Sunday, 29 June 2014

The greatest brand that ever was.

I see that former billionaire Tony, sorry, Sir Anthony, O'Reilly has become the latest Irish industrial titan to go belly up.  Maybe now I'll see him in the queue the next time I buy rashers at my local Aldi. Sir Anthony always believed his particular genius (he saw himself pretty much as a genius in everything really) lay with brands. Give me a good brand, he'd say, and I can make billions.

I wonder what he'd do had he had the chance with the greatest branding triumph of them all: The Holocau$t™. It may surprise some of you to know that this marketing miracle came into being as late as 1971.  For example both De Gaulle and Churchill never mentioned it in their war memoirs, both written in the late forties and early fifties. In fact prior to 1971 the word itself would have meant nothing to the average person.  They'd have asked 'what holocaust are you talking about?'.  The swine.
That all changed after a study group at the Jewish Documentation Centre in Vienna came up with the wheeze that gave birth to The Holocaust (capital T, capital H....... that's important) and a branding miracle was born. And boy, what a brand!  For comparatively little expenditure it's helped extract billions from the unfortunate German taxpayers and has rendered any criticism of Jews as the worst of all offences. It embedded the meme of Jews as an innocent sorely oppressed victim group which must never be criticised. ('Don't hit me with The Holocau$t™ in my arms').  And they've lived royally off it ever since.
The marketing strategy was implemented by the Simon Wiesenthal Center and related corporate affiliates.  And as with any good branding strategy it's developed a range of spin-offs which both underpin the main brand and contribute to targets in their own right.  Hence Auschwitz (roll of drums, sombre music), single word, punchy, memorable....classical marketing.  There are dozens of others, Nazis, Anne Frank, family fleeing from the Nazis, gas chambers, evil Germans, Hitler as a multi-purpose villain straight from central casting who can be dusted down and wheeled out any time the goyim look like getting stroppy.
Yes, without doubt the greatest branding triumph of all time. Sir Anthony would have been proud.

Wednesday, 25 June 2014


Well first, the pre-moderation seems to be going ok and it's not proving to be particularly onerous on me.  I get great satisfaction in seeing the trolls don't see the light of day. Only problem really is that pre-moderation militates against the immediacy of the comments.

Second is the Gary Oldman 'outburst' which many of you have referred to.  Again we witness the SOP of grovelling recantation as the transgressor begs forgiveness from his disapproving masters. As UN has said in the comments, and as I've said repeatedly, he's wasting his time. Grovelling won't gain you fact they'll see it as a sign of weakness and, like hyenas around a wounded wildebeest, will tear and gouge for every last morsel.  ('Never forget, never forgive').  Far better to retain some pride and stand by what you said.  But it never happens.

Finally to Wimbledon. One of the commentators claimed to be surprised at my not having introduced the subject of tennis yet. Well right now I'm listening as the Williams brothers sisters take on a pair of Eastern European girls in the 'Ladies' doubles. Gigantic, shrieking, howling, snarling....punching the air, refusing the merest hint of apologies after hitting an opponent with a smash. Black as the ace of spades.  Yet the deluded brainwashed Gorgonian masses in the stands, almost all of whom are White, shriek and bellow their support for the monsters.  I can hear them now from my office. I know when they get a point by the reaction of the orcs.  Not a scintilla of racial awareness, let along solidarity. But plenty of same from the few blacks in the crowd. They know who they support.  And why.


Monday, 23 June 2014

Comments: Pre-moderation applied

Well, as some of you will have noticed, I've reapplied the pre-moderation facility for comments.  This may be a victory for the trolls but it's only a partial one.  Their rubbish and sabotage will now not see the light of day.  I'll do my best to moderate as often as possible.

Saturday, 21 June 2014

The Special Olympics of debating

The concept of formalised debate goes back all the way to  the ancient Greeks, Socrates in particular who developed the eponymous Socratic Dialogue. While this was subsequently refined by Plato and later still the Sophists the core components remained extraordinarily consistent.

Essentially the teams are given a proposition which one side must defend, while the other seeks to rebut that defence. Adherence to the subject is central to the structure.  As is a point-by-point rebuttal of your opponents position, strict adherence to time limits, no interruptions or shouting. 

As I say, these requirements have remained remarkably consistent for literally millennia.

Until now.

When Glen C, a reader from Texas, sent me this link my initial impression - notwithstanding being acutely aware of the West's spiralling decline in standards - was that it had to be a joke, some kind of send-up. It was not, it could not be, the Final of an American Inter-University Debate. 

It was in fact the Final of an American Inter-University Debate. Between Towson University and Oklahoma State.  You need to just look at about five minutes of the video to fully appreciate its sheer awfulness, nay, madness. That the 'debaters' weren't locked up in some secure facility, chained to the wall of a padded cell while swathed in straightjackets is remarkable.  In olden days people used to actually pay to gain admission to the Bedlam lunatic asylum in London to experience a similar frothing cauldrons of madness. Endless mirth was derived from the antics of the inmates.

