Jewish Nazis by E. Michael Jones

[ada]

http://www.culturewars.com/2011/JewishNazis.htm

Jewish Nazis

by E. Michael Jones
-------------------------------------------
 Dorothy Rabinowitz recently announced the death of multiculturalism in the Wall Street Journal. Citing the pronouncements of the prime ministers of England, France, and Germany, she crowed: "Who would have believed that in the space of a few weeks the leaders of the three major European powers would publicly denounce multiculturalism and declare in so many words that it was a proven disaster and a threat to society?"

Rabinowitz claimed that multiculturalism had "led to segregated communities"; it had also "helped nurture radical Islam's terrorist cells." Rabinowitz goes on to claim that multiculturalism, which she describes as "the unofficial established religion of the universities," is, in fact, "a faith whose requirements have shaped every aspect of cultural, economic and political life in Western democracies for the last 50 years.particularly Louis Marshall], internal cohesion, well-funded programs, sophisticated lobbying techniques, well-chosen non-Jewish allies and good timing."

If timing is everything the timing was all wrong in Rabinowitz's attack on the connection between Major Hasan, Islam and multiculturalism. One the one hand, Islam was changing the political face of the Middle East through non-violent, pro-democracy rallies. Egypt had just toppled its dictator in a bloodless revolution. (Paradoxically, the same pro-democracy forces that neocons like Rabinowitz had promoted as agents of change in the Middle East were finally having their day, and the neocons were upset being pro-democracy in the Middle East means invariably being anti-Israel.) On the other hand, at the very moment when the Islamic world was becoming a paradigm of non-violent democratic revolution of the sort that the neocons all claimed they desired in the mid-East, Americans were treated to a spate of mass murders perpetrated by Jews.

That you may not have noticed this is not surprising. Ever since the Leo Frank trial in America, the Dreyfus case in France, and the Mendil Beilis case in Russia, the Jewish-dominated press has adopted a policy of 1) suppressing the evidence whenever a suspect in a crime turns out to be a Jew and 2) accusing anyone who brings up this fact of anti-Semitism. In addition to that, the Jewish dominated media work for the exoneration of any Jew brought to trial.  The pattern had already been established in the 19th century. Once Jews gained significant control over the press, they instituted a policy which suppressed the identification of Jews as criminals, or as a fallback position, once the Jewishness of the perpetrator was inescapable, of proclaiming the suspect as an innocent victim of anti-Semitism. The trial of Leo Frank is a good case in point, and it has served as a template for the Jewish press ever since. As one writer put it in 1892:

It is a strange phenomenon which otherwise is evident in no other religious group that the Jewish public opinion in the Austrian press always shows solidarity with Jewish criminals. Every time a Jew is convicted of a crime, it is take as new proof for pervasive anti-Semitism. Every conviction is evidence of anti-Semitism.[3]

II

 

Dorothy Rabinowitz could have bolstered her case against multiculturalism if she had cited the story of Maksim Gellman.  One week before her article appeared in the Wall Street Journal, Maksim Gelman, a recent Ukrainian immigrant, who became an American citizen in 2005, went on a two-day killing spree from February 11 to February 12, 2011, which resulted in the stabbing deaths of four people, including his girlfriend's mother, and the wounding of five others. The only problem in this scenario, at least from Rabinowitz's point of view, is that Gelman is a Jew. He was certainly a product of Jewish-inspired multiculturalism which opened this country's borders in 1965, but it is unlikely that he was inspired by jihadism, especially since his father drove an ambulance for a Jewish organization.  If Rabinowitz were interested in understanding the psychology of mass murderers, she should have focused on the Jews because it was they who were making the news as mass murderers in early 2011, not the Muslims.

The story of Jared Loughner is another case in point. Roughly one month before Maksim Gelman's homocidal rampage in New York,  on January 8, 2011, Loughner went on a shooting spree that resulted in the death of six people and left 14 wounded. One of the people whom Loughner shot but did not kill was United States Representative Gabrielle Giffords, who is Jewish. The response to the killings was both predictable and immediate. Loughner was accused of being a right-wing anti-Semite whose actions had been set in motion by right-wing talk radio and politicians like Sara Palin, whose website featured a picture of Giffords in the cross hairs of a gun sight. The hate crime story circulated widely until the facts started to emerge. Loughner, it turns out, was a Jew himself. In fact, according to some reports, he was a member of the same synagogue that Giffords attended. To make matters more complicated, his favorite book was Mein Kampf. Loughner was, in other words, a Jewish Nazi.  According to the Jewish Telegraph Agency:

Bryce Tierney, a friend of Loughner from high school, told Mother Jones magazine that the alleged gunman posted "Mein Kampf" as a "favorite book" on a social media site in part to provoke his mother, who Tierney says is Jewish.

Once it became apparent that Loughner was Jewish, and once it had become clear that it was going to be impossible to maintain the right-wing, anti-Semite story line, the story began to change. The ADL then released an "analysis of the messages written by Arizona shooting suspect Jared Lee Loughner" which "revealed Wednesday that the he may not have been motivated by anti-Semitism when shooting Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, but rather by a profound mistrust of government."

"While there is still much we don't know about Loughner, his online footprint offers one window into his mindset in the months leading up to the killings," said Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director. "The writings that have come to light so far suggest someone who probably was not associated with any extremist group or movement, but who has a generic distrust of government and a vague interest in conspiracy theories."
In other words, the ADL was telling us that the fact that Mein Kampf was Loughner's favorite book had nothing to do with his attempted assassination of a Jewish member of Congress. The only way this makes sense is if we look at the already mentioned pattern of Jewish organizations and newspapers, who exonerate automatically any suspect who happens to be Jewish. But even granting that, it's probably just as accurate to say that the concept of a Jewish Nazi is simply too difficult for the media to process.

 

The historic precedent of Jewish Nazis assassinating Jewish politicians, however, has already been established, no matter how alien it seems to 21st American media categories. Anton Graf von Arco auf Valley was a Jewish Nazi in the most literal sense of the term.  In February 1919, he assassinated Kurt Eisner, the Jewish premier of the Bavarian soviet republic. Arco Valley had served in the German army during World War I and upon his return to civilian life in Munich he was appalled at what he saw as the Jewish influence which took over German culture in the wake of their defeat. Some speculate that he decided to kill Eisner to prove himself to his nationalist friends in the Thule Society, but the mystery remains. Why would a Jew other than Groucho Marx want to be part of an organization that would not accept him as a member? Politics may have had something to do with it. Arco Valley is reported to have said that "Eisner is a Bolshevist, a Jew; he isn't German; he doesn't feel German; he subverts all patriotic thoughts and feelings. He is a traitor to this land.JDL founder Meir] Kahane, who learned nothing from the Nuremberg Laws, had exactly the same notions about the Arabs.

 

Shahak and Mershinzky conclude their book with a condemnation of "those who are silent and do not condemn Jewish Nazism, as exemplified by the ideologies of Goldstein and Ginsburgh, especially if they are Jews, [because they] are guilty of the terrible consequences that may yet develop as a result of their silence."

 

III

 

Seven years after Baruch Goldstein murdered 29 Palestinians in the cave of the patriarch in Hebron, and less than 5 years after Shahak and Merzinsky explained how Goldstein was a Jewish Nazi, The Believer, a film written and directed by Henry Bean about an orthodox Jew who becomes a neo-Nazi won the Grand Jury Prize at the 2001 Sundance film festival. The film is based loosely on the life of Daniel Burros, a neo-Nazi who committed suicide in the mid-'60s after a New York Times reporter wrote an article exposing him as a Jew. According to Bean:

 

Burros was staying at a camp in the Poconos with the neo-Nazis when the story in the New York Times claiming that he was Jewish came out.  The Nazis weren't upset. They were saying just sit down; we can talk about this. But Burros went up to his room, put on a Wagner record and shot himself. He killed himself within an hour of the story coming out.

 


 
Bean began discussing the Danny Burros story in the '70s when he was a writer living on the West Coast. He began to see Burros as typifying a particular kind of Jew. "He was a rabbi manque.  Antisemitism is a form of practicing Judaism.  He's sort of a rabbi after all. A Jew by day, a Nazi by night. . . . He was desperately hiding something and compulsively trying to bring it out at the same time. People are drawn to contradiction. He undergoes a conversion, but not back to the Torah." By telling the story of the Jewish Nazi, Bean concluded, "I began to understand what Judaism was."

 

Bean's explanation of how a Jew can become a Nazi is at root theological. Through a series of flashbacks, the viewer sees Danny Balint, as he is called in the movie, arguing with his Yeshiva teacher about whether Abraham spared Isaac's life, as recounted in the Genesis account, or whether, as Danny maintains, he died on Mt. Moriah. Danny's problems with religion stem from the fact that he takes the Torah much more seriously and literally than his fellow Yeshiva bokkers. When one of them tells Danny that "Fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom," he becomes rhapsodic: "Fear of the Lord," he responds, "makes you afraid of everything. Do you even believe in God? I'm the only one who does believe. I see Him for the power-drunk madman that he is. And we're supposed to worship such a deity? I say never."

 

At this point the teacher tells one of the students "to ask Rabbi Singer remove Danny from my class," something which prompts Danny to turn his eyes upward and say to God, "Then let Him destroy me now. Let Him destroy me like the conceited bully that He is. Go ahead."

 

 Like Jared Loughner, Danny Balint is a Jew who has read Mein Kampf and thinks it's a great book. "Did you ever read Mein Kampf?" Danny asks his fellow skinheads when they end up in jail after a fight with two blacks. "Hitler had some of his best ideas in prison." Danny admires Hitler, especially his views on race. In the middle of a meeting of more moderate right-wingers at an upscale Manhattan apartment, Danny, who is wearing a red T-shirt emblazoned with a black swastika, interrupts the speaker to opine that "race is central to everything we're talking about tonight. Race is the source of religion." When the speaker objects that this would mean "Germany all over again." Danny responds by saying, "Isn't that what we want? Germany all over again but done right this time?"

 

When Danny gets a call from a New York Times reporter, he gives an eloquent articulation of anti-Semitism. Judaism "is a sickness. . . . The real Jew is a nomad and a wanderer. He has no roots and no attachments. He universalizes everything. All he can do is buy and sell and manipulate markets. It's all mental. Marx, Freud, Einstein: what have they given us? Communism, infantile sexuality and the atom bomb. They want nothing but nothingness, nothing without end."

 

The main issue in The Believer is theological. Danny has penetrated to the heart of the Jewish religion by understanding that the Jew worships Nothingness. As he says to the Times reporter, the Jews "want nothing but nothingness, nothing without end."

 

The Times reporter is impressed, but as we have come to expect from reporters, at the moment when the real issue is framed, the reporter changes the subject. "Wow," he tells Danny, "You're incredibly articulate, but how can you believe all this when you're a Jew yourself?"

 

When confronted by the contradiction at the heart of his identity, Danny becomes violent. At first he denies he's Jewish, then he threatens to sue the Times if the reporter publishes the article: "It's reckless disregard. I'm going to sue your fucking Jew paper." Finally, he takes out a gun and puts it into the mouth of the reporter and announces, as if unaware of the contradiction: "If you publish that article, I will kill myself."

 

All of the themes we have been discussing—Jews, racism, Nazism, nihilism, and violence—are all present in this powerful scene. At this point, they begin to coalesce into a coherent picture. The Jewish Nazi is a political terrorist, but he is, first of all, a Nazi, which is to say a particular kind of socialist. Jews were drawn to socialism and communism throughout the 19th century. In fact Jews made up the backbone of those movements. Jews were drawn to those movements because they provided both an antidote and a way to give political expression to the Jewish nihilism which came into being when the Enlightenment arrived in the shtetl and destroyed rabbinic Judaism. Deprived of a coherent worldview, the Jew still had a sense of himself as a member of the chosen race which could now only find expression in revolutionary violence. The best way for the shtetl Jew to bring about tikkun olan was via dynamite and the Colt revolver.

 

Because Danny lives in an age in which socialism has failed, he is unsure of how to focus the revolutionary violence that is going to deliver him from the strong pull toward non-being which Jewish nihilism creates. Should he kill the reporter from the Jew newspaper or should he kill himself? Actually, the question needs to be reframed in light of what Danny actually said, namely, "If you publish that article, I will kill myself."  Should Danny the Nazi kill Danny the Jew? In a fantasy he picked up after hearing a holocaust survivor describe how a Nazi soldier killed his son, Danny plays the role of both Jew and Nazi soldier.

 

JUDAISM IS NIHILISTIC

 

Judaism, according to the theology proposed by The Believer, is essentially nihilistic. The Jews "want nothing but nothingness, nothing without end." This theme gets developed throughout the film. When Danny's girlfriend asks him to explain the difference between God's apophatic character and "Him not existing at all," Danny replies, "there is no difference." When she tells him that "Christianity's silly but at least there's something to believe in," Danny responds by saying, "Judaism is nothing. Nothing but nothingness." Then as if reconsidering the issue, Danny says, "Judaism isn't really about belief. It's about doing things."

 

"And belief follows?" his girlfriend asks.

 

"Nothing follows."

 

Eventually his girlfriend catches on. After setting out a seder meal for Danny, she says he should sit down and take part in the meal because God "commands it whether he exists or not."

 

Like Jacob, Danny's girlfriend concludes that there is no point in fighting God. "We can fight Him and be crushed. Or we can submit."

 

"And be crushed," says Danny.

 

After their rejection of Christ, the Jews confected a religion which is based on the absence of Logos, which is to say, the absence of Being, which is to say, nothing. If the Eucharist in the tabernacle in the Catholic Church can be termed "the real presence," then what the Jew who rejected Christ worships in his synagogue can be termed "the real absence," which is another word for nothing. The Jew worships nothing; or better, the Jew worships nothingness. The Jew, as Jacques Derrida has pointed out malgre lui but amply in his deconstructive literary criticism, is obsessed with the absence of presence or the presence of absence.

 

Nihilism leads inevitably to violence because violence, which is a manifestation of the arbitrary and autonomous will, is the only way that the acting person can assert his existence in a world without Logos. Violence is an extreme form of self-assertion, and only extreme forms of assertion are powerful enough to prevent the slide into non-being to which the Jewish nihilist is exposed by the very fact that he is Jewish. That is so because Jews worship the absence of being and as a result "want nothing but nothingness, nothing without end." Judaism is about doing things because nihilism is ultimately about doing things, because action is the only thing that prevents dissolution into non-being in a universe based on nothingness.

 

Nihilism, in other words, leads inevitably to violence. So to get back to the plot of The Believer, when Danny goes to a Jewish bookstore, he meets one of his former Yeshiva classmates, who invites him to the synagogue for services--the same synagogue, it turns out, where Danny planted a bomb, which failed to go off. This time he plants another bomb, timed to go off during Sabbath services, at which he decides to read the Torah.  When Danny goes to the synagogue, he meets one of his former Yeshiva classmates, who calls him a "Jewish Nazi." By showing up to davin at the synagogue where he has planted a bomb, Danny the Nazi finally succeeds in killing Danny the Jew. But since he dies reciting the Torah, it is equally accurate to say the Danny the Jew ends up killing Danny the Nazi.

 

At the end of the film, after Danny blows up the synagogue in which he is praying, we next see him running up a flight of stairs at the Yeshiva. At the top of one flight, Danny sees his former teacher, who now agrees with Danny, claiming now that "Isaac died on Mt. Moriah and was reborn in the world to come," but Danny runs past him up yet another flight of steps, causing the teacher to ask, "Danny, where are you going. Don't you know? There's nothing up there." Jewish nihilism, in other words, leads to Jewish violence. To be continued.

 

E. Michael Jones is the editor of Culture Wars.

[Yo Mama]

E. Michael Jones is full of crap.  His only loyalty is to the Jewish cult of Christ-insanity.  He places fantasy(religion) over reality(biology).

 :up:

[Christopher Marlowe]

Another penetrating Yo Mama review. Hey, Yo, do you ever actually read anything?  Or do you just post atheist crap?

[Yo Mama]

Another penetrating Yo Mama review. Hey, Yo, do you ever actually read anything?

Yep, I read this crap when it was posted the first time a few weeks ago.  And I've read E. Michael Jones garbage before.  So I already know what he's about.  He's a traditional Christard race denier.   :roll:

[Christopher Marlowe]

Yep, I read this crap when it was posted the first time a few weeks ago.  And I've read E. Michael Jones garbage before.  So I already know what he's about.  He's a traditional Christard race denier.   :roll:

But your response is always the same, and it has nothing to do with the content of E M Jones has written. You always just find a reason to insult Christianity. Why not actually find some statement that Jones has made that is logically flawed, or point to some other internal inconsistency?  In other words, why not do a meaningful critique?

Most of your posts are starting to look like a stamped signature. "I don't believe in Jesus, and I find the whole idea absurd. - Yo Mama."  We get it.  You are not a Christian. You don't believe in God.  

Do you ever get the feeling that some of the most adamant proponents of certain topics are actually insecure in their own beliefs, and perhaps are overcompensating to make up for their insecurity? "The lady doth protest too much, methinks."

I didn't think that atheists could have a crisis in faith...Would a lapsed atheist pray on occasion?  And if he did, would he ever confess that, or would he just keep it to himself?  I guess there is no point in confessing sin if one doesn't believe in God.

And some atheist might dispute that last remark by saying that there is no such thing as sin, but I would wonder what it is when a man does what he knows to be wrong. Every man violates his own standards on occasion. Christians would say that a man sins. I suppose an atheist might say that a man just does what he does, and then he moves on.  

But then there would be no right and no wrong for that man; and he could never say that any man did rightly or wrongly, because it would be hypocritical for a man to hold others to a higher standard than he holds himself.  

And of course there can be no absolute right or wrong without a God, because right and wrong would only be a matter of opinion.

[ada]

Yo mama is most likely a jewish kiddy atheist.
He has not much to say except how to insult peoples opinions.
Learn tolerance please though it may be hard for you cause of
your talmudic view of thinking.
Some time and if you ask for; Jesus may be able to open your eyes.

[joeblow]

Please keep it civil and on topic.

Thanks.

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

The real Jew is a nomad and a wanderer. He has no roots and no attachments. He universalizes everything. All he can do is buy and sell and manipulate markets. It's all mental. Marx, Freud, Einstein: what have they given us? Communism, infantile sexuality and the atom bomb. They want nothing but nothingness, nothing without end."

Yep, Jewish Nihilism—the only kind of Nihilism.