There are few things more pathetic than a university that restricts free speech for the BNP, but that supports the principle of freedom of speech.
I went to Kent University and studied law and saw for myself just how pathetic the far left and liberals are on the issue of free speech.
Whilst every che guevara worshipping chinless wonder is allowed to spread their nonsense on campus, the one point of view that is surpressed is nationalism.
Paedophiles are more popular on most campus's in the country than nationalists, and this is simply due to the fact that the kids that go to university are brainwashed by the left as soon as they enter the places.
The NUS, the academics and the staff all push on the kids leftism in all its forms, from liberalism to communism.
Whilst I was working in the Law Clinic at Kent University the National Front held a demonstration at Margate at which about 25 of their members attended. The university rent a mob lefty idiots organised a counter demo and with their self aggrandising nonsense depicted themselves as the socialists heroes and heirs of Stalingrad for standing in the street for an hour shouting 'Nazi scum off our streets'.
The fact that most of the idiots on the demo were a bunch of henriettas and jeremys from posh middle class areas of the country and did not even live in Margate and also all of them supported the NUS policy on No Platform for the BNP or NF, made their claim for ownership of Margate and their defence of liberty a total joke.
The problem with the liberals and left though is that they lack any sense of self irony, they are hypocrites who are too stupid to stand back and realise just how stupid they are. Therefore they keep on being stupid.
I wrote in the student magazine that as a defender of free speech, it was worse to censor the NF than allow them to speak. That censorhip is the true tyranny, not the presence of 25 people on the streets of margate for an hour.
You can imagine the howls of protest by the idiots.
Suddenly I was as popular as Chris Rock at a Ku Klux Klan meeting.
I was booed when I went into my lectures and the already icy shoulder (middle class snobs dont like working class people) suddenly became a shoulder drenched in liquid nitrogen.
The article below seeks to bring down the No Platform policy and replace it with a One Debate Policy, that of equating the BNP with only one issue that being race. We are to be allowed to debate, but only if we debate race as the left reckon they might be able to win that debate.
Yeah right.
Apparently the vision of free speech that even these academics want to see is a free speech engineered to produce a result they like, in other words we must be allowed to debate race as the LIBERALS AND LEFT reckon they can defeat us on that issue.
Yet again it just reveals how crass these people are.
Free speech is cool, but only if they can win the argument.
Well lets at least see if they have the balls to put their debating rooms where their mouths are.
I was once invited to speak at a conference on Marixsm at Kent University by my old proffessor John Fitzpatrick (NOW AN OBE !)
But of course it was withdrawn as the lefties attending the conference said either I was withdrawn or they would withdraw.
The middle class marxist insipids could not debate with me in case the whole democratic system collapsed.
Or was it simply that like all bullies they like to talk a good fight, but when it comes to it just do not have the brains or balls for a fair fight.
The NUS is an absurd organisation, a sad and pitiful joke, run by idiots for idiots.
You dont get educated in universities these days, you just get to become as stupid as the people who teach you.
Against The Grain: 'I'd invite the BNP to a debate'
Interview by Chris Green
Thursday, 19 June 2008
Dennis Hayes is a visiting professor at the Westminster Institute of Education at Oxford Brookes University. He argues that academics should have the freedom to put forward controversial and unpopular opinions with impunity, no matter how offensive they might be.
Every week there seems to be a new attack on academic freedom, and yet academics aren't defending it, because they don't see what's happening. Many institutions' statements on academic freedom have so many caveats that they cease to be about freedom at all, and the University and College Union has an entirely contradictory view of it: it supports the academic freedom of the left-wing academics it agrees with, while condemning the right-wing ones it disagrees with. But university should be a place where you can challenge every bit of perceived wisdom.
Freedom of speech is under attack throughout society, and the academy should be ensuring that every viewpoint can be heard and challenged, but it's not doing that. Everybody in academia should be able to say what they like, otherwise we're not universities any more, we're just training institutions to school people in the "right" views.
I'm not arguing that academics should go around being gratuitously abusive or insulting people's grandmothers, but freedom of speech is shut down when people are afraid to say anything that might be seen as offensive. Last year, Staffordshire University decided that there would be no political debate during freshers' week, arguing that the new students should be being welcomed rather than being forced to engage in a heated debate. When I went to university, we took it as normal that every lesson you went to would turn your views upside down: now, nobody's views are ever challenged.
Academics should stop self-censoring and be brave enough to accept the right to hold extreme views. It's their responsibility to say whatever they think is true, but they shirk this by blaming anybody but themselves for restricting the freedom to speak: the education system, the government, even the law. And if they're not prepared to challenge their students' views, then the students are getting a raw deal out of university, and so are they: people will start thinking of university as a place to be intellectually safe.
People ask me if I would let the BNP in on a debate, and I say, "Of course I would." It's not because I'm a racist or I like the BNP, it's because you have to respect people's ability to make up their own minds about an issue.
Racist ideas are not stunningly intellectual, and the majority of 18-year-olds would be able to challenge them successfully without any trouble whatsoever. But if you are to defeat these arguments, you at least have to hear them.
Dennis Hayes is the founder of Academics for Academic Freedom, which university lecturers and researchers can sign up to at www.afaf.org.uk.
Showing posts with label free speech. Show all posts
Showing posts with label free speech. Show all posts
Thursday, 19 June 2008
Monday, 16 June 2008
Jewish Chronicle Interview
Had another call from Dana at the Jewish Chronicle today about my article 'Burn Down Hollywood' about how the power of the Jewish elite that run Hollywood is being abused to undermine the Anglo-European community in the US and Europe.
I was very surprised that Dana had not ever heard of or read Kevin McDonalds book 'The Culture of Critique' which chronicles the role of Jewish intellectuals and activists in American society.
The fact that the Jewish community has disproportionate power over various sectors of American society is only controversial to those that think those Jewish groups are doing something wrong.
If you you have nothing to hide, then why fear debate ?