From the very outset of this 'debate' the most basic rule was jettisoned: "Instead of talking about the topic, they insisted on discussing the war on black communities being waged by the U.S. government".  Well, duh!  If you thought it couldn't get any worse, you'd be wrong.  I though the 'winning' team were suffering from an epileptic seizure, such was the gulping, gasping delivery. Then one of the opposing team, when advised that his time limit had been exceeded, responded - in the finest Socratic traditions - by yelling 'fuck the time!  Don't know about you but all I could pick out from the ghetto jive 'debate' was 'fuck', 'shit', 'nigga' ....and, well, that's about it.

I checked out the ever reliable Salon to see whether they'd be able to report it with a straight face.  What they did was get some black 'academic' (Black Gender Studies) to provide a defence of the indefensible. Her article is well worth a read in that it was reminiscent of the old Black And White Minstrels with its made-up words and dictionary-bending whoppers passing for erudition.

Here are some choice excerpts:

Black students have not only excelled at traditional debate [sure, we see it all the time] but they have invented new modes of competitive forensics, including a more performative style of debate that incorporates rap music, poetry and personal anecdotes.  Ameena and Korey [the 'winners'] are being targeted because they mastered the rules of the debate world and then broke the rules masterfully.

Yeah, dem rules tings be whiteman sheet.

Just two posts back I wrote that America in 2050 will be like Brazil today.  I was wrong.  If this 'debate' is anything to go by it'll be worse.

Monday, 16 June 2014

Comment policy update

We're obviously having problems with comments again.  The improvements that followed NU's departure have been fading away and many threads are degenerating into irrelevant trolling.

Two issues in particular I want to address:

First is the denigration of Nilus/GTRman, Brighton etc. and the constant references to black queers. I have no idea what's behind this but the effect is to mess up with the threads.

Second relates to invective.  We can all vent here but there have to be some limits. It seems the Google warning has been withdrawn - I have no idea why - and I don't want to give them any further excuses for reapplying it.  So I don't want screaming comments along the lines of 'DIRTY FILTHY KIKE BASTARDS I PISS ON YOUR GRAVES YA DIRTY FUCKING C*NTS!!!!!'     Look, we can all make our point very well without degenerating to such puerile invective.  And it drags the blog down to the level of the National Enquirer and such like.

There are also a number of other  trolling activities going on which are more opportunistic.

May I point out that it's a pain in the ass to have to delete comments in Blogger so I intend to track IP addresses of offenders and block them permanently.

Meanwhile the 99% of you who make this blog with your comments please keep 'em coming.

Friday, 13 June 2014

America in 2050..and it's beautiful

That is the headline in a recent National Geographic article. And this is the face of the new America. Suitably edited to make it look more attractive than your normal mulatto. The author (Zac Cheney-Rice) is black and the article itself, lacking as it does even a semblance of intellectual or academic rigour, lends further credence to the view that any black who can throw two words together in print has a bright future as a (cough) writer.

This clown ends up with the following gem ' let us applaud these growing rates of intermixing for what they are: An encouraging symbol of a rapidly changing America. 2050 remains decades away, but if these images are any preview, it's definitely a year worth waiting for'.

Well there's an old adage Zac, which undoubtedly you never encountered, which says 'be careful what you wish for'.  You see, your puerile and logic-free musings currently provide you with a handsome living as a "writer". Be assured that you're in this happy position purely on the basis of your race. A White person with your level of skills and insight would be tossing hamburgers in MacDonald's. The reason? A combination of illogical White guilt and a program undertaken by treasonous nation-wreckers to destroy White America.

Now here's my point.  The demographic profile that you deem to be 'worth waiting for' is very similar to Brazil's today. And probably, in your ignorance and naivety, you think this to be a good thing. After all isn't Brazil vibrant, exciting and multicultural? Indeed it is. But it's also, in common with all mulatto countries, grindingly poor for the vast majority of the population. There are enormous disparities in income between the wealthiest and the poorest. The latter, as this image illustrates, often live in close and envious proximity to the wealthy, albeit separated by a cordon sanitaire more impermeable than the Siegfried Line. 

Now here's another piece of information of which you are undoubtedly unaware. The poverty/wealth trajectory tracks almost perfectly with skin colour. See that splendid high-rise with its swimming pools and tennis courts?  The people living there will be, with some rare exceptions, lily white. The unfortunates in the favelas on whom they look down, literally and figuratively, will be black/dark skinned. The various other points on the spectrum will also reflect this colour:wealth correlation.

So here's the thing, Zac.  When productive Whites make up the bulk of the population, as is the case in the West today, they can afford to indulge and subsidise a parasitic black undertow. (You know, like writers who can't write). However in Brazil (or in your longed-for 2050 America) that productive White class will be a minority surrounded by a giant sea of poverty-stricken darkies.  When Whites are a small minority they'll be neither willing nor able to continue such patronising and self-indulgent altruism.

