Frozen for the Chosen

I’ve never thought the difference between Western and non-Western societies is that we’re good and they’re bad. No, we’re bad and they’re worse. Mass immigration is ensuring that we get more like them every day. The two most powerful engines of human conflict are race and religion, so America, Britain and Europe now have a lot of horsepower under their hoods. Sooner or later someone will stamp on the gas and start burning rubber. The prospect deeply concerns the Anti-Defamation League, America’s foremost anti-bigotry crusaders, and they want to ward disaster off with tough, no-nonsense laws:

All Americans have a stake in an effective response to violent bigotry. Hate crimes demand a priority response because of their special emotional and psychological impact on the victim and the victim’s community. The damage done by hate crimes cannot be measured solely in terms of physical injury or dollars and cents. Hate crimes may effectively intimidate other members of the victim’s community, leaving them feeling isolated, vulnerable and unprotected by the law. By making members of minority communities fearful, angry and suspicious of other groups – and of the power structure that is supposed to protect them – these incidents can damage the fabric of our society and fragment communities. ADL has long been in the forefront of national and state efforts to deter and counteract hate-motivated criminal activity. Hate crime statutes are necessary because the failure to recognize and effectively address this unique type of crime could cause an isolated incident to explode into widespread community tension. (“Hate Crimes: Introduction”, www.adl.org)

Or to put it another way: “Smite the White!” The ADL is really in the forefront of the effort to turn America into a Judeocracy. Hate laws are part of the journey towards that shining Police State on a Hill. Look at the false assumption that underlies them: that hate crime is committed only by the majority against minorities. Look at the lie used to justify them: that they protect the “fabric of our society.” If the ADL were really concerned about that, it would campaign against something that really rips society’s fabric and “fragments communities”: mass immigration. The ADL is, of course, vehemently in favor of mass immigration. Its notoriously sleazy director, Abe Foxman, wants conflict because he can exploit conflict. “Diversity is Our Strength” is a typical piece of Jewish chutzpah. It’s a blatant, bare-faced lie. A diverse society is a divided society that will fall apart unless it’s glued together with authoritarianism.

When the glue weakens – when communism collapses in Yugoslavia or Saddam is toppled in Iraq – the society then falls apart and the suffering is immense. As Horace said: “You can drive Nature out with a pitchfork, but she will return.” He also said: “They change their skies, not their souls, who cross the sea.” Over the past few years many people in Britain and Europe have been learning, much to their surprise and disappointment, that Muslims didn’t turn into good little gay-loving, feminist-supporting liberal secularists as soon as they stepped off the plane. Even worse, it doesn’t even look as though they want to. I have to say I sympathize. I also have to say I feel sorry for Muslims in Britain and Europe. True, not as sorry as I feel for the whites who suffer at their hands, but Muslims have been pawns in the game described here by the Jewish journalist Larry Auster:

Just the other week I was telling a secular, leftist Jew of my acquaintance, a man in his late sixties, about my idea that the only way to make ourselves safe from the specter of domestic Moslem terrorism is to deport all jihad-supporting Moslems from this country. He replied with emotion that if America deported Moslem fundamentalists, it would immediately start doing the same thing to Jews as well. “It’s frightening, it’s scary,” he said heatedly, as if the Jews were already on the verge of being rounded up. In the eyes of this normally phlegmatic and easy-going man, America is just a shout away from the mass persecution, detention, and even physical expulsion of Jews. Given the wildly overwrought suspicions that some Jews harbor about the American Christian majority who are in fact the Jews’ best friends in the world, it is not surprising that these Jews look at mass Third-World and Moslem immigration, not as a danger to themselves, but as the ultimate guarantor of their own safety, hoping that in a racially diversified, de-Christianized America, the waning majority culture will lack the power, even if it still has the desire, to persecute Jews.

The self-protective instinct to divide and weaken a potentially oppressive majority population may have served Jews well at certain times and places in the past when they truly were threatened. Under current circumstances – in America, the most philo-Semitic nation in the history of the world – it is both morally wrong and suicidal. Not only are the open-borders Jews urging policies harmful to America’s majority population, but, by doing so, they are surely triggering previously non-existent anti-Jewish feelings among them. The tragedy is that once a collective thought pattern gets deeply ingrained, as is the Jews’ historically understandable fear of gentiles, it takes on a life of its own and becomes immune to evidence and reason.... What this means is that in the minds of Jews, any desire on the part of gentiles to maintain an all-gentile country club, or any statement by a Christian, no matter how mild and civilized, that shows any concern about any aspects of the cultural and political influence of secular Jews in American life, is an expression of anti-Jewish bigotry that could easily lead to mass extermination, and therefore it must be ruthlessly suppressed. (“Why Jews Welcome Muslims”, FrontPageMagazine.com, 22nd June 2004)

But some Jews have now decided it’s time to push Muzzies off the board, at least so far as public favor and political support go. We get a constant stream of anti-Islamic propaganda from the likes of Larry Auster, Mark Steyn and the curious white hybrids who follow in their wake: the anti-racist conservatives. Brussels Journal is one of the hybrids’ hang-outs in Europe. “Multi-culti bad! Muzzies worse!” it constantly wails, in between planting kisses on the boots of its ideological overlords. But sometimes it combines wails and kisses in a single article:

A Crime Against Taxpayers of All Cultures

Canadians in the province of Ontario have learned that their government handed out $32.5 million of their tax dollars during the 2006-2007 fiscal year, in a manner that was “not open, transparent, or accountable.” According to a damning report from the province’s auditor-general, James McCarter, the money was given through the Immigration and Citizenship Ministry to various cultural, religious and ethnic groups who would be likely to support Liberal Premier Dalton McGuinty in the upcoming provincial election. Grants were authorized often without written applications or other formal processes, with no official announcement of the possibility of a grant being offered and with little or no accounting of what happened to the money once it was doled out. While some of the groups who received money have a respected and established presence in Canada (for example, the United Jewish Appeal), many of the groups who received funds were previously unknown to the ministry, or seemed to have friends in high places.

Further, little care seemed to be taken distinguishing between moderate or extremist organizations when cheques were being signed. One Sikh gurdwara which received a grant, proudly displays a photograph of the mastermind of the 1985 Air India bombing – the worst terrorist attack in Canadian history – on its premises. Did anyone bother to look into where the money was actually going? And if they did, did they decide that getting votes was so important, that it didn’t matter who was courted? Included on the list of grant recipients: the Armenian Community Centre ($500,000); the Islamic Institute of Toronto ($500,000); the St. George Arab Cultural Centre ($300,000); six Sikh temples ($750,000); the Museum of Hindu Civilization ($200,000); Sri Sathya Sai Baba Centre of Toronto ($250,000); the Iranian-Canadian Community Centre ($200,000). What is more distressing, is who was left out of the gift-giving. A Hindu temple outside Toronto, which had been destroyed by a fire in a post-September 11 hate crime, was told there was no funding available for them to rebuild. (Brussels Journal, 5th August 2007)

Curiously, this stern assault on multi-culti pork-barreling made no mention of the biggest grant of all: the $15m “doled out” to an organization serving Canada’s richest and most powerful ethnic minority. True, the organization was mentioned, but only in puckered-up parenthesis, as it were. According to BJ, it has a “respected and established presence in Canada”: the United Jewish Appeal (UJA). The reference to the “post-September 11 hate crime” was another kiss on those Jewish jackboots: “See, masters? We keep quiet about your looting and we take the concept of ‘hate crime’ seriously! We’re good goys, aren’t we, masters?”

Even a writer who had the courage to name’n’shame the UJA was careful to do the goy grovel as he did so:

Jonathan Kay on the Ontario multiculti payout scandal: Why on earth did United Jewish Appeal get $15-million?

By now, the scandal over payouts from Ontario’s Ministry of Citizenship and Immigration to well-connected religious and ethnic groups is old news. To summarize: Ontario has been giving out tens of millions of dollars to bolster organizations that represent dozens of immigrant and faith groups. As Ontario’s Auditor-General concluded in a July 26 report, many of the grants were handed out on the basis of personal connections: If you managed to shake hands with someone in the Ministry, your group might get a cheque with few questions asked. Thus far, a lot of the attention has focused on a few particularly egregious grants – such as the Ontario Cricket Association getting $1-million (even though the Association itself only asked for $150,000!), and the distribution of hundreds of thousands of dollars to Sikh temples whose members lavish praise on Sikh terrorists, including those who perpetrated the 1985 bombing of Air India Flight 182. But to my mind, the biggest eye-popper was the massive $15-million line item for United Jewish Appeal Federation. That $15-million to this one group represents almost three-quarters of the total funds allocated in 2006-2007. Or, put another way, UJA got three times as much as all 30 other recipient groups combined. Why aren’t people making a bigger deal of this? I hope readers of my columns know that I have nothing against Jews. But isn’t this a little crazy?

What makes things even more bizarre is that the Jewish community in Ontario (and just about everywhere in North America for that matter) tends to skew upwards in education and, therefore, earnings. The rate of poverty among Jews in Toronto is about half of what it is for the city as a whole – 12% versus 23%. Moreover, the fundraising capability of Jewish community groups such as UJA is legendary: I have been to UJA events where millions of dollars were raised in a single night. In May, 2006, a single Toronto businessman (Larry Tanenbaum) gave $50-million to the endowment arm of UJA, bringing its asset base close to $200 million. For most other comparatively-sized Canadian faith/ethnic groups, such as aboriginals or blacks, these numbers are in the realm of science fiction. I don’t think the government should be in the business of subsidizing any ethnic or faith groups. But if you are going to be running these sort of giveaways, at least give the cash to groups representing communities in need. This is no knock against the UJA or the Jewish community it serves: Indeed, it is a tribute to the generosity and high-mindedness of Jewish benefactors that they donate so much. But given the reality that this community is already so comparatively wealthy and well-served by private charity, it is worth asking why $15-million was dispensed to the UJA when, to pick one example at random, the city’s Filipino Centre got $50,000, or 1/300th as much. (The National Post, 11th August 2007)

“Why aren’t people making a bigger deal of this?” the writer asks. He then answers his own question: “I hope readers of my columns know that I have nothing against Jews.” He’s rightly scared of what might happen if anyone did start to think he had something against Jews. ’Coz Jews are great! Their presence blesses Western societies more than we can know. Okay, they’re insatiably greedy, incessantly selfish and irredeemably dishonest, but everyone’s got their little foibles. No need to single Jews out for special criticism. In fact, there’s no need to criticize Jews at all, but lots of need to lavish praise on them. That’s the rule followed by the wisest conservatives and Jonathan Kay was unwise to cast even a pebble against the UJA.

But keeping quiet about Jewish misbehavior is wise only in the short term. Brussels Journal points the finger at the ethnic arsonists in the Western house but doesn’t mention who opened the door to them or handed them cans of gasoline and boxes of matches once they were inside. Mass immigration has “MADE IN JUDEA” stamped all over it. Multi-culti and anti-racism are Jewish inventions designed to benefit Jews. They’re the thread-like hyphae of a fungus growing into a living tree and sucking out nourishment. Israel is the body of the fungus and organizations like the ADL and UJA are its hyphae in the West. If you visit the UJA’s website, you’ll find that its largest payout in 2005-6 was $16,668,344 for “Israel and Overseas Allocations.” Next came $12,083,939 for “Jewish Education and Identity.” Can you imagine how Jews would react to any organization that sought tax-payers’ money to promote “White Education and Identity”?

Oy, my ears are ringing just thinking about it! The central rule of Western societies is that every group should seek its own advantage and put its own interests first except the group that actually built those societies: whites. The Western tree has to raise its branches, spread its roots and keep its rich sap flowing not for its own benefit but for the benefit of the ethnic fungi growing through wounds in its bark. The wounds were inflicted by Marxism and liberalism, but our bark was always too thin. Then again, if the Western tree had had thicker bark, it would now have a shorter trunk and branches. The same innate features that helped make whites uniquely freedom-loving and creative have made us vulnerable to the uniquely freedom-hating and uncreative Jews. What would the West have achieved by now if it hadn’t had the albatross of mass immigration and multi-racialism around its neck? I don’t know, but I do know who tied the albatross there and why it’s proving so hard for us to recognize this fact. A race that believes truth has objective existence finds it hard to fathom the mentality of a race that believes truth is purely subjective: “Votever’s best for us!”

If you don’t understand your enemy, you find it much harder to repel his attacks. If you don’t even realize those attacks are taking place, you won’t even attempt to repel them. That’s why Jews are so resolutely opposed to genuine free speech, because it exposes their behavior to scrutiny and criticism. In Britain, Europe and Canada, they’ve already got the gags in place; in the US, they’ve got a constitutional obstacle to overcome. “Hate crime” legislation is a first step to removing that obstacle:

Hate Crimes: Frequently Asked Questions

Do hate crime laws violate the First Amendment or punish thought?

No. Hate crimes laws punish violent acts, not beliefs or thoughts – even violent thoughts. Hate crime statutes do not punish, nor prohibit in any way, namecalling, verbal abuse or expressions of hatred toward any group even if such statements amount to hate speech. It is only when the perpetrator crosses the line from speech to criminal action that hate crime laws might come into effect. (www.adl.org)

Of course “hate crime laws” punish thoughts! They also encourage thoughts. The thoughts they punish are white hostility to non-whites; the thoughts they encourage are non-white hostility to whites. The laws overseen by the ADL are based on the lie that the white majority is an ever-present danger to minorities. The truth is the complete opposite, but the laws are designed to make whites feel guilt and non-whites feel resentment. The ADL wants to exploit that guilt and resentment to undermine the First Amendment even more. When you intend to take a nation’s freedoms away, don’t try and take them all at once. Even sheeple can wake up and protest if you do that. No, take them a little at a time while constantly proclaiming your pure intentions: “We’re not taking freedom away, we’re defending the fabric of society! We’re binding communities together! We’re on the side of Good and he who is not for us is against us!”

Well, anyone who thinks Abe Foxman is on the side of good needs his head testing. The inquisitor general of the ADL is only on the side of “Vot’s good for us”, like Mike Whine, the head of the freedom-hating, hate-law-supporting Community Security Trust in the UK. As the farce of Western liberalism enters its final act and the stage shudders before cataclysmic collapse, what more appropriate names could we have for two of the chief villains hiding their predatory intent behind masks of compassion and concern? A Jew called Foxman and a Jew called Whine. The Great Casting Director in the Sky is trying to tell us something and it’s long past time we woke up and listened. Foxman, Whine and other Jews want white societies frozen for the Chosen. They and their liberal allies promised us a tropical paradise through mass immigration and “diversity”, but they’re really marching us towards arctic perdition.

LUKE O’FARRELL

---