Link Here - http://www.kevinmacdonald.net/books.htm
I explained to Dana that due to historical racism in American society against Jews, this has led to the Jewish community becoming concentrated in various specific sections of US society, and one of those sections is Hollywood, including the media and the entertainment industry.
This racism directed at the Jewish community in the past has also led to their admirable ethno-communalism and their power as a community as defined by lobby groups such as AIPAC. This process is not unique to Jews though, as the Irish who also suffered racism in US society also have organised the second strongest lobby group in US society, this being the Irish-American lobby groups.
Whilst AIPAC dominates American foreign policy towards Israel, the Irish lobby groups historically used their power to allow American donations to fund the IRA terror campaigns to flow to Ireland, assisted US arms entering Ireland and Northern Ireland, used their powers to turn the USA into a refuge for fleeing IRA terrorists and to undermine the British states fight against the IRA through US political interference.
Whilst these lobby groups may have once been set up to serve and DEFEND the interests of the communities they served, I assert that they have begun to abuse that power long ago and have begun to use their political power to undermine other community groups and to hijack American politics for their interests - and not for the interests of all Americans.
I explained to Dana that it is both admirable and legitimate for any community to organise to protect, defend and represent their own community interests in a democracy, but what is not acceptable is when those groups use their power in any society to undermine, usurp, weaken and attack other communities or to undermine the community interests of other communities.
When defence becomes offence this is not acceptable.
I explained that whilst Hollywood has gone past the 1950's era of depicting all Native Americans as barabrous painted savages or the 1930's era of depicting blacks as servants and illiterate cotton pickers, it has now developed a fetish for depicting Muslims as terrorists and the English / Russians / Blondes as evil racists, fascists, crooks, hitmen etc etc.
White English males are now routinely depicted as thugs, nazis or crooks, Muslims as terrorists and white blonde females are depicted as sluts.
I explained that this process is akin to the demonisation and community undermining process as seen recently in Rwanda, in that this process of pumping out negative propaganda is creating an impression that these communities are somehow infereior or innately evil.
Positive Propaganda is acceptable in that it seeks to promote and create positive role models for communities within our culture and thereby develop a culture of aspiration in those communities, but Negative Propaganda is what the media and Hollywood pump out when they seek to conflate criminality with specific racial groups and ethnic communities and when they seek to undermine the cohsion and identities of communities.
Radio Télévision Libre des Mille Collines (RTLM) was a Rwandan radio station which broadcast from 8 July 1993 to 31 July 1994. It played a significant role during the April-July 1994 Rwandan Genocide.
The station's name is French for "Thousand Hills Independent Radio and Television", deriving from the description of Rwanda as "Land of a Thousand Hills". It received support from the government-controlled Radio Rwanda, which initially allowed it to transmit using their equipment.
Widely listened to by the general population, it projected hate propaganda against Tutsis, moderate Hutus, Belgians, and the United Nations mission UNAMIR. It is widely regarded as having played a crucial role in creating the atmosphere of charged racial hostility that allowed the genocide to occur.
Propaganda that seeks to perpetuate or create stereotypes that seek to dehumanise a section of the community or to portray them as sub-humans is a crime against humanity, it is classified as an incitement to genocide.
In the past Hollywood has done this many times ranging from the depictions it pumped out of Native Americans, Blacks and to now the Anglo-European community.
Dana seemed surprised that I said that it is a well known fact that Jews dominate Hollywood. Seeing as this is something the Jewish community frequently boasts about and mentions, then I cannot see why she would be surprised.
For example, Marlon Brando complained on the Larry King Live show on april 5th 1996 that, "Hollywood is run by Jews - it is owned by Jews!". Marlon Brando's chief complaint was that the Jews in Hollywood are always depicted in a way that is positive and aspirational. The Jewish writer Michael Medved wrote in the magazine Moment in 1996 that, "Jewish writers and directors employ unquestionably flattering depictions of Jews for audiences to react with sympathy and affection."
Compare that with recent Hollywood depictions of Catholic Preists, Anglo-European women as promiscuous sluts, white working class people as racist bigots and thuigs, the English as crooks and hooligans and the imagesof blacks as gangsters/ criminals and misogynistic rappers.
The American Moment Magazine was subtitled, "The Jewish Magazine for the '90s".
Its edition of Aug. 1996 stated "Jews Run Hollywood - So What?" The author was the Jewish writer Michael Medved who stated in the article:
"It makes no sense at all to try to deny the reality of Jewish power and prominence in popular culture. Any list of the most influential production executives at each of the major movie studios will produce a heavy majority of recognizably Jewish names."
The article states how the Jewish mogul Michael Eisner, the Head of Walt Disney studios only hired "highly paid Jewish moguls" as producers such as Jeffrey Katzenberg, Michael Ovitz, Joe Roth (former head of 20th Century Fox). Medved emphazised the point that, "The famous Disney organization, which was founded by Walt Disney, a gentile Midwesterner who allegedly harboured anti-Semitic attitudes, now features Jewish personnel in nearly all its most powerful positions."
Medved continued: "Men and women of Jewish background enjoy a vastly disproportionate - if not dominate - influence in Hollywood." He added that those studios which were bought out by the Japanese Sony Corp, and by Rupert Murdoch, still had to hire, "a Yiddish team of long-time industry leaders in all the most powerful positions. When Mitsushita took over MCA-Universal, they did nothing to undermine the unquestioned authority of Universal's legndary - and all-Jewish - management triad of Lew Wasserman, Sid Scheinberg and Tom Pollack."
Medved further wrote that most of today's movie moguls graduated from Ivy League colleges, "where Jews are vastly over-represented - just as they are in Hollywood." He says that nepotism plays a role exemplified with Samuel Goldwyn Pictures being run by the son of founder Samuel Goldwyn and a third generation, Tony Goldwyn, is waiting in the wings to take over. He adds: "This dynastic tendency in American entertainment certainly is a factor in the continued prominence of the Jewish role."
Medved finished the article by saying ;
"The combined weight of so many Jews in one of America's most lucrative and important industries gives the Jews of Hollywood a great deal of political power. They are a major source of money for Democratic candidates. The industry's informal patriarch, MCA chairman Lew Wasserman, wields tremendous personal clout in state and national politics. So do Barbara Streisand, Norman Lear and others."
Note that after winning the Democratic nomination Obama first gave a speech to AIPAC about how he will offer unconditional support to Israel' and also he began to woo Clintons backers in Hollywood such as Barbara Streisand.
The US black run website ' Black Agenda Report ' did a superb article on Obamas speech to AIPAC here ;
http://www.blackagendareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=656&Itemid=1
William A. Donohue, president of the conservative Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, has also pointed out the role of Jews in Hollywood ;
http://mediamatters.org/items/200412210001
He said " Who really cares what Hollywood thinks? All these hacks come out there. Hollywood is controlled by secular Jews who hate Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular. It's not a secret, okay? And I'm not afraid to say it. ... ".
He also said here http://www.heebmagazine.com/articles/view/131 about the Mel Gibson move the Passion of Christ which was labelled anti-semitic ;
"Donohue has calmed down a bit. “I was expressing frustration over the pounding Catholics have taken from disproportionately Jewish studios,” he says over the phone from his New York City office. “We finally had a movie that we liked, and not only does nobody want to put it out, but we’re considered anti-Semitic because we like the movie.” If Donohue actually believed his 2004 contention, he hides it well. “Look, the problem is not Jews,” he says, widening his complaint to encompass a larger secular crowd. “But Hollywood definitely has more secular-minded Jews than Catholics or Muslims. If someone says Jews run Hollywood, how can you deny it?”
Even Mel Gibson who was widely attacked for saying Jews run Hollywoood was forced to recant on bended knee for his heresy of saying what everyone knows but that everyone is usually afraid to say which is that ' the Jews run Hollywood'.
Even Haaretx says this in its article here - http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=690808&contrassID=2
The largest media conglomerate today is Walt Disney Company, whose chairman and CEO, Michael Eisner, who is Jewish ran the company from 1984-2005. The Disney empire, was headed by a man described by one media analyst as "a control freak," included several television production companies (Walt Disney Television, Touchstone Television, Buena Vista Television), its own cable network with 14 million subscribers, and two video production companies.
Eisner was so despised by his own board for the way he ran Disney, that the board set up a 'Save Disney Campaign'. On March 4, 2004, Disney's board of directors, on which Mitchell had served since 1995, named him Michael Eisner's replacement as Chairman of the Board after 43% of the company's shares were voted against Eisner's reelection. Mitchell himself received a 25% negative vote, a fact that led dissident Disney shareholders Roy E. Disney and Stanley Gold to criticize the appointment of Mitchell, whom they saw as Eisner's puppet. On June 28, 2006, Disney announced that its board had elected one of its members, John Pepper, Jr., former CEO of Procter and Gamble, to replace Mitchell as chairman effective January 1, 2007.
As for feature films, the Walt Disney Picture Group, headed by Joe Roth (also a Jew), includes Touchstone Pictures, Hollywood Pictures, and Caravan Pictures. Disney also owns Miramax Films, run by the Weinstein brothers, who have produced such ultra-raunchy movies such as The Crying Game, Priests, and Kids.
The Group in its current form was initiated in 1998 by then Studio Chairman Joe Roth in order to centralize the various production units and to make live-action film production within Disney more cost-efficient. The President of the Group is Oren Aviv, who reports to Dick Cook, Chairman of the Walt Disney Studios. Cook, in turn, reports to Robert (Bob) Iger, President/CEO of The Walt Disney Company. Oren Aviv is also Jewish I believe.
When the Disney Company was run by the Disney family prior to its takeover by Eisner in 1984, it epitomized wholesome, family entertainment. While it still holds the rights to Snow White, under Eisner the company had expanded into the production of graphic sex and gratuitous violence. In addition to TV and movies, the corporation owns Disneyland, Disney World, Epcot Center, Tokyo Disneyland, and Euro Disney.
Time Warner, Inc., is the second of the international media leviathans. The chairman of the board and CEO, Gerald M. Levin, is a Jew. Time Warner’s subsidiary HBO is the country’s largest pay-TV cable network.
Viacom, Inc., headed by Sumner Redstone (born Murray Rothstein), is the third largest megamedia corporation in the country, with revenues of over $10 billion a year. Viacom, which produces and distributes TV programs for the three largest networks, owns 12 television stations and 12 radio stations. It produces feature films through Paramount Pictures, headed by Jewess Sherry Lansing.
Sumner Murray Redstone (born Sumner Murray Rothstein; May 27, 1923) is majority owner and Chairman of the Board of the National Amusements theater chain. Through National Amusements, Sumner Redstone and his family are majority owners of CBS Corporation, Viacom, and Midway Games, MTV Networks, BET, and movie production and distribution Paramount Pictures and DreamWorks movie studios, and are equal partners in MovieTickets.com.
Its publishing division includes Prentice Hall, Simon & Schuster, and Pocket Books. It distributes videos through over 4,000 Blockbuster stores. It is also involved in satellite broadcasting, theme parks, and video games.
Viacom’s chief claim to fame, however, is as the world’s largest provider of cable programming, through its Showtime, MTV, Nickelodeon, and other networks. Since 1989, MTV and Nickelodeon have acquired larger and larger shares of the juvenile television audience.
Number four on the list is Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation, which owns Fox Television Network and 20th Century Fox Films. Murdoch is a Gentile, but Peter Chernin, who heads Murdoch’s film studio and also oversees his TV production, is a Jew.
Peter Chernin (born May 29, 1951 in Harrison, New York) is President and Chief Operating Officer of News Corporation, and Chairman and CEO of the Fox Group. In addition to the Fox duties, he is also a Corporate Director for American Express.
Widely considered one of the most powerful media executives in the world, Chernin has been credited in particular with the success of Fox's cable operations. Prior to joining Fox, Chernin was president and COO of Lorimar Film Entertainment. His other executive roles include positions at Showtime/The Movie Channel, Warner Books and St. Martin's Press.
For example, New World Entertainment, proclaimed by one media analyst as "the premiere independent TV program producer in the United States," is owned by Ronald Perelman, a Jew who also owns Revlon cosmetics.
In 1989, Perelman went back and bought New World Entertainment, the former parent company of Marvel, and then Four Star International. In 1993, Perelman acquired three major entities: SCI Television for $120 million plus $730 million in assumed debt, with seven television stations included in the deal; Genesis Entertainment, and Guthy-Renker. In late 1993, he reorgnanized all of the above-mentioned companies into a single corporation called New World Communications. In 1994, Perelman bought four more stations from the Great American Communications Company for $360 million and four more from Argyle Television Holdings for $716 million. His purchases set the stage for the Fox affiliate switches of 1994 in which Ronald Perelman rewrote the rules for how television affiliates operated and helped establish Fox as a force to be reckoned with. Naturally, Ronald took home a tidy profit: In two deals in 1994 and 1996, Rupert Murdoch bought complete control of New World Communications for $3 billion.
The best known of the smaller media companies, DreamWorks SKG 1994 amid great media hype by recording industry mogul David Geffen, former Disney Pictures chairman Jeffrey Katzenberg, and film direction Steven Spielberg, all three of whom are Jews. The company produces movies, animated films, television programs, and recorded music. Considering the cash and connections that Geffen, Katzenberg, and Spielberg have, DreamWorks may soon be in the same league as the big three.
Two other large production companies, MCA and Universal Pictures, are both owned by Seagram Company, Ltd. The president and CEO of Seagram, the liquor giant, is Edgar Bronfman, Jr., who was also president of the World Jewish Congress.
Of course the issue of the owneship of the major studios in Hollywood is irrelevant as long as those that make the movies are not abusing their powers to undermine or attack other communities, but this is not the case.
In recent years we have seen how the Hollywood demonisation process, which was once obsessed with the stereotypical Blonde Nazi German, has now shifed to creating new
steretypes for a new century.
Now it is the English and the Russians that appear to be the new enemies that Hollywood wants to pimp out to the masses.
I contend that Hollywood has now gone beyond entertainment and is nor producing propaganda, which is designed for one reason which is to undermine the group solidarity of those social groups that some section of the Jewish community in the US conceive as a threat to themselves and their community.
This includes Anglo-Americans, Catholics, Ethno-centric Black organisations and other ethno-comunity structures that could organise to undermine the power of the existing lobby groups and community groups that dominate American politics and American society.
No doubt I shall expect another avalanche of death threats from the CST and other thugs for daring to debate an issue that appears to be 'taboo'.
It is not anti-semitic to point out that a specific section of the US society is dominated by one ethnic or racal group, as many sections of American society are dominated by ethnic and racial groups of all kinds.
It is an abuse of the right to define anything as anti-semitic when the aim is to silence legitimate debate on an issue, and such Marxist-Leninist Terrorism of the Word must be resisted.
Democracy depends on free debate, tyranny begins when censorship begins.
It is perverse is it not that in an era when Hollywood pumps out pornography, glorifies drug abuse, sexualises children, peddles violence in its movies, glorifies guns, war and horror and churns out endless torture porn movies as entertainment - Hollywood itself seeks to censor all those want to investigate what it is doing and who is running it ?
Isnt that the ultimate hypocrisy ?
I was very surprised that Dana had not ever heard of or read Kevin McDonalds book 'The Culture of Critique' which chronicles the role of Jewish intellectuals and activists in American society.
The fact that the Jewish community has disproportionate power over various sectors of American society is only controversial to those that think those Jewish groups are doing something wrong.
If you you have nothing to hide, then why fear debate ?
Link Here - http://www.kevinmacdonald.net/books.htm
I explained to Dana that due to historical racism in American society against Jews, this has led to the Jewish community becoming concentrated in various specific sections of US society, and one of those sections is Hollywood, including the media and the entertainment industry.
This racism directed at the Jewish community in the past has also led to their admirable ethno-communalism and their power as a community as defined by lobby groups such as AIPAC. This process is not unique to Jews though, as the Irish who also suffered racism in US society also have organised the second strongest lobby group in US society, this being the Irish-American lobby groups.
Whilst AIPAC dominates American foreign policy towards Israel, the Irish lobby groups historically used their power to allow American donations to fund the IRA terror campaigns to flow to Ireland, assisted US arms entering Ireland and Northern Ireland, used their powers to turn the USA into a refuge for fleeing IRA terrorists and to undermine the British states fight against the IRA through US political interference.
Whilst these lobby groups may have once been set up to serve and DEFEND the interests of the communities they served, I assert that they have begun to abuse that power long ago and have begun to use their political power to undermine other community groups and to hijack American politics for their interests - and not for the interests of all Americans.
I explained to Dana that it is both admirable and legitimate for any community to organise to protect, defend and represent their own community interests in a democracy, but what is not acceptable is when those groups use their power in any society to undermine, usurp, weaken and attack other communities or to undermine the community interests of other communities.
When defence becomes offence this is not acceptable.
I explained that whilst Hollywood has gone past the 1950's era of depicting all Native Americans as barabrous painted savages or the 1930's era of depicting blacks as servants and illiterate cotton pickers, it has now developed a fetish for depicting Muslims as terrorists and the English / Russians / Blondes as evil racists, fascists, crooks, hitmen etc etc.
White English males are now routinely depicted as thugs, nazis or crooks, Muslims as terrorists and white blonde females are depicted as sluts.
I explained that this process is akin to the demonisation and community undermining process as seen recently in Rwanda, in that this process of pumping out negative propaganda is creating an impression that these communities are somehow infereior or innately evil.
Positive Propaganda is acceptable in that it seeks to promote and create positive role models for communities within our culture and thereby develop a culture of aspiration in those communities, but Negative Propaganda is what the media and Hollywood pump out when they seek to conflate criminality with specific racial groups and ethnic communities and when they seek to undermine the cohsion and identities of communities.
Radio Télévision Libre des Mille Collines (RTLM) was a Rwandan radio station which broadcast from 8 July 1993 to 31 July 1994. It played a significant role during the April-July 1994 Rwandan Genocide.
The station's name is French for "Thousand Hills Independent Radio and Television", deriving from the description of Rwanda as "Land of a Thousand Hills". It received support from the government-controlled Radio Rwanda, which initially allowed it to transmit using their equipment.
Widely listened to by the general population, it projected hate propaganda against Tutsis, moderate Hutus, Belgians, and the United Nations mission UNAMIR. It is widely regarded as having played a crucial role in creating the atmosphere of charged racial hostility that allowed the genocide to occur.
Propaganda that seeks to perpetuate or create stereotypes that seek to dehumanise a section of the community or to portray them as sub-humans is a crime against humanity, it is classified as an incitement to genocide.
In the past Hollywood has done this many times ranging from the depictions it pumped out of Native Americans, Blacks and to now the Anglo-European community.
Dana seemed surprised that I said that it is a well known fact that Jews dominate Hollywood. Seeing as this is something the Jewish community frequently boasts about and mentions, then I cannot see why she would be surprised.
For example, Marlon Brando complained on the Larry King Live show on april 5th 1996 that, "Hollywood is run by Jews - it is owned by Jews!". Marlon Brando's chief complaint was that the Jews in Hollywood are always depicted in a way that is positive and aspirational. The Jewish writer Michael Medved wrote in the magazine Moment in 1996 that, "Jewish writers and directors employ unquestionably flattering depictions of Jews for audiences to react with sympathy and affection."
Compare that with recent Hollywood depictions of Catholic Preists, Anglo-European women as promiscuous sluts, white working class people as racist bigots and thuigs, the English as crooks and hooligans and the imagesof blacks as gangsters/ criminals and misogynistic rappers.
The American Moment Magazine was subtitled, "The Jewish Magazine for the '90s".
Its edition of Aug. 1996 stated "Jews Run Hollywood - So What?" The author was the Jewish writer Michael Medved who stated in the article:
"It makes no sense at all to try to deny the reality of Jewish power and prominence in popular culture. Any list of the most influential production executives at each of the major movie studios will produce a heavy majority of recognizably Jewish names."
The article states how the Jewish mogul Michael Eisner, the Head of Walt Disney studios only hired "highly paid Jewish moguls" as producers such as Jeffrey Katzenberg, Michael Ovitz, Joe Roth (former head of 20th Century Fox). Medved emphazised the point that, "The famous Disney organization, which was founded by Walt Disney, a gentile Midwesterner who allegedly harboured anti-Semitic attitudes, now features Jewish personnel in nearly all its most powerful positions."
Medved continued: "Men and women of Jewish background enjoy a vastly disproportionate - if not dominate - influence in Hollywood." He added that those studios which were bought out by the Japanese Sony Corp, and by Rupert Murdoch, still had to hire, "a Yiddish team of long-time industry leaders in all the most powerful positions. When Mitsushita took over MCA-Universal, they did nothing to undermine the unquestioned authority of Universal's legndary - and all-Jewish - management triad of Lew Wasserman, Sid Scheinberg and Tom Pollack."
Medved further wrote that most of today's movie moguls graduated from Ivy League colleges, "where Jews are vastly over-represented - just as they are in Hollywood." He says that nepotism plays a role exemplified with Samuel Goldwyn Pictures being run by the son of founder Samuel Goldwyn and a third generation, Tony Goldwyn, is waiting in the wings to take over. He adds: "This dynastic tendency in American entertainment certainly is a factor in the continued prominence of the Jewish role."
Medved finished the article by saying ;
"The combined weight of so many Jews in one of America's most lucrative and important industries gives the Jews of Hollywood a great deal of political power. They are a major source of money for Democratic candidates. The industry's informal patriarch, MCA chairman Lew Wasserman, wields tremendous personal clout in state and national politics. So do Barbara Streisand, Norman Lear and others."
Note that after winning the Democratic nomination Obama first gave a speech to AIPAC about how he will offer unconditional support to Israel' and also he began to woo Clintons backers in Hollywood such as Barbara Streisand.
The US black run website ' Black Agenda Report ' did a superb article on Obamas speech to AIPAC here ;
http://www.blackagendareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=656&Itemid=1
William A. Donohue, president of the conservative Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, has also pointed out the role of Jews in Hollywood ;
http://mediamatters.org/items/200412210001
He said " Who really cares what Hollywood thinks? All these hacks come out there. Hollywood is controlled by secular Jews who hate Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular. It's not a secret, okay? And I'm not afraid to say it. ... ".
He also said here http://www.heebmagazine.com/articles/view/131 about the Mel Gibson move the Passion of Christ which was labelled anti-semitic ;
"Donohue has calmed down a bit. “I was expressing frustration over the pounding Catholics have taken from disproportionately Jewish studios,” he says over the phone from his New York City office. “We finally had a movie that we liked, and not only does nobody want to put it out, but we’re considered anti-Semitic because we like the movie.” If Donohue actually believed his 2004 contention, he hides it well. “Look, the problem is not Jews,” he says, widening his complaint to encompass a larger secular crowd. “But Hollywood definitely has more secular-minded Jews than Catholics or Muslims. If someone says Jews run Hollywood, how can you deny it?”
Even Mel Gibson who was widely attacked for saying Jews run Hollywoood was forced to recant on bended knee for his heresy of saying what everyone knows but that everyone is usually afraid to say which is that ' the Jews run Hollywood'.
Even Haaretx says this in its article here - http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=690808&contrassID=2
The largest media conglomerate today is Walt Disney Company, whose chairman and CEO, Michael Eisner, who is Jewish ran the company from 1984-2005. The Disney empire, was headed by a man described by one media analyst as "a control freak," included several television production companies (Walt Disney Television, Touchstone Television, Buena Vista Television), its own cable network with 14 million subscribers, and two video production companies.
Eisner was so despised by his own board for the way he ran Disney, that the board set up a 'Save Disney Campaign'. On March 4, 2004, Disney's board of directors, on which Mitchell had served since 1995, named him Michael Eisner's replacement as Chairman of the Board after 43% of the company's shares were voted against Eisner's reelection. Mitchell himself received a 25% negative vote, a fact that led dissident Disney shareholders Roy E. Disney and Stanley Gold to criticize the appointment of Mitchell, whom they saw as Eisner's puppet. On June 28, 2006, Disney announced that its board had elected one of its members, John Pepper, Jr., former CEO of Procter and Gamble, to replace Mitchell as chairman effective January 1, 2007.
As for feature films, the Walt Disney Picture Group, headed by Joe Roth (also a Jew), includes Touchstone Pictures, Hollywood Pictures, and Caravan Pictures. Disney also owns Miramax Films, run by the Weinstein brothers, who have produced such ultra-raunchy movies such as The Crying Game, Priests, and Kids.
The Group in its current form was initiated in 1998 by then Studio Chairman Joe Roth in order to centralize the various production units and to make live-action film production within Disney more cost-efficient. The President of the Group is Oren Aviv, who reports to Dick Cook, Chairman of the Walt Disney Studios. Cook, in turn, reports to Robert (Bob) Iger, President/CEO of The Walt Disney Company. Oren Aviv is also Jewish I believe.
When the Disney Company was run by the Disney family prior to its takeover by Eisner in 1984, it epitomized wholesome, family entertainment. While it still holds the rights to Snow White, under Eisner the company had expanded into the production of graphic sex and gratuitous violence. In addition to TV and movies, the corporation owns Disneyland, Disney World, Epcot Center, Tokyo Disneyland, and Euro Disney.
Time Warner, Inc., is the second of the international media leviathans. The chairman of the board and CEO, Gerald M. Levin, is a Jew. Time Warner’s subsidiary HBO is the country’s largest pay-TV cable network.
Viacom, Inc., headed by Sumner Redstone (born Murray Rothstein), is the third largest megamedia corporation in the country, with revenues of over $10 billion a year. Viacom, which produces and distributes TV programs for the three largest networks, owns 12 television stations and 12 radio stations. It produces feature films through Paramount Pictures, headed by Jewess Sherry Lansing.
Sumner Murray Redstone (born Sumner Murray Rothstein; May 27, 1923) is majority owner and Chairman of the Board of the National Amusements theater chain. Through National Amusements, Sumner Redstone and his family are majority owners of CBS Corporation, Viacom, and Midway Games, MTV Networks, BET, and movie production and distribution Paramount Pictures and DreamWorks movie studios, and are equal partners in MovieTickets.com.
Its publishing division includes Prentice Hall, Simon & Schuster, and Pocket Books. It distributes videos through over 4,000 Blockbuster stores. It is also involved in satellite broadcasting, theme parks, and video games.
Viacom’s chief claim to fame, however, is as the world’s largest provider of cable programming, through its Showtime, MTV, Nickelodeon, and other networks. Since 1989, MTV and Nickelodeon have acquired larger and larger shares of the juvenile television audience.
Number four on the list is Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation, which owns Fox Television Network and 20th Century Fox Films. Murdoch is a Gentile, but Peter Chernin, who heads Murdoch’s film studio and also oversees his TV production, is a Jew.
Peter Chernin (born May 29, 1951 in Harrison, New York) is President and Chief Operating Officer of News Corporation, and Chairman and CEO of the Fox Group. In addition to the Fox duties, he is also a Corporate Director for American Express.
Widely considered one of the most powerful media executives in the world, Chernin has been credited in particular with the success of Fox's cable operations. Prior to joining Fox, Chernin was president and COO of Lorimar Film Entertainment. His other executive roles include positions at Showtime/The Movie Channel, Warner Books and St. Martin's Press.
For example, New World Entertainment, proclaimed by one media analyst as "the premiere independent TV program producer in the United States," is owned by Ronald Perelman, a Jew who also owns Revlon cosmetics.
In 1989, Perelman went back and bought New World Entertainment, the former parent company of Marvel, and then Four Star International. In 1993, Perelman acquired three major entities: SCI Television for $120 million plus $730 million in assumed debt, with seven television stations included in the deal; Genesis Entertainment, and Guthy-Renker. In late 1993, he reorgnanized all of the above-mentioned companies into a single corporation called New World Communications. In 1994, Perelman bought four more stations from the Great American Communications Company for $360 million and four more from Argyle Television Holdings for $716 million. His purchases set the stage for the Fox affiliate switches of 1994 in which Ronald Perelman rewrote the rules for how television affiliates operated and helped establish Fox as a force to be reckoned with. Naturally, Ronald took home a tidy profit: In two deals in 1994 and 1996, Rupert Murdoch bought complete control of New World Communications for $3 billion.
The best known of the smaller media companies, DreamWorks SKG 1994 amid great media hype by recording industry mogul David Geffen, former Disney Pictures chairman Jeffrey Katzenberg, and film direction Steven Spielberg, all three of whom are Jews. The company produces movies, animated films, television programs, and recorded music. Considering the cash and connections that Geffen, Katzenberg, and Spielberg have, DreamWorks may soon be in the same league as the big three.
Two other large production companies, MCA and Universal Pictures, are both owned by Seagram Company, Ltd. The president and CEO of Seagram, the liquor giant, is Edgar Bronfman, Jr., who was also president of the World Jewish Congress.
Of course the issue of the owneship of the major studios in Hollywood is irrelevant as long as those that make the movies are not abusing their powers to undermine or attack other communities, but this is not the case.
In recent years we have seen how the Hollywood demonisation process, which was once obsessed with the stereotypical Blonde Nazi German, has now shifed to creating new
steretypes for a new century.
Now it is the English and the Russians that appear to be the new enemies that Hollywood wants to pimp out to the masses.
I contend that Hollywood has now gone beyond entertainment and is nor producing propaganda, which is designed for one reason which is to undermine the group solidarity of those social groups that some section of the Jewish community in the US conceive as a threat to themselves and their community.
This includes Anglo-Americans, Catholics, Ethno-centric Black organisations and other ethno-comunity structures that could organise to undermine the power of the existing lobby groups and community groups that dominate American politics and American society.
No doubt I shall expect another avalanche of death threats from the CST and other thugs for daring to debate an issue that appears to be 'taboo'.
It is not anti-semitic to point out that a specific section of the US society is dominated by one ethnic or racal group, as many sections of American society are dominated by ethnic and racial groups of all kinds.
It is an abuse of the right to define anything as anti-semitic when the aim is to silence legitimate debate on an issue, and such Marxist-Leninist Terrorism of the Word must be resisted.
Democracy depends on free debate, tyranny begins when censorship begins.
It is perverse is it not that in an era when Hollywood pumps out pornography, glorifies drug abuse, sexualises children, peddles violence in its movies, glorifies guns, war and horror and churns out endless torture porn movies as entertainment - Hollywood itself seeks to censor all those want to investigate what it is doing and who is running it ?
Isnt that the ultimate hypocrisy ?
Sunday, 2 December 2007
Pickled Politics and the Mafia of the Mediocre
A few days ago I had the pleasure of being banned from the Pickled Politics site by the mafia of the mediocre, the moderators, that run the site.
This was after the site put up an article about Nick Griffin speaking at the Oxford Union, where they stated that though Nick and the BNP had a right to free speech that the BNP were a nasty, despicable organisation with nothing to say and that its ideas and views could be combated and torn apart as easily as a wet kleenex in the hands of a sobbing liberal.
http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/1551
The site says it stands for free speech and that the 'intellectuals' were ready to 'demolish' the arguments the BNP put forward.
BIG MISTAKE.
I trotted along their and began posting a few comments in response to the vapid and asinine comments being posted on the site by the regulars who post on the site. No problem for a while.
The arguments put forward by the people that post on the site were so pathetic that I wasnt sure at first if they were taking the piss.
They werent.
They really are that dumb.
For example one person called Morgoth wrote the following
" Therefore my question: do we possess the right to pursue conditions conducive to our survival?
Survival? Kelly Holmes (to take one example) is 100, no, a million times the Briton than Nick Griffen could ever hope to be. And the future of this country is assured with shining eggs like her about.
Lets have, as Rumbold (I think) said upthread, lots more inter-”racial” marriages - the sooner a shitty little inconsequntial accident of nature (skin colour) is made irrelevant beyond the point of total irrelevance the better."
I replied " Oh yes, just what we need as a society and a nation to ensure our future survival in a world where Peak Oil is about to hit and Eco-Conflicts begin is to allow people to enter and live in our country simply on the basis that they can run really, really fast. That the British people and British nation and British culture that has created such brilliant minds as Darwin, Newton, Stephenson, Charles Merz, Brunel, Dickens, Shakespeare, Roger Bacon, William Blake, Robert Grosseteste, Alexander Fleming, Charles Babbage, Tim Berners-Lee, Milton , Hobbes, Thomas Paine etc etc etc needs now to be surrendered so as to allow immigrants into our country and then justify their presence by saying they can run fast.
Pathetic.
That we should surrender our culture, ancestral rights and liberties and free speech just so that these immigrants who can run fast do not have to hear us complaining about the betrayal of all the wars and sacrifices our ancestors fought to keep our nation free.
As for the 'inconsequential' nature of our race, ask anyone from an ethnic minority if they feel their race is inconsequential. It is only white, self hating liberals who despise their own race as they have adopted the conditioned reflexive self hating guilt that Orwell wrote about. No other race but the whites want to destroy themselves or spend so much time on their knees pleading for forgiveness for the colour of their skin."
The comments that I had then managed to post a few times, then suddenly stopped.
A strange message then began to appear on the screen saying the site was now 'stopping spam' and that the moderators would vet the posts before putting them up.
Guess what - not one of the comments I put on the site were then allowed to go onto the site.
The mafia of the mediocre had decided to censor me and stop my free speech.
Pickled Politics had become proffesional hypocrites.
This is not unusual. I have done radio interviews before where the presenter has begun the interview before going live by saying that that he would allow me to stay on the show and debate with me.
Then when I have torn him and his arguments to pieces from the start, by the first break in the show I am usually removed.
What happens is that the media believe their own propaganda about us.
They say 'these people are thick, we can tear their arguments to pieces and they have no ideas we cannot destroy with our mighty brains' but then once they have to debate us, they realise that we are in fact intellectually and politically far superior to them.
All that the policy of No Platform has done is ensure that the journalists have gotten used to debating with the idiots of the mainstream parties.
Journalists are no longer capable of debating with us, as the quality of journalists is no longer such that they can debate with us.
For decades they have gotten used to debating with the idiots, middle ranking minds and muppets.
This is why they no longer debate with us, as they are now so dumbed down that they cannot win the debate.
Its like watching pygmies in a boxing ring boxing each other, whilst the real heavweight fighters have been forced to stand outside the ring in silence and watch as the pygmies are crowned the heavy weight champs of the world.
No Platform is another example, like way exams are made easier in schools, of our society dumbing down.
To ensure that the stupidscan feel good, the intelligent are either forced to become as stupid as the stupids or else are censored and ignored.
This is why we now live in an Idiocracy, where the idiot is the ideal.
This is also why programmes like Question Time and other political 'current affairs' shows are now so bloody boring.
Year after year, series after series, the same old boring politicians are hauled on to tell the same old boring bullshit to the British public.
Its like watching the political version of Jurassic Park, where only political dinosaurs are allowed to bellow and blow live on air.
Poor old Dimbelby must be bored rigid, it must be like Groundhog Day in the Question Time offices.
Things have to be bad if they invite Nigel Farrage on Question Time. To have the Kermit the Frog lookalike who runs a party filled with prostitute banging, corrupt, EU cash trough gorging, reactionary old farts on Question Time is a classic sign of morbidity.
That parrot is now deceased.
Those that say the Internet is the last bastion of free speech are deluding themselves.
Free speech is not free debate.
The Internet does not allow free debate, as the mafia of the mediocre that are the moderators on sites such as Pickled Politics, censor anyone they cannot intellectually contain and nullify.
Its like saying ' Here we have free speech ' and then denying anyone they cannot win a debate with access to the debating chamber.
It is nothing more than pure hypocrisy.
Here is my challenge - to anyone who thinks they can defeat me in a free and fair public debate on any political issues then get in touch.
Let me know where and when and we will have the debate. But I wont hold my breath.
Pickled Politics can kiss my proud, hairy, White, Anglo-Saxon arse.
This was after the site put up an article about Nick Griffin speaking at the Oxford Union, where they stated that though Nick and the BNP had a right to free speech that the BNP were a nasty, despicable organisation with nothing to say and that its ideas and views could be combated and torn apart as easily as a wet kleenex in the hands of a sobbing liberal.
http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/1551
The site says it stands for free speech and that the 'intellectuals' were ready to 'demolish' the arguments the BNP put forward.
BIG MISTAKE.
I trotted along their and began posting a few comments in response to the vapid and asinine comments being posted on the site by the regulars who post on the site. No problem for a while.
The arguments put forward by the people that post on the site were so pathetic that I wasnt sure at first if they were taking the piss.
They werent.
They really are that dumb.
For example one person called Morgoth wrote the following
" Therefore my question: do we possess the right to pursue conditions conducive to our survival?
Survival? Kelly Holmes (to take one example) is 100, no, a million times the Briton than Nick Griffen could ever hope to be. And the future of this country is assured with shining eggs like her about.
Lets have, as Rumbold (I think) said upthread, lots more inter-”racial” marriages - the sooner a shitty little inconsequntial accident of nature (skin colour) is made irrelevant beyond the point of total irrelevance the better."
I replied " Oh yes, just what we need as a society and a nation to ensure our future survival in a world where Peak Oil is about to hit and Eco-Conflicts begin is to allow people to enter and live in our country simply on the basis that they can run really, really fast. That the British people and British nation and British culture that has created such brilliant minds as Darwin, Newton, Stephenson, Charles Merz, Brunel, Dickens, Shakespeare, Roger Bacon, William Blake, Robert Grosseteste, Alexander Fleming, Charles Babbage, Tim Berners-Lee, Milton , Hobbes, Thomas Paine etc etc etc needs now to be surrendered so as to allow immigrants into our country and then justify their presence by saying they can run fast.
Pathetic.
That we should surrender our culture, ancestral rights and liberties and free speech just so that these immigrants who can run fast do not have to hear us complaining about the betrayal of all the wars and sacrifices our ancestors fought to keep our nation free.
As for the 'inconsequential' nature of our race, ask anyone from an ethnic minority if they feel their race is inconsequential. It is only white, self hating liberals who despise their own race as they have adopted the conditioned reflexive self hating guilt that Orwell wrote about. No other race but the whites want to destroy themselves or spend so much time on their knees pleading for forgiveness for the colour of their skin."
The comments that I had then managed to post a few times, then suddenly stopped.
A strange message then began to appear on the screen saying the site was now 'stopping spam' and that the moderators would vet the posts before putting them up.
Guess what - not one of the comments I put on the site were then allowed to go onto the site.
The mafia of the mediocre had decided to censor me and stop my free speech.
Pickled Politics had become proffesional hypocrites.
This is not unusual. I have done radio interviews before where the presenter has begun the interview before going live by saying that that he would allow me to stay on the show and debate with me.
Then when I have torn him and his arguments to pieces from the start, by the first break in the show I am usually removed.
What happens is that the media believe their own propaganda about us.
They say 'these people are thick, we can tear their arguments to pieces and they have no ideas we cannot destroy with our mighty brains' but then once they have to debate us, they realise that we are in fact intellectually and politically far superior to them.
All that the policy of No Platform has done is ensure that the journalists have gotten used to debating with the idiots of the mainstream parties.
Journalists are no longer capable of debating with us, as the quality of journalists is no longer such that they can debate with us.
For decades they have gotten used to debating with the idiots, middle ranking minds and muppets.
This is why they no longer debate with us, as they are now so dumbed down that they cannot win the debate.
Its like watching pygmies in a boxing ring boxing each other, whilst the real heavweight fighters have been forced to stand outside the ring in silence and watch as the pygmies are crowned the heavy weight champs of the world.
No Platform is another example, like way exams are made easier in schools, of our society dumbing down.
To ensure that the stupidscan feel good, the intelligent are either forced to become as stupid as the stupids or else are censored and ignored.
This is why we now live in an Idiocracy, where the idiot is the ideal.
This is also why programmes like Question Time and other political 'current affairs' shows are now so bloody boring.
Year after year, series after series, the same old boring politicians are hauled on to tell the same old boring bullshit to the British public.
Its like watching the political version of Jurassic Park, where only political dinosaurs are allowed to bellow and blow live on air.
Poor old Dimbelby must be bored rigid, it must be like Groundhog Day in the Question Time offices.
Things have to be bad if they invite Nigel Farrage on Question Time. To have the Kermit the Frog lookalike who runs a party filled with prostitute banging, corrupt, EU cash trough gorging, reactionary old farts on Question Time is a classic sign of morbidity.
That parrot is now deceased.
Those that say the Internet is the last bastion of free speech are deluding themselves.
Free speech is not free debate.
The Internet does not allow free debate, as the mafia of the mediocre that are the moderators on sites such as Pickled Politics, censor anyone they cannot intellectually contain and nullify.
Its like saying ' Here we have free speech ' and then denying anyone they cannot win a debate with access to the debating chamber.
It is nothing more than pure hypocrisy.
Here is my challenge - to anyone who thinks they can defeat me in a free and fair public debate on any political issues then get in touch.
Let me know where and when and we will have the debate. But I wont hold my breath.
Pickled Politics can kiss my proud, hairy, White, Anglo-Saxon arse.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