That 2050 America that you long for will be a very much poorer country than today's. The middle class and wealthy will represent a vastly diminished proportion of the population, and they'll still be largely White.  And to them you will be (in the unlikely event of your ever coming to their notice) just another negrito from the favela.  If you're lucky they might give you some work cleaning their swimming pools. But they most definitely will not be providing you or any of the other millions of negritos with sinecures for 'writing' or anything else for that matter.

See that shack in the bottom left of the picture above? That's where you'll be in 2050 mulatto America, eking out a living amidst squalor and poverty.

Still think it's worth waiting for?

Tuesday, 10 June 2014

More evidence for climate change

More evidence for climate change emerges as crows, hitherto unknown in the region, flock in large numbers to the Persian Gulf.

Friday, 6 June 2014

Do they really believe this shite?

Ok, you're a one-eyed black dwarf who wants to make it big in Hollywood.  Any chance?   Sammy Davis Junior knew what to do. Become a Jew!  And boy did it work. As it should, given that Hollywood and Tin Pan Alley are owned and run by and for Jews, as they themselves proudly admit

Anyway you'll be happy to know that Sammy's career subsequently prospered and improved even further when he later joined the Church of Satan.

Sammy has an entry on the site Jew Or Not Jew? (a useful reference site) and the following is an excerpt:  'If there's one thing we can't understand (actually, there are lots of things we can't understand, but bear with us) it's someone who isn't Jewish that chooses to be so. Seriously, who in their right mind looks and says: "You know what? Thousands of years of prejudice, violence and misery with little end in sight sounds good to me. Sign me up!" Oh sure, it's a great religion, wonderful culture, good sandwiches, yadda yadda yadda. And we've all been indoctrinated that there's nobility in being the underdog, the shlimazel done good. Heck, plenty of people marry in and we understand how that happens, too. But choosing this kind of inevitable heartbreak of your own accord? On purpose?  So, do we welcome someone as famous and distinguished as Sammy Davis Jr. with open arms? Every day of the week and twice on shabbos. But do we understand his decision? Not even a little bit.'

Here's my question.  Do they really believe this shite? And if so, how could they? I mean being Jewish is an open sesame for the media, a guarantee of a glittering career irrespective of talent.  The only other requirement being to have a pulse. Jesus, they even got the equine Sarah Jessica Parker classified as a beauty.  As GTRman/Nilus has demonstrated in copious detail, much of what we see in the media is one Jew talking with another Jew about things important to Jews on a media platform owned by Jews. And anyone who even hints that Jews may be less than 100% wonderful is consigned to oblivion.  Ask Mel Gibson or Helen Thomas.

If the excerpt above actually represents the way they see flies so much in the face of all available facts as to be literally psychotic. Literally psychotic. Which in turn could explain the phenomenon of Jews never owning up to even the possibility of their having contributed in some small way to their historical problems.

If so the prognosis for future Jew/goy relations is grim.

Monday, 2 June 2014

Has Snowden failed the 9/11 Litmus Test?

The 9/11 Litmus Test is a powerful tool, the objective of which is to establish the real bona fides of prominent figures. It's a simple test based on the following principle: He who assigns responsibility for the 9/11 attacks to fanatical Muslim 'pilots' seizing the planes and crashing them into buildings is at best a coward, at worst a fraud. I make this bold assertion because the evidence against such a simplistic explanation for 9/11 is simply overwhelming.

I used to see Edward Snowden as a true patriot and hero. But his interview with Brian Williams of NBC seriously undermines this view.  Here's an excerpt: “You know, and this is a key question that the 9/11 Commission considered. And what they found, in the post-mortem, when they looked at all of the classified intelligence from all of the different intelligence agencies, they found that we had all of the information we needed as an intelligence community, as a classified sector, as the national defense of the United States to detect this plot.”

Well, duh!  As one commentator observed 'if he is implying we should believe somebody who knew about 9/11 was not actually planning it, then Snowden is a psiops plant.'  Sadly, or so it seems to me, that's just what he's implying. We also have to ask ourselves why he used a Jewish lawyer (Glen Greenwald) as his conduit who now, quelle surprise, is planning to write a best seller about Snowden's revelations. Or those revelations deemed fit to print.

There are other troubling aspects. You see, like all American media, NBC is totally in thrall to the government (the Real Permanent Government, that is).  The RPG could have stopped this interview with a finger click. Yet they left it go ahead despite, as we're constantly warned, Snowden's possessing information hugely damaging to American interests.  And Snowden, as well as glossing over 9/11,  never said anything about the elephant in the room, the Zionist control of America's political and national security systems.

Here's a possibility, albeit pure speculation on my part. Given that more and more people question the official 9/11 fairy tale, and given the explosive (!) impact of the truth's emergence, could there be a plot whereby a whistle blower who 'has seen everything' reveals 'all'.......and this 'all' happens to support the official 9/11 version, and as a bonus turns a blind eye to broader Zionist shenanigans?  Think about it. For the sake of a little bit of collateral damage a lot a boxes would be ticked.

Will we ever know?