is much to say in favor (think contributions since late 18th century, not to speak of the Bible and Christianity itself). It’s good, even important, to write about that, not the least for the benefit of American Jews who don’t seem to have a clue how much their socialist-multiculti-bleeding heart drift alienates them from the American white majority and puts them in a camp of people who are no friends of theirs.

With this said, CA’s [Concerned American] policy is right simply because there seem to be no people around who have the knowledge and the psychological balance to do this analysis correctly and truthfully, so commenters usually prattle nonsense that’s either malignantly false or stupid; antisemitism is after all 2300 years old. If they have the intellectual equipment, such as the premier antisemite of our age, Kevin MacDonald does, they cherry pick among the zillion facts they adduce to flesh out the negative, but suppress the positive in order to build a twisted theory. Or they lack the intellectual equipment altogether and just prattle what they soaked from some snake-swalling preacher about the Jews not being the Jews but WASPs being the Jews; with all of their Bible reading they haven’t even stopped to think that Jesus. Mary, Peter, Paul, the apostles and all Christians for the first 50 years of the creed were Jews, not Yorkshiremen.

I have studied theses issues for a long time and touch on them in my writings. Two of my articles archived at Gates of Vienna are specifically about the JQ; “Critique of the Culture of Kevin McDonald” and “F Street.” [Chechar’s note: Seiyo omits the fact that he “criticized” MacDonald without actually reading his triolgy on Jewry. See my comment at the bottom of this post.] GoV had so much trouble with nazizoid commenters to those two and in other posts where Jews were mentioned that it had to close down discussion of such matters.

Rollory said…

If someone can summarize in a sentence or three what exactly the point and message is of any one of Takuan Seiyo’s articles, I’d be grateful. It was when I realized I couldn’t do that, and that whatever the message might be was lost in the flood of words, that I stopped reading him. It was when he deliberately asserted in a comment thread discussion that I’d said the exact opposite of what I had actually said, in order to brand me with his nazizoidist label, that I stopped considering him to be on the side of the angels. It was when he deliberately and repeatedly refused to engage in the sort of deliberate discussion of facts CA has advocated in the past, preferring instead to assert blanket guilt and self-destructiveness on the part of a people he evidently considers not his own, that I stopped much caring what he has to say about anything. He is a deeply dishonest man.

There certainly are those who assert things about the Jews without providing sufficient evidence. There are also those who draw conclusions from facts in evidence that I don’t find sufficiently justified. This does not make reasonable and sane discussions of the matter impossible. In the GoV discussions he references, it would have been entirely possible to say “I don’t want to discuss that here, and I’m not going to” or “I don’t consider those facts to be a major factor, for such and such reasons.” This is not what was done. Instead he went from zero to nuclear and full insult. “Oh, but he’s so tired of the constant unreasonable attacks!” Stop making excuses for him. I’m part French, I’ve been hearing my nation—a nation with far more qualities than America and Americans have ever displayed, and which has earned my loyalty in ways the USA hasn’t even tried—insulted and demeaned pretty much my entire life, and currently I get to watch the French population being systematically replaced by Muslim Arabs while “genocide” is something only Jews are allowed to own, and I generally manage to keep my mouth shut about it, or to discuss the matter peaceably when the occasion arises. There is no right to be free from insult, even for Jews.

“The Jew cries out in pain as he strikes you.” It takes a conscious act of will to not notice the applicability of this phrase to repeated actions by Jewish people, including Seiyo himself as I mentioned earlier. Just a couple weeks ago, a Quebec radio host, talking with a Muslim caller, mentioned that he wouldn’t be able to say the same things the caller was because speaking too loudly on certain topics gets one in trouble with the Jews. The local Jewish organization promptly called for him to be sacked. What exactly are they trying to prove? Rick Sanchez claimed Jews have a lot of power at CNN; they promptly demonstrated their… lack of power?—by getting him fired. A Jewish journalist went looking for non-Jews in positions of power in Hollywood; he found six, one of which turned out to be Jewish after all. I could go on all day, but that’s not the point—the point is that there is measurable evidence and facts concerning hypocrisy and power and Jewish reactions to taking note of these facts, and that the only response ever made to this by the pro-Jewish side of any argument is precisely the dishonest and hypocritical one that CA made: ridicule, and a refusal to actually address any facts, either by refusing to bring them up or refusing to engage in discussion on the topic by ruling it out of bounds.

Concerned American [CA] said…

Citations, sir?

Also, did you actually read the linked Seiyo articles?

Thank you for voicing your predispositions as well.

Rollory said…

The world we are living in today is the direct and linear result of the victory in 1945. It is a world created by the victors of 1945. It is designed and run according to their principles, and implements many of the goals they explicitly advocated. Everything that is happening today, from the Muslim rape gangs in European suburbs to English nationalists getting locked up in an Orwellian manner to the TSA accustoming “born free” citizens to having their daughters’ breasts groped to Congress fuming impotently at its bureaucracy and not firing it to the massive taxation increases on the most productive to the dissolving of sovereignty in international bureaucracies to the American presidency becoming a thing to be bought and used in a manner directly contrary to the expressed wishes of the people and in fact the general trend of governments everywhere in the white nations deliberately persisting in courses of actions their people repeatedly object to but don’t seem to have the ability to stop—every bit of this is the legacy of the victors of 1945. It is their doing, their responsibility, their worldview brought to life.

In 1945, the bad guys won

Every single man who has fought and bled in the service of the victors of 1945 and their inheritors has fought and bled in the service of evil.

Maybe the other side were bad guys also. Maybe they weren’t. I’m not saying they didn’t kill a lot of people—I do say genocide is justified at times, depending on perspective, in the same way that killing a man is justified at times—depending on perspective. Nobody wants to die, but irreconcilable differences exist. I also know this much: the victor writes the history books, the victor always makes the other side out to be worse than they actually were while hiding its own misdeeds, and in this case, the victors have been proven by their own actions to be civilization- and nation-destroying oathbreaking scumbags. I also know that the people running things right now lie like they breathe; from carbohydrates to cholesterol to equality to finance to genetics to who voted when and where to what actually happened in any given foreign policy crisis to what gets reported and what gets suppressed in the newspapers and talking-head shows each day.

Nothing I am told by this system and this society is to be trusted. If they say the sky is blue, I will walk outside to check for myself.

Everything is on the table.

That includes Hitler.

He may have been wrong about some things. He may have been wrong about a lot of things. Based on the reading I’ve done so far, there certainly were things he didn’t get right. There were certainly also things that he did.

Have YOU read Mein Kampf, or Table Talks? (I haven’t, yet.) Do you really trust what you’re told about it, when the same people give you Tina Fey saying “I can see Russia from my house!”, and Obama insisting he did so call it a terrorist attack?

Do you really have to have it explained to you, again, that you’re being lied to?

“Oh, but they wouldn’t lie about that!”

There’s a funny thing about the “Big Lie”. People talk about it in the context of the Nazis, as a Nazi propaganda tactic. In fact, it was a Nazi accusation. The Nazis were saying that their enemies were telling gigantic monstrous lies that nobody would even think to disbelieve. They never advocated it as something for their own propaganda to engage in. But that’s not how it is remembered. The “Big Lie” has itself become a Big Lie.

Chuck said…

Rollory said: “I do say genocide is justified at times, depending on perspective, in the same way that killing a man is justified at times—depending on perspective.”

Are you fucking kidding me?

Rollory said…

Finally, a quote.

“The fundamental realization of the Dark Enlightenment is that all men are not created equal, not individual men, nor the various groups and categories of men, nor are women equal to men, that these beliefs and others like them are religious beliefs, that society is just as religious as ever it was, with an official state religion of progressivism, but this is a new religion, an evil religion, and, if you are a Christian, a demonic religion.

The Dark Enlightenment does not propose that leftism went wrong four years ago, or ten years ago, but that it was fundamentally and terribly wrong a couple of centuries ago, and we have been heading to hell in a handbasket ever since at a rapidly increasing rate—that the enlightenment was dangerously optimistic about humans, human nature, and the state, that it is another good news religion, telling us what we wish to hear, but about this world instead of the next.”

We are not Jedi, we are Sith. The Jedi have lost their way, and we understand the truth both of their now-perverted ideals and the reality underlying them better than they ever did.

That is why we will win.



My comment for this blog:

At Gates of Vienna (GOV) Takuan Seiyo told the lie that I am a Holocaust denier; I didn’t even bother to reply but now…

Seiyo writes that that Kevin MacDonald cherry picks “among the zillion facts they adduce to flesh out the negative, but suppress the positive in order to build a twisted theory.”

I see that, almost three years after my article “A lightning in the middle of the night!” Seiyo has not addressed the thrust of my direct challenge to him: that Jews “are never over-represented in organizations or movements that represent the interests of the ethnic majority, only those that weaken that majority.”

The “positive” that Seiyo writes about is in fact neutral in the sense that Jewish contributions to technology, science or commerce are not meant to improve whites qua whites as a race: for example a medical discovery applies to all Gentiles, and Jewry too. The real point of my 2010 piece was that Jews never represent the ethnic interests of whites; only the interests that weaken whites as an ethnic group.

But in that thread in the older incarnation of my blog Seiyo never really addressed my challenge and it’s improbable he will address it now. He is a man who wants to have it both ways: he purports to defend the West but if Western interests collide with Jewish interests he automatically sides the latter.

I see that at the thread of the Western Rifle Shooters Association Seiyo mentions the decision of the admin of Gates of Vienna, Ned May (“Baron Bodissey”), to censor all discussion on the Jewish Question as if Ned “had so much trouble with nazizoid commenters.”

That’s another lie.

Ned closed comments after a challenge by some of GOV-ers—to accept criticism of Jews only provided that the critics were Jews or half-Jews. I accepted the challenge in the form of the excerpts I typed with the purpose of showing GOV-ers how even an academic of Jewish origin touches the question, Albert Lindemann in Esau’s Tears. But apparently it was not possible to discuss the JQ at GOV even after I took the trouble to type all those excerpts from Esau’s Tears for GOV-ers to see.

But aside Seiyo’s lies (that Ned “had so much trouble with nazizoid commenters”), I believe that Rollory summarized above the broadest issues better than what I did at the bottom of this post.

For my collection exposing Seiyo, see these entries at WDH (with the exception of “Liberals–about to be mugged by reality” that are quotations of Seiyo’s online book).

Published in: on December 19, 2012 at 8:13 pm  Comments (9)  
Tags